Prospect Info: The 2018 Draft Thread

Status
Not open for further replies.

rambo97

Registered User
Jan 2, 2018
902
585
I'm just going to post this again for a good reminder. The odds are that the player we pick (if we keep the pick) at #10 is likely not going to be a top 4 blueliner or a top 6 forward. The odds say we will get a bottom pairing dman or 4th line forward or worse:

DRAFT PICK VALUE CHART, 1990-2013

PICKAVG. RATING% PLAY 100 GPTOP 6 F, TOP 4 D, 1 G4TH LINE OR WORSE
17.75100.0%79.2%8.3%
27.79100.0%87.5%0.0%
37.06100.0%79.2%8.3%
46.2183.3%54.2%25.0%
56.75100.0%62.5%8.3%
65.6383.3%58.3%41.7%
75.7791.7%41.7%33.3%
84.8870.8%29.2%45.8%
95.4087.5%33.3%50.0%
104.5278.3%13.0%65.2%
[TBODY] [/TBODY]
[TBODY] [/TBODY]

https://www.tsn.ca/statistically-speaking-nhl-draft-pick-value-1.786131
 

KarmaPolice

Snack enthusiast
Oct 5, 2007
19,063
10,369
In Limbo
So here's my short video analysis on Boqvist. He's #7 in white. This in an SHL game where he played roughly 9-10 minutes.



Nice. Pretty small guy. I have a feeling he might drop a few spots than where expected to be taken because of his size, as I think most GMs still think that size is a very important factor when I'm not sure that's clear these days. Or it's certainly less clear than it used to be. For a small guy he has some very strong legs, and is good at pinning much bigger opponents to the boards, thereby stripping the puck. Nice hands, too. Skating doesn't seem amazing, but it's adequate. He has a good shot, though it wasn't shown in the clip; I think everyone already knows it. He's an interesting prospect for sure.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Zaddy and Aerrol

Aerrol

༼ つ ◕_◕ ༽つ
Sep 18, 2014
6,555
3,208
I'm just going to post this again for a good reminder. The odds are that the player we pick (if we keep the pick) at #10 is likely not going to be a top 4 blueliner or a top 6 forward. The odds say we will get a bottom pairing dman or 4th line forward or worse:

DRAFT PICK VALUE CHART, 1990-2013

PICKAVG. RATING% PLAY 100 GPTOP 6 F, TOP 4 D, 1 G4TH LINE OR WORSE
17.75100.0%79.2%8.3%
27.79100.0%87.5%0.0%
37.06100.0%79.2%8.3%
46.2183.3%54.2%25.0%
56.75100.0%62.5%8.3%
65.6383.3%58.3%41.7%
75.7791.7%41.7%33.3%
84.8870.8%29.2%45.8%
95.4087.5%33.3%50.0%
104.5278.3%13.0%65.2%
[TBODY] [/TBODY]
[TBODY] [/TBODY]
https://www.tsn.ca/statistically-speaking-nhl-draft-pick-value-1.786131

Interesting numbers. But at the same time, every year there's at least one player that drops to this range that really blows up (I suppose that fits with the 13% number). If we ignore the Oilers developmental record, we're bound to have someone turn into a player for us around this range again.
 
  • Like
Reactions: KarmaPolice

BudBundy

Registered User
May 16, 2005
5,765
7,511
Knowing the oilers, they will indeed trade the pick. No matter what. Good deal or bad deal. Hamilton or Reinhart. Doesn't matter. Because that is the course they've set themselves on.
Sadly this, as our donkey-in-chief at the helm has already thrown away all our assets and is now desperately clinging to his job.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Consultant

dustrock

Too Legit To Quit
Sep 22, 2008
8,360
981
I'm just going to post this again for a good reminder. The odds are that the player we pick (if we keep the pick) at #10 is likely not going to be a top 4 blueliner or a top 6 forward. The odds say we will get a bottom pairing dman or 4th line forward or worse:

