Guadana
Registered User
Sounds adultish and sad.
Prospect Info: 2024 NHL Draft Thread
- Thread starter Devs3cups
- Start date
I’m sorry. Woukd it help if I said the team should pick the next Ben Lovejoy?
Guadana
Registered User
I'm pro Nygard. Seems like the perfect piece with a floor of a 3rd line winger that brings a physical game.
I'm in the Nygard camp too.
Forge
Blissfully Mediocre
I'm still of the opinion that if MBN is outside of the top 15 of Bobbie Mac's final rankings then I think there's a fairly small chance we'll take him at 10.
Bobbie Mac's rankings aren't the end all be all, but I still think they are the most telling info we have in how the draft may play out
Bobbie Mac's rankings aren't the end all be all, but I still think they are the most telling info we have in how the draft may play out
He's on the list for @evnted and myself, we just haven't gotten to him yet.
There isn't any Ben Lovejoy comparative players this year. They needed to win the Lottery last year to get the next Lovejoy.
evnted
Registered User
- Apr 14, 2016
- 681
- 1,096
while i agree bobs list is a great measure of where teams stand, i have couple thoughts on this:
-the worlds, without a doubt, have given him a bump (same as solberg) largely due to visibility. and while mbn was solid through the hockeyallsvenskan season, he really stepped up in the playoffs, which took place not that much before he likely surveyed those scouts. imo mbn shining brighter on the bigger stage/when it matters will likely be reflected in his final list
-bob only asked for teams top 12s, not 15. the reason his board is bigger is because he kept seeing the same 15 names appear and he thought it made sense to include all of them. 2 other names had top 12 support (1 of which was actually top 10). i cant say where mbn landed for these teams, but its feasible to think he was just outside everyones top 12, which wouldnt be reflected on the list due to how polling was conducted
-tom does as tom feels lol he makes plenty of picks that reject our notion of consensus, so for him specifically i dont think it would matter much. his early round drafting almost feels like hes putting together puzzle pieces, so if the team thinks mbn is as important to the roster as much as some of the posters here do, i would anticipate him being high on the board
Lou Bloom
Registered User
- Oct 14, 2020
- 978
- 1,820
Just last year Bob had Simashev 19th (went 6th), Willander 20th (went 11th) and But 22nd (went 12th). I feel confident having watched a ton of Nygard that he's a clear top 15 player in this class. Add to the fact that Fitzgerald has commented about how this team needs to improve when it comes to 200ft play and you'd have to think a player like Nygard that checks a lot of boxes that the team is lacking will be heavily discussed.
Forge
Blissfully Mediocre
Funny that two of those were taken by Arizona and another one of the more recent big shockers was hayton, also taken by the coyotes
At 10, I'm pretty content that we'll not do anything drastically crazy
Guadana
Registered User
Benson amd dropped dropped, Simashev, But, Willander were drafted higher. Perreault, Barlow, Crystall, Heidt dropped.
Danielson still was drafted higher he was 16th in the Bob's list, he was drafted by Detroit by 9th pick. .It's like something familiar.
Rankings outside Bob are all over the ice this year.
Fitz has huge needs and one of the needs is not waiting for too long. He drafted Holtz for need in top ten(Perfetti and Rossi were ranked higher), he drafted Nemec for need in top ten. Only Luke was top 10 pick for ceiling.
This draft have different opinions about where who should be drafted, who is better and why. Mckenzie talks only with 10-12 scouts as I remember. 20 other teams could have different opinions. And as I understand its scouts, not "head scouts" - so even opinion of the teams this scouts work for could be different. 16th rank in Mckenzie list means nothing, and I believe its not even final.[/QUOTE]
I have Nygard ranked #7. Taking him at #10 is not *crazy*, it's "you're lucky he is still on the board".
At least, in my view.
We need to keep in mind that while *my view* is clearly not the be-all-end-all, I've been doing this a long time, I do a lot of research, I am mindful of context with prospects and I have strong convictions. Sometimes I'm wrong, but I'm probably right more than the average idiot.
In this sense, we compare me to an NHL scout or scouting director. While a head scout on one team might listen to me and think I'm an idiot for ranking Nygard at #7 because he doesn't have Nygard in his top 20, a head scout on another team might say "that's all?" because he's ranked Nygard #5.
Nygard has myriad qualities which make him a rare player of a model which NHL executives annually value more than draft-writers -- big & fast & physical & near-NHL-ready & huge shot & ridiculously smart & competitive & versatile & two-way player.
Numerical rankings are flawed by definition. What is the correct way to properly rank Catton and Silayev? One is a scoring forward, the other a defensive defenseman. One is smallish and not fast but preternaturally skilled with the puck, the other is 6'7 and fast but can struggle with the puck. I mean, you couldn't have two more different players. But when I'm ranking there is a point where I'm choosing for a slot and Catton is my top LW and Silayev my top LD and I have to choose one. Even as I do this, I know how inherently ridiculous I am for doing this. But people love rankings, and so I do them.
With Nygard and the Devils, certainly there is a chance they will take him. We can probably say the same for 5 or 6 players, but we must include Nygard in that conversation regardless of what one draft writer's list or another draft writer's list says. Because Fitzgerald has shown a willingness to go off the board even in the first round for "his guy" (see: Mukhamadullin) this is a GM who has repeatedly told the media he intends to get NJ bigger, more defensively sound and harder to play against.
My next rock band's first album will now be entitled: "Adultish and Sad".
That's realistic enough, but as everyone including myself keeps saying, this year's draft in particular will be hard to project. There are multiple guys like Eiserman and Sennecke and Connolly who can go top 5 or fall out of the top 20. I've seen Silayev ranked #2 overall and outside the top 15. It's bananas.
Dickinson to the Devils would be great in my opinion. But 6'3-205 solid two-way defensemen with high-end skating tend to be liked more by NHL execs than draft-writers, so I don't see him falling that far.
Forge
Blissfully Mediocre
When I said "At 10, I'm pretty content that we'll not do anything drastically crazy" I wasn't suggesting he would be a crazy pick there, I was just saying that I feel good that Fitz won't do anything crazy there in general. So any pick fitz makes is more or less likely going to make sense. I feel good that it won't be a truly off the board random
That post came off worded oddly with regards to meaning, I know
My post was oddly worded, too. What I meant to say was: "I'm a crazy idiot, but there are even stupider and crazier people than me working in NHL front offices right now."
Forge
Blissfully Mediocre
Does Burnevik play with any edge to his game? I haven't seen much of anything, just random clips and whatnot. Seems to have quick hands, good awareness on where space is, but the skating looks kind of clunky to me and I was curious if that was offset with a physical component at all
Just make sure you give @Guadana a shout out in the liner notes. Are those still a thing in the digital age?
Guadana
Registered User
My next rock band's first album will now be entitled: "Gates of Nygarð". Scandinavic folk metal. May be with some more... modern lyrics.
I've seen Austin Burnevik in a couple USHL games which I watched with other prospects in mind. He got my attention a bit because he's huge and has skill, but I didn't notice himself use his size as anything other than an asset to protect the puck from defenders and win corner battles. The skating is certainly the problem with him, and although I can see a team drafting him on the basis of size/scoring, I imagine it wouldn't be until very late in the draft, like Round 6/7.
2024 Draft Profile:
RW Terik Parascak, Prince George WHL
To be honest, I was kind of dreading this write-up, because there is a lot to like -- even love -- about this player, and he put up some whopping numbers. For a rookie in the WHL to top 100 points is rare -- and Parascak opened a lot of eyes with a stunning 43-62-105 scoring line in just 68 games. But -- and I wish I could sugarcoat this -- his skating is so genuinely poor, that even with an elite IQ and a tremendous skill set, this is a player who might not make it in today's NHL.
Parascak has a consensus ranking in the late 1st round. He has several elite traits, usually found in a top 10 caliber pick. He is one of the best passers in the entire draft class, and his offensive IQ is off the charts. He's a terrific shooter and puck-handler. His stratospheric awareness and almost uncanny sense of anticipation allow him to play with a seeming 6th sense for where the puck is going to be, where his teammates are going to be, where the lanes and open ice are and how they can be opened up. On the power play, he operates like a surgeon. Once the defense backs up he will manipulate and beat defenders as if he has it planned two steps ahead.
On the power play in particular -- when players are more set up in formation and the pace becomes more methodical in the offensive zone -- Parascak is every bit as great as Berkly Catton and looks like a player who should be discussed in the top 10. The problem is when the game speeds up in open ice, Parascak gets lost in the pace whereas a Catton most certainly does not.
Parascak is a very poor skater with a very clunky, almost uncoordinated stride. He's not "below average". In a footrace to a corner, a below average skater would beat Parascak by a step or two. Now imagine him against NHL players. It's problematic to say the least. Though -- again -- his almost supernatural awareness allows him to often beat opposition to pucks in space, in the defensive zone he's a bit of a liability and in the neutral zone he always seems to be chasing the rush instead of leading it.
I'd say Parascak's big hope is if an NHL skating coach can completely undo and reinvent his entire skating stride and mechanics, from the top down. Because this kid is so unbelievably good with the puck, if he even nears average skating speed and agility, he has serious scoring upside at any level. But that's a huge IF, and as such I'm not sure this is a player I would draft in the 1st round, and maybe even not in the 2nd. It's a hurtful reality, especially considering how enjoyable it is to watch him tear up the WHL.
RW Terik Parascak, Prince George WHL
To be honest, I was kind of dreading this write-up, because there is a lot to like -- even love -- about this player, and he put up some whopping numbers. For a rookie in the WHL to top 100 points is rare -- and Parascak opened a lot of eyes with a stunning 43-62-105 scoring line in just 68 games. But -- and I wish I could sugarcoat this -- his skating is so genuinely poor, that even with an elite IQ and a tremendous skill set, this is a player who might not make it in today's NHL.
Parascak has a consensus ranking in the late 1st round. He has several elite traits, usually found in a top 10 caliber pick. He is one of the best passers in the entire draft class, and his offensive IQ is off the charts. He's a terrific shooter and puck-handler. His stratospheric awareness and almost uncanny sense of anticipation allow him to play with a seeming 6th sense for where the puck is going to be, where his teammates are going to be, where the lanes and open ice are and how they can be opened up. On the power play, he operates like a surgeon. Once the defense backs up he will manipulate and beat defenders as if he has it planned two steps ahead.
On the power play in particular -- when players are more set up in formation and the pace becomes more methodical in the offensive zone -- Parascak is every bit as great as Berkly Catton and looks like a player who should be discussed in the top 10. The problem is when the game speeds up in open ice, Parascak gets lost in the pace whereas a Catton most certainly does not.
Parascak is a very poor skater with a very clunky, almost uncoordinated stride. He's not "below average". In a footrace to a corner, a below average skater would beat Parascak by a step or two. Now imagine him against NHL players. It's problematic to say the least. Though -- again -- his almost supernatural awareness allows him to often beat opposition to pucks in space, in the defensive zone he's a bit of a liability and in the neutral zone he always seems to be chasing the rush instead of leading it.
I'd say Parascak's big hope is if an NHL skating coach can completely undo and reinvent his entire skating stride and mechanics, from the top down. Because this kid is so unbelievably good with the puck, if he even nears average skating speed and agility, he has serious scoring upside at any level. But that's a huge IF, and as such I'm not sure this is a player I would draft in the 1st round, and maybe even not in the 2nd. It's a hurtful reality, especially considering how enjoyable it is to watch him tear up the WHL.
2024 Draft Profile:
RW Ryder Ritchie, Prince Albert WHL
With many prospects, it's just as important to discuss the context of their on-ice performance as the performance itself. Ryder Ritchie is one such case. A tremendously fun, high-paced, high-motor player, he is often overlooked because he tallied just 44 points in his draft-eligible campaign. But upon closer look, we have a player who battled through injuries all season and, on a team with limited talent at forward, was forced into a role of play-driver when his ultimate ceiling is as a complimentary top-6 winger.
The first thing one notices about Ritchie is the pace at which he plays. The 6'0-170 winger is an very fast and agile skater with terrific edges with, in tandem with a terrific set of hands, create the impression he's a pinball ricocheting all over the ice at breakneck speed. This excitement is further abetted by the fact Ritchie is a high-motor player with one of the best compete levels in the draft. He's tenacious on the forecheck and dogged on the backcheck, a real hustler in every sense of the word. Not a proactively physical player despite a lack of core strength, Ritchie is fearless enough to battle anyone for pucks. He can be outfought by brute strength and he's not too difficult for a tough opponent to knock off the puck, but the effort is there and the power will get better for Ritchie with age and time in the weight room.
Ritchie is an excellent passer in terms of decision making and accuracy, but although his creative vision is good, it is not high-end. His shot is also very impressive in terms of accuracy, release and deception, but the power is lacking somewhat. Overall he is a smart player on both sides of the puck, but again I wouldn't call his hockey IQ anything towards the elite end.
Ryder Ritchie is generally ranked in the very late 1st round to the early 2nd. In my opinion, a lack of elite physical tools gives him a visible ceiling as a complimentary top-6 NHLer, but the high motor and quickness of his overall pace will make him a very good one. His relentless hustle and understanding of how to play a team-oriented game also gives Ritchie a relatively high floor -- I think at the very least he'll be a 3rd liner in the pros. As such, I think we have a very good player who is certainly worth drafting in the 20s overall.
RW Ryder Ritchie, Prince Albert WHL
With many prospects, it's just as important to discuss the context of their on-ice performance as the performance itself. Ryder Ritchie is one such case. A tremendously fun, high-paced, high-motor player, he is often overlooked because he tallied just 44 points in his draft-eligible campaign. But upon closer look, we have a player who battled through injuries all season and, on a team with limited talent at forward, was forced into a role of play-driver when his ultimate ceiling is as a complimentary top-6 winger.
The first thing one notices about Ritchie is the pace at which he plays. The 6'0-170 winger is an very fast and agile skater with terrific edges with, in tandem with a terrific set of hands, create the impression he's a pinball ricocheting all over the ice at breakneck speed. This excitement is further abetted by the fact Ritchie is a high-motor player with one of the best compete levels in the draft. He's tenacious on the forecheck and dogged on the backcheck, a real hustler in every sense of the word. Not a proactively physical player despite a lack of core strength, Ritchie is fearless enough to battle anyone for pucks. He can be outfought by brute strength and he's not too difficult for a tough opponent to knock off the puck, but the effort is there and the power will get better for Ritchie with age and time in the weight room.
Ritchie is an excellent passer in terms of decision making and accuracy, but although his creative vision is good, it is not high-end. His shot is also very impressive in terms of accuracy, release and deception, but the power is lacking somewhat. Overall he is a smart player on both sides of the puck, but again I wouldn't call his hockey IQ anything towards the elite end.
Ryder Ritchie is generally ranked in the very late 1st round to the early 2nd. In my opinion, a lack of elite physical tools gives him a visible ceiling as a complimentary top-6 NHLer, but the high motor and quickness of his overall pace will make him a very good one. His relentless hustle and understanding of how to play a team-oriented game also gives Ritchie a relatively high floor -- I think at the very least he'll be a 3rd liner in the pros. As such, I think we have a very good player who is certainly worth drafting in the 20s overall.
evnted
Registered User
- Apr 14, 2016
- 681
- 1,096
2024 Draft Profile:
C Linus Eriksson, Djurgardens HockeyAllsvenskan
In what is otherwise a disappointingly thin year for Swedish prospects, Eriksson offers a smart, speedy, and extremely mature game that seems likely to scale to the NHL. The young center started off his season in the J20 Nationell, and while he never put up eye-popping numbers, his steady play eventually earned him a promotion to the HockeyAllsvenskan, at which point he never looked back. Incomprehensibly, Eriksson's consolidated ranking has him as an early 3rd round target, yet I personally believe he should be discussed as a late 1st round option.
Eriksson is the type of player every coach would feel confident sending out for a shift. He's a quick, shifty skater who is great at varying his speed to add a layer of deception to his mobility. Eriksson pairs this skating with great spatial awareness and a near elite level motor to keep defenders at bay. On the puck, he's extremely poised in transition, responsible with the chances he takes, and great at finding linemates. He'll rarely ever wow you with a play, but his decision making is near flawless. Off puck, Eriksson might even be better. His cerebral forechecking game and adept defensive stick positioning can take away breakout lanes for the opposition before they even realize. In fact, it's quite common for a number of his best plays to originate from a shrewd intercept or seamless strip of the puck.
