HFBoards

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

Penguins new top-20

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
09-05-2011, 11:53 AM
  #1
Ian Altenbaugh
Hockey's Future Staff
 
Ian Altenbaugh's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Pittsburgh
Country: United States
Posts: 1,251
vCash: 500
Penguins new top-20

Greetings all!

Here is the link to the new top-20. I got quotes from Bennett, Tangradi, Kuhnhackl, Samuelsson, McNeill, and a few others so it's a bit longer than in the past. The Pens also have a considerably better and more accomplished group of prospects in the past so there was more to write about. They could be well represented at the 2012 WJCs as well.

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

There are a few surprising omissions, Hanowski being the biggest one probably. To be honest it was very difficult determining the last handful of players. They all fell under a few categories: project player with high potential who are either have a lot of developing still or a major hurdle or two to overcome (Archibald, Hanowski, Rogalski, Petersen, etc), safe prospects with limited potential (Vitale, Sill), and guys who's future with the Penguins might be limited (Pechurskiy, CPZ, Modig). Grant was left off because he played only a small handful of games last season and given his age, I'm frankly concerned over how that will affect his development. Missing a season for a defenseman I think is a bigger blow developmentally than for a forward.

I'll stop by a few times if anyone has any questions or interesting points, otherwise don't hesitate to email me at ian.altenbaugh@hockeysfuture.com

__________________
Follow Ian's hockey and Pittsburgh related notes on Twitter.
Ian Altenbaugh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-05-2011, 12:15 PM
  #2
Rowdy Roddy Peeper
You Suck McBain!
 
Rowdy Roddy Peeper's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 42,299
vCash: 500
Thanks Ian, solid write-ups. But I am curious why would you rank Bennett over Despres given how their respective seasons went...I guess you just figure Bennett's upside is that much higher?

Rowdy Roddy Peeper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-05-2011, 12:20 PM
  #3
Sidney the Kidney
Beastmode Penguins
 
Sidney the Kidney's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Country: Canada
Posts: 14,357
vCash: 80
Good write up. I must be slacking. I didn't even realize McNeil had been traded to Barrie.

Sidney the Kidney is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-05-2011, 12:33 PM
  #4
Ian Altenbaugh
Hockey's Future Staff
 
Ian Altenbaugh's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Pittsburgh
Country: United States
Posts: 1,251
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Champagne Wishes View Post
Thanks Ian, solid write-ups. But I am curious why would you rank Bennett over Despres given how their respective seasons went...I guess you just figure Bennett's upside is that much higher?
They were like 1A and 1B. I frankly think Bennett is more important to the organization at this point so I ranked him first. He's easily the most offensively creative forward prospect the Penguins have.
If Bennett hadn't gone down with his knee injury, he would've likely played in the WJCs and posted much bigger totals in his freshman season with DU. With that in mind and the fact he has dramatically improved his conditioning, I think he is going to have a huge season with DU. He has a giant bag of tricks too. It reminds me of Crosby in the sense that I saw Bennett try so many different little things in practice. The short answer though is because he is the only Penguin prospect who is dynamic enough to create offense on his own. Guys like Tangradi, Agostino, Thompson, and Kuhnhackl are all offensively gifted with soft-hands and good offensive instincts but project more as complementary pieces or finishers.

I really like Despres, I think he projects as a good number 3 and if his offensive continues to progress maybe a number 2. Probably a number 3 though. I think Morrow is right behind him, he projects as a number 3 or 4. I think Morrow has a better offensive game than Despres but Despres's offense isn't far behind and he has better size. Both have played shutdown roles in the CHL and will likely start out as shutdown players before developing their offensive games.

Agostino could be a breakout star this year depending on how his WJCs go. He was an absolute monster at the US jr evaluation camp. Coach Bylsma said that Agostino could develop into a solid offensive forward who can do a lot of the dirty work for a scoring line.

It's worth mentioning Kuhnhackl trained with the Penguins this year. He spent a great deal of time with Mike Kadar, training with Aaron Asham and a handful of other members of the NHL squad. That's huge because he was not in the greatest condition last season and still managed strong totals.

