HFBoards

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

I like our prospect list a lot!

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
07-14-2004, 01:37 PM
  #26
Digger12
Registered User
 
Digger12's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Defending the border
Posts: 14,550
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kokopeli
That is indeed correct. Both of these teams have drafted players with outstanding potential, but they are not even under contract at this point, so why get all excited about them? They are nothing but a huge question mark, even with their talent. See if some of these "can't miss prospects" ring a bell for you? Pavel Brendl, Tim Connolly, Brian Finley, Kris Beech, Jamie Lundmark, Denis Shvidki, Jani Rita, Scott Kelman, Konstatin Koltsov, Kirill Safronov and Barrett Heisten? All of them top 20 draft picks in ONE DRAFT and all of them have essentially seen their careers go in the wrong direction or fade into oblivion before they even had a chance to step on an NHL sheet of ice (this draft class was selected because a player drafted this year should step in after 3-5 years and begin to contribute, which equates to the 1999 draft class). The draft is a crapshoot. All you have is a lottery ticket. That goes double for goaltenders who are longshots in any round. Just look at the goaltenders in the NHL and check out their draft position. Not many first rounders in there. Going back almost a decade here are the goaltenders selected in the opening round up until 2001. Jamie Storr (#7), Eric Fichaud (#16), Evgeni Ryabchikov (#21), Dan Cloutier (#26), JS Giguere (#13), Martin Biron (#16), Brian Boucher (#22), Marc Denis (#25), Craig Hillier (#23), Roberto Luongo (#4), JF Damphousse (#24), Patrick Desrochers (#14), Mathieu Chouinard (#15), Brian Finley (#6), Maxime Oulett (#22), Ari Ahonen (#27), Rick DiPietro (#1), Brent Krahn (#9), Pascal Leclaire (#8), Dan Blackburn (#10), Jason Bacashihuia (#26), and Adam Munro (#29). Of those, how many goaltenders actually lived up to their billing? How many of them were complete washouts? How many of them even ended up being starters (5ish)? Goaltenders are a crapshoot just as badly as other positional players are. You don't know what you have until he arrives, one way or the other.
I think we get this.

So what do you propose we talk about at hockeysfuture.com then?

Digger12 is offline  
Old
07-14-2004, 01:42 PM
  #27
dawgbone
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 21,104
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to dawgbone Send a message via MSN to dawgbone
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kokopeli
That is indeed correct. Both of these teams have drafted players with outstanding potential, but they are not even under contract at this point, so why get all excited about them? They are nothing but a huge question mark, even with their talent. See if some of these "can't miss prospects" ring a bell for you? Pavel Brendl, Tim Connolly, Brian Finley, Kris Beech, Jamie Lundmark, Denis Shvidki, Jani Rita, Scott Kelman, Konstatin Koltsov, Kirill Safronov and Barrett Heisten? All of them top 20 draft picks in ONE DRAFT and all of them have essentially seen their careers go in the wrong direction or fade into oblivion before they even had a chance to step on an NHL sheet of ice (this draft class was selected because a player drafted this year should step in after 3-5 years and begin to contribute, which equates to the 1999 draft class). The draft is a crapshoot. All you have is a lottery ticket. That goes double for goaltenders who are longshots in any round. Just look at the goaltenders in the NHL and check out their draft position. Not many first rounders in there. Going back almost a decade here are the goaltenders selected in the opening round up until 2001. Jamie Storr (#7), Eric Fichaud (#16), Evgeni Ryabchikov (#21), Dan Cloutier (#26), JS Giguere (#13), Martin Biron (#16), Brian Boucher (#22), Marc Denis (#25), Craig Hillier (#23), Roberto Luongo (#4), JF Damphousse (#24), Patrick Desrochers (#14), Mathieu Chouinard (#15), Brian Finley (#6), Maxime Oulett (#22), Ari Ahonen (#27), Rick DiPietro (#1), Brent Krahn (#9), Pascal Leclaire (#8), Dan Blackburn (#10), Jason Bacashihuia (#26), and Adam Munro (#29). Of those, how many goaltenders actually lived up to their billing? How many of them were complete washouts? How many of them even ended up being starters (5ish)? Goaltenders are a crapshoot just as badly as other positional players are. You don't know what you have until he arrives, one way or the other.
Then why does this site exist?

Why do these boards exist?

