Huberdeau

 

Draft time is just around the corner. Many of you will be looking to draft prospects that can produce right now and most of you will be looking to stock up on players that will produce in a season or two. Seven prospects will be examined this week, three of whom are draftable, but won't produce this season. The other four are to be avoided completely for upcoming fantasy drafts and have a lot to prove before they are considered legitimate prospects again.

 

Also this week is the start of a series on underrated prospects. Each week at the end of every column I'll briefly discuss one prospect that is under hyped and overlooked.



Won't produce this season


Jonathan Huberdeau, C, Florida



I'm not saying not to draft Huberdeau this season, just realize that he's not going to play more than nine games. Florida is surprisingly deep at centre with Stephen Weiss, Tomas Fleischmann and Mike Santorelli as the top-six options. If any of them falter or get injured, a more mature prospect, Shawn Matthias will be given a chance to prove himself as a top-six player. Huberdeau also has to fill out considerably before the Panthers will risk giving him a full time NHL job.


Ryan Ellis, D, Nashville



Despite the loss of Cody Franson, Nashville still has plenty of offensive options from the back end with Shea Weber and Ryan Suter. Because of an acrimonious salary arbitration, Weber will likely be moved, but expect that to happen later in the season. Nashville has two other defensive prospects in the wings - Jonathan Blum and Roman Josi - that can provide some offense. Blum is a lock to make the team and Josi is a little older than Ellis and has a full year of pro experience under his belt. Ellis might get 20-25 points this season, but don't expect more than that.


Adam Larsson, D, New Jersey



Larsson is the complete package defensively and will very likely make the Devils. The danger here is that Larsson's offensive game is a question mark. He's more than capable of playing a complete two-way game, but it's still unknown whether he'll be able to put up fantasy worthy numbers. He's worth considering, but you'll probably have to wait a couple of seasons before you know whether he's Luke Schenn or Drew Doughty.         



Do not draft



Nikita Filatov, W, Ottawa



Columbus Blue Jackets' former coach Ken Hitchcock wouldn't play the highly touted Filatov because he didn't like Filatov's compete level. Many believed Hitchcock's hardnosed approach wasn't a good fit for the young Russian. After Hitchcock’s departure in 2010, however, Scott Arniel was brought in to coach the team and Arniel's assessment of Filatov was similar to Hitchcock's. Filatov was sent packing in the offseason and finds himself in offensively starved Ottawa. He will have to prove to a third coach that he has enough drive to compete at the NHL level. Unfortunately for Filatov, if there is one thing that can ruin an NHL career it is a lack of competitiveness (ask Alexandre Daigle). Not only does Filatov have two strikes against him in that area, he also suffers from neck and concussion issues. Stay away until he proves he can produce consistently.


Zach Hamill, C, Boston



Stay away from Hamill completely. The 8th pick in the 2007 draft has bust written all over him. Hamill, 5'11, 185 pounds, has sweet hands, a little grit but not much else. He's slow and he gets pushed off the puck easily. He notched 34 points in 68 games in the AHL last season but at 23, he should be producing a lot more than that. He looks like he'll be a fine AHL centre for years to come.


Luca Caputi, LW, Toronto



It usually takes bigger players more time to develop and at 6'3, 205 pounds, Caputi is a big player. He's also a well rounded forward  who looked like he would get some playing time on Pittsburgh's top six earlier in his career, but his move to Toronto and injuries have taken a toll on his potential impact as a fantasy producer. Because he's so well rounded, Caputi is likely to play in the NHL in a bottom six checking role. His upside was never high to begin with and his chances of reaching it have greatly diminished.


Jordan Schroeder, C/RW, Vancouver


He's just too small. Schroeder was Vancouver's 1st pick (22nd overall) in the 2009 entry draft. Schroeder was drafted much lower than expected on draft day and his stock has been dropping ever since. At 5'8, 180 pounds, Schroeder was a risk to begin with, and unfortunately for him his development since the draft has not been smooth. Prior to the draft he scored 45 points in 35 games for Minnesota in the NCAA. In his next season Schroeder only managed 28 points in 37 games for Minnesota. Last season he scored a measly 28 points in 61 games for Manitoba in the AHL and suffered through an ankle injury. Schroeder has enough skill to make the NHL, but his size and injury potential make him a huge fantasy risk.


