HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Western Conference > Central Division > Dallas Stars
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

HFStars-Voted Summer 2010 Top-20 Prospects: [Final Results]

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
08-02-2010, 02:36 PM
  #1
piqued
Registered User
 
piqued's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Dallas
Country: United States
Posts: 32,014
vCash: 3722
HFStars-Voted Summer 2010 Top-20 Prospects: [Final Results]

H F S t a r s2 0 1 0 T o p - 2 0 P r o s p e ct s :
#1.GJack Campbellnew
#2.DPhilip Larsen 2
#3RWScott Glennie 0
#4RWAlex Chiasson 4
#5RWTomas Vincour12
#6.GRich Bachman 1
#7.COndrej Roman 1
#8.DPatrik Nemethnew
#9RWColton Sceviour 1
#10.GTyler Beskorowany 4
#11LWCurtis McKenzie 9
#12RWSergei Korostin 1
#13RWReilly Smith 6
#14LWAlex Guptillnew
#15RWAustin Smith 3
#16.DJohn Klingbergnew
#17.DAlex Theriaunew
#18.DMike Bergin≥3
#19.DHubert Labrienew
#20.CTristan Kingnew

Fun Facts:

Right Wings: 7
Defensemen: 6
Goalies: 3
Centers: 2
Left Wings: 2

-----------------

Amongst skaters only:

Left Shots: 8
Right Shots: 9 (!)

-----------------

35% of the list are new prospects as of last year's rankings.

Of those returning, the average change in rank was +3.3 spots.

5 players fell out of the rankings entirely. Of those, 3 are still in the system.

2 graduated to the NHL. 1 was traded.

------------------

5th rounders: 5 (yay, good players!)
4th rounders: 3
3rd rounders: 3
2nd rounders: 3
Undrafted: 2
1st rounders: 2
6th rounders: 1
7th rounders: 1

------------------

Where they will be:

NA Professionals: 8
NCAA: 5
CHL: 4
Sweden: 2
USHL: 1

------------------

17 year-olds: 1 (Klingberg will turn 18 in a few weeks)
18 year-olds: 4
19 year-olds: 7
20 year-olds: 2
21 year-olds: 4
22 year-olds: 1
23 year-olds: 1 (old man Bachman)

------------------

10 out of the 20 are currently under contract.

------------------

Posted on 09-09-2009:
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigG44 View Post
McKenzie because he's mini-Benn.

He'll have the biggest jump in our rankings next summer, IMO.
WRONG! McKenzie only had the 2nd biggest jump, idiot.


Last edited by piqued: 08-02-2010 at 03:00 PM. Reason: more fun facts
piqued is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-02-2010, 03:11 PM
  #2
Karitimes
JetsJetsJets
 
Karitimes's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: NS
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,368
vCash: 500
Good info, thanks for putting that all together. Looking around some of the other fanboards, this one seems to be 'top shelf' in comparison to others.

How many other prospects do we have under contract outside this list? I know Tousignant, but are there any others besides him?


Last edited by Karitimes: 08-02-2010 at 03:21 PM. Reason: momentary dyslexia
Karitimes is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-02-2010, 03:16 PM
  #3
piqued
Registered User
 
piqued's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Dallas
Country: United States
Posts: 32,014
vCash: 3722
Depends on what you consider a prospect.

Of those who would've been eligible for this poll: Gazdic, M. Neal, Tousignant, Coyle, and Monast are under contract.

Then there's Backman, Gagnon, Ludwig, Wathier and Sawada as the overagers who are still vaguely prospect-y.

piqued is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-02-2010, 03:20 PM
  #4
Karitimes
JetsJetsJets
 
Karitimes's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: NS
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,368
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by piqued1457 View Post
Of those who would've been eligible for this poll: Gazdic, M. Neal, Tousignant, Coyle, and Monast are under contract.
This answers it.

Karitimes is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-20-2010, 01:04 PM
  #5
piqued
Registered User
 
piqued's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Dallas
Country: United States
Posts: 32,014
vCash: 3722
HF's rankings

1. Jack Campbell, G, 8.C
2. Scott Glennie, RW, 7.5C
3. Philip Larsen, D, 7.5C
4. Alex Chiasson, RW, 7C
5. Ondrej Roman, LW/C, 7C
6. Curtis McKenzie, LW, 7C
7. Tomas Vincour, RW, 7C
8. Richard Bachman, G, 7D
9. Reilly Smith, RW, 7C
10. Tyler Beskorowany, G, 7D
11. Perttu Lindgren, C, 7D
12. Austin Smith, RW, 7D
13. Patrik Nemeth, D, 7D
14. Hubert Labrie, D, 6.5C
15. Colton Sceviour, RW, 6.5C
16. Tristan King, C, 6.5C
17. Sergei Korostin, LW/RW, 6.5D
18. Alex Theriau, D, 6.5C
19. Aaron Gagnon, C, 6B
20. John Klingberg, D, 6.5C

