Prospect Info: The Athletic ranks Rangers as 11th best system
- Thread starter RangerBoy
- Start date
Irishguy42
Mr. Preachy
lol I'm sorry but the Islanders do not have a better farm than us. Top-heavy but that's it.
Also...Flyers not in Top 10? lol
Also...Flyers not in Top 10? lol
I Eat Crow
Fear The Mullet
- Jul 9, 2007
- 19,984
- 13,650
Actually not as bad as I thought it would be. I only disagree with the following:
- I'd have Hajek and Lundkvist as legit NHL prospects rather than merely "having a chance"
-Lindgren should be one category higher in the "has a chance" category rather than a depth piece.
-Actually think Miller should be bumped down from legit prospect to has a chance. I think the potential is there for him to be a great prospect, but he's proven very little so far as a defenseman. If he has a good year at Wisconsin I will agree, but to me honestly, Lundkvist is the safer bet to be an NHL'er over Miller.
- I'd have Hajek and Lundkvist as legit NHL prospects rather than merely "having a chance"
-Lindgren should be one category higher in the "has a chance" category rather than a depth piece.
-Actually think Miller should be bumped down from legit prospect to has a chance. I think the potential is there for him to be a great prospect, but he's proven very little so far as a defenseman. If he has a good year at Wisconsin I will agree, but to me honestly, Lundkvist is the safer bet to be an NHL'er over Miller.
Irishguy42
Mr. Preachy
At least he acknowledges that our farm system, while not overly top-heavy (which is good) is very deep.
We dont have enough super skilled little guys who won't make the nhl for pronman to truly love our prospect group.
I don't even really see the point in commenting on this. It is what it is.
EDIT: For the record, I won't take issue with ranking us 11th. I don't pay attention to the other teams enough to have an educated opinion there. But the way our guys are "tiered" is just silly. So, whatever. Certainly does not make me want to subscribe to The Athletic.
EDIT: For the record, I won't take issue with ranking us 11th. I don't pay attention to the other teams enough to have an educated opinion there. But the way our guys are "tiered" is just silly. So, whatever. Certainly does not make me want to subscribe to The Athletic.
Oscar Lindberg
Registered User
Interesting he is high on Lindbom but the rest is fine
I think our group ranks anywhere from 5-10 in the league, depending on who you ask
After this season's deadline, and next summers draft, I would assume our pool will top 3 easily
I think our group ranks anywhere from 5-10 in the league, depending on who you ask
After this season's deadline, and next summers draft, I would assume our pool will top 3 easily
FireGerardGallant
The Artist Formerly known as FireDavidQuinn
- Mar 19, 2016
- 6,656
- 7,576
I rarley agree with Pronman but it think being ranked 11 is fair. However what I dont understand is some of the teams he has ranked ahead of the Rangers and the Flyers (Habs, Isles, etc.)
will1066
If you score four, you better f'n win the game
- Oct 12, 2008
- 52,562
- 75,841
Rankings generally are a waste of time. They're great when we're ranked high, they're terrible or what is the ranker smoking when they're not favorable. Either way, take with a grain of salt.
Of course I speak in generalities.
Of course I speak in generalities.
mrmovies779
The Greatest Teacher,Failure is.
- Feb 5, 2013
- 8,057
- 8,627
NYRFAN218
King
Yeah, I’m not getting the hate to be honest. There’s some things I disagree with but it’s really not that far off base from the consensus minus a guy or two being in a different category. It was a good read and I think the ranking is fair. Blueshirt Banter’s is much more in depth though with their rankings though that’s to be expected since they’re only looking and focusing on one teams prospects.
Islanders top prospects are Dobson, Whalstrom and Sorokin, are they so much better than Chytil, Shestyorkin, Lias and Kravtsov for them to be above the Rangers in this ranking? I don't think so, and I'm not even considering our depth.
Chaels Arms
Formerly Lias Andersson
Not defending Pronman specifically but The Athletic is definitely worth the subscription price, especially for its hockey coverage. They have a lot of interesting, unique articles about aspects of the game that aren't covered anywhere else. They had an article last week about some new goaltending techniques in the NHL with interviews from goalie coaches and gifs and videos illustrating what they were talking about. It was probably one of the best hockey articles I've read in the past couple of years and it was about a topic I've never really been interested in.
Irishguy42
Mr. Preachy
I Eat Crow
Fear The Mullet
- Jul 9, 2007
- 19,984
- 13,650
The lack of a top line center or top pairing prospect is what is preventing this farm from being top 10. Add Turcotte, Newhook, or Byram next June and we're top 5 easily.
- Sep 17, 2007
- 24,967
- 22,936
Pronman asked his Twitter followers to send him a note and project where he would rank their team. I had Ranges 7-10 so I am not surprised. A few surprising player ratings as to be expected. It’s a hell of a lot better than 29.
I expect the top teams all to have one or more top 2-3 picks from recent drafts. Buffalo, Carolina etc.
I am curious to see how he has the Habs in top 10. That doesn’t compute.
I expect the top teams all to have one or more top 2-3 picks from recent drafts. Buffalo, Carolina etc.
I am curious to see how he has the Habs in top 10. That doesn’t compute.
As I’ve said forever if Lias Andersson could skate he’d get more respect. If he were considered a top prospect we’d have a top 5 farm in the pundits eyes. But because he’s looked at as good not great prospect we drop. I honestly don’t have an issue with anything pronman said here except for two things. Kravtsov I think is an unknown to a lot of these guys. Once he has a big year here including hopefully a WJC appearance that will change. He should be considered a blue chipper.
And then his notes on hajek. He’s a sure fire top 4 dman in my opinion. Those guys don’t grow on trees. He’s short changing him.
And then his notes on hajek. He’s a sure fire top 4 dman in my opinion. Those guys don’t grow on trees. He’s short changing him.
Do you want ants
Thats how u get ants
- Jul 2, 2015
- 1,476
- 1,253
So you acknowledge issues with pronman’s rankings and prospect judgement but then still take a shot at Lias. If he’s wrong in your eyes about Kravtsov and Hajek, couldn’t he also be wrong about Lias?
I would agree with his general characterization of the Rangers farm system, but I would have Kravstov, Lias, and Ragnarsson higher than he does.
I think he underestimates Kravstov's playmaking ability. Last year Kravstov actually had the same amount of assists as goals (16) and of the 10 assists of his I've watched, 7 of them were primary, including some really brilliant passes, and the 3 secondary assists were all plays where his pass directly created the scoring chance. Additionally, I find the significance of Kravstov getting knocked off the puck gets way overblown. Firstly, how many of the prospects Pronman will rank above Kravstov, like Wahlstrom or Hughes for example, wouldn't have had trouble with the physicality of a professional league if they had played in a professional league instead of a junior / college league? Secondly, Kravstov is 6'2" and is a fantastic skater. How many guys like that have trouble protecting the puck once they are physically developed? Finally, Kravstov's production (which puts him in line with guys like Kuznetsov, Panarin, etc) came despite the fact that he gets knocked off the puck. Why does a guy who is as skilled as he is need to be a bulwark on the puck? There are plenty of elite NHL scorers who produce despite limited physicality.
I agree with his characterization of Lias as a guy with skilled hands and great hockey sense who is an average skater but has off-the-charts work ethic and is aggressive going to the dirty areas. The question with Lias is, when it comes to his offensive upside, how much can his work ethic and willingness to go the dirty areas offset his average skating ability? I don't think there's an obvious answer, but I tend to lean on his production as a cue (and I think his production is especially significant because it has been consistent in a variety of situations [HV 71, Frolunda, WJC, Wolfpack] which greatly reduces the odds that his production is a function of the situation he was in, as opposed to his intrinsic ability). So the fact that he scored at the same rate in his draft + 1 season that guys like JT Miller, Mika Zibanejad, and Anisimov (who all turned into 40-50+ point players) scored at in their draft + 2 seasons, biases me to think he projects as a top-6 player instead of bottom-6 player where Pronman has him.
I also disagree with the argument that Ragnarsson doesn't have the ability to make plays at higher levels. His scoring rate was comparable to OEL, Mattias Ekholm, and Rasmus Andersson, who are all excellent offensively in the NHL or AHL. So it seems like a big jump to me to conclude that Ragnarsson won't be able to make NHL plays at even a 3rd pairing level.
In general, I think Pronman's style, which weighs observed skill / flashy plays heavily, tends to penalize prospects in pro leagues relative to prospects in junior leagues and that bias seems pronounced to me in his evaluations of Kravstov, Lias, and Ragnarsson.
