HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Metropolitan Division > Philadelphia Flyers
Notices

Joacim Eriksson new top prospect for Philadephia Flyers

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
09-06-2010, 12:00 PM
  #1
HF Article
Hockey's Future Staff
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Country:
Posts: 6,936
vCash: 500
Joacim Eriksson new top prospect for Philadephia Flyers

In the fall edition of the Philadelphia Flyers top 20, goaltender Joacim Eriksson tops a group deep of goalies and role players.

More...

HF Article is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-06-2010, 06:45 PM
  #2
infidelappel*
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 2,507
vCash: 500
Pretty good analysis, but I don't see how Bartulis falls to #7 when he's more or less shown that he's ready for the NHL. That's the only thing I don't really get about these rankings, everything else seems pretty good.

infidelappel* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-06-2010, 07:14 PM
  #3
blah
Registered User
 
blah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 4,269
vCash: 500
It's about potential. Bartulis is a 5-6 defensive dman. I like him, but he doesn't have top 4 potential. He's going to be a solid defensive dman.

blah is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-06-2010, 07:41 PM
  #4
infidelappel*
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 2,507
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by blah View Post
It's about potential. Bartulis is a 5-6 defensive dman. I like him, but he doesn't have top 4 potential. He's going to be a solid defensive dman.
Yeah. After re-reading some of the pages about rankings, I guess I get that.

I just kinda thought he wouldn't really just count as a prospect at this point. Or if he does, I think he's already exhibited more potential than, say, Nodl.

infidelappel* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-06-2010, 07:51 PM
  #5
CS
Bryzgalov's Blueline
 
CS's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Lumberton, NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 13,971
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by infidelappel View Post
Yeah. After re-reading some of the pages about rankings, I guess I get that.

I just kinda thought he wouldn't really just count as a prospect at this point. Or if he does, I think he's already exhibited more potential than, say, Nodl.
I disagree on the shot at Nodl. I think Nodl has demonstrated he has more value than Bartulis. Nodl could hold his own fairly well against playoff competition. Bartulis was torn to shreds.

All in all, I'm not very high on Bartulis' upside. I don't think it exists, but if I had dropped him lower, which I originally planned to do, there would be an absolute uproar from the Flyers forum.

That said, I take a lot of stock in others' opinions around here when it comes to prospects. Not as much as my own in the end, but I do pay attention.

Another thing you have to realize is that Bartulis will NOT play on this team. He's the 8th best defenseman on the roster right now.

On the other hand, I'm fairly confident that Nodl is the first call-up among forwards if all things remain equal, as in if he does not make the team outright.

CS is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
09-06-2010, 08:20 PM
  #6
blah
Registered User
 
blah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 4,269
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by infidelappel View Post
Yeah. After re-reading some of the pages about rankings, I guess I get that.

I just kinda thought he wouldn't really just count as a prospect at this point. Or if he does, I think he's already exhibited more potential than, say, Nodl.
It's the potential aspect. Nodl has more potential. Bartulis is more of a sure thing as, at worst, a 6th dman journeyman type.

The rankings are subjective. Opinions will differ.

blah is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-06-2010, 08:46 PM
  #7
JVR21
G
 
JVR21's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Country: United States
Posts: 7,849
vCash: 500
Hasn't Eriksson been the top prospect?

JVR21 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-06-2010, 08:50 PM
  #8
infidelappel*
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 2,507
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris Shafer View Post
I disagree on the shot at Nodl. I think Nodl has demonstrated he has more value than Bartulis. Nodl could hold his own fairly well against playoff competition. Bartulis was torn to shreds.

All in all, I'm not very high on Bartulis' upside. I don't think it exists, but if I had dropped him lower, which I originally planned to do, there would be an absolute uproar from the Flyers forum.

That said, I take a lot of stock in others' opinions around here when it comes to prospects. Not as much as my own in the end, but I do pay attention.

Another thing you have to realize is that Bartulis will NOT play on this team. He's the 8th best defenseman on the roster right now.

On the other hand, I'm fairly confident that Nodl is the first call-up among forwards if all things remain equal, as in if he does not make the team outright.
Quote:
Originally Posted by blah View Post
It's the potential aspect. Nodl has more potential. Bartulis is more of a sure thing as, at worst, a 6th dman journeyman type.

The rankings are subjective. Opinions will differ.
I dunno, I guess I don't see that much potential from Nodl.

