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

Penguins #4 prospect

View Poll Results: Who is our #4 prospect?
Josh Archibald (20, Nebraska-Omaha/WCHA) 0 0%
Teddy Blueger (18, Minnesota State/WCHA) 1 0.96%
Nick D'Agostino (23, Cornell/ECAC) 0 0%
Brian Dumoulin (21, Wilkes-Barre/AHL) 85 81.73%
Jake Guentzel (18, Sioux City/USHL) 0 0%
Eric Hartzell (24, Quinnipiac/ECAC) 2 1.92%
Tristan Jarry (18, Edmonton/WHL) 11 10.58%
Tom Kühnhackl (21, Wilkes-Barre/AHL) 3 2.88%
Matia Marcantuoni (19, Kitchener/OHL) 0 0%
Jayson Megna (23, Wilkes-Barre/AHL) 0 0%
Bryan Rust (21, Notre Dame/CCHA) 0 0%
Oscar Sundqvist (19, Skellefteå AIK Juniors/SWE) 0 0%
Dominik Uher (20, Wilkes-Barre/AHL) 0 0%
Scott Wilson (21, UMass-Lowell/Hockey East) 0 0%
Anton Zlobin (20, Val d'Or/QMJHL) 2 1.92%
Voters: 104. You may not vote on this poll

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
07-27-2013, 12:41 PM
  #1
Burgs
Registered User
 
Burgs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Country: Germany
Posts: 5,894
vCash: 500
Penguins #4 prospect

Harrington with the clear win to round out the top 3. Pretty sure the next one on the list will be another defenseman. Added Guentzel.

2013 poll results
#1 Derrick Pouliot (56.68%)
#2 Olli Määttä (84.17%)
#3 Scott Harrington (66.44%)

Burgs is offline  
Old
07-27-2013, 01:02 PM
  #2
Darth Vitale
Moderator
Transitional Period
 
Darth Vitale's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Victoryville
Country: United States
Posts: 25,628
vCash: 500
I see the "D Prospet Blinders" are still on. I expect a goalie to get picked around 8 or 9. Funny.

Darth Vitale is offline  
Old
07-27-2013, 01:13 PM
  #3
MichiganWolverines
Big Mac Attack
 
MichiganWolverines's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Brampton, Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,660
vCash: 500
Add Harrison Ruopp.

MichiganWolverines is offline  
Old
07-27-2013, 01:15 PM
  #4
Rowdy Roddy Peeper
Spreadin Cheer;Mumps
 
Rowdy Roddy Peeper's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 44,211
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chancellor Vitale View Post
I see the "D Prospet Blinders" are still on. I expect a goalie to get picked around 8 or 9. Funny.
I'm not sure what you mean. What's the argument for a player at another position over a guy who's had a very successful collegiate career, led our AHL defense to the conference finals, and is the closest to contributing at the NHL level?

Rowdy Roddy Peeper is offline  
Old
07-27-2013, 01:18 PM
  #5
Randy Butternubs
Makin Bacon Pancakes
 
Randy Butternubs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 7,763
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chancellor Vitale View Post
I see the "D Prospet Blinders" are still on. I expect a goalie to get picked around 8 or 9. Funny.
Waaaait a second...

Quote:
Seriously thought the only obvious thing about any of this is, none of our forwards even crack the Top 5.

Pouliot
Maatta
Harrington
Dumoulin
Jarry
Harztell

are all more valuable prospects than all of the F, and the D among them are more likely than any two F prospects put together, to make positive contributions to this team in the next 2-3 years.

Other than passing time I truly do not understand the purpose of polls like these. Everyone knows our best prospects are D prospects and by not a small margin, followed by the goalies. Our F prospects don't even qualify as "average" in terms of the probability than any has a lasting impact on the team. It COULD happen but it's so far-fetched right now that it's pointless to even think about it for a couple years.
http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/sh...3&postcount=97

So you have those blinders on too?

Randy Butternubs is offline  
Old
07-27-2013, 01:24 PM
  #6
Ogrezilla
Nerf Herder
 
Ogrezilla's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Pittsburgh
Posts: 34,621
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chancellor Vitale View Post
I see the "D Prospet Blinders" are still on. I expect a goalie to get picked around 8 or 9. Funny.
I don't get how you think the need of the team has anything to do with the quality of the prospect. Every forward on our team could retire right now and it shouldn't change these rankings one bit. Our defensemen are better prospects than our goalies and forwards. I really think you are just completely out to lunch on this one.

