Aren't these the guys that make some of their magazines full of models? Pretty sure THN Fully Loaded is just full of models showing off "hockey gear"...
The list I'm pretty sure comes from 30 scouts. One from each team. You guys need to chill. The only reason we're 20th is because Gardiner, and Frattin are ineligible.
The Hockey News considers "Kids" or "prospects" are those players 17- 21 years old (first 5 years after drafting), with the top 75 including only those with less than 50 NHL games.
Philly gets credit as a team ranking for Brayden Schenn and Sean Couturier among their "kids/youth", but do not have a top 75 non NHL prospect at present in the future pipeline.
Our Leafs (although average team age) have a young(ish) team, they don't have a lot of prospects/kids of those under age 21 players. Gardiner, Kadri, Colborne and recently added Carter Ashton (from the Aulie trade) is the core of Leafs overall ranking. Every organization has Greg McKegg and Kenny Ryan type prospects that cancel each other out.
These THN rankings are also compiled by a consensus consolidated opinion of NHL amateur scouts.. Leafs Director of Amateur Scouting Dave Morrison often participates as Toronto's representative in these rankings.
It's funny because we have twice the depth the oilers have in terms of prospects outside the NHL and their top prospect klefbom isn't head and shoulders better than Colborne, Ashton, or even Blacker ffs. These rankings are hilarious
The Oilers top ranking is because they have an entire #1 NHL line of Hall, Eberle and Ryan Nugent-Hopkins under age 21 include in the team rankings.. Klefbom is the only top 75 ranked prospect not in the NHL at this time however..
The Hockey News format doesn't punish a team like the Oilers for successful draft picks, so they are included in the under age 21 ranking for all 30 teams for consistency.
__________________
Signature: There is no greater demonstration of Fan patience then to suggest to "Play the Kids " and be willing to accept the consequences of those actions..
The Leafs after 6 straight non playoff years, and only 1 of 2 teams to not make the playoffs during that stretch are considered to have a bottom 10 prospect pool of players under age 21.
That bottom 10 ranking includes the additions of Colborne, Gardiner, Ashton to boot obtained through trade, and not draft picks earned through bottom 10 finishes.
Picks like Tyler Biggs and Stuart Percy despite being 1st rounders are not considered among the top 75 (non NHL) prospects among consensus opinions of NHL amateur scouts.
Teams like Ottawa and Florida that we were once ahead of in the standings, have now passed us, and they have prospect pools full of potential future NHLers in the system ranked #2 and #3 overall as organizations overall in depth.
This thread is getting pretty funny. It's really not that complicated people.
Kadri looked like he was going to keep playing regularly in NHL when they were making the lists, same as guys like B. Schenn, RNH, and so on, so he was left off the list of prospects.
The team grades included non-prospects who are 21 or younger. As they point out, a team shouldn't be punished with a lower grade because they have prospects good enough to jump right into the NHL.
They gave Philly a high grade despite their lack of prospects because of Schenn and Couturier being under 21, thus counting towards their team grade.
As for the Leafs lower grade, it makes sense given the criteria. Aulie and Frattin had played too many NHL games to count as prospects, but were both over 21, so they didn't count towards the team grade either. Moving Aulie for a the 37th ranked Ashton obviously would move us up the list.
It's a weird system of ranking things, I don't really put much stock in it and at the very least, it has to be taken with a grain of salt.
But for people who want something to complain about, at least try to understand what they're doing before you start on about how stupid everyone is.
It's funny because we have twice the depth the oilers have in terms of prospects outside the NHL and their top prospect klefbom isn't head and shoulders better than Colborne, Ashton, or even Blacker ffs. These rankings are hilarious
I have the 2011 Future watch, the page with the "Team Grades" which says:
Quote:
...unbiased indication of which teams have the best prospects and 21-and-under NHL players
Last year Toronto had a C (28th in the league) with Luke Schenn the only player under 21 on the team. Kadri was 13th overall prospect, the only prospect in the top 75, Colborne who was still a Bruin was 45th.
So if anything this means THN thinks the leafs are doing better (even with still 1 roster player under 21 Gardiner.)
Anyone remember their Jake Gardiner is a second round pick article after the Beauchemin trade?
Shea Weber and Duncan Keith both Norris trophy candidates considered among the best in the game were also 2nd round picks. While Zdeno Chara and Nik Lidstrom were 3rd rounders in their drafts.
Just saying!!
Its not always about where you pick, but how well your scouts do their jobs by whom then pick.
If Burke doesn't waste a 2nd rounder to trade up to take fellow America Tyler Biggs the leafs could have taken Rattie with the 30th (personal fav at this spot) and Brandon Saad at the 39th pick.
The 2011 draft had too much Burke involvement. In hindsight his 4 years as manager is springing more leaks than the Titanic.
I don't really care where the team is ranked out of 30 for prospects, and I don't really care for our prospect depth when there isn't an elite, #1Center in the works. Depth players can be acquired at trade deadlines when the time comes, we shouldn't be overly excited about the 2nd/3rd liners we are developing. It's nice that the team won't have to go spend $3 million on a guy like Armstrong because we'll have a young player in that spot, but at the end of the day, without a #1C (and #1G eventually), depth doesn't mean anything.
You build around those positions, and fill in the other spots after. You don't make a 2nd and 3rd line and then hope for a #1C. We already tried that with Richards, Richards, Getzlaf... to no avail. So clearly this team needs to draft that guy. Hoping we move up this list next year with a guy like Galchenyuk on the list.
Shea Weber and Duncan Keith both Norris trophy candidates considered among the best in the game were also 2nd round picks. While Zdeno Chara and Nik Lidstrom were 3rd rounders in their drafts.
Just saying!!
Its not always about where you pick, but how well your scouts do their jobs by whom then pick.
The analysis really had nothing to do with scouting it was simply 30+ players from the 2008 draft have already played NHL games, therefore they are better prospects than Jake Gardiner.
So clearly this team needs to draft that guy. Hoping we move up this list next year with a guy like Galchenyuk on the list.
Probably won't have to move up. But Russians taken in the first round are a risky proposition. Alot of busts here. Zherdev, Radulov, Semin and Filatov immediately come to mind.
Here are the list of players rated 1st overall in Future Watch (1994 was the first year they did a top 50):
1994: Peter Forsberg
1995: Ed Jovanovski
1996: Bryan Berard
1997: Marc Denis
1998: Marian Hossa
1999: Roberto Luongo
2000: Roberto Luongo
2001: Rostislav Klesla
2002: Tuomo Ruutu
2003: Kari Lehtonen
2004: Kari Lehtonen
2005: Alex Ovechkin
2006: Evgeni Malkin
2007: Erik Johnson
2008: Carey Price
2009: Nikita Filatov
2010: Alex Pietrangelo
2011: Brayden Schenn
-------------------------------
Berard, Denis, Klesla, Ruutu and Filatov seem like obvious misses ... but remember, just because they didn't pan out, doesn't mean they weren't one of the best prospects in the world at the time.
Probably won't have to move up. But Russians taken in the first round are a risky proposition. Alot of busts here. Zherdev, Radulov, Semin and Filatov immediately come to mind.
Galchenyuk was born in Wisconsin. He's American. His dad is from Belarus. I'm really hoping we draft him. Hopefully Burke's american bias will come in handy and we go all out for him. Looks like he'll go in the top ten. Hopefully we don't need to trade up.
Rankings are done by a panel of NHL scouts. They aren't done by the staff members at THN.
Each organizations top 10 list comes straight from a member of that organization, whether it be a scout, assistant GM or GM.
---
Top 10:
1. Evgeny Kuznetsov
2. Mikael Granlund
3. Jonathan Huberdeau
4. Dougie Hamilton
5. Mika Zibanejad
6. Vladimir Tarasenko
7. Mark Scheifele
8. Jacob Markstrom
9. Ryan Strome
10. Brandon Gormley
---
I can post 11-20 though:
11. Ryan Ellis
12. Jonas Brodin
13. Zack Kassian
14. Charlie Coyle
15. Sven Baertschi
16. Brendan Smith
17. Tim Erixon
18. Joe Colborne
19. Nick Bjugstad
20. Robin Lehner
---
(I think this is the Leafs top 10 in Future Watch ... Reminder: apparently, this top 10 is straight from the organization itself, not THN)
via noBSleafsFAN:
Toronto:
Colborne
Biggs
Mckegg
Percy
Blacker
Ross
Holzer
Scrivens
D'amigo
Mueller
---
FROM THE MAGAZINE
"The Future Watch top 50 ranking is a blend of ratings provided by a panel of 14 NHL scouts and GM's. The process begins shortly after the WJC in early January when each team's top-10 list of prospects is established in consultation with the organizations scouts. The master list of all 300 prospects is then distributed to a scouting representative from each NHL team. 14 responded and we asked each of them to formulate a list of the top 50 prospects based on long-term NHL upside (five to ten years). A spreadsheet does the rest. Voting points are weighted heavily towards players at the top of the list. More than 130 prospects received votes this year."
"The Future Watch top 50 ranking is a blend of ratings provided by a panel of 14 NHL scouts and GM's. The process begins shortly after the WJC in early January when each team's top-10 list of prospects is established in consultation with the organizations scouts. The master list of all 300 prospects is then distributed to a scouting representative from each NHL team. 14 responded and we asked each of them to formulate a list of the top 50 prospects based on long-term NHL upside (five to ten years). A spreadsheet does the rest. Voting points are weighted heavily towards players at the top of the list. More than 130 prospects received votes this year."
It would be interesting to find how these 14 scouts ranked their prospect pool against others. It would be hard to answer to your boss why the prospect pool that you helped put together is ranked so low, so there just may be a bit of bias there. The bias probably extends to how they rate other teams as well - a little jab at someone you don't like.
"The Future Watch top 50 ranking is a blend of ratings provided by a panel of 14 NHL scouts and GM's. The process begins shortly after the WJC in early January when each team's top-10 list of prospects is established in consultation with the organizations scouts. The master list of all 300 prospects is then distributed to a scouting representative from each NHL team. 14 responded and we asked each of them to formulate a list of the top 50 prospects based on long-term NHL upside (five to ten years). A spreadsheet does the rest. Voting points are weighted heavily towards players at the top of the list. More than 130 prospects received votes this year."
It would be interesting to find how these 14 scouts ranked their prospect pool against others. It would be hard to answer to your boss why the prospect pool that you helped put together is ranked so low, so there just may be a bit of bias there. The bias probably extends to how they rate other teams as well - a little jab at someone you don't like.
"The Future Watch top 50 ranking is a blend of ratings provided by a panel of 14 NHL scouts and GM's. The process begins shortly after the WJC in early January when each team's top-10 list of prospects is established in consultation with the organizations scouts. The master list of all 300 prospects is then distributed to a scouting representative from each NHL team. 14 responded and we asked each of them to formulate a list of the top 50 prospects based on long-term NHL upside (five to ten years). A spreadsheet does the rest. Voting points are weighted heavily towards players at the top of the list. More than 130 prospects received votes this year."
It would be interesting to find how these 14 scouts ranked their prospect pool against others. It would be hard to answer to your boss why the prospect pool that you helped put together is ranked so low, so there just may be a bit of bias there. The bias probably extends to how they rate other teams as well - a little jab at someone you don't like.
Also, scouts have limited knowledge because they are typically assigned to a certain geographic area and/or league.
