Prospect Info: General Discussion of Prospects

[joshjull]

 

[Buffaloed]

That's the most important part. Points are fickle over short time periods.

I don't care about points. I measure success in goals.

 

[Zman5778]

I just saw the top 25 under 25 over at Die by the Blade. My goodness.

Here's my top 25 prospects

Power
Peterka
Quinn
Poltapov
Rosen
Samuelsson
Levi
Johnson
Portillo
Ruotsalainen
Lukkonen
Murray
Kisakov
Laaksonen
Weissbach
Pekar
Bloom
Fitzgerald
Nadeau
Rousek
Sardarian
Lyckasen
Novikov
Huglen
Cederqvist

Those 25 all have a shot at NHL or NHL/AHL tweener (15F, 8D, 3G). Don't see much point in ranking the rest.

All prospects have a shot. That's why they're prospects. But in that list.......I have no problem envisioning at least 15 having at least several cups of coffee in the NHL. Maybe closer to 20. We are as deep as we've been in years.

 

[Zman5778]

I don't care about points. I measure success in goals.

Psh. Secondary power play assist to primary shorthanded point ratio is where it's at.

 

[flashsabre]

Psh. Secondary power play assist to primary shorthanded point ratio is where it's at.

I don’t even count secondary goals. Primary goals are the only ones I count.

 

[Sabre the Win]

Literally. Are you already sure that Eklund will be as good as Kucherov or Gaudreau? But you think Power won't be so good. It is very strange.

I don't understand what you're trying to say here in rebuttal to my post, I don't see the correlation of what I said that adds Kucherov or Gaudreau into this and I never said Power wont be any good, I said the only person I would chose over Power in that draft is Eklund and if we HAD chosen Eklund he would be already showing and proving like he's doing in San Jose.

 

[Fjordsen]

I don't understand what you're trying to say here in rebuttal to my post, I don't see the correlation of what I said that adds Kucherov or Gaudreau into this and I never said Power wont be any good, I said the only person I would chose over Power in that draft is Eklund and if we HAD chosen Eklund he would be already showing and proving like he's doing in San Jose.

I'm talking about this and say that Eklund has not yet proven anything and I would not choose him instead of Power. In your first message, you talk about Eklund as if he is already an established and proven player, but he is not.

 

[Sabre the Win]

I'm talking about this and say that Eklund has not yet proven anything and I would not choose him instead of Power. In your first message, you talk about Eklund as if he is already an established and proven player, but he is not.

He will be, he's clearly showing he's going to be a good NHL player. He's been a big part of San Jose's early success.

 

[Fjordsen]

He will be, he's clearly showing he's going to be a good NHL player. He's been a big part of San Jose's early success.

Are you so sure about this? I like him, but he played a couple of games. Also obviously, that doesn't mean Power won't.

 

[Jacob582]

If Power decided to sign this year and was playing the exact level that Hagg is playing; we would be pretty thrilled, wouldn't we?

 

[BuffaloGooner]

If Power decided to sign this year and was playing the exact level that Hagg is playing; we would be pretty thrilled, wouldn't we?

Casuals absolutely would not be but on this board we’d be thrilled IMO

 

[Jim Bob]

 

[SnuggaRUDE]

I'm talking about this and say that Eklund has not yet proven anything and I would not choose him instead of Power. In your first message, you talk about Eklund as if he is already an established and proven player, but he is not.

To be fair Eklund's success in the SHL was more proof than anything Power did when drafted.

 

[Fjordsen]

To be fair Eklund's success in the SHL was more proof than anything Power did when drafted.

Do you understand what I'm talking about in general? Maybe I won't explain myself too clearly due to translation difficulties?

FUTURE

I'm talking about the future, and that I will take Power instead of Eklund.

 

[SnuggaRUDE]

Do you understand what I'm talking about in general? Maybe I won't explain myself too clearly due to translation difficulties?

FUTURE

I'm talking about the future, and that I will take Power instead of Eklund.

Maybe it's a translation difficulty. It somehow came across of holding a lack of establishment only against Eklund.

 

[Fjordsen]

Maybe it's a translation difficulty. It somehow came across of holding a lack of establishment only against Eklund.

Now I don't understand you.

I don’t know how to explain it more easily.

Power - good prospect
Eklund - good prospect

I like both prospects, but due to several factors, I'll take Power.

And about the future, I said that it is not known how all this will look in five years. Moreover, Adams has taken many good wingers with high ceilings over the past two years: Quinn, Peterka, Rosen, Poltapov, Kisakov and other guys.

 

[Washed Up 29YearOld]

The thing about d-men, is that a top 4 core has such a pervasive effect on the game. You're on the ice longer than forwards. There's 2 pairing not 3 line. You have a bigger impact.

If you have the ability to be elite at defense first, winning puck/board battles, and move the puck out of the zone consistently -- that's good enough-- because if Power can achieve this he's going to generate lots of possession that'll lead to goals/offensive threat but usually diluted off the score-sheet by the time it's in the net.

I have a low bar for points in a d-man, Power is offensively talented and skilled. But if he can consistently shift possession and move it out of the zone, have elite shutdown defense, win most battles- he'll be just as valuable as what Eklund could end up

 

[Fjordsen]

The thing about d-men, is that a top 4 has such a pervasive effect on the game. You're out there more than forwards. There's 2 pairing not 3 line. You have a bigger impact.

If you have the ability to be elite at defense first, winning puck/board battles, and move the puck out of the zone consistently -- that's good enough; cos you're going to have Power create a lot of possession that leads to goals but mostly diluted off the score-sheet by the time it's in the net.

I don't care about points really, he is offensively talented and skilled. But if he can consistently shift possession and move it out of the zone while contributing significant offensive- he'll be just as valuable as what Eklund could end up

I am of the same opinion. Getting a good winger is much easier than a guy with potential #1 D, and I think he has that potential.

 

[GOALOFSSON]

Him and Dahlin will be huge

 

[MarkusKetterer]

Him and Dahlin will be huge

He already is huge

 

[Club]

Man I love our prospect pool.

 

[Brodeur]

PSA, Wisconsin@Michigan is on at 7pm EST on Big Ten Network.

 

[Fjordsen]

Power looks solid vs Wisconsin

 

[jc17]

Nice assist.

Kevyn adams in attendance? For power, portillo, beniers, or brisson?

 

[itwasaforwardpass]

Power is very aggressive sneaking in to soft spots in the offensive zone.