How many teams have developed a plethora of top 4 defense men or top six forwards that were not picked in the 1st round? I have nothing to do for a while so here is a list of teams who, out of their top 6 forwards and top 4 defense men, have drafted at least 6 of them.
I might have missed some, and tried to accommodate for players that will be in these roles next year too. Some observations from this list. There is only one team that does not have a player that was selected in the draft lottery and that is the Red Wings. They also have the most players drafted by them playing in their top six or top 4 out of any team in the entire league.
Pleae tell me some more about how the Red Wings only develop role players...
What does that have to do with anything? we're talking rankings, not the degree of difficulty finding talent......
Biggest head scratcher for me is Detroit above Minny. The Wild have 2 sick forward prospects in Granlund and Coyle, 2 sick d prospects in Dumba and Brodin, an elite goalie prospect in Hackett, AND tonnes of depth (Philips, Lehtonen, Lucia, Zucker, Haulua, etc.). Putting them below Detroit just makes no sense to me, I'd take their forward prospects over Detroit's, their d prospects over Detroit's, and their goalie prospects over Detroit's. Detroit definitely have a good prospect pool, but they have no real stars, the Wild have arguably the best prospect pool in the league.
That is a pretty basic analysis and doesnt really tell you who drafted well and who didnt imo.
Who is playing those games for you? An elite player like Datsyuk or a plugger like Horcoff?
If Kevin Lowe played more games than Bobby Orr does that mean Edmonton drafted better than Boston?
exactly, not to mention (at least in wings case) they would trade away draft picks like nothing when there was no cap. Like I said simply looking at #'s with no context tell nothing.
So overrated??? Wanna laugh?? The only thing we are lacking is a legit goaltending prospect, other than that we have exceptional depth at any positions..
Galchenyuk
Beaulieu
Tinordi
Leblanc
Collberg
Gallagher
Ellis
Kristo
Thrower
Bournival..
When you have guys like Bennett Bozon Holland Palushaj Dietz out of your top 10, it gives you an idea how deep your prospects pool is..
Biggest head scratcher for me is Detroit above Minny. The Wild have 2 sick forward prospects in Granlund and Coyle, 2 sick d prospects in Dumba and Brodin, an elite goalie prospect in Hackett, AND tonnes of depth (Philips, Lehtonen, Lucia, Zucker, Haulua, etc.). Putting them below Detroit just makes no sense to me, I'd take their forward prospects over Detroit's, their d prospects over Detroit's, and their goalie prospects over Detroit's. Detroit definitely have a good prospect pool, but they have no real stars, the Wild have arguably the best prospect pool in the league.
As a Wild fan, I agree. In my opinion, we have 5 "blue-chippers" and our depth goes 10-12 deep of legit NHL potential (not even including this past years 2nd - 7th rounders).
By the way, change Lehtonen to Bulmer. Lehtonen will never cross the ocean.
Biggest head scratcher for me is Detroit above Minny. The Wild have 2 sick forward prospects in Granlund and Coyle, 2 sick d prospects in Dumba and Brodin, an elite goalie prospect in Hackett, AND tonnes of depth (Philips, Lehtonen, Lucia, Zucker, Haulua, etc.). Putting them below Detroit just makes no sense to me, I'd take their forward prospects over Detroit's, their d prospects over Detroit's, and their goalie prospects over Detroit's. Detroit definitely have a good prospect pool, but they have no real stars, the Wild have arguably the best prospect pool in the league.
Well as I conceded in the column, the top end of Minny's system is the best in the NHL and if your ranking approach focused primarily or mostly on that aspect, I would put them 1, I did have them at 1 in my first draft, and I think the top four systems as I said in the column could be put in any order and I wouldn't have much issue with it. I'd disagree with your assessment Minnesota has a ton of depth at least in terms of significant prospects. I'm not saying it's bad as it's solid, but I don't see it on the same level as FLA, NYI, DET, OTT. The forwards I'll give you by a marginal gap, but I'd take DET's D prospects over Minnesota. Smith is right there with Brodin and Dumba IMO and while the other top MIN D prospect is a giant gap ahead of DET's 2nd best D prospect, DET has several quality D prospects and I don't see that from MIN seeing as I don't count Scandella or Falk as prospects which closes the gap and I think tilts it towards DET on that front.
Well as I conceded in the column, the top end of Minny's system is the best in the NHL and if your ranking approach focused primarily or mostly on that aspect, I would put them 1, I did have them at 1 in my first draft, and I think the top four systems as I said in the column could be put in any order and I wouldn't have much issue with it. I'd disagree with your assessment Minnesota has a ton of depth at least in terms of significant prospects. I'm not saying it's bad as it's solid, but I don't see it on the same level as FLA, NYI, DET, OTT. The forwards I'll give you by a marginal gap, but I'd take DET's D prospects over Minnesota. Smith is right there with Brodin and Dumba IMO and while the other top MIN D prospect is a giant gap ahead of DET's 2nd best D prospect, DET has several quality D prospects and I don't see that from MIN seeing as I don't count Scandella or Falk as prospects which closes the gap and I think tilts it towards DET on that front.
I guess I just don't buy the fact that less depth of defensive prospects outweighs higher top end talent at all three positions, comparable (if not more; personally, I believe more) forward depth and more goaltending depth.
I guess I just don't buy the fact that less depth of defensive prospects outweighs higher top end talent at all three positions, comparable (if not more; personally, I believe more) forward depth and more goaltending depth.
Well it's also not as simple as Team A has more depth that Team B. It depends who is included in the depth. I wrote in the column I don't consider depth bottom 6 kind of players. My idea of good depth is a lot of quality prospects but just not Top 50 caliber kind of prospects which is the more high-end types. Basically I think the defensive talent as a whole is better, the forward talent I think is slightly worse that MIN. DET has several high quality F prospects and good depth as well. They don't have Granlund, but they have several well above-average forward prospects. I also don't think having good goalie prospects delivers anything notable in terms of value.
Well as I conceded in the column, the top end of Minny's system is the best in the NHL and if your ranking approach focused primarily or mostly on that aspect, I would put them 1, I did have them at 1 in my first draft, and I think the top four systems as I said in the column could be put in any order and I wouldn't have much issue with it. I'd disagree with your assessment Minnesota has a ton of depth at least in terms of significant prospects. I'm not saying it's bad as it's solid, but I don't see it on the same level as FLA, NYI, DET, OTT. The forwards I'll give you by a marginal gap, but I'd take DET's D prospects over Minnesota. Smith is right there with Brodin and Dumba IMO and while the other top MIN D prospect is a giant gap ahead of DET's 2nd best D prospect, DET has several quality D prospects and I don't see that from MIN seeing as I don't count Scandella or Falk as prospects which closes the gap and I think tilts it towards DET on that front.
Hard to rate quantity over quality when only a small percentage of prospects ever have sustainable careers in the nhl anyway. What good is a prospect pool that is 1000 square miles but only a few inches deep?
The Wings have quite a few decent prospects, but if they dont have high end talent, then they are behind those that do, not in front of them.
Its not like the Wild only have a couple high end pieces and then nothing. Theyve got some depth there too.
So overrated??? Wanna laugh?? The only thing we are lacking is a legit goaltending prospect, other than that we have exceptional depth at any positions..
Galchenyuk
Beaulieu
Tinordi
Leblanc
Collberg
Gallagher
Ellis
Kristo
Thrower
Bournival..
When you have guys like Bennett Bozon Holland Palushaj Dietz out of your top 10, it gives you an idea how deep your prospects pool is..
Well it's also not as simple as Team A has more depth that Team B. It depends who is included in the depth. I wrote in the column I don't consider depth bottom 6 kind of players. My idea of good depth is a lot of quality prospects but just not Top 50 caliber kind of prospects which is the more high-end types. Basically I think the defensive talent as a whole is better, the forward talent I think is slightly worse that MIN. DET has several high quality F prospects and good depth as well. They don't have Granlund, but they have several well above-average forward prospects. I also don't think having good goalie prospects delivers anything notable in terms of value.
You talk about good forward depth, but negate goalie depth as having value? That is ridiculous. Minnesota has a better crop of forwards and better goaltending prospects. You're only ranking them higher solely based on the fact they have more prospects that have 3-6 potential on the defensive end. It doesn't matter if they have Granlund, I'd still take Coyle above any one of their forward prospects.
Back to the goaltending having no value, that is ridiculous. You can never have too much goaltending.
You talk about good forward depth, but negate goalie depth as having value? That is ridiculous. Minnesota has a better crop of forwards and better goaltending prospects. You're only ranking them higher solely based on the fact they have more prospects that have 3-6 potential on the defensive end. It doesn't matter if they have Granlund, I'd still take Coyle above any one of their forward prospects.
Back to the goaltending having no value, that is ridiculous. You can never have too much goaltending.
Charlie Coyle is becoming so ridiculously overrated
Hard to rate quantity over quality when only a small percentage of prospects ever have sustainable careers in the nhl anyway. What good is a prospect pool that is 1000 square miles but only a few inches deep?
It's not just quantity over quality. It's a balance and it depends who is in that quantity. It's also a matter of the slightest degrees, again we're talking about my #3 system over my #4 and as I've said previously if you wanted to put Minnesota anywhere in the top 4 including 1 I wouldn't really argue. In terms of your sustainable career remark, I don't buy that. Sure the distribution in terms of elite prospects in terms of their high to low end projection has a much more desirable median/average value than a lower tier of prospect. Each distribution has its own value and there is a ton of value in having well above-average prospects and depending on the quantity of a certain level of value it could certainly overtake an elite prospect.
Quote:
The Wings have quite a few decent prospects, but if they dont have high end talent, then they are behind those that do, not in front of them.
Its not like the Wild only have a couple high end pieces and then nothing. Theyve got some depth there too.
I disagree on the high-end talent. They don't have a Granlund type prospect, but Brendan Smith arguably is right there with anyone Minnesota can put up after Granlund. Brodin and Dumba are better than the top DET prospects after Smith but DET has several well above-average prospects like Nyquist, Jarnkrok, Jurco and Tatar that are all arguably top 50 prospects.
I also never said anything poor about Minnesota's depth. I'm doing their org's column right now and am very impressed with their quality going to their 9th-10th best prospect. I just see DET a notch higher.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Victorious Secret
You talk about good forward depth, but negate goalie depth as having value? That is ridiculous. Minnesota has a better crop of forwards and better goaltending prospects. You're only ranking them higher solely based on the fact they have more prospects that have 3-6 potential on the defensive end. It doesn't matter if they have Granlund, I'd still take Coyle above any one of their forward prospects.
Back to the goaltending having no value, that is ridiculous. You can never have too much goaltending.
I wrote a post referencing several good studies on the goaltender matter last year about my stance on this. Should better explain it.