Some fairly big differences this year compared to last year. I like ours quite a bit better. It goes against the consensus of pretty much everyone here by putting Glennie in front of Larsen. Labrie one spot behind Nemeth and ahead of Sceviour makes my head spin. Klingberg's going to make the #20 spot look like a joke. I think even we had him too low. Guptill's not even on there.


Last edited by piqued: 08-20-2010 at 01:09 PM.
piqued is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-20-2010, 01:26 PM
  #6
txomisc
Registered User
 
txomisc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: California
Country: United States
Posts: 8,637
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by piqued1457 View Post
HF's rankings


Some fairly big differences this year compared to last year. I like ours quite a bit better. It goes against the consensus of pretty much everyone here by putting Glennie in front of Larsen. Labrie one spot behind Nemeth and ahead of Sceviour makes my head spin. Klingberg's going to make the #20 spot look like a joke. I think even we had him too low. Guptill's not even on there.
Well to be fair theres not alot of difference between the potential of glennie and larsen. Of course we are going to rate larsen higher because we really really want to believe we have a legit d prospect and he is our only hopem as well as being a late round draft pick. Conversely we are going to knock glennie a bit because of the weirdness that surrounded his pick and the fact that many wanted kulikov there whos already in the nhl.

labrie that high I dont get. He seems like an ok player but someone that small really needs to have some offense to his game.

Klingberg sounds like a very intriguing prospect but lets be realist. He wasnt expecting to be drafted for a reason. He may have high upside (certainly higher than 6.5) but he is really scrawny and has a looooong way to go before he can be considered a real valuable prospect.

Guptill was considered a big reach, something we seem to like to do with 3rd rounders. A good season could have him shoot up the charts (which i think reilly smith may have, im not sure what he was ranked before) but until he proves anything he's just a stretch of a pick whos only played against poor competition. Looks like Reilly Smith went from unranked to number 9 that is quite a good improvement for him after a good season. Guptill can do the same.

txomisc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-20-2010, 01:43 PM
  #7
Chad_
 
Chad_'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Dallas
Country: United States
Posts: 3,100
vCash: 500
What a crock the HF list is. Tristain King should have been at least in the top one.

Chad_ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-20-2010, 01:52 PM
  #8
vofty
Registered User
 
vofty's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: TX
Posts: 3,410
vCash: 500
I had no idea that HF was psychic
Quote:
Aaron Gagnon had a break out year in 2010-11.

vofty is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-20-2010, 03:53 PM
  #9
piqued
Registered User
 
piqued's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Dallas
Country: United States
Posts: 32,014
vCash: 3722
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chad_ View Post
What a crock the HF list is. Tristain King should have been at least in the top one.
You know, now that Tassone is back in the fold and ostensibly healthy enough to continue his hockey career, he absolutely belongs back in the Top 20 (AHL contract or not) bumping King out of the rankings.

piqued is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-20-2010, 04:07 PM
  #10
txomisc
Registered User
 
txomisc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: California
Country: United States
Posts: 8,637
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by piqued1457 View Post
You know, now that Tassone is back in the fold and ostensibly healthy enough to continue his hockey career, he absolutely belongs back in the Top 20 (AHL contract or not) bumping King out of the rankings.
Because we think he might better if he had stayed healthy? He hasn't done anything to indicate hes going to make any sort of impact and hes not even dallas stars property. You can't put unrestricted free agents into your top prospects list just because hes a good story.

txomisc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-20-2010, 04:18 PM
  #11
piqued
Registered User
 
piqued's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Dallas
Country: United States
Posts: 32,014
vCash: 3722
I'm not concerned with technicalities. Tassone will have an impact in Dallas, guaranteed.

piqued is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-20-2010, 04:21 PM
  #12
txomisc
Registered User
 
txomisc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: California
Country: United States
Posts: 8,637
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by piqued1457 View Post
I'm not concerned with technicalities. Tassone will have an impact in Dallas, guaranteed.
Or any team that offers him an entry level contract. His not being in the system is not a technicality, hes not a dallas stars prospect thus he cant be ranked among the top stars prospects.

