Bobby Mac's Midterm Rankings

[arsmaster*]

I really dont buy the Ryan Kesler comparison