NHL Entry Draft 2019 Entry Draft Discussion

[Sen sational]

BondraTime and SOA, thank you for your perspectives and the article. You make some interesting points including the greater chance that a player will not make the NHL if you take a lower ranked player over the BPA. Here BPA is based solely on his own personal hockey skills, and does not include any organizational needs.

I can certainly agree with this premise if there is a substantial difference in the evaluation process ie. rating 95 for BPA and 70 for your organizational need player. Where I think there is room for organizational need is where the rating is not significant, 95 BPA and 94.5 or 93 RD. Certainly you wouldn't see this decision in the early part of the 1st round but, depending on the depth, there would be substantially less differential the further down the draft you went.

I also acknowledge that in 3 years time your teams needs may change and that you may be able to take your BPA and trade him for your organizational need, however I also know that if I see something specific in the organizational need that I want, ie. big, physical, good skating, RD, with good first pass, and hockey IQ, it may be very difficult for me to pry a player with those skills away from a team for my BPA LW as the RD is more scarce in general.

In the limited reading I have done the advocates of BPA, hockey skills only, suggest that BPA works for rounds 1 and 2 but should not govern the following rounds. The only problem with that is if you leave your selection of organizational need, high end RD, are you really giving yourself a chance of filling that position in rounds 3 to 7?

In summary, I acknowledge that BPA is more often than not the right pick in rounds 1 and 2, but I still believe that organizational need, which includes the type of game you want to play ie. Jake Vertanen versus William Nylander, should be taken into consideration when making a pick.

 

[Sens of Anarchy]

I'm kinda giving up hope on picking at 19th... Assuming we pick int the final four, id like to land two of the following with the clb puck and our 2nd:

Leason, Thompson, Heinola, Pelletier and Hoglander.

I'd be happy with that particularly if Leason is there.

Edit: looks like Heinola has rocketed up the rankings and probably won't be available unless Clb loses to boston... Oh well

28-32 in some order (any 2 of these for me would be great)

28. Afanasyev
29. Leason
30. Rees
31. Tracey
32. Thomson

 

[tstracuzza]

Everything seems to go against the Sens wow... Hopefully the success Columbus is having leads to them resigning Duchene at least. But I doubt it.

Also.. anyone know what happens if San Jose does not resign Karlsson but they do make the cup final? (I know if they do sign him and make it that we get another 1st, and that if he signs and they don't it's a 2nd )

 

[Sens of Anarchy]

Everything seems to go against the Sens wow... Hopefully the success Columbus is having leads to them resigning Duchene at least. But I doubt it.

Also.. anyone know what happens if San Jose does not resign Karlsson but they do make the cup final? (I know if they do sign him and make it that we get another 1st, and that if he signs and they don't it's a 2nd )

Notta

 

[Sens of Anarchy]

BondraTime and SOA, thank you for your perspectives and the article. You make some interesting points including the greater chance that a player will not make the NHL if you take a lower ranked player over the BPA. Here BPA is based solely on his own personal hockey skills, and does not include any organizational needs.

I can certainly agree with this premise if there is a substantial difference in the evaluation process ie. rating 95 for BPA and 70 for your organizational need player. Where I think there is room for organizational need is where the rating is not significant, 95 BPA and 94.5 or 93 RD. Certainly you wouldn't see this decision in the early part of the 1st round but, depending on the depth, there would be substantially less differential the further down the draft you went.

I also acknowledge that in 3 years time your teams needs may change and that you may be able to take your BPA and trade him for your organizational need, however I also know that if I see something specific in the organizational need that I want, ie. big, physical, good skating, RD, with good first pass, and hockey IQ, it may be very difficult for me to pry a player with those skills away from a team for my BPA LW as the RD is more scarce in general.

In the limited reading I have done the advocates of BPA, hockey skills only, suggest that BPA works for rounds 1 and 2 but should not govern the following rounds. The only problem with that is if you leave your selection of organizational need, high end RD, are you really giving yourself a chance of filling that position in rounds 3 to 7?

In summary, I acknowledge that BPA is more often than not the right pick in rounds 1 and 2, but I still believe that organizational need, which includes the type of game you want to play ie. Jake Vertanen versus William Nylander, should be taken into consideration when making a pick.

If you are trying to fill a roster for a fantasy team or at an expansion draft at some point you need to fill all positions. In the NHL draft , where you are drafting futures, If none of the D in R1 and R2 at your picks match up to the level of the Forwards or even Goalie at those picks and you need to replenish your D stable should you go off the board. I don't think so. If you know the players are evenly or very closely ranked (eg 1 at 17 and 1 at 18 on your list) sure take the D if that' s a position of significant need over the other imo. I would look at BPA as SOP not a hard and fast absolute rule; meaning there are situations where you deviate but not too far. One could argue the Sens need everything and although we see potential in some prospects at certain positions most of them can be improved upon. NHL teams can build through the draft (not necessarily 1 draft); trade for, or sign free agents to build their team.

When the Sens create their BPA list .. they have inside knowledge as well.. For example when they are putting together their list I would suppose they would rank a 6'4 mobile two way RD higher than a 5'7 smooth PMLD that can QB a powerplay; If they are close. Other teams may have them the other way around so its not in a total vacuum of who they are currently. If that smaller player is Quinn Hughes and the RD is Moritz Seider .. well the ranking would not be that close and they would / should not go off the board passing up Hughes for Seider even though that big RD is a bigger need. It may be different for someone like Heinola and Seider if they have them really close when they are putting together their board.

 

[OD99]

To me overall we are talking assets, regardless of position, when we discuss players.

A team wants as many top assets as possible, period. I can always trade my #3 C who plays like a #2 if I want to get a better RD (as an example) or they can determine at draft time that the organization is better off to trade the pick for additional assets (other picks / prospects / established players).

I imagine management takes in to consideration how quickly they feel a player will make the NHL as well - if there is a glaring need and the player should make the jump next year (and isn't a huge departure from a player ranked higher) then maybe they consider drafting for need. That could be risky but at least at that stage the team isn't looking 4 years down the road, they are expecting immediate impact. In that regard I think early in the draft is the only time you could reasonably look to use that strategy.

Overall I go back to original sentence and you need to look at players are assets to a degree - how valuable are they to the organization and overall around the league?

 

[tstracuzza]

Notta

Wow Dorion seriously didn't think of that possibility... ugh

 

[GoodGoodnotBad]

The Score - May Mock Draft - Sens take Matthew Robertson at 19
NHL Mock Draft: What happens after Hughes and Kakko go 1-2?

 

[danielpalfredsson]

I want the mid round 1st, but if CBJ re-signs Duchene, I am not going to count my chickens or however that saying goes. (Is that an actual saying or am I Ricky?)

Unprotected 1sts are very valuable just because of the upside.

 

[bert]

The Score - May Mock Draft - Sens take Matthew Robertson at 19
NHL Mock Draft: What happens after Hughes and Kakko go 1-2?

There is no way they would take Robertson over Soderstrom. I really dont see the draft going that way, Byram dropping that far by Detroit ya no.

 

[bert]

I want the mid round 1st, but if CBJ re-signs Duchene, I am not going to count my chickens or however that saying goes. (Is that an actual saying or am I Ricky?)

Unprotected 1sts are very valuable just because of the upside.

Next years draft is also better than this year, I dont expect Karlsson to re-sign at this point but I think Duchene will.

 

[danielpalfredsson]

Next years draft is also better than this year, I dont expect Karlsson to re-sign at this point but I think Duchene will.

I'm not saying that I think it's a given that Karlsson stays in San Jose, but their ability to offer a 8th year could be huge at his age. With that in play, I haven't lost hope about that extra pick.

Of course, it becomes moot if San Jose doesn't make the Cup final.

 

[coladin]

The Score - May Mock Draft - Sens take Matthew Robertson at 19
NHL Mock Draft: What happens after Hughes and Kakko go 1-2?

Interesting, hopefully Ottawa grabs a player that drives us to eat, Brink, and be merry!

 

[Sen sational]

The law of supply and demand, Ottawa will have more dance partners for their cap space and will be able to demand higher draft picks.

 

[Micklebot]

1000 posts long past, Continue here

NHL Entry Draft - 2019 Entry Draft Discussion (part 2)