I think Nodl's best will be a plugger who runs around and hits, and is defensively conscientious. Which is fine - he did that decently in the playoffs, but I don't expect to see much more from him. I don't think his offensive game is going to come around; at a certain point when that's been more or less stagnant at the pro level you have to eliminate that from consideration for his potential.

I think Bartulis' job is more difficult, which is why it was more noticeable when he was out of position or outmatched in the playoffs. I do think he has potential to be a solid bottom half kinda guy, and contribute more consistently than a guy like Nodl.

I guess I still just find it odd that he's on the list behind people who have yet to demonstrate they can even get as far as he did, even though it is based on potential. I guess at this point I don't even consider him to be in that same prospect pool as these other guys. (I think Nodl's moving past that window, too). At what point do you no longer consider a player to be a prospect?

infidelappel* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-06-2010, 08:57 PM
  #9
MountainHawk
Registered User
 
MountainHawk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Salem, MA
Country: Vanuatu
Posts: 12,771
vCash: 450
Quote:
Originally Posted by infidelappel View Post
I dunno, I guess I don't see that much potential from Nodl.

I think Nodl's best will be a plugger who runs around and hits, and is defensively conscientious. Which is fine - he did that decently in the playoffs, but I don't expect to see much more from him. I don't think his offensive game is going to come around; at a certain point when that's been more or less stagnant at the pro level you have to eliminate that from consideration for his potential.

I think Bartulis' job is more difficult, which is why it was more noticeable when he was out of position or outmatched in the playoffs. I do think he has potential to be a solid bottom half kinda guy, and contribute more consistently than a guy like Nodl.

I guess I still just find it odd that he's on the list behind people who have yet to demonstrate they can even get as far as he did, even though it is based on potential. I guess at this point I don't even consider him to be in that same prospect pool as these other guys. (I think Nodl's moving past that window, too). At what point do you no longer consider a player to be a prospect?
HF rules on prospects:

A player will be considered a prospect until he meets the following criteria:

1. If a prospect is a skater (forward, defenseman) and has played in 65 NHL games or more before the completion of the season of his 24th birthday; or, if a goaltender has played in 45 NHL games before the completion of the season of his 24th birthday, that player will be considered graduated to the NHL. Conversely, if a player completes the season of his 24th birthday without passing those milestones, then that player will no longer be considered a prospect by Hockey’s Future, regardless of the player’s status with his NHL club.
2. An NCAA player who signs his first contract at or above the age of 22 has three years to meet the above criteria (65/45), while those NCAA players that turn pro under the age of 22 will be subjected to
the criteria above.
3. European players who sign their first NHL contract at or above the age of 22 have three seasons from the time they sign that contract to meet the above criteria. Those European players below the age of 22 that have signed a NHL contract will be subjected to the criteria in section one.

MountainHawk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-06-2010, 08:58 PM
  #10
CS
Bryzgalov's Blueline
 
CS's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Lumberton, NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 13,971
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JVR21 View Post
Hasn't Eriksson been the top prospect?
vanRiemsdyk was still a "prospect" back in the Spring 2010 Top 20, as was Leino.

CS is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
09-06-2010, 10:17 PM
  #11
GoneFullHextall
adios Holmgren
 
GoneFullHextall's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Somewhere in NH
Country: United States
Posts: 30,625
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris Shafer View Post
I disagree on the shot at Nodl. I think Nodl has demonstrated he has more value than Bartulis. Nodl could hold his own fairly well against playoff competition. Bartulis was torn to shreds.

All in all, I'm not very high on Bartulis' upside. I don't think it exists, but if I had dropped him lower, which I originally planned to do, there would be an absolute uproar from the Flyers forum.

That said, I take a lot of stock in others' opinions around here when it comes to prospects. Not as much as my own in the end, but I do pay attention.

Another thing you have to realize is that Bartulis will NOT play on this team. He's the 8th best defenseman on the roster right now.

On the other hand, I'm fairly confident that Nodl is the first call-up among forwards if all things remain equal, as in if he does not make the team outright.
its all opinion Chris. some think Nodl stinksto put it nicely. I am in that group. I just havent seen anything in Nodl that jumps out at me. Bartulis is a dime a dozen bottom pairing guy. I still would rather have him out there over Walker.

