HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Western Conference > Pacific Division > Los Angeles Kings
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

Hockey's Future Top 50 prospects, Fall 2010, 1-10

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
10-04-2010, 12:19 PM
  #1
Prince
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 499
vCash: 500
Hockey's Future Top 50 prospects, Fall 2010, 1-10

http://www.hockeysfuture.com/article...s_fall2010110/

Bernier @ 5 & Schenn @ 7 the only Kings in the top 50.

Prince is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-04-2010, 12:31 PM
  #2
Telos
Moderator
In Dean We Trust
 
Telos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Reno, NV
Country: United States
Posts: 26,692
vCash: 424
Send a message via ICQ to Telos Send a message via AIM to Telos Send a message via MSN to Telos Send a message via Yahoo to Telos
Well, if you are going to have two players in the top 50, it might as well be the top 10 Good stuff.

__________________

“This is for you Kings fans wherever you may be. All the frustration and disappointment of the past is gone. The 45 year drought is over. The Los Angeles Kings are indeed the Kings of the National Hockey League. They are the 2012 Stanley Cup Champions!” - Bob Miller
Telos is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-04-2010, 12:55 PM
  #3
Capn Brown
Registered User
 
Capn Brown's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 3,493
vCash: 500
So, wait a minute.....


Loktionov, Clifford, and Hickey aren't good enough for the NHL's Top-50 prospects? Hmmmm..................

Capn Brown is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-04-2010, 01:34 PM
  #4
Tadite
Registered User
 
Tadite's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Rhode Island
Country: United States
Posts: 4,793
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Capn Brown View Post
So, wait a minute.....


Loktionov, Clifford, and Hickey aren't good enough for the NHL's Top-50 prospects? Hmmmm..................


Loktionov should have been easily with Clifford getting a outside chance.

Think this is just round bias. If Loki had been taken way up in the 2nd, like he could have if he wasn't Russian, then he would have been ranked top-50.

Tadite is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-04-2010, 01:42 PM
  #5
Telos
Moderator
In Dean We Trust
 
Telos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Reno, NV
Country: United States
Posts: 26,692
vCash: 424
Send a message via ICQ to Telos Send a message via AIM to Telos Send a message via MSN to Telos Send a message via Yahoo to Telos
Hickey and Clifford wouldn't make it. Hickey has fallen a bit and Clifford doesn't have the skillset that grabs the attention of top prospect pools. Loktionov would, but he is still under the radar. Either way, it isn't a huge deal. Our primary guys are on there and the rest will continue to develop.

Telos is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-04-2010, 03:09 PM
  #6
JMFJ 3
Registered User
 
JMFJ 3's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Country: French Polynesia
Posts: 4,770
vCash: 500
Forbort will be on that list soon...

JMFJ 3 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-04-2010, 03:22 PM
  #7
outofrange
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 740
vCash: 500
Lokti isn't getting love because he was a late pick. We've got such a gem.

outofrange is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-04-2010, 03:47 PM
  #8
redcard
Registered User
 
redcard's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 4,569
vCash: 500
There's 30 teams in the NHL guys, 30 teams with prospects, 30 first round picks a year. Having two in the top 50 is already more than most teams, HF is going to rank the recent 1st round picks of other teams the last two years over our 5th round pick. It shouldn't be a surprise and it doesn't mean much.

What this shows us is that our top 2 prospects are better than every other teams top 2 prospects. We shouldn't be upset that our 3-5 best prospects aren't listed ahead of other teams top 2.

redcard is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-04-2010, 05:15 PM
  #9
dabeechman
Registered User
 
dabeechman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 4,749
vCash: 500
It's HF's top 50 prospects. Not Top first and second rounds picks.

These are some of the worst ranking I have ever seen from HF. Makes it hard to take them seriously at this point.

dabeechman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-04-2010, 06:00 PM
  #10
tigermask48
Maniacal Laugh
 
tigermask48's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: R'Lyeh, Antarctica
Country: Antarctica
Posts: 2,948
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by dabeechman View Post
It's HF's top 50 prospects. Not Top first and second rounds picks.

These are some of the worst ranking I have ever seen from HF. Makes it hard to take them seriously at this point.
Exactly, you can't put too much stock into a list when the the Florida Panthers just put the #48 best prospect in the world on waivers... Meanwhile the Kings #4 and #8 best prospects may have just made the team... They're a good gauge of popularity but really not much else, certainly nothing to get upset about.

tigermask48 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-04-2010, 06:20 PM
  #11
Josh Deitell
Hockey's Future Staff
 
Josh Deitell's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Boston
Country: United States
Posts: 3,212
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by tigermask48 View Post
Exactly, you can't put too much stock into a list when the the Florida Panthers just put the #48 best prospect in the world on waivers... Meanwhile the Kings #4 and #8 best prospects may have just made the team... They're a good gauge of popularity but really not much else, certainly nothing to get upset about.
Hey, we're not the only ones

http://hfboards.com/showthread.php?p=26865082

ESPN projections: 70 games, 28 goals, 20 assists
http://games.espn.go.com/fhl/tools/p...3&proTeamId=26

etc.

