HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Western Conference > Central Division > Colorado Avalanche
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

Avs Organization #22 in HF Rankings

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
04-17-2010, 08:32 PM
  #1
Bonzai12
Registered User
 
Bonzai12's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Denver CO
Country: United States
Posts: 7,101
vCash: 500
Send a message via Yahoo to Bonzai12
Avs Organization #22 in HF Rankings

Here's the details:

http://www.hockeysfuture.com/article...pring20102130/

"Strengths: Defense is the strong point of the Avalanche pool with five of their top seven prospects on the blue line. There are some intriguing prospects at center. Weaknesses: The wings lack both quality and quantity. Overall, many players at the top of the depth charts are not ready for the NHL, despite the need to rebuilld. The Avalanche have yet to see a payoff after trying to shore up goaltending depth. There have been several misses in this department. Top five prospects: 1. Kevin Shattenkirk, D, 2. Stefan Elliott, D, 3. Ryan Stoa, C, 4. Colby Cohen, D, 5. Tyson Barrie, D. Lost to graduation: Matt Duchene, C, Ryan O’Reilly, C, T.J. Galiardi, C, Chris Stewart, RW."


Was kind of expecting this after so many guys that would have made up our young "depth" are on the current roster. We're going to need another 2-3 good drafts to fill the cupboards.

Bonzai12 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-17-2010, 08:53 PM
  #2
SoundwaveIsCharisma
Moderator
 
SoundwaveIsCharisma's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Screw You Blaster
Country: Canada
Posts: 22,858
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to SoundwaveIsCharisma
Quote:
Originally Posted by scott76 View Post
Here's the details:

http://www.hockeysfuture.com/article...pring20102130/

"Strengths: Defense is the strong point of the Avalanche pool with five of their top seven prospects on the blue line. There are some intriguing prospects at center. Weaknesses: The wings lack both quality and quantity. Overall, many players at the top of the depth charts are not ready for the NHL, despite the need to rebuilld. The Avalanche have yet to see a payoff after trying to shore up goaltending depth. There have been several misses in this department. Top five prospects: 1. Kevin Shattenkirk, D, 2. Stefan Elliott, D, 3. Ryan Stoa, C, 4. Colby Cohen, D, 5. Tyson Barrie, D. Lost to graduation: Matt Duchene, C, Ryan O’Reilly, C, T.J. Galiardi, C, Chris Stewart, RW."


Was kind of expecting this after so many guys that would have made up our young "depth" are on the current roster. We're going to need another 2-3 good drafts to fill the cupboards.
We've been producing quality NHLers for a while and will probably never move that far up the rankings. It's like everyone is surprised we even have prospects. Seriously, Stastny came with no hype, Stewart with very little noise, Galiardi - yea, like anyone aside from this team knew him. Not to mention guys like Jones and Yip, who are showing (or have shown) they could be really good players.

Heck, Shattenkirk could turn out to be the best defensemen from his draft class and people will still pay very little attention to him.

SoundwaveIsCharisma is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-17-2010, 08:58 PM
  #3
sonny side up
Registered User
 
sonny side up's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: the dark room
Country: United States
Posts: 2,541
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ClericMercenaryAgent View Post
We've been producing quality NHLers for a while and will probably never move that far up the rankings. It's like everyone is surprised we even have prospects. Seriously, Stastny came with no hype, Stewart with very little noise, Galiardi - yea, like anyone aside from this team knew him. Not to mention guys like Jones and Yip, who are showing (or have shown) they could be really good players.

Heck, Shattenkirk could turn out to be the best defensemen from his draft class and people will still pay very little attention to him.
Personally, I would like to keep it that way. I love it when my teams fly under the radar. I hate it when teams are over hyped and then crash and burn miserably (the Lightning)

sonny side up is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-17-2010, 09:09 PM
  #4
PeterTheGreat
Registered User
 
PeterTheGreat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 7,078
vCash: 500
Didn't THN rank us in the top 10 or something?

Interesting to see such a disparity.

