Craig's List 2014 Prospects

[RyZ]

Originally Posted by CalgaryFan1988

I'll be shocked if we don't end up with one of Reinhart/Bennett/Ekblad. To me, it seems like Burke sees a big gap outside of the top 3.

I'd do the 1st + two 2nds to get into the top 3. I think the top 3 are that much better (from reading, not scouting obviously).

Who wouldn't trade a first, a second and Berra for a potential franchise player?

I wonder if that would be enough. I know there is no McKinnon in this draft, but the Flames offered 3 first rounders to Colorado for 1st overall last year and it didn't get the trade done. I'm sure all the others teams see the drop after 4-5 this year as well and would likely be hesitant. I would do it though to get Reinhart or Ekblad.

[CalgaryFan1988]

Originally Posted by EYE_Overstand

Who would give up a franchise player for a 5th overall and 2nds?

Originally Posted by RyZ

I wonder if that would be enough. I know there is no McKinnon in this draft, but the Flames offered 3 first rounders to Colorado for 1st overall last year and it didn't get the trade done. I'm sure all the others teams see the drop after 4-5 this year as well and would likely be hesitant. I would do it though to get Reinhart or Ekblad.

I have no idea and I don't presume to know but like petemoss said, it just takes one GM (ie: Florida) to view their draft needs a little differently. 2nd to 5th might not be as big of a deal for them if they are targeting Draisaitl or Dal Colle, etc...

[Flames Draft Watcher]

Originally Posted by InCoGnEtO

From the Brian Burke Lunch, he went through the top 10...here is what I got out of it:
Bennett - He loves him Competes, plays all 3 zones, tough, and sticks up for himself. Not afraid to drop the gloves.
Ekblad - I got the sense that if we won the lottery, he would be the pick. Burke said he builds from the line out, and he is a 25min guy. Mature, hard hitting. Said that his knock is that he wouldn't drop the gloves, but Burke said if you are hitting clean, you don't have to.
Reinhart - Tough player, high compete level, watched him tear apart the Hitmen.
Dal Colle - Big guy, skates well, uses his body. Reading between the lines, it sounded like Burke question's his 'compete'.
Draisatl - This is almost exactly what Burke said 'Draisatl is a big guy...I don't like him. lets move on.' Unless he is throwing out a smoke-screen, cross him off your wish list.
Ritchie - Carries about 10 lbs too much, but your prototypical power forward. Will be scoring goals in the pros for years! I am guessing if we land at 5, he will be our pick (based only on what Burke said today).

I'm sure some are wondering what he said about Virtanen. I suspect he's not in the conversation where we'll end up.

[Flames Draft Watcher]

Originally Posted by Ashasx

It would be such a disappointing end to the season to pick Ritchie at 5th overall. He has no business being in the conversation.

Yeah he does actually. Not sure why you think he doesn't. Someone on HF convinced you he's terrible or have you ever seen him play?

[Flames Draft Watcher]

Originally Posted by nik-

I think the question is why is a top 10 eligible CHL player overweight in the first place.

I think the question is why you're making so much bigger of a deal out of a prospect being slightly overweight than the players who are clearly underweight. Why aren't Bennett and Reinhart in pro shape already and why haven't you dropped them out of your top 10 for not being at NHL playing weight yet?

The argument is pretty silly. Some people are naturally skinny. Some people are naturally thicker. Both types can learn to train like pros and get into proper shape.

Until the scouts see these kids at the combine and actually say Ritchie's conditioning is a huge red flag I'm going to consider the concerns on Ritchie by a very vocal minority to be hysterics and nothing more.

[Flames Draft Watcher]

Originally Posted by Ashasx

My biggest concern with Ritchie isn't even his weight. Hell, Kessel has a belly and is one of the fastest skaters in the league.

It's that Ritchie lacks any sort of hockey sense. Of the top 10 rated prospects, he has the worst, and it's not even close. He can't effectively use his teammates and often makes the same mistakes over and over.

Yeah, he racks up his points by being on average 50 pounds heavier than his competition, but that's not something that will transition to the NHL.

He's the easiest player to predict to be a bust at this point in time.

Where do you get this stuff? Seriously. Where?

Your scouting report on him in no way compares to any other I've read. So either you're totally off base or...?

How many times have you seen him live? How many on TV? I'm guessing none and one perhaps?