DRAFT PICK VALUE CHART, 1990-2013

PICKAVG. RATING% PLAY 100 GPTOP 6 F, TOP 4 D, 1 G4TH LINE OR WORSE
17.75100.0%79.2%8.3%
27.79100.0%87.5%0.0%
37.06100.0%79.2%8.3%
46.2183.3%54.2%25.0%
56.75100.0%62.5%8.3%
65.6383.3%58.3%41.7%
75.7791.7%41.7%33.3%
84.8870.8%29.2%45.8%
95.4087.5%33.3%50.0%
104.5278.3%13.0%65.2%
[TBODY] [/TBODY]
[TBODY] [/TBODY]
https://www.tsn.ca/statistically-speaking-nhl-draft-pick-value-1.786131

This is fascinating - then you look at where Tampa Bay picked guys like Kucherov and Palat and wonder how many wasted picks are made in the first 50 picks.

I also wonder about D - how much of this is from people picking the Colton Teuberts of hockey way too early.

If you took "skilled" D-men in the first 10 picks, how does it turn out?
 

nexttothemoon

and again...
Jan 30, 2010
29,303
16,475
Northern AB
As a corollary to that chart above (and the extension of the chart shown on the TSN site that shows the average draft values from picks 11-30 in the 1st round as well)... it's proof that this concept that there are tiers of talent (beyond the very top talents) is likely somewhat of an illusion.

Yes you are likely to have the highest chances at getting your 6/7+ rated type players in the 1st 5 or so picks... but beyond that very highest tier it becomes much more random in the rest of the 1st round and even down at picks 23/24/26 you are likely to get players as good as at 10/11/15/16 etc.

This is in line with what I see this year as well. I see gradual declines in the distinction between prospects in the top 5/6 with only slight gradual differences in the prospects as you go down the list of prospects in the top 10/20/30 etc. I don't see the sharp distinct type of tiers that some say there are in this draft.. especially where the Oilers are drafting in that 8-15 range.

Point being... a team like the Isles having 2 picks at 11/12 aren't missing out on anything because of some supposed sharply defined tier of players above that 11/12 range. They'll likely get 2 very good prospects at that point that will have as good of a chance at turning out as well as teams drafting several spots above them.
 
Last edited:

Trafalgar Sadge Law

Registered User
Nov 8, 2007
11,476
6,873
Then you have a second line center on your third line or a second line winger who can slide over to center when needed.

I feel like I'm already beating a dead horse in regards to Hayton, so I'll just say if you think a player who is ranked 10-15 in most places has 3rd line upside at best, you've got a skewed view of the player.
Except once again you're under the impression that's a possibility with his skillset, and unless his footspeed improves drastically, that's just not going to happen. Most players that can transition seamlessly from center to wing in a top 6 role have high end skating and more importantly are capable of generating their own offense. Jack Kopacka has been the main line driver at even strength for Hayton's line, and Frost/Timmins are the players that drive the power play unit that Hayton has benefitted greatly from. He is one of the worst even strength producers among 1st round caliber forwards, and plays the net front role on the power play. which is much easier to find than a setup man, a big one timer near the half wall, or a power play quarterback.

You know who else was ranked around 10-15ish in his draft year? Curtis Lazar (I recall you having a massive man crush on this abomination of a hockey player 5 years ago too, advocating stuff like trading down for him, because of similar reasons as Hayton). And that was considered a stronger draft than this year. There were legit people here calling him the steal of the 1st round, when the only things he stole were Ottawa's time/effort/money. I called out Lazar's issues during his draft year, many of which Hayton shares, so no it's not a skewed view of the player. It's a view of a skillset and a type of game these players play that prevents them from becoming impact players at the NHL level.
 
Last edited:

Trafalgar Sadge Law

Registered User
Nov 8, 2007
11,476
6,873
I personally think you really overrate skating, Raab. It's obviously super important, but it seems like you think a player will be at a disadvantage unless their skating is elite.

