The Kings top 20 Prospects (as voted by you)

[Captain Mittens*]

yeah thats exactly what it says to me He trying to saying that a unknown would be drafted in later rounds cause know one knows about him However i highly doubt any team didnt know about watson.

ok why would a team draft someone ahead of a player if hes not better I don't understand any reason a team would do that. answer me that and i may change my opinion till then i will believe a team only picks the best player for that organization. if they pick for organizatonal needs that means to me hes a better fit in the organization hense should be rated higher.

Paragraph 1: that is not what I said. KP summized it

Paragraph 2: Risk.. Also why pay more when you don't have to.

If you were going to buy a vacuum and am employee told you that the exact vacuum you want is going on sale tomorrow, would you wait a day? Or still buy the vacuum at full price?

 

[KingCanadain1976]

Your not seeing my point. Refer to the bolded part of your post. These lists are NOT about what the Kings see in a player, its about what the poster sees. THAT'S why where the Kings drafted a guy matters nothing in a thread like this.

Your not seeing my point I was told it just my opinion and i was using this to say that the kings scouting staff ( more then just a few ) seem to agree with me or he would have been picked earlier

 

[Jason Lewis]

He is high risk. He's not someone I would count on, but other people have valid, defensible reasons for ranking him higher than other players drafted before him.

For example, I have Amadio and Middleton much higher than Lintuniemi, even when he was picked much earlier. They are "safer" players. They are players I am higher on.

Exactly. Later round picks aren't always less talented than players in earlier rounds. It's all about possibility of them panning out. Risk vs. reward.

 

[KingCanadain1976]

Exactly. Later round picks aren't always less talented than players in earlier rounds. It's all about possibility of them panning out. Risk vs. reward.

this is exactly why i don't think he should be on the list. The list being top 20 king prospect right now and there is over 25 better prospects ready to pan out right now imo. I realize he can grow and there has been a few 5 9 players in the league but lets not kid anyone there is no way he would make the king lineup at all at 5 9. This is a list for today not 5 year in the future. I think this "potential in future" is getting over value in a prospect today list.

 

[kingsfan]

this is exactly why i don't think he should be on the list. The list being top 20 king prospect right now and there is over 25 better prospects ready to pan out right now imo. I realize he can grow and there has been a few 5 9 players in the league but lets not kid anyone there is no way he would make the king lineup at all at 5 9. This is a list for today not 5 year in the future. I think this "potential in future" is getting over value in a prospect today list.

Why is it 'right now?' Whether we are talking about Kempe or Watson, it isn't 'right now' its what they'll be in two years, four years, five years. If it was all about right now, the Kings wouldn't even have drafted Kempe likely. The Kings are looking long term, just like most posters to this thread. Watson, LONG TERM, has significant upside. Odds are he won't reach it, but he could and that's why he gets on people's lists. Not sure why this is so hard to grasp.

 

[tigermask48]

this is exactly why i don't think he should be on the list. The list being top 20 king prospect right now and there is over 25 better prospects ready to pan out right now imo. I realize he can grow and there has been a few 5 9 players in the league but lets not kid anyone there is no way he would make the king lineup at all at 5 9. This is a list for today not 5 year in the future. I think this "potential in future" is getting over value in a prospect today list.

There are maybe 4-7 players in the entire Kings prospect pipeline that have a better offensive skillset than Watson right now. Pus he's decent defensively as well. Yeah he's small and that brings up question marks, but from a purely skill standpoint I'd say Watson is right up there at the top with guys like Peason, Zykov, Weal, and Porkins right now. Size shouldn't be that big of a limiting factor in ranking, but it should drop him a bit but certainly not to the very bottom of the list when you seemingly want to put him.

 

[KingCanadain1976]

Why is it 'right now?' Whether we are talking about Kempe or Watson, it isn't 'right now' its what they'll be in two years, four years, five years. If it was all about right now, the Kings wouldn't even have drafted Kempe likely. The Kings are looking long term, just like most posters to this thread. Watson, LONG TERM, has significant upside. Odds are he won't reach it, but he could and that's why he gets on people's lists. Not sure why this is so hard to grasp.

well the list is a right now list its not the top 20 prospects in there hockey carrer Its the 2014 top 20 prospects period There was /is no mention of taking there potential into it no mention of carrer potential no Its said simply the 2014 top 20 prospects period. I get hes got potential but until shows it hes not on the top 20 im not sure how your not getting what im saying but I have as much right to state my reasoning as much as anyone has to

 

[KingCanadain1976]

There are maybe 4-7 players in the entire Kings prospect pipeline that have a better offensive skillset than Watson right now. Pus he's decent defensively as well. Yeah he's small and that brings up question marks, but from a purely skill standpoint I'd say Watson is right up there at the top with guys like Peason, Zykov, Weal, and Porkins right now. Size shouldn't be that big of a limiting factor in ranking, but it should drop him a bit but certainly not to the very bottom of the list when you seemingly want to put him.

First off this is a list of ALL types of prospect not just offensive. The kings are a defensive first team so it makes sence the majority or a good portion of our prospects are defensive. Next we have at least 3 goalies i put ahead of Watson. As far as offensive ability I will agree he in our top 15 ish. Until he proves he can do it above the ohl level hes offensive ability isn't saying it translates Look at Lewis 62games 29 44 73points in his last year at owen sound. How good did that translate to the nhl. The kings will never play him being so small Our smallest player is richards at 5 10. If Sutter or Dean would have let Kozan play a few games then you could think he may have a chance but if a team as straved for goals at the time as we were and him being a 20 + goals a season in the ahl and they promoted dwight king and nolan over him That to me means no one under 6 will get a chance to play. Until watson does something in the ahl hes not a top 20 prospect to me.


just adding clifford had 57 points on 58 games so yeah showing offense in the ohl doesnt always mean anything.

 

[tigermask48]

First off this is a list of ALL types of prospect not just offensive. The kings are a defensive first team so it makes sence the majority or a good portion of our prospects are defensive. Next we have at least 3 goalies i put ahead of Watson. As far as offensive ability I will agree he in our top 15 ish. Until he proves he can do it above the ohl level hes offensive ability isn't saying it translates Look at Lewis 62games 29 44 73points in his last year at owen sound. How good did that translate to the nhl. The kings will never play him being so small Our smallest player is richards at 5 10. If Sutter or Dean would have let Kozan play a few games then you could think he may have a chance but if a team as straved for goals at the time as we were and him being a 20 + goals a season in the ahl and they promoted dwight king and nolan over him That to me means no one under 6 will get a chance to play. Until watson does something in the ahl hes not a top 20 prospect to me.


just adding clifford had 57 points on 58 games so yeah showing offense in the ohl doesnt always mean anything.

So it's about stats... until it isn't.
It's about potential... until it isn't.
It's opinion... until it isn't.
It's about draft order... until it isn't.
It's about skill... until it isn't.
It's about size...you get the picture hopefully.

I'm done even discussing it, because it's laughable how somebody can be this against a single prospect that joined the organization just over 2 months ago.

 

[KingCanadain1976]

So it's about stats... until it isn't.
It's about potential... until it isn't.
It's opinion... until it isn't.
It's about draft order... until it isn't.
It's about skill... until it isn't.
It's about size...you get the picture hopefully.

I'm done even discussing it, because it's laughable how somebody can be this against a single prospect that joined the organization just over 2 months ago.

I'm not as much against him as i am for the other 20+ prospects. I wasn't the one that bought out the offensive potential stuff you were. My opinion is supported by our scouts imo Yes draft order does play into it to me. Yes size is a major part of it as well to me How can you put a player that would be to small to get a call up in our top 20 sorry that makes no sence to me. Again i just think theres at least 25 other players more deserving

 

[kingsfan]

well the list is a right now list its not the top 20 prospects in there hockey carrer Its the 2014 top 20 prospects period There was /is no mention of taking there potential into it no mention of carrer potential no Its said simply the 2014 top 20 prospects period. I get hes got potential but until shows it hes not on the top 20 im not sure how your not getting what im saying but I have as much right to state my reasoning as much as anyone has to

If its about right now and not about taking potential into it, McNabb should be number one on your list and Kempe should be about 13th. Your own list doesn't even jive with what you are saying.

 

[KingCanadain1976]

If its about right now and not about taking potential into it, McNabb should be number one on your list and Kempe should be about 13th. Your own list doesn't even jive with what you are saying.

re read my list post It clearly states its in no particular order Also Pearson would still be number one

 

[kingsfan]

re read my list post It clearly states its in no particular order Also Pearson would still be number one

So you simply are listing the 20 most NHL ready prospects, in no order? Yet you then claim to put guys like Marchment ahead of Watson because he was drafted ahead of Watson by the Kings. The Kings don't draft guys based on NHL readiness solely, so how can you rank a guy like Marchment ahead of a guy like Watson simply using his draft selection spot?

 

[KingCanadain1976]

So you simply are listing the 20 most NHL ready prospects, in no order? Yet you then claim to put guys like Marchment ahead of Watson because he was drafted ahead of Watson by the Kings. The Kings don't draft guys based on NHL readiness solely, so how can you rank a guy like Marchment ahead of a guy like Watson simply using his draft selection spot?

My list was simply 25 prospects that i think would be ahead of Watson I was taking the list from a lineup that is printed in the sports forecaster book. It is mostly done at random. I could sit down later tonight and make up my actual top 25 list if it would help you understand where i'm coming from

My reason for the player drafted ahead of Watson this year being better prospect because i think our scouts draft the best fit for the organization If there better fits that makes them better "king prospects" to me. If Watson was a better prospect then the people ahead of him he should have been drafted then.

 

[kingsfan]

My list was simply 25 prospects that i think would be ahead of Watson I was taking the list from a lineup that is printed in the sports forecaster book. It is mostly done at random. I could sit down later tonight and make up my actual top 25 list if it would help you understand where i'm coming from

My reason for the player drafted ahead of Watson this year being better prospect because i think our scouts draft the best fit for the organization If there better fits that makes them better "king prospects" to me. If Watson was a better prospect then the people ahead of him he should have been drafted then.

First you say it's NHL readiness, now it's because the guys drafted ahead of Marchment are 'better fits.'

You shall be called flip flop

 

[KingCanadain1976]

First you say it's NHL readiness, now it's because the guys drafted ahead of Marchment are 'better fits.'

You shall be called flip flop

Huh i think you confused its watson your aguing for not marchment ( jake is higher then watson on my list if it matters)

You shall be called confused

 

[kingsfan]

Huh i think you confused its watson your aguing for not marchment ( jake is higher then watson on my list if it matters)

You shall be called confused

Sorry, sub out Marchment for Watson in my last post, because that was my intention. After that, my point still stands.

 

[KingCanadain1976]

Sorry, sub out Marchment for Watson in my last post, because that was my intention. After that, my point still stands.

I'm sorry i started this mess but i must have upset you someway. Your looking for anything to try and turn this on me. First your picking out things and twisting them without fully reading.(when i clear state its not in any order) then when i prove that your assumation is wrong u go on to calling me a flip flop without you acknowledging your were wrong with your assumption. Its simple as this I have taken the position that there is 25 other players ahead of him right from the get go. I am saying the reason the 8 people drafted ahead of him would be ahead of him is because they were drafted ahead of him thus making them better because if they weren't he would have been drafted higher. This is not flip flopping this is explaining why i am saying what i'm saying but if u want to call it flip flopping so be it.

 

[Captain Mittens*]

so be it.

Am I the only person that hears "so be it" and thinks of this?

 

[KingCanadain1976]

Am I the only person that hears "so be it" and thinks of this?

lol yup for me

 

[Jason Lewis]

well the list is a right now list its not the top 20 prospects in there hockey carrer Its the 2014 top 20 prospects period There was /is no mention of taking there potential into it no mention of carrer potential no Its said simply the 2014 top 20 prospects period. I get hes got potential but until shows it hes not on the top 20 im not sure how your not getting what im saying but I have as much right to state my reasoning as much as anyone has to

They are prospects. They are drafted based on potential among other things. So why can we not put together a top 20 and base some of the selections on potential?

 

[KingCanadain1976]

They are prospects. They are drafted based on potential among other things. So why can we not put together a top 20 and base some of the selections on potential?

Jason I'm not trying to tell anyone how to make up there list. There were no rules / guidelines on how to make your list. However I still can't see how Watson would make anyone top 20. We have at least 25 better prospects. I'm not trying to put down his talent however i would like people to realize there are better players more likely to make this team. Everyone sees a big point total and falls in love . There as been numerous number of similar types of players that put up the same point totals and number do anything. He is also 5 9 which is not the type of players that see a sniff of nhl action on our kings. We have had talented players leave our team kozan and avendo without getting a sniff. We are known for being a big hard working physical team and on all 3 accounts Watson simply doesn't make it.

 

[Captain Mittens*]

We are known for being a big hard working physical team and on all 3 accounts Watson simply doesn't make it.

You still need skill.

Look at how effective Gaborik was for us. Even though he is listed at 6'1 204, he plays like he is 5'9 160

 

[KingCanadain1976]

You still need skill.

Look at how effective Gaborik was for us. Even though he is listed at 6'1 204, he plays like he is 5'9 160

I totally agree that gaborik was effective for us He does not play like hes 5'9 at all he goes to the dirty areas to get pucks which 5 9 players don't He also is strong on the puck where 5 9 players aren't sorry i can't disagree more.