HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Metropolitan Division > New York Rangers
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

Hockey Prospectus' Top 10 Rangers prospects

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
08-14-2011, 10:11 PM
  #101
Vito Andolini
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 923
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ColonialsHockey10 View Post
That season, as in after these ranking occurred. And I'm sure Callahan's ranking shot up as well. But that has very little to do with the rankings you posted, in fact it has nothing to do with them at all. Otherwise you would have posted the 2007 ranking, where they likely were neck and neck in the standings. At the time of that ranking, Callahan was asked to play an overage season in the OHL to earn a contract, while Dawes was scoring at an impressive rate in a much better league. Funny you should bring up "potential", as that article clearly labels Callahan's upside as a 3rd liner, while giving a much more glowing report on Dawes. Dawes had better credential and upside then Callahan according to the writer. For that time they were very much in the majority opinion.
You said Dawes was a "flat out better player" than Callahan at that point. Where's your evidence? I think that's your guess based on the fact that Dawes was coming off a good season in the AHL, while Callahan was still in Juniors. That's fine that it's your opinion, but it's not a fact. The fact is that you don't know if Callahan was a better player at that point because they didn't play in the same league...and once they did play in the same league in 06-07 Callahan (the multi dimensional player) outscored Dawes (the one dimensional player) in less games.

The reason I brought up the 06 ranking is simply to show that opinions change. Hagelin stated that it was "stupid" to rank St Croix above Thomas. I disagree. I think it's stupid to write someone's opinion completely off just because it differs with the current consensus.


Quote:
Originally Posted by ColonialsHockey10 View Post
Like I said before, any of these prospects can turn out better then ones ranked further along, everyone knows that. But what if the guy ranked Randy McNaught ahead of Thomas, would you simply say, "oh, that's his opinion", or comment on how ridiculous it is, even if it may one day come true? Calling him incorrect is wrong, you are right, but it doesn't take away from the fact that I don't value this guys opinion higher then any poster here, especially after reading this nonsense.
That's perfectly fair for you to decide not to value his opinion, but I personally don't think his ranking is "ridiculous". The simple reason is that I don't know much about him, nor have I watched St Croix or Thomas with enough regularity to form my own opinion (not just recycled opinions from NYR brass)...so I'm willing to keep my mind open.

Vito Andolini is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-14-2011, 11:53 PM
  #102
ColonialsHockey10
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 10,027
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vito Andolini View Post
You said Dawes was a "flat out better player" than Callahan at that point. Where's your evidence? I think that's your guess based on the fact that Dawes was coming off a good season in the AHL, while Callahan was still in Juniors. That's fine that it's your opinion, but it's not a fact. The fact is that you don't know if Callahan was a better player at that point because they didn't play in the same league...and once they did play in the same league in 06-07 Callahan (the multi dimensional player) outscored Dawes (the one dimensional player) in less games.

The reason I brought up the 06 ranking is simply to show that opinions change. Hagelin stated that it was "stupid" to rank St Croix above Thomas. I disagree. I think it's stupid to write someone's opinion completely off just because it differs with the current consensus.




That's perfectly fair for you to decide not to value his opinion, but I personally don't think his ranking is "ridiculous". The simple reason is that I don't know much about him, nor have I watched St Croix or Thomas with enough regularity to form my own opinion (not just recycled opinions from NYR brass)...so I'm willing to keep my mind open.
Players regress and players improve. I really think it's more then an opinion that Dawes was a better player then Callahan, otherwise Cally would have earned a contract. Then, like Leslie said, Callahan was ranked just as high a year later, and deservingly so.

I guess we'll have to agree to disagree on the rest.

ColonialsHockey10 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-15-2011, 02:09 AM
  #103
Ola
Registered User
 
Ola's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Sweden
Country: Sweden
Posts: 18,720
vCash: 500
I would definitely listen to anyone claiming that St. Croix is better than his draftposition indicate.

But facts are that anyone and everyone knew everything there is to know about this kid, and everyone and anyone passed on this kid for a bunch of rounds, Gordie Clark included.

