NHL Entry Draft 2020 NHL Draft Discussion - PART V

[Sens of Anarchy]

2020 NHL DRAFT: Most Polarizing Prospect by Region
Covers
Stranges
Poirier
Guhle
Gushchin
Andrae
Jarventie
Mukhamadullin

Not sure Guhle belongs on the list as "polarizing" but .. I guess people question his offense upside

 

[bert]

I can’t rank him above players just because he played great for 2/3rds of the season. Jan Mysak has a similar start this season with many variable going against him; coming here in January when the season is in full swing, ohl rookie, North American ice, worse team than the 67s etc.

From what I’ve watched he’s not the best goal scorer on his team behind Rossi, and Perfetti/Holtz being better than both.

Marco Rossi: 0.55 Ev goals/game
Jack Quinn: 0.54 Ev goals/game

That’s a negligible difference, but Rossi is a facilitator giving setting up his line mates while Quinn is there to score. That’s my opinion and choosing either as the better goal scorer is fine. It’s really close.

Thats why you need to watch the games and not only look at the stat line. If you think Rossi is the better goal scorer you really havent been watching. Rossi played with much better linemates all season long too. Based on your response it appears nothing I wrote has been taken into account. Quinn has been good for two seasons not just 2/3rds of one. I didnt say that you should rank him ahead of those players, but you are not close to giving an accurate take on the player. He is WAY better than you make it seem. His two way game is one of the best in the draft. It honestly appears that you didnt even take the time to watch the scouting report.

Go right ahead and have Mysak ahead of him, were all entitled to our opinions but your argument for him being better has tons of holes in it along with ignoring all the facts I presented. He played with Kaliyev, if you think playing with a rotating 16 year old and Mitch Hoelscher is an advantage than so be it. Also coming from the WJC to the OHL is not a hard transition the pace of play is way slower and there is way more time and space.

 

[bert]

Ok first of all, the point you keep missing is I haven't been saying anything about Quinn this whole time. I keep saying I've hardly seen him play. I don't know what you want me to say about him. He looks good from what I've seen. I like Mercer better.

What I was trying to say is Holtz would put up monster numbers in the OHL on any team, with any linemates. You seem to be arguing that he would need an elite playmaker like Rossi to do so.

Secondly, nuance, man. I'm saying Holtz doesn't tend to drive play with the puck. You're saying "he needs someone to set him up" and then you say that we're saying the same thing. We're not. I believe you're off in your evaluation of Holtz. Again, his playmaking is terribly underrated, and he's so much more than a pure shooter. Maybe tomorrow I'll find some clips for you.

Amirov and I think Rossi fall under the same category (although again, I haven't seen nearly as much of Rossi). They can dictate play away from the puck by skating good routes and getting into dangerous areas, they don't need the puck on their stick long to make good things happen, they're good give-and-go players. This is a very NHL-translatable quality; players who always have the puck in junior might not always have it in the NHL so they have to know how to play away from the puck.

But as with Amirov or Rossi, Holtz was very dynamic with the puck in short bursts at the junior level. From what I've seen I'd say he's actually more dangerous than either of those players in one-on-one situations. He's maybe not as deceptive a skater but he's got some vicious dekes in his arsenal.

Who are some good NHL examples? Maybe Brayden Point or David Pastrnak. I'd like to see a study on who creates the most offense per amount of time with the puck on their stick.

Oh, one more thing, I never yelled "bullshit". I spoke it in a very calm, reserved manner. If only you'd heard the tone I said it this debate wouldn't have got so heated.

The bolded portion is absolutely false. I said he would thrive more in that situation than, Quinn thats it. You have based your entire argument on a false assumption. You have said 'bullshit' in two straight posts. For absolutely no good reason I might add. Seems like you are trippling down on something I didnt say.

 

[Sens of Anarchy]

Does anyone know where to find OHL goals per game league wide?

I'd like to make a post comparing some scoring, but the OHL was inflated this year (so is claimed by many), so I wanted to get an actual measure of the inflation.

I know I could do it manually, but I was hoping past years were already calculated somewhere.