Obviously the graduation of our prospects a little earlier than usual hurts us in the rankings.

If we had Duchene, O'Reilly, Galiardi, Wilson and Stewart still as prospects (like they all were before this season), we'd be top 5-10 no doubt when you add them to the base we have now (Shattenkirk, Elliott, Gaunce, Cohen, Stoa, Barrie, Holos).

PeterTheGreat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-17-2010, 09:10 PM
  #5
Stories
Hockey scientist
 
Stories's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Bethesda, MD
Country: United States
Posts: 6,343
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by PeterTheGreat View Post
Didn't THN rank us in the top 10 or something?

Interesting to see such a disparity.

Obviously the graduation of our prospects a little earlier than usual hurts us in the rankings.

If we had Duchene, O'Reilly, Galiardi, Wilson and Stewart still as prospects (like they all were before this season), we'd be top 5-10 no doubt when you add them to the base we have now (Shattenkirk, Elliott, Gaunce, Cohen, Stoa, Barrie, Holos).
I do believe that at the time THN (when we were ranked #3) was still considering guys like Duchene and O'Reilly to be prospects.

Stories is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-17-2010, 09:24 PM
  #6
chewey
dmitri
 
chewey's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Near You!
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,852
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by sonny side up View Post
Personally, I would like to keep it that way. I love it when my teams fly under the radar. I hate it when teams are over hyped and then crash and burn miserably (the Lightning)
All hail cody hodg.. I mean, Stamkos is a bust.

Quote:
Originally Posted by PeterTheGreat View Post
Obviously the graduation of our prospects a little earlier than usual hurts us in the rankings.

If we had Duchene, O'Reilly, Galiardi, Wilson and Stewart still as prospects (like they all were before this season), we'd be top 5-10 no doubt when you add them to the base we have now (Shattenkirk, Elliott, Gaunce, Cohen, Stoa, Barrie, Holos).
Not sure on that part of your comment. Duchene was ranked a top 10 prospect in the offseason but he was lower than Hodgson, Filatov, Bassard and no. 8 in the top 50 prospects I believe [he was relatively low] and no one else other than Shattenkirk was ranked overall on the top 50. This season Shattenkirk isn't even in the top 50 prospects.

Even if we had Duchene and the rest of them, I am sure HF would still rank us around 15 - 20.

chewey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-17-2010, 10:16 PM
  #7
R S
Renegade Stylings
 
R S's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 24,076
vCash: 420
Meh, hockeynews had us way way higher. Really...who cares.

R S is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-17-2010, 10:17 PM
  #8
NHL33*
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: New York
Country: Antarctica
Posts: 7,873
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Asce View Post
This season Shattenkirk isn't even in the top 50 prospects.
Yeah, that really surprised me, but I guess I shouldn't be shocked.

I'm more or less OK with the overall assessment since lots of key players have graduated. We don't know what we have in players like Olver, Tessier, etc., yet so the forwards prospect crop is very unproven. Goaltending is a crap shoot and for all we know Maxwell could be a future NHL starter or Delmas improves and so forth. At least our defensive outlook is very good -- we need a blue line turnover so the timing works out nicely.

NHL33* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-18-2010, 03:29 AM
  #9
Zih
Dater's Gonna Hate
 
Zih's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Colorado
Country: United States
Posts: 2,306
vCash: 133
I like how they try to have it both ways. Saying we have lack good prospects "despite the need to rebuild," yet totally ignoring the fact that we're pulled off the fastest rebuild ever BECAUSE our (graduated) prospects have turned out so well.

Either we're still rebuilding (in which case our prospect depth is good) or we're a good up and coming team in which case we're no longer rebuilding. Instead they took the worst of both worlds.

Overall I'm torn between grading this a and a .

