Quote:
Originally Posted by Calgary4LIfe
To add to Calgary's potential rise in the standings, was just how good almost every prospect drafted last season performed, along with Parekh as you mentioned already. I am definitely interested to see the net change in Calgary's rankings.
One thing that always grinds my gears about these lists, however, is graduating prospects. Advantage is given to teams with prospects that take longer to develop. Having Montreal with Reinbacher listed as a prospect, but not San Jose with Celebrini and Smith seems wrong. Ok, so comparing defencemen to forwards here, with defencemen that take longer. Chicago doesn't have Bedard counting any longer, but Detroit has Danielson - same draft, and they are both centers selected 8 picks apart. Bedard is the much more valuable franchise-altering player, but on these lists, Detroit would rank higher. No list is perfect I guess, but I really do prefer the "23 and under" or "25 and under" lists as a better gauge of how strong a team is trending to be in the next few years.
I am still very interested to see the lists, even after complaining! lol
|
I think the folks that put these together struggle with that too. That's why you see others do rankings based on every player in the org 23 years or under.
Each is valid.
I prefer to be looking at the coming pipeline focused on prospects only, so I don't mind the graduation element, as long as its consistent.
But it's not necessarily fully capturing "which teams have the best future" because obviously young impct NHLers are extremely valuable.