F Brady Tkachuk (2018, 4th, OTT)

[Smeagoal]

But this draft has literally no quality centers, and its mediocre for goalies. I don't think there's a center I could rank right now in the top 10. Great for defensemen, good for wingers, but its very weak in two of the six positions in the sport. Maybe Dahlin and Svechnikov prop it up, but I don't think this is looking like a great draft. I think good or average are the most likely possibilities for this draft.

I agree somewhat. I don't agree with the Goalies in the draft since I can't even recall the last time one was taken very high other than Carey Price. However, the lack of potential elite 'C' talent is alarming. Other than Brady...?? Veleno? It seems heavy with D/W prospects which isn't bad, but it's missing that elite 'C' that's usually in most top-5 or even top-10 selections.

Oh well, guess we will see where the chips falls come draft day.

 

[Juxtaposer]

Goalies aren’t really ever that prominent any more in the modern draft. They are rarely taken in the top 20 anyways. It’s weak on centers, but the defense makes up extremely well for it. It’s a fact; you should always draft for BPA. Where there there is lots of one position or not, you look at the overall depth of the class without factoring in positions, and it’s very good. Oh no I have 2 #1 centers! Trade one away for a top pair defender!

The thing is that if a draft doesn’t have a surefire #1C, it can’t be classified as a strong draft. Elite D and wingers and goalies are available elsewhere in the draft. True #1 centers are not available anywhere but in the top-10.

Top D prospects bust at a much higher rate (not talking about Dahlin, he’ll be a star for sure, but the others aren’t such sure bets) and wingers aren’t nearly as vital to success.

Look at 2012. 2018 looks like if you took 2012 and added Dahlin. I wouldn’t call that an overly strong draft, even if Dahlin is a near-generational prospect.

 

[Tryamkin]

The thing is that if a draft doesn’t have a surefire #1C, it can’t be classified as a strong draft. Elite D and wingers and goalies are available elsewhere in the draft. True #1 centers are not available anywhere but in the top-10.

Top D prospects bust at a much higher rate (not talking about Dahlin, he’ll be a star for sure, but the others aren’t such sure bets) and wingers aren’t nearly as vital to success.

Look at 2012. 2018 looks like if you took 2012 and added Dahlin. I wouldn’t call that an overly strong draft, even if Dahlin is a near-generational prospect.

It really doesn’t imo. There’s so much potential here, especially seeping into the late first round

 

[elitepete]

The thing is that if a draft doesn’t have a surefire #1C, it can’t be classified as a strong draft. Elite D and wingers and goalies are available elsewhere in the draft. True #1 centers are not available anywhere but in the top-10.

Top D prospects bust at a much higher rate (not talking about Dahlin, he’ll be a star for sure, but the others aren’t such sure bets) and wingers aren’t nearly as vital to success.

Look at 2012. 2018 looks like if you took 2012 and added Dahlin. I wouldn’t call that an overly strong draft, even if Dahlin is a near-generational prospect.

So 2014 isn’t a strong draft?

 

[Volica]

appart from first 3 picks
this is a highly overated draft

bring it back to earth

Wasn't last years' draft suppose to suck too? There looks like there's some really excellent players in the making.
Once you have one or two A+ draftees, the draft will always be considered good. You don't have a crystal ball, and can't project that someone taken 15th OA won't end up a first liner in the NHL.

Even the dog that was the 2012 draft looks like it produced a few all-stars outside the top 10 of the draft.

People are sleeping on Brady like they slept on Matt. This kid's going to be a top 6 centre in the league for the next 15 years; that's not a bad value for a 5-10 pick.

 

[93LEAFS]

Wasn't last years' draft suppose to suck too? There looks like there's some really excellent players in the making.
Once you have one or two A+ draftees, the draft will always be considered good. You don't have a crystal ball, and can't project that someone taken 15th OA won't end up a first liner in the NHL.

Even the dog that was the 2012 draft looks like it produced a few all-stars outside the top 10 of the draft.

People are sleeping on Brady like they slept on Matt. This kid's going to be a top 6 centre in the league for the next 15 years; that's not a bad value for a 5-10 pick.

The chances he is a center in the NHL are remote. He's a winger at BU, was primarily a winger at the USNTDP being centered by Josh Norris, and is a winger on the world junior team.

This draft is average to good. I don't think its particularly special.

Your point about guys outside the top 10 draft, that tends to hold true for all drafts, which makes the top 10 very important on determining if a draft class will be good, average or bad. The only draft that really breaks this rule is 2003, which appears to just be an aberration.

