Prospect Info: Wild Prospect Thread 2022-23

[Wabit]

Also, that hype developed post draft, not leading up to the draft. If he had all that hype before he was drafted he would've gone sooner.

I don't think he would have. It was 2010 and anything under 6'0" was considered a very undersized FWD.

 

[thestonedkoala]

I don't think he would have. It was 2010 and anything under 6'0" was considered a very undersized FWD.

He was also the highest taken European skater. There were questions about how his skating would translate as well.

 

[Wabit]

He was also the highest taken European skater. There were questions about how his skating would translate as well.

There was a Swiss player and a Russian taken ahead of Granny, but they both had CHL time under their belts. Just as a clarification.

 

[JiricekSaveUs]

OOh, forgot that he signed a contract. NVM, then, he'll be in Iowa next year, more than likely, though I am of two minds whether the SHL or AHL is the better development league for a young Swede. I like having him play in the smaller rinks, with likely future teammates, being indoctrinated into the Wild systems and having the possibility of a call up when he's with Iowa.
I like the lack of travel, skill development, and lack of cultural adjustment for a young person in Sweden. Some young guys aren't ready to leave the nest, others are. Who knows, maybe his mother is a lousy cook, he hates his family/team, and he can't wait to get away from his clingy gf?

I think Ohgren Will stay in Sweden for another year. Yurov will be in Iowa next year.

 

[57special]

I think Ohgren Will stay in Sweden for another year. Yurov will be in Iowa next year.

Just a feeling, or have you heard this somewhere?

I wonder if the potential to play with Kaprizov is a pull for Russians. Now that i think of it, it's probably a pull for non- russians.

 

[TaLoN]

Finnish Baby Jesus? And that wasn't all tongue in cheek.

That is once again post draft hype based on what he was doing AFTER he was drafted. He didn't fully live up to it, but he did respectable, and he absolutely lived up to at least his draft hype - at least at wing if not center, though he's been a pretty good center as well. 64pts last year at center.

Again... not even close to your "massive bust" claim while giving Sheppard a pass with a career 91pts in near 400 games as just a "borderline bust", when his expectations were to be around where Granlund turned out to be.

Also Sheppard was seen as a top 6 power forward. Minnesota rushed him, Sheppard didn't develop due to a lot of conditions (mainly he should have stayed in the CHL and spent a year or two in the AHL). But Sheppard wasn't seen as much more than a top 6 center.

And he completely FAILED as a top 6 center, which means he was a complete bust.

Finally, I said Granlund was a massive bust comparatively speaking to the hype surrounding him, but he was a useful forward. He wasn't a bust in a traditional sense, but for a prospect that was once rated as THE top prospect in the world, he certainly didn't live up to it. He has carved out a pretty good career, but he is more of a Bouchard than a Kaprizov when the team needed a Kaprizov.

"A useful forward" who just happened to be the team's best player? Yeah, that was pretty useful. Ok, he didn't turn into a franchise player, but that doesn't make him a bust. He wasn't expected to be a franchise player on draft day. The hype blew up so much based on what he was doing post draft development, and it upped the expectations... sure... but he still became out clear cut best player on the team. That's not a bust.

I don't think he would have. It was 2010 and anything under 6'0" was considered a very undersized FWD.

#1 overall picks 2005-2019 under 6'0
Crosby is 5'11 - 2005
Kane is 5'10 - 2007
Yakupov is 5'11 - 2012
Jack Hughes is 5'10 - 2019

Yes, if Granlund had that hype pre-draft, he'd have been drafted higher.

Now... prior to Crosby? You have to go back to '85... but the league views changed when Crosby was drafted.

 

[Wabit]

That is once again post draft hype based on what he was doing AFTER he was drafted. He didn't fully live up to it, but he did respectable, and he absolutely lived up to at least his draft hype - at least at wing if not center, though he's been a pretty good center as well. 64pts last year at center.

Again... not even close to your "massive bust" claim while giving Sheppard a pass with a career 91pts in near 400 games as just a "borderline bust", when his expectations were to be around where Granlund turned out to be.


And he completely FAILED as a top 6 center, which means he was a complete bust.