Don't hate the players, hate the game. You are supposed to talk about prospects, and the future of the teams and the league in general.

I mean, if you don't want to hear about prospects in terms of what they've done, what they are doing, and what they might do, you are in the wrong place.

Go start up your own website and message board... hockeypresent.com is an available domain name. That way you don't have to hear about prospects and potential and all those other words you hate so much.

But at hockeys future, prospects are huge, and potential is huge... so either accept it, or go somewhere else, because it isn't going to change. This site is here for people who want to talk about the future (as in they haven't done it yet) stars of the game.

__________________
TheSpecialist - MacT thinks he was that good of a hockey player when in actuality he was no better then a Louie Debrusk.
dawgbone is offline  
Old
07-14-2004, 01:48 PM
  #28
thome_26
HFBoards Sponsor
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Edmonton
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,860
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to thome_26
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kokopeli
That is indeed correct. Both of these teams have drafted players with outstanding potential, but they are not even under contract at this point, so why get all excited about them? They are nothing but a huge question mark, even with their talent. See if some of these "can't miss prospects" ring a bell for you? Pavel Brendl, Tim Connolly, Brian Finley, Kris Beech, Jamie Lundmark, Denis Shvidki, Jani Rita, Scott Kelman, Konstatin Koltsov, Kirill Safronov and Barrett Heisten? All of them top 20 draft picks in ONE DRAFT and all of them have essentially seen their careers go in the wrong direction or fade into oblivion before they even had a chance to step on an NHL sheet of ice (this draft class was selected because a player drafted this year should step in after 3-5 years and begin to contribute, which equates to the 1999 draft class). The draft is a crapshoot. All you have is a lottery ticket. That goes double for goaltenders who are longshots in any round. Just look at the goaltenders in the NHL and check out their draft position. Not many first rounders in there. Going back almost a decade here are the goaltenders selected in the opening round up until 2001. Jamie Storr (#7), Eric Fichaud (#16), Evgeni Ryabchikov (#21), Dan Cloutier (#26), JS Giguere (#13), Martin Biron (#16), Brian Boucher (#22), Marc Denis (#25), Craig Hillier (#23), Roberto Luongo (#4), JF Damphousse (#24), Patrick Desrochers (#14), Mathieu Chouinard (#15), Brian Finley (#6), Maxime Oulett (#22), Ari Ahonen (#27), Rick DiPietro (#1), Brent Krahn (#9), Pascal Leclaire (#8), Dan Blackburn (#10), Jason Bacashihuia (#26), and Adam Munro (#29). Of those, how many goaltenders actually lived up to their billing? How many of them were complete washouts? How many of them even ended up being starters (5ish)? Goaltenders are a crapshoot just as badly as other positional players are. You don't know what you have until he arrives, one way or the other.
Why are you on these boards then... as stated by a previous poster everybody is aware that you don't know exactly what you're getting and when or if you'll get it. But never the less - ifyou don't like to talk about these kind of "what ifs" then go to some other threads or some other board entirely - because we all are aware of what you're trying to say and have been for a VERY long time. Everybody from Lowe to outKast is aware that there is risk that every pick may not pan out (hence us picking DD when we already had JDD).

__________________
http://hfboards.com/forumdisplay.php?f=160 - the Unofficial HF Political board
thome_26 is offline  
Old
07-14-2004, 02:23 PM
  #29
Lanny MacDonald*
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Tuvalu
Posts: 4,457
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by thome_26
Why are you on these boards then...
To talk about the FUTURE, but to do so in a realistic manner. I believe in Napoleonic prospect evaluation. Every player is guilty until proven innocent. Unless the player is so beyond his peers in performance (Ovechkin, Phaneuf and Fleury as present examples at each position, and I don't personally like Fleury much), then you seriously have to look at these kids, warts and all. Its one thing to talk about Schremp and say what a great future this offensive dynamo has, but its negligent not to mention his character flaws and how so many teams passed on this uber-talent. If that doesn't raise some red flags and make you wake up to reality, then nothing will. I guess expectations are maybe just a little high when your resident writer states that your top prospect, not even close to being the best prospect at his position, is considered a potential franchise player. Realistic? Not in the slightest. That is my point.

Lanny MacDonald* is offline  
Old
07-14-2004, 02:25 PM
  #30
Allan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Edmonton
Country: United Nations
Posts: 1,405
vCash: 500
That gets mentioned several times in every thread.

