Prospect Info: 2015 NHL Draft Discussion Part Deux

[garret9]

In other words, trading the two 1st's to move up in draft would suck.

*On average. Yes.

There's always exceptions to every rule.

Sometimes the teams earlier make mistakes and a top 4 talent is on the board (Ehlers).
The issue is teams usually outsmart themselves in thinking that is happening more often than it does.

 

[AWSAA]

So I signed on as the Jets here:
http://hfboards.mandatory.com/showthread.php?t=1896125

Anyone want to claim Pittsburgh and trade me Malkin & Crosby for scraps?

Actually, I could use some help identifying draft targets for the 2nd-4th rounds. Any players of interest I should be reading up on.

 

[Mortimer Snerd]

In other words, trading the two 1st's to move up in draft would suck.

That's on average. It would depend on the specific player targeted. Impossible to say from this distance because a)We don't actually know how far we could move up and b)We don't know which players would be available at that spot. This is something that has to happen quickly, on the spot.

 

[Daximus]

That's on average. It would depend on the specific player targeted. Impossible to say from this distance because a)We don't actually know how far we could move up and b)We don't know which players would be available at that spot. This is something that has to happen quickly, on the spot.

As a GM who has Ehlers, I'd have to think about trading both to get Meier. He tickles my fancies.
Obviously my scouts would remind me how mad that is. But I would still entertain the idea.

 

[Whileee]

As a GM who has Ehlers, I'd have to think about trading both to get Meier. He tickles my fancies.
Obviously my scouts would remind me how mad that is. But I would still entertain the idea.

Not me. I don't think Meier is in the same category as Ehlers in terms of potential impact. I think the Jets should be able to get two good prospects at 17 and 25, and I wouldn't be at all surprised if there are players available at that tier of picks that will turn out to be top 10-15 prospects from this draft, when all is said and done. Of course, that assumes that the Jets nail one or both of those picks. I like having two chances to nab a good prospect, rather than moving up. So far, they've been pretty good with their first round selections, and with the exception of Sutter haven't had many blatant mistakes the other rounds.

 

[buggs]

Not me. I don't think Meier is in the same category as Ehlers in terms of potential impact. I think the Jets should be able to get two good prospects at 17 and 25, and I wouldn't be at all surprised if there are players available at that tier of picks that will turn out to be top 10-15 prospects from this draft, when all is said and done. Of course, that assumes that the Jets nail one or both of those picks. I like having two chances to nab a good prospect, rather than moving up. So far, they've been pretty good with their first round selections, and with the exception of Sutter haven't had many blatant mistakes the other rounds.

I'm not overly enamored of Meier at the moment. It's a tough call really. Obviously has chemistry with Ehlers but is it Ehlers driving it or is it his own exceptional talent? Time will tell.

But I like retaining the picks, getting hopefully a very nice forward piece and a very nice D piece (or two forwards, whatever). The Jets have shown, as Whileee indicates, a very good ability to pick smart. I'll trust that and enjoy the numbers.

 

[Jetabre]

Last year 17+25 was Sanheim and Pastrnak..Just saying.

 

[Sweech]

As a GM who has Ehlers, I'd have to think about trading both to get Meier. He tickles my fancies.
Obviously my scouts would remind me how mad that is. But I would still entertain the idea.

That's a pretty quick way to sink a franchise by giving up value to get a player's junior buddy.

I like Meier, but he's valued in that area of picks anyway so giving up 2 similar players for 1 is pretty much a loss no matter how you cut it.

 

[Romang67]

Isn't it interesting how Meier has largely avoided the whole discussion about whether he is a product of another player, despite actually playing mostly with Ehlers?

 

[Daximus]

Isn't it interesting how Meier has largely avoided the whole discussion about whether he is a product of another player, despite actually playing mostly with Ehlers?

I've read a lot about him and I've seen it on plenty of scouting reports. Wasn't the same said about Ehlers though when he played with Drouin?

 

[Daximus]

That's a pretty quick way to sink a franchise by giving up value to get a player's junior buddy.

I like Meier, but he's valued in that area of picks anyway so giving up 2 similar players for 1 is pretty much a loss no matter how you cut it.

Yeah I obviously wouldn't do it but the thought would cross my mind. It will be cool to see where this crop of guys lands in the next 5-10 years.

 

[JC Numminen]

Isn't it interesting how Meier has largely avoided the whole discussion about whether he is a product of another player, despite actually playing mostly with Ehlers?

Well if they are together on the same NHL team, there shouldn't be a problem

But seriously, I imagine there has been a few extra points added to Meier's name because of Ehlers, but it probably works both ways a little.

I think they are both great players.

 

[DEANYOUNGBLOOD17]

Last year 17+25 was Sanheim and Pastrnak..Just saying.

............ This says it all. I like Meier but I have come to terms that he will not be available at our pick. I do not like paying the premium that is involved with moving up in the draft.

Re ..... Our first draft in 2011
-we traded 2 4th round selections to move up to the 3rd round and take Serville (bust)
-Then we traded a 5th & a 7th to move up to the 4 th round and pick Yuen (bust)

...... Just saying ...... we gave up 2 4 th round picks in 2011..... Hmmmm who was picked in that fourth round of 2011........(Johnny Hockey Gaudreau and in the 5 th A. Shaw (CHI).

 

[ps241]

Isn't it interesting how Meier has largely avoided the whole discussion about whether he is a product of another player, despite actually playing mostly with Ehlers?

Really good point.

 

[drumzan]

That's on average. It would depend on the specific player targeted. Impossible to say from this distance because a)We don't actually know how far we could move up and b)We don't know which players would be available at that spot. This is something that has to happen quickly, on the spot.

Well, IMO, 17 and 25 ain't worth the 10th pick unless Hanifin is miraculously still sitting there (0% chance).

 

[Hammer Slammer]

I had no idea Oliver Kylington's name was pronounced Shillington until I watched a video just now. You crazy Swedes.

 

[Daximus]

I had no idea Oliver Kylington's name was pronounced Shillington until I watched a video just now. You crazy Swedes.

Whhhhhaaaatt?!

We should draft Svech and Kylington. My gut tells me they will be left and we will pick them. You heard it here first.

 

[garret9]

Don't draft for chemistry.

 

[Mortimer Snerd]

Well, IMO, 17 and 25 ain't worth the 10th pick unless Hanifin is miraculously still sitting there (0% chance).

How about 9th and Werenski?

 

[Daximus]

Don't draft for chemistry.

The arguement could go either way. Look what the Canucks got with the Sedins. Look what we got with Kane. Chemistry is one of the intangibles that can get you to Stanley Cup finals more often than it won't IMO.

 

[garret9]

The arguement could go either way. Look what the Canucks got with the Sedins. Look what we got with Kane. Chemistry is one of the intangibles that can get you to Stanley Cup finals more often than it won't IMO.

I don't think so, no...

Sedins are not exactly what you call a norm situation... being identical twins and all that. But even then... They were also not drafted for their chemistry, but their skill (and also there is a marketing factor that goes under noticed by fans). They were bonafide top picks that year.

I also think the whole Kane chemistry thing is BS. Kane didn't *look* to make his linemates better, but he made his linemates better. That's the role of a "machine gun" type player. Vrbatta, Ovechkin, Nash, Neal, Hornqvist, etc.

Kane's linemates tended had better 5v5 shot attempt differentials (Corsi) with him than without. Kane's linemates tended had better 5v5 goal differentials with him than without. Kane's linemates tended had better 5v5 point production per minute with him than without. The only player who really did worse was Bryan Little, where the alternative was Andrew Ladd -- a pretty damn good player.

So... about that chemistry then.

Chemistry is more about putting players in situations where they succeed. Certain players have differing strengths and weaknesses and you can use players skillsets to place them in optimal situations.

It's faulty thinking like this that leads to Kunitz playing on Team Canada over Hall or Seguin.

Don't draft for chemistry.

 

[YWGinYYZ]

@garret: there's also no guarantee that whatever "chemistry" existed at the junior level will follow through to the pro level, or that the player in question will even make it at the next level. Seems very risky, to me.

 

[garret9]

@garret: there's also no guarantee that whatever "chemistry" existed at the junior level will follow through to the pro level, or that the player in question will even make it at the next level. Seems very risky, to me.

Yup.

What if Meier doesn't make the NHL?
What if he does but isn't good enough to play as high as Ehlers does?

The draft is essentially is a game where you are given free assets that are potential cost controlled players. Optimizing asset control should be the name of the game for drafting.

Take the best player. Get the best possible asset value you can. From there work with what you got.

 

[Sweech]

I've read a lot about him and I've seen it on plenty of scouting reports. Wasn't the same said about Ehlers though when he played with Drouin?

Yeah, but the main difference is Ehlers only played on Drouin's line on the PP whereas Meier and Ehlers play on the same even strength and PP lines so it's safe to assume Ehlers is affecting his point totals.

 

[Sweech]

The arguement could go either way. Look what the Canucks got with the Sedins. Look what we got with Kane. Chemistry is one of the intangibles that can get you to Stanley Cup finals more often than it won't IMO.

Just how many teams in the cup finals have players who played junior together?

I'd rather take multiple players and let them develop NHL chemistry if (a pretty important if) they make the show rather than throw all he eggs in one basket because there's a player who has shown chemistry with our highly rated prospect in junior.

I think chemistry is a real and powerful thing in sports, but there is no way it should be used to condone trading for junior prospects paying over the odds to acquire.