People who make their living scouting and projecting kids think Ritchie is a very good offensive talent. You're going to have to explain why your opinion differs so much from the professionals or no one is going to take you seriously (if anyone still does.)

[Flames Draft Watcher]

Originally Posted by saXon

I don't know. I just see another Ryan Howse scenario, with a little bit more of a physical streak to his game.

Not really comparable talents at all.

[Ashasx]

Originally Posted by Flames Draft Watcher

I think the question is why you're making so much bigger of a deal out of a prospect being slightly overweight than the players who are clearly underweight. Why aren't Bennett and Reinhart in pro shape already and why haven't you dropped them out of your top 10 for not being at NHL playing weight yet?

The argument is pretty silly. Some people are naturally skinny. Some people are naturally thicker. Both types can learn to train like pros and get into proper shape.

Until the scouts see these kids at the combine and actually say Ritchie's conditioning is a huge red flag I'm going to consider the concerns on Ritchie by a very vocal minority to be hysterics and nothing more.

His argument is silly, yet you compare it to a CHL player being underweight? There's a huge difference between a JUNIOR AGED player being below the desired NHL weight and another player being 20 pounds overweight.

Of course he can learn the necessary habits going forward, but that's just another thing you have to worry about. That's not a risk I want to take with a top 5 pick.

There are reports that he is a very inconsistent player, and it's not just between games, but between shifts. That is a huge red flag for me. He's 18 years old playing 70+ games a season + practice. If he's have weight problems now, it's more than likely going to follow him throughout his career.

Why take all of these risks when Dal Colle will likely still be on the board? Or Fleury? Hell, why not Nylander?

Ritchie does not exhibit the habits of a star hockey player nor the qualities of a top 5 pick. I'm not usually this blunt, but I think any team that picks him in the top 7-8 is making a mistake, and they'll see it within a year or two. Definitely the most likely bust potential of similar ranked players.

[nik-]

Yeah, thats an odd comparison. An 18 year old not having a mans body and an 18 year old being overweight despite being in one of the most most active junior leagues in the world are not the same thing.

[Caged Great]

Originally Posted by Ashasx

His argument is silly, yet you compare it to a CHL player being underweight? There's a huge difference between a JUNIOR AGED player being below the desired NHL weight and another player being 20 pounds overweight.

Of course he can learn the necessary habits going forward, but that's just another thing you have to worry about. That's not a risk I want to take with a top 5 pick.

There are reports that he is a very inconsistent player, and it's not just between games, but between shifts. That is a huge red flag for me. He's 18 years old playing 70+ games a season + practice. If he's have weight problems now, it's more than likely going to follow him throughout his career.

Why take all of these risks when Dal Colle will likely still be on the board? Or Fleury? Hell, why not Nylander?

Ritchie does not exhibit the habits of a star hockey player nor the qualities of a top 5 pick. I'm not usually this blunt, but I think any team that picks him in the top 7-8 is making a mistake, and they'll see it within a year or two. Definitely the most likely bust potential of similar ranked players.

You and I seem to be seeing the same things and think the same way especially in the bolded part when it comes to Ritchie.

Why pick the one player in the top 10 who has a largest amount of question marks. The only knock on guys like Dal Colle is that he's doesn't use his size effectively yet, or on Nylander and Ehlers that they are slightly undersized. It would be safer to go that route than the Ritchie route even if our criticisms of him are overstated (don't think they are personally but to each their own)

[Ashasx]

I want to say that I don't think draft guides are always the best source of information regarding top eligible draft prospects.

In any draft guide you find, they tend to magnify the positives of their highly ranked players and talk little of their weaknesses. Why else would they have the player ranked in the top 10 they're going to talk more about his weaknesses than his strengths? The tone is often very positive.

This is even more true in a weak draft.

[Flames Draft Watcher]

Originally Posted by Ashasx

His argument is silly, yet you compare it to a CHL player being underweight? There's a huge difference between a JUNIOR AGED player being below the desired NHL weight and another player being 20 pounds overweight.

Of course he can learn the necessary habits going forward, but that's just another thing you have to worry about. That's not a risk I want to take with a top 5 pick.

What's the huge difference? And who said Ritchie was 20 lbs overweight? Burke just said 10 didn't he? Do you need hyperbole to make your point?

I don't see at all why it's a smaller concern for a kid to add 20 lbs vs another kid with a different metabolism who needs to drop 10 lbs. These kids will get the best instruction on nutrition and fitness. Neither should be a huge concern. You guys are blowing this weight issue massively out of proportion.