Allan is offline  
Old
07-14-2004, 02:29 PM
  #31
copperandblue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 10,724
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kokopeli
To talk about the FUTURE, but to do so in a realistic manner. I believe in Napoleonic prospect evaluation. Every player is guilty until proven innocent. Unless the player is so beyond his peers in performance (Ovechkin, Phaneuf and Fleury as present examples at each position, and I don't personally like Fleury much), then you seriously have to look at these kids, warts and all. Its one thing to talk about Schremp and say what a great future this offensive dynamo has, but its negligent not to mention his character flaws and how so many teams passed on this uber-talent. If that doesn't raise some red flags and make you wake up to reality, then nothing will. I guess expectations are maybe just a little high when your resident writer states that your top prospect, not even close to being the best prospect at his position, is considered a potential franchise player. Realistic? Not in the slightest. That is my point.
Once you hash through all the warts, something that I think has been quite well covered in regards to Schremp already. Do you still need to qualify all your projects or hopes for his future by adding - if he gets his **** together?

At some point, I think it it is pretty well understood that the context in which the poster is talking about - which ever player - he/she chooses, is generally with the assumption that the player has overcome his short comings.

copperandblue is offline  
Old
07-14-2004, 02:36 PM
  #32
Seachd
Registered User
 
Seachd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: The Fail
Posts: 13,390
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kokopeli
Its one thing to talk about Schremp and say what a great future this offensive dynamo has, but its negligent not to mention his character flaws and how so many teams passed on this uber-talent. If that doesn't raise some red flags and make you wake up to reality, then nothing will.
8 teams passed up on Phaneuf. How many red flags are there? How about Parise, who a lot of people like? How about Schwarz? How about Zetterberg? See how much draft position actually matters?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kokopeli
I guess expectations are maybe just a little high when your resident writer states that your top prospect, not even close to being the best prospect at his position, is considered a potential franchise player. Realistic? Not in the slightest. That is my point.
Do you know what "potential" means? Of course he's a potential franchise player. I'm a potential billionaire. What's not realistic is instantly writing off these players for no reason, when in the end, some of them will make a pretty decent impact.

Seachd is offline  
Old
07-14-2004, 02:46 PM
  #33
thome_26
HFBoards Sponsor
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Edmonton
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,860
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to thome_26
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kokopeli
To talk about the FUTURE, but to do so in a realistic manner. I believe in Napoleonic prospect evaluation. Every player is guilty until proven innocent. Unless the player is so beyond his peers in performance (Ovechkin, Phaneuf and Fleury as present examples at each position, and I don't personally like Fleury much), then you seriously have to look at these kids, warts and all. Its one thing to talk about Schremp and say what a great future this offensive dynamo has, but its negligent not to mention his character flaws and how so many teams passed on this uber-talent. If that doesn't raise some red flags and make you wake up to reality, then nothing will. I guess expectations are maybe just a little high when your resident writer states that your top prospect, not even close to being the best prospect at his position, is considered a potential franchise player. Realistic? Not in the slightest. That is my point.
You're manner is extremely un-Napoleonic. Bonaparte opitimizes what it is to be hopeful and optimistic. As far as guilty until proven innocent - I suggest you educate yourself on how Napoleon ran government in France. You are simply somebody who hasn't been on the boards long enough to know how we talk about prospects (it becomes EXTREMELY redundent to say "If he fixes his biggest problem" when talking about somebody's potential. Because that is EXTREMELY obvious). JDD is among the top few goalie prospects. It isn't in anyway to consider him a potential franchise player.

thome_26 is offline  
Old
07-14-2004, 02:58 PM
  #34
MrMackey
Registered User
 
MrMackey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: cgy
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,061
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kokopeli
Its one thing to talk about Schremp and say what a great future this offensive dynamo has, but its negligent not to mention his character flaws and how so many teams passed on this uber-talent. If that doesn't raise some red flags and make you wake up to reality, then nothing will. I guess expectations are maybe just a little high when your resident writer states that your top prospect, not even close to being the best prospect at his position, is considered a potential franchise player. Realistic? Not in the slightest. That is my point.
You don't have to be one of the top two or three in your position to be considered a future franchise player. Of the current franchise players, half of them never seemed destined to become so great. Other players who seemed to have the tools never lived up to expectations (Daigle, Bonsignore, Falloon). Others, like Ilya Kovalchuk, had negatives attached to them (like selfishness or ego), and have been able to shake them off to become great players.

