HFBoards

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

Contrary to popular belief, Paul Holmgren drafts well

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
07-12-2013, 11:06 PM
  #26
hockeyfreak7
Registered User
 
hockeyfreak7's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Charlottesville
Posts: 8,478
vCash: 500
Sort of off topic, but related, the Flyers prospect pool is seriously underrated. I'm reading the prospects board Top 10 Prospect Pools thread, and I see repeated mention of Detroit.

Detroit: Mantha, Smith, Sproul, Ouellet, Nyquist, Tatar, Jurco, Mrazek, Jarnkrok

Is that really better than this?

Philly: Laughton, Morin, Hagg, Cousins, Gustafsson, Gostisbehere, Raffl, Straka, Stolarz, McGinn


I understand a couple of their prospects get added hype for being a part of a Calder Cup team, and I also realize we didn't draft a couple of those guys, but is there as big a difference as some people would have you believe or am I just really biased?

hockeyfreak7 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-12-2013, 11:09 PM
  #27
Coppy
Good Luck Richie!
 
Coppy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 929
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Haute Couturier View Post
It's not that it counts against the Flyers. It's the simple fact that a higher draft position means a better chance at landing quality and a better chance the player will contribute sooner. So how can you accurately compare everyone when the teams with high picks have an advantage?

Heck forget about Detroit for a moment. The Oilers had a 6th overall pick and two 1st overalls during that time. Does that automatically make them a better drafting team compared to teams at the bottom like Vancouver that did not have those high picks?
I get what you're saying, however at a certain point the data becomes overwhelming even in the face of draft position.

Since the lockout, notable picks:

Detroit:
Gustav Nyquist
Brendan Smith
Joakim Andersson
Cory Emmerton
Shawn Matthias
Jan Mursak
Jakub Kindl
Justin Abdelkader
Darren Helm

Philadelphia:
Sean Couturier
Eric Wellwood
Luca Sbisa
Marc-Andre Bourdon
Zac Rinaldo
James Van Riemsdyk
Claude Giroux
Andreas Nodl
Steve Downie
Oskars Bartulis

Coppy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-13-2013, 01:02 AM
  #28
Toonces
The beer kitty
 
Toonces's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: New Jersey
Country: Ireland
Posts: 3,676
vCash: 500
Holmgren was a scout at one point, so I'm sure he knows something about spotting talent, but with that being said, I think is is more a reflection on the scouting staff the organization has assembled rather than his own individual talent. Where I think Holmgren excels is his willingness to listen to people who spend a lot more time than him watching kids play.

Unfortunately, I believe Homer gets his bad rep in player management from Snider's influence more than anything else. He probably is a little too quick to pull the trigger, but this is an organizational problem as a whole, as it largely preceded Holmgren.

Toonces is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-13-2013, 05:54 AM
  #29
Psuhockey
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 1,873
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by hockeyfreak7 View Post
Sort of off topic, but related, the Flyers prospect pool is seriously underrated. I'm reading the prospects board Top 10 Prospect Pools thread, and I see repeated mention of Detroit.

Detroit: Mantha, Smith, Sproul, Ouellet, Nyquist, Tatar, Jurco, Mrazek, Jarnkrok

Is that really better than this?

Philly: Laughton, Morin, Hagg, Cousins, Gustafsson, Gostisbehere, Raffl, Straka, Stolarz, McGinn


I understand a couple of their prospects get added hype for being a part of a Calder Cup team, and I also realize we didn't draft a couple of those guys, but is there as big a difference as some people would have you believe or am I just really biased?
Prospect rankings of any sport should be taken with a grain if salt. Most of these ranking services are based on somebody's opinion who has for the most part barely seen all these players. There is bound to be bias in there since it is a persons opinion. My contention as that since it is widely accepted that Detroit is the best drafting team, their prospects get a little overrated simply because Detroit has drafted them. I cant prove it as it is near impossible to prove bias but Helm, Kindl, Ericsson and Abdelkater were all thought to be great prospects by at least the Hockey News and proved to be nothing more than role players.

