Prospect Info: 2018 Draft Thread (STL #1 via WPG is 29th OA)

[Mike Liut]

What you guys think of dropping down with #29 ---> islanders #41 and #43? Is that value wise good to both teams or favor one of Blues or Islanders?


Or Blues #29 ---> Rangers #39 and #48?

I know Blues #29 ---> Wings #33 and #36 is too much from Wings and we would need to add.

Id rather take the BPA at 29. Quality > quantity

 

[MortiestOfMortys]

What you guys think of dropping down with #29 ---> islanders #41 and #43? Is that value wise good to both teams or favor one of Blues or Islanders?


Or Blues #29 ---> Rangers #39 and #48?

I know Blues #29 ---> Wings #33 and #36 is too much from Wings and we would need to add.

Yeah I would do that for sure. The values in that range are so close you would essentially be doubling the value of your picks. In all likelihood though, it would be one of those low 30s pick and a 3rd though, I believe that tends to be the “going rate.” But if the Islanders or Wings are game, so am I. That would allow us to grab a high end dman and two forwards, and that’s exactly what we need out of this draft

 

[EastonBlues22]

There's a big mixed bag from the late first through the mid second...say picks 25-ish through 40-ish. You're getting the dregs of that tier in the mid-40s, and there's a good chance none of the guys you actually prefer from that tier make it that far, which kind of defeats the purpose.

I'd love another pick or two in that range, but I don't think trading down is the way to get it.

 

[stl76]

I like Wise, so you don't need to convince me.

Height (assuming a reasonable frame) is usually more critical than weight at this stage, so teams tend to focus on those at the draft. Players will almost universally add weight over the years as they train post-draft...usually a significant amount (20+ lbs). It's much rarer to add a significant amount of height post-draft, and almost impossible to project it with any accuracy.

We'll see how it goes. Teams are usually slow to change, but it does happen. I'm not holding my breath on this one, though.

Forgive me, I should have been more clear. I was not trying to convince you that the Blues should draft Wise. Rather, the point I was trying to make was that Wise's size is pretty well in line with recent picks by the Blues. In other words, tall guys you posted quotes about (Sanford/Thompson) are really more the exception than the rule when it comes to the Blues recent early round draft picks, Sanford of course not even being a Blues pick.

Fair point about height being more important than weight for young prospects, they can and usually do fill out as they get older/more mature, but growing taller is more rare. However, of the 7 recent high draft picks included in that sample, 5 were 6'0" or shorter when they were drafted. If you were holding your breath for the team to change, you might already be able to exhale.

 

[EastonBlues22]

Forgive me, I should have been more clear. I was not trying to convince you that the Blues should draft Wise. Rather, the point I was trying to make was that Wise's size is pretty well in line with recent picks by the Blues. In other words, tall guys you posted quotes about (Sanford/Thompson) are really more the exception than the rule when it comes to the Blues recent early round draft picks, Sanford of course not even being a Blues pick.

Fair point about height being more important than weight for young prospects, they can and usually do fill out as they get older/more mature, but growing taller is more rare. However, of the 7 recent high draft picks included in that sample, 5 were 6'0" or shorter when they were drafted. If you were holding your breath for the team to change, you might already be able to exhale.

I think you misunderstand a bit. When I was looking through the Blues draft tendencies awhile back, I noticed that lack of short players being drafted early. None under 5'10'', and only two at 5'10'' IIRC (Fabbri and Schwartz), and both those guys projected as wingers (well, to me they did, at least).

That's a pretty distinct drafting trend going back 15-20 years...the sort of trend that makes me think that it's not by chance that things are playing out that way. Drafting a number of 5'11'/6'0'' guys during that span doesn't really demonstrate a reversal of that trend.

I'm not saying the Blues need to go out of their way to draft short players. I'm just saying the trend is there, and I'm going to assume it will continue to hold until there's evidence that the Blues have shifted their draft philosophy. I liked DeBrincat quite a bit back in 2016, but I wrote him off for the Blues during the moderator mock for just that reason (and said so in the draft discussion thread on the Blues forum). I knew the Blues would pass even though the talent was there...and they did.

 

[stl76]

I think you misunderstand a bit. When I was looking through the Blues draft tendencies awhile back, I noticed that lack of short players being drafted early. None under 5'10'', and only two at 5'10'' IIRC (Fabbri and Schwartz), and both those guys projected as wingers (well, to me they did, at least).

