[News] Pronman ranks top U-23 players

[Since1984]

Originally Posted by SuperMatt18

50 forwards that are 5'10 or shorter have played at least 10 games in the NHL this year. With the shortest being Alex Debrincat and Cole Caufiled listed at 5'7". (6 PPG players are 5'10" or shorter)

369 forwards are between 5'11 to 6'3"

40 forwards are 6'4" or taller. (One PPG player 6'4" or taller - Rantanen)

So there are more players, and specifically offensive producers that are Pelletiers size or smaller, than are Ruzicka's size or bigger.

I don't have the time to do the math right now but if I had to guess the average NHL forward would be about 6'0" tall, so not sure that being 5'10" is really that undersized in the big scheme of things.

Edit:

I found the bios on NHL website and ran some numbers.

598 forwards have taken a shift in the NHL this year. The average height of an NHL forward based on that is 6' 0.5" and 195 lbs. Pelletier is listed as 5'10" and 180 lbs on the AHL website. So he's only about 15 lbs undersized, which for a 20 year old isn't that surprising and would probably be normal for most 20 year olds.

This also would be a little inflated and I have a feeling if I was able to filter by guys who have played at least 150 minutes (regular forwards) then it would probably come down a little bit.



Carolina is a great example...

Seth Jarvis is younger than Pelletier, is 5'10" and 170 pounds and he's playing a regular shift.

Trochek: 5'10"
Aho: 5'11"
Teravainen: 5'11"
Stepan: 6'0"
Fast: 6'0"
Martinook: 6'0"
Necas: 6'1"
Svechnikov: 6'2"
Kotkaniemi: 6'2
Niederreiter: 6'2"
Stall: 6'4"

Aho, Teravainen, and Trocheck are 3 of the top 4 scoring forwards on that team, all under 5'11".

Aho is 6' tall that is most definitely not under 5'11.

[Jiri Hrdina]

Originally Posted by Wastedyouth

Do you actually know this, or you are speculating, because he likes to say how many scouts he has talked to?

I follow him closely including his podcast where he regularly has other scouts on. There seems to be a high level of mutual respect.

Originally Posted by Wastedyouth

Again, he likes to say he attends games, watches games, talks to a lot of scouts.

Because he does. He hits all the tournaments that he can. And he watches a ton of video. He puts in the work. Still just means these are his opinions but he's putting in a lot of time to get to known these players .

Originally Posted by Wastedyouth

It's his anecdotal opinions. It might as well be the opinion of anyone else on this board.

I doubt anyone on this board watches near the amount of hockey he does. And he's paid to offer these opinions. Someone has valued them enough that he's making a living by being a prospect "expert". So it's just one opinion but a more qualified opinion than anyone on this board who watches these players a small fraction of the time compared to him.

Originally Posted by Wastedyouth

I will say that I stopped paying attention to him 5 years ago when i was clear he was far behind the curve on qualitative analysis on prospects and just continued to piggyback other peoples work. But maybe he has developed his "system".

I actually follow him more now than before. But it stands to reason he has gotten better at his craft.

Originally Posted by Wastedyouth

I know I am piling on here, but last thing I will say is, if Pronman was as good at scouting, analyzing and reviewing prospects. Why hasn't he been picked up by any of the teams that are heavy into the kind of prospect analysis the market has developed? All the big names have been scooped up over the last 5 years. My guess is because he is just what he is, a content creator with little substance.

Each to their own.
I'm always amazed that people slam people like him and Button for having different views and lists. I like reading different opinions. I see little value in reading a bunch of lists and opinions that are largely all the same. He has strong views that are informed by watching the players a LOT. That has value to me. If it doesn't for you - don't read it.

But I find the criticisms to be largely invalid.

[TheoFleury]

So are we just going to give pronman the benefit of the doubt and assume he watches the 100+ hours a week of these kids that would be required to rank 100+ players?

He's obviously just more social media trash. He's probably watched 5% of the players on this list, and probably once or twice at best

It's just more empty click bait garbage that you have to sift though to actually find decent content. Empty, baseless and a waste of time even discussing it. Kudos to him for making money creating this crap though. That's the only impressive thing about him


Sent from my SM-G988W using Tapatalk

[Jiri Hrdina]

"Social media trash"

That seems uncalled for. If you don't like the content that's fine, but where are you going for better information about prospects? This is a pretty comprehensive article with a lot of thought. Disagreeing with his views is one thing but the quality of content is high.

I'm not sure what some of you are looking for. Except to complain about everything you can.

"Social media trash".
SMH.

[Jiri Hrdina]

I get that being in the media means these guys are putting themselves out there for criticism but some of you come across as petty, uninformed and unnecessarily mean.
That is what makes for true social media trash.

[Jiri Hrdina]

Sorry one more do you even have a subscription and did you even read the article? In full?

[Since1984]

I didn't realize working for The Athletic as a senior prospects analyst and previously in a similar position with ESPN translates to "Social media trash"

[Jay Random]

Originally Posted by Since1984

I didn't realize working for The Athletic as a senior prospects analyst and previously in a similar position with ESPN translates to "Social media trash"

No, but sometimes being social media trash translates into getting a high-profile gig with a media company that is trying to cut costs.

