As perfect a Mock Draft as you'll get :)

[headsigh]

If Landeskog is still available at 6, Rick Dudley's gonna throw himself head over heels to trade up.

On the other hand, landing Huberdeau wouldn't be horrible. Not bad.

 

[DEVILS ALL THE WAY*]

I think if Landeskog is there at 4 NJ will swap picks with Ottawa for Ottawa's other 1st round pick. OTW would take Landeskog, The NYI will take Murphy, the NJD will take either Huberdeau or Hamilton.

I can't see Snow drafting Murphy when they got DeHaan a couple of years ago and they also have Streit and Hamilton. I can see them going with a bigger body who can still contribute offensively in Dougie Hamilton.

But I might be in left field, maybe a Islander fan can shed a little light on who they would like to pick.

 

[DEVILS ALL THE WAY*]

If Landeskog is still available at 6, Rick Dudley's gonna throw himself head over heels to trade up.

On the other hand, landing Huberdeau wouldn't be horrible. Not bad.

I don't know if you saw Murray's face at the lottery cause he looked like someone just ran over his dog right in front of him when they pulled NJ's logo at #4. Gabriel Landeskog is the guy he wants and it became really transparent in several of the interviews he did with TSN/Sportsnet if I recall correctly.

If he's there at #6, there's no way you are taking him away from Ottawa, no way.

 

[Homesick]

It was a pretty good attempt. I don't see the Oilers taking Musil at 19th when the latest rankings have him around the 31st.
I could also see the Oilers shocking everyone and taking Larsson. But RNH seems to be the consensus #1

 

[Minister of Offence]

I don't know if you saw Murray's face at the lottery cause he looked like someone just ran over his dog right in front of him when they pulled NJ's logo at #4. Gabriel Landeskog is the guy he wants and it became really transparent in several of the interviews he did with TSN/Sportsnet if I recall correctly.

If he's there at #6, there's no way you are taking him away from Ottawa, no way.

He was the only GM right before the lottery to admit there was "one guy" they really wanted. And after it on Ottawa radio the first thing he started talking about was trading up to 3rd. He's a perfect storm of Murray's preferences, and a player that even the business side of the franchise would love just because he's the closest thing to an Alfredsson heir if everything works out.

Funny, I said it at the start of the year when first familiarizing myself with the 2011 prospects...I said, the Sens will do whatever is necessary to take Landeskog. Now I was just being naive "knowing" that we wouldn't be in a range to take him without a monster deal, expecting us to be in the 15-22 range. I didn't expect "anything", would be to lose 14 of 15 games in the New Year.

I expect teams ahead of us will be getting some healthy offers.

 

[trentmccleary]

I think if Landeskog is there at 4 NJ will swap picks with Ottawa for Ottawa's other 1st round pick. OTW would take Landeskog, The NYI will take Murphy, the NJD will take either Huberdeau or Hamilton.

6th & 21st to move up 2 spots in this draft to select a grinder? ... You're out of your mind!

He was the only GM right before the lottery to admit there was "one guy" they really wanted.

Has anybody ever come close to predicting an Ottawa draft choice correctly since 2008?

 

[Minister of Offence]

6th & 21st to move up 2 spots in this draft to select a grinder? ... You're out of your mind!

Has anybody ever come close to predicting an Ottawa draft choice correctly since 2008?

There are no "grinders" in the top 10. Tyler Biggs is a grinder....and the same people that say you don't take checkers in the 1st round, and put Biggs later, put Landeskog in the top 3.

I'm sure tons of people had Ottawa taking Cowen in 2009...it gets a lot easier the higher your team is picking. Especially when there is a prospect that fits the bill of everything your GM/franchise covets.

And by healthy offers, I mean....the NSH 1st is probably not available. That's a little much, especially in a draft where a lot of teams ratings 1-8 are probably not differing all that much.

 

[trentmccleary]

There are no "grinders" in the top 10. Tyler Biggs is a grinder....and the same people that say you don't take checkers in the 1st round, and put Biggs later, put Landeskog in the top 3.

Fair enough. You don't give up 2 1st rounders to draft a guy who will be the 3rd or 4th best offensive forward on a good team.

I'm sure tons of people had Ottawa taking Cowen in 2009...it gets a lot easier the higher your team is picking. Especially when there is a prospect that fits the bill of everything your GM/franchise covets.

And by healthy offers, I mean....the NSH 1st is probably not available. That's a little much, especially in a draft where a lot of teams ratings 1-8 are probably not differing all that much.

I don't think anybody had Cowen going that low.
Regardless, I don't think that anybody was predicting that Murray's scouts would draft 4 D-men and a goalie with their 6 highest picks over the past 3 drafts (9, 15, 17, 39, 42, 46........ 76).

