Prospect Info: 2019 NHL Draft.

[Go Wings]

Is it too early to think about Byfield in 2020?

Never to early. I am looking forward to seeing what he can do in the CHL this year.

 

[Winger98]

Which is essentially resigning yourself to not being able to evaluate defensemen, and overpaying down the road, instead of holding your scouting department accountable to find at least one high-end player to begin with.

Yes, what you advocate is certainly possible. But why take an 88 forward over an 84 defenseman, just to end up trading "100 or more forward points" later on for a more proven defenseman that is very similar to the projection of the 84 guy you passed up on? That's basically paying a higher price to have somebody else do your shopping for you.

Now if you want to do both, and trade an extra forward or two to SUPPLEMENT the practice of drafting defensemen with just a high priority as drafting forwards, ok. The same would be fine for a team that had plenty of defensemen, but insufficient forwards. But don't just lock in on draft day BPA forever, and allow the pendulum to swing all the way to one side, thinking that a trade or two will fix everything.

If we're talking about top10 picks, I think you have to go with whoever is highest on your board. If you screw that pick up by picking a guy a little lower because of something like position, you're setting yourself back more than by having to pull out that hypothetical trade you mention. And even later in the draft, I don't think it's wise get too pretty with your drafting. It's hard enough to pull a good player from the draft, handicapping yourself by limiting your choices by position is asking to just entirely bomb your drafts.

 

[jkutswings]

If we're talking about top10 picks, I think you have to go with whoever is highest on your board. If you screw that pick up by picking a guy a little lower because of something like position, you're setting yourself back more than by having to pull out that hypothetical trade you mention. And even later in the draft, I don't think it's wise get too pretty with your drafting. It's hard enough to pull a good player from the draft, handicapping yourself by limiting your choices by position is asking to just entirely bomb your drafts.

I completely agree...if you're looking at a single pick in a vacuum. But if you already have 4 or 5 forwards that look like part of your next core, and you rate every last one of them higher than any of your defensive prospects (because there isn't a single defenseman already on the roster that will be part of the next core), that should at least play a factor.

 

[njx9]

If we're talking about top10 picks, I think you have to go with whoever is highest on your board.

If you go that route, you're going to take a forward 70% of the time (116 out of the last 170 picks) since ~2000. While that might speak to lowered value for defensemen, it also means you're likely waiting for a unicorn year (2012) to actually address the position with anything that even sort of looks like top end talent (and your chances, even if you're Nashville, of hitting on a top end player with a later pick are miniscule), or you're hoping that you were on the right side of the roughly 50% chance that your forwards are made up of mostly Cs (58 of each, not accounting for later position change) and thus have some players with actual trade value.

BPA is just not a sustainable way to build a team. It's fine when you're good up and down the roster, and it's great when you have absolutely nothing of value on the roster, and it works really well in a sport where every position has the same relative value.

 

[Henkka]

Too bad we drafted Zadina. I hate him. Should have taken Bouchard.

 

[njx9]

Too bad we drafted Zadina. I hate him. Should have taken Bouchard.

This is such non-additive, childish trash. Is it your intention to inject as much negativity as possible into the conversation, no matter how dishonestly you have to post to do it?

Grow up.

 

[Frk It]

If you go that route, you're going to take a forward 70% of the time (116 out of the last 170 picks) since ~2000. While that might speak to lowered value for defensemen, it also means you're likely waiting for a unicorn year (2012) to actually address the position with anything that even sort of looks like top end talent (and your chances, even if you're Nashville, of hitting on a top end player with a later pick are miniscule), or you're hoping that you were on the right side of the roughly 50% chance that your forwards are made up of mostly Cs (58 of each, not accounting for later position change) and thus have some players with actual trade value.

BPA is just not a sustainable way to build a team. It's fine when you're good up and down the roster, and it's great when you have absolutely nothing of value on the roster, and it works really well in a sport where every position has the same relative value.

Too bad we drafted Zadina. I hate him. Should have taken Bouchard.

I like the Zadina pick (a lot), but people need to understand how opportunity cost works. Drafting a blue chip winger means you did not draft a blue chip defenseman. When you get to the point where you have used 1 first rounder on a defenseman in a 10 year span while simultaneously having the worst D core in the NHL, you probably need to tweak your draft strategy.