Originally Posted by Ashasx

There are reports that he is a very inconsistent player, and it's not just between games, but between shifts. That is a huge red flag for me. He's 18 years old playing 70+ games a season + practice. If he's have weight problems now, it's more than likely going to follow him throughout his career.

There are reports that pretty much every draft eligible player struggles with inconsistency. Ryan Getzlaf struggled with inconsistency in his draft year. I wonder how many scouts regret passing on him with his size, skill and skating combination? Ritchie also has that same combination.

Originally Posted by Ashasx

Why take all of these risks when Dal Colle will likely still be on the board? Or Fleury? Hell, why not Nylander?

Ritchie does not exhibit the habits of a star hockey player nor the qualities of a top 5 pick. I'm not usually this blunt, but I think any team that picks him in the top 7-8 is making a mistake, and they'll see it within a year or two. Definitely the most likely bust potential of similar ranked players.

All what risks? These small, skilled kids bust quite frequently so I'm not sure why you ignore size concerns about them and then trash a kid who's slightly too big.

http://ohlprospects.blogspot.ca/2014...-for-2014.html

He definitely exhibits some star qualities. Great shot, great instincts for driving the net, winning board battles, good passing. Have you only read the negative reports about him? Let me guess you read all the following quotes and the only thing you picked out of them was that he doesn't compete and he's fat...

"I know scouts are a little concerned about his weight this season, but that's a question he can answer at the draft combine. Otherwise, he's putting up offense on a team that needs it and his snarly, nasty play at the Top Prospects Game was excellent." - Anonymous

"Can be the best Player in the draft, physically dominates at times, disappears far too often, high risk-reward player, hard to handle on the wall." - Anonymous

"So big, powerful and strong but also kills penalties, blocks shots and once given a legitimate center in hunter garlent, has dominated the league.....I question his work ethic and his desire but too many intanglibes and maybe the highest ceiling to me in the draft....terrific release." - Anonymous

"A bit of a Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde scenario for Ritchie. I have been to games this season where he looks like the undisputed top prospect for this draft. A real bull in a china shop who can force his will on anyone physically as well as possessing the offensive skills to singlehandedly dominate the game and carry the Petes to victory, and then some games where he looks disinterested and played like a real dog. Partly due to improved health but lately his contributions and efforts have been more consistent which has his stock rising. Think physical dominance like Milan Lucic but with better offensive abilities (shot, hands, sense)." - Dan Stewart

Obviously there's some negatives but you seem to be ignoring the several scouts who acknowledge he could end up as the best forward. Will Burke swing for the fences and grab a Burke type player? We'll see I guess. This organization needs a powerforward or two BADLY.

[moon]

I would say there is a much, much bigger issue with amateur message board scouts projecting their biases on players than draft guides focusing on the positive.

Ritchie is has the biggest bust potential? Based on what? That some posters don't like big guys and think that little supposedly skilled (not sure either Nylander or Ehlers has more skill) are the better way to go?

I am not advocating for Ritchie at #5 but the hyperboles against him by many in this thread are laughable.

[Flames Draft Watcher]

Originally Posted by nik-

Yeah, thats an odd comparison. An 18 year old not having a mans body and an 18 year old being overweight despite being in one of the most most active junior leagues in the world are not the same thing.

No they aren't. But you seem to think one is easily correctible and the other isn't and that is a strange stance to take. As I said to ashasx, is it really that much easier for one kid to add 20 lbs of muscle vs another kid losing 10 lbs of fat? I have no idea why you guys think Ritchie is doomed to be fatty mcfatterson the rest of his life while some of these skinny kids are going to be able to add 20-30lbs of muscle no problem. The argument does seem more than a little ridiculous to me. With pro trainers, nutritionists, etc Ritchie shouldn't have a big problem getting into pro shape.

[Vulcan]

Originally Posted by Caged Great

You and I seem to be seeing the same things and think the same way especially in the bolded part when it comes to Ritchie.

Why pick the one player in the top 10 who has a largest amount of question marks. The only knock on guys like Dal Colle is that he's doesn't use his size effectively yet, or on Nylander and Ehlers that they are slightly undersized. It would be safer to go that route than the Ritchie route even if our criticisms of him are overstated (don't think they are personally but to each their own)

Screw Nylander and Ehlers, they aren't what we need.

