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

[Mrb1p]

List is 2019 heavy. 20/50 being 2019 picks is a bit much. No coincidence the team you cheer for ended up having the most prospects on the list either.

It is 2019 heavy, but its mostly an asset list, as I use the "would I trade X for Y" to rank players.

 

[Skinnyjimmy08]

This is one of the most heated rankings ive ever seen!!

I am actually enjoying reading all the comments!!!

Good on OP taking the time to do his rankings. Its one thing i have never attempted on here cause its very difficult. Obviously there are some parts to it i dont agree with but i dont think ive ever read a ranking that i 100% agree with.

Fun thread to read!

 

[Volica]

Alright, you've seen him live, that makes you an expert ? Josh Brook played like 20 games on national television.

But anyway, since you like in the WHL how do you know Dobson is better ? I clearly watched more than you, or did you take the scenic road through the Parc de la vérandrye to Rouyn ?

Top 15 pick, big kid with room to fill out, first team Canadian national; just put up a massive run for the Huskies.
He's done nothing to downgrade himself from being a top pick, while I think Josh's increased his stock... he hasn't increased it to be considered a top 15 pick in his draft year.

 

[Kobe Armstrong]

Lots of people in this thread complaining about how many Canadiens there are in the top-50 but nobody is providing any logical arguments for why players behind them should be ranked higher.

 

[Volica]

Lots of people in this thread complaining about how many Canadiens there are in the top-50 but nobody is providing any logical arguments for why players behind them should be ranked higher.

Do you all work government jobs or something

I mean, I just did a couple pages worth of why Josh Brook isn't the 13th best prospect in hockey. But hey, Live your life and see what you want.

 

[TeddyBare]

Lots of people in this thread complaining about how many Canadiens there are in the top-50 but nobody is providing any logical arguments for why players behind them should be ranked higher.

Do you all work government jobs or something

Ty smith
WHL defenseman of the year
CHL defenseman of the year
younger than Josh brooke

Josh brooke
didnt win WHL defenseman of the year
didnt win CHL defenseman of the year
older than Ty smith

Logical enough for you?

 

[greasysnapper]

You have to love people coming in here just to post that OP is a homer because he ranked a MTL prospect higher than their own prospect. The irony is strong in here.

Good on Mrb1p for defending is OPINION through the last 6 pages.

Lots of people myself included can easily see the bias, and it has nothing to do with the team they follow. I mostly follow the Sharks. And I'm saying how is someone like Kravtsov or Kaprizov (who was 35th or something) behind someone like Brooks? Either MrB1P has no idea what he's talking about (plausible) or only watches Habs prospects and has very limited knowledge of any other prospect (plausible).

 

[Mrb1p]

Ty smith
WHL defenseman of the year
CHL defenseman of the year
younger than Josh brooke

Josh brooke
didnt win WHL defenseman of the year
didnt win CHL defenseman of the year
older than Ty smith

You know that Brook was runner up?

Also
Josh Brook
75 in 59, 1.27 PPG
Ty smith
69 points in 57 games, 1.21 PPG

 

[LeafGrief]

Saw the thread title. Skipped the OP entirely and dove straight into the juicey bits (which started on post 2).

Did not disappoint, 10/10 would chuckle again.

 

[Mrb1p]

Lots of people myself included can easily see the bias, and it has nothing to do with the team they follow. I mostly follow the Sharks. And I'm saying how is someone like Kravtsov or Kaprizov (who was 35th or something) behind someone like Brooks? Either MrB1P has no idea what he's talking about (plausible) or only watches Habs prospects and has very limited knowledge of any other prospect (plausible).

Or maybe I watch them, and this is my opinion of those players. Maybe it has nothing to do with bias, but actually an opinion.

 

[CantLoseWithMatthews]

You know that Brook was runner up?

Also
Josh Brook
75 in 59, 1.27 PPG
Ty smith
69 points in 57 games, 1.21 PPG

Why is being runner up and older better than winning and being younger?

 

[TeddyBare]

You know that Brook was runner up?

Also
Josh Brook
75 in 59, 1.27 PPG
Ty smith
69 points in 57 games, 1.21 PPG

Ty smith D+1
69 points in 57 games, 1.21 PPG

Josh brook D+1
32 points in 45 games, 0.71 PPG

Funny how that works doesn't it?

 

[Mrb1p]

Why is being runner up and older better than winning and being younger?

Its one spot difference, and thats not what makes him better.

Better tools, better production is what does.

