Flames Prospect Polls comparison

[Fire]

I bet CPs rankings will be the most accurate of the bunch in 10 years.

[Fighting Banana Slug]

Originally Posted by Wastedyouth

Flamesnation cuts their rankings off at under the age of 24 I believe.

Jankowski is ranked so low because he didn't have a great Freshman year. He racked up points against the weakest teams in the NCAA and was fed butter soft top 6 minutes.

Not to say he is terrible. But he has shown nothing to say he is close to a top 10 prospect besides being drafted in the first round (which shouldn't be that much of a qualifier in this organization).

Jankowski will always be a polarizing prospect, but I am not sure what "butter soft top 6 minutes" even means, especially on a team like Providence. He did fine, considering the jump to NCAA.
To me, the upcoming season will be quite telling as to where he fits in with the rest of the prospects.

(Full disclosure: I would rank him lower, somewhere around 10-12)

[Alberta_Beef]

Originally Posted by Wolven

Maybe Flames Nation doesn't realize that Brodie has been playing in the NHL...

I really don't think Flames Nation has a clue about very much at all.


also they are doing polls on HF boards as well in the Flames area, would be interesting to see how it compares to the CP polls as well

[Beatle17]

Originally Posted by Wastedyouth

Flamesnation cuts their rankings off at under the age of 24 I believe.

Jankowski is ranked so low because he didn't have a great Freshman year. He racked up points against the w[B]eakest teams in the NCAA[/B] and was fed butter soft top 6 minutes.

Not to say he is terrible. But he has shown nothing to say he is close to a top 10 prospect besides being drafted in the first round (which shouldn't be that much of a qualifier in this organization).

How is Hockey East the weakes teams in NCAA hockey? The majority of teams in Hockey East would beat all CHL teams on a regular basis.

[Red Menace]

added the rankings from the Hockeys Future message boards as well....
similar results....Reinhart a little higher, Sieloff a little lower.....

[1991 Canadian]

Originally Posted by Fire

I bet CPs rankings will be the most accurate of the bunch in 10 years.

Just how CP came to the conclusion that Brent Krahn will be an NHL goalie before Andrei Medvedev... although everyone seemed to agree they'd both be NHL goalies.

http://forum.calgarypuck.com/showthread.php?t=53

Lets be honest, all these polls tend to overvalue players that will never make an impact in the NHL.

[handgroen]

Originally Posted by 1991 Canadian

Just how CP came to the conclusion that Brent Krahn will be an NHL goalie before Andrei Medvedev... although everyone seemed to agree they'd both be NHL goalies.

http://forum.calgarypuck.com/showthread.php?t=53

Lets be honest, all these polls tend to overvalue players that will never make an impact in the NHL.

who are you? or how long have you lurked in the long grass for?

i smell a repeat customer

[Fighting Banana Slug]

Ranking the prospects doesn't mean all of them will make the NHL. It doesn't mean anything, really, other than folks sharing their opinions on hockey players. Carry on.

[Enoch Root]

As someone mentioned, the FN list certainly looks like it values NHL-readiness higher, and I respect other opinions, but nonetheless, you have to wonder what they are smoking...

Horak 4
Reinhart 5
Arnold 6
Cundari 7

Wotherspoon 12
Agostino 13
Jankowski 15
Sieloff 17

Which 4 guys would you rather have if you had to choose?

They even have the combo of Granlund, Ferland, Ortio and Brossoit ranked higher than those 4

There are opinions, and then there is absurdity

[vicarious]

Originally Posted by Fighting Banana Slug

Ranking the prospects doesn't mean all of them will make the NHL. It doesn't mean anything, really, other than folks sharing their opinions on hockey players. Carry on.

What percentage of prospects would realistically end up having an NHL career to speak of? And what percentage would realistically become NHL all stars?

[Wastedyouth]

Originally Posted by Beatle17

How is Hockey East the weakes teams in NCAA hockey? The majority of teams in Hockey East would beat all CHL teams on a regular basis.

You do know that they don't only play teams in HE right? That's not how NCAA hockey works.

He had his big games against Sacred Heart (bottom feeder), and North Eastern (bottom feeder). He plays the 1st PP unit, and made a good majority of his zone starts in the offensive zone.

He had an ok year for a young guy on a weak team, but he has shown nothing to prove he is a top 10 prospect.

[Wastedyouth]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

As someone mentioned, the FN list certainly looks like it values NHL-readiness higher, and I respect other opinions, but nonetheless, you have to wonder what they are smoking...

Horak 4
Reinhart 5
Arnold 6
Cundari 7

Wotherspoon 12
Agostino 13
Jankowski 15
Sieloff 17

Which 4 guys would you rather have if you had to choose?