Psuhockey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-18-2013, 12:57 AM
  #30
panayiotis
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 1,248
vCash: 500
nonsense

apart from bob and sharp the flyers have not drafted any significant players outside the first round. they traded a batch of picks. the rest have been stiffs or lesser players.

panayiotis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-18-2013, 03:08 AM
  #31
OzFlyer
Registered Boozer
 
OzFlyer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Australia
Country: Australia
Posts: 689
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by panayiotis View Post
apart from bob and sharp the flyers have not drafted any significant players outside the first round. they traded a batch of picks. the rest have been stiffs or lesser players.
Bob wasn't drafted. They found him.

OzFlyer is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
07-18-2013, 07:08 AM
  #32
Snotbubbles
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 3,490
vCash: 500
The problem I have with this analysis is that it uses # of games played in the NHL. The Flyers by their own admission take forwards over defenseman early (though they didn't this year) because they are easier to get a read on.

If you really want to make a more meaningful analysis, add in average draft position by round, break it down games played by draft round, add some kind of impact figure like points/draft pick and TOI/draft pick and I'm sure there are other categories that could be added. Otherwise, under your analysis, drafting JvR at #2 with his 244 GP is better than drafting PK Subban at #43 with his 202 GP.

Does Holmgren draft well? Maybe, but this analysis didn't prove that.

Snotbubbles is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-18-2013, 08:12 AM
  #33
Psuhockey
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 1,873
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Snotbubbles View Post
The problem I have with this analysis is that it uses # of games played in the NHL. The Flyers by their own admission take forwards over defenseman early (though they didn't this year) because they are easier to get a read on.

If you really want to make a more meaningful analysis, add in average draft position by round, break it down games played by draft round, add some kind of impact figure like points/draft pick and TOI/draft pick and I'm sure there are other categories that could be added. Otherwise, under your analysis, drafting JvR at #2 with his 244 GP is better than drafting PK Subban at #43 with his 202 GP.

Does Holmgren draft well? Maybe, but this analysis didn't prove that.
Your right, games played is a bad way of judging a teams ability to draft. I don't think there is any good way of doing it. Lets look at your example of Montreal and PK Subban. Montreal looks great for drafting Subban in 2007 in the 2nd round, but go back one year earlier and they took draft bust David Fischer 2 picks ahead of Claude Giroux. Are they a good drafting team for taking Subban or a bad drafting team for taking Fischer? Detroit gets a lot of credit for picking Datsyuk but isn't that really luck? Detroit picked 7 players ahead of Datsyuk who they must of had rated higher and only one, Jiri Fischer in the 1st rd, played any thing significant in the NHL (one other guy played 2 games). Are they great at drafting for finding Datsyuk or bad for whiffing on the other 6 including two 2nd rd picks. Are the Flyers a bad drafting team cause they haven't found any late round gems or a good drafting team because they haven't had any first round busts? Ranking a teams draft ability is completely subjective and there is no stat or formula that can be made to quantify it.

Psuhockey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-18-2013, 08:43 AM
  #34
Snotbubbles
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 3,490
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Psuhockey View Post
Your right, games played is a bad way of judging a teams ability to draft. I don't think there is any good way of doing it. Lets look at your example of Montreal and PK Subban. Montreal looks great for drafting Subban in 2007 in the 2nd round, but go back one year earlier and they took draft bust David Fischer 2 picks ahead of Claude Giroux. Are they a good drafting team for taking Subban or a bad drafting team for taking Fischer? Detroit gets a lot of credit for picking Datsyuk but isn't that really luck? Detroit picked 7 players ahead of Datsyuk who they must of had rated higher and only one, Jiri Fischer in the 1st rd, played any thing significant in the NHL (one other guy played 2 games). Are they great at drafting for finding Datsyuk or bad for whiffing on the other 6 including two 2nd rd picks. Are the Flyers a bad drafting team cause they haven't found any late round gems or a good drafting team because they haven't had any first round busts? Ranking a teams draft ability is completely subjective and there is no stat or formula that can be made to quantify it.
It's tough to answer your Datsyuk question. Detroit was ahead of the curve with their Euro/Rus scouting and I don't really know the climate at that time in terms of bringing Russian players over to the NHL. Reading up about Datsyuk, the Detroit scout who saw him believed he was the only scout to see him play prior to the NHL draft, so it makes sense to wait until the 7th round to draft him if you reasonably believe no one else heard of this kid. That's good drafting, waiting on a player you believe could be a top 50 guy until the 7th round. Nowadays, that situation probably doesn't happen as often.

