HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Western Conference > Central Division > Nashville Predators
Notices

HF Article Organization Rankings 20-11

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
09-28-2004, 11:46 PM
  #1
Joe T Choker
Roll Wide Roll
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Country: Italy
Posts: 23,190
vCash: 500
HF Article Organization Rankings 20-11

http://www.hockeysfuture.com/article.php?sid=7223

Joe T Choker is offline  
Old
09-29-2004, 12:26 AM
  #2
barrytrotzsneck
Retired Global Mod
 
barrytrotzsneck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Nashville, TN
Country: United States
Posts: 31,022
vCash: 500
this is starting to look as flawed as last year. somehow, minnesota, edmonton and anaheim are going to be top 10...and i just don't see that. shrug, oh well. at least we're improving from FOURTEEN

__________________
www.thepredatorial.com

barrytrotzsneck is offline  
Old
09-29-2004, 12:35 AM
  #3
thestonedkoala
Everyone! PANIC!
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 18,268
vCash: 500
We added Voloshenko, Sprunger to our group...Rizk is having a very strong outing this year and we already had strong depth at center with Wallin, O'Sullivan, Koivu, and Courchaine...

Add in the strong seasons of Irmen and we still have Foy, that's a lot of good depth at the forward position with some really big surprises.

Lots of high risk, high reward prospects...

And then add in Thelen and Burns on the blueline with Bolduc breaking out and Misharin having a good season last year with Heid, Michalek, Stoner, Reitz, and Stokes rounding them out and that's some good depth and some good players there.

Only problem I really see is goaltending depth...

thestonedkoala is offline  
Old
09-29-2004, 12:43 AM
  #4
barrytrotzsneck
Retired Global Mod
 
barrytrotzsneck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Nashville, TN
Country: United States
Posts: 31,022
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DoobieDoobieDo
We added Voloshenko, Sprunger to our group...Rizk is having a very strong outing this year and we already had strong depth at center with Wallin, O'Sullivan, Koivu, and Courchaine...

Add in the strong seasons of Irmen and we still have Foy, that's a lot of good depth at the forward position with some really big surprises.

Lots of high risk, high reward prospects...

And then add in Thelen and Burns on the blueline with Bolduc breaking out and Misharin having a good season last year with Heid, Michalek, Stoner, Reitz, and Stokes rounding them out and that's some good depth and some good players there.

Only problem I really see is goaltending depth...
the problem is...outside thelen, o'sullivan...and MAYBE koivu...most of those are the types of prospects that every team has a few of...guys that look pretty decent, but are hardly "sure things."

barrytrotzsneck is offline  
Old
09-29-2004, 12:44 AM
  #5
Enoch
This is my boomstick
 
Enoch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Chattanooga TN
Country: United States
Posts: 12,485
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by nomorekids
this is starting to look as flawed as last year. somehow, minnesota, edmonton and anaheim are going to be top 10...and i just don't see that. shrug, oh well. at least we're improving from FOURTEEN
Depends - Minnesota still has Koivu, Burns, O'Sullivan whose stock has sky-rocketed, as well as several good players they drafted this year - Voloshenko and Thelen. I think they can be considered top 10...its just a matter of perspective.

I'm not sure about Edmonton either, but two first round picks this year along with Pouilot from last years draft and the players they acquired via trades this year Gilbert (Huge underrated dman) and Woywitika....not to mention Deslauriers is decent depth in all areas....and pretty high-end talent at that. I like them in the top 10, but not that high...

Anaheim is a head-scratcher, but one has to assume that the panel really liked Getzlaf and Bryzgalof b/c otherwise there are just not that many top-end prospects (Smid and Perry is about it).

Overall, though, I like this years list. The write ups are better. Some teams like New Jersey have been bumped down significantly (their ranking at no. 4 last year was an absolute joke), and as long as Montreal doesn't claim no. 1 overall again...then I will accept this list as the best one in awhile. Its better than last year, at the least, and although I would have likely flip flopped Florida and Anaheim...its like I said....just a matter of perspective.

Oh and - Nashville got into the top 10 where they belonged! Now if we can just make sure they aren't no. 10!

__________________
- Enoch -
Enoch is offline  
Old
09-29-2004, 12:50 AM
  #6
thestonedkoala
Everyone! PANIC!
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 18,268
vCash: 500
I agree with Enoch, matter of prespective...

O'Sullivan, Foy, Irmen, Courchaine, Wallin, Koivu, Voloshenko all could be very good top six wingers/centers and if they are developed right Sprunger and Rizk could join them. I don't know much about the later round draft guys.

Courchaine might get his boost from Brule and Bolduc might get his boost from Bolduc but...

Thelen, Burns are good top 4 defensemen, Bolduc might turn out to be a steal in the 9th round of the 2003 draft if he continues progressing the way he does, Misharin looked good as I said, Stoner is a Mitchell type as is Stokes...