 

[Doug Prishpreed]

The chances he is a center in the NHL are remote. He's a winger at BU, was primarily a winger at the USNTDP being centered by Josh Norris, and is a winger on the world junior team.

You're forgetting -- if you repeat that he will be a center enough times, it will become true.

 

[93LEAFS]

You're forgetting -- if you repeat that he will be a center enough times, it will become true.

It is reminding me of Filip Forsberg all over again.

 

[Volica]

The chances he is a center in the NHL are remote. He's a winger at BU, was primarily a winger at the USNTDP being centered by Josh Norris, and is a winger on the world junior team.

This draft is average to good. I don't think its particularly special.

Your point about guys outside the top 10 draft, that tends to hold true for all drafts, which makes the top 10 very important on determining if a draft class will be good, average or bad. The only draft that really breaks this rule is 2003, which appears to just be an aberration.

All of which are guys who were older than him were centering him.
I project him as a centre, he's too big, fast, smart and physically dominant to not be eventually used down the middle. Hell, if he doesn't he'll just be a top line LW for the next 15 years. Same as a his brother.

 

[93LEAFS]

All of which are guys who were older than him were centering him.
I project him as a centre, he's too big, fast, smart and physically dominant to not be eventually used down the middle. Hell, if he doesn't he'll just be a top line LW for the next 15 years. Same as a his brother.

BU has chosen to move Greenway to center over giving Tkachuk a chance. Josh Norris is like 4 months older, that is hardly much of a difference.

He's a likely winger. I don't know why people would continue to project him as a center. I also wouldn't really call him fast. His game screams power-winger at the NHL level.

 

[Zegs2sendhelp]

Really have enjoyed watchin him play at the juniors, very mu h like his brother... almost wish we were in a posistion to draft him as perrys repacement

 

[Dominance]

He’s really good, but he’s such an immense tool. He’s not a “pest”, he’s an utter dipshit.

 

[Yotes4Cup]

He’s really good, but he’s such an immense tool. He’s not a “pest”, he’s an utter dip****.

You saying this is what makes him and his brother that much better. They do not want you to like them unless you're a fan of their team.

 

[Dominance]

You saying this is what makes him and his brother that much better. They do not want you to like them unless you're a fan of their team.

Fair enough. I’ve never before actively wished for a guy to get injured.

 

[Juxtaposer]

So 2014 isn’t a strong draft?

Does Leon Draisaitl suddenly not exist? Reinhart and Bennett were expected to be 1C’s too.

 

[JK2K]

Watched yesterday.
Tkachuk will be a complimentary winger.
Not enough high end skill to create on his own. Good positioning for the skilled Center to find him. Very sloppy skater. This needs work, but has been on the ice everyday of his life I’m sure so maybe that’s it. Good in front of net. No one fights anymore so anyone with a set should realize that’s where you go and battle. Dahlin looked like Lidstrom out there and Tkachuk looked like a solid 2-3 liner that Can be used on PP net front.
Zadina looked like a scoring machine. Should go #2.
Hughes was only used when offense was needed (much like Merkley in Hlinka) not sure how this affected scouts thoughts.
Svechnikov was good, but not used nearly as much as Tkachuk. No goals for a “goal scorer” is not great, I think he goes #3.
Kupari was non existent
Lundestrom as well.
I still believe Tkachuk will be taken early but I don’t believe he is top 5.

 

[newfy]

A lotof people wrote off his brother because he played with Dvorak and Marner and was a product of them in junior. Now you could make the argument hes the best of those 3 (I would definitely take him over Dvorak, close with Marner) I wouldnt be so quick to write Brady off as a 2-3 liner just yet.

He said on Spittinchiclets podcast the other day that his parents know he would take Matthew in a fight if they scrapped at the NHL level, he also said he wouldnt be scared to fight him if he cheapshooted a teammate. I could see these 2 going at it

 

[Frk It]

Watched yesterday.
Tkachuk will be a complimentary winger.
Not enough high end skill to create on his own. Good positioning for the skilled Center to find him. Very sloppy skater. This needs work, but has been on the ice everyday of his life I’m sure so maybe that’s it. Good in front of net. No one fights anymore so anyone with a set should realize that’s where you go and battle. Dahlin looked like Lidstrom out there and Tkachuk looked like a solid 2-3 liner that Can be used on PP net front.
Zadina looked like a scoring machine. Should go #2.
Hughes was only used when offense was needed (much like Merkley in Hlinka) not sure how this affected scouts thoughts.
Svechnikov was good, but not used nearly as much as Tkachuk. No goals for a “goal scorer” is not great, I think he goes #3.
Kupari was non existent
Lundestrom as well.
I still believe Tkachuk will be taken early but I don’t believe he is top 5.

