Prospect Info: Marlies/Prospects Thread

[Anthrax442]

Any update on Amirov and his recovery?

From what I read, he is going back to Germany for next round of treatment next month

 

[Anthrax442]

Here, found the sauce

 

[horner]

To bad knies didn't get invited to the usa world championship team

 

[fahad203]

Matt Tomkins should be a depth target

 

[Prominence]

Not that this is groundbreaking, but fusco is leaving harvard.

Tristan Broz, Cruz Lucius Leaving University Of Minnesota

What is happening in Minneapolis? Fresh off of a Frozen Four appearance, the University of Minnesota is having a nightmare …

www.prohockeyrumors.com

Noticed that tristan broz is leaving minnesota as well. He was drafted one pick after knies.

 

[Morgs]

Not that this is groundbreaking, but fusco is leaving harvard.

Tristan Broz, Cruz Lucius Leaving University Of Minnesota

What is happening in Minneapolis? Fresh off of a Frozen Four appearance, the University of Minnesota is having a nightmare …

www.prohockeyrumors.com

Noticed that tristan broz is leaving minnesota as well. He was drafted one pick after knies.

Fusco leaving is strange. Didn't get the pick in the first place, but he's Harvard royalty. His dad and uncle both played there. His cousin played there 4 years on the woman's side. His brother is going there this upcoming season.

I get he wasn't playing a lot, but its not like Harvard is especially stacked at defense going into next year, and he still played 26 games (limited minutes) this year.

 

[Twine Tickler]

 

[SeaOfBlue]

He wasn't scoring goals like that when he was last in the NHL.

 

[SeaOfBlue]

BC may be a good place for Fusco, if he wants to stay in that region. They have a number of smaller skill defenseman in their top 4 already, but they don't have the deepest defensive group and his main competition for a job would be Charlie Leddy.

That pick was really questionable from day 1. A D+1 undersized prep offensive defenseman who didn't even dominate should not be on anyone's radar.

 

[Mad hatter]

He wasn't scoring goals like that when he was last in the NHL.

Do you think the couple years he spent over there will translate into a better NHL player when he returns? I remember at the time thinking that wasn’t a bad deal for the leafs, but I was wrong.

 

[SeaOfBlue]

Do you think the couple years he spent over there will translate into a better NHL player when he returns? I remember at the time thinking that wasn’t a bad deal for the leafs, but I was wrong.

It wouldn't be the first time it happens.

He looks stronger and he looks like someone who may be able to fit in a bottom 6 in the NHL. Everything else was more than good enough to be an NHL player before he left, but he was kind of left in that limbo of not being good enough to be a top 6er, and not being a great fit for a bottom 6.

I also would not say the deal is bad just because the results didn't work out. This is a complete hyperbole for the Marchment/Malgin situation but if I offered you a $100 scratcher with a supposed 99% chance of winning $1000000 and you lost, would you not try again if you had another $100? The chances you lost twice in a row would be 0.01%, and the odds that you end up a lot better than you did are still significantly better if you make that deal than if you did not.

The only question that you should really be asking yourself is if you really have a 99% chance of winning, and that is where the real work goes. The decision is usually easier than getting the right information to make the right decision and being presented with the opportunity to make those decisions in the first place. If you believe Malgin was a 99% scratch ticket with a $1000000 payoff and Marchment was only worth $100, then it still a great deal to make even if Marchment works out and that scratcher is a bust. Most people can live without $100 with those kinds of chances at $1000000. However, if it turns out that Marchment was $1000 and you only had a 1% chance at $1000000 with Malgin, then it probably makes more sense to go with the sure thing (at least if you are not risk-seeking).

The real debate is more what is Marchment's risk-reward profile vs. Malgin's. I think that is really where the debate should be more than the final result... And I think Malgin's profile was much better than Marchment's. That is why I don't say that deal was a good one even though it didn't work out as expected (and that is also how you don't use revisionist history and hindsight to make decisions).

 

[Mad hatter]

It wouldn't be the first time it happens.

He looks stronger and he looks like someone who may be able to fit in a bottom 6 in the NHL. Everything else was more than good enough to be an NHL player before he left, but he was kind of left in that limbo of not being good enough to be a top 6er, and not being a great fit for a bottom 6.

I also would not say the deal is bad just because the results didn't work out. This is a complete hyperbole for the Marchment/Malgin situation but if I offered you a $100 scratcher with a supposed 99% chance of winning $1000000 and you lost, would you not try again if you had another $100? The chances you lost twice in a row would be 0.01%, and the odds that you end up a lot better than you did are still significantly better if you make that deal than if you did not.

The only question that you should really be asking yourself is if you really have a 99% chance of winning, and that is where the real work goes. The decision is usually easier than getting the right information to make the right decision and being presented with the opportunity to make those decisions in the first place. If you believe Malgin was a 99% scratch ticket with a $1000000 payoff and Marchment was only worth $100, then it still a great deal to make even if Marchment works out and that scratcher is a bust. Most people can live without $100 with those kinds of chances at $1000000. However, if it turns out that Marchment was $1000 and you only had a 1% chance at $1000000 with Malgin, then it probably makes more sense to go with the sure thing (at least if you are not risk-seeking).

