MrB1P's top 50 affiliated prospects. Edition 2019-2020.

[Mrb1p]

I've probably watched more Suzuki than you over the past 3 years than you have. Talked to more informed people who actually scout the OHL as a profession etc. So, don't try to say my opinion is stats driven. I just used quantifiable evidence to support my case. You want to belittle my opinion by saying its stats driven. Your opinion is clearly driven by who the Habs have the rights too. You seem to think you know more than everyone here, and seem to think no one else watches these players. Guess what, no, dominating the OHL playoffs in your last OHL playoffs doesn't dramatically change things. The only reason you heavily weight it is because his prospect rights are now owned by MTL and not Vegas. I actually watch Hockey and follow prospects. Age-related factors need to be accounted for. You seem to just say, well its the same as someone doing it a year younger. All evidence shows that isn't true. You continually try to compare Marner's 18-year-old numbers to Suzuki's 19-year-old numbers.

Mete isn't a top 4 d-man, he may be used as one, but nothing really supports the case. His doesn't produce points, he isn't a good possession player, and outside of his skating, he doesn't do anything particularly well. Dermott dramatically outplayed him this year. Its not even close. Now, Dermott has a year and a half on him. Cody Ceci got the most 2nd ES minutes on the Senators last year? Does that make him a good player? Zaitsev and Hainsey got the 2nd and 3rd most on the Leafs? Does that make them good players? Mete's gf% ratio is good over that stretch because Price played lights out, not because of Mete. He was just lucky to have goaltending that stopped 94.1% of shots right behind him. So, he isn't good possessionally and doesn't produce points.

Obviously, Mete isnt a perfect player, but when most of the hockey world, including his coach, thinks hes a top 4 Dman, maybe your stats dont tell you the whole story. Anyway, youve made your case, I don't think its supported by actual viewings, or youre not being honest about what you actually saw on the ice for both Mete and Suzuki.

 

[93LEAFS]

Obviously, Mete isnt a perfect player, but when most of the hockey world, including his coach, thinks hes a top 4 Dman, maybe your stats dont tell you the whole story. Anyway, youve made your case, I don't think its supported by actual viewings, or youre not being honest about what you actually saw on the ice for both Mete and Suzuki.

Tons of coaches think players are top 4 players and they aren't. That's just an appeal to authority.

I don't think a lot of your rankings are supported by actual viewings, but you seem to claim to watch more than anyone else here. I've seen Suzuki develop for 4 years. Yes, his playoffs are impressive. But, he's also a 19 year old in a league which only allows 3 players older per team, with most of the good ones going to the AHL and pro-hockey. You seem to continually ignore the age curve related to development when talking about Suzuki. Yes, he obviously improved this year, but he's expected to significantly improve, and his season this year didn't dramatically beat that age curve.

I mean, the same appeal to authority argument could be made that the Habs even decided to send Mete down to the AHL at one point this season.

 

[Dead Coyote]

Josh Brooks season is literally the best WHL season for a Dman scoring-wise since the turn of the millenium.

I wanted to look up this stat cause it seemed pretty incredible but...it's pretty patently false no matter how you look at it.

In terms of points, there's a lot more players that had over 75 points. I think the highest I saw was 85 by Brenden Kichton in the 12-13 season. At the time, he was 19.

In terms of ppg, the highest I saw with a reasonable amount of games was Kale Clague who had 71 in 54 back in 17-18. For most of that season he was 18.

Oh, the PPG was 1.27 for Josh Brooks and 1.31 for Kale Clague.

Still incredible, just not as incredible.

Personally I think Fleischmann's rookie season was probably the most impressive from a dman in the WHL.

 

[93LEAFS]

I wanted to look up this stat cause it seemed pretty incredible but...it's pretty patently false no matter how you look at it.

In terms of points, there's a lot more players that had over 75 points. I think the highest I saw was 85 by Brenden Kichton in the 12-13 season. At the time, he was 19.

In terms of ppg, the highest I saw with a reasonable amount of games was Kale Clague who had 71 in 54 back in 17-18. For most of that season he was 18.

Oh, the PPG was 1.27 for Josh Brooks and 1.31 for Kale Clague.

Still incredible, just not as incredible.

Personally I think Fleischmann's rookie season was probably the most impressive from a dman in the WHL.

