The Athletic: Top 50 drafted NHL prospects

[TheOnlyBilko]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

Cupboards are stocked!

They have been for a few years now that's why we can trade away our top picks to grab guys like Hamilton and the guy we got from the Islanders last summer , Hamonic

[TheOnlyBilko]

Can someone copy and paste this guy's top 50? I guess you need an account or sumthing to read article

[Jiri Hrdina]

Originally Posted by TheOnlyBilko

Can someone copy and paste this guy's top 50? I guess you need an account or sumthing to read article

No please don’t. It’s copyright material behind a pay wall.

[Strange Brew]

Agree with it or not, the Flames have been sacrificing organizational depth to acquire NHL talent. The open question is whether the NHL team is ready to compete for something.

The huge glaring question mark is goaltending. Stopgap solutions at the NHL level, question marks in the system, and very little assets remaining to use as trade chips.

[d_phaneuf]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

Also, the author has Fox and Valimaki slotted together at #34 and #35. I suspect for him it is something of a coin toss as to whom he prefers, and hardly surprising that others would have Valimaki ranked ahead of Fox.

He also tiered the top 50 and valimaki and fox are in the one that goes from 16 to 38, so they are very close to most of the higher ranked d men

Only d in the higher tiers are dahlin, heiskenin, hughes, chabot

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by Strange Brew

Agree with it or not, the Flames have been sacrificing organizational depth to acquire NHL talent. The open question is whether the NHL team is ready to compete for something.

The huge glaring question mark is goaltending. Stopgap solutions at the NHL level, question marks in the system, and very little assets remaining to use as trade chips.

Acquiring (young, core) NHL talent is not sacrificing depth.

The goal is to build the best NHL team possible, not to have the most prospects. And the fact of the matter is that the Flames have amassed a lot of good young talent. That is the opposite of sacrificing depth.

Again, how many teams do you think have more total organizational talent, 25 and under, than the Flames?

[Strange Brew]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

Acquiring (young, core) NHL talent is not sacrificing depth.

The goal is to build the best NHL team possible, not to have the most prospects. And the fact of the matter is that the Flames have amassed a lot of good young talent. That is the opposite of sacrificing depth.

Again, how many teams do you think have more total organizational talent, 25 and under, than the Flames?

Organizational depth and NHL talent, no matter their age, are definitely not the same thing in my mind.

It’s fine to believe the Flames NHL team is going to be great. But it’s not going to be because of their prospect depth. It will be because their NHL talent will improve.

[FlamesAddiction]

I imagine that a list like this is very tedious to develop outside of say the top 20. Then you are splitting hairs, going by gut feeling and trying to balance and weight small details.

It's a fun exercise, but I would bet that even the most knowledgeable people start getting less than 50% accuracy half way through the list.

[Jay Random]

It’s an opinion piece. When there is no way of measuring whether a given entry on the list is objectively right or wrong, it is meaningless to talk about accuracy.

[Bingo]

Manny Elk dropped a top 15 drafted prospects post in early July based on a new model. Not suggesting his model is better or worse than a ranking from the Athletic, but it's got math behind it and not just an effort to put names in order.

He had Valimaki as the 10th best prospect on the list, Rasmus Andersson 12th. Fox didn't make the top 15

https://twitter.com/user/status/1017640912485343238

3rd round picks can certainly gain ground and pass the value of first round picks a year apart, it happens. But to do that you need an epic leak from the third rounder (have seen that), and a fall from the first rounder (haven't) so I wouldn't be so quick to equate or flip them at this point based on one ranking having them close.

[ricardodw]

Originally Posted by Bingo

Manny Elk dropped a top 15 drafted prospects post in early July based on a new model. Not suggesting his model is better or worse than a ranking from the Athletic, but it's got math behind it and not just an effort to put names in order.

He had Valimaki as the 10th best prospect on the list, Rasmus Andersson 12th. Fox didn't make the top 15

https://twitter.com/user/status/1017640912485343238

3rd round picks can certainly gain ground and pass the value of first round picks a year apart, it happens. But to do that you need an epic leak from the third rounder (have seen that), and a fall from the first rounder (haven't) so I wouldn't be so quick to equate or flip them at this point based on one ranking having them close.

When in Gaudreau's development would have this stats based analysis have him as a top-5 prospect out of the 2011 draft? Was his survival of his freshman year enough?

I Know this is a special case as Gaudreau was only a 4th round pick because he was so small and not because he lacked any particular skills.

On the other hand would have Jankowski's slow development knocked him out of the first round as a prospect after his freshman year or would have the stats shown that he was actually NHL bound?

[Enoch Root]

Gaudreau's stock started to skyrocket after his freshman year at BC. Despite looking like a 14 year old kid out there, Gaudreau got better and better as the season went on. By the time they got to the Frozen Four, he was becoming their best player. And in the National Championship game, he dominated. (and remember, they had Kreider in his senior season on that team).

I don't think there is any comparison between Fox' s rookie NCAA season and Gaudreau's freshman season. Gaudreau was electrifying, and became the best player on the team by the end of the season of the NCAA champs.

To answer the question: Gaudreau's draft + 1 season showed he was a star with special talent. However, there was still the fact that he was 137 lbs. So evaluating him as an NHL prospect remained next to impossible.

[Textcritic]

Why are we still talking about Gaudreau in this thread? It's ridiculous.

But for the sake of context and to further emphasize Enoch Root's point about drawing comparisons between college players, it is worth pointing out that in the last five years the ECAC where Adam Fox plays has boasted such luminaries as Matthew Peca, Jimmy Vesey, Spencer Foo, Alexander Kerfoot, and Michael Vecchione. There are some good players there, for sure, but no one even remotely comparable to Gaudreau.

Can we dispense with this nonsense, please?

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

Gaudreau's stock started to skyrocket after his freshman year at BC. Despite looking like a 14 year old kid out there, Gaudreau got better and better as the season went on. By the time they got to the Frozen Four, he was becoming their best player. And in the National Championship game, he dominated. (and remember, they had Kreider in his senior season on that team).

I don't think there is any comparison between Fox' s rookie NCAA season and Gaudreau's freshman season. Gaudreau was electrifying, and became the best player on the team by the end of the season of the NCAA champs.

I would definitely agree with that, and of course you add in the obvious caveat of comparing a winger to a defenseman, both in terms of development track and the much better history of good forwards coming from the NCAA - there are very few elite NCAA defensemen currently playing in the NHL. Frankly, if you put Gaudreau from that year in a time machine, he'd have a strong case for "best forward" placement on that list.

[Hockey Fan #751]

I think the biggest misfire on the list is Dylan Strome at 10. I'd have him further down into the 40s. Not a big believer in his top 6 upside.

[Hot_Flatus]

Originally Posted by Cantrader

That is no good.Fox could end a top 2 D. He probably will end up playing for the Rangers, hope he ends up being a Tim Erxion

No reason so wish ill on a guy that by all accounts did nothing wrong. The Flames made a deal that hopefully maximized their asset - this should help both teams down the road.

[Hot_Flatus]

Originally Posted by ricardodw

How in the world can anyone make a valid comparison between Fox and Valimaki? Fox playing against older players, less games, more practices.

Fox has had Gaudreau like success at the NCAA level. He has been the best player on any team he is on like Gaudreau. He had 40 pts in 35 games as an 18 year old rookie defenseman in the NCAA. Gaudreau had 44 pts in 44 games in Draft +1.

I do not buy the "likely won't sign with the Flames discount" that CP has granted management to treat Fox like a 3rd round pick. I am pretty sure that the Flames held their water when teams came around asking for Gaudreau as a sweetener in a trade deal after his first 2 years in the NCAA with the same sort of feelings that he would rather play on the east coast.