I found this. You could probably ask Steve if he has the numbers. He has a thread of his profiles on the Prospects page

 

[MatchesMalone]

The bolded portion is absolutely false. I said he would thrive more in that situation than, Quinn thats it. You have based your entire argument on a false assumption. You have said 'bullshit' in two straight posts. For absolutely no good reason I might add. Seems like you are trippling down on something I didnt say.

Bullshit.

 

[Hale The Villain]

I agree that your draft year matters much more but when a players body of work leading up to the draft should be taken into account. That’s why I’m sceptical of drafting Quinn; his bad production last year as a 17 year old raises a red flag, coupled that with him playing on the second line this season getting second tier opposition to Rossi and being the trigger man on a stacked teams power play should all be taken into account into understanding why his production went up.

Jan Mysak 2019-2020 First 22 games: 15G 25 points
Jack Quinn 2019-2020 First 22 games: 12G 27 points
Mysak is a year younger.


That’s with Mysak being a rookie into the OHL and coming into the new year on North American ice when the season is on full swing too.

A player taking a huge step forward from their 17YR old to 18YR old year is exactly what we should be looking for. Makes it more likely there will be a big step forward in their 19YR old year.

Look at players like Draisaitl, Pettersson, Backstrom, Kadri, Meier, and Bailey. All of them had disappointing 17YR old production that likely wouldn't have made them top 10 picks if they hadn't been late birthdays and didn't have the extra year to impress scouts before being drafted. Their production exploded in their 18YR old season and it got them drafted top 10, and rightfully so.

If teams had put too much emphasis on their production as 17YR olds instead of focusing on their impressive growth year-to-year and their excellent production as 18YR olds, they may have missed out on them. Don't make the same mistake with guys like Rossi and Quinn.

 

[Sweatred]

A player taking a huge step forward from their 17YR old to 18YR old year is exactly what we should be looking for. Makes it more likely there will be a big step forward in their 19YR old year.

Look at players like Draisaitl, Pettersson, Backstrom, Kadri, Meier, and Bailey. All of them had disappointing 17YR old production that likely wouldn't have made them top 10 picks if they hadn't been late birthdays and didn't have the extra year to impress scouts before being drafted. Their production exploded in their 18YR old season and it got them drafted top 10, and rightfully so.

If teams had put too much emphasis on their production as 17YR olds instead of focusing on their impressive growth year-to-year and their excellent production as 18YR olds, they may have missed out on them. Don't make the same mistake with guys like Rossi and Quinn.

I get nervous evaluating older players. Lots of over age /D+1+ players return to the CHL and have impressive scoring numbers.

It’s hard for guys like Rossi / Quinn. Are they elite prospects developing on accelerated curves or are they good prospects using age to their advantage in a young league?

Are these the opposite of Adam Beckman types that if he was a few months older his CHL numbers may support a 1st round pick. We pick between 1-6 so we can’t miss with a guy who really is a 10-20th overall type with inflated age related numbers.

 

[DrSense]

It is interesting, because I can't remember a year where the top 20 was so overloaded with so many older late birthdays. The top 10 actually isn't so bad with Laf, Rossi and Lundell being the only late '01's, and Holtz and Stutzle being January guys. But in the 10-25 range it is crazy to see so many including Mercer, Zary, Holloway, Quinn, Amirov, Gunler, Schneider, Barron and Brisson, and then a few more January birthdays in Guhle, and Bourque. Basically 16 of the top 20 something guys were born within 3 months of cutoff. Freakanomics, indeed.

It's not those players fault obviously, but when you take a look at the two summer birthday kids who if born a few months later would be '21 draftees, namely Byfield and Sanderson, you do start to appreciate that their at a pretty big disadvantage versus most of other top 20 guys. Hasn't really hurt either of them in the rankings, but when you get to the Sens pick around 20, do they take one of those older guys still on the board, or do they consider a player almost a year younger like Mysak and Wallinder. Something they'll look at if they see them as similar prospects right now.

 

[Sweatred]

It is interesting, because I can't remember a year where the top 20 was so overloaded with so many older late birthdays. The top 10 actually isn't so bad with Laf, Rossi and Lundell being the only late '01's, and Holtz and Stutzle being January guys. But in the 10-25 range it is crazy to see so many including Mercer, Zary, Holloway, Quinn, Amirov, Gunler, Schneider, Barron and Brisson, and then a few more January birthdays in Guhle, and Bourque. Basically 16 of the top 20 something guys were born within 3 months of cutoff. Freakanomics, indeed.

It's not those players fault obviously, but when you take a look at the two summer birthday kids who if born a few months later would be '21 draftees, namely Byfield and Sanderson, you do start to appreciate that their at a pretty big disadvantage versus most of other top 20 guys. Hasn't really hurt either of them in the rankings, but when you get to the Sens pick around 20, do they take one of those older guys still on the board, or do they consider a player almost a year younger like Mysak and Wallinder. Something they'll look at if they see them as similar prospects right now.

I completely agree but I feel there fan pressure to consider Rossi/Quinn at least at our second pick. It’s probably working a bit against Byfield and a lot against Sanderson.

My guess is 2021 Sanderson (18+) is way better than 2020 Quinn/Rossi (18+) but their draft position may be close and more people have pushed for Rossi > Quinn > Sanderson all season.

 

[JungleBeat]

A player taking a huge step forward from their 17YR old to 18YR old year is exactly what we should be looking for. Makes it more likely there will be a big step forward in their 19YR old year.

Look at players like Draisaitl, Pettersson, Backstrom, Kadri, Meier, and Bailey. All of them had disappointing 17YR old production that likely wouldn't have made them top 10 picks if they hadn't been late birthdays and didn't have the extra year to impress scouts before being drafted. Their production exploded in their 18YR old season and it got them drafted top 10, and rightfully so.

If teams had put too much emphasis on their production as 17YR olds instead of focusing on their impressive growth year-to-year and their excellent production as 18YR olds, they may have missed out on them. Don't make the same mistake with guys like Rossi and Quinn.

I don’t agree with this because Draisaitl,Kadri, and Bailey all did totally fine during their respective draft - 1 season. Pettersson and Bäckström played pro hockey at 17.

 

[BondraTime]

Hoping the Sens look at picking up Villeneuve in the 2nd/3rd and Nickl in the 3rd/4th. 2 D I really like out of the Q.

Obviously 90% of my live views are in the Quebec league, my posts reflect that.

 

[ijif]

I completely agree but I feel there fan pressure to consider Rossi/Quinn at least at our second pick. It’s probably working a bit against Byfield and a lot against Sanderson.

My guess is 2021 Sanderson (18+) is way better than 2020 Quinn/Rossi (18+) but their draft position may be close and more people have pushed for Rossi > Quinn > Sanderson all season.

I don't think you are looking at the problem correctly. It is better to use all information available. You need to ask if the younger players will actually have a better year next year than Rossi or Quinn had this year.

No one seems to knock Lafreniere for being a late birthday. I would argue that if we baseline for the same development year, Lafreniere isn't number one in this draft, but he showed great progress this year. Why try and predict Stuztle or Byfield making that jump when you can take the player that already did?

 

[MatchesMalone]

A player taking a huge step forward from their 17YR old to 18YR old year is exactly what we should be looking for. Makes it more likely there will be a big step forward in their 19YR old year.

Look at players like Draisaitl, Pettersson, Backstrom, Kadri, Meier, and Bailey. All of them had disappointing 17YR old production that likely wouldn't have made them top 10 picks if they hadn't been late birthdays and didn't have the extra year to impress scouts before being drafted. Their production exploded in their 18YR old season and it got them drafted top 10, and rightfully so.

If teams had put too much emphasis on their production as 17YR olds instead of focusing on their impressive growth year-to-year and their excellent production as 18YR olds, they may have missed out on them. Don't make the same mistake with guys like Rossi and Quinn.

Ok but this seems to be assuming scouts are looking at production, not actually scouting.

 

[ijif]

Hoping the Sens look at picking up Villeneuve in the 2nd/3rd and Nickl in the 3rd/4th. 2 D I really like out of the Q.

Obviously 90% of my live views are in the Quebec league, my posts reflect that.

Can you give a little scouting report on Villeneuve?

I haven't seen much of him, but his numbers suggest he should be one of the first defenders off the board. Based on the numbers, I'd be happy to select him with the Islanders pick.

 

[DrSense]

I don't think you are looking at the problem correctly. It is better to use all information available. You need to ask if the younger players will actually have a better year next year than Rossi or Quinn had this year.

