Have you seen Hanowski or just looking at his stats? I like that he's going out and cleaning up his skating but until I see at least quicker feet I just can't rank him this high.
No matter the stats... his skating is that bad.
I've seen Hanowski play some. Despite his skating issues he's shown a lot of skills, vision and a good scoring touch to get the job done. It's not the easiest thing for someone to cleanup their skating, but it can happen. Jeffrey's skating went from crap to good in less than a year. And I'm definitely a little more optimistic for Hanowski to be able to, if he's been training with Diane Ness as much as he has this summer.
It's WAY overdue to add Archibald. Let's not forget, he actually made the WJC team, which not many of our prospects have done.
Voted Agostino, and very surprised I'm the only one. This time last year, every single person on these boards had Agostino in their top-10 and were singing his praises after he put up some points in the US WJC development camp. He may not have made that team, but he's still a very good prospect with higher potential than most of our other guys.
It's WAY overdue to add Archibald. Let's not forget, he actually made the WJC team, which not many of our prospects have done.
Point is, did he make the team only because the head coach was also the head coach at UNO and wanted to make his own program look better? Once there, Archibald didn't do much of anything. And he faded badly in the second half of his college season.
Quote:
Voted Agostino, and very surprised I'm the only one. This time last year, every single person on these boards had Agostino in their top-10 and were singing his praises after he put up some points in the US WJC development camp. He may not have made that team, but he's still a very good prospect with higher potential than most of our other guys.
Agostino and several others have fallen victim to the bunch of highly regarded newcomers pushing everyone else down the ranks. But I would still rank him ahead of Blueger. Well, I would rank several of players left ahead of Blueger. The kid may have nice hands and good upside but he has still only played high school hockey whereas Agostino improved nicely as a sophomore, Wilson won conference Freshman of the Year, and Hanowski finally broke out as a points producer. I have all of them above Blueger right now. He could very well leapfrog all of them next summer but I want to see more than some dekes at prospect camp first.
Agostino and several others have fallen victim to the bunch of highly regarded newcomers pushing everyone else down the ranks. But I would still rank him ahead of Blueger. Well, I would rank several of players left ahead of Blueger. The kid may have nice hands and good upside but he has still only played high school hockey whereas Agostino improved nicely as a sophomore, Wilson won conference Freshman of the Year, and Hanowski finally broke out as a points producer. I have all of them above Blueger right now. He could very well leapfrog all of them next summer but I want to see more than some dekes at prospect camp first.
Seriously... people get way too caught up in shiny new toy syndrome this time of the year. If these kids prove themselves next year then sure move them up.
Seriously... people get way too caught up in shiny new toy syndrome this time of the year. If these kids prove themselves next year then sure move them up.
Wah wah people don't vote how I want them to on rankings that mean nothing . . . maybe people like being optimistic instead of cynical.
I see this year's high school dazzler has surpassed at least in the minds of voters the 2009 model, who has grown into the leader of a college team.
I love how the shiny new toys always get the most love for doing the least.
Not impress... halfa da prospec corps doesn't care. I honestly think their goal as prospec, is to do da LEASE work dey can. Dey have no vision for the future, they.... SOFF. Like I never see a bunch of prospec dis soff before. But Zatkoff, he been great for us... thank God.
Last edited by Chancellor Vitale: 08-09-2012 at 09:35 AM.
Heheh. Other than 8 and 9, this matches my list pretty much to a T. You listen to da chancellor. Dohn be soff! I say this poll needs more Macaroni... it needs more Macaroni!
Heheh. Other than 8 and 9, this matches my list pretty much to a T. You listen to da chancellor. Dohn be soff! I say this poll needs more Macaroni... it needs more Macaroni!
Yes, but it needs more haluski before the macaroni.
Blueger is taking over? the kid is 17 years old and has only played 2 years in, as competitive as highschools can get, St Mary's. Sure he put up good numbers and has skill but he has yet to really prove himself in at a much higher level. I assume hes getting so many votes solely based on his potential which seems to me this board attributes to skill at a very young age regardless of league and experiences. New toy syndrome is bad this year IMO, I think a forward who puts up greater than a point per game in college (hanowski) proves his worth a lot more than a player who puts up greater than a point per game in high school.
