Prospect Info: 2021 NHL Entry Draft

[Gwyddbwyll]

I think we should drop down from the Columbus pick and grab more picks. Lol. Who’s with me????

From an asset management perspective, it makes total sense. The more top 100 picks we can get, the better, especially in this year where rankings will be all over the place. Finding both Jenik + Maccelli instead of picking a LeNeveu or Gistedt with an early 2nd is appealing.

I'm sure there will be prospects / fallers that people will want desperately to pick at the CBS slot though :/ for example Ty Boucher

 

[XX]

I think we should drop down from the Columbus pick and grab more picks. Lol. Who’s with me????

I would do this every draft on principle outside the top tier but BA seems like the type to go with 'his guy'. Just doesn't seem like the wheeling dealing type who'd risk it.

 

[Jakey53]

I think we should drop down from the Columbus pick and grab more picks. Lol. Who’s with me????

I would rather try to move up from that pick. I would love to see us somehow get a mid first round pick this year, not swing for the fences type pick especially this year. There might be a really good player that drops a few spots that BA has ranked much higher.

 

[rt]

I wouldn’t mind picking a couple from Bux’s list, for sure.

2-CBJ-Tyler Boucher(W)
2-ARI-Roman Schmidt(RD)
4-ARI-Jayden Grubbe(C)
4-PIT-Connor Punnett(LD)

 

[BUX7PHX]

The GM builds the roster. Look at the last three rosters. It’s not a mystery.

But you are dicounting that we had Rinaldo and Schenn on roster prior. I don't think we purposefully decided to go that route, as we tried to sign Maroon in the past, as an example. FA doesn't always work out perfectly.

As far as drafting goes, I'd like to thonk Bahl, Entwistle, or Schnarr were the types that would step in for physicality. Maybe I am 100% wrong on that. My personal logic is let's say every year, one of our 5th-7th round picks becomes an NHL caliber player. Well, if those picks are grit guys, they probably wind up as bottom 6 role players, which is all well and good. If we move them at deadline, are we getting a high return? Probably not - we probably get a 3rd or 4th round pick. Let's say each of those picks turns into a Garland clone. The return that we get at the deadline is likely far greater than that of what we get for the grinder types.

I think you may have a misconception about the process for the roster. I think the key was always to put a little less on the physicality side, because the lack of skill means that any future ROI for the pick is quite limited. Instead, try and find skill that hopefully transcends the value of the pick. The grit and physical guys are available in FA instead, as the likelihood is that we will find immediate help through FA in that regard. Someone who can immediately step in and fill that void is going to be found in the top 10-15 picks, with the skill/grit combo. The rest of the draft will have guys who have a long road to get to the NHL. When skill and grit can be married perfectly, that is ideal, however, there are probably only a handful each year that can fall into the top 80 picks. The select few occur in the early 1st. Then, you have the "pick your poison" scenario which I referred to earlier. Either take someone 15-30 picks early, and hope you are right, or stay safe and maybe that player falls to you at the next pick in the proper range. If they are picked early by a different team, you probably avoided a losing lottery ticket, as opposed to bypassing a winning one.

In other words, draft for the long term skill set, and not for the short term "protector" types, as those are less likely to pan out. Once that skill is shown in the NHL, it is easier for the protectors to sign with teams like Tampa, Vegas, or others, because they are protecting sure-fire playoff teams. Let FA dictate who you can get as yhe grit guys, and unfortunately, our issue was striking out with regard to some of the grit additions, as opposed to sitting out altogether.

 

[rt]

But you are dicounting that we had Rinaldo and Schenn on roster prior. I don't think we purposefully decided to go that route, as we tried to sign Maroon in the past, as an example. FA doesn't always work out perfectly.

As far as drafting goes, I'd like to thonk Bahl, Entwistle, or Schnarr were the types that would step in for physicality. Maybe I am 100% wrong on that. My personal logic is let's say every year, one of our 5th-7th round picks becomes an NHL caliber player. Well, if those picks are grit guys, they probably wind up as bottom 6 role players, which is all well and good. If we move them at deadline, are we getting a high return? Probably not - we probably get a 3rd or 4th round pick. Let's say each of those picks turns into a Garland clone. The return that we get at the deadline is likely far greater than that of what we get for the grinder types.

I think you may have a misconception about the process for the roster. I think the key was always to put a little less on the physicality side, because the lack of skill means that any future ROI for the pick is quite limited. Instead, try and find skill that hopefully transcends the value of the pick. The grit and physical guys are available in FA instead, as the likelihood is that we will find immediate help through FA in that regard. Someone who can immediately step in and fill that void is going to be found in the top 10-15 picks, with the skill/grit combo. The rest of the draft will have guys who have a long road to get to the NHL.

In other words, draft for the long term skill set, and not for the short term "protector" types, as those are less likely to pan out. Once that skill is shown in the NHL, it is easier for the protectors to sign with teams like Tampa, Vegas, or others, because they are protecting sure-fire playoff teams. Let FA dictate who you can get as yhe grit guys, and unfortunately, our issue was striking out with regard to some of the grit additions, as opposed to sitting out altogether.

You don’t get Comtois, Wilson, the Tkachuks, Perry, Getzlaf, Brown, Simmonds, or usually even Bennetts Lauzons, etc via UFA in their primes.

You’re taking about strictly bottom pair, fourth line in UFA. Even decent 3rd liners or 2nd pairs that bring this element are so valuable that you almost never get them as a prime ufa.

Regarding your general point, it’s a lot of noise, honestly. Chayka’s rosters were two things the whole time 1) dog shit bad & 2) baby poop soft. That’s is legacy. Excrement. Glad you love the smell. You’re the only one on earth.

 

[BUX7PHX]

You don’t get Comtois, Wilson, the Tkachuks, Perry, Getzlaf, Brown, Simmonds, or usually even Bennetts Lauzons, etc via UFA in their primes.

You’re taking about strictly bottom pair, fourth line in UFA. Even decent 3rd liners or 2nd pairs that bring this element are so valuable that you almost never get them as a prime ufa.

Regarding your general point, it’s a lot of noise, honestly. Chayka’s rosters were two things the whole time 1) dog shit bad & 2) baby poop soft. That’s is legacy. Excrement. Glad you love the smell. You’re the only one on earth.

You are kind of making the point for me with the names provided. Each one of those was picked in the top 80. VERY hard to marry that skill set with grit. Find me those players in the 4th round and beyond. For every one of those guys selected, it is probably 2-3 years between drafts that you find those types who perfectly balance that out. Jason Robertson of the Stars is 6'3" and 210 lbs., but I don't recall him as being the physical presence so much as the type who is better with puck on stick and passing. Not everyone is built to just be able to muck it up around the crease, even when picked higher up.

So the logical conclusion would be that the only way we can guarantee finding that type of player over and over is to have at least 5 or 6 picks in the top 80 or so, so that you can take a chance on that type of player, assuming that the player hasn't already been selected.

The greater likelihood is that you have a bunch of skill players, and 1 or 2 grit guys who don't have that skill set. Get the skill players, and then find the grit in FA. If you happen to find that perfect mix of player, you have to be in that perfect draft spot to get them, but there is no guarantee the 2nd round is ripe with those types, let alone the 1st round being ripe with them, either. If you consistently miss on those picks, you won't be long as a GM either, because your 1st, 2nd and 3rd round picks rarely meet expected value.

Again, having a soft roster was not a result of not trying for those types. Maroon didn't sign, even though we offered him more money than St. Louis did. Trying and failing is still failing, but not trying to do something is worse. I think you are conflating the concept that nothing was done, when in reality, attempts were made, but the money or situation wasn't right for it. Big difference.

 

[rt]

You are kind of making the point for me with the names provided. Each one of those was picked in the top 80. VERY hard to marry that skill set with grit. Find me those players in the 4th round and beyond. For every one of those guys selected, it is probably 2-3 years between drafts that you find those types who perfectly balance that out. Jason Robertson of the Stars is 6'3" and 210 lbs., but I don't recall him as being the physical presence so much as the type who is better with puck on stick and passing. Not everyone is built to just be able to muck it up around the crease, even when picked higher up.

So the logical conclusion would be that the only way we can guarantee finding that type of player over and over is to have at least 5 or 6 picks in the top 80 or so, so that you can take a chance on that type of player, assuming that the player hasn't already been selected.

The greater likelihood is that you have a bunch of skill players, and 1 or 2 grit guys who don't have that skill set. Get the skill players, and then find the grit in FA. If you happen to find that perfect mix of player, you have to be in that perfect draft spot to get them, but there is no guarantee the 2nd round is ripe with those types, let alone the 1st round being ripe with them, either. If you consistently miss on those picks, you won't be long as a GM either, because your 1st, 2nd and 3rd round picks rarely meet expected value.

Again, having a soft roster was not a result of not trying for those types. Maroon didn't sign, even though we offered him more money than St. Louis did. Trying and failing is still failing, but not trying to do something is worse. I think you are conflating the concept that nothing was done, when in reality, attempts were made, but the money or situation wasn't right for it. Big difference.

I think they’re more likely to be there later now than before because the culture of the game has changed. But I don’t think it means that it’s evolved past their usefulness. In fact, their rareness makes them more effective and more valuable. Yet I still see them as under appreciated on draft day.

 

[tucknroll]

Rather use the first 3-4 rounds of the draft to aim for the players like Point, Kucherov, both Robertsons, Debrincat, Guentzel, Letang, Fox.. etc (only used examples outside of first round, If i used first round it would be too easy). Much easier to see a player that is skilled enough for the NHL, has the ability to think at a higher level and hopefully work ethic is there too. It's difficult to project the actual potential of a player that is less skilled, doesn't think the game as fast but uses his more developed body to dominate smaller guys. Occasionally you get players like the Tkachuk's that are a mix of it all but it's not common. I'd rather trade for players who have already shown what they can do in the NHL or at least have had more success at the junior level and have a more predictable idea of their potential. Physical players are traded more frequently than star offensive players too. Lucic, Simmonds, Lemieux, Oleksiak, Zadorov, Gudas, Clutterbuck, Reaves, Both Foligno's even Bennett, Domi, Bogosian, Anderson, Ritchie, Maroon.. these are just the more noteworthy ones and all were traded at least once before the age of 27 I believe.. and when they were traded it often wasn't too expensive either, at least when compared to what a star player would cost.

 

[BUX7PHX]

I think they’re more likely to be there later now than before because the culture of the game has changed. But I don’t think it means that it’s evolved past their usefulness. In fact, their rareness makes them more effective and more valuable. Yet I still see them as under appreciated on draft day.

I think that is a fair statement. As you point out, their rareness makes them more valuable. So, we often find that while it would be nice to not have to reach for these types, because they are rare, we would almost have to.

Take Simmonds. He was the 61st overall pick in 2007. We had the 32nd and 36th pick that year. So, the only way for us to get him would have been to take him 25 picks earlier than he went.

Unless we have an amazing scouting department that rarely misses, and every scout believes Simmonds is closer to #30-40, we find ourselves having to take that risk.

I am not disagreeing that these types of players are helpful and what the Coyotes ultimately need. I think that the reality is that these types are much harder to come by, and to take that risk of finding them requires something like three 2nd round picks to use. Not often that teams have multiple 2nd round picks, but the way to accrue those is to get skill players that you then sell off to other teams.

I looked back through a lot of drafts between 2005 and now, and there jist aren't that many players who have long NHL careers with the mix of skill, park in the crease, and/or defend your teammates. You can get parts of that, but all 3 are hard to come by. When we failed to get Maroon, who covers all 3, we trade for Soderberg, who at least will park himself in front every so often, and has some skill. Not a fighter, though, so you take what you can get.

 

[rt]

I think that is a fair statement. As you point out, their rareness makes them more valuable. So, we often find that while it would be nice to not have to reach for these types, because they are rare, we would almost have to.

Take Simmonds. He was the 61st overall pick in 2007. We had the 32nd and 36th pick that year. So, the only way for us to get him would have been to take him 25 picks earlier than he went.

Unless we have an amazing scouting department that rarely misses, and every scout believes Simmonds is closer to #30-40, we find ourselves having to take that risk.

I am not disagreeing that these types of players are helpful and what the Coyotes ultimately need. I think that the reality is that these types are much harder to come by, and to take that risk of finding them requires something like three 2nd round picks to use. Not often that teams have multiple 2nd round picks, but the way to accrue those is to get skill players that you then sell off to other teams.

I looked back through a lot of drafts between 2005 and now, and there jist aren't that many players who have long NHL careers with the mix of skill, park in the crease, and/or defend your teammates. You can get parts of that, but all 3 are hard to come by. When we failed to get Maroon, who covers all 3, we trade for Soderberg, who at least will park himself in front every so often, and has some skill. Not a fighter, though, so you take what you can get.

It happens all the time. Chinakov. Nikishin. Heineman. That’s just last year. This year there will be WTF head scratchers every five selections. (Talking about anti-consensus picks, not playing style, here)

 

[BUX7PHX]

It happens all the time. Chinakov. Nikishin. Heineman. That’s just last year. This year there will be WTF head scratchers every five selections. (Talking about anti-consensus picks, not playing style, here)

Sure. Anti-consensus picks occur. I would say that anti-consensus picks happen way more often than finding the perfect player of skill and grit with prolonged NHL careers.

Give me the skill players throughout, because if you hit one or more of those, you can trade for the picks or player types that you are looking for far more easily.

 

[rt]

Sure. Anti-consensus picks occur. I would say that anti-consensus picks happen way more often than finding the perfect player of skill and grit with prolonged NHL careers.

Give me the skill players throughout, because if you hit one or more of those, you can trade for the picks or player types that you are looking for far more easily.

