Strengths: Ottawa's primary strength is a talented and diverse group of blueliners. With an incredibly impressive trio of young rearguards, the Sens' back end is likely to be a strength for years to come. Swedish puck-moving defenseman David Rundblad is complemented brilliantly by two-way talent Patrick Wiercioch and the imposing shutdown defenseman Jared Cowen.
Weaknesses:There is a real lack of elite talent up front as Ottawa does not have any prospect with the look of an impact top six NHLer. They are also thin between the pipes, with work-in-progress Swedish butterfly goalie Robin Lehner being the lone netminder of note.
Top 5 Prospects:1. Jared Cowen, D, 2. David Rundblad, D, 3. Patrick Wiercioch, D, 4. Robin Lehner, G. 5. Louie Caporusso, C. Lost to graduation: Erik Karlsson
Last edited by danishh: 11-01-2010 at 09:09 PM.
Reason: trolling
That's amazing that Murray got the organization to mid-pack so quickly after Muckler left it for dead. That one draft of Karlsson, Wiercioch, Z.Smith, Petersson really got things moving.
We moved up 5 spots from last year and we did not have much of a draft cause our lack of picks and we lost EK to graduation, I think we are doing pretty good and we will move up even more as of next year because no one else will graduated between now and then except maybe Z Smith.
Plus its not like we had spectacular picks we only had one top 10 (and it was 9) in those 4 years, I think we have done pretty well, you just love to hate
Who gives a ****. This is opinion. It's true, we are thin up front but if that can be solved through trades or free agency for the next 3-5 years then that's fine, enough time to draft some forwards.
Murray has brought out future D to what I would call (remember, this is opinion) elite. Lehner will (hopefully) be what we need in net. I agree with a previous poster, before Murray our prospect pool was non-existent. I would say what Murray did in only 4 years is pretty remarkable. There are only so many drafts right...
Yup and I found it interesting they had the Leafs sixth
Why shouldn't the Leafs load their Top-5 "prospect" list full of 24 yo NHL'ers like Gustavsson, Bozak and Gunnarsson and attach unreasonably optimistic ratings to them to cover up a lack of actual prospects?
I also eagerly await finding out how many 5th and 6th rounders from 3-4 years ago that the Rangers writer has handed out 8.0's like candy to.
What do paid analysts with pro experience have to say?
Considering they mention college and free-agent signings as bolstering the leafs' prospect pool, you've gotta admit it's strange they didn't note guys like Butler (who's been hot) or Hoffman.
Quote:
Originally Posted by trentmccleary
Why shouldn't the Leafs load their Top-5 "prospect" list full of 24 yo NHL'ers like Gustavsson, Bozak and Gunnarsson and attach unreasonably optimistic ratings to them to cover up a lack of actual prospects?
I also eagerly await finding out how many 5th and 6th rounders from 3-4 years ago that the Rangers writer has handed out 8.0's like candy to.
What do paid analysts with pro experience have to say?
Yeah, why do the (leaf favouring) sports analysts do that anyway? Wouldn't it be better to downgrade the leafs to like 20th so it looks like an extraordinary success when they actually have a few decent prospects break into the NHL over the next few years? Lol, and way to include 24 year olds, why not toss Regin, Foligno, and Karlsson back in for us?
We moved up 5 spots from last year and we did not have much of a draft cause our lack of picks and we lost EK to graduation, I think we are doing pretty good and we will move up even more as of next year because no one else will graduated between now and then except maybe Z Smith.
Plus its not like we had spectacular picks we only had one top 10 (and it was 9) in those 4 years, I think we have done pretty well, you just love to hate
I believe Carl Gunnarson and Bozak graduated, yet they are included in the Leafs write up. Seems like another article not worth the time it takes to read.
I believe Carl Gunnarson and Bozak graduated, yet they are included in the Leafs write up. Seems like another article not worth the time it takes to read.
Yeah, why do the (leaf favouring) sports analysts do that anyway? Wouldn't it be better to downgrade the leafs to like 20th so it looks like an extraordinary success when they actually have a few decent prospects break into the NHL over the next few years? Lol, and way to include 24 year olds, why not toss Regin, Foligno, and Karlsson back in for us?
Hmm, not sure... perhaps it's because they're just so much younger.
It's nice to see us moving up on this, but I've got to say these things are pretty stupid.
It's essentially just a ranking of where your prospects were drafted. Anybody who was drafted later and impresses enough to get noticed will crack an NHL roster before ever influencing these lists.
The ratings is based on prospects as determined by the rules, BEFORE the season started. Thus Karlsson is included in our position at 16th. That is why the Leafs get credit for Gustafsson, Bozak and Gunnerson.
