Jump to content
The Official Site of the Vancouver Canucks
Canucks Community

[ESPN Insider: Pronman] Ranks Canucks prospect pipeline 9th in league


aGENT

Recommended Posts

34 minutes ago, TheGuardian_ said:

Thanks for the video, I really like that they posted this, is there any from previous years? 

For 2015 and 2016.  The McDavid year was the first time the video was made available to the public - before only teams had access to them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, TheGuardian_ said:

I guess they are saving his and Horvat's signings to pump up sales at the start of the season.

What kind of dummy is going to go out and buy Canucks tickets because Bo Horvat re-signed? There's probably a 0.5% chances that he holds out. We all know Bo will be a Canuck come opening day. What difference does it make whether he re-signed on July 1st or Oct 1st? Neither date will dictate whether or not I buy a ticket. I don't know...I guess it could just be a marketing ploy for the fair-weather fans. "Hey, look! The Canucks are in the news. I think I'll go buy me some tickets....derp".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

OVerall i'd say it's pretty accurate, I don't think i'd have the yotes so high and maybe have TB, MIN and STL in the top 5

 

One of the caveats was. 

 

"For purposes of this ranking, a player is no longer a prospect if he has played 25 or more games in any NHL season, or 50 total in his career. Ultimately, the inclusion or exclusion of one player doesn't move a team up or down 12-15 spots, unless you're talking top-10 overall prospects."

 

 

So for if were really looking at the players it's.

PHI- Patrick, Frost, Ratcliffe, Rubstov, Hart, Samhiem, Morin, Lindblom

ARZ – Keller, Strome, Merkley, Joseph, Dineen

NYI – Salo, Bellows, Barzal, Dal Colle, Ho Sang, Pulock

NSH – Tolvanen, Farrance, Fabbro, Girard, Trenin, Kamenev, Dougherty

NJ – Hischier, Boqvist, Walsh, McLeod, Anderson, Quenville

MIN – Lodnia, Shaw, Kunin, Eriksson-Ek, Greenway, Kaprizov, Tuch,

TB – Sergachev, Foote, Howden, Hajek, Raddysh, Lipanov, Cirelli

STL – Kostin, Thomas, Thompson, Kyrou, Stevens, Dunn, Letunov

VAN- Pettersson, Boeser, Juolevi, Guadette, Demko

BOS – McAvoy, Vaakanainen, Frederic, Zboril, DeBrusk, Donato

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, apollo said:

It's tough to draft an elite guy with anything other than a top 3 pick. 

 

As long as the old boys club does their draft behind closed doors, Vancouver will NEVER have a top 3 pick. Those pieces of trash (old boys) hate us cuz they aint us. 

They are all jealous and secretly want to live in B.C.  Ontario has its moments but has nothing on the beauty and laid back culture the west is famous for.

 

It's ok we will prevail in spite of this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, S'all Good Man said:

geez Hip, that would take a lot of work, you're expecting a lot from the media on that front. 

 

I like to browse around Cap Friendly a lot and look at who's in the ELC category and then who the best college players are. Then there's the number of "top 100" guys that your team may have but even that doesn't quite cover it. 

 

The ELC-level performance gives you a good sense of who's got a decent pipeline or not I think, but for sure a detailed look at this would be nice. 

lol nah, not the media.  They're kinda lazy

 

I expect some enterprising nerd with to much time on their hands would compile some such list.  If I wasn't endlessly staring at photos of drooling babies and awkward weddings I'd probably do just that within parameters X and Y 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, ForsbergTheGreat said:

OVerall i'd say it's pretty accurate, I don't think i'd have the yotes so high and maybe have TB, MIN and STL in the top 5

 

One of the caveats was. 

 

"For purposes of this ranking, a player is no longer a prospect if he has played 25 or more games in any NHL season, or 50 total in his career. Ultimately, the inclusion or exclusion of one player doesn't move a team up or down 12-15 spots, unless you're talking top-10 overall prospects."

 

 

So for if were really looking at the players it's.

