2022 NHL Entry Draft Discussion

Status
Not open for further replies.

Green Snow Storm

Registered User
Jul 22, 2009
5,180
1,524
Canada
Really sounds like these guys have been told to lead with their words.
I'm the best scorer in the draft.
I'm a leader on and off the ice.
I'm blah blah blah.

I'd hope the teams scouting 1st./2nd./3rd./4th. round players know all this before they ever meet them.
Agreed. Their agents prepare them so well.
 
  • Like
Reactions: hockeywiz542

stickty111

Registered User
Jan 23, 2017
26,696
33,033

Options at No. 25

Noah Ostlund, C | Djurgardens-Sweden Jr. | 5-foot-11, 163 pounds
Scott Wheeler’s final ranking: 23 | Corey Pronman’s final ranking: 30

If Noah Ostlund is available at 25, his clever playmaking and smooth skating make him something of a no-brainer for the Leafs.
Ostlund plays with the kind of elite hockey brain that the Leafs covet and his consistency and composure on and off the puck allow me to believe he might be able to transition to North American professional hockey relatively soon. But his draft stock has soared lately, and it’s now a more sizeable “if” he’ll be available at 25.

Liam Ohgren, LW | Djurgardens-Sweden Jr. | 6-foot-0, 187 pounds
Wheeler’s final ranking: 14 | Pronman’s final ranking: 28

The ultra-competitive forward has a blend of scoring, skill, smarts and maturity that make him a very likely fit for the Leafs. My understanding is they’ve shown genuine interest in Ohgren, and he feels far more likely to be available than Ostlund.
Ohgren is not a massive player, but his sense of competitiveness seems to make up for that. Serving as captain for Sweden at the under-18 world championships is a valuable piece to his makeup, and the fact that his father, Andreas, is known as a relentless trainer (“The Gary Roberts of Sweden” was how he was described to me by one person who knows Ohgren well) could only help increase his chances of succeeding in the NHL.

The Canadiens, who also have interest in Ohgren, pick right after the Leafs. Picking Ohgren just lines up for so many reasons.

Rutger McGroarty, RW | USA U-18 NTDP | 6-foot-1, 200 pounds
Wheeler’s final ranking: 15 | Pronman’s final ranking: 18


McGroarty not only has size, great hands and an excellent shot, but what sticks out to me is his understanding of where he needs to be on the ice and the efforts he needs to make to succeed in the NHL. He captained the U-18 team and oozes charisma, which apparently impressed most NHL teams he interviewed with at the NHL combine. McGroarty interviewed with the Leafs at the combine and they continued to monitor him throughout this past season. His skating needs to improve, but the Leafs have to like that McGroarty already began working with their former longtime skating coach, Barb Underhill. His stride is awkward, but if the Leafs feel it can be refined then his scoring plus his drive to compete and win puck battles in all areas of the ice makes him another smart choice for the Leafs.

Denton Mateychuk, LHD | Moose Jaw-WHL | 5-foot-11, 188 pounds
Wheeler’s final ranking: 13 | Pronman’s final ranking: 14

I’ve heard more and more that there’s some interest in Mateychuk from teams drafting late in the first round who feel he’ll be available.
Pronman had Mateychuk going to the Leafs in his mock draft, too, and he certainly fits the profile: The incredibly crafty and pacey defenceman can read the game in a unique way, and projects to be the kind of blue liner who can join the team’s forwards with boatloads of skill and confidence. He skates remarkably well, increasing the chances that he could make the jump to the pros soon enough. The only question is whether he’ll indeed fall to 25. I have some reservations about that, at least compared to some of the other players on this list. But if Mateychuk is available, I wonder if the Leafs consider themselves fortunate, don’t overthink things and rush to the podium to make this selection.

Luca Del Bel Belluz, C | Mississauga-OHL | 6-foot, 175 pounds
Wheeler’s final ranking: 47 | Pronman’s final ranking: 27

I’m torn here between two Mississauga centres, both of whom the Leafs probably like in some capacity: Del Bel Belluz and Owen Beck.
Both play with skill, but Del Bel Belluz’s skating needs a little more work, and he could stand to bulk up some more. It wouldn’t surprise me if the Leafs do end up going for Del Bel Belluz given that his puck skills and his shot beat out Beck’s and his ceiling feels higher.