I don't think anyone here is expecting anything. And there are very few bold statements being made. Schremp has solid talent and has the skills to become a star player... but nobody's saying he's a sure thing. I don't think its unfair to speculate and debate the future of this player just after he's been drafted.

Phaneuf isn't the best in his position either (or even close to it at this point) and he has flaws of his own... but he has a unique skill set that could make him a potential franchise player.

MrMackey is offline  
Old
07-14-2004, 03:04 PM
  #35
Lanny MacDonald*
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Tuvalu
Posts: 4,457
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by thome_26
You are simply somebody who hasn't been on the boards long enough to know how we talk about prospects ...
Oh trust me, I have been here a lot longer than you my friend. Just because my present post count is low does not mean I have not been here for a very long time. I pre-date what most of you consider HF and have provided content for over half a dozen hockey related media sources, including this one. Post count means very little at a site where you can change identities like you can change socks. If post count meant anything, Zoidberg would be the all-knowing-all-seeing entity here. Post count means very little. And I completely understand how you talk about prospects, that's why I think you folks should reconsider how and why you do so.

You may like to elevate JDD to the mythical level of "franchise goaltender", but need I remind you that there have been a lot better goaltenders with a lot better resumes rated a lot higher who washed out. Look no further than Brian Finley for a perfect example. Give the kids a break and let them prove something before raising expectations to a level that they will never be able to attain.

Lanny MacDonald* is offline  
Old
07-14-2004, 03:13 PM
  #36
copperandblue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 10,724
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrMackey
Phaneuf isn't the best in his position either (or even close to it at this point) and he has flaws of his own... but he has a unique skill set that could make him a potential franchise player.
He's an interesting player to bring up.

Until he laid out Pouliot in the prospects game he was just another good prospect defenceman, similar to Brent Seabrook (as my memory serves me anyways). He made a name for himself off that hit and under the spotlight it created has garnered attention ever since.

If he doesn't make that hit, the attention that it created for him likely never happens and he drops in the rankings. Instead he becomes a focal point and everything he did since gets held up as a "see I told you he is great" kinda thing.

Schremp had that impressive (and yes cocky) move at the propsect game and instead of seeing it as a kid being creative with the puck, he is seen as a kid with an attitude. There is a preconceived opinionthat will continue to dog this kid until he can prove everyone wrong.

We just have to hope he does just that.

Actually it kinda reminds me of Bull Durham when Costner's character is schooling Tim Robbin's character and tells him that he can't have fungus on his shower shoes because everyone will think he is a slob. But once he makes it big, he can grow the fungus back and he will be seen as colourful.

If Schremp minds his P's and Q's for a while, he can excel at this game and at that point he can open his yap and let all the cockiness he wants too ooze out. Then he will simply look like the second coming of Jeremy Roenick.... who everyone seems to love because his attitude comes with on ice talent.

copperandblue is offline  
Old
07-14-2004, 03:15 PM
  #37
Oiltalk
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Edmonton
Posts: 2,720
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kokopeli

Give the kids a break and let them prove something before raising expectations to a level that they will never be able to attain.
If your talking about the Ovechkin/Crosby to Gretzky comparisons your correct, but stating that a young talented guy in Schremp is first line material and a potential star player in the future is raising attainable expectations.

Oiltalk is offline  
Old
07-14-2004, 03:16 PM
  #38
MrMackey
Registered User
 
MrMackey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: cgy
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,061
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kokopeli
I pre-date what most of you consider HF and have provided content for over half a dozen hockey related media sources, including this one.
That's impressive!

In that case, I think you're right and everybody should rethink how we talk about prospects.

I actually agree that sometimes our optimism as fans can lead to disappointment. But I think it's ridiculous to suggest that fans can't get a little bit excited about players that may have an impact on the organization.

Its not like people here are roaming over to other boards and proclaiming that JDD is the best goalie the league will ever see.

MrMackey is offline  
Old
07-14-2004, 03:22 PM
  #39
Lanny MacDonald*
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Tuvalu
Posts: 4,457
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrMackey
Phaneuf isn't the best in his position either (or even close to it at this point) and he has flaws of his own... but he has a unique skill set that could make him a potential franchise player.
I appreciate your candor, but please feel free to list those players that are considered to be better defensive prospects than Dion Phaneuf. Mr. Phaneuf surpassed every single prospect at his position with his performance over the past year and a half. He is considered by many to be the best defensive prospect not having play in the NHL. 29 teams would give up almost any player on their roster to get him, he is that good. While it pains you to see him drafted by your most bitter rival I suggest you take a closer look at the player in question. I spoke with an agent a couple months ago that stated that of the 2003 draft were done over that Phaneuf would very likely go first overall. Those were heady words from an agent who represents some of the best young players Europe has to offer. Phaneuf is consider as can't miss as you can get and will (if there is a season) be in the NHL next year.

Lanny MacDonald* is offline  
Old
07-14-2004, 03:24 PM
  #40
copperandblue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 10,724
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kokopeli
I pre-date what most of you consider HF and have provided content for over half a dozen hockey related media sources, including this one.

Your name isn't Stan Fischler, is it?

copperandblue is offline  
Old
07-14-2004, 03:33 PM
  #41
Oiltalk
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Edmonton
Posts: 2,720
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kokopeli
I appreciate your candor, but please feel free to list those players that are considered to be better defensive prospects than Dion Phaneuf. Mr. Phaneuf surpassed every single prospect at his position with his performance over the past year and a half. He is considered by many to be the best defensive prospect not having play in the NHL. 29 teams would give up almost any player on their roster to get him, he is that good. While it pains you to see him drafted by your most bitter rival I suggest you take a closer look at the player in question. I spoke with an agent a couple months ago that stated that of the 2003 draft were done over that Phaneuf would very likely go first overall. Those were heady words from an agent who represents some of the best young players Europe has to offer. Phaneuf is consider as can't miss as you can get and will (if there is a season) be in the NHL next year.
Then again why get excited over Phaneuf. He hasn't proven a thing in the NHL. Isn't this your argument?

Oiltalk is offline  
Old
07-14-2004, 03:41 PM
  #42
MrMackey
Registered User
 
MrMackey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: cgy
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,061
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kokopeli
I appreciate your candor, but please feel free to list those players that are considered to be better defensive prospects than Dion Phaneuf. Mr. Phaneuf surpassed every single prospect at his position with his performance over the past year and a half. He is considered by many to be the best defensive prospect not having play in the NHL. 29 teams would give up almost any player on their roster to get him, he is that good. While it pains you to see him drafted by your most bitter rival I suggest you take a closer look at the player in question. I spoke with an agent a couple months ago that stated that of the 2003 draft were done over that Phaneuf would very likely go first overall. Those were heady words from an agent who represents some of the best young players Europe has to offer. Phaneuf is consider as can't miss as you can get and will (if there is a season) be in the NHL next year.
Off the top of my head, I'd rather have Pitkanen, Bouwmeester and Grebeshkov as young defenseman who also have a way to go before they're franchise players.

I don't consider the Flames to be our most bitter rival, although I wish they were. And I'm not denying that he's a can't miss prospect, that the Flames did a great job in landing him at #9, or that Sutter will try and make a spot on the roster for him.

The Oilers certainly don't have a defensive prospect as good as Phaneuf IMO. However I don't think the Flames have a forward prospect as good as Schremp or a goalie prospect as good as Deslauriers.

Please note that I say prospect, and no one will know for certain if they'll amount to anything.

MrMackey is offline  
Old
07-14-2004, 03:57 PM
  #43
hockeyaddict101
Registered User
 
hockeyaddict101's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 19,903
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kokopeli
I appreciate your candor, but please feel free to list those players that are considered to be better defensive prospects than Dion Phaneuf. Mr. Phaneuf surpassed every single prospect at his position with his performance over the past year and a half. He is considered by many to be the best defensive prospect not having play in the NHL. 29 teams would give up almost any player on their roster to get him, he is that good. While it pains you to see him drafted by your most bitter rival I suggest you take a closer look at the player in question. I spoke with an agent a couple months ago that stated that of the 2003 draft were done over that Phaneuf would very likely go first overall. Those were heady words from an agent who represents some of the best young players Europe has to offer. Phaneuf is consider as can't miss as you can get and will (if there is a season) be in the NHL next year.
Let me use your own logic on you. He hasn't played a professional game yet and has not signed a contract so ANY talk of him being a great player is premature.

