Leafs ranked 20th by Hockey's Future.

[The Apologist]

What a bout Bozak?

DO was practically psychic in predicting last season for Tyler. It is actually very eerie how close his prediction came to being right, wasn't it DO?

 

[The Apologist]

No I haven't watched them play, I'm comparing their individual prospect rankings to our individual prospect rankings.

I see Rielly as the highest ranked prospect out of both teams at 8.5C.
I see Chicago having 2 players at 7.5C (Teravainen and Saad).
I see Toronto having 3 players at 7.5C (Kadri, Colborne and Blacker).
I see Chicago with 10 players at 7.0C while Toronto has 8 at 7.0C.
I see Chicago has 4 players with 7.0D while Toronto has 3 at 7.0D.

Toronto has more of the highest ranked prospects. Chicago has slightly more of the other higher ranked prospects.

Right off the bat given the rankings one could say Toronto has better prospects. Other factors such as NHL readiness (Saad and Shaw looked pretty good at the end of last season) I realize can jump Chicago past Toronto in the rankings but I fail to see why they should be 11 rankings ahead. Something more like 1 or 2 ahead of Toronto (whether it be around the 10 or 20th mark in the rankings I don't care) seems better to me.

Well done sir, well done.

 

[charliolemieux]

DO was practically psychic in predicting last season for Tyler. It is actually very eerie how close his prediction came to being right, wasn't it DO?

Really? I don't remember.

Please DO, tell us the story of Bozak.

 

[RogerRoeper*]

"Due to financial constraints, the Columbus Blue Jackets are sad the select Nikolai Zherdev"

That was exactly my point. Their first round busts have nothing to do with money. Teams select what are the best players available to them. Some turn out, some don't.

Money is a lazy argument to avoid his argument that rebuilding the "Right Way" doesn't always work.

 

[MakeTheIronSing]

Is it possible to rebuild the wrong way.... Or is that one of them crazy oxy moron type things?

 

[RogerRoeper*]

Boston won a cup with fantastic second round drafting, trades and UFA signings.

 

[Disgruntled Observer*]

I never said that. What I said was it doesn't always work.

And again, you honestly think teams like Columbus, Florida, and Islanders only have seen their players not turn out like they expected because of money? They are taking the same players everyone else would have in terms of top 5-10 picks. Money has nothing to do with it.

Nashville has serious financial issues, yet they've been fine drafting players.

There are of course exceptions to rules.
Nashville is a poor team that has been successful.
Good for them. There are other examples as well.

But as a general rule, the poor teams struggle. They draft superstars like Tavares, yet still struggle.
Some poor teams are affected by both poor drafting and financial disadvantages.
Columbus for example drafts poor players and are poor.

Is that your point? If your team is poor and drafts lousy players, you don't succeed?
Wow.
Enlightening.

 

[Disgruntled Observer*]

The bias was plainly shown by Grant.

And when you called him a liar about 4 other people showed you you were wrong. So I don't know how you managed to miss that.

Has nothing to do with Burke unless he is making the rankings.

I did not miss that and I apologized to grant for calling him a liar.

Again, I'm not saying these rankings are gospel. I'm not saying they're 100% evidence of which prospects will succeed.
They are simply a very good benchmark. Especially when compared to other prospect rankings (like the hockey news, who created their lists based on consensus of nhl scouts).

People like you and Grant barely seen these other guys play (if at all).
Who do you think I should allow to affect my opinion?
Grant and Charliolemiux on the internet who haven't even seen most of the players?
Or rankings created by people whose specific job it is to travel and watch the players in question? Or actual nhl scouts ranking systems like in the hockey news?

Face it... I'm much more impartial than you. I allow facts and informed opinions to shape my judgement... whereas you just say "I 'like' the leafs, so that means our prospects are the best!!!!"

 

[charliolemieux]

There are of course exceptions to rules.
Nashville is a poor team that has been successful.
Good for them. There are other examples as well.

But as a general rule, the poor teams struggle. They draft superstars like Tavares, yet still struggle.
Some poor teams are affected by both poor drafting and financial disadvantages.
Columbus for example drafts poor players and are poor.

Is that your point? If your team is poor and drafts lousy players, you don't succeed?
Wow.
Enlightening.

You're flailing at straws now.

Tell us about Bozak.

 

[Disgruntled Observer*]

Really? I don't remember.

Please DO, tell us the story of Bozak.

Bozak is an ahl player.
Do to our lack of a legit Center (or lack of a legit GM, depending on how you look at it), we've been stuck with an ahl player as our number 1 C.

Still stand by that...

 

[charliolemieux]

I did not miss that and I apologized to grant for calling him a liar.

Again, I'm not saying these rankings are gospel. I'm not saying they're 100% evidence of which prospects will succeed.
They are simply a very good benchmark. Especially when compared to other prospect rankings (like the hockey news, who created their lists based on consensus of nhl scouts).

People like you and Grant barely seen these other guys play (if at all).
Who do you think I should allow to affect my opinion?
Grant and Charliolemiux on the internet who haven't even seen most of the players?
Or rankings created by people whose specific job it is to travel and watch the players in question? Or actual nhl scouts ranking systems like in the hockey news?

Face it... I'm much more impartial than you. I allow facts and informed opinions to shape my judgement... whereas you just say "I 'like' the leafs, so that means our prospects are the best!!!!"

YOu hate everything associated with BUrke and everything he has done. No real reason you just hate him.

That makes you the LEAST impartial person around here.

You refuse to even look at the facts that the rankings are totally screwy just so you can rail on about what a terrible job Burke has done and how awful our prospects are. Your hatred blinds you, but you think you are impartial.

I'm surprised you even think Rielly is a half decent junior player.

 

[charliolemieux]

Bozak is an ahl player.
Do to our lack of a legit Center (or lack of a legit GM, depending on how you look at it), we've been stuck with an ahl player as our number 1 C.

Still stand by that...

Now I remember.

Good one.

 

[Bomber0104]

Is it possible to rebuild the wrong way.... Or is that one of them crazy oxy moron type things?

its definitely possible. for example when your idiotic management team ****s over your team as bad as this franchise and you are one of the ********* hockey teams on the planet for almost a decade while having a ****** prospect system in the eyes of all reputable sources.....well yea i think its pretty obvious that there our idiot managers have made the wrong decisions

 

[Disgruntled Observer*]

No I haven't watched them play, I'm comparing their individual prospect rankings to our individual prospect rankings.

I see Rielly as the highest ranked prospect out of both teams at 8.5C.
I see Chicago having 2 players at 7.5C (Teravainen and Saad).
I see Toronto having 3 players at 7.5C (Kadri, Colborne and Blacker).
I see Chicago with 10 players at 7.0C while Toronto has 8 at 7.0C.
I see Chicago has 4 players with 7.0D while Toronto has 3 at 7.0D.

Toronto has more of the highest ranked prospects. Chicago has slightly more of the other higher ranked prospects.

Right off the bat given the rankings one could say Toronto has better prospects. Other factors such as NHL readiness (Saad and Shaw looked pretty good at the end of last season) I realize can jump Chicago past Toronto in the rankings but I fail to see why they should be 11 rankings ahead. Something more like 1 or 2 ahead of Toronto (whether it be around the 10 or 20th mark in the rankings I don't care) seems better to me.

So I guess that proves that everything they've done is wrong... and same with the hockey news. And that means that the leafs prospects are epic.

Do you think it is possible for a team to have mediocre prospects? Is it possible?
If your answer is yes, what would count as "proof" of their mediocrity?
Because apparantly consensus of nhl scouts doesn't count. Nor hf rankings.
What will count as evidence?
or do you think that EVERY team has "equal" prospects, and every single GM has done a good as a job as every other GM?

 

[Grant]

I'm curious on the Hockey News rankings but can't find it. Could someone link me?

 

[Bomber0104]

It's simple. This is HF, the land of 'busts' like Gardiner. I'm sure HF is bang on again this time with yet another Leaf trolling.

right pal...so a site that makes its money delivering the best possible scouting publications they can are compromising their own integrity to "troll Leafs fans".

if thats what you think. wow. im appalled.

doesnt sound like a good business model at all.

 

[Disgruntled Observer*]

YOu hate everything associated with BUrke and everything he has done. No real reason you just hate him.

That makes you the LEAST impartial person around here.

You refuse to even look at the facts that the rankings are totally screwy just so you can rail on about what a terrible job Burke has done and how awful our prospects are. Your hatred blinds you, but you think you are impartial.

I'm surprised you even think Rielly is a half decent junior player.

I didn't hate Burke at the beginning you know. I was right on board with him.

But then things fell apart and I didn't allow my hometeam bias to affect my opinion.

Last year we finished 5th last, so my opinion that he's a bad GM is backed up by facts.
People would defend him by saying "No, he's dramatically improved our prospects."
But nobody believes that other than leaf fans. Not the nhl scouts that make the hockey news rankings, nor HF, nor ANYBODY.

The facts are on my side. Not bias. Facts.

