Boston Bruins Offseason Prospect Update: Part 2

PART 1

This is the second in a series of articles covering Boston Bruins prospects.

Today, we will analyze the player’s performance. In the past, I have utilized a formula to assess a player’s expected output. Some fans doubt its effectiveness, and that’s valid as their viewpoints are significant and not ignored. However, one NHL team has its use. I often pose these questions to the doubters: why does it succeed for Beckett Hendrickson and not Chris Pelosi, who shared the same league and team for a majority of the season? Similarly, why does it work for Kristian Kostadinski and not Casper Nassen, who also competed in the same league and team?

The following chart displays the season predictions made by my model for the players, along with their actual production this year. Subsequently, I will provide insights on each player.

Casper Nassen

Nassen didn’t approach the model. I’m not one to make excuses, but he had a slow start and later missed some time due to injury towards the end of the Norra division schedule. Upon his return from injury, his performance in the latter part would have actually placed him ahead of the model. Now, he embarks on the transition to North America, following the paths of Oskar Jellvik and Dans Locmelis.

Jonathan Myrenberg

Frequent visitors to this blog are aware of my emphasis on the importance of player development over point production, particularly as Myrenberg embarks on his professional hockey career in the Swedish Hockey League at a young age. My model accounts for this, explaining his anticipated modest statistics. I find his progress since joining the Bruins from Vancouver to be highly impressive.

Kristian Kostadinski

At the previous summer’s development camp, it was evident that Kostadinski had to enhance his skating abilities. He made progress, yet there is room for further improvement. He performed approximately as expected. However, he is unlikely to amass many points and is expected to excel as a physical, defensive defenseman. He could opt to play in the J20 for another year or join Dubuque of the USHL next season.

Andre Gasseau

Following a successful first year, the model indicated a slight uptick in Gasseau’s output. However, his performance fell below expectations, as did points per game. Deem it somewhat disappointing, particularly given his consistent line partnership with Oskar Jellvik (see below). On a positive note, Gasseau’s defensive abilities notably improved, despite being an offence first player.

Oskar Jellvik

The model predicted significant growth for Jellvik, nearly doubling his output as a freshman. He exceeded all expectations. This blog has been a supporter of his since before he was drafted, and even more so now. Expected to have a more prominent role at Boston College next season, his response will be interesting. However, it is unlikely that he will continue playing NCAA hockey beyond the upcoming season.

Jake Schmaltz

Schmaltz’s production has decreased year by year. Despite the model forecasting a slight uptick in production, he fell short. While his assists were near expectations, he struggled to score goals. Although he has developed into a reliable defensive forward, his offensive capabilities are waning, raising questions about how far his defensive skills can take him.

Cole Spicer

Spicer was exceeding expectations according to the model until he became ineligible for the second half of the season. This year is considered a setback, and the focus now shifts to the upcoming season as he aims to return to the University of Minnesota-Duluth.

Quinn Olson

Olson failed to meet expectations during his five seasons with Minnesota-Duluth. The projections for an increase in performance from last season were minimal, and Olson did not reach his production levels from the previous year. At the end of the season, he transitioned to a professional career by signing a two-way AHL contract with the Ontario Reign.

Beckett Hendrickson

Hendrickson nearly hit the target perfectly. He had a great season overall, despite the trade. His performance slightly decreased in the playoffs, which is common for most players. The upcoming season marks the beginning of three transitions as he moves to the University of Minnesota. This is when we will truly see his projected level.

Chris Pelosi

Some may mock the model here, but as mentioned, it was successful for Hendrickson, who shared the same team for the most of the season. As a center, I appreciate Pelosi’s higher number of assists, as I prefer players in the middle to excel as playmakers. I have favored Hendrickson over Pelosi since the draft, though the future will determine their success. Pelosi moves to the Quinnipiac next season.

Roman Bychkov

He met low expectations. As mentioned in part one of this series, “he has been unable to make a KHL team, so making it to an NHL team seems unlikely.”

Dans Locmelis

Locmelis did not meet projected expectations. However, I am not worried since this year was a transition period for him in North America. Despite intending for him to play a more significant role alongside more talented teammates, he mostly served on the third line in a defensive capacity. Just like with Jellvik this season, we will gain a better understanding of Locmelis in the upcoming season.

Ryan Walsh

I was confident in Walsh’s ability to perform well, but he slightly underperformed overall and his goals-to-assists ratio was off. Some observers questioned his capabilities at the college level, but I believe those doubts have been dispelled. Despite being older, I anticipate significant progress from him in the upcoming season. He has consistently excelled in scoring points, and I predict that trend will continue.

Mason Langenbrunner

When Bruins selected Langenbrunner in 2020, he was eligible by just one day. Not known for his offensive skills, he possessed the attributes to excel as a shutdown defenseman. However, his time at Harvard during a challenging year led him to occasionally overextend himself, making it challenging to fully assess his capabilities. As Langenbrunner enters his third year at Harvard, the upcoming season will be crucial for him to demonstrate further growth.

Riley Duran

Duran has transitioned to the professional level and showed promise in a few Providence games. However, I found his offensive performance somewhat underwhelming. While I have emphasized in the past that his strength lies in areas other than offense, the amount of ice time and responsibilities he has been given at the NCAA level on the top line and top powerplay unit should have translated into greater output. I am eager to see how he performs in his upcoming full season with Providence.

Ty Gallagher

I can’t remember a late round draft pick showing as much promise as Gallagher did, only to decline so rapidly. It’s unclear whether this decline is due to Gallagher himself or the limited ice time he received as the seventh defenseman. The answer may become apparent next season, as he has moved to Colorado College. I think we should be patient and allow Gallagher a year to demonstrate his true capabilities.

Jackson Edward

When Edward joined the OHL through the draft, he was chosen as an offensive defenseman. During his first season, he adapted his playing style to focus more on defense, with assistance from Coach Dale Hunter. This adjustment contributed to his development into the versatile defenseman we witnessed this year. While he didn’t achieve the anticipated offensive statistics, he made strides in other aspects of his performance, such as assuming a leadership position and predominantly playing on the right side despite being a left-handed shooter.

Watch for Part 3 in the coming days as that will include my own prospect rankings. Part 4 will have your questions answered. If you wish to submit a question, please feel free to do so here.

Follow me on X @dominictiano.