Thread: Prospect Info: Top 20 Flyers Prospects, #4
View Single Post
Old
07-21-2013, 12:05 AM
  #35
Damaged Goods
Registered User
 
Damaged Goods's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Philadelphia
Country: United States
Posts: 2,027
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CS View Post
I agree, but how can someone like Laughton be a bluechip prospect then when his potential isn't any higher than Gostisbehere's?
Laughton is a better player, for starters.

My starting point for a prospect is a young hockey player who compares highly favorably to his peers. Laughton is arguably NHL-ready even though he just turned 19 (and is one of only 5 players from his draft year to have already played in the NHL). Ghost, at age 20, is not considered close to NHL-ready and has no credentials that I am aware of that put him amongst the top handful of players born in 1993. My basic premise is that most of the best players born in a given year will continue to be the best players born in that year as they age. Then, after enough development, your peers become NHL veterans, rather than other prospects. The notable players who deviate from this pattern are the busts and the late-bloomers. Unfortunately the former are more common than the latter.


Quote:
Originally Posted by CS View Post
Gostisbehere has done nothing to persuade you that he'll start to regress or that he will stagnate.
I would say that it's up to Gostisbehere to show that he's substantially deviated from the development path that made him a 3rd round pick just a year ago. It'll take more of a sustained track record before I am convinced he is this kind of rare bird. If you say that there are roughly 30 blue-chippers born in a given year, that means Ghost has already jumped close to 50 prospects from the 2012 draft based on one strong season of college play.


Quote:
Originally Posted by CS View Post
Another thing to point out, at this point Gustafsson still hasn't completed the number of necessary games to be a true "non-prospect" even though he really isn't one anymore. Do you consider him a bluechip?
No. He's never compared that favorably to players the same age as him, but by the same token he has done well to start holding down a spot in the NHL by the age of 24. And I would consider Ghost much closer to Gus at age 20 than he is to Laughton at 19.


Quote:
Originally Posted by CS View Post
How do you define a bluechip? Their potential to be a top line forward or a top pairing defenseman
You have to be at least a top-50 prospect, for starters. I would say top-50 is at the liberal end. 30-40 is probably a better number. Blue chip denotes extremely high relative value. That value comes from standing high above your peers.

Damaged Goods is offline   Reply With Quote