NHL Entry Draft 2019 Entry Draft Discussion

[BondraTime]

The analogies are unneeded. Take the BPA, this isn't the NFL draft.

 

[Micklebot]

I seriously doubt the BPA delta of the best forward vs best defensman at pick 20-30 is 2x the prospect value ($10 vs 5). The analogy does work - unless a top 5-7 type forwArd falls to the 20th pick it is a $4.74 vs $5.00 analogy or perhaps more like picking a penny stock at $.04 vs $0.5 and hoping to make a few bucks.

The biggest reason the analogy fails is because you won't know if you still need change to make a call when the pick matures and is ready. Either way the asset has similar value and can be exchanged for the specific service you need, you might take a loss on excanging it but going back to your 5 vs 4.75 example the loss on getting change for a 5 needs to be greater than 5% for it to be a better option (you could just as likely come away with a gain though).

Drafting based on need just increases risk while adding very little if any reward

 

[Micklebot]

LOL, nicely crafted and reluctant to continue....but still don't agree

1 yes everyone we draft today will be subject to guessing, based on past performance. Today, I need to make my call so I need to make my decision today. The analogy was "stepping over a 10 to pick up a 5", today.

2 based on today, I know that the only RD, of any consequence, not playing for Ottawa is JBD. Based on this, I know that unless Ottawa is satisfied with Ceci, DeMelo, and Jaros I will need to be making an emergency call in a few years for RD, and it will cost me more since I didn't plan in advance. If I take the BP today I have to hope that when I put my money in the telephone it will work, and that someone will pick up on the other end and give me what I want/need..... a RD. If no one picks up to give me a RD, of the caliber I need for fair value of my BP I have to pay more to get what I need or I have to wait until someone picks up. I don't want to be stranded trying to find change at 2 am.

3 what if no one has quarters when I need to make my call? No one wants to give me their quarters because they don't have many and they want to protect themselves in case of an emergency?

Drafting is inhearently the most risky way to fill a specific need because other than top 5 or top 10 picks there is still huge risk that they will never fill the particular need you forcast having 3+ years down the road. If you know now where you have that hole you don't wait 3 years to use alternative methods to address the hole. You evalute trade options now you look at ufa and you make the moves to shore up what drafting didn't cover, not the other way around.

Drafting for need gets you lee instead of kopitar.

You can get away with it in the later rounds when the probabilities are much tighter but in the first round it's foolish.

 

[Viletho]

Drafting for need is a big no in early round.

You go BPA. Now every team has list if you are drafting 19 and on your list the 17 to 20 are equal in your mind, then you can think of drafting for need between the X players that are equal for you.

At least' that's how I view it.

 

[aragorn]

Drafting for need is a big no in early round.

You go BPA. Now every team has list if you are drafting 19 and on your list the 17 to 20 are equal in your mind, then you can think of drafting for need between the X players that are equal for you.

At least' that's how I view it.

I'm in agreement with you & of course it depends on how the scouting staff have ranked this yr's draft eligible players. Every draft we see someone go off the board to select a player they really want & not every team has these players ranked the same nor these hockey ranking sites or experts. So who the best players are & where they are ranked is somewhat relative to what a particular scout & scouting staff likes in a player. So the BPA depends on who you are talking too & most here seem to go with Mac's analysis which he bases on numerous scouts he talks to but might not necessarily be who your team's scouts has as the BPA at where they are ranked. It would be easy if every site & scout ranked the players exactly the same but clearly everyone has their preferences & usually they can be close on some players & way off on others.

Yakopov was ranked the #1 player in his draft yr & is now out of the NHL while many others drafted after him are still playing. Ranked high & developing into a player are two different things & good scouts need to be able to forecast how they see these players developing. The BPA doesn't always translate into a player developing into the player they expected & could turn out to be something better or worse or different. It's a crap shoot really, some scouts are much better at forecasting what a player will become but I'm quite sure they have an equal amount of failures as they have successes.

So BPA depends on how good your scouting staff is with the players in this draft which could change from draft to draft, some yrs lucky & good & some yrs not so much. Some on here had Tkachuk ranked much later & other players ranked higher than where they went so guessing the BPA is not easy nor is it consistent with every team, scout & so called experts. Tkachuk may not have been the BPA but he was certainly what the Sens needed up front. It's really more of an educated guessing game how a player will turn out even after being highly scouted.

 

[FormentonTheFuture]

I would only draft for need at the top of the draft. For example if they had the #3 pick I would take Byram regardless of who else is available and if there are better forwards. Only draft for need when the player is more of a sure thing.

 

[BondraTime]

I would only draft for need at the top of the draft. For example if they had the #3 pick I would take Byram regardless of who else is available and if there are better forwards. Only draft for need when the player is more of a sure thing.

I'd argue a guy like Dach would be a bigger need than a top pairing D for the Sens, though I obviously wouldn't be upset with Byram.

 

[Alf Silfversson]

I would only draft for need at the top of the draft. For example if they had the #3 pick I would take Byram regardless of who else is available and if there are better forwards. Only draft for need when the player is more of a sure thing.

Byram Bowen is likely going 3rd overall based on where he's ranked.

The question more would be if you would take him if you had 1st or 2nd overall.

 

[stempniaksen]

I would only draft for need at the top of the draft. For example if they had the #3 pick I would take Byram regardless of who else is available and if there are better forwards. Only draft for need when the player is more of a sure thing.

The top of the draft is exactly where you should be taking BPA (as opposed to drafting for need). Drafting for need in the top-10 gave us Brian Lee over Anze Kopitar. Just take the talent early and if you feel the need to draft for need don't do it until late.

I'd also argue a #1 C is more important than another LHD (even one as good as Byram) but that's kind of beside the point.

 

[BondraTime]

The best example of drafting for need with guys ranked closely is last year with Kotkaniemi. Everyone knew that the Habs needed a C, and wanted a C.

Kotkaniemi was only viewed as a to 5 pick towards the end of the year, and was seen as a reach by some (he wasn't).

I had heard the Habs were one of the teams who had Dobson ranked top 5, and I'm sure they had Tkachuk ranked highly as well. They needed the C, so they took the guy who filled the need. They had apparently been zoning in on him before the end of their season and his U-18's and when they were picking ~6/7th overall in the standings.

 

[FormentonTheFuture]

The top of the draft is exactly where you should be taking BPA (as opposed to drafting for need). Drafting for need in the top-10 gave us Brian Lee over Anze Kopitar. Just take the talent early and if you feel the need to draft for need don't do it until late.

I'd also argue a #1 C is more important than another LHD (even one as good as Byram) but that's kind of beside the point.

I didn’t mean top 10, I meant the top elite tier picks. and yeah Brian Lee was a terrible pick, I said only pick need if the guy you’re picking is virtually guaranteed to become the player you think he will be

 

[aragorn]

Well I would argue that if they are drafting at the top of the draft I would take Kakko, Cozens, Dach or Podkolzin since two are centres but all shoot right & Ott lacks RW depth & right shot centre depth. Not only would they draft the BPA with any of these guys but they would also fill an organizational need. I would also take Broberg over Byram myself, if it came to that but they really need more depth a RD much more so than another LD. Lavoie is another centre who shoots right who may be ranked closer to where Ott might be picking from. It should be quite interesting what they do in the first two or three rds of the 2019 draft where I think they have an opportunity to select the BPA at the same time while adding depth to positions where they lack depth such as RD & RW.

 

[BondraTime]

Well I would argue that if they are drafting at the top of the draft I would take Kakko, Cozens, Dach or Podkolzin since two are centres but all shoot right & Ott lacks RW depth & right shot centre depth. Not only would they draft the BPA with any of these guys but they would also fill an organizational need. I would also take Broberg over Byram myself, if it came to that but they really need more depth a RD much more so than another LD. Lavoie is another centre who shoots right who may be ranked closer to where Ott might be picking from. It should be quite interesting what they do in the first two or three rds of the 2019 draft where I think they have an opportunity to select the BPA at the same time while adding depth to positions where they lack depth such as RD & RW.

He's not a center, or won't be. He's been lining up at wing all season.

 

[Wallet Inspector]

What do you guys think of using our 2nd round pick on Spencer Knight? His ranking in the draft seems to be all over the place so he could be available there. While we got a couple of good goalie prospects, I feel like he could be a cut above the rest.

 

[Sens of Anarchy]

There are 2 back to back highlight vids of Leason in this link Brett Leason Scouting Report: 2019 NHL Draft #28 - Last Word on Hockey
Man would this guy look good on right wing with White and Tkachuk. His style of play fits them perfectly imo. If we happen to move down via a CBJ win or at 32. I would not mind to see him in a Sens uni

 

[aragorn]

He's not a center, or won't be. He's been lining up at wing all season.