I didn't know McNeill was traded until he told me actually. Him and Harrington flew in on the same flight to the prospect camp and I jokingly said, so what do you guys have planned for an encore? To which McNeill replied, "getting traded to Barrie". He's a funny guy and easy to like. Also extremely mobile of a skater.

Ian Altenbaugh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-05-2011, 12:45 PM
  #5
Rowdy Roddy Peeper
You Suck McBain!
 
Rowdy Roddy Peeper's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 42,299
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ian Altenbaugh View Post
They were like 1A and 1B. I frankly think Bennett is more important to the organization at this point so I ranked him first. He's easily the most offensively creative forward prospect the Penguins have.
If Bennett hadn't gone down with his knee injury, he would've likely played in the WJCs and posted much bigger totals in his freshman season with DU. With that in mind and the fact he has dramatically improved his conditioning, I think he is going to have a huge season with DU. He has a giant bag of tricks too. It reminds me of Crosby in the sense that I saw Bennett try so many different little things in practice. The short answer though is because he is the only Penguin prospect who is dynamic enough to create offense on his own. Guys like Tangradi, Agostino, Thompson, and Kuhnhackl are all offensively gifted with soft-hands and good offensive instincts but project more as complementary pieces or finishers.
Perfectly reasonable. Thanks.

Bennett developing as projected would be so huge for the organization. And take a bit of the sting out of the Caps taking Kuznetsov afterwards.

Quote:
Agostino could be a breakout star this year depending on how his WJCs go. He was an absolute monster at the US jr evaluation camp. Coach Bylsma said that Agostino could develop into a solid offensive forward who can do a lot of the dirty work for a scoring line.
It's always a little difficult to gauge players just looking at ECAC totals, so it was great to see Agostino do so well against the best of his peers. It'd be huge for his confidence if he could translate some of that to the tourney.

Quote:
It's worth mentioning Kuhnhackl trained with the Penguins this year. He spent a great deal of time with Mike Kadar, training with Aaron Asham and a handful of other members of the NHL squad. That's huge because he was not in the greatest condition last season and still managed strong totals.
Too bad Germany won't be in the WJCs this year.

Rowdy Roddy Peeper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-05-2011, 12:55 PM
  #6
starling
Registered User
 
starling's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Ottawa
Country: Ukraine
Posts: 3,188
vCash: 500
Freshman Bennett 8.0C(9G-16A) over freshman Zucker 7.0C(23G-22A)? okay...

starling is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-05-2011, 01:09 PM
  #7
Biz Nasty
Cooke 4 Lady Byng
 
Biz Nasty's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Piffsburgh
Posts: 2,004
vCash: 500
I'm glad that Thompson is finally getting some credit after a lot of the posters here dropped him in the board rankings.

Biz Nasty is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-05-2011, 01:16 PM
  #8
Darth Vitale
Moderator
Transitional Period
 
Darth Vitale's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Victoryville
Country: United States
Posts: 25,486
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ian Altenbaugh View Post
safe prospects with limited potential (Vitale, Sill),
I've had just about enough of the officially sanctioned hate for all things versatile and victorious around here. Another list where he's not in the Top 10. You should feel shame!


That said, good write up overall. Surprised Bennett is #1, considering he didn't make that much noise at the development camp AFA i heard. Looking forward to seeing how Morrow and Agostino develop over the next year / see if they make a quicker jump to the AHL than we think.


Last edited by Darth Vitale: 09-05-2011 at 01:32 PM.
Darth Vitale is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-05-2011, 01:29 PM
  #9
Rowdy Roddy Peeper
You Suck McBain!
 
Rowdy Roddy Peeper's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 42,299
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by starling View Post
Freshman Bennett 8.0C(9G-16A) over freshman Zucker 7.0C(23G-22A)? okay...
It isn't about who puts up more points at lower levels, it's about whose game will translate better to the pros.

Dustin Jeffrey outproduced Chris Stewart as a 19 year old in the OHL. That doesn't mean he was a better prospect.

Rowdy Roddy Peeper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-05-2011, 01:30 PM
  #10
Ian Altenbaugh
Hockey's Future Staff
 
Ian Altenbaugh's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Pittsburgh
Country: United States
Posts: 1,251
vCash: 500
I'd caution looking too much into stat production at the NCAA level.