Without a doubt, Eriksson's lack of ++ offensive tools and relatively modest production have contributed to his unusually low rankings. His skating and smarts are great, and he plays about as low-maintenance of a game as you can find, but there's minimal else to bet on, particularly so for a player of extremely average size. For as much as he can dictate play while he's on the puck, it feels like his main focus is on getting it from point A to point B. His linemates are the ones who are crashing the net, finding the soft spots, getting the shot off, etc. It is not unfair to claim that Eriksson is more of a play supporter or facilitator than he is a true driver or catalyst.
At the end of the day, Djurgardens did not promote this kid (and continue to shift him into the playoffs) for no reason, they did it because they considered him one of their 12 best options up front. Even factoring in the hard skill limitations, Eriksson plays a high tempo, defensively responsible game that is easy to envision being worth NHL shifts. His positioning, anticipation, and controlled playmaking game inspires some confidence that a bit more offense could come in time. Eriksson is not a big swing or the type of player who significantly alters a team's outlook, but he is absolutely the type of middle 6 pivot that every contender wants to bring in as a depth option come trade deadline day. For this reason, I believe an average ranking in the 70s greatly undersells his potential utility.
C Linus Eriksson, Djurgardens HockeyAllsvenskan
In what is otherwise a disappointingly thin year for Swedish prospects, Eriksson offers a smart, speedy, and extremely mature game that seems likely to scale to the NHL. The young center started off his season in the J20 Nationell, and while he never put up eye-popping numbers, his steady play eventually earned him a promotion to the HockeyAllsvenskan, at which point he never looked back. Incomprehensibly, Eriksson's consolidated ranking has him as an early 3rd round target, yet I personally believe he should be discussed as a late 1st round option.
Eriksson is the type of player every coach would feel confident sending out for a shift. He's a quick, shifty skater who is great at varying his speed to add a layer of deception to his mobility. Eriksson pairs this skating with great spatial awareness and a near elite level motor to keep defenders at bay. On the puck, he's extremely poised in transition, responsible with the chances he takes, and great at finding linemates. He'll rarely ever wow you with a play, but his decision making is near flawless. Off puck, Eriksson might even be better. His cerebral forechecking game and adept defensive stick positioning can take away breakout lanes for the opposition before they even realize. In fact, it's quite common for a number of his best plays to originate from a shrewd intercept or seamless strip of the puck.
Without a doubt, Eriksson's lack of ++ offensive tools and relatively modest production have contributed to his unusually low rankings. His skating and smarts are great, and he plays about as low-maintenance of a game as you can find, but there's minimal else to bet on, particularly so for a player of extremely average size. For as much as he can dictate play while he's on the puck, it feels like his main focus is on getting it from point A to point B. His linemates are the ones who are crashing the net, finding the soft spots, getting the shot off, etc. It is not unfair to claim that Eriksson is more of a play supporter or facilitator than he is a true driver or catalyst.
At the end of the day, Djurgardens did not promote this kid (and continue to shift him into the playoffs) for no reason, they did it because they considered him one of their 12 best options up front. Even factoring in the hard skill limitations, Eriksson plays a high tempo, defensively responsible game that is easy to envision being worth NHL shifts. His positioning, anticipation, and controlled playmaking game inspires some confidence that a bit more offense could come in time. Eriksson is not a big swing or the type of player who significantly alters a team's outlook, but he is absolutely the type of middle 6 pivot that every contender wants to bring in as a depth option come trade deadline day. For this reason, I believe an average ranking in the 70s greatly undersells his potential utility.
Great write-up, glad you did the analysis of Eriksson and you knocked it out of the park. Eriksson is precisely the type of 3rd/4th-round target Devils fans should be paying attention to.
Ad
Latest posts
-
-
-
Confirmed with Link: All-Purpose Coyotes Arena Talk: Land Auction Date Set - 6/27- Latest: Coyotedroppings
Upcoming events
-
-
-
-
Game 6 Dallas Stars @ Edmonton Oilers - Edmonton leads series 3-2Wagers: 14Staked: $23,471.00Event closes- Updated:
-
Series Winner Dallas Mavericks vs Boston CelticsWagers: 1Staked: $300.00Event closes - 4 days from now- Updated: