Prospect Info: Rangers Prospect Poll: #30 (LAST ROUND)

[Beacon]

C Morgan Barron won round 29. C Daniel Catenacci is added to the poll.

Since this is the last round of voting, no further prospects will be added.


TOP PROSPECTS

1. LW/RW Pavel Buchnevich
2. G Igor Shesterkin
3. C Lias Andersson
4. D Anthony DeAngelo
5. C Filip Chytil


SECOND TIER

6. D Alexei Bereglazov
7. D Ryan Graves
8. D Sean Day
9. D Neal Pionk
10. G Adam Huska
11. C/LW Cristoval "Boo" Nieves
12. LW Ryan Gropp
13. G Tyler Wall
14. G Alexandar Georgiev
15. D Sergey Zborovskiy



PROJECTS & SUSPECTS

16. RW Nicklas Jensen
17. LW Tim Gettinger
18. RW Robin Kovacs
19. D Calle Sjalin
20. C Dominik Lakatos
21. RW Ty Ronning
22. D Tarmo Reunanen
23. D Vince Pedrie
24. D Brandon Crawley
25. C Patrik Virta


LONG SHOTS

26. C Gabriel Fontaine
27. G Brandon Halverson
28. C Adam Tambellini
29. C Morgan Barron


Morgan Barron
Center -- shoots L
Born Dec 2 1998 -- Halifax, NS
Height 6.02 -- Weight 200

St. Andrew's College CAHS 46GP 28 22 50 15 PIM

Click to read more...

 

[Beacon]

Chris Nell had a good college career and deserves to be up there in the top-30.

Leedahl only put up half-decent stats in his overager year because he played with 2 guys who scored 130+ points each. He was obviously a passenger. Before that, his stats were amazingly bad, worse than Sam Noreau put up as a defenseman.

Fogarty is a 24-year-old AHL 4th liner on a terrible AHL team.

Gilmour is a 24 year old third-pair AHL defenseman on a terrible AHL team.

Lettieri is an undersized guy without enough skill to overcome his size.

Cat is another 24 year old who really has not shown he can crack the NHL and is already at the end of his development years.

Nell should be the obvious choice.

 

[ManUtdTobbe]

Going with Gilmour here.

I like how you (Beacon) talk about Nells college career while pegging Gilmour as a 3rd pairing AHLer when he's 1 year away from a good college career. Everyone on Hartford gets a pass for last season imo because they were such an insane mess.

 

[Beacon]

John Gilmour is 1 year away from a good college career.

No way. He absolutely did not have a good NCAA career. He was an undersized defenseman with average offense and terrible defense. And that's in his overager year. When Gilmour was Under-22, even his offense was awful. It could've easily been predicted he will be a borderline AHL/ECHL player, but he dominated Traverse and since people don't recognize that Traverse is below ECHL level, his stock jumped up. Gilmour sucks, Gilmour alwats sucked.

 

[ManUtdTobbe]

Eh, i strongly disagree, he had a good college career. Not worth discussing it further with you though.

 

[Fugazy]

Fogarty.

 

[nyr2k2]

Nell, who had a very nice college career.

 

[eco's bones]

Fogarty. I think calling him a 4th liner for Hartford last year is a little bit off. Yeah--20 points in 66 games ain't great production but he's pretty decent as far as being a defensive player. And those 20 points were as a first year pro and those 20 points were good for 10th best point production on the team. Truthfully I like his chances better than Tambellini's. Nothing against Nell and Lettieri--both are pretty much unknowns at this point.

 

[Beacon]

Eh, i strongly disagree, he had a good college career. Not worth discussing it further with you though.

You can disagree as strongly as you want, but once again your analysis of how a lower league player will transition to a higher league was proven wrong as mine was proven right, so I'm pretty sure it's you who's not worth discussing anything with. Your whole "analysis" is based on you being consistently wrong and instead of having any basis for it, you just have insults that you use to cover up the total lack of understanding how to judge a prospect.

 

[Beacon]

Fogarty. I think calling him a 4th liner for Hartford last year is a little bit off.

He literally spent most of the season on the 4th line and never went up above the third line for any significant number of games.

