Prospect Info: Wild Prospect Thread 2023-2024

[AKL]

Again, Firstov did not look impressive in his brief time in Iowa.

That's why he needs to develop, right? Because he needs to improve offensively?

But I still don't see why Iowa is going to be better for that than the KHL. That's the missing link here.

 

[AKL]

When was the last time Iowa developed anything but fourth liners?
So why would I want Firstov there if my hope is that he becomes more than a fourth liner?

Closest I can find is maybe Zucker, who spent 77 games in Houston/Iowa from 2012-14, although he was better coming out of college than Firstov is now, so I'm not sure how much he really developed in the AHL. He also played 42 NHL games during those two seasons.

Iowa is not the place to go to get better offensively. I'll take the KHL route there. If I want another Duhaime/Dewar/Shaw type player though I'm definitely sending him to Iowa. Adam Beckman has been "developing" in the AHL for over two years now and the amount of offensive progression he's had is close to nothing. Rossi isn't developing offensively, most people would say they're disappointed with where he's at.

 

[Dr Jan Itor]

‘Develop’ is a buzzword. We either picked a good player or we didn’t.

 

[AKL]

‘Develop’ is a buzzword. We either picked a good player or we didn’t.

Then it really shouldn't matter if he's in Iowa or Russia. If he stays in Iowa, fine. If he'd rather play in Russia for a couple years, no sweat. Let him go where he's more comfortable, let him go where he'll get more playing time, whatever his reasons are, no one should be upset.

 

[Circulartheory]

Why would I want him to be a Duhaime or Dewar type player lol. That's silly. Those are fourth line grinders. Firstov has more skill and IQ than that. His all around game is perfectly fine for a middle six caliber winger, I want him focusing on offense, because, as you said, he's more of a skill player than a checking player. So what's the problem with playing top 6 in the KHL?

When was the last time Iowa developed anything but fourth liners?
So why would I want Firstov there if my hope is that he becomes more than a fourth liner?

I think you kind of missed my point completely. My point is, in the 4 years he has been drafted, from my readings of the forums, from watching the scrimmages in camps, from stat watching, none of it has been impressive to me personally offensively for an offensive player. 23 points each year in the NCAA since being drafted and 26 points in the KHL aren't impressive to me. 3rd in scoring for his UConn and 8th in scoring on his KHL team.

So as on offensive player, I don't see him making it. We are heading into his 5th year since being drafted and my patience is just about out. This season is probably the last for me. I have no problem with the KHL but unless he produces at Khusnutdinov rate - somewhere in the 40pt range (who btw is a year younger, faster, and plays a versatile game anywhere from offensive top line to responsible PKer), he is a bust for me.

And also, its a gradual assessment. I want to see upward trajectory in a prospect. And after every average year in this NCAA career, he kept falling down for me, his KHL season this year stopped the fall. It did not put him back into the plus column for me, it just started the falling momentum. I'm indifferent now.

Now, if he wants to change his game into a bottom six guy where points matter less, I think the best place is Iowa, not the KHL.

 

[Dr Jan Itor]

Then it really shouldn't matter if he's in Iowa or Russia. If he stays in Iowa, fine. If he'd rather play in Russia for a couple years, no sweat. Let him go where he's more comfortable, let him go where he'll get more playing time, whatever his reasons are, no one should be upset.

Correct.

 

[AKL]

I think you kind of missed my point completely. My point is, in the 4 years he has been drafted, from my readings of the forums, from watching the scrimmages in camps, from stat watching, none of it has been impressive to me personally offensively for an offensive player. 23 points each year in the NCAA since being drafted and 26 points in the KHL aren't impressive to me. 3rd in scoring for his UConn and 8th in scoring on his KHL team.

So as on offensive player, I don't see him making it. We are heading into his 5th year since being drafted and my patience is just about out. This season is probably the last for me. I have no problem with the KHL but unless he produces at Khusnutdinov rate - somewhere in the 40pt range (who btw is a year younger, faster, and plays a versatile game anywhere from offensive top line to responsible PKer), he is a bust for me.

