Can the Leafs make it happen?

[Menzinger]

No, I think sometimes it pays to just draft a little higher. Mix up the playbook every year, cause I'd hate to look back on the 2015-whatever drafts and look at all the names we are going to inevitably miss out on.

It depends on where the pick is, statistically you have a much higher chance of getting an impact NHLer with 2nds that you do with a mid to late 1st. I'd be less reluctant to trade out of the top 15 in a draft though.


http://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/nhl/analyzing-value-nhl-draft-picks/

Admittedly you need to look at every year's class - this draft may be very weak in the 2nd round.

 

[WillNytheSwedishGuy]

No, I think sometimes it pays to just draft a little higher. Mix up the playbook every year, cause I'd hate to look back on the 2015-whatever drafts and look at all the names we are going to inevitably miss out on.

It depends entirely on the front office's assessment of the depth of the draft class. If they are sitting at pick 22 with a group of 5 or 6 guys they would be comfortable taking, trading back a bit makes sense. If they are sitting at 22 and a guy they think is a top 10 prospect is sitting there, I'd like to imagine they keep it.

As a general approach, I think trading back and accumulating as many picks as you can in the first three rounds makes a ton of sense. Particularly when the organization is in the midst of trying to grow its prospect pool. But that general strategy needs to be married with some context specific considerations/assessments.

 

[Menzinger]

It depends entirely on the front office's assessment of the depth of the draft class. If they are sitting at pick 22 with a group of 5 or 6 guys they would be comfortable taking, trading back a bit makes sense. If they are sitting at 22 and a guy they think is a top 10 prospect is sitting there, I'd like to imagine they keep it.

As a general approach, I think trading back and accumulating as many picks as you can in the first three rounds makes a ton of sense. Particularly when the organization is in the midst of trying to grow its prospect pool. But that general strategy needs to be married with some context specific considerations/assessments.

That's the thing - if the odds aren't all that different between a late round 1st and a 2nd, id rather have twice the chance of getting a player, especially if there are several that I'd like to have.

Nothing was more frustrating that watching Burke trade up to get Biggs at the 2011 draft.

 

[Babcocks Marner]

Assuming the Pens make the playoffs id rather trade back and try to pick up as many 2nds as possible, like they did last year with the Preds pick.

I think that is what is going to happen.

If our pick is say 20th..... I would assume the top 5 D are all gone. I can see them taking a shot on 2-3 people Vs. that 20th OVA.

 

[Apotheosis]

I'm just hoping we draft bottom 3 with our pick. Preferably Laine if we don't win the lottery. Hopefully we stockpile some picks with the guys from the TDL. That way, if the Pitts pick is somewhere from like 15-18, we can package that pick with multiple later picks (maybe even throw in a prospect or a roster player that said team could actually use) to get into that 8-12 range.

 

[WillNytheSwedishGuy]

That's the thing - if the odds aren't all that different between a late round 1st and a 2nd, id rather have twice the chance of getting a player, especially if there are several that I'd like to have.

Nothing was more frustrating that watching Burke trade up to get Biggs at the 2011 draft.

Given the way the draft is scheduled nowadays, I think there is certainly value to be had dropping from the late first round to the early second. A first rounder has an inflated allure, while the difference in the quality of the prospect is pretty negligible. Not sure the Leafs will be in that position this year, but if I'm picking in the last 5 picks of the first round, I'm giving hard thought to trading down to the early second if I can.

 

[Prince N]

I'm just hoping we draft bottom 3 with our pick. Preferably Laine if we don't win the lottery. Hopefully we stockpile some picks with the guys from the TDL. That way, if the Pitts pick is somewhere from like 15-18, we can package that pick with multiple later picks (maybe even throw in a prospect or a roster player that said team could actually use) to get into that 8-12 range.

That's exactly what I would agree with!!! At the end of the day the Leafs pick 2 in the top 12ish.

This team under the oceans 11 management squad is going to be sick!!!

 

[indigobuffalo]

If Alex Nylander has been identified as a target for this team, I think it far, far more likely we trade down from wherever our "3rd last place" pick puts us, than moving out a player along with the Pens pick to move up to grab Alex.

As previously stated, it would likely be one of Kadri/JVR/Gardiner+ to do that.

Packaging assets to move up is completely against the mantra of this new management group.

They would only do this if there was a very serious talent they felt would put them over-the-top. As always, think of the new regime's drafting plan as that of the New England Patriots.

Almost always are they trading down to get more picks. The only recent selection where they moved up was to select some guy named Gronkowski.

If Alex Nylander was seen as the NHL's Gronkowski, the Leafs would more likely use their own 1st to get him than move up with the Pens.