PHI- Patrick, Frost, Ratcliffe, Rubstov, Hart, Samhiem, Morin, Lindblom

ARZ – Keller, Strome, Merkley, Joseph, Dineen

NYI – Salo, Bellows, Barzal, Dal Colle, Ho Sang, Pulock

NSH – Tolvanen, Farrance, Fabbro, Girard, Trenin, Kamenev, Dougherty

NJ – Hischier, Boqvist, Walsh, McLeod, Anderson, Quenville

MIN – Lodnia, Shaw, Kunin, Eriksson-Ek, Greenway, Kaprizov, Tuch,

TB – Sergachev, Foote, Howden, Hajek, Raddysh, Lipanov, Cirelli

STL – Kostin, Thomas, Thompson, Kyrou, Stevens, Dunn, Letunov

VAN- Pettersson, Boeser, Juolevi, Guadette, Demko

BOS – McAvoy, Vaakanainen, Frederic, Zboril, DeBrusk, Donato

Solid list. and reasoning.  Still skeptical 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Rob_Zepp said:

Great thoughts here.   I think Canucks are in  upper half - not sure as high as 10 but somewhere in 10 to 15 which is miles further than just two-three years ago when I would have said 25-30th.    

 

I too don't understand Jets or Bruins being that high.   I think Coyotes have best prospects in NHL.   I also think Canes should be in top 10.

This list is taking the last draft way too seriously.  WNP, TO and ANA  should be in the top ten, with honourable mentions to  CAR, OTT and EDM ( don't think they considered Puljajarvi a prospect, but he still is) , PHI should be around 7-9, and Boston, STL and Nashville are definitely not top ten.  

 

It's a subjective exercise no doubt, but it contradicts other lists a lot.  Look forward to the start of the season to see which prospects will become rookies and the actual impact they will have (Chabot on the PP with Karlsson?,  Sergachev doing his best Werenski impression dishing to Stamkos and Kucherov? Keller making his best Eichel impression? Patrick vs Hirschier? Boeser the CY young award winner? ).  Once some of these guys make the jump the list will juggle some more and VANs position ( which is spot on IMO)will likely go up a little given most of our guys are not ready.

 

War Hippy good job as usual.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think that our management has Adam Gaudette very high in their rankings. There are rumors that they think he will be in their lineup at the end of the year. What I seen from him  this spring made me think his ceiling is very high end. Prongman has him as an honorable mention.

Peterson needs to get stronger and he will be a high reward or bust type of prospect until he proves that he can handle the NHL grind. Next year he may be looked at as one of the best players outside of the league.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, J.R. said:

And in really pretty short time too and without the help of in spite of the lotto balls.

 

That was only a few years ago. Any of the people questioning Benning's ability to rebuild should looks closely at that.

FTFY ;)

 

It hasn't been all roses, but it's better for sure.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, Warhippy said:

Yet again I am questioning Pronman and I just don't know why.  Every time he puts this list out he marks his criteria then immediately goes against it.

 

Flyers at 1.  Ok, Patrick is his reasoning...really?  They'd not even be top 7 on my list.  Some ok D prospects and Patrick who screams potential bust.  That is not #1

Yotes at 2.  Perfect in my eyes, they're top 3 for prospects no matter how you spin it.

Preds at 3.  Not so much.  Certainly top 10 but to quote it as "star power" I don't see that with the Preds anywhere.  Just decent prospects.  Nothing to get excited about

Islanders at 4.  OK why?  Because of barzal?  Who else do they have?  Sorokin?  Best goalie prospect?  Hmmm  To shallow to be top 5

Devils at 5.  Because of Hischier alone?  The devils are thin for being so bad.  Prospects not prospect.  Again, against his own criteria

Wild at 6.  Putting them in the same place as the Preds.  more middle of the pack.  Good prospects but nothing to get uber excited about yet.   YET!

Lightning at 7.  Dammit...have to agree here.  They've built something special, managed to stay under the cap and STILL have solid prospects to burn.  Stupid Cal Foote...

