HFBoards

HFBoards (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/index.php)
-   Dallas Stars (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/forumdisplay.php?f=44)
-   -   HFStars-Voted Summer 2010 Top-20 Prospects: [#5] (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/showthread.php?t=798534)

piqued 07-12-2010 02:47 PM

HFStars-Voted Summer 2010 Top-20 Prospects: [#5]
 
The 2 right-shot wingers go in the same order as they were drafted.

   HFStars 2010 Top-20 Prospects
#1Ghttp://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...States.svg.pngJack Campbell
#2Dhttp://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...enmark.svg.pngPhilip Larsen
#3RWhttp://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...Canada.svg.pngScott Glennie
#4RWhttp://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...Canada.svg.pngAlex Chiasson
#5   
#6   
#7   
#8   
#9   
#10   
#11   
#12   
#13   
#14   
#15   
#16   
#17   
#18   
#19   
#20   

Besko and McKenzie added. Thought it would be more sporting for Bachman to have to win with the other goalie on the board.

________ 07-12-2010 02:59 PM

If McKenzie is added, Guptill and Klingberg should also be added.

For me on this one it's between Vincour and Roman, can't go wrong with either. I'm giving the slight edge to Vincour though.

Ogi1Kenobi 07-12-2010 03:05 PM

Bachman or Vincour. I would have put Roman at #5, but he lost a whole year of development.

Starsdude 07-12-2010 03:09 PM

went Roman. Vincour is my next pick. What makes mackenzie so much better than the smiths as a wing prospect. I also think Colton S. is underrated.

txomisc 07-12-2010 03:18 PM

went Vincour. So that means 3 of my top 5 stars prospects are RWs. Nice. Its about time we had some of those. Anyway I think it was a tossup last time with Vincour and Chiasson so Vincour was an easy pick here for me.

piqued 07-12-2010 03:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Starsdude (Post 26882647)
What makes mackenzie so much better than the smiths as a wing prospect.

He's not. Look, the guys who get added aren't terribly important right now. None of them are going to get voted for their first couple of times through the polls. I definitely think hard about who I'm putting in next. I added McKenzie here due to his superior production to R. Smith, professional's body type, and tougher conference than A. Smith.

_______, if you want Guptill added this early you need to provide some sort of argument or explanation. He's essentially a cypher right now, other than the fanboy-esque testimony of people who knew him. I don't foresee him getting votes until the end.

Starsdude 07-12-2010 03:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by piqued1457 (Post 26883118)
He's not. Look, the guys who get added aren't terribly important right now. None of them are going to get voted for their first couple of times through the polls. I definitely think hard about who I'm putting in next. I added McKenzie here due to his superior production to R. Smith, professional's body type, and tougher conference than A. Smith.

_______, if you want Guptill added this early you need to provide some sort of argument or explanation. He's essentially a cypher right now, other than the fanboy-esque testimony of people who knew him. I don't foresee him getting votes until the end.

Its cool I was just curious about Mckenzie wondering if someone saw something I did not the few Ohio games I saw.

glovesave_35 07-12-2010 04:02 PM

Wow, the underrating of Roman continues. I get that he lost a year of development but it shouldn't hurt him this much. Aside from Larsen, Roman is the next closest prospect to making a legitimate impact in the NHL, a journey that I see beginning for both during this upcoming NHL season.

Guptill doesn't have a legitimate reason to be in this poll yet.

________ 07-12-2010 04:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by piqued1457 (Post 26883118)
_______, if you want Guptill added this early you need to provide some sort of argument or explanation. He's essentially a cypher right now, other than the fanboy-esque testimony of people who knew him. I don't foresee him getting votes until the end.

IMO Guptill has the second highest offense upside in the Stars system after Glennie. That's not a knock on Chiasson, Vincour or Roman or anything. Guptill is a pure goal scorer in a couple years he'll probably be one of the Stars top 3 prospects.

txomisc 07-12-2010 04:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by glovesave_35 (Post 26883846)
Wow, the underrating of Roman continues. I get that he lost a year of development but it shouldn't hurt him this much. Aside from Larsen, Roman is the next closest prospect to making a legitimate impact in the NHL, a journey that I see beginning for both during this upcoming NHL season.

Guptill doesn't have a legitimate reason to be in this poll yet.

Have never been particularly impressed with Roman. Granted I only saw a handful of games a few years ago but he didnt really stand out. Losing a year of development doesnt just hurt him from a development standpoint, but from a "we havent seen him do anything so why should we vote him this high" type situation.

________ 07-12-2010 04:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by glovesave_35 (Post 26883846)
Wow, the underrating of Roman continues. I get that he lost a year of development but it shouldn't hurt him this much. Aside from Larsen, Roman is the next closest prospect to making a legitimate impact in the NHL, a journey that I see beginning for both during this upcoming NHL season.

Guptill doesn't have a legitimate reason to be in this poll yet.

It depends on how your voting if it's pure upside, closest to NHL ready or a mix of both.

As of this point I'd rank Vincour, Roman and Guptill, but Guptill has a higher ceiling then either one. Though Guptill might be less likely to reach his overall ceiling since he's coming out of tier two.

Since it's in on the subject of Guptill, Roman and Vincour. Those three could be a good line in the future.

Starsdude 07-12-2010 07:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ________ (Post 26883938)
IMO Guptill has the second highest offense upside in the Stars system after Glennie. That's not a knock on Chiasson, Vincour or Roman or anything. Guptill is a pure goal scorer in a couple years he'll probably be one of the Stars top 3 prospects.

Is this off scouting reports or have you seen him because most thought he was ahuge reach when he was taken

piqued 07-13-2010 06:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by txomisc (Post 26884164)
Have never been particularly impressed with Roman. Granted I only saw a handful of games a few years ago but he didnt really stand out. Losing a year of development doesnt just hurt him from a development standpoint, but from a "we havent seen him do anything so why should we vote him this high" type situation.

Roman also stands the risk of turning into Lindgren mark 2, although his greater commitment to defense will always make him a more viable candidate for advancement. The Stars really need either him to make it or the Benn experiment to work, because otherwise it's going to be awfully barren down the middle for quite some time. Roman also is very different kind of center than both Benn and Wandell and that emphasis on playmaking would be a welcome balancing force on the roster eventually.

Going down to the wire here with Bachman and Vincour. 30+ votes are probably going to be required to determine a winner.

BigG44 07-13-2010 09:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Starsdude (Post 26883525)
Its cool I was just curious about Mckenzie wondering if someone saw something I did not the few Ohio games I saw.

McKenzie had an immediate impact with Miami. The early games I watched, Smith was a bottom six forward (like Brunnstrom, I don't think he'll ever be successful in that role). McKenzie was always in front of the net, contributing on offense, the most aggressive forward on the team, and he was active in the defensive zone.

As the season moved on, McKenzie remained on the top line (actually playing with Miami's best player), but he and the line started to struggle. On the other hand, Reilly Smith moved up to the "second line", but they were outscoring the top line (McKenzie's line). In later games I watched, you could tell Smith oozes skill. The guy can dangle and make plays that result in goals, scoring chances, or drawing a call.

McKenzie's fast start and weak finish with Smith’s slow start and strong finish ended up with both players finishing with similar points. Overall, both had better freshman seasons than I would have imagined. That Miami team was deep and returned quite a few players from a run to the National Championship game. It speaks volumes about Dallas’ prospects that they captured Top 6 roles and PP time on this team.

For my money, McKenzie has an easier path to the NHL. He has the potential to play on any line. If he can't find his scoring touch in the NHL, he can be a great banger in the bottom six. Reilly is a Top 6 or bust prospect right now. Miami is a great team, and they could turn him into a two-way forward. That's not the case right now, and they really need to bulk that guy up.

As far as Guptil is concerned, his scouting reports read like a mix of Curtis McKenzie and Reilly Smith. He's big, but he can get stronger. He's skilled, but he's willing to bang bodies. One Dallas scout said he had no flaws, but I did see another scout that said he tends to float. Guptil is a big time goal scorer in a weak league, just like Benn was. It would be awesome if he could translate that to pro success, but success in Tier II Canadian hockey doesn't always translate. Benn was a special player. Guptil hasn't proven anything yet.

It sucks he’ll play the season in the USHL because I won’t get to see him play. If you subscribe to McKeen’s though, they cover the USHL more than any other scouting service. They’ll probably have at least 2 or 3 reports on him throughout the season. Fortunately, playing for Michigan the following year, several of his games could end up on Fox College Sports, Big 10, ESPN U, NHL Network, or CBS Sports. Minnesota gets the best coverage of any college it seems. I think I watched part of 15 or 20 games for the Gophers last year.

Starsdude 07-13-2010 10:00 AM

Thanks BigG-I got U-verse and having all the Fox channels as well as ESPNU was great. caught a few Ohio games. The Sioux were on a ton as well but no Stars this season. Watched a few Min games but given that Sachetti was basically an afterthought kinda just flipped channels. Of the d prospects, bergin looked real good during RPIs suprising run. hope he can stay healthy.

I also thought Reilly was real interesting , again Mckenzie to me was an afterthought who did not seem to show much offense when I watched him as checking got tighter down the stretch. Is Winkler really even a prospect, he was invisible to me and the CC game I saw he got maybe 6 shifts. Hope Guptill is not Winkler v2.

To see the east teams , it was more difficult so did not see as much Chaisson or A. Smith as i would like. Anyone have any thoughts on backman who seems like a small AHL type whose game may not translate to the bigs

DallasFan121 07-13-2010 10:58 AM

Where is King in this list?
 
He has to be higher than Guptill and Vincour based on the Prospects Camp viewing

BigG44 07-13-2010 11:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DallasFan121 (Post 26895697)
He has to be higher than Guptill and Vincour based on the Prospects Camp viewing

Tristan King???

You said it yourself ..... Prospects Camp viewing.

That camp is his bread and butter. However, he's weak defensively, and he plays soft. Les Jackson said he has NHL offensive skills, but he has a long way to go before he ever sniffs the NHL. He needs significant work in every other aspect of his game.

IMO, King will struggle next year in the AHL just like Sergei Korostin did. They both need quite a bit of time in the minors to develop. King is one of Dallas' several long term projects.

Chad_ 07-13-2010 12:21 PM

King is also two years older than Guptil. Based upon where King has played, irrespective of age differences, he's also pretty far ahead in the development curve than Guptil. but that doesn't mean he's a better prospect; he's certainly not.

DallasFan121 07-13-2010 05:02 PM

Interesting
 
Why does the organization have King rated higher than Guptill and Vincour ? Maybe you know something that the Stars organization doesn't? This is from overheard conversations at the DPC recently BTW.

Chad_ 07-13-2010 05:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DallasFan121 (Post 26901979)
Why does the organization have King rated higher than Guptill and Vincour ? Maybe you know something that the Stars organization doesn't? This is from overheard conversations at the DPC recently BTW.

King is further along in his development than Guptil. Guptil is at least three years away, while King will be in Austin this year with a possible call-up. In terms of a higher ceiling irrespective of age, Guptil is a better prospect than King and I highly doubt any Stars scout would say such a thing. Guptil is very raw, but has some very good tools to work with.

glovesave_35 07-13-2010 06:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ________ (Post 26884172)
It depends on how your voting if it's pure upside, closest to NHL ready or a mix of both.

For me it's a mixture of the two. Basically, I see Roman as a Ribeiro starter kit with a better shot. It's entirely possible I'm overrating Roman, but when I've seen him he's stuck out to me in a positive way similar to how Benn did. I see at worst an NHL player, at best a significant point producer.

BigG44 07-13-2010 07:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DallasFan121 (Post 26901979)
Why does the organization have King rated higher than Guptill and Vincour ? Maybe you know something that the Stars organization doesn't? This is from overheard conversations at the DPC recently BTW.

Unverifiable conversations or quotes from the organization?

I'll consider the professional scout employed by the Stars who said Guptill didn't have a major flaw in his game, and Les Jackson saying King has significant development to accomplish in the AHL before ever challenging to make the NHL.

piqued 07-13-2010 07:33 PM

OK, I'm calling it. I've decided to award the #5 spot to King. Thanks for voting, but that was before we had the overheard conversation.

#6 should be up shortly.

Chad_ 07-13-2010 07:42 PM

Hey, maybe it's obvious to everyone else, but since voting is public and you can see who voted for whom before you vote, how to access that feature after you've voted? After I've voted, it just shows the overall results without the detail.

piqued 07-13-2010 07:44 PM

Click on the numbers.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:46 PM.

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com, A property of CraveOnline, a division of AtomicOnline LLC ©2009 CraveOnline Media, LLC. All Rights Reserved.