2015 NHL Draft Thread, Part II

[SoupNazi]

Continue here.

Click to read more...

 

[Bench]

So... Best player available or go for a defender?

Isn't to say the defender couldn't become better, but assume at the moment the forward is projecting higher. Easy to say BPA always, but when it's only a slight edge to a winger?

 

[Electric Eric]

So... Best player available or go for a defender?

Isn't to say the defender couldn't become better, but assume at the moment the forward is projecting higher. Easy to say BPA always, but when it's only a slight edge to a winger?

If its between a Winger with top 6 potential and a Dman that's mainly boom/bust type I say we need to swing for the stars and take the Dman.

We're set at forward for the time being and any player we take in this draft will still be around 3 years from making the Wings. If we take the players we have now 3 years into the future we're looking pretty good at forward but holy crap is defense a **** show.

It has to be a heavy Dman draft this year. Only exception is grabbing someone who is an absolutely obvious talent tier above any player remaining.

 

[Frk It]

So... Best player available or go for a defender?

Isn't to say the defender couldn't become better, but assume at the moment the forward is projecting higher. Easy to say BPA always, but when it's only a slight edge to a winger?

Definitely don't go for a position, just because you need it.

If there is a big run on defenseman, that means someone like White, Merkley, or even maybe better is left at 19. You should take them all day IMO, can never have enough good centers.

But if the draft goes "as expected", and one of Chabot, Kylington, or Roy is left at #19, then I would rather take any of those guys.

It really just depends on how it shakes out.

 

[SirloinUB]

So... Best player available or go for a defender?

Isn't to say the defender couldn't become better, but assume at the moment the forward is projecting higher. Easy to say BPA always, but when it's only a slight edge to a winger?

BPA. Always

 

[Rzombo4 prez]

If he is the only player left in his talent tier, take him regardless of position of need.
If there are multiple players in a talent tier show preference to position of need.

 

[Tatar]

So... Best player available or go for a defender?

Isn't to say the defender couldn't become better, but assume at the moment the forward is projecting higher. Easy to say BPA always, but when it's only a slight edge to a winger?

It depends. I'm sure Holland and Co. have a short list of "elite" players they're hoping slide down to them - like Mantha and Larkin. If those players are gone they'll trade down. Having an elite defenseman is most likely the top priority for them. With a plethora of talent in this draft, if we can't pick up the "elite" defensman we want we should pick the best forward available. I'm all for trading down and getting more picks, but the problem is were beginning to be overrun with mediocrity. Players like Ouelette, Sproul, and Marchenko are all great players that I'm happy we have, but having a handful of #4-#7 defenseman won't push our team through to the deeper rounds of the playoffs. Taking one player like Nikita Zadorov or Cody Ceci as oppose to trading down and getting two players the likes of Sproul and Marchenko is the only way to rebolster our team. In short we need to begin drafting quality over quantity, and stop trading picks!

 

[Rzombo4 prez]

It depends. I'm sure Holland and Co. have a short list of "elite" players they're hoping slide down to them - like Mantha and Larkin. If those players are gone they'll trade down. Having an elite defenseman is most likely the top priority for them. With a plethora of talent in this draft, if we can't pick up the "elite" defensman we want we should pick the best forward available. I'm all for trading down and getting more picks, but the problem is were beginning to be overrun with mediocrity. Players like Ouelette, Sproul, and Marchenko are all great players that I'm happy we have, but having a handful of #4-#7 defenseman won't push our team through to the deeper rounds of the playoffs. Taking one player like Nikita Zadorov or Cody Ceci as oppose to trading down and getting two players the likes of Sproul and Marchenko is the only way to rebolster our team. In short we need to begin drafting quality over quantity, and stop trading picks!

When exactly did we start drafting quantity over quality? Furthermore, why do you think someone ranked 18th, 19th or 20th in some public scouting report is necessarily a better NHL prospect than someone ranked 29th, 35th or 48th?

If you can get what you consider the best player available while still trading back, you sure as **** should trade back.

 

[Frk It]

If he is the only player left in his talent tier, take him regardless of position of need.
If there are multiple players in a talent tier show preference to position of need.

Pretty sure this is exactly how we draft.

Though unfortunately, I think a drawback of this that we have drafted a relatively low number of defenseman over the last 5-10 years. BPA can have it's drawbacks.

 

[Rzombo4 prez]

Pretty sure this is exactly how we draft.

Though unfortunately, I think a drawback of this is this is why we haven't drafted a lot of defenseman recently. BPA can have it's drawbacks.

You hit on a very big point. People like to cry about our inability to develop first-pair defensemen. One of the reasons we haven't had much success is because we haven't drafted a whole lot of defensemen in the last ten years.

 

[Unfriendly Ghost]

BPA insofar as it's a center or a defenseman. There is absolutely no reason to draft a winger.

 

[Frk It]

BPA insofar as it's a center or a defenseman. There is absolutely no reason to draft a winger.

1 exception to that rule for me. Sprong. Kid is going to be an absolute stud and score a boatload of goals.

 

[SirloinUB]

Pretty sure this is exactly how we draft.

Though unfortunately, I think a drawback of this that we have drafted a relatively low number of defenseman over the last 5-10 years. BPA can have it's drawbacks.

You hit on a very big point. People like to cry about our inability to develop first-pair defensemen. One of the reasons we haven't had much success is because we haven't drafted a whole lot of defensemen in the last ten years.

BPA insofar as it's a center or a defenseman. There is absolutely no reason to draft a winger.

Theoretically, You can later trade the BPA for a dman

 

[AD1066]

Furthermore, why do you think someone ranked 18th, 19th or 20th in some public scouting report is necessarily a better NHL prospect than someone ranked 29th, 35th or 48th?

Outside of the top ten, I haven't seen much difference between picks 10-20, 20-30, 30-40 as far as defensemen panning out.

It's not common, but guys like Keith, Weber, Subban, Faulk, Letang were all found outside of the first.

We seem to draft well in the second and I'd be comfortable rolling the dice on two defensemen in that range.

 

[Electric Eric]

Theoretically, You can later trade the BPA for a dman

I keep hearing but I don't think I've ever seen that pan out in reality.

Outside of the top ten, I haven't seen much difference between picks 10-20, 20-30, 30-40 as far as defensemen panning out.

It's not common, but guys like Keith, Weber, Subban, Faulk, Letang were all found outside of the first.

We seem to draft well in the second and I'd be comfortable rolling the dice on two defensemen in that range.

Like Sproul and Oulette? We need high end talent and that usually comes in the first round, plus we don't have a 2nd this year. That makes our first round pick that much more important.

 

[Unfriendly Ghost]

Theoretically, You can later trade the BPA for a dman

But do you really think Ken Holland would do that? I think even Ken Holland knows he wouldn't do that.

 

[SirloinUB]

But do you really think Ken Holland would do that? I think even Ken Holland knows he wouldn't do that.

the·o·ret·i·cal
THēəˈredək(ə)l/
adjective

Based on or calculated through theory rather than experience or practice.



Either way, Im not campaigning for a winger persay. Just saying we shouldn't be afraid of picking the best player, just because he is a winger.

 

[sarcastro]

As long as it's not a goalie...

 

[Frk It]

You hit on a very big point. People like to cry about our inability to develop first-pair defensemen. One of the reasons we haven't had much success is because we haven't drafted a whole lot of defensemen in the last ten years.

It has nothing to do with developing, and everything to do with drafting.

Theoretically, You can later trade the BPA for a dman

Yes, this is a good point and SHOULD happen.

But

1) We have a GM who loves excessive depth
2) We have a GM who is extremely conservative

so, good luck with that coming to fruition.

 

[SirloinUB]

But do you really think Ken Holland would do that? I think even Ken Holland knows he wouldn't do that.

It has nothing to do with developing, and everything to do with drafting.



Yes, this is a good point and SHOULD happen.

But

1) We have a GM who loves excessive depth
2) We have a GM who is extremely conservative

so, good luck with that coming to fruition.

I am fully aware Of Ken Holland's operating history, but sooner than later (especially if we draft another winger) he will break that history.

 

[Frk It]

I am fully aware Of Ken Holland's operating history, but sooner than later (especially if we draft another winger) he will break that history.

I don't know, when logic says that Holland has exceeded the threshold of players, sometimes that is not even enough to trigger a move.

Like when we had too many forwards signed, so Tatar had to start as the 13th forward... and Nyquist had to start in GR...

Like what in the actual ****? How does that ever even happen?

But I am hoping, like you, that this does bring some kind of a move. He just has so much job security man, so I could just as easily see him sitting on his stockpile of players.

Would be awesome if we could ship one of these excess forwards out for some help on the blue line. That is definitely something we can all hope for, even if it is probably unlikely.

 

[Rzombo4 prez]

I keep hearing but I don't think I've ever seen that pan out in reality.




Like Sproul and Oulette? We need high end talent and that usually comes in the first round, plus we don't have a 2nd this year. That makes our first round pick that much more important.

High end talent usually comes at the beginning of the first round. The Redwings are not drafting at the beginning of the first round.

Make fun of XO all that you want, but he is doing no worse than Oleksiak, Siemens, Percy or Morrow.

 

[wingsfan33]

We got no second so I say we trade down to 26-29, add another pick and draft meloche

 

[Chex LeMeneux]

We got no second so I say we trade down to 26-29, add another pick and draft meloche

That's what I was thinking too. Off the top of my head, Buffalo, Winnipeg and Arizona are all options. It depends on who is available when we pick though. I'd hate to miss out on one of Chabot, Kylington or Roy if they're still sitting there at 19.

 

[Anchor Town*]

BPA. Always

This is a really dumb stance. You're the Wings, you've got the top 9 wings set for years to come. Our pick is up and the BPA is a wing. Next best player available is a RHD who is just a skosh below that winger. Do you take the winger? No, take the position of need if they are so close. Now if it's a large gap, then take the winger. Point is, to be so staunch on one situation or another is very very short sighted. It's always a fluid situation, it always...depends.