Blues at 8.  Again, why?  A couple of intriguing prospects but not uber excited.  Pronman.  By your own criteria bud...look deeper than just this year

Nucks at 9.  Gonna get flamed here but ya, I see 9-10 right now.  1 more decent draft and we're top 3.  More than just this year and late round success

Boston at 10.  MacAvoy.  That is all.  Seriously, kids a stud but pretty thin afterwards.

 

I won't go deeper because this is all just my opinion but I've always taken Pronman with a huge shot of sodium (grain of salt) because he makes his criteria, states it's set in stone.  Then immediately goes against it.

 

For me, again my opinion; prospect depth, skill is set against more than 1 draft and includes 

  • NHL ready prospects
  • Emergence of young stars
  • Star power and name recognition
  • Late round success
  • Long term viability

Meaning to say 1 prospect drafted this year alone with such a shallow pool behind them should not qualify a team to be in his top ten.  But a team like Carolina who has done nothing but steadily build players that will win you cups and now has the ability to drop an NHL caliber player in to the league every year for the next 3-5 years from their pool is at 15.

 

1 MacAvoy sets Boston in to the top 10, but an entire core of young top prospects in the Jets system doesn't even set them in the top 15.

 

Again, my opinion only but I never really put much stock in to Pee Mans lists anymore.  But I will echo myself from a few prior threads when i say the canucks are on the path to something good.  2 more drafts in the top 10 and another in the top 20 with extra picks in the first 3 rounds could see us with the deepest prospect pool this organization has ever had.

 

Pretty much dead on Warhippy. Choosing to have the nucks ranked 9th is a fair assestment.  The future looks alot brighter now then it did a couple years ago.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Warning Long read, team break down....

 

23 hours ago, Warhippy said:

 

Yet again I am questioning Pronman and I just don't know why.  Every time he puts this list out he marks his criteria then immediately goes against it.

 

Flyers at 1.  Ok, Patrick is his reasoning...really?  They'd not even be top 7 on my list.  Some ok D prospects and Patrick who screams potential bust.  That is not #1

Out side of Patrick, Frost and Ratcliff from this years draft, they have some really good talent,  I do agree that they might not be top place but assuming patrick lives up to expectations he's a elite talent. 

They also have:

 

Lindblom, he was 2nd in goals in the SEL and 4th in points and he was doing it a 19 years old (young b-day).  We'd be ecstatic if Pettersson put up those kind of numbers +2 years after draft.

 

Sanhiem put up 37 points in 76 games in his first full year in the AHL,  He's got size and also knows how to play both ends of the ice. 

 

Rubtsov, came over to the Q and showed why he was a first round pick last year putting up 1.38 ppg. 

 

 

23 hours ago, Warhippy said:

Yotes at 2.  Perfect in my eyes, they're top 3 for prospects no matter how you spin it.

 

See I don't agree with them being in the top 3.  They have Strome who dominated the OHL and Keller who put up boeser numbers as a freshman in NCAA .

Wood and Fischer both had really good years in the AHL putting up over 40 points in their first full year in the AHL, but Chyhcrun doesn't count since he's played over 30 games and  Merkley has taken a step back from his draft year

 

They rightfully are ahead of Vancouver but I think some other teams have some more exciting players (likely just my personal bias)

 

23 hours ago, Warhippy said:

Preds at 3.  Not so much.  Certainly top 10 but to quote it as "star power" I don't see that with the Preds anywhere.  Just decent prospects.  Nothing to get excited about

Trenin, Kamenev and Tolvanen are high power offensive players,  Kamenev has ardvisson potential, Girard he's a pure offensive machine from the point and you should be familiar with Fabbro who's a extremely nice piece to round things out. 

 

And don't for get there future #1 goalie Soros, who still technically is part of this list since he's played under 30 NHL games. 

 

23 hours ago, Warhippy said:

Islanders at 4.  OK why?  Because of barzal?  Who else do they have?  Sorokin?  Best goalie prospect?  Hmmm  To shallow to be top 5

NYI makes total sense because of how many good players they have who've been cooking in the AHL and still meet the criteria to make this list,  players like Ho-sang, who's already got a decent start in the NHL, Dal Colle who's quietly been progressing every year 41 points in his first season in the AHL, and Pulock who's almost a ppg in the AHL.  These are some exciting players.  Add in Bellows, Barzal, Salo and Sorokin (who's an absolute stud).  I can easily see them in the top 5.