Josh Deitell is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-04-2010, 07:41 PM
  #12
William H Bonney
Registered User
 
William H Bonney's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Sierra Nevada
Country: United States
Posts: 19,634
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Capn Brown View Post
So, wait a minute.....


Loktionov, Clifford, and Hickey aren't good enough for the NHL's Top-50 prospects? Hmmmm..................
It's payback for them putting Moller in the Top 10 a year or so back.

In reality, it's what redcard said: there's 30 teams with 60/90 recent first round picks and a lot of those teams have their under the radar prospects like Loktionov too. Not that I usually understand or even agree with about half their list every year, there's a lot of prospects to rank.

__________________
"I have been complimented many times and they always embarrass me; I always feel that they have not said enough." - Mark Twain.
William H Bonney is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-04-2010, 09:32 PM
  #13
avs1986
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 265
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JMFJ 3 View Post
Forbort will be on that list soon...
Agreed. Man, that D is looking scary.

avs1986 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-04-2010, 09:39 PM
  #14
Capn Brown
Registered User
 
Capn Brown's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 3,493
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by redcard View Post
There's 30 teams in the NHL guys, 30 teams with prospects, 30 first round picks a year. Having two in the top 50 is already more than most teams, HF is going to rank the recent 1st round picks of other teams the last two years over our 5th round pick. It shouldn't be a surprise and it doesn't mean much.

What this shows us is that our top 2 prospects are better than every other teams top 2 prospects. We shouldn't be upset that our 3-5 best prospects aren't listed ahead of other teams top 2.

Yeah, but the point is, there's plenty of bias. Several examples could be pointed out, but here's just one: Nick Bjugstad (sp). Same draft as Forbort, but taken (as well as ranked by scouts) 6-7 spots lower than Forbort. So why does Bjugstad get included while Forbort does not? I'm just sayin', there's bias, that's all.

Capn Brown is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-04-2010, 10:00 PM
  #15
Telos
Moderator
In Dean We Trust
 
Telos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Reno, NV
Country: United States
Posts: 26,692
vCash: 424
Send a message via ICQ to Telos Send a message via AIM to Telos Send a message via MSN to Telos Send a message via Yahoo to Telos
Quote:
Originally Posted by Capn Brown View Post
Yeah, but the point is, there's plenty of bias. Several examples could be pointed out, but here's just one: Nick Bjugstad (sp). Same draft as Forbort, but taken (as well as ranked by scouts) 6-7 spots lower than Forbort. So why does Bjugstad get included while Forbort does not? I'm just sayin', there's bias, that's all.
I dunno, that sort of proves to me that there isn't bias and that draft position doesn't matter when considering where a player is ranked in their ability, potential, and development

Forbort is a project prospect and a long ways off from making an impact in the NHL. It doesn't surprise me one bit that he is not in the top 50, he isn't expected to make it to the NHL for several seasons.

Telos is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-04-2010, 10:05 PM
  #16
Josh Deitell
Hockey's Future Staff
 
Josh Deitell's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Boston
Country: United States
Posts: 3,212
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Capn Brown View Post
Yeah, but the point is, there's plenty of bias. Several examples could be pointed out, but here's just one: Nick Bjugstad (sp). Same draft as Forbort, but taken (as well as ranked by scouts) 6-7 spots lower than Forbort. So why does Bjugstad get included while Forbort does not? I'm just sayin', there's bias, that's all.
Of course there's bias The cumulative opinion of the particular people who put this list together thought that Bjugstad had a higher upside and is more likely to reach it than Bjugstad. That's all there is to it. It's the collective opinion of a few people, all of whom have their own individual preferences and biases. When we did our preliminary rankings, there were people that had certain players ranked 15-20 spots away from others. I think if you looked at draft boards for individual NHL teams, you'd probably find the same phenomenon.

Josh Deitell is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-04-2010, 10:14 PM
  #17
Telos
Moderator
In Dean We Trust
 
Telos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Reno, NV
Country: United States
Posts: 26,692
vCash: 424
Send a message via ICQ to Telos Send a message via AIM to Telos Send a message via MSN to Telos Send a message via Yahoo to Telos
Quote:
Originally Posted by Josh Deitell View Post
Of course there's bias The cumulative opinion of the particular people who put this list together thought that Bjugstad had a higher upside and is more likely to reach it than Bjugstad. That's all there is to it. It's the collective opinion of a few people, all of whom have their own individual preferences and biases. When we did our preliminary rankings, there were people that had certain players ranked 15-20 spots away from others. I think if you looked at draft boards for individual NHL teams, you'd probably find the same phenomenon.
That too

Telos 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 11:11 PM.

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.