Ranking Prospects

[Kin]

Also, to really turn from a bottom feeder into a Cup contender, you have hit a couple homeruns outside the 1st round. You have find the Keiths, Letangs, etc, and they're much harder to put a timeline on finding. If you're lucky, you already have a couple guys like that in the system when you're bottoming out, but most teams don't, and a lot of teams never find them.

Which is where the Leafs lousy drafting under Burke and potentially Nonis really hurts the idea of a "quick" turnaround. If you look at the Blackhawks then in the three years prior to them drafting Kane and Toews in the top 3, they drafted Hjalmarrson, Bickell, Boland, Brouwer, Seabrook, Byfuglien and Crawford. Go back another year and you add Keith.

By comparison, in the three years prior to the Leafs run of picks in the top 10 the Leafs have...Kadri. And outside of people expecting big things from Garrett Sparks or Stuart Percy I don't think any of those players are going to develop into NHL regulars.

So this idea that the core of the team that'll shoot out of the basement next year is Nylander, Rielly, Marner and whoever the Leafs pick next year is further hampered by the fact that there's just not much of a base right now. The Blackhawks taking the leap forward that they did wasn't just because of their two teenaged superstars, it was that they had a whole bunch of 23 and 24 year old players who were able to competently fill roles. The Leafs aren't in that position.

 

[Frank E]

Also, to really turn from a bottom feeder into a Cup contender, you have hit a couple homeruns outside the 1st round. You have find the Keiths, Letangs, etc, and they're much harder to put a timeline on finding. If you're lucky, you already have a couple guys like that in the system when you're bottoming out, but most teams don't, and a lot of teams never find them.

Which is where the Leafs lousy drafting under Burke and potentially Nonis really hurts the idea of a "quick" turnaround. If you look at the Blackhawks then in the three years prior to them drafting Kane and Toews in the top 3, they drafted Hjalmarrson, Bickell, Boland, Brouwer, Seabrook, Byfuglien and Crawford. Go back another year and you add Keith.

By comparison, in the three years prior to the Leafs run of picks in the top 10 the Leafs have...Kadri. And outside of people expecting big things from Garrett Sparks or Stuart Percy I don't think any of those players are going to develop into NHL regulars.

So this idea that the core of the team that'll shoot out of the basement next year is Nylander, Rielly, Marner and whoever the Leafs pick next year is further hampered by the fact that there's just not much of a base right now. The Blackhawks taking the leap forward that they did wasn't just because of their two teenaged superstars, it was that they had a whole bunch of 23 and 24 year old players who were able to competently fill roles. The Leafs aren't in that position.

I think this kind of lends to my contention that Gardiner and Kadri may not fit this rebuild because they're just a bit too old.

Given the Chicago template, I'd prefer the Leafs to acquire a couple more 19-21 year old high-upside defensemen...a couple of years ahead of Marner/Nylander.

 

[L K]

Also, to really turn from a bottom feeder into a Cup contender, you have hit a couple homeruns outside the 1st round. You have find the Keiths, Letangs, etc, and they're much harder to put a timeline on finding. If you're lucky, you already have a couple guys like that in the system when you're bottoming out, but most teams don't, and a lot of teams never find them.

Which is where the Leafs lousy drafting under Burke and potentially Nonis really hurts the idea of a "quick" turnaround. If you look at the Blackhawks then in the three years prior to them drafting Kane and Toews in the top 3, they drafted Hjalmarrson, Bickell, Boland, Brouwer, Seabrook, Byfuglien and Crawford. Go back another year and you add Keith.

By comparison, in the three years prior to the Leafs run of picks in the top 10 the Leafs have...Kadri. And outside of people expecting big things from Garrett Sparks or Stuart Percy I don't think any of those players are going to develop into NHL regulars.

So this idea that the core of the team that'll shoot out of the basement next year is Nylander, Rielly, Marner and whoever the Leafs pick next year is further hampered by the fact that there's just not much of a base right now. The Blackhawks taking the leap forward that they did wasn't just because of their two teenaged superstars, it was that they had a whole bunch of 23 and 24 year old players who were able to competently fill roles. The Leafs aren't in that position.

