Top 25 Under 25 - Final Rankings
The Top 25 Under 25 is done for the third time, and I hope it's been an encouraging series. There is a lot of talent in this organization, which means the future is bright. The thing is, I've got each of my top sixteen guys as quite likely to have a reasonable NHL career (say, at least 160 GP). If they all make it, that'll be incredible. More likely, I'm overvaluing a guy here, someone will lose a career to injury there, that kind of thing. After the jump, we'll look at the combined table.
Below is a chart showing the each writer's individual ratings. I've included all 42 players here because it gives some flavour to each person's list - flavour like Tyler Bunz, Philippe Cornet or Robby Dee in the Top 25. Anyroad, the columns in the chart are sortable; simply click on the header row and you're ready to go. If you want to look at the best list, just skip to the far right (kidding... but not really).
| Overall | Player | Ben Rank | Bruce Rank | Derek Rank | Jon Rank | Scott Rank |
| 1 | Taylor Hall | 1 | 1 | 1-T | 1 | 1 |
| 2 | Sam Gagner | 3 | 4 | 1-T | 3 | 2 |
| 3 | Jordan Eberle | 2 | 2 | 5-T | 2 | 3 |
| 4 | Magnus Paajarvi | 4 | 3 | 3 | 4 | 4 |
| 5 | Ladislav Smid | 8 | 9 | 8 | 5 | 6 |
| 6 | Linus Omark |
10 | 10 | 4 | 10 | 5 |
| 7 | Tyler Pitlick |
6 | 12 | 7 | 8 | 10 |
| 8 | Martin Marincin |
16 | 5 | 11 | 6 | 12 |
| 9 | Anton Lander |
12 | 8 | 9 | 14 | 8 |
| 10 | Theo Peckham |
9 | 7 | 10 | 11 | 15 |
| 11 | Curtis Hamilton |
11 | 11 | 12 | 7 | 13 |
| 12 | Jeff Petry | 15 | 13 | 5-T | 9 | 14 |
| 13 | Devan Dubnyk |
5 | 6 | 18 | 12 | 18 |
| 14 | Alex Plante | 13 | 14 | 14 | 15 | 9 |
| 15 | Ryan Martindale |
7 | 15 | 23 | 17 | 11 |
| 16 | Andrew Cogliano |
18 | 16 | 21 | 13 | 7 |
| 17 | Teemu Hartikainen |
17 | 18 | 13 | 19 | 16 |
| 18 | Gilbert Brule |
14 | 17 | 22 | 18 | 17 |
| 19 | Olivier Roy |
19 | 19 | 17 | 23 | 19 |
| 20 | Liam Reddox |
20 | 21 | 15 | 20 | 25 |
| 21 | Brandon Davidson |
23 | 23 | 19 | 16 | 21 |
| 22 | Taylor Chorney |
21 | 22 | 24 | 26 | 23 |
| 23 | Chris Vande Velde |
25 | 24 | 20 | 28 | 20 |
| 24 | Johan Motin |
24 | 26 | 16 | 25 | 29 |
| 25 | Jérémie Blain |
26 | 27 | 30 | 21 | 22 |
| 26 | Toni Rajala |
30 | 28 | 29 | 22 | 27 |
| 27 | Ryan O'Marra | 22 | 25 | 36 | 27 | 30 |
| 28 | Tyler Bunz | 33 | 20 | 33 | 24 | 34 |
| 29 | Philippe Cornet |
27 | 35 | 28 | 31 | 24 |
| 30 | Milan Kytnar | 31 | 32 | 27 | 29 | 26 |
| 31 | Kyle Bigos |
32 | 34 | 26 | 32 | 28 |
| 32 | Robby Dee | 36 | 31 | 25 | 30 | 32 |
| 33 | Drew Czerwonka |
35 | 30 | 31 | 33 | 35 |
| 34 | Kellen Jones |
28 | 33 | 34 | 34 | 36 |
| 35 | Kristians Pelss |
37 | 29 | 35 | 35 | 39 |
| 36 | Troy Hesketh |
41 | 38 | 32 | 39 | 31 |
| 37 | Bryan Pitton |
29 | 37 | 41 | 40 | 38 |
| 38 | Greg Stewart |
34 | 36 | 40 | 36 | 41 |
| 39 | Cameron Abney |
38 | 39 | 39 | 41 | 37 |
| 40 | Alexander Bumagin |
42 | 41 | 37 | 42 | 33 |
| 41 | Matt Marquardt |
39 | 42 | 38 | 38 | 40 |
| 42 | Jordan Bendfeld |
40 | 40 | 42 | 37 | 42 |
The guys with the biggest range of responses are Martindale (7 to 23), Cogliano (7 to 21), O'Marra (22 to 36), Bunz (20 to 34), Motin (16 to 29), Dubnyk (5 to 18), Pitton (29 to 41), Marincin (5 to 16), Cornet (24 to 35) and Dee (25 to 36).The most similar lists belong to Jonathan and Bruce, the most divergent to Derek and Bruce.