And also, its a gradual assessment. I want to see upward trajectory in a prospect. And after every average year in this NCAA career, he kept falling down for me, his KHL season this year stopped the fall. It did not put him back into the plus column for me, it just started the falling momentum. I'm indifferent now.

Now, if he wants to change his game into a bottom six guy where points matter less, I think the best place is Iowa, not the KHL.

I didn't miss your point, it's just not relevant to me. It's fine that you have an opinion of him, but ultimately your opinion is worth as much as my opinion, and my opinion is that he isn't a bust, so now we're at an impasse, right?

What he's done since the draft doesn't matter to me. The points he put up on a largely mediocre UConn team don't matter to me. I'm not saying he's blown the doors off offensively. I'm not even saying he's going to be a top 6 NHL player. And his pace compared to Khusnutdinov doesn't matter either because Khusnutdinov has always been considered to have a higher ceiling. That doesn't mean Firstov can't still be a solid NHL player. Especially when some people here think Khusnutdinov can be an NHL first liner. There are two entire lines between "well he's not as good as Khusnutdinov" and "I guess he'll have to become Duhaime".

I believe my post to you was "I don't understand why going to the KHL equals bust". The short answer is, it doesn't. It still doesn't. If that wasn't your argument, then we're having two separate conversations here.

My points have been
1) Why are people so bent out of shape over him going to the KHL? We don't even know his reasons
2) In terms of his development from now on, assuming we want him to be a top 9 player, what can Iowa do for him that the KHL can't? Iowa isn't exactly churning out offensive talent
3) Why should he have to "tough it out" or "grind it out" or "earn it" in Iowa when he can just as easily go to his home country to play?
4) Why does choosing that option mean he's a bust?

We all agree he needs to get better offensively than what he's shown so far, to make the NHL, but no one has been able to intelligently articulate why it's mandatory he do that in Iowa instead of Russia. We've seen what Kaprizov did staying in Russia, we're seeing what Khusnutdinov is doing staying in Russia, so what's the problem with Firstov going back to Russia to see if he can find something there too?

 

[Circulartheory]

I didn't miss your point, it's just not relevant to me. It's fine that you have an opinion of him, but ultimately your opinion is worth as much as my opinion, and my opinion is that he isn't a bust, so now we're at an impasse, right?

What he's done since the draft doesn't matter to me. The points he put up on a largely mediocre UConn team don't matter to me. I'm not saying he's blown the doors off offensively. I'm not even saying he's going to be a top 6 NHL player. And his pace compared to Khusnutdinov doesn't matter either because Khusnutdinov has always been considered to have a higher ceiling. That doesn't mean Firstov can't still be a solid NHL player. Especially when some people here think Khusnutdinov can be an NHL first liner. There are two entire lines between "well he's not as good as Khusnutdinov" and "I guess he'll have to become Duhaime".

I believe my post to you was "I don't understand why going to the KHL equals bust". The short answer is, it doesn't. It still doesn't. If that wasn't your argument, then we're having two separate conversations here.

My points have been
1) Why are people so bent out of shape over him going to the KHL? We don't even know his reasons
2) In terms of his development from now on, assuming we want him to be a top 9 player, what can Iowa do for him that the KHL can't? Iowa isn't exactly churning out offensive talent
3) Why should he have to "tough it out" or "grind it out" or "earn it" in Iowa when he can just as easily go to his home country to play?
4) Why does choosing that option mean he's a bust?

We all agree he needs to get better offensively than what he's shown so far, to make the NHL, but no one has been able to intelligently articulate why it's mandatory he do that in Iowa instead of Russia. We've seen what Kaprizov did staying in Russia, we're seeing what Khusnutdinov is doing staying in Russia, so what's the problem with Firstov going back to Russia to see if he can find something there too?

I think you may be attributing other people's arguments to mine.

For one, I have never said your opinions were wrong - in fact made the effort to say I have never read your original comments so my opinion on Firstov as a bust is not a rebuke to you.

Second, like you said, we are having two different conversations because I don't think going to the KHL means he is a bust. I believe his 3 average years and 1 okay year in KHL means he is a bust (or at least, I'm on the final straw/year for him). There hasn't been a single season since being drafted where I got excited about him - and I'm generally a glass half full type of guy.