I think this kind of lends to my contention that Gardiner and Kadri may not fit this rebuild because they're just a bit too old.

Given the Chicago template, I'd prefer the Leafs to acquire a couple more 19-21 year old high-upside defensemen...a couple of years ahead of Marner/Nylander.

I think that's a bit of an exaggerated concern.  Realistically we are looking at 4-5 years before this team is doing serious damage and at that time Kadri and Gardiner are going to be 30.  It's not like they are going to be 37 year old guys who aren't able to keep up at that point.  If anything that might be the prime period of Gardiner's career and Kadri would have more of a veteran role on the team at that point.

 

[mr grieves]

Timing is an issue as well. You can usually be assured that you end up with a pretty good player drafting 1st overall, but, every so often, the best available guy is Chris Phillips. And, sometimes, that guy is good, but not franchise level good - like Fleury, RNH or Yakupov. There's a lot of variables at play.

True. Also, even in a best case scenario anyone other than a Crosby/McDavid type prospect is going to take a year at least until they're making a huge impact. Players like Stamkos, Tavares and Hall all look like they're absolutely legitimate #1 picks but between the three of them their first seasons average out to:

75 GP, 23 goals, 47 points.

So not exactly guys who come in and take teams to the next level. In fact, after drafting those guys at #1 this is where those teams drafted the next year:

Well, that's part of an answer to my question (how long can the Leafs suck/ draft in the franchise-level elite spot?). Nylander and Marner joining the team shouldn't hurt that too much. But is this team as stripped down as the Chicago teams that drafted Kane and Toews? The one that drafted Crosby? -- There are still some serviceable, albeit overpaid and so (apparently) unmoveable, NHLers on this roster...

I don't think the rebuild will be particularly fast because they've already got some good players. I'm not optimistic about that. But I'm not optimistic that they'll be drafting in the lottery range as often/for as long as we'd like if (a) they haven't moved out any talent besides Kessel, (b) have improved their coaching staff, (c) are getting better at identifying useful contributors in the FA market, and (d) have some high-end talent joining the team in relatively near future...  Does it only seem possible to me the closest they get to the Kanes, Toews, Crosbys of the world -- the franchise cornerstone types -- could be Nylander, Marner, Rielly, and one of Puljujarvi, Chychrun, or Tkachuk?

 

[herman]

I think this kind of lends to my contention that Gardiner and Kadri may not fit this rebuild because they're just a bit too old.

Given the Chicago template, I'd prefer the Leafs to acquire a couple more 19-21 year old high-upside defensemen...a couple of years ahead of Marner/Nylander.

I think that's a bit of an exaggerated concern.  Realistically we are looking at 4-5 years before this team is doing serious damage and at that time Kadri and Gardiner are going to be 30.  It's not like they are going to be 37 year old guys who aren't able to keep up at that point.  If anything that might be the prime period of Gardiner's career and Kadri would have more of a veteran role on the team at that point.

At the same time, I think it's a pretty good time this upcoming trade deadline to spin Kadri, Gardiner, and van Riemsdyk off for 1st rd picks and/or high potential prospects more in-line with the 4-5 year window, and potentially help package off some of the harder to move pieces (Robidas, Lupul, Bozak).

Edit: I've been spelling JvR's name wrong all this time... =(

 

[Kin]

Well, that's part of an answer to my question (how long can the Leafs suck/ draft in the franchise-level elite spot?). Nylander and Marner joining the team shouldn't hurt that too much. But is this team as stripped down as the Chicago teams that drafted Kane and Toews? The one that drafted Crosby? -- There are still some serviceable, albeit overpaid and so (apparently) unmoveable, NHLers on this roster...

All bad teams have serviceable NHL players. Look at the Oilers the last couple of years. In addition to a ton of young offensive talent they've had guys like Andrew Ference, Boyd Gordon, Benoit Pouliot, Jeff Petry, David Perron...all guys who are legit players who have either played roles for good teams or that good teams thought enough of to acquire.