He is listed as a centre on numerous sites although I was thinking that he might work at RW, good to hear he is playing that position.

What do you guys think of using our 2nd round pick on Spencer Knight? His ranking in the draft seems to be all over the place so he could be available there. While we got a couple of good goalie prospects, I feel like he could be a cut above the rest.

I like Askarov in 2020 who could be ranked where Ott could pick with their 2nd 1st rd pick or early in the 2nd rd. But tbh I'm not sure who will be the better of the two, both could be very good.

 

[Micklebot]

There are 2 back to back highlight vids of Leason in this link Brett Leason Scouting Report: 2019 NHL Draft #28 - Last Word on Hockey
Man would this guy look good on right wing with White and Tkachuk. His style of play fits them perfectly imo. If we happen to move down via a CBJ win or at 32. I would not mind to see him in a Sens uni

I would love to get him... but I'm still holding out hope for Seider.

 

[Liver King]

I think we get two of:

Seider Leason Pelletier Poulin Rees Brink Grewe Afanasyev N.Robertson

 

[Sens of Anarchy]

I would love to get him... but I'm still holding out hope for Seider.

I have not actually seen Seider play.. The scouting reports are great. He has good size. Plays in the DEL vs men. Big 2 way RHD probably goes closer to that 18-20 area, maybe higher imo. Need a CBJ loss to be in that area.

 

[Liver King]

The best example of drafting for need with guys ranked closely is last year with Kotkaniemi. Everyone knew that the Habs needed a C, and wanted a C.

Kotkaniemi was only viewed as a to 5 pick towards the end of the year, and was seen as a reach by some (he wasn't).

I had heard the Habs were one of the teams who had Dobson ranked top 5, and I'm sure they had Tkachuk ranked highly as well. They needed the C, so they took the guy who filled the need. They had apparently been zoning in on him before the end of their season and his U-18's and when they were picking ~6/7th overall in the standings.

But example of not drafting for need is Detroit passing on both Hughes and Dobson (when they were definitely planning on picking a dman for need) for Zadina.

BPA isnt objective - ideally you get a great player that also solves a need

 

[R2010]

But example of not drafting for need is Detroit passing on both Hughes and Dobson (when they were definitely planning on picking a dman for need) for Zadina.

BPA isnt objective - ideally you get a great player that also solves a need

That's an example of not going BPA. A lot of teams are going to look stupid passing on Dobson.

 

[Liver King]

That's an example of not going BPA. A lot of teams are going to look stupid passing on Dobson.

No that's an example of a team going BPA on their list.

Defence was drafting for need, Zadina was drafting BPA

 

[Tuna99]

Alex Daigle was the unanimous BPA and was a horrible pick, Ottawa should of taken Pronger at #2.

You can’t build a team of wingers and goalies, and some point you have to take C and D - and puck moving D and big Centers. So you have to draft by need

 

[BondraTime]

Alex Daigle was the unanimous BPA and was a horrible pick, Ottawa should of taken Pronger at #2.

You can’t build a team of wingers and goalies, and some point you have to take C and D - and puck moving D and big Centers. So you have to draft by need

Would you take Drysdale over Lafreniere? Lundell and Byfield as well?

Ottawa made the right choice taking Diagle, as anyone would of.

If we are using hindsight, Karlsson is probably the only time we picked the right player over the past 10 decades.

 

[Tuna99]

Would you take Drysdale over Lafreniere? Lundell and Byfield as well?

Ottawa made the right choice taking Diagle, as anyone would of.

If we are using hindsight, Karlsson is probably the only time we picked the right player over the past 10 decades.

And Brady Tkachuk, Chabot.

But BPA is silly because Dorion admitted in his scouting meetings his room was essentially 50/50 over who was the #1 pick - Stankos or Doughty. Everyone thinks Stankos was unanimous and thus the BPA but clearly he wasn’t and in hindsite - Doughty is the better player.

So BPA last year would of had us take Zadina who is a PP specialist over Brady who’s just a stud hockey player. We drafted for need (leadership, down low presence) over the scouting evaluation and it’s worked out great for us.

So I’m not a believer in BPA because it doesn’t take into account leadership, fearlessness that players like EK and Chabot play with, intangibles.

But intangibles gets you Lazar over Anthony Mantha some drafts