Underrated Prospect



Anders Lindback, G, Nashville



Already 23 and with a full season as a backup under his belt, some fantasy hockey publications don't even consider Lindback to be a prospect. Lindback is still Calder eligible, however, and has done everything he can to prove he's an elite goaltending prospect. At 6'6, 215 pounds, Lindback plays the hybrid goalie style to perfection. He was 11-5-2 with a .915 save percentage, playing behind Pekke Rinne last season. If Rinne gets hurt or Lindback gets traded, look for him to thrive as a number one goalie. Because he's playing behind Rinne in a small market, Lindback hasn't gotten the same attention as other elite goalie prospects such as Jacob Markstrom and Jonathan Bernier. Use that to your advantage on draft day.


Write comment
Comments (31)add comment

davemoosehead said:

davemoosehead
... I have no problem with someone saying there's a good chance Weber won't be on the 2012/13 roster. Heck I may even say I agree with it. That isn't what I was getting at, though. My beef was that it sounded like your main point was Weber will be moved midseason, which I find extremely unlikely. So for me, we'll know who was right by the trade deadline smilies/wink.gif

I do agree that something fishy went on with the whole agent switch, so we have common ground there. Seems like we just misunderstood each other's main points.
September 01, 2011
Votes: +0

Stuart McDonald said:

Slantman
... Hey Dave.

Quite frankly I don't recall two sides ever being so far apart in negotiations, however I could be wrong (I doubt it though). I understand the need to lowball, highball etc. but like the rest of the media, I felt the two sides were just so far apart that it seemed absurd.

I'd like to know why Weber didn't simply negotiate a longer deal with Poile. I think 7M for 7 years is a darn good starting point and if Weber wanted to stay why didn't he opt for a long-term deal. My belief is that Nashville can't afford to give Weber what he wants long term, so they went to arbitration instead.

"Rhetoric about him staying in Nashville quieted considerably after the change" was simply me paraphrasing an article from a major newspaper. I didn't just pull that out of my behind. I was part of the research that I did for the article. It might not be a big deal but then again it might, especially after he just changed agents. I suspect Weber felt he wanted to go for big money and he could do it better with a new agent. I'll admit there is nothing concrete here but I think there is smoke and where there is smoke there is always fire.

Whether they trade him mid-season or next summer isn't my main argument. If he gets traded in the summer then it's even more likely that Ellis isn't breaking through this season which was the reason I put him on the list of guys to stay away from this year. Ultimately I believe this is his last season in Nashville and I believe it because Nashville can't afford him.

I agree Nashville has a fine replacement for Rinne and I discussed him in my underrated prospect review. Yes they have produced a number of excellent goalies, however, you could say the same thing about their depth on the blue line. They are flush with good blueliners and good blueline prospects. No, none of them are like Weber simply because Weber is an elite Norris Trophy type defenceman who can demand top dollars that Nashville doesn't have.

I'm going to give you the last word on this because I've seen these types of debates last forever. I'm not trying to be mean by ending the debate because you seem informed and you've been civil, it's just that I don't think we're going to find common ground. Ultimately, we'll know who is right at the beginning of next season. If Weber is still in Nashville then I tip my hat to you, but I just don't happen to agree with your assessment.

Cheers.

Stu.
September 01, 2011
Votes: +0

davemoosehead said:

davemoosehead
... @Stuart "3.25M apart" Where did you get that information? Or are you referring to the numbers that each party presented to arbitrator? Because if so, that is a standard negotiation tactic used in every single arbitration case, ever. One side low balls, the other side high-balls, and they meet somewhere in the middle. That is how these things have always worked. When Weber, his agent, and Poile were asked about those numbers, they were all surprised at how the media was making such a big deal out of it. The rumors from Nashville are saying Poile's offer was around $7M for 7 years. So they weren't that far apart.

"Changing agents" No one knows why Weber changed agents. The only info we have on that is that the change set back negotiations considerable since they essentially had to start from scratch. His new agency has never had a client this big, so it was a new thing for them. Assistant Coach Peterson did say they believe Weber got "poor advice" from his agent.

