Prospect Info: 2021 NHL Draft: The Home Stretch, Draft July 23-24

[OgeeOgelthorpe]

Yeah, I don't disagree with everything they have. I have Hughes way higher than they do. But they watch and have access to more than I do, and have a pretty good track record. So I will listen to what they have to say.

I think Sillinger in particular will look really good in a few years, and people will try to say they were higher on him than they were. Kudos to people who plant their flag ahead of time. We will have to see if they are good or bad takes.

I tend to fall on the same side of things with Wallstedt vs Cossa. I definitely prefer Wallstedt. But just because Wallstedt looks better now, doesn't mean he will in 3-4 years. The projection part of it is really hard sometimes.

The argument that drives me crazy about Wallstedt now, and it's been touched on earlier in this thread, is the "He's good NOW but how much more can he grow?" idea. He was great as a rookie in the SHL and looked incredibly well-coached from his technical prowess but his athleticism was great as well. With the right goalie coach and growth and conditioning how could he NOT become better?

Anyway, there's also a new-ish scouching on Cole Sillinger from 6 days ago. I like the player and if we were picking in the teens I would consider him but I think that he's also a guy that could end up falling more than rising.



EDIT: And I like him way more than Chaz Lucius as a goalscoring C/W in this year's draft.

 

[AD1066]

Clarke has really grown on me. Feels like he could develop into an Adam Fox type player.

 

[Hen Kolland]

EDIT: And regarding some of the other rankings, I like Cole Sillinger but taking him in the top 5 would make a few other teams happy because that means someone else fell. If NJD took Sillinger then you're looking at Edvinsson maybe falling and CBJ snaps their eventual Werenski replacement up, etc.

Sure, but why would we care? I'm sure that the team taking Sillinger top 5 is more than happy to let other teams be happy as a result of landing a player they have in the top 5. If I really love Sillinger and view him as a top 5 guy and get him at 6, I don't care if teams 7 8 and 9 each get guys they view as top 5 guys because of how the dominos fall.

Frk It's point is relevant, much in the way that there is no true consensus, teams shouldn't give a damn what other teams behind them think when they are on the clock. It's the Seider thing all over again; Wings had Seider top 6, maybe higher. You can flirt with the idea of trading back, but what is more important, guaranteeing yourself a top 6 guy for you, or trading back in praying that nobody has a similar opinion of him as you just because the "value" seems off to the bloggers and columnists of the world? Stick to your list and trust the scouts unless someone is going to comically overpay for a narrow gap pick swap.

 

[Frk It]

The argument that drives me crazy about Wallstedt now, and it's been touched on earlier in this thread, is the "He's good NOW but how much more can he grow?" idea. He was great as a rookie in the SHL and looked incredibly well-coached from his technical prowess but his athleticism was great as well. With the right goalie coach and growth and conditioning how could he NOT become better?

Anyway, there's also a new-ish scouching on Cole Sillinger from 6 days ago. I like the player and if we were picking in the teens I would consider him but I think that he's also a guy that could end up falling more than rising.

That's fair. Even if I think Wallstedt doesn't have an Askarov/Knight upside, I don't have concerns about his upside. I like goalies that rely on positioning, and are calm and composed in net. I could see Wallstedt being a really good starting goalie for a long time.

I am also not sure he will go top 10 in this draft (given where we saw Knight and Askarov go)? But it's definitely possible we look back and say he should have.

 

[Frk It]

Sure, but why would we care? I'm sure that the team taking Sillinger top 5 is more than happy to let other teams be happy as a result of landing a player they have in the top 5. If I really love Sillinger and view him as a top 5 guy and get him at 6, I don't care if teams 7 8 and 9 each get guys they view as top 5 guys because of how the dominos fall.

Frk It's point is relevant, much in the way that there is no true consensus, teams shouldn't give a damn what other teams behind them think when they are on the clock. It's the Seider thing all over again; Wings had Seider top 6, maybe higher. You can flirt with the idea of trading back, but what is more important, guaranteeing yourself a top 6 guy for you, or trading back in praying that nobody has a similar opinion of him as you just because the "value" seems off to the bloggers and columnists of the world? Stick to your list and trust the scouts unless someone is going to comically overpay for a narrow gap pick swap.

and it's so weird to me when I read the comments from the NHL folks that Pronman spoke to on MacTavish:

“I think he’s a great player. I buy the offense and 200-foot game, but with his average skating, you’d like him to do more with the puck for a top-10 pick. How much different is he than Cole Sillinger, who you won’t have to pay as high a price for?”

If Sillinger is like Mactavish, and you think MacTavish is a great player... why are you sure Sillinger is going to go at a more reasonable price?

