Thread: Stan-ding Pat
View Single Post
Old
07-28-2012, 11:04 AM
  #14
hockeydoug
Registered User
 
hockeydoug's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Country: United States
Posts: 1,585
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cullksinikers View Post

Look at all the solid prospects we have. It seems like with all the sites that rank prospect pools, we are often around the fifth best prospect pool. We have a lot of solid guys in the system. If you have some good NHL talent already and a lot of good prospects, it seems extremely logical that you'd package two or three of them up and maybe accompany the prospects with a draft pick to try and fill a hole.
I think the prospect pool is full of "High-floor" guys instead of the riskier "high-ceiling" guys. The pool was broke and I think the tried to make moves and picks to put more size and a higher % of some NHL contribution likely among those prospects they picked. My point is I really don't think the prospects do much for almost all gms to improve on a big trade. Few of the prospects will be top 6/ top 4 types and while I think there are a few in the system, hardly any have been identified.

Gms aren't likely to make a major trade with Chicago involving Hawk prospects (with maybe 1 or 2 exceptions), especially within the conference . We wouldn't expect Bowman to either. Right now the value of the prospect pool is to Chicago, not everybody else. Maybe by the midway point of this season some more of the kids will stand out and we'll be better able to see more of the true NHL value of these prospects. I'm guessing it's another year before the system has a decent number of players that other gms actually want.

Based on all the roster activity last year, Chicago isn't even sure how to rank and project all their prospects. They're still too young and will need a little more time to be worth something significant to the rest of the league if they don't have the projected performance ceiling to crack the top line or top pair in my opinion.

hockeydoug is offline   Reply With Quote