2019-20 Prospects Thread

[ChristopherReevesLegs 7,022]

10 minutes ago, kipwinger said:

Nobody said you couldn't.  Also, it seems perfectly reasonable to discussion the quality of competition the kid has faced up to this point in his career.  It also seems reasonable to wonder what effect, if any, that will have on him once he's consistently facing NHL caliber talent (whether that be in training camp, the pre-season, the AHL, or the NHL).  It seems equally relevant to ask whether a performance at a prospects tournament is the best evaluative tool when A) more than half of each team is full of free agent invitees (like Gregor McLeod) or late round picks (like Elmer Soderblom), or B) the competition is so weak that projected bottom of the roster guys like Chase Pearson are performing at insanely unsustainable rates. 

That's your 2nd oblique reference to Nazism today.  You're on fire. 

Tragedy is comedy

EDIT: We don't have any Jewish players do we?

Edited September 10, 2019 by ChristopherReevesLegs

[ely s 458]

but even in a prospect tournament he is playing against better, more experienced players than you would face on a daily basis in the Q for example and when you look like a standout you must be one of the better players. So it´s reasonable to believe that we found something special. You seem to be a pessimist or let´s say, someone who does not allow himself to be hyped and probably dissapointed. I´m more of a optimist trying to be as realistic as I can.

[krsmith17 7,191]

5 minutes ago, ely s said:

but even in a prospect tournament he is playing against better, more experienced players than you would face on a daily basis in the Q for example and when you look like a standout you must be one of the better players. So it´s reasonable to believe that we found something special. You seem to be a pessimist or let´s say, someone who does not allow himself to be hyped and probably dissapointed. I´m more of a optimist trying to be as realistic as I can.

What was it @frankgrimes used to say?...

[ChristopherReevesLegs 7,022]

Just now, krsmith17 said:

What was it @frankgrimes used to say?...

lol positive surprises? I can't remember

[kipwinger 8,772]

10 minutes ago, ely s said:

but even in a prospect tournament he is playing against better, more experienced players than you would face on a daily basis in the Q for example and when you look like a standout you must be one of the better players. So it´s reasonable to believe that we found something special. You seem to be a pessimist or let´s say, someone who does not allow himself to be hyped and probably dissapointed. I´m more of a optimist trying to be as realistic as I can.

Maybe, maybe not.  It's true of the game against Chicago.  Not true against Toronto (who dressed few of their top prospects).  This tourney is also 4 games long. So while his performance is encouraging, IMO it isn't enough for me to conclude much about him as a player. It's obviously better than he play good than bad, but nothing about it makes him "special".  Because if being a standout made him "special", then by that rationale Chase Pearson would also be "special".  And he's clearly not.  I'm not blaming Seider for playing the competition he's given, I just think he needs to play consistently better players before we have any idea how good he's going to be. 

Edited September 10, 2019 by kipwinger

[krsmith17 7,191]

2 minutes ago, kipwinger said:

Maybe, maybe not.  It's true of the game against Chicago.  Not true against Toronto (who dressed none of their top prospects).  This tourney is also 4 games long. So while his performance is encouraging, IMO it isn't enough for me to conclude much about him as a player. It's obviously better than he play good than bad, but nothing about it makes him "special".  Because if it did, then Chase Pearson would also be "special" by that rationale.  And he's clearly not.  I'm not blaming Seider for playing the competition he's given, I just think he needs to play consistently better players before we have any idea how good he's going to be. 

In other words, do not discuss any prospect until they reach at least the AHL...

[ely s 458]

3 minutes ago, kipwinger said:

Maybe, maybe not.  It's true of the game against Chicago.  Not true against Toronto (who dressed none of their top prospects).  This tourney is also 4 games long. So while his performance is encouraging, IMO it isn't enough for me to conclude much about him as a player. It's obviously better than he play good than bad, but nothing about it makes him "special".  Because if it did, then Chase Pearson would also be "special" by that rationale.  And he's clearly not.  I'm not blaming Seider for playing the competition he's given, I just think he needs to play consistently better players before we have any idea how good he's going to be. 

I know what you mean, but this time it might be a little bit different than before. Just watch him, it´s just a few days till training camp. In the meantime I will watch him again tonight.

[kipwinger 8,772]

11 minutes ago, krsmith17 said:

In other words, do not discuss any prospect until they reach at least the AHL...

