Prospect Info: 2015 NHL Entry Draft Thread | McKenzie's Final Ranking Released

[Canovin]

People who want to take a goalie in the 1st round in a crazy stacked year like this probably forgot we also have Brossoit and Eetu Laurikainen on the rise. We aren't exactly bare. We just need a proven starter.

 

[Zaddy]

I'm worried Samsonov is getting overhyped. I've seen russian posters say he is not as good as Vasilevski in his draft year and that he's really a poor mans version of Vasilevski. So, is that still worth a mid 1st round pick?

You can compare numbers. Vasya had 93.1 SVS% in MHL in 27 games, Samsonov 91.8% in 18. Not to mention the fact Vasilevski actually not only made but was the starting goaltender for Team Russia in the world juniors in his draft year and posted a very impressive 95.3 SVS% in 5 games. Samsonov didn't even make the WJC team.

I think Samsonov is a very good goalie but I think he is getting overhyped here, taking him that high in the 1st might be a mistake. I'd be much more comfortable taking him with #33 and if he isn't still there then that's fine, there's a good number of goalies in this draft with potential.

 

[CupofOil]

You really can't. Right now (pre draft) we don't have a single forward prospect that realistically projects to be a top 6 player. Like it or not, we're going to be in a situation where one day some of our players are going to price themselves out of Edmonton. At that point it's imperative you've got young cheap players who can step in and if not replace them outright, provide reasonable production in their place.

BPA, BPA, BPA. You never know what the team will need in 3 or 4 years time when you start to get a grasp on what you've gotten out of a draft.

Yep. If little Nick Merkley is the BPA at 16 then you take him even though the need for small skilled players would seem lowest on the list currently but as you said, the makeup of the team could look vastly differently when these non-lottery prospects are ready for the jump.

They have drafted for need too often in the past and it has bit them in the rear more times than not (Musil and Moroz most notably) so draft the best player and worry about filling current needs through trade and free agency.

And a BIG no to taking a goalie in the 1st round. As has been noted by many, drafting goalies are like throwing darts at a dartboard with a blindfold on.

 

[Trafalgar Sadge Law]

I watched Carlo play 5-6 games in January and February. I came away pretty impressed, his size/reach and competitiveness stood out to me. His skating, puck skills and hockey IQ seemed fine too. His point production is a red flag, and I don't see him producing much at the pro level. Overall I'd say it's easy to see why scouts like him, and in my book he's a pretty safe bet to become a NHL player. I'd defnitley consider him at #33, if he's available.

There's a difference between offensive and defensive hockey IQ. He's great at making reads and positioning himself to cut off passing and shooting lanes, but as he exits the defensive zone, he stops knowing what to do.

 

[McDraekke]

Sure, but as few goalies get drafted in the first round even fewer actually end up panning out. 12 goalies have gone in the first round since 2005: only four are NHL starters today (and Bernier is probably on the fringe of that group). Only Price is with the team that drafted him. Two are too soon to tell (Subban, Vasilevskiy) and the remaining six never had a sniff. So even if you assume the two prospects pan out, you've got a 50/50 chance of blowing that pick. Too big a risk for something that will take years to come to fruition.

Now what is the chance that a non-goalie draftee in the 16th spot doesn't pan out?

14 Sonny Milano
13 Zadorov
12 Wilson
11 Armia
10 Tarasenko
09 Leddy
08 Colborne
07 Gillies
06 Ty Wishart
05 Alex Bourret
04 Nokelainen
03 Bernier
02 Jakub Klepis
01 Umberger
00 Marcel Hossa
99 Dave Tanabe
98 Eric Chouinard
97 Ty Jones
96 Mario Laroque

Now there are some decent players in this list, but Larocque, Jones, Chouinard, Klepis, Bourret are all players I haven't heard of. Not that I follow every team, but a 16th overall pick is one that is assumed to be a player of significance, so if I haven't heard of them, I'm going to say they didn't pan out. So that's about 30% of that group, plus many who are too young to tell yet and some that although made it to the NHL, weren't anything special.

Just saying, I don't think it's as big a risk as some people think.

 

[Trafalgar Sadge Law]

Now what is the chance that a non-goalie draftee in the 16th spot doesn't pan out?

14 Sonny Milano
13 Zadorov
12 Wilson
11 Armia
10 Tarasenko
09 Leddy
08 Colborne
07 Gillies
06 Ty Wishart
05 Alex Bourret
04 Nokelainen
03 Bernier
02 Jakub Klepis
01 Umberger
00 Marcel Hossa
99 Dave Tanabe
98 Eric Chouinard
97 Ty Jones
96 Mario Laroque

Now there are some decent players in this list, but Larocque, Jones, Chouinard, Klepis, Bourret are all players I haven't heard of. Not that I follow every team, but a 16th overall pick is one that is assumed to be a player of significance, so if I haven't heard of them, I'm going to say they didn't pan out. So that's about 30% of that group, plus many who are too young to tell yet and some that although made it to the NHL, weren't anything special.

Just saying, I don't think it's as big a risk as some people think.

But if you look at the trend, you'd see that 16th overall is becoming a hit at a higher rate as the years go on, which is to be expected as scouting is becoming more of a science than an art in recent years.

For the record, I wouldn't mind if we picked Samsonov 16th overall, but I think we'd be better off targeting a guy like Daniel Vladar with a later pick.

 

[McShogun99]

I'd only take a goalie with the 33rd pick if Samsonov or Blackwood are available. I actually prefer Blackwood over Samsonov anyways.

 

[CupofOil]

But if you look at the trend, you'd see that 16th overall is becoming a hit at a higher rate as the years go on, which is to be expected as scouting is becoming more of a science than an art in recent years.

Plus this is a deeper draft year than most years by all accounts.

With all the talent that is sure to be available at 16, I just can't imagine taking a goalie at that spot. 33rd pick? Sure, but not at 16.
In any event, I'd be very surprised if the Oilers were picking at 16 on draft day.

 

[Trafalgar Sadge Law]

I guess I'll join in on draft scenarios too:

1st: CMD
16th: Meier/Svechnikov/Guryanov
33rd: Juulsen/Kylington
57th: Andersson (I have a hard-on for his upside, even though he's a bit Schultz-ish)
79th: Schemitsch/Lindgren
83rd: Vladar/Tomek

1st: CMD
16th: Roy/Chabot/Zboril
33rd: Bittner/Boeser
57th: Andersson
79th: Schemitsch/Lindgren
83rd: Vladar/Tomek

 

[McDraekke]

But if you look at the trend, you'd see that 16th overall is becoming a hit at a higher rate as the years go on, which is to be expected as scouting is becoming more of a science than an art in recent years.

For the record, I wouldn't mind if we picked Samsonov 16th overall, but I think we'd be better off targeting a guy like Daniel Vladar with a later pick.

Ya, I definitely did notice that trend. Does anyone know if there is a similar trend with early goaltenders, or if it generally remains the same?

It's not like I will be upset if they don't pick him at 16, but I just don't think he'll make it to 33.

 

[Canovin]

I guess I'll join in on draft scenarios too:

1st: CMD
16th: Meier/Svechnikov/Guryanov
33rd: Juulsen/Kylington
57th: Andersson (I have a hard-on for his upside, even though he's a bit Schultz-ish)
79th: Schemitsch/Lindgren
83rd: Vladar/Tomek

1st: CMD
16th: Roy/Chabot/Zboril
33rd: Bittner/Boeser
57th: Andersson
79th: Schemitsch/Lindgren
83rd: Vladar/Tomek

1st draft scenario. Though I would swap Andersson for Hintz. Everything else is a perfect.

edit: Kylington and Lingdren are high risk high award type D. Guys who have the Karlsson type upside. They mesh well with shutdown D like Klefbom and Nurse. These are the type Oilers need to draft in the 2nd rounds or later considering if the we do plan to trade/offersheet for Dougie Hamilton who has a safer trajectory.

 

[Zaddy]

My current favorites:

1. McDavid
16. Guryanov/Chabot/Roy
33. Larsson/Dunn/Roslovic
57. Fischer/Dergachyov/Hintz
79. Tomek/Wotherspoon/Nättinen
83. Lööke/Guhle/Korostelev

 

[CantHaveTkachev]

1. Connor
16. Roy/Chabot/Svechnikov/Zboril
33. Trade for goalie (Talbot/Jones)
57. Pilon/Gagne

please no goalies in round 1

 

[Young Lions*]

Now what is the chance that a non-goalie draftee in the 16th spot doesn't pan out?
...
Now there are some decent players in this list, but Larocque, Jones, Chouinard, Klepis, Bourret are all players I haven't heard of. Not that I follow every team, but a 16th overall pick is one that is assumed to be a player of significance, so if I haven't heard of them, I'm going to say they didn't pan out. So that's about 30% of that group, plus many who are too young to tell yet and some that although made it to the NHL, weren't anything special.

Just saying, I don't think it's as big a risk as some people think.

But that's my point: it's enough of a longshot to get a player out of the middle of the first round without stretching the odds further by taking a flyer on a position that rarely works out.

Ya, I definitely did notice that trend. Does anyone know if there is a similar trend with early goaltenders, or if it generally remains the same?

Seems like it's been more misses than hits. The best goalies of the period 2005-2014 were both picked back in 2005.

 

[Young Lions*]

If one is dead set on getting a goalie with the 16th pick, it makes more sense to trade it for one that's already knocking on the door.

 

[s7ark]

....

Just saying, I don't think it's as big a risk as some people think.

I am going to keep posting this because it sums everything up.

https://bluebulletreport.wordpress.com/2015/06/04/rethinking-how-to-draft-goalies/comment-page-1/

The stats don't support taking a goalie in the 1st. Most seasons there is a goalie or two that get taken in the 1st and they don't pan out at a higher rate than goalies taken in the 2nd or early 3rd. And they pan out less than a skater taken in the 1st.

Samsonov could be a good goalie. I just think that Vas has skewed people to think that Samsonov is going to be similar to him when the stats of the two don't support that argument.

This is copied from the above article. Here are the top goalies from this draft.

NAME | HT | WT | SA% | SA%(W/O) | +/- | LEAGUE RANK
Mackenzie Blackwood | 6.04 | 215 | 0.906 | 0.893 | 0.13 | 9th
Callum Booth | 6.03 | 199 | 0.900 | 0.888 | 0.12 | 7th
Ilya Samsonov | 6.03 | 200 | 0.918 | 0.919 | -0.01 | 10th
Daniel Vladar | 6.05 | 185 | 0.926 | 0.904 | 0.22 | 6th

Why is it so vital that we chase Samsonov that we use a 16th OA pick in a stacked draft? Vladar had a .22 sv% over the other goalies on his team. Blackwood was .13 better. Samsonov was actually a bit worse.

 

[IAGTTAYM]

There's a difference between offensive and defensive hockey IQ. He's great at making reads and positioning himself to cut off passing and shooting lanes, but as he exits the defensive zone, he stops knowing what to do.

Well, I disagree with your assessment of his play with the puck. From what I've seen, Carlo is an effective puck mover. And in the Tri-City games that I did watch, he was on the 2nd PP unit, doing a decent job.

 

[BoldNewLettuce]

I like this idea of gurianov falling too....I doubt it happens though.

McDavid
Zboril/Roy (if Zboril is rated higher you may have to take him)
Gurianov/Bittner
Vladar/Blackwood/Samsonov (likely Vladar)
Guhle/Musil (token edmonton guy pick...prefer Guhle)
Olhaver/Elfstrom/Pearson/Warren/Kolesar/BPA (I don't know who would be left really...possibly none of these guys)
Jasek (a trio of czechs?)
Robinson/Vehvilainen/McBride/Herbst/Toth (long term goalie project)


anyway....would anyone be upset if they take Musil?

I think I would be fine with it if its after the second round. I'd rather have Vladar or one of the swedish defenders then Musil at that spot.

 

[40oz]

http://ohlprospects.blogspot.ca/2015/06/final-mediascout-top-10-for-2015.html

Brock Otten's Final scout/media top 10 had some comments on Blackwood (he was an HM):

"Central Scouting's No. 1 ranked goalie on the North American list possesses NHL strength, quickness and battle. He has great size. He's one of those goalies you could see in the NHL 4-5 years down the road from now. He's got tools that separate him from the others. I like his power. Calm and relaxed and exhibits excellent positional play. His butterfly style provides great low net coverage and he has good control laterally." - Morreale

"He didn't have a dominate year statistically but he's what the the prototypical goalie in the NHL is today, 6-4 200 plus pounds. He is calm and doesn't let players get under his skin. If an NHL team allows him to develop the next three-four years he can become an above-average starter down the road." - Fournier

"It’s not a great year for goaltenders in the OHL. While the 98 and 99 birth years look very impressive, generally speaking the 97s lack true NHL starter potential goaltenders. That said, Barrie Colts net minder Mackenzie Blackwood has established himself as one of the best in the draft, combining size, athleticism and a healthy compete level that have grabbed scouts attention over the past two years in the OHL. Measuring in at 6'4', he has the prototypical NHL level size that is almost a requirement these days, and while usually big goaltenders rely not hat size to block, Blackwood also offers a impressive athleticism, which allows him to make impressive reflex/reaction saves. He still struggles at times with his consistency, he looks like a star for games on end only to lose his positioning and technique and struggle for the next few starts, which hopefully will disappear as he gets more experience at higher levels." - Lafortune

 

[AUAIOMRN]

Is Samsonov even that great, or is he just "the best goalie available this year"?

I'm also not a big fan of Murkley at 16... the sudden rise in interest for him feels like Memorial Cup overexposure.

 

[misfit]

I like this year's goalie class, but it seems like that quality is being carried by the European quotient. It's not a great class at all for NA goalies, and just because Blackwood is the best of them, it doesn't put him on par with the top goalies in this class. Just like in another good goalie year (2004), only the opposite was true then. The NA class was very strong (Montoya, Dubnyk, Schneider, Schantz, Peters), but the European portion wasn't. Marek Schwarz was probably ranked too high on account of him being the best of a poor group in an overall strong year (2nd ranked goalie in the draft going in).

Blackwood seems a lot like Fucale to me in the way he's being viewed among his peers. Lots of glowing reports, but pedestrian numbers, and in each passing year, it's looking more and more like the numbers should've been given more weight in the evaluation process.

 

[Zaddy]

Is Samsonov even that great, or is he just "the best goalie available this year"?

I'm also not a big fan of Murkley at 16... the sudden rise in interest for him feels like Memorial Cup overexposure.

Merkley has consistently been ranked somewhere between 12-20 throughout the season. Taking him at #16 wouldn't be a reach. It's possible his popularity among fans have risen thanks to his playoffs but he's a real solid player and worthy of a top20 selection definitely. I have him #15 on my list.

 

[Lacaar]

I'm against Samsanov at 16.

In a draft that's billing billed for the depth of skaters and the weakness of goaltending.

It seems wrong to take a goalie.

Heck I hate taking goalies in the first round in the best of times.

 

[Game 8]

Thing is, scouts also understand the risk of drafting goalies, yet Samsonov is ranked as a 1st rounder. That's got to be worth something.

Mckenzies lists are usually pretty close to the mark. Once I saw how high he had this guy ranked I was sold! Imagine having one of the top Goalies in the league a few years down the road together with this group. It would fill a huge hole, and some currency whether its a draft pick or by trading a good young prospect needs to be spent in this area if we are to be a good team. I pick the early draft pick particularly this year with two firsts. Any draft pick can miss so the same logic applies to every position drafted.

 

[Zaddy]

I like this year's goalie class, but it seems like that quality is being carried by the European quotient. It's not a great class at all for NA goalies, and just because Blackwood is the best of them, it doesn't put him on par with the top goalies in this class. Just like in another good goalie year (2004), only the opposite was true then. The NA class was very strong (Montoya, Dubnyk, Schneider, Schantz, Peters), but the European portion wasn't. Marek Schwarz was probably ranked too high on account of him being the best of a poor group in an overall strong year (2nd ranked goalie in the draft going in).

Blackwood seems a lot like Fucale to me in the way he's being viewed among his peers. Lots of glowing reports, but pedestrian numbers, and in each passing year, it's looking more and more like the numbers should've been given more weight in the evaluation process.

Agree. I'm just not a big fan of taking goalies from CHL in general. I don't think that format suits goalies very well, at least it doesn't seem to. Most top goalies today have come from somewhere else. Either from Europe (Rask, Lundqvist, Rinne, Bobrovski, Varlamov) or US High School/NAHL (Schneider, Bishop, Quick).

CHL goalies just tend to get quite overrated it seems. Personally I'd love to go with someone like Joel Daccord. Great numbers in high school and has real solid technique thanks to his father running a goaltending school.

I think for me my goalie rankings would be something like:
1. Samsonov
2. Tomek
3-4. Vladar/Daccord
5. Blackwood

But that's just me...