Tkachuk was great in that tournament. I don't know how you could watch and say anything else. Seems like some just don't want to admit that their pre-WJC opinions may have been off.

 

[JK2K]

HE HAS his positives.
He has his negatives.
I spelled it out.
I don’t think he skates well, or hasn’t a high level of skill. He’s good in front of the net, along boards and works hard. He is a complimentary player and there’s no shame in that.
Never deviated from any of that.
Said he will be picked early, but shouldn’t be too 5. My opinion.

 

[Thebesthockey]

Good player that goes to dirty areas
his character is fun to watch
but not sure his antics will translate well in the nhl
teamates have a tendency to hate the constant after the whistle theatrics

 

[HaNotsri]

Looks like a good top 6 winger in the making. Playoff mold.

 

[Habs76]

I don't understand the lack of skill take people have on him. He looks to have good hands, coupled with a big body and the willingness to compete. Some complain about his skating, but I personally don't think it's bad. He seems to get around the ice fine. He is bordering on top five for me and I doubt he'll drop below #8 at any point during the season.

 

[kabidjan18]

Tkachuk was great in that tournament. I don't know how you could watch and say anything else. Seems like some just don't want to admit that their pre-WJC opinions may have been off.

Basically. Tall players who are more active with their hands and heads and not their skates are the easiest kids to hate on. WJC put a slight damper on that party, but they will be back.

HE HAS his positives.
He has his negatives.
I spelled it out.
I don’t think he skates well, or hasn’t a high level of skill. He’s good in front of the net, along boards and works hard. He is a complimentary player and there’s no shame in that.
Never deviated from any of that.
Said he will be picked early, but shouldn’t be too 5. My opinion.

I just find this attempt at even-handedness hilarious. "He has positives". No shit. He's widely considered a top 5 pick. You're telling us he does indeed have some positives. What a fair analysis.

Finally, just a short while ago you said you didn't think he was top 10 material. I asked you to name the players you were taking over him. The situation has not changed. You keep talking about "top 5", "top 10" in completely abstract terms. When you say he should not be taken in the top 5, what you are implying isn't that he doesn't meet your abstract criteria of what a top 5 prospect looks like. It means you think there are 5 players who should go ahead of him. In order to argue he is not a top 5 pick, you need to actually argue there are 5 people over whom he should not be picked. Now let's be generous. Let's just say Dahlin, Svechnikov, Boqvist, Zadina, those we can accept. Some will dispute but we'll just accept it for now. Who is your 5th? A top 5 needs 5 names. Feel free to replace any of the ones I suggested.

 

[JK2K]

I stated what I think he’s good at, and what I think he needs work on.
Dahlin
Zadina
Svechnikov
Boqvist

Then.......?
I really feel there are 10-15 guys you can put there I would personally have Hughes right now but that can change. No one is clear cut.
Tkachuk is in the mix, but so are so many.

 

[kabidjan18]

I stated what I think he’s good at, and what I think he needs work on.
Dahlin
Zadina
Svechnikov
Boqvist

Then.......?
I really feel there are 10-15 guys you can put there I would personally have Hughes right now but that can change. No one is clear cut.
Tkachuk is in the mix, but so are so many.

There are ten guys of relative parity you can put in the #5 slot. Welp. I really don't know what to say.

Ok, I'll try taking this seriously. Let's ignore, for just a moment, the statistical silliness of this statement. If there are legitimately 10 guys, 10 at least nonetheless up to 15 evidently, who one could make a legitimate argument for being in the #5 slot then there should be a great variation of #5 picks among credible mock drafts comprised of the athletes not listed in the (arguable) top 4. This because there would be a legitimate argument for each member of this pack of 10, and the result would largely depend on the preferences of individual selectors and their predilections for certain indicators.

Small problem. Virtually the only names you'll actually see in the 5 slot (aside from our "consensus" top 4, which is not truly a consensus either as there are such listings) are spelled "Tkachuk" or "Hughes". How should we explain this phenomena? Is it perhaps the case that all such ranking and drafting parties are identical in their value systems? That seems unlikely given the variation generally between these drafts. Perhaps you have a better way to explain this phenomenon.