Funny how this logic applies to any Edmonton Oiler prospect but not to Phaneuf

Funny you use Rita as an example of a player that skates OVERRATED. He was listed as a can't miss prospect and one of the best players not in the NHL just a few years ago. Could the same think happen to Pheneuf? If scouts are always right then there would be no busts!

Though from what we all understand Rita has signed a one-way contract with the Oil but it hasn't been announced, so we will see what he does when he is given the opportunity.

Many of the BUSTS that you mentioned were all considered can't miss prospects and still didn't make it.

IMO Edmonton doesn't have a lot of high end prospects except for Schremp but the depth of our prospects is more than almost any other organization.

We have all talked about the weaknesses and strengths of the Oiler prospects ad naseum and of course some are going to bust or never make it but at the same time some that were not expected to make it will improve their game and make the lineup or some will be traded to address other needs.

Like any other gamble the more players you have in your system the more chance you have for success. So depth is important.

For every Bongisnore there is a Kelly Buchberger. The draft is a crap shoot and we all know that but it is fun to talk about.


Last edited by hockeyaddict101: 07-14-2004 at 04:15 PM.
hockeyaddict101 is offline  
Old
07-14-2004, 04:14 PM
  #44
Lanny MacDonald*
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Tuvalu
Posts: 4,457
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrMackey
Off the top of my head, I'd rather have Pitkanen, Bouwmeester and Grebeshkov as young defenseman who also have a way to go before they're franchise players.

I don't consider the Flames to be our most bitter rival, although I wish they were. And I'm not denying that he's a can't miss prospect, that the Flames did a great job in landing him at #9, or that Sutter will try and make a spot on the roster for him.

The Oilers certainly don't have a defensive prospect as good as Phaneuf IMO. However I don't think the Flames have a forward prospect as good as Schremp or a goalie prospect as good as Deslauriers.

Please note that I say prospect, and no one will know for certain if they'll amount to anything.
I agree, that Pitkanen and Bouwmeester are both superior players. You will notice that I did say NOT having played in the NHL however. Phaneuf is the best player at his position available, like it or not.

I also was unaware that this was going to turn into a comparison between two teams (the Flames and the Oilers). That was not my intention, but if you wish to head that way, then I will play along. You are correct that the Oilers don't have a prospect like Phaneuf. Not many of the teams in the NHL do. He is an elite prospect without a doubt.

You are also correct that the Flames do not have a prospect like Schremp. Schremp is a swing for the fences and nothing more. He either works out, or the Oilers look stupid for selecting a player that was on a very slippery slope (no player that has fallen as far as Schremp has ever gone on to have a successful career in the NHL BTW). It was a good gamble by a team with a second first rounder desperate to find a top line talent. In defense of the Flames, that has not been their strategy in selecting players since before Button was hired. The Flames have focused on drafting players with a high potential for playing in the NHL, and look to have some players that will indeed do so. Their latest draft pick, Chris Chucko, is a player that is a pro-typical NHL player. He does nothing exceptionally well, but does nothing poorly. He has a very well rounded game and numerous teams (including the Oilers) were looking at him. He is a pick with less upside, but very good potential to play in the NHL in some capacity. He is similar to Eric Nystrom in that regard. A player that is not pretty, but is extremely effective and plays the NHL style of game.

I think you are very wrong in your assessment of the Flames system in regards to the comparison at goaltender. The Flames have an excellent, and unhearlded, prospect in Andrei Medvedev. There are those narrow minded folk that like to poke fun at his waist line, but can you name another goaltender his age that has experienced so much success? Medvedev has THREE world championship gold medals (in his age group) as a starter. He started this year as a backup in the RSL and ended up taking the starting position away from the incumbent half way through the season. He is now poised to be a starter as a 21 year old in aruably the second best league in the world. All the guy does is continue to develop and continue to win. The hype machine may not be there like it is for Deslauriers, but he is probably the better goaltender. I guess the question is, how many national team bids did Deslauriers fail to take advantage of? If you're not the best your country has to offer how can you possibly be one of the best on the horizon? That same stigma followed another Flames prospect (Brent Krahn) around after his failure at selection camp, and he only crashed and burned at one.