Murray has shown he's willing to move up, but I don't think that his record indicates that he's careless with picks as some other organizations (Tor for example, gave up too move to move up two spots for Schenn... let alone the other big examples).

 

[Minister of Offence]

I agree, especially in this draft, the extra 1st is far too much to move up. We could get a player with more offensive upside than Landeskog in the 2nd 1st rounder.

Doubt Murray's afraid to get creative. Just as an example...you could move NSH 1st + OTT 1st for FLA 1st and FLA 2nd. Given the depth of this draft, OTT may feel that is a no loss....but maybe FLA sees someone they feel they will have to be in a better position in the later 1st round to get their hands on. Drafting 4 times in the 2nd round....they just might get 2-3 guys they wanted in the middle-late 1st round anyways. This draft is said to be that unpredictable after the top tier. Tim Murray said he doesn't see much difference from the 10-50 area.

 

[ponokanocker]

After seeing previous drafts, this mock is as likely as any. Doesn't anyone remember Fowler dropping? Strange things happen compared to where "experts" think players should go. If NJ is that high on Murphy, I doubt they risk trading down and losing out on him. Other teams may be high on him as well.

Another note as well. Just because a team drafts a player this year doesn't mean they are filling that teams need for the upcoming season. There will be a few players from this draft make rosters next year, but the number will be low. The ones that do make it rarely make a huge positive contribution as they are still learning the NHL game. Teams aren't trading players away or allowing UFA's to walk because they draft a player this year. Think more along the lines of 3-4 years from now.

 

[Minister of Offence]

After seeing previous drafts, this mock is as likely as any. Doesn't anyone remember Fowler dropping? Strange things happen compared to where "experts" think players should go. If NJ is that high on Murphy, I doubt they risk trading down and losing out on him. Other teams may be high on him as well.

Another note as well. Just because a team drafts a player this year doesn't mean they are filling that teams need for the upcoming season. There will be a few players from this draft make rosters next year, but the number will be low. The ones that do make it rarely make a huge positive contribution as they are still learning the NHL game. Teams aren't trading players away or allowing UFA's to walk because they draft a player this year. Think more along the lines of 3-4 years from now.

Especially with the way people are describing this way, I expect individual teams lists are varying GREATLY from independent scouting lists.

Teams that know what they are doing in regards to scouting may make out like bandits in a draft like this.

 

[boredmale]

I can't see New Jersey passing on Landeskog.

and if Jersey does then I don't see the Islanders passing on him.

But I might be in left field, maybe a Islander fan can shed a little light on who they would like to pick.

The Islanders don't have any dire needs to fill. You can make arguments they might want a center in case Bailey doesn't pan out, they might need a little more toughness on wings and they probably could use another top pairing defense(and can go either way in terms of size or get somebody to replace Streits offense in a few years)

Only think I will tell you is you won't have any clue who the Islanders are interested in going into the draft so if Lou trades down, he better like 2 players

After seeing previous drafts, this mock is as likely as any. Doesn't anyone remember Fowler dropping? Strange things happen compared to where "experts" think players should go. If NJ is that high on Murphy, I doubt they risk trading down and losing out on him. Other teams may be high on him as well.

I think this year is like 2006 or 2008 where the top 8 guys all went in the top 8. If somebody falls out of that group I don't see them dropping past 9, maybe 10th at worst.

 

[SpezDispenser]

i think ottawa and NJ would have to flip picks to make this work.

maybe work in some cap relief like kuba for rolston, add one of the sens 2nds or 3rds.

Now that is an interesting scenario. I never once thought of taking Rolston off their hands in exchange for moving up to 4. Quite plausible - although, I think Rolston would have to waive his NTC to come to Ottawa and that might be an issue.

 

[Analyzer*]

Tyler Biggs ? Yes please

 

[Minister of Offence]

and if Jersey does then I don't see the Islanders passing on him.

People probably just think this because the independent lists tell them to...no one was passing on Fowler either. There's probably more than a few teams out there with Landeskog out of the top 5, maybe it is yours. You say ya but Bobby Mac said there's a big 3....yeah, he said Gormley and Fowler were top 5 shoe ins last year....and Ryan Johansen was sub top 10.

Some posters say they wouldn't take a player with limited offensive upside in the top 3....all it takes is for a GM to have that philosophy as well. Don't take the independent lists as gospel...if your team has drafted well, and they do something you think is a little different than you expected, I'd trust them.

 

[tarheelhockey]

Jim Rutherford doesn't like to draft defensemen. I don't see Carolina picking one up with the #12 unless it's someone who just blows them away.

 

[SpezDispenser]

I don't know if you saw Murray's face at the lottery cause he looked like someone just ran over his dog right in front of him when they pulled NJ's logo at #4. Gabriel Landeskog is the guy he wants and it became really transparent in several of the interviews he did with TSN/Sportsnet if I recall correctly.

If he's there at #6, there's no way you are taking him away from Ottawa, no way.

Correct, no chance in hell. Unless you want to throw us Ladd...no? Okay, no chance in hell.

 

[trentmccleary]

Tim Murray said he doesn't see much difference from the 10-50 area.

Not sure I'd go this far. Seems like a lot of rankings between those 9th-20th (12 spots) keep putting 6-8 of the same players in around those spots (Zibanejad, Armia, Beaulieu, Bartschi, Oleksiak, McNeil, Saad, Rattie). So I think that 9-20 will be a lot more predictable than anything between 21-40.

 

[nanzenkills]

People probably just think this because the independent lists tell them to...no one was passing on Fowler either. There's probably more than a few teams out there with Landeskog out of the top 5, maybe it is yours. You say ya but Bobby Mac said there's a big 3....yeah, he said Gormley and Fowler were top 5 shoe ins last year....and Ryan Johansen was sub top 10.

Some posters say they wouldn't take a player with limited offensive upside in the top 3....all it takes is for a GM to have that philosophy as well. Don't take the independent lists as gospel...if your team has drafted well, and they do something you think is a little different than you expected, I'd trust them.

Actually, McKenzie's panel had Johansen at 6 or 7 last year. He wasn't out of the top 10.

 

[Minister of Offence]

Not sure I'd go this far. Seems like a lot of rankings between those 9th-20th (12 spots) keep putting 6-8 of the same players in around those spots (Zibanejad, Armia, Beaulieu, Bartschi, Oleksiak, McNeil, Saad, Rattie). So I think that 9-20 will be a lot more predictable than anything between 21-40.

Don't you ever get the sense that these scouting lists just work off each other? Any list that puts a guy NHL CS has in the late 2nd in the 1st round gets blasted by fans as unreliable. These lists are directed to fans, fans just want to feel like they are getting the right scoop, and to keep them interested they get interested when they see the odd "interesting" rating...like Couturier going 8 or 9. In reality, come draft day, there's always weird stuff happening in the real thing.

NHL teams don't even look at them, so if I was scouting for the whole year without having any reference to bias my perception of these players, I expect in certain years my list would come out amazingly different to what ISS does. And lets pretend I'm an experienced scout.

 

[Minister of Offence]

Actually, McKenzie's panel had Johansen at 6 or 7 last year. He wasn't out of the top 10.

Did he get that months before the draft, or was that right before the draft? I'm asking. Perhaps that was a poor example. The other ones stand though, and this draft is said to be a bit more fluid than last year.

 

[boredmale]

People probably just think this because the independent lists tell them to...no one was passing on Fowler either

I don't think the Fowler(and Gormley) comparison is that good. One was a slightly smaller defenseman who some people might have questions is he a top pairing guy or second pairing PP specialist(who also had some skating questions), the other was a jack of all trades master of none.

Landeskog is the type of forward every team would love to get, and while he probably won't end up the best player drafted he will more then likely end up what you expect then other longer shots.

 

[Minister of Offence]

I don't think the Fowler(and Gormley) comparison is that good. One was a slightly smaller defenseman who some people might have questions is he a top pairing guy or second pairing PP specialist(who also had some skating questions), the other was a jack of all trades master of none.

Landeskog is the type of forward every team would love to get, and while he probably won't end up the best player drafted he will more then likely end up what you expect then other longer shots.

Typically you want an offensive stud as much as possible in the top 3. Some people are saying the opposite about Landeskog, his certainty alone shouldn't make him a top 3 pick. All I'm saying is that since the consensus among the "minor league" scouting agencies is that Landeskog is top 3 doesn't mean every team sees it that way, perhaps not even close.

It only took until September for people to realize how much teams made a mistake passing on Fowler, and a lot of people seem to think the same will be said about Gormley.

Fans perception of draft prospects is always biased by the way they are placed by these lists...when the real thing is done, there are always some significant differences.

 

[Forgot About Drai]

Id rather have Puempel at 19 and try to get Musil at 31

 

[trentmccleary]

Don't you ever get the sense that these scouting lists just work off each other?

Yep, but Bob McKenzie's June lists have predicted...

179 of 210 in terms of projecting first rounders (85 percent)... In the last six years

... and most of the misses will be between 25-30th.

I used those same lists Bob posted for past years and found that the last player in a hypothetical tier (3rd, 5th, 10th) from Bob's list was actually selected at average pick of 3.3 / 7.1 / 16.

There will be tiers, players certainly won't go in a popularly predicted order... but even in this draft, I'm guessing thatsomething like:
8 of 10
15 of 20
20-22 of 30
will be predicted come June.