GDT: 2019 Draft Lottery

[Shaman464]

They have Byram going to Flyers at 10. That about invalidates it for me.
2019 NHL Mock Draft - NHL - DraftSite.com

Why does it invalidate it? I don't think people saw Bouchard or Dobson dropping like they did, and I would argue they are on the same level as Byram.

 

[DetroitRed]

Double post.

 

[DetroitRed]

Double.

 

[DetroitRed]

How do you guys feel about this list?

Detroit Red Wings - Draft Picks - NHL - DraftSite.com

If we are serious about ending the rebuild soon, then I think we have to be honest about Filip Larsson and say that we aren't truly sure about him yet. Secondly, drawing on our past experiences, it sometimes requires that you have two good goalies to win a cup. Two good goalies is just never a bad thing. So, I would prioritize goalies more than they did.

This is what I would do instead:

We have multiple 2nd-round picks. So, if a NA top 5 goalie prospect is still available for the taking with one of our extra (later) 2nd-round picks, then I draft my goalie there, near the end of 2nd round. If that happens, then I'm done spending picks on goalies for the rest of this entire draft. Otherwise, I use my first 5th round pick on a goalie as well as my second 4th round pick.

So, I feel a little more urgency for goalies than they do.

I like that they went heavy on defensemen. I guess though that depending on whether they pick Byram in the 1st round, a fair few of those later defender picks would be centers instead. Byram is a real possibility.

 

[Bench]

I've lost what we're all arguing about to begin with. I think we all agree a top 3 pick would be excellent.

Some of us think it's essential. Others think it's optional. That's basically it.

If our lottery ball falls, rather than rise, I believe it will stall the rebuild. I'm always open to being surprised, though.

The Wings will need some luck to fall their way eventually.

 

[Frk It]

Why does it invalidate it? I don't think people saw Bouchard or Dobson dropping like they did, and I would argue they are on the same level as Byram.

He’s the top player at his position... there’s no way that many teams will pass on a defenseman.

Similar to how Kotkaniemi got pushed up draft boards by being the top center last year to an extent.

 

[Nemesis Prime]

I don't want this pick wasted on another forward.

If we're picking 3-4, Byram all day. If we drop 7-10, Soderstrom.

If either are gone, trade the pick for defence.

 

[Shaman464]

He’s the top player at his position... there’s no way that many teams will pass on a defenseman.

Similar to how Kotkaniemi got pushed up draft boards by being the top center last year to an extent.

I never put too much stock into mock drafts, on average. Teams are going to draft on a lot of criteria, some of which we aren't privy to. If he falls to 8-10 I wouldn't be surprised. If he's taken 3rd I wouldn't be surprised.

 

[Steve Yzerlland]

Why does it invalidate it? I don't think people saw Bouchard or Dobson dropping like they did, and I would argue they are on the same level as Byram.

And Zadina. GM's have different lists and even the mocks will change quite a bit from now to the end of June..

 

[Dotter]

Any updated mock drafts with descriptive playing styles around the net? What's your go-to mock draft?

 

[Dotter]

I never put too much stock into mock drafts, on average. Teams are going to draft on a lot of criteria, some of which we aren't privy to. If he falls to 8-10 I wouldn't be surprised. If he's taken 3rd I wouldn't be surprised.

Understatement. I suspect teams might like a kid's style then learn during evaluation that his personality/attitude is a complete deal breaker. Stuff we don't have any access too. We get to watch 5 second YouTube clips and read from various sources (that's usually regurgitated) about how great kid __X__ is. Then your team passes on player __X__ and everyone is up in arms. There's always a reason that our limited armchair scouting ability can't/doesn't get to see.

 

[plymouthmi]

I did the Lottery Simulator for the first time and on my first try Detroit was #3.

Of course, then I did it again and Detroit was #6, Arizona was #1 and Chicago was #2. If both the #1 and #2 picks were teams jumping that many spots I would lose my mind.

 

[Red Stanley]

This year has no consensus #3. Therefore, using the "top 3" statistical argument for this particular draft is rather pointless. From the weak draft of 2017 the #5 pick appears to be the best overall player so far. Last year we got the #3 ranked player at 6 due to teams ahead reaching and picking for need. It would be great to win the #1 or #2 pick this year for sure, but a great prospect will still be available in the 3-7 range. We should consider ourselves lucky to land our rebuild in the middle of at least three stacked drafts in a row.

 

[haulinbass]

Why does it invalidate it? I don't think people saw Bouchard or Dobson dropping like they did, and I would argue they are on the same level as Byram.

I wouldn't say that. I didn't see Dobson dropping to 12 but I never thought he was quite as good as certain people hyped him. I did however predict Bouchard dropping and I was surprised he didn't fall further. I watch as many shift-by-shifts as I can get my hands on and Bouchard makes an abundance of bad plays under pressure. Dobson has potential to be a very good D in all situations but I do question whether or not he has the offensive tools to produce big numbers in the NHL. I would have taken Dobson any day of the week over Bouchard though. As I do think Dobson is a good selection relative to his peers if a D is what your after. I think Bouchards bust potential is very high. He might end up being one of those guys that show offensive promise in the NHL for a while but I put my money on him never putting it all together.

Byram at the same stage of their careers is superior to Dobson and Bouchard. Byram has great defensive upside and more dynamic offensive tools along with the IQ to use those tools. Does one of these other players exceed Byrams career? Maybe, considering even pro scouts couldn't tell you anything for sure at this point, but I would feel much more comfortable risking a high selection on Byram by a long shot.

 

[Gniwder]

Why does it invalidate it? I don't think people saw Bouchard or Dobson dropping like they did, and I would argue they are on the same level as Byram.

I don't see Broberg and Soderstrom going before Byram, even if the top 7 teams pick forwards, which I also think is unlikely.

 

[haulinbass]

This year has no consensus #3. Therefore, using the "top 3" statistical argument for this particular draft is rather pointless. From the weak draft of 2017 the #5 pick appears to be the best overall player so far. Last year we got the #3 ranked player at 6 due to teams ahead reaching and picking for need. It would be great to win the #1 or #2 pick this year for sure, but a great prospect will still be available in the 3-7 range. We should consider ourselves lucky to land our rebuild in the middle of at least three stacked drafts in a row.

I have actually found these last 2 drafts to be lacking high end offensive potential. I think people get caught labeling the quality of the draft by the 2 or 3 guys at the very top. It's also easy to get excited about all the young players with nothing but fresh potential. Then 5 years down the road ya look back and realize it wasn't so great.

This years draft I'm seeing a lot of pretty solid guys with pretty good chances of playing in the NHL and being pretty solid, but not quite seeing the huge offensive potential, the gems who might be able to run with the top 2 picks a few years down the road. I'm sure there will be a couple, but I would have a hard time believing someone who is claiming this draft to be above average. As far as high end potential goes, I prefer last years draft over this one.

 

[lilidk]

I have actually found these last 2 drafts to be lacking high end offensive potential. I think people get caught labeling the quality of the draft by the 2 or 3 guys at the very top. It's also easy to get excited about all the young players with nothing but fresh potential. Then 5 years down the road ya look back and realize it wasn't so great.

This years draft I'm seeing a lot of pretty solid guys with pretty good chances of playing in the NHL and being pretty solid, but not quite seeing the huge offensive potential, the gems who might be able to run with the top 2 picks a few years down the road. I'm sure there will be a couple, but I would have a hard time believing someone who is claiming this draft to be above average. As far as high end potential goes, I prefer last years draft over this one.

And that is why I exiting more about 2 and 3 round picks than the first one.

 

[jkutswings]

As far as high end potential goes, I prefer last years draft over this one.

If you feel 2019 lacks potential home runs, ok. But what about 2018 excites you? I see Petterson, a defenseman or two, and otherwise a barren desert (in terms of high end potential).

 

[Red Stanley]

I have actually found these last 2 drafts to be lacking high end offensive potential. I think people get caught labeling the quality of the draft by the 2 or 3 guys at the very top. It's also easy to get excited about all the young players with nothing but fresh potential. Then 5 years down the road ya look back and realize it wasn't so great.

This years draft I'm seeing a lot of pretty solid guys with pretty good chances of playing in the NHL and being pretty solid, but not quite seeing the huge offensive potential, the gems who might be able to run with the top 2 picks a few years down the road. I'm sure there will be a couple, but I would have a hard time believing someone who is claiming this draft to be above average. As far as high end potential goes, I prefer last years draft over this one.

I am by no means a draft expert, but everything I've heard and read has led me to believe that all three ('18, '19 and '20) are good draft years, aka above average.

 

[haulinbass]

If you feel 2019 lacks potential home runs, ok. But what about 2018 excites you? I see Petterson, a defenseman or two, and otherwise a barren desert (in terms of high end potential).

Petterson is a 2017 draftee. I'm still going to assume you meant the 2018 draft though.

With high offensive players typically comes more risk with the boom/bust aspect. Otherwise these guys would be drafted within the first few picks. Depending on team needs I like having those options on the table. If you have some elite players on your roster you may opt to grab a less risky player who may not have a super high ceiling. In the Wings situation, we do have some very solid players but are lacking that elite talent. We don't need anymore 55 point caliber wingers.

A player like Kravtsov has the potential to be dynamite offensively. Tkachuk offers a surefire NHLer with a rare skillset that has the upside to be a player every team wish they had. Boqvist and Quinn Hughes offer a ton of upside considering they were had at 7 and 8 OA. I do like Byram better than both of these players but I have a feeling Byram is going to go a little bit higher. Zadina put up better numbers in the CHL than all of the players (in that league) ranked within the top 10 of the 2019 draft. I predicted Zadina to fall from 3 to around 5 as I think has some questions marks that may make it difficult for him to become a high end consistent scorer at the NHL. But the potential is there and I have zero complaints about taking him at 6, I just wouldn't want to be a GM who opted to use a 3OA on him.

I'm also not a fan of the 2018 draft. I think the 18 and 19 draft top 10 is average. I don't know which turns out better between 18 or 19. But I know I cannot find the player I would want to see the Wings draft in their currently projected range. Byram is a player I really like, but at this moment I'm considering the possibly that he could be selected 3rd OA. Dach so far is looking like my next best option because he fills a team need.

My scouting report on Dach:

Kirby Dach – Ryan Johansen would be a fair comparable. Pass first player with good vision and passing ability with the size to buy himself time and space. Puts himself into position to find loose pucks and break up plays. Finds ways to impact the game on a shift-to-shift basis. Potential PP1 half-bards setup man at NHL level.

This is obviously a player we need but I am not quite sure his ceiling is super high. But considering we have Larkin, a 60 point 2nd line C wouldn't be the worst thing in the world.

A power forward like Cozens, no thanks.

Dylan Cozens – Power forward whose bread and butter is power moves around defenders to the net. Has a good shot to capitalize on his opportunities. Picks up a lot of assists off his own opportunities on net. Not much of a playermaker or play driver, may be better suited as a winger at the NHL level.

I got a lot of hours of film to cover yet before I draw any real conclusions. But so far, I am just not impressed with the quality of the top 10. If I wasn't a little optimistic and excited for the lotto tomorrow, I probably wouldn't even be speaking on these players yet.

 

[haulinbass]

I am by no means a draft expert, but everything I've heard and read has led me to believe that all three ('18, '19 and '20) are good draft years, aka above average.

The draft takes a lot of work to follow, unless you have other reasons to scout these players then why would ya really.

Every single year people say that its a good draft year, that it is above average. If the top 1-2 guys aren't as good as last years, then its certainly a deeper than average draft.

Also the introduction to the 1st round of the 2019 draft surely will not be, "Welcome everyone, this is a really horrible draft and you guys might as well turn off your TV now." They will hype the draft and they will hype nearly every player that gets picked in the 1st round. Then next year they will do the same, and the year after.... They have to right? Its their jobs to make the NHL exciting.

