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

Top 10 Discussion

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
08-08-2012, 11:14 AM
  #51
Ogrezilla
Nerf Herder
 
Ogrezilla's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Pittsburgh
Posts: 33,787
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by IHWR View Post
Well then find me some examples that show otherwise. Show me a top 10 list generated by Hockey's Future or as voted by some of the boards here or produced by someone that graduated 70-80% of their players to the NHL. I've looked and they don't exist without multiple top 3 picks being included and even then they aren't as successful as you'd think.

Here's the Pens from 2005:

1. Sidney Crosby
2. Evgeni Malkin
3. Marc-Andre Fleury
4. Ryan Whitney
5. Noah Welch
6. Maxime Talbot
7. Colby Armstrong
8. Johannes Salmonsson
9. Sergei Anshakov
10. Andy Chiodo

That lists contains 3 players selected in the top 2 of their respective drafts, 4 in the top 5 and 5 first rounders in total. This list produced 6 players.

Here's Chicago in 2007:

1. Jonathan Toews
2. Patrick Kane
3. Cam Barker
4. Troy Brouwer
5. Jack Skille
6. Dustin Byfuglien
7. Dave Bolland
8. Danny Richmond
9. Evan Brophey
10. Igor Makarov

3 top 3 picks, this list pumped out 6 NHL players so far with Skille on track to crack 200 possibly 8 years after being drafted.

I'm literally just pulling from teams that had a bevy of high draft picks in a row, which our list doesn't have.

But yeah...maybe I'm wrong this time. It could happen that we absolutely hit one out of the park with these 10 and nearly all of them go on to have careers in the NHL. It just happens so little that odds are that isn't the case. It doesn't mean you can't still enjoy our prospects or have your favorites or whatever. I'm just speaking for the other side on this one and trying to show that people here might be letting their excitement about our prospects breed unrealistic expectations.

Believe me, as a Pens fan, I'd love to see all these guys crack the lineup and contribute.
I'm not even saying your conclusion is wrong. Just that your argument to support it is wrong.

Ogrezilla is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
08-08-2012, 11:56 AM
  #52
IHWR
The Chiropractor
 
IHWR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Ottawa, ON
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,393
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ogrezilla View Post
I'm not even saying your conclusion is wrong. Just that your argument to support it is wrong.
Yeah and that's fine. I'm not selling it as gospel. This is just how I've formulated my opinion on evaluating the success rate of prospects and it's definitely made me re-look at how I specifically rate them.

IHWR is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-08-2012, 12:10 PM
  #53
Rowdy Roddy Peeper
**** You, Duthie
 
Rowdy Roddy Peeper's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 42,864
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by IHWR View Post
Well then find me some examples that show otherwise. Show me a top 10 list generated by Hockey's Future or as voted by some of the boards here or produced by someone that graduated 70-80% of their players to the NHL. I've looked and they don't exist without multiple top 3 picks being included and even then they aren't as successful as you'd think.
7 of the Red Wings' Top 10 from '07 have a good chance at making it to 200 games. And that's not even counting Helm, who came in at #11.

http://www.hockeysfuture.com/article...ects_fall2007/

I'd imagine that if you have a good developmental system in place like the Red Wings do, the percentage of NHLers you develop probably goes up too.

Rowdy Roddy Peeper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-08-2012, 12:17 PM
  #54
zero8771
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 778
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ogrezilla View Post
I'm not even saying your conclusion is wrong. Just that your argument to support it is wrong.
Basically this. I think your conclusion is on the low end for sure, but I think your argument is the part that I take issue with.

Hopefully I'm right (and not for the sake ofbeing right) and the pens have lots of assets to trade for top 6 wingers!

zero8771 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-08-2012, 01:00 PM
  #55
Beauner
Bye Bye Bylsma
 
Beauner's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Pittsburgh
Country: United States
Posts: 5,712
vCash: 500
Where are you guys getting these top 10 lists? I can't find any between 2000 and now.

Beauner is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
08-09-2012, 09:48 AM
  #56
netwolf
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Washington, PA
Country: United States
Posts: 170
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to netwolf Send a message via AIM to netwolf Send a message via Yahoo to netwolf
NHL.com weighs in with their own top 10 Pens prospects here:
http://www.nhl.com/ice/news.htm?id=6...id=nhl-rxl-twt

netwolf is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-09-2012, 10:00 AM
  #57
SCUDeriMISSILE
We traded Staal
 
SCUDeriMISSILE's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
Country: United States
Posts: 14,136
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by netwolf View Post
NHL.com weighs in with their own top 10 Pens prospects here:
http://www.nhl.com/ice/news.htm?id=6...id=nhl-rxl-twt
For those that don't want to click the link:

1. Morrow
2. Despres
3. Dumoulin
4. Maatta
5. Pouliot
6. Bennett
7. Harrington
8. Strait
9. Hanowski
10. Marcantuoni

SCUDeriMISSILE is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-10-2012, 08:16 PM
  #58
Freeptop
Registered User
 
Freeptop's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
Country: United States
Posts: 973
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by IHWR View Post
Well then find me some examples that show otherwise. Show me a top 10 list generated by Hockey's Future or as voted by some of the boards here or produced by someone that graduated 70-80% of their players to the NHL. I've looked and they don't exist without multiple top 3 picks being included and even then they aren't as successful as you'd think.

Here's the Pens from 2005:

1. Sidney Crosby
2. Evgeni Malkin
3. Marc-Andre Fleury
4. Ryan Whitney
5. Noah Welch
6. Maxime Talbot
7. Colby Armstrong
8. Johannes Salmonsson
9. Sergei Anshakov
10. Andy Chiodo

That lists contains 3 players selected in the top 2 of their respective drafts, 4 in the top 5 and 5 first rounders in total. This list produced 6 players.
On the flip-side, that top 10 list is missing the following players, all of whom have played in at least 200 NHL games, and all of whom were in the prospect pool in 2005:
Kris Letang, Alex Goligoski, Tyler Kennedy, Dan Carcillo, Matt Moulson and Erik Christensen.

It also missed Joe Vitale and Paul Bissonnette who haven't yet hit 200 games, but have established themselves as NHL players.

That raises the total from the prospect pool of the time to a range of 9 to 11 NHLers.

In other words, just because the collective wisdom of Hockey's Future at the time thought that Andy Chiodo was a better prospect than future All-Star Kris Letang doesn't mean that the Pens' current system is only going to produce 3-4 NHLers.

Granted, the successes of Letang and Goligoski (and to an extent, Kennedy as well) are due to the changes in the enforcement of the rules that allow smaller players to succeed, while the people making the ratings hadn't adjusted to that fact yet. At the same time, it is worth noting that the current top 10 list includes the same number of first round picks as that list from 2005.

Freeptop is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-11-2012, 07:24 AM
  #59
Rob Scuderi
Registered User
 
Rob Scuderi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Country: United States
Posts: 2,706
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rowdy Roddy Peeper View Post
7 of the Red Wings' Top 10 from '07 have a good chance at making it to 200 games. And that's not even counting Helm, who came in at #11.

http://www.hockeysfuture.com/article...ects_fall2007/

I'd imagine that if you have a good developmental system in place like the Red Wings do, the percentage of NHLers you develop probably goes up too.
Nah it's a static process where all things are equal.

Factors like that and others such as quality of drafts (when they were historically weak with the size over skill emphasis) and quality of each team's individual drafting don't come into play.

Rob Scuderi 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 08:01 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.