No.  Discuss anything you want.  It just might be wise to hold off concluding how good a player is going to be until you've seen him play at a comparable level to the one you're projecting him in.  Otherwise we may end up with egg on our collective faces the way we did with Zadina. 

Edited September 10, 2019 by kipwinger

[kipwinger 8,772]

2 minutes ago, ely s said:

I know what you mean, but this time it might be a little bit different than before. Just watch him, it´s just a few days till training camp. In the meantime I will watch him again tonight.

I'll follow the team as best as I can during camp, and watch all the pre-season games.  Those tend to be more illuminating than Traverse City because all the guys who obviously suck will be sent home before the preseason games start.  Then obviously the AHL will be a huge step up from that. 

[ChristopherReevesLegs 7,022]

2 minutes ago, kipwinger said:

Maybe, maybe not.  It's true of the game against Chicago.  Not true against Toronto (who dressed none of their top prospects).  This tourney is also 4 games long. So while his performance is encouraging, IMO it isn't enough for me to conclude much about him as a player. It's obviously better than he play good than bad, but nothing about it makes him "special".  Because if it did, then Chase Pearson would also be "special" by that rationale.  And he's clearly not.  I'm not blaming Seider for playing the competition he's given, I just think he needs to play consistently better players before we have any idea how good he's going to be. 

With observation bias in mind...

IMO Seider looked way ahead of the rest of the players out there these last 3 games. Sure Pearson has a bunch of goals, and Veleno has a bunch of goals. But at no point did I watch these games and think "Wow Veleno looks way too good to be out there". I did think this with Seider. I'm certainly glad a bunch of younger players have scored a lot, but I wasn't truly wowed by anything they did. But on the other hand Seider looks like a true specimen. He's always in the right spot. His passing is crisp and accurate. He makes the simple play. He's calm and steady running the point. His skating is excellent for a big Dman. He's telling guys where to go off the faceoff. He's jawing at his guys between whistles. He's wrecking shop in the corners. He's the wet dream I've been waiting for on the backend.

Negatives: He's taken some penalties that were unneeded, and he did commit a turnover last game that resulted in a goal for Toronto. More generally, I definitely don't see him as a creative player. He's gonna play textbook hockey, but he's going to do it extremely well.

He plays like he's a 30 year old vet IMO. I think he could play productive NHL hockey this year, but I will be content with 9 games...

[krsmith17 7,191]

6 minutes ago, kipwinger said:

No.  Discuss anything you want.  It just might be wise to hold off concluding how good a player is going to be until you've seen him play at a comparable level to the one you're projecting him in.  Otherwise you may end up with egg on our collective faces the way we did with Zadina. 

First, there's no "egg on our collective faces" with anything to do with Zadina. Only a select few thought he would step into the NHL last season and dominate. Most people knew he'd need some time in the minors to develop. My opinion on Zadina hasn't really changed a whole lot since we drafted him. Nor should it have.

Second, who cares if we overhype a player, and end up being "wrong"? I don't necessarily think Seider is a lock to be a number one defenseman, but I do think he has all the tools to be a very solid top pairing defenseman. If he comes up short, and only ends up being a middle pairing defenseman, it would really suck. But it would suck because we used a 6th overall pick on a 2nd pairing defenseman, not because we were wrong in or initial projection of him. Who really gives a s***? I don't.

I'd personally rather wrongfully think that Jurco is going to be a very good 2nd line winger, than wrongfully think that Zadina is going to be a complete bust... But that's just me...

[krsmith17 7,191]

2 minutes ago, ChristopherReevesLegs said:

With observation bias in mind...

IMO Seider looked way ahead of the rest of the players out there these last 3 games. Sure Pearson has a bunch of goals, and Veleno has a bunch of goals. But at no point did I watch these games and think "Wow Veleno looks way too good to be out there". I did think this with Seider. I'm certainly glad a bunch of younger players have scored a lot, but I wasn't truly wowed by anything they did. But on the other hand Seider looks like a true specimen. He's always in the right spot. His passing is crisp and accurate. He makes the simple play. He's calm and steady running the point. His skating is excellent for a big Dman. He's telling guys where to go off the faceoff. He's jawing at his guys between whistles. He's wrecking shop in the corners. He's the wet dream I've been waiting for on the backend.

Negatives: He's taken some penalties that were unneeded, and he did commit a turnover last game that resulted in a goal for Toronto. More generally, I definitely don't see him as a creative player. He's gonna play textbook hockey, but he's going to do it extremely well.

