2023 NHL Entry Draft - Kraken Edition

[RainyCityHockey]

Well folks we're only a week out before the start of a new year and even though we're in a way different position than most though, I think it's time to start the conversation about the upcoming draft.

Given our play so far we don't have to look at the biggest names while hoping for more losses to improve our draft chances.
Unless the team completely folds it seems like we should be on the clock between the 15th and 25th selection and there are still a lot of interesting options available.

Right now, which is way too far out from the draft, it seems like quite a few defenseman should be available in that range which would fit our needs, prospect wise.
Though, to me, no matter what you're still taking the best player available no matter what position he plays.

Here are some interesting sites/mock drafts.

2024 NHL Mock Draft with Lottery Simulator | Tankathon

2024 NHL Mock Draft with lottery simulator to see where the top NHL prospects could be drafted. Order updated after every game. Some team needs are factored into each draft simulation result

www.tankathon.com

2024 NHL Mock Draft | 2024 NHL Draft | NHL Draft

2024 NHL Mock Draft and NHL Draft History. 2024 NHL Draft prospect videos, stats, and written profiles updated throughout the year.

www.mynhldraft.com

NHL Mock Draft 2023 | NHL Draft Rounds - Lines.com

Full round 2023 NHL mock draft projections, with trades and compensatory picks based on weekly team projections and college and amateur player rankings.

www.lines.com

Elite Prospects - NHL Draft Center

List and rankings of all top prospects eligible for the 2024 NHL Entry Draft

www.eliteprospects.com

NHL Draft Rankings: Horn's Top 32 for December

The 2023 NHL Draft is going to be full of talent and should produce a few stars. Here are my top 32 ranked players as of December 2022.

thehockeywriters.com

I personally would like for the Kraken to get their hands on Austrian right shot defenseman David Reinbacher but I think he'll probably gone before we're on the clock.
Another guy would be winger Koehn Zimmer from the Prince George Cougars of the WHL and he could be available when we're on the clock.

What are your thoughts about the 2023 entry draft and what players do you like?

Click to read more...

 

[majormajor]

This will be a fun thread when I get a chance to watch more of these mid to late round type of players. Currently I've only seen the top 5 or so.

1. My most preferred option is trading the pick for a young player that can give the team an immediate boost. The Kraken core is prime age now and we should want to complement that and help that window. The Kirby Dach acquisition (for a 13OA pick) is a good model. Not easy to pull off but that's what I'd try to do. Nils Lundqvist was another young player moved for a 1st. I like the idea of getting an all situations D-man.

2. Ds like Reinbacher, Gulyayev, or Simashev all have some appeal.

3. It's going to take years for these players to provide any value and we don't really know what the team will need 3+ years from now, so if the BPA isn't a D, that's fine, pick them.

 

[RainyCityHockey]

I strongly disagree with trading away first round picks or that this core actually having a window to compete/go for the cup.

To me the actual core is Beniers, Wright and whichever one of the other draft picks develops with a couple of McCann's, Burakovsky's and Bjorkstrand's springled in.

The rest of that core(Larsson, Oleksiak, Grubauer, Gourde etc.) are good complimentary players but nothing more and overall we have way too many of those to talk about this core "having a window", IMO.

Still, I'm curious to see how the season goes and at what position we'll draft next year.

 

[gstommylee]

We need dmen to improve our prospect pool there. Looking at the total picture of what we have in the organization + prospects , we are weak there. I feel just taking any position depending on who is BPA with 1OA just to do so is a mistake.

 

[majormajor]

I strongly disagree with trading away first round picks or that this core actually having a window to compete/go for the cup.

To me the actual core is Beniers, Wright and whichever one of the other draft picks develops with a couple of McCann's, Burakovsky's and Bjorkstrand's springled in.

The rest of that core(Larsson, Oleksiak, Grubauer, Gourde etc.) are good complimentary players but nothing more and overall we have way too many of those to talk about this core "having a window", IMO.

Still, I'm curious to see how the season goes and at what position we'll draft next year.

I know I don't have the more favored opinion here.

Looking at the biggest problems this team has - goaltending and basic defensive structure (encompassing PK), these are not the problems that are best solved with massive investments in UFA/trade or 1st round picks. These are the problems you solve with the right acquisitions (with some luck involved) and good coaching. Those problems potentially could be fixed in a year, if not earlier. You have to try and improve them soon.

