2020 Draft & Undrafted Free Agent Thread: Part III

[Matz03]

One guy I'd like to see us take a look at in the middle rounds is Jack Finley (C, Spokane Chiefs). One of the latest birthdays in the draft (9/2/02), 6'5" 207lbs, and put up 19-38-57 in 61 GP. In a lot of the draft-sims I do, he's available at 107.

(Also, got Zary & Jarvis in my most recent one)

I think he’ll go in the 2nd round, getting him in the third would be a solid bet to take.

 

[Amazing Kreiderman]

One guy I'd like to see us take a look at in the middle rounds is Jack Finley (C, Spokane Chiefs). One of the latest birthdays in the draft (9/2/02), 6'5" 207lbs, and put up 19-38-57 in 61 GP. In a lot of the draft-sims I do, he's available at 107.

(Also, got Zary & Jarvis in my most recent one)

He's the type of player Rangers fans will love, for sure. In the games I watched of him (against the Thunderbirds) he was hard to miss. Played some good games against them haha

 

[Mikos87]

One of the things to keep in mind about getting a guy like Lundell is that he's played with Kakko before, and they have had a lot of team success internationally. There is a plus to that pick. He's a safe pick as well.

If the Rangers walkaway with Lundell and Peterka, you have the makings of a very good young skilled players who can play in your bottom six, and be very good in those roles.

Both guys can skate, play a pro style game, are already physically mature, and have played pro already.

It also allows the Rangers to fill in back fill roles and make trades. Same with Holloway. You get two of Lundell, Holloway, and a guy like Peterka (or a Jake Neighbours for that matter) it helps the Rangers window of contention for 5 cost controlled years. Three on the ELC, and a short bridge.

I would love to get Quinn, but I think he's gone before the Rangers pick. Holloway will go early. He plays a snarly game, and while I think he's a better wing as a pro, some teams see a guys like Nick Bonino. That's a good player to get.

Frankly, I feel that this year's draft is going to change how some prospects come up, and how teams value players. There are a lot of high floor guys, and you have a skewed amount of late birthdays who have had an extra year of development. There are a number of guys who would be good role or systems players.

 

[TheWhiskeyThief]

Yeah but a team has to be willing to trade down.

I don't think a team has actually traded down inside of the top 10 since the Isles did it twice in 2008. The only other instances of a team trading into the top 10 (since 2010) involved moving roster players (Carter, J.Staal, Schenider, Stepan.) Kessel to Tor sort of applies as well but I don't think Burke makes that deal if he knew those picks would be a 2 OA and an 8 OA.

On my value calculator, the drop off at 10 to 11 is as much as the difference from 4 to 10. Next drop off is after 15, then 20, then 26

 

[Ola]

On my value calculator, the drop off at 10 to 11 is as much as the difference from 4 to 10. Next drop off is after 15, then 20, then 26

I definitely don’t got great track of this draft and I am not sure I will be able to catch up, the U18 has always been a foundation for me.

But from my limited perspective I agree on this.

I would definitely be in favor of trading down if our pick is in the 11-15 range. Think there will be many gems available later on. Teams will not be as prepared as they usually are. Especially on the European side.

Potential trade targets could be:

21 and 33 from Ottawa

26 and 34 from SJ

24 and 42 from Minny

Post lottery of course.

 

[eco's bones]

I definitely don’t got great track of this draft and I am not sure I will be able to catch up, the U18 has always been a foundation for me.

But from my limited perspective I agree on this.

I would definitely be in favor of trading down if our pick is in the 11-15 range. Think there will be many gems available later on. Teams will not be as prepared as they usually are. Especially on the European side.

Potential trade targets could be:

21 and 33 from Ottawa

26 and 34 from SJ

24 and 42 from Minny

Post lottery of course.

Personally I'd hang on to the 14 (if that's our early pick) which pretty much kills a draft pick trade with Ottawa. To me quantity is not really a problem for us--we have quite a lot of prospects to sort through right now. We should go for quality as much as possible. I imagine at 14 there is going to be someone the Rangers really really want.

If are other pick was the 22 I'd be more open to moving it to San Jose---I just don't think San Jose would do that. San Jose needs to restart developing and the more prospects the better---they need quantity. As for Minnesota I would probably do that but I'd wait for the pick to come up on draft day to see who was left on board. If you've got two or three players there that's fine. Minnesota to move up two spots might hesitate about the 2nd though and do the the 24 and maybe a 3rd if they have one.