Where did we go wrong (you know, other than Derek using ties and not having Hall alone in first)? Give us your critiques in the comments!
33 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
You can kepp making fun as long as you keep posting stuff like this:
Derek has been on Petry’s bandwagon all along, and deserves some credit for seeing what the rest of us didn’t. A year ago, he had Petry fourth, five spots higher than anyone else, and in the summer he had Petry seventh, four spots higher than anyone else. Now he has Petry in a tie (that’s the kind of indecision that could make him Steve Tambellini’s right-hand man!) for fifth, once again at least four spots higher than the rest of us.
Editor of The Copper & Blue, and leader of The Cult Of Hartikainen.
Deal!
Abney, Abney, oh why TF did we have to pick Abney?
by Scott Reynolds on Feb 1, 2011 5:33 PM MST up reply actions
The funny part about this whole thing is that in my personal “defense always” mode, I really have a hard time not putting Petry #1.
Editor of The Copper & Blue, and leader of The Cult Of Hartikainen.
Here's a thought
Anyone ever seen Derek and Tambo in the same room?
I can’t get the sortable function to work. That’s all Derek and his dithering ties, isn’t it?
Writer for The Cult of Hockey, The Copper & Blue, and primary shareholder of Zorg Industries
"Never be ashamed of who you are" -- Jean-Baptiste Emanuel Zorg
Negative. That would be operator error by your author.
Editor of The Copper & Blue, and leader of The Cult Of Hartikainen.
Omark’s proven himself to be a top 10 scorer in the 2nd, 3rd, and 4th best leagues in the world.
Editor of The Copper & Blue, and leader of The Cult Of Hartikainen.
by Derek Zona on Feb 1, 2011 7:24 PM MST up reply actions 1 recs
fine, but eberle did great in Whl, the 20 or so games he played in Ahl and now in Nhl.
He had a better under 20 career than Omark, he did equally good at the Ahl level and in the limted nhl viewing looked better than Omark too.
Furthermore, he played well on all the international events he was a part of. he twice dominated the WJC, small sample sizes agreed, but he did it 2 years in a row.
While Omark has done very well for himself in SEL and KHL, but Eberle made the Nhl as a 4 year younger age than Omark and has had superior results to show for it
Rebuild is a convenient excuse for GMs who dont wish to do their jobs
Derek’s list is based on making everybody angry.
Manager at Vancouver Whitecaps and western Canadian soccer website Eighty Six Forever and infrequently-posting flunky at Edmonton Oilers blog The Copper & Blue.
by Benjamin Massey on Feb 2, 2011 12:27 PM MST up reply actions
Derek’s blogging career is based on making everybody angry. ;)
SNN Sports - A theoretical Oilers blog (i.e. theoretically, I write stuff there). Link now 100% less broken.
Well, you’re all underrating Davidson, Blain and Rajala.
And I overrated a couple of junior players, in retrospect.
Finally, aside from Scott we all underated Cogliano.
A posse ad esse.
