Rank the prospects

Voynov
Tuebert
Loktionov
Bernier
Schenn
Moller
Hickey
Jones
Martinez
Zatkoff

I would list the long-term potential rankings like this:
1. Jonathan Bernier
2. Vyacheslav Voinov
3. Brayden Schenn
4. Thomas Hickey
5. Oscar Moller
6. Colten Teubert
7. Martin Jones
8. Andrei Loktionov
9. Kyle Clifford
10. Nicolas Deslauriers

I believe the top 5 are very close on the scale of potential. Same with slots 6-10 but clearly separated from the top 5.

Azevedo is rated too high, Czarnik is not even rated!

my opinion....

1. voynov
2. bernier
3. schenn
4. hickey
5. loktionov
6. moller
7. tuebert
8. martzinez
9. zatkoff
10. king

I agree with anthony about voynov...as far as I'm concerned....it's either him or hickey in that offensive/smaller defender of the future...and i have a hunch hickey wont pan out as planned and has a higher trade value....

I also like king a lot...he could shocka lot of people and make the team within the next few years

1) Hickey
2) Bernier
3) Schenn
4) Moller
5) Purcell
6) Voinov
7) Teubert
8) Loktionov
9) Zatkoff
10) Martinez

1. Hickey
2. Bernier
3. Voinov
4. Moller
5. Schenn
6. Teubert
7. Loktionov
8. Lewis
9. Purcell
10. Zatkoff

it's pretty encouraging when you look at other team's prospect lists. we have quite a bit of depth in our system.

Okay, first of all, in order to get the list down to TEN, I had to drop Purcell, who is one of my favorite prospects. I dropped him because he's older, and it's unclear really whether he's really going to make the leap, although I think he's going to. In terms of sheer potential, everyone else on this list, by virtue of being much younger, has not spent as many of his coupons as Teddy has.

My only other thoughts about the HF top twenty list are that I think Zatkoff will get a shot somewhere but probably not with the Kings (trade), Martinez should not be in the top twenty and Campbell probably should, I don't get their comment that King is "hanging by a thread" or whatever they said, and I don't know why Wudrick isn't in the top twenty.

Okay, here's my ten.

1. Hickey
1. Bernier
1. Schenn
1. Moller
1. Jones
6. Lewis
7. Teubert
7. Loktionov
9. Clifford
10. Voinov

Of all these, who will be the most productive for the Kings? Moller and Loktionov. I even find myself perversely wishing Moller would start in Manchester so they could skate on the same line together.

1. Thomas Hickey
2. Jonathan Bernier
3. Brayden Schenn
4. Oscar Moller
5. Colten Teubert
6. Andrei Loktionov
7. Vyacheslav Voinov
8. Trevor Lewis
9. Martin Jones
10. Kyle Clifford

1. Bernier
2. Schenn
3. Moller
4. Hickey
5. Teubert
6. Voinov
7. Loktinonov
8. Zatkoff
9. Purcell
10. Lewis

For me it's:

1: Hickey
2: Teubert
3: Voynov
4: Schenn
5: Moeller
6: Loktionov
7: Bernier
8: Lewis
9: Clifford
10: Zatkoff

I just don't see Bernier as being that high anymore. He hasn't shown he's NHL caliber yet. Zatkoff may even be a better long term option then Bernier, but out of respect to Bernier I'll rank him higher.

My top 10 is:

1. Thomas Hickey
2. Oscar Moller
3. Jonathan Bernier
4. Brayden Schenn
5. Trevor Lewis
6. Martin Jones
7. Andrei Loktionov
8. Colten Teubert
9. Vyacheslav Voynov
10. Alec Martinez

1.) Bernier
2.) Schenn
3.) Hickey
4.) Moller
5.) Voynov
6.) Jones
7.) Teubert
8.) Lewis
9.) Zatkoff
10.) Loktionov

No matter how you slice it the Kings are loaded with prospects. Thank you Easter bunny for allowing the scouts to find these eggs.

I just noticed that, of my list, only two (Bernier and Schenn) were no-brainer picks. The rest were either off-the-board (Hickey), selected with picks we traded for (Teubert, Lewis), free agents (Jones) or non-1st rounders (everyone else).

1. Bernier
2. Hickey
3. Schenn
4. Moller
5. Voynov
6. Lewis
7. Teubert
8. Loktionov
9. Jones
10. Zatkoff

No Matter how you look at the Kings farm system that they got strongly going from now into the future, it is going to be a bright future for the club because these are all great prospects.

The prospects I can't wait to see until they start playing with the Kings are- Bernier, Hickey, Schenn, and Teubert.

I would also like to see Jones (especially) and along with Zatkoff play with the Kings, but I don't see that happening because as long as Quick, Ersberg, and Bernier are around, that would only put Jones and Zatkoff as depth in system of Kings for awhile.

You guys don't understand how good Martin Jones is. And if he's our 10th guy on that list then that means we are in GREAT SHAPE!

I won't post a specific list since I haven't see all the prospects play except for Loktionov. And he's amazing. If he was in this years draft and with the Windsor Spitfires exposure he'd go top 10 first round for sure.

Riddle me this batman- how is it that a guy who PLAYED solid NHL D for multiple games is 16th? when these other stiffs haven't even got a sniff of the league- I'll take boring- steady stay at home D men who more often than not make the right play over these other guys any day of the week- last time I checked the NHL was a better league than QMJL-AHL-WHL-ECHL or college - It makes me wonder if anyone is actually watching the games- Can't wait for the season-

it's really hard to be exact in such a list since prospects are playing different positions, etc...

but here's mine for what it's worth...:

1. moller (he has made the most progress so far in deserving this ranking)
2. bernier
3. hickey
4. loktionov
5. voinov
6. jones
7. teubert
8. schenn
9. lewis
10. purcell

and while i'm at it, here's 11-20...:

11. azevedo
12. clifford
13. zatkoff
14. martinez
15. drewiske
16. mikus
17. deslauriers
18. parse
19. roe
20. king

dirtmover,

I think the reason Drewiske is lower than the other d-men in the list is due to expectations rather than actual NHL productivity. Drewiske is projected as a third pairing defenseman whereas all of the other d-men are possibly first or second pairing d-men. The ranking is somewhat meaningless since most of these kids have yet to play in the NHL, but it's fun to speculate (especially in the long month of August) who will do what when their time comes and it's nice to see that the Kings are loaded with quality young players. Just imagine what this team will look like when Doughty is 25 years old... good lord.

I would have thought Elkins would have been a little higher.

The best thing about this list is that there is not one player who you would say, "this guy could make it if he tried harder".

jet said:

The best thing about this list is that there is not one player who you would say, "this guy could make it if he tried harder".

Teddy Purcell.

I agree with you dirtmover, and Irishpat!
I think there is an excellent chance that Drewiske keeps Voinov and Hickey from coming up. His play on the penalty kill-end of season-was great, and his positioning was outstanding. He seemed very calm under pressure. If this guy is our "worst dman-#6/7", then we have an incredible d-core.

what about Brandon Kozun? He looked better then most and about the same as Acevado at the prospect training camp plus a great back hand goal..

1. moller
2. hickey
3. loktionov
4. voinov
5. bernier
6. teubert
7. schenn
8. lewis
9. purcell
10. Kozun

I'd have Drewiske and Azevedo ranked better than HF has them. Drew higher than Martinez at this point. Parse is interesting at 19, make or break time for him, but I'd have him ranked as an also-ran.

re Drewiske getting snubbed,

I'm in full agreement. Drewiske is in my top 10.

1. Moller
2. Bernier
3. Hickey
4. Schenn
5. Voynov
6. Loktionov
7. Teubert
8. Jones
9. Drewiske
10. Lewis

My next 10 would be:

11. Purcell
12. Clifford
13. Azevedo
14. Zatkoff
15. Roe
16. Deslauriers
17. Campbell
18. King
19. Martinez
20. Wudrick/Kozun (I can't decide)

Re Drewiske -

I don't think Drewiske will "keep" Hickey or Voynov from making it, but I think he will make it. Voynov is proabably too young and scrawny still. Hickey I think has an edge because of his age and experience (albeit at junior level). The thing about ranking Drewiske as a prospect is a question of ceiling. Also, a la Quincey, it's entirely possible to skip your team's prospect top 20 altogether. Drewiske, Moller, Purcell and maybe Hickey will cease to be prospects this year.

When you're ranking 18 year olds and 23 year olds in the same list, you can't really rank them by their skill level TODAY. The only way to make sense of such a list is to rank them in terms of their potential and where they are in terms of meeting their potential.

Azevedo is on the list because he has a very high ceiling and, although he is a very long shot to play significant minutes in the NHL, he has so far performed on pace to silence his critics. That is, he's doing better than expectations. Moller, Loktionov and Voynov are similarly ahead of schedule, though their odds were never as long as Azevedo's.

Lewis and Purcell are in the top ten for HF presumably because they learned their lessons and show it, at least by the end of the season.

The other short fast centers -- Kozun, Roe -- are too early in their careers to have been able to prove much, even to the degree Azevedo has.

It's not really a very meaningful list, right? It's a catalogue of potential, which is to say, a list of dreams. Easier to dream about how good Hickey, Moller, Loktionov, Bernier, Jones, Teubert et al might be, than to dream of Drewiske.

And I like Drewiske.

While on one hand I think Drewiske doesn't lack offensive skills, I don't think he cares to use them as he is so focused on defense and positioning. I think he can be a Ken Danyeko for a long long time.

As for Roe not having proven much, wasn't he considered for the Hobey Baker last year? I know the HF list says he is a dark horse for this year, but I remember reading articles talking about him being considered throughout last season. While he didn't win it, I consider it somewhat of an accomplishment to be considered. I guess I just think Roe has proven a little more than Kozun, but that could also be because I have a slightly higher regard for top college scorers than top junior scorers.

A bit confused here; does "Top Prospect" mean "most NHL ready" or "potential greatness"? I don't care which it is, just pick one and go with it, consistently. For example, on the one hand, Moller is the Kings 4th top prospect, but on the other hand, Moller is listed as the 10th overall prospect in the NHL, with no King listed above him. The author is clearly mixing definitions. And poor Drewiske (who could be a Sean O'Donnell-type player for years, never flashy, always solid) gets little respect on this list, yet is likely to make the Kings this year, certainly before most other D-men on the list above him, probably even before Hickey.

Quisp,
I don't see them rushing Voinov, or Hickey, into one of the six spots, only to move Drewiske out of one of those spots. Its counter-productive. If you have a player that is playing great hockey, then why risk breaking something thats fixed? So, i have to assume, based on your very knowledgable responses on this site, that you are referring to SOD, or Harrold, being scratched to make room for the youngsters to get some experience.
Hickey needs another year in Man. to prove himself. I'm just going to continue to say that Voinov was to the Russian Jr. team what Doughty was to the Canadian JR. team. Those of you that saw the tourney...please back me up on this. I'm betting he gets the call before Hickey

Just a few things that come to mind:

1. What's with all the love for Voinov? #1 prospect? To be honest, I have only even seen him play one game at the world juniors. Maybe you guys have season tickets to the Monarchs... otherwise I don't know what you're basing that ranking on.

2. The problem with ranking prospects is we tend to overvalue the new crop. I guess they're fresher in our minds. Not sure why people are ranking Clifford so high. I hadn't even heard the kids name before the draft.

3. I think most people undervalue Martin Jones. This kid came out of no where and should be Team Canada's starting goalie this year.

With that said, my top 10 is:
1. Hickey (without a doubt I might add)
2. Moller
3. Bernier
4. Schenn
5. Loktionov
6. Voinov
7. Jones
8. Teubert
9. Lewis
10. Zatkoff

Bring back the Shield -

Exactly. They (and probably we) mix those two definitions all the time. The real definition is, "who am I rationally or irrationally excited about."

Moller is listed 10th overall because it's a different pool of writers, as opposed to the one writer who did this evaluation, and also, this is the end of summer evaluation, which will not be updated for another year. The over-all list is done in the Spring. So there's a lot of inconsistency.

darko -

The safe bet is Hickey to the AHL. But I think he will make it hard on TM/DL. No, I don't think one of the vets will be displaced. Yes, I think it would be Drewiske. But I agree with you in general that there would be no harm and much to gain from keeping Hickey in Manchester for at least part of the season.

Re Harrold: yeah, I think he will be the 13/14th wheel on forward. The only way he plays d is on the power play if Hickey doesn't make it. He's eminently scratchable.

Canadian King -

Agreed re Voynov. He's played beyond expectations and he could maybe possibly make the team this year, but it's extremely unlikely given his physical immaturity.

Yes, re Jones. he frequently looks like the best of the bunch to me. Though we know all goalies are crazy.

These ranking are always tough to organize because they differ in position, styles and time(long term or short term expectation).