Zih is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-18-2010, 01:21 PM
  #10
chewey
dmitri
 
chewey's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Near You!
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,852
vCash: 500
I feel argumentative lately [mostly cause I am bored] so I am going to pick on ya!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Zih View Post
I like how they try to have it both ways. Saying we have lack good prospects "despite the need to rebuild," yet totally ignoring the fact that we're pulled off the fastest rebuild ever BECAUSE our (graduated) prospects have turned out so well.
You just said it yourself, our “graduated” prospects. The only prospect in the list that is a first round pick is Shattenkirk, while Cohen, Stoa and Elliot were taken with our 2nd round pick. We do have a lack of good prospects. Stoa looks like he’ll be graduating soon himself and Shattenkirk and Elliot would be are only prospects with high potential left. I would argue that Holos is vastly underrated on HF however.

If you go back to before the 09 draft, Stastny would have been our only prospect that would have "turned out so well" and you could also make a case for Stewart at the end of last season and certainly make a case now. After the 09 draft we got Duchene and RoR both of which made the jump into the NHL right away. Duchene was no surprise however, RoR is the first 2nd round pick since Bergeron back in 03 to play right after being drafted. We got lucky that Duchene and RoR turned out the way they did otherwise our prospects that "have turned out so well" would be rather dry.

Quote:
Either we're still rebuilding (in which case our prospect depth is good) or we're a good up and coming team in which case we're no longer rebuilding. Instead they took the worst of both worlds.

Overall I'm torn between grading this a and a .
You do understand why we are ranked #22 right? It its not “if our prospect depth is or was good or not in general”, its “if our current prospect depth is good or not against the rest of the 29 teams in the NHL”.

They count our current prospects being:
Shattenkirk
Elliot
Stoa
Cohen
Barrie
etc.

Sorry to tell you, you could argue about it, but that list isn’t exactly a deep pool of prospects compared to other teams.

chewey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-18-2010, 02:00 PM
  #11
Starrlinx
Registered User
 
Starrlinx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Seattle, WA
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,189
vCash: 500
I'm not sure we got lucky that Duchene turned out the way he did. We got lucky that we had an injury plagued season and got the #3 pick last year but Duchene (from all appearances since I've hardly seen any games) has been everything most expected him to be I would say.

O'Reilly on the other hand is astonishing considering a lot were ripping the pick on draft day

I think the ranking is fine. To me we only have three prospects (excluding Stoa) I feel really good about in Shattenkirk, Elliot, and Barrie. Cohen, Gaunce, Holos, Mercier, Olver, etc...who really knows. So yeah, we have some work to do. This is just the nature of what happens when you rebuild the right way. Your good prospects move up to the big club and you need to continue to replenish them in the draft.

Starrlinx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-18-2010, 02:47 PM
  #12
Hasbro
HFBoards Sponsor
 
Hasbro's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: South Rectangle
Country: Sami
Posts: 30,462
vCash: 500
The Cubbard's Bare!!!!

Hasbro is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-18-2010, 02:52 PM
  #13
Pure
Registered User
 
Pure's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 9,955
vCash: 500
I don't mind these rankings. We usually do not have the prospects with the hype like some other organizations. We generally draft high character guys whose talents are not as obvious but they are much easier to develop. Hence, the Avs and also the Devils, usually not that high up in the rankings but still pump out some very good players.

Pure is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-18-2010, 03:21 PM
  #14
Zih
Dater's Gonna Hate
 
Zih's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Colorado
Country: United States
Posts: 2,306
vCash: 133
Quote:
Originally Posted by Asce View Post
I feel argumentative lately [mostly cause I am bored] so I am going to pick on ya!
I don't care that they graded us 22nd. HF's rankings always been a bit of a joke, so I don't particularly care what they have to say.

I was more picking on their description of us as "needing to rebuild." This year we promoted a ton of our prospect depth, and pretty much everyone that got called up has proved to be NHL worthy and is going to stick around in the NHL for a long, long time. Just take a look at who is already up on the roster ("graduated") that will be here for awhile:

x - Stastny - Stewart
Mueller - Duchene - Jones
Yip - O'Reilly - Galiardi
McLeod - Hendricks - Porter

We're still lacking a true first line left wing (though Galiardi's done admirably in the role, he isn't yet first line material). But other than that, we've got our top 3 centers locked in for the next decade and good young depth at wing. We're hardly in need of rebuilding the forward corps. Not to mention we have Stoa who was progressing well in Lake Erie and should take a spot on Left Wing for next year.

