2024 NHL Draft: Play with no weenie, for Celebrini

[57special]

I guess this is the official ranking list?

NHL Draft Prospects Rankings | NHL.com

Top prospects for the NHL Draft as ranked by the NHL Central Scouting Bureau.

www.nhl.com

NHL rankings are always bad. Mackenzie's tend to be the most realistic, but hasn't come out yet

 

[Wabit]

NHL rankings are always bad. Mackenzie's tend to be the most realistic, but hasn't come out yet

None of the lists vary too much from each other for the top-30 or so. They all use the same cliff notes when making their lists.

 

[DANOZ28]

if not a RHD prospect im guessing billy tries again for a power forward type with size instead of BPA. this year im hoping bpa, (not my usual)

 

[Wabit]

if not a RHD prospect im guessing billy tries again for a power forward type with size instead of BPA. this year im hoping bpa, (not my usual)

This is the draft for RD and power FWD (at least the build to be one). Most of the 1st round players are listed at 6'0" 180 lbs or larger. It comes down to mentality after that.

 

[Webster]

Some of these forwards, only 18, over 6 feet and 200 lbs. That's impressive. I guess they won't grow much taller, but can put on even more weight. The Wild could use a couple of those talented big boys.

 

[57special]

None of the lists vary too much from each other for the top-30 or so. They all use the same cliff notes when making their lists.

Mackenzie's list is a compilation of actual scouts and team officials. No "Cliff's notes". It's kind of funny that every year he gets criticized by people who don't get this... he simply uses his very extensive contacts in the NHL to put together a list, collates, and presents it. Year after year his list tends to be the most accurate, because he is actually talking to the people picking the players.

Most other lists are either a private scouting organization, an individual, Nothing wrong with that, but some of them simply re-hash whatever lists they have read, like you said. I've caught a couple repeating the same erroneous "facts" about a prospect that they never would've said if they had actually seen the player in person or on screen. One of them was copying the other, but as we all know from our school days, if you are gonna cheat, at least cheat off the smart girl, not the dopey guy in the back of the room.

 

[57special]

Some of these forwards, only 18, over 6 feet and 200 lbs. That's impressive. I guess they won't grow much taller, but can put on even more weight. The Wild could use a couple of those talented big boys.

There's a school of thought that you go for the most talented, but immature player(Elias Petersson, Aho, Pasternk), as he has more room to grow and improve, rather than the early maturing type who lords it over juniors, but is maxed out physically at 18yo(Bellows, Crouse, Wahlstrom).

Love to have size and reach, but every aspect is important.

This is the most confusing draft for me in a long time, partly because we don't have an obvious positional need, and partly because some of the most talented prospects also have some fairly big question marks.

 

[Wabit]

Mackenzie's list is a compilation of actual scouts and team officials. No "Cliff's notes". It's kind of funny that every year he gets criticized by people who don't get this... he simply uses his very extensive contacts in the NHL to put together a list, collates, and presents it. Year after year his list tends to be the most accurate, because he is actually talking to the people picking the players.

Most other lists are either a private scouting organization, an individual, Nothing wrong with that, but some of them simply re-hash whatever lists they have read, like you said. I've caught a couple repeating the same erroneous "facts" about a prospect that they never would've said if they had actually seen the player in person or on screen. One of them was copying the other, but as we all know from our school days, if you are gonna cheat, at least cheat off the smart girl, not the dopey guy in the back of the room.

The lists accuracy are all about the same. So his list comes from talking to people that have in in their best interest to not reveal everything. Draft boards are some of the most highly guarded things by teams in any sports.

The info they give is nice, for sure, because I don't have the time to watch 500 prospects and rank them all every year. But I won't take any of them as gospel or say we should pick this guy over that guy because his name being higher on a list.

There's a school of thought that you go for the most talented, but immature player(Elias Petersson, Aho, Pasternk), as he has more room to grow and improve, rather than the early maturing type who lords it over juniors, but is maxed out physically at 18yo(Bellows, Crouse, Wahlstrom).

Love to have size and reach, but every aspect is important.

This is the most confusing draft for me in a long time, partly because we don't have an obvious positional need, and partly because some of the most talented prospects also have some fairly big question marks.

C, RD, RHS winger

 

[BagHead]

There's a school of thought that you go for the most talented, but immature player(Elias Petersson, Aho, Pasternk), as he has more room to grow and improve, rather than the early maturing type who lords it over juniors, but is maxed out physically at 18yo(Bellows, Crouse, Wahlstrom).

Love to have size and reach, but every aspect is important.

This is the most confusing draft for me in a long time, partly because we don't have an obvious positional need, and partly because some of the most talented prospects also have some fairly big question marks.

Stramel... minus the lording.

I actually like that school of thought, taking the most skilled guy who may not be done maturing yet. It's got some risk involved, the main one being that they actually are done maturing. Another risk is that they could be a skilled enough player, but have major flaws in their game, like defensive or 5v5 play, but I guess that's something that's more true of all players and should be accounted for regardless of skill level.

