He could be a 2-4th round probably. Clearly a talent worth mentioning. Thing is, you exaggerate very often.
You are good at problematizing when comparing how you, yourself would see and think regarding Estonian prospects for an example. But the thing is you go all the way and handle these scenarios with a complete black or white perspective in your eagerness of making a point. Also, you seem to think or believe that everyone else would share your subjective thoughts about prospects or other things.
You did the same with Vilmanis. I get it, Latvia are finally producing some interesting talent and that's fun. But you come off as bitter when, and cynical with your statements with a bit too much of this or the highway kind of reasoning. Which makes it difficult to take you serious. Have a good one.
Edit: Also, last but not least. Murnieks is a clear and good example of you being wrong. Very interesting prospect and he's already known and recognized since way back and he will most likely be a 1-2 rounder. And why then? Because of his own talent, career decisions and performances. With decisions I mean what? Of course the fact he went to NA or left Latvia because most likely there aren't competition enough for him to take the next step there. You need to evaluate, see and take your opportunities as well and he did. Good for him.
Whilst you on the other hand? Reason in a way like everything should be served for you (him) in some strange way... Very rare does anything work like that in a result oriented world. And if does, then it's because of corruption.
He is a 2nd to 4th round prospect, correct. Currently underrated due to systemic bias and could be ridiculously overrated if Latvia medals in the U18s and he racks up a dozen points.
Glad we agree on that.
The rest of the post is really cringey, but let's dissect it anyway.
What is the NHL draft? Effectively, it's a collective, quantifiable assessment of a specific pool of hockey players in a given age cohort.
Being assessed (i.e., drafted) does not promise anyone anything. Being assessed incorrectly can be a big deal, but usually it's not, as long as you get into that top 225 or w/e. Sometimes, though, being drafted lower brings you down in the pecking order to the point of it affecting your chances of even having a shot at proving yourself. Sometimes you don't even get drafted, and that can be a big deal for your future career.
Osmanis will get drafted and he will have a shot at proving himself. So being underrated is not really that big of a deal in his case.
What rocks my boat is how obvious the systemic bias is and how oblivious a lot of hfboards regulars are about it. NHL franchises are not effective at making player selections in the lower rounds and some players get so overhyped it's ridiculous. There's literally nothing black or white about this, it's a multi-factorial issue with a whole array of biases skewing the player selections in one way or the other.
The WJC/U18 thing is just one of many such biases. Some of the more popular ones concern size, date of birth, etc.
I have no idea how Vilmanis relates to any of this. Vilmanis is not underrated, he just has an ELC, so it's not financially wise for the Panthers to get someone waived because of him. He clearly would have already played for the Panthers if he had a one-way contract. A Latvian defenceman literally played 4th line wing a number of games for them just now because of it.
As for Murnieks, again, I have no idea what you're trying to tell me. Honestly, no clue. Was that supposed to be a jab at me? You're just talking random weird shit by this point. Can you rephrase that part and maybe present a coherent argument about, well, anything? What is the point you're trying to counter?
Every single Latvian prospect leaves Latvia early, usually earlier than 16. Every single one.
Everything should be served for him? Corruption? What the f***.