 

 

23 hours ago, Warhippy said:

Devils at 5.  Because of Hischier alone?  The devils are thin for being so bad.  Prospects not prospect.  Again, against his own criteria

I don't think i'd have NJ in the top 5,  likely still top 10 though. Hischier "might" be the best prospect any team has.  He should becoming an impact player in the NHL like Nylander and Ehlers did.  In my opinon he's a pure lock for a top line player.  The have queniville who put up .8ppg in his first AHL season, Joey Andersson and one of my favorites Walsh who is a pure offensive D that dominated highschool hockey last year (69 points in 30 games).  The still have Blackwood in net that could someday take over if NJ moves on from Cory.  and last years first round pick McLoed who improved to 1.2 ppg.

 

23 hours ago, Warhippy said:

Wild at 6.  Putting them in the same place as the Preds.  more middle of the pack.  Good prospects but nothing to get uber excited about yet.   YET!

Wild are my front runner for the best prospect pool.  A big question does rely on if the russian Kaprizov (who has Kucherov type ceiling) ever signs (he just signed another 3 years in the KHL), but they have loads and loads of exciting prospect.  The after him Erissson Ek was able to come over from the SEL and immediately make an impact in the NHL, he's a top choice for the calder trophy next year,  Kunin dominated the NCAA and was able to make a really quick transition into the AHL putting up almost a ppg in his first AHL stint.  We saw what kind of dominate force Greenway is capable being of in the WJC.  he also had a really good year in the NCAA with BU.  They have Tuch who put up .65 ppg in his first AHL 57 games.  and then finally they have another high end skilled russian, Sokolov who put up 48 goals in 64 games OHL last year  And this year they were able to snag Lodina and Shaw later in the draft.  Both were supposed to go in the early second round.

 

23 hours ago, Warhippy said:

Lightning at 7.  Dammit...have to agree here.  They've built something special, managed to stay under the cap and STILL have solid prospects to burn.  Stupid Cal Foote...

They are the team the really give wild a run.  Sergachev is my favorite D prospect,  Raddysh was top 2 players in the OHL last year, Ingram was one of the best goalies in the WHL last year, Cirelli put up 1.25 ppg in the OHL and Stephens put up 1.04 ppg, Howden lite up the WHL last year and then put up 6 points in his first 7 AHL games.  Add in Cal Foote and Lipanov from this year draft and they have as solid of a prospect pool as they come.

 

23 hours ago, Warhippy said:

Blues at 8.  Again, why?  A couple of intriguing prospects but not uber excited.  Pronman.  By your own criteria bud...look deeper than just this year

Dunn is a very exciting D prospect, he put up 45 points in his first 72 AHL games last year,  Kyrou put up 1.42ppg in the OHL lat year good enough for 6th as a 19 year old.   Stevens is there equivalent to our Gaudette, Kostin is the wild card,  he could be a elite NHL talent or he could be a Nuchiskin, Thomas looks like a Horvat 2.0 and Thompson is a 6'5" monster center coming off a ppg season in the NCAA, Walman is an offesnve producing D many who was able to put up a ppg in the NCAA.  Schmaltz is an all around D that has put up .5 ppg in the AHL the last two season..

 

23 hours ago, Warhippy said:

Nucks at 9.  Gonna get flamed here but ya, I see 9-10 right now.  1 more decent draft and we're top 3.  More than just this year and late round success

I think 9th is also fair.  Mostly because most of our prospects that meet this criteria haven't proven much at a pro level yet.  While other teams have players proven themselves at the AHL and pro Europe levels we don't have that...yet.  I think by this time next year (as long as most of our rookies don't play over 30 NHL games) we will move up that list, if all goes will likely up to the top 3.   

 

23 hours ago, Warhippy said:

Boston at 10.  MacAvoy.  That is all.  Seriously, kids a stud but pretty thin afterwards.