Snotbubbles is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-18-2013, 12:19 PM
  #35
CS
Bryzgalov's Blueline
 
CS's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Lumberton, NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 14,001
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by panayiotis View Post
apart from bob and sharp the flyers have not drafted any significant players outside the first round. they traded a batch of picks. the rest have been stiffs or lesser players.
Bobby Clarke - 2nd round - 1144 GP
Bill Clement - 2nd round - 719 GP
Tom Bladon - 2nd round - 610 GP
Pelle Lindbergh (G) - 2nd round - *157 GP
Peter Zezel - 2nd round - 873 GP
Scott Mellanby - 2nd round - 1431 GP
Greg Johnson - 2nd round - 785 GP
Chris Simon - 2nd round - 782 GP
Mikael Renberg - 2nd round - 661 GP
Janne Niinimaa - 2nd round - 741 GP
Bob Kelly - 3rd round - 837 GP
Jimmy Watson - 3rd round - 613 GP
Derrick Smith - 3rd round - 537 GP
Chris Therien - 3rd round - 764 GP
Vinny Prospal - 3rd round - 1108 GP
Patrick Sharp - 3rd round - 595 GP
Colin Fraser - 3rd round - *325 GP
Adam MacAdam - 4th round - 864 GP
Dave Schultze - 5th round - 535 GP
Don Saleski - 6th round - 543 GP
Paul Holmgren - 6th round - 527 GP
Ron Hextall (G) - 6th round - 608 GP
Rick Tocchet - 6th round - 1144 GP
Dmitri Yushkevich - 6th round - 786 GP
Alexander Selivanov - 6th round - 459 GP
Antero Niittymaki (G) - 6th round - 234 GP
Roman Cechmanek (G) - 6th round - 202 GP
Dennis Seidenberg - 6th round - 581 GP
Zac Rinaldo - 6th round - *98 GP
Rejean Lemelin (G) - 7th round - 507 GP
Dave Brown - 7th round - 729 GP
Todd Fedoruk - 7th round - 545 GP
Pete Peeters (G) - 8th round - 489 GP
Per-Erik Eklund - 8th round - 594 GP
Murray Baron - 8th round - 988 GP
Gord Murphy - 9th round - 862 GP

In the pool with NHL potential:
Anthony Stolarz (2nd)
Robert Hagg (2nd)
Nick Cousins (3rd)
Shayne Gostisbehere (3rd)
Tye McGinn (4th)
Marcel Noebels (4th)

CS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-18-2013, 05:01 PM
  #36
jd2210
Registered Non User
 
jd2210's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Great White North
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,533
vCash: 500
Anyone who argues that bob was a pick probably isn't worth debating. Just kidding. Nice list CS. I can't believe that Murphy was a 9th rounder. We have been pretty stellar with the 6th round picks.

jd2210 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
07-18-2013, 05:29 PM
  #37
GKJ
Global Moderator
Entertainment
 
GKJ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Do not trade plz
Country: United States
Posts: 110,742
vCash: 5888
Given the moves made in the front office this summer, it seems like Paul Holmgren doesn't think Paul Holmgren drafts well.

If you trade a guy you drafted in a hockey trade, that's still a good draft pick. Dennis Seidenberg was a good draft pick, they just made a dumb trade that really hurt when the Flyers (under Holmgren's volition if you believe Bob Clarke) tried to replace Kim Johnsson with Nolan Baumgartner.

Rating it on sheer number of games played is still not the way to do it. Which guys make a real impact, and especially at the value of their pick. When Colorado drafted Scott Parker in the 1st round, was that a good pick because he played for 8 years in the league, or is it a bad pick since he was a forward who never scored more than 2 goals in a season.