"rhetoric about him staying in Nashville quieted considerably after the change" Not only is this false, but I don't see why you would view this as a big deal. Maybe his new agent didn't want Weber talking to the media anymore because they were in the middle of the biggest negotiation of their company's existence? Not sure why you would think this is abnormal. Furthermore, after the hearing Weber went out of his way several times to tell the media how much he loves Nashville, understands the whole process of just business, and that he hopes to get a longer deal done.

Weber asking for a 1 year deal only supports the evidence that Weber wants to be in Nashville. If Weber truly wanted out, he would have requested a 2 year deal which would have brought him to UFA status so he could leave on his own terms.

Yes, like I said, it may make sense to let a big ticket item go in order to improve other areas of the team. But again I ask, why would they trade Weber midseason? He'll be RFA, so they won't lose him to free agency without first getting the chance to match the offer sheet (which management has gone on record stating they would match any offer). If Weber is going to be traded, it's going to happen next summer.

Of the big 3 in Nashville, my money is on them letting Rinne go, and re-signing Weber and Suter. Nashville is a goalie factory so Rinne is probably the easiest to replace. Moreover, Nashville has no dmen prospects who are similar to Weber. Suter, on the other hand, could be replaced by Blum or Ekholm. They play a very similar game.
September 01, 2011
Votes: +0

Stuart McDonald said:

Slantman
... @Davemoosehead. Weber and Nashville were 3.25 million dollars apart going into arbitration. That's a HUGE difference and made this particular arbitration more acrimonious than others. Weber changed agents in late June and the rhetoric about him staying in Nashville quieted considerably after the change. Weber asked for a one year deal which means he'll be an RFA next year and they'll have to go through this again. Nashville is a small market team and it would make more sense to let one big ticket player go rather than lose a couple of their young defencemen. They have a lot of depth back there and a lot of good young d-men (Josi, Ellis and Blum). I'd be really surprised if he wasn't traded.
August 31, 2011
Votes: +0

davemoosehead said:

davemoosehead
... @Larry There is some truth to what you say, but what does that have to do with this season? There is probably a good chance that 1 or more will be gone by 2012/13, but I do not see a mid season trade happening. Even if there were, Weber would be the least likely of the 3 to be traded. They are a playoff team and will likely be in the thick of things so selling off their assets doesn't make sense.
August 30, 2011
Votes: -1

Larry said:

Rollie1967
Nashvilles screwed... davemoosehead: Weber makes $7mil this year- next year he is an UFA- what will he command/expect then? Nashville has shown no interest in spending what it most likely takes to ice a winner- so something has to give. Given that both Suter and Rinne are also UFA after this year... Nashville is dumping someone,luckily they do have some up and comers on defense (Josi,Ellis) but regardless- theyre gonna lose atleast 1 top player at some point this season.
August 30, 2011
Votes: +0

davemoosehead said:

davemoosehead
... I think this article gives good advice, even though you gave bold and unpopular predictions. One thing I disagree about, and this isn't really related to the article, is your comments about Weber. The arbitration process of Weber was in no way acrimonious (unless you simply believe that all arbitrations are), and I doubt Weber will be traded. Sure there is a chance, but it is FAR from likely.
August 29, 2011
Votes: +0

Larry said:

Rollie1967
20 + comments... On this article and counting..... were all starving for real hockey news smilies/grin.gif
All this talk about kool-aid is making me thirsty.

As for the players mentioned- the only one Id even consider is Filatov- but thats an extreme longshot. A change of scenery has got to be a good thing (if he cant get consistant minutes on that roster...hello Russia!)
Schroeder's stock has fallen quite a bit,not sure how much injuries played into his poor season, but even if he had put up point/game numbers- where does he fit on the Canucks roster? Granted there is a temporary spot open with Raymonds injury- but AV hasnt shown the greatest trust in rookies. Hodgson,Grabner,Shirokov have all had more to offer than Schroeder-and werent able to get any kind of regular shifts. (hopefully Hodgson breaks that trend this year). Schroeders size/style isnt what the Canucks lack either, so unless he shows amazing chemistry with either the Sedins or Hodgson(Kesler might not be ready at the start of the season)- he wont make the team this year.
August 29, 2011
Votes: +0

heater said:

heater
... a tough assignment to pick out prospects to avoid when most readers will most likely already own one of the players and already have a biased and outlook on their player(s). it would be much easier to pump up prospects or pick on the Gudbranson stay-at-home types in points only leagues...