The Copper & Blue|OilersNation|Hockey or Die!
Twitter: @JonathanWillis
Mail: jonathan.willis@live.ca
I would rate Cogliano about 10 spots higher as a winger.
Editor of The Copper & Blue, and leader of The Cult Of Hartikainen.
Blain and Davidson? They are late round picks playing decent hockey in their post-draft seasons.
Editor of The Copper & Blue, and leader of The Cult Of Hartikainen.
I’d have Hamilton, Marincin and Petry all higher. They’re going to play. Hamilton because this team doesn’t have a two-way player with size (other than Penner, who may or may not be part of this organization going forward), so he fills a need, and Marincin and Petry because this team is weak on defence, and will find a home pretty quick for a couple of guys with a multiplicity of skills. In this organization, bet on the guys that are talented and versatile because they’re in short supply on the big club, and may get fast-tracked.
Cogliano and Brule sitting where they are might be overreactions out of sheer frustration. I’d be inclined to be patient with one of them; I don’t think having two players with an identity crisis on the same line for much of the season helped matters. But we shall see. I’d bet on at least one of them going on to having a long, productive career somewhere. Maybe not in Edmonton.
Pitlick and Lander sit a little higher than I’d like. They have both done reasonably well since being drafted. But as much as we like the idea of Lander (centre that’s defensively responsible and can chip in offensively!) and Pitlick (forward with size, skating ability and two-way play!), they’re on track, but not significantly ahead of it. When you look at what players like Hamilton and Marincin have accomplished since being drafted… they’ve just tracked better than the other two. I think they should be in the same group as a guy like Martindale; performing well enough that an NHL career looks like a reasonable bet, but nothing so far that suggests they’re a sure-thing.
Also, I think at least eight of these players will end up playing a bigger role on a team than Ladislav Smid. (I guarantee that he’ll be a defense first, second pairing guy thata plays with an offensive minded #3 with some flaws in his game)Would not have him quite that high.
Other than that
Interesting thoughts. I take it you’d have Marincin and Petry at about fifth and sixth with Hamilton somewhere in the top ten? Seems similar to Jonathan’s list, actually. I agree with you about one of Cogliano and Brule having a solid career too (and I’m sure you can guess which one!).
Abney, Abney, oh why TF did we have to pick Abney?
by Scott Reynolds on Feb 1, 2011 7:44 PM MST up reply actions
My top ten would be 1) Hall, 2) Eberle, 3) Gagner, 4) Paajarvi, 5) Marincin, 6) Omark, 7) Petry, 8) Hamilton, 9) Dubnyk, 10) Peckham. (Smid is 11.) 2-4 are extremely fluid, though, as are 5-8. Dubnyk, Peckham and Smid are sort of par on my list; if I put a player above them, it’s because I’m convinced (short of injury or some other derailment) that they will play a bigger role in the NHL long-term than a reasonably competent goaltender or defenseman. Guys in the 12-17 spot would include Martindale (who is scoring quite well, but he’s not the highest scoring player on his line), Pitlick (who looks promising, but isn’t blowing the competition out of the water enough to make me think he’s someone I’d feel safe betting on), Plante (who seems capable, but his game seems to go through cycles, and seems to be lagging behind a few others on the depth chart), and Lander (who I think is going to play, but I don’t know if he’s going to be more than a fourth line centre), and Brule and Cogliano, who have shown that they can play in the NHL, but not consistently enough to be full-time players in defined roles yet. What’s remarkable is that I can reach 17 on this list, and still have a guy who I think still has a reasonable chance to play a role. They’re not all going to be here, but considering that this team only has five veterans on its current roster that you could have as part of the long-term solution (Penner, Hemsky, Horcoff, Gilbert, Whitney), I don’t think it’s inconceivable that of the 17 players I mentioned, 10 of them will be part of this team going forward, and one or two of them might go on to find success in another organization (I think Cogliano will get dealt at the deadline or draft).
by David Supina on Feb 2, 2011 12:30 PM MST up reply actions
Eberle, Petry, and Dubnyk are too low.