"A useful forward" who just happened to be the team's best player? Yeah, that was pretty useful. Ok, he didn't turn into a franchise player, but that doesn't make him a bust. He wasn't expected to be a franchise player on draft day. The hype blew up so much based on what he was doing post draft development, and it upped the expectations... sure... but he still became out clear cut best player on the team. That's not a bust.


#1 overall picks 2005-2019 under 6'0
Crosby is 5'11 - 2005
Kane is 5'10 - 2007
Yakupov is 5'11 - 2012
Jack Hughes is 5'10 - 2019

Yes, if Granlund had that hype pre-draft, he'd have been drafted higher.

Now... prior to Crosby? You have to go back to '85... but the league views changed when Crosby was drafted.

Kane and Crosby were elite talents. They are the exception to the rule.

Hughes being 5'-10" was 9 drafts years later, and the mindset had started shifting towards drafting smaller guys earlier.


top-10s under 6'0" (hockey reference):
2003- 0
2004- 0
2005- 2 Crosby (1st), and the other busted
2006- 0
2007- 3 Kane (1st), Granger was decent, Hamill wasn't looking good
2008- 0
2009-1 Duchene just had a great rookie season
2010- 2 Skinner, Granny
2011- 0
2012- 1 Yak (1st) just a terrible draft class overall.
2013- 0
2014- 0
2015- 0
2016- 2 Keller, Jost
2017- 2 Makar, Andersson
2018- 2 Q. Hughes, Boquvist
2019- 2 J. Hughes (1st), Turcotte
2020- 5 Raymond, Drysdale, Quinn, Rossi, Perfetti
2021- 1
2022- 2

From 2003-2015 (13 drafts) 130 top-10 drafted player 9 total players under 6'0" drafted (7%), and 3 of those 9 were considered best prospects in their draft and 1st oa. Size didn't mattered at the time of Granny's draft.

Picking a Rossi clone in the top-10 would have been widely panned if it happened 10+ years ago.

 

[TaLoN]

Kane and Crosby were elite talents. They are the exception to the rule.

Hughes being 5'-10" was 9 drafts years later, and the mindset had started shifting towards drafting smaller guys earlier.


top-10s under 6'0" (hockey reference):
2003- 0
2004- 0
2005- 2 Crosby (1st), and the other busted
2006- 0
2007- 3 Kane (1st), Granger was decent, Hamill wasn't looking good
2008- 0
2009-1 Duchene just had a great rookie season
2010- 2 Skinner, Granny
2011- 0
2012- 1 Yak (1st) just a terrible draft class overall.
2013- 0
2014- 0
2015- 0
2016- 2 Keller, Jost
2017- 2 Makar, Andersson
2018- 2 Q. Hughes, Boquvist
2019- 2 J. Hughes (1st), Turcotte
2020- 5 Raymond, Drysdale, Quinn, Rossi, Perfetti
2021- 1
2022- 2

From 2003-2015 (13 drafts) 130 top-10 drafted player 9 total players under 6'0" drafted (7%), and 3 of those 9 were considered best prospects in their draft and 1st oa. Size didn't mattered at the time of Granny's draft.

Picking a Rossi clone in the top-10 would have been widely panned if it happened 10+ years ago.

You're supporting my point though. The hype built post draft for Granlund, and that is the hype being discussed. The claim "best player not in the NHL" was the hype, it would've made him a top 5 pick had it been pre-draft, but it wasn't is my point. Being 9th at the moment of drafting? The expectation was a top 6 forward, preferably center.

He is exactly that. He was our team's best player for multiple years before he was traded. The ultimate point? He was not even close to a bust.

 

[thestonedkoala]

considered best prospects in their draft and 1st oa. Size didn't mattered at the time of Granny's draft.

You mean size did matter at the time of Granny's draft, because I keep seeing a lot of articles questioning his transition to the NHL due to size. And size is still a bit of a factor today.

Just imagine if Minnesota picked Tarasenko vs Granlund. Tarasenko turned out to be one of the best in his draft class.

 

[thestonedkoala]

You're supporting my point though. The hype built post draft for Granlund, and that is the hype being discussed. The claim "best player not in the NHL" was the hype, it would've made him a top 5 pick had it been pre-draft, but it wasn't is my point. Being 9th at the moment of drafting? The expectation was a top 6 forward, preferably center.

He is exactly that. He was our team's best player for multiple years before he was traded. The ultimate point? He was not even close to a bust.