 

[charliolemieux]

I'm curious on the Hockey News rankings but can't find it. Could someone link me?

I have the THN yearbook.

TOR is still 20th.
CHI is 12th.
DET is whaaaaa???? 21st

MIN is 7th
MTL 28th
EDM 1st


So ya a little discrepancy going on.

 

[charliolemieux]

right pal...so a site that makes its money delivering the best possible scouting publications they can are compromising their own integrity to "troll Leafs fans".

if thats what you think. wow. im appalled.

doesnt sound like a good business model at all.

Actually you could not be more wrong.


Just look at how much action these stupid rankings have caused around here.

YOu have it totally backwards. Trolling the TML is good for business.

 

[Bomber0104]

I am not sure what you do not understand.

Unless one is saying that Hamilton is or will be better than Neidermeyer, which is flat-out ridiculous to assume, then the Kessel trade is not worse.

whats ridiculous to assume is that you think you can look into the future and predict how the trade will end. thats whats ridiculous to assume. theres no facts to support this position. none. just fantasy land.

The fact is you DONT know what is going to happen to Phil Kessel in Toronto...especially when he is a UFA with a NMC. You dont know what Dougie Hamilton is going to be. You dont know how much more potential Tyler Seguin has.

You simply dont.

What we do know is that Kessel hasnt done **** for the Leafs and they are still a **** team whether he is on it or not. He is a UFA with a NMC in 2014. Tyler Seguin is on contract until 2019. Dougie Hamilton is in junior.

So stop this ridiculousness. You dont have clairvoyance. You cant see into the future. Stop pretending that you can.

Thanks.

 

[Disgruntled Observer*]

You're flailing at straws now.

Tell us about Bozak.

So you think it's mere coincidence that most of the poor teams struggle?
It's magic?
Maybe the rich teams cast a magic spell on them?
Is that what you think?

It's just such common sense...
The poor teams (that have WAY less money) spend almost $20 million less on their players... but that's not why they lose.
Let alone advantages like highest paid scouting departments, front offices filled with elite hockey minds...
none of that makes a difference?
The poor teams generally fail (remember, I'm well aware there are a few exceptions) because of magic?

This is a new low Charliolemiux.
Believing in magic? Really? Magic?

 

[charliolemieux]

I didn't hate Burke at the beginning you know. I was right on board with him.

But then things fell apart and I didn't allow my hometeam bias to affect my opinion.

Last year we finished 5th last, so my opinion that he's a bad GM is backed up by facts.
People would defend him by saying "No, he's dramatically improved our prospects."
But nobody believes that other than leaf fans. Not the nhl scouts that make the hockey news rankings, nor HF, nor ANYBODY.

The facts are on my side. Not bias. Facts.

Sure man whatever you say.

 

[Bomber0104]

Actually you could not be more wrong.


Just look at how much action these stupid rankings have caused around here.

YOu have it totally backwards. Trolling the TML is good for business.

Nope. Its just a few silly fans like you and Edie that cant accept reality. I mean if you actually track the progress of this thread its really just been a few homer Leafs fans that prevent reasonable discussion and ultimately reasonable conclusions from being made. you were up all night last night stating that you can see into the future. you obviously have some sort of a problem with accepting reality.

Other fans realize the Leafs have a **** team with **** prospects because we've seen this crap before.

Back in 2008 the LEafs fans thought they had wicked prospects, without support from the credible people. And these critics were right. Leafs fans were wrong.

So please tell me when all these expert opinions decided to throw their integrity out the door to start "trolling Leafs fans".

 

[Disgruntled Observer*]

I have the THN yearbook.

TOR is still 20th.
CHI is 12th.
DET is whaaaaa???? 21st

MIN is 7th
MTL 28th
EDM 1st


So ya a little discrepancy going on.

Ok, so never mind Detroit of Nashville...

What do you think of the fact that both the hockey news rankings (created by professional nhl scouts) AND HF both list the leafs as 20.

Do you consider the possibility that our prospects are simply mediocre?

 

[charliolemieux]

So you think it's mere coincidence that most of the poor teams struggle?
It's magic?
Maybe the rich teams cast a magic spell on them?
Is that what you think?

It's just such common sense...
The poor teams (that have WAY less money) spend almost $20 million less on their players... but that's not why they lose.
Let alone advantages like highest paid scouting departments, front offices filled with elite hockey minds...
none of that makes a difference?
The poor teams generally fail (remember, I'm well aware there are a few exceptions) because of magic?

This is a new low Charliolemiux.
Believing in magic? Really? Magic?

And this makes sense how?

A little coherency would be appreciated.