Last edited by GKJ: 07-18-2013 at 05:37 PM.
GKJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-18-2013, 05:33 PM
  #38
LegionOfDoom91
Registered User
 
LegionOfDoom91's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Country: United States
Posts: 13,794
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by GKJ View Post
Given the moves made in the front office this summer, it seems like Paul Holmgren doesn't think Paul Holmgren drafts well.
How do you figure that? The whole scouting staff basically stayed the same except a few additions overseas. Chris Pryor still remains as overseeing the scouts and handling the draft.

LegionOfDoom91 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
07-18-2013, 05:52 PM
  #39
GKJ
Global Moderator
Entertainment
 
GKJ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Do not trade plz
Country: United States
Posts: 110,742
vCash: 5888
Quote:
Originally Posted by LegionOfDoom91 View Post
How do you figure that? The whole scouting staff basically stayed the same except a few additions overseas. Chris Pryor still remains as overseeing the scouts and handling the draft.
They didn't bring back Ron Hextall haha's, and did they not change Dave Brown's and John Paddock's title (again)? Could be wrong, thought I saw that discussed around here. The article linked in the OP seems to cite that number of games played is the standard, and the Flyers brought back the assistant GM of the team who is at the top of the list.



Beyond that, to be determined a team that 'drafts well,' these guys have to be making an impact for your team, since it's the easiest way to acquire good players at economically friendly costs. As as been noted many times many people, there are Flyers fans who are of legal drinking age who were not born the day the Flyers drafted a defenseman who they kept and developed into a long-term piece for the majority of their career. Not even Leafs fans can say that.

You also can't say you're a team that drafts well late in the draft, and do so by naming your 13th forward, another forward who you (wrongly) found ways to keep off the team, and your 7th defenseman who is maybe 3rd on the '7th defenseman' depth chart. Of any player who played for the Phantoms and Flyers in the later half of the draft, the best one (McGinn) wasn't even named in the entire article, and he's the mostly likely to make a positive impact of any non-1st round pick.

GKJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-18-2013, 06:11 PM
  #40
LegionOfDoom91
Registered User
 
LegionOfDoom91's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Country: United States
Posts: 13,794
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by GKJ View Post
They didn't bring back Ron Hextall haha's, and did they not change Dave Brown's and John Paddock's title (again)? Could be wrong, thought I saw that discussed around here. The article linked in the OP seems to cite that number of games played is the standard, and the Flyers brought back the assistant GM of the team who is at the top of the list.
That haven't specified exactly what Hextall will be doing, he was the GM of the farm club in LA. Dave Brown is a pro-scout not an amateur, he won't be doing anything draft related, he'll oversee the pro-scouting department. John Paddock is officially moving to the coaching staff, he was there last year but still had the title of Assistant GM.


Last edited by LegionOfDoom91: 07-18-2013 at 06:24 PM.
LegionOfDoom91 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
07-18-2013, 07:42 PM
  #41
GKJ
Global Moderator
Entertainment
 
GKJ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Do not trade plz
Country: United States
Posts: 110,742
vCash: 5888
Quote:
Originally Posted by LegionOfDoom91 View Post
That haven't specified exactly what Hextall will be doing, he was the GM of the farm club in LA. Dave Brown is a pro-scout not an amateur, he won't be doing anything draft related, he'll oversee the pro-scouting department. John Paddock is officially moving to the coaching staff, he was there last year but still had the title of Assistant GM.
Brown took Hextall's job when Hextall left (Director of Player Personel), so if he's a pro-scout then that's a change. Doesn't sound like it is though. But that's still working with the players after they turn pro, and pretty much since Hextall left, the Phantoms have been a disaster.

GKJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-18-2013, 07:58 PM
  #42
LegionOfDoom91
Registered User
 
LegionOfDoom91's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Country: United States
Posts: 13,794
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by GKJ View Post
Brown took Hextall's job when Hextall left (Director of Player Personel), so if he's a pro-scout then that's a change. Doesn't sound like it is though. But that's still working with the players after they turn pro, and pretty much since Hextall left, the Phantoms have been a disaster.
Pryor was overseeing both Pro & Amateur scouting departments last year. Now he's only overseeing the Amateur scouting department. Brown's title is now is "Head Pro-Scout". I guess Brown oversees the Pro scouting department now. I don't know if he still is the Director Player Personnel as well. The Flyers haven't updated their FO section on their website so I don't know for sure. I'm only going by tweets from our beat writers.

LegionOfDoom91 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
07-18-2013, 10:53 PM
  #43
Norm MacDonald
Registered User
 
Norm MacDonald's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Country: United States
Posts: 4,281
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by hockeyfreak7 View Post
Sort of off topic, but related, the Flyers prospect pool is seriously underrated. I'm reading the prospects board Top 10 Prospect Pools thread, and I see repeated mention of Detroit.

Detroit: Mantha, Smith, Sproul, Ouellet, Nyquist, Tatar, Jurco, Mrazek, Jarnkrok

Is that really better than this?

Philly: Laughton, Morin, Hagg, Cousins, Gustafsson, Gostisbehere, Raffl, Straka, Stolarz, McGinn


I understand a couple of their prospects get added hype for being a part of a Calder Cup team, and I also realize we didn't draft a couple of those guys, but is there as big a difference as some people would have you believe or am I just really biased?
Unfortunately, yes. It's a lot better. That Detroit list doesn't even include guys like Sheahan, Frk and Backman who would be top prospects with the Flyers organization. Fans who follow Detroit closely don't necessarily hype them up as much because they have so many other promising young players to get excited about.

Fans of every team in the league like to hype their prospect pool, but if you really objectively study the depth of other organizations, you might find that your team doesn't look quite as good in comparison. That's not to say the Flyers don't have some really promising prospects. Laughton seems to be progressing well, and Morin and Hagg are loaded with potential. However, it's pretty common to expect the best case scenario from your prospects, but the worst case scenario from everyone else.

I'd rank Flyers at around 25th in the league in terms of prospect depth (barely ahead of New Jersey, San Jose, Washington, and NYR). Certainly better than a couple years ago, but nothing to really boast about. I hope they can find some gems in later rounds, because that's one thing that the Flyers scouting department generally hasn't been able to do.

EDIT: Actually, not NYR. I don't know what I was thinking.


Last edited by Norm MacDonald: 07-18-2013 at 11:29 PM.
Norm MacDonald is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
07-18-2013, 11:53 PM
  #44
panayiotis
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 1,248
vCash: 500
get serious

Quote:
Originally Posted by CS View Post
Bobby Clarke - 2nd round - 1144 GP
Bill Clement - 2nd round - 719 GP
Tom Bladon - 2nd round - 610 GP
Pelle Lindbergh (G) - 2nd round - *157 GP
Peter Zezel - 2nd round - 873 GP
Scott Mellanby - 2nd round - 1431 GP
Greg Johnson - 2nd round - 785 GP
Chris Simon - 2nd round - 782 GP
Mikael Renberg - 2nd round - 661 GP
Janne Niinimaa - 2nd round - 741 GP
Bob Kelly - 3rd round - 837 GP
Jimmy Watson - 3rd round - 613 GP
Derrick Smith - 3rd round - 537 GP
Chris Therien - 3rd round - 764 GP
Vinny Prospal - 3rd round - 1108 GP
Patrick Sharp - 3rd round - 595 GP
Colin Fraser - 3rd round - *325 GP
Adam MacAdam - 4th round - 864 GP
Dave Schultze - 5th round - 535 GP
Don Saleski - 6th round - 543 GP
Paul Holmgren - 6th round - 527 GP
Ron Hextall (G) - 6th round - 608 GP
Rick Tocchet - 6th round - 1144 GP
Dmitri Yushkevich - 6th round - 786 GP
Alexander Selivanov - 6th round - 459 GP
Antero Niittymaki (G) - 6th round - 234 GP
Roman Cechmanek (G) - 6th round - 202 GP
Dennis Seidenberg - 6th round - 581 GP
Zac Rinaldo - 6th round - *98 GP
Rejean Lemelin (G) - 7th round - 507 GP
Dave Brown - 7th round - 729 GP
Todd Fedoruk - 7th round - 545 GP
Pete Peeters (G) - 8th round - 489 GP
Per-Erik Eklund - 8th round - 594 GP
Murray Baron - 8th round - 988 GP
Gord Murphy - 9th round - 862 GP