Granlund had enough hype going into the draft and was considered to be one of the biggest boom or bust prospects in the draft at the time. Granlund was playing against men (similar to Lundell) and there were two things holding a lot of teams back; Granlund's skating and his size. A lot of scouts knew Granlund had the potential to do what he did POST draft, so it wasn't like his post draft hype came out of nowhere. Scouts had to weigh that trajectory.

Similar to Trevor Zegras. Teams KNEW his potential; you don't think Chicago, Colorado, Edmonton, or Los Angeles are kicking themselves for not taking him?

No, the expectation was clear that when Granlund was drafted he was going to be a top 6 center. There was no reason not to take him. If they wanted a winger, they should have went after Tarasenko.

Multiple years? Two, maybe three at best. More so, I'd argue that Staal was Minnesota's best player as he played a more impact position (1st line center) and tied Minnesota's season record for goals at the time.

Granlund wasn't a bust that he turned out to be a top 6 player, he turned out to be a bust for the Wild because he was part of the failed youth movement that began in 13 when Minnesota signed Parise and Suter. One of the biggest reasons for them signing was that they were excited about the prospects that Minnesota had drafted or traded for. One of the biggest reasons why Minnesota sputtered in the playoffs is that none of those prospects turned out as good as they had hoped.

 

[TaLoN]

Tarasenko turned out to be one of the best in his draft class.

So did Granlund? Less than 100 points difference between them.

 

[Dr Jan Itor]

It's all relative.

What were you expecting the player to be when he was picked? What did he turn out to be?

Doesn't have to be all or nothing.

 

[thestonedkoala]

So did Granlund? Less than 100 points difference between them.

Tarasenko helped his team get a ring, Granlund didn't. Also Tarasenko lost out on almost two complete seasons. He's had 7 seasons of scoring 20 or more goals and has had 4 seasons of 70 or more points and two seasons more 60 or more points.

Granlund has had only 3 seasons of 60 or more points, but has never hit 70 points. He also has never hit more than 26 goals in his career.

It's all relative.

What were you expecting the player to be when he was picked? What did he turn out to be?

Doesn't have to be all or nothing.

I would also add in, it really, really depends on mitigating factors. I don't consider Cuma a bust because of his injuries. Nor do I fault sometimes players just have terrible coaches or terrible teams.

 

[TaLoN]

Tarasenko helped his team get a ring, Granlund didn't. Also Tarasenko lost out on almost two complete seasons. He's had 7 seasons of scoring 20 or more goals and has had 4 seasons of 70 or more points and two seasons more 60 or more points.

Granlund has had only 3 seasons of 60 or more points, but has never hit 70 points. He also has never hit more than 26 goals in his career.

You have to stretch that thread pretty thin.... yet still can't reach him being a bust no matter how hard you try. He's still a 60+point top 6 forward today who got 64pts playing center this past season even.

You want to argue about the TEAM falling to win the cup? Fine, different conversation for a different thread, that is more about GMs and coaches than whether or not Granlund was a bust at 9th overall in 2010.

 

[Dr Jan Itor]

To bring it back to our current prospects, my expectations based on what seemed to be sold to us when drafted/traded for:

Rossi - good top 6 center
Ohgren - good middle 6 winger, leaning 3rd line (3rd best player on a 2nd line, or 1st/2nd best player on a 3rd line)
Yurov - good middle 6 winger, leaning 2nd line
Faber - 2nd best defenseman on a top pair, or best defenseman on a 2nd pair (basically what people would call a "#2/#3 defenseman")
Lambos - same as Faber
Wallstedt - top 10ish starting goalie

 

[north21]

You said yourself you expected a kap level forward, that is overselling it. Granny was a good producer and had plenty of skills. He just didnt turn out to be the center we needed. Wouldnt mind him as a center right now.

 

[thestonedkoala]

To bring it back to our current prospects, my expectations based on what seemed to be sold to us when drafted/traded for:

Rossi - good top 6 center
Ohgren - good middle 6 winger, leaning 3rd line (3rd best player on a 2nd line, or 1st/2nd best player on a 3rd line)
Yurov - good middle 6 winger, leaning 2nd line
Faber - 2nd best defenseman on a top pair, or best defenseman on a 2nd pair (basically what people would call a "#2/#3 defenseman")
Lambos - same as Faber
Wallstedt - top 10ish starting goalie

Rossi - I agree, which is a concern is that he isn't going to be able to make it as a middle 6 or even bottom 6 center. It's either top 6 or bust for him.