Besides all that, what has he done? hes a late round pick who had one good minor league season.

txomisc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-20-2010, 04:43 PM
  #13
Chad_
 
Chad_'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Dallas
Country: United States
Posts: 3,100
vCash: 500
I've got to agree with txomisc on this one. Tassone can't be listed on the Dallas Stars top prospect list because he's not a Dallas Stars prospect. He is a Texas Stars prospect though.

Besides, even though he had some good numbers when healthy, he wasn't healthy too often during the last two seasons, or often enough to get a good gauge on him. His injuries were serious enough not to get an entry-level deal and the time away from the game was long enough to hamper his projection. All of this is coming from someone who thought he might be a hidden 'gem' too.

Chad_ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-20-2010, 05:09 PM
  #14
glovesave_35
Name
 
glovesave_35's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: South Korea
Country: United States
Posts: 16,514
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by txomisc View Post
Or any team that offers him an entry level contract. His not being in the system is not a technicality, hes not a dallas stars prospect thus he cant be ranked among the top stars prospects.
You're right, technically he is not Dallas Stars property. But are you saying that his signing with Texas has zero to do with Dallas? Because IMO that is absurd. He was a free agent who could have theoretically signed with any minor league team (that wanted him) and he somehow wound up playing for the Stars' primary affiliate.

I agree he shouldn't be in a Stars prospect list, but his playing for Texas as opposed to any number of other teams says something.

glovesave_35 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-20-2010, 07:10 PM
  #15
Karitimes
JetsJetsJets
 
Karitimes's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: NS
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,368
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by piqued1457 View Post
I'm not concerned with technicalities. Tassone will have an impact in Dallas, guaranteed.
Heard of John Lammers?

Karitimes is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-20-2010, 07:31 PM
  #16
piqued
Registered User
 
piqued's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Dallas
Country: United States
Posts: 32,014
vCash: 3722
Of course, your point?

piqued is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-20-2010, 07:45 PM
  #17
piqued
Registered User
 
piqued's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Dallas
Country: United States
Posts: 32,014
vCash: 3722
Here's a question: why does someone have to be property of a certain team in order to be considered a prospect of that team?

A prospect is by definition a candidate for a future position. What are we measuring here when we make our rankings? We're trying to nail down who among these young hockey players has the largest probability of having the biggest impact on the NHL team. Is contract status or even draft rights the be-all and end-all? It's a huge boost, sure. It's probably 95% of the equation. We can say with confidence that Alex Chiasson is more likely to play for Dallas than Sean Couturier. A whole host of events would have to fall into line for Courturier to enter the Stars' orbit. It's impossible to predict draft position or future trades to a degree that speculating on them in the context of a ranking is ridiculous. But are Tassone's chances that remote? He's clearly got the interest of the team's decision-makers and will continue to be under close observation. Travis Morin got a contract from Dallas instead of Texas this year after the team sized up his play. Who are the 20 people in the world most likely to play and play well for the Stars down the road is essentially what I'm asking. Why should we be forced to limit our conception of a prospect?

piqued is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-20-2010, 08:16 PM
  #18
Rune Forumwalker
Registered User
 
Rune Forumwalker's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 2,868
vCash: 500
There is very little difference between Larsen and Glennie. They have roughly the same potential, and the only real difference is when each was drafted and how close to the NHL each is. So it's not shocking to see Glennie at #2 instead of Larsen. Any other prospect would be shocking, but there isn't a big enough difference between the two to really knock the order on HF's list.

Quote:
Originally Posted by piqued1457 View Post
Here's a question: why does someone have to be property of a certain team in order to be considered a prospect of that team?
Seriously? If he isn't signed, another team can sign him. It's just silly to have a player unsigned by an NHL team on any NHL teams prospect list.

Rune Forumwalker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-20-2010, 08:19 PM
  #19
Karitimes
JetsJetsJets
 
Karitimes's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: NS
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,368
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by piqued1457 View Post
Of course, your point?
Same okay junior player, and lifetime AHLer and/or European leaguer. Point is it's probably okay to leave him off the prospects list.

