Bob McKenzie's Top 30 Draft Prospects

[Slats432]

There are some guys too high, but nice work on putting it together....

I am not big on neither Lee, Kindl, nor Hanzal....but overall a pretty solid list.

...and Bob, you should drop a note to the web editor that Ryan Parent is mistakenly listed as a centre.

 

[West]

Mostly to Bob but anyone else who knows the answer feel free.

Is Central Scouting coming out with a final list this year (and when)?

I can't really see what they'd be waiting for at this point, it's not like there still watching players. Anyways I'm just really curious.

Thanks

 

[montreal]

btw: is this a weak draft for russian and swedes? i see only bergfors in the first, low draft for euros or just in the first round

i dont see 1 russian in his mock in the first, suprising cuz theyve come up with so many top end guys in the past few years, and not 1 this year

It apears to be a weak draft for Russians. There's a few guys who might get interest in the first round I would think. Zubov, Istomin come to mind. Guys like Churilov, Buravchikov, Anikienko, Belov, Zubarev, Krysanov, Skorykh, Shirokov, Zarkov, should all get interest from NHL teams I would think.

The one thing to consider is what effect the Russian Federation leaving the IIHF will have on gm's. Things could get very interesting once the CBA is signed, from what I understand, Russia wants to be on their own, apart from the IIHF, while the NHL doesn't want to deal with the IIHF until the Russian Federation is apart of the IIHF.

Now I'm just getting this from things I read, so I could be wrong or perhaps things have changed since I first heard about all of this. If it is the case that the RF stays on it's on, then gm's will have to consider this when selecting any Russians, as it's unclear what kind of fee they will ask in order to release a player. Of course if they get too greedy it could also backfire on them as a player could just defect.

Not saying that gm's won't pick Russians, but without any Ovechkin's and Malkin's in this draft from what it appears, perhaps some gm's will at least consider holding off on drafting Russians in the first round, when the fees are at there highest. I have no freaking clue if this would happen or not, as only the gm's really know what impact if any this will have at the draft.

 

[Chief]

Is Central Scouting coming out with a final list this year (and when)?

About a month ago they told me they would be publishing their final rankings but wouldn't give an exact date.

FYI - In many ways, their final list is the least important, at least for NHL teams. Most, if not all teams use Central Scouting as a source for accurate information regarding player heights and weights, and other types of info. Now that most teams have gotten to workout the players they have targeted for the draft, it lessens their need for Central Scouting's service.

 

[Brooklyndevil]

The kid that intrigues me is Alex Bourret. Never seen him play, but all the scouting reports seem to be the same: Skates like the wind. Pain in the ass. Good finish and all-round game. Short, but built like a brick house.

 

[tom_servo]

Marc Staal
Gilbert Brule
Anze Kopitar

 

[LaLaLaprise]

The kid that intrigues me is Alex Bourret. Never seen him play, but all the scouting reports seem to be the same: Skates like the wind. Pain in the ass. Good finish and all-round game. Short, but built like a brick house.

If he was 6'02 he would be the consensus #2 pick.

The kid really does it all. His offensive upside is as good as Benoit Pouliot but he also has A LOT more edge to his game. Perhaps a little underrated because he is 5'10.

 

[Brooklyndevil]

If he was 6'02 he would be the consensus #2 pick.

The kid really does it all. His offensive upside is as good as Benoit Pouliot but he also has A LOT more edge to his game. Perhaps a little underrated because he is 5'10.

Thanks!

 

[turnbuckle*]

Best list I've seen so far IMO. Apparently the scouts who told me they weren't that high on Latendresse and Setoguchi weren't just blowing smoke, although, like Bob mentioned, I see Latendresse and Zagrapan as being real wildcards in this draft; same thing with Parent. They all have a chance of being top ten picks (Latendresse being the longest shot) or dropping into the late stages of the first round - there is a wide divergence of opinion on several players.

I'll go out on a limb and make the following predictions:

a/ Ryan and Pouliot are top five picks
b/ Staal will go in the top 7, perhaps ahead of Brule
c/ Latendresse and in particular Setoguchi won't be top ten selections
d/ Bourdon will be selected ahead of Price unless a team with a goalie
need is in top 10 - last time I checked most teams weren't starving for goalies

I think the rankings are so close after Crosby that some of the teams with the 2nd thru 6th picks will draft for need. If Columbus gets the second pick I'd be awfully suprised if they didn't take Johnson. Same with the Rangers, but you never know with Sather. I'd expect Anaheim or Minnesota to take Johnson. Atlanta would be a tough call - I'm thinking they'd like to land Pouliot to center Kovalchuk and Heatly some day - lots of length on that line.