Fox has said that he will jump to the NHL when he is sure he will have an impact at the NHL level. If he has the Junior year jump that Gaudreau had he will be playing with Carolina next year. He will be faced with earning no money for another year or burning a year of his ELC by playing a game or 2 with the Canes and earning 1 M instead of playing a year for free.

Gaudreau made an extra 7-8 Million by not playing his 4th year at the NCAA.

Hanifin had 23 pts in 37 NCAA games as a freshman and played a full year in the NHL the next season.


At the very least Fox would have been the #2 Flame prospect had the Flames sweetened Hamilton/Ferland pot with a 3rd round pick or Kylington for instance.

There is a chance that Fox might be the best player in the Hamilton trade in 5 years.

There's also a chance he is nothing in 5 years. That's the way it goes and for the record I think they nailed it on this one with Fox.

It would have been idiotic for Treliving to hold onto the guy if they had any doubts at all about signing him when right now is the only time the organization can sell high. No way Kylington would have gotten that deal done and the team had no 3rd round or even decent pick to move instead.

[Strange Brew]

Originally Posted by Hot_Flatus

There's also a chance he is nothing in 5 years. That's the way it goes and for the record I think they nailed it on this one with Fox.

It would have been idiotic for Treliving to hold onto the guy if they had any doubts at all about signing him when right now is the only time the organization can sell high. No way Kylington would have gotten that deal done and the team had no 3rd round or even decent pick to move instead.

I think it’s intersting to speculate how Fox was valued in this deal.

Assume the deal starts as Ferland and Hamilton for Hanifin and Lindholm. That was not enough for Carolina. If Flames didn’t have rights to Fox, what would have been comparable?

It’s impossible to know without inside knowledge, but it seems pretty clear Flames didn’t get Valimaki type value for him since he’s not signed. Would love to know what other options were on the table.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by Strange Brew

I think it’s intersting to speculate how Fox was valued in this deal.

Assume the deal starts as Ferland and Hamilton for Hanifin and Lindholm. That was not enough for Carolina. If Flames didn’t have rights to Fox, what would have been comparable?

It’s impossible to know without inside knowledge, but it seems pretty clear Flames didn’t get Valimaki type value for him since he’s not signed. Would love to know what other options were on the table.

My guess is that Valimaki was off the table altogether, but that negotiations centred on Fox and the two AHL defensemen as the sticking point. At this point the debate is whether to believe that one of Kylington or Andersson was not enough for Carolina to strike a deal, or whether it was too much for the Flames to finalize.

[ricardodw]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

Why are we still talking about Gaudreau in this thread? It's ridiculous.

But for the sake of context and to further emphasize Enoch Root's point about drawing comparisons between college players, it is worth pointing out that in the last five years the ECAC where Adam Fox plays has boasted such luminaries as Matthew Peca, Jimmy Vesey, Spencer Foo, Alexander Kerfoot, and Michael Vecchione. There are some good players there, for sure, but no one even remotely comparable to Gaudreau.

Can we dispense with this nonsense, please?

Why don't you rage back at Bingo?


I was asking simple clear questions on the value of the statistical analysis of a rating prospects.

I would have more confidence in the Manny Elks process if it was statistically upgrade Gaudreau as a prospect in D+1 and keep Jankowski relatively high as a prospect after his D+1. Does his process have a track record? Could the statistical analysis be executed on previous years prospects?

as for your rambling somewhat obtuse argument on the undervaluing of the ECAC:

There are a very limited of players of Fox performance level representing all American (NCAA or CHL) as Fox has put up at international competitions. He was top-3 USA player in the U20 in D+2 same as Gaudreau. He was top-3 on team team with Mittelstadt , Bellows and Brady Tkachuk who he beat out as a top-3 player on team USA. Fox already had a gold medal in year D+1.

You missed his teammate Donato who jumped from the weak sister ECAC to the Bruins roster and put up 9 pts in his first 12 NHL games and is #14 in the Athletics prospect rating.