When I look over the last few years, and the guys that the Sens have graduated, the pickings are pretty slim (Foligno, Lee, Regin, Karlsson, Emery, Winchester etc.)
Now I look at what we have for prospects, and I am pretty happy no matter what our rating will be.
Based on early returns I see the following changes in evaluations
Cowen, Up (bad year last year due to recovery from knee injury)
Rundblad - Up a lot (Dominating the SEL)
Lehner - Up a bit (more recognition, need to prove himself in Bingo)
Wiercioch - Down (seems to be struggling in the pros)
Butler - Up ( doing fine in Bingo)
Hoffman - Down (size issues at pro level?)
Silfverberg - Up a lot (showing offensive potential that was not apparent)
Petersson - Down ( slow start to the season)
I believe Carl Gunnarson and Bozak graduated, yet they are included in the Leafs write up. Seems like another article not worth the time it takes to read.
They have not graduated yet, you have to have had played more than 65 games for skaters and 45 for goalies but Gustavsson, Bozak and Gunnarsson will graduate this year.
The ratings is based on prospects as determined by the rules, BEFORE the season started. Thus Karlsson is included in our position at 16th. That is why the Leafs get credit for Gustafsson, Bozak and Gunnerson.
When I look over the last few years, and the guys that the Sens have graduated, the pickings are pretty slim (Foligno, Lee, Regin, Karlsson, Emery, Winchester etc.)
Now I look at what we have for prospects, and I am pretty happy no matter what our rating will be.
Based on early returns I see the following changes in evaluations
Cowen, Up (bad year last year due to recovery from knee injury)
Rundblad - Up a lot (Dominating the SEL)
Lehner - Up a bit (more recognition, need to prove himself in Bingo)
Wiercioch - Down (seems to be struggling in the pros)
Butler - Up ( doing fine in Bingo)
Hoffman - Down (size issues at pro level?)
Silfverberg - Up a lot (showing offensive potential that was not apparent)
Petersson - Down ( slow start to the season)
Thought losing a player to graduation meant the player wasn't included.
Also have no idea what the rules are, but both Bozak and Gunnarson were with the Leafs last year, yet remain prospects??
They have not graduated yet, you have to have had played more than 65 games for skaters and 45 for goalies but Gustavsson, Bozak and Gunnarsson will graduate this year.
Sometimes I think this organization takes BM for granted...
What a great job he did, hopefully he works his magic on forwards this year.
Not trying to be antagonistic or derail the conversation entirely... but Murray's great at scouting, but trading is not his strong suit and that's half the job. Personally, I'd love to see someone with Murray's drafting ability and Steve Yzerman's trade acumen. But to say "what a great job he did" would be focusing on only one aspect of being a GM.
Back on the article, I think it's great that we're moving up despite a somewhat thin draft. Nowhere to go but up.
Not trying to be antagonistic or derail the conversation entirely... but Murray's great at scouting, but trading is not his strong suit and that's half the job. Personally, I'd love to see someone with Murray's drafting ability and Steve Yzerman's trade acumen. But to say "what a great job he did" would be focusing on only one aspect of being a GM.
Back on the article, I think it's great that we're moving up despite a somewhat thin draft. Nowhere to go but up.
i certainly hope you're not going to use the gagne trade as an example for yzerman's trade accumen, because so far it's looking like he got fleeced.
Fleeced? I think you're putting a lot of faith in a small sample size. There's no denying that Gagné is a solid playmaker when he's got chemistry with linemates. These things take time. Also, he gave up Matt Walker, who's on IR for a few months, and a 4th round pick. If he really had gotten fleeced, the parts he sent back the other way would have to be lighting it up, or hell, even contributing somewhat.
That said, Yzerman probably wasn't the best guy to bring up when discussing trade acumen. Holland, Burke or a young Lamoriello would've been a better example. My point stands that Murray is not good at all when it comes to trades.
My point stands that Murray is not good at all when it comes to trades.
You're not making it, so nothing "stands"... it's just your opinion. You'd have to go through Murray's trades to prove your point and you're not doing that.
Fleeced? I think you're putting a lot of faith in a small sample size. There's no denying that Gagné is a solid playmaker when he's got chemistry with linemates. These things take time. Also, he gave up Matt Walker, who's on IR for a few months, and a 4th round pick. If he really had gotten fleeced, the parts he sent back the other way would have to be lighting it up, or hell, even contributing somewhat.
That said, Yzerman probably wasn't the best guy to bring up when discussing trade acumen. Holland, Burke or a young Lamoriello would've been a better example. My point stands that Murray is not good at all when it comes to trades.
Burke really? or you mean the Lou and Kovy deal?
I am sure you would be singing Murray praise if he traded the 2nd overall pick how about how useless Versteeg looks so far or how utterly useless Phaneuf is offensively and half the time defensively