He plays like he's a 30 year old vet IMO. I think he could play productive NHL hockey this year, but I will be content with 9 games...

All things you could only say after actually watching the games...

For what it's worth though, I don't think Seider looked THAT superior out there, but he was definitely one of the better players on the ice in each game. I believe the same to be true of Veleno too though. It's not the 5 goals that make me say that either. I'm more impressed with how responsible he is defensively, while also being able to produce offensively. He's been far and away our best forward. I'm really looking forward to the game coming up in a half hour, but even more than that, training camp and pre-season...

[ely s 458]

3 minutes ago, kipwinger said:

I'll follow the team as best as I can during camp, and watch all the pre-season games.  Those tend to be more illuminating than Traverse City because all the guys who obviously suck will be sent home before the preseason games start.  Then obviously the AHL will be a huge step up from that. 

I find it very illuminating to have a chance to learn more about the players we have in our system, otherwise I wouldn´t know how good a skater and skillfull Soderblom really is or that Pearson looks like a possible bottom 6 C. I´m realistic enough to know that it´s a long way for most of them and some won´t make it all. At least it´s easier to rank the prospects within our system.

[ChristopherReevesLegs 7,022]

14 minutes ago, kipwinger said:

No.  Discuss anything you want.  It just might be wise to hold off concluding how good a player is going to be until you've seen him play at a comparable level to the one you're projecting him in.  Otherwise we may end up with egg on our collective faces the way we did with Zadina. 

The turning on Zadina has begun! lol

Seider and Zadina are two very different circumstances for me.

With Seider I watched him prior to the draft and was super interested in him, but never believed Yzerman would reach for him at #6.
With Zadina I did not watch him much at all prior to the draft, but was thrilled to take someone who slipped to us at #6.

I think it took me until October of last year to decide I did not like Zadina. Or at least that I did not think he displayed the level of talent that I believe a #6 pick should have.

I'll certainly reassess Seider after a month of play in the AHL as well, but one things for certain, I have hard and fast opinions on players, and Seider is already pretty deep into my good graces.

[kipwinger 8,772]

18 minutes ago, krsmith17 said:

First, there's no "egg on our collective faces" with anything to do with Zadina. Only a select few thought he would step into the NHL last season and dominate. Most people knew he'd need some time in the minors to develop. My opinion on Zadina hasn't really changed a whole lot since we drafted him. Nor should it have.

Second, who cares if we overhype a player, and end up being "wrong"? I don't necessarily think Seider is a lock to be a number one defenseman, but I do think he has all the tools to be a very solid top pairing defenseman. If he comes up short, and only ends up being a middle pairing defenseman, it would really suck. But it would suck because we used a 6th overall pick on a 2nd pairing defenseman, not because we were wrong in or initial projection of him. Who really gives a s***? I don't.

I'd personally rather wrongfully think that Jurco is going to be a very good 2nd line winger, than wrongfully think that Zadina is going to be a complete bust... But that's just me...

A significant portion of our fanbase thought Zadina would play on the NHL club out of camp last year.  That was way off base.  And it became clear the minute we all realized he wasn't even an especially good AHLer yet.  That's my only point.  If you didn't feel that way then great.  You pointing out that fact that you didn't is a demonstration of the other point I'm about to make.  Which is...

As far as the bolded, the only value in player projection (for a fan) is to test (and demonstrate) that you know something about the sport you're discussing.  Because obviously none of us have jobs in professional hockey player evaluation.  As such, overvaluing a prospect is just as useless as undervaluing one.  In either case you've demonstrated that you don't know as much about that player as you thought.  The only real value, again for a fan, is getting it close to right (and having intelligent reasons why you think so).  Otherwise, why talk about it at all.  Just sit back and wait to see how they turn out.  Therefore, it's usually good to get as much quality information as you can before concluding how good a player is going to be. 

9 minutes ago, ely s said:

I find it very illuminating to have a chance to learn more about the players we have in our system, otherwise I wouldn´t know how good a skater and skillfull Soderblom really is or that Pearson looks like a possible bottom 6 C. I´m realistic enough to know that it´s a long way for most of them and some won´t make it all. At least it´s easier to rank the prospects within our system.

I know it's anathema to say so around here, but if you wanted to learn that Pearson "might" be a bottom 6 center or that Soderblom can skate well for a big man you could always just read Corey Pronman's farm system analysis of the Red Wings.  He made both of those exact points.  Again, lots around here act like you're an ******* if you read his stuff but he apparently gets things right from time to time.

