Elite Prospects Top 100 Affiliated Prospect Skaters

[Namikaze Minato]

what Leafs are on the list?

Cowan at 28 and Danford at 84

 

[Chainshot]

It does seem to slant HARD toward recency bias.

 

[coooldude]

It does seem to slant HARD toward recency bias.

People say this about a lot of the affiliated lists, but I'm not so sure.

1. Older prospects who are good graduate to the NHL
2. Older prospects who are not as good stay on the list but since they haven't graduated, they're more likely to maybe have performed below the potential of others
3. New players still have a shot to graduate early, so they by definition have a wider set of outcomes than older prospects who are still on the list.

For example, 21 of the top 50 are from 2024 (I might have been +/-1 or 2). 40% is perfectly reasonable given dynamics above.

8 of the top 15 are from 2024, but the very top of the list is the most likely to graduate early, so you'd expect this kind of thing because last year's best 2020-2022's already graduated. Next year, at the very least, you'll see Celebrini, Michkov, Gauthier, Stankoven, and Smith graduate from this top 15, which is 2 from 2023, 1 from 2021/22/24.

Recency weight isn't a bias, it's just an outcome of a natural process of graduating from this list.

 

[Juxtaposer]

It does seem to slant HARD toward recency bias.

Not to pick on you, because a lot of people in this thread have said the same thing, but I have to shake my head at this sort of comment.

Of course the highest ranked prospects are going to be 2024 draftees, because the top picks from previous years have graduated! Obviously! And naturally the top picks from 2024 will be over the top picks from 2022 and before because if the latter had progressed as well as their draft position, they would have graduated! Obviously!

 

[coooldude]

Not to pick on you, because a lot of people in this thread have said the same thing, but I have to shake my head at this sort of comment.

Of course the highest ranked prospects are going to be 2024 draftees, because the top picks from previous years have graduated! Obviously! And naturally the top picks from 2024 will be over the top picks from 2022 and before because if the latter had progressed as well as their draft position, they would have graduated! Obviously!

Jinx!

 

[Chainshot]

Not to pick on you, because a lot of people in this thread have said the same thing, but I have to shake my head at this sort of comment.

Of course the highest ranked prospects are going to be 2024 draftees, because the top picks from previous years have graduated! Obviously! And naturally the top picks from 2024 will be over the top picks from 2022 and before because if the latter had progressed as well as their draft position, they would have graduated! Obviously!

It's more that someone who can't come over like Nikishin was pushed down the list year on year despite continuing to be one of the best defensemen outside of the NHL due to folks who weren't even in the top 10 of the 2024 draft.

 

[coooldude]

It's more that someone who can't come over like Nikishin was pushed down the list year on year despite continuing to be one of the best defensemen outside of the NHL due to folks who weren't even in the top 10 of the 2024 draft.

They're probably wrong on Nikishin and they're bold on a few others (from multiple years) but I don't think it means the entire list is recency biased.

 

[Juxtaposer]

It's more that someone who can't come over like Nikishin was pushed down the list year on year despite continuing to be one of the best defensemen outside of the NHL due to folks who weren't even in the top 10 of the 2024 draft.

Nikishin is a unique case, and I don't think you can make broad sweeping statements about recency bias because of one ranking you disagree with.

 

[Chainshot]

Nikishin is a unique case, and I don't think you can make broad sweeping statements about recency bias because of one ranking you disagree with.

There is more than one, that was the easiest to note. Someone like Greentree being as highly placed as he is. When I'm home I'll re-order my thoughts and post something more in-depth.

 

[Patty Ice]

There is more than one, that was the easiest to note. Someone like Greentree being as highly placed as he is. When I'm home I'll re-order my thoughts and post something more in-depth.

Having Parekh and Iginla ranked higher than Will Smith is pretty insane.

 

[jfhabs]

Having Parekh and Iginla ranked higher than Will Smith is pretty insane.

I can see an argument for Parekh because the upside is sky high, but no way for Iginla. Clear recency biais.

 

[Lou Bloom]

Oh no. EP didn't rank everyone according to the fanbase's consensus.

How dare they have preferences?

So It's fine for EP to criticize prospects but criticizing EP's rankings of said prospects is a bridge too far? It's a public ranking list of course people are going to criticize and give their opinions on it.

 

[Juxtaposer]

There is more than one, that was the easiest to note. Someone like Greentree being as highly placed as he is. When I'm home I'll re-order my thoughts and post something more in-depth.

More than recency bias, it's just that EP has certain prospects they like way more than anyone else. I mean, would you call Will Smith being 10 and Quentin Musty being 15 recency bias?

 

[Sam de Mtl]

So It's fine for EP to criticize prospects but criticizing EP's rankings of said prospects is a bridge too far? It's a public ranking list of course people are going to criticize and give their opinions on it.

It's fine to criticize the list, but some people's souls are tearing apart when the number next to their favorite guy is too low.

Also, how do you know that they criticize the players in one way or the other? Unless you got behind the paywall and read more than I did, all you saw was a list. Not much criticism involved.

Maybe you can do a ranking of lists and put EP's list way down. I won't criticize.

 

[Pavels Dog]

People say this about a lot of the affiliated lists, but I'm not so sure.

1. Older prospects who are good graduate to the NHL
2. Older prospects who are not as good stay on the list but since they haven't graduated, they're more likely to maybe have performed below the potential of others
3. New players still have a shot to graduate early, so they by definition have a wider set of outcomes than older prospects who are still on the list.

For example, 21 of the top 50 are from 2024 (I might have been +/-1 or 2). 40% is perfectly reasonable given dynamics above.

8 of the top 15 are from 2024, but the very top of the list is the most likely to graduate early, so you'd expect this kind of thing because last year's best 2020-2022's already graduated. Next year, at the very least, you'll see Celebrini, Michkov, Gauthier, Stankoven, and Smith graduate from this top 15, which is 2 from 2023, 1 from 2021/22/24.

Recency weight isn't a bias, it's just an outcome of a natural process of graduating from this list.

Everyone understands that, it's just overdone on this list. Barely any 2023s have graduated, and only a few 2022s. Normal development time shouldn't be held against a prospect. I really doubt for example that Danielson and Willander would have potentially been 2nd round picks if they were eligibile for the 2024 draft.

 

[Lou Bloom]

It's fine to criticize the list, but some people's souls are tearing apart when the number next to their favorite guy is too low.

Also, how do you know that they criticize the players in one way or the other? Unless you got behind the paywall and read more than I did, all you saw was a list. Not much criticism involved.

Maybe you can do a ranking of lists and put EP's list way down. I won't criticize.

All I've seen are people saying X player is too low or too high, not much soul tearing apart.

Criticism is inherent when it comes to rankings. Otherwise how could you decide to put X player over another player if you aren't judging them against each other or by some type of standard?

I just think it's a pointless statement to complain about people criticizing a ranking without making any specific disagreements on why you think they're wrong for their criticisms.

 

[Sam de Mtl]

All I've seen are people saying X player is too low or too high, not much soul tearing apart.

Criticism is inherent when it comes to rankings. Otherwise how could you decide to put X player over another player if you aren't judging them against each other or by some type of standard?

I just think it's a pointless statement to complain about people criticizing a ranking without making any specific disagreements on why you think they're wrong for their criticisms.

You are allowed to think that. I just think people criticize with very little knowledge of their own except for a big pile of steaming group-think.

Why is it unacceptable for anyone to not put Nikishin in their top 10? For all we know, EP staff spends way more time looking at prospects than most (all?) of us.

I personally have seen very little of Nikishin, so I wouldn't feel comfortable having a debate trying to rank him up, down or anywhere. I can admit that. Probabilities say that quite a few of those saying the ranking is bad because Nikishin is low are in the same boat as me (not all of course, but quite a few).

The intense group-think on these boards is why all the rankings we see are either more or less the same, or get piled on severely.

Then again, as you say, criticizing is fine on a forum that is more or less made for that exact reason, but it doesn't mean people shouldn't be called out on its biases or the group-think mentality should be accepted as is.

 

[Chainshot]

Nikishin is a unique case, and I don't think you can make broad sweeping statements about recency bias because of one ranking you disagree with.

More than recency bias, it's just that EP has certain prospects they like way more than anyone else. I mean, would you call Will Smith being 10 and Quentin Musty being 15 recency bias?