Karitimes is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-20-2010, 08:27 PM
  #20
piqued
Registered User
 
piqued's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Dallas
Country: United States
Posts: 32,014
vCash: 3722
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rune Forumwalker View Post
Seriously? If he isn't signed, another team can sign him. It's just silly to have a player unsigned by an NHL team on any NHL teams prospect list.
Is he more likely to be signed by another NHL team than he is by the Stars? If not, how much less likely? I would say so much so as to be basically irrelevant at this point, after not being A) drafted by another club or B) signed by another NHL or AHL team this summer.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jon Casey 91 View Post
Same okay junior player, and lifetime AHLer and/or European leaguer. Point is it's probably okay to leave him off the prospects list.
I don't understand your comparison. Lammers is 24. He has played for 5 different teams unaffiliated with the Stars since he was last in the system. Tassone is 20. He has played for no professional teams not affiliated with the Stars. He was also a better player in juniors IMO.

piqued is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-20-2010, 08:39 PM
  #21
Karitimes
JetsJetsJets
 
Karitimes's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: NS
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,368
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by piqued1457 View Post
I don't understand your comparison. Lammers is 24. He has played for 5 different teams unaffiliated with the Stars since he was last in the system. Tassone is 20. He has played for no professional teams not affiliated with the Stars. He was also a better player in juniors IMO.
Went to school in the town Lammers' played for. He was standout and key contributor for the Canes. I've sampled some, albeit less of Tassone, and he's no better IMO. Sure it's not the best comparison, but their junior careers from a production standpoint are comparable. Lammers was okay for Providence this year, but he's never going to accomplish much if anything in the NHL. Tassone without a contract makes me think he could follow the same path as Lammers has the past 4 years, so I don't think it's a guarentee he makes an impact in Dallas.

Karitimes is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-20-2010, 08:40 PM
  #22
txomisc
Registered User
 
txomisc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: California
Country: United States
Posts: 8,637
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by piqued1457 View Post
Here's a question: why does someone have to be property of a certain team in order to be considered a prospect of that team?
Because if you include him you can include any unsigned college free agent. You can include any overseas player whos rights are not owned by an NHL. You can point to Morin as a guy that signed with Texas and then Dallas signed, but you can also look at Mathieu Beaudoin as the other side of the coin. Signed with Texas and then bolted to another team. Yeah Tassone is closer to Dallas and im sure they will have their eyes on him, but if they aren't the first team to offer him an entry level deal then he is sure to go somewhere else.

txomisc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-20-2010, 08:46 PM
  #23
Chad_
 
Chad_'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Dallas
Country: United States
Posts: 3,100
vCash: 500
The Dallas Stars don't own the rights to Tassone at this point, correct? That's the assumption I am working on, based upon the team not offering him an entry level deal.

If that's right, including Tassone in a Dallas Stars prospect list would be the same as adding any other hockey player whose rights are not owned by Dallas or any other NHL team. The Dallas Stars did not consider Paul Szczechura a prospect in their own pool because he was never with the Dallas Stars organization, but he was signed by their AHL affiliate.

Wait a minute. Is this really what we're arguing, because if so I don't get how anyone would want to include an unsigned, unprotected and not contractually connected player to any team in terms of that team's prospects or rankings.

And by the way, I was joking around about Tristain King.

Chad_ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-20-2010, 08:51 PM
  #24
piqued
Registered User
 
piqued's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Dallas
Country: United States
Posts: 32,014
vCash: 3722
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jon Casey 91 View Post
Went to school in the town Lammers' played for. He was standout and key contributor for the Canes. I've sampled some, albeit less of Tassone, and he's no better IMO. Sure it's not the best comparison, but their junior careers from a production standpoint are comparable. Lammers was okay for Providence this year, but he's never going to accomplish much if anything in the NHL. Tassone without a contract makes me think he could follow the same path as Lammers has the past 4 years, so I don't think it's a guarentee he makes an impact in Dallas.
Lammers is the classic kind of guy who can put up points in juniors but not the next level. Undersized, game based on finesse, perimeter-oriented. That's the opposite of Tassone. Even then he only put up PPG in his last year.

Quote:
Originally Posted by txomisc View Post
Because if you include him you can include any unsigned college free agent. You can include any overseas player whos rights are not owned by an NHL.
Sure, let's do it. That's what I'm saying. But only if you believe that these random college free agents are more likely to play in Dallas, for whatever reason, than whoever would rank below them that are already fully in the system.

piqued is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-20-2010, 09:09 PM
  #25
txomisc
Registered User
 
txomisc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: California
Country: United States
Posts: 8,637
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by piqued1457 View Post
Lammers is the classic kind of guy who can put up points in juniors but not the next level. Undersized, game based on finesse, perimeter-oriented. That's the opposite of Tassone. Even then he only put up PPG in his last year.


Sure, let's do it. That's what I'm saying. But only if you believe that these random college free agents are more likely to play in Dallas, for whatever reason, than whoever would rank below them that are already fully in the system.
Ok I think its silly but whatever. Where do you put him? 20? He just takes Tristan Kings (who somehow seems to have become a little bit of a whipping boy) spot?

txomisc 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 03:47 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2015 All Rights Reserved.