That is the last I will say on that, I know I have belabored this point.

Back to the 2019 Draft... there really are a ton of good forwards. It's going to be a tough task for defenseman to supplant these kids at the top of the draft. Maybe the quality of forwards will make a guy like Byram slip to 4, 5, or 6. Not likely, but could work out in our favor.

I like Hughes, Turcotte, and Suzuki a ton. Very high end puck posession players that play a style I like.

 

[Henkka]

Defencemen are easier to trade when you have quality forwards. Latest trade markets have proven it.

I'll stay on that reality and not try find a problem from every possible good thing.

At next year we'll take a center with our highest pick and defencemen after, and keep the talent-pool growing bigger.

 

[Heaton]

Defencemen are easier to trade when you have quality forwards. Latest trade markets have proven it.

I'll stay on that reality and not try find a problem from every possible good thing.

At next year we'll take a center with our highest pick and defencemen after, and keep the talent-pool growing bigger.

Who?

 

[Rzombo4 prez]

My peace on the issue:

No one is going to trade us an elite defensemen for someone we can afford to give up. If you want an elite defensemen, you need to go draft one.

 

[HisNoodliness]

I like the Zadina pick (a lot), but people need to understand how opportunity cost works. Drafting a blue chip winger means you did not draft a blue chip defenseman. When you get to the point where you have used 1 first rounder on a defenseman in a 10 year span while simultaneously having the worst D core in the NHL, you probably need to tweak your draft strategy.

That is the last I will say on that, I know I have belabored this point.

Back to the 2019 Draft... there really are a ton of good forwards. It's going to be a tough task for defenseman to supplant these kids at the top of the draft. Maybe the quality of forwards will make a guy like Byram slip to 4, 5, or 6. Not likely, but could work out in our favor.

I like Hughes, Turcotte, and Suzuki a ton. Very high end puck posession players that play a style I like.

I know you said it's the last you'll say on it, but opportunity cost demonstrates the only problem with Zadina well. This was THE draft to get a D. We needed a D and we gave up a huge opportunity to take one when we took Zadina. Now I also love the Zadina pick, he is an awesome player that I'm really excited to watch in the NHL. But it's going to be a big problem for us soon if BPA this year is a center (as it seems like it will be). Soon we're going to either be reaching on D or be stuck icing a defense without any top line D.

I'm excited for this draft too. There looks like there'll be a lot of high skill, entertaining, possession forwards available. Assuming there's not a D available at our spot, I'm hopeful we can draft a C that'll push Larkin into the 2C spot. A lot of NHL teams seem to be running C-W pairings while rotating the third forward on their lines. Having
1C-Zadina
Larkin-Mantha
could be awesome and difficult to matchup against. It's going to be a really fun draft to watch develop. Hockey better get started again soon.

 

[Winger98]

I completely agree...if you're looking at a single pick in a vacuum. But if you already have 4 or 5 forwards that look like part of your next core, and you rate every last one of them higher than any of your defensive prospects (because there isn't a single defenseman already on the roster that will be part of the next core), that should at least play a factor.

Only if you're not sure of who you're taking. I don't think that happens very often, though. Maybe I'm way off, but until the second half of the draft I'm betting the Wings have a pretty established list of who they want. If Holland doesn't trust his staff enough to trust their list or their board, then he needs to get a new staff. If that means you end up with 9 first line forwards, you start looking at deals to fill other issues.

If we want more cracks at a D in the top half of the draft, then we probably need to make sure we get good returns on dealing some vets.

If you go that route, you're going to take a forward 70% of the time (116 out of the last 170 picks) since ~2000. While that might speak to lowered value for defensemen, it also means you're likely waiting for a unicorn year (2012) to actually address the position with anything that even sort of looks like top end talent (and your chances, even if you're Nashville, of hitting on a top end player with a later pick are miniscule), or you're hoping that you were on the right side of the roughly 50% chance that your forwards are made up of mostly Cs (58 of each, not accounting for later position change) and thus have some players with actual trade value.

BPA is just not a sustainable way to build a team. It's fine when you're good up and down the roster, and it's great when you have absolutely nothing of value on the roster, and it works really well in a sport where every position has the same relative value.

um, we don't exactly have a lot of high end talent on our NHL roster, and we're not really overflowing with blue chip prospects in our system. We have, arguably, two - Zadina and Rasmussen. And Rasmussen still has his share of doubts.