Smid, Marincin, and Cogliano are too high.
Manager at Vancouver Whitecaps and western Canadian soccer website Eighty Six Forever and infrequently-posting flunky at Edmonton Oilers blog The Copper & Blue.
I’m not happy with my Petry and Reddox ratings. Stuff has changed since we took the poll, and those two guys have made a real good impression with the big club.
Writer for The Cult of Hockey, The Copper & Blue, and primary shareholder of Zorg Industries
"Never be ashamed of who you are" -- Jean-Baptiste Emanuel Zorg
I just want to say thanks to all the authors for another excellent installment of a great series. Keep it up!
by Yeti# on Feb 1, 2011 7:40 PM MST reply actions 2 recs
In terms of the ratings, I don’t really get the Love for Lander. It seems that he has imposed himself on this list through force of character alone. Almost like a glorified Jason Strudwick. OK, that’s harsh, but I really don’t see anything compelling enough to have him at 9. Compare the Love for Lander with the Hate for Hartikaenen, who is stranded down at 17, yet I think brings more to the table aside from those abstract qualities of ‘compelling leadership’.
Lander is one of the hardest people to rank. I said in the comments of Scott’s writeup:
I never have any idea where to rank this kid. He was drafted far too high for a defense-only player, but all of his intangibles point towards him being an exceptional defense-only player.
Where do you put that?
Editor of The Copper & Blue, and leader of The Cult Of Hartikainen.
I think any sort of NHL player in the second round, short of an enforcer, is a reasonable pick in the second round. I looked at the 2003 draft, one of the deepest in recent memory at the second round. Know how many players in the second round from that draft went on to play at least 100 games? 14. 9 never got a sniff, and another six players played a number of games you can count on one hand. If you go back to 2002, only 6 players of the 33 drafted have played over a hundred games. Even if I’m nice, and move the marker back to fifty games, there’s still only 12 of them. Interestingly, the Oilers got two of the players over a hundred games (Stoll and Greene), and one player that passed fifty (Deslauriers), which is a wildly successful second round, for a year that will be remembered as The Year of the Obscure First Round Euro. I digress. Point is, getting any NHL player in the second round is a success.
by David Supina on Feb 2, 2011 12:39 PM MST up reply actions
Can you please explain your criteria for your rankings? Best player. Highest ceiling. Most valuable to the franchise etc.
My simple metric would be the answer to this question "Who would I value more in a trade (without taking contract into consideration).
1- Hall
2- Eberle
3- MPS
4- Gagner
5- Marincin
6- Smid
7- Omark
8- Peckham
9- Petry
10- Hamilton
I do pretty much exactly that; I always ask, "if these two players were both RFA’s today (no arb. rights and q.o. has been rejected), and were traded for one another, which side of the trade would I want to be on." Of course, I use different things to help in making those decisions. Some of the most important things I consider are statistical performance, opinion of scouting community (priority if I haven’t seen the player much) / personal viewing (priority if I’ve seen the player a lot), recent performance, long-term performance, age, success at a high level (NHL > AHL / Europe > NCAA > CHL > Other). That said, I know that each one of us makes decisions a little bit differently.
Abney, Abney, oh why TF did we have to pick Abney?
by Scott Reynolds on Feb 1, 2011 11:54 PM MST up reply actions
I think the biggest individual fuck ups on the list are Dubnyk at 18 (twice?), Marincin at 16, and everyone who had Petry at 13+. I think Peckham may be better Dman right now than Smid, but Smid still probably has a higher upside (although the window for advancement seems to get less likely as he gets older and produces basically the same results).
http://hockeyzen.com
I agree on Petry, and would likely have him higher if given a do-over. With Dubnyk, I’m curious as to where you’d put him. If I had to do it all again, I’d still just move him up one spot (past Brule).
Abney, Abney, oh why TF did we have to pick Abney?
by Scott Reynolds on Feb 1, 2011 11:57 PM MST up reply actions
Any ranking is a guess, and those into the stats can make some very informed guesses based on past performance of similar players coming into the NHL who made a career of some sort.