A guy like Bouchard, for example, will not be held back by his skating. He has an above average first step, solid four-way mobility and has no problems skating backwards(second only to Dobson at the Top Prospects combine). The only knock is his top speed and he's not a guy who relies on that. His bread and butter is his outlet passing and in-zone offense where that's pretty much a non-factor.

Dobson having better skating(and basically that's it) doesn't make him a better prospect.

You get into dangerous territory when you start drafting guys because of size and skating.
You can get into even more dangerous territory when you draft because of things like stats, character, and even perceived hockey iq. Drafting on stats alone gets you nowhere obviously. Character doesn't mean squat when there's a difference in talent, otherwise you end up with titanic flops like Curtis Lazar. Also, lets face it, as fans we're absolutely terrible at judging things like hockey sense, something even the scouts get wrong sometimes (see: Yakupov, Nail). At least with things like skating, size, shot etc, they're tangible tools that we as fans can accurately judge for the most part. I'll put my eggs in the basket of the player who I believe has tools that translate better to the NHL and that is Dobson. For the record, most scouts are very high on Dobson's hockey IQ, especially his defensive awareness.
 

guymez

The Seldom Seen Kid
Mar 3, 2004
32,644
12,154
I'm just going to post this again for a good reminder. The odds are that the player we pick (if we keep the pick) at #10 is likely not going to be a top 4 blueliner or a top 6 forward. The odds say we will get a bottom pairing dman or 4th line forward or worse:

DRAFT PICK VALUE CHART, 1990-2013

PICKAVG. RATING% PLAY 100 GPTOP 6 F, TOP 4 D, 1 G4TH LINE OR WORSE
17.75100.0%79.2%8.3%
27.79100.0%87.5%0.0%
37.06100.0%79.2%8.3%
46.2183.3%54.2%25.0%
56.75100.0%62.5%8.3%
65.6383.3%58.3%41.7%
75.7791.7%41.7%33.3%
84.8870.8%29.2%45.8%
95.4087.5%33.3%50.0%
104.5278.3%13.0%65.2%
[TBODY] [/TBODY]
[TBODY] [/TBODY]
https://www.tsn.ca/statistically-speaking-nhl-draft-pick-value-1.786131

Interesting to say the least.

Also interesting to look at the Reinhart deal through this lense.
 

MessierII

Registered User
Aug 10, 2011
27,646
16,191
A guy like Bouchard, for example, will not be held back by his skating. He has an above average first step, solid four-way mobility and has no problems skating backwards(second only to Dobson at the Top Prospects combine). The only knock is his top speed and he's not a guy who relies on that.
I agree with you top end speed is literally one of the least concerning things for me looking at prospects. A couple of seasons with a power skating coach and your laughing.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Aerrol

McDNicks17

Moderator
Jul 1, 2010
41,588
29,948
Ontario
Except once again you're under the impression that's a possibility with his skillset, and unless his footspeed improves drastically, that's just not going to happen. Most players that can transition seamlessly from center to wing in a top 6 role have high end skating and more importantly are capable of generating their own offense. Jack Kopacka has been the main line driver at even strength for Hayton's line, and Frost/Timmins are the players that drive the power play unit that Hayton has benefitted greatly from. He is one of the worst even strength producers among 1st round caliber forwards, and plays the net front role on the power play. which is much easier to find than a setup man, a big one timer near the half wall, or a power play quarterback.

You know who else was ranked around 10-15ish in his draft year? Curtis Lazar (I recall you having a massive man crush on this abomination of a hockey player 5 years ago too, advocating stuff like trading down for him, because of similar reasons as Hayton). And that was considered a stronger draft than this year. There were legit people here calling him the steal of the 1st round, when the only things he stole were Ottawa's time/effort/money. I called out Lazar's issues during his draft year, many of which Hayton shares, so no it's not a skewed view of the player. It's a view of a skillset and a type of game these players play that prevents them from becoming impact players at the NHL level.