 

[Mrb1p]

Ty smith D+1
69 points in 57 games, 1.21 PPG

Josh brook D+1
32 points in 45 games, 0.71 PPG

Funny how that works doesn't it?

Know what happened to Josh Brook that season? Theres no doubt that Smith was better than Brook in their D+1, but thats black and white.

 

[Mrb1p]

If we come back to this list in 3 years, and all your prospects have panned out to fit your list you will be heralded as a great prospect analyst. However, should it not pan out you should probably never post a prospect rankings list ever again.

Bookmarked this thread for future bumping.

Not the first time Ill be wrong or right, I am not all-seeing Odin and I cannot be 100% right all the time. I was wrong last year for ranking Pettersson 6th overall with Necas and Mittlestatd above him.

 

[lakai17]

Ty Smith a little high.

 

[Bevans]

Or maybe I watch them, and this is my opinion of those players. Maybe it has nothing to do with bias, but actually an opinion.

The rest of your list aside, Josh Brooks reeks of an over-reaction to a D2 season. I think this is a good example of the flaw of the eye-test.

Sure he looks amazing to you, anything less would be a massive disappointment. Prospects shouldn't be sent flying up the list for dominating in their 19/20 season. Its not surprising he didn't continue to dominate when he got to the AHL and returned to playing against guys who are older than him.

I expect him to struggle next year and quietly slide down your list. Which isn't to say he can't be a good prospect. 13 is just an over-reaction in my mind, so I'm not surprised you're getting blow back.

Addison, Woo, and Smith all had more productive D1 seasons than Brooks did. I wonder if you'll have room for all of them in the top 15 next season when they invariably dominate the 16 year olds they line up against?

 

[Kobe Armstrong]

Ty smith
WHL defenseman of the year
CHL defenseman of the year
younger than Josh brooke

Josh brooke
didnt win WHL defenseman of the year
didnt win CHL defenseman of the year
older than Ty smith

Logical enough for you?

I personally would take Smith over Brook as well but I can see the argument for why someone would prefer Brook. He's a good bit bigger, more physical, and plays a premium position. Either way it's better to differences their differences rationally than to belittle the OP with useless comments

 

[Kobe Armstrong]

Also I respect the Hague ranking at 11. Not sure if I would have him there but he's such an interesting prospect that seems to never get talked about. He'll score goals like Parayko in the NHL

 

[mattydamon]

Oh man - I mean I guess respect for responding to all of these but this list is something else.

Quinn at 19 jumps out but there are a lot of crazy ratings here - go habs go!

 

[David Suzuki]

Lafreniere got outproduced by a guy with limited offensive upside.

Veleno isn't very good man

 

[Kairi Zaide]

If we come back to this list in 3 years, and all your prospects have panned out to fit your list you will be heralded as a great prospect analyst. However, should it not pan out you should probably never post a prospect rankings list ever again.

Bookmarked this thread for future bumping.

Then we should stop doing "consensus" prospect rankings because the lists that stems from these polls are always equally as bad as most prospect lists out there.

 

[Mrb1p]

The rest of your list aside, Josh Brooks reeks of an over-reaction to a D2 season. I think this is a good example of the flaw of the eye-test.

Sure he looks amazing to you, anything less would be a massive disappointment. Prospects shouldn't be sent flying up the list for dominating in their 19/20 season. Its not surprising he didn't continue to dominate when he got to the AHL and returned to playing against guys who are older than him.

I expect him to struggle next year and quietly slide down your list. Which isn't to say he can't be a good prospect. 13 is just an over-reaction in my mind, so I'm not surprised you're getting blow back.

Addison, Woo, and Smith all had more productive D1 seasons than Brooks did. I wonder if you'll have room for all of them in the top 15 next season when they invariably dominate the 16 year olds they line up against?

I already have Smith in my top 15, just behind Brook.

Also who says Brook struggled in the AHL ? Ive seen one of his game live and three on TV, he was an absolute monster defensively, and he was physical as hell. But I guess he didn't produce much in the games he played, so he "struggled".

Are you aware of Brook's injury history?

Oh man - I mean I guess respect for responding to all of these but this list is something else.

Quinn at 19 jumps out but there are a lot of crazy ratings here - go habs go!

Nah, go Canucks go, amirite ?

 

[Adtar02]

It is 2019 heavy, but its mostly an asset list, as I use the "would I trade X for Y" to rank players.

That makes it even worse

 

[Lampedampe]

Last years list looks terrible in hindsight. There is absolutely no way have watched and analysed each and everyone of these prospects enough to accurately rank them, did you regularly watch full KHL, BCHL, SHL, NCAA and FEL games?