As much as I like sergachev, McAvoy is the best D prospect.  He proved that with his play all last year in the clutch situations. Frederic over a ppg in NCAA,

Zboril has been a disappointing pick,

DeBrusk 49 points in his first 74 AHL games,

Donato over a ppg in NCAA,

Heinen 44 points in 64 AHL games this year,

Chelarik put up 38 points in his first 49 games in the AHL this year. 

Grzelchyk was .5 ppg D in his first AHL 70 games this year.

Forsbacka-Karlsson had such a good NCAA season Bruins signed him and used up a year in his ELC status to lock him up.

There pool is far from being thin, they have a ton of upcoming talent, talents that's already proving them selves at the pro levels

 

I think jets are very similar to the bruins but McAvoy is what would set them apart,  Since the criteria means they can't have played over 20 games.  The most exciting prospect like Laine and Ehlers can't be in there.  They still have some exciting players like Conner, Foley, Roslovic and Harkins, just not as much as a team like the Bruins have.

 

Overall a team like Av's don't have enough outside of Jost and makar. Stars could make an arguement weith Honka, Gurianov, Elie, Dickinson, Tufte and now Hieskanen and Oettinger,  Sabres could also argue with Mittelstadt, Nylander, Asplund, and Pu, Even the leafs could make a case with Dermott, Bracco, Nielsen, Kapanen and now Liljegren,  I think it gets really tight between 10 and 14 where you could interchange any of the teams and everyone would have cases for and against it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Regardless of whether we are top 5, top 10, or top 15 in prospect rankings, I think everyone can agree that this is the deepest prospect talent pool we have ever had.  We should have 1 more year of adding to the pool before we start graduating players to the NHL.  While we won't contend for a few more years, it will be an exciting time for the team.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

Grady Sas Retweeted Corey Pronman

Top 10 #Canucks prospects: 10. Lockwood 9. Gaudette 8. Demko 7. DiPietro 6. Lind 5. Goldobin 4. Dahlen 3. Pettersson 2. Juolevi 1. Boeser

Grady Sas added,

Corey PronmanVerified account @coreypronman
 
 
In Corey Pronmans list of the individual Canuck prospects he had Michael Dipietro ahead of Thatcher Demko..?..How does that happen?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Honky Cat said:

Grady Sas Retweeted Corey Pronman

Top 10 #Canucks prospects: 10. Lockwood 9. Gaudette 8. Demko 7. DiPietro 6. Lind 5. Goldobin 4. Dahlen 3. Pettersson 2. Juolevi 1. Boeser

Grady Sas added,

Corey PronmanVerified account @coreypronman
 
In Corey Pronmans list of the individual Canuck prospects he had Michael Dipietro ahead of Thatcher Demko..?..How does that happen?

It looks like he doesn't put as much stock in NCAA success only.  Boeser backed his up with a fantastic start to his pro career, but Demko had a rough first year in the AHL. Also would explain why Gaudette and Lockwood are below Lind.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, westcoast said:

They are within striking distance of number 1 if they finish last and fire sale older guys at the TD18.

Yup, we need another top five pick, and successful draft.  More picks gives us a better chance to get several good prospects to for sure. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2017-08-18 at 1:20 PM, D-Money said:

It looks like he doesn't put as much stock in NCAA success only.  Boeser backed his up with a fantastic start to his pro career, but Demko had a rough first year in the AHL. Also would explain why Gaudette and Lockwood are below Lind.

As I remember Demko had a rough first half in the AHL and began to figure it out in the second half. This is isn't surprising considering it's a young man getting used to being a professional, a tougher, longer schedule in the AHL and integrating changes to his game that were inevitable once Canucks goalie coaches got to work with him full time. I expect him to make a huge jump in his second year as a pro now that there won't be any surprises for him and the team in Utica should be a little better then last year. Having DiPietro ahead of Demko on that list was one thing that had me scratching my head. Then again it's just someone's opinion so you take it with a grain of salt.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/17/2017 at 11:29 AM, Warhippy said:

Yet again I am questioning Pronman and I just don't know why.  Every time he puts this list out he marks his criteria then immediately goes against it.

