Maybe the NHLe rates should be adjusted if this many are putting up NHL 100pt projected rates.
Prospect Info: Sharks Prospect Info & Discussion thread XXI: "New, improved, and wayyyy to much info" Edition
- Thread starter The Nemesis
- Start date
Maybe the NHLe rates should be adjusted if this many are putting up NHL 100pt projected rates.
Haven't watched them much, but despite their size, just based on stat lines, we should sign Pohlkamp (who looked great already last summer) + Muldowney for AHL.
Rimashevsky got size, but not sure if he'd go from KHL to AHL.
OrrNumber4
Registered User
- Jul 25, 2002
- 15,706
- 4,953
I think that's openly acknowledged. CHL and KHL have taken a half-step back, while NCAA has taken a step ahead...and maybe the gap between those leagues and the AHL/NHL has also widened!
jMoneyBrah
Registered User
Out of curiosity, what are we seeing from Rimashevsky that signals he’s ready for AHL? Admittedly, I’m just going off his stat line, but is 15 points in 55 games as a 20 year old in the KHL impressive? I’m not being flippant, I have no sense of what that means about Rimashevsky.
Last edited:
He started playing regularly in the KHL as a 19 year old, that's what's impressive.
KHL used to be clear cut second best league after the NHL. There's more fluctuation now between teams, so there's been debate on whether this is still true.
Either way, if he did make the jump over he would do well in the AHL.
However for development, it might be fine to just keep him in the KHL longer. Someone closer to the KHL would know better what the growth opportunities at his team look like.
Juxtaposer
Outro: Divina Comedia
Just leave Rimashevsky in Russia, and if he's dominating the KHL in three/four years, then you bring him over. Long-shot prospects playing in the KHL don't come to the States to play three years in the AHL, and understandably so.
THN future watch arrived in my mailbox this morning.
Sharks prospect pool ranked 1st overall, I believe counting the value of Celebrini and Smith as U21 NHLers.
In the top 100 prospects (not counting guys in the NHL) were:
7) Dickinson
41) Musty
68) Mukhamadullin
72) Chernyshov
88) Bystedt
and the organizational top 10 is:
1) Dickinson
2) Musty
3) Mukhamadullin
4) Chernyshov
5) Bystedt
6) Halttunen
7) Graf
8) Cagnoni
9) Sahlin Wallenius
10) Lund
I couldn't find their criteria to understand why Askarov is excluded, though the best guess I can make is NHL GP (even though he's only got 16 games) possibly interacting with the fact that he's had multiple seasons with GP in the NHL
Sharks prospect pool ranked 1st overall, I believe counting the value of Celebrini and Smith as U21 NHLers.
In the top 100 prospects (not counting guys in the NHL) were:
7) Dickinson
41) Musty
68) Mukhamadullin
72) Chernyshov
88) Bystedt
and the organizational top 10 is:
1) Dickinson
2) Musty
3) Mukhamadullin
4) Chernyshov
5) Bystedt
6) Halttunen
7) Graf
8) Cagnoni
9) Sahlin Wallenius
10) Lund
I couldn't find their criteria to understand why Askarov is excluded, though the best guess I can make is NHL GP (even though he's only got 16 games) possibly interacting with the fact that he's had multiple seasons with GP in the NHL
timorous me
Gristled Veteran
- Apr 14, 2010
- 1,778
- 2,680
I wonder how many games Chernyshov had with Saginaw before they put this together. It's going to be fun to see him shoot up some lists this summer.
Mukhamadullin is one of those guys who feels like he's just going to have been perennially underrated as a prospect, which is kind of funny because he has all the tools that you'd think people would salivate over. But I guess ever since the beginning--going back to him being sort of under-scouted in Russia--there have always been some complicating factors, so I can't say I hold it against all these prospect evaluators out there. But I've always thought it's going to be fun watching them look silly as he becomes a top-4 d-man, which I'm feeling better and better about lately.
Jargon
Registered User
The thing I’ve really liked about Muhk is he seems really coachable and sort of slowly and methodically improved all the things people tell him to improve. This season was a major setback but as I kept saying when people were saying he was busting, the injury was a major detriment to him. The fact that he’s recovered and continued his upward trajectory really speaks well of him as a prospect, I think he’s going to be very, very good and I’m excited to see him take more steps in the NHL.
I only wish he got to play on his natural side but he seems to be doing okay on the left. I think a Dickinson - Muhk pairing is going to be insane.
timorous me
Gristled Veteran
- Apr 14, 2010
- 1,778
- 2,680
Yeah, I was thinking about it the other day and maybe the idea is putting a young player on his off side is better than a veteran because certain things are less engrained and they're more flexible? Because it does seem kind of crazy at first glance because a young defenseman getting acclimated to the NHL is hard enough without having to deal with the awkwardness that sometimes ensues from being against the half-wall on your backhand, for instance.
It'll be really interesting to see how things shake out going forward with the d-pairings. Obviously the draft this year will have some impact on things. I do like seeing Mukh roam and get a little free and creative with the puck—I think there's a lot of potential there to take that to another level—so I'd be a little worried that with someone like Dickinson (or Schaefer!), he'd become too defensive/passive, in a way that would be to the detriment of his overall game. But yeah, lots to figure out going forward, but it's things like this that create excitement for me (especially as someone who's become pretty fascinated by the way defensemen play over the years) even if we're losing most of our games for now.