 

[indigobuffalo]

Unless there is some situation where they move down with their pick and make a subsequent trade to move up where a team takes less value.

Take this chart for example...

Assume the Leafs get the 3rd OA pick, and the Pens pick is 17th OA.

If the Leafs anticipate their target player being available at 6th OA (Chychrun?) and see Nylander going 7th OA, here's what *could* possibly work.

Based on the chart, moving down grants a bonus value (historically based on NHL trades, see my comment history circa last draft) of about 15-25%. So let's assume Leafs bargain hard and get 25% bonus value. 2,200 * 1.25 = 2,750

So moving down to 6th OA would require an additional 1,150 points, or roughly a packaging of the 6th OA and 13th OA picks.

So then to move up from 17th OA, to land the 7th OA, and having the 13th OA to add to that, the Leafs have a combined total of: 2,100, but moving up has a penalty of 15-25%, so assuming 20% penalty, that leaves 1,680, which easily gets the 7th OA along with maybe a 4th rounder to boot.

But of course things get complicated if the Leafs pick is worse or the Pens pick is worse. But I would trust in the Leafs' negotiating prowess to get better value moving down than the penalty incurred moving up.

Curious how others feel about taking 3+17 or 6+7 or 6+13+17? Which package of picks would be your choice?

 

[ULF_55]

Unless there is some situation where they move down with their pick and make a subsequent trade to move up where a team takes less value.

Take this chart for example...

Assume the Leafs get the 3rd OA pick, and the Pens pick is 17th OA.

If the Leafs anticipate their target player being available at 6th OA (Chychrun?) and see Nylander going 7th OA, here's what *could* possibly work.

Based on the chart, moving down grants a bonus value (historically based on NHL trades, see my comment history circa last draft) of about 15-25%. So let's assume Leafs bargain hard and get 25% bonus value. 2,200 * 1.25 = 2,750

So moving down to 6th OA would require an additional 1,150 points, or roughly a packaging of the 6th OA and 13th OA picks.

So then to move up from 17th OA, to land the 7th OA, and having the 13th OA to add to that, the Leafs have a combined total of: 2,100, but moving up has a penalty of 15-25%, so assuming 20% penalty, that leaves 1,680, which easily gets the 7th OA along with maybe a 4th rounder to boot.

But of course things get complicated if the Leafs pick is worse or the Pens pick is worse. But I would trust in the Leafs' negotiating prowess to get better value moving down than the penalty incurred moving up.

Curious how others feel about taking 3+17 or 6+7 or 6+13+17? Which package of picks would be your choice?

I doubt the Leafs are drafting 3rd. overall.

But I'd take 6+7 any day over 6+13+17, and especially in this draft.

I'm guessing the top 2 defenders in the draft could be had 6+7, and wth I'd take them there.

 

[saltming]

I don't see the need to trade up for Nylander. If we win one of the lotteries, we'll be adding one of Matthews/Laine/Puljujarvi to an already deep forward prospect pool for Nylander, Marner, Kapanen , Brown, Timashov, Johnson, etc.

We need a stud D prospect much more than we need Nylander. Just because he's brothers with one of our top prospects doesn't mean we should bias our draft moves in his direction.

Agreed. If we get a top 3 the Pitts pick, if we get it, should be used on one is chychrun/joulevi/Sergachev

 

[Eternal Leaf]

Assuming we have the 15th-16th pick with Pitts just squeaking in, it would take a great piece.

Nylander will go in the 7-10 range at worst.

You would have to package the 1st round pick (Pitts) + Percy/Kapanen. Meaning it's just not going to happen as it is far too risky.

I agree with the others that you would have a better chance at getting him by taking Nylander early (i.e 3rd overall) or moving down in the draft.

I think Laine/Puljujarvi + Jost/Rubstov is a great day at the office for Toronto anyway. No need to waste assets unless someone good drops and is within reach.

 

[finnbalor*]

Best case scenario for Nylander would be if we fall out of top 3 due to lottery loses make a small trade down for him say we're 4th or 5th and then try to use those and TDL assets to move up with Pittsburgh pick.

If we could walk away with a Nylaner + Juolevi or Fabbro (we really need another RHD, Fabbro + Zaitsev would be a major coup for the organization IMO) we're laughing.

But Mathews, Laine (6'4) or Puljujarvi (6'3)? Sorry Nylander.

 

[indigobuffalo]

I doubt the Leafs are drafting 3rd. overall.

But I'd take 6+7 any day over 6+13+17, and especially in this draft.

I'm guessing the top 2 defenders in the draft could be had 6+7, and wth I'd take them there.

I'm projecting based on current standings (obviously moving PIT into a playoff position though.)

So you'd take Juolevi over Nylander, assuming you were also getting Chychrun? Or passing on Chychrun to take Juolevi, depending on who you rank higher...

