Summer 2014 Prospect Ranking Poll Rd2

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by Papi34

Chose Sven,

Easy to pick bennett but Sven has played at a higher level and i feel that qualifies him as a more certain prospect to make an impact on the team. Bennett i believe will be a superstar in this league but right now Sven is the better prospect

So, this begs the question about what posters see behind the purpose of the poll.

In my mind, a "prospect ranking" has everything to do with how respondents feel about potential. Because this is a measure of potential, then matters about who is "NHL ready" should not really factor into it, unless the situation involves a close tie-breaker between two very, very similarly rated prospects. I just don't think that Baertschi by any measure has even as remotely close a potential ceiling as Bennett, regardless of his presently longer track of development. Even if one plays in the NHL next year and the other in Juniour, it is highly probable that the latter will be a better player and a more valuable component to this team's success going forward.

[The Fonz]

Originally Posted by Papi34

Chose Sven,

Easy to pick bennett but Sven has played at a higher level and i feel that qualifies him as a more certain prospect to make an impact on the team. Bennett i believe will be a superstar in this league but right now Sven is the better prospect

That's flawed thinking, IMO.

Neither are full-time NHL players right now, and you even imply that Bennett will be better when that time comes, yet you voted Sven.

[Cali Panthers Fan]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

I think it should be a rule here that everyone who does not select Bennett in this poll is required to include a post that effectively validates their choice.

I would love to hear the rationale of picking Hickey, a player who was in the AJHL last season, over the #1 overall ranked N.A. CSS prospect in this year's draft.

No seriously, tell me why.

Oh, and a small point of order, but there is no second "c" in Klimchuk.

[ricardodw]

Bennett still has a lot to do and could very well be 3 years away (like Scheifele #7 overall 2011) who didn't become a NHL regular until 2013-14 but was a top centre on Team Canada the year after he was drafted at the WJC.

It might be more of a challenge for him as Monahan, Backlund and Granlund/Rienhart could already be established NHLers when he is ready.

[The Fonz]

Potential has to play a huge part in the decision making for these polls.

Like I said in Rd1, if you're not including potential in your valuing of our prospects, you're basically just listing our prospects from oldest to youngest.

[Flames Fan, Ph.D.]

I chose Granlund.

Brief showing in the NHL, but played well. Played very well in Abby. I think it is fair to say that he has surprised nicely at the pro level, suggesting that he's generally figured out what it takes to compete.

Admittedly this is a bird-in-the-hand type consideration, but so be it.

[mikephoen]

Originally Posted by Cali Flames Fan

I would love to hear the rationale of picking Hickey, a player who was in the AJHL last season, over the #1 overall ranked N.A. CSS prospect in this year's draft.

No seriously, tell me why.

Oh, and a small point of order, but there is no second "c" in Klimchuk.

I will assume one of the following reasons:

1. Personal friend or family member
2. misclick
3. Protest that we didn't just move on to round 3 since this was obviously going to be a blow out for Bennett

[EldrickOnIce]

Originally Posted by ricardodw

Bennett still has a lot to do and could very well be 3 years away (like Scheifele #7 overall 2011) who didn't become a NHL regular until 2013-14 but was a top centre on Team Canada the year after he was drafted at the WJC.

It might be more of a challenge for him as Monahan, Backlund and Granlund/Rienhart could already be established NHLers when he is ready.

That sounds like crazy talk.
It seems pretty obvious:
He has the skill to play now.
He has the game to play now.
He lacks the strength to play now - as one of the youngest players in the draft, he simply needs his body to mature to compete against men. I can't see it's reasonable to suggest this is three years away.

[ricardodw]

Originally Posted by Papi34

Chose Sven,

Easy to pick bennett but Sven has played at a higher level and i feel that qualifies him as a more certain prospect to make an impact on the team. Bennett i believe will be a superstar in this league but right now Sven is the better prospect

Then in the most recent comparables where they were playing against the same opposition you have to give the edge to Granlund , Rienhart, Corban Knight and Ferland who did much better at the AHL level than Baertschi.

I was not too disappointed in Baertschi at the NHL level but totally expected him to dominate at the AHL level..... how can you say that he is more NHL ready when he didn't show he was AHL ready.