Beck might end up being a bit more of a complete package. I may be higher on Beck than others for the Leafs’ pick at 25, but I’m thinking about a safe option here for a possible third-line centre down the road, and both players fit that bill.

Wild cards to watch at 25


There is risk inherent in all of the players in this category, but if the Leafs want to take a swing and bet on a player’s upside, there are a few options.

Filip Mesar, RW | Poprad-Slovakia | 5-foot-10, 167 pounds
Wheeler’s final ranking: 21 | Pronman’s final ranking: 34


I can’t get enough of the way Mesar plays. He’s incredibly active, and always seems to want to use his high-end skating to create dynamic offensive options in the offensive zone or break up plays in the neutral zone. But, as they say, your greatest strength is your greatest weakness, and as much as I love watching him dazzle in all three zones, I wonder if it’s a sustainable option in the NHL. His size is a genuine concern, but there’s a fearlessness in his approach that the Leafs have proven to be fans of with past draft picks. Like nearly every player on this list, he uses his brain to impact the game, and did so playing against men for the last two seasons in Slovakia.

Isaac Howard, LW | USA U-18 NTDP | 5-foot-10, 182 pounds
Wheeler’s final ranking: 10 | Pronman’s final ranking: 33


My opinion on Howard has soured slightly after my initial list. He’s got the kind of hands, shot and sheer desire to score that will entice NHL teams in the first round, but my reservations are centred around how much he can impact the game in the neutral and defensive zones. I’m not as concerned about his size as I am about others on this list. He plays with the kind of moxie that seems to make up for his frame.

Brad Lambert, C | Pelicans-Finland | 6-foot, 175 pounds
Wheeler’s final ranking: 8 | Pronman’s final ranking: 15


I wrestled here with two names: Lambert and Russian left winger Ivan Miroshnichenko.

On talent alone, Miroshnichenko feels like a possible top 10 pick. But after being diagnosed with non-Hodgkins Lymphoma in March, there were questions about how that would impact his future. He’s since been cleared to play, which is a good thing for him and his future.

Then there’s Lambert, an elite talent whose skating stands out in this draft class and feels more likely to be available at 25 than Miroshnichenko.

There are questions about his intensity off the puck. Here’s Pronman: “He’s full of potential, even though I’ve seen him take a lot of nights off.” Pronman said he thinks he will be a top-six NHL winger but “he may frustrate coaches.”

What gets me thinking about Lambert as an option is the team’s long-standing proclivity for players who need to be handled differently. Josh Ho-Sang is an obvious comparison, and the entire Marlies organization went to great lengths to indulge Ho-Sang and his unique approach throughout this season. Do the Leafs have enough confidence in their coaching staff to get the best out of Lambert?

Interestingly, their development staff might have spent a little more time than usual watching his game, considering 2019 Leafs draft pick and recently-signed defenceman Mikko Kokkonen played for Lambert’s team in Finland this season.

Jagger Firkus, RW | Moose Jaw-WHL | 5-foot-9, 153 pounds
Wheeler’s final ranking: 34 | Pronman’s final ranking: 31


Firkus has the kind of hands that make his game pop. When he’s surveying the ice and making difficult passes, it’s hard not to appreciate his game and envision what the elusive, shifty forward might be capable of down the road. The Leafs are not short on, well, short and skilled players in their prospect pool. Part of me wonders if they’re looking to continually diversify the looks of their prospect group, especially at the top of the list, as evidenced by the selection of hulking forward Matthew Knies last year.

Lane Hutson, LHD | USA U-18 NTDP | 5-foot-8, 148 pounds
Wheeler’s final ranking: 19 | Pronman’s final ranking: 22


There will (obviously) be a team to take a risk on the supremely skilled Hutson, and they’ll do so knowing that the list of 5-foot-8 NHL defencemen is a short one.

First, Hutson appears to want to face the challenge head on, bringing a report to the NHL combine from his endocrinologist which indicated that his bone age is delayed relative to his age and that he’s expected to grow more. You have to appreciate the gusto and if he continues growing, his elite vision and ability to make dangerous plays look easy may end up benefiting an NHL team. The position of defence is changing, and we know Hutson has the ability to change the game when he’s on the ice. Hey, the Leafs have never shied away from drafting small players before, right?
Certainly a positive indication where Leafs will go towards.
If Mateychuk falls to 25, Leafs will not waste time and quickly select him. If not, looks like Ostlund, Ohgren, and Mcgroarty are all in play. Potentially even Lambert.
 