No one seems to knock Lafreniere for being a late birthday. I would argue that if we baseline for the same development year, Lafreniere isn't number one in this draft, but he showed great progress this year. Why try and predict Stuztle or Byfield making that jump when you can take the player that already did?

I think the fact Lafreniere was clearly the best player at the WJC is what really solidified his position and set him apart. When you look at the WJC allstar team - of which he was the best of the bunch - every other player on that allstar team is actually a 2000 born player, most of them drafted two years ago. He has demonstrated all you can at the junior level when you are the best forward at the WJC, in addition to being the best player in your league, all while playing alongside players a year or two older. He'll probably be named the top player in the entire CHL to top it off.

So you can't hold it against Lafreniere, because he's better than every player drafted in the last two years that isn't already in the NHL.

 

[Sweatred]

I don't think you are looking at the problem correctly. It is better to use all information available. You need to ask if the younger players will actually have a better year next year than Rossi or Quinn had this year.

No one seems to knock Lafreniere for being a late birthday. I would argue that if we baseline for the same development year, Lafreniere isn't number one in this draft, but he showed great progress this year. Why try and predict Stuztle or Byfield making that jump when you can take the player that already did?

I share your view ... maybe I didn’t explain it well.

 

[BondraTime]

Can you give a little scouting report on Villeneuve?

I haven't seen much of him, but his numbers suggest he should be one of the first defenders off the board. Based on the numbers, I'd be happy to select him with the Islanders pick.

Doesn't wow in any way. Solid defensively, solid offensively, good, albeit choppy, skater. Good shot, good vision, and good passing and breaking the puck out. An all around solid D, but with no elite skills, at the moment. He is very, very smart with his decisions, and is able to make the other team do what he wants them to do to open lanes and room for his team mates.

Isles pick is too high to take him, especially with who will be left. I wouldn't be upset at taking him in the high 2nd, but I think with no 1st round Q playoffs and no U-18's, his stock will not be as high as it would have been had the season continued, he could be available later in the 2nd, possibly even the 3rd.

I like him better than Porier, but Porier will go in the 20's to some team who are wow'd by his technical skills. If we feel Porier can somehow get a brain to go with his skills, we should bumrush the stage to get him, but I don't think that's the case. Villeneuve's brain is his best asset, While Porier's is his technical skills.

 

[ijif]

I think the fact Lafreniere was clearly the best player at the WJC is what really solidified his position and set him apart. When you look at the WJC allstar team - of which he was the best of the bunch - every other player on that allstar team is actually a 2000 born player, most of them drafted two years ago. He has demonstrated all you can at the junior level when you are the best forward at the WJC, in addition to being the best player in your league, all while playing alongside players a year or two older. He'll probably be named the top player in the entire CHL to top it off.

So you can't hold it against Lafreniere, because he's better than every player drafted in the last two years that isn't already in the NHL.

I am not sure the point of this post because it is just proving my point, so hopefully, the point was just to expand on my thoughts!

 

[Hale The Villain]

Ok but this seems to be assuming scouts are looking at production, not actually scouting.

Hard to impress scouts without producing. Two generally go hand-in-hand, especially for forwards.

Although there are obviously many cases where scouts overlook underwhelming production for tools and projectability, usually it's a mistake to do so.

 

[DrSense]

I am not sure the point of this post because it is just proving my point, so hopefully, the point was just to expand on my thoughts!

Yeah, sorry, the point was why Lafreniere isn't being penalized for his draft year - you asked that question - and the answer is because he's the best junior player in the world already, even compared to players a year older. Where as other juniors that are Lafreniere's age, are not necessarily the best junior players, and were not dominant at the WJC against older players.

And if by baselining, you mean remove this year from Lafrenierre's resume, you can't really do that in a meaningful analysis, because dismissing data (this season) to try and level the playing field just takes away relevant information. Perhaps the most relevant. So the question is, which of the younger players in the draft will be the best junior player in the world next year? If you can project that, and guess correctly, then you might have a player EQUAL to the value of Lafrenierre now, but with a bunch of 'ifs'. Or using another example, if you are looking at Mysak and you project he'll be a 50-60 goal guy next year in the OHL - perhaps with more projectable skills - then you might justify he is better than Quinn or Rossi.

Hopefully that made sense.

 

[MatchesMalone]

Hard to impress scouts without producing. Two generally go hand-in-hand, especially for forwards.

Although there are obviously many cases where scouts overlook underwhelming production for tools and projectability, usually it's a mistake to do so.

Scouts generally understand that players who are playing down the lineup on a good team or in a good league, or are physically underdeveloped compared to the competition, . As hard as it is to impress scouts without producing, I'd say it is even harder to produce numbers that will impress scouts playing on the third line. Fans and media are much more interested in production than scouts are. Overlooking underwhelming production for tools and projectability isn't a mistake, nor is it correct, it is a side effect.

Scouting is how players are evaluated, the numbers are road signs: they give scouts an idea of who to watch for. And they can act as buffers - if a scout or a team has a player ranked highly but that player isn't producing then they need to consider how context can explain the lack of production, and if it can't be explained by the context then they need to go back and watch the player more and figure out what's going on. Same thing vice versa if they have a player ranked poorly and the player starts producing.

 

[Hale The Villain]

I don't think you are looking at the problem correctly. It is better to use all information available. You need to ask if the younger players will actually have a better year next year than Rossi or Quinn had this year.

No one seems to knock Lafreniere for being a late birthday. I would argue that if we baseline for the same development year, Lafreniere isn't number one in this draft, but he showed great progress this year. Why try and predict Stuztle or Byfield making that jump when you can take the player that already did?

Perfectly said.

 

[Hale The Villain]

Scouts generally understand that players who are playing down the lineup on a good team or in a good league, or are physically underdeveloped compared to the competition, . As hard as it is to impress scouts without producing, I'd say it is even harder to produce numbers that will impress scouts playing on the third line. Fans and media are much more interested in production than scouts are. Overlooking underwhelming production for tools and projectability isn't a mistake, nor is it correct, it is a side effect.

Scouting is how players are evaluated, the numbers are road signs: they give scouts an idea of who to watch for. And they can act as buffers - if a scout or a team has a player ranked highly but that player isn't producing then they need to consider how context can explain the lack of production, and if it can't be explained by the context then they need to go back and watch the player more and figure out what's going on. Same thing vice versa if they have a player ranked poorly and the player starts producing.

I mostly agree with this. Obviously watching the players is a necessary and important part of projecting their potential. I'd never recommend we select a player if I've only ever seen them on hockeydb.

Have to combine the eye test with the stat test. I'd just argue that a lot of scouts overestimate their ability to project players based on the eye test and underestimate players who produce well in their given role in their draft year.

 

[MatchesMalone]

I mostly agree with this. Obviously watching the players is a necessary and important part of projecting their potential. I'd never recommend we select a player if I've only ever seen them on hockeydb.

Have to combine the eye test with the stat test. I'd just argue that a lot of scouts overestimate their ability to project players based on the eye test and underestimate players who produce well in their given role in their draft year.

Yeah that's fair. I mean, you'd want a scout to be confident, but only when they're sure. Ultimately it falls on the GM to know their scouts. I mean Anders Östberg must have been pushing pretty hard on Viktor Lodin for Dorion to have taken him in the 4th round last year. Unless there's something else going on behind the scenes we're not privy to, it would seem that that's a case where the scout was confident in the player and got it wrong. Should Dorion and Mann have trusted the brand new guy with a 4th round pick? Will they be more hesitant in the future with Östberg's recommendation?

I actually just came up with a theory as I was writing this. With all the new members of the scouting staff, and given how important this 2020 draft is to the franchise, how strong a draft it's supposed to be, and how many picks we have... I wonder if last year's draft (at least beyond the first round) was in large part a litmus test for the new scouts. Pinto was obviously Flanagan's guy through and through, as a native New Yorker. Lodin was obviously Östberg's guy, and Guenette seems to have been De Blois' pick. All three were in their first year on the Sens' scouting staff.

 

[ReginKarlssonLehner]

My guess is 2021 Sanderson (18+) is way better than 2020 Quinn/Rossi (18+) but their draft position may be close and more people have pushed for Rossi > Quinn > Sanderson all season.

Good point, hopefully we wont have to worry about that where we will be in a position to draft Drysdale instead... and that's with our 2nd pick.