Toggle sidebar

Prospect Info: Wild Prospect Thread 2023-2024

  • Work is still on-going to rebuild the site styling and features. Please report any issues you may experience so we can look into it. Click Here for Updates
Status
Not open for further replies.
Wasted Talent said:
I wonder if Pronman managed to unite both sides of the Faber civil war by ranking Stramel as the 3rd best prospect after Rossi and Wallstedt.

theathletic.com

Corey Pronman's NHL Pipeline Rankings: No. 10 Wild have a strong collection of talent

Ranking the top prospects and under-23 players in the organization. Plus, what to expect of every player.
theathletic.com theathletic.com
Click to expand...
Pronman is a really good writer, and I love reading his articles. I also love reading fiction. Maybe these things are related. I do appreciate you posting this. As I said, I love reading his work.

Quick edit because I think that was a little harsh: predicting the future is impossible, and that's what Pronman is effectively trying to do. He's doing just fine.
 
Wasted Talent said:
I wonder if Pronman managed to unite both sides of the Faber civil war by ranking Stramel as the 3rd best prospect after Rossi and Wallstedt.

theathletic.com

Corey Pronman's NHL Pipeline Rankings: No. 10 Wild have a strong collection of talent

Ranking the top prospects and under-23 players in the organization. Plus, what to expect of every player.
theathletic.com theathletic.com
Click to expand...
He also has Yurov above Faber, which was the debate (for me) that started the civil war.

Rossi over Wallstedt is a joke though. Bankier over Ohgren too.
 
Digitalbooya said:
He also has Yurov above Faber, which was the debate (for me) that started the civil war.

Rossi over Wallstedt is a joke though. Bankier over Ohgren too.
Click to expand...
I have Yurov right behind Faber (among non-goalies). I have and had no issue with your ranking of them. My point of consternation laid in a different F word.

I don't take Pronman's rankings too seriously. They're entertainment, and meant to gain clicks. A fun little read and nothing more.
 
BagHead said:
I have Yurov right behind Faber (among non-goalies). I have and had no issue with your ranking of them. My point of consternation laid in a different F word.

I don't take Pronman's rankings too seriously. They're entertainment, and meant to gain clicks. A fun little read and nothing more.
Click to expand...
What’s the other F word? I must not be paying really close attention.
 
I think for this season, I might do a Prospect of the Week/Month type of ongoing post with a player card and everything.

Do you all want anything else or have any ideas I can try? Maybe something 2024 draft related stuff?

Also going to try my best to watch some more Iowa games.
 
  • Like
Reactions: P10p and Obvious Fabertism
Circulartheory said:
I think for this season, I might do a Prospect of the Week/Month type of ongoing post with a player card and everything.

Do you all want anything else or have any ideas I can try? Maybe something 2024 draft related stuff?

Also going to try my best to watch some more Iowa games.
Click to expand...
I'd love to see this. You should use it as a resume for The Athletic next summer.

To answer your question, I'd love to see a segment on why a player might not make it in the NHL, what the risks of drafting them would be. The scouting reports almost always talk about why you should be hyped about a player, but they barely even mention their flaws. I'd love to see a "lowlights" bit in the profile to contrast the "highlights". and maybe a guess at how detrimental to their chances these foibles are.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 57special
BagHead said:
I'd love to see this. You should use it as a resume for The Athletic next summer.

To answer your question, I'd love to see a segment on why a player might not make it in the NHL, what the risks of drafting them would be. The scouting reports almost always talk about why you should be hyped about a player, but they barely even mention their flaws. I'd love to see a "lowlights" bit in the profile to contrast the "highlights". and maybe a guess at how detrimental to their chances these foibles are.
Click to expand...

You'd have to have some pretty thick skin to go the lowlights/flaws route. You'd basically be the "heel" with every post you make.
 
You'd probably be fine pointing out the lows/negatives as long as it's not the FOTM prospect like Faber.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DigitalBoldy
BagHead said:
This is true. Words worth considering @Circulartheory
Click to expand...
No need, I'm already there! :) When I need to quickly read a scouting report, that's basically all I'm interested in reading. You can have a pretty leveled view looking at promising stats with the context of their flaws in the back of your head.

But not sure if thats a fun read or thing to write up personally. I might do a Prospect of Month (weekly might be too much to chew on and might not be alot to write about if they play like only 2 games). Some draft spotlights/rankings in the draft thread as well.

Would updated prospects stats be worth doing? Or do people just go to EP/HockeyDB?

P.S I'm done with writing seriously hah. I got a different type of job and I realized I'm really not that good at "writing". But just wanted to be more active on these boards and do more prospect/draft related stuff for fun.
 
  • Like
Reactions: fgobuzz, BagHead and Obvious Fabertism
Circulartheory said:
No need, I'm already there! :) When I need to quickly read a scouting report, that's basically all I'm interested in reading. You can have a pretty leveled view looking at promising stats with the context of their flaws in the back of your head.

But not sure if thats a fun read or thing to write up personally. I might do a Prospect of Month (weekly might be too much to chew on and might not be alot to write about if they play like only 2 games). Some draft spotlights/rankings in the draft thread as well.

Would updated prospects stats be worth doing? Or do people just go to EP/HockeyDB?

P.S I'm done with writing seriously hah. I got a different type of job and I realized I'm really not that good at "writing". But just wanted to be more active on these boards and do more prospect/draft related stuff for fun.
Click to expand...

My suggestion is a writeup every 7(ish) games (AHL season is 72 games) if it's just covering the AHL team; that would be 10 or 11 articles for the season.

If it's the entire prospect pool you could go the 1st and 15th of the month (or every 2 weeks on a Monday) for consistency sake.

The more generic "Prospect Spotlight" as the title could give you a little more wiggle room for articles instead of being stuck (using last year as an example) writing 3 articles about Walker, 2 about Rossi, and 2 about Wallstedt over the course of a season.

Just spitballing random ideas and seeing if anything resonates for you.
 
AKL said:
You'd probably be fine pointing out the lows/negatives as long as it's not the FOTM prospect like Faber.
Click to expand...
Who has no flaws.

Circulartheory said:
P.S I'm done with writing seriously hah. I got a different type of job and I realized I'm really not that good at "writing". But just wanted to be more active on these boards and do more prospect/draft related stuff for fun.
Click to expand...
Yeah, me neither. Like how I used "who" above, but I'm suspicious that it should be "whom". A better writer would know.
 
BagHead said:
Who has no flaws.


Yeah, me neither. Like how I used "who" above, but I'm suspicious that it should be "whom". A better writer would know.
Click to expand...
It would be whom because Faber is an object
 
Last edited:
TaLoN said:
If you can replace with "he" or "she" it's who, if you can replace with "him" or "her" it's whom.

This case is who
Click to expand...
Then why is “to whom am I speaking to?“ grammatically correct? You can’t put in him or her in that instance.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Top Bottom