[Flames Draft Watcher]

Originally Posted by Ashasx

I want to say that I don't think draft guides are always the best source of information regarding top eligible draft prospects.

In any draft guide you find, they tend to magnify the positives of their highly ranked players and talk little of their weaknesses. Why else would they have the player ranked in the top 10 they're going to talk more about his weaknesses than his strengths? The tone is often very positive.

This is even more true in a weak draft.

In any draft guide? How many did you buy last year and which ones? For the record I bought Redline, ISS and Future Considerations.

Redline has been mocked on HF for being too hard on certain prospects over the years. They certainly don't shy away from dropping players they don't like and voicing exactly what their concerns are.

But in one sense what you say is quite obvious. Of course the tone on most prospects they like for their top 10 will be positive, those are what they think the top 10 kids are for the entire draft. They shouldn't have the biggest question marks on them. It should give you pause that you seem to be a lot harder on a kid that most have top 10 than actual scouts are. Makes me wonder why.

Going to be interesting to see how Ritchie does at the combine and to read the final scouting reports on him. I think some of what has been said about him in this thread is borderline ridiculous.

You still never answered the question about how many times you've seen Ritchie. I guess you're scared to admit you haven't even watched much of him at all...

[Bezer]

Originally Posted by sureLoss

The better question is who might be willing to trade down.

Buffalo? Unlikely they already have enough 2nd and 1st round picks in the upcoming drafts.

Florida? They are already deep at C in terms of prospects and if Ekblad is gone, may consider trading down and get a winger plus a pick.

Edmonton? No 2nd rounders or 3rd rounders this year. Also speculated to want to move the 1st for immediate help. Perhaps easier to move that first if they trade down a few spots and pick up an early 2nd in this draft? But would they do that with a hated divison rival...

Islanders? Unlikely, need quality if they are giving up next year's first. Besides trading up 1 spot, is counter productive unless you are trying to block another team from doing it.

I have thought this for a bit, but I am probably bias value wise in Calgary's favor but how about Glenncross and our 4th or 5th pick for the Oilers pick which leaves us with one of Ekblad, Reinhart or Bennett.

We have prospects coming up on the left wing and the Oilers are weak on the left wing. The Oilers still get a decent prospect with either Dal Colle or Draisaitl and a vet for immediate help.

I know we are talking a jump of 2 or 3 spots (maybe more depending on the lottery and how teams finish) but I think it would be worth it for both teams.

***I am gonna say I am not a fan of Glenncross but I could see him potting 30 goals in a season and of all the teams in the NHL he would waive his NTC it would be the Oilers.

[Cheerio]

Maybe this is an unpopular opinion but I would rather trade our pick for Evander Kane than draft Nick Ritchie

[moon]

That is a horrible deal for the Oilers so they would probably go for it.

I can't see any team in the top 3/4 moving their pick for ours unless it is a big overpayment. It makes zero sense for them to do so.

If there is a guy they like enough that they think may be there at 5 they most likely just take him at their spot to risk not losing them.

Top 5 picks are rarely moved and this year there isn't a lot the Flames have (and willing to move) or that other teams need that would get the teams to move their picks.

[Ashasx]

Originally Posted by Flames Draft Watcher

What's the huge difference? And who said Ritchie was 20 lbs overweight? Burke just said 10 didn't he? Do you need hyperbole to make your point?

I don't see at all why it's a smaller concern for a kid to add 20 lbs vs another kid with a different metabolism who needs to drop 10 lbs. These kids will get the best instruction on nutrition and fitness. Neither should be a huge concern. You guys are blowing this weight issue massively out of proportion.



There are reports that pretty much every draft eligible player struggles with inconsistency. Ryan Getzlaf struggled with inconsistency in his draft year. I wonder how many scouts regret passing on him with his size, skill and skating combination? Ritchie also has that same combination.



All what risks? These small, skilled kids bust quite frequently so I'm not sure why you ignore size concerns about them and then trash a kid who's slightly too big.

http://ohlprospects.blogspot.ca/2014...-for-2014.html

He definitely exhibits some star qualities. Great shot, great instincts for driving the net, winning board battles, good passing. Have you only read the negative reports about him? Let me guess you read all the following quotes and the only thing you picked out of them was that he doesn't compete and he's fat...