Like I said, if you think a player who is ranked 10-15 has 3rd line upside, is a bad skater, is a passenger on his line and is one of the worst even strength forwards in the 1st round, you've got a skewed view of the player.

I'm not sure what bringing up Lazar is suppose to prove. He came from a league that struggles historically to produce forwards and from a program that struggles to produce any NHL talent. You could compare any player in the draft to a bust. It doesn't mean anything.

And I think you've got me mixed up. I was always on the Monahan and Nurse train. Should be pretty obvious I'm an OHL guy.
 

Raab

Registered User
Oct 6, 2007
18,085
2,777
I agree with you top end speed is literally one of the least concerning things for me looking at prospects. A couple of seasons with a power skating coach and your laughing.

And there's guys who never improve their skating. It should be a huge concern. For every Draisaitl you get guys like Griffen Reinhart or Cody Franson.
 

MessierII

Registered User
Aug 10, 2011
27,646
16,191
And there's guys who never improve their skating. It should be a huge concern. For every Draisaitl you get guys like Griffen Reinhart or Cody Franson.
Yeah but there’s a difference. First interview I heard with Reinhart after we acquired him he said and I quote “I think my skating is underrated”. As long as the player actually acknowledges there is a problem and works on it from the outset speed is a very easy thing to improve upon.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Aerrol

PKSpecialist

Registered User
Feb 6, 2010
1,750
838
And there's guys who never improve their skating. It should be a huge concern. For every Draisaitl you get guys like Griffen Reinhart or Cody Franson.

Agree wholeheartedly with this. We’ve really skewed our view on the importance of skating because in our recent history we have a guy like Drai who improved his so much. Look at guys like Henrik Samuelsson.. same knock..never improved.

Have to remember that most of these guys are already working with power skating coaches. If you play junior hockey in Canada you aren’t going to get any better training post draft than pre draft. Some players just have that ah ha moment and fix something, and some just don’t.

I will admit that I don’t think top end speed is overly important. It’s more the first step acceleration and agility that is important in the league.
 

Zaddy

Registered User
Feb 8, 2013
13,058
5,850
I think when it comes to skating it depends largely on which aspects it is that you have to improve. A guy like Reinhart was IMO a pretty poor skater in all aspects whereas Drai was a pretty decent skater already but just needed to add a bit of power and strength. I think that is a lot easier than if your entire fundamentals are bad. That's hard to improve on. It really depends from player to player and what it is they need to work on.
 

Aerrol

༼ つ ◕_◕ ༽つ
Sep 18, 2014
6,555
3,208
I think when it comes to skating it depends largely on which aspects it is that you have to improve. A guy like Reinhart was IMO a pretty poor skater in all aspects whereas Drai was a pretty decent skater already but just needed to add a bit of power and strength. I think that is a lot easier than if your entire fundamentals are bad. That's hard to improve on. It really depends from player to player and what it is they need to work on.

I also thought his edges/general agility on his skates needed work too. From what I recall, actually, his skating top speed was fine, but his acceleration, agility, and edge work were all lacking. I think Drai deserves a lot of credit for improving pretty much every aspect of his skating, even top speed. His skating is almost unrecognizable compared to his juniors days for me. I tend to agree with @MessierII here, I think mindset and dedication to fixing it is a huge part of the improvement. And while it's one of the more fixable things for a prospect, it shouldn't be totally ignored.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Zaddy

Raab

Registered User
Oct 6, 2007
18,085
2,777
Yeah but there’s a difference. First interview I heard with Reinhart after we acquired him he said and I quote “I think my skating is underrated”. As long as the player actually acknowledges there is a problem and works on it from the outset speed is a very easy thing to improve upon.

While that might be true. We've seen it in other prospects like Teubert and Gagner. Some guys just dont improve enough. What really scares me is that Reinhart didnt look like that bad of skater against junior players. Which means an average skater in junior isn't good enough for the NHL now. They have to pretty much be above average against junior players to be average in the NHL. I wouldn't say Bouchard's skating is much better then Reinhart's IMO, which is why he's dropped for me. I still take him in the top 10, because if his skating gets fixed you have a legitimate #1 dman, if not he'll be more of a bottom pairing PP specialist. The risk vs reward is there after 5 but why take him ahead of Hughes or Dobson who both look like they're 100% to play in your top 4.
 

Raab

Registered User
Oct 6, 2007
18,085
2,777
So here's my short video analysis on Boqvist. He's #7 in white. This in an SHL game where he played roughly 9-10 minutes.



Nice video, but it also shows exactly why Im not a fan of Boqvist's game. I want a small dman to be faster on the puck. If you look at that Stenlund clip, its clear Stenlund has the skating advantage over Boqvist. And it results in a physical play along the boards, that admittedly Boqvist wins. Now if you put Hughes in that position he would beat Stenlund to the puck and be circling around the net already transitioning back up the ice as Stenlund is out of position deep in the zone. I dont want a small dmen who has to get into physical board battles because his skating isnt good enough. I want elite skaters in small dmen so they can avoid the board battles all together. I think its crucial and even more important at the NHL level.
 

Raab

Registered User
Oct 6, 2007
18,085
2,777
There's a nice clip in this highlight of Dobson from Game 3 of the QMJHL final yesterday. Watch at 1:40 into the clip. It shows what I like to see from defenders in terms of decision making. Dobson already knows where he wants the puck to go before he gets it. You can tell by where he's looking before he even gets the puck. Also watch how quickly the puck is on and off his stick, and at the end shows his skating ability a few strides and he's back in the play. Makes it look to easy. This guy is 100% going to be an NHL dman. Question is how good will he be?

 

McDNicks17

Moderator
Jul 1, 2010
41,588
29,948
Ontario
While that might be true. We've seen it in other prospects like Teubert and Gagner. Some guys just dont improve enough. What really scares me is that Reinhart didnt look like that bad of skater against junior players. Which means an average skater in junior isn't good enough for the NHL now. They have to pretty much be above average against junior players to be average in the NHL. I wouldn't say Bouchard's skating is much better then Reinhart's IMO, which is why he's dropped for me. I still take him in the top 10, because if his skating gets fixed you have a legitimate #1 dman, if not he'll be more of a bottom pairing PP specialist. The risk vs reward is there after 5 but why take him ahead of Hughes or Dobson who both look like they're 100% to play in your top 4.

I think the biggest thing for a defenseman is pivots and lateral/backwards mobility.

That was Reinhart's pitfall, IMO. Lackluster backwards skater who turned into a pylon every time he tried to pivot.


That's basically the same reason why I'm not too worried about Bouchard's skating.

I don't think he's a bad skater in the same way a lot of these guys that struggled to improve are. Most of them seemed to actually have decent straight line speed, but struggled with their first step and four-way mobility. Bouchard is the opposite, to me.

If his speed doesn't improve, I think it will hinder his puck-rushing and ability to join the rush to some degree, but I also don't think he stylistically projects to have those things as a focal point of his game.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Aerrol

Raab

Registered User
Oct 6, 2007
18,085
2,777
I think the biggest thing for a defenseman is pivots and lateral/backwards mobility.

That was Reinhart's pitfall, IMO. Lackluster backwards skater who turned into a pylon every time he tried to pivot.


That's basically the same reason why I'm not too worried about Bouchard's skating.

I don't think he's a bad skater in the same way a lot of these guys that struggled to improve are. Most of them seemed to actually have decent straight line speed, but struggled with their first step and four-way mobility. Bouchard is the opposite, to me.

