Prospect Info: #13OA - D Jake Bean - Calgary, WHL

[Brock Anton]

^ It's just weird to trade for a guy who should, barring disaster, have no real place on our roster. Hanifin and Slavin are our top-4 LHD, locked in for the long term. Fleury will have some seasoning by the time Bean's ready to break in; and it would be pretty bad if Fleury couldn't at least hold down a bottom pair spot, right?

So we've basically drafted a trading chip. It's weird. Not unheard of, but weird.

Slavin could always move to the right.

 

[Finlandia WOAT]

And AHL all Star Trevor Carrick was an AHL all Star.

 

[tarheelhockey]

Slavin could always move to the right.

McAvoy was on the board and taken with the very next pick. I would've understood if they had taken him as the future RHD under (or over????) Faulk.

As I said in the other thread, I'm not mad about this pick. I'm just perplexed and a little bit skeptical that it was the right player for this organization.

 

[Unsustainable]

McAvoy was on the board and taken with the very next pick. I would've understood if they had taken him as the future RHD under (or over????) Faulk.

As I said in the other thread, I'm not mad about this pick. I'm just perplexed and a little bit skeptical that it was the right player for this organization.

I with you on this, a RHD would have made more sense.

 

[Sens1Canes2]

What if they didn't like McAvoy even close to Bean? Do you really make a decision of how good a player is based on handed-ness? If he's clearly your BPA?

 

[geehaad]

I thought the general consensus in this group was that BPA was the way to go with the top pick. Apparently I read that way wrong.

 

[Anton Dubinchuk]

I thought the general consensus in this group was that BPA was the way to go with the top pick. Apparently I read that way wrong.

not when its not our general consensus bpa

which oddly enough almost always fits team need

 

[A Star is Burns]

Seriously. If they thought McAvoy was better, they take him. Doesn't seem that hard. None of our dmen, even the ones that performed so well last year, are guaranteed to ever take a step forward, or none backwards. Maybe they think he has that Green or Karlsson offensive type potential ultimately, in which case, you easily trade one of these other guys long term. Stocking up on young dmen is never a bad thing, even if you have a lot and a lot of the same hand. I just don't get how guys in this area of the draft that are a two to three year plan can be that perplexing.

 

[Penaltykiller17]

Initially, i'm not going to lie I was let down. After the Gauthier selection, I'm 100% comfortable with this pick. I think he was the best Dman left, and his ceiling could be better than any forward selected between 14-20th, and right along the lines of our current D. Not bad RF, not bad.

 

[SaskCanesFan]

Wasn't thrilled with this at first, mostly because it was so unexpected and I never bothered to learn anything about Bean. I was worried about him being another Ryan Murphy, but I like this guy the more I look at him. Skates well and makes good decisions, two things I think are central to the makeup of this team going forward. Also not nearly as small or bad defensively as I had thought.

If this was BPA then its the right pick. I originally wanted a forward, but the more I think about it picking for need early is stupid. It's too hard to predict what will be needed down the line. Just 2 years ago we were looking bare on D. The consensus at the time seemed to be that Fleury was a bit of a reach and probably not BPA at 7, but he was such an organizational need that the Canes wouldn't pass him up. Fast forward, with the addition of Hanifin, now Bean, the emergence of Slavin and all of a sudden LHD isn't a need at all, but skilled C/RW William Nylander would look perfect on Carolina's roster. Those are the kind of things that can happen, so pick the best guy.

 

[tarheelhockey]

What if they didn't like McAvoy even close to Bean?

Then they would be going against consensus. Which is probably the case given the way it turned out, but I think people are justified in raising their eyebrows when a team goes against consensus.

Do you really make a decision of how good a player is based on handed-ness?

When it comes to defensemen specifically, handedness matters. Teams that are unbalanced are at a disadvantage, and therefore in many cases a player's handedness affects his path to the NHL.

If they see Bean as a superior player to Fleury, sure, this makes sense. But if that's the case, we should probably be worried about Fleury.

 

[Anton Dubinchuk]

i was a little like wtf when we first made the pick, but honestly im fine w it

i agree with tarheel about the confusion regarding the lhd, but who the hell knows what happens in the next two years

maybe slavin ends up being just a solid bottom pairing guy, takes no more steps forward, and last year was playing over his head. maybe he ends up being a beast on the right side and peters loosens his stance on lhd-rhd pairings

maybe boston in their desperate search for a defenseman offers us two first round picks and pastrnak for hanifin

i dont think it takes the "absolute worst case scenario" for bean to "not have a spot". i see the argument, but i think its fine.

in the end, if all three end up amazing, we trade one for lots of good things.

if not, more darts for the dartboard

 

[Sens1Canes2]

Then they would be going against consensus. Which is probably the case given the way it turned out, but I think people are justified in raising their eyebrows when a team goes against consensus.



When it comes to defensemen specifically, handedness matters. Teams that are unbalanced are at a disadvantage, and therefore in many cases a player's handedness affects his path to the NHL.

If they see Bean as a superior player to Fleury, sure, this makes sense. But if that's the case, we should probably be worried about Fleury.

The Bob Mac rankings (which I believe are simply an amalgamation of a bunch of rankings) definitely had Bean > McAvoy. I don't know if you are responding to my "liking him way better"...if that's the case, fair enough.

As far as handed-ness....it's 2 or 3 years down the road WITH an expansion draft in the middle of it. It's always ok to have an embarrassment of riches.

I found an interview with Tim Murray to be enlightening with respect to postions. The reporter asked him about C versus wing for Nylander, and he was all "Ahhh that'll work itself out down the road, I'm just envisioning him on our PP with Eichel." Not the same as D, obviously...I just thought it was interesting.

 

[Anton Dubinchuk]

maybe we can try to get bean to switch handedness

sometimes you have to adjust your game to be effective at the nhl level

 

[Sens1Canes2]

maybe we can try to get bean to switch handedness

sometimes you have to adjust your game to be effective at the nhl level

Very true. If he doesn't want to, we can talk about his bad attitude.

 

[Anton Dubinchuk]

Very true. If he doesn't want to, we can talk about his bad attitude.

cant believe we drafted this kid he has already told the coaching staff hes not willing to adjust his game

idiot

 

[Unsustainable]

Wait 2 years, Oilers offer sheet Hanifin, and we when lotto for next 4 years.

 

[Sens1Canes2]

cant believe we drafted this kid he has already told the coaching staff hes not willing to adjust his game

idiot

SOMEONE really blew it.

 

[DaveG]

Frankly, I'm surprised at how near-sighted you're viewing this pick. Trade a defenseman to Edmonton? You knew that was never in the cards.

This selection is who the organization thinks will be the best player - as a chip in trade or as a guy who puts on the sweater - out of all the ones that they had to choose from. Not the guy that Edmonton will want. Not the guy that will maybe play this year or next. This is the guy that when you look at his Hockey's Future profile, you see a bigger number with a grade closest to A.

Not at all on this one, the only way I'm looking at this is long-term, and it still doesn't make too much more sense to me there, aside from the fact that we went forward heavy last year as we should have.

Right now, our LHD situation for the next 2-3 years plays out like this:

Hanifin - 2 years left on ELC
Slavin - 2 years left on ELC
Fleury - 3 years left on ELC
Carrick - rising but stuck behind depth.

RHS isn't much better frankly:

Faulk - 4 years left on contract
Pesce - 2 years left on ELC
McKeown - 3 years left on ELC

Right now, I see Bean as not really having a spot he can even really push for by the time he's ready (3 years) aside from the #7 slot unless a trade is made in the next couple years. The Edmonton quip definitely was me looking at things short-term, but on the other end of it I'm also looking at it as the point when the window of this team as a contender, not just a playoff caliber team, would be opening.

Effectively as I see it right now, picking Bean here is looking at the team having a need for another LHD in 5 years.

The problem I have is that we also have, even after the emergence of Aho, Roy, the Saarela and TT trades, and the Gauthier pick, far more pressing needs are still up front long-term. Even if Lindholm were to effectively make the move to C long-term, which looks very much up in the air at this point in his development curve.