Buffalo would have a tough decision to make, but I'd expect them to be interested in a big talented forward like Ryan, Kopitar or Pouliot. Florida would jump on Johnson I think; he'd make a great top pairing with Bouwmeester in the future. Chicago would likely go for the big forward prospect as well given their abundance of defensive prospects, I could see the Hawks pegging Ryan; they could use a power forward to complement Mark Bell. Ryan, Ruttu and Bell would be a nice looking line in a couple of seasons.

I'd be awfully surprised to see Brule go second overall - I just don't see any teams preferring him over Ryan, Pouiot or Johnson. Depending on the draft order I could see Brule dropping to seventh behind Sid, JJ, Kopitar, Brule, Ryan and Staal. If Columbus, Florida, Minnesota and Anaheim all have top six picks, I'd be surprised if Staal is not selected before Brule as he fills the biggest need and may end up being the steadier NHLer in the long run. Mind you, if teams like Chicago, Buffalo and Atlanta end up with top six picks, he may go fifth or sixth overall.

Tough decisions for scouts: Do you take Hanzal or o'Marra? Little question about which player has shown more character, but may a team choose untapped European potential over NA NHL-ready? O'Marra has some skating concerns that could see him drop below Hanzal, but I'd be more tempted to go with O'Marra after his solid Under 18 performance. He certainly isn't a poor skater at the junior level; with his determination I think he'll make the next step and be successful.

Zagrapan or Bourret? Another toughie from what I've heard. Each have their own special traits, both are good skaters - do you want the player who has more chance of being a bust but also more chance of being a scorer, or do you take the buzzsaw that may or may not become a decent scorer at the NHL level, but will almost certainly play on at least your 3rd line?

It promises to be a dramatic draft, whenever the hell it is.

 

[Isles72]

thanks for the ''good read'' Bob -- from a fellow draft junkie

I only hope they can get some type of live draft held in Ottawa as originally planned --I'm sure their new owner would accomodate

 

[NYR469]

on why anyone would tell him the rankings...2 things to keep in mind.

1)he said he spoke to scouts for 10 teams, not that he talked to 10 GMs. each team has several scouts and just because 1 scout has a player in a particular spot that doesn't necessarily mean that the team has the exact same rankings after putting all the scouts together. so it isn't like GM showed him the teams 100% final rankings

2)there is a trust/respect factor involved that assumes that mckenzie won't turn around and show the list to anyone. teams don't want info like this to be made public because they don't want other teams to know, not because they don't want fans or media to know. so mckenzie got info from 10 teams but no one knows what the 10 teams were or what the individual team rankings looked like. if he posted the individual team ranking or called up brian burke and said "here is everyone's ranking" then next year no one would talk to him. but he shows them respect in the matter and in return they show him respect (or atleast it should work that way)

 

[Captain Conservative]

Depending on the draft order I could see Brule dropping to seventh behind Sid, JJ, Kopitar, Brule, Ryan and Staal.

That'd be quite a trick.

On a serious note, Some nice thoughts in your post, but I believe you are way too high on Staal, and way too low on Brule. I think that Staal definitely has a better disposition, but Brule is way more talented. I don't think the height difference will be enough to push Staal ahead of Brule. As well, teams will not skip a player just because he doesn't fill a need at the moment. I've never bought into that logic.

 

[bert]

No way on earth is Staal picked ahead of Brule, no way.

 

[bert]

If he was 6'02 he would be the consensus #2 pick.

The kid really does it all. His offensive upside is as good as Benoit Pouliot but he also has A LOT more edge to his game. Perhaps a little underrated because he is 5'10.

You gotta be kidding me Pouliots offensive upside is second only to Crosby. He has far and away the most potential in this draft after sid.

 

[Rabid Ranger]

You gotta be kidding me Pouliots offensive upside is second only to Crosby. He has far and away the most potential in this draft after sid.

"Far and away"? Quit drinking the kool-aid. Pouliot's a nice player with upside, but he's not light years ahead of the other top forwards in this draft (after Crosby).

 

[turnbuckle*]

That'd be quite a trick.

On a serious note, Some nice thoughts in your post, but I believe you are way too high on Staal, and way too low on Brule. I think that Staal definitely has a better disposition, but Brule is way more talented. I don't think the height difference will be enough to push Staal ahead of Brule. As well, teams will not skip a player just because he doesn't fill a need at the moment. I've never bought into that logic.

Height difference? I don't think that will be the main reason why he'll be picked over Brule. Apparently my explanation about teams possibly looking for the second ranked defenceman over the fifth or sixth ranked forward was not a consideration while you were laughing, LOL.

I understand your point tho on the size thing. Pat Falloon was thought to be a feisty, 5-11 forward with all kinds of scoring skill in his draft year. Looking at his stats alone (he was more than just a stats guy in junior tho) - he was a dominant 17-year-old, and thought by many to be a can't miss future star. Scouts were wrong. Stephen Weiss was thought to be skilled enough to overcome his lack of size, thus his top four selection in his draft year. Hamhuis, Ruutu and Komisarek would have been better choices on hindsight IMO, and yes, they're all much bigger than Weiss.

Might scouts, and thusly, GMs, be a little weary about picking a "Falloon" type with a top six pick? You betcha.

Compare that to what a scout said to me this spring regarding Staal. "He'll never make an all-star team, but he'll play for 14 years on your blueline, and never make a mistake." Yes he was overstating his worth, but the fact remains that there are scouts out there that consider Staal to be a better prospect than Brule, and a resultant top 6 pick. We'll see what happens on draft day.

I'll tell you this - I cannot see Columbus picking Brule over Staal if they end up with the 5th/6th pick. Same thing with Florida. Perhaps I'm wrong. I like as Staal as a future NHLer a lot more than you do I suspect, while I'm a little more leery about Brule's star potential than you are. I will admit that Brule's shown more agressiveness than Falloon did in the WHL, although I will still state that Falloon was far from a wallflower in junior, playing with an even smaller Ray Whitney on a dominant WHL line. Where scouts made the mistake was overrating Falloon and underestimating Whitney, not the first time it's happened with a junior line.

Brule will be picked between the sixth and eight selections IMO. He may end up being better than two or three of those selected in front of him, he may not.

Should be fun. Seriously.

 

[Vinland]

Height difference? I don't think that will be the main reason why he'll be picked over Brule. Apparently my explanation about teams possibly looking for the second ranked defenceman over the fifth or sixth ranked forward was not a consideration while you were laughing, LOL.

I understand your point tho on the size thing. Pat Falloon was thought to be a feisty, 5-11 forward with all kinds of scoring skill in his draft year. Looking at his stats alone (he was more than just a stats guy in junior tho) - he was a dominant 17-year-old, and thought by many to be a can't miss future star. Scouts were wrong. Stephen Weiss was thought to be skilled enough to overcome his lack of size, thus his top four selection in his draft year. Hamhuis, Ruutu and Komisarek would have been better choices on hindsight IMO, and yes, they're all much bigger than Weiss.

Might scouts, and thusly, GMs, be a little weary about picking a "Falloon" type with a top six pick? You betcha.

Compare that to what a scout said to me this spring regarding Staal. "He'll never make an all-star team, but he'll play for 14 years on your blueline, and never make a mistake." Yes he was overstating his worth, but the fact remains that there are scouts out there that consider Staal to be a better prospect than Brule, and a resultant top 6 pick. We'll see what happens on draft day.

I'll tell you this - I cannot see Columbus picking Brule over Staal if they end up with the 5th/6th pick. Same thing with Florida. Perhaps I'm wrong. I like as Staal as a future NHLer a lot more than you do I suspect, while I'm a little more leery about Brule's star potential than you are. I will admit that Brule's shown more agressiveness than Falloon did in the WHL, although I will still state that Falloon was far from a wallflower in junior, playing with an even smaller Ray Whitney on a dominant WHL line. Where scouts made the mistake was overrating Falloon and underestimating Whitney, not the first time it's happened with a junior line.

Brule will be picked between the sixth and eight selections IMO. He may end up being better than two or three of those selected in front of him, he may not.

Should be fun. Seriously.

Falloon had major problems off the ice so your whole Brule is like Falloon is way off.

 

[LaLaLaprise]

You gotta be kidding me Pouliots offensive upside is second only to Crosby. He has far and away the most potential in this draft after sid.

