[ARTICLE] Hockey Prospectus Top 100 Prospects (Includes 1 Canuck)

[hockeywoot]

Why is it a fail?

But the lack of Canucks is pathetic after all.

[Fozzy]

What's the upside?

Is he somehow going to beat out Lack, Schneider, and Luongo, and become the Canucks' starter? Odds of that happening would probably need to be set at about 1%.

Far better strategy to take a flyer on a skater, given the strength that we have in goal.

[Fozzy]

so much better? Hodgson was "the next captain",etc while Schroeder is written off as too small and unlikely to stick in the NHL - I think they have fairly comparable potential, and given the Canucks needs, I'd prefer the guy with a more speed and grit who is more suited to play a two-way role than the player with allegedly more offensive upside, but not terribly strong in his own end, and not particularly willing to wait to earn top 6 minutes.

[Vancanwincup]

Derp.

Anyone can get hot and win a couple Stanley Cups with a combined .924 save% against the best teams in the NHL?

Ok there.

That "skater's game" reduction is extremely simplistic. If the skaters are so good, you need a goaltender that can counter them, no?

Your point about LA's roster is irrelevent - it doesn't have any glaring weaknesses, including their goaltending - hence their success.

Did you see any of the Pittsburgh / Philly series? Terrible goaltending that couldn't get either of them past the second round, despite all their superstar skaters and young guns...

[bure's triple deke]

Lack of Canucks aside.

This list is pretty much, fail.

[Peaches]

Thats what I was thinking to.

[King of the ES]

This "KingofEs" figure is forgetting the biggest and most important thing about the Canucks drafting ideal. The Canucks always pick the best player available in their eyes. Drafting based on current needs of the team just leads to an even weaker prospect pool similar to the Nonis days.

[King of the ES]

so much better? Hodgson was "the next captain",etc while Schroeder is written off as too small and unlikely to stick in the NHL - I think they have fairly comparable potential, and given the Canucks needs, I'd prefer the guy with a more speed and grit who is more suited to play a two-way role than the player with allegedly more offensive upside, but not terribly strong in his own end, and not particularly willing to wait to earn top 6 minutes.

[TmanVan]

Dave Nonis draft picks: Schneider, Edler, M. Brown, Hansen, Bourdon, Raymond, Grabner, Shirokov

Mike Gillis draft picks: Hodgson

Gillis now has more drafts than Nonis did, as GM. And let's not forget that I'm not including Nonis' time as Executive VP with Burke, where Kesler, Bieksa, and those Sedin guys were drafted.

In conclusion, Gillis better hope that some of his picks actually start to show a bit of promise, because if you're calling Nonis' prospect pools "weak", what exactly is Gillis'? "Vegetative"?

[oldnews]

Dave Nonis draft picks: Schneider, Edler, M. Brown, Hansen, Bourdon, Raymond, Grabner, Shirokov

Mike Gillis draft picks: Hodgson

Gillis now has more drafts than Nonis did, as GM. And let's not forget that I'm not including Nonis' time as Executive VP with Burke, where Kesler, Bieksa, and those Sedin guys were drafted.

In conclusion, Gillis better hope that some of his picks actually start to show a bit of promise, because if you're calling Nonis' prospect pools "weak", what exactly is Gillis'? "Vegetative"?

[oldnews]

Wait, wait, wait.

Are you declaring that you'd rather have Jordan Schroeder than Cody Hodgson?

[Pouria]

This is a big problem for this team that MG still has not fixed. I just don't understand why this team still has issues drafting decent prospects. Only one in the top 100? Even Detroit who have had low picks for years have 6 or 7 in their.

I've hated watching the world juniors the last few years and seeing no Canuck drafts (Hodgson the exception) year after year.

[BuretoMogilny]

We have arguably one of the worst prospect pools in the league.

[BuretoMogilny]

Dave Nonis draft picks: Schneider, Edler, M. Brown, Hansen, Bourdon, Raymond, Grabner, Shirokov

Mike Gillis draft picks: Hodgson

Gillis now has more drafts than Nonis did, as GM. And let's not forget that I'm not including Nonis' time as Executive VP with Burke, where Kesler, Bieksa, and those Sedin guys were drafted.

In conclusion, Gillis better hope that some of his picks actually start to show a bit of promise, because if you're calling Nonis' prospect pools "weak", what exactly is Gillis'? "Vegetative"?

[BuretoMogilny]

Same scouting group son. A GM doesn't pick the players, the Scouts do. MG is running the team and relies on his staff to tell him where/who.

[Jägermeister]

Lol...What are you talking about?

Here's a list of terrible players in our pipeline

Tier 1: Top end talent - how the player develops really depends on him

Jensen - clearly will be an NHL'er

Kassian - Same as above

Lack - Same as above

Connaughton - Same as above

McNally - A few years away but showing he has terrific upside

Tier 2: Strong potential to be regular players in the NHL, some may have high end ability

Schroeder - high end talent but ability to find a way to survive given his size will be his make/break

Corrado - Showing every year he is getting better, and if he continues to add size/strength should one day have a good shot

Sauve - Already showing he is a strong depth defenseman, recovered from a horrific accident and will play at worst as a depth guy in the NHL

Alex Mallet - overager who may be our next Lappy

Anton Rodin - role player who has upside but has to continue to develop his game, likely a Hansen type player

Gaunce - At worst a terrific 3rd line player, great upside.

These are players all drafted (ex Kass) with pics late in each round, not bad, development takes time and MG has done a decent job given where he's drafting. Could it be better, of course, always could, but its challenging to find steals where they draft. Alot of teams would be happy to have this level of potential in their minors if they were drafting 30 overall every year.

Moreoever if you look at the makeup of that group, it is solid, a mix of role players, size, speed, skill, and really only lacking an elite high end player / game breaker. And those don't fall to thirty, they are developed and surprise or are traded for when underperforming and break out (Ie Nazzy).

On top of that, you have players who have come up through our system

Edler, Kesler, Bieksa, Schnieder, Hansen,

So not sure what you're expecting but clearly you think a GM can pull rabbits out of a hat at #30

[Stefan]

Jensen should definately be higher up - he's already had success in the AHL playoffs with 4 goals in 6 games which is remarkable, and his game is built for the NHL.

I'm also surprised Gaunce didn't get a mention. Mistake me if I'm wrong, but he was the 2nd best center to go at this last NHL draft.

[-DLC-]

Your last line: "cue the...." makes your post trolling, as it indicates that it's designed to incite a negative reaction.

So we'll let this fly, but also consider that the point here isn't to grind gears, it's to have discussion and if your intention is to stir the pot, we're watching.

This list is but one guy's opinion, keeping in mind that he went to college for computer programming and business. Yes, it appears he did extensive research in compiling this list, but, beyond that, not really sure how qualified he is to name "the top". "His" top list - yes. But, with that being said, I know I'm not qualified to assess, so will let you guys have a go at it....

[Standing_Tall#37]

THe cut-off was 25 NHL games --- Kassian played 44

[Pouria]

Compare our top 10 prospects to the top 10 prospects of other teams and you will see.

As someone pointed out, we definitely have San Jose beat, but after that its a toss up between us and 5 or so other teams.

I'm not even complaining though, I understand how hard it is to build a solid prospect group when you keep getting low picks, Gillis has made a handful of shrewd picks that might turn out well, but it doesn't change the fact that we do have a weak group.