If you're selective about who you take and weigh the risks appropriately, I think taking the most skilled player is almost always the best option. You won't get centers without drafting centers, but you also won't get centers by drafting centers who aren't good enough to even make it.

I have no idea which player this year is the most skilled player, and it'll probably be nearly impossible for me to get upset by the pick, minus another Filip Johansson or Charlie Stramel style reach.

 

[Saga of the Elk]

None of the lists vary too much from each other for the top-30 or so. They all use the same cliff notes when making their lists.

Mackenzie's is a poll of various scouts and other sources. And it has had a very good success rate over the years for that reason.

 

[57special]

Stramel... minus the lording.

I actually like that school of thought, taking the most skilled guy who may not be done maturing yet. It's got some risk involved, the main one being that they actually are done maturing. Another risk is that they could be a skilled enough player, but have major flaws in their game, like defensive or 5v5 play, but I guess that's something that's more true of all players and should be accounted for regardless of skill level.

If you're selective about who you take and weigh the risks appropriately, I think taking the most skilled player is almost always the best option. You won't get centers without drafting centers, but you also won't get centers by drafting centers who aren't good enough to even make it.

I have no idea which player this year is the most skilled player, and it'll probably be nearly impossible for me to get upset by the pick, minus another Filip Johansson or Charlie Stramel style reach.

I would also add IQ(as in hockey IQ), character, competitive drive being important parts of the equation. I grew up with a family on the same block as me...played road hockey, shinny, organized hockey with the younger one. The eldest was an early 1st rounder. He had size, shot, physicality, skill, was leader of his Memorial Cup winning junior team, etc. His brother was about the same size and strength, had good skill, and was a better, more natural skater. He would be great for a game or two, then would disappear. He just didn't want it enough. He liked his water skiiing in the summer, cars, girls ... normal things. Didn't have the drive to be the best.

Almost all successful prospects are very driven committed, and competitive. If you are a bit wishy washy, you will fall behind. That's what i like about Rossi, even though he isn't the fastest, and has a size handicap. If he does fail in the league, then it won't be because he isn't trying hard enough.
A guy like Dmitri Sokolov is an example of a guy who wasn't committed enough(I think, not close enough to the situation to say for sure).

 

[AKL]

He just didn't want it enough. He liked his water skiiing in the summer, cars, girls ... normal things. Didn't have the drive to be the best.

Almost all successful prospects are very driven committed, and competitive.

For the record, this is why I'm strongly opposed to moving Rossi. He doesn't have all the physical tools some other guys have, but he has the drive and the work ethic that's required, but often missing.

EDIT: I didn't even finish reading your post mentioning Rossi before I posted, I just saw that section and Rossi came to mind, oops

 

[Circulartheory]

Not reallying following the chain but just wanted to say - I USED to say, drafting a d-man makes sense because there are many talented defensemen options to be picked at #13 that isn't off the board.

However, now that I'm watching more vids, Iginla and Greentree are moving up and I see some clear red flags from the dmen options. Very high risk options. TLDR Jiricek (very raw), Parekh (makes high risk plays), Yakemchuk (average movements), Levyshunov (average hockey sense).

I feel like Greentree might be the Wild pick. He reminds me a little of Boldy - hes got the big frame BG loves, actually moves decently well, and like Boldy, has some lowkey nifty puck skills. And while we need a bluechip dman prospect, you can never say the Wild don't need more offense. And he's a realistic pick at 13. And we could use a RW option if Yurov is moving to center

 

[57special]

Not reallying following the chain but just wanted to say - I USED to say, drafting a d-man makes sense because there are many talented defensemen options to be picked at #13 that isn't off the board.

However, now that I'm watching more vids, Iginla and Greentree are moving up and I see some clear red flags from the dmen options. Very high risk options. TLDR Jiricek (very raw), Parekh (makes high risk plays), Yakemchuk (average movements), Levyshunov (average hockey sense).

I feel like Greentree might be the Wild pick. He reminds me a little of Boldy - hes got the big frame BG loves, actually moves decently well, and like Boldy, has some lowkey nifty puck skills. And while we need a bluechip dman prospect, you can never say the Wild don't need more offense. And he's a realistic pick at 13. And we could use a RW option if Yurov is moving to center

But that's just it, many of the Dmen do provide offense, but from the back end. Having Faber, Brodin, Spurgeon(?), and Middleton allows us to gamble on a high risk, offensive Dman at #13, rather than settle for a 2nd tier forward, if that's the way things shake out. I like Greentree, and have doubts about Parekh, but that latter has done ridiculously good things offensively this year, while Greentree is just kind of.... nice, but we've seen it before many times. Also love the RHD aspect of Parekh, and Yak.

If it's a choice between Parekh, Levshunov, Yakemchuk and Greentree, Greentree is last on the list.

 

[Digitalbooya]

I hope that Levshunov’s average hockey sense drops him down to #13.

 

[16thOverallSaveUs]

MBN at 13 would be a bit of a reach for me. I think he’s kinda like a right handed Ohgren. Great shot. Pretty good skater. Good compete. Skill is meh.