Elite Prospects - WHL Stats All-time season

Also ignores the fact, most elite young defenders graduate out of the league before they play their 19-year-old season like Seth Jones, Morgan Rielly, and Ivan Provorov.

 

[Ezekial]

He meant best season in the WHL ever for having played 59 games. Wow.

 

[Legend123]

Tons of coaches think players are top 4 players and they aren't. That's just an appeal to authority.

I don't think a lot of your rankings are supported by actual viewings, but you seem to claim to watch more than anyone else here. I've seen Suzuki develop for 4 years. Yes, his playoffs are impressive. But, he's also a 19 year old in a league which only allows 3 players older per team, with most of the good ones going to the AHL and pro-hockey. You seem to continually ignore the age curve related to development when talking about Suzuki. Yes, he obviously improved this year, but he's expected to significantly improve, and his season this year didn't dramatically beat that age curve.

I mean, the same appeal to authority argument could be made that the Habs even decided to send Mete down to the AHL at one point this season.

Yeah u clearly dont watch mete lol. Hes one of the best skaters out there with an elite stick. His defending is elite esp at such a young age. And sure his stats dont scream offense but if u watched him play you would see he always joins the offense and is quite good in that regard.
Stop saying u watch him.

 

[ChaoticOrange]

Brook at 13, Bouchard an HM. Nope, no bias there.

 

[93LEAFS]

Yeah u clearly dont watch mete lol. Hes one of the best skaters out there with an elite stick. His defending is elite esp at such a young age. And sure his stats dont scream offense but if u watched him play you would see he always joins the offense and is quite good in that regard.
Stop saying u watch him.

I've seen him a bunch from his time to London, to his time in the show. His only high-end attribute is his skating.

 

[Legend123]

I've seen him a bunch from his time to London, to his time in the show. His only high-end attribute is his skating.

So u agree.

 

[Hfbsux]

Tons of coaches think players are top 4 players and they aren't. That's just an appeal to authority.

I don't think a lot of your rankings are supported by actual viewings, but you seem to claim to watch more than anyone else here. I've seen Suzuki develop for 4 years. Yes, his playoffs are impressive. But, he's also a 19 year old in a league which only allows 3 players older per team, with most of the good ones going to the AHL and pro-hockey. You seem to continually ignore the age curve related to development when talking about Suzuki. Yes, he obviously improved this year, but he's expected to significantly improve, and his season this year didn't dramatically beat that age curve.

I mean, the same appeal to authority argument could be made that the Habs even decided to send Mete down to the AHL at one point this season.

You think Suzuki didn't significantly improved? The big knock I (and pretty much everybody) had on him was his lack of intensity and involvment. Did he improve those? Yes. Significantly? Yes. He even said himself he was focusing on rounding his game up.

Unless you are statwatching only..

 

[Stewie Griffin]

You think Suzuki didn't significantly improved? The big knock I (and pretty much everybody) had on him was his lack of intensity and involvment. Did he improve those? Yes. Significantly? Yes. He even said himself he was focusing on rounding his game up.

Unless you are statwatching only..

He literally said in his post that he did improve. What I believe he's trying to say is that even though he improved, it's expect as a 19 year old CHL player (especially a former 1st round pick) that if you're not dominating, you're not developing right.

 

[Mrb1p]

Tons of coaches think players are top 4 players and they aren't. That's just an appeal to authority.

I don't think a lot of your rankings are supported by actual viewings, but you seem to claim to watch more than anyone else here. I've seen Suzuki develop for 4 years. Yes, his playoffs are impressive. But, he's also a 19 year old in a league which only allows 3 players older per team, with most of the good ones going to the AHL and pro-hockey. You seem to continually ignore the age curve related to development when talking about Suzuki. Yes, he obviously improved this year, but he's expected to significantly improve, and his season this year didn't dramatically beat that age curve.

I mean, the same appeal to authority argument could be made that the Habs even decided to send Mete down to the AHL at one point this season.

Suzuki turned 19 in aughust, so no, there was not only "3" players older than him per team. Its not how age works, age is only a number you get on a random calendar, in reality, Suzuki was much closer to 2018 than a typical 2017 draftee, but I know you already know that and you are just being dishonest, so thats about it.

I wanted to look up this stat cause it seemed pretty incredible but...it's pretty patently false no matter how you look at it.

In terms of points, there's a lot more players that had over 75 points. I think the highest I saw was 85 by Brenden Kichton in the 12-13 season. At the time, he was 19.

In terms of ppg, the highest I saw with a reasonable amount of games was Kale Clague who had 71 in 54 back in 17-18. For most of that season he was 18.

Oh, the PPG was 1.27 for Josh Brooks and 1.31 for Kale Clague.

Still incredible, just not as incredible.

Personally I think Fleischmann's rookie season was probably the most impressive from a dman in the WHL.

Brook was better than all of those this year, few more points or not.

Brook at 13, Bouchard an HM. Nope, no bias there.

I don't like Bouchard, and this was before he was drafted by the Oilers, to be honest, he'd be out of the top 50 even if the Habs drafted him in 2018.

 

[Hfbsux]

He literally said in his post that he did improve. What I believe he's trying to say is that even though he improved, it's expect as a 19 year old CHL player (especially a former 1st round pick) that if you're not dominating, you're not developing right.

"Yes, he obviously improved this year, but he's expected to significantly improve, and his season this year didn't dramatically beat that age curve."

Sounds like statwatching to me.

 

[Mrb1p]

He literally said in his post that he did improve. What I believe he's trying to say is that even though he improved, it's expect as a 19 year old CHL player (especially a former 1st round pick) that if you're not dominating, you're not developing right.

So really, why are people so high on Morgan Frost then ? He's a 2017 first rounder too, I shouldve dropped him out of my top 50.

 

[Stewie Griffin]

So really, why are people so high on Morgan Frost then ? He's a 2017 first rounder too, I shouldve dropped him out of my top 50.

Well for one, why do you have Morgan Frost at 41, yet Suzuki at 20? If you're comparing the two of them right now clearly you think they are similar (as does everyone else), yet you ranked them 21 spots differently. Let's compare their stats:
Morgan Frost: (2017-18 season) 67 GP - 112 P (Playoffs) 24 GP - 28 P
Nick Suzuki: (2017-18 season) 64 GP - 100 P (Playoffs) 11 GP - 12 P (note: they played eachother in the playoffs this year)

Morgan Frost: (2018-19 season) 58 GP - 109 P (Playoffs) 11 GP - 18 P
Nick Suzuki: (2018-19 season) 59 GP - 94 P (Playoffs) 24 GP - 42 P

Now other than this year's playoffs, Frost has outscored Suzuki everywhere. Yes Suzuki had a historic run, and is a very good prospect to have, but how does this rank him 21 spots above Frost? Frost has put up at least 70 assists in each of the past 2 OHL seasons.
Another thing I'd like to point out is you seem to value WJC scoring when you were talking about Poehling's rank. So why was WJC scoring not valued when you ranked Suzuki? He only put up 3 points in 5 GP, while Frost put up 8 points in those same 5 GP. Your rankings show no consistency, and that's why people are calling you out for bias.

 

[Mrb1p]

Well for one, why do you have Morgan Frost at 41, yet Suzuki at 20? If you're comparing the two of them right now clearly you think they are similar (as does everyone else), yet you ranked them 21 spots differently. Let's compare their stats:
Morgan Frost: (2017-18 season) 67 GP - 112 P (Playoffs) 24 GP - 28 P
Nick Suzuki: (2017-18 season) 64 GP - 100 P (Playoffs) 11 GP - 12 P (note: they played eachother in the playoffs this year)

Morgan Frost: (2018-19 season) 58 GP - 109 P (Playoffs) 11 GP - 18 P
Nick Suzuki: (2018-19 season) 59 GP - 94 P (Playoffs) 24 GP - 42 P

Now other than this year's playoffs, Frost has outscored Suzuki everywhere. Yes Suzuki had a historic run, and is a very good prospect to have, but how does this rank him 21 spots above Frost? Frost has put up at least 70 assists in each of the past 2 OHL seasons.
Another thing I'd like to point out is you seem to value WJC scoring when you were talking about Poehling's rank. So why was WJC scoring not valued when you ranked Suzuki? He only put up 3 points in 5 GP, while Frost put up 8 points in those same 5 GP. Your rankings show no consistency, and that's why people are calling you out for bias.

My rankings shows no consistency when you focus solely on stats, I agree.

 

[Stewie Griffin]

My rankings shows no consistency when you focus solely on stats, I agree.

Yes I think everyone is aware of that

What ranks Suzuki 21 spots above Frost when Frost has outplayed him in every level? What ranks Suzuki above Barret Hayton who is a year younger, and plays a more complete game? What ranks Poehling above Frost and Hayton? I wouldn't mind if you had them all similarly ranked, as they all are similar prospects with top-6 forward potential, but you ranked the 2 habs prospects MUCH higher than the others. I think the problem people have with your rankings is that you clearly showed some bias (which is okay, we're all human), but then when people comment on the bias, you keep trying to defend yourself and keep saying things any one that watches hockey could say: "I don't like their skill set that much"

 

[Stewie Griffin]

Now I apologize for the bickering and I appreciate the time you put into these rankings. I love scouting prospects and trying to come up with ranks but the bias in these is pretty bad and you have been defending yourself also in a bias way.

 

[HockeyDBspecialist]

Brenden Kichton in the 12-13 season. At the time, he was 19.

59 vs 71 games...

 

[ChaoticOrange]

Suzuki turned 19 in aughust, so no, there was not only "3" players older than him per team. Its not how age works, age is only a number you get on a random calendar, in reality, Suzuki was much closer to 2018 than a typical 2017 draftee, but I know you already know that and you are just being dishonest, so thats about it.



Brook was better than all of those this year, few more points or not.



I don't like Bouchard, and this was before he was drafted by the Oilers, to be honest, he'd be out of the top 50 even if the Habs drafted him in 2018.

“I really highly value player IQ”

“I don’t like Bouchard”

K man, cmon. You can think Bouchard has some speed/quickness issues, but if you value IQ as highly as you say you do, your list should be significantly different. There’s a very strong Habs bias here, and considering you’ve slapped Habs prospects higher than significantly better prospects at every turn, Bouchard would be top 10 if he was in Montreal’s system.

Bouchard was just ranked the 17th best affiliated prospect in the world by HF, that generally hates the Oilers at least as much as you do.

I get you put yourself out there with a list like this but it’s got a lot of flaws.

 

[Stewie Griffin]

Yeah Brooks is another one who is a great prospect but should be no where near #13. He scored 75 points in 59 games as a 19 year old defense man. The season before, Ty Smith scored 73 points in 69 games as a 17 year old. That season, Clague also scored 71 points in 54 games as a 19 year old (same age as Brooks when he did it) and only scored 4 less points in 5 less games.

The bias is real.

 

[Hfbsux]

Yeah Brooks is another one who is a great prospect but should be no where near #13. He scored 75 points in 59 games as a 19 year old defense man. The season before, Ty Smith scored 73 points in 69 games as a 17 year old. That season, Clague also scored 71 points in 54 games as a 19 year old (same age as Brooks when he did it) and only scored 4 less points in 5 less games.

The bias is real.

You're one of the best statwatcher I've seen.

 

[Hfbsux]

“I really highly value player IQ”

“I don’t like Bouchard”

K man, cmon. You can think Bouchard has some speed/quickness issues, but if you value IQ as highly as you say you do, your list should be significantly different. There’s a very strong Habs bias here, and considering you’ve slapped Habs prospects higher than significantly better prospects at every turn, Bouchard would be top 10 if he was in Montreal’s system.

Bouchard was just ranked the 17th best affiliated prospect in the world by HF, that generally hates the Oilers at least as much as you do.

I get you put yourself out there with a list like this but it’s got a lot of flaws.

How is Bouchard defensive IQ?

 

[Stewie Griffin]

You're one of the best statwatcher I've seen.

Please tell me how Brooks is rated higher than Smith and that much higher than Clague then? Ty Smith is one of the better D-prospects out there. And are these stats irrelevant now? I think stats are the main reason Brooks was rated so high, so I think it's fair to use them to compare to other defenseman.

 

[Hfbsux]

Please tell me how Brooks is rated higher than Smith and that much higher than Clague then? Ty Smith is one of the better D-prospects out there. And are these stats irrelevant now? I think stats are the main reason Brooks was rated so high, so I think it's fair to use them to compare to other defenseman.

Viewings. I know how the poster is. He might be biaised but at least he watches the players. He's also aware of all the stats out there, like most regular here on hfboards. Funny because I'm pretty sure I had a discussion with him about Brook vs Smith and his opinion hasn't changed.

You'd think Caufield would be higher on his list since he's a habs prospect?