Thanks for the response. I took Poulin because I believe he has to potential to be more than a third liner. Definitely more skilled than he gets credit for, also a lot closer to Lavoie than most people think. I'll admit I didn't know enough about Doro to take him there. Knyazev I had higher on my list, so I was happy to get him at that pick. Mastrosimone and Cajkovic were definitely considered there as well.
Speculation: 2019 NHL Draft thread
- Thread starter 895
- Start date
- Status
Langway
In den Wolken
- Jul 7, 2006
- 32,414
- 9,132
Combine results with testing currently ongoing. Beecher, Bjornfot and Hoglander have performed pretty well so far. I don't put huge stock in combine performance but it's a useful snapshot in getting a sense of where a player is in their physical maturity and overall athletic regimen.
CapitalsCupReality
It’s Go Time!!
- Feb 27, 2002
- 64,677
- 19,518
Boost? It would diminish him IMO because so far, he’s a lazy shit. Makes the pro gamer a risk/reward selection. The next Volchkov or not?
For me, in talent evaluation, work ethic (the desire to be great) is secondary only to elite skill levels, barely.
Langway
In den Wolken
- Jul 7, 2006
- 32,414
- 9,132
It's just more data. I'm not sure any two players are exactly alike, though the Sedins came pretty close. They should all be pretty fit, it's more a matter of how much and in what sense. Even the stronger players still have a lot growth potential. It just may be more in one particular area than another. There are always testing standouts but particularly earlier on in the draft I don't think it alone changes much. It could potentially help make the case for a particular high character player over one with some slight concerns but that's more of a cumulative argument. Similarly, poor physical testing plus poor interviews can add up on a player in the other direction. It's not overly important in itself but it further helps paint the picture. The combine overall, interviews included, may be bigger for the more limited exposure players who scouts haven't seen as much up close or players later in the draft for the higher ups to get a better sense of the person. Earlier on in the draft, though, I don't think testing impacts too much. Even if there was an organizational shift toward bigger/stronger prospects the profile of their main targets would already be well known before the testing.
Players like Djoos & Johansen had ample room to improve physically and they're still struggling to close that gap. Even if their character checks out it's not a lock enough strides will be made in the following two to four plus years once more closely handled by NHL trainers. Some are just hard gainers. Lower body explosiveness is probably the best indicator of athletic ability. The other areas are important but I'd consider those measures most in separating out the better athletes (at least the ones with the strongest foundation). Huge strides can be made in some cases but the total late bloomer is an outlier. Most have already pretty well absorbed the pro lifestyle and what goes into it to have success. They're so well schooled, in many cases for many years already. Some are more than others due to either level of play or overall support system but I don't think teams consider weaker testing as necessarily indicative of massive upside. If they otherwise love the drive of the player maybe they would in some respects but particularly in today's game it's hard to pound the table for an intangibles player that may, say, lack explosiveness. It's one thing to not have the upper body strength or not do a pull-up and another to maybe not have stellar athletic genes generally.
Players like Djoos & Johansen had ample room to improve physically and they're still struggling to close that gap. Even if their character checks out it's not a lock enough strides will be made in the following two to four plus years once more closely handled by NHL trainers. Some are just hard gainers. Lower body explosiveness is probably the best indicator of athletic ability. The other areas are important but I'd consider those measures most in separating out the better athletes (at least the ones with the strongest foundation). Huge strides can be made in some cases but the total late bloomer is an outlier. Most have already pretty well absorbed the pro lifestyle and what goes into it to have success. They're so well schooled, in many cases for many years already. Some are more than others due to either level of play or overall support system but I don't think teams consider weaker testing as necessarily indicative of massive upside. If they otherwise love the drive of the player maybe they would in some respects but particularly in today's game it's hard to pound the table for an intangibles player that may, say, lack explosiveness. It's one thing to not have the upper body strength or not do a pull-up and another to maybe not have stellar athletic genes generally.
Was it Sam Bennett who couldn't do a single pull-up at the Combine his draft year? Casey Middelstadt couldn't complete one rep either. I know it doesn't mean shit when it comes to their on ice performance but how an 18 year old who has been an athlete his whole life and who seemingly has trained with elite trainers can't do one pull-up is nuts to me.
Dr John Carlson
Registered User
Cody Glass couldn't do a pull-up during his early junior days either. Probably not as uncommon as a lot of people think, and thus not something too concerning.
Langway
In den Wolken
- Jul 7, 2006
- 32,414
- 9,132
It's probably the least useful test of them all and something I could see being phased out. Central Scouting has probably gotten hell for it from agents but players also know it's tested. It may not be tremendously functional aside from maybe battle scenarios but it shows who has gone the extra mile and shows who is kind of jacked for their weight and more equally upper body focused.
You do see players like Eichel that are specimens pre-draft throwing up heavy cleans with ease. I'd rather have the strength than not enough all-around but it isn't absolutely essential at the junior level beyond a certain level. It's more who has the head start.
