Hockey Futures Flames 2014 Draft Recap

[Bezer]

I know it is a long boring summer without hockey so I present this for your viewing pleasure.


http://www.hockeysfuture.com/article...w/#more-110915

[mile]

Originally Posted by Bezer

I know it is a long boring summer without hockey so I present this for your viewing pleasure.


http://www.hockeysfuture.com/article...w/#more-110915

Not a bad article.

This is probably entirely arbitrary, but I would adjust some of their prospect grades however:

1)Sam Bennett: Change from 8.0C to 8.5C -
I'm divided as to whether Bennett is really good complimentary piece: a top two line center who is just below elite (8.0), or whether he can be that single franchise/cornerstone player a team can build around (9.0). An 8.5 grade would make a little more sense.

2)Max Reinhart: Change from 7.5C to 6.5B -
Reinhart will definitely be an NHLer: But his current grade is a little high, insinuating he projects to be a top two line forward. I see him as a top 9 player: primarily a third liner, but has enough offense such that he can step into a top 6 role sparingly in case of injuries.

3)Emile Poirier: Change from 7.0C to 7.5C -
Bumping Poirier's grade to an 8.0 is tempting, but will stick to a 7.5 for now. I can easily see Poirier playing RW on the first or second line in the future.

4)Bill Arnold: Change from 7.0C to 6.5C -
It's definitely possible Arnold could be a second line centre. Similar to Reinhart's case though, I see him as more of a third liner.

5)Gillies and Ortio: Change from 7.0C to 7.5C -
I think both have potential to be #1 goaltenders, not just #1a/b starters.

6)Gaudreau: Change from 8.0C to 8.5C
Similar argument to why Bennett's grade should be upgraded.

7)Hanowski and Van Brabant: Change from 7.0C to 6.0C (Hanowski) and 6.5D to 6.0C(Van Brabant)
Doesn't have enough offense to be a second liner.

8)Agostino: Change from 7.0C to 6.5C
Don't have enough confidence to say he could be a second liner, but there is a chance he could be one.

Jooris, Cundari, Ramage, and Billins should all be downgraded from 6.5C to 6.0C.

[Fire]

Originally Posted by mile

Not a bad article.

This is probably entirely arbitrary, but I would adjust some of their prospect grades however:

1)Sam Bennett: Change from 8.0C to 8.5C -
I'm divided as to whether Bennett is really good complimentary piece: a top two line center who is just below elite (8.0), or whether he can be that single franchise/cornerstone player a team can build around (9.0). An 8.5 grade would make a little more sense.

2)Max Reinhart: Change from 7.5C to 6.5B -
Reinhart will definitely be an NHLer: But his current grade is a little high, insinuating he projects to be a top two line forward. I see him as a top 9 player: primarily a third liner, but has enough offense such that he can step into a top 6 role sparingly in case of injuries.

3)Emile Poirier: Change from 7.0C to 7.5C -
Bumping Poirier's grade to an 8.0 is tempting, but will stick to a 7.5 for now. I can easily see Poirier playing RW on the first or second line in the future.

4)Bill Arnold: Change from 7.0C to 6.5C -
It's definitely possible Arnold could be a second line centre. Similar to Reinhart's case though, I see him as more of a third liner.

5)Gillies and Ortio: Change from 7.0C to 7.5C -
I think both have potential to be #1 goaltenders, not just #1a/b starters.

6)Gaudreau: Change from 8.0C to 8.5C
Similar argument to why Bennett's grade should be upgraded.

7)Hanowski and Van Brabant: Change from 7.0C to 6.0C
Doesn't have enough offense to be a second liner.

8)Agostino: Change from 7.0C to 6.5C
Don't have enough confidence to say he could be a second liner, but there is a chance he could be one.

Jooris, Cundari, Ramage, and Billins should all be downgraded from 6.5C to 6.0C.

I agree with all of the above. They should get you to do these grades.

[bubbsy]

have they released their organizational rankings for this year?

[JiriHrdina]

You could almost argue that Johnny should be something like a 9.0D.
The upside with this guy is that off an elite player in the NHL, but his size makes it less likely he'll get there.

[Cheese]

In years past Id argue that Johnny's size would be a detriment. With the way the Flames are being rebuilt to house large skilled players to serve and protect, the fact that there are currently many smaller guys with less skills and smarts playing in the league, and the fact that rule changes over the last decade have taken a lot of the goonery out of the game...I think he stands a greater than average chance to be a top player...regardless of his diminutive stature.
IF he can manage to be a cross between St Louis and Zuccarello we have a pretty damned good player

List of short players

[Bezer]

Originally Posted by JiriHrdina

You could almost argue that Johnny should be something like a 9.0D.
The upside with this guy is that off an elite player in the NHL, but his size makes it less likely he'll get there.