Those issues aside, the Kraken pretty much roll over most teams right now. You can't stop the Kraken from scoring. And the West is wide open. I wouldn't say this is a "window" yet but you can turn it into one with a few moves and I think they should do that now.

In composite models (like you'll see from Evolving Wild or Dom L) the peak years are in that 23-31 age range. Peak scoring is closer to 22-28 but total contribution is 23-31, when players are better at defense and game management. By those measures, by the time Wright and this year's pick are 23+, then your McCann, Burakovsky, Bjorkstrand's etc... are going to be 31 or 32+. It doesn't line up. I think if you're really intent on building around Wright and say, Reinbacher, then you're probably going to need a rebuild in between now and then to get things to line up. That would be a waste. I think you probably have a better shot now with this group than you will get from Wright, etc...

 

[majormajor]

We need dmen to improve our prospect pool there. Looking at the total picture of what we have in the organization + prospects , we are weak there. I feel just taking any position depending on who is BPA with 1OA just to do so is a mistake.

If I read you correctly, you're saying we shouldn't go BPA because we need young D so badly.

One thing I'll point out is that the league is full of top 4 D taken in the second round or later. Josi, Fox, Montour, Slavin, Pesce, Andersson, etc...

You might do better to consistently pick second round D, or at least most years go D in the second, and then go BPA in the first.

 

[GrungeHockey]

BPA. Always BPA.

Now if you have 2 guys almost ranked equal I'd take the D man sure, but otherwise always BPA.

I'm not going to think about picks yet as it's way too early to tell where we will end up. A late round first is a lot harder to assess than a top 10.

and always draft a goalie somewhere in a later round. I firmly believe in that.

 

[majormajor]

BPA. Always BPA.

Now if you have 2 guys almost ranked equal I'd take the D man sure, but otherwise always BPA.

I'm not going to think about picks yet as it's way too early to tell where we will end up. A late round first is a lot harder to assess than a top 10.

and always draft a goalie somewhere in a later round. I firmly believe in that.

I agree except I don't believe in drafting goalies.

They're going to be erratic anyways. Just sign them.

 

[gstommylee]

BPA. Always BPA.

Now if you have 2 guys almost ranked equal I'd take the D man sure, but otherwise always BPA.

I'm not going to think about picks yet as it's way too early to tell where we will end up. A late round first is a lot harder to assess than a top 10.

and always draft a goalie somewhere in a later round. I firmly believe in that.

Have you seen how weak our pool is for Dmen. Once you get outside like the top 10 in the draft. it doesn't matter between BPA and need. Unless you are prefectly fine with only drafting wingers and centers and nothing else just cause its "BPA".

If I read you correctly, you're saying we shouldn't go BPA because we need young D so badly.

One thing I'll point out is that the league is full of top 4 D taken in the second round or later. Josi, Fox, Montour, Slavin, Pesce, Andersson, etc...

You might do better to consistently pick second round D, or at least most years go D in the second, and then go BPA in the first.

All the better Centers and wingers would be gone by the time we pick.

 

[GrungeHockey]

I agree except I don't believe in drafting goalies.

They're going to be erratic anyways. Just sign them.

You draft goalies late so you have many of them in your system. The rationale is that late round picks are a gamble anyway and very few make the NHL BUT goalies are weird and have strange and unusual and sometimes long development curves. Take Devon Levi for a recent example. Seventh rounder. Now considered a top prospect.

Have you seen how weak our pool is for Dmen. Once you get outside like the top 10 in the draft. it doesn't matter between BPA and need. Unless you are prefectly fine with only drafting wingers and centers and nothing else just cause its "BPA".



All the better Centers and wingers would be gone by the time we pick.

Prospect pools are never what they appear to be (or rarely) and you get free agents or make trades to fill holes if you have them. We end up with too many wingers we trade a prospect winger to a team with too many prospect D men. It's simple.

You just don't drop down your list for a position of need or you end up dropping down literally.

 

[majormajor]

All the better Centers and wingers would be gone by the time we pick.

If that's the case then the D will be BPA anyways, and then what are we debating here?

It's often the case that each team has a favorite guy that slips to them. Firkus might have been a mid 1st guy to them, we don't know.

 

[Irie]

I know I don't have the more favored opinion here.