You can disagree, I was only stating an opinion

 

[Debrincat93]

It apears to be a weak draft for Russians. There's a few guys who might get interest in the first round I would think. Zubov, Istomin come to mind. Guys like Churilov, Buravchikov, Anikienko, Belov, Zubarev, Krysanov, Skorykh, Shirokov, Zarkov, should all get interest from NHL teams I would think.

The one thing to consider is what effect the Russian Federation leaving the IIHF will have on gm's. Things could get very interesting once the CBA is signed, from what I understand, Russia wants to be on their own, apart from the IIHF, while the NHL doesn't want to deal with the IIHF until the Russian Federation is apart of the IIHF.

Now I'm just getting this from things I read, so I could be wrong or perhaps things have changed since I first heard about all of this. If it is the case that the RF stays on it's on, then gm's will have to consider this when selecting any Russians, as it's unclear what kind of fee they will ask in order to release a player. Of course if they get too greedy it could also backfire on them as a player could just defect.

Not saying that gm's won't pick Russians, but without any Ovechkin's and Malkin's in this draft from what it appears, perhaps some gm's will at least consider holding off on drafting Russians in the first round, when the fees are at there highest. I have no freaking clue if this would happen or not, as only the gm's really know what impact if any this will have at the draft.

understandable, thanks buddy

 

[turnbuckle*]

I never said Brule is like Falloon, I only said that scouts are weary about taking a similar prospect so high in the draft because, like Falloon, Brule isn't overly large, and like Falloon, Brule had a high scoring draft year (like Falloon did) that doesn't necessarily translate into NHL success. The recent failure of Weiss to so far live up to his hype is a recent reminder that taking an undersized forward so high in the draft can be a risk.

As for Falloon's off-ice problems, I am not privy to his entire personal background; apparently you are, and you're also so up on Brule's background that you can accurately predict that he will never have personal problems at the NHL level. I'm not that talented, nor presumptuous.

If I thought Brule was going to turn into an exact replica of Falloon, I can assure you that I wouldn't still think he was worthy of a top-seven selection.

 

[Blind Gardien]

When I think of guys who are comparables to Brule and were top-10 candidates in recent years, I would list Josh Holden, maybe Jamie Lundmark, Daymond Langkow, even Scott Upshall, perhaps even Todd Harvey, guys like that a bit more than Pat Falloon... guys with a significantly bigger edge in junior than I think of Falloon ever having. Falloon may not have been a wallflower, but he didn't go out of his way, either. Plus, there are similarities in individualism for someone like Holden with Brule, which I believe is also part of the turnoff for NHL teams.

Anyway, all that said, if the best case is Langkow, and the worst case is Holden, then it's reasonable to see why Brule is rated where he is. Bob M's rating is one of the first that takes a pretty realistic NHL perspective on him as a prospect. Brule has a lot more attraction for us fantasy draft poolie types than he probably does to the pros.

 

[Habsfan 32]

I like the list.

 

[WADEugottaBELAKthat]

For pure impact, I say there is no way that Staal goes before Brule.

 

[Vinland]

I never said Brule is like Falloon, I only said that scouts are weary about taking a similar prospect so high in the draft because, like Falloon, Brule isn't overly large, and like Falloon, Brule had a high scoring draft year (like Falloon did) that doesn't necessarily translate into NHL success. The recent failure of Weiss to so far live up to his hype is a recent reminder that taking an undersized forward so high in the draft can be a risk.

As for Falloon's off-ice problems, I am not privy to his entire personal background; apparently you are, and you're also so up on Brule's background that you can accurately predict that he will never have personal problems at the NHL level. I'm not that talented, nor presumptuous.

If I thought Brule was going to turn into an exact replica of Falloon, I can assure you that I wouldn't still think he was worthy of a top-seven selection.

Clean out your pm's

 

[Russian_fanatic]

My favourite prospect in this draft has got to be Marc Staal. Smart kid who doesn't throw out crushing hits. Doesn't have GREAT offensive potential, but good offensive potential.My comparision for Marc Staal is a Canadian version of Mattias Ohlund. Both can contribute on the offensive ends at times, and both can play physical. Although I feel Ohlund is a bit better offensively, but I feel Staal can be a 25-35 point defenseman in the future, while contributing on the defensive end. Great kid.