Our real need is good young defensemen, and lo and behold our top prospects are all defensemen! In the next year or two guys like Shattenkirk, Cohen, and Gaunce graduate, and then our defense will be looking pretty good (not elite, but good) with Quincey, Wilson, and Cumiskey already up.

Goaltending depth is an issue. Goaltending prospects are always a crapshoot, which is why so few are taken in the first few rounds of the draft. Thankfully there's a glut of NHL goaltenders out there, meaning we can pick up a goaltender cheaply if we so need.

The main point of what I'm saying is that the rankings make it seem like we're stuck in a Calgary-like hell of having a bad team and terrible prospects. We're the exact opposite. We have a good young forward corps and a crop of very nice defensive prospects coming up to fill the slots as older guys like Foote, Hannan, Salei, and Clark head on out.

Basically, I don't see the point of having a Spring review of prospects. The draft is in June, then you have a review of your previous prospects + whoever you drafted. Between the fall review and the spring review, absolutely nothing has changed prospect-wise unless you happened to pick some up via trades. And once the draft rolls around, our prospect depth will be much better than it is now. That's when I might be concerned about having a bare cubbard.

Zih is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-18-2010, 04:39 PM
  #15
detrude
(╯°□°)╯ ︵ ┻━┻
 
detrude's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Country: Djibouti
Posts: 3,573
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ClericMercenaryAgent View Post
We've been producing quality NHLers for a while and will probably never move that far up the rankings. It's like everyone is surprised we even have prospects. Seriously, Stastny came with no hype, Stewart with very little noise, Galiardi - yea, like anyone aside from this team knew him. Not to mention guys like Jones and Yip, who are showing (or have shown) they could be really good players.

Heck, Shattenkirk could turn out to be the best defensemen from his draft class and people will still pay very little attention to him.
Truth. Unfortunately perception is reality when it comes to these lists and their associated hype, and certain organizations will always be perceived as great (despite actual results) while others will always get overlooked.

detrude is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-18-2010, 04:42 PM
  #16
NWAvsFan
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Washington State
Posts: 2,825
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hasbro View Post
The Cubbard's Bare!!!!
You were out of a job for a couple months there.

NWAvsFan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-18-2010, 05:09 PM
  #17
Freudian
Deja vu again?
 
Freudian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Country: Sweden
Posts: 31,476
vCash: 50
I'd rather have our young players make an impact in the NHL than making a list.

Avs current roster says everything we need to know about Avs scouting, drafting and player development at the moment.

And seeing as how many of our players they (the 'experts') got completely wrong, it is not exactly science.

Freudian is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-18-2010, 05:16 PM
  #18
Hasbro
HFBoards Sponsor
 
Hasbro's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: South Rectangle
Country: Sami
Posts: 30,462
vCash: 500
So much of it is based on 1st round picks and right now we have 1 in the system: Shattenkirk thanks to Cheney and Stewart making the jump. I recall a couple years ago the top 50 had 1 player not taken in the first two rounds (Justin Pogge).

Plenty of us have advocated HF compiling a list or just doing an article of best prospects that weren't first round picks.

One thing I like about NFL draft guides is they actively list sleepers.

Hasbro is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-20-2010, 01:03 AM
  #19
dsheehan73
Registered User
 
dsheehan73's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 213
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zih View Post
Goaltending depth is an issue. Goaltending prospects are always a crapshoot, which is why so few are taken in the first few rounds of the draft. Thankfully there's a glut of NHL goaltenders out there, meaning we can pick up a goaltender cheaply if we so need.
Not sure if you follow the OHL but Maxwell for Kitchner has been putting on a dominant show against the '09 Memorial Cup champs the Windsor Spitifires. Not going to say he's been playing like Anderson but its close, he's faced 45-55 shots a game and won all 3 so far.

May bode well for our goaltending depth.

dsheehan73 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

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 01:58 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.