Prospect Info: Rangers Prospects Poll: Summer 2013 Results

[Beacon]

BCHL a second-rate league? It's one of the best Junior A leagues out there next to the USHL. I did a quick look up of that Penticton team, twelve guys on that team either are now playing D-I or are committed to D-I schools.

Yes, it is by definition a second rate league. College and Canadian Juniors are first rate, BCHL and USHL are second rate. Pretty much every team in the BCHL/USHL is worse than every team in college and juniors. That only a couple kids from a super-loaded BCHL team are playing D1 hockey proves just that.

BCHL/USHL is where you play if you aren't good enough to play in the Canadian Juniors or college. An occasional player who wins up there by choice should dominate, even on a loaded team.

 

[BLOCKERSAVE]

Yes, it is by definition a second rate league. College and Canadian Juniors are first rate, BCHL and USHL are second rate. Pretty much every team in the BCHL/USHL is worse than every team in college and juniors. That only a couple kids from a super-loaded BCHL team are playing D1 hockey proves just that.

BCHL/USHL is where you play if you aren't good enough to play in the Canadian Juniors or college. An occasional player who wins up there by choice should dominate, even on a loaded team.

BCHL/USHL has kids playing at the age of 16 - 18. D1 has 19 - 22 years old. Of course D1 is better, apples to oranges.

 

[Beacon]

BCHL/USHL has kids playing at the age of 16 - 18. D1 has 19 - 22 years old. Of course D1 is better, apples to oranges.

And that is why a good prospect at the age of 18 should dominate the BCHL.

 

[NYR Viper]

And that is why a good prospect at the age of 18 should dominate the BCHL.

Beacon, I respect your opinion, but the fact that he is already well versed in the defensive side of the puck for such a young player is a very good sign. He doesn't have to set the world on fire even through his (4) years in college to be a NHL player. He will develop for another 2-3 years and continue to fill out and get more playing time. No rush, but I like him.

 

[nyr2k2]

Tyler Bozak, during his age 18-19 season, had a less impressive offensive output than Fogarty. He was a late bloomer. Now he's a quality NHL player. If Fogarty does little developing offensively, he can still make it as a defensive specialist. It's crazy to write him off. As long as he continues to develop, he'll be okay. If the offense comes around this year, he's a real good prospect.

 

[Lindberg Cheese]

He found himself in a spot where he had to adapt to a new role because the team had several veteran players ahead of him at center. He did just that. Yet instead of being lauded for his mental strength, ability to adapt, and vastly improved defensive play, he gets pegged as a guy who couldn't beat out scrubs and score more points in a 'second rate' league.

Like it or not, that team had a lot of offensive skill and Fogarty simply wasn't the most skilled center on the team. Instead of whining about it he showed the determination and commitment to improve his game and turn himself into a well-rounded player. All while still putting up decent numbers and anchoring a line with two guys (Benik and Gervais) who had little idea what the defensive zone even looked like.

I'm pleased with the development he's shown. The offense has always been the least of my concerns and I expect that will be proven with a larger role with Notre Dame this season. So far I've seen nothing in his game that would make me even consider the notion of him having stalled out in his development.

Fogarty has the shot of being that late bloomer guy who never was the best player on his team at any level but whose game translates well to the NHL. I think the ceiling for him is Rucchin which is not shabby.

 

[Beacon]

Tyler Bozak, during his age 18-19 season, had a less impressive offensive output than Fogarty. He was a late bloomer. Now he's a quality NHL player. If Fogarty does little developing offensively, he can still make it as a defensive specialist. It's crazy to write him off. As long as he continues to develop, he'll be okay. If the offense comes around this year, he's a real good prospect.

I agree that he still has good potential, but it is likely on the bottom-6, and he will need to show significant improvement next year. As a ,20/21 year old, he will need to show us something this year.

 

[NYR Viper]

I agree that he still has good potential, but it is likely on the bottom-6, and he will need to show significant improvement next year. As a ,20/21 year old, he will need to show us something this year.

With his size, face-off skills and defensive awareness, he could score 10 points every year in college and still have a shot at a NHL spot as a 4th line center.

 

[Fitzy]

With his size, face-off skills and defensive awareness, he could score 10 points every year in college and still have a shot at a NHL spot as a 4th line center.

A shot, because 4th liners can be of any ability and it doesn't kill you. The Rangers came close to keeping Matt Maccarone as a 4th line center and I was probably a better overall player than he was.

Danny Hobbs was great at everything you listed, scored in the 20's in points and is now in the ECHL.

It's tough to make the NHL if you don't score in college.