"I know scouts are a little concerned about his weight this season, but that's a question he can answer at the draft combine. Otherwise, he's putting up offense on a team that needs it and his snarly, nasty play at the Top Prospects Game was excellent." - Anonymous

"Can be the best Player in the draft, physically dominates at times, disappears far too often, high risk-reward player, hard to handle on the wall." - Anonymous

"So big, powerful and strong but also kills penalties, blocks shots and once given a legitimate center in hunter garlent, has dominated the league.....I question his work ethic and his desire but too many intanglibes and maybe the highest ceiling to me in the draft....terrific release." - Anonymous

"A bit of a Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde scenario for Ritchie. I have been to games this season where he looks like the undisputed top prospect for this draft. A real bull in a china shop who can force his will on anyone physically as well as possessing the offensive skills to singlehandedly dominate the game and carry the Petes to victory, and then some games where he looks disinterested and played like a real dog. Partly due to improved health but lately his contributions and efforts have been more consistent which has his stock rising. Think physical dominance like Milan Lucic but with better offensive abilities (shot, hands, sense)." - Dan Stewart

Obviously there's some negatives but you seem to be ignoring the several scouts who acknowledge he could end up as the best forward. Will Burke swing for the fences and grab a Burke type player? We'll see I guess. This organization needs a powerforward or two BADLY.

You know, you have an extreme problem with posters who don't share your opinion. Please learn to treat others with respect.

Guess what? I don't like Nick Ritchie as a hockey player. I'm glad you read THN's hockey guide and their positive reviews of every player they ranked in their top 15, but most players picked in this range do not become impact NHLers.

What's the huge difference? And who said Ritchie was 20 lbs overweight? Burke just said 10 didn't he? Do you need hyperbole to make your point?

Uh, what? Since when is Burke's word final? He's 6'3, 235 pounds at age 18. 20 pounds overweight is on the lower end of this limit. If you're saying his ideal weight is 225 pounds at age 18, that's assuming a hell of a lot of muscle mass.

There have not many (any?) top 5 picks with the fitness concerns that Ritchie has for a while. I am not blowing anything out of proportion.

There are reports that pretty much every draft eligible player struggles with inconsistency. Ryan Getzlaf struggled with inconsistency in his draft year. I wonder how many scouts regret passing on him with his size, skill and skating combination? Ritchie also has that same combination.

Just because Getzlaf became an NHL star does not exclude these issues with Ritchie's game. If you want to say "well, player x had similar concerns when he was drafted, and look at the player he became, so we don't have to worry about it", go ahead. I think that's an unintelligent way to evaluate prospect weaknesses.

He definitely exhibits some star qualities. Great shot, great instincts for driving the net, winning board battles, good passing. Have you only read the negative reports about him? Let me guess you read all the following quotes and the only thing you picked out of them was that he doesn't compete and he's fat...

"great shot, great instincts". Sounds like I'm listening to Craig Button on That's Hockey. 4/5 Ice Q and 5/5 shot, right?

"I know scouts are a little concerned about his weight this season, but that's a question he can answer at the draft combine. Otherwise, he's putting up offense on a team that needs it and his snarly, nasty play at the Top Prospects Game was excellent." - Anonymous

"Can be the best Player in the draft, physically dominates at times, disappears far too often, high risk-reward player, hard to handle on the wall." - Anonymous

"So big, powerful and strong but also kills penalties, blocks shots and once given a legitimate center in hunter garlent, has dominated the league.....I question his work ethic and his desire but too many intanglibes and maybe the highest ceiling to me in the draft....terrific release." - Anonymous

"A bit of a Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde scenario for Ritchie. I have been to games this season where he looks like the undisputed top prospect for this draft. A real bull in a china shop who can force his will on anyone physically as well as possessing the offensive skills to singlehandedly dominate the game and carry the Petes to victory, and then some games where he looks disinterested and played like a real dog. Partly due to improved health but lately his contributions and efforts have been more consistent which has his stock rising. Think physical dominance like Milan Lucic but with better offensive abilities (shot, hands, sense)." - Dan Stewart

These are exactly the kinds of scouting reports I'm talking about. They are written for entertainment purposes. The highlight the strengths of the player while barely touching on the weaknesses.

"So big, powerful and strong" followed by "I question his work ethic and his desire" (and not going any deeper into these huge red flags) is not a good scouting report. The latter is much more important for NHL players than the former.

Ultimately, as I've said in the past, I think the NHL power forward is dead. Somebody truly exceptional has to come along for me to change my mind, and Ritchie is not that prospect.