Edited September 10, 2019 by kipwinger

[ChristopherReevesLegs 7,022]

5 minutes ago, krsmith17 said:

All things you could only say after actually watching the games...

For what it's worth though, I don't think Seider looked THAT superior out there, but he was definitely one of the better players on the ice in each game. I believe the same to be true of Veleno too though. It's not the 5 goals that make me say that either. I'm more impressed with how responsible he is defensively, while also being able to produce offensively. He's been far and away our best forward. I'm really looking forward to the game coming up in a half hour, but even more than that, training camp and pre-season...

I forgot to mention he pinches correctly too. Dmen who pinch when appropriate is my secret fetish.

In all fairness, I spent the first two games pretty zeroed in on Seider. So I'm biased fersure. I didn't really pay much attention to Veleno's defensive game.

Let me quote the old cliche "you're not supposed to notice Dmen". In Seider's case he's doing all the little things excellently. If I was watching very casually I might not even notice. He's going to be a steady boring workhorse who eats big minutes.

[ely s 458]

8 minutes ago, kipwinger said:

...

I know it's anathema to say so around here, but if you wanted to learn that Pearson "might" be a bottom 6 center or that Soderblom can skate well for a big man you could always just read Corey Pronman's farm system analysis of the Red Wings.  He made both of those exact points.  Again, lots around here act like you're an ******* if you read his stuff but he apparently gets things right from time to time.

I prefer to see stuff with my own eyes, instead of just relying on someone else´s opinion

[kipwinger 8,772]

Just now, ely s said:

I prefer to see stuff with my own eyes, instead of just relying on someone else´s opinion

And there's nothing wrong with that as long as you're aware (which I'm sure you are) that A) our eyes can often deceive us, and B) other people's opinions are often more informed than our own. 

[ChristopherReevesLegs 7,022]

15 minutes ago, kipwinger said:

I know it's anathema to say so around here, but if you wanted to learn that Pearson "might" be a bottom 6 center or that Soderblom can skate well for a big man you could always just read Corey Pronman's farm system analysis of the Red Wings.  He made both of those exact points.  Again, lots around here act like you're an ******* if you read his stuff but he apparently gets things right from time to time.

Genius Corey Pronman ranking Mo Seider #29 circa 2019

[kipwinger 8,772]

20 minutes ago, ChristopherReevesLegs said:

The turning on Zadina has begun! lol

Seider and Zadina are two very different circumstances for me.

With Seider I watched him prior to the draft and was super interested in him, but never believed Yzerman would reach for him at #6.
With Zadina I did not watch him much at all prior to the draft, but was thrilled to take someone who slipped to us at #6.

I think it took me until October of last year to decide I did not like Zadina. Or at least that I did not think he displayed the level of talent that I believe a #6 pick should have.

I'll certainly reassess Seider after a month of play in the AHL as well, but one things for certain, I have hard and fast opinions on players, and Seider is already pretty deep into my good graces.

Wait, are you saying that it's premature to tell how good Seider will be without a healthy dose of personal bias and that he was a reach at 6th?  Because you wouldn't believe the sh*t I caught for making both of those points recently. 

[kipwinger 8,772]

7 minutes ago, ChristopherReevesLegs said:

Genius Corey Pronman ranking Mo Seider #29 circa 2019

I know!  The nerve of this egghead, traveling around the globe watching thousands of hockey players over and over and over again and then not picking the exact order of the 1st round with 100 percent accuracy.  What a d*ck. 

22 minutes ago, ChristopherReevesLegs said:

I forgot to mention he pinches correctly too. Dmen who pinch when appropriate is my secret fetish.

In all fairness, I spent the first two games pretty zeroed in on Seider. So I'm biased fersure. I didn't really pay much attention to Veleno's defensive game.

Let me quote the old cliche "you're not supposed to notice Dmen". In Seider's case he's doing all the little things excellently. If I was watching very casually I might not even notice. He's going to be a steady boring workhorse who eats big minutes.

Genuine question, didn't Seider get burned for goals in both the first and second games on bad pinches?  I obviously didn't watch but definitely thought I read that somewhere.

[ChristopherReevesLegs 7,022]

2 minutes ago, kipwinger said:

Wait, are you saying that it's premature to tell how good Seider will be without a healthy dose of personal bias and that he was a reach at 6th?  Because you wouldn't believe the sh*t I caught for making both of those points recently. 