Ohgren - Feels like an Eriksson-Ek except on the wing. Kind of a swiss-army type of player that can do everything good, but nothing elite.

Yurov - Was sold as a top 6 player that had potential to be something more than that.

Faber - Agreed, though I see that the Wild are extremely high on him and while you can't compare defensemen vs forwards, they thought they got an impact defenseman the same way that Fiala was an impact forward. Not necessarily a franchise guy, but a guy that compliments the franchise guy.

Lambos - He's hard to tell. He had the potential to be a top pairing guy, but he is so inconsistent that he could end up as a poor man's Suter (top 4) or a poor man's Scandella. Who knows with him, but his inconsistencies are troublesome.

Wallstedt - Franchise goaltender that is in the running for the Vezina and could turn the franchise around in terms of goaltending.

 

[Dr Jan Itor]

Rossi - I agree, which is a concern is that he isn't going to be able to make it as a middle 6 or even bottom 6 center. It's either top 6 or bust for him.

Ohgren - Feels like an Eriksson-Ek except on the wing. Kind of a swiss-army type of player that can do everything good, but nothing elite.

Yurov - Was sold as a top 6 player that had potential to be something more than that.

Faber - Agreed, though I see that the Wild are extremely high on him and while you can't compare defensemen vs forwards, they thought they got an impact defenseman the same way that Fiala was an impact forward. Not necessarily a franchise guy, but a guy that compliments the franchise guy.

Lambos - He's hard to tell. He had the potential to be a top pairing guy, but he is so inconsistent that he could end up as a poor man's Suter (top 4) or a poor man's Scandella. Who knows with him, but his inconsistencies are troublesome.

Wallstedt - Franchise goaltender that is in the running for the Vezina and could turn the franchise around in terms of goaltending.

A top 10 pick "settling" as a bottom 6 player isn't much of a consolation for me. I'm fine with the boom or bust.

If Ohgren can be Eriksson Ek on the wing, I'd be relatively thrilled, since it seems like Eriksson Ek is more than just a 3rd line center. The only thing that would prevent me from being legit thrilled is knowing how we got him.

Yurov is a balance between where he was picked and where he maybe should have been picked if there weren't outside factors, which is why have him leaning towards 2nd liner expectations.

I'd agree that there's wiggle room for defensemen. If Lambos/Faber became a kick-ass 2nd pairing, would I be wildly disappointed? Probably not. That's pretty much what Brodin/Dumba have been at their best over the last few years. Difference is 7th + 10th picks vs. 26th + 2nd round picks (even though I'm not holding Faber to 2nd pick standard, call it another late 1st).

 

[thestonedkoala]

A top 10 pick "settling" as a bottom 6 player isn't much of a consolation for me. I'm fine with the boom or bust.

If Ohgren can be Eriksson Ek on the wing, I'd be relatively thrilled, since it seems like Eriksson Ek is more than just a 3rd line center. The only thing that would prevent me from being legit thrilled is knowing how we got him.

Yurov is a balance between where he was picked and where he maybe should have been picked if there weren't outside factors, which is why have him leaning towards 2nd liner expectations.

I'd agree that there's wiggle room for defensemen. If Lambos/Faber became a kick-ass 2nd pairing, would I be wildly disappointed? Probably not. That's pretty much what Brodin/Dumba have been at their best over the last few years. Difference is 7th + 10th picks vs. 26th + 2nd round picks (even though I'm not holding Faber to 2nd pick standard, call it another late 1st).

The problem with Rossi is that he hasn't shown he has the ability to be a bottom 6 player. Bottom 6 guys are useful. I wonder if they are going to move Rossi out to wing?

I have been a huge fan of Eriksson-Ek, so if Ohgren ends up being like JEE, I'd be extremely happy as teams always need guys like him.

Agree with Yurov.

 

[Dr Jan Itor]

The problem with Rossi is that he hasn't shown he has the ability to be a bottom 6 player. Bottom 6 guys are useful. I wonder if they are going to move Rossi out to wing?

