Hockey's Future Islanders Top 20 Prospects, Spring Edition
1 De Haan
2 Joensuu
3 Hamonic
4 Petrov
5 MacDonald
6 Schremp
7 T. Smith
8 Gregoire
9 Rakhshani
10 Ness
11 Koskinen
12 Nilsson
13 Trivino
14 Cizikas
15 DiBenedetto
16 Day
17 Donovan
18 Poulin
19 Kohn
20 Kessel
Some surprising things here - I didn't think both Schremp and MacDonald still qualify as prospects. Joensuu jumps up a couple of spots to 2nd, which is deserved after how he's played the second half of the year. Smith at 7 is a head scratcher. He hasn't played well this year and is really pushing the age limit to be called a prospect. How is he in the top 20 and Matt Martin, Anders Lee or David Ullstrom not? Donovan should be higher. I might to an airing of grievances fan post later...
almost 2 years ago
David Hanssen
11 comments
0 recs |
Comments
Huh, yeah I have the same questions you do. Fun to have a new list to toss about, though.
I might to an airing of grievances fan post later…

I’ll pull the pole out of storage…
.
Lighthouse Hockey: What's wrong with lotteries? I've been in lots of lotteries.
email the writer... oh wait
Written by: Omair Taher
try clicking on the email link in the article, non-existent, and is that a guy’s or girl’s name anyway?
i’m always less trusting of a person’s opinion when i can’t make a gender specific bias about them out of complete prejudice ;-P
NY Islanders Hockey: Where MRI's are addictive
i’m always less trusting of a person’s opinion when i can’t make a gender specific bias about them out of complete prejudice ;-P
Mine should really be “Dominique” with a “que,” by the way.
Lighthouse Hockey: What's wrong with lotteries? I've been in lots of lotteries.
This list seems pretty accurate to me, which is kind of depressing. Joensuu is probably never going to amount to anything. Schremp and MacD probably qualify as prospects based just on games played.
My thing with Schremp and MacDonald is with the amount of NHL games played they shouldn’t be on the list. It’s nothing against them, they’ve had great seasons before their respective injuries.
We're doomed. Doomed!
by David Hanssen on Mar 16, 2010 10:37 AM EDT up reply actions
So of the “top six” (though like Hans I find the inclusion of Schremp and Mac odd), four had serious or season-ending injuries and one is KHL-confined.
But I never know how to balance out rankings like this. Simply closest to NHL? Then Schremp and Mac should be 1-2, if they’re on it. Highest ceiling? Then several of those guys should go up (Donovan?) and several should go down. The amount of guys from the last two drafts gives me hope; stars come when they come, but add one more summer of Jankowski magic and we should have a healthy pipeline of quality players. Which will be a nice upgrade over the, “Well we have four marginal prospects in Bridgeport” situation..
Lighthouse Hockey: What's wrong with lotteries? I've been in lots of lotteries.
I think it’s a combination of ceiling and likelihood of reaching that ceiling. That appears to be the upshot of the number/letter grades, in any event.
So Donovan gets pwn3d because he is too small to play in the NHL and maintain that level of effectiveness, in other words.
But then why is Donovan punished and Ness isn’t? Donovan had a better season statistically than Ness in the WCHA and was chosen over Ness on the WJC squad. I think several of the selections, like this one and Trivino over Martin, Lee or Ullstrom, are reputation over actual performance.
We're doomed. Doomed!
by David Hanssen on Mar 16, 2010 12:19 PM EDT up reply actions






























