2015 NHL Draft Prospect Discussion - At the 5/8 Mark of the Season

[BertCorbeau]

Last one was full

Top 10 is suddenly looking relevant for the Leafs

Click to read more...

 

[theIceWookie]

Yeah, let Marner fall to us. The kid could have elite potential.

He does have elite potential. Kid is a stud and works his ass off, but he's not a center. He's a winger. Though that doesn't change how high his upside is, just if people are expecting him to play center, they are going to be dissapointed.

Though it would be hella interesting to see him and Nylander together (assuming Dineen gets his act together and transitions Nylander to center). Could be some magic like Domi and Marner are currently making.

 

[NiL8r87]

If I was Nonis I'd be targeting LA HEAVILY, they've probably been the biggest disappointment this season and we might be able to get their 1st for say Franson.

 

[The Winter Soldier]

So what's the story on Zacha?

http://www.nhl.com/ice/news.htm?id=743383



Big center.

Wouldn't he be in the Leafs wheelhouse?

I was thinking, dreaming the other day is more precise of a Strome-Zacha one - two punch down the middle. 2 big skilled, high character centers down the middle for a decade. If only....Dreams would come true.

 

[theIceWookie]

This was a great draft, I think it is living up to its hype. Barkov will be a fine player I am sure. I wouldn't have picked him at #2. But he's a can't miss useful player.

Monahan and Jones dropped a bit. Drafts are indeed unpredictable. This is why I am not so tank-centric as some here. Sure I want Mcdavid or Eichel. But each draft is different. And I see this draft picking at #5. A no lose situation if this is where we pick. So many great players to choose from. Maybe we fall on a Monahan or Jones this summer. THat would be a boost for Leafs fans.

That would be nice. I believe that is what happened last year with Nylander, though I know you don't agree. It would be nice to see that happen again this year and hit on someone who can make an impact quickly like Monahan.

 

[The Winter Soldier]

That would be nice. I believe that is what happened last year with Nylander, though I know you don't agree. It would be nice to see that happen again this year and hit on someone who can make an impact quickly like Monahan.

I have nothing against Nylander if we can get more size and grit skilled guys on our team for a nucleus. I never questioned his skill, like any young guy, I would like to see him grow past just being a skilled fwd. Perhaps grow into a leader, be a guy that hates to lose, show some intangibles because we all know he has the skill.

My belief is you can only have so many smallish even if they are high skilled wingers on a team. You need the right blend of players to win a cup.

Kessel is here for now, JVR is big but is soft. Just too many skilled but weak on the boards fwds.

So if we can dream, and add a Strome and Zacha to the mix. Trade some of the softness out of this core. Nylander could be a good piece in a future core of big guys with skill and will on the boards. Just have to have the right mix of players.

 

[theIceWookie]

I have nothing against Nylander if we can get more size and grit skilled guys on our team for a nucleus.

My belief is you can only have so many smallish even if they are high skilled wingers on a team. You need the right blend of players to win a cup.

Kessel is here for now, JVR is big but is soft. Just too many skilled but weak on the boards fwds.

So if we can dream, and add a Strome and Zacha to the mix. Trade some of the softness out of this core. Nylander could be a good piece in a future core of big guys with skill and will on the boards. Just have to have the right mix of players.

To be fair though Strome really isn't what I would call a player with grit. He's more of a passive big man. Not that this is a bad thing, but he's not going to really improve our system's toughness in any discernible way.

Zacha is much more of a gritty big center though.

 

[The Winter Soldier]

To be fair though Strome really isn't what I would call a player with grit. He's more of a passive big man. Not that this is a bad thing, but he's not going to really improve our system's toughness in any discernible way.

Zacha is much more of a gritty big center though.

I would disagree on the assessment on Strome, I think he would go through 10 walls to win a game. This is grit to me. He's going to be a player that you look at his stats line, and it will not tell the entire truth of his worth.

Zacha has an edge to the game. He's a little Bobby Holik with much more skill. Too bad we will only have a chance to get one of the two.

 

[theIceWookie]

I would disagree on the assessment on Strome, I think he would go through 10 walls to win a game. This is grit to me. He's going to be a player that you look at his stats line, and it will not tell the entire truth of his worth.

Zacha has an edge to the game. He's a little Bobby Holik with much more skill. Too bad we will only have a chance to get one of the two.

I actually question if Strome would do that to win. I haven't seen that from him to be honest, now I'll admit I haven't seen as mch as others about him but I think he lacks that killer instinct. Maybe I'm wrong though. I'll have to watch him in the OHL playoffs this year.

 

[Johny Drama]

Would love either of Jenner or Wennberg but sadly I can't see them dealing either. If we could use our pick for let's say Strome, and then deal Phil for just their pick to get Provorov or Barzal I would be ecstatic.

The individual return for Phil might be smaller then you'd might hope, but if we get two number one centres or a number one centre and top pair d man, I'd say it's a success.

I would also love to see us target that CBJ pick. Looking like it may land in the top 10 at this point. Would imagine that is the type of deal that would happen at the draft when CBJ know exactly where they are picking. Wennberg or Jenner would be good pickups, also like the look of Bjorkstrand.

Not sure how much interest CBJ have in Kessel.

 

[snizzbone*]

My question is how would Hanifin stack up in comparison to Ekblad? I've only seen 2 NCAA games and the US jr games but to me; Ekblad looked more dominant between the 2.... Are they close in potential?

Still a great prospect but I'm starting to learn towards Strome over Hannifin

I don't know about Ekblad, but I've read from a few people that Hanifin is/was better than Jones at the same age. Ekblad obviously is having an amazing year (which I don't think anyone expected).

 

[The Winter Soldier]

I actually question if Strome would do that to win. I haven't seen that from him to be honest, now I'll admit I haven't seen as mch as others about him but I think he lacks that killer instinct. Maybe I'm wrong though. I'll have to watch him in the OHL playoffs this year.

This is the time of year to watch more CJHL games. Will have more opinions to come.

 

[WilliamNylander]

Let's say we finish at 6 with McDavid, Eichel, Hannifin, Strome, and Marner off the board.

Who would you guys want to have at 6?

For me its Werenski or Barzal

 

[Shwaguy*]

I'm not sure I want Barzal.


If new management is truly convinced Nylander can be a Centre by the draft, I'd be open to Crouse at 6. He's like Ritchie, but he's fast and with a lot a of skill.

 

[theIceWookie]

I don't know about Ekblad, but I've read from a few people that Hanifin is/was better than Jones at the same age. Ekblad obviously is having an amazing year (which I don't think anyone expected).

I've heard the same thing, but I'm not sure how much I like the "better at the same age" argument with prospects. Growth and development is the kind of thing that isn't linear. Players grow at different times, fill out at different times, put things together at different times, get taught different skills at different times. So while one prospect might be better at the same age compared to another, it doesn't inherently make said player a better prospect than another player. Especially when it comes to big lanky players who are still growing around 16/17/18 and even 19.

Though Hanifin's skills are top notch and he has been quite impressive. I've always found it hard to compare players in completely different development paths. Not a rant or anything just more a comment about something I see commonly said about players often times.

 

[91Kadri91*]

Let's say we finish at 6 with McDavid, Eichel, Hannifin, Strome, and Marner off the board.

Who would you guys want to have at 6?

For me its Werenski or Barzal

Zacha, for me. I'd actually take him ahead of Strome, knowing full well that such a decision would lead to an outcry from Leafs fans.

 

[theIceWookie]

Let's say we finish at 6 with McDavid, Eichel, Hannifin, Strome, and Marner off the board.

Who would you guys want to have at 6?

For me its Werenski or Barzal

It would come down to a choice between Zacha, Werenski or Rantanen and maybe Kylington for me.

Ultimately I think I'd choose Zacha

 

[Trapper]

I'm not sure I want Barzal.


If new management is truly convinced Nylander can be a Centre by the draft, I'd be open to Crouse at 6. He's like Ritchie, but he's fast and with a lot a of skill.

IMO if you take the BPA, Barzal > Crouse. Just my opinion. I won't pass on drafting a player who could be a no. 1 center because I'm counting on Nylander (who hasn't even made the team yet) to be that no. 1. You will always get a Crouse in trade for a top line center but you won't get a top line center for Crouse.

 

[Green Snow Storm]

Let's say we finish at 6 with McDavid, Eichel, Hannifin, Strome, and Marner off the board.

Who would you guys want to have at 6?

For me its Werenski or Barzal

Anyone of Provorov, Werenski, Barzal, Zacha, or Crouse would be fine with me. Love this draft.

 

[The Winter Soldier]

One of the Centers will fall, a guy like Travis Konecny due to his size could be a great pick up if we can get a 2nd first rd pick.

This kid has upside and some risk, but if he hits his upside, he can be a stud pick.

 

[gabeliscious]

Anyone of Provorov, Werenski, Barzal, Zacha, or Crouse would be fine with me. Love this draft.

realistically at 6 or 7 we are still going to get a great prospect. if provorov is on the board do we pass? the kid is suppose to be legit. although i guess the same could be said with all of the kids you have listed lol. wish we could scoop up another top 10 pick

 

[Green Snow Storm]

realistically at 6 or 7 we are still going to get a great prospect. if provorov is on the board do we pass? the kid is suppose to be legit. although i guess the same could be said with all of the kids you have listed lol. wish we could scoop up another top 10 pick

He's legit. I haven't seen too much of Hanifin, but if he is head and shoulders better than Provorov that would be scary.

 

[Face Of Bear]

After the top 5 (McDavid/Eichle/Hanifin/Strome/Marner) there isnt much differentiating 6-11 imo (Werenski/Provorov/Crouse/Zacha/Kylington/Rantanen)

All have sky high ceilings despite lingering questions about their games currently. IMO it would be tough to argue one will for sure be better then the rest, although personally I'd lean towards Werenski/Provorov if in that position

 

[timlap]

This post is on the long side, but some of you may enjoy it. I had fun putting it together.

I did a little study looking at CHL forwards who were drafted in the top 10 from the years 1995-2004. I chose that decade because many of us will be familiar with those players, yet their careers are either complete or well on their way. This allows us to make a hindsight judgment about how good they turned out to be.

I divided players into four subjective categories: Great Career, Good, Respectable, Disappointing. I just went with my gut feeling. I have no quarrel if you wish to categorize the players differently. I just want a rough sense.

Note that for most of us "Respectable" is a disappointing outcome for a top 10 pick since we're hoping for something more than a solid player. But respectable is a lot better than Disappointing.

I am not trying to make any grand conclusions. This study is too limited in scope to give us any ability to generalize. Any attempt to do so amounts to magical thinking- for instance, we can't assume that because Player 'A' has similar qualities to Player 'B', therefore their career trajectories are likely to be similar.

The reason I chose CHL forwards is because we have several in our wheelhouse this year: Strome, Marner, Crouse, Baral, Zacha, and maybe even Konecny and Merkley (who certainly have their fans around here).

I wanted to get a realistic sense of what a typical top ten picks look like (compared to draft year performance), once we have the luxury of looking back on their career. I limited it to CHL forwards for simplicity and ease of comparison.

10 notes and reflections (not to be confused with "facts" ):

1. Almost all the "great" players were selected 1st or 2nd.

2. The best players selected after #2 were guys like Doan, Horton, Legwand (actually went 2nd), Hartnell, etc.

3. 20 out of 34 were either "Respectable" or "Disappointing". That's 58.8%! The percentage shoots up to 74% if you remove 1st and 2nd picks! 74% of CHL forwards picked between 3-10 had, at best, a respectable career. (Remember, this sample size is too small and the scope too selective to make very useful comments on specific players available in 2015).

4. It would make a HUGE difference to our odds of success, if we could win the lottery. I would be willing to believe that the difference between the top two picks and the rest of the draft is significant (this little study certainly doesn't prove it, but I'm willing to make the leap).

5. Be cautious about assuming guys like Marner, Strome, and Barzal are going to be amazing NHLers. The odds are against them. I will still be pleased to get one of them, but be prepared for them to be just a solid depth player.

6. Lawson Crouse- perhaps the issue not that "anti-Crouse" posters are underrating him so much as they are overrating the competition. If Crouse has good odds to be a 2nd/3rd line two-way player with goal scoring ability, then I think you can see that would be a better than average return on a pick in the 5-10 range.

7. I have no desire to trade our first pick (I enjoy the draft too much) but I think you might see from this that being willing to trade our pick for Ryan O'Reilly (say) is really not insane given what we know about RO'R already, and what picks in the 5-10 range typically return. I don't want to do it, but it's not insane.

8. Obviously the draft turns out star players almost every year (even after the first couple of picks), but to get them you have to get lucky. Maybe two or three out of a couple hundred will hit the high level- maybe 1.5% (just pure guessing, here). What's interesting to me is how low the odds seem to be even after the first two picks. I think I personally have overrated the importance of top ten picks.I wonder if people hoping to tank are hoping something that doesn't increase our odds of success very much- say picking 5th instead of 8th.

9. That said, the odds are pretty decent that you'll get an NHL'er of some sort in the top ten. That's nothing to sneeze at. A thorough analysis of drafting requires an appreciation for the ability to find those respectable players. I suspect there is less luck involved here, though that's purely a guess.

10. Picks in other round are important because we're sure to find some solid NHLers and, just maybe (once a decade or so) we'll be the team who strikes lightning and finds a legit star in the later rounds. Still, individual picks will have a low rate of return.



CHL Forwards Drafted Top 10 1995-2004 (Note: this is not a ranking. Players are listed in order of draft year)

Format: Name (draft position) Draft year stats

Great Career (7 players)
Shane Doan (7) 71-37-57-94
Joe Thornton (1) 59-41-81-122
Patrick Marleau (2) 71-51-74-125
Vincent Lecavalier (1) 58-44-71-115
Jason Spezza (2) 56-43-73-116
Rick Nash (1) 54-32-40-72
Eric Staal (2) 66-39-59-98

Good Career (7 players)
Daymond Langkow (5) 72-67-73-140
J.P. Dumont (3) 68-48-57-105
David Legwand (2) 59-54-51-105
Scott Hartnell (6) 62-27-55-82
Joffrey Lupul (7) 72-56-50-106
Nathan Horton (3) 54-33-35-68
Andrew Ladd (4) 71-30-45-75

Respectable Career (9 players)
Chad Kilger (4) 65-42-53-95
Boyd Deveraux (6) 66-20-38-58
Manny Malhotra (7) 57-16-35-51
Mark Bell (8) 55-34-26-60
*Mike Rupp (9) 26-7-3-10
Tim Connolly (5) 46-34-34-68
Taylor Pyatt (8) 68-37-38-75
Raffi Torres (5) 68-43-48-91
Scottie Upshall (6) 61-32-51-83
Pierre-Marc Bouchard (8) 69-46-94-140
*Mike Rupp was drafted a second time after going unsigned. I call his career “respectable” given that he played 610 games and more or less delivered on the kind of player he looked to be.

Disappointing Career (11 players)
Steve Kelly (6) 68-31-41-72
Terry Ryan (8) 70-50-60-110
Alexandre Volchkov (4) 47-36-27-63
Daniel Tkaczuk (6) 62-45-48-93
Rico Fata (6) 64-44-33-76
Pavel Brendl (4) 68-73-61-134
Kris Beech (7) 68-26-41-67
Jamie Lundmark (9) 70-40-51-91
Nikita Alexeev (8) 64-24-29-53
Petr Taticek (9) 60-21-42-63
Alexandre Picard (8) 69-39-41-80

 

[Ace88*]

He's legit. I haven't seen too much of Hanifin, but if he is head and shoulders better than Provorov that would be scary.

He isn't, imo.