 

[TheGroceryStick]

Marner-Matthews-Stamkos
JvR-Nylander-Nylander
Komarov-Kadri-Kapanen
Johnson-Gauthier-Brown
Leipsic


Rielly-Hamonic
Gardiner-Dermot
Percy-Neilsen

Bibeau
Sparks


PP1:

Nylander-Matthews-Nylander
Stamkos-Marner

PP2:
JvR-Kadri-Brown
Reilly-Hamonic

PK1:
Gauthier-Komarov
Rielly-Hamonic

PK2:
Matthews-Kapanen
Percy-Valiev

DE-VEL-OP-MENT!

 

[ULF_55]

I'm projecting based on current standings (obviously moving PIT into a playoff position though.)

So you'd take Juolevi over Nylander, assuming you were also getting Chychrun? Or passing on Chychrun to take Juolevi, depending on who you rank higher...

Yes, I'd take the defenseman over Nylander unless the Leafs believe Nylander >> defenseman.

If Leafs had 6&7 and Chychrun and Juolevi were available I'd take them both.

Marner and Nylander and Timashov/Kapanen
Chychrun and Juolevi and Rielly

Core pieces

 

[BoredBrandonPridham]

Marner-Matthews-Stamkos
JvR-Nylander-Nylander
Komarov-Kadri-Kapanen
Johnson-Gauthier-Brown
Leipsic


Rielly-Hamonic
Gardiner-Dermot
Percy-Neilsen

Bibeau
Sparks


PP1:

Nylander-Matthews-Nylander
Stamkos-Marner

PP2:
JvR-Kadri-Brown
Reilly-Hamonic

PK1:
Gauthier-Komarov
Rielly-Hamonic

PK2:
Matthews-Kapanen
Percy-Valiev

DE-VEL-OP-MENT!

How did we get both Matthews and A. Nylander at the draft?

 

[LeafsGeeks]

We're going to have a surplus of picks this year (already have 11, and The Great Selloff 2016 hasn't even started yet). It wouldn't shock me if the Leafs packaged a few of those picks for a trade. Whether for thats a young player in the NHL or a high draft pick is yet to be seen. if Nylander starts to slide in the draft though, we have the ammunition to trade up. Should be an interesting draft this year!

 

[Eb]

How did we get both Matthews and A. Nylander at the draft?

Without trading a roster player of value. Pretty amazing.

Valiev playing on the PK while not being in the top 6 Dmen is also pretty amazing.

 

[Duckrider]

If in the top 3 I would trade down to pick up the top Dman. If I thought that Dman would be a legit #1

 

[TML1967]

Last overall guarantees only a 4th overall pick.
2nd last overall guarantees only a 5th overall pick.
3rd last overall guarantees only a 6th overall pick.

Of course, the team will have higher odds of a top 3 pick in those situations but nothing is guaranteed.

If you finish 3rd, what are the odds you pick 6th? It would mean that three teams ranked 4th or worse all get picked 1-3. Cant see that being statistically likely. (Even less so if we finish last)

 

[indigobuffalo]

If you finish 3rd, what are the odds you pick 6th? It would mean that three teams ranked 4th or worse all get picked 1-3. Cant see that being statistically likely. (Even less so if we finish last)

The combined chance for a team 4th to 14th to win the lottery is 55%, so if you want to know the worst possible odds (where teams 14, 13, then 4-12 win the lottery), it would be 0.55 * 0.54 * 0.525 = 0.15592 or basically a 15% chance of the 3rd OA team falling to 6th OA.

That team also only has an 11.5% chance of winning so... yeah.

Granted, the 11.5% is packaged with the 1st OA and 2nd OA in the sense that if either win then that is one fewer spots that team can fall.

Either way, it's not out of the realm of possibility that a team in the bottom 3 could get effed by the new lottery system.

 

[indigobuffalo]

Yes, I'd take the defenseman over Nylander unless the Leafs believe Nylander >> defenseman.

If Leafs had 6&7 and Chychrun and Juolevi were available I'd take them both.

Marner and Nylander and Timashov/Kapanen
Chychrun and Juolevi and Rielly

Core pieces

True but the same can be said for having A. Nylander in the core too.

Our very own Staal brothers!

 

[ULF_55]

True but the same can be said for having A. Nylander in the core too.

Our very own Staal brothers!

At least the Leafs wouldn't have to over pay to have another brother set. Heck, sometimes it might even work out, and their parents wouldn't have to go to 2 games to watch them play.

I don't think there is any benefit to the team to have 2 brothers playing.

I think there is a greater need for stud defenders than offensive forwards. Only concern is whether Marner will be the real deal in the NHL.