Wheeler’s Top 100 prospects

[Captain Mountain]

I think the dumbest thing about having tiers on such lists is that if you go back and look at any old top prospects list, you'll realize that a lot of guys are interchangeable, especially after the first few spots. Furthermore, some guys will be lower simply because they're younger and not as proven yet, so inevitably they will climb. So putting prospects, who have such a malleable quality to them, into tiers this way just seems needlessly rigid.

As opposed to what, just having a numbered list? The point of tiers is to highlight how malleable these lists actually are.

 

[Rabid Ranger]

Why is Celebrini in his own tier?

 

[Helistin]

Why is Celebrini in his own tier?

My guess would be Wheeler thinks Celebrini is tier above the next best players.

 

[DJJones]

As opposed to what, just having a numbered list? The point of tiers is to highlight how malleable these lists actually are.

Ya if anything you could just drop the numbers and go strictly tiers. Not sure why you would get rid of tiers.

 

[Digitalbooya]

Yurov just set the record for under 21 scoring in the KHL, beating all of Tarasenko, Kaprizov and Kuznetsov.

Wheeler literally used this sentence to describe him: “If you were to fill up two buckets with his tools (one for the strengths, one for the weaknesses) and place them on a scale, the bucket with his strengths in it would be overflowing and the one with his weaknesses would be near empty.”

How is he #30??

 

[Thallis]

I like all the people hating on Scott for doing his job and making lists, as though he's somehow a bad person for being a sports writer. He's literally doing what many people here do. Is there a paywall? Yes, because he works for a large company. Does he claim to know more than NHL scouts? No. Does he get things wrong? Yes, but so do NHL scouts, so who cares? This is literally an entertainment piece, meant to engage fans from a variety of teams, and give people an opinion on the best upcoming prospects.

"He's a stat watcher." Duh. He also watches clips, games, and highlights, but yeah, obviously stats are going to be the primary tool used to sort hundreds of players. It's literally the best way to compare players. Stats correlate to success more than literally any other metric.

Trying to call out Wheeler is just yelling at clouds. He does a good job of compiling small blurbs about the many prospects, and groups them into rough tiers. I wouldn't get bogged down in the specifics, or you're wasting your time.

It's also clear just from the comments that the bones people have to pick usually center around "he doesn't like my guy!!!"

 

[Helistin]

Yurov just set the record for under 21 scoring in the KHL, beating all of Tarasenko, Kaprizov and Kuznetsov.

Wheeler literally used this sentence to describe him: “If you were to fill up two buckets with his tools (one for the strengths, one for the weaknesses) and place them on a scale, the bucket with his strengths in it would be overflowing and the one with his weaknesses would be near empty.”

How is he #30??

Hard to compare to other prospects buckets. We don't know the size of the bucket or how much it is overflowing. Maybe there are 29 prospects whose buckets overflow more?

Should have used the bucket analogy on every player for better comparison.

 

[Fantomas]

As opposed to what, just having a numbered list? The point of tiers is to highlight how malleable these lists actually are.

wat

 

[Captain Mountain]

wat

The point of tiers is to say that generally there isn't much difference in the quality of prospect ranked x to the the quality of prospect ranked y, but that players in a higher tier are generally higher quality prospects than in a lower tier.

Its not complicated, its literally a means to address exactly what you're complaining about when it comes to ranking prospects.

 

[Fantomas]

The point of tiers is to say that generally there isn't much difference in the quality of prospect ranked x to the the quality of prospect ranked y, but that players in a higher tier are generally higher quality prospects than in a lower tier.

Its not complicated, its literally a means to address exactly what you're complaining about when it comes to ranking prospects.

Tell me more of how Jake Sanderson needed to be in a lower tier than Brandt Clarke.

 

[Fantomas]

The idea that there are two tiers separating Nikishin and Edvinsson is freaking hilarious. Complete nonsense fiction conjured up in Wheeler's twisted imagination.

 

[A1LeafNation]

Tier 3

10 Clarke
11 Dickinson
12 Jiricek
13 Perrault
14 Stankoven
15 Gatton
16 Eiserman
17 Silayev
18 Lindstrom
19 Gauthier
20 Benson
21 Leonard
22 Helenius
23 Iginla
24 Yakemchuk
25 Sennecke

 

[Captain Mountain]

Tell me more of how Jake Sanderson needed to be in a lower tier than Brandt Clarke.

What on earth are you talking about?

1) Jake Sanderson is not on this list.
2) That would not an issue with using tiers, its that you disagree with the views of the person making the list.
3) Its not even a thing Wheeler has said or conveyed. The last time Wheeler did a list with both Jake Sanderson and Brandt Clarke on the same list (2022), he has Sanderson 1 spot ahead of Clarke. He's never had Jake Sanderson and Brandt Clarke on the same list which used tiers.

 

[DJJones]

Tell me more of how Jake Sanderson needed to be in a lower tier than Brandt Clarke.

I have no idea what you actually want. Do you want him to just list 100 names alphabetically?

Yes, he is ranking prospects by tiers on how he views them. That's the whole purpose of the article. You don't have to agree with it

 

[Fantomas]

What on earth are you talking about?