That's a pretty distinct drafting trend going back 15-20 years...the sort of trend that makes me think that it's not by chance that things are playing out that way. Drafting a number of 5'11'/6'0'' guys during that span doesn't really demonstrate a reversal of that trend.

I'm not saying the Blues need to go out of their way to draft short players. I'm just saying the trend is there, and I'm going to assume it will continue to hold until there's evidence that the Blues have shifted their draft philosophy. I liked DeBrincat quite a bit back in 2016, but I wrote him off for the Blues during the moderator mock for just that reason (and said so in the draft discussion thread on the Blues forum). I knew the Blues would pass even though the talent was there...and they did.

Our current front office/scouting staff have been in place since 2011, maybe 2010. Not sure how to really distribute credit for the 2010 draft, so let's just say 2011 onward. Point being, I don't see drafts from 15-20 years ago as relevant at all to current team draft philosophy. The game league wide, as well as our individual team's management/scouting team, has changed drastically since the late 90's and early 2000's. Hell, even our owners have changed.

Even looking back as far as 20 years, I doubt the Blues are alone in rarely drafting players below 5'10", especially in the first round. I would be curious to see how many teams have drafted a player shorter than 5'10" in the first round between the years 2000-2010. Wouldn't shock me if more than half the teams in the league did not. Drafting shorter players is becoming more common, and this year may change the veracity of the following statement, but I believe there STILL has never been a defenseman shorter than 5'10" taken in the top 10 of the NHL draft.

Am I still misunderstanding your point? Because in the IMO more relevant time frame (roughly since 2011 under the current management team), the Blues drafting players 6'0" and under is more common than them drafting players over 6'0" in the first two rounds. Even if the Blues drafting a player shorter than 5'10" is even rarer (A.K.A. nonexistent lol), I still think you're overstating the significance of a trend of drafting for size. Would the Blues have to use a 1st on a player 5'9" or shorter in order for the trend to be reversed in your eyes?

As far as DeBrincat goes, 29 other teams passed on him in the first round, and 7 other teams passed on him twice that year. Granted many of them may feel silly now, but it's not like the Blues were alone there. If you're trying to say that a player being short should not be an automatic disqualifier for using a 1st round pick, I agree with you 100%. But I don't see a notable recent trend of the Blues coveting tall players or shunning short players in recent early round picks.

 

[67Blues]

How many rounds is the mod mock draft? Ryan O’Reilly would be a good 4th round target...because...irony. (In the Alannis Morissette sense)

Watch the main board absolutely blow up if it was posted "The Blues used a 4th round pick to get Ryan O'Reilly.

 

[EastonBlues22]

Our current front office/scouting staff have been in place since 2011, maybe 2010. Not sure how to really distribute credit for the 2010 draft, so let's just say 2011 onward. Point being, I don't see drafts from 15-20 years ago as relevant at all to current team draft philosophy. The game league wide, as well as our individual team's management/scouting team, has changed drastically since the late 90's and early 2000's. Hell, even our owners have changed.

Even looking back as far as 20 years, I doubt the Blues are alone in rarely drafting players below 5'10", especially in the first round. I would be curious to see how many teams have drafted a player shorter than 5'10" in the first round between the years 2000-2010. Wouldn't shock me if more than half the teams in the league did not. Drafting shorter players is becoming more common, and this year may change the veracity of the following statement, but I believe there STILL has never been a defenseman shorter than 5'10" taken in the top 10 of the NHL draft.

Am I still misunderstanding your point? Because in the IMO more relevant time frame (roughly since 2011 under the current management team), the Blues drafting players 6'0" and under is more common than them drafting players over 6'0" in the first two rounds. Even if the Blues drafting a player shorter than 5'10" is even rarer (A.K.A. nonexistent lol), I still think you're overstating the significance of a trend of drafting for size. Would the Blues have to use a 1st on a player 5'9" or shorter in order for the trend to be reversed in your eyes?

As far as DeBrincat goes, 29 other teams passed on him in the first round, and 7 other teams passed on him twice that year. Granted many of them may feel silly now, but it's not like the Blues were alone there. If you're trying to say that a player being short should not be an automatic disqualifier for using a 1st round pick, I agree with you 100%. But I don't see a notable recent trend of the Blues coveting tall players or shunning short players in recent early round picks.

That data covered the first three rounds, not just the first round.

The 5'10'' cutoff wasn't arbitrary. The most common heights in the NHL are (in order) 6'1'', 6'2'', 6'0'', 6'3'', and 5'11'' (see graphic below for evidence). Combined, that population represents about 69% of all NHL players (or a roughly 1 standard deviation by back of the hand approximation), with the remaining NHL population filling out the tails of the bell curve about like you would expect. I wanted to see how often the Blues drafted less common heights, and which side they tended to fall on (if indeed a preference could be found for one side or the other). Since 5'11'' and 6'0'' are within 1 standard deviation of average, they don't really count as being "short" in my book.

I checked a bunch of teams, and the Blues drafted fewer guys at 5'10'' or less (by percentage of draft picks) than every other team I checked...well under 5%. Going back the last 10 drafts only, the Blues have used 2 out of 32 picks in the first three rounds on guys 5'10'' or smaller (6.25%). Higher, but still a low number in the grand scheme of things.

I'm not going to go through all the other teams again to figure out how that changes everything for them, but it's hard to imagine there being many teams who draft significantly fewer guys like that than the Blues. Not that it matters, really. For the purpose of the comment I made earlier, the trend speaks for itself regardless of what every other team is doing.

Anyway, this doesn't prove that the Blues "covet" tall players (moreso, say, than players of average height). It only demonstrates that they have historically been very unlikely to use an early draft picks on a short player...hence, it would be a surprise if they did.

 

[simon IC]

Just a minor point, but I read in this thread that players rarely get taller than their draft height. Fabbri, Oshie, Schwartz and of course, Parayko, ( who's growth spurt may be an anomaly), are all taller now than when they were drafted.

 

[MortiestOfMortys]

Just a minor point, but I read in this thread that players rarely get taller than their draft height. Fabbri, Oshie, Schwartz and of course, Parayko, ( who's growth spurt may be an anomaly), are all taller now than when they were drafted.

Don’t forget about Blais

 

[EastonBlues22]

Just a minor point, but I read in this thread that players rarely get taller than their draft height. Fabbri, Oshie, Schwartz and of course, Parayko, ( who's growth spurt may be an anomaly), are all taller now than when they were drafted.

I said much more rarely (relative to prospects putting on weight post-draft), and almost impossible to predict.

Virtually every prospect puts on weight, even those with very slight builds. Nowhere close to every prospect continues to grow in height.

You can reliably guesstimate to some degree how much weight a prospect can add by his frame. If there's a method for accurately predicting who will get a growth spurt at college age, I don't know about it.

 

[Ranksu]

There's a big mixed bag from the late first through the mid second...say picks 25-ish through 40-ish. You're getting the dregs of that tier in the mid-40s, and there's a good chance none of the guys you actually prefer from that tier make it that far, which kind of defeats the purpose.

I'd love another pick or two in that range, but I don't think trading down is the way to get it.

Bolded: I forgot to add in my post that everything rely if Islanders, Rangers (or Winges) would like to move up and they should first take the phone in their hands and contact Army, ofc not the other way.

 

[Alklha]

I'm still half expecting us to move the pick for an established player.

If we don't do that, then there is probably a better chance that we'll be looking to move up a few spots. Ty Dellandrea just seems like such a Bill Armstrong pick, and I don't see him being on the board at 29. I'd be surprised if he got past Chicago at 27.

I'm just not seeing a scenario where moving down is realistic. Even if Detroit are desperate and looking to move 33 & 36 for 29 & 76, we'd need to see multiple guys (or none) we really like in order to make that deal.

 

[Ranksu]

I'm still half expecting us to move the pick for an established player.

If we don't do that, then there is probably a better chance that we'll be looking to move up a few spots. Ty Dellandrea just seems like such a Bill Armstrong pick, and I don't see him being on the board at 29. I'd be surprised if he got past Chicago at 27.

I'm just not seeing a scenario where moving down is realistic. Even if Detroit are desperate and looking to move 33 & 36 for 29 & 76, we'd need to see multiple guys (or none) we really like in order to make that deal.

Bolded: you say #29 ----> #33 and #36 isn't good for Blues? If guy like Dellandrea isn't available anymore? And Wings are willing to trade up just for few spot and lose one valuable pick.

 

[BangarangxRufio]

I’m watching him with interest too. This is another good interview with him. You don’t have to listen to him for too long to understand he’s cut from a bit different cloth.

Jonny Tychonick Apr6

I like this kid...I would be very happy getting him.

 

[BangarangxRufio]

I like this kid...I would be very happy getting him.

2018 NHL Mock Draft: Latest Predictions for All 1st-Round Prospects
AND it looks like bleacher report agrees lol

 

[Alklha]

Bolded: you say #29 ----> #33 and #36 isn't good for Blues? If guy like Dellandrea isn't available anymore? And Wings are willing to trade up just for few spot and lose one valuable pick.

It's a good deal if we aren't particularly keen on any one player, but it would need the Red Wings to be desperate to get someone to make that kind of offer. That's about the only scenario I could see us trading down, and it's not very likely.

 

[EastonBlues22]

McKenzie's final consensus draft rankings (1-93) have been released HERE.

The 15 to 55 range which is most relevant to the Blues first two picks:

15-19
Denisenko
Kaut
Farabee
Bokk
Noel

20-24
Kupari
Lundestrom
McLeod
Dellandrea
K. Miller

25-29
Wilde
McIssac
Sandin
A. Thomas
Foudy

30-34
Alexeyev
M. Samuelsson
Merkley
Groulx
O'Brien

35-39
McBain
Lunkdvist
Ylonen
Berggren
Beaudin

40-44
Olofsson
Addison
Woo
Ginning
Marchenko

45-49
Lauko
Bernard-Docker
Bahl
Durzi
Rodrigue

50-55
Tychonick
McLaughlin
Wise
Lindbom
F. Johansson
Nordgren

Don't think either goalie should be ranked in the top 62. Noel is too high for my liking given how raw he is. Foudy too, for that matter. A lot of hope baked into those rankings. I think Groulx is too high as well, and I'm not sure why he's over a number of the guys behind him. Wise should definitely be higher than he is, IMO.

I generally prefer the forwards in the late first/early second range to their defensemen counterparts.

This draft is going to be fascinating, I think. So many flawed players with other good abilities or good upside. It's kind of like a Rorschach test just waiting to reveal what's going on beneath the surface of each organization.

 

[Alklha]

Bob McKenzie's draft rankings are out.

Not surprised to see Dellandrea that high, but I am surprised to see Foudy in the first round.

 

[Oberyn]

Wise at 52 is interesting. If he's available with our 45th pick, I hope the Blues jump all over that.

 

[BangarangxRufio]

I want to trade up for McLeod. If he is available at 20-24 we need to make a move.

https://www.tsn.ca/ryan-mcleod-centre-1.1086874

Craig Button's Analysis

"Excellent skating playmaker. Drives play with his speed and creates opportunities for his team and headaches for opponents."
Projection: Top 6 Skill Forward
Comparable: Nicklas Backstrom

 

[Ranksu]

Any idea when ISS hockey draft preview is released, it was superb last draft.

nvm, its released already.

 

[MortiestOfMortys]

I want to trade up for McLeod. If he is available at 20-24 we need to make a move.

https://www.tsn.ca/ryan-mcleod-centre-1.1086874

Craig Button's Analysis

"Excellent skating playmaker. Drives play with his speed and creates opportunities for his team and headaches for opponents."
Projection: Top 6 Skill Forward
Comparable: Nicklas Backstrom

I just don’t see anything special with McLeod. Prime example of all tools no toolbox, just like his older brother. McLeod the Younger’s shot is better though

 

[Bluesnatic27]

I want to trade up for McLeod. If he is available at 20-24 we need to make a move.

https://www.tsn.ca/ryan-mcleod-centre-1.1086874

Craig Button's Analysis

"Excellent skating playmaker. Drives play with his speed and creates opportunities for his team and headaches for opponents."
Projection: Top 6 Skill Forward
Comparable: Nicklas Backstrom

You might be the first person I've seen on HFBoards to praise McLeod.

 

[EastonBlues22]

Brock and his informal scout poll for OHL prospects both have McLeod behind all of Dellandrea, Noel, and Thomas (in some order).

It's close, to be sure, but the point is that he's probably not a target that's really worth chasing hard.