Looking at the biggest problems this team has - goaltending and basic defensive structure (encompassing PK), these are not the problems that are best solved with massive investments in UFA/trade or 1st round picks. These are the problems you solve with the right acquisitions (with some luck involved) and good coaching. Those problems potentially could be fixed in a year, if not earlier. You have to try and improve them soon.

Those issues aside, the Kraken pretty much roll over most teams right now. You can't stop the Kraken from scoring. And the West is wide open. I wouldn't say this is a "window" yet but you can turn it into one with a few moves and I think they should do that now.

In composite models (like you'll see from Evolving Wild or Dom L) the peak years are in that 23-31 age range. Peak scoring is closer to 22-28 but total contribution is 23-31, when players are better at defense and game management. By those measures, by the time Wright and this year's pick are 23+, then your McCann, Burakovsky, Bjorkstrand's etc... are going to be 31 or 32+. It doesn't line up. I think if you're really intent on building around Wright and say, Reinbacher, then you're probably going to need a rebuild in between now and then to get things to line up. That would be a waste. I think you probably have a better shot now with this group than you will get from Wright, etc...

I don't look at the situation quite the same. That is, the current team having a shot at the cup, and then needing a rebuild to the try again with the following group... I think the current group is designed to be the character and mentor core to develop the eventual real core of this rebuild (build).

I just do not see this team as a contender, regardless of what their final record is.

This coaching staff gets this team to play playoff intensity hockey during the regular season and they come at opponents in waves and outwork other teams on most nights, but they are undisciplined. If Seattle gets a high enough seed, they might be able to outplay a lower seeded opponent, but I feel that as soon as they draw an opponent with superior talent and playoff experience that has another gear that they can kick their effort into, the effort advantage will be gone, and we are all going to learn a hard lesson on the importance of team building balance and the importance of coaching discipline.

I am not trying to be pessimistic, I think there is a lot to like with this team, but I still believe it will be the draft picks coming into the fold and slowly replacing the Eberles, the Schwartzes, and the Burakovskis that will lead this team to playoff success, and I believe that a coaching change will be necessary to see that next level.

 

[Irie]

Have you seen how weak our pool is for Dmen. Once you get outside like the top 10 in the draft. it doesn't matter between BPA and need. Unless you are prefectly fine with only drafting wingers and centers and nothing else just cause its "BPA".

I think in a typical draft, with good scouting, the concept of BPA should go far beyond the top ten. Most drafts I feel BPA should be a top priority through at least half of the second round.

In deep drafts, if you trust your scouting staff, you draft BPA through the third round before you allow positional consideration to over-rule your selection.

 

[Irie]

It's often the case that each team has a favorite guy that slips to them. Firkus might have been a mid 1st guy to them, we don't know.

He was sitting at 17 on my board

 

[The Marquis]

I voted D, but because I interpreted the title as what position should the Kraken focus on building their prospect pool. In that case, D all the way. As for first round, I would always take BPA. Would also with a high second as well. The rest, draft for what you lack if your BPA picks weren’t that.

 

[majormajor]

I don't look at the situation quite the same. That is, the current team having a shot at the cup, and then needing a rebuild to the try again with the following group... I think the current group is designed to be the character and mentor core to develop the eventual real core of this rebuild (build).

I just do not see this team as a contender, regardless of what their final record is.

This coaching staff gets this team to play playoff intensity hockey during the regular season and they come at opponents in waves and outwork other teams on most nights, but they are undisciplined. If Seattle gets a high enough seed, they might be able to outplay a lower seeded opponent, but I feel that as soon as they draw an opponent with superior talent and playoff experience that has another gear that they can kick their effort into, the effort advantage will be gone, and we are all going to learn a hard lesson on the importance of team building balance and the importance of coaching discipline.

I am not trying to be pessimistic, I think there is a lot to like with this team, but I still believe it will be the draft picks coming into the fold and slowly replacing the Eberles, the Schwartzes, and the Burakovskis that will lead this team to playoff success, and I believe that a coaching change will be necessary to see that next level.

Well I hope you're wrong. I suppose we'll probably find out what they look like in the playoffs.

I will just say that most of my favorite clubs have been patient build through the draft teams and it is far from fool proof. The failure rate is high. It is perhaps more of a gamble than just trying to win when you're already middle of the pack.

He was sitting at 17 on my board

I think I might also have had him there.

I just checked my June list and he was 22nd, and I know I bumped him up from there in July.

 

[Irie]

Well I hope you're wrong. I suppose we'll probably find out what they look like in the playoffs.

I will just say that most of my favorite clubs have been patient build through the draft teams and it is far from fool proof. The failure rate is high. It is perhaps more of a gamble than just trying to win when you're already middle of the pack.

I think it does take some luck, but looking back to the start of the cap era, most of the cup champions and all of the multiple cup winners had substantial losing seasons where they stockpiled high draft talent.

Penguins - 5 consecutive top 5 picks.
Tampa - 3 top 5 picks
Chicago - 3 top 5 picks, and then luck winning the Campbell and Hossa UFA sweepstakes and Keith breaking out to negate the Barker fiasco.
L.A. 3 top 5 picks and patiently stockpiling talent they were able to trade away for Richards and Carter
Colorado 4 top 5 picks (5, but one was parlayed into another)

A lot of teams draft for a bit. and then trade a lot of capital before they are contenders, falling shot and requiring a reset (see Buffalo the past 3 GM changes). You can't cheat the building process.

Teams like Nashville are victims of their own good coaching and success. Only one top 5 pick in their entire existence, (first year in the league), and just good enough to challenge as a bubble team, never bad enough to draft enough elite talent to put them over the hump.

And then some teams are just victims of poor management and/or bad drafting. (There are some really low IQ GMs in the hockey GM recycle program) - You can not overcome stupid GMing.

I think I might also have had him there.

I just checked my June list and he was 22nd, and I know I bumped him up from there in July.

Great minds...

 

[majormajor]

I think it does take some luck, but looking back to the start of the cap era, most of the cup champions and all of the multiple cup winners had substantial losing seasons where they stockpiled high draft talent.

Penguins - 5 consecutive top 5 picks.
Tampa - 3 top 5 picks
Chicago - 3 top 5 picks, and then luck winning the Campbell and Hossa UFA sweepstakes and Keith breaking out to negate the Barker fiasco.
L.A. 3 top 5 picks and patiently stockpiling talent they were able to trade away for Richards and Carter
Colorado 4 top 5 picks (5, but one was parlayed into another)

A lot of teams draft for a bit. and then trade a lot of capital before they are contenders, falling shot and requiring a reset (see Buffalo the past 3 GM changes). You can't cheat the building process.

Teams like Nashville are victims of their own good coaching and success. Only one top 5 pick in their entire existence, (first year in the league), and just good enough to challenge as a bubble team, never bad enough to draft enough elite talent to put them over the hump.

And then some teams are just victims of poor management and/or bad drafting. (There are some really low IQ GMs in the hockey GM recycle program) - You can not overcome stupid GMing.

How do you suggest we acquire 3-5 top 5 draft picks?

I think whether a GM is a genius for his draft choice or a fool is a bit random too. Even Stevie Y is guaranteed no success in Detroit.

Great minds...

On 32 thoughts podcast last week they used the phrase

"great minds think alike, and fools seldom differ".

Let's see what kind we look like after Firkus matures.

 

[gstommylee]

You draft goalies late so you have many of them in your system. The rationale is that late round picks are a gamble anyway and very few make the NHL BUT goalies are weird and have strange and unusual and sometimes long development curves. Take Devon Levi for a recent example. Seventh rounder. Now considered a top prospect.


Prospect pools are never what they appear to be (or rarely) and you get free agents or make trades to fill holes if you have them. We end up with too many wingers we trade a prospect winger to a team with too many prospect D men. It's simple.

You just don't drop down your list for a position of need or you end up dropping down literally.

Just considering the draft alone we only have 4 Dman prospects. Only one of those 4 is currently in the AHL the rest aren't old enough yet to be AHL eligible.

Overall by position (entry draft wise), we drafted 12 Forwards 4 Dmen 2 goalies.

 

[Irie]

How do you suggest we acquire 3-5 top 5 draft picks?

I think whether a GM is a genius for his draft choice or a fool is a bit random too. Even Stevie Y is guaranteed no success in Detroit.

You don't. That is the cost of ownership putting on onus on winning now. Another top three pick in this draft would likely have set this team up with a core to build around for a decade.