The draft is too much of a crapshoot to worry about having too many good forwards. Did I want a D this year? Yeah. Do I think Zadina is a better prospect than any of the D on the board? Yeah, and so I can't pass the guy up. Your GM starts getting cute with the draft and you see him picking a guy like Dylan McIlrath. Totally missing on a top10 pick is going to hurt this franchise more than having too many really good forwards.

 

[Unfriendly Ghost]

Holland

dealing some vets

And even then, what vets? Mike "picture of health" Green? Vanek? The inestimable Justin Applegator? Darren Helm-Holland? I dunno if that group gets you very much at all.

 

[Winger98]

And even then, what vets? Mike "picture of health" Green? Vanek? The inestimable Justin Applegator? Darren Helm-Holland? I dunno if that group gets you very much at all.

He just dealt Tatar. He's sold expiring contracts at the past two deadlines. I wish he had started earlier, but dealing vets isn't something he has been avoiding lately. And on expiring deals, at the TDL, I think those guys are going to pull at least 3rds and better. If we deal them before their contracts are set to expire, I think we can pull similar returns but while retaining on the deals.

 

[Frk It]

Your GM starts getting cute with the draft and you see him picking a guy like Dylan McIlrath. Totally missing on a top10 pick is going to hurt this franchise more than having too many really good forwards.

Obviously it has to be when guys are reasonably close. No one is advocating making reaches equivalent to drafting McIlrath. People knew that was dicey even back then.

 

[Unfriendly Ghost]

He just dealt Tatar. He's sold expiring contracts at the past two deadlines. I wish he had started earlier, but dealing vets isn't something he has been avoiding lately. And on expiring deals, at the TDL, I think those guys are going to pull at least 3rds and better. If we deal them before their contracts are set to expire, I think we can pull similar returns but while retaining on the deals.

But do we think we're going to find our top pairing with 2nds and 3rds? I guess I don't. And in the same vein, I don't think we're going to land a top pairing defensemen by trading excess wingers.

 

[rhef3]

I'm sure it was the plan to draft a defenseman with the 6th pick, we all knew it, was planning for it and all. BUT Zadina slipped and it changed everything, next year will be the same, i'm sure we will plan on drafting a defenseman with our first pick unless it would be reaching and we would try to trade down.

I'm not mad at all drafting zadina over dobson/ bouchard etc, sure we all wanted to draft D but you can't pass up that value, you just can't.

 

[obey86]

I like the Zadina pick (a lot), but people need to understand how opportunity cost works. Drafting a blue chip winger means you did not draft a blue chip defenseman. When you get to the point where you have used 1 first rounder on a defenseman in a 10 year span while simultaneously having the worst D core in the NHL, you probably need to tweak your draft strategy.

That is the last I will say on that, I know I have belabored this point.

Back to the 2019 Draft... there really are a ton of good forwards. It's going to be a tough task for defenseman to supplant these kids at the top of the draft. Maybe the quality of forwards will make a guy like Byram slip to 4, 5, or 6. Not likely, but could work out in our favor.

I like Hughes, Turcotte, and Suzuki a ton. Very high end puck posession players that play a style I like.

What 1st round defensemen have they actually passed on for forwards over the years that are actually worth a damn?

Defensemen drafted in the 1st round after the Wings took a forward with their pick, last 15 seasons:
2003: didn't have a 1st round pick
2004: didn't have a 1st round pick
2005: drafted Kindl, n/a
2006: didn't have a 1st round pick
2007: drafted Smith, n/a
2008: had the last pick of the 1st round and took a goalie, Roman Josi went 8 picks later (although in the 2nd round).
2009: didn't have a 1st round pick
2010: Sheahan at #21, the only 1st round defenseman drafted after was Mark Pysyk who went 2 picks later.
2011: didn't have a 1st round pick, traded down to the 2nd round IIRC. if they had kept their 1st rounder they would have had a shot at 1st round D studs like Nathan Beaulieu, Oscar Klefbom, Connor Murphy, Joe Morrow, and Stuart Percy.
2012: didn't have a 1st round pick
2013: Mantha at #20, the only 1st round dman drafted after was Shea Theodore. Ian McCoshen and Chris Bigras went #1 and #2 in the 2nd round.
2014: Larkin at #15. Later 1st round dmen were Travis Sanheim and Anthony DeAngelo.
2015: Svechnikov at #19. Later 1st round men were Noah Juulsun and Jacob Larsson.
2016: drafted Cholowski, n/a
2017: drafted Rasmussen at #9, lots of dmen taken later in the 1st, too early to tell if they will be any good or not.