 

[Kakko Schmakko]

Personally I'd hang on to the 14 (if that's our early pick) which pretty much kills a draft pick trade with Ottawa. To me quantity is not really a problem for us--we have quite a lot of prospects to sort through right now. We should go for quality as much as possible. I imagine at 14 there is going to be someone the Rangers really really want.

If are other pick was the 22 I'd be more open to moving it to San Jose---I just don't think San Jose would do that. San Jose needs to restart developing and the more prospects the better---they need quantity. As for Minnesota I would probably do that but I'd wait for the pick to come up on draft day to see who was left on board. If you've got two or three players there that's fine. Minnesota to move up two spots might hesitate about the 2nd though and do the the 24 and maybe a 3rd if they have one.

there is a very good chance that at 14 there will be either undersized centers/lw, or Right wings or Dmen so we might need to trade up a little to get a center or LW with some decent size.

 

[bobbop]

Personally I'd hang on to the 14 (if that's our early pick) which pretty much kills a draft pick trade with Ottawa. To me quantity is not really a problem for us--we have quite a lot of prospects to sort through right now. We should go for quality as much as possible. I imagine at 14 there is going to be someone the Rangers really really want.

If are other pick was the 22 I'd be more open to moving it to San Jose---I just don't think San Jose would do that. San Jose needs to restart developing and the more prospects the better---they need quantity. As for Minnesota I would probably do that but I'd wait for the pick to come up on draft day to see who was left on board. If you've got two or three players there that's fine. Minnesota to move up two spots might hesitate about the 2nd though and do the the 24 and maybe a 3rd if they have one.

I think the second pick in the first round could be in play. With the order as currently constituted, Anaheim (#31 & 36) would be possible target. Not a lot of teams between 23-30 have draft capital to trade up.

Of course, this is all a strange exercise since the Rangers could be picking just about anywhere (1-3, 8-31) in the draft order.

 

[eco's bones]

I think the second pick in the first round could be in play. With the order as currently constituted, Anaheim (#31 & 36) would be possible target. Not a lot of teams between 23-30 have draft capital to trade up.

Of course, this is all a strange exercise since the Rangers could be picking just about anywhere (1-3, 8-31) in the draft order.

I would think so too. But the first one I think the Rangers would try to move up. The second one is either up or down. They might use up a 3rd to move up a couple spots for instance. If they were to use Georgiev I would expect them to move up several (as in at least 5--Georgiev gets the pick into a higher tier). That said I'm somewhat resistant to moving Alex--you still need a backup goalie capable of playing 30-35 games a year. Henrik may be okay for the rest of his contract but there's no way I'm resigning him and I don't think either Huska or Wall are ready. Adam's had two mediocre seasons in a row IMO.

I'd be shocked also if we were in the final four. That said the Rangers have a tiny fraction of a chance to pull off a Stanley Cup and win the lottery with Carolina's pick.

 

[eco's bones]

there is a very good chance that at 14 there will be either undersized centers/lw, or Right wings or Dmen so we might need to trade up a little to get a center or LW with some decent size.

I would guess these 6 players will be absolutely off the table and unless we win the lottery with our pick or Carolina's pick we won't be able to move up to get them. They are Alexis Lafreniere, Quinton Byfield, Tim Stutzle, Jamie Drysdale, Marco Rossi and Alexander Holtz. Holtz to me looks like the first guy in the third tier. I also expect Yaroslav Askarov to go before our pick. We could possibly move up to get a Raymond, Perfetti or Lundell (also third tier guys) but they will also be gone by 14 or 15 as will Jake Sanderson. That's 11 guys I expect before our 14/15 pick and that leaves us looking at guys like Quinn, Holloway, Amirov, Jarvis, Mercer, Khusnutdinov, Gunler and Zary if we stay where we are one of those players is likely to be our #14/15 pick IMO.

 

[Amazing Kreiderman]

there is a very good chance that at 14 there will be either undersized centers/lw, or Right wings or Dmen so we might need to trade up a little to get a center or LW with some decent size.

Size should never be the most important attribute of a player when drafting.

 

[eco's bones]

There's also the real possibility that some team or two goes a bit off board and players you wouldn't expect then drop. Sometimes though it's also been the Rangers who have done the off boarding like with both Andersson and Chytil but also Jessiman, McIlrath. The Rangers are not always an easy team to figure.