Ogrezilla is offline  
Old
07-27-2013, 01:25 PM
  #7
Darth Vitale
Moderator
Transitional Period
 
Darth Vitale's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Victoryville
Country: United States
Posts: 25,628
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Randy Butternubs View Post
Waaaait a second...

So you have those blinders on too?

Those aren't ordered rankings (I don't really know if Pouliot is better than Maatta is better than Harrington or if Harztell is better than Jarry, because I never get to see them play). I just posted the guys who are obviously our best prospects based on pedigree (i.e. none are forwards), and think the goalies are more important than people are recognizing.

IOW I do think when the votes are counted, the goalies will end up (wrongly) sliding beneath guys like Kuhnhackl or Zlobin or Megna, because goalies are often overlooked and the forward dangle-factor from camp always gets people excited when it really shouldn't.

Darth Vitale is offline  
Old
07-27-2013, 01:27 PM
  #8
Darth Vitale
Moderator
Transitional Period
 
Darth Vitale's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Victoryville
Country: United States
Posts: 25,628
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ogrezilla View Post
I don't get how you think the need of the team has anything to do with the quality of the prospect. Every forward on our team could retire right now and it shouldn't change these rankings one bit. Our defensemen are better prospects than our goalies and forwards.
And our goalie prospects are better than our F prospects (at least Hartzell and Jarry), and probably better than all but the blue-chip D (Pouliot, Maatta... with Harrington... hard to know for sure).

I don't say "need relates to the quality of the prospect". I suggested instead that when ranking them (presumably they are ranked to know which are the most important / have the best chance of helping this team?), team need should be as important as quality. The opportunities that will arise first are F and G opportunities. Even the blue chip D will have to wait their turn most likely for a couple more years.

Darth Vitale is offline  
Old
07-27-2013, 01:28 PM
  #9
Ogrezilla
Nerf Herder
 
Ogrezilla's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Pittsburgh
Posts: 34,621
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chancellor Vitale View Post
Those aren't ordered rankings (I don't really know if Pouliot is better than Maatta is better than Harrington or if Harztell is better than Jarry, because I never get to see them play). I just posted the guys who are obviously our best prospects based on pedigree (i.e. none are forwards), and think the goalies are more important than people will vote given our goalie situation, that the votes are going strictly on draft pedigree AFAICT.

BUT I do think when the votes are counted, the goalies will end up (wrongly) sliding beneath guys like Kuhnhackl or Zlobin or Megna, because goalies are often overlooked and the forward dangle-factor from camp always gets people excited when it really shouldn't.
I highly doubt that

Ogrezilla is offline  
Old
07-27-2013, 01:29 PM
  #10
Randy Butternubs
Makin Bacon Pancakes
 
Randy Butternubs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 7,763
vCash: 500
Hartzell is #5 for me.

Add Ruopp.

Randy Butternubs is offline  
Old
07-27-2013, 01:31 PM
  #11
Ogrezilla
Nerf Herder
 
Ogrezilla's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Pittsburgh
Posts: 34,621
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chancellor Vitale View Post
And our goalie prospects are better than our F prospects (at least Harzell and Jarry), and probably better than all but the blue-chip D (Pouliot, Maatta... with Harrington... hard to know for sure).
There is a much higher chance of Brian Dumoulin becoming an NHL player than any of our goalie prospects. Goalies who have never played a professional hockey game are longshots.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chancellor Vitale View Post
I don't say "need relates to the quality of the prospect". I suggested instead that when ranking them (presumably they are ranked to know which are the most important / have the best chance of helping this team?), team need should be as important as quality.
No, they are ranked on potentially how good of a hockey player than can be weighed with their chance to ever reach that potential. Our own team need has nothing to do with it. Basically, I think of it as what order would I draft these kids based on what we know today.

Ogrezilla is offline  
Old
07-27-2013, 01:33 PM
  #12
Gallatin
A Banksy of Goonism
 
Gallatin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Pittsburgh
Country: United States
Posts: 1,142
vCash: 500
Ok Chancellor - you got my vote for Hartzell in the next round.

But this conversation you have going reminds me of your weak boycott the NHL argument because you thought the players were getting screwed....

Gallatin is offline  
Old
07-27-2013, 01:37 PM
  #13
Darth Vitale
Moderator
Transitional Period
 
Darth Vitale's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Victoryville
Country: United States
Posts: 25,628
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ogrezilla View Post
I highly doubt that
Well I would prefer that you be right as it would be a positive reflection on people here... but I bet they'll slide. We shall see. Maybe people will vote them up to prove me wrong.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Randy Butternubs View Post
Hartzell is #5 for me.

Add Ruopp.
Fair enough.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Ogrezilla View Post
There is a much higher chance of Brian Dumoulin becoming an NHL player than any of our goalie prospects.
Based on what? Are guys like Hartzell and Jarry (based on pedigree) really THAT far behind everyone else's G prospects? Because presumably, some percentage of the goalie prospects out there, have a good chance to become NHL goalies, based on how those things are measured right?

Also you have the pure numbers game of it. Every team has 7D they put on a roster and only 2G... but in general my point stands. Removing the statistical element of it and just looking at G quality, are those two G prospects really that subpar compared to prospects out in the world who writers and others think are "likely to make it"? If so, say so (I'll take your word for it). I don't get that impression though.


Quote:
No, they are ranked on potentially how good of a hockey player than can be weighed with their chance to ever reach that potential. Our own team need has nothing to do with it.
OK. Someone should spell that out. I always took the rankings to have some measure of "importance to us as a team" vs. they may not be that important if they were the prospect of some other team, because that team's needs and makeup are different, thus altering how likely it is the prospect would "make it" on that team.

Darth Vitale is offline  
Old
07-27-2013, 01:42 PM
  #14
Ogrezilla
Nerf Herder
 
Ogrezilla's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Pittsburgh
Posts: 34,621
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chancellor Vitale View Post
Well I would prefer that you be right as it would be a positive reflection on people here... but I bet they'll slide. We shall see. Maybe people will vote them up to prove me wrong.
I'll be surprised if number 5 isn't a goalie. Possibly 6 too.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chancellor Vitale View Post
Based on what? Are guys like Hartzell and Jarry (based on pedigree) really THAT far behind everyone else's G prospects? Because presumably, some percentage of the goalie prospects out there, have a good chance to become NHL goalies, based on how those things are measured right?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chancellor Vitale View Post
Also you have the pure numbers game of it. Every team has 7D they put on a roster and only 2G... but in general my point stands. Removing the statistical element of it and just looking at G quality, our those two G prospects really that subpar compared to prospects out in the world who writers and others thing "will make it"? If so, say so. I don't get that impression though.
All goalie prospects are a longshot. None of our goalie prospects have ever played a single game of professional hockey. Meanwhile, Brian Dumoulin has done quite well in the AHL.

Simply put, a goalie prospect is a lot harder to predict than any skater. Its why they are rarely drafted high, and why so many top goalies seemingly come out of nowhere.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chancellor Vitale View Post
OK. Someone should spell that out. I always took the rankings to have some measure of "importance to us as a team" vs. they may not be that important if they were the prospect of some other team, because that team's needs and makeup are different, thus altering how likely it is the prospect would "make it" on that team.
I've always taken it as a rank of the intrinsic value of each player in general. Mainly because that's how the HF ranking system works. 1-10 for quality, A-F or whatever for chance to get there. Also because the team needs change drastically from year to year based on things like trades and free agency. For example, all of our forwards retiring wouldn't magically make our forward prospects better hockey players.


Last edited by Ogrezilla: 07-27-2013 at 01:47 PM.
Ogrezilla is offline  
Old
07-27-2013, 01:43 PM
  #15
Sidney the Kidney
Beastmode Penguins
 
Sidney the Kidney's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Country: Canada
Posts: 14,745
vCash: 1000
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chancellor Vitale View Post
I don't say "need relates to the quality of the prospect". I suggested instead that when ranking them (presumably they are ranked to know which are the most important / have the best chance of helping this team?), team need should be as important as quality. The opportunities that will arise first are F and G opportunities. Even the blue chip D will have to wait their turn most likely for a couple more years.
Disagree with this line of thinking. Largely because you assume that just because our goalie depth is weak, that means a guy like Hartzell is closer to getting a shot at the NHL than a D prospect, where the Pens are pretty strong. That's flawed because you're not even taking into account the Pens can fill that spot with a free agent or trade. It's not like the only option available to them is what they have in their system.