There are lots of players who produce huge numbers that never amount much. There is also so others who produce under a point-per-game who end up good NHLers. It's about their development at the level more than their production. Nobody thinks Brian Gibbons is a better forward than Chris Kreider even though Gibbons outproduced Kreider in his first two seasons of college hockey.

As it stands now, Zucker projects more as a Steve Ott type forward, a really strong two-way forward who can chip in offensively and stir the pot. He can get into good scoring position (at the NCAA level at least) but I think a lot of his success this past season was due to playing on a very good line with Drew Shore. They were able to simply outwork most opposing teams the majority of the time.

Bennett though is a much more creative forward. Instead of chipping the puck into the offensive zone he could carry it in, create space for a linemate, and dish the puck off to score a goal. He can play almost every position on the powerplay including the center point of the umbrella. He's just far more dynamic of a forward and his offensive sense for the game is superior. He's not as polished of a two-way player as Zucker (Zucker was considered to be one of the best two-way forwards in the 2010 draft), nor was he as well conditioned last year. I'd expect the gap to narrow quite considerably this coming season.


Last edited by Ian Altenbaugh: 09-05-2011 at 01:45 PM.
Ian Altenbaugh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-05-2011, 01:45 PM
  #11
Ian Altenbaugh
Hockey's Future Staff
 
Ian Altenbaugh's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Pittsburgh
Country: United States
Posts: 1,251
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChiChi Vitale View Post
I've had just about enough of the officially sanctioned hate for all things versatile and victorious around here.
Heheh, It was getting tiring writing phrases like 'hardworking' over and over again in talent analysis. For what it's worth, some players with serious offensive potential were left off the board as well. Archibald was someone who opened a lot of eyes in prospect camp. He has a lot of slick moves.

Leaving Hanowski off was a calculated risk because he could have a monster breakout season in his junior year. I talked to enough reporters from Minnesota though to decide to leave him off. It was basically unanimous that he was great on the powerplay but disappeared in five-on-five and had some skating issues. I think some of the problem was he was playing center a position I don't think he's mobile enough for, but that doesn't change the lack of even-strength production.

I'd say the last few slots were more or less interchangeable with most of the Pens prospects.

Ian Altenbaugh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-05-2011, 10:13 PM
  #12
CoyotesHFNHL
Registered User
 
CoyotesHFNHL's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 213
vCash: 500
As someone who has seen all of your top 5 guys play in person on numerous occasions over the last 2 years I have no clue how Bennett is higher than Despres, Tangradi and Morrow. Joe Morrow was a steal for the Penguins, and I'd almost argue that, long term he's the most valuable Penguins pick. But to each their own. Kuhnhackl is a great talent, and a steal of a pick where the Penguins got him, I really like him, but i'd concede to his upside maybe not being where Bennett is, but to me, personally Bennett above the other 3 is a little outrageous, but that's just my personal opinion after seeing them all play.

CoyotesHFNHL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-05-2011, 10:34 PM
  #13
Jeff Goldblum
Registered User
 
Jeff Goldblum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Country: United States
Posts: 7,910
vCash: 500
Bennett shouldn't be above Despres at this point in time. His upside means that he could eventually be the better player; it does not mean we ignore Despres' accomplishments and Bennett's relative lack thereof. I don't agree that organizational needs should ever impact a prospect ranking.

In itself, this isn't a big deal. However, HF's process for choosing their league-wide top 50 prospects is that only the highest writer-ranked player available for each team will be discussed. Correct me if I'm wrong, Ian, but this is how it was done a few seasons ago when I last discussed it with the writers. Despres will not be eligible for a place in the top-50 until Beau Bennett is voted the best prospect available. That might not occur at all. Beau Bennett isn't a top-50 prospect right now. Simon Despres very easily is.

Again, this isn't a big deal, but I do look forward to reading the prospect rankings, so I'm somewhat disappointed that Despres' ranking will ultimately be determined by Bennett's. It wouldn't surprise me to see them go back-to-back, as Despres should be head and shoulders above all others by the time Bennett is voted in.

Jeff Goldblum is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-05-2011, 11:12 PM
  #14
CoyotesHFNHL
Registered User
 
CoyotesHFNHL's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 213
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeff Goldblum View Post
Bennett shouldn't be above Despres at this point in time. His upside means that he could eventually be the better player; it does not mean we ignore Despres' accomplishments and Bennett's relative lack thereof. I don't agree that organizational needs should ever impact a prospect ranking.

In itself, this isn't a big deal. However, HF's process for choosing their league-wide top 50 prospects is that only the highest writer-ranked player available for each team will be discussed. Correct me if I'm wrong, Ian, but this is how it was done a few seasons ago when I last discussed it with the writers. Despres will not be eligible for a place in the top-50 until Beau Bennett is voted the best prospect available. That might not occur at all. Beau Bennett isn't a top-50 prospect right now. Simon Despres very easily is.

Again, this isn't a big deal, but I do look forward to reading the prospect rankings, so I'm somewhat disappointed that Despres' ranking will ultimately be determined by Bennett's. It wouldn't surprise me to see them go back-to-back, as Despres should be head and shoulders above all others by the time Bennett is voted in.
Thats the point of it. It's Pittsburgh's top 20 prospects. Just like Nashville, the last thing they need is more D prospects, but that doesn't change a D from being #1.. because he is the best. The point to the ranking is to rank the players from best to worst. Everyone is going to have their opinions, pesronally mine is Despres, Tangradi, Morrow, Bennett, Khuhnhackl. I think he's done a good job making sure the top 5 prospects are all in the top 5, but they're a little out of order in terms of upside both current showing and future wise. Morrow, Tangradi and Despres should be "B" prospects because they all have a high likelyhood of playing in the NHL. Bennett should almost have a "D" becasue simply put he's a high risk to make the NHL but if he does he has a lot of potential to be good. But at the end of the day, the best value prospect is probably Despres considering how close he is to the NHL and what he brings to the table. Penguins fans will likely not see or hear much from Beau Bennett over the next 4-5 years if at all, because of the amount of development he still has ahead of him to reach his potential. The other 3 IMO will already be useful players in the Penguins line-up by that time.

CoyotesHFNHL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-06-2011, 06:43 AM
  #15
bigd
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 4,761
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CoyotesHFNHL View Post
Thats the point of it. It's Pittsburgh's top 20 prospects. Just like Nashville, the last thing they need is more D prospects, but that doesn't change a D from being #1.. because he is the best. The point to the ranking is to rank the players from best to worst. Everyone is going to have their opinions, pesronally mine is Despres, Tangradi, Morrow, Bennett, Khuhnhackl. I think he's done a good job making sure the top 5 prospects are all in the top 5, but they're a little out of order in terms of upside both current showing and future wise. Morrow, Tangradi and Despres should be "B" prospects because they all have a high likelyhood of playing in the NHL. Bennett should almost have a "D" becasue simply put he's a high risk to make the NHL but if he does he has a lot of potential to be good. But at the end of the day, the best value prospect is probably Despres considering how close he is to the NHL and what he brings to the table. Penguins fans will likely not see or hear much from Beau Bennett over the next 4-5 years if at all, because of the amount of development he still has ahead of him to reach his potential. The other 3 IMO will already be useful players in the Penguins line-up by that time.
Everyone has a different criterior for evaluating a prospect. If you are taking into account how close a player is to playing in the NHL then Jeffrey should be the #1 forward and Strait should be the #1 D-man. So that criterior alone doesn't work. I think Ian puts a high value on upside which some prospects may or may not reach. It's good to see the different rankings and peoples different views of players but, at the end of the day, the only prospect rankings that count are that of the Pens organization. And that's ever changing.

bigd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-06-2011, 07:20 AM
  #16
JTG
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Country: Sierra Leone
Posts: 38,673
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeff Goldblum View Post
Bennett shouldn't be above Despres at this point in time. His upside means that he could eventually be the better player; it does not mean we ignore Despres' accomplishments and Bennett's relative lack thereof. I don't agree that organizational needs should ever impact a prospect ranking.

In itself, this isn't a big deal. However, HF's process for choosing their league-wide top 50 prospects is that only the highest writer-ranked player available for each team will be discussed. Correct me if I'm wrong, Ian, but this is how it was done a few seasons ago when I last discussed it with the writers. Despres will not be eligible for a place in the top-50 until Beau Bennett is voted the best prospect available. That might not occur at all. Beau Bennett isn't a top-50 prospect right now. Simon Despres very easily is.

Again, this isn't a big deal, but I do look forward to reading the prospect rankings, so I'm somewhat disappointed that Despres' ranking will ultimately be determined by Bennett's. It wouldn't surprise me to see them go back-to-back, as Despres should be head and shoulders above all others by the time Bennett is voted in.
So HF rankings really aren't rankings at all, as I'm sure both Bennett and Despres are better than some team's top prospects, as I'm sure teams like Edmonton have a few prospects that may be top 50 prospects, but aren't because of the voting criteria here.

It's not like I put stock into this site's rankings anyways, more just understanding the thought process behind those top 50 rankings. I've sat there on numerous occasions saying to myself, "this can't be right."

JTG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-06-2011, 07:52 AM
  #17
Ugene Malkin
Bück Dich Baby!
 
Ugene Malkin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Pittsburgh
Country: Germany
Posts: 21,127
vCash: 500
Thanks Ian, was a great read.

Ugene Malkin is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
09-06-2011, 07:59 AM
  #18
Rowdy Roddy Peeper
You Suck McBain!
 
Rowdy Roddy Peeper's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 42,299
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeff Goldblum View Post
Bennett shouldn't be above Despres at this point in time. His upside means that he could eventually be the better player; it does not mean we ignore Despres' accomplishments and Bennett's relative lack thereof. I don't agree that organizational needs should ever impact a prospect ranking
Unless I misinterpreted Ian, he seemed to say that he had the two ranked equally (Despres is more accomplished, but he feels Bennett has the higher upside), and positional need really only settled the "pick 'em".

I mean, somebody has to go first.

Rowdy Roddy Peeper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-06-2011, 08:03 AM
  #19
Ugene Malkin
Bück Dich Baby!
 
Ugene Malkin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Pittsburgh
Country: Germany
Posts: 21,127
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Champagne Wishes View Post
Unless I misinterpreted Ian, he seemed to say that he had the two ranked equally (Despres is more accomplished, but he feels Bennett has the higher upside), and positional need really only settled the "pick 'em".

I mean, somebody has to go first.
Right on the button.

Ugene Malkin is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
09-06-2011, 08:52 AM
  #20
Darth Vitale
Moderator
Transitional Period
 
Darth Vitale's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Victoryville
Country: United States
Posts: 25,486
vCash: 500
I like Bennett because he makes wise cracks with Billy and calls the coach "Mr. Bylsma".

I think Disco likes that...


"Call me, SIR.... God damnit!!"


Darth Vitale is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-06-2011, 09:23 AM
  #21
cassius
Registered User
 
cassius's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 9,908
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeff Goldblum View Post
Bennett shouldn't be above Despres at this point in time. His upside means that he could eventually be the better player; it does not mean we ignore Despres' accomplishments and Bennett's relative lack thereof. I don't agree that organizational needs should ever impact a prospect ranking.

In itself, this isn't a big deal. However, HF's process for choosing their league-wide top 50 prospects is that only the highest writer-ranked player available for each team will be discussed. Correct me if I'm wrong, Ian, but this is how it was done a few seasons ago when I last discussed it with the writers. Despres will not be eligible for a place in the top-50 until Beau Bennett is voted the best prospect available. That might not occur at all. Beau Bennett isn't a top-50 prospect right now. Simon Despres very easily is.

Again, this isn't a big deal, but I do look forward to reading the prospect rankings, so I'm somewhat disappointed that Despres' ranking will ultimately be determined by Bennett's. It wouldn't surprise me to see them go back-to-back, as Despres should be head and shoulders above all others by the time Bennett is voted in.
I'm with you 100%. Bennett has no business being ranked above Despres at this point.

Bennett has the pedigree, talent, and certainly fills an organizational need, but what has he accomplished so far? He also didn't look that hot during the recent prospect camp.

cassius is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
09-06-2011, 05:56 PM
  #22
Jeff Goldblum
Registered User
 
Jeff Goldblum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Country: United States
Posts: 7,910
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Champagne Wishes View Post
Unless I misinterpreted Ian, he seemed to say that he had the two ranked equally (Despres is more accomplished, but he feels Bennett has the higher upside), and positional need really only settled the "pick 'em".