I don't think the rebuild will be particularly fast because they've already got some good players. I'm not optimistic about that. But I'm not optimistic that they'll be drafting in the lottery range as often/for as long as we'd like if (a) they haven't moved out any talent besides Kessel, (b) have improved their coaching staff, (c) are getting better at identifying useful contributors in the FA market, and (d) have some high-end talent joining the team in relatively near future...  Does it only seem possible to me the closest they get to the Kanes, Toews, Crosbys of the world -- the franchise cornerstone types -- could be Nylander, Marner, Rielly, and one of Puljujarvi, Chychrun, or Tkachuk?

I'm pretty confident that 1) the people running the Maple Leafs are at least as smart as I am and as such can figure out what I've figured out and 2) they can figure out a way to be at the bottom of the league.

As to the specific concerns:

A) Just because they've only moved Kessel this summer doesn't mean that's all they'll be able to do. We haven't heard much about them hard shopping Kadri or JVR or Gardiner but I'm guessing that if they did, they'd be able to find takers. Others, like Polak will certainly be dealt this year and quite a few of the "untradeable" players you mention might be more attractive to teams with less time on their contracts. The tear down, like the rebuild, isn't going to happen overnight.

B) I think you're both drastically overrating the impact coaching will have on a talent shy team's record and underestimating Babcock's ability to engineer the results the front office actually want.

C) The results of which have yet to be seen. All we know from the off-season this management team has had is that they've got no real interest in anyone who will credibly make a major impact in a short term sense and, realistically, very few guys who'll even be on the team next year.

Regardless, if they've gotten really good at identifying what UFA's will contribute heavily to a better record in the short term then, presumably, if they want bottom of the league finishes they can choose not to sign those players.

D) As mentioned previously, being realistic about the "high-end" talent the Leafs have in the system means expecting major contributions from them 2 or 3 years down the road which was the number of high lottery picks that corsi fenwick thought they'd have.

 

[herman]

#5: Mitch Marner

What we're seeing in voting this time around is a clear split in those who are voting with a "what can you do for me now" look at the top five and those who are looking for future potential. Marner had all his votes in the top 5, ranging from 1-5, but only four voters had him in their top two.

Followed by Scott Wheeler's own note in the comments:

I think there was way too much emphasis placed on the present here. Marner is without a doubt one of the best prospects the Leafs have ever had (in a nearly 100-year history). His value [to] the current state of the Leafs franchise (one that isn?t thinking in the present, though many of the voters did) supersedes the value of any of the current NHLers. Sans-McDavid/Eichel he?s in the first overall pick conversation. If he was taken there, I doubt we?d see him ranked where he currently is. The Leafs would deal Kadri/Gardiner/probably Rielly for another Marner without thinking twice.

My own opinion echoes Wheeler's. With Nylander/Marner/Rielly in the fold, I would trade Kadri/Gardiner/van Reimsdyk in a heartbeat for shots at drafting more of the former.

 

[skrackle]

#5: Mitch Marner

What we're seeing in voting this time around is a clear split in those who are voting with a "what can you do for me now" look at the top five and those who are looking for future potential. Marner had all his votes in the top 5, ranging from 1-5, but only four voters had him in their top two.

Followed by Scott Wheeler's own note in the comments:

I think there was way too much emphasis placed on the present here. Marner is without a doubt one of the best prospects the Leafs have ever had (in a nearly 100-year history). His value [to] the current state of the Leafs franchise (one that isn?t thinking in the present, though many of the voters did) supersedes the value of any of the current NHLers. Sans-McDavid/Eichel he?s in the first overall pick conversation. If he was taken there, I doubt we?d see him ranked where he currently is. The Leafs would deal Kadri/Gardiner/probably Rielly for another Marner without thinking twice.

My own opinion echoes Wheeler's. With Nylander/Marner/Rielly in the fold, I would trade Kadri/Gardiner/van Reimsdyk in a heartbeat for shots at drafting more of the former.

So would I.

 

[herman]

Kadri is #4

 

[mr grieves]

Kadri is #4

Reminding us why a 'shot' at another shiny new toy like Nylander or Marner doesn't make a lot of sense.