Other than that, his rankings make sense to me, and my difference in opinion would only put the Rangers at 6-7 instead of 11th, so I don't think it's a particularly big deal. Big picture, while I don't agree with every decision Gorton has made, his willingness to rebuild voluntarily and get value for established players instead of trying to make an unlikely playoff run has greatly improved the Rangers future prospects and I'm hopeful that, with some luck, in another year or two we can have the foundation for another run at the cup.
I think he underestimates Kravstov's playmaking ability. Last year Kravstov actually had the same amount of assists as goals (16) and of the 10 assists of his I've watched, 7 of them were primary, including some really brilliant passes, and the 3 secondary assists were all plays where his pass directly created the scoring chance. Additionally, I find the significance of Kravstov getting knocked off the puck gets way overblown. Firstly, how many of the prospects Pronman will rank above Kravstov, like Wahlstrom or Hughes for example, wouldn't have had trouble with the physicality of a professional league if they had played in a professional league instead of a junior / college league? Secondly, Kravstov is 6'2" and is a fantastic skater. How many guys like that have trouble protecting the puck once they are physically developed? Finally, Kravstov's production (which puts him in line with guys like Kuznetsov, Panarin, etc) came despite the fact that he gets knocked off the puck. Why does a guy who is as skilled as he is need to be a bulwark on the puck? There are plenty of elite NHL scorers who produce despite limited physicality.
I agree with his characterization of Lias as a guy with skilled hands and great hockey sense who is an average skater but has off-the-charts work ethic and is aggressive going to the dirty areas. The question with Lias is, when it comes to his offensive upside, how much can his work ethic and willingness to go the dirty areas offset his average skating ability? I don't think there's an obvious answer, but I tend to lean on his production as a cue (and I think his production is especially significant because it has been consistent in a variety of situations [HV 71, Frolunda, WJC, Wolfpack] which greatly reduces the odds that his production is a function of the situation he was in, as opposed to his intrinsic ability). So the fact that he scored at the same rate in his draft + 1 season that guys like JT Miller, Mika Zibanejad, and Anisimov (who all turned into 40-50+ point players) scored at in their draft + 2 seasons, biases me to think he projects as a top-6 player instead of bottom-6 player where Pronman has him.
I also disagree with the argument that Ragnarsson doesn't have the ability to make plays at higher levels. His scoring rate was comparable to OEL, Mattias Ekholm, and Rasmus Andersson, who are all excellent offensively in the NHL or AHL. So it seems like a big jump to me to conclude that Ragnarsson won't be able to make NHL plays at even a 3rd pairing level.
In general, I think Pronman's style, which weighs observed skill / flashy plays heavily, tends to penalize prospects in pro leagues relative to prospects in junior leagues and that bias seems pronounced to me in his evaluations of Kravstov, Lias, and Ragnarsson.
Other than that, his rankings make sense to me, and my difference in opinion would only put the Rangers at 6-7 instead of 11th, so I don't think it's a particularly big deal. Big picture, while I don't agree with every decision Gorton has made, his willingness to rebuild voluntarily and get value for established players instead of trying to make an unlikely playoff run has greatly improved the Rangers future prospects and I'm hopeful that, with some luck, in another year or two we can have the foundation for another run at the cup.
Last edited:
eco's bones
Registered User
Time will tell.
To me the Rangers have 12 guys--Chytil, Andersson, Shesterkin, Kravtsov who should become excellent players and then Georgiev, Hajek, Pionk, Howden, Rykov, Lindgren, Miller, Lundkvist (those 8 in no particular order) most all of who should at the very least become very solid NHL players. And after those 12 we have a good 15-20 other very intriguing prospects. But it's a lot of depth and a lot of very good depth.
To me the Rangers have 12 guys--Chytil, Andersson, Shesterkin, Kravtsov who should become excellent players and then Georgiev, Hajek, Pionk, Howden, Rykov, Lindgren, Miller, Lundkvist (those 8 in no particular order) most all of who should at the very least become very solid NHL players. And after those 12 we have a good 15-20 other very intriguing prospects. But it's a lot of depth and a lot of very good depth.
The Crypto Guy
Registered User
- Jun 26, 2017
- 29,227
- 38,914
Don't really agree with him but it's one persons opinion so i'm not going to get all worked up over it.
Machinehead
Fox Mafia Consigliere
Ad
Upcoming events
-
-
-
-
Props Alex Ovechkin to Record 895th Career Goal During 2024/25 Regular SeasonWagers: 11Staked: $20,983.00Event closes - 6 days from now- Updated: