Prospect Info: 2018 NHL Draft

Status
Not open for further replies.

lilidk

Registered User
Mar 4, 2008
9,588
3,424
Skill is fine, but if these idiots focus on forwards this draft I might finally lose it...
don't forget that Pittsburg won 2 years in the row without good defense. They simply have best 2 centers in NHL , but i think we should get defenseman in the first pic
 

Ezekial

Cheap Pizza, Bad Hockey
Sponsor
Nov 22, 2015
22,377
14,884
Chicago
Skill is fine, but if these idiots focus on forwards this draft I might finally lose it...
In our past two drafts we've drafted 10 D, 5 Forwards, and 1 G. We need forwards too - outside of Svech and Rasmussen, do we have any top 9 potential outside of the NHL?

For the record, I want either a D or one of the 4 Forwards I like early in the first, likely a D with 3 of the forwards being top 5. Bouchard would be great.
 
Last edited:
Jul 30, 2005
17,659
4,588
I mean, what is location, really
In our past two drafts we've drafted 10 D, 5 Forwards, and 1 G. We need forwards too - outside of Svech and Rasmussen, do we have any top 9 potential outside of the NHL?

For the record, I want either a D or one of the 4 Forwards I like early in the first, likely a D with 3 of the forwards being top 5. Bouchard would be great.
But the majority of those defensemen were in late rounds. It's just not the same.

That and they drafted a ton of stay at home types when that's not really a need. Or even appropriate, given today's style of play.
 

Ezekial

Cheap Pizza, Bad Hockey
Sponsor
Nov 22, 2015
22,377
14,884
Chicago
But the majority of those defensemen were in late rounds. It's just not the same.

That and they drafted a ton of stay at home types when that's not really a need. Or even appropriate, given today's style of play.
3 of the 5 Forwards were drafted after pick 160

So we're looking at Rasmussen and Smith.
 
Jul 30, 2005
17,659
4,588
I mean, what is location, really
3 of the 5 Forwards were drafted after pick 160

So we're looking at Rasmussen and Smith.
Right, but the Wings have forward depth at the NHL level. They're not struggling in that department. With the NHL guys, Svechnikov, Rasmussen, and potentially Smith if he ever takes it up a notch, that's a solid group. Not super high upside, but that seems to be a running theme.

My point is, you can frame is as "well, the Wings have drafted 9 defensemen in the last 2 years!" But that would be hiding the fact that 5 of those guys are late round garbage, 1 is an underachieving stay at home guy with little offense or skating ability, and 3 are decent prospects. And of those 3, Cholowski and Hronek are far ahead of Lindstrom, who needs to show a lot more to justify being picked at 38. So if we're talking about guys we can pencil in, there are really just 2 defensemen.

So while that looks like depth, it is really not. Drafting a lot of players doesn't mean much if you don't draft good players. I don't even mean that they need to be psychic or something, but some of these picks were ridiculous. I mean, Reilly Webb? Come on. Cole Fraser wasn't a good pick either, but at least he's a CHL regular.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: JustJokinenAround

JustJokinenAround

just a goofball
Feb 5, 2018
1,015
536
a local rink
Same here would love to draft Evan Bouchard, If we stay around the same area. I can see Bouchard as a realistic possibility.
I continue to see him rise which kind of scares me. He would be a great addition on the right side, kind of reminds me of Duncan Keith. Never in a bad spot positionally and can certainly chip in offensively. And he has an outstanding first pass.
 

JustJokinenAround

just a goofball
Feb 5, 2018
1,015
536
a local rink
Right, but the Wings have forward depth at the NHL level. They're not struggling in that department. With the NHL guys, Svechnikov, Rasmussen, and potentially Smith if he ever takes it up a notch, that's a solid group. Not super high upside, but that seems to be a running theme.

My point is, you can frame is as "well, the Wings have drafted 9 defensemen in the last 2 years!" But that would be hiding the fact that 5 of those guys are late round garbage, 1 is an underachieving stay at home guy with little offense or skating ability, and 3 are decent prospects. And of those 3, Cholowski and Hronek are far ahead of Lindstrom, who needs to show a lot more to justify being picked at 38. So if we're talking about guys we can pencil in, there are really just 2 defensemen.

So while that looks like depth, it is really not. Drafting a lot of players doesn't mean much if you don't draft good players. I don't even mean that they need to be psychic or something, but some of these picks were ridiculous. I mean, Reilly Webb? Come on. Cole Fraser wasn't a good pick either, but at least he's a CHL regular.
Chow and Hronek are probably the only two who have a shot to become NHL regulars. I didn't like when they drafted Chow because Fabbro and Chychrun went around the same time, but he looks like he could be a good top 4-5 piece and give you good PP time.
 

Ezekial

Cheap Pizza, Bad Hockey
Sponsor
Nov 22, 2015
22,377
14,884
Chicago
Right, but the Wings have forward depth at the NHL level. They're not struggling in that department. With the NHL guys, Svechnikov, Rasmussen, and potentially Smith if he ever takes it up a notch, that's a solid group. Not super high upside, but that seems to be a running theme.

My point is, you can frame is as "well, the Wings have drafted 9 defensemen in the last 2 years!" But that would be hiding the fact that 5 of those guys are late round garbage, 1 is an underachieving stay at home guy with little offense or skating ability, and 3 are decent prospects. And of those 3, Cholowski and Hronek are far ahead of Lindstrom, who needs to show a lot more to justify being picked at 38. So if we're talking about guys we can pencil in, there are really just 2 defensemen.

So while that looks like depth, it is really not. Drafting a lot of players doesn't mean much if you don't draft good players. I don't even mean that they need to be psychic or something, but some of these picks were ridiculous. I mean, Reilly Webb? Come on. Cole Fraser wasn't a good pick either, but at least he's a CHL regular.
I'm not going to argue the necessity of defense on this team, but our NHL organizational depth at forward isn't very good. If you want to trade veterans instead of re-signing them were going to need better forwards to take their spots.

I agree that we need to take a few D early, but we also need to take forwards still or our organizational depth is going to be trash in a couple years.
 

njx9

Registered User
Feb 1, 2016
2,161
340
In our past two drafts we've drafted 10 D, 5 Forwards, and 1 G. We need forwards too - outside of Svech and Rasmussen, do we have any top 9 potential outside of the NHL?

I think we have just as many top 6 forwards as top 3 D in the system.

Saying that out loud makes our scouting department/farm situation even more dire than I thought it was before.
 
Jul 30, 2005
17,659
4,588
I mean, what is location, really
Not the skating, but the poise and he puts himself in really good spots. His skating is a question no doubt.
I think we're really overstating any problems with Bouchard's skating. He has stuff to work on, but he doesn't have anything that looks like it's going to be a lasting issue. If anything, he's getting unfair criticism because he's the worst skater in a defense group filled with really, really good skaters. It doesn't mean he's bad. He's not.
 

JustJokinenAround

just a goofball
Feb 5, 2018
1,015
536
a local rink
I think we're really overstating any problems with Bouchard's skating. He has stuff to work on, but he doesn't have anything that looks like it's going to be a lasting issue. If anything, he's getting unfair criticism because he's the worst skater in a defense group filled with really, really good skaters. It doesn't mean he's bad. He's not.
I don't think it is a huge issue because he is good in almost every other aspect of the game. It isn't elite but it isn't bad I would say.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->