This list is based on my style or personality, not necessarily pure talent.

1. Moller has to be number one.
2. Hickey
3. Voinov- Two and three could be switched.
4. Bernier- Reminds me of JJ, tons of talent, but can he put it together.
5. Schenn- Haven't seen him play, going along with the group.
6. Jones
7. Zatcoff- Six and Seven interchangeable. This high because I feel this position is the most important and it's were someone is going to make a difference in the long run, no matter who it is.

Continued,

8. Drewiske- Over Teubert because he's playing now, and quite frankly, I like him.
9. Teubert- Has a lot of work to do, but can be a force in the years to come.
10. Lewis

Irish -- I do not think Purcell's issue is laziness, I think he honestly doesn't know where to go. He is quite without the puck in the attacking zone. If he is moving and gets below the red line without a pass, then come out and recycle. His man can lose him for short periods in the defensive zone. He seemed to improve on both ends as the season progressed. I believe the college players need an extra season or two to be able to play a complete nhl game. A player in juniors can get an additional 25 games a season, more with playoffs. In addition, the practices in juniors can be longer. Purcell and Boyle for that matter can be productive players if they can get another 150 games under their belt. The question then becomes, is there a benefit to the Kings to invest 150 games in such a player? For Boyle, the answer was no.

1. Juraj Mikus
2. Juraj Mikus
3. Juraj Mikus
4. Juraj Mikus
5. Juraj Mikus
6. Juraj Mikus
7. Juraj Mikus
8. Juraj Mikus
9. Mini Ditka (14 inch; not the full-grown Ditka)
10. Juraj Mikus

UGG - He is quite stationary without the puck in the attacking zone.

jet,

Yeah, I see your point. I think I take his lack of confidence and try to tag him as lazy, which probably isn't the case. It's funny because I've jumped on people for not being patient with Jack Johnson or Jonathan Bernier and here I am being contrary to those arguments with the Purcell kid. I do see his skill set and I hope he develops, but I'm skeptical and I'm sure it has to do with his lost puppy dog look when he skates with the Kings. Excellent rebuttal by the way.

1. Hickey (top 2 D Pair potential, has hit all the milestones to back up the assessment, makes the team this year esp cuz they need a PP guy)
2. Bernier (Francise goalie, dealt with adversity, and is following DL track to the T. IMO, they sacrificed Quick's development bc Labs sucked)
3. Teubert (Top 4 Dman, fits the toughness gap that this team needs. Is a year away but has size and mean streak to make it. Coaching can fill in the holes in his game)
4. Schenn (2nd line center means he never gets top billing on any prospect list, but work ethic makes him a "good bet" to make the NHL)
5. Voinov (Top 4 d man, offensive upside, should have been a first rounder were it not for the Russian thing)
6. Martin Jones (stud coming from obscurity, has time to develop)
7. Moller (has some success at NHL level but does not have the upside to be a true #1 winger, does he make a much stronger Kings team over the next two years?)
8. Loktionov (skill, success at OHL level and age make him another good Kings prospect)
9. Lewis (Can he crack the lineup and have success? Speed gets him on the ice, scoring keeps him on it)
10. Azevedo (has always proved critics wrong, huge upside)
11. Clifford (3rd/4th line potential means he is a safe bet)
12. Purcell (has cracked the big club already, tough to find a spot with Smyth and JWilliams but injuries mean opportunity)
13. Drewiske (Same as Purcell, solid fill in, little upside but always a good guy to have in the system)
14. Zatkoff (can never have too many solid goalies in the system)
15. Martinez (same as Drewiske, I thought he would get a call up last year)

Where is Mark Hartsook on this list?

Irish -- Maybe we could put some "hair grow" medicine at the top of his nose and give him a real mean looking uni-brow. And, teach him how to scowl.
Upon reflection, I think you are on to something with the confidence comment.

5. Voinov (Top 4 d man, offensive upside, should have been a first rounder were it not for the Russian thing)

what was the russian thing

blake -

I assume he's referring to the uncertainty surrounding russian players last year because of the relationship between the KHL and the NHL and/or whatever bodies govern that. It wasn't clear that Loktionov and Voynov would be able to play in North America if they were drafted, so lots of russians fell in the draft.

Voinov tops the list for me, based upon what I saw at the WJC's.
I think Radko Gudas would be in the top ten of this list. It's a shame he's not a King's prospect yet.