 

[Amazing Kreiderman]

There's also the real possibility that some team or two goes a bit off board and players you wouldn't expect then drop. Sometimes though it's also been the Rangers who have done the off boarding like with both Andersson and Chytil but also Jessiman, McIlrath. The Rangers are not always an easy team to figure.

Kotkaniemi, Hayton and Kravtsov in 2018 were off the board picks at those spots (Kotkaniemi was expected there but not ranked that high)

Soderstrom last year is another example

I wouldn't be surprised if a team goes for a defenseman once Drysdale and Sanderson are off the boards. I don't really see the top-15 baving just 2 D-men

 

[Ola]

Personally I'd hang on to the 14 (if that's our early pick) which pretty much kills a draft pick trade with Ottawa. To me quantity is not really a problem for us--we have quite a lot of prospects to sort through right now. We should go for quality as much as possible. I imagine at 14 there is going to be someone the Rangers really really want.

If are other pick was the 22 I'd be more open to moving it to San Jose---I just don't think San Jose would do that. San Jose needs to restart developing and the more prospects the better---they need quantity. As for Minnesota I would probably do that but I'd wait for the pick to come up on draft day to see who was left on board. If you've got two or three players there that's fine. Minnesota to move up two spots might hesitate about the 2nd though and do the the 24 and maybe a 3rd if they have one.

there is a very good chance that at 14 there will be either undersized centers/lw, or Right wings or Dmen so we might need to trade up a little to get a center or LW with some decent size.

Granted, I/we don't know who will be available or not, and I don't really know how good everyone that might be available or not are, but I break it down like this.

What would be a real jack-pot for us is if we can pick a steal with our top 1st that within 2-3 years really can come in and make a difference (nobody should be expected to do it from day 1). 2-3 years down the road is in it self a pretty long time-frame, but from a prospect development time POV very short. Normally it takes 4-5 years at least. So from that perspective, drafting for "need" is pretty long in it self.

However, if we don't think we can get a player type with this pick that really is unique, that will be very hard for us to find otherwise if not high up in a draft, and we can't pick a real "steal", then we are talking about a "depth pick" no matter what. Its easy to get carried away here, but a really good pick in that range is a JT Miller type. A not so good pick is border line NHLer/bust. That is how the odds play out. They apply to us too.

In this draft, I think there are some real high quality talent that very likely can be available later in the draft. I think there has been an undisputable trend the last handful of years were CHL prospects have been overrated early in the season and European prospects have had their stocks rise later on, with the U18s putting the dot on i. I am sure this has nothing to do with general bias but everything to do with exposure bias. The higher hiarchy guys scout the CHL and the lower hiarchy guys scout Europe. All scouts have a fairly good opinion on the players they rank early, but its obvious that the european scouts don't quite get herd before after the U18s when the higher hiarchy guys can see what they can see.

In this context I think our larger scouting organization with more resources function better than many others (of course not all). But it just shows in McKenzies rankings. Why did it take a U18 for someone like Kotkaniemi to jump up what 20 spots? I am sure everyone's Finnish scouts didn't change their opinion on him dramatically. Seems unlikely, right? It is just obvious that many organizations have a high turnover among European scouts from year to year and in the end they deploy someone they like but that they don't really trust. Then at the end of the year, they go and check what the fuzz was about and make up their minds. Somewhat. Give or take.

But we know that we don't operate like that. Gorton by all accounts made up his mind on both Nils Lundqvist and Vitaly Kravtsov early. We flag up and follow up on these kids from day 1.

Hence, I think we have every chance to come away with more or less 2 guys somewhat like Nils Lundqvist if we have two picks in late 1st/early 2nd.

In addition, I do think that there always is a risk with higher picks that is magnified if you end up outside one of these tier drop offs. And that risk is sooo magnified when you more or less disqualify a large group of prospects because you are in a tier in which you actively look for safe bets and players that are close to the NHL. There are soooo many examples of the best of the rest being so much better picks than the worst of the best, if that makes any sense. Like you create a group with mature highly talented and high performing prospects and sort them and get like a top 10 or top 15 or whatever. Then you run out of kids fitting that criteria, and starts to look at kids who isn't mature yet or doesn't have a complete game or that is still growing or that haven't performed great because of environment or whatever.

I just like our bet on two Nils Lundqvist type of picks better than trying to hit a homerun around 12-15. Or I do this at least if the above assumptions are correct.

 

[eco's bones]

Kotkaniemi, Hayton and Kravtsov in 2018 were off the board picks at those spots (Kotkaniemi was expected there but not ranked that high)

Soderstrom last year is another example

I wouldn't be surprised if a team goes for a defenseman once Drysdale and Sanderson are off the boards. I don't really see the top-15 baving just 2 D-men

Where we picked in 2018--when our pick actually came up I was 1. Dobson 2. Kravtsov 3. Wahlstrom. I'm kind of still there but keeping in mind we later took Miller and Lundkvist I think if we took Dobson we wouldn't have taken two more defensemen and IMO Lundkvist might end up better than Dobson.

If there are more than two D going before we pick that works to our favor. Personally I'd be happy with Holloway but I'd be even happier with Lundell. Amirov, Jarvis, Mercer all look like they'd be good too and perhaps Peterka with the later pick. Perhaps Gunler and Zary but I'm pretty much a layman and when you hear iffy things about guys I tend to get leery. It's a forward friendly draft and we could use forwards more than D. I would tend to go forwards throughout.

Anyway from the Rangers perspective--they tend towards Europeans and college bound prospects and I trust Bobrov's judgement a bit more than Clark's.

 

[Amazing Kreiderman]

Where we picked in 2018--when our pick actually came up I was 1. Dobson 2. Kravtsov 3. Wahlstrom. I'm kind of still there but keeping in mind we later took Miller and Lundkvist I think if we took Dobson we wouldn't have taken two more defensemen and IMO Lundkvist might end up better than Dobson.

If there are more than two D going before we pick that works to our favor. Personally I'd be happy with Holloway but I'd be even happier with Lundell. Amirov, Jarvis, Mercer all look like they'd be good too and perhaps Peterka with the later pick. Perhaps Gunler and Zary but I'm pretty much a layman and when you hear iffy things about guys I tend to get leery. It's a forward friendly draft and we could use forwards more than D. I would tend to go forwards throughout.

Anyway from the Rangers perspective--they tend towards Europeans and college bound prospects and I trust Bobrov's judgement a bit more than Clark's.

I feel the 3 areas they trust the most:

- College bound players
- EU based players
- WHL based players

With their high picks, I would bet good money they go with whoever fits one of these 3 categories. Lundell, Amirov, Zary, Jarvis, Holloway, Gunler, Hirvonen, Neighbours, Ghule, Schneider, Peterka, Nybeck... That's who they will look at probably.

 

[eco's bones]

Granted, I/we don't know who will be available or not, and I don't really know how good everyone that might be available or not are, but I break it down like this.

What would be a real jack-pot for us is if we can pick a steal with our top 1st that within 2-3 years really can come in and make a difference (nobody should be expected to do it from day 1). 2-3 years down the road is in it self a pretty long time-frame, but from a prospect development time POV very short. Normally it takes 4-5 years at least. So from that perspective, drafting for "need" is pretty long in it self.

However, if we don't think we can get a player type with this pick that really is unique, that will be very hard for us to find otherwise if not high up in a draft, and we can't pick a real "steal", then we are talking about a "depth pick" no matter what. Its easy to get carried away here, but a really good pick in that range is a JT Miller type. A not so good pick is border line NHLer/bust. That is how the odds play out. They apply to us too.

In this draft, I think there are some real high quality talent that very likely can be available later in the draft. I think there has been an undisputable trend the last handful of years were CHL prospects have been overrated early in the season and European prospects have had their stocks rise later on, with the U18s putting the dot on i. I am sure this has nothing to do with general bias but everything to do with exposure bias. The higher hiarchy guys scout the CHL and the lower hiarchy guys scout Europe. All scouts have a fairly good opinion on the players they rank early, but its obvious that the european scouts don't quite get herd before after the U18s when the higher hiarchy guys can see what they can see.

In this context I think our larger scouting organization with more resources function better than many others (of course not all). But it just shows in McKenzies rankings. Why did it take a U18 for someone like Kotkaniemi to jump up what 20 spots? I am sure everyone's Finnish scouts didn't change their opinion on him dramatically. Seems unlikely, right? It is just obvious that many organizations have a high turnover among European scouts from year to year and in the end they deploy someone they like but that they don't really trust. Then at the end of the year, they go and check what the fuzz was about and make up their minds. Somewhat. Give or take.

But we know that we don't operate like that. Gorton by all accounts made up his mind on both Nils Lundqvist and Vitaly Kravtsov early. We flag up and follow up on these kids from day 1.

Hence, I think we have every chance to come away with more or less 2 guys somewhat like Nils Lundqvist if we have two picks in late 1st/early 2nd.

In addition, I do think that there always is a risk with higher picks that is magnified if you end up outside one of these tier drop offs. And that risk is sooo magnified when you more or less disqualify a large group of prospects because you are in a tier in which you actively look for safe bets and players that are close to the NHL. There are soooo many examples of the best of the rest being so much better picks than the worst of the best, if that makes any sense. Like you create a group with mature highly talented and high performing prospects and sort them and get like a top 10 or top 15 or whatever. Then you run out of kids fitting that criteria, and starts to look at kids who isn't mature yet or doesn't have a complete game or that is still growing or that haven't performed great because of environment or whatever.

I just like our bet on two Nils Lundqvist type of picks better than trying to hit a homerun around 12-15. Or I do this at least if the above assumptions are correct.

The Rangers roster is pretty much an Europeanized forward group with a few Canadian and Americans--European goalies and an American friendly defense with two Canadians hanging on to their spots by their fingernails.

The Rangers don't really draft a lot of CHL players either. More Europeans and college bound players--some from the USNTDP. Other teams do things differently for sure. I wouldn't be surprised mind you if the Rangers take a couple WHL players in this draft but I think the Rangers trend is going to continue. It's something both Clark and Bobrov seem comfortable with. I could see us moving the 22 either down or up. If it's a third maybe two spots up or down--if it's an early second (which we don't have) maybe 4/5 spots down.

 

[eco's bones]

I feel the 3 areas they trust the most:

- College bound players
- EU based players
- WHL based players

With their high picks, I would bet good money they go with whoever fits one of these 3 categories. Lundell, Amirov, Zary, Jarvis, Holloway, Gunler, Hirvonen, Neighbours, Ghule, Schneider, Peterka, Nybeck... That's who they will look at probably.

I think you're right on all of that.

 

[Amazing Kreiderman]

The Rangers roster is pretty much an Europeanized forward group with a few Canadian and Americans--European goalies and an American friendly defense with two Canadians hanging on to their spots by their fingernails.

The Rangers don't really draft a lot of CHL players either. More Europeans and college bound players--some from the USNTDP. Other teams do things differently for sure. I wouldn't be surprised mind you if the Rangers take a couple WHL players in this draft but I think the Rangers trend is going to continue. It's something both Clark and Bobrov seem comfortable with. I could see us moving the 22 either down or up. If it's a third maybe two spots up or down--if it's an early second (which we don't have) maybe 4/5 spots down.

With draft scout Steve Konowalchuk, the New York Rangers venture West again - Forever Blueshirts: A site for New York Rangers fanatics

 

[Crease]

Size should never be the most important attribute of a player when drafting.

Whenever a player's draft report leads with "size" or "character", my spidey sense starts to tingle.

 

[Amazing Kreiderman]

Whenever a player's draft report leads with "size" or "character", my spidey sense starts to tingle.

Yeah. If "size" is the first thing people talk about, draft them late

 

[Mikos87]

At the pro level with the Rangers at the moment, the kids that are making it and playing well versus the ones that are not, are the ones that can handle intensity. It's why they like a guy like Sanderson. The other kids are super talented, and getting some insulated development times. Then you have the guys that are not ready or on the fringes.

There's a lot too choose from this year, but if they keep up with what I think they are building at the NHL level.

They are going to draft competitors that can skate well and think the game well. The skill level and how the draft slots out will determine upside, but I truly feel the Rangers have set of fundamental core values lined up with what they are looking for.

That or a trade or two.

 

[Mikos87]

With draft scout Steve Konowalchuk, the New York Rangers venture West again - Forever Blueshirts: A site for New York Rangers fanatics

Konowalchuk was a really smart hockey player in the day. One the guys that you would describe as an old school, technically refined third liner for the game as it was played in as era. Great article and content man. Good to see you putting things out there that we talked about over lunch.

Throw up that Patreon brother, I'll happily subscribe.

Superb content.

 

[Amazing Kreiderman]

Konowalchuk was a really smart hockey player in the day. One the guys that you would describe as an old school, technically refined third liner for the game as it was played in as era. Great article and content man. Good to see you putting things out there that we talked about over lunch.

Throw up that Patreon brother, I'll happily subscribe.

Superb content.

Yeah, we need to talk about that a bit more haha.

 

[Mikos87]

Yeah, we need to talk about that a bit more haha.

Haha fair enough, will do.