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

Our top 37 prospects...

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
11-17-2003, 07:47 PM
  #26
Jacob
Registered User
 
Jacob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Country: United States
Posts: 25,863
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Evilo
Well so far this season he hasn't been that impressive (and so shouldn't ranked higher) and to boot, it's COLLEGE for god's sake!!!!
When in hell you guys are going to give more credit to pros than juniors???
Take it easy, big guy. It's just a few people's opinions. I know for a fact that you don't know any more about Schneider than I do. I'm guessing, like me, you can just go by stats.

Quote:
Until Schneider proves himself in the AHL or NHL, I don't consider his college career as a perfect indication of what he's going to be.
I never said it would. I just find his production, his scouting reports, and his pedigree to be impressive.

Quote:
Until he's there I give more credit to guys like Endicott or Lupaschuk.
Fine by me. Usually guys that have been around and that are already in the system have less upside but are more likely to make the NHL, while the younger guys that are still in juniors have more upside (for instance; Schneider's stats alone annihilate Scuderi's) but are further from making it to Pittsburgh. Apples to oranges.

Quote:
I see no reason to jump on Schneider's right now.
No problem. I do.

Quote:
No. Lupaschk has improved ever since he went from -25 or something to -2 last year (can't remember the exact numbers).
Hey, Berehowsky is amongst our leaders in +/-. Modano is the worst in the league. All stats, and especially plus minus, can be misleading.

Quote:
Schneider was a late pick for a reason, and while I hope he gets to the NHL, odds are against him.
So that's your argument? I shouldn't need to tell you that being picked late doesn't seal a prospect's fate. Especially kids drafted out of high school, which is more or less what Schneider was.

Quote:
And to project Schneider as high as Whitney or Welch is really premature.
Funny, I consider valuing Scuderi over Schneider is pretty premature also.

Jacob is offline  
Old
11-18-2003, 03:25 AM
  #27
Der Schweinehund
Registered User
 
Der Schweinehund's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Kitchener, ON
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,730
vCash: 500
Call me Captain Obvious here, but the moral of the story is just how much of a crapshoot this is. We have seen some players' values plummet like a sinking stone thus far - most notable on that list might be Abid who probably isn't worth a 6th vote. On the other hand, some have just skyrocketed when not much, if anything, was expected of them - see Malone at #27 and Chiodo at #35.

There are so many arguments this way and that way about each player. I mean at one point, Daniel Fernholm was considered to be a challenger for Jay Bouwmeester for best defenseman in the '02 crop. Knock on wood, hopefully his injury days and work ethic questionmarks are behind him as he has now put in three games in a row for Djurgardens. So who knows - toss a coin - might be heads, might be tails, might land on it's edge too.

Quite frankly, were all not very learned in this business. So some of these arguments are really moot points. If I have seen a player play 12 games and someone else has seen a player play the same 12 games and we disagree on their merit, then we have a valid debate. Until then, it's all statistical supposition.

Der Schweinehund is offline  
Old
11-18-2003, 07:34 AM
  #28
Evilo
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: France
Country: France
Posts: 27,060
vCash: 432
Quote:
Originally Posted by Der Schweinehund
Call me Captain Obvious here, but the moral of the story is just how much of a crapshoot this is. We have seen some players' values plummet like a sinking stone thus far - most notable on that list might be Abid who probably isn't worth a 6th vote. On the other hand, some have just skyrocketed when not much, if anything, was expected of them - see Malone at #27 and Chiodo at #35.

There are so many arguments this way and that way about each player. I mean at one point, Daniel Fernholm was considered to be a challenger for Jay Bouwmeester for best defenseman in the '02 crop. Knock on wood, hopefully his injury days and work ethic questionmarks are behind him as he has now put in three games in a row for Djurgardens. So who knows - toss a coin - might be heads, might be tails, might land on it's edge too.

Quite frankly, were all not very learned in this business. So some of these arguments are really moot points. If I have seen a player play 12 games and someone else has seen a player play the same 12 games and we disagree on their merit, then we have a valid debate. Until then, it's all statistical supposition.
Captain Obvious...


Evilo is online now  
Old
11-18-2003, 07:37 AM
  #29
Evilo
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: France
Country: France
Posts: 27,060
vCash: 432
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jacobv2
Take it easy, big guy. It's just a few people's opinions. I know for a fact that you don't know any more about Schneider than I do. I'm guessing, like me, you can just go by stats.


I never said it would. I just find his production, his scouting reports, and his pedigree to be impressive.


Fine by me. Usually guys that have been around and that are already in the system have less upside but are more likely to make the NHL, while the younger guys that are still in juniors have more upside (for instance; Schneider's stats alone annihilate Scuderi's) but are further from making it to Pittsburgh. Apples to oranges.


No problem. I do.


Hey, Berehowsky is amongst our leaders in +/-. Modano is the worst in the league. All stats, and especially plus minus, can be misleading.


So that's your argument? I shouldn't need to tell you that being picked late doesn't seal a prospect's fate. Especially kids drafted out of high school, which is more or less what Schneider was.


Funny, I consider valuing Scuderi over Schneider is pretty premature also.
Still you can't argue that odds are against a guy drafted that late.
Scouts saw flaws in his game. That he seems to have progressed is a good thing.
But as of right now I give more credit to what is actually played on the ice (Scuderi) than what could be (Schneider).

Once again, to answer MrKnowNothing, I see no reason why Schneider should be ranked above pros making impacts (Malenkhyk comes to mind).