Just circling back after a much-too-long work day yesterday:

So it's that Smith is below some 2024's like Iginla for sure but it was more things like '24s like:

Elick at 78
Brunicke at 79
Danford at 84

...over HM's like Molendyk or Svozil or Casey and then Luneau down at 83 despite his Q D of the year win and then making the Ducks at 19. I get that the recent picks are still both fresh in mind and have a length of developmental runway left that can lead to extrapolating/dreaming of what they can be while the players who have moved forward some are usually a bit more set in their path. The cement has started to harden so to speak.

Not to say the list is poor, just that there does seem to be an attraction to the 2024 draftees generally speaking. I applaud that they're generally consistent in their rankings in this list compared to the draft ranking as well and we don't know how close their HM's wound up to being on the list. I've tried grading out some guys using ceiling, projection and development and it isn't easy. I'm not going to cancel my sub to them or anything.

 

[hn777]

Anyone have a link to their top 15 goalie list that is visible without the paywall?


Thanks!

Same Instagram account as linked in post #2 in this thread.

 

[Juxtaposer]

Just circling back after a much-too-long work day yesterday:

So it's that Smith is below some 2024's like Iginla for sure but it was more things like '24s like:

Elick at 78
Brunicke at 79
Danford at 84

...over HM's like Molendyk or Svozil or Casey and then Luneau down at 83 despite his Q D of the year win and then making the Ducks at 19. I get that the recent picks are still both fresh in mind and have a length of developmental runway left that can lead to extrapolating/dreaming of what they can be while the players who have moved forward some are usually a bit more set in their path. The cement has started to harden so to speak.

Not to say the list is poor, just that there does seem to be an attraction to the 2024 draftees generally speaking. I applaud that they're generally consistent in their rankings in this list compared to the draft ranking as well and we don't know how close their HM's wound up to being on the list. I've tried grading out some guys using ceiling, projection and development and it isn't easy. I'm not going to cancel my sub to them or anything.

I totally get your gripes. My response is specifically that EP's list is heavily influenced by their own rankings (naturally). All the three defensemen you mentioned were ranked in EP's first round. Svozil and Casey weren't first round picks and I don't feel like they were high on Molendyk either.

I think HF as a collective are a bit too reactive. That is to say, we let single seasons affect our projection of prospects much more than EP does. They are more loyal to their original pre-draft rankings than HF is, and I think that's where the disconnect is.

Hell, I'm just surprised that they even included Shakir Mukhamadullin on this list given how much they hated him when he was drafted.

 

[Chainshot]

I totally get your gripes. My response is specifically that EP's list is heavily influenced by their own rankings (naturally). All the three defensemen you mentioned were ranked in EP's first round. Svozil and Casey weren't first round picks and I don't feel like they were high on Molendyk either.

I think HF as a collective are a bit too reactive. That is to say, we let single seasons affect our projection of prospects much more than EP does. They are more loyal to their original pre-draft rankings than HF is, and I think that's where the disconnect is.

Hell, I'm just surprised that they even included Shakir Mukhamadullin on this list given how much they hated him when he was drafted.

I do appreciate that they rank their folks in a manner that I think they have their regional people putting eyes on so they see players more often than some of the press folks who appear to be one-man-shows and then don't vacillate based on short-term performance (say, an offensively productive or prominent Hlinka-Gretzky or U-18).

 

[jfrank21]

Thanks, clearly not high on Detroit kids.

It's a joke list, EP can be ok at times but they wont rate a Wings' kid high until he has already knocked the door down ala Seider. Danielson may well be locking dudes down on the big club this fall, but sure, little ol Cole Eiserman who didnt even stand out playing summer hockey in the showcase is somehow way better.

 

[HawksDub89]

It's a joke list, EP can be ok at times but they wont rate a Wings' kid high until he has already knocked the door down ala Seider. Danielson may well be locking dudes down on the big club this fall, but sure, little ol Cole Eiserman who didnt even stand out playing summer hockey in the showcase is somehow way better.

Might have something to do with the Wings taking prospects with a limited ceiling. (MBN/Danielson)

I actually really like both of those prospects, but they aren’t necessarily high ceiling players.

 

[CallMeShaft]

Between skaters and goalies, Hawks have the most players in EP's rankings with 9. Habs are right behind them with 8 players.

 

[Xirik]

Still can't understand How Hutson is 27th and Casey is a HM.