I would understand the "shiny new toy syndrome" thing being said if Blueger was winning the #8 poll or something, but as of now he has way more potential than guys like Agostino. It's not crazy to believe he'll be better than anyone left on the poll. Ask yourselves "Would i trade Blueger for Agostino straight up?" I answerd no. I did that for every one else left and answered no for all of them too, which is why I voted For Blueger.
Blueger is taking over? the kid is 17 years old and has only played 2 years in, as competitive as highschools can get, St Mary's. Sure he put up good numbers and has skill but he has yet to really prove himself in at a much higher level. I assume hes getting so many votes solely based on his potential which seems to me this board attributes to skill at a very young age regardless of league and experiences. New toy syndrome is bad this year IMO, I think a forward who puts up greater than a point per game in college (hanowski) proves his worth a lot more than a player who puts up greater than a point per game in high school.
Yeah but look at Michel Ouellet's numbers with WB. Sometimes you have to look at the players ability and style over his stats.
It says a lot about Hano's skill that he can put up numbers like that while skating so poorly but his skating isn't even close to being NHL average. Thats not going to fly in pro leagues. Its great that he's working on his skating but until we see at least a little improvement I can't put him over Blueger or Uher.
I'm not in favor of voting Blueger higher than some prospects still on the list for the simple reason he's played at a lower level of hockey (relatively speaking) than them. IMO, he's got to show that his fancy stickhandling and whatnot can translate to a higher level of hockey than high school prep hockey.
St Marys is a fairly prestigous school that has graduated a lot of top end NHL talent though, and I think maybe that's why he has gained a bit more favor. I remember Hanowski tore up High School, but I do not remember where (Minnesota somewhere is all I remember). How comparable were the HS stats and league of Bleuger and Hanoski? That being said I still voted Hanowski. closer to playing, and producing in highr league as others have said.
Hands are fun to watch, but ask Rob Schremp how far that got him.
St Marys is a fairly prestigous school that has graduated a lot of top end NHL talent though, and I think maybe that's why he has gained a bit more favor. I remember Hanowski tore up High School, but I do not remember where (Minnesota somewhere is all I remember). How comparable were the HS stats and league of Bleuger and Hanoski? That being said I still voted Hanowski. closer to playing, and producing in highr league as others have said.
Hands are fun to watch, but ask Rob Schremp how far that got him.
here's a thread that sheds some light on SSM vs. the rest of Minnesota high schools.
Yeah but look at Michel Ouellet's numbers with WB. Sometimes you have to look at the players ability and style over his stats.
It says a lot about Hano's skill that he can put up numbers like that while skating so poorly but his skating isn't even close to being NHL average. Thats not going to fly in pro leagues. Its great that he's working on his skating but until we see at least a little improvement I can't put him over Blueger or Uher.
It's amazing that with just 10 more NHL games played, Michele Ouellet would have transformed from punchline into a respectable NHLer.
I always thought Ouellet was a below average NHL'er, but his stats were always OK. It's one of those eye test things for me. The stats aren't telling, IMO.
I actually kind of liked MO a little. He has good hands and sense and developed a pretty good work ethic under MT.
I remember watching a game when he was with Malkin and Staal. He was first in on the fore check, hit the defender to turn over the puck and then Malkin passed to Staal for the goal. Then later on that night I came on to the boards and posters did nothing but rip MO a new one.
He was an ugly skater to the point that it hurt his shooting. He needed pucks on a platter to score but he learned to keep his feet moving to offset some issues. I wouldn't say "lets get him back" but I didn't think he was all that bad.
St Marys is a fairly prestigous school that has graduated a lot of top end NHL talent though, and I think maybe that's why he has gained a bit more favor. I remember Hanowski tore up High School, but I do not remember where (Minnesota somewhere is all I remember). How comparable were the HS stats and league of Bleuger and Hanoski? That being said I still voted Hanowski. closer to playing, and producing in highr league as others have said.
Hands are fun to watch, but ask Rob Schremp how far that got him.
Hanowksi played at a pretty low level for Minnesota High School Hockey.
IMO, I think a forward who puts up greater than a point per game in college (hanowski) proves his worth a lot more than a player who puts up greater than a point per game in high school.