Evilo is online now  
Old
11-18-2003, 09:30 AM
  #30
Jacob
Registered User
 
Jacob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Country: United States
Posts: 25,863
vCash: 500
But Scuderi was also a 5th round pick.

Sometimes kids fall in the draft for reasons other than their play on the ice. Schneider was already a 20 year old, like Scuderi in his draft year, who had committed to UND. It seems teams will pass on those guys that are 4 years away and take the junior kids that are 1-2 years away (from turning pro). Experience is a factor, also. Schneider had only played in the USHL, which doesn't give him a snowball's chance of world competition and is not up to the level of play of juniors or NCAA.

Maybe size was an issue? On draft day, he was listed at 6'0" 200. He's now 6'1" 215. Maybe he had injury problems? Who knows, all I know is that I'm glad he did fall so far, and I'm sure scouts are already kicking themselves for not picking him higher, even though he has yet to play a single pro game.

Jacob is offline  
Old
11-18-2003, 09:41 AM
  #31
Evilo
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: France
Country: France
Posts: 27,060
vCash: 432
Oh make no mistake. I'm also glad with the way he's developping.
But let's not get overboard and say one was right because he ranked him higher than others because the guy is having decent numbers in college.

Right now, I'd say the people that put Sivek, Abid or Surovy high and Endicott, Lupaschuk and Arsmtrong low are the ones making mistakes AS OF RIGHT NOW.
We can't judge Schneider until he's proven something at the pro level.

Evilo is online now  
Old
11-18-2003, 10:38 AM
  #32
Der Schweinehund
Registered User
 
Der Schweinehund's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Kitchener, ON
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,730
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Evilo
Once again, to answer MrKnowNothing, I see no reason why Schneider should be ranked above pros making impacts (Malenkhyk comes to mind).
But even comparing pro-to-pro, you still have discrepancy. If Bartschi is putting up the same numbers in the top Russian or Swedish leagues, I guarantee you the guy is our number two prospect, after only Fleury. So even pro-to-pro comparisons aren't entirely accurate.

While a pro/semi-pro league might be more conducive to preparing someone to play in the NHL, it's not the hard-and-steadfast rule. In fact, while this argument has been going on, we have a great example staring us in the face - Ryan Malone. Did anyone give the guy a chance prior to training camp without, at very least, some 'conditioning time' in the AHL? And this guy isn't just a warm body either - he is an effective NHLer and arguably the biggest surprise on this team.

Ultimately, is this really worth getting hot-under-the-collar for though? We won't have an answer until when/if they hit the NHL. And then at that point, I am very happy for one or both sides of the debate to come and say "I told you so!"

Der Schweinehund is offline  
Old
11-18-2003, 10:46 AM
  #33
DJ Spinoza
Registered User
 
DJ Spinoza's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Pittsburgh
Country: Netherlands
Posts: 12,802
vCash: 500
^ Beat me to it, Der..

Guys like Malone and Orpik looked to have sealed up jobs for the longterm, quicker than many guys who went to Juniors or elsewhere that are still working their way 'up the ladder' so to speak. Maybe the NCAA helps you get ready quicker?

Evilo, I didn't bump this to call you out for ranking Schneider so low.

I just thought it'd be interesting for us all to redo the list (or some to do original lists since some of us didn't and we have new posters who didn't vote before) and see what we think now in comparison.

Not trying to start a debate here.

DJ Spinoza is offline  
Old
11-18-2003, 11:01 AM
  #34
Der Schweinehund
Registered User
 
Der Schweinehund's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Kitchener, ON
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,730
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrKnowNothing
Maybe the NCAA helps you get ready quicker?
Despite my love for Canadian Major Junior, I have long felt that the best route is for NCAA. I like the extended time and maturing process (not to mention alternate career preparation) that comes with the college route. When players come out from a full four years in the NCAA, their bodies, minds, and attitudes are so much more ready to adapt to NHL life. That's not to say there aren't exceptions of course.

I have friends/aquaintences who have made it to pro-hockey (AHL, NHL, Europe) through the varying routes. The ones who were most prepared (and will say it) went through the NCAA. Also, for the ones who made it and had just a taste, the ones who are best-off post-hockey are also NCAA trained. My disappointment lies in the CIAU (Canadian University) not being very solid in it's hockey development in comparison.

Personally, if I have a son who enjoys and is gifted in hockey, I will very strongly encourage them to go the US college hockey route.

Der Schweinehund is offline  
Old
11-18-2003, 11:23 AM
  #35
Evilo
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: France
Country: France
Posts: 27,060
vCash: 432
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrKnowNothing
^ Beat me to it, Der..

Guys like Malone and Orpik looked to have sealed up jobs for the longterm, quicker than many guys who went to Juniors or elsewhere that are still working their way 'up the ladder' so to speak. Maybe the NCAA helps you get ready quicker?

Evilo, I didn't bump this to call you out for ranking Schneider so low.

I just thought it'd be interesting for us all to redo the list (or some to do original lists since some of us didn't and we have new posters who didn't vote before) and see what we think now in comparison.

Not trying to start a debate here.
I don't mind bumping it.
I just see no reason why Schneider has proved he belongs higher.
That was my point.
On the other hand, guys like Lupaschuk, or even more Endicott and Armstrong were ranked lower than they should have based on a bad year at the PRO level.
I felt that was not merited then and I certainly feel it also now that they seem to find their game back.

Evilo is online now  
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 01:31 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.