 

[OgeeOgelthorpe]

and it's so weird to me when I read the comments from the NHL folks that Pronman spoke to on MacTavish:

“I think he’s a great player. I buy the offense and 200-foot game, but with his average skating, you’d like him to do more with the puck for a top-10 pick. How much different is he than Cole Sillinger, who you won’t have to pay as high a price for?”

If Sillinger is like Mactavish, and you think MacTavish is a great player... why are you sure Sillinger is going to go at a more reasonable price?

Sillinger and McTavish are similar in that they both are average skaters, have great shots and aren't afraid of contact but I think that's where the similarities end.

McTavish is a guy that initiates the contact and I think we saw at the WJC18's that he can find his teammates much better on breakouts while having a really good awareness of what's happening on the ice. Sillinger plays more individualistic and was less engaged defensively. The scouching video highlights that pretty well. And while Sillinger isn't afraid of contact he's also not the one engaging it as often as McTavish.

 

[Hen Kolland]

(considered putting Sillinger at this spot recently, glad to see someone else agree)

Seems as if the Sillinger vs McTavish debate could be a heated one if you are a big time proponent of HP's work. Based on reading both write ups, it feels like it comes down to raw vs refined and how that influences projections. Especially if you think you can improve Cole's skating ability.

 

[OgeeOgelthorpe]

Seems as if the Sillinger vs McTavish debate could be a heated one if you are a big time proponent of HP's work. Based on reading both write ups, it feels like it comes down to raw vs refined and how that influences projections. Especially if you think you can improve Cole's skating ability.

If we're discussing goalscorers in the draft then Matthew Coronato should also be mentioned here. The kid absolutely lit up the USHL with 48 goals in 51 games. High IQ, great motor, great stick skills, ok skater. I think he's a dark horse to make it into the early teens as a pick which is where I think Cole Sillinger is ranked on most lists. What does HP's work say about him?

 

[jkutswings]

If we're discussing goalscorers in the draft then Matthew Coronato should also be mentioned here. The kid absolutely lit up the USHL with 48 goals in 51 games. High IQ, great motor, great stick skills, ok skater. I think he's a dark horse to make it into the early teens as a pick which is where I think Cole Sillinger is ranked on most lists. What does HP's work say about him?

Here are a couple of fairly recent articles suggesting Coronato to Chicago at 12 or Philly at 14 (not sure why the Flyers article lists him at 16, since they're drafting at "14", with the Arizona pick moving things up yet another notch):

Chicago Blackhawks NHL Draft Wishlist: Matthew Coronato

BSH 2021 Community Draft Board, No. 16: Matthew Coronato

 

[Frk It]

If we're discussing goalscorers in the draft then Matthew Coronato should also be mentioned here. The kid absolutely lit up the USHL with 48 goals in 51 games. High IQ, great motor, great stick skills, ok skater. I think he's a dark horse to make it into the early teens as a pick which is where I think Cole Sillinger is ranked on most lists. What does HP's work say about him?

Ive been saying this….

 

[OgeeOgelthorpe]

Ive been saying this….

Oh, I'm aware.

 

[Hen Kolland]

If we're discussing goalscorers in the draft then Matthew Coronato should also be mentioned here. The kid absolutely lit up the USHL with 48 goals in 51 games. High IQ, great motor, great stick skills, ok skater. I think he's a dark horse to make it into the early teens as a pick which is where I think Cole Sillinger is ranked on most lists. What does HP's work say about him?

I don't think he really fits the profile of either of the other two. That's more of what I was looking at is a wholistic profile, not just as goal scorers.

 

[Lil Sebastian Cossa]

I want Craig MacTavish over Mike Sillinger

 

[OgeeOgelthorpe]

I want Craig MacTavish over Mike Sillinger

I see what you did there.

 

[HisNoodliness]

Edvinsson a safe pick? He is probably with Johnson the least safe pick in the top 10....

Honestly I don't agree at all. While I think he has a lot of developing left to do, and is very uncertain to hit his very high ceiling, I think his skating, size and excellent gap make him damn near certain to be a second pairing defensive defenseman. He's already NHL ready at defending in transition IMO and I'd be surprised if he he can't develop everything he needs to be effective in his own end.

Now the risk with him, as far as I can tell, is if he can be something more than a less physical Erik Cernak. If he cleans up his passing and develops his O-zone game, he'll be a premier two way defenseman. I think Edvinsson is the second safest defenseman and third safest player altogether in the draft behind Power and Beniers. Hughes who needs a lot of work defensively and Clarke who's skating form may hold him back are both a lot more uncertain to stick in the top 4 for me.

 

[Gniwder]

I want Craig MacTavish over Mike Sillinger

I would take Mike Sillinger over Dale McTavish.

 

[Frk It]

Oh, I'm aware.

 

[Bench]

Don't see the issue, but OK. People are so conditioned into there being this "consensus" that doesn't actually exist.

Usually the rankings after 5ish are all pretty tightly bundled with the same class of player. I've never considered taking someone at #8 that was ranked #17 by a few sources a "reach" for example. Maybe not anticipated, but hardly a reach.

 

[MBH]

After perusing HockeyProspect's book and reading their take the key players who may or may not be available to us at 6...

• The big change is I'm more comfortable with Edvinsson at 6.
• Despite Hughes falling to 11, I'm still fine with him at 6.
• I'm fine with Kent Johnson @ 6 if Edvinsson or Hughes are gone.
• Not sold on Eklund for the Wings.
• Wallstedt falls a bit for me. I'm not sure I'm OK with either Wallstedt or Cossa. My belief in taking a goalie at 6 was a bit too frail to have the Wallstedt report come out right now.

So my draft board for that 6th overall pick now looks like:

1. Power - To be honest, I haven't even considered him because he won't be there.
2. Hughes - Like Byfield and Sanderson last year, I think people forget he's super, super young. He's even younger than those two were.
3. Edvinsson - The idea a fleet-footed 6'4 defenseman next to 6'5 Seider, or maybe on the other pairing, sounds too good.
4. Johnson - if he bombs, 3rd line winger. If he's great, maybe a 1C. f*** it. Go for gold. He's not young. In fact, he's among the older kids in the draft. But he's physically behind everyone. He's got room to improve everything a lot. A lot of these other prospects coming in at 6'1 200 are athletically already at or close to their peak.
5. Beniers - Larkin 2.0.
6. McTavish - Heavy center with a shot and grit. Opposite of Johnson, in that I wonder if he might be physically maxed out just beating up on weaker kids.

For me - I really don't want McTavish either.
I want someone from the top 5. I think Johson will be there.
Wallstedt was probably in the 3-6 range before this.

 

[Hen Kolland]

Narrator: "So in conclusion, MBH has not changed his opinion on anything and wants the centers and left D because they are centers and left D. Any winger should be inhumanely put down before the Wings even think about selecting them."

 

[MBH]

Seriously. Cossa over Wallstedt? Sillinger at 5 while Clarke is at 10 and Hughes is at 11?

Oof.

Well, if things shake out that way that makes it easier for us to draft any combination of...

Wallstedt/McTavish/Svechkov/Clarke at #6
Olausson/Pinelli/Rosen/Kisakov/Bolduc at #23(22)

People always say shit like that when somebody busts their ranking framework.

Last year, even though several publications put Sanderson over Drysdale, people barfed when HP did it.
And lo and behold, Sanderson was picked first anyway.

That's one reason I respect HP's final ranking.

 

[MBH]

Narrator: "So in conclusion, MBH has not changed his opinion on anything and wants the centers and left D because they are centers and left D. Any winger should be inhumanely put down before the Wings even think about selecting them."

No winger available to us at 6 is on a different level than the LD and Cs available to us.
If there was, I'd draft them.
But there aren't. Not that I can see.
Nothing in HP's Black Book makes me feel like I missing out by skipping Eklund or Clarke or Guenther.
Even with Eklund at #2 - he's a 5'10 winger with slightly above average skating.

And I have changed my opinion.
I didn't have Edvinsson this high.
And I also had Wallstedt higher.

 

[DInTheB]

Not a surprise but worth noting

 

[Hen Kolland]

No winger available to us at 6 is on a different level than the LD and Cs available to us.
If there was, I'd draft them.
But there aren't. Not that I can see.

And I have changed my opinion.
I didn't have Edvinsson this high.
And I also had Wallstedt higher.

I think Eklund deserves to be held on a level that makes him a candidate for Detroit. If you are going to knock him for being a likely winger, then you should also be knocking Johnson for being a likely winger. In my opinion, he is still a tier above the other forwards, possibly my top player in the draft.

And that's not to say that my opinion holds some amount of value...it doesn't, but I think there's quite a bit there that you are underselling. But then again, I do know how highly you value the position they are listed as, and I do understand the positional importance side of things.

 

[OgeeOgelthorpe]

People always say shit like that when somebody busts their ranking framework.

Last year, even though several publications put Sanderson over Drysdale, people barfed when HP did it.
And lo and behold, Sanderson was picked first anyway.

That's one reason I respect HP's final ranking.

It's not ranking busting. It's looking at the disparity in talent.

Drysdale vs. Sanderson was very close in terms of talent and I think will be for a long time in the NHL. Wallstedt vs. Cossa in a side-by-side comparison looks like there is a much more significant talent gap.