 

[Frank E]

Kadri is #4

Reminding us why a 'shot' at another shiny new toy like Nylander or Marner doesn't make a lot of sense.

I don't understand what you're saying here.

 

[Kin]

I think PPP is a good website but I fear we may be approaching a point where their rankings are being taken a little too seriously in this thread.

 

[CarltonTheBear]

Reminding us why a 'shot' at another shiny new toy like Nylander or Marner doesn't make a lot of sense.

I don't understand what you're saying here.

Draft Schmaft?

Really all this says is that a large chunk of the voters placed way too much emphasis on who the best player is at this very moment. Which is a weird thing to do in a ranking like this, but that's their prerogative I guess. I don't think that any of them would really say that Kadri's ceiling is higher than Marner's.

 

[GhostofPotvin29]

Reminding us why a 'shot' at another shiny new toy like Nylander or Marner doesn't make a lot of sense.

I don't understand what you're saying here.

Draft Schmaft?

Really all this says is that a large chunk of the voters placed way too much emphasis on who the best player is at this very moment. Which is a weird thing to do in a ranking like this, but that's their prerogative I guess. I don't think that any of them would really say that Kadri's ceiling is higher than Marner's.

Well it's "Top 25 Under 25" so that might mean "most potential under 25" to some or "best right now" to others - they didn't set any parameters on it, seems they just let the voters interpret it and vote how they wanted. 

 

[herman]

I'm only using the PPP list to help generate discussion. I like seeing others' opinions and views on these prospects and players. In this year's edition of the list, they collectively went in a direction that I personally would not have, but I'm not their staff, nor am I a professional hockey writer, so it doesn't matter.

One of their commentors put it most poignantly:

I understand how different people rank based on different criteria, but for the top 5 the criteria should be based on one question; If you had to pick one player between two, who would it be?

Kadri or Rielly?
Kadri or Nylander?
Kadri or Marner?
Kadri or Gardiner?

Even outside the context of our current NHL lineup situation and prime timing of prospects/contracts, I'd still put Nylander/Marner/Rielly as Tier 1 over Kadri/Gardiner/JvR based on their junior/pro numbers and projections.

 

[Kin]

I like seeing others' opinions and views on these prospects and players. In this year's edition of the list, they collectively went in a direction that I personally would not have, but I'm not their staff, nor am I a professional hockey writer, so it doesn't matter.

Well, they put it out there for it to be consumed and, one hopes, thoughtfully criticized so it should matter what you think of it. Like CtB said, this seems like a strange exercise without stricter parameters of just what it was they were measuring but, well, it's the off-season and content needs a generatin'.

 

[herman]

I like seeing others' opinions and views on these prospects and players. In this year's edition of the list, they collectively went in a direction that I personally would not have, but I'm not their staff, nor am I a professional hockey writer, so it doesn't matter.

Well, they put it out there for it to be consumed and, one hopes, thoughtfully criticized so it should matter what you think of it. Like CtB said, this seems like a strange exercise without stricter parameters of just what it was they were measuring but, well, it's the off-season and content needs a generatin'.

I've given them so many page hits this offseason...

The T25U25, if anything, has proven to be a good way to generate interest ramping up to the rookie tournament and training camp. I peruse other team rankings for tradebait.

 

[mr grieves]

Kadri is #4

Reminding us why a 'shot' at another shiny new toy like Nylander or Marner doesn't make a lot of sense.

I don't understand what you're saying here.

That Kadri's really good -- elite in some ways -- and chucking a really good player that you've drafted and developed, who'll still be very good when you want your team to be good, for the chance to draft another really good player to develop seems... hasty? Pointless? I mean, until he's really tried out in the 1C role, seems trading him away would be Steen Redux.

 

[Bender]

Kadri is #4

Reminding us why a 'shot' at another shiny new toy like Nylander or Marner doesn't make a lot of sense.

Dont follow

 

[mr grieves]

Kadri is #4

Reminding us why a 'shot' at another shiny new toy like Nylander or Marner doesn't make a lot of sense.

Dont follow

Getting rid of what good players you've drafted and developed to be a perennial loser draft junkie is dumb.