[Fire]

Originally Posted by Papi34

Chose Sven,

Easy to pick bennett but Sven has played at a higher level and i feel that qualifies him as a more certain prospect to make an impact on the team. Bennett i believe will be a superstar in this league but right now Sven is the better prospect

You should have picked Granlund if that is how your voting. Granlund has proven more at the professional level imo.

[Knut]

It has the be Bennett.

You have to look at this as if you are 20 years in the future looking back at how our prospects have done. That takes out the age / experience differences.

[fastpuck]

I chose Baertschi. He has a ton of skill, can dominate games even at the NHL level. He had a real difficult growing up year last year and I think will rebound and regroup. He may start in Adirondack but will push for a main camp rooster spot. I think Bennett has great skills, and like Sven, is dominating his league. I think he will stay in Juniors. He will be a better two way forward, but Sven will have a higher offensive game.

[ricardodw]

Originally Posted by EldrickOnIce

That sounds like crazy talk.
It seems pretty obvious:
He has the skill to play now.
He has the game to play now.
He lacks the strength to play now - as one of the youngest players in the draft, he simply needs his body to mature to compete against men. I can't see it's reasonable to suggest this is three years away.

So do you have him making this rather weak Flame team out of Training camp?

I have not seen anyone slotting him the opening day lineup.... That means he is at least 2 years away.

In Winnipeg they are not disappointed in Scheifele.... although they were getting worried for the 1st 20 games of last season...

They have a similar slight build .... with Scheifele being a couple of inches taller. It took him 2 more seasons to get the extra 10-15 lbs of muscle to get to the NHL level....

At some point genes take over. Monahan was blessed with a larger body and more strength. He worked like mad to get NHL ready and had quick amazing results.

For guys like Scheifele and Bennett there is only so much that work can do and it will take them a longer time. It is very important that the Flames take the extra time with Bennett so that he doesn't get punked Hemsky style when he tries out his style against the Regehr's of the NHL.

Hemsky wasn't strong enough to battle with Regehr so he cross checked him in the throat. Is still paying for that mistake.

[Coach]

Originally Posted by Hesla

It has the be Bennett.

You have to look at this as if you are 20 years in the future looking back at how our prospects have done. That takes out the age / experience differences.

This could also be why someone might take a flyer on a later round player, especially if they know more about them than the average fan.

How many people would have picked Gaudreau, the current number one, after he was drafted in the 4th round at 5'6 145 lbs?

[FeyWest]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

So, this begs the question about what posters see behind the purpose of the poll.

In my mind, a "prospect ranking" has everything to do with how respondents feel about potential. Because this is a measure of potential, then matters about who is "NHL ready" should not really factor into it, unless the situation involves a close tie-breaker between two very, very similarly rated prospects. I just don't think that Baertschi by any measure has even as remotely close a potential ceiling as Bennett, regardless of his presently longer track of development. Even if one plays in the NHL next year and the other in Juniour, it is highly probable that the latter will be a better player and a more valuable component to this team's success going forward.

I go by the ruling, "If you could only keep one player, which would it be..." with respect to what rank we are looking at, I chose Bennett because I think he has a higher ceiling and potential for the future and I'd rather lose Baertschi (3rd) over Bennett (2nd). To me that's how a ranking is supposed to be

That takes out the "... player X is more NHL ready than player Y..." typecasting for ranks.

I leave up to each persons preference though

[Lanny_McDonald]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

So, this begs the question about what posters see behind the purpose of the poll.

In my mind, a "prospect ranking" has everything to do with how respondents feel about potential. Because this is a measure of potential, then matters about who is "NHL ready" should not really factor into it, unless the situation involves a close tie-breaker between two very, very similarly rated prospects. I just don't think that Baertschi by any measure has even as remotely close a potential ceiling as Bennett, regardless of his presently longer track of development. Even if one plays in the NHL next year and the other in Juniour, it is highly probable that the latter will be a better player and a more valuable component to this team's success going forward.

There has to be some balance between perceived potential and actual results. Just because player X was drafted early does not mean he retains that high potential. Player Y may be drafted after player X but vault past him because of actual development. For example, Nail Yakupov was drafted 1st overall. He has huge potential. Teuvo Teravainen was drafted 17 picks later, so should have lesser potential. I would say the better prospect is Teravainen because he has shown some excellent development while Yakupov has fallen on his face.

