Prospect Info: Phantoms (AHL), Reading Royals (ECHL), NCAA, Jrs., Int'l, etc. [Mid-April Edition]

[Beef Invictus]

I swear, I'm trying to give Briere the benefit of the doubt, but every time he speaks, I find at least 2 problems in what he said.

1) Focusing on making Cutter a center, which is already trying to fit him in a role instead of just focusing on growing his strengths and findings ways to minimize their weakness. That doesn't mean you can't try him at center, but clearly his best position is the wing.
2) Discussing 4th line roles, meaning that he might still holds the view of 4th line/bottom 6 lines having to be solely a low/non-offensive role grinding-type role. Given his praises of Desluariers, it's not making me feel great...

There's no reason a team couldn't start development of one of their top forwards in the bottom 6. The only reason is that you're already decided the a very specific part of your lineup has a very specific role. By thinking this way, you've already mentally boxed yourself in. In order to be good, you need some type of secondary scoring out of your bottom 6, AND you also need production out of your ELCs and 2nd contracts.

Regarding Cutter's development, I'd rather see them deploy him in ways to beneficial Cutter's development. Ideally, sure with other offensive talent, but that doesn't mean he can't play 11-12 min of 5v5 and PP time and still develop. It's not long term, but it's fine to have a young player come into the league in the bottom of your lineup, almost everyone needs a certain amount of games to acclimate to the NHL speed.

If Briere had a functional and good understanding of how to build a bottom six then he wouldn't have this job.

They're going to keep doing the stupid thing where they develop everyone into grinders and try to build from the bottom up. It's all this team knows and nothing has been done to change it.

 

[VladDrag]

If Briere had a functional and good understanding of how to build a bottom six then he wouldn't have this job.

They're going to keep doing the stupid thing where they develop everyone into grinders and try to build from the bottom up. It's all this team knows and nothing has been done to change it.

Honestly my biggest fear is they stick with Briere, suck for 2-3 more years, draft elite top line, but fail because they don’t know how to identify bottom line talent.

 

[Beef Invictus]

Honestly my biggest fear is they stick with Briere, suck for 2-3 more years, draft elite top line, but fail because they don’t know how to identify bottom line talent.

The idea of loading the squad with all the talent they can and letting top 6 talent drift into the middle 6 (or lower!) is completely unknown to them. You have 6 talented players and 6 bad players who supposedly work hard. That's their entire roster building philosophy. That's why they bemoan having to play skilled players in the bottom six and prefer to just leave them in the AHL eternally if they can.

 

[deadhead]

Honestly my biggest fear is they stick with Briere, suck for 2-3 more years, draft elite top line, but fail because they don’t know how to identify bottom line talent.

I don't think that's an issue drafting, just look at their drafts under Flahr (with the legacy scouts for the most part):
After the 2nd rd:
2019: Attard #72
2020: Desnoyers #135
2021: Kolosov #78, Zanetti #110, Samson #174, Avon UDFA
2022: Kaplan #69, Gendron #220
Not all will make it, but if you can find a starter every other year after round 2, you're doing very well, especially with the relative lack of picks the last four years.

The problem is with the pro scouts, you fill out rosters with both later round picks, but also waiver wire finds, cheap FAs, and low cost trades.
If you nail the 1st rd, get some extra picks so you add one player a year later in the draft, and find 1 player a year on the trash heap, in 4 years you've added 12 players, including 3-4 top players, to the current roster.

 

[Magua]

Honestly my biggest fear is they stick with Briere, suck for 2-3 more years, draft elite top line, but fail because they don’t know how to identify bottom line talent.

That's my biggest fear, except take out the elite top line.

 

[Beef Invictus]

That's my biggest fear, except take out the elite top line.

Their coach, who has say in the roster and draft, believes this team doesn't need top line players. They need 10-12 goal PK specialists.