Regardless of league, as I’m getting older and grumpier and more stubborn, I really just want to see a few things from forward (ideally center) prospects, these days:

1) do they work hard to generate turnovers, are they a hound? [Y/N]

2) do they look to dump at the blueline or drop pass back into the neutral zone or do they skate the puck into the offensive zone with possession? [Y/N]

3) do they stick to the perimeter when they gain the zone, or are they inside players that put their shoulder down, and take the puck directly to the net? [Y/N]

Basically I want to see guys who at the very least, just as a cost of entry, generate Takeaways, are top Controlled Zone Entry producers, and top generators of Shots and High Danger Chances.

If I can get 3 Yesses on the above, then you can talk to me about their skating, vision, IQ, size, strength, hands and shot. Rank them based on those qualities from there.

But I need at least one guy on every line in my system from the NHL to the ECHL that can do those three bare minimum things consistently and effectively. And that’s never going to change. In my eyes that’s a constant.

I'd add a 4th, now; "4) Does he consistently and assertively, and enthusiastically respond to physical challenges from the opposition?"

Basically I want to see guys who at the very least, just as a cost of entry, generate Takeaways, are top Controlled Zone Entry producers, and top generators of Shots and High Danger Chances, and play the game with BALLS.

That's the team I want to build. One with at least one of those guys on every line (with varying levels of skill). If I'm drafting a forward, I'm only drafting forwards that fit that criteria. Everything else is negotiable.

 

[rt]

New McKenzie Poll is out:
Owen Power the unanimous No. 1 in TSN’s mid-season draft rankings - TSN.ca

L’Heureux down to 27 (list compiled prior to 4th suspension and could drop more). Simon Robertsson (28) and Saha Pastujov (29) right behind. These are three of my favorite names in the 1st. All right in “Darcy Kuemper Zone” for us.

Nervous to see Ty Boucher all the way up to 40. Want that kid with the CBJ pick. Will throw a temper tantrum if we don’t get him.

Interesting to see Josh Doan all the way up to 80. Plandowski’s kid is right behind him at 81 (smooth, smart, defensive D) and Stillman’s kid is 49 (rambunctious winger with some skill). Riley Stillman isn’t a great prospect but he’s certainly translated that tough, hard hitting game to the NHL. Chase seems to bring an element of that but with more of the old man’s skill. Could be a good target with our own 2nd.

 

[The Feckless Puck]

Interesting to see Josh Doan all the way up to 80. Plandowski’s kid is right behind him at 81 (smooth, smart, defensive D) and Stillman’s kid is 49 (rambunctious winger with some skill). Riley Stillman isn’t a great prospect but he’s certainly translated that tough, hard hitting game to the NHL. Chase seems to bring an element of that but with more of the old man’s skill. Could be a good target with our own 2nd.

I really hope we don't draft Plandowski's and Stillman's kids just because their dads work for us. Then again, I hope we draft Josh Doan because he's a Doan, so I'm definitely talking out of both sides here.

 

[rt]

I really hope we don't draft Plandowski's and Stillman's kids just because their dads work for us. Then again, I hope we draft Josh Doan because he's a Doan, so I'm definitely talking out of both sides here.

I wouldn’t REACH for them. But if they’re in expected range, why not?

 

[Gwyddbwyll]

Nervous to see Ty Boucher all the way up to 40. Want that kid with the CBJ pick. Will throw a temper tantrum if we don’t get him.

Risers rise. From past experience, he's likely not going to be there. Early to mid 2nd rounders with increasing hype usually end up a late 1st rounder. Someone will trade up to take him if he doesnt get picked. His skill-set / reputation isnt one that's likely to diminish in the next 2 months in the same way a skill player can tail off (eg/ playoff no-show, injuries or competitiveness concerns)

 

[rt]

Are the U18s not on in the states this year?!?!?

 

[hbk]

Tuesday. Canada vs Sweden on TSN1. 10-15 first rounders in this draft set to play. Best player likely a kid not eligible until 2023 who cant even legally drive yet.

 

[TheLegend]

Tuesday. Canada vs Sweden on TSN1. 10-15 first rounders in this draft set to play. Best player likely a kid not eligible until 2023 who cant even legally drive yet.

you talking about this kid?

 

[hbk]

you talking about this kid?

Absolutely

 

[RemoAZ]

Tuesday. Canada vs Sweden on TSN1. 10-15 first rounders in this draft set to play. Best player likely a kid not eligible until 2023 who cant even legally drive yet.

We should be starting another rebuild by 2023 so we'll have a chance to be disappointed that we're drafting third. Can't wait!

 

[rt]

We should be starting another rebuild by 2023 so we'll have a chance to be disappointed that we're drafting third. Can't wait!

I’m ready for Shane Wright next draft!

 

[RemoAZ]

Help us Bill Armstrong. You're our only hope.

 

[lanky]

Help us Bill Armstrong. You're our only hope.

I'm excited for the day when Bill earns an Obi Wan Kanobi photoshop.