I have been a huge fan of Eriksson-Ek, so if Ohgren ends up being like JEE, I'd be extremely happy as teams always need guys like him.

Agree with Yurov.

They are useful, and can also be readily found where Greenway, Shaw and Dewar were drafted.

 

[Circulartheory]

A top 10 pick "settling" as a bottom 6 player isn't much of a consolation for me. I'm fine with the boom or bust.

If Ohgren can be Eriksson Ek on the wing, I'd be relatively thrilled, since it seems like Eriksson Ek is more than just a 3rd line center. The only thing that would prevent me from being legit thrilled is knowing how we got him.

Yurov is a balance between where he was picked and where he maybe should have been picked if there weren't outside factors, which is why have him leaning towards 2nd liner expectations.

I'd agree that there's wiggle room for defensemen. If Lambos/Faber became a kick-ass 2nd pairing, would I be wildly disappointed? Probably not. That's pretty much what Brodin/Dumba have been at their best over the last few years. Difference is 7th + 10th picks vs. 26th + 2nd round picks (even though I'm not holding Faber to 2nd pick standard, call it another late 1st).

Like I said before, my stance has 'generally' been you can't bust on your 1st round pick, you should be an NHLer so I don't mind picking a safer choice to ensure that happens (while obvious balancing getting as much upside as you can in that pick).

That said, I'm VERY sympathetic because if you only pick bottom six players and middle-pairing dmen, then you'll up with a mediocre team. So I believe there's a balance that be carefully tip toed - picking a nice mix of high end boom bust picks and some key two-way players like JEE over a span of a few years. And with our current very well-rounded prospect pool, I am currently leaning on a riskier pick this upcoming draft.

So its really about not just the selection itself but the opportunity cost and other available selections. In this draft, the boom or bust pick was Isaac Howard, extremely flashy hands, ton of points, lead USA U-18 team in points at WJCU18. And he was seen to be a 20ish pick so its not far off. OR Brad Lambert, seen as a possible top 5 pick heading into the draft, speedy, good 16 year old year but then didn't really show progress so he fell down the list. Time will tell who ends up better as its still too early.

 

[Dr Jan Itor]

Like I said before, my stance has 'generally' been you can't bust on your 1st round pick, you should be an NHLer so I don't mind picking a safer choice to ensure that happens (while obvious balancing getting as much upside as you can in that pick).

That said, I'm VERY sympathetic because if you only pick bottom six players and middle-pairing dmen, then you'll up with a mediocre team. So I believe there's a balance that be carefully tip toed - picking a nice mix of high end boom bust picks and some key two-way players like JEE over a span of a few years. And with our current very well-rounded prospect pool, I am currently leaning on a riskier pick this upcoming draft.

So its really about not just the selection itself but the opportunity cost and other available selections. In this draft, the boom or bust pick was Isaac Howard, extremely flashy hands, ton of points, lead USA U-18 team in points at WJCU18. And he was seen to be a 20ish pick so its not far off. OR Brad Lambert, seen as a possible top 5 pick heading into the draft, speedy, good 16 year old year but then didn't really show progress so he fell down the list. Time will tell who ends up better as its still too early.

My "general" mindset, not etched in stone but at least written in ink, is:

Top 5 pick - star player
Picks 6-15 - top line/top pair to good 2nd liner/#3D
Picks 16-32 - good middle 6er, 2nd pair D
2nd round and beyond - mostly content with just finding NHL players, but do expect to hit the occasional double (Greenway), triple (Zucker) or home run (Kaprizov)

 

[thestonedkoala]

My "general" mindset, not etched in stone but at least written in ink, is:

Top 5 pick - star player
Picks 6-15 - top line/top pair to good 2nd liner/#3D
Picks 16-32 - good middle 6er, 2nd pair D
2nd round and beyond - mostly content with just finding NHL players, but do expect to hit the occasional double (Greenway), triple (Zucker) or home run (Kaprizov)

Would Scandella be a double or a single?

 

[Dr Jan Itor]

Would Scandella be a double or a single?

Double/triple. He was a pretty good 2nd pair D for a decent number of years.

 

[thestonedkoala]

Double/triple. He was a pretty good 2nd pair D for a decent number of years.

The Suter - Brodin, Spurgeon-Scandella years were awesome. Don't know why they moved away from that.