CapitalsCupReality
It’s Go Time!!
- Feb 27, 2002
- 64,677
- 19,518
Hivemind
We're Touched
Langway
In den Wolken
- Jul 7, 2006
- 32,414
- 9,132
The angle/colors don't do him any favors but...damn.
The Flames have some combine interviews up. They pick after the Caps at 26. Hoglander stands out as someone very likely on Washington's radar. I don't know that he's necessarily Arvidsson but that type of player would add a pretty solid dynamic to a third-line (or as a player that could move around the top nine).
Last edited:
CapitalsCupReality
It’s Go Time!!
- Feb 27, 2002
- 64,677
- 19,518
I saw that picture and thought the same. Dude looks like one of the players let his kid brother do the interview for him as a joke.
Langway
In den Wolken
- Jul 7, 2006
- 32,414
- 9,132
Hasn't Johnny Hockey has been a ghost in the postseason? It's my biggest concern with a guy like McMichael due to his size. I would have liked to have seen DeBrincat in the playoffs to see how he handles the playoffs since he's similarly small (listed at 5'7'', 165) and prolific during the regular season. Also McMichael is a center... who was the last small center who was really effective in the postseason? Tyler Johnson is really the only one I can think of but I'm sure I'm missing someone.
hb12xchamps
Registered User
At least this year, I'd say Gaudreau definitely had a high compete level and was dangerous in the playoffs while being pretty snakebitten. I tuned into a couple of those games since it was Grubauer in net and Grubi made some nice saves and Johnny had a decent amount of post/crossbar shots. He was kind of the opposite of Kuzy where he had the high compete level but wasn't getting any points
CapitalsCupReality
It’s Go Time!!
- Feb 27, 2002
- 64,677
- 19,518
Thats just it right? The regular season, where these days, players get a lot of room, little guys can excel more regularly. In the postseason......still not many successful diminutive guys because teams start trying hard, eliminating space and taking the body every shift.
Langway
In den Wolken
- Jul 7, 2006
- 32,414
- 9,132
Mike Richards wasn't all that big. Datsyuk wasn't either but they had some elite traits to help overcome size limitations be it IQ or competitiveness. Of course, it's something of a different game than when they were in their prime. Tyler Johnson is the only more recent example that comes to mind. I'd still take the ~100 point player and find a way to deal with it. Marchand's a winger but not that big and still produces. I think it's more about structure and that Gaudreau may also need more of an elite center than Monahan. Of course, it also helps if the player is able to fight through traffic and still has enough lateral shiftiness in more intense circumstances to create open ice. That's part of what makes Marchand effective. That skating factor combined with the overall size question could be why teams pass on Brink. He is a July birthdate so on the younger side but he's got a lot of work ahead. He's probably two or three years away and even then maybe not someone you'd want on a third-line (though by then Oshie may be there anyway).
If they want more of a fast-tracker physically, Hoglander helped himself in the testing. Poulin is probably up there, though he'll need more explosiveness in his skating. Nikolayev is in a similar boat. Rees & Beecher up front along with Johnson & Bjornfot on D also may be a little more ahead of schedule in terms of style. It's pretty wide open at 25 I think. My guess is the most likely target is Hoglander,though Nashville picks at 24 and he reportedly models his game after Arvidsson so that may be a fit. I like Tracey as a higher upside option and the WHL factor could help but I wonder about Afanasyev. He's very raw but a bigger body that likes to shoot. It seems like he's headed for Windsor/OHL next season but will consult with whoever drafts him. With that frame I could see him being their Alexeyev in this draft. From a sheer frame standpoint up front it would have to be either him, Beecher or Leason. Upside should be the bigger priority and among the three he probably has the most.
Tomasino/Suzuki then Hoglander then Brink/Tracey/Afanasyev is how I'd lean at the moment but if they're sold on Brink's upside then go for it. If he's available he's very likely the highest upside skilled forward left. It just may take a while.
If they want more of a fast-tracker physically, Hoglander helped himself in the testing. Poulin is probably up there, though he'll need more explosiveness in his skating. Nikolayev is in a similar boat. Rees & Beecher up front along with Johnson & Bjornfot on D also may be a little more ahead of schedule in terms of style. It's pretty wide open at 25 I think. My guess is the most likely target is Hoglander,though Nashville picks at 24 and he reportedly models his game after Arvidsson so that may be a fit. I like Tracey as a higher upside option and the WHL factor could help but I wonder about Afanasyev. He's very raw but a bigger body that likes to shoot. It seems like he's headed for Windsor/OHL next season but will consult with whoever drafts him. With that frame I could see him being their Alexeyev in this draft. From a sheer frame standpoint up front it would have to be either him, Beecher or Leason. Upside should be the bigger priority and among the three he probably has the most.