So with that said this is how I was looking at things before tonight in the big picture:

Skinner - ??????? - Teravainen
Roy - J Staal - Aho
??????? - Rask - Lindholm
Woods - Bishop - McGinn
wildcards: Saarela, Wallmark, Tolchinsky

Slavin - Faulk
Hanifin - Pesce
Fleury - McKeown
wildcards: Murphy, Carrick, Wesley

Ned
Altshuller
Booth


Now, the issue to me at least, is how they project things from here. Bean of course jumps to the head of the defense wildcard slot in 3-5 years, but even with the addition of Gauthier, which allows Aho to move to a more comfortable more scoring oriented spot, we're still down a top 9 forward, and most notably it's a top 6 center. Even if Rask projects as a low end #1, which I think he can, we'd still need a high end #2 or #3 to compliment him long term when our window is opening. I'm not confident that either of those two options are Saarela or Wallmark. I'm a little more confident if it's Lindholm and one of those two are moved to the wing hole, but we have yet to see Lindholm do that on a consistent basis. Less confident that he can be a strong 3 (which is needed with a low end 1) or Rask proving to be better then a low end 1.

That's where the issue on this comes in for me, in the opportunity cost when the window should be opening for us. Dmen generally take a longer time to mature and the Bean pick patches a hole that I don't see existing with a guy that should be getting ready at 21-22 that could have been filled with a guy that was 19-20 at the forward positions where a hole is currently projected.

Opportunity cost when it's time for our window to open is that I'm looking at. Also why I liked the idea of D later on, when it's more likely to run in to an impact player (compared to forward) and still have them be available for us when our window is set to open. That's the biggest reason I bring a trade up, better to get that asset now when it's cheaper then to be forced in to an overpaying situation when the cost for doing so will be much much higher.

That said, if the belief is that Bean flat out is far better then the forward options that were available, and he very well could be, that's another matter entirely and makes up for the difference in lost opportunity. I don't see it personally, but then again I was much higher on guys like Kunin and Bellows that would be there at 13 then most were in this draft.

 

[Boom Boom Apathy]

I thought the general consensus in this group was that BPA was the way to go with the top pick. Apparently I read that way wrong.

Exactly. For years, many on this board lamented that JR tended to gravitate to forwards who could play right away, as opposed to picking BPA. Now we have a GM who is doing just that, picking BPA regardless of short term needs.

Will Bean be a good pick? Who knows, but picking who they think is BPA, regardless of position is something I can stand behind.

 

[cptjeff]

Congrats! I think this kid might be one of those under-rated dark horses, for you guys.

Wow, spectacular hands. And great skating. Regardless of whether he really fits in our lineup right now, I'm sold. I mean, I know it's a highlight reel and thus not representative, but with skill like that, I have a hard time not seeing him as an NHL fixture, whether with the Canes or elsewhere.

 

[geehaad]

if the belief is that Bean flat out is far better then the forward options that were available

That's how I'm thinking about this. We all know that the organization acknowledges that it lacks scoring on its current roster and its organizational depth. So why then would they pick a LH defenseman? Only one answer makes sense. Because he was far better than any other choice.

And we've come to give credit to this group to do the sensible thing, so why is our faith so easily derailed? Only one answer makes sense. Because he wasn't what we wanted. Because we never saw it coming. Because we've never seen his highlight video before tonight.

 

[Finlandia WOAT]

To be Frank was generally unaware bean existed until tonight

 

[geehaad]

^^^ Hey, did you guys notice where Bean lined up with Sanheim at even strength?

Yep. Off side.

Ohhhhhhh shhhhhhhhhhiiiiiiiiiitttttt.

 

[Roboturner913]

That's how I'm thinking about this. We all know that the organization acknowledges that it lacks scoring on its current roster and its organizational depth. So why then would they pick a LH defenseman? Only one answer makes sense. Because he was far better than any other choice.

And we've come to give credit to this group to do the sensible thing, so why is our faith so easily derailed? Only one answer makes sense. Because he wasn't what we wanted. Because we never saw it coming. Because we've never seen his highlight video before tonight.

Pretty much.

I don't think RF has given us too much reason to doubt him to this point. As disappointed as I am to not get Bellows I like that RF sticks to his board and doesn't waver. And really, if you're going to be overstocked at a position, do it on defense.