Now to the bullet points which I find more interesting as we can in the same discussion.
1) I can't speak to one or to other people. KHL is a fine place to develop. Yurov and Khusnutdinov are there, and Kaprizov developed there and no complaints on all 3.
2) I think the only thing it can do that the KHL can't is introduce him into the Wild playing system as NHL and AHL teams seem to have similar systems and styles. I would also argue getting used the NA rink. Obviously Wallstedt is a goalie but for him, it was a big deal.
3) from an talent/agent POV, its perfectly valid. But also valid for the AHL team to not provide security of a top six role if he hasn't proved it. that is why I also explicitly said there is no blame to throw - its just part of the biz. no one is in the wrong.
4) It doesn't - but the 4 years since being draft that haven't been impressive to me, plus no signs of hype of forums, average camps, and lukewarm videos that I can see, to me mean's he's a bust.

Honestly, between you and I, it just comes down to to having two different conversations. Simply put, I really like the KHL, but I also don't think Firstov is going to make the NHL, whether he plays AHL, KHL, SHL, SM-Liiga etc. unless he bursts out offensively this year.

 

[north21]

‘Develop’ is a buzzword. We either picked a good player or we didn’t.

I think so too, players either find a way to succeed, find their nitch in the nhl or just don't have enough physical tools, attitude, skills or smarts to make it at the nhl level. If you could clone some high end busts there isn't one team that will suddenly develop them into a their full potential because they have some secret development plan.

 

[thestonedkoala]

‘Develop’ is a buzzword. We either picked a good player or we didn’t.

Huh?

 

[Saga of the Elk]

I think so too, players either find a way to succeed, find their nitch in the nhl or just don't have enough physical tools, attitude, skills or smarts to make it at the nhl level. If you could clone some high end busts there isn't one team that will suddenly develop them into a their full potential because they have some secret development plan.

Interesting points. Teams with good reputations for development seem to get that because they have other key pieces in place and can fit players into the right depth roles. Teams with a bad reputation for development, like Edmonton and the Rangers, get that based on the perception that every high draft pick is a guaranteed NHL superstar.

 

[Minnewildsota]

Huh?

I believe what they’re trying to say is that the organization can’t turn straw into gold. A player has a ceiling and we can’t really make them better than that. Really, the only thing we can do is hinder their development.

I may be wrong though

 

[Dickie Dunn]

‘Develop’ is a buzzword. We either picked a good player or we didn’t.

yes/no

I get your point in general, can't make chicken salad out of chicken s##t. But I think there is a lot more nuance to it at a place like the AHL. Similar to minor league baseball, those programs are supposed to be rounding off the rough edges and turning on occasion a C+ into a B. To AKL's point, they have done a pretty nice job at times of sending up guys who can play a little and contribute but I can't think of a player who came up and "wow'd" with his contribution. Sample size? Not drafting the right guys in the first place? Who knows but there haven't been the obvious development wins I would have hoped for.

 

[Dr Jan Itor]

I believe what they’re trying to say is that the organization can’t turn straw into gold. A player has a ceiling and we can’t really make them better than that. Really, the only thing we can do is hinder their development.

I may be wrong though

Not wrong. Pretty much that.

 

[Wildabeast]

Not wrong. Pretty much that.

At the end of the day these guys have to have that ultra competitive fire and desire to try and be world class hockey players. It's hard to develop stuff like that. That's why Spurgeon made it for example; he wanted it bad and worked his a$$ off to make it happen. Need the talent in some form of course but without that fire/desire good luck.

 

[Wabit]

Iowa has been pretty awful at developing much of anything as far as NHL players.

The list of players that have at least 35 AHL games (half a season worth of games) in Iowa and 100+ NHL games
Player: games in Iowa
Soucy: 136 games
Seeler: 112 games
Reilly: 103 games
Dewar: 103 games
Duhaime: 87 games
Kunin: 76 games
Kahk: 73 games
Tuch: 57 games
Sturm: 55 games
Folin: 44 games

Lineup regulars from last season that don't have 100 NHL games (yet?):
Shaw: 188 games
Addison: 74 games

Holdovers from the Houston AHL team:
Haula: 31 games
Kemps: 22 games
Zucker: 22 games

Rossi (116 games) is 8th (tied with Dewar) in total points. Beckman (130 games) is 17th in total points. Dewar has the most points (59) in Iowa and 100 games played (not a including vet players like Schroeder and Cal O'Rielly).