GoneFullHextall is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
09-07-2010, 08:07 AM
  #12
jd2210
Registered Non User
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Great White North
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,503
vCash: 500
I don't mind those rankings at all. I think you did a bang up job on them. The only guy I'd say you missed on is Rinaldo who (as much as I hate his immaturity) has a billion times the talent that a guy like Klotz has.

jd2210 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-07-2010, 08:24 AM
  #13
Cartsiephan*
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 2,488
vCash: 500
The rankings still state the obvious....the Flyers farm system SUCKS. Who knows what they get from Bobrovsky or if Eriksson really pans out, he has never played and adult season against some better players. If Maroon and Nodl are the top ranked forwards then we are really screwed in a bad way for the near future. It is win now or trouble on the horizon and players will need to be moved prior to big paydays.

Cartsiephan* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-07-2010, 08:24 AM
  #14
Larry44
FlyersTankNation
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 5,059
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by jd2210 View Post
I don't mind those rankings at all. I think you did a bang up job on them. The only guy I'd say you missed on is Rinaldo who (as much as I hate his immaturity) has a billion times the talent that a guy like Klotz has.
Yeah, Rinaldo has a much greater chance of seeing an NHL jersey than a guy like Labrecque.

Bourdon is ranked way too high for a Dman who can't skate.

Kalinski is ranked too low. When the org. was asked about prospects for the THN Future Watch, he was ranked #1.

It makes me wonder, Chris, do you bother to call the Flyers to see how they actually rank their prospects? It might be worth it, I'm sure Chris Pryor or someone would be happy to talk to you about it.

Larry44 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-07-2010, 08:32 AM
  #15
Jester
Registered User
 
Jester's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: St. Andrews
Country: Scotland
Posts: 34,075
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by GoneFullHolmgren View Post
its all opinion Chris. some think Nodl stinksto put it nicely. I am in that group. I just havent seen anything in Nodl that jumps out at me. Bartulis is a dime a dozen bottom pairing guy. I still would rather have him out there over Walker.
Why, just because he has yet to prove he can score at the professional level?

As of now Nodl's potential looks like that of a 3rd/4th liner, and last year he looked like he had started to embrace that. However, in extended stays he's also been absolutely shredded defensively (impressive for a forward).

Bartulis' potential looks like a bottom pairing D, maybe (if he's lucky) a second pairing guy.

Whose potential is more valuable... a mucker and grinder forward, or a bottom pairing D?

D by a mile.

Jester is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-07-2010, 08:35 AM
  #16
GKJ
Global Moderator
Entertainment
 
GKJ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Do not trade plz
Country: United States
Posts: 109,238
vCash: 5775
Quote:
Originally Posted by Larry44 View Post
Yeah, Rinaldo has a much greater chance of seeing an NHL jersey than a guy like Labrecque.

Bourdon is ranked way too high for a Dman who can't skate.

Kalinski is ranked too low. When the org. was asked about prospects for the THN Future Watch, he was ranked #1.

It makes me wonder, Chris, do you bother to call the Flyers to see how they actually rank their prospects? It might be worth it, I'm sure Chris Pryor or someone would be happy to talk to you about it.
With all due respect to Chris' opinions and whatever process he does, his evaluation is no more or less credible than Chris Pryor's.

The fact of the matter is that until the Flyers start producing NHL players, who actually stick around the league after an extended stay with the Phantoms (more than one season), you can't honestly take seriously what anyone who works for the Flyers have to say about them. They talk every year about how they like everyone on the Phantoms, and they never get there. I don't know why anyone can't make a list with varying degrees of research and such, and have it be just as valid as any other, including one such as THN where the team contributed to it.

GKJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-07-2010, 10:34 AM
  #17
Larry44
FlyersTankNation
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 5,059
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by go kim johnsson 514 View Post
With all due respect to Chris' opinions and whatever process he does, his evaluation is no more or less credible than Chris Pryor's.

The fact of the matter is that until the Flyers start producing NHL players, who actually stick around the league after an extended stay with the Phantoms (more than one season), you can't honestly take seriously what anyone who works for the Flyers have to say about them. They talk every year about how they like everyone on the Phantoms, and they never get there. I don't know why anyone can't make a list with varying degrees of research and such, and have it be just as valid as any other, including one such as THN where the team contributed to it.
Very funny, and very telling, that you really believe that the director of hockey operations on a real NHL team that actually scouts, signs and employs the players, based on reports from real scouts that have actually seen the players play and knows them personally, is no better qualified than an internet amateur to rank the prospects of those players ever playing in the NHL. The mind boggles.