I'm really happy with the prospects Minnesota got.

thestonedkoala is offline  
Old
09-29-2004, 10:19 AM
  #7
SmokeyClause
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Miami, FL
Country: Cuba
Posts: 9,999
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to SmokeyClause
They've really revamped this list. I'm not sure they went off of last years much at all. It's funny, we have the best draft in our history and drop several spots. Now we have a relatively weak draft and gain some spots. I think they just started fresh and redid it.

SmokeyClause is offline  
Old
09-29-2004, 10:23 AM
  #8
Joe T Choker
Roll Wide Roll
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Country: Italy
Posts: 23,190
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SmokeyClause
They've really revamped this list. I'm not sure they went off of last years much at all. It's funny, we have the best draft in our history and drop several spots. Now we have a relatively weak draft and gain some spots. I think they just started fresh and redid it.
I think they wanted to wait and see how all prospects drafted from the previous year performed...and with two of our canadian boys qbing their teams offense to the Memorial Cup will almost do that 9 times out of 10 plus Suter, Upshall, Shishkanov, etc, etc, etc...

Joe T Choker is offline  
Old
09-29-2004, 10:25 AM
  #9
SmokeyClause
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Miami, FL
Country: Cuba
Posts: 9,999
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to SmokeyClause
Quote:
Originally Posted by Seven_Nation_Army
I think they wanted to wait and see how all prospects drafted from the previous year performed...and with two of our canadian boys qbing their teams offense to the Memorial Cup will almost do that 9 times out of 10 plus Suter, Upshall, Shishkanov, etc, etc, etc...
I'd buy that if all the other teams with great drafts didn't move up considerably.

SmokeyClause is offline  
Old
09-29-2004, 10:41 AM
  #10
Hossa
Registered User
 
Hossa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Abroad
Posts: 9,220
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SmokeyClause
They've really revamped this list. I'm not sure they went off of last years much at all. It's funny, we have the best draft in our history and drop several spots. Now we have a relatively weak draft and gain some spots. I think they just started fresh and redid it.
The group is different each year, and it is not done as a comparison to the previous list. Each list is independent from the last for a number of reasons. One great reason is that this year, the criteria is difference because over the summer, we re-invented what is an eligible prospect. That may not have impacted the Predators, but if nothing else, it means that the last list had little direct bearing on this list.

Glad to hear that generally the feedback is good. It's actually quite amazing, and the general reaction has been about as good as I could have expected as a member of the committee.

Hossa is offline  
Old
09-29-2004, 11:33 AM
  #11
Enoch
This is my boomstick
 
Enoch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Chattanooga TN
Country: United States
Posts: 12,485
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SmokeyClause
I'd buy that if all the other teams with great drafts didn't move up considerably.
Exactly - If they were to wait a year...the NY Rangers have no buisness being in the top 10 .

Enoch is offline  
Old
09-29-2004, 11:40 AM
  #12
SmokeyClause
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Miami, FL
Country: Cuba
Posts: 9,999
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to SmokeyClause
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hossa
The group is different each year, and it is not done as a comparison to the previous list. Each list is independent from the last for a number of reasons. One great reason is that this year, the criteria is difference because over the summer, we re-invented what is an eligible prospect. That may not have impacted the Predators, but if nothing else, it means that the last list had little direct bearing on this list.

Glad to hear that generally the feedback is good. It's actually quite amazing, and the general reaction has been about as good as I could have expected as a member of the committee.
I figured it was independent of last years. Hey, I can't complain. We are top 10.

SmokeyClause is offline  
Old
09-29-2004, 12:51 PM
  #13
saskhab
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Saskatoon
Posts: 994
vCash: 500
I like Minnesota's group, and Josh Harding is probably the most underrated prospect in the NHL. What more does a guy have to do to get top prospect consideration...

Anaheim has a great group, though Lupul apparently doesn't qualify anymore... Bryzgalov, Getzlaf, Perry, Smid, and a good group of almost made it d-men like Popovic, Foster, and Malec.

This year's top 10 looks like it belongs there. The Caps should be #1.

saskhab is offline  
Old
09-29-2004, 01:00 PM
  #14
Joe T Choker
Roll Wide Roll
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Country: Italy
Posts: 23,190
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by saskhab
This year's top 10 looks like it belongs there. The Caps should be #1.
I think every non-homeristic Habs fan can agree with that statement...the Caps are absolutely SET for the future

Joe T Choker is offline  
Old
09-29-2004, 01:03 PM
  #15
saskhab
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Saskatoon
Posts: 994
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Seven_Nation_Army
I think every non-homeristic Habs fan can agree with that statement...the Caps are absolutely SET for the future
I think, at best, the Habs should be #5, but probably lower. We weren't a #1 last year, but the Oilers weren't a #2 either.

saskhab is offline  
Closed Thread

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:36 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2014 All Rights Reserved.