93LEAFS

Registered User
Nov 7, 2009
33,976
21,073
Toronto
NHLe would have had Point pegged as a top-15~ pick. There are almost ALWAYS signs when guys end up as stars, with the obvious exceptions being weak leagues, low playing time, etc. Biases like height cause players like Point to fall. When a guy puts up 1st round numbers in their d-1 and then improves to top-10 numbers in their D0 they're likely going to be a star.

Edit: After writing that I checked Baders star% on Point and he had a 47% chance to be a star in his draft year. His draft year. The only players that were more likely to become stars were (in order): TDA (85%), Drai (71%), Reinhart (71%), Nylander (70%), and Fiala (68%). The guys he was slightly ahead of? Pastrnak (44%), Ritchie (42%), Goldobin (41%). Every single one of those guys were 1st round picks, and four were top-10. Only Ritchie who is an average player, TDA who's a racist homophobe (but is objectively a good player), and Goldobin who washed out after a meh career didn't become stars. How Point slipped to the 3rd is just more bad scouting by the league and again how Tampa took advantage of draft biases.
I'm talking about the dramatic jump in skating.

I have a ton of issues with his model. Which I've already outlined. It clearly doesn't properly evaluate USNTDP players since he's using a catch-all number for them. It also has its own biases built in. He's measuring the USNTDP games which is loaded with the U-18 events, but hasn't bothered to create something that measures the olympics or world championships that lead his system to remove some international events and not others. Finally, NHLe isn't really the metric you should be using. The metric should be a stat that measures how a production of a player from the ages 16-19's numbers from those respective leagues translates to production 5 to 10 years down the line. NHLe is designed to measure production and how it carries from one year to the next. That is going to give a very inflated number for CHL players, where only the very top players go to the NHL at ages that young. I don't have a problem with analytics, but his methods are so simplistic and basically just a copy and paste of what was written in Stat Shot over a 6 years ago while not making any progress on it.
 

WTFMAN99

Registered User
Jun 17, 2009
33,066
11,078
I'm talking about the dramatic jump in skating.

I have a ton of issues with his model. Which I've already outlined. It clearly doesn't properly evaluate USNTDP players since he's using a catch-all number for them. It also has its own biases built in. He's measuring the USNTDP games which is loaded with the U-18 events, but hasn't bothered to create something that measures the olympics or world championships that lead his system to remove some international events and not others. Finally, NHLe isn't really the metric you should be using. The metric should be a stat that measures how a production of a player from the ages 16-19's numbers from those respective leagues translates to production 5 to 10 years down the line. NHLe is designed to measure production and how it carries from one year to the next. That is going to give a very inflated number for CHL players, where only the very top players go to the NHL at ages that young. I don't have a problem with analytics, but his methods are so simplistic and basically just a copy and paste of what was written in Stat Shot over a 6 years ago while not making any progress on it.

You have a horse or wishlist at 25 big guy? :P
 

supermann_98

Registered User
May 8, 2002
9,465
7,811
Visit site
My personal list, based on the projections and reading everything about the guys in our range and watching their highlight packages, etc.

1. Mateychuk - if he somehow falls to us I’ll be ecstatic. This would allow them to trade Sandin knowing a LHD prospect of his calibre (but 10x the skater) is still in the pipeline

2. McGroarty - exactly what we need in our lineup, similar to Knies, you can’t have enough big strong skilled wingers with heart who can snipe

3. Bischel - smooth skating big Dman who can move the puck but is maybe limited offensively, Guess what? This describes Slavin and Pesce but apparently we couldn’t get either of those guys even if we offered up Nylander.

4. Pickering - see Bischel above. Exactly what we need to replace Muzzin when his contract is finished

5. Ohlund - love this guys highlights and attitude but we already have Robertson, Amirov, and Knies as our LW’s of the future so positionally he’d be redundant. I’ll be a little jealous if Montreal takes him right after our pick
 
  • Like
Reactions: Morgs and Stigma

Fogelhund

Registered User
Sep 15, 2007
21,265
23,737
My personal list, based on the projections and reading everything about the guys in our range and watching their highlight packages, etc.