Prospects come in all different shapes and sizes with all sorts of warts. You have to consider the warts that they have and exactly how they fit into the big picture. For Edmonton it is very likely that Deslauriers will play in some capacity. The shelf is bare otherwise. Schremp is a kid that will have some hurdles to overcome, but he may get a chance to skate in the NHL with Edmonton for the same reasons Deslauriers does. What other options do they have? Until Edmonton develops some top line talent to prevent these kids from getting a shot (the emcumbent preventing management from giving the opportunity) these question marks get a chance. In other organizations its very likely that a lot of these kids don't see the light of day (or are drafted at all by the teams in question). Drafting philosophy comes into play here and Edmonton's is one that they like to pick the guys big on potential but short on probability. That's the thing that needs to be worked into the equation, probablility. WILL a kid get the opportunity and WILL he have enough to stick. Look to Rita for answers to that question.

I'm not condemning the Oilers prospects or anything. Heck, I think there are some good prospects there. What I am saying is to be a little more realistic in your hopes for your players. There's a big difference between having skills and being able to play in the NHL. What is the likelihood of a player getting a chance to display those skills and impressing enough to stick (production counts here)?

Lanny MacDonald* is offline  
Old
07-14-2004, 04:14 PM
  #45
thome_26
HFBoards Sponsor
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Edmonton
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,860
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to thome_26
:troll:
Kokopeli is nothing but a troll. The guy is rediculously inconsistent and he's only been around onthis thread (please reveal who you were currently listed as so we can recall your past opinions and know what to expect out of you).

As said before, this entire board and site is to talk and analyze future potential - that is what we are doing, get lost if you don't like it.

And on Phaneuf - Any of the top four are easily higher potential players then Phaneuf. He doesn't have the elite offensive upside required to have or to currently be able to break into the top five IMO.

thome_26 is offline  
Old
07-14-2004, 04:18 PM
  #46
Digger12
Registered User
 
Digger12's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Defending the border
Posts: 14,550
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kokopeli
The draft and being drafted does not mean you are going to be a player.
Remind me again why Dion Phaneuf WILL be in the NHL next year, since he hasn't really accomplished anything yet by your own definition?

And since when did player agents become scouts?

This started out as a decent thread, but seems to be turning into a 'troll against the world' scenario...seems to be happening around here a lot lately.

Digger12 is offline  
Old
07-14-2004, 04:21 PM
  #47
Lanny MacDonald*
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Tuvalu
Posts: 4,457
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by thome_26
:troll:
Kokopeli is nothing but a troll.
That's right, I come and discuss a subject fairly and politely and I get called a troll. Isn't that the last resort for someone who is backed into a corner? I thought so. I've stayed here and defended my position and have not been insulting (can't say the same for you thome_26). No wonder people avoid talking with you folks. There's no discussion allowed. Stick with it thome_26. The future is so bring you gotta wear blinders!


Lanny MacDonald* is offline  
Old
07-14-2004, 04:25 PM
  #48
windowlicker
Registered User
 
windowlicker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Murky Wisconsin
Country: United States
Posts: 2,181
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kokopeli
I appreciate your candor, but please feel free to list those players that are considered to be better defensive prospects than Dion Phaneuf.
Just off the top of my head, Ryan Suter. On top of which Suter has a considerably higher offensive upside.

windowlicker is offline  
Old
07-14-2004, 04:31 PM
  #49
thome_26
HFBoards Sponsor
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Edmonton
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,860
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to thome_26
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kokopeli
You are also correct that the Flames do not have a prospect like Schremp. Schremp is a swing for the fences and nothing more. He either works out, or the Oilers look stupid for selecting a player that was on a very slippery slope (no player that has fallen as far as Schremp has ever gone on to have a successful career in the NHL BTW). It was a good gamble by a team with a second first rounder desperate to find a top line talent. In defense of the Flames, that has not been their strategy in selecting players since before Button was hired. The Flames have focused on drafting players with a high potential for playing in the NHL, and look to have some players that will indeed do so. Their latest draft pick, Chris Chucko, is a player that is a pro-typical NHL player. He does nothing exceptionally well, but does nothing poorly. He has a very well rounded game and numerous teams (including the Oilers) were looking at him. He is a pick with less upside, but very good potential to play in the NHL in some capacity. He is similar to Eric Nystrom in that regard. A player that is not pretty, but is extremely effective and plays the NHL style of game.
Good god.... the fact that you are even trying to compare the Oilers scouting and drafting to the Flames is absolutely rediculous much less that you are talking as if the Flames have done a better job! The Oilers haven't had as low picks as the Flames for a decade and you try and say that the Flames have done a good job!? The Oilers farm system is so superior to that of the Flames it's not even funny. Chucko is a gamble if one ever existed - the kid played in teir two hockey and rode Zajac. Chucko is a good prospect, and I believe he has a strong chance at the NHL - but if you think Chucko is some kind of safe blue chipper then you are one something. The kid hasn't even played against the highest level in his age group for god sakes.