 

[renberg]

Gauthier could well end up being a center that is not today's traditional type. A lot of the centers today are sought out who can quickly move up the ice and then be an assist first; goal scorer second, player. CG may be the opposite of that. He may well be the ideal center for a player such as Bobby Brink who has been a great passer off of the wing. Gauthier's size, speed and shot can drive play. At least it has a BC. If he has a wing like BB to pass off to who can then dispense more action off of the wing like Voracek often did when he was here, the Flyers might have the makings of a line that can click.

 

[PDX Flyer]

I don't think that's an issue drafting, just look at their drafts under Flahr (with the legacy scouts for the most part):
After the 2nd rd:
2019: Attard #72
2020: Desnoyers #135
2021: Kolosov #78, Zanetti #110, Samson #174, Avon UDFA
2022: Kaplan #69, Gendron #220
Not all will make it, but if you can find a starter every other year after round 2, you're doing very well, especially with the relative lack of picks the last four years.

The problem is with the pro scouts, you fill out rosters with both later round picks, but also waiver wire finds, cheap FAs, and low cost trades.
If you nail the 1st rd, get some extra picks so you add one player a year later in the draft, and find 1 player a year on the trash heap, in 4 years you've added 12 players, including 3-4 top players, to the current roster.

Aren’t you the poster that supported Fletcher in trading all those second round and after picks?

 

[deadhead]

Aren’t you the poster that supported Fletcher in trading all those second round and after picks?

No. I just thought it wasn't the big deal it was made out to be at the time, with the FO committed to winning now, I was glad (until Risto) that he avoided trading 1st rd picks - which are far more valuable. A lot of GMs given win now mandates spend 1st rd picks like they were pocket change, which is fine as long as you keep winning, those picks are in the late 20s and you're a legitimate cup contender. But falter, and that will burn you for years.

 

[Beef Invictus]

No. I just thought it wasn't the big deal it was made out to be at the time, with the FO committed to winning now, I was glad (until Risto) that he avoided trading 1st rd picks - which are far more valuable. A lot of GMs given win now mandates spend 1st rd picks like they were pocket change, which is fine as long as you keep winning, those picks are in the late 20s and you're a legitimate cup contender. But falter, and that will burn you for years.

Blowing all your second round picks on bad moves isn't excusable just because your boss told you to make the team good.

 

[renberg]

Blowing all your second round picks on bad moves isn't excusable just because your boss told you to make the team good.

It was a tradition from the Clarke/Holmgren years. They just didn't think that good players could be had after the first round.

 

[VladDrag]

The problem is with the pro scouts

The problem is not singular, it is systemic and it manifests itself in all parts of the organization.

 

[deadhead]

It is harder to get top 6/top 4 players after the first round, just look at any roster on a top team.
By the third round, you're primarily drafting for depth, but that's still cheaper than paying older veterans $2-3M a year and hope they don't fall off a cliff.
And organizational depth is insurance against the inevitable injuries that occur over 100 games (you're building to go deep into the playoffs, aren't you?).

But you can't bet on landing top 6/top 4 players after the 2nd rd.

2014: #79 Point, #108 Toews D, #112 Arvidsson, #117 Bunting, #126 Forsling D
2015: #72 Cirelli, Garland #123, #135 Kaprizov, #148 Terry, #154 Marino D, #159 Gavrikov D, #166 Mangiapane
2016: #66 Fox D, #159 Hagel, #162 Bratt

And even the 2nd rd is sparse pickings for the most part
2014: #33 Barbashev, #55 Montour D, #58 Dvorak
2015: #35 Aho, #37 Carlo D, #43 Cernak D, #49 Hintz, #53 Andersson D, #56 Dunn D
2016: #35 Kyrou, #39 DeBrincat, #47 Girard D, #49 Lindgren D, #53 Hronek D, #56 Dube

 

[Beef Invictus]

If it's harder then you fix that by having more picks, not fewer.

 

[Tripod]

The idea of loading the squad with all the talent they can and letting top 6 talent drift into the middle 6 (or lower!) is completely unknown to them. You have 6 talented players and 6 bad players who supposedly work hard. That's their entire roster building philosophy. That's why they bemoan having to play skilled players in the bottom six and prefer to just leave them in the AHL eternally if they can.

What a concept. Have 12 guys capable of being useful hockey players. If the 4th line was like Laczynski-Cates-Allison...or people LIKE THAT, that's not a hard ask.

 

[Curufinwe]

Three more years of Deslauriers playing almost every game at 4LW, then he replaces Lappy in LHV.

 

[deadhead]

What a concept. Have 12 guys capable of being useful hockey players. If the 4th line was like Laczynski-Cates-Allison...or people LIKE THAT, that's not a hard ask.

I'd want someone better than Laczynski, maybe Desnoyers or Avon down the road.

Cates is too good for 4th line duties, you'd be wasting an elite defender - I'd like to see them build something similar to the Goodrow - Gourde - Coleman line around him - an energy line that can shut down top offensive lines.

 

[Tripod]

I'd want someone better than Laczynski, maybe Desnoyers or Avon down the road.

Cates is too good for 4th line duties, you'd be wasting an elite defender - I'd like to see them build something similar to the Goodrow - Gourde - Coleman line around him - an energy line that can shut down top offensive lines.

You entirely miss the point....as usual.

 

[Beef Invictus]

I'd want someone better than Laczynski, maybe Desnoyers or Avon down the road.

Cates is too good for 4th line duties, you'd be wasting an elite defender - I'd like to see them build something similar to the Goodrow - Gourde - Coleman line around him - an energy line that can shut down top offensive lines.

He's too good for the 4th line so you want him on the 4th line?

That line you cited didn't just shut people down and play an energy role. They scored. They outscored their opposites instead of hanging on until their shift ended. What a concept.

 

[Beef Invictus]

And on that note, Cates is not Gourde. He can't score enough.

 

[shaner8989]

Really think Avon was a huge signing for you guys. He does everything. Game breaker, scores huge goals when it matters. Got wheels. He hits. Big fan.

 

[deadhead]

Really think Avon was a huge signing for you guys. He does everything. Game breaker, scores huge goals when it matters. Got wheels. He hits. Big fan.

Watching him, I see a Grabner type, not really skilled enough for the top 6, but can use his speed to make plays and can score on breakaways.
I think he'll get better as he fills out and gets experience. Probably end up at 6'0 190-195 in a couple years.
July birthday, missed the 2020-21 season due to COVID, took a step up this post-season.
Probably needs at least a year in the AHL to smooth out the rough edges.
Voted fastest player in the OHL two years running, and that speed stood out in rookie camp and got him signed a couple years ago.

 

[blackjackmulligan]

I don't think that's an issue drafting, just look at their drafts under Flahr (with the legacy scouts for the most part):
After the 2nd rd:
2019: Attard #72
2020: Desnoyers #135
2021: Kolosov #78, Zanetti #110, Samson #174, Avon UDFA
2022: Kaplan #69, Gendron #220
Not all will make it, but if you can find a starter every other year after round 2, you're doing very well, especially with the relative lack of picks the last four years.

The problem is with the pro scouts, you fill out rosters with both later round picks, but also waiver wire finds, cheap FAs, and low cost trades.
If you nail the 1st rd, get some extra picks so you add one player a year later in the draft, and find 1 player a year on the trash heap, in 4 years you've added 12 players, including 3-4 top players, to the current roster.

nothing special about those picks at all. Kolosov is who i like a lot. have a feeling Attard does not become an NHL regular. Just a hunch

proc scouting blows big time.

 

[blackjackmulligan]

And on that note, Cates is not Gourde. He can't score enough.

38 points his first full season. no reason why he cant get into the 40-45 range.

 

[deadhead]

nothing special about those picks at all. Kolosov is who i like a lot. have a feeling Attard does not become an NHL regular. Just a hunch

proc scouting blows big time.

You expect to find special players after the 2nd round? Do you actually expect to win the lottery when you buy a ticket?
Finding solid bottom six/third pair guys is a win after the 2nd round.