 

[Circulartheory]

Iowa has been pretty awful at developing much of anything as far as NHL players.

The list of players that have at least 35 AHL games (half a season worth of games) in Iowa and 100+ NHL games
Player: games in Iowa
Soucy: 136 games
Seeler: 112 games
Reilly: 103 games
Dewar: 103 games
Duhaime: 87 games
Kunin: 76 games
Kahk: 73 games
Tuch: 57 games
Sturm: 55 games
Folin: 44 games

Lineup regulars from last season that don't have 100 NHL games (yet?):
Shaw: 188 games
Addison: 74 games

Holdovers from the Houston AHL team:
Haula: 31 games
Kemps: 22 games
Zucker: 22 games

Rossi (116 games) is 8th (tied with Dewar) in total points. Beckman (130 games) is 17th in total points. Dewar has the most points (59) in Iowa and 100 games played (not a including vet players like Schroeder and Cal O'Rielly).

Forgive me as I'm not sure if you're being sarcastic - truly, no shade intended - but that list looks pretty good to me. Especially since most of top prospects we drafted skip the AHL step so we can't judge them (Boldy, Brodin, Dumba, Kaprizov).

Now, in truth, the reason why they skip it is because our NHL lacked talent. Great NHL teams, like Lightning a few seasons ago, has so much depth that they had the luxury of developing high end talent in the minors. We lucked out that players like Brodin and Dumba handle the NHL easily but there was a risk where we rushed players like James Sheppard.

But I think we are getting closer to that point. We aren't in a situation where we need to force Ohgren, Yurov, Lambos into a regular spot. Not fully there because Faber is needed in a top four role. But getting closer.

 

[DigitalBoldy]

It’s not like players are skipping the AHL entirely.

Granlund - 29 games
Coyle - 47 games
Eriksson Ek - 18 games
Boldy - 24 games
Tuch - 57 games

Most of them were too good for the AHL and they were promoted quickly.

 

[BagHead]

Iowa has been pretty awful at developing much of anything as far as NHL players.

The list of players that have at least 35 AHL games (half a season worth of games) in Iowa and 100+ NHL games
Player: games in Iowa
Soucy: 136 games
Seeler: 112 games
Reilly: 103 games
Dewar: 103 games
Duhaime: 87 games
Kunin: 76 games
Kahk: 73 games
Tuch: 57 games
Sturm: 55 games
Folin: 44 games

Lineup regulars from last season that don't have 100 NHL games (yet?):
Shaw: 188 games
Addison: 74 games

Holdovers from the Houston AHL team:
Haula: 31 games
Kemps: 22 games
Zucker: 22 games

Rossi (116 games) is 8th (tied with Dewar) in total points. Beckman (130 games) is 17th in total points. Dewar has the most points (59) in Iowa and 100 games played (not a including vet players like Schroeder and Cal O'Rielly).

Am I not understanding the total points paragraph? Rossi had nearly as many points in his AHL rookie year as Dewar's entire AHL career, and has nearly double Dewar's AHL point total in just 13 more games. I think I'm confused. Dewar has certainly outproduced Rossi at the NHL level, though.

Anyway, this is an interesting post. I actually think the AHL has done fairly well at producing useful players for the Wild. It's done less well at creating star players, but I don't know how many star players even get significant AHL time. That'd be interesting to learn, and see how the Iowa Wild compare to other teams in that regard.

 

[Wabit]

Forgive me as I'm not sure if you're being sarcastic - truly, no shade intended - but that list looks pretty good to me. Especially since most of top prospects we drafted skip the AHL step so we can't judge them (Boldy, Brodin, Dumba, Kaprizov).