Quote:
I think you are very wrong in your assessment of the Flames system in regards to the comparison at goaltender. The Flames have an excellent, and unhearlded, prospect in Andrei Medvedev. There are those narrow minded folk that like to poke fun at his waist line, but can you name another goaltender his age that has experienced so much success? Medvedev has THREE world championship gold medals (in his age group) as a starter. He started this year as a backup in the RSL and ended up taking the starting position away from the incumbent half way through the season. He is now poised to be a starter as a 21 year old in aruably the second best league in the world. All the guy does is continue to develop and continue to win. The hype machine may not be there like it is for Deslauriers, but he is probably the better goaltender. I guess the question is, how many national team bids did Deslauriers fail to take advantage of? If you're not the best your country has to offer how can you possibly be one of the best on the horizon? That same stigma followed another Flames prospect (Brent Krahn) around after his failure at selection camp, and he only crashed and burned at one.
Medved is a good prospect, but your logic that he must be better because he's the best in Russia is rediculous. Salo is the best Sweden has to offer... does that mean he's NEARLY as good as Canada's 5th or 6th best goalie? Not a hope in hell buddy. JDD was one of the best players at the camp from what I have read but was left out simply because of Fleury was gift-wrapped the starting spot and they didn't want to French goalies. Medvedev is a lesser prospect and is less likely to play in the NHL then what Mikhnov is!
Quote:
Prospects come in all different shapes and sizes with all sorts of warts. You have to consider the warts that they have and exactly how they fit into the big picture. For Edmonton it is very likely that Deslauriers will play in some capacity. The shelf is bare otherwise. Schremp is a kid that will have some hurdles to overcome, but he may get a chance to skate in the NHL with Edmonton for the same reasons Deslauriers does. What other options do they have? Until Edmonton develops some top line talent to prevent these kids from getting a shot (the emcumbent preventing management from giving the opportunity) these question marks get a chance. In other organizations its very likely that a lot of these kids don't see the light of day (or are drafted at all by the teams in question). Drafting philosophy comes into play here and Edmonton's is one that they like to pick the guys big on potential but short on probability. That's the thing that needs to be worked into the equation, probablility. WILL a kid get the opportunity and WILL he have enough to stick. Look to Rita for answers to that question.
If you really believe that the Oilers are some kind of inferior team that just hands over spots to its kids then you don't know what you're talking about. The Oilers are a perrenial 90 point team and have one of the youngest teams in the league. If Rita was a Flame he would have been in the NHL two years ago becuase the oppportunity would have been there. The Shelf is bare after Deslauriers???? The Oilers are the second deepest team prospect wise in the entire NHL you know-nothing.


Quote:
I'm not condemning the Oilers prospects or anything. Heck, I think there are some good prospects there. What I am saying is to be a little more realistic in your hopes for your players. There's a big difference between having skills and being able to play in the NHL. What is the likelihood of a player getting a chance to display those skills and impressing enough to stick (production counts here)?
Be a little more realistic..... If you think it's unreal that we have 6-7 players REALLY pushing to get into the lineup in the next two years then you don't know your stuff buddy.

thome_26 is offline  
Old
07-14-2004, 04:33 PM
  #50
MrMackey
Registered User
 
MrMackey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: cgy
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,061
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kokopeli
I also was unaware that this was going to turn into a comparison between two teams (the Flames and the Oilers). That was not my intention, but if you wish to head that way, then I will play along. You are correct that the Oilers don't have a prospect like Phaneuf. Not many of the teams in the NHL do. He is an elite prospect without a doubt.
The reason I chose to mention Phaneuf in the first place is that, even though you never mentioned the Flames in your posts, you came across as a Flames fan that was here to let us know that we were all overly optimistic and that we shouldn't get our hopes up.

I figured you'd bite on Phaneuf... but I didn't expect that you'd go on and on about Medvedev and Chucko with the same exuberance that you were cautioning us Oiler fans against.

MrMackey 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 08:33 AM.

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.