HFBoards

HFBoards (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/index.php)
-   Columbus Blue Jackets (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/forumdisplay.php?f=31)
-   -   Ryan Murray heads Columbus Blue Jackets rankings (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/showthread.php?t=1249085)

HF Article 08-20-2012 02:15 PM

Ryan Murray heads Columbus Blue Jackets rankings
 

 

After finishing last in the Central Division the past three seasons, the Columbus Blue Jackets have plenty of top draft picks to begin rebuilding the hockey team.

The Blue Jackets are stacked with defensive talent, including Ryan Murray and the newly-acquired Tim Erixon, and have a knack for drafting undersized wingers who play with an edge like Cam Atkinson and Matt Calvert. Scott Howson has become very good at identifying which free agent prospects have the best upside, and under barely any publicity, he signed undrafted winger Jonathan Audy-Marchessault this summer. The Jackets also have been addressing their problem between the pipes and drafted two goalies with NHL potential in Oscar Dansk and Joonas Korpisalo.… read more



More...

Viqsi 08-20-2012 03:27 PM

Quote:

5. (9) T.J. Tynan, C, 7.0B
Do you see? DO YOU PEOPLE SEE?

I feel so validated right now. :D

pay no attention to the fact that cam is ranked #7 which is of course completely absurd
EDIT: also pay no attention to the fact that Forsberg is COMPLETELY UNRANKED WHAT THE ****ING HELL

candyman82 08-20-2012 03:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Viqsi (Post 53728731)
Do you see? DO YOU PEOPLE SEE?

I feel so validated right now. :D

pay no attention to the fact that cam is ranked #7 which is of course completely absurd
EDIT: also pay no attention to the fact that Forsberg is COMPLETELY UNRANKED WHAT THE ****ING HELL

How is Calvert over Atkinson?

Mayor Bee 08-20-2012 04:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HF Article (Post 53726369)
*

After finishing last in the Central Division the past three seasons, the Columbus Blue Jackets have plenty of top draft picks to begin rebuilding the hockey team.

The Blue Jackets are stacked with defensive talent, including Ryan Murray and the newly-acquired Tim Erixon, and have a knack for drafting undersized wingers who play with an edge like Cam Atkinson and Matt Calvert. Scott Howson has become very good at identifying which free agent prospects have the best upside, and under barely any publicity, he signed undrafted winger Jonathan Audy-Marchessault this summer. The Jackets also have been addressing their problem between the pipes and drafted two goalies with NHL potential in Oscar Dansk and Joonas Korpisalo.

"Has become"? First offseason involved signing Derek MacKenzie and Jan Hejda.

Roadman 08-20-2012 04:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by candyman82 (Post 53729625)
How is Calvert over Atkinson?

That's a head scratcher for sure.

LetsGOJackets!! 08-20-2012 04:14 PM

One of the first things I noticed was that
 
TJ was in the top 10. The second thing I noticed is that we are a franchise full of mighty mites aye? Chaput & Jenner are over 6', but help me with this, Atkinson is 5'7" Calvert 5'8", Tynan 5'9", and MAD is 5'9".

I can see looking for a Marty St Louis type with a big chip on his shoulder, but we have recruited a couple full lines of mites. I hope one or two of them decides to play their arses off.

Viqsi 08-20-2012 04:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by candyman82 (Post 53729625)
How is Calvert over Atkinson?

Judging by the descriptions, it's based on the fact that Atkinson didn't immediately step in and kick butt and take names in his first stint here. Or, IOW, First Impressions.

Quote:

Originally Posted by LetsGOJackets!! (Post 53730111)
TJ was in the top 10. The second thing I noticed is that we are a franchise full of mighty mites aye? Chaput & Jenner are over 6', but help me with this, Atkinson is 5'7" Calvert 5'8", Tynan 5'9", and MAD is 5'9".

I can see looking for a Marty St Louis type with a big chip on his shoulder, but we have recruited a couple full lines of mites. I hope one or two of them decides to play their arses off.

That's because all the big guys are currently on the roster. Dorsett, MacKenzie, Atkinson, Russell, and Letestu are the only guys under 6' on the NHL roster (and of those guys, three are 5'11" - heck, Dorsett's apparently getting listed at 6' now!) - and the only blueliners in the organization under 6' are Reilly and Olson.

EDIT: I'm grabbing that from forecaster.ca, and they also claim Calvert is 5'11". So, of course, some of those may be inaccurate. ;) Still, the point stands.

CBJWennberg41 08-20-2012 04:56 PM

What the **** how is Atkinson below Tynan?

Robert 08-20-2012 06:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by candyman82 (Post 53729625)
How is Calvert over Atkinson?

Not sure, perhaps hope.. Atkinson along with Dubinsky and Anisimov should get the most offensive ice time... I think they are our best bet for scoring as a unit.. Calvert is in the mix no doubt but he is not at Atkinsons level right now.