 

[Fitzy]

I guess I will go with Nell this round, since he will likely be competing with Halverson and Georgiev for a spot in Hartford.

Gilmour would be higher but we just added so many young dmen its hard to see him fitting in. Our fans here who watch Canadian juniors have informed me that Leedahl is terrible, so I'm inclined to believe them.

Looks like our voted ranking won't be far from my own personal ones.

 

[cwede]

went Lettieri, improved each season as a Gopher, they produce a lot of NHL players

but also not down on Fogarty yet, lets see if, in pro year 2, he becomes a top 8 F

for Leedahl and Gilmour (for opposite reasons) need to find out if last year was a fluke, or not

Nell has earned himself a Talbot-esque opportunity, we'll see how he adapts

Catenacci is C.Thomas/R.Bourque redux, til he shows us otherwise

 

[Beer League Sniper]

I still think Fogarty has real NHL upside. Is it 4th line upside? Sure, but I still think he's the kind of player that will eventually be able to fill 4C duties competently and responsibly. I never give up on a prospect until they stagnate. Fogarty got better every season at Notre Dame. I'd at least like to give him one more season in the AHL before writing him off.

 

[ManUtdTobbe]

You can disagree as strongly as you want, but once again your analysis of how a lower league player will transition to a higher league was proven wrong as mine was proven right, so I'm pretty sure it's you who's not worth discussing anything with. Your whole "analysis" is based on you being consistently wrong and instead of having any basis for it, you just have insults that you use to cover up the total lack of understanding how to judge a prospect.

This is just pure BS, you're the one that's always super condescending and come with these really broad statements on prospects you haven't watched at all, but you do you i guess.

 

[Beacon]

This is just pure BS, you're the one that's always super condescending and come with these really broad statements on prospects you haven't watched at all, but you do you i guess.

Again, all you do is attack as a form of self-defense because you're literally always wrong and since you have no explanation for why I'm right and you're wrong, you make it about general personal attacks. Read ANY of our exchanges. Literally ANY of them. Pick any random one you choose.

Despite your claim that I make "broad statements," I make a lot of very concrete predictions about prospects, and every year I go against the general consensus on several of them. It's easy to find what I wrote as it's available repeatedly in the prospects thread as well as in these polls twice a year. Neither you nor anyone else found a single case when I was wrong when I took a strong stand on someone - not talking about random prospects like Morgan Barron or whoever else I don't know much about. But when I took strong stands, which I do on most prospects, when was I wrong?

You have no response to this because there is no response to this. So you engage in shaming as a self-defense technique meant to just shut up the opposition. A direct question can have a direct answer. But in the absence of a direct answer, what you throw out is: 1) you can't be right if you're not a scout because being a scout is the highest honor one can strive for in his career and nobody would choose any other job if he could be a scout; 2) you don't watch the games... you don't... you just don't... you do live play-by-play on hockey games? F U, I will just ignore that and yell that you just don't watch games; 3) you're a bad person; 4) you're stupid.

None of that, however, addresses my very direct question: when did I take a strong position on a player and turned out to be wrong? From our #1 prospect I crapped on (Grachev) to a total scrub I pimped (Talbot) to dozens of other guys, when was I wrong? But yeah yeah, I'm a bad, dumb person whose opinion does not count since I'm not a scout.

 

[eco's bones]

He literally spent most of the season on the 4th line and never went up above the third line for any significant number of games.

and...so what? He literally also played for the worst coach in the entire league and there must have been two fourth lines to fit all of Fogarty, Glass, Kovacs, Stromwall and all the assorted games played by McPherson, Chapie, Lettieri, Joly, Oksanen etc.---so I don't exactly buy your explanation.

 

[NYR713]

I think Leedahl has a chance at being an NHL player as a high energy, gritty 4th liner. Those offensive stats are deceiving but he may still have a shot if he can continue to play his style in Hartford.

 

[ManUtdTobbe]

Beacon - What are you even on about? I haven't talked about anything you just ranted about.
This was about John Gilmour and his college career, has nothing to do with Grachev or Talbot in any way shape or form.
Also not sure how i'm "shaming" you? Actually, don't answer that.

Going back to my earlier statement, not worth discussing this further with you.