FlamesNation Prospect Profile Roundup: Full rankings and lists revealed

Another summer has come and gone, and with our recognition of the Flames’ prospects, so has the 2016 edition of the Top 20 Prospects. Out of the 35 players in the system eligible to win the Calder this season – although for the strong majority of them, that’s but an extremely far off pipe dream – nine of us parsed through the list, and came together to form our own top 20.

You may agree. You may disagree! We’ve seen the praise and the occasional yelling in the comments. But let’s give you guys a spot to really praise and/or yell at us, as we’ll reveal to you just how the rankings went down.

The top 20

We used a pretty simple system to compose nine separate lists into one. A first place vote got the prospect 20 points; a 20 place vote got him one. Because this is all very subjective, and the differences between prospects can be contentious – the differences between already established NHLers can be, too – there were a number of very, very close cases.

So if you thought someone was ranked a little too high or too low, there is a chance it wouldn’t have been the case if just one or two people had submitted lists slightly differently.

Rank Prospect Points
1 Matthew Tkachuk 180
2 Hunter Shinkaruk 160
3 Jon Gillies 157
4 Rasmus Andersson 149
5 Oliver Kylington 146
6 Andrew Mangiapane 138
7 Tyler Parsons 112
8 Adam Fox 108
9 Daniel Pribyl 105
10 Brandon Hickey 97
11 Mark Jankowski 96
12 Brett Kulak 79
13 Emile Poirier 65
14 Dillon Dube 62
15 Matthew Phillips 51
16 Brett Pollock 47
17 Mason McDonald 39
18 Morgan Klimchuk 29
19 Linus Lindstrom 25
20 Ryan Culkin 20

There’s some clear division here. For example, Tkachuk was unanimously ranked the top prospect in the Flames’ system, while Shinkaruk and Gillies were close, as were Andersson and Kylington. The gap doesn’t get noticeably bigger until after Mangiapane, so we were all pretty settled on who the Flames’ top six is, for the most part.

The closest, though? Jankowski missed being a part of the top 10 by one point.

And for the record, Garnet Hathaway came in 21st with 10 points to his name. After that, it was only stray votes here and there that saw a couple of other prospects get a bit of acknowledgment, depending on our views.

Individual lists

Now here’s the chance to yell at us as individuals! Have fun, please be gentle, and such.

Rank Ari Ryan Kent Mike Taylor Christian R Christian T Byron Beloch
1 Tkachuk Tkachuk Tkachuk Tkachuk Tkachuk Tkachuk Tkachuk Tkachuk Tkachuk
2 Shinkaruk Gillies Andersson Andersson Shinkaruk Shinkaruk Shinkaruk Shinkaruk Andersson
3 Kylington Kylington Gillies Gillies Kylington Gillies Gillies Mangiapane Mangiapane
4 Gillies Shinkaruk Shinkaruk Shinkaruk Gillies Kylington Kylington Andersson Pribyl
5 Andersson Mangiapane Mangiapane Kylington Andersson Andersson Andersson Gillies Gillies
6 Mangiapane Hickey Hickey Mangiapane Mangiapane Parsons Pribyl Kylington Kylington
7 Fox Parsons Fox Fox Pribyl Fox Parsons Pribyl Shinkaruk
8 Hickey Jankowski Jankowski Parsons Hickey Mangiapane Fox Jankowski Jankowski
9 Parsons Pollock Kylington Jankowski Kulak Hickey Mangiapane Parsons Parsons
10 Pribyl Andersson Pribyl Hickey Fox Kulak Kulak Kulak Fox
11 Kulak Poirier Parsons Kulak Parsons Pribyl Dube Hickey Culkin
12 Jankowski Fox Kulak Pribyl Jankowski Poirier Phillips Poirier Dube
13 Dube Klimchuk Poirier Poirier Poirier Jankowski Hickey Fox Phillips
14 Poirier Dube McDonald Phillips Pollock McDonald Pollock Dube McDonald
15 Phillips Phillips Phillips Dube Dube Pollock Jankowski Phillips Lindstrom
16 Lindstrom Kulak Dube Lindstrom McDonald Klimchuk McDonald Culkin Pollock
17 Klimchuk Pribyl Lindstrom McDonald Klimchuk Dube Poirier Klimchuk Gilmour
18 Pollock Tuulola Hathaway Klimchuk Hathaway Phillips Hathaway Pollock Falkovsky
19 McDonald Lindstrom Pollock Pollock Morrison Lindstrom Culkin McDonald Poirier
20 Tuulola Culkin Klimchuk Culkin Ollas Mattsson Culkin Tuulola Lindstrom Hathaway

This is where I note that when we were submitting our lists, the Flames still held Gilmour’s rights.

I can’t speak for everyone else, but I do know this list was pretty difficult for me, with a lot of what ended up being, I’d say, arbitrary swapping. Am I ranking someone on his NHL readiness? Well, I guess I was with Shinkaruk. Am I ranking on potential? I think I was for most of the list, otherwise.

Was I constantly flipping who I was ranking? Yup! I knew Tkachuk was my number one. I knew who I wanted two-five, but wasn’t sure in what order. I knew Mangiapane was my sixth, I knew Fox was my seventh, I knew who I wanted up until about 12 but wasn’t sure of my order for those players. Eventually you just… pick something and go with it.

That’s just me, though. Maybe I’m not a good list-maker.

Share your thoughts in the comments!

  • First Name Unidentified

    Kent- I’m curious as to why Kylington ranks so low on your list? Is it readiness? Is it ceiling? I’d say Fox and Hickey and most certainly Jank are all about couple years away in terms of readiness. So do you not consider his ceiling higher than Jank or Fox?

    Just curious

    • Kylington is still very raw. He has a nice collection of skills, but up until now his main accomplishment is…playing as a teen in the pros. That’s not nothing, but I need to see more before I get excited.

      Kylington comes advertised as an offensive defender, but he has never really scored much as a pro. And both scouts and coaches note his defensive game needs work.

      I like him as a prospect, but I will start to really like him when we can start talking about his results and not just his raw abilities.

      • piscera.infada

        If Kylington had played in the CHL this past season and put up ~0.9 ppg (Andersson’s numbers), where would you have him ranked?

        I’m not necessarily arguing your ranking, but he’s played in much, much more difficult circumstances (as a teenager, against men–which you correctly state) than Andersson. If Andersson comes out next year and puts up ~0.25 ppg (Kylington numbers) in his first year pro, does he suddenly become a worse-rated prospect?

        Again, I’m not arguing, and I really like both players (as I was advocating both of them throughout the season prior to their draft). I just don’t see how a defenseman playing against teenagers can be ranked ahead of a defenseman playing against men (at 7 months younger than the former), simply because “counting stats”. If it’s not because of “raw skills” and it’s not because of competition, is it really just his perceived defensive weaknesses versus what I can only assume is Andersson’s perceived lack of defensive weaknesses?

      • The Last Big Bear

        I’m sure you’re aware of the 51% rule, which for the benefit of your other readers is as follows:

        The majority of players (i.e. More than 51%) who post 0.09 ppg or more in Swedish elite hockey before age 18 have gone on to successful NHL careers (200+ games).

        Any hard-stats based metric with a 50+% predictive value of NHL success is about as solid as you can get.

        Kylington SMASHED that mark, with a 0.28 ppg.

        So from a pretty solid analytics basis, the worst you can say about Kylington is that he will probably be a successful NHL player.

        There’s only 2 other players on this list I can say that about.

  • Bring Back Brathwaite

    So, a pretty consistent top 6 and not a ton of variance in the new guys like Parsons, Dube, and Fox.

    Pribyl goes as high as 4 and as low as 17, and Hickey gets as high as six (twice), as low as not ranked.

    Most of the variance comes from Beloch’s list, who picked John “not a prospect” Gilmour at 17. Still a decent list though, I like the Falkovsky pick at 18.

    Jankowski actually varies a lot less than I thought he would

  • freethe flames

    When I look at prospects I am most concerned with whom might impact the team this year. Guys who are going to college, most likely back to the CHL or signed and playing in Europe are of little interest to me at this point and I become more focused on the the guys we are likely to see. So I have a different list: Tkachuk, Pribyl, Shinkaruk, Spoon, and Kulak are in my top tier of guys who may make an impact this season. My second tier are Hathaway, Jankowski, Poirier and Gillies. Then I have Andersson, Kylington, and Mangipane. Other guys might have higher ceilings but are likely two or three seasons away.

    I am also very interested to see what kind of years Ollas Mattsson(I have been impressed with him at the last two development camps)has and Tuulola (how well will he adjust to NA hockey); these are my two sleepers for this organization for next year.

    • Jumping Jack Flash

      I agree that Ollas Mattson and Tuolo are 2 players to watch. Both have big thick frames and likely need to lean out to make the jump but I have been impressed with their movement and Hockey IQ.

  • cberg

    It would be a pretty tough job to figure out, especially when the ground rules are different for each person.

    I would roughly equate it to the draft, as the same sort of issues come to the fore and there is NOT really a full consensus order of picks.

    There are some big swings, like Fox, with 4 picking him #7 but the lowest being #13, and Jankowski with 4 picking him #8 but the lowest #15.