the underated lindback didn't really flow when i read it either, maybe a different font for the header or something so it doesn't just blend in with the rest of the article...
August 28, 2011
Votes: +0

Stuart McDonald said:

Slantman
... I got the information on Huberdeau from Donny Rivette, a Florida blogger otherwise known as Litter Box Cats and I swear I wasn't wanking at the time smilies/smiley.gif Rivette is one of the best bloggers out there and I consider him an excellent source. I appreciate that so many people have read the column and as a former print journalist I can totally handle the criticism. I can't wait for Filatov to play this season. I had him in my keeper pool for two seasons and was a huge fan. I've seen him play many times in person at the AHL level and a few times on TV. He has been a major disappointment so far and knowing that his competitiveness has been questioned by two coaches I wouldn't draft him in a keeper league. Good luck to him in Ottawa and good luck to those that draft him. Cheers and thanks for reading.
August 28, 2011
Votes: +1

lcbtd said:

germant
Forgot... Forgot to mention that, ironically, I'm a fan of (most of) sentium's posts lol
August 28, 2011
Votes: +0

lcbtd said:

germant
Solid Nice work Stu. Well written and I must say I agree with you on most, if not all counts.

The ridiculous criticism is, well, ridiculous. But it's not shocking. I see this stuff on Yahoo boards all the time and it's from guys who want to stir the pot and who have nothing really valid or "constructive" to add.

August 28, 2011
Votes: +0

Kris said:

4horsemen
Hek's list Your list is mostly comprised of players who weren't on competitive teams and that makes a HUGE difference. It also doesn't mean much to include consensus number one picks like Hall or Tavares because it becomes an apples to oranges argument. The only guys you've listed who should be discussed in the same argument as Filatov are: Skinner, Ennis and Stepan if we want to keep this an apples to apples argument. OK, so those three players proved they could crack the roster of a competing team and thrive. How does this pertain to Filatov again? He obviously hasn't experienced the success that they had but that in and of itself means very little.
August 28, 2011
Votes: +0

Draft Dodger said:

steve_oshp
you said it Hek I agree with your comments regarding sentium, does that mean I'm drinking your kool-aid now? :-)
Seriously sentium you make some valid points in countering Stu's opinions, but saying he's stupid and 'a whole lot of stat wanking backed up by virtually no actual hockey know-how or watching any games' is far from constructive. You say the reason you write here is you want to know how you can get better. Then when we criticize your post you lash out LOL
August 28, 2011
Votes: +0

Hek said:

87Flyer
Defensive? It's got nothing to do with being defensive. My apologies if that's the way you think it came off. It's about respect and not being a dick. Constructive criticism is a great thing. It helps a person improve. Writing what you think is "constructive" though with words like "stupid" and "bad writing" when someone doesn't have any idea about what it's like to have your work criticized is just plain "stupid". When you want to help someone improve you say things like "hey this might not be the best way to do this" or "hey I didn't really agree with this so why don't you try this". Maybe it's just me but I can remember the early days when Sentium would provide constructive criticism and plenty of valid points and insight. Unfortunately though for the last while Sentium hasn't had a nice thing to say about anything it seems. I used to read his comments to glean something that many others would consider. Now all I read is harsh words and "constructive criticism".

Interesting that all I seen out of any of those responses was about me being defensive. Why was it there was no reference to the list of kids I provided who have ALL made the NHL at 21 or under? Are you sure it's not you being defensive lmao. Again I ask. Why is it these kids have had no problem contributing in the NHL at the same or younger ages as Filatov who has been a prospect now for what, 3 years? Btw. Just so you're aware. It takes big balls to fly against the wind. Anyone can sail along with it. Stu has done just that and hopefully the readers who don't have their noses all bent out of shape will benefit from it. Great stuff.
August 28, 2011
Votes: +0

Dobber said:

Dobber
Fantastic article One of your best, Stu. Loved that you take a stand, unpopular or no. And I agree with you on pretty much all counts.
August 28, 2011
Votes: +0

shaun b said:

shingy
... This shit is free. It's amazing. Thanks for the time and effort.