Tomasino/Suzuki then Hoglander then Brink/Tracey/Afanasyev is how I'd lean at the moment but if they're sold on Brink's upside then go for it. If he's available he's very likely the highest upside skilled forward left. It just may take a while.
Cush
Registered User
NHL.com Mock Draft
Kimelman -- Brayden Tracey, LW, Moose Jaw (WHL): The Capitals have done well adding young defensemen the past few seasons and will now turn their focus to forward. Tracey (6-0, 177) has high-end offensive skills and great vision, and the Capitals' depth will allow him all the time he needs to fully develop his skills.
Morreale -- Samuel Poulin, RW, Sherbrooke (QMJHL): A strong (6-1, 208), skilled, smart, hard-working player who had 76 points (29 goals, 47 assists) in 67 games on a relatively young team, Poulin, the son of former NHL forward Patrick Poulin, is a power forward who has improved his skating this season and could fill a middle-six role in any lineup.
Lepage -- Poulin: The Capitals love big, fast, offensive-minded forwards, and Poulin fits that profile perfectly. Recognized for his professionalism and leadership off the ice, he carried Sherbrooke on his shoulders in the playoffs with 14 points (eight goals, six assists) in 10 games.
Kimelman -- Brayden Tracey, LW, Moose Jaw (WHL): The Capitals have done well adding young defensemen the past few seasons and will now turn their focus to forward. Tracey (6-0, 177) has high-end offensive skills and great vision, and the Capitals' depth will allow him all the time he needs to fully develop his skills.
Morreale -- Samuel Poulin, RW, Sherbrooke (QMJHL): A strong (6-1, 208), skilled, smart, hard-working player who had 76 points (29 goals, 47 assists) in 67 games on a relatively young team, Poulin, the son of former NHL forward Patrick Poulin, is a power forward who has improved his skating this season and could fill a middle-six role in any lineup.
Lepage -- Poulin: The Capitals love big, fast, offensive-minded forwards, and Poulin fits that profile perfectly. Recognized for his professionalism and leadership off the ice, he carried Sherbrooke on his shoulders in the playoffs with 14 points (eight goals, six assists) in 10 games.
Those sound like decent options with hopefully hitting on a 3rd/2nd line winger. The reality these are picks that more than unlikely won't contribute till post AO era is depressing.
Langway
In den Wolken
- Jul 7, 2006
- 32,414
- 9,132
ISS June rankings. Usually a top 31 but includes a top 62 plus goalies. Poulin at 25, Tomasino at 18, Brink/Kaliyev at 22/23. Hoglander not in their top 62 (?).
They'll have some fast-tracker options if they want them. With or without Ovechkin they need goal-scoring so I'd tend to put that and plus physical play as important attributes. Poulin makes a lot of sense under that line of thinking given that he's probably the best power forward available and not purely a more one-dimensional type at that. More finesse, less physically mature types certainly could wind up more dynamic down the line. There's bound to be some risk either way but I'd probably just take the biggest competitor generally with the best tools suggesting strong upside. They're so thin organizationally that any projectable scoring-line talent would be a sorely needed add but they ought to be looking for someone less likely to be manhandled and wilt in the playoffs. Historically they've been very patient and sided with upside but you do wonder if that changes as the main core group gets older. They've got a ring so there's less total urgency but there's got to be some temptation toward accelerating into that next prime window.
895
Registered User
- Jun 15, 2007
- 8,398
- 7,069
I base all my draft wishlists on hockey names. Connor McMichael is pretty good. Bobby Brink is excellent.
Dr John Carlson
Registered User
We're extremely lucky not to have a pick in the 5-10 range. Dach? Zegras? Krebs??? Hard pass on those made-up names.
Cush
Registered User
Pronman has the Caps taking Nicholas Robertson,
Larry Fisher (THW) has them taking Moritz Seider (he has Calgary taking Brink with the next pick)
Complete Team Draft: https://thehockeywriters.com/2019-nhl-mock-draft-team-results/
Yeah, I can see them passing on Brink for Seider (no sarcasm)
Button's final rankings: https://www.tsn.ca/craig-s-list-caufield-scores-his-way-into-top-5-1.1316942
Larry Fisher (THW) has them taking Moritz Seider (he has Calgary taking Brink with the next pick)
Complete Team Draft: https://thehockeywriters.com/2019-nhl-mock-draft-team-results/
Yeah, I can see them passing on Brink for Seider (no sarcasm)
Button's final rankings: https://www.tsn.ca/craig-s-list-caufield-scores-his-way-into-top-5-1.1316942
Last edited:
- Status
Ad
Latest posts
-
-
GDT: Round 1 Game 4 Playoffs: Jets @ Avs Apr 28, 2024 – 1:30 PM CT. TV: CBC; Radio: 680 CJOB/Power 97- Latest: Conflicted Habs fan
-