Making a ranking based on – avid hockey fan – experience observing – opinion of what a team needs to be a winner:
1-Hall
2-Gagner (because of NHL experience, although I would trade him because of his speed and his best projections aren’t what I would want as a 1 or 2 centre – too small for 3-4)
3-Petry (full skill set D with speed and size, hen’s teeth)
4-Pitlick (big C with a 2 way game are again hen’s teeth, great CHL season)
5-Eberle (amazing hockey smarts that are already effective in the NHL, and slippery – doesn’t take unnecessary hits which is key for a small guy that plays the boards)
6-Peckham (big, tough, doing it well already)
7-Marincin (killing it CHL, has size, grit, skill – golden)
8-Pajaarvi (blazing speed, size, effort, finish has always been his drawback as top 6)
9-Hartikainen (big player doing well both ways, a spark-plug and leader in OK)
10-Dubnyk (doing it well – stable and good SP in the NHL, our goalie unless a miracle happens)
11-Cogliano- wants to be a top 6 centre without the requisite skill, doesn’t want wing. Is gritty and game
12-Smid- because of injuries but has potential
13-Omark- tiny guys need to prove they have sustain at a high enough level to justify no physical presence – like St Louis
14-Lander- maybe should be up there – to me not clear he translates well to the NHL because of skating and lack of grit for a projected 3-4 centre.
15-Hamilton – not gritty enough for my team on 3-4, not a 1-2 winger, 2 broken collar bones, but a good player.
16-Martindale – previous effort issues, likely to continue through his career
17- Brule – has the skill set and pedigree, somethings wrong, great human
With regards to Lander, define grit? I agree that its a bit of a mystery how well he’ll translate to the NHL and I can see him getting killed in his first season or 2, at least if they rush him (i.e. Tambo, please play him at least half a season in OKC first), but to me Lander comes across as very gritty – my definition of grit being determination to win and Leadership. From what I hear he’s not afraid to go into the dirty areas and battle, he might not be physical in terms of hits and fights but he’s definitely gritty in my book.
By grit I mean players that have some game, play physically and can fight well. It is the type of deterrent that the team lacks. MacIntyre is nuclear deterrent, can’t be used much. Stortini and Jacques don’t play the role well. There are a lot of nice guys on the Oilers, unfortunately too many, the team is soft and gets taken advantage of because of it.
Some roster spots need to be reserved for players who opponents don’t like to play against and take a physical toll, which is especially important during the playoffs. It’s hard to disrupt a good team’s game plan and systems, and physicality is a part of it, wearing good players down, taking them out of plays. The Oilers don’t do this well now, and the results speak for themselves.
I think Lander is a very good prospect, but on a team with so many centres and possibly 3 top centre spots taken if the plan is for Hall to transition there, Lander isn’t the type of player I would have at 4C.
If someone above him gets moved, or he can pass over Cogliano, Pitlick ( I hope they drafted him to be a centre and not another RW) I might rank him higher in terms of value to the team. I like Lander’s type of game, but at some point the imbalance in the roster needs to be addressed for long term success.
Detroit often gets sighted as an example of a team that does well without gritty players, but I don’t agree. They have tough players, but don’t need to mix it up all the time because they have already set the tone. Datsyuk showed this year he is no wilting flower. For another post regarding the need for effective size I found the average for Wings and Oiler forwards – Detroit averages out at 211, Oilers 203. If you take Mac out who never plays, and the Wings biggest forward (Bertuzzi, who does play) it worse at Wings 210 and Oilers 199.
If the Wings aren’t seen as a tough team. clearly Edmonton has got to do things differently than they are. Role players cost less and are vital. The cap dictates that you can’t ice 4 talented lines or 6 great defensemen (at least not for long), maybe not even 3 skill lines if you have a high end top 6.

by 

