It states is bold letters above the article that he believes these players won't produce THIS season. He's right, they shouldn't.

Filatov has only proved he needs time. Drafting him is obviously a risk/reward situation.
August 28, 2011
Votes: +0

Kris said:

4horsemen
Hmmmmm I couldn't disagree more on your Filatov 'Do Not Draft' label for Filatov. What is the context for this recommendation? If I were to draft a 12 team yahoo league I'd be very interested in Filatov during the later rounds because he's exactly the sort of player that can put a team over the top. While others are drafting the perenial 40-45 point guys I'll take my homerun swing on Filatov and if I miss....who cares? Saying not to draft him implies that he can't be useful asset and as Grabner showed us all last year that's just not sound advice.

Now it doesn't really sound like you're article is geared at the one year league so this makes the comment even more perplexing. I understand if your position is to cool some peoples jets on Filatov and tell them not to reach for him when there are still blue-chip assets on the table but saying not to draft him is nuts. I'd take him inside of the top 10 picks in this years draft class in a hearbeat, my only question would be how high? Sure the bust label is hovering over him but as others have pointed out he floundered under a system that has a brutal track record for prospect development and to top it off the Jackets were a team focused on making the playoffs whereas the Sens are a rebuilding franchise and he couldn't have asked for a better environment to land in. If he busts, he busts but we'll all know within the next two years.

My other comment is a much smaller nit pick but it's something that's nagged at me for years around here. The Penguins have shown beyond a shadow of a doubt that they do not intend to throw a prospect on a line with Malkin or Crosby, this is partly because they haven't had any blue-chippers to speak of and partly becaue they're a competitive franchise so they can't take the risk. Despite this, people persist in over-rating 2nd rate Pens prospects (eg, Caputi, Tangradi, Jeffrey, etc) but the fact of the matter is that people should have been happy to see a Caputi go to Toronto because he was entering an environment where he'd be givin a chance and that's the best thing he could have asked for. Well it's now become evident that he's not going to be a top six player in the NHL, as you rightly identified, but the move from Pittsburgh to Toronto was not a negative for him as many have concluded.
August 28, 2011
Votes: +0

Shoeless said:

Shoeless
Hey Stu We're all experts, you know. smilies/tongue.gif Tough crowd to write for. Keep doing it and keep us talking about this stuff - thanks.
August 28, 2011
Votes: +1

sentium said:

Dakkster
... Hek and Draft Dodger: You two are part of a growing problem on this site. Dissent and constructive criticism are CLEARLY no longer welcome on this site. If you dare to disagree with the gospel, you're clearly have "nothing but rotten crap coming out of [your] mouth".

I could've written something like "this article sucks" and not give one single shred of a reason as to why I think it does. What I wrote in my comment is called constructive criticism. I pointed out flaws so that Stu can correct them the next time. I'm sorry if I, by this time in the history of the site, expect articles that aren't just random drivel. Stu is a very good writer and this was just a rare case of a poor article. When I write stuff I want to know how I can get better, which is exactly why I chime in here. But you guys are obviously content with badly researched mediocrity and drinking whatever koolaid is being served. Awesome! Go you!
August 28, 2011
Votes: +0

Trevor said:

Brady19
... @Hek - you need to quit being so defensive. I thought Sentium's comments were pretty accurate. In my opinion, this is a pretty bold article, with some pretty bold names thrown in there. I can't imagine someone writing an article about "players to avoid" then naming a top 3 prospect from this draft, and NOT expecting some criticism.

He mentioned eliteprospects to reference Huberdeau... And plain as day I see him listed there as a left winger. If you are tired of people complaining about positions... Well, in leagues where positions are HUGE it matters a lot. And to say don't draft this player, because his team sees him as a skinny two-way centre on a crappy team...

I guess when you write what could be seen as a controversial article, it's even moreso important to get your facts straight in my opinion so that nickpickers dont have cause for complaint. Not to say ONE DAY Huberdeau won't move to center (like Giroux) but as far as me (and many others) are concerned, he is a winger for now because in reality that is what he plays.

Again, I had very little complaints about the article myself, except I thought it was strange to say Florida drafted Huberdeau as a two-way centre when that was the first I had heard that. And being even half-intelligent you have to know that when people hear "two-way" it immediately screams "lower fantasy value" than a regular top line forward.