I personally don't like including just drafted players in these polls because they haven't been given an opportunity to display if the investment has potential to payoff. I can see Bennett getting the nod because of his top five draft status, but he will naturally have a lot to do to maintain his ranking. Other players have been given that opportunity to prove themselves and show a positive growth curve, so they should be considered better prospects. Players that don't prove to be improving should see their potential and ranking diminish, no? If a guy steps up and proves to be dominant at one level, and then does it again at the next, does his potential not increase? Conversely when a player struggles to find consistency at that next level and either plateaus or goes retrograde, should that player's potential decrease? To me that is how you judge how a prospect is doing and how they should be ranked. Or is that nonsense too?

[EldrickOnIce]

Originally Posted by ricardodw

So do you have him making this rather weak Flame team out of Training camp?

No.
But to repeat, it's neither his skill nor his game that needs developing.
I might/would have him play in the AHL, were it possible.

[Flames Fan, Ph.D.]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

So, this begs the question about what posters see behind the purpose of the poll.

In my mind, a "prospect ranking" has everything to do with how respondents feel about potential. Because this is a measure of potential, then matters about who is "NHL ready" should not really factor into it, unless the situation involves a close tie-breaker between two very, very similarly rated prospects. I just don't think that Baertschi by any measure has even as remotely close a potential ceiling as Bennett, regardless of his presently longer track of development. Even if one plays in the NHL next year and the other in Juniour, it is highly probable that the latter will be a better player and a more valuable component to this team's success going forward.

For me it's all about trajectory.

Gaudreau at #1 makes perfect sense as he has upped his game at every subsequent level and every subsequent year. Bennett at second, to me, would be based on a very different set of criteria than the one people used to rate Gaudreau at 1. I think that if we're being consistent on the criteria, Bennett can't be #2.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by New Era

There has to be some balance between perceived potential and actual results. Just because player X was drafted early does not mean he retains that high potential. Player Y may be drafted after player X but vault past him because of actual development.

Of course this is true, but if you do not factor in actual results for just drafted prospects, who have not had the chance yet to play in the NHL, then this will always prejudice the results against them.

Originally Posted by New Era

For example, Nail Yakupov was drafted 1st overall. He has huge potential. Teuvo Teravainen was drafted 17 picks later, so should have lesser potential. I would say the better prospect is Teravainen because he has shown some excellent development while Yakupov has fallen on his face.

Sure, but one of the reasons for these annual polls is not just to see how players project in the minds of fans, it is also to help track the development of players over the years. Yakupov started his career as a higher rated prospect than TEravainen—I don't think that is at all beyond dispute. But he currently is probably no longer to projected as better, since his history is trending in the wrong direction.

Originally Posted by New Era

I personally don't like including just drafted players in these polls because they haven't been given an opportunity to display if the investment has potential to payoff. I can see Bennett getting the nod because of his top five draft status, but he will naturally have a lot to do to maintain his ranking.

NO. Bennett is getting the nod because his top-five draft status is an accurate reflection of just how good a player he is compared to his peers. Of course his potential and fans' perceptions about him are liable to change. But when assessing the value of assets within the organisation, it makes little sense to ignore some of those assets simply because we know a little less about them. We know enough to make educated guesses.

Originally Posted by New Era

Other players have been given that opportunity to prove themselves and show a positive growth curve, so they should be considered better prospects. Players that don't prove to be improving should see their potential and ranking diminish, no?

Absolutely. But if we are not ranking the newest prospects in the first place, then there is no base point from which to gauge how they are progressing / regressing in the eyes of fans.
One of the best things about Bingo's polls is the ability we have to look backwards. If we don't start ranking prospects on their long-term potential from the beginning, then this picture in hindsight is less complete, and much less interesting.

Originally Posted by New Era

...Or is that nonsense too?

The shoe fits.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by Flames Fan, Ph.D.

For me it's all about trajectory.

Gaudreau at #1 makes perfect sense as he has upped his game at every subsequent level and every subsequent year. Bennett at second, to me, would be based on a very different set of criteria than the one people used to rate Gaudreau at 1. I think that if we're being consistent on the criteria, Bennett can't be #2.

That makes sense, but I take issue with your criteria. In my opinion, we all benefit from having a base from which to track rankings through each prospect's history with the team, as I explain in the above post.