Now, you draft smart and hold your assets and don't trade away picks or prospects for shortterm gains until you are a legitimate cup contender and have already made the playoffs. (And if you want to have a sustainable window, you don't trade away assets until your farm can absorb the losses and stil provid the team with a steady flow of quality ELC replacement players to manage cap issues and fill holes left by UFA departures.

Trying to build a contender before being battle tested is impossible. No GM knows what they have until they have been through a playoff series or two to see their team's true colors.

On 32 thoughts podcast last week they used the phrase
"great minds think alike, and fools seldom differ".

Let's see what kind we look like after Firkus matures.

Do you believe many others had Firkus in their top 20? Some may call that a reach (which is yet to be seen), but I don't think anyone would call that ranking "popular opinion", which i think is what they were trying to convey.

We are the Firkus Free Thinkers my friend.

 

[majormajor]

You don't. That is the cost of ownership putting on onus on winning now. Another top three pick in this draft would likely have set this team up with a core to build around for a decade.

Now, you draft smart and hold your assets and don't trade away picks or prospects for shortterm gains until you are a legitimate cup contender and have already made the playoffs. (And if you want to have a sustainable window, you don't trade away assets until your farm can absorb the losses and stil provid the team with a steady flow of quality ELC replacement players to manage cap issues and fill holes left by UFA departures.

Trying to build a contender before being battle tested is impossible. No GM knows what they have until they have been through a playoff series or two to see their team's true colors.

Okay, well you know what my position will be this offseason if they win a playoff round or two and look decent at it.

Do you believe many others had Firkus in their top 20?

On HF, a lot. Elite prospects had him around #20 actually (can't find their list for some reason).

 

[RainyCityHockey]

I know I don't have the more favored opinion here.

Looking at the biggest problems this team has - goaltending and basic defensive structure (encompassing PK), these are not the problems that are best solved with massive investments in UFA/trade or 1st round picks. These are the problems you solve with the right acquisitions (with some luck involved) and good coaching. Those problems potentially could be fixed in a year, if not earlier. You have to try and improve them soon.

Those issues aside, the Kraken pretty much roll over most teams right now. You can't stop the Kraken from scoring. And the West is wide open. I wouldn't say this is a "window" yet but you can turn it into one with a few moves and I think they should do that now.

In composite models (like you'll see from Evolving Wild or Dom L) the peak years are in that 23-31 age range. Peak scoring is closer to 22-28 but total contribution is 23-31, when players are better at defense and game management. By those measures, by the time Wright and this year's pick are 23+, then your McCann, Burakovsky, Bjorkstrand's etc... are going to be 31 or 32+. It doesn't line up. I think if you're really intent on building around Wright and say, Reinbacher, then you're probably going to need a rebuild in between now and then to get things to line up. That would be a waste. I think you probably have a better shot now with this group than you will get from Wright, etc...

It's actually not about how "beloved" someone's opinion is and should never be.
You're certainly entitled to it(and made your point why you think that way) and I think we'll just have to agree to disagree on this one.

Another thing about your argument was a guy like Kirby Dach but that wasn't actually a team trading away their (only) first round pick.
It was the Canadiens sending Romanov to the Islanders and then using that pick to trade for Dach cause they didn't take a center at #1 and needed another younger guy at that position.

So if we were to aquire another first round pick and could, hypothetically, use that pick to bring in a younger defenseman(let's say a guy like Chychrun given his age and contract) then I wouldn't mind that.

Still, I don't think this core has a real window of achieving too much in the playoffs unless both Beniers and Wright turn into top notch guys within this and next year, while the other guys are still in a good spot age wise.
So I agree with @Irie that this core is more of a start for the Franchise and a collection of solid pros that is here to establish a culture and pass that on to the young guys who should then take over.

But like I've said, let's agree to disagree on this one as it is good to have different opinions.

Have you seen how weak our pool is for Dmen. Once you get outside like the top 10 in the draft. it doesn't matter between BPA and need. Unless you are prefectly fine with only drafting wingers and centers and nothing else just cause its "BPA".

All the better Centers and wingers would be gone by the time we pick.

This draft appears to be really deep and if you look at scoring wingers and where they were drafted you'll find a lot of them being still available in the 20's and later on.
For example DeBrincat was a 2nd rounder and a guy like Pastrnak was drafted 25th overall.

On top of that is that fact that you can never have too many centers and that quite a few of them turn into wingers(at the NHL level) anyways.

So I think you should still draft BPA(especially during your 3rd ever entry draft as an NHL franchise)) even if you draft somewhere between 20 - 30.

You don't. That is the cost of ownership putting on onus on winning now. Another top three pick in this draft would likely have set this team up with a core to build around for a decade.

Now, you draft smart and hold your assets and don't trade away picks or prospects for shortterm gains until you are a legitimate cup contender and have already made the playoffs. (And if you want to have a sustainable window, you don't trade away assets until your farm can absorb the losses and stil provid the team with a steady flow of quality ELC replacement players to manage cap issues and fill holes left by UFA departures.

Trying to build a contender before being battle tested is impossible. No GM knows what they have until they have been through a playoff series or two to see their team's true colors.

I think you can actually make an argument that this season's success might be too early given that you need more than just two top four picks in order to built a prospect pool which could than get you places as they become NHL players.

But success also isn't linear in the NHL and we could also have more trouble next season(goaltending is still not good enough and the pk's killing us) or even miss the playoffs if we keep on playing like most of our games during the last stretch where we lost six out of nine.

Also, I do think Francis and his scouting team have done a good job here(and back in Carolina) which is why I also think you 1) don't trade away your first round pick and 2) we could have a good draft even with a pick between 15 - 25.

 

[Kevinsane]

It's actually not about how "beloved" someone's opinion is and should never be.
You're certainly entitled to it(and made your point why you think that way) and I think we'll just have to agree to disagree on this one.

Another thing about your argument was a guy like Kirby Dach but that wasn't actually a team trading away their (only) first round pick.
It was the Canadiens sending Romanov to the Islanders and then using that pick to trade for Dach cause they didn't take a center at #1 and needed another younger guy at that position.

So if we were to aquire another first round pick and could, hypothetically, use that pick to bring in a younger defenseman(let's say a guy like Chychrun given his age and contract) then I wouldn't mind that.

Still, I don't think this core has a real window of achieving too much in the playoffs unless both Beniers and Wright turn into top notch guys within this and next year, while the other guys are still in a good spot age wise.
So I agree with @Irie that this core is more of a start for the Franchise and a collection of solid pros that is here to establish a culture and pass that on to the young guys who should then take over.

But like I've said, let's agree to disagree on this one as it is good to have different opinions.



This draft appears to be really deep and if you look at scoring wingers and where they were drafted you'll find a lot of them being still available in the 20's and later on.
For example DeBrincat was a 2nd rounder and a guy like Pastrnak was drafted 25th overall.

On top of that is that fact that you can never have too many centers and that quite a few of them turn into wingers(at the NHL level) anyways.

So I think you should still draft BPA(especially during your 3rd ever entry draft as an NHL franchise)) even if you draft somewhere between 20 - 30.



I think you can actually make an argument that this season's success might be too early given that you need more than just two top four picks in order to built a prospect pool which could than get you places as they become NHL players.

But success also isn't linear in the NHL and we could also have more trouble next season(goaltending is still not good enough and the pk's killing us) or even miss the playoffs if we keep on playing like most of our games during the last stretch where we lost six out of nine.

Also, I do think Francis and his scouting team have done a good job here(and back in Carolina) which is why I also think you 1) don't trade away your first round pick and 2) we could have a good draft even with a pick between 15 - 25.

Agreed. A second year team should NEVER be thinking about trading away a first round pick.

If anything, players with ascending value should be moved to accumulate picks. If Gourde or even McCann can fetch a first and more in a deep draft you do that in a heartbeat. The Kraken’s window is not this year and the next. A step back for a massive leap forward with cap space and great young players on ELC’s is the way to go IMO.

 

[GrungeHockey]

Just considering the draft alone we only have 4 Dman prospects. Only one of those 4 is currently in the AHL the rest aren't old enough yet to be AHL eligible.

Overall by position (entry draft wise), we drafted 12 Forwards 4 Dmen 2 goalies.

We've only had 2 drafts so what did you expect?

 

[RayMartyniukTotems]

If M Gulyayev miraculously falls to the Kraken I'd pounce.!He's going to be special. If not then C Stramel,G Perreault or EGauthier. In the 2nd round if the Kraken don't take a D-man I'd be taking 2 out of the 3 picks on Defense with maybe a goaltender thrown into the mix