1) Jake Sanderson is not on this list.
2) That would not an issue with using tiers, its that you disagree with the views of the person making the list.
3) Its not even a thing Wheeler has said or conveyed. The last time Wheeler did a list with both Jake Sanderson and Brandt Clarke on the same list (2022), he has Sanderson 1 spot ahead of Clarke. He's never had Jake Sanderson and Brandt Clarke on the same list which used tiers.

Look at page 2 of the thread. Whether or not he used tiers in that instance is irrelevant. If he did, he'd have them in completely separate tiers.

The tiers thing is nonsense. You only use tiers when there's a very strong separation in talent level, which you don't get in a top 50 NHL prospect list.

Yes, he is ranking prospects by tiers on how he views them. That's the whole purpose of the article. You don't have to agree with it

There's a difference between ranking prospects and placing them in tiers.

Saying "I like player X more than player Y" is different than saying "player X is one or two tiers above player Y." The latter implies a major difference, the former doesn't.

 

[Captain Mountain]

Look at page 2 of the thread. Whether or not he used tiers in that instance is irrelevant. If he did, he'd have them in completely separate tiers.

The tiers thing is nonsense. You only use tiers when there's a very strong separation in talent level, which you don't get in a top 50 NHL prospect list.

Your issue with tiers is because you took a selective bad faith post that had nothing to do with tiers which was in respect of the views of a single prospect writer at a single point in time, then making unsupported assumptions based on that, and drawing broad, sweeping conclusions based on that?

Ok champ.

 

[Fantomas]

Your issue with tiers is because you took a selective bad faith post that had nothing to do with tiers which was in respect of the views of a single prospect writer at a single point in time, then making unsupported assumptions based on that, and drawing broad, sweeping conclusions based on that?

Ok champ.

I articulated my position very clearly and you're venting. If you're Wheeler's biggest fan it's really not my problem.

 

[DJJones]

Look at page 2 of the thread. Whether or not he used tiers in that instance is irrelevant. If he did, he'd have them in completely separate tiers.

The tiers thing is nonsense. You only use tiers when there's a very strong separation in talent level, which you don't get in a top 50 NHL prospect list.



There's a difference between ranking prospects and placing them in tiers.

Saying "I like player X more than player Y" is different than saying "player X is one or two tiers above player Y." The latter implies a major difference, the former doesn't.

He thinks there's a major difference. Again, that's the whole point.

1st ranking to 10th ranking is a lot more of a drop than 50th to 60th.

Hell there's probably another twenty or thirty prospects in the bottom tier that he cut off

 

[Captain Mountain]

I articulated my position very clearly and you're venting. If you're Wheeler's biggest fan it's really not my problem.

I vehemently disagree with Wheeler on a lot of things (specifically that he favours offensive flash too much) and think Sanderson has always been a better prospect than Clarke. Your position is just incoherent because you're refusing to decouple your argument against tiers and what appears to be an argument against how Wheeler views the quality of different prospects.

If you think there isn't much difference and that tiers don't help, then why would you care where one player sits on a list relative to another?

 

[North]

But I was promised by Edmonton fans that Savoie was universally regarded as a top prospect?

Are you actually taking one guys ranking to prove a point nobody made? Who said it was universal? They said he was highly ranked on several lists.

 

[Angler]

I articulated my position very clearly and you're venting. If you're Wheeler's biggest fan it's really not my problem.

Haha talk about a strawman. He was explaining that tiered lists are an effective way of organizing prospects into general groups. He never showed or said anything to indicate he was a Wheeler fan and never defended Wheeler's specific opinion on particular prospects. Stop making things up to try to save face.

 

[HawksDub89]

No Reinbacher or Hutson in the top 20?!?!?! Outrageous!

lol

 

[Blackhawkswincup]

Hawks with 5 in top 100 and 2 HM is not bad

Though I don't consider Reichel a prospect anymore and this is make or break year for his future as Hawk after struggling last year (Promising before that)

 

[A1LeafNation]

Are there any examples of a Wheeler late ranked pick (~90s) that surprised in the NHL that next season.

 

[OgeeOgelthorpe]

I like all the people hating on Scott for doing his job and making lists, as though he's somehow a bad person for being a sports writer. He's literally doing what many people here do. Is there a paywall? Yes, because he works for a large company. Does he claim to know more than NHL scouts? No. Does he get things wrong? Yes, but so do NHL scouts, so who cares? This is literally an entertainment piece, meant to engage fans from a variety of teams, and give people an opinion on the best upcoming prospects.

"He's a stat watcher." Duh. He also watches clips, games, and highlights, but yeah, obviously stats are going to be the primary tool used to sort hundreds of players. It's literally the best way to compare players. Stats correlate to success more than literally any other metric.

Trying to call out Wheeler is just yelling at clouds. He does a good job of compiling small blurbs about the many prospects, and groups them into rough tiers. I wouldn't get bogged down in the specifics, or you're wasting your time.

We don't think he's a bad person. We think he's a bad sports writer. Huge difference.