In the pool with NHL potential:
Anthony Stolarz (2nd)
Robert Hagg (2nd)
Nick Cousins (3rd)
Shayne Gostisbehere (3rd)
Tye McGinn (4th)
Marcel Noebels (4th)
recent history dude. apart from sharp. where are the front line talent. that has been drafted outside first round. lets say in the last decade......

panayiotis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-19-2013, 02:44 AM
  #45
CS
Bryzgalov's Blueline
 
CS's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Lumberton, NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 14,001
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by panayiotis View Post
recent history dude. apart from sharp. where are the front line talent. that has been drafted outside first round. lets say in the last decade......
Sharp wasn't in the last decade...

Also keep in mind that there are two factors working against the Flyers as we get more modern in draft class...those factors also happen to be working against the entire NHL making for less and less talent discovered in later rounds...

1) the expansion era has added more picks to each round making the draft longer by the end meaning that later picks end up being legitimately being even later picks because of the era

2) with more modern technology in the modern era of hockey, the scouting process has also improved making the draft more top heavy. think about the technology that was just coming out a decade ago...**** think about the technology that was just coming out 5 years ago.

So even if the number of players the Flyers are finding in later rounds is significantly less than 20-30 years ago, it is the same exact way across the board in the NHL.

CS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-19-2013, 06:33 AM
  #46
Psuhockey
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 1,873
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Norm MacDonald View Post
Unfortunately, yes. It's a lot better. That Detroit list doesn't even include guys like Sheahan, Frk and Backman who would be top prospects with the Flyers organization. Fans who follow Detroit closely don't necessarily hype them up as much because they have so many other promising young players to get excited about.

Fans of every team in the league like to hype their prospect pool, but if you really objectively study the depth of other organizations, you might find that your team doesn't look quite as good in comparison. That's not to say the Flyers don't have some really promising prospects. Laughton seems to be progressing well, and Morin and Hagg are loaded with potential. However, it's pretty common to expect the best case scenario from your prospects, but the worst case scenario from everyone else..
So let me get this straight. Other teams fans overhype their prospect pool but not Detroit fans because they have too many good prospects. And Detroit's prospect pool is so much better than the Flyers that their 2nd tier guys would be top prospects in the Flyers pool. That makes a lot of sense, no fan hype there.


Last edited by Psuhockey: 07-19-2013 at 06:48 AM.
Psuhockey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-19-2013, 07:01 AM
  #47
Snotbubbles
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 3,490
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Norm MacDonald View Post
Unfortunately, yes. It's a lot better. That Detroit list doesn't even include guys like Sheahan, Frk and Backman who would be top prospects with the Flyers organization. Fans who follow Detroit closely don't necessarily hype them up as much because they have so many other promising young players to get excited about.

Fans of every team in the league like to hype their prospect pool, but if you really objectively study the depth of other organizations, you might find that your team doesn't look quite as good in comparison. That's not to say the Flyers don't have some really promising prospects. Laughton seems to be progressing well, and Morin and Hagg are loaded with potential. However, it's pretty common to expect the best case scenario from your prospects, but the worst case scenario from everyone else.

I'd rank Flyers at around 25th in the league in terms of prospect depth (barely ahead of New Jersey, San Jose, Washington, and NYR). Certainly better than a couple years ago, but nothing to really boast about. I hope they can find some gems in later rounds, because that's one thing that the Flyers scouting department generally hasn't been able to do.

EDIT: Actually, not NYR. I don't know what I was thinking.
The Detroit prospect pool looks better because all the Flyers good prospect don't qualify to be called "prospects".