I'm not saying anything for or against Pronman. Just that media gigs are no proof of expertise. Unless you want an expert on hot dog costumes, in which case Gene Principe is your man.

[SuperMatt18]

Originally Posted by Since1984

Aho is 6' tall that is most definitely not under 5'11.

The bios you can download listed him as 71 inches and the NHL pages lists him as 6’0”. (Although that may have been a data issue since the d-man Aho is 5’11”)

Either way it’s kind of like splitting hairs. I’m not sure being 5’10”, 5’11”, or 6’0” makes a substantial difference either way on a players ability to play in the NHL.

[Strange Brew]

It’s just kind of sad to read people make insulting comments about the guy because they don’t agree with his opinions. It gets so freaking tiring to read.

[Wastedyouth]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

I follow him closely including his podcast where he regularly has other scouts on. There seems to be a high level of mutual respect.



Because he does. He hits all the tournaments that he can. And he watches a ton of video. He puts in the work. Still just means these are his opinions but he's putting in a lot of time to get to known these players .



I doubt anyone on this board watches near the amount of hockey he does. And he's paid to offer these opinions. Someone has valued them enough that he's making a living by being a prospect "expert". So it's just one opinion but a more qualified opinion than anyone on this board who watches these players a small fraction of the time compared to him.



I actually follow him more now than before. But it stands to reason he has gotten better at his craft.




Each to their own.
I'm always amazed that people slam people like him and Button for having different views and lists. I like reading different opinions. I see little value in reading a bunch of lists and opinions that are largely all the same. He has strong views that are informed by watching the players a LOT. That has value to me. If it doesn't for you - don't read it.

But I find the criticisms to be largely invalid.

Fair enough. I dont read it. Just clicked on the thread and joined the convo. Isn't that the point of the forum.

I think he's overrated and has oversold his opinion.

Just sharing that opinion. Haha. You don't have to value it. I'm good with that! Im sure Pronman doesn't give two craps about my criticism. He's heard it before right from me!

[Jiri Hrdina]

Originally Posted by Wastedyouth

Fair enough. I dont read it. Just clicked on the thread and joined the convo. Isn't that the point of the forum.

I think he's overrated and has oversold his opinion.

Just sharing that opinion. Haha. You don't have to value it. I'm good with that! Im sure Pronman doesn't give two craps about my criticism. He's heard it before right from me!

I mean you can do what you want, but I find it lazy when people feel like they can blast someone without even reading their content.

So basically it's an admission that your opinion is entirely uninformed.

All good. But uninformed opinions are one of the problems with the interwebs.
People sharing uniformed opinions about stuff they haven't read - is that the point of the forum?

[Wastedyouth]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

I mean you can do what you want, but I find it lazy when people feel like they can blast someone without even reading their content.

So basically it's an admission that your opinion is entirely uninformed.

All good. But uninformed opinions are one of the problems with the interwebs.
People sharing uniformed opinions about stuff they haven't read - is that the point of the forum?

Conversations are the point of the forum. No?

I skimmed bits of the article. It's the same stuff he would write years ago. He's got a schtick. So I'm concluding it's the same schtick he had years ago. Same terminologies. Same opinions!

Anyyyyyywho. Onwards!

[Jay Random]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

I mean you can do what you want, but I find it lazy when people feel like they can blast someone without even reading their content.

So basically it's an admission that your opinion is entirely uninformed.

So because someone hasn't clicked on this particular article, they aren't entitled to have an opinion on Pronman? You have to read absolutely everything he ever writes or shut up about him?

There's an old saying: ‘You don't have to eat all of an egg to know if it's rotten.’

[Jay Random]

Originally Posted by Strange Brew

It’s just kind of sad to read people make insulting comments about the guy because they don’t agree with his opinions. It gets so freaking tiring to read.

If a guy is passing himself off as an authority on a subject, he'd better have more than just opinions to back him up.

[TheScorpion]

I strongly disagree with putting Ruzicka over Pelletier but I still value Pronman's insight, he watches these guys a ton.

[Strange Brew]

Originally Posted by Jay Random

If a guy is passing himself off as an authority on a subject, he'd better have more than just opinions to back him up.

Talk about missing the point of what I said.

[GullFoss]

Regardless of how he ranks prospects, it has zero impact on how those prospects turn out or how teams value those prospects.

His job is to entertain people. If people find his predictions entertaining then great. I find the entire premise that this guy actually provides informational value as ridiculous and silly. But, everything about being a fan of a pro-sports team is pretty silly. So who cares? If people like him, let them like him.

[blender]

nm

[Jiri Hrdina]

Originally Posted by Jay Random

So because someone hasn't clicked on this particular article, they aren't entitled to have an opinion on Pronman? You have to read absolutely everything he ever writes or shut up about him?

There's an old saying: ‘You don't have to eat all of an egg to know if it's rotten.’

No but the poster I replied to admitted they stopped following him five years ago
So I would consider that to be an uninformed opinion