I mean, somebody has to go first.
Of course somebody has to go first, but I'd like to see a tangible reason given for choosing one over the other. I don't think positional need should ever come into play, even as a tie-breaker. That's nothing more than wishful thinking and says nothing about the prospects themselves. If they are equal, using accomplishments makes sense as a tie-breaker. Hell, even the ever-mysterious 'upside' makes more sense as a tie-breaker than positional need.

If Bennett's upside is higher than Despres' to the point that it balances out a relatively average (but encouraging) freshman season with a WJC Silver, a QMJHL Championship, a Memorial Cup Championship, and an Emilie Bouchard Trophy for best defenseman in the Q (none of which were specifically mentioned in Ian's write-up), I'd expect that to be reflected in their Prospect Ratings. However, Ian rated both at 8.0C. That's inconsistent with his above explanation.

I even disagree that wing is a bigger need. We have Neal and Kennedy already on the roster with Tangradi close to cracking it and Bennett, Kuehnhackl, and Agostino coming up through the system. Kunitz's salary will also likely be put back on the wing this summer. Our defense is set for the next three seasons, but then Orpik and Letang are UFA followed by Martin and Michalek the following year. I expect Letang to be re-signed, but the other three will likely be decided on after playing out their present contracts. If we're discussing long-term organizational need (which I would say is 3 years +), then defense is just as much of an unknown quantity as the wingers.

Again, it's not a big deal; it's just something I enjoy reading because it's worth discussing in September. Let me put it this way: last year, Ian ranked Despres above Bennett. Has Bennett's growth in the past year exceeded that of Despres? Was Bennett's season more indicative of a promising NHL future than Despres'? I don't think so. I don't think there's any tangible reason for Bennett jumping Despres.

Jeff Goldblum is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-06-2011, 07:23 PM
  #23
Rowdy Roddy Peeper
You Suck McBain!
 
Rowdy Roddy Peeper's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 42,299
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeff Goldblum View Post
Of course somebody has to go first, but I'd like to see a tangible reason given for choosing one over the other. I don't think positional need should ever come into play, even as a tie-breaker. That's nothing more than wishful thinking and says nothing about the prospects themselves. If they are equal, using accomplishments makes sense as a tie-breaker. Hell, even the ever-mysterious 'upside' makes more sense as a tie-breaker than positional need.
If Ian felt it was a pick 'em situation, he could've used eye colour to determine who went first for all I care.

Quote:
If Bennett's upside is higher than Despres' to the point that it balances out a relatively average (but encouraging) freshman season with a WJC Silver, a QMJHL Championship, a Memorial Cup Championship, and an Emilie Bouchard Trophy for best defenseman in the Q (none of which were specifically mentioned in Ian's write-up), I'd expect that to be reflected in their Prospect Ratings. However, Ian rated both at 8.0C. That's inconsistent with his above explanation.
True, but it'd be hard to either make Despres a 7.5B (he's not that much of a sure thing) or Bennett an 8.5D (he's not that much of a long shot nor does he have that kind of upside).

Despres is a year ahead of Bennett development-wise too, which should be taken into consideration.

Quote:
Again, it's not a big deal; it's just something I enjoy reading because it's worth discussing in September.
For sure. We're all hurting for something hockey-related to argue about at this point.

Quote:
Let me put it this way: last year, Ian ranked Despres above Bennett. Has Bennett's growth in the past year exceeded that of Despres? Was Bennett's season more indicative of a promising NHL future than Despres'? I don't think so. I don't think there's any tangible reason for Bennett jumping Despres.
To be fair though, Bennett had only played BCHL hockey at the time of last year's ranking. Maybe it was simply a case of getting more familiar with a player who had just come from a league relatively few people watch.

Rowdy Roddy Peeper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-06-2011, 07:30 PM
  #24
Karnage420
Registered User
 
Karnage420's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 787
vCash: 500
yeah i kinda expected Bennett to retain his "D" status. making him a step below Despres and maybe some 7.5's

Karnage420 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 12:59 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.