The real debate is more what is Marchment's risk-reward profile vs. Malgin's. I think that is really where the debate should be more than the final result... And I think Malgin's profile was much better than Marchment's. That is why I don't say that deal was a good one even though it didn't work out as expected (and that is also how you don't use revisionist history and hindsight to make decisions).

I haven’t watched him play since he played on the leafs. I’m going to assume that you don’t see a top 6 player there still though? Was hoping he could maybe challenge for the open spot with JT.

 

[SeaOfBlue]

I haven’t watched him play since he played on the leafs. I’m going to assume that you don’t see a top 6 player there still though? Was hoping he could maybe challenge for the open spot with JT.

I guess he could, but I don't think Malgin is what that line needs unless Nylander is not going to be there.

Malgin would be more like a Kase or Kerfoot type. It is the same reason why Robertson may not make sense there either. Tavares' line needs someone like Knies, Killorn, Bunting, or Palat.

 

[diehardleafsfan9878]

I guess he could, but I don't think Malgin is what that line needs unless Nylander is not going to be there.

Malgin would be more like a Kase or Kerfoot type. It is the same reason why Robertson may not make sense there either. Tavares' line needs someone like Knies, Killorn, Bunting, or Palat.

Which is exactly why it's insane Ritchie was never tried there. Ritchie was trash, no question about that, but it is conceivable that he performs better playing with JT and WN.

 

[SeaOfBlue]

Which is exactly why it's insane Ritchie was never tried there. Ritchie was trash, no question about that, but it is conceivable that he performs better playing with JT and WN.

IDK why he wasn't tried there more either. That is the place he made the most sense.

 

[Thornbury]

IDK why he wasn't tried there more either. That is the place he made the most sense.

Yep, slow and slower. Can't see how that wouldn't have been a dynamite combo....

 

[SeaOfBlue]

Yep, slow and slower. Can't see how that wouldn't have been a dynamite combo....

At least Ritchie would have allowed Tavares to get more involved than just a net front guy, and that line did do well together in the brief time they were together.

 

[hockeywiz542]

 

[SeaOfBlue]

FWIW, those "forecasts" seem more like baseline expectations than upside. Outside of Niemela, Hirvonen, and Tverberg (who are all a bit younger), all of those guys have either already met those forecasts or are within a year of solid development from meeting those forecasts. I think it is a little bit pessimistic to think they are all going to plateau when the oldest ones are 23 or 24 right now, and we have seen countless guys jump up another tier at 25 or 26.

 

[Fogelhund]

I feel like they underrated Holmberg a bit.

 

[stickty111]

FWIW, those "forecasts" seem more like baseline expectations than upside. Outside of Niemela, Hirvonen, and Tverberg (who are all a bit younger), all of those guys have either already met those forecasts or are within a year of solid development from meeting those forecasts. I think it is a little bit pessimistic to think they are all going to plateau when the oldest ones are 23 or 24 right now, and we have seen countless guys jump up another tier at 25 or 26.

TORONTO TRADES	ARIZONA TRADES
William Nylander ($6.962 million AAV)	Jakob Chychrun ($4.6 million AAV)
Timothy Liljegren (RFA)	Lawson Crouse (RFA)
2024 first-round pick	2024 third-round pick

This is the trade he proposed. I'm not sure that scout is exactly great with this being the suggested.

 

[Morgs]

I feel like they underrated Holmberg a bit.

Everyone does.

I don't think people realize that he was a 22 year old 1C in the third best league in the league in the world all season dominating shot attempts with a 0.89PPG. Good/great skater to go with great defensive instincts, big work ethic, and an improved shot/offensive skillset the last few years as he's gotten more opportunity. Also won the MVP of the playoffs after he just turned 22 as a fun little thing.

He's the exact kind of player we love (but a bit worse a skater) in Mikheyev and Engvall. Might not be on the Leafs day 1 next season, but if it goes right he'll play 50+ games next season.

 

[htpwn]

Not saying its likely, but it'd be pretty funny after all the bellyaching about Marchment, if Malgin turned into a legit top 6 scoring threat.

 

[Maplebeasts]

I feel like they underrated Holmberg a bit.

I feel like they underrated a lot of guys there. Nick Robertson topping out as a "middle sixer" instead of a legit top 6 forward would be a disappointment. Legitimately elite production relative to age despite having injury issues. Also Niemela forecasted as a bottom pairing defenseman? Seriously? The "forecasts" are a lot closer to their floors than the middle or upper ends of their upside.

 

[mistaclick]

Agreed, to forecast Niemela as a “bottom-pairing” defenseman is a joke.
Source: I watched at least 30+ of his games this season.
To me he proved to be the most or second most reliable dman for Karpat in all situations by the end of the season (maybe only behind Ohtamaa who was an Olympian).
Much more reasonable to say his forecast is a second-pairing defender who will QB the PP. And I think he’ll turn heads when he’s here next camp, mark my words. For it all to work though he needs to add to his frame, at least hit 180 lbs or it might not really work out. Super excited to see him play again soonish and see where he’s at