I think that Hek simply needs to be less defensive about something that has nothing to do with him, and hopefully Stu took Sentium's criticism the way it was meant... Which is as constructive criticism.
August 28, 2011
Votes: -1

Hek said:

87Flyer
Unreal Don't mind Sentium Stu. Usually he has constructive things to say in his messages but lately he's had nothing but rotten crap coming out of his mouth. I'm not quite sure who's pi55ing in his corn flakes each morning but he should definitely get it figured out because the old Sentium who contributed interesting information is missed.

Some food for thought. All the kids listed below didn't seem to have any trouble sticking around for their rookie years when they were 21 or under. Not all of them are of NHL size yet they had something special to help them overcome the challenges that Filatov is missing. Heart. Maybe if he wasn't so worried about the chances he wasn't being given and more worried about making something of the chances he has been given he would be playing.

21 and under and playing in the NHL NOW.
Skinner- 5'10 193lbs
Ennis- 5'9 163lbs
Stepan- 6'0 187lbs
Eberle- 5'10 174lbs
Hall- 6'1 185
Fowler- 6'1 190lbs
Carlson- 6'3 208lbs
Paajarvi- 6'2 201
Johansson- 6'0 196lbs
Hamonic- 6'2 215lbs
Duchene- 5'11 200lbs
Tavares- 6'0 195lbs
Myers- 6'8 219lbs
Del Zotto-6'1 195lbs
Kane-6'2 190lbs

Filatov- 6'0 185lbs
Schroeder- 5'8 182lbs

I'm a little tired of constantly reading comments after an article about wrong positions by a player. If that isn't the hardest thing to predict with a young player then I don't know what is. Check five different sites and it's a good bet that three of them will have a different position listed. You people really need to find something new to complain about.

One last thing. It's always easy to make a rotten comment about another persons article when you don't have any of your own articles to be criticized. Maybe once some of you start putting up your own articles you will have a much better idea of just how difficult it is and how much thought and time goes into them. Try having your hard work dissected a few times and then see if you are still willing to call someone else's work stupid. Disgusting.
August 27, 2011
Votes: +1

david said:

newper114
Flash So this is an interesting piece but i am not sure why you have Fleischmann at center for Florida. i know in washington he has played it all lw,rw,c but in colorado he only played winger. all reports ive read or seen he is projected to be LW in florida.

wondering where you saw or read or thought he was center?

but even with all my questions great piece and cant wait for the next.
August 27, 2011
Votes: +0

Draft Dodger said:

steve_oshp
pretty harsh Sentium, way too harsh man. You don't have to agree but how can you say it's crap?
First, his advice on Filatov is just fine. Stay away until he prove's he can produce consistently. Maybe I'd lose the word 'consistently' but nothing wrong with saying stay away until he has actually produced, period.
Same with his advice on Schroeder. He is a fantasy risk. He's not saying he'll never make it, but not worth drafting this year to put him on your bench for years in the hope he might produce. You compared his situation to Martin St. Louis, if you had drafted St. Louis at 20 years old you'd have had to sit on him for what 6-7 years before you saw any half-decent production?
At best you could say Stu should have said more clearly 'stay away unless you are looking to draft long-shots and/or players who are possibly a half-dozen years away' or 'dont use anything higher than your last draft pick on these guys'
And finally, you said no prelude to recommending Lindback as a guy to draft? It's right at the end of his article 'Also this week is the start of a series on underrated prospects. Each week at the end of every column I'll briefly discuss one prospect that is under hyped and overlooked'

August 27, 2011
Votes: +1

sentium said:

Dakkster
... Huberdeau is mainly a leftwinger. That's where he's actually played if you've watched the games or listened to people who've watched the games. It's like insisting that Jiri Hudler is a center just because he was originally listed as such when he came over to NA.

This article feels like a whole lot of stat wanking backed up by virtually no actual hockey know-how or watching any games.