So to me, it's a no-brainer that when ranking prospects, you rank them on their individual talent. Which ones have the best skillset? Which ones are most likely to turn into good players, as opposed to average players or not even make the NHL at all? So IMO, it's silly to even factor in where the Pens are strong/weak positionally ahead of the actual potential of the players discussed.

On a separate note: am I the only one who looks at that list and thinks the Pens are really, really thin prospect-wise? There's maybe 4 guys (all defensemen) who look like close to sure bets to at least play in the NHL. After that, it's a bunch of guys who are longshots to even be bottom sixers/bottom pairing guys.

Sidney the Kidney is offline  
Old
07-27-2013, 01:46 PM
  #16
Ogrezilla
Nerf Herder
 
Ogrezilla's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Pittsburgh
Posts: 34,621
vCash: 500
Next? This is over

Ogrezilla is offline  
Old
07-27-2013, 01:49 PM
  #17
Darth Vitale
Moderator
Transitional Period
 
Darth Vitale's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Victoryville
Country: United States
Posts: 25,628
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sidney the Kidney View Post
Disagree with this line of thinking. Largely because you assume that just because our goalie depth is weak, that means a guy like Hartzell is closer to getting a shot at the NHL than a D prospect, where the Pens are pretty strong.
No as I said I'm ranking them relative to their importance (trades etc don't enter into it -- any of these guys can be traded at any time or have their would-be spot filled with a FA signing or other trade).

IOW looking at who is on our roster, and looking at the prospect's level of talent, how good are they and where are they on the scale of "almost ready" to "not even close and likely never will be"?

Really I want someone who knows a lot about G prospects to chime in on this (abstracting the "why we vote" part if they want) and shed some light on how good are these G prospects, in terms of their talent being able to eventually take them to the NHL level, relative to the rest of our prospects not named Maatta, Harry, or Pouliot, and their chances for their skill to take them to the NHL level... particularly defensemen who will have to beat out other good defensemen on this team.

Darth Vitale is offline  
Old
07-27-2013, 01:52 PM
  #18
Ogrezilla
Nerf Herder
 
Ogrezilla's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Pittsburgh
Posts: 34,621
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chancellor Vitale View Post
No as I said I'm ranking them relative to their importance (trades etc don't enter into it -- any of these guys can be traded at any time or have their would-be spot filled with a FA signing or other trade).

IOW looking at who is on our roster, and looking at the prospect's level of talent, how good are they and where are they on the scale of "almost ready" to "not even close and likely never will be"?

Really I want someone who knows a lot about G prospects to chime in on this (abstracting the "why we vote" part if they want) and shed some light on how good are these G prospects, in terms of their talent being able to eventually take them to the NHL level, relative to the rest of our prospects not named Maatta, Harry, or Pouliot, and their chances for their skill to take them to the NHL level... particularly defensemen who will have to beat out other good defensemen on this team.
I don't know a lot about these guys in particular, but I think its an easy guess to say there's less than 50% chance that any of our goalie prospects ever becomes a starting goalie in the NHL. Probably considerably lower than that.

Ogrezilla is offline  
Old
07-27-2013, 01:52 PM
  #19
BlindWillyMcHurt
Registered User
 
BlindWillyMcHurt's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 7,829
vCash: 500
Dumoulin rather easily.

After this, the waters are muddied quite a bit, IMO. Hartzell seems like the "obvious" choice at five... but I dunno. As has been pointed out multiple times, goaltenders are notoriously difficult players to project. Even those with higher pedigree than Jarry and Hartzell often flame out. Jarry himself is far too much of an unknown with a limited (though impressive) sample size to place him high in the rankings, IMO. I don't dislike the pick, or anything... but he still hasn't even really played a full season, yet.

It wouldn't surprise or chafe me at all if guys like Sundqvist, Blueger or Kuhn end up being ranked before those two.

BlindWillyMcHurt is offline  
Old
07-27-2013, 01:52 PM
  #20
Darth Vitale
Moderator
Transitional Period
 
Darth Vitale's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Victoryville
Country: United States
Posts: 25,628
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gallatin View Post
Ok Chancellor - you got my vote for Hartzell in the next round.