As for Murray, he has the goods to make the team and stick next season but we need to see more of him.. He was my first pick for our draft and by all accounts that I have read is NHL ready.

RunYouOutOfTheRink 08-20-2012 07:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Viqsi (Post 53730783)
Judging by the descriptions, it's based on the fact that Atkinson didn't immediately step in and kick butt and take names in his first stint here. Or, IOW, First Impressions.



That's because all the big guys are currently on the roster. Dorsett, MacKenzie, Atkinson, Russell, and Letestu are the only guys under 6' on the NHL roster (and of those guys, three are 5'11" - heck, Dorsett's apparently getting listed at 6' now!) - and the only blueliners in the organization under 6' are Reilly and Olson.

EDIT: I'm grabbing that from forecaster.ca, and they also claim Calvert is 5'11". So, of course, some of those may be inaccurate. ;) Still, the point stands.

Reilly has grown. He's 6'1 now.

Sore Loser 08-20-2012 11:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Robert (Post 53732961)
Not sure, perhaps hope.. Atkinson along with Dubinsky and Anisimov should get the most offensive ice time... I think they are our best bet for scoring as a unit.. Calvert is in the mix no doubt but he is not at Atkinsons level right now.

As for Murray, he has the goods to make the team and stick next season but we need to see more of him.. He was my first pick for our draft and by all accounts that I have read is NHL ready.

If Murray doesn't make this team, it will be because Moore and/or Savard have simply out-performed him at camp. In probably over 200 times watching him play, I can honestly say that he is very much capable of stepping right into the NHL next year.

That being said, I certainly don't think sending him back to the WHL (especially in what should be a down year for us anyways!) is the wrong idea. I'd love to see his offensive game continue to develop, and dominating for a full season would be great for his confidence.

georgiabluejacket 08-21-2012 01:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sore Loser (Post 53740853)
That being said, I certainly don't think sending him back to the WHL (especially in what should be a down year for us anyways!) is the wrong idea. I'd love to see his offensive game continue to develop, and dominating for a full season would be great for his confidence.

Something I didn't understand last year(and probably won't this one, if there is one) is why we didn't allow Johansen to play in the WJC. We were in last place and he was sitting in the press box the whole time. Why not let him go play top line minutes in a major tournament? The same this year with Murray. If he's only getting 3rd defensive minutes, why not let him got get 20-25 on a "national" stage?

Sore Loser 08-21-2012 12:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by georgiabluejacket (Post 53742627)
Something I didn't understand last year(and probably won't this one, if there is one) is why we didn't allow Johansen to play in the WJC. We were in last place and he was sitting in the press box the whole time. Why not let him go play top line minutes in a major tournament? The same this year with Murray. If he's only getting 3rd defensive minutes, why not let him got get 20-25 on a "national" stage?

I agree.

KanetoToews2883 08-21-2012 05:38 PM

TJ deserves to be in that area of where he's at. ( I felt he went much too low in the board rankings). That said, is the same guy doing the CBJ prospect ratings each year.
TJ's rankings have gone wonky.

After draft (7.5 D) , mid-season update (8.0 D) and now (pre-2012) 7.0 B.

The grading criteria go 8 is a 1st liner , 7 is a 2nd liner 6 a 3rd liner 5 a 4th liner 4 AHL depth etc.

D is could slip 3 or more levels C 2 or more levels B 1 or more level A locked in.

So basically his upside has gone from 1st/2nd to 1st to 2nd.

blahblah 08-22-2012 07:49 AM

Despite a couple of oddities, the list looks fairly good. Tynan was rated pretty low around here. At least it finally got updated, took them quite a while to even update our prospect list. Shouldn't take the act of rating the organization to get updates to the prospect list.

candyman82 08-23-2012 07:30 AM

Did anybody else notice that Cucuruto isn't ranked?

Viqsi 08-23-2012 09:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by candyman82 (Post 53795433)
Did anybody else notice that Cucuruto isn't ranked?

I was going to say that that didn't strike me as particularly unusual... then I took a second look and noticed that yeah, he's not listed at all.

That said, they had the same thing going with TJ Tynan at one point. He mysteriously reappeared after I emailed the HF folks...

Nordique 08-23-2012 09:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by candyman82 (Post 53729625)
How is Calvert over Atkinson?

Yeah, that kind of deflated the credibility of the article for me. Under no criteria would I put Atkinson 7th on our prospect listing.

FlaggerX 08-23-2012 08:17 PM

It's hard to tell about Hockey's Future's 'scouts'. I'm sure they love the game and watch more games then I do, but some of their picks mystify. Calvert over Atkinson? Okay, neither has a full season so they get a pass. Tynan should be under either, but it's my understanding Tynan has even more speed, maybe even the fastest guy we have, and like Atkinson a scorer and playmaker's touch. He might have more potential, if that's what they're grading for. And it's interesting that they see Savard over Erixon. I haven't seen Erixon, and while i like Savard he needs to improve his defense. If he does that, he'll have a very long NHL career. If not.


They've been wrong so much in the past, it's more of a fun guide to be taken with salt.

Sore Loser 08-24-2012 09:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by FlaggerX (Post 53813789)
It's hard to tell about Hockey's Future's 'scouts'. I'm sure they love the game and watch more games then I do, but some of their picks mystify. Calvert over Atkinson? Okay, neither has a full season so they get a pass. Tynan should be under either, but it's my understanding Tynan has even more speed, maybe even the fastest guy we have, and like Atkinson a scorer and playmaker's touch. He might have more potential, if that's what they're grading for. And it's interesting that they see Savard over Erixon. I haven't seen Erixon, and while i like Savard he needs to improve his defense. If he does that, he'll have a very long NHL career. If not.


They've been wrong so much in the past, it's more of a fun guide to be taken with salt.

As someone who is a "scout" myself ;) (I actually use that term loosely, as it's more a recreation than anything), I can see where they are coming from, to an extent.

I certainly wouldn't place Calvert's upside ahead of Atkinson, and their grading system is exactly the reason Atkinson should be higher than Calvert on the list. I think Atkinson has second line potential, whereas Calvert looks like a safe bet to play on our third line in a year or two. So, while Atkinson certainly has more upside, I actually think Calvert at this point is a safer bet for the NHL. Yes, I said it :) ... reason being, if Atkinson doesn't become a scoring forward for us, I don't think he has the tangible assets to play another role - Calvert, however, has proved above average two-way play at every level, and bases his game primarily off of effort and compete. Not to say Atkinson doesn't have effort or show up to compete, just that Calvert's game will allow him a depth role.

As for Erixon vs. Savard, I think the upside is similar. The people thinking Erixon is going to be a top pairing player for us are going to be a little bit disappointed, I'm afraid. I would put both he and Savard as potential second pairing guys with powerplay skill, but I don't think either of them will be that 25+ minute defenseman for us. That's why we needed Ryan Murray at the draft. You have guys like Erixon, Savard, and Moore already in the system, and a guy like Murray could be the anchor that allows them to all play their risky styles. I think if you took a poll of 100 scouts, it would be fairly close to 50/50 between Erixon and Savard. They simply chose Savard for their list.

Iron Balls McGinty 09-28-2012 10:25 AM

I have to admit I'm glad we drafted Murray and not Yakupov after reading about the transfer fiasco and the blame game being played about him playing in Russia during the lockout. This just sounds like the beginning of another high Russian prospect with a sense of entitlement that he hasn't earned at the NHL level yet.

EspenK 09-28-2012 12:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mayor Bee (Post 53729851)
"Has become"? First offseason involved signing Derek MacKenzie and Jan Hejda.

True masterpieces. A 4th liner and a guy who had one really good season and then declined. :dunno:

candyman82 09-28-2012 01:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Iron Balls McGinty (Post 54635639)
I have to admit I'm glad we drafted Murray and not Yakupov after reading about the transfer fiasco and the blame game being played about him playing in Russia during the lockout. This just sounds like the beginning of another high Russian prospect with a sense of entitlement that he hasn't earned at the NHL level yet.

He's playing in Russia because the Oilers wanted him to. The Sarnia Sting want him to play for them and are causing a fuss. You should do a bit more research.

Iron Balls McGinty 09-28-2012 03:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by candyman82 (Post 54639457)
He's playing in Russia because the Oilers wanted him to. The Sarnia Sting want him to play for them and are causing a fuss. You should do a bit more research.

Well, maybe the Oilers should have followed proper protocol. And also reading Yakupov's dad pipe us in saying he would refuse to play for Sarnia irks me a bit.

If a player played in Juniors and doesn't make the NHL team, he should go back to the junior team as that is who holds his rights until he is 20. Just because he signed an NHL contract doesn't exempt him from those rules. Murray had no issue going back to Everett. No other CHL player had issues with going back to their team.

From the article I have posted below:

"The case is unique because the Russian was drafted as a North American-based player. He signed an entry-level deal with the Oilers over the summer and those contracts include a clause that states CHL-eligible players may only appear in that league or the NHL."

http://www.edmontonjournal.com/sport...446/story.html

There, I did my research. This has nothing to do with him going there because Edmonton wanted him to. it has everything to do with proper processes and protocols not being followed.

If anything, he would have wanted to go there to make a quick buck in the KHL versus playing in the CHL where he would make nothing.

digdug41982 09-28-2012 03:35 PM

I'm already afraid of the Hawks going up against this guy. Blessing in disguise you didn't get the No. 1 pick, this is the guy Edmonton should have taken. Great score.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:09 AM.

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com, A property of CraveOnline, a division of AtomicOnline LLC ©2009 CraveOnline Media, LLC. All Rights Reserved.