Your hypothesis that the Wings drafting forwards in the 1st round and has caused them to miss out on all these great 1st round defensemen appears to be be blatantly false. The only one they seemed to have missed on for drafting a non-defenseman in the 1st round was Roman Josi, who wasn't even a 1st round pick.

 

[Frk It]

What 1st round defensemen have they actually passed on for forwards over the years that are actually worth a damn?

Defensemen drafted in the 1st round after the Wings took a forward with their pick, last 15 seasons:
2003: didn't have a 1st round pick
2004: didn't have a 1st round pick
2005: drafted Kindl, n/a
2006: didn't have a 1st round pick
2007: drafted Smith, n/a
2008: had the last pick of the 1st round and took a goalie, Roman Josi went 8 picks later (although in the 2nd round).
2009: didn't have a 1st round pick
2010: Sheahan at #21, the only 1st round defenseman drafted after was Mark Pysyk who went 2 picks later.
2011: didn't have a 1st round pick, traded down to the 2nd round IIRC. if they had kept their 1st rounder they would have had a shot at 1st round D studs like Nathan Beaulieu, Oscar Klefbom, Connor Murphy, Joe Morrow, and Stuart Percy.
2012: didn't have a 1st round pick
2013: Mantha at #20, the only 1st round dman drafted after was Shea Theodore. Ian McCoshen and Chris Bigras went #1 and #2 in the 2nd round.
2014: Larkin at #15. Later 1st round dmen were Travis Sanheim and Anthony DeAngelo.
2015: Svechnikov at #19. Later 1st round men were Noah Juulsun and Jacob Larsson.
2016: drafted Cholowski, n/a
2017: drafted Rasmussen at #9, lots of dmen taken later in the 1st, too early to tell if they will be any good or not.

Your hypothesis that the Wings drafting forwards in the 1st round and has caused them to miss out on all these great 1st round defensemen appears to be be blatantly false. The only one they seemed to have missed on for drafting a non-defenseman in the 1st round was Roman Josi, who wasn't even a 1st round pick.

Shea Theodore is a very good young defenseman for the record. Sanheim is too, but Philly can really draft defenseman so they’re a little crowded back there.

My point was mostly I don’t think drafting 1 defenseman in the first round every 10 years is a viable plan. I think we need to have a little more of an emphasis there and learn from that. Maybe we can just agree to disagree, and get back to talking about 2019 prospects. I recall you said you like Newhook, if so I also really think you would like Alex Turcotte.

 

[obey86]

Bolded isn’t a thing I actually said, so OK.

Shea Theodore is a very good young defenseman for the record. Sanheim is too, but Philly can actually draft defenseman so they’re a little crowded back there.

I don’t think drafting 1 defenseman in the first round every 10 years is a viable plan. If you disagree, fine. It’s pretty clear we are probably just going to disagree at this point.

As history has shown, there were few to no defensemen worth drafting when the Red Wings picked in the first round over the past 15 years. It looks like they made the right choice passing on defensemen in the first round much more often than they didn't. So you can say "drafting 1 defensemen in the 1st round every 10 years isn't a viable plan" and in a complete vacuum I would agree. However, the world isn't a vacuum and when we actually look at the defensemen they passed on in the 1st round over the past 10 years it looks like they were right for passing on them outside of a few small exceptions. Where they picked in the 1st round over the past 10 years was not a good spot to find good defensemen, as history shows.

In case you haven't noticed the forward group hasn't been good either. It's not an either/or thing. The Wings need talent, period. Whether that's forward or defense really doesn't matter at this point IMO, they need help everywhere.

