Rangers Prospect Poll (Summer 2018): #23 Prospect

[Matz03]

IDK what we're doing with Lindbom going above Huska. Since we drafted him, Huska was USHL goaltender of the year, won the starting job against two older players and then had a really good Freshman season at UConn (who sucked that year), and then as a Sophomore basically replicated his success save for a couple injuries that hurt the overall line. He also had two WJC's with ****ty numbers, but all of us that watched know he was Slovakia's best player and at times helped keep them in games they had no business competing in. He's really developing nicely. If he's fully healthy, which I understand he is, he should have a terrific year.

Lindbom, on the other hand, I know the team likes him enough to spend a second round pick on him, but is there any track record? He has played well in a couple international tournaments, which is definitely encouraging, but that's really all I can say for him at this point (17, I know he's young). At this point, I'd think the odds of him ever even making it here are less than 50/50, and if he does, it's going to be a long time from now.

Do people see some sort of "star" potential in Lindbom? I definitely think Huska has starter potential, and he's probably only 3 or so years away from being ready. I literally have no idea what Lindbom's potential is, and if he comes, when will that be--six years from now? If it's a matter of draft position, I have just as much faith in a UDFA signing as a guy picked in round two.

Every player on the list should be ahead of Lindbom, there’s an argument to be made for Gettinger, Huska, Keane, Fontaine and even Bigras. Lindbom belongs in the honorable mentions section, has done nothing at all thus to warrant being ranked.

 

[Pavel Buchnevich]

Huska, add Hughes

 

[Edge]

Every player on the list should be ahead of Lindbom, there’s an argument to be made for Gettinger, Huska, Keane, Fontaine and even Bigras. Lindbom belongs in the honorable mentions section, has done nothing at all thus to warrant being ranked.

It's primarily what he showed at the international level.

 

[nyr2k2]

It's primarily what he showed at the international level.

I think Huska showed very well at his two WJCs. The unfortunate reality however is that he's a Slovak and not a Swede, and his teams are therefore overmatched.

 

[Edge]

I think Huska showed very well at his two WJCs. The unfortunate reality however is that he's a Slovak and not a Swede, and his teams are therefore overmatched.

He's had his ups and downs, especially over the last two visits to the WJC.

Having said that, a save percentage of nearly 95 in the WJC, and other international performances over a three season span definitely has Lindbom in the conversation when we talk about the 20s: Olof Lindbom at eliteprospects.com

 

[Matz03]

He's had his ups and downs, especially over the last two visits to the WJC.

Having said that, a save percentage of nearly 95 in the WJC, and other international performances over a three season span definitely has Lindbom in the conversation when we talk about the 20s: Olof Lindbom at eliteprospects.com

6 games, 6 games, he's completely unproven outside of a few very short tournaments

 

[Edge]

6 games, 6 games, he's completely unproven outside of a few very short tournaments

Probably closer to 35 international games, on top of another 50 some odd junior level games over the same stretch.

I mean it's a pretty big leap to conclude he was drafted for 6 games.

And at this stage, all the debates are going to come down to less experience but promising, versus more experience but questionable.

That's why these guys are being voted on for the 23-30 spot, and not the top 10, or 15, or even 20.

If they're more proven, have fewer questions and are more promising --- they're already off the list.

 

[nyr2k2]

Probably closer to 35 international games, on top of another 50 some odd junior level games over the same stretch.

I mean it's a pretty big leap to conclude he was drafted for 6 games.

And at this stage, all the debates are going to come down to less experience but promising, versus more experience but questionable.

That's why these guys are being voted on for the 23-30 spot, and not the top 10, or 15, or even 20.

If they're more proven, have fewer questions and are more promising --- they're already off the list.

Okay, but tell me what makes Huska "questionable" in any way? I would argue he's more proven and has fewer questions. I can't speak towards "more promising" since I don't know anything about Lindbom.

 

[Matz03]

I don't think he was drafted for his 6 games, but you said his 950 save % wjc in above post as an argument for him. He didn't come close to that in the few seasons you rolled together in the above post. If you look at all the games over past 1 or 2 seasons he's all over the place, so not sure how you can make any judgment about possible upside for a small 17 yo goalie who has proven to be all over the place. I don't think he should even be ranked, he's the definition of unproven and having a ton of question marks.

 

[Edge]

Okay, but tell me what makes Huska "questionable" in any way? I would argue he's more proven and has fewer questions. I can't speak towards "more promising" since I don't know anything about Lindbom.

I don't think it's necessarily things he didn't know, so much as what some other guys did.

Huska's done well in college, though his play perhaps wasn't quite as crisp or consistent this season --- at least not quite to the level I was expecting. He made adjustments and he moved forward.

I will admit that his play over the last two seasons against top-level competition left quite a bit to be desired, specifically what I've seen in bigger stage situations like the WJC. If anything, you could argue his last two years are kind of the opposite of Lindbom's on that stage. Of course it's not all his fault, but he didn't necessarily help the cause.