But this conversation you have going reminds me of your weak boycott the NHL argument because you thought the players were getting screwed....
I have no idea why this would remind you of that (a business and legal topic), and I think you're mischaracterizing my stance at the time. I was mostly pissed with the owners but I spoke out a number of times when Fehr and the players did something stupid, too. And in fact predicted before the lockout ever started that Fehr would be a divisive figure, etc. You have to remember all of it, not just the times I was ragging on Jacobs or Snider.

Anyway back to how much everyone disagrees with me about the importance of our G prospects.

Darth Vitale is offline  
Old
07-27-2013, 01:55 PM
  #21
Randy Butternubs
Makin Bacon Pancakes
 
Randy Butternubs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 7,763
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ogrezilla View Post
Next? This is over
Maybe there should be a rule for that. Such as:

If the lead vote getter, after 24 hours, is leading the 2nd most by over 50%, we declare that poll to be over.

Does that sentence even make sense?

Randy Butternubs is offline  
Old
07-27-2013, 01:56 PM
  #22
Darth Vitale
Moderator
Transitional Period
 
Darth Vitale's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Victoryville
Country: United States
Posts: 25,628
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ogrezilla View Post
I don't know a lot about these guys in particular, but I think its an easy guess to say there's less than 50% chance that any of our goalie prospects ever becomes a starting goalie in the NHL. Probably considerably lower than that.
OK... and looking at everyone other than Boston (or any team with a supposed can't-miss G prospect), what are the chances that all the rest of teh teams' best goalie prospects make the NHL? Also less than 50%? THat's sort of what I'm driving at. What's the benchmark for knowing when a G prospect is "up there" or "that good"? Because most G prospects are more of a crap-shoot by nature... but that doesn't diminish their importance to the team or in the case of a team with a bad goalie situation the next few years, where a guy should be ranked / what chance he has to excel in the minors to prove he might be worth the shot when he's mature enough.

Darth Vitale is offline  
Old
07-27-2013, 01:56 PM
  #23
Ogrezilla
Nerf Herder
 
Ogrezilla's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Pittsburgh
Posts: 34,621
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Randy Butternubs View Post
Maybe there should be a rule for that. Such as:

If the lead vote getter, after 24 hours, is leading the 2nd most by over 50%, we declare that poll to be over.

Does that sentence even make sense?
I'm pretty sure he's done that before.

Ogrezilla is offline  
Old
07-27-2013, 01:57 PM
  #24
Randy Butternubs
Makin Bacon Pancakes
 
Randy Butternubs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 7,763
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ogrezilla View Post
I'm pretty sure he's done that before.
So me no fail english? That unpossible.

Randy Butternubs is offline  
Old
07-27-2013, 01:59 PM
  #25
Ogrezilla
Nerf Herder
 
Ogrezilla's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Pittsburgh
Posts: 34,621
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chancellor Vitale View Post
OK... and looking at everyone other than Boston (a team with a supposed can't-miss G prospect), what are the chances that all the rest of teh teams' best goalie prospects make the NHL? Also less than 50%? THat's sort of what I'm driving at. What's the benchmark for knowing when a G prospect is "up there" or "that good"? Because most G prospects are more of a crap-shoot by nature... but that doesn't diminish their importance to the team or in the case of a team with a bad goalie situation the next few years, where a guy should be ranked / what chance he has to excel in the minors to prove he might be worth the shot when he's mature enough.
I am not in any way diminishing the quality of our goalie prospects compared to the rest of the league. I am saying that pretty much any goalie who has never even played a single game of pro hockey should be considered a long shot. Then, consider that one of ours has never even been a starter in juniors and I think its fair to say that we shouldn't get our expectations up too high.

And again, team need means nothing here. I don't care if we literally don't have a single goalie signed or if we sign Ludqvist and Rinne tomorrow, that doesn't change the quality of the prospects.

Keep in mind, my next vote will be for a goalie. They are still better than our forwards who are also huge longshots. But compared to high end guys like Maatta and Pouliot or fairly well proven guys like Harrington and Dumoulin, its really not even close. They are clearly our top 4 prospects with a pretty big gap between them and the next bunch of guys.

Ogrezilla is offline  
Closed Thread

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 11:29 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.