I hope, when you got to the doctor next, you get someone who has actually been to medical school, as opposed to someone who read about being a doctor on the internet....

Larry44 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-07-2010, 11:12 AM
  #18
DrinkFightFlyers
Grave Before Shave
 
DrinkFightFlyers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 12,203
vCash: 155
Send a message via AIM to DrinkFightFlyers
I'll believe it when I see it. I haven't seen him play in a live game yet and I am very weary of getting into the hype of a young goalie because they have such a high failure rate (especially in this city). Not bashing the kid at all, I just won't hop on the bandwagon until I see him play live with my own two eyes.

DrinkFightFlyers is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-07-2010, 09:20 PM
  #19
GKJ
Global Moderator
Entertainment
 
GKJ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Do not trade plz
Country: United States
Posts: 109,238
vCash: 5775
Quote:
Originally Posted by Larry44 View Post
Very funny, and very telling, that you really believe that the director of hockey operations on a real NHL team that actually scouts, signs and employs the players, based on reports from real scouts that have actually seen the players play and knows them personally, is no better qualified than an internet amateur to rank the prospects of those players ever playing in the NHL. The mind boggles.

I hope, when you got to the doctor next, you get someone who has actually been to medical school, as opposed to someone who read about being a doctor on the internet....
Why should I really believe them? They never turn out anyone. This organization treats any player who needs more than one full season in the AHL like damaged goods. And I don't know what doctors have to do with it, since that is plainly irrelevant (since, uh, people usually look things up on the internet, home remedies and such, before they go see a doctor, at least I do, and I'm pretty sure 99% of people who own a computer do too), but it's the usual shtick of someone who wants to hide behind the "I'm sure you know more than a professional hockey team sitting behind that computer of yours," cop-out.

This Chris Pryor fellow, please rattle off the laundry list of names of prospects he helped turned out by drafting, and developing them through the minor leagues - for more than one season (so you don't get Giroux or Darroll Powe as they each had no more than one full season on the Phantoms), into legitimate NHL players - since there aren't any on the Flyers. If you want to start your list with Randy Jones, I strongly advise against it.

GKJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-07-2010, 09:48 PM
  #20
CS
Bryzgalov's Blueline
 
CS's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Lumberton, NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 13,971
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Larry44 View Post
Yeah, Rinaldo has a much greater chance of seeing an NHL jersey than a guy like Labrecque.

Bourdon is ranked way too high for a Dman who can't skate.

Kalinski is ranked too low. When the org. was asked about prospects for the THN Future Watch, he was ranked #1.

It makes me wonder, Chris, do you bother to call the Flyers to see how they actually rank their prospects? It might be worth it, I'm sure Chris Pryor or someone would be happy to talk to you about it.
I remember that ranking.

To me it looked at lot more like who was closest to being NHL-ready with Eriksson thrown in. Again, I'd have to look at it again to be sure, but if I remember correctly, Nodl was pretty high as well.

That said, if you think Kalinski has more potential than Nodl, you're crazy. It's very possible that Kalinski becomes a better and more consistent NHLer than Nodl, but I don't know how you can argue Kalinski being a better prospect than Nodl unless you are looking at it based on who is closer to the NHL.

HF's job is inherently different than an update as to who is most NHL-ready.

We're here to give you potentials and the likelihood of those players reaching their potential.

You want the truth though?

These rankings are pointless. If you want a real picture/image/painting/whatever of what's going on, then read the articles instead of looking at the numbers.

Arguing over who is more likely to do what is kind of pointless. The numbers, the letters, all of it.

My job is to inform you, through my articles, of what is happening to the prospects, how they are progressing, and maybe give you some reports as to the strengths/weaknesses of some players you probably don't have the opportunity to see.

You want perfection? Then watch the games yourself and do the research yourself. I really mean that, because nobody is ever going to be happy with anyone else's ranking/grading system. Believe it or not, in my mind the grades are just another thing for members here to complain about how we're not doing our jobs correctly. All that, when the service we provide is free. To me that just doesn't make sense, particularly because a lot of us put a lot of work into this.

Nobody knows what happens until each player's career is completely over. Even then, ranking players is a crapshoot.

CS is online now   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 12:59 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.