Prospect Info: Wild Prospect Thread 2024-25

[Obvious Fabertism]

Haight did not look 6’2” or at least noticeably large during the Memorial Cup to me, having said that, physicality was not an issue for him at that level, he used his leverage very well in battles and was effective at keeping it out of the opponents reach when he had the puck.

Having that translate up levels is of course where the development happens, but he’s starting from a pretty solid foundation. His willingness to muck it up is why I see him far more likely to succeed as a Center than Heidt for example, though I see Haight more fitting the mold of a distributor 3C if he hits. Being able to win face offs against NHLers is obviously never a given, that is something both will need to develop a lot.

Brodziak or Cullen level contributions are what I would consider a success for him. Not flashy, though his hands are very solid, but makes the efficient and effective play most often, generally bringing smart, positive play that enables his line mates to take more risks. The Swiss Army knife version of Freddy Gaudreau isn’t the worst comparison either in terms of projecting playstyle.

 

[Puhis]

Brodziak or Cullen level contributions are what I would consider a success for him.

I must say, centering Wild's first line alongside an all-star with a 50 goal season under his belt and a right-shot winger having a career year doesn't sound half bad.

 

[MNRube]

. The Swiss Army knife version of Freddy Gaudreau isn’t the worst comparison either in terms of projecting playstyle.

I don’t hate this comparison. I think between Foligno, Trenin, Hartman, Marat, Stramel, Haight, Ohgren and others, we should have a nice plethora of checking/defensive options for the bottom 6 the next few years. At the very least we won’t be having anymore Lucchini/Letteiri types playing big minutes

 

[Digitalbooya]

Scott Wheeler's thoughts on many of our prospects

Cliff note thoughts from Wheeler that stuck with me:

- Hockey Canada has extremely mixed opinions on Heidt, which could impact if he plays for Canada at the World Juniors

- Viewed Kiviharju as a 2nd round pick. Injury derailed his season and he said that he came back slower than before his injury

- Stramel putting up 20 points in 30 games would be great stepping stone for his development

- Yurov exploded because of his move to the center position. He was not being given offensive opportunities while in a winger role

- He marked Heidt as the most underrated prospect and Kiviharju as the most underrated later round pick.

- He is starting to lean towards O'Rourke not having an NHL career. His initial view was a hard nosed 300-400 NHL game #5 dman.

- He likes Lambos and Spacek as "options" and I got the impression he views them as really similar players, which is interesting because those two were duking it out in our prospect pool rankings (Spacek won the tiebreaker poll by 1 vote).

- Players he views as top 6 forwards/top 4 defensemen:

• Yurov - top 6 forward
• Buium - top pairing dman
• Wallstedt - starting goaltender
• Ohgren - he likes him as a potential 2nd line guy, but also mentioned he might be a scoring 3rd line guy. Views him as goal scorer, but is uncertain on if he is cerebral enough of a playmaker to be a 50 point winger in the NHL (surefire 2nd line winger). High likelyhood he is a 20+20 type of guy.
• Heidt - top 6 or bust

 

[Digitalbooya]

https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/5632710/2024/08/28/minnesota-wild-nhl-prospect-pipeline-rankings-2024/?source=user_shared_article

 

[Wasted Talent]

https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/5632710/2024/08/28/minnesota-wild-nhl-prospect-pipeline-rankings-2024/?source=user_shared_article

Buium above Faber was a bit surprising for me.

And maybe to a lesser, Bankier above is Ohgren is also interesting

Heidt not ranked, mentioned in the "has a chance to play" honorable mentions

 

[Digitalbooya]

Buium above Faber was a bit surprising for me.

And maybe to a lesser, Bankier above is Ohgren is also interesting

Heidt not ranked, mentioned in the "has a chance to play" honorable mentions

Stramel in the top 10 above Ritchie, Khusnutdinov, Kumpulainen, and Heidt is interesting too.

Buium over Faber feels like a “he has a higher ceiling” type of call.

 

[AKL]

Buium above Faber was a bit surprising for me.

It's always jarring when you rank prospects above players who just had seasons like Faber did, especially at the age Faber is, but Buium has much more hype around him than Faber did at this age, and he just dominated the same league Faber never could. Obviously doesn't mean he'll be a better pro, but what Buium did is relatively unheard of, and Faber never came close to it. There's definitely some logic to it, even if it seems like a tall order.

 

[TaLoN]

Why call Faber a prospect anymore at all?

 

[Wasted Talent]

Why call Faber a prospect anymore at all?

Pretty sure the ranking is just based on some age cut-off, not prospect status. They had Boldy as #1 in Wild's "pipeline" last year for example

 

[TaLoN]

Pretty sure the ranking is just based on some age cut-off, not prospect status. They had Boldy as #1 in Wild's "pipeline" last year for example

Yet the link says prospect pipeline

 

[Dr Jan Itor]

Yet the link says prospect pipeline

It's 22 years old and younger as of 9/15/24.

 

[Wabit]

Stramel in the top 10 above Ritchie, Khusnutdinov, Kumpulainen, and Heidt is interesting too.

Buium over Faber feels like a “he has a higher ceiling” type of call.

I have Stramel over all of those FWDs too. He and Kump are more of a coin flip though for me.

Prospect rankings usually have points scoring d-men over the stay at home d-men. Faber has a much better complete game and I'd rather have that.