 

[Frk It]

As history has shown, there were few to no defensemen worth drafting when the Red Wings picked in the first round over the past 15 years. It looks like they made the right choice passing on defensemen in the first round much more often than they didn't. So you can say "drafting 1 defensemen in the 1st round every 10 years isn't a viable plan" and in a complete vacuum I would agree. However, the world isn't a vacuum and when we actually look at the defensemen they passed on in the 1st round over the past 10 years it looks like they were right for passing on them outside of a few small exceptions.

In case you haven't noticed the forward group hasn't been good either. It's not an either/or thing. The Wings need talent, period. Whether that's forward or defense really doesn't matter at this point IMO, they need help everywhere.

I get it. I edited my post, sorry not trying to be an ass, I just am pretty fed up with having a trash defense is all.

This year was a great starting point, we clearly went for some skill guys with some upside. That excited me as a fan.

I will have to see what we do in the next year or two here.

Here are some guys I’m keeping an eye on this year:

Suzuki (C)
Turcotte (C)
Rees (C)
Dach (C)
York (D)
Vlasic (D)
Korczak (D)
Byram (D)
Helleson (D)
Warren (D)
Brinkman (D)
Kalmikov (W)
Kaliyev (W)
Cajkovic (W)
Foote (W)

 

[jkutswings]

As history has shown, there were few to no defensemen worth drafting when the Red Wings picked in the first round over the past 15 years. It looks like they made the right choice passing on defensemen in the first round much more often than they didn't. So you can say "drafting 1 defensemen in the 1st round every 10 years isn't a viable plan" and in a complete vacuum I would agree. However, the world isn't a vacuum and when we actually look at the defensemen they passed on in the 1st round over the past 10 years it looks like they were right for passing on them outside of a few small exceptions. Where they picked in the 1st round over the past 10 years was not a good spot to find good defensemen, as history shows.

In case you haven't noticed the forward group hasn't been good either. It's not an either/or thing. The Wings need talent, period. Whether that's forward or defense really doesn't matter at this point IMO, they need help everywhere.

Apparently a defensive prospect is locked into his entire career arc at 18, and anything that happens after he is drafted has no impact on the next 10-20 years.

Asking for a slightly more balanced approach to drafting by position isn't the detriment you make it out to be.

 

[obey86]

Apparently a defensive prospect is locked into his entire career arc at 18, and anything that happens after he is drafted has no impact on the next 10-20 years.

Asking for a slightly more balanced approach to drafting by position isn't the detriment you make it out to be.

So I can assume you’ve never once complained that the Wings passed on a player in the draft who ended up being really good? Right? Because as you say, things that happen after the draft play a part in the outcome. Just want to make sure you’re being intellectually honest here.

I never said drafting more balanced would be a detriment. Forgive me for not being upset about missing out on a bunch of Joe Morrows over the years though.

 

[The Zetterberg Era]

So I can assume you’ve never once complained that the Wings passed on a player in the draft who ended up being really good? Right? Because as you say, things that happen after the draft play a part in the outcome. Just want to make sure you’re being intellectually honest here.

I never said drafting more balanced would be a detriment. Forgive me for not being upset about missing out on a bunch of Joe Morrows over the years though.

I also believe it is out there that we have drafted the least amount of D-man of any team over a significant interval before around here. We don't take chances down the board there either often.

I am a BPA person, but you either need to be trading some of the glut of forwards for d-man or trying to select more to hopefully hit on a few lower ones or something. Currently we have built up to an area where a change of strategy on how to assemble out blueline is probably needed. I even like a few of the prospects in Hronek and Cholowski a lot but this is the big part of the rebuild that needs answering. Using the same strategy at this point probably isn't great for the answer. Holland needs to tie this part together, I don't really care if he figures it out miraculously through Karlsson, next two drafts or trading forward talent to fix the back-end and replenish the forwards in the next couple drafts, but they do hopefully have a plan and are looking for opportunities that meet their vision. If not we are building the current Leafs a team that can score but who has an atrocious D that isn't going to win anything as the best case scenario in my opinion.

For the record I think Holland can probably find these answers which makes me different than most. But the answer remains necessary. We are not going to be a contender until we start to have a plan on the back-end.

 

[obey86]

Draft the best players period. No matter how much everyone complains, our forward group hasn’t been good enough over the past 5 -10 years to avoid drafting forwards in favor or defensemen if the Wings feel the forward was going to be the better player.