The list that was posted earlier: Mantha (18), Smith (24), Sproul (20), Ouellet (19), Nyquist (23), Tatar (22), Jurco (20), Mrazek (21), Jarnkrok (21) has a ton of older "prospects".

When I look at similar aged Flyer players I get: Voracek (23), Simmonds (24), L. Schenn (23), B. Schenn (21), Couturier (20), Laughton (19), Morin (18), Hagg (18)

So Detroit prospect pool, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah. I'll take the Flyers young guys over Detroits even if they aren't considered "prospects" anymore.

Snotbubbles is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-19-2013, 07:16 AM
  #48
Hiesenberg
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Country: United States
Posts: 3,354
vCash: 491
Quote:
Originally Posted by Snotbubbles View Post
The Detroit prospect pool looks better because all the Flyers good prospect don't qualify to be called "prospects".

The list that was posted earlier: Mantha (18), Smith (24), Sproul (20), Ouellet (19), Nyquist (23), Tatar (22), Jurco (20), Mrazek (21), Jarnkrok (21) has a ton of older "prospects".

When I look at similar aged Flyer players I get: Voracek (23), Simmonds (24), L. Schenn (23), B. Schenn (21), Couturier (20), Laughton (19), Morin (18), Hagg (18)

So Detroit prospect pool, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah. I'll take the Flyers young guys over Detroits even if they aren't considered "prospects" anymore.
Thats a good point. Flyers typically have their young guys playing for them, so while their "prospects" are lacking, its because they have a 19 year old centering their 3rd line. And a 20 year old playing wing on the top line or centering their 2nd line.

Hiesenberg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-19-2013, 10:56 AM
  #49
Norm MacDonald
Registered User
 
Norm MacDonald's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Country: United States
Posts: 4,281
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Psuhockey View Post
So let me get this straight. Other teams fans overhype their prospect pool but not Detroit fans because they have too many good prospects. And Detroit's prospect pool is so much better than the Flyers that their 2nd tier guys would be top prospects in the Flyers pool. That makes a lot of sense, no fan hype there.
As I said, every team overhypes their prospects (Detroit included). Some are just more deserving than others. And yes, guys like Sheahan and Frk would easily be in the Flyers' top 5 prospects.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Snotbubbles View Post
The Detroit prospect pool looks better because all the Flyers good prospect don't qualify to be called "prospects".

The list that was posted earlier: Mantha (18), Smith (24), Sproul (20), Ouellet (19), Nyquist (23), Tatar (22), Jurco (20), Mrazek (21), Jarnkrok (21) has a ton of older "prospects".

When I look at similar aged Flyer players I get: Voracek (23), Simmonds (24), L. Schenn (23), B. Schenn (21), Couturier (20), Laughton (19), Morin (18), Hagg (18)

So Detroit prospect pool, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah. I'll take the Flyers young guys over Detroits even if they aren't considered "prospects" anymore.
It's true, the Flyers have a great young core, but we're still talking about players coming into the team rather than ones already there. Also, Detroit's list is especially impressive when considering where they picked. They've been able to use their non-firsts to select and develop great prospects, maximizing the value of their assets without having to acquire them by trading their top players (like Richards and Carter).

Norm MacDonald is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
07-19-2013, 11:10 AM
  #50
hockeyfreak7
Registered User
 
hockeyfreak7's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Charlottesville
Posts: 8,478
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Norm MacDonald View Post
As I said, every team overhypes their prospects (Detroit included). Some are just more deserving than others. And yes, guys like Sheahan and Frk would easily be in the Flyers' top 5 prospects.
Neither of them would "easily" be in the Flyers top five. Both of them are similar in quality to Cousins who is the Flyers fifth best prospect. Laughton, Morin, Hagg, and Gostisbehere are all clearly ahead of them at this point. And note, Hagg, Gostisbehere, and Cousins were all taken outside of the first round as well.

The Wings have better prospect depth. I'll concede on that, but the Flyers have better high end talent which evens the comparison in my opinion.

hockeyfreak7 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 05:43 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.