 

[Digitalbooya]

Why call Faber a prospect anymore at all?

He fits the criteria for the “NHL Pipeline Rankings” article. It does not say prospect in the title or the introductory paragraph of the article before it gets into each individually ranked player.

 

[BagHead]

https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/5632710/2024/08/28/minnesota-wild-nhl-prospect-pipeline-rankings-2024/?source=user_shared_article

Kind of funny that he lists Kiviharju as 5'9" 170lbs, when the hyperlink in his own article goes to a page that lists him at 5'10" 184lbs. That's a noticeable size difference. He's still undersized, but more for a defenseman than in general.

I agree with his overall take on the player, though. It's harder to see him as a regular top-4 defenseman than as a guy who is good enough to make it to the NHL, but difficult to find a regular spot in the lineup for.

 

[Dr Jan Itor]

I have Stramel over all of those FWDs too. He and Kump are more of a coin flip though for me.

Prospect rankings usually have points scoring d-men over the stay at home d-men. Faber has a much better complete game and I'd rather have that.

Faber didn't have his current complete game at 18/19 years old, though it was still very good for that age.

 

[Digitalbooya]

Kind of funny that he lists Kiviharju as 5'9" 170lbs, when the hyperlink in his own article goes to a page that lists him at 5'10" 184lbs. That's a noticeable size difference. He's still undersized, but more for a defenseman than in general.

I agree with his overall take on the player, though. It's harder to see him as a regular top-4 defenseman than as a guy who is good enough to make it to the NHL, but difficult to find a regular spot in the lineup for.

Pretty sure that is Kiviharju’s pre combine height and weight. His combine listing was 5’9.5” 184lbs.

 

[Wabit]

Faber didn't have his current complete game at 18/19 years old, though it was still very good for that age.

And? The at this age comparison is rather meaningless to me. It's a pick and choose when to pay attention (when a player needs to be propped up) or ignore (when it goes against the point trying to be made) for comparing players. Like with Lambos last year in the preseason prospect ratings it was completely ignored that when he went 8th, Hunt went 12th and ROR went 16th. Yet they all had very similar stats for their last CHL season (matching Lambos' age).

Faber was an all situation 1D in the NHL last year. I don't think Buium will ever be that as a player. I do think Buium will be a very nice complementary (2/4) d-man, but I don;t see the him as the carrying a pairing (1/3) d-man.

 

[saywut]

https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/5632710/2024/08/28/minnesota-wild-nhl-prospect-pipeline-rankings-2024/?source=user_shared_article

Bankier over Ohgren is an opinion I can't see the justification for making(even if someone were to argue positional value I'd say Ohgren is more likely to play games at 3C than Bankier), but other than that there's nothing insane, even if no one would actually be in the same slot for me.

 

[Dr Jan Itor]

And? The at this age comparison is rather meaningless to me. It's a pick and choose when to pay attention (when a player needs to be propped up) or ignore (when it goes against the point trying to be made) for comparing players. Like with Lambos last year in the preseason prospect ratings it was completely ignored that when he went 8th, Hunt went 12th and ROR went 16th. Yet they all had very similar stats for their last CHL season (matching Lambos' age).

Faber was an all situation 1D in the NHL last year. I don't think Buium will ever be that as a player. I do think Buium will be a very nice complementary (2/4) d-man, but I don;t see the him as the carrying a pairing (1/3) d-man.

And Buium has room to be an even better all around player than Faber, given where his current starting point is.

Ignoring that players get better with age is a pretty ridiculous hill to stand on.

 

[Wabit]

And Buium has room to be an even better all around player than Faber, given where his current starting point is.

Ignoring that players get better with age is a pretty ridiculous hill to stand on.

I'm fine being on that hill with the season Faber just had.

 

[57special]

Hey, if Buium is better than Faber then i'm thrilled, but it seems a tad optimistic. Same with Bankier v Ohgren, Marat, or Heidt.

The Stramel thing baffles me. I have seen nothing from him for two years straight. Doesn't he actually have to do things on the ice to be highly ranked, or is being tall and good at combines enough?

 

[AKL]

The Stramel thing baffles me. I have seen nothing from him for two years straight. Doesn't he actually have to do things on the ice to be highly ranked, or is being tall and good at combines enough?

At this point, if you set aside his draft position and just look at what he's done on ice, Stramel projects to be a really solid strength and conditioning coach

 

[Digitalbooya]

Hey, if Buium is better than Faber then i'm thrilled, but it seems a tad optimistic. Same with Bankier v Ohgren, Marat, or Heidt.

The Stramel thing baffles me. I have seen nothing from him for two years straight. Doesn't he actually have to do things on the ice to be highly ranked, or is being tall and good at combines enough?

Is this because you sat down and watched Wisconsin games and feel that way or because you looked at his stat sheet?

The reason I ask is because if it is just stat sheet watching, would you have crapped all over Yurov during the 22-23 season when he put up 12 points in 59 games?

 

[BagHead]

Is this because you sat down and watched Wisconsin games and feel that way or because you looked at his stat sheet?

The reason I ask is because if it is just stat sheet watching, would you have crapped all over Yurov during the 22-23 season when he put up 12 points in 59 games?

For me, it's because I looked at his stat sheet. His statistical performance has been as impressive as my analysis of his game.