Personally don't think Eklund is a "franchise" player, to me that category is reserved for guys like Matthews, Kucherov, Point, McDavid, Draisaitl, etc. You might have a different definition of franchise than me, though. That being said I think he could be a good 1st line player if he pans out.

Agree and his tier 2 has a lot of b prospects in it

See above comments

A lot of over rating here

Only McDavid and Mathews of those would be listed as 'Tier 1' until they panned out anyway though.

Eklund to many scouts is a difference maker and a future all star. I agree with you guys that he is closer to a high lever 2nd tier guy. did anyone read my description?

this is why i hate the 1st tier. i feel tier 1 is top line top D pair all star caliber guys.
but most others save tier one for once in a decade talent, and that is a slam in the face of other high profile prospects to me.

Eklund is projected to be an Elite player all star, to me that’s Tier 1 but scouts seem to save tier one for 1 player a decade and that is silly to me.
read my description and how i value the tiers and my rankings might not look like an over reach.

yes i am hopeful everyone on here reaches these expectations, however i honestly feel only 1/2 will reach these expectations and the other half will fall 1-2 tiers if not completely off the boards.

but predicting who falls of and who reaches their expectations is difficult, even for experienced scouts.

to be fair B grade prospects are the ones who make up most top 6 and top 4 lines in the NHL. A grade prospects are rare.

and yes i may be reaching a bit but we all do. I doubt fans of other teams watch every teams prospect pool.

why is Tier 1 so sacred to hockey players? Eklund has a 98% expectation of being a full time NHLer and an 86% expectation of being an Elite NHL per his scouting report prior to the draft.
why should that not be tier 1? i honestly think 85% of the teams out there should have 1-2 Tier 1 prospects and it shouldn’t be saved for 1-2 players a Decade.
but yes if i went with Hockey on this and Tier 1 was as sacred as they make it Eklund is high tier 2 just like i mentioned in my description.
Tier 1 should be players who’s career arch has them as potential HOF and if Eklund reaches his expectations he could be!

Sorry I wasn't very clear in my response. I'm mostly agreeing with you. I think Eklund is an excellent prospect and for the Sharks, he's in a tier of his own. What I was meaning to say is there are no prospects that we know for certain are going to turn out to be Kucherov, Point, Draisaitl and those players wouldn't be considered 'Tier 1' prospects when they were drafted as well. IMO Eklund has the potential to be the best player from that draft so I have no problem with you calling him the Tier 1 franchise prospect.

i feel like the tiers are pretty solid in terms of who's in them, people are just getting sucked into the definitions of what each tier is. if we see tier one as maybe not franchise player bc people have high expectations and different definitions of what that means but instead like top line/top pair contributor, i think this is a really good list

Solid list, and agreeing with what you said in your description about Eklund being a high end Tier 2/Lower Tier 1, but the only one I am not overly sure on is Coe. He is a stud in the OHL right now, but he is 20 years old and dominating the league like any over age player should. That said I think I'd put him high tier 3, but that is only a minor tweak and it is personal opinion.

It isn't saved for 1-2 players a decade. Franchise players =/= generational players. Generational players are McDavid, Crosby, Ovechkin, etc. There are far more franchise players currently in the NHL. Active NHL-players that come to mind: Matthews, Draisaitl, Bergeron, Kucherov, Malkin (prime), Kane, MacKinnon, Tavares (prime), Karlsson (prime), Hedman. And there are only a few prospects I'd put in that category at the moment (Power, Byfield, Rossi, Sanderson). But Eklund is very close to being tier 1.

I feel Tier 1 should be those prospect who are all but a lock for top line & top D pair (I exclude Goalies cause they tend to be harder to project than other positions)
every draft should have 1-5 tier 1 prospects at the draft and then 5-10 more that blow up after their 1st years should end up in this Tier as well.
I mean why have a Tier that NEVER gets used? the way it is set no prospect ever lands in that tier cause the McDavid's and the Eichel's and the Crosby's al end up playing in the NHL in their rookie seasons anyways.

yeah i’m with you, feels like those top top prospects should be in like a 1A tier and then projected top line guys should be in tier 1

I do agree with you. but 99.9% of Tier 1 prospects don't ever play in the minors. they usually go straight to the NHL, that why I feel you should have top line top D pair in tier 1, tier 2 is top 6 top 4 D, tier 3 is middle 6 middle pair D, tier 4 is bottom 6 bottom pair D, and tier 5 is likely never to play in the NHL tier/ to young to grade any higher. you could add an G tier for generational talent for those 4-5 prospects each decade that are a class to themselves.
I don't know I just feel tier 2 is actually 2 tiers of players and would rather separate those b/b+ prospects from the A prospects.
eklund IMO is an A- prospect, not at a McDavid or Crosby level (obviously) but better than most that make the 2nd tier though.

With Coe you could very well be right.
he is big at 6'4" but he is still fast and puck handles like the smaller guys (puck handles in close to the body so he isn't pick pocketed) has a good shot and plays smart on both ends of the rink.
last year at 18/19 playing in the AHL he didn't look out of place and was playing stronger as the season went on. this year at 19/20 is completely dominating the OHL and it isn't even close.
I've watched a decent amount of film and he looks like a legit top 6 but might end up as a middle 6 guy so you are not wrong in your assessment.

Scouts before the draft all raved about his intangibles but wondered if he could ever put them together to reach his potential. lots of scouts said he could end up being the steal of the draft and to me I feel his work in the OHL will translate through to the NHL as long as he doesn't lose his confidence!
Funny thing about the 2020 draft we got 3 players scouts all said could end up steels.
Robins who was drafted in the 3rd cause he was only 5'7" then grew 3" last year
Bordeleau who should have been our pick at 31 but we got lucky enough to get him in the 2nd and
Coe in the 4th.

That's exactly what I did. I ditched one of the bottom two tiers and labeled it "Extras / no large role at the NHL level". Instead, there's a tier between Franchise player and Top 6 Forward / Top 4 Defenseman / Above average Starter.

https://www.capfriendly.com/forums/thread/541274

Your post is the one I saw that gave me the idea for this one!

Is Evgenii Kashnikov a C or LD? I haven't heard much of him really. How are his NHLer % and Elite %?

Also why not like a Tier 0 for the Crosby's and McDavid's?

Robins was drafted in the 2nd Round, Gushchin was our 3rd that year.

Seems rather unnecessary since there aren't many of them. And most of the time they play in the NHL immediately and aren't considered prospects 3 months later.

yea your right I forgot we had 2 2nds, but Robins was at the end of the 2nd.

he is a bigger LD and has played surprisingly well this year. both him and Laroque (RD) have looked much better than their projections.
I would be ok splitting tier 2 into different categories, but all star caliber top line prospects and solid 2nd line prospect shouldn't be in the same tier IMO I think if we moved all the players from Tier 3 and below down a notch and make tier 2 top line top pair D and tier 3 top 6/ top 4 D I would be happy with that i guess.
in my projections I just eliminated the existing Tier 1 and converted it to top line projected players.
this just makes more sense, besides Elite tier 1 players are NHL players the day they are drafted so what's the point adding them to the prospect lists.