2012 D-Crop to Impact 2011?

[Aaron Vickers]

One of the nice things about having Canada's goalie development camp in Calgary was that I got the chance to go out and bump into some familiar faces before the draft.

And given that the draft was right around the corner I had a few different conversations about it, but also about 2012. What continually came up was the crop of defensemen that is coming in next year's draft. I asked one NHL executive if the fact that there are so many quality blueliners next year impacts them taking any this year.

One said that a defenseman you can get in the latter part of the first round next year has bigger upside than what you can get this year.

I asked him if it impacted his organization's chances of picking up a defenseman with their pick (it is outside the top-15), and he seemed to insinuate the value was worth the wait.

I touched on this idea after talking with him here: http://futureconsiderationsdotca.wordpress.com/2011/06/14/2012-draft-impacting-picks-in-minnesota/

What do you think? Does it make sense, given the strong blueline crop of 2012, to spend your first rounder on a forward knowing the odds are greater that you'll be drafting a defenseman next year?

Click to read more...

 

[Alberta tough]

As an avid follower of the the WHL I think the 2012 dmen are the best crop of dmen I have seen since 2003. The forwards do not look that great thus far. So I would say draft a forward this year and a dman next year. I would also take two 2012 WHL dmen before RNH if they were to go in this years draft. This is just with my observation of the WHL.

 

[Jared Ramsden]

It's something I've brought up a couple of times on the Devils board here. I think it's a very valid point. The 2012 crop of defenseman is going to be unbelievable. Why reach for a defenseman this year when you can sit back and get one next year?

 

[Kid Canesten]

a team which is forward heavy (like edmonton) is sitting in a nice spot right now. they can grab rnh this year and next year, build the back end. in a couple of years, watch out.

 

[blinkman360]

It's something I've brought up a couple of times on the Devils board here. I think it's a very valid point. The 2012 crop of defenseman is going to be unbelievable. Why reach for a defenseman this year when you can sit back and get one next year?

Agreed. As an Islander fan, I am pretty confident that they will go forward with the 5th pick. A) Because of just how strong the 2012 defenders are, and B)Snow has a pretty consistent track record of going offense in round 1(aside from de Haan, who was their 2nd pick in the 1st that year).

What is interesting though is that as stocked as the 2012 class is with talented defensemen, there are some pretty damn talented forwards as well at the top of that draft in Yakupov, Galchenyuk and Grigorenko. Should be a very fun draft to follow and watch.

 

[R S]

I think it should.

 

[DJB]

Team that stay with BPA have the most success imo.

No reason to pass on a defenceman this year and take a forward simply because of next years draft. To me that is silly.

Now if an organization has two players rated identically, and it's a toss up between a forward or a defenceman, I could see that team take the forward in that instance...

But to pass up a better prospect is absurd if you ask me. Prospects can always be dealt...

 

[J17 Vs Proclamation]

In theory, yes it should have an impact.

However, there are quite a few complications. Firstly, 2012 draft eligible players by and large won't have been bearly as heavily scouted. Judgements will be less "valid" if you will. Secondly, the most important season is the draft year. This year we've seen players like Ambroz, Saad etc fall in the rankings. It's IMO poor judgement to base a particular draft selection year on the next draft ; because we as of yet don't have their draft development year. Things change so quickly. To me atleast, it seems a ploy that has holes in it and is not a logical one.

So perhaps it could have a minimal impact, but it doesn't seem logical for it to have any meaningful direct impact on 2011 selections.

If a team has a BPA available at say 13, then i find it completely absurd for them to assign need over BPA based on notions of a future event over a year away that will undoubtedly change dramatically and event that they don't even possess sufficient data and information on now.

 

[Silly Goose]

Just curious, and I don't know any specifics, but consensus seems to be that Adam larsson is the top D prospect this year. Where do you think he would slot in to next years draft in terms of Defensemen, Top 3? Top 5? worse?

 

[Pyke*]

This is silly. Who knows how players will develop over the next year.

 

[theIceWookie]

Team that stay with BPA have the most success imo.

No reason to pass on a defenceman this year and take a forward simply because of next years draft. To me that is silly.

Now if an organization has two players rated identically, and it's a toss up between a forward or a defenceman, I could see that team take the forward in that instance...

But to pass up a better prospect is absurd if you ask me. Prospects can always be dealt...

In theory, yes it should have an impact.