But it's also important to note what I've said many times on here, at this stage the differences between these kids is not measured in miles. The difference between the 21 and 30 is not nearly as big as the difference between 11 and 20. So I'm a little hesitant to get too hung up on where these kids are being slotted --- at this point it really comes down to preferences or glimpses. But I don't think there's really anyone on the poll the last few votes who is out of left field at this point.

 

[Edge]

I don't think he was drafted for his 6 games, but you said his 950 save % wjc in above post as an argument for him. He didn't come close to that in the few seasons you rolled together in the above post. If you look at all the games over past 1 or 2 seasons he's all over the place, so not sure how you can make any judgment about possible upside for a small 17 yo goalie who has proven to be all over the place. I don't think he should even be ranked, he's the definition of unproven and having a ton of question marks.

But that's the thing, he's really not that all over the place based on the league he's playing in.

And that's always been one of the challenges when this board tries to look at European leagues and compare them to say the OHL, or another North American league.

It reminds me of scene from Futurama where Zap Brannigan laments that they're in uncharted territory and his assistant reminds him that they're not in uncharted territory --- they lost the maps. I think there's a tendency to assume that kids have proven less, when in reality it's mainly that we haven't seen it or don't have a basis for comparison.

His numbers for his respective league, and his team, are respectable. Are they earth-shattering? No, but we're also talking about a ranking in the mid-20s.

However, at the very least, his play is good enough to have him competing for a spot on the Swedish International teams, of which he's obviously made the most of.

It's not like he made a traveling team in Kazakhstan. He's consistently being pick to not only represent Sweden, and he's not only starting, he's excelling at a very high level. Even if we throw out the WJC, there's other International experience with some pretty promising numbers.

When we're at this point of the conversation regarding our prospect cupboard, that's his primary calling card.

 

[nyr2k2]

Huska's play last season wasn't as consistent because he f***ed up his wrist and missed two months. Also, prior to that, he got slammed into and eventually had to come out of a game. Don't remember what specifically it was. He initially tried playing through it and it didn't go well, so he missed a few games. IDK. I think he had a good season all things considered.

Two WJCs back, he beat Belarus. Then he stopped 32 of 34 against the Czechs who dominated (but only won 2-0). Then he got hammered by Finland, 8-3, where again, the Slovaks were dominated, allowing 48 shots to a team with Laine, Aho, and Puljujarvi. Then he lost to Russia, 2-1 despite playing really well. Final game, they get smoked by Sweden--shots were 55-17. His team was horseshit. He was their best player ("Top 3 on Team" or whatever stupid thing IIHF uses; he was also Top 3 at the U18 WJC the prior year).

His last WJC, he starts against Canada. Canada out-shoots Slovakia 44-6. 44-6! Huska stops 39 and earns universal praise. Next game, Huska beats Latvia. Final game, the Slovaks are again embarrassed, out-shot 50-18 in losing to Sweden. Again, he's "Top 3 on Team."

Edge, you would be the first person I've spoken to who thought his play left anything to be desired at the WJC. He was on really bad teams that could only legitimately compete against the bottom-feeders like Belarus and Latvia. That game against Canada, I remember, he was great. And the game was so completely lopsided. He was literally all they had. That was the case most nights. I don't know what more could have been expected from him.

Lindbom has international success, which is great, but that's it. 33 games of club hockey over the past two years. He's young, I get that. There's just so little to evaluate him on. I can't rank a kid with 30 games of club, um, average-ness and 30 games of really nice international play over a guy with a season of USHL success, two seasons of college success, and strong play despite the numbers at multiple levels of WJC. Maybe Lindbom makes me eat my words. I think he's more likely to become a "some dude we drafted who was mediocre and never got a contract" guy, but we'll see.

 

[Edge]

Edge, you would be the first person I've spoken to who thought his play left anything to be desired at the WJC. He was on really bad teams that could only legitimately compete against the bottom-feeders like Belarus and Latvia. That game against Canada, I remember, he was great. And the game was so completely lopsided. He was literally all they had. That was the case most nights. I don't know what more could have been expected from him.

I think I would feel differently if he didn’t show me the same concerns two consecutive years at the WJC.

When teams moved side to side, his ability to position himself and get in front of pucks simply was not there was often as I would’ve liked.

None of this is to say he isn’t a good prospect, but I do have some concerns about his ability to elevate his play when the team in front of him isn’t playing a style that accentuates his strengths.

But again, I don’t really view the difference in ranking at this point to be substantial.

It often comes down to subtleties, maybe liking a certain environment more, or a response to a situation, or other factors.

The difference between me voting for a player at 23 vs. 25 or even 28 doesn’t necessarily mean I absolutely love one player and don’t really like the other.

With that said, I do think we’re probably taking out our frustrations about taking a goalie in the second on Lindbom. Because based on his actual play, and Swedish juniors isn’t exactly an obscure path to the NHL, he’s certainly in the conversation.