I caught a lot of s*** for pooping on Zadina last year

My opinion of Seider is riddled with confirmation and observation bias, so I don't blame anyone who wants to "wait and see". When he makes the team out of camp my toldyasos will be locked and loaded though ;)

I hate the term reach, because it was only a reach according to the media. And I value the opinions of the media far less than I do actual managers and scouts. Yzerman clearly had Seider in his top6 of best available players, maybe even higher than 6. I respect that he wanted to trade down to game the system a bit, but in the end he got in his mind the BPA at #6... even if he could have maybe possibly also gotten him at #10 or #15 or something.

[kipwinger 8,772]

5 minutes ago, ChristopherReevesLegs said:

I caught a lot of s*** for pooping on Zadina last year

My opinion of Seider is riddled with confirmation and observation bias, so I don't blame anyone who wants to "wait and see". When he makes the team out of camp my toldyasos will be locked and loaded though

I hate the term reach, because it was only a reach according to the media. And I value the opinions of the media far less than I do actual managers and scouts. Yzerman clearly had Seider in his top6 of best available players, maybe even higher than 6. I respect that he wanted to trade down to game the system a bit, but in the end he got in his mind the BPA at #6... even if he could have maybe possibly also gotten him at #10 or #15 or something.

I'm not even sure this part is true though.  Quite a number of reports from the accursed media had Dach and Turcotte at the top of Detroit's board.  If Zegras or Cozens goes top 5, as was widely expected, it's not really that hard to see how Seider might not have even whiffed the top 15.  Which is all to say that it's hard to say that Yzerman A) wanted Seider all along at 6th, or B) thought Seider was the 6th best player in the draft.  It only really means that 5 other players they may have liked more were gone AND nobody was willing to trade up for anybody who was left. 

Edited September 10, 2019 by kipwinger

[ChristopherReevesLegs 7,022]

10 minutes ago, kipwinger said:

I know!  The nerve of this egghead, traveling around the globe watching thousands of hockey players over and over and over again and then not picking the exact order of the 1st round with 100 percent accuracy.  What a d*ck. 

Genuine question, didn't Seider get burned for goals in both the first and second games on bad pinches?  I obviously didn't watch but definitely thought I read that somewhere.

Pretty sure most of Pronman's knowledge comes from directly talking to scouts (correct me if I'm wrong). In the case of Seider, the Wings may have played it super close to the vest (wouldn't surprise me) and so maybe Pronman just didn't know the Wings intentions of taking this kid super high? In that sense maybe Yzerman really was the only one super high on Seider? Although I suspect Holland would've likely been high on him too. 

Seider was one of the very few prospects I watched prior to the draft and I really liked him. I think I said at the time this kid should be ranked 10-15 not 20-30. So that made me feel like Pronman is dumb. And that opinion only got validated when Yzerman took him even higher than #10.

Last game Seider got burned coming up the middle of the neutral zone on a 3 on 2. A leafyboi picked off his pass and scored on the ensuing rush. I don't recall any bad pinches that led to goals against in games 1 and 2.

[kipwinger 8,772]

8 minutes ago, ChristopherReevesLegs said:

Pretty sure most of Pronman's knowledge comes from directly talking to scouts (correct me if I'm wrong). In the case of Seider, the Wings may have played it super close to the vest (wouldn't surprise me) and so maybe Pronman just didn't know the Wings intentions of taking this kid super high? In that sense maybe Yzerman really was the only one super high on Seider? Although I suspect Holland would've likely been high on him too. 

Seider was one of the very few prospects I watched prior to the draft and I really liked him. I think I said at the time this kid should be ranked 10-15 not 20-30. So that made me feel like Pronman is dumb. And that opinion only got validated when Yzerman took him even higher than #10.

Last game Seider got burned coming up the middle of the neutral zone on a 3 on 2. A leafyboi picked off his pass and scored on the ensuing rush. I don't recall any bad pinches that led to goals against in games 1 and 2.

You've got that part wrong.  The guy personally watches thousands of prospects each year and augments his observations with others' observations (including scouts and managers) in order to minimize bias.  Very different than, say, a Craig Button (who also was a scout and manager himself) who tends to defer to video.  I know your tribe isn't too high on media types these days, but it's not like they got some dumbf*ck to opine on these guys. 

Edited September 10, 2019 by kipwinger