If his speed doesn't improve, I think it will hinder his puck-rushing and ability to join the rush to some degree, but I also don't think he stylistically projects to have those things as a focal point of his game.

The problem is Bouchard is routinely leading the rush or deep in the offensive zone. I really like him as a prospect just stating why I have him outside of Hughes and Dobson. If he puts it all together he's going to be one hell of a dman. Similar to when we took Draisaitl. You could tell he had the talent, but needed to work on skating and a few other things to get to where he is now. Ill be VERY happy with anyone of Hughes, Dobson, Bouchard. I wouldnt be as excited if we get Boqvist as I feel he's been somewhat over hyped by the talking heads, but I still think he'd be a decent prospect for us.
 

Zaddy

Registered User
Feb 8, 2013
13,058
5,850
Nice video, but it also shows exactly why Im not a fan of Boqvist's game. I want a small dman to be faster on the puck. If you look at that Stenlund clip, its clear Stenlund has the skating advantage over Boqvist. And it results in a physical play along the boards, that admittedly Boqvist wins. Now if you put Hughes in that position he would beat Stenlund to the puck and be circling around the net already transitioning back up the ice as Stenlund is out of position deep in the zone. I dont want a small dmen who has to get into physical board battles because his skating isnt good enough. I want elite skaters in small dmen so they can avoid the board battles all together. I think its crucial and even more important at the NHL level.

You can't get by in the NHL as a defenseman only by winning puck-races. You have to be able to play along the boards, box out your man, use your stick effectively, prevent zone entries, move the puck out of the zone etc. I show you Boqvist doing all these things (after your said he was 'lacking in defensive play') and the thing you decide to zero in on is him 'losing' one 50-50 puck race even though he then completely owns that battle vs a much bigger opponent. The fact that he is a physically underdeveloped 17 year old kid playing against men in one of the best leagues in the world does not seem to matter to you.

I also don't know why you keep comparing him to Hughes and lamenting how inferior Boqvist is to him. Well I could show you things that Boqvist does better than Hughes too and that could impact how they translate to the NHL. I could show you goals Boqvist scores that Hughes probably never will score in the NHL because he just doesn't have nearly the shot that Boqvist does. But I don't, because it's pointless. Both are fantastic prospects and I really don't see why you have to be so critical of Boqvist just because you like Hughes more.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Aerrol

Raab

Registered User
Oct 6, 2007
18,085
2,777
You can't get by in the NHL as a defenseman only by winning puck-races. You have to be able to play along the boards, box out your man, use your stick effectively, prevent zone entries, move the puck out of the zone etc. I show you Boqvist doing all these things (after your said he was 'lacking in defensive play') and the thing you decide to zero in on is him 'losing' one 50-50 puck race even though he then completely owns that battle vs a much bigger opponent. The fact that he is a physically underdeveloped 17 year old kid playing against men in one of the best leagues in the world does not seem to matter to you.

I also don't know why you keep comparing him to Hughes and lamenting how inferior Boqvist is to him. Well I could show you things that Boqvist does better than Hughes too and that could impact how they translate to the NHL. I could show you goals Boqvist scores that Hughes probably never will score in the NHL because he just doesn't have nearly the shot that Boqvist does. But I don't, because it's pointless. Both are fantastic prospects and I really don't see why you have to be so critical of Boqvist just because you like Hughes more.

Im being critical of Boqvist because I think he's overrated and shouldnt be in the same conversation as Hughes, Dobson, Bouchard. If he's there at 10 we should still take him. Its not like he's horrible. But I will be extremely surprised if he picked in the top 7 picks.

Edit: And to put this in perspective I feel he's a much better prospect then Juolevi was at the same age. So that just shows how good the top end of this draft is. I'll be surprised if we dont see all of Dahlin, Hughes, Dobson, Svechnikov, Zadina, Tkachuk, Kotkaniemi in the NHL within the next 2 years.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->