 

Flyers at 1.  Ok, Patrick is his reasoning...really?  They'd not even be top 7 on my list.  Some ok D prospects and Patrick who screams potential bust.  That is not #1

Yotes at 2.  Perfect in my eyes, they're top 3 for prospects no matter how you spin it.

Preds at 3.  Not so much.  Certainly top 10 but to quote it as "star power" I don't see that with the Preds anywhere.  Just decent prospects.  Nothing to get excited about

Islanders at 4.  OK why?  Because of barzal?  Who else do they have?  Sorokin?  Best goalie prospect?  Hmmm  To shallow to be top 5

Devils at 5.  Because of Hischier alone?  The devils are thin for being so bad.  Prospects not prospect.  Again, against his own criteria

Wild at 6.  Putting them in the same place as the Preds.  more middle of the pack.  Good prospects but nothing to get uber excited about yet.   YET!

Lightning at 7.  Dammit...have to agree here.  They've built something special, managed to stay under the cap and STILL have solid prospects to burn.  Stupid Cal Foote...

Blues at 8.  Again, why?  A couple of intriguing prospects but not uber excited.  Pronman.  By your own criteria bud...look deeper than just this year

Nucks at 9.  Gonna get flamed here but ya, I see 9-10 right now.  1 more decent draft and we're top 3.  More than just this year and late round success

Boston at 10.  MacAvoy.  That is all.  Seriously, kids a stud but pretty thin afterwards.

 

I won't go deeper because this is all just my opinion but I've always taken Pronman with a huge shot of sodium (grain of salt) because he makes his criteria, states it's set in stone.  Then immediately goes against it.

 

For me, again my opinion; prospect depth, skill is set against more than 1 draft and includes 

  • NHL ready prospects
  • Emergence of young stars
  • Star power and name recognition
  • Late round success
  • Long term viability

Meaning to say 1 prospect drafted this year alone with such a shallow pool behind them should not qualify a team to be in his top ten.  But a team like Carolina who has done nothing but steadily build players that will win you cups and now has the ability to drop an NHL caliber player in to the league every year for the next 3-5 years from their pool is at 15.

 

1 MacAvoy sets Boston in to the top 10, but an entire core of young top prospects in the Jets system doesn't even set them in the top 15.

 

Again, my opinion only but I never really put much stock in to Pee Mans lists anymore.  But I will echo myself from a few prior threads when i say the canucks are on the path to something good.  2 more drafts in the top 10 and another in the top 20 with extra picks in the first 3 rounds could see us with the deepest prospect pool this organization has ever had.

 

You are highly underrating Philly's D prospects. Myers and Sanheim look like top 4 D. Patrick should be a top 2c. 

And no offense but the bold is ridiculous. Have you heard of Kaprizov? He might be the best prospect in all of hockey. As someone else mentioned in this thread he has a Kucherov type ceiling. You are really, severely underrating Kaprizov if you think there's nothing to be excited about with him. He'd easily be our best prospect and likely would for 30 other teams as well.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, GoBoGo53 said:

You are highly underrating Philly's D prospects. Myers and Sanheim look like top 4 D. Patrick should be a top 2c. 

And no offense but the bold is ridiculous. Have you heard of Kaprizov? He might be the best prospect in all of hockey. As someone else mentioned in this thread he has a Kucherov type ceiling. You are really, severely underrating Kaprizov if you think there's nothing to be excited about with him. He'd easily be our best prospect and likely would for 30 other teams as well.

 

 

He's not expected to sign in the NHL any time soon.  Good prospects.  Nothing "exciting" as of yet.

 

Exciting is someone you know you're seeing soon, high energy not a hope and prayer as of yet.  The Wild have done well, no question.  Flyers as well.  But

 

And bear with me here

 

There are reasons I made the statement I did in regards to them.  I do believe the Flyers at 1 based mainly on Patrick is completely incorrect on behalf of Pron man.  I see solid prospects with both the Wild and Preds that I don't get excited about, but know will be solid players once they enter the league.

 

Exciting players don't always win cups remember that, just because I am not excited about them doesn't mean I am saying they're not good prospects.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...