 

[jkutswings]

Petterson is a 2017 draftee. I'm still going to assume you meant the 2018 draft though.

With high offensive players typically comes more risk with the boom/bust aspect. Otherwise these guys would be drafted within the first few picks. Depending on team needs I like having those options on the table. If you have some elite players on your roster you may opt to grab a less risky player who may not have a super high ceiling. In the Wings situation, we do have some very solid players but are lacking that elite talent. We don't need anymore 55 point caliber wingers.

A player like Kravtsov has the potential to be dynamite offensively. Tkachuk offers a surefire NHLer with a rare skillset that has the upside to be a player every team wish they had. Boqvist and Quinn Hughes offer a ton of upside considering they were had at 7 and 8 OA. I do like Byram better than both of these players but I have a feeling Byram is going to go a little bit higher. Zadina put up better numbers in the CHL than all of the players (in that league) ranked within the top 10 of the 2019 draft. I predicted Zadina to fall from 3 to around 5 as I think has some questions marks that may make it difficult for him to become a high end consistent scorer at the NHL. But the potential is there and I have zero complaints about taking him at 6, I just wouldn't want to be a GM who opted to use a 3OA on him.

I'm also not a fan of the 2018 draft. I think the 18 and 19 draft top 10 is average. I don't know which turns out better between 18 or 19. But I know I cannot find the player I would want to see the Wings draft in their currently projected range. Byram is a player I really like, but at this moment I'm considering the possibly that he could be selected 3rd OA. Dach so far is looking like my next best option because he fills a team need.

My scouting report on Dach:

Kirby Dach – Ryan Johansen would be a fair comparable. Pass first player with good vision and passing ability with the size to buy himself time and space. Puts himself into position to find loose pucks and break up plays. Finds ways to impact the game on a shift-to-shift basis. Potential PP1 half-bards setup man at NHL level.

This is obviously a player we need but I am not quite sure his ceiling is super high. But considering we have Larkin, a 60 point 2nd line C wouldn't be the worst thing in the world.

A power forward like Cozens, no thanks.

Dylan Cozens – Power forward whose bread and butter is power moves around defenders to the net. Has a good shot to capitalize on his opportunities. Picks up a lot of assists off his own opportunities on net. Not much of a playermaker or play driver, may be better suited as a winger at the NHL level.

I got a lot of hours of film to cover yet before I draw any real conclusions. But so far, I am just not impressed with the quality of the top 10. If I wasn't a little optimistic and excited for the lotto tomorrow, I probably wouldn't even be speaking on these players yet.

Sorry, it's late. My brain had a cramp. I was picturing the 2017 class.

EDIT: But after reading the rest of your posts, I'm curious (once you see more film) about your take on Turcotte.

 

[Dotter]

Sorry, it's late. My brain had a cramp. I was picturing the 2017 class.

EDIT: But after reading the rest of your posts, I'm curious (once you see more film) about your take on Turcotte.

I think Turcotte has potential to be the 2nd best Center and most complete player in this draft. He's a competitive two-way player like Larkin without the blazing Larkin speed. I think Turcotte might have better playmaker/passing skills than Larkin. And is as good shooter and good stick handler as Larkin. His skating speed is good, just doesn't have the top speed and edge work as Larkin. In fact, I think Turcotte's edgework might be his one weakness that could use improvement. Probably a 25-30 goal and 60-70 point guy if I'm guessing conservatively. But brings intangibles and leadership.... like Larkin.

Turcotte is definitely a Red Wings -type player.

 

[Dotter]

I want the #2 and take Kakko. He's NHL ready right now and will be an instant improvement for the team. He's going to be a super star.

It's tough because we need Dmen and centers, but Kakko is special. Moreso than Zadina.

 

[Shaman464]

I want the #2 and take Kakko. He's NHL ready right now and will be an instant improvement for the team. He's going to be a super star.

It's tough because we need Dmen and centers, but Kakko is special. Moreso than Zadina.

And he's been playing center. The number 2 pick is by all account the safest, because no matter who goes first, you're going to have a great player to draft at #2.