However, there are quite a few complications. Firstly, 2012 draft eligible players by and large won't have been bearly as heavily scouted. Judgements will be less "valid" if you will. Secondly, the most important season is the draft year. This year we've seen players like Ambroz, Saad etc fall in the rankings. It's IMO poor judgement to base a particular draft selection year on the next draft ; because we as of yet don't have their draft development year. Things change so quickly. To me atleast, it seems a ploy that has holes in it and is not a logical one.

So perhaps it could have a minimal impact, but it doesn't seem logical for it to have any meaningful direct impact on 2011 selections.

If a team has a BPA available at say 13, then i find it completely absurd for them to assign need over BPA based on notions of a future event over a year away that will undoubtedly change dramatically and event that they don't even possess sufficient data and information on now.

I agree with both of the above. I understand how it could be said that team thinks they will get a more solid defender net year and if they feel they have the luxury, try and swap a pick from this year for next year, however I`m not sure the logic that it factors in significantly.

As someone above said, you can trade a prospect. Plus getting a 2nd prospect at a position is never bad. Depth wins. I`m not sure how a pick next year might affect this year. With player rankings fluctuating because of performance, or growth in skill or size (like Hamilton`s spurt) and with a team being not really guaranteed to be in any spot at the draft, it doesn`t make much sense sense to me to bet on next year by skipping someone this year.

The only scenario I think something could happen with the draft next affecting the scenario would be as follows. A team like the Islanders are up and they have two players that they have a shot at, that they think are equal for all intents and purposed. One is a forward and one is a defender. They decide to take the forward because they feel even if they are in the middle ten picks they could get a strong defender.

 

[ottawah]

And given that the draft was right around the corner I had a few different conversations about it, but also about 2012. What continually came up was the crop of defensemen that is coming in next year's draft. I asked one NHL executive if the fact that there are so many quality blueliners next year impacts them taking any this year.

My gut in general says no. The reason why is that D men pretty much always take 3 - 4 years to develop properly, forwards, 2 - 3 years. And at the front of the draft its even more pronounced, with the top few forwards usually going NHL right away. And the top 10 picks is usually heavily forward weighted. As such, if you are thinking about drafting a D this year, its probably a bit deeper in the draft, so you know in all likelihood you are looking at 4 years down the road before the player is really ready to step in and be a contributor. If you want to wait for a year to take a D man, that stretches to 5 years down the road, an eternity in the NHL. Maybe if you were picking players that stepped in right away, yes, but when players are really that far from being NHL ready, waiting a year on a position does not make a lot of sense.

I agree, BPA is always the best strategy, at least in the top round or two. After that I'd draft for organizational depth at positions.

 

[Jabba11]

I would tend to say yes. Teams that are in a position to draft a good forward this year, should do it. I would pick guys like RNH, Couturier, Landeskog and Huberdeau before Hamilton and Larsson. Next year's top 15 should have excellent defenseman. Outside of Sarnia's Yakupov and Galchenyuk, the rest of the crop seems to be filled of excellent defenseman.

 

[R S]

This is silly. Who knows how players will develop over the next year.

It's not silly at all. Scouts who are watching 2011 players are also keeping tabs on 2012 guys. They know what's coming even more so then some random posters on a message board.

It will play into it somewhat.

 

[UpsideHockey]

Team that stay with BPA have the most success imo.

No reason to pass on a defenceman this year and take a forward simply because of next years draft. To me that is silly.

Now if an organization has two players rated identically, and it's a toss up between a forward or a defenceman, I could see that team take the forward in that instance...

But to pass up a better prospect is absurd if you ask me. Prospects can always be dealt...

Nailed it.

***
• Prospects and draft analyst at The Hockey Writers (THW):
• http://thehockeywriters.com/author/cralph/
• The Next Ones (from the files of The Hockey Spy):
• http://hockeyspy.blogspot.com/
• Twitter: @ChrisRalphTHW

 

[J17 Vs Proclamation]

It's not silly at all. Scouts who are watching 2011 players are also keeping tabs on 2012 guys. They know what's coming even more so then some random posters on a message board.

It will play into it somewhat.

Keeping tabs is pretty much the key word here. There is a difference between keeping tabs and actually focusing on something. It also isn't logical to base on event which has no impact on the quality of another event. Considering the data for 2012 will not be THAT reliable and that the data for 2012 has no impact on the data for 2011, why would it have an impact?

Especially if you pick in the 20's this year. You pass up on a BPA D because of 2012? Not only have you passed up on a BPA but you've based a decision on a need that by the time these 2 prospects are likely to be NHL ready, your needs may have potentially changed anyway.

 

[R S]

Keeping tabs is pretty much the key word here. There is a difference between keeping tabs and actually focusing on something. It also isn't logical to base on event which has no impact on the quality of another event. Considering the data for 2012 will not be THAT reliable and that the data for 2012 has no impact on the data for 2011, why would it have an impact?

Especially if you pick in the 20's this year. You pass up on a BPA D because of 2012? Not only have you passed up on a BPA but you've based a decision on a need that by the time these 2 prospects are likely to be NHL ready, your needs may have potentially changed anyway.

I never said you for surely pass anyone up. I said it definitely needs to play into things.

 

[BestWestern]

I don't think it would have an effect such as a team passing over Larsson/hamilton in Cavour of a forward, but if you want a defenseman and are considering trading up to get a shot at Larsson/Hamilton, the depth of the 2012 class may make that a less reasonable option, as you would have to give up assets to move up this year, when you could stay put next year and get a player of similar potential and talent.

Ex. Oilers trading up into the top 5 again this year (would most likely have to give up 19+ hemsky, etc) to get Hamilton

OR

stay put this year, and possibly acquire griffin reinhart or Ryan Murray next year.

 

[Rob Scuderi]

Unless you're planning on being a lottery pick next year, which applies to at most a few teams, there's really no reason to even consider it. Even teams with a long-term rebuild planned would be foolish to pass on the player they view as BPA because maybe next year there will be better options at D.

BPA all the way, as someone already said prospects can be moved too.

 

[J17 Vs Proclamation]

I never said you for surely pass anyone up. I said it definitely needs to play into things.

How? You haven't really provided any real explanation of how it would.

It will barely factor into draft day decisions at all. Teams aren't going to base an important 1st round decision on something which has insufficient data and has actual relevance on this event.

 

[periferal]

It's something I've brought up a couple of times on the Devils board here. I think it's a very valid point. The 2012 crop of defenseman is going to be unbelievable. Why reach for a defenseman this year when you can sit back and get one next year?

What kind of a ridiculous attitude is this? You should take BPA ALL the time. If you try to force picks because of what might be available later, you will hurt yourself in the long run.

I really hope this "next year's draft is D-heavy" attitude lets Adam Larsson slip to the Islanders at #5....And then the they don't hesitate if they can get Nick Ebert next year as well.

Build the BEST prospect base you can. If your team becomes so defense-heavy, you can always make a trade later. And when you're making a deal I'd rather be dealing an A-level defenseman than a B+ level forward.

 

[Gobo]

Just curious, and I don't know any specifics, but consensus seems to be that Adam larsson is the top D prospect this year. Where do you think he would slot in to next years draft in terms of Defensemen, Top 3? Top 5? worse?

Murray
Ebert
Larsson
Reinhart and Co.

 

[bluechipbonzo]

What kind of a ridiculous attitude is this? You should take BPA ALL the time. If you try to force picks because of what might be available later, you will hurt yourself in the long run.

I really hope this "next year's draft is D-heavy" attitude lets Adam Larsson slip to the Islanders at #5....And then the they don't hesitate if they can get Nick Ebert next year as well.

Build the BEST prospect base you can. If your team becomes so defense-heavy, you can always make a trade later. And when you're making a deal I'd rather be dealing an A-level defenseman than a B+ level forward.

This makes a lot of sense.

 

[Jared Ramsden]

What kind of a ridiculous attitude is this? You should take BPA ALL the time. If you try to force picks because of what might be available later, you will hurt yourself in the long run.

I really hope this "next year's draft is D-heavy" attitude lets Adam Larsson slip to the Islanders at #5....And then the they don't hesitate if they can get Nick Ebert next year as well.

Build the BEST prospect base you can. If your team becomes so defense-heavy, you can always make a trade later. And when you're making a deal I'd rather be dealing an A-level defenseman than a B+ level forward.

All I said was it was a valid point. Are teams going pass on a player because of looking ahead to the '12 draft class? I highly doubt it. It's just an interesting point to consider.

I'm interested to see how many 1st, 2nd and even 3rd round picks next year get moved on draft day and during the season. Don't get me wrong, high picks this year still have value, but I think next years picks will have even more value.

 

[R S]

How? You haven't really provided any real explanation of how it would.

It will barely factor into draft day decisions at all. Teams aren't going to base an important 1st round decision on something which has insufficient data and has actual relevance on this event.

I just think that if a team is deciding between a defenseman or a forward later in the first round, I would hope they might consider next year's D crop and let that play into the decision....even just a little bit. And this is really mostly for later in the first round. For something like a top 10 choice, I don't think it should weigh into it one bit.

You might not agree with me, but that doesn't mean I am wrong.

And how come it seems like you always have something critical to say about MY posts? Did I do something to you at some point along the way?