1. Mateychuk - if he somehow falls to us I’ll be ecstatic. This would allow them to trade Sandin knowing a LHD prospect of his calibre (but 10x the skater) is still in the pipeline

2. McGroarty - exactly what we need in our lineup, similar to Knies, you can’t have enough big strong skilled wingers with heart who can snipe

3. Bischel - smooth skating big Dman who can move the puck but is maybe limited offensively, Guess what? This describes Slavin and Pesce but apparently we couldn’t get either of those guys even if we offered up Nylander.

4. Pickering - see Bischel above. Exactly what we need to replace Muzzin when his contract is finished

5. Ohlund - love this guys highlights and attitude but we already have Robertson, Amirov, and Knies as our LW’s of the future so positionally he’d be redundant. I’ll be a little jealous if Montreal takes him right after our pick
Good to know that your personal list hasn't changed any in 20 minutes. :laugh:;) it is a good list though.
 

Stigma

Registered User
May 24, 2015
3,160
2,370
Mississauga
My personal list, based on the projections and reading everything about the guys in our range and watching their highlight packages, etc.

1. Mateychuk - if he somehow falls to us I’ll be ecstatic. This would allow them to trade Sandin knowing a LHD prospect of his calibre (but 10x the skater) is still in the pipeline

2. McGroarty - exactly what we need in our lineup, similar to Knies, you can’t have enough big strong skilled wingers with heart who can snipe

3. Bischel - smooth skating big Dman who can move the puck but is maybe limited offensively, Guess what? This describes Slavin and Pesce but apparently we couldn’t get either of those guys even if we offered up Nylander.

4. Pickering - see Bischel above. Exactly what we need to replace Muzzin when his contract is finished

5. Ohlund - love this guys highlights and attitude but we already have Robertson, Amirov, and Knies as our LW’s of the future so positionally he’d be redundant. I’ll be a little jealous if Montreal takes him right after our pick
This is very close to my list too. Although I'm high on Kulich as well. I can live with Beck and De Bel Belluz too. Firkus.....as mentioned, it feels as though we have an abundance of these type of players. If anything, these are the type of players I feel are more easily attainable in trades (unless he turns into a scoring machine, of course).
 

Fogelhund

Registered User
Sep 15, 2007
21,265
23,737
This is very close to my list too. Although I'm high on Kulich as well. I can live with Beck and De Bel Belluz too. Firkus.....as mentioned, it feels as though we have an abundance of these type of players. If anything, these are the type of players I feel are more easily attainable in trades (unless he turns into a scoring machine, of course).

Personally I think Beck doesn't have the skills to be the BPA at 25. I think it's probable there will be better options. If we make a trade, and get an early second round pick, for sure though. Same with De Bel Belluz, skating issues concern me.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Smif

Morgs

#16 #34 #44 #88 #91
Jul 12, 2015
19,546
15,414
London, ON
I'm talking about the dramatic jump in skating.

I have a ton of issues with his model. Which I've already outlined. It clearly doesn't properly evaluate USNTDP players since he's using a catch-all number for them. It also has its own biases built in. He's measuring the USNTDP games which is loaded with the U-18 events, but hasn't bothered to create something that measures the olympics or world championships that lead his system to remove some international events and not others. Finally, NHLe isn't really the metric you should be using. The metric should be a stat that measures how a production of a player from the ages 16-19's numbers from those respective leagues translates to production 5 to 10 years down the line. NHLe is designed to measure production and how it carries from one year to the next. That is going to give a very inflated number for CHL players, where only the very top players go to the NHL at ages that young. I don't have a problem with analytics, but his methods are so simplistic and basically just a copy and paste of what was written in Stat Shot over a 6 years ago while not making any progress on it.
Firstly, he fixed the issue with NTDP and mentioned it barely changed a thing- as it shouldn't have because only the NTDP plays in the NTDP meaning you only can compare that 'league' with the only team in it. Not to mention with USDP it does factor in the U18 events because... all NTDP played the same type of games and he's using historical comparables in the same 'league'. So long as everyone was doubled it didn't matter besides the raw stats/USHL numbers and he did state a few guys (like Caufield) saw decent drops because of it.

Secondly NHLe is by far the most translatable analytic we have in regards to predicting the future success of a prospect as we can historically compare the success of other prospects in the league who put up similar numbers and what they did in their NHL careers. What youve described as needed is LITERALLY his Star/NHL model to a tee because it uses context for the production. Not to mention NHLe is just one factor in a long list of important things you need to look for in prospects.

His rankings are irrelevant as context is completely lost and it spits out the best chance of stars/nhl% and completely leaves out the context behind it, and there are major exceptions which hold it back (weak leagues, playing time, too strong a league), but it is easily the first thing I look to when looking at a prospect so long as you have half a brain and understand the context behind it.
 

93LEAFS

Registered User
Nov 7, 2009
33,976
21,073
Toronto
Firstly, he fixed the issue with NTDP and mentioned it barely changed a thing- as it shouldn't have because only the NTDP plays in the NTDP meaning you only can compare that 'league' with the only team in it. Not to mention with USDP it does factor in the U18 events because... all NTDP played the same type of games and he's using historical comparables in the same 'league'. So long as everyone was doubled it didn't matter besides the raw stats/USHL numbers and he did state a few guys (like Caufield) saw decent drops because of it.

Secondly NHLe is by far the most translatable analytic we have in regards to predicting the future success of a prospect as we can historically compare the success of other prospects in the league who put up similar numbers and what they did in their NHL careers. What youve described as needed is LITERALLY his Star/NHL model to a tee because it uses context for the production. Not to mention NHLe is just one factor in a long list of important things you need to look for in prospects.

His rankings are irrelevant as context is completely lost and it spits out the best chance of stars/nhl% and completely leaves out the context behind it, and there are major exceptions which hold it back (weak leagues, playing time, too strong a league), but it is easily the first thing I look to when looking at a prospect so long as you have half a brain and understand the context behind it.
No he hasn't fixed the issue with the USNTDP. Because what he's doing is measuring every game they play at the same level. He's decided to count 4 nation, 5 nation, U-18 tournament games in the case of all USNTDP players, while not counting those same events for other players (because he doesn't count internationals). The USNTDP is a nightmare to quantify because of all the different levels they play, and using just the USHL transfer rate for them would be very misleading. That is a major flaw in the metric double counting or not.

And, no. Immediate transferability of NHLe is a limited metric not designed to measure future performance. What you need to do is use the general scoring rate and how it transfers 5 years down the line for a much larger sample of CHL players. Otherwise you are measuring a much smaller sample of mostly elite players. Seriously, the people from Hockey Abstract/Statshot came up with more advanced forms of NHLe over a 6 years ago specifically designed to measure long-term scoring, rather than year-to-year transitions.

How is his model not flawed, when he manages to count pretty much all international games for USNTDP, but ignores players who played in the same tournaments "because they are international events." He doesn't count 4 nations, 5 nations or U-18's for anyone else, which makes up the numbers for USTNDP year totals. He also ignores other major events which have value on the premise "they aren't as valuable."

Anyone with half a brain can see their are obvious flaws in a method that manages to count games like that. If a game between Sweden and USA at the U-18 is only managed to be counted for USNTDP players, but not players on Sweden.
 
Last edited:

Morgs

#16 #34 #44 #88 #91
Jul 12, 2015
19,546
15,414
London, ON
No he hasn't fixed the issue with the USNTDP. Because what he's doing is measuring every game they play at the same level. He's decided to count 4 nation, 5 nation, U-18 tournament games in the case of all USNTDP players, while not counting those same events for other players (because he doesn't count internationals). The USNTDP is a nightmare to quantify because of all the different levels they play, and using just the USHL transfer rate for them would be very misleading. That is a major flaw in the metric double counting or not.

And, no. Immediate transferability of NHLe is a limited metric not designed to measure future performance. What you need to do is use the general scoring rate and how it transfers 5 years down the line for a much larger sample of CHL players. Otherwise you are measuring a much smaller sample of mostly elite players. Seriously, the people from Hockey Abstract/Statshot came up with more advanced forms of NHLe over a 6 years ago specifically designed to measure long-term scoring, rather than year-to-year transitions.
Except years of data has spit out the number that best quantifies the league in regards to its competition. It is a nightmare to quantify (which is why I personally only count USHL data- similar to how I only count Lekkerimaki's SHL and Ohgren's J20 in my data), but people much smarter than me have done the research.

That's the whole issue. You're seeing NHLe as only a transferable number where there is an entire premise behind it is to use the number in a historical capacity based on current league scoring rates and trends. Using NHLe as a tool to simply state: this guy in the KHL had a 0.6 PPG, so he would score at a 0.4 rate in the NHL is asinine and using it too literally. The idea is to see how 30+ years of production data translated on a general scale can show trends in regards to a prospects progression throughout their years as a 'prospect'. It's why we can look back and say Brayden Point should have been a top-10 pick, what was the bias that caused him to drop to 79 or why is Gleb ranked in the 50s with some of the best historical comparables in the draft.
 

93LEAFS

Registered User
Nov 7, 2009
33,976
21,073
Toronto
Except years of data has spit out the number that best quantifies the league in regards to its competition. It is a nightmare to quantify (which is why I personally only count USHL data- similar to how I only count Lekkerimaki's SHL and Ohgren's J20 in my data), but people much smarter than me have done the research.

That's the whole issue. You're seeing NHLe as only a transferable number where there is an entire premise behind it is to use the number in a historical capacity based on current league scoring rates and trends. Using NHLe as a tool to simply state: this guy in the KHL had a 0.6 PPG, so he would score at a 0.4 rate in the NHL is asinine and using it too literally. The idea is to see how 30+ years of production data translated on a general scale can show trends in regards to a prospects progression throughout their years as a 'prospect'. It's why we can look back and say Brayden Point should have been a top-10 pick, what was the bias that caused him to drop to 79 or why is Gleb ranked in the 50s with some of the best historical comparables in the draft.
You are ignoring my main point of contention. Which is why does an U-18 event game count for anyone who plays for USNTDP (since its in their catch-all stats) but it doesn't matter for the team playing them. That is a massive flaw in his system.

No, the issue with using NHLe, especially from the CHL is that it only captures elite talent. Whereas transfers for other leagues uses a much larger sample set. Which runs into major issues when transferring it into a catch-all across leagues. Which is why you need to measure long-term effectiveness. NHLe for example would ignore high scorers who failed but didn't play in the NHL until years later or never at all.

When a guy goes all out against Slafkovsky being a bad pick, but manages to ignore about 33% of his season where he excelled against high level comp or played well in Hlinka. There are serious questions to be raised about the validity of what he is saying.

People like Iain Fyffe figured this out over half a decade ago. He basically copied Fyffe's system and made it worse.
 

Future

Registered User
Feb 8, 2011
10,707
3,512
Ontario
Seems like most people here are high on Mateychuk, but I have some questions about the translatability of his game.

From what I’ve seen from him, he needs a lot of work defensively. Often I’ve seen him losing his position on the ice and struggling while defending in transition. Also seems to lack that real competitiveness and grit compared to a Rasmus Sandin, for example.

Also his skating is talked about as a major strength and some have compared him to Makar, but I don’t see the elite top end speed there of a Makar or even a Morgan Rielly. He seems to be more agile than anything and his forward acceleration is impressive, yet going backwards he seems quite average.

Don’t get me wrong, I see the appeal there. These are just questions I have about him.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TimeZone

mistaclick

Registered User
Feb 2, 2022
292
431
Seems like most people here are high on Mateychuk, but I have some questions about the translatability of his game.

From what I’ve seen from him, he needs a lot of work defensively. Often I’ve seen him losing his position on the ice and struggling while defending in transition. Also seems to lack that real competitiveness and grit compared to a Rasmus Sandin, for example.

Also his skating is talked about as a major strength and some have compared him to Makar, but I don’t see the elite top end speed there of a Makar or even a Morgan Rielly. He seems to be more agile than anything and his forward acceleration is impressive, yet going backwards he seems quite average.

Don’t get me wrong, I see the appeal there. These are just questions I have about him.
Funny enough, I thought in my viewings of Mateychuk that his skating posture/stride reminds me of another former Moose Jaw defenseman, maybe it’s a bit of body type too. That one worked out for us well in Rielly! I agree he can have his moments defensively though. At our pick you run to the podium to announce his name if it can be done, but he should be gone beforehand.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad