Pre-Game Talk: 2024 Draft Thread

[Blueston]

I have only seen one ranking that had Freij as a very late 1st rounder. Most have him anywhere from mid 2nd to early 3rd. I just think taking him at 16 would be a massive reach but very real possibility with our early 2nd.

think back to last year. nobody had willander as more than late 1st. lindstein was thought to be 2nd. after u18 @PerryTurnbullfan and i and some others were shouting from hilltops on them. i expect you are going to see freij, emery, and brunicke start showing up on lots of folks' 1st round projections going forward. each of these 3 really helped themselves at u18. it's such a great showcase for d, because top teams will expose you if you have key flaws, but if you can show that you can step up and even impose your will over course of event, scouts take notice.

 

[Blanick]

think back to last year. nobody had willander as more than late 1st. lindstein was thought to be 2nd. after u18 @PerryTurnbullfan and i and some others were both shouting from hilltops on them. i expect you are going to see freij, emery, and brunicke start showing up on lots of folks 1st round projections going forward. each of these 3 really helped themselves at u18. it's such a great showcase for d, because top teams will expose you if you have key flaws, but if you can show that you can step up and even improve your will over course of event, scouts take notice.

Fair enough. That being said the more research I do the more I think the Blues extra picks in 2nd and 3rd could really help restock the cupboard on defense. Yes the projected high end talent on D will likely be gone by 16 but I see a bundle of defenseman projected between the 20s all the way to late 3rds that could be NHL talent. I really hope the Blues go defense heavy these first 3 rounds, maybe we hit a homerun.

 

[AyeBah]

think back to last year. nobody had willander as more than late 1st. lindstein was thought to be 2nd. after u18 @PerryTurnbullfan and i and some others were both shouting from hilltops on them. i expect you are going to see freij, emery, and brunicke start showing up on lots of folks 1st round projections going forward. each of these 3 really helped themselves at u18. it's such a great showcase for d, because top teams will expose you if you have key flaws, but if you can show that you can step up and even improve your will over course of event, scouts take notice.

I agree with this. Will Scouch (small scale scouting guy but has decent prospect coverage overall even if he tends to overvalue small skill guys) has been pounding the table for Freij all year and has him as the top D in the class at 5th in his rankings. Not saying that's an end all be all data point but I think people will start to trend warmer on him after U18s. Might be too risky to sit at 48 and assume he's there.

 

[kimzey59]

Fair enough. That being said the more research I do the more I think the Blues extra picks in 2nd and 3rd could really help restock the cupboard on defense. Yes the projected high end talent on D will likely be gone by 16 but I see a bundle of defenseman projected between the 20s all the way to late 3rds that could be NHL talent. I really hope the Blues go defense heavy these first 3 rounds, maybe we hit a homerun.

IMO the "homerun" pick this year might be another 3/4 rounder like Parayko was (thinking specifically about Gabriel Eliasson).

 

[STL fan in MN]

I have only seen one ranking that had Freij as a very late 1st rounder. Most have him anywhere from mid 2nd to early 3rd. I just think taking him at 16 would be a massive reach but very real possibility with our early 2nd.

And Ferrari has him at 8. Dobber at 18, Smaht at 19, McKeen’s at 21.

There is virtually no consensus with this draft. Opinions are all over the place so who can really say who is a reach? If you like the player, pick him IMO. This draft in particular, I think it’s going to be hard to accurately guess where certain guys will go.

 

[STL fan in MN]

Well this isn’t good for the Blues…

Bob McKenzie was asked why he did a top-15 list and not a top-16 and this was his answer:

I’ve been asked this question a few times so here’s a long-winded, more-info-than-anyone-wants-or-needs answer to why our latest rankings are a Top 15, not 16 (as 16 is the number of teams in tonight’s draft lottery).

Although, it is worth pointing out the winner(s) of the two lottery draws tonight (for Nos. 1 and 2) can only move up 10 slots, so only a team in the Top 11 (odds) can get to No. 1 and only a team in the Top 12 can get to No. 2.

Nevertheless…

Last year (2023) I asked our panel of scouts for their Top 10 prospects and a couple of honourable mentions. Going into the exercise, I was thinking we would probably go with a Top 12 (for the teams that could win the Nos. 1 or 2 picks). I figured asking for 10 names (and two honourable mentions to help with tiebreakers etc) would easily give me a solid ranking of a dozen prospects. And that’s what we did.

This year (2024), I asked our panel of scouts for their Top 12 as I was inclined to probably go with just 12 names again, but if the polling results justified it, I was fully prepared to expand it to any number up to and including 16.

I was quite surprised by the results. Shocked actually.

In a draft where, pick by individual pick in the Top 12, there is very little consensus (a wide array of prospects got consideration at virtually every pick outside of Nos. 1 and 2; see the story attached to the rankings), there is (at this moment in time) an almost unbelievable level of consensus on who are viewed by our scouting panel as the top 15 prospects in this draft.

That is, only 17 prospects showed up in our Top 12 polling and — here’s the kicker — two of those 17 only got mentioned one time apiece. The other 15 were mentioned four or more times and seven of them were on all 10 (Top 12) ballots.

So, basically, the collective scouting support for players as a Top 12 prospect (at this point in time) fell off a cliff after 15 prospects.

I was very comfortable adding (13) Eiserman, 14 (Sennecke) and (15) Connelly to the list because all three of them have notable support are legitimate Top 12, if not, Top 10 candidates who are viewed in the same solar system as the prospects just ahead of them on the list.

I suppose I could have added one of those two outliers (Nos. 16 or 17) to make it an even 16 for purposes of the list mirroring the number of teams in the lottery — I won’t say who No. 16 is even though his one vote was in the Top 10 — but my view is that if I had included the 16th name it wouldn’t have been in the same realm as the 15 ahead of him.

The numbers are the numbers. So that is why it’s a Top 15.

Bet you’re sorry you asked.

 

[Majorityof1]

And Ferrari has him at 8. Dobber at 18, Smaht at 19, McKeen’s at 21.

There is virtually no consensus with this draft. Opinions are all over the place so who can really say who is a reach? If you like the player, pick him IMO. This draft in particular, I think it’s going to be hard to accurately guess where certain guys will go.

MacKenzie must be cracked. I was told all year by posters on here that there is "virtually" no difference between 12 and 16 this year. That virtually, if you believe Mackenzie's scouting group, is doing a lot of heavy lifting.

 

[Blueston]

MacKenzie must be cracked. I was told all year by posters on here that there is "virtually" no difference between 12 and 16 this year. That virtually, if you believe Mackenzie's scouting group, is doing a lot of heavy lifting.

we shall see. mackenzie's ranking is gold standard for what industry is thinking, but that doesn't mean that they're right. meaning the draft may play out in this order, but that doesn't mean when we look back on it that will still feel like the order they should have gone. there does appear to be consensus tier break above where we pick, but some of those guys i DON'T want for the blues. i'm not worried about rankings, i'm worried about the quality of player we end up wit, and i stand by what i said, that there will be player or players available at 16 who are every bit as good as guys who go in 10-12 range..

 

[sfvega]

think back to last year. nobody had willander as more than late 1st. lindstein was thought to be 2nd. after u18 @PerryTurnbullfan and i and some others were shouting from hilltops on them. i expect you are going to see freij, emery, and brunicke start showing up on lots of folks' 1st round projections going forward. each of these 3 really helped themselves at u18. it's such a great showcase for d, because top teams will expose you if you have key flaws, but if you can show that you can step up and even impose your will over course of event, scouts take notice.

There's a lot of mocks that are dated out there. A lot from March and much has changed since then.

Freij has a lot of variance in where he's projected. Simashev had a ton last year. Some had him in the 30s, 20s and he ended up going a lot higher. I thought I was high on him at 14-18, and he overshot that by a good bit too.

 

[kimzey59]

MacKenzie must be cracked. I was told all year by posters on here that there is "virtually" no difference between 12 and 16 this year. That virtually, if you believe Mackenzie's scouting group, is doing a lot of heavy lifting.

Per Mac's article; the #16 guy had a vote inside the top 10.

It's not a "consensus" ranking(where scouts discuss things and put together a list), it's a consolidated ranking(each scout put their own list together and Mac posted the averages).
There are huge variances in opinions with most of these prospects.

 

[TK 421]

I'm really not sure why people put such faith in scouting services as if they're some infallible draft guide. Especially this upcoming draft where it's Celebrini and then your guess is as good as mine at 2nd overall.

Hey remember scouting guru Jarmo Kekalainen? The guy who was going to draft us to a better team? Yeah my personal picks at those first two selections in that 2006 draft were better than his and I'm just some schmuck on the internet. I wanted Backstrom at No1 (unquestionably a better pick than EJ). At 31st I wanted Cal Clutterbuck and he didn't go off the board until Minnesota took him 72nd overall in the 3rd Rd. He has since gone on to play 1,064 NHL games for two teams over the course of 17 seasons. That's quite a bit better than Tomas Kana who did absolutely nothing at the NHL level.

Is this my long winded way of saying I'm some kind of elite talent scout? Nope, my point is these lists are all just speculation and somebodies arbitrary ranking. If you're putting forth an argument that so and so is BPA my first question is, "According to who?". BPA could be a different guy for each of the 32 teams so where does that leave us?

 

[Blanick]

I'm really not sure why people put such faith in scouting services as if they're some infallible draft guide. Especially this upcoming draft where it's Celebrini and then your guess is as good as mine at 2nd overall.

Hey remember scouting guru Jarmo Kekalainen? The guy who was going to draft us to a better team? Yeah my personal picks at those first two selections in that 2006 draft were better than his and I'm just some schmuck on the internet. I wanted Backstrom at No1 (unquestionably a better pick than EJ). At 31st I wanted Cal Clutterbuck and he didn't go off the board until Minnesota took him 72nd overall in the 3rd Rd. He has since gone on to play 1,064 NHL games for two teams over the course of 17 seasons. That's quite a bit better than Tomas Kana who did absolutely nothing at the NHL level.

Is this my long winded way of saying I'm some kind of elite talent scout? Nope, my point is these lists are all just speculation and somebodies arbitrary ranking. If you're putting forth an argument that so and so is BPA my first question is, "According to who?". BPA could be a different guy for each of the 32 teams so where does that leave us?

That's true I have definitely done the same but have also gone the other way. I remember being absolutely over the moon when we drafted Dominik Bokk and while he helped us as trade stock his career has been an absolute flop.

 

[PerryTurnbullfan]

this will be first of my u18 wrap up thoughts. starting with teams that didn't medal. only focusing on draft-eligibles, so while there were lots of good 2025 kids i didn't really focus on them. there weren't any prospects of interest on kazakh or norway teams (norway has a couple top prospects but they are a bit too old for u18).

1/4 losers-

swiss- their top player (muggli) got hurt on high hit earlier in tourney. he is probably only guy likely to go top couple rounds, and it's too bad didn't get more extensive look. they have another couple d (ustinkov and meier) who are likely to get drafted but neither excites me. like fine, take one in 4th or 5th, hope for the best. but muggli is interesting as potential top 4 d. a bit smaller than ideal, he is likely about leddy size so not too bad. he didn't look out of place at u20s a couple months ago either. i could see being happy with him in 2nd.

latvia- uljanskis i think gets drafted in mid-rounds. he was top '24 prospect on their team, but they seem to be getting better and overall talent level on team didn't look out of place. wouldn't surprise me if there is another player or 2 here that get a shot but they are below level at which i can opine with any level of detail.

czechia- this team was huge disappointment. they went from beating swedes to losing to kazakhs (their 1st ever win but they still got relegated) and then got eliminated by what was thought to be weak slovak team. they have a couple d i was excited to see, but both fbigir and galvas had disappointing tournaments. they weren't bad per se, but as talented undersized d they needed to stand out for me more than they did. i see them as guys i'd maybe take a flyer on in mid rounds, but not as anyone worth targeting.

finland- the host fins were another huge disappointment. i thought they had chance to take this tournament, but boy was i wrong. they were huge bust. helenius is stud but he had only fair tourney (he will play in men's worlds so he was likely only half there). Hemming underwhelmed, showing nice shot and little else. i came in thinking he was potential 1st rounder and now i wonder whether he will even go in 2nd. kivarju is coming off injury but he looked small and slow and like he peaked at age 15. vaisanen was another guy who underwhelmed, a smooth skating 6' lhd who offers nothing else of interest either offensively or defensively who will likely go mid-late rounds. the less touted jokinen looked better at times as a late round option. i was also excited to see koivu (saku's kid) but he didn't show much in either game of theirs i saw.

semi-loser

slovakia- i want to give props to these guys. they came in with nobody touted as 2024 prospect and were on verge of relegation. they were youngest team in the field, with about half their roster 2025 draft eligibles, and they made huge improvement over course of tourney. not bad for what is really a down year between some much better slovak draft classes.

Good stuff. I’m higher on Hemming. One timer was pretty new. Hadn’t seen that. Halttunen light?

Like Joona their captain too. Good player but small. Guy you go to war with.

Jecho had his moments but I just can’t see him above the 4th round. Lots of flop to his game.

 

[PerryTurnbullfan]

think back to last year. nobody had willander as more than late 1st. lindstein was thought to be 2nd. after u18 @PerryTurnbullfan and i and some others were shouting from hilltops on them. i expect you are going to see freij, emery, and brunicke start showing up on lots of folks' 1st round projections going forward. each of these 3 really helped themselves at u18. it's such a great showcase for d, because top teams will expose you if you have key flaws, but if you can show that you can step up and even impose your will over course of event, scouts take notice.

Very true! Still pushing for Friej as a possibility. Dude can really skate. I would also look hard at Fransen as a PP guy. Not too many Swedish D pop 20 goals. That’s like 30 in the OHL or WHL. 3rd?

He’s not rated anywhere I saw, but can really skate two way guy and is a late birthday is Ozbej Rep. he was Sodertalje’s number 1 D. Slovenian. Worth a late pick.

 

[TK 421]

That's true I have definitely done the same but have also gone the other way. I remember being absolutely over the moon when we drafted Dominik Bokk and while he helped us as trade stock his career has been an absolute flop.

Yep, even for the pros who do it for a living it's a tough thing to project out several years, so much depends on post draft development and just plain luck.

 

[LGB]

Very intrigued by Brunicke. The point totals are underwhelming but he certainly has the size and skill of a 1st round defenseman.

https://x.com/MitchLBrown/status/1732813225115394543

 

[Majorityof1]

I'm really not sure why people put such faith in scouting services as if they're some infallible draft guide. Especially this upcoming draft where it's Celebrini and then your guess is as good as mine at 2nd overall.

Hey remember scouting guru Jarmo Kekalainen? The guy who was going to draft us to a better team? Yeah my personal picks at those first two selections in that 2006 draft were better than his and I'm just some schmuck on the internet. I wanted Backstrom at No1 (unquestionably a better pick than EJ). At 31st I wanted Cal Clutterbuck and he didn't go off the board until Minnesota took him 72nd overall in the 3rd Rd. He has since gone on to play 1,064 NHL games for two teams over the course of 17 seasons. That's quite a bit better than Tomas Kana who did absolutely nothing at the NHL level.

Is this my long winded way of saying I'm some kind of elite talent scout? Nope, my point is these lists are all just speculation and somebodies arbitrary ranking. If you're putting forth an argument that so and so is BPA my first question is, "According to who?". BPA could be a different guy for each of the 32 teams so where does that leave us?

I mean, the fact you gave to go back to 2006 says a lot. Nobody is saying scouts are perfect. But they probably have a hell of a lot better track record than random posters playing arm chair scout for free in a message board. Thise posters probably base at least some of their opinions on lists and write-ups by those scouts

And if you were refering to my comment, it was more about how patently ridiculous the statement that 16 is just as good as 12 is. Even outside scouting, earlier is always better. The fact that a premiere scout and his team say there is a clear top 15 is just icing

 

[bleedblue1223]

Don't forget that a few teams ahead of us will make off the wall picks, it's not like every projected top 15 prospect goes in the top 15.

 

[STL fan in MN]

IMO the "homerun" pick this year might be another 3/4 rounder like Parayko was (thinking specifically about Gabriel Eliasson).

Help me understand your fascination with Eliasson. I just don’t see it with him. He’s big and has a mean streak but in terms of actual ability to play hockey, I don’t see much. What skills does he have that should translate well to the NHL?

 

[AyeBah]

Don't forget that a few teams ahead of us will make off the wall picks, it's not like every projected top 15 prospect goes in the top 15.

True but some of the top 15 in that list I don't really want us to pick like Connelly or Eiserman and those are two that I could see falling

 

[STL fan in MN]

True but some of the top 15 in that list I don't really want us to pick like Connelly or Eiserman and those are two that I could see falling

Most years I would tend to agree with bleedblue but there really does seem to be a cutoff in the 12-15 range this year.

There’s 13 players I really like (the 15 McKenzie listed minus Eiserman and Connelly) and I’ll be a little surprised if any of those 13 are available at pick 16.

 

[The Note]

Most years I would tend to agree with bleedblue but there really does seem to be a cutoff in the 12-15 range this year.

There’s 13 players I really like (the 15 McKenzie listed minus Eiserman and Connelly) and I’ll be a little surprised if any of those 13 are available at pick 16.

Is there any off-ice stuff that’s a concern with Eiserman? I usually follow prospects at an arms length until around this time of year, but I seem to remember there being a good amount of hype around him. Just concerns his game/the scoring won’t translate?

 

[Blueston]

Good stuff. I’m higher on Hemming. One timer was pretty new. Hadn’t seen that. Halttunen light?

Like Joona their captain too. Good player but small. Guy you go to war with.

Jecho had his moments but I just can’t see him above the 4th round. Lots of flop to his game.

Jecho I shoulda mentioned. I think he couid be interesting maybe in 3rd. A bit of upside but more likely a torpo type.

 

[STL fan in MN]

Is there any off-ice stuff that’s a concern with Eiserman? I usually follow prospects at an arms length until around this time of year, but I seem to remember there being a good amount of hype around him. Just concerns his game/the scoring won’t translate?

No, not really. Seems to be a good teammate (at least in the locker room, off the ice etc) and I’ve heard of no character issues with him.

And really not too many concerns about his scoring not translating. I think it’ll translate quite well actually. The problem is that his game is completely devoid of substance outside of scoring. He has average size and is a fine skater but unless he’s scoring, he’s usually a detriment to his team. Amazing hammer on the PP but he hasn’t really developed much the last year or so and it’s odd how devoid the rest of his game is.

So he’s a one-trick pony. BUT, the one trick he’s really good at is the one thing that’s the most valuable in the game - scoring goals.

I’d consider him at 16. After the top-13, I have a grouping from 14-22 and he’s in that group for me.

If he can round out his game a bit at BU, he could be really good. Even if he doesn’t, he can still be a useful but flawed winger that’ll need the right center and sheltering to be successful.

He scored 127 goals in 119 games for the NTDP over 2 years. That’s the most all-time (Cole Caufield had 126 in 123). The only NTDP player to ever put up more points over the 2 years is Jack Hughes.

NTDP all-time goals per game:
Eiserman: 1.067
Caufield: 1.024
Kessel: 0.986
Bellows: 0.806
P. Kane: 0.773
Matthews: 0.760
Leonard: 0.706
Morin: 0.684
Lucius: 0.677
J. Hughes: 0.673
W. Smith: 0.667
Hagens: 0.610
Eichel: 0.604
Perreault: 0.587
Keller: 0.577
——————-
Snuggerud: 0.375

 

[Stupendous Yappi]

Yep, even for the pros who do it for a living it's a tough thing to project out several years, so much depends on post draft development and just plain luck.

People fail to acknowledge that there are different outcomes to a players development which depend on either luck (injury) and their choices. There can be an identical player drafted who could become a good ppick or a bad pick depending on his choices after the draft. They’re trying to predict his character and drive too, but the truth is that guys still get to make choices which are unpredictable. It doesn’t mean the assessment was wrong at the time.