I am not one to get too caught up in hype but after watching Johnny Hockey play at BC (albeit 2 games) the WJC, the WC, the Flames and the last two years at prospect camp this guy is the real deal. His talent is mesmerizing and I think his ceiling is super high.

An example is this year at camp, he was participating in a drill on the south side of the ice and an errant puck from the north side group ended up at the top of the circle as he skated by the puck he back handed it top corner into the net with a flick of a wrist. Unreal.

[FlamesAddiction]

I disagree with the downgrading of Arnold. He might not project to a top line player, but he looks like he has all the tools to become an NHL player.

[Scoutski]

Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction

I disagree with the downgrading of Arnold. He might not project to a top line player, but he looks like he has all the tools to become an NHL player.

I think the number is just an indicator of skill, 6.5 doesn't mean goon or anything. It's the letter that is the likelihood of becoming an NHL player.

I kind of agree though that I'm not sure we've seen enough of him either in college or pros to be touching his ranking at all though...

[SuperMatt18]

Disagree with Reinhart too, think we are all underrating his offensive game since he is such a good defensive player.

He just put up near a PPG as a 21 year old in the AHL. He might have more to his offensive game as a gritty second liner then we give him credit for.

[jemjey]

I think Bennett and JG should both be 9.

To me, both could definitely grow to be franchise players. But then, maybe I'm just a homer.

And I agree with the above posts regarding Max and Billy, I think it is too early and we haven't seen enough of their games to pigeon-hole them into bottom-six roles. Max looked really good in his call-ups. Billy should've scored his first game too, and it's not like ALL of his points were gift-wrapped by JG.

Like SuperMatt said, I think we underestimate their offensive abilities because of how good they are defensively. Time will tell.

[Monahan23]

Originally Posted by jemjey

I think Bennett and JG should both be 9.

To me, both could definitely grow to be franchise players. But then, maybe I'm just a homer.

And I agree with the above posts regarding Max and Billy, I think it is too early and we haven't seen enough of their games to pigeon-hole them into bottom-six roles. Max looked really good in his call-ups. Billy should've scored his first game too, and it's not like ALL of his points were gift-wrapped by JG.

Like SuperMatt said, I think we underestimate their offensive abilities because of how good they are defensively. Time will tell.

8.5 is good, 8.5 D for Gaudreau

[Vulcan]

Originally Posted by Monahan23

8.5 is good, 8.5 D for Gaudreau

To me a "D" probably means he won't make it. I'd put Gaudreau at a "9 C" myself.

For Bennett I'd rate him at a "9 A". He was the top rated prospect by many rankings and we don't have any reason to lower that rating.

[Monahan23]

Originally Posted by Vulcan

To me a "D" probably means he won't make it. I'd put Gaudreau at a "9 C" myself.

For Bennett I'd rate him at a "9 A". He was the top rated prospect by many rankings and we don't have any reason to lower that rating.

http://www.hockeysfuture.com/prospect-rankings/

the #1 ranked prospect according to HF is Alex Barkov, 8.5 C, 2nd is Drouin with 9 C. So you're saying that Bennett is clearly the best prospect in the game and Gaudreau is #2

[mile]

Originally Posted by Monahan23

http://www.hockeysfuture.com/prospect-rankings/

the #1 ranked prospect according to HF is Alex Barkov, 8.5 C, 2nd is Drouin with 9 C. So you're saying that Bennett is clearly the best prospect in the game and Gaudreau is #2

Agreed.

To me a 9 is that one player a team could build around alone; A true franchise player and a cornerstone like MacKinnon, Tavares, Stamkos, Toews. I don't know if you could build around Gaudreau as THE key piece.

[Vulcan]

Originally Posted by mile

Agreed.

To me a 9 is that one player a team could build around alone; A true franchise player and a cornerstone like MacKinnon, Tavares, Stamkos, Toews. I don't know if you could build around Gaudreau as THE key piece.

I'd maybe rank those players as a 9.5 with a Crosby as a 10 but it's pretty well just a personal judgment and doesn't need to jive with HF. If you're going to count to 10, there has to be some point where it's used.
HF also has almost every player rated at a Probability of Success as a "C". In that case it doesn't mean anything.