  • cberg

    Perhaps it would be interesting to re-list the guys on 2 different criteria. Let’s try this and see what the response is:

    1. Potential to make the Flames and be a Regular starter for the team by, say Christmas 2017 (Top 10):

    Shinkaruk, Kulak, Wotherspoon, Jankowski, Hathaway, Tkachuck, Pribyl, Poirier, Gillies, Kylington

    2. Ultimate Top-End Potential position, AND assuming they make it to the NHL as a Regular (Top 20):

    1LW-Tkachuk
    1C-
    1RW-Shinkaruk, Tuulola
    2LW-Mangiapanne, Dube
    2C-Jankowski
    2RW-Ferland, Pribyl, Poirier
    3LW-Klimchuk
    3C-
    3RW-
    4LW-
    4C-
    4RW-Hathaway
    1/2D-Kylington, Andersson, Fox
    3/4D-Kulak, Hickey
    5/6D-Wotherspoon, Ollas-Matsson
    sG-Parsons, Gillies
    bupG-

  • Jumping Jack Flash

    Re-posted

    Here is another example of the polarizing effect of Mark Jankowski. I am curious to know why Jankowski has dropped out of the Top 5. He had a strong development camp but an average scrimmage which is hardly enough to drop him out of the top 5 but this list drops him out of the top 10 which defies reason.

    I saw an interesting approach from a blogger on Leaf Nation which I will steal for the purpose of discussion. The ranking of prospects is based on levels of a pyramid. This exercise helps us avoid the minutiae of which players are better and why.

    So here goes….

    Level 1 – Tkachuck

    Level 2 – Gillies, Jankowski, Rasmussen, Mangiapane

    Level 3 – Kyllington, Shinkaruk, Parsons, Dube, Hickey, Fox, Pourier, Prybil

    Level 4 – MacDonald, Kulak, Culkin, Lidstrom, Tuolo

    Level 5 – Klimchuk, Pollock , Phillip

    The purpose of this exercise is not to debate the players(which could be done exhaustively)rather which player belongs on which level with similarly rated prospects. Most of the debate may Center around Level 2 and Level 3 inter changeability.

    • freethe flames

      I watched the link you posted and it makes some sense. My approach as posted earlier is the to rank the guys who I think will impact the team by order of appearance(making the big team/call ups) not by ceilings which I assume yours is. Tkachuk likely makes the team out of camp for a 9 game addition. Shinkaruk has a very good chance of another forward position out of camp as well, I honestly believe one of Spoon or Kulak makes it out of camp as number 6 unless the Flames make a move before the season starts.

      • Jumping Jack Flash

        Yes, this is an a interesting way of looking at the prospects and using this criteria it would change my list. I agree that Tkachuk and Shinkaruk are inter twined. I think Tkachuk will make a min of 9 games, if he is sent back to Junior Shink will move up the ranks.

        I am one of the few that feel there is a back doors deal with Nack (assuming the team does not bring back Russell) which will take Spoon or Kulack out of a roster spot.

        • Baalzamon

          I am one of the few that feel there is a back doors deal with Nack (assuming the team does not bring back Russell) which will take Spoon or Kulack out of a roster spot.

          Not necessarily. The Flames have shown before that they don’t have a problem carrying 8 defensemen. Nak would make eight, but that’s including Smid, who’s going on LTIR. So replace him with Woz. Then you have Wideman, Jokipakka, Nakladal, Wotherspoon(or Kulak), and Engelland rotating in and out of the lineup. I’ll admit it doesn’t seem likely, but it’s hardly unprecedented.

          • Jumping Jack Flash

            With Tree I would not rule anything out. I hope Calgary does not become one of those teams that entices player to come from overseas only to burry them in the organization without allowing them to realize their potential. The real test will be with Prybil. I am not sure they would sign him after his injury just to play in the minors.

  • ChinookArchYYC

    My list for the top 5 are guys with potential of being difference-makers. While I like Shinkaruk he’s 5th for on that list, and only gets to 3rd when if the list is of the NHL locks for 100+ games.

    Top 5 Differnce-maker Prospects:

    Tkachuk

    Gilles

    Kylington

    Anderson

    Shinkaruk

    I’ve only read about Maggiapane, otherwise he might move into 3rd.

  • Just.Visiting

    I think that it would be very interesting to do an update on the top 20 after either the Prospects Tournament or the main camp.

    Perhaps do it in two articles-an update on how you rank 11-20 and an update on the top 10.

    There might be some movement, there might be some additions and deletions and there might be some validation.

    I think it would put a nice bow on things.

    Anyone who moves into the top 20 from outside can get their own article as well.

    Just an idea.

    • Ari Yanover

      I love this idea. I remember last year I had Andersson a bit lower and after training camp was like, “What the hell was I thinking??”

      I think we’ll re-explore this. Thank you!

  • Just.Visiting

    Thanks for the quick feedback, Ari!

    I think that there will be a lot of interest in seeing a real time update.

    Gave it my first ever ranking on another post since signing up…LOL