They even have the combo of Granlund, Ferland, Ortio and Brossoit ranked higher than those 4

There are opinions, and then there is absurdity

I'd take the 4 guys that include 3 that have played pro hockey and had a few NHL games including an AHL Allstar and a kid that's played over 100 NHL games over the 4 that have never played a pro game in their life.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by Wastedyouth

I'd take the 4 guys that include 3 that have played pro hockey and had a few NHL games including an AHL Allstar and a kid that's played over 100 NHL games over the 4 that have never played a pro game in their life.

They have played pro games because they are older and have progressed to that point (and I am not taking anything away from them, it is an accomplishment to progress that far).

But in analyzing prospects, you have to consider the potential, along with the current progression.

To blindly say that Cundari has played in the NHL and is therefore a better prospect than Wotherspoon (based simply on that fact) is silly.

I think that if you offered up the 4 I referenced, as trade bait for the 4 you support, that pretty much every GM in the league would happily make that trade

[Wastedyouth]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

They have played pro games because they are older and have progressed to that point (and I am not taking anything away from them, it is an accomplishment to progress that far).

But in analyzing prospects, you have to consider the potential, along with the current progression.

To blindly say that Cundari has played in the NHL and is therefore a better prospect than Wotherspoon (based simply on that fact) is silly.

Except Cundari has already shown he can play in the AHL and quite successfully. That's a huge step in any prospects progression. Wotherspoon may crash and burn in the AHL like many of our promising D prospects before him.

Thus Cundari is the better prospect at this point.

I think FN is just rating the prospects differently. Doesn't make it bad. Just different priorities.

[Bingo]

This link has a great summary of past Calgarypuck prospect rankings. Most of the links work which is amazing given all the changes around here.

http://www.calgarypuck.com/archive/Future.htm

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by Wastedyouth

Except Cundari has already shown he can play in the AHL and quite successfully. That's a huge step in any prospects progression. Wotherspoon may crash and burn in the AHL like many of our promising D prospects before him.

Thus Cundari is the better prospect at this point.

I think FN is just rating the prospects differently. Doesn't make it bad. Just different priorities.

As for Wotherspoon, of course he could crash and burn - like any prospect.

And yes, FN's rates their prospects differently, that is the whole point.

But I think FN - and you - seem to lack an understanding of the word prospect, and what it references with respect to young players.

MacKinnon has not played a game in the NHL or in the AHL - so Cundari is a better prospect than him?

There are two major variables to consider when rating prospects, IMO. One is progression, or NHL-readiness. The other is potential.

How you weight those variables is completely subjective.

But it appears, by the sheer fact of their outlying position relative to all others, that FN puts too much emphasis on the first, and not enough on the second.

[Wastedyouth]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

As for Wotherspoon, of course he could crash and burn - like any prospect.

And yes, FN's rates their prospects differently, that is the whole point.

But I think FN - and you - seem to lack an understanding of the word prospect, and what it references with respect to young players.

MacKinnon has not played a game in the NHL or in the AHL - so Cundari is a better prospect than him?

There are two major variables to consider when rating prospects, IMO. One is progression, or NHL-readiness. The other is potential.

How you weight those variables is completely subjective.

But it appears, by the sheer fact of their outlying position relative to all others, that FN puts too much emphasis on the first, and not enough on the second.

So they base their rankings on priorities differently, yet as you said in the bold validly, and they are just wrong?

Bit of interesting logic on your part. I get it, you prefer potential, doesn't make you more right.

[SuperMatt18]

Honestly think that after the top 3 it really is a toss up and all the lists show that.

By most accounts Gaudreau, Monahan, and Baertschi are our top 3 and that is pretty much agreed upon.

But from 4-15 it really does depend on who is making the list and where you put your priorities.

Really it is just like the various teams lists heading into the draft. The top 3-5 are pretty much agreed upon and after that it is a crap shoot.

[Cali Panthers Fan]

Originally Posted by Bingo

This link has a great summary of past Calgarypuck prospect rankings. Most of the links work which is amazing given all the changes around here.

http://www.calgarypuck.com/archive/Future.htm

Anyone else note that both David Moss and Adam Cracknell were unranked, and now they are both successful NHL bottom 6 players? Terrible list of top prospects if you ask me, and #1 is Leland Irving. Can't blame the ranking at the time, but, well, you know, le sigh.......

[Freeway]

If I remember right, the FN list was a consensus ranking based on the voting of five panelists (I was one of 'em). While age was the cap for FN's list, my THW list excluded players I dubbed NHL regulars (basically just TJ Brodie).

I should be doing a revised THW ranking sometime before the World Juniors.