CHALUPA
Registered User
- Oct 9, 2008
- 963
- 68
Those look like Lane Hutson’s NHL stats, and therefore I’m required to point out that they’re most likely all secondary assists and/or PP points, undermining his output
Munnyro
Registered User
EP put out there U23 Top 100 list.
2 Celebrini (Berdard is #1)
35 Eklund
37 Smith
42 Dickinson
58 Musty
80 Chernyshov
2 Celebrini (Berdard is #1)
35 Eklund
37 Smith
42 Dickinson
58 Musty
80 Chernyshov
Musty over Chernyshov is certainly a choice at this point. Surprised about Bedard over Celebrini bc ones trending up and one is not haha
Munnyro
Registered User
Quote about Igor which fits our running joke:
"Missing the first half of the season didn’t matter for Igor Chernyshov, who has scored an insane 2.4 points per game through 20 games. He’s hit a bit of a slump lately, scoring “only” 2.0 points per game in his last 10 games."
Juxtaposer
Outro: Divina Comedia
I have some minor quibbles with this ranking as a whole, but it's a huge undertaking and the work that went into it is crazy. Great writeups, thoughtful analysis, good balance of "talented but unproven" and "proven but lacking elite upside". I will give them credit for not being reactionary click-bait artists and sticking to their guns against popular opinion. For every ranking I thought "really?", I started looking at the guys around their rankings and found that I was okay with it.
That said, they also have Their Guys and no interest in moving off them. Musty is one of Their Guys, Dickinson and Smith (whom I think are both low, especially Smith) are not. Putting Ryan Leonard at #16 and Will Smith at #35 feels extremely insane to me. Smith being ahead of Gauthier, who they liked considerably more prior to this season, and right behind Benson, whom EP has always loved, is definitely a step in the right direction for them in terms of course-correction. Hell, I'm surprised Nazar and Catton are down in the mid-50's.
I'm not mad about Dickinson's ranking, as he is sandwiched by two very similar guys in Dmitri Simashev and Kaiden Guhle. Similarly, Musty is placed between Gabe Perreault and Dawson Mercer, which seems appropriate. Chernyshov sits next to Daniil But and Liam Greentree, who are decent comparables even if I'm higher on Igor (probably because I watch him more).
Munnyro
Registered User
LadyStanley
Registered User
Benson better be selke level defensively to be placed above smith. We still have potentially 14 more games for smith and he is already above bensons career high in points.
WHL game of the week on Youtube tonight is Victoria (Misskey) vs Kelowna. It started like 5 minutes ago.
Juxtaposer
Outro: Divina Comedia
I have no interest in arguing with people about Zach Benson. If you know you know, if you don't you don't. Plain and simple.
matt trick
Registered User
- Jun 12, 2007
- 9,781
- 1,388
Interesting that they've got Celebrini and Bedard as the same aggregate score: 46. Stutzle is 44. Not sure I buy the 5 for Bedard's physicality (Eklund is a 4.5, Smith and Kent Johnson are 4s).
As bad as Bedard's linemate situation is, I'm absolutely taking Celebrini first, but they effectively have it as a tie. Credit to EP for making a call rather than opting for 1A and 1B, though they're wrong
One thing that stands out to me, how few centers there are. Celebrini, Fantilli, Carlsson, Cooley, Johnston are your true 1C candidates. Stutzle/Bedard look more like franchise-level wings who can effectively fill the C role to me. We'll say it another 1000 times, but thank God we got Celebrini.
As bad as Bedard's linemate situation is, I'm absolutely taking Celebrini first, but they effectively have it as a tie. Credit to EP for making a call rather than opting for 1A and 1B, though they're wrong
One thing that stands out to me, how few centers there are. Celebrini, Fantilli, Carlsson, Cooley, Johnston are your true 1C candidates. Stutzle/Bedard look more like franchise-level wings who can effectively fill the C role to me. We'll say it another 1000 times, but thank God we got Celebrini.
Would we say that though if Gregor didn't screw us out of Bedard and we had an Eklund-Celebrini-Bedard top line or Celebrini and Bedard as a 1-2 center punch? I don't know but either way, I blame Gregor for giving Chicago something they should've been screwed out of lolInteresting that they've got Celebrini and Bedard as the same aggregate score: 46. Stutzle is 44. Not sure I buy the 5 for Bedard's physicality (Eklund is a 4.5, Smith and Kent Johnson are 4s).
As bad as Bedard's linemate situation is, I'm absolutely taking Celebrini first, but they effectively have it as a tie. Credit to EP for making a call rather than opting for 1A and 1B, though they're wrong
One thing that stands out to me, how few centers there are. Celebrini, Fantilli, Carlsson, Cooley, Johnston are your true 1C candidates. Stutzle/Bedard look more like franchise-level wings who can effectively fill the C role to me. We'll say it another 1000 times, but thank God we got Celebrini.
matt trick
Registered User
- Jun 12, 2007
- 9,781
- 1,388
For me, yes. I always want to build through the middle. Aside from height, Celebrini has everything i could ever want in #1 C. If he were 6’3 he’d be perfect. Not many players I’ve seen in my lifetime who attack like he does. Needs to learn to vary his pace, but I love his all gas no breaks.
Bedard for all his exceptional skill, is everything I want in an elite scorer, not my top center.
But if he's with Celebrini on the same team, he doesn't have to be the top center. He can be the Kane to Celebrini's Toews.
