HF Habs: 2024 NHL Draft Thread

[VirginiaMtlExpat]

...

And you figure out the rest later.

What if next year's "BPA" is also a LD? And then the following year, maybe a RD? And then, the obvious "BPA" in 3 years is, wait for it, an LD! And why not, year 4, can't avoid this obvious BPA at RD. We need to build that juggernaut defense!

Will the other teams give us the equivalent forward to some of our redundant LDs and RDs, comparable to what we could have drafted at forward that year? Sure they will!

How long does this insanity continue? This is what is wrong with the BPA thesis. It assumes a perfect tradability of excess players at the same position, but GMs can sniff the desperation to trade from a counterpart, with say, 8-9 excess defensemen, since most of them will be dealing from a position of comparable balance in relation to the "perfect BPA" advocate.

I would make drafting a high-first rounder D conditional on trading 1-2 Ds out for a star forward that day. But definitely not "figure it out later".

 

[WeThreeKings]

Yeah I don't want a defenseman but if Levshunov is there at 5 and Demidov/Lindstrom are gone, that's the situation where you have no choice but to go BPA.

That being said I don't see how Levshunov makes it passed 4, let alone 2 or 3.

 

[Vachon23]

What if next year's "BPA" is also a LD? And then the following year, maybe a RD? And then, the obvious "BPA" in 3 years is, wait for it, and LD! And why not, year 4, can't avoid this obvious BPA at RD. We need to build that juggernaut defense!

Will the other teams give us the equivalent forward to some of our redundant LDs and RDs, comparable to what we could have drafted at forward that year? Sure they will!

How long does this insanity continue? This is what is wrong with the BPA thesis. It assumes a perfect tradability of excess players at the same position, but GMs can sniff the desperation to trade from a counterpart, with say, 8-9 excess defensemen, since most of them will be dealing from a position of comparable balance in relation to the "perfect BPA" advocate.

In the top 10, for me you always go with BPA. I don’t see us drafting top 10 after this year and usually after the top 10, the list change for everyone

Yeah I don't want a defenseman but if Levshunov is there at 5 and Demidov/Lindstrom are gone, that's the situation where you have no choice but to go BPA.

That being said I don't see how Levshunov makes it passed 4, let alone 2 or 3.

Exactly, someone will take him before 5 I have no doubt about that

 

[WeThreeKings]

In the top 10, for me you always go with BPA. I don’t see us drafting top 10 after this year and usually after the top 10, the list change for everyone


Exactly, someone will take him before 5 I have no doubt about that

The only thing I'm sure of right now is Celebrini goes 1 and that Levshunov is gone in the top 3. Chicago San Jose Anaheim all need defense, specifically right shot defense.

 

[HuGo Burner Acc]

The only thing I'm sure of right now is Celebrini goes 1 and that Levshunov is gone in the top 3. Chicago San Jose Anaheim all need defense, specifically right shot defense.

Thats why Im hoping Columbus gets the lottery win if habs dont

 

[VirginiaMtlExpat]

BPA is a fabrication. There is no such quantification. There is no measuring tape that makes it an exact science. That is the other problem with this thesis. It is a mantra that some people keep repeating, because they trust their peers who use the same language.

 

[Schooner Guy]

It would be extremely hard for me to pass on Levshunov If he’s available when we pick

As I have mentioned before, I'm not a fan and I hope someone takes him early so that other players near the top drop back a slot. Too many warts for me. He's ultra skilled and a massive physical specimen but his game has no structure and he doesn't even pretend to play defense. I prefer Buium, Dickinson or Parekh if I was picking a dman.

He was #3 on Bobby Mac's mid-year. We'll see if he drops.

 

[Schooner Guy]

BPA is a fabrication. There is no such quantification. There is no measuring tape that makes it an exact science. That is the other problem with this thesis. It is a mantra that some people keep repeating, because they trust their peers who use the same language.

I do think that GMs/scouting directors have to take the top player left on their list if #2 is in a lower tier/grouping. I don't think you can pass up on someone your scouting team sees as a #1 dman for a 2nd line forward.

We're in good position to grab a forward in this draft however. After Celebrini goes, I really don't see a huge difference between #2 and #7.

 

[DramaticGloveSave]

Yeah I don't want a defenseman but if Levshunov is there at 5 and Demidov/Lindstrom are gone, that's the situation where you have no choice but to go BPA.

That being said I don't see how Levshunov makes it passed 4, let alone 2 or 3.

Think it’s possible he makes it to us. Seems buium is the hot D name at the moment. Honestly after Celebrini, the next half dozen picks or so could go in almost any order. Personally I’m not buying the Lindstrom hype so not even including him in that group.

 

[Ezpz]

Yeah I don't want a defenseman but if Levshunov is there at 5 and Demidov/Lindstrom are gone, that's the situation where you have no choice but to go BPA.

That being said I don't see how Levshunov makes it passed 4, let alone 2 or 3.

Most of the tank teams aren't looking for d yet. San jose need literally everything so they could draft any way. Anaheim definitely need forwards more than D. Chicago need to surround Bedard with elite talent, could go either way. Columbus would take Lev for sure under Jarmo, who knows what new management is thinking.

Wouldn't shock me if no D til 5 for the second year in a row.

 

[River Meadow]

BPA is a fabrication. There is no such quantification. There is no measuring tape that makes it an exact science. That is the other problem with this thesis. It is a mantra that some people keep repeating, because they trust their peers who use the same language.

Drafting BPA (Best Player Available) in the NHL means selecting the prospect who is considered the most talented and has the highest potential, regardless of the team's positional needs. The rationale behind the BPA strategy is to acquire the best overall talent available when a team is on the clock, rather than reaching for a player at a specific position of need. This approach aims to build the deepest and most talented roster possible over time. Some key points about drafting BPA in the NHL:

• It focuses solely on a prospect's skill and upside, not on filling an immediate roster hole.
• It helps avoid reaching for a lesser prospect just to address a positional need in the short-term.
• It provides flexibility as prospects develop and roster needs change due to trades, free agency, etc.
• Top teams often utilize BPA, understanding that elite talent is the foundation for long-term success.
• However, it requires patience as high-end prospects take time to make the NHL and contribute.

While drafting for organizational needs is sometimes required, the BPA philosophy prioritizes drafting the best overall player on the board when a team's pick comes up, banking on talent over positional fit in the NHL Draft.

 

[Habs7631]

Most of the tank teams aren't looking for d yet. San jose need literally everything so they could draft any way. Anaheim definitely need forwards more than D. Chicago need to surround Bedard with elite talent, could go either way. Columbus would take Lev for sure under Jarmo, who knows what new management is thinking.

Wouldn't shock me if no D til 5 for the second year in a row.

If Chicago doesn’t win the lotto for Celebrini I can see them go for Demidov.

Bedard and Demidov on the same line for the next 10+ years...

BUT

The expectations for this draft was supposed to be a strong draft for defensemen and most of them delivered. Like some of them had historical rookie seasons for defensemen.

The early projections for next year draft (2025) is that most of the top prospects are forwards (lot of centers).

So good draft for D this year, good draft for F next year. If you’re a team like CHI/SJ and you know you’re gonna pick in the top again next year, why not go for the D with #1 potential this year and grab the F with game-breaker talent next year.

 

[SannywithoutCompy]

Defensemen are DND with that pick for me. If you feel they're too good not to take them then someone else does too, and you trade down and add another 1st or 2nd and get Catton or Iggy.

We have a ridiculous logjam already and guys aren't going to be able to develop to their full potential without opportunity.

 

[VirginiaMtlExpat]

Drafting BPA (Best Player Available) in the NHL means selecting the prospect who is considered the most talented and has the highest potential, regardless of the team's positional needs. The rationale behind the BPA strategy is to acquire the best overall talent available when a team is on the clock, rather than reaching for a player at a specific position of need. This approach aims to build the deepest and most talented roster possible over time. Some key points about drafting BPA in the NHL:

• It focuses solely on a prospect's skill and upside, not on filling an immediate roster hole.
• It helps avoid reaching for a lesser prospect just to address a positional need in the short-term.
• It provides flexibility as prospects develop and roster needs change due to trades, free agency, etc.
• Top teams often utilize BPA, understanding that elite talent is the foundation for long-term success.
• However, it requires patience as high-end prospects take time to make the NHL and contribute.

While drafting for organizational needs is sometimes required, the BPA philosophy prioritizes drafting the best overall player on the board when a team's pick comes up, banking on talent over positional fit in the NHL Draft.

Do I really need schooling on bpa? I don't like to pull rank, but... I know what the term means. I've said elsewhere, and now here, that teams use a constrained optimization that is a weighted sum of need and bpa. Of course the weight varies, but is never 0 for either term. Otherwise you can end up with a scenario like I evoked above, where misguided BPA advocates would keep drafting lds and rds under the assumption that these are the top player each year, and would never get fair value in trades for their redundant players. Which none of the BPA orthodoxes have addressed, nor the utter subjectivity of BPA.

 

[Seb]

Drafting BPA (Best Player Available) in the NHL means selecting the prospect who is considered the most talented and has the highest potential, regardless of the team's positional needs. The rationale behind the BPA strategy is to acquire the best overall talent available when a team is on the clock, rather than reaching for a player at a specific position of need. This approach aims to build the deepest and most talented roster possible over time. Some key points about drafting BPA in the NHL:

• It focuses solely on a prospect's skill and upside, not on filling an immediate roster hole.
• It helps avoid reaching for a lesser prospect just to address a positional need in the short-term.
• It provides flexibility as prospects develop and roster needs change due to trades, free agency, etc.
• Top teams often utilize BPA, understanding that elite talent is the foundation for long-term success.
• However, it requires patience as high-end prospects take time to make the NHL and contribute.

While drafting for organizational needs is sometimes required, the BPA philosophy prioritizes drafting the best overall player on the board when a team's pick comes up, banking on talent over positional fit in the NHL Draft.

BPA is still highly subjective. Teams usually draft the BPA according to their list.

It's just that when it goes against some people's own list then they like whining about the pick and claim they drafted by need. It's even worse with hindsight like when people claim the Habs should've drafted Tkachuk who was BPA when this board was almost unanimous in not wanting to draft him at the time.

 

[VirginiaMtlExpat]

If my perspective on this seems a little mathy, that's because of a grad course based on this book.

 

[NeptunesTrident]

If Chicago picks at 2, Lindstrom could be a compelling option for them. Bedard with all his skill isn't big. Lindstrom would give them something they haven't got a lot of in their Top 6...size. A lot depends on his injury history but if it checks out that could potentially create another Crosby/Malkin-like tandem

 

[River Meadow]

BPA is still highly subjective. Teams usually draft the BPA according to their list.

It's just that when it goes against some people's own list then they like whining about the pick and claim they drafted by need. It's even worse with hindsight like when people claim the Habs should've drafted Tkachuk who was BPA when this board was almost unanimous in not wanting to draft him at the time.

Of course it becomes subjective after a certain point. It's not the same thing in the 1st round top 10 vs 6th round.

There are also failures, even at 1st OA, it happens. It doesn't mean it's a foolproof system for drafting, nothing is ever certain.

However drafting for positional need VS taking BPA even if that's not the position you want, can come back to bite you...

 

[River Meadow]

Whoever gets 1st Overall is taking Celebrini, correct?

No brainer, isn't it?

He's BPA, of course they would.

If they passed and instead took Lindstrom, because you know what, they see something in him... fine, but they aren't drafting BPA, based on the current available data.

 

[Rozz]

Whoever gets 1st Overall is taking Celebrini, correct?

No brainer, isn't it?

He's BPA, of course they would.

If they passed and instead took Lindstrom, because you know what, they see something in him... fine, but they aren't drafting BPA, based on the current available data.

I agree with this philosophy here because it's blatantly obvious he is BPA. However, at our pick, the BPA gets a little fuzzy.. there is a case for each one of the kids from about 3-10.. possibly even 2-10... but Demidov seems to have a pretty good hold on that #2 spot.

 

[Vachon23]

Defensemen are DND with that pick for me. If you feel they're too good not to take them then someone else does too, and you trade down and add another 1st or 2nd and get Catton or Iggy.

We have a ridiculous logjam already and guys aren't going to be able to develop to their full potential without opportunity.

So you would pass on the futur cornerstone of your defence because we have many lesser good dmen ?

 

[River Meadow]

I agree with this philosophy here because it's blatantly obvious he is BPA. However, at our pick, the BPA gets a little fuzzy.. there is a case for each one of the kids from about 3-10.. possibly even 2-10... but Demidov seems to have a pretty good hold on that #2 spot.

Right.

Unfortunately (or fortunately), this year there's no clear #5 (if we pick 5), there's not even realllllllly a clear #2 at least as of now.

If we decided at #5, we want a big 6ft6 Center, so we take Dean Letourneau (ranked mid 20s NA), as an example, that would def not be BPA, but who knows he could turn out to be one of the best players in the draft (in hindsight).

At #5 there are many players that could be considered BPA that's why I do not envy scouts this year.

IF they think a D man like Buium is the best player at #5 though, and will just be much better than any of the forwards available.. it is what it is IMO, and that's fine. Our D pool looks full but nothing ever really goes according to plan with prospects, and trades are also a thing.

 

[Rozz]

Right.

Unfortunately (or fortunately), this year there's no clear #5 (if we pick 5), there's not even realllllllly a clear #2 at least as of now.

If we decided at #5, we want a big 6ft6 Center, so we take Dean Letourneau (ranked mid 20s NA), as an example, that would def not be BPA, but who knows he could turn out to be one of the best players in the draft (in hindsight).

At #5 there are many players that could be considered BPA that's why I do not envy scouts this year.

IF they think a D man like Buium is the best player at #5 though, and will just be much better than any of the forwards available.. it is what it is IMO, and that's fine. Our D pool looks full but nothing ever really goes according to plan with prospects, and trades are also a thing.

agreed! the only way to know for sure it was for need over BPA is if it's a total reach. I also am glad I don't actually have to make that call this year lol

If they take one of the defensemen at #5... while I'm not rooting for that to be the pick, I will definitely be rooting for the player and will have some faith in our scouting... they've earned it and seem to have a plan.

 

[River Meadow]

agreed! the only way to know for sure it was for need over BPA is if it's a total reach. I also am glad I don't actually have to make that call this year lol

If they take one of the defensemen at #5... while I'm not rooting for that to be the pick, I will definitely be rooting for the player and will have some faith in our scouting... they've earned it and seem to have a plan.

I don't think they will do it, and I wasn't keen on it myself (drafting a D man this year especially after taking Reinbacher last year), but Buium looks like he will be an absolute killer at the next level.

I highly doubt they do it, but I would not be mad at all.

 

[Spearmint Rhino]

I don't think they will do it, and I wasn't keen on it myself (drafting a D man this year especially after taking Reinbacher last year), but Buium looks like he will be an absolute killer at the next level.

I highly doubt they do it, but I would not be mad at all.

View attachment 858698

I’d trust this mgmt team if they drafted a D that they have a plan in place to add the forward in a different way. Took lots of therapy to get over Hope as a Plan from the last regime