Now, in truth, the reason why they skip it is because our NHL lacked talent. Great NHL teams, like Lightning a few seasons ago, has so much depth that they had the luxury of developing high end talent in the minors. We lucked out that players like Brodin and Dumba handle the NHL easily but there was a risk where we rushed players like James Sheppard.

But I think we are getting closer to that point. We aren't in a situation where we need to force Ohgren, Yurov, Lambos into a regular spot. Not fully there because Faber is needed in a top four role. But getting closer.

It's just the stats, nothing more. MN hasn't really been rushing prospects. They had a pretty set roster, other than the bottom of the lineup.

TB has been mostly NHL right away with their young key players. But Point, Cirelli, Drouin/Sergachev (trade), Kucherov, Headman, Stamkos, and Vasilevskiy were all in the NHL with little to no AHL time. Then guys like Paquette, Cernak and Killhorn only had a year in the AHL.

 

[Wabit]

It’s not like players are skipping the AHL entirely.

Granlund - 29 games
Coyle - 47 games
Eriksson Ek - 18 games
Boldy - 24 games
Tuch - 57 games

Most of them were too good for the AHL and they were promoted quickly.

That's my conclusion. They are either too good for the AHL, or never leave that level. At least as far as it goes for MN developing prospects. Tuch is the main outlier in this. Kunin would be too, but he had like 3 or 4 injuries and a lot of his time was more recovery than developing his game.

JEE started in the NHL and was demoted to the AHL. Boldy should have been straight to the lineup from college. I also think about half of his AHL games were injury recovery time?

 

[north21]

Iowa has been pretty awful at developing much of anything as far as NHL players.

Most teams are pretty awful at developing talent according to the real numbers. When you fail 63% of the time in the first round and 83% of the time in the 2nd round those are just how things work. Even then odds are many of the guys playing more than 99 career games are just depth plugs anyway.

People need to look at this drafting and developing business more like gambling at a casino, yes some people win, but more often than not the odds are against you.

 

[Wabit]

Most teams are pretty awful at developing talent according to the real numbers. When you fail 63% of the time in the first round and 83% of the time in the 2nd round those are just how things work. Even then odds are many of the guys playing more than 99 career games are just depth plugs anyway.

People need to look at this drafting and developing business more like gambling at a casino, yes some people win, but more often than not the odds are against you.

That chart doesn't say 62.7% of 1st round won't get to 100 games; that would mean 20 1st rounders every draft are complete busts. 100 games is a very low bar, it's only ~1.25 seasons. From the 2000-2017 drafts the most 1st rounders in a draft class to not get to 100 games is 10

The chart is just a breakdown of where all (it doesn't account for undrafted players) NHL players were drafted.
Break it down per team (23 man roster) with those numbers (MN's Playoff roster):
1st (8.6): MAF, MarJo, Brodin, Dumba, Hartman, JEE, Boldy, Steel)
2nd (4.0): Goli, Merrill, Gus (66 games), Faber (2 games)
3rd (3.1) Dewar, Sundqvist
4th (2.5): Foligno, Duhaime, Nyquist
5th (1.7): Kap, Klingberg, Reaves
6th (1.8) (Spurgeon
7th (1.3): Middleton,
undrafted (not listed): Freddy G, Zucc

 

[57special]

Amazed that Klingberg was a 5 th rounder.

The strength of our prospect pool is not so much the high enders, but the amount of decent prospects that might end up being high enders. Prospects bust, or at least underwhelm, all the time, so it’s important to have a lot of them, and hope one is the next Bergeron or Ryan O’Rielly.

 

[chchelseII]

Most teams are pretty awful at developing talent according to the real numbers. When you fail 63% of the time in the first round and 83% of the time in the 2nd round those are just how things work. Even then odds are many of the guys playing more than 99 career games are just depth plugs anyway.

People need to look at this drafting and developing business more like gambling at a casino, yes some people win, but more often than not the odds are against you.

I think if people studied the history of rounds two-seven, they would come away with a very different impression of the value of those draft picks. Hitting a top six/ top pair player in those rounds is like hitting a jackpot. And fans who see the jackpot pick, keep pumping their quarters into the draft slot machine in hopes of hitting the jackpot. When reality is almost all will lose.