From the little I've seen of St. Croix, I honestly do not get why everyone passed on him for so long. His top end ability is great and what not. But I've seen very little of him, and its not that hard to guess the number of problems scouts had with him (small, not a great engine, ultra offensiveminded). Its tough to get to the NHL, the game is becoming more about playing good hockey all over the ice as opposed just in the top end, like a player like LeCavalier who is great in the offensive zone but only avg in the neutral zone is not a top 5-10 player in the game anymore while he really should be in his prime now. St. Croix is no Lecavalier.

But with that siad, a bunch of scouts passed on Marc Savard too... I certainly think its going to be interesting to follow him this upcoming season. And when it comes to the ranking, truth to be told, I doubt he had seen much of these kids.

Ola is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-15-2011, 04:07 AM
  #104
Leaf Rocket
Leaf Fan Till I Die
 
Leaf Rocket's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Fredericton, NB
Country: India
Posts: 72,324
vCash: 500
I just read the Hockeyprospectus for you guys and gotta say it's a bit odd that those guys has underrated some of your prospects, especially JT miller, that guy has talent but i don't see him being a third line center.

Leaf Rocket is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-15-2011, 05:56 AM
  #105
ohbaby
Registered User
 
ohbaby's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Country: United States
Posts: 955
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ola View Post
There is a ton of good things you can say about Christian Thomas.

But I do not think people on here has much perspective on him. What's said paints a default picture IMHO.

Here is why. No matter what he is small, physically he is far from say a Callhan, and my bet is that will be the case when he gets older too. He falls into the Dawes cathegory, a tad less stocky but only a tad taller, not weak, but small.

He is also, in lack of better words, from a offensive perspective, a one dimensional sniper.

If you look at his offensive abilities, this kid is clutch and game, but definitely no wonder kid or something like that.

Thats what you have. And how successful are kids like that on avg in the NHL? Thats the question you got to ask yourself. What do we have. What does that result in.

Its hard to answer that question.

No matter how his goals are described, and while some of them comes from distance when he is using his slapper from the point, he is a kid who has to go to work in the dirty areas in the NHL day after day after day. Thats just tough. Its not the same thing as in the OHL.

I love the pick of Thomas. I think he gives you great value for a 2nd round pick. I think his upside might be compared to say a Danny Briere (worse playmaking ability, better attitude). But at the same time, to be realistic, its far from given that he even makes it to the NHL, and if, its probably the most likely scenario that he has like a Prucha/Dawes type of career. We should be optimistic and what not. But I don't agree that there is reason to rank Thomas 3rd on our intern prospect ranking, other kids we have can become just as good and has just as high potential. If not higher.
I'm not sure what a high ranking consists of,... but if he's the only prospect this year to make the team, wouldn't that be a consideration? Being NHL ready?

Maybe I have high hopes for Thomas but they are for valid reasons. His shot is as good as Gabby's and Richards' right now. And while the grind of the NHL affects all rookies, Thomas will not shy away from the dirty areas, much like Cally or Zucc. His speed also will be welcome addition. The praise he gets for his character and intangibles sounds a whole lot like our future Capt Callahan. But I believe the biggest asset he has going to make the NHL is his dad. Steve Thomas was known for coming to play every night. He had a great work ethic and a long career. Worked hard on and off the ice. And it's no doubt, he has taught his son well, to be NHL ready. Add the fact he was here at last years camp which will give him insight on what is expected and needed to make the team, and we just might have a star in the making. After scoring close to 100 goals the last 2 years in the OHL, he has nothing to gain by returning to the juniors. He is determined to make this team.

Last year you could make an argument the Rangers were a team composed mostly of 3rd liners with a few exceptions. If Thomas makes the team, and lets not kid ourselves,... he will need to score in bunches to do so, he will be a breath of fresh air. Most of our call ups of late, have been of the 3rd line grade other than Step. Thomas will need to be a star rookie in order to stay. We have no more room for another 3rd liner on this team. We need a star. And I'm excited Thomas might be just that. I don't see any other prospects with a better chance this upcoming season.


Last edited by ohbaby: 08-15-2011 at 07:25 AM.
ohbaby is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-15-2011, 06:24 AM
  #106
chosen
Registered User
 
chosen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 5,938
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by HagelinForPresident View Post
I am calling you ******** not for your opinion, but for your non-stop replies back to me that make no sense because they are the opposite of what I'm saying. You said I am bashing the Isles prospect pool, which I was doing the exact opposite of, and you brought up my name twice after I told you what it meant already. That is the part that was annoying. Your arguments made no sense because they were based off what you thought of my posts, which were completely wrong.
Person A offers an opinion about prospects.

Person B opines that Person A is a ******** idiot because clearly the opinions he expressed are wrong, while at the same time admitting that this is not a science and is based solely on opinions.

Person C questions how Person B can be so sure of his opinions when he admits there is no science here.

Person B responds that Person C has reading comprehension issues, is ******** and is an idiot.

Person C is now the one who is certain about the lack of intellectual capacities of Person B.

chosen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-15-2011, 07:03 AM
  #107
ohbaby
Registered User
 
ohbaby's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Country: United States
Posts: 955
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ola View Post
I would definitely listen to anyone claiming that St. Croix is better than his draftposition indicate.

But facts are that anyone and everyone knew everything there is to know about this kid, and everyone and anyone passed on this kid for a bunch of rounds, Gordie Clark included.

From the little I've seen of St. Croix, I honestly do not get why everyone passed on him for so long. His top end ability is great and what not. But I've seen very little of him, and its not that hard to guess the number of problems scouts had with him (small, not a great engine, ultra offensiveminded). Its tough to get to the NHL, the game is becoming more about playing good hockey all over the ice as opposed just in the top end, like a player like LeCavalier who is great in the offensive zone but only avg in the neutral zone is not a top 5-10 player in the game anymore while he really should be in his prime now. St. Croix is no Lecavalier.

But with that siad, a bunch of scouts passed on Marc Savard too... I certainly think its going to be interesting to follow him this upcoming season. And when it comes to the ranking, truth to be told, I doubt he had seen much of these kids.
I seem to like disagreeing with you ola! Vinnie is still a force to be reckoned with. Nagging injuries have hampered him the last 2 years, but when it counts, you can bet he is still the go to guy. TB's success in the playoffs wasn't due to Stamkos. Vinnie scored 19 points in 18 playoff games.

Savard will accidentally get bumped by his own teamate in camp causing him to miss the entire season due to his never ending concussions. Sorry.

ohbaby is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-15-2011, 09:25 AM
  #108
Clowes Line
Cally's Chicken Parm
 
Clowes Line's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: New Yawk
Country: United States
Posts: 12,544
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by chosen View Post
Person A offers an opinion about prospects.

Person B opines that Person A is a ******** idiot because clearly the opinions he expressed are wrong, while at the same time admitting that this is not a science and is based solely on opinions.

Person C questions how Person B can be so sure of his opinions when he admits there is no science here.

Person B responds that Person C has reading comprehension issues, is ******** and is an idiot.

Person C is now the one who is certain about the lack of intellectual capacities of Person B.
And you still can't admit that what you were writing was based off what you think I was saying. I was bashing the Islanders right buddy?

Clowes Line is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-15-2011, 01:48 PM
  #109
Ola
Registered User
 
Ola's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Sweden
Country: Sweden
Posts: 18,720
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ohbaby View Post
I'm not sure what a high ranking consists of,... but if he's the only prospect this year to make the team, wouldn't that be a consideration? Being NHL ready?

Maybe I have high hopes for Thomas but they are for valid reasons. His shot is as good as Gabby's and Richards' right now. And while the grind of the NHL affects all rookies, Thomas will not shy away from the dirty areas, much like Cally or Zucc. His speed also will be welcome addition. The praise he gets for his character and intangibles sounds a whole lot like our future Capt Callahan. But I believe the biggest asset he has going to make the NHL is his dad. Steve Thomas was known for coming to play every night. He had a great work ethic and a long career. Worked hard on and off the ice. And it's no doubt, he has taught his son well, to be NHL ready. Add the fact he was here at last years camp which will give him insight on what is expected and needed to make the team, and we just might have a star in the making. After scoring close to 100 goals the last 2 years in the OHL, he has nothing to gain by returning to the juniors. He is determined to make this team.

Last year you could make an argument the Rangers were a team composed mostly of 3rd liners with a few exceptions. If Thomas makes the team, and lets not kid ourselves,... he will need to score in bunches to do so, he will be a breath of fresh air. Most of our call ups of late, have been of the 3rd line grade other than Step. Thomas will need to be a star rookie in order to stay. We have no more room for another 3rd liner on this team. We need a star. And I'm excited Thomas might be just that. I don't see any other prospects with a better chance this upcoming season.
Let me tell you this, the kids comes to play every night and is a very smart player. Good PKer for example. Like Cally on the forecheck. You are definitely right in that regard.

But I wouldn't write under on that his shot is up there with Gabby and co. His shot is elite for the Junior level, but so was Dawesies really. I don't think Thomas shot is nearly as spectacular as Brendls for example.

And he is a definite notch smaller than Callahan.

Its always tough for players like him to make it. Some does, many actually does not. This kid is definitely no lock to make it in the NHL.

Ola is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-15-2011, 02:36 PM
  #110
Leslie Treff
Hockey's Future Staff
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 1,226
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ola View Post
This kid is definitely no lock to make it in the NHL.
Despite my being very high on Thomas myself, this is very true.

Leslie Treff is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-15-2011, 06:28 PM
  #111
BlueshirtBlitz
Rich Nash
 
BlueshirtBlitz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: New York
Posts: 19,521
vCash: 500
This is such a terrible thread.

Bad ranking, too.

BlueshirtBlitz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-15-2011, 07:45 PM
  #112
chosen
Registered User
 
chosen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 5,938
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by HagelinForPresident View Post
And you still can't admit that what you were writing was based off what you think I was saying. I was bashing the Islanders right buddy?
Never said you were bashing the Islanders. Never said anything other than what I wrote. You keep extrapolating things out of my comments that were never there. The Islanders one is the latest one.

From the beginning I have asserted that if selecting prospects was a science, all GMs would all want the same player at the same spots. There would be nothing left to chance in the process. However, most fans (and GMs) understand that aside from perhaps one or two players a year, there are no definite future stars at draft time.

For the nth time, I said you are calling people idiots, retards, and reading comprehension challenged for having an opinion that you disagree with, even though you admit that predicting the future of prospects is solely based on opinions.

If questioning your opinion makes someone a ******** idiot with reading comprehension problems, I can live with your well thought out assessment.

chosen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-15-2011, 09:04 PM
  #113
Clowes Line
Cally's Chicken Parm
 
Clowes Line's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: New Yawk
Country: United States
Posts: 12,544
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by chosen View Post
Never said you were bashing the Islanders. Never said anything other than what I wrote. You keep extrapolating things out of my comments that were never there. The Islanders one is the latest one.

From the beginning I have asserted that if selecting prospects was a science, all GMs would all want the same player at the same spots. There would be nothing left to chance in the process. However, most fans (and GMs) understand that aside from perhaps one or two players a year, there are no definite future stars at draft time.

For the nth time, I said you are calling people idiots, retards, and reading comprehension challenged for having an opinion that you disagree with, even though you admit that predicting the future of prospects is solely based on opinions.

If questioning your opinion makes someone a ******** idiot with reading comprehension problems, I can live with your well thought out assessment.
So you never said that I bashed the Isles prospect pool, making it inconceivable to take what I say seriously, because I said the Red Wings shouldn't be #1? You said basically, if the Red Wings shouldn't be #1, it makes no sense that you're bashing the Isles who are #2 and have been drafting top 5 each year. Only problem is, I wasn't bashing the Isles, which makes your whole argument false because it's based off something I never said.

Clowes Line is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-16-2011, 06:43 AM
  #114
chosen
Registered User
 
chosen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 5,938
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by HagelinForPresident View Post
So you never said that I bashed the Isles prospect pool, making it inconceivable to take what I say seriously, because I said the Red Wings shouldn't be #1? You said basically, if the Red Wings shouldn't be #1, it makes no sense that you're bashing the Isles who are #2 and have been drafting top 5 each year. Only problem is, I wasn't bashing the Isles, which makes your whole argument false because it's based off something I never said.
It's not about the Islanders. Never was about the Islanders. Never will be about the Islanders.

Look, if after reading my last post where I explicitly laid out (again) why I think it's ridiculous to call people names because they hold a different opinion, you are still focusing on the Islanders, so what's the point?

chosen 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 07:09 AM.

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

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2015 All Rights Reserved.