I would just take a swing on the most upside at 13, which to me is Greentree / Sennecke / Yakemchuk

 

[f7ben]

But that's just it, many of the Dmen do provide offense, but from the back end. Having Faber, Brodin, Spurgeon(?), and Middleton allows us to gamble on a high risk, offensive Dman at #13, rather than settle for a 2nd tier forward, if that's the way things shake out. I like Greentree, and have doubts about Parekh, but that latter has done ridiculously good things offensively this year, while Greentree is just kind of.... nice, but we've seen it before many times. Also love the RHD aspect of Parekh, and Yak.

If it's a choice between Parekh, Levshunov, Yakemchuk and Greentree, Greentree is last on the list.

Dickinson also

 

[Circulartheory]

But that's just it, many of the Dmen do provide offense, but from the back end. Having Faber, Brodin, Spurgeon(?), and Middleton allows us to gamble on a high risk, offensive Dman at #13, rather than settle for a 2nd tier forward, if that's the way things shake out. I like Greentree, and have doubts about Parekh, but that latter has done ridiculously good things offensively this year, while Greentree is just kind of.... nice, but we've seen it before many times. Also love the RHD aspect of Parekh, and Yak.

If it's a choice between Parekh, Levshunov, Yakemchuk and Greentree, Greentree is last on the list.

It allows us to gamble but I have never been a fan of huge swings. I always think in a group that high risk prospects that always drop, there are always players who are seen as a bit safer but above average skill that, with some time, put it together to be a better sum-of-all-the parts guy (Boldy, JEE and now Yurov).

Parekh just leaves a bad taste in my mouth. While a huge fan of Jiricek previously, I'm now seeing a very raw player, which also don't like that taste. Similar taste with Yakemchuk. Levshunov I will give a pass and select.

But Greentree is a rising prospect and belongs in that group. Originally had him last in that group but as I watch more vids, he keeps creeping up and Parekh/Jiricek/Yakemchuk keeps creeping lower. There still a few months to finialize what I'm feeling but I'm feeling a trend. And he's not slouch, he leads the OHL in forward points scored by a first-year draft elibigle player (Parekh is the only 1st-year above Greentree, but Greentree is also 6-2 and plays both a power and skill game).

I hope that Levshunov’s average hockey sense drops him down to #13.

Heh, I guess I didn't mean to suggest not picking him at #13 bc everything else just outweights the cons. But it just to say - I'm not a huge fan of this years draft. Every prospect that isn't in the top 5 is going to be come with some asterisks, more than other years.

 

[Dr Jan Itor]

Heh, I guess I didn't mean to suggest not picking him at #13 bc everything else just outweights the cons. But it just to say - I'm not a huge fan of this years draft. Every prospect that isn't in the top 5 is going to be come with some asterisks, more than other years.

Which years doesn't this apply to?

 

[Circulartheory]

Which years doesn't this apply to?

I think the key part of the statement is "more than other years". My feeling on this draft is its similar to 2021, which I was probably equally unenthused.

What years my unexcitement didn't apply to? 2010-2018. Thought excited for draft day on all those years about the top 15 picks. I was okay about 2019-2020. Wasn't too excited about 2021-2023 but was REALLY happy we ended with my favourite prospects in Wallstedt and Ohgren, so I'm hoping a similar prospect will fall (I'm looking at Lindstrom, Buium and Silayev but I have them top 8 picks so not holding out much hope).

I think these players we are talking about 8-15 would go 12-25 in 2010-2018. And I'm trying to make this gauge with my original opinions (But fair to say hindsight 50-50 so there is bias).

 

[57special]

Dickinson also

he's a different story. High floor, vg defender, big, excellent skater, perhaps limited offensive ceiling. If he's there at #13 I jump on him, even though he is a LHD.

 

[f7ben]

he's a different story. High floor, vg defender, big, excellent skater, perhaps limited offensive ceiling. If he's there at #13 I jump on him, even though he is a LHD.

Pretty sure he and Levshunov are gone by 6.

 

[DANOZ28]

same as michkov falling to philly at #7 , IF buium falls to NJ at #10 i'd trade up. imo i think the 4 top D will go 3-9.

 

[Spurgeon]

Feel like if there’s one year the Wild win a draft lottery, it’d be the year when they can’t move into 1st & there isn’t really a consensus #3.

Not that I’d complain, but it’d be fitting.

 

[57special]

Feel like if there’s one year the Wild win a draft lottery, it’d be the year when they can’t move into 1st & there isn’t really a consensus #3.

Not that I’d complain, but it’d be fitting.

Yeah, i've thought that. Last year, it was Bedard, Fantilli, Carlsson. This year, it's Celebrini, and... I'm sure they'll be some really good ones, but I can see faults in about all of them. Demidov, maybe, but him playing nothing but MHL makes it tough to gauge what he will do against better competition.

I wouldn't be shocked if Iginla is better than Lindstrom and Catton, or Parekh better than Levshunov and Dickinson, but I sure wouldn't want to bet on it. If i was BG and i lucked into the #3 I might consider trading down to the 7-8 spot, and get another first in the teens(if there is a team), or a 1st next year, if i am trading with a team that i think will be a lottery team.