On the top 50 prospects
View Single Post
04-12-2004, 11:52 AM
Join Date: Jun 2002
Originally Posted by
For starters the HF people who made this list are morons. They have small town chips on their shoulders and hate NY for the most part. The Ranger farm system has been underrated for over 2 years now because idiot Sather and his coach refused to play the kids. Not because they didn't have kids that could play.
Seeing names like Igor Grigorenko is laughable. They have him 7th and he shouldn't even be on the list. Either should Hudler. If they weren't Wing prospects they wouldn't make the list at all. They are assuming because it's the Wings that they are top prospects. Grigorenko hasn't done crap since his accident and Hudler is lazy and small.
Kesler 23 is absurd. He's nothing more then a good role player like Murray will be.
Carlo Colaiacovo at 31 is amusing. He isn't close to being in the top 50. Kondratiev was by far the best defense prospect on Toronto according to a lot of Leaf fans. One guy said the only reason this guy got so much hype was because he piled up points on the PP in juniors due to Boyes and Corey Pecker. I think he is nothing more then a 6th defenseman.
Ballard. That one is so stupid it's mind boggling. He will never be a good NHL defenseman.
Bernier is a pile of crap compared to Jessiman. He's lazy and stupid.
Morons at HF forget to realize that the Rangers have drafted exactly the type of players the past 3 years that win games on the NHL level. Players like Parise are small and weak. Yet Parise isn't so tiny like St. Louis and Fleury where they can duck under everything and almost never get hit. He will be destroyed rather easily in physical games.
A guy like Jessiman plays with total losers on his team. He's mugged each night now and he's only learning how to condition himself. He will be 6'5, 230-240 in a year and then will be a major force on the ice. Liffiton, Potter, Guenin, Taylor and Beranka are all the exact type of defenseman that win games for you on the NHL level. They are tough, mean, defenseman who don't take stupid penalties and can skate well for big guys so they match up vs. speed teams. A guy like Beranka should be a top 25 prospect. He comes over in his first year and plays a ton for a expansion WHL team which wins the division and now is about to advance again in the playoffs. He's a legit, big time, defense prospect.
It's a classic example of the stupidity of people who rate players. They let their anti New York mentality cloud their judgement.
Wow, glad to see the $15 bucks I spent to watch Hartford and Worcester last week went to good use. I can't defend each individual selection on the top 50 because I wasn't a part of the rating team, but since you have a couple of things that I can respond to, I will try.
1. No one on the ratings team has any personal bias to a team when they make the rankings. The format for rankings is a compilation of HF Staff that all rank the players, then the rankings get put into a spreadsheet and then the list gets looked over again by all of the Staff involved in the process and some adjustments are made. Regardless of who I cheer for when I am home alone in front of my TV, that means nothing when I compare Hugh Jessiman to Tomas Vanek.
2. Igor Grigorenko. This again is personal opinion, but I wouldn't have him that high on my personal list. But as an NFL aside, the rule is that a player doesn't lose his position to injury. That is how I think that most feel.(Including the morons
in the NHL executive who voted to make The Hockey News Future Watch that rank him 13th) also the NHL executives also had Hudler at 23rd, Kesler at 14th, Colaiacovo at 18th, and of course this valued poll of NHL executives also had Zach Parise at 5th.
Not to say that I agree with all of the rankings. I am not that big on Bernier myself. But an overall assessment of the rankings based on where you see your own players is shortsighted and doesn't take into account everything that the HF Staff has to look at when it comes to a ranking like this. Projecting prospects is not an exact science or Daigle wouldn't have been a first overall pick, Daniel Tkazcuk wouldn't have been a top 10 pick and of course Daniel Alfredsson wouldn't have been a 6th rounder. As an overall body of work, the HF Top 50 was solid and in many cases not too dissimilar from the one that the NHL's Top executives made for THN.
It is fine to disagree with the list, but I wouldn't go so far as to call the HF Staff that made the effort morons, especially because many NHL executives mirror their opinions.
View Public Profile
Visit Slats432's homepage!
Find More Posts by Slats432