About Filatov: He has talent and will and he is still just 21 years old. Where was Bobby Ryan when he was 21? Where are most prospects when they are 21? Basically, if you give up on a prospect because a team who traditionally misdevelop young players, you're ... well, stupid comes to mind, but let's go with a bit premature. Last year Filatov looked great in preseason in the top six and then in one of the opening games in Stockholm Scott Nichol got him high with a late, dirty hit and he wasn't quite the same afterwards. That can happen to any 20 year old player. There, now you have a context for your stats. Use it properly. Suddenly he's in a no pressure environment where he has been told that he can play to his strengths, which he has never experienced in the US, which is exactly what Guy Boucher has been telling Stamkos in Tampa. He can be the total jackpot player. It's just ignorant to tell people hands down to stay away from Filatov. He doesn't give the best odds, no, but if you hit that homerun, it will be epic, and it's not like you're drawing a one-out hand.

Schroeder, same there. Look at the context instead of throwing out his points per game ratio. Manitoba couldn't score this past season and Schroeder looked great for stretches. Is it a surprise that a 20-year-old has consistency issues in his first pro season, especially on an offensively challenged team? Add to that the fact that smaller player need a bit more time to figure out the pro game. Schroeder is shiftier, stronger and more skilled than most players, let alone smaller guys. Basically, if he can't make it into the NHL in due time, we might as well draft absolutely no smaller guys according to Stu McDonald. Don't bother with Marty St Louis at 25 years old a decade ago, never mind Jordan Schreoder at 20 years old now when smaller players get even more of the benefit of the doubt.

Basically, about these two players, you've taken ONLY the worst parts of their careers, taken them out of context and emphasized the bad stuff. That's just bad writing if you ask me.

Also, if the article is called "Prospects to avoid", then why are you throwing in Lindback as a guy we should draft? There is no prelude to it whatsoever. He's just there at the end. You usually write very solid stuff, Stu, but with all due respect, this was a far cry from your best piece. Badly researched, not the best structure. I'm 100% sure that you can write a lot better because you always do better than this. Then again, it's the dog days of summer, so it's not easy to churn out quality stuff this time of year, so I understand that. But please take this criticism properly and consider what you can do better the next time.
August 27, 2011
Votes: +0

Stuart McDonald said:

Slantman
... Sigh. I've read it on more than one site but eliteprospects.com is one site where you'll find him listed as a two-way forward. I could give you others where he is listed as a centre but I'm not going to because "this has been beaten to a pulp enough times."
August 27, 2011
Votes: +0

Trevor said:

Brady19
... This has been beaten into a pulp enough times... But did Huberdeau not play wing virtually all of this past season? Zack Phillips was his center, and I'm curious where you got the info that Florida is drafting him to be a "two-way center".
August 27, 2011
Votes: +0

Stuart McDonald said:

Slantman
... @Rob. You are correct Rob. Huberdeau can definitely play left wing, but the Panthers would like him to be a top line, two-way centre. Putting such a valuable prospect on the wing as an 18 year old wouldn't help his overall development as much as sending him back to junior in his natural position and letting him fill out. He's still VERY light for an NHL player. The Panthers have also made a commitment not to rush their prospects. He'd have to blow people away in camp to get more than nine games and even then, Florida might want to play it safe.
August 27, 2011
Votes: +0

Stuart McDonald said:

Slantman
... @Mike. There are a tonne of people who feel Filatov just needs a chance, but he was only getting 8 minutes of ice time in Columbus for a reason. The coaches there just didn't trust him. His issue is clearly not one of talent, but when two coaches won't give him more than fourth line minutes you have to start asking some serious questions. Sure he'll get top six minutes in Ottawa, but I'd like to know why he wasn't getting the same in Columbus. I was the biggest Filatov fan until Arniel gave up on him. There are some serious character issues here.
August 27, 2011
Votes: +0

Mike Wolfe said:

Death_from_above
Filatov will surprise I disagree with Filatov. He will either play on the 1st line with Spezza and Butler or probably the 2nd line with Alfredsson.
Either way at least one very good player that will push a him. Remeber Filatov previously got a hat trick in Columbus and only played 8 minutes in the game.
August 27, 2011
Votes: +0

Rob Myatt said:

robmyatt
Huberdeau I'm sure I've read in a few places that Huberdeau could also play the wing. If this happens would he have a better chance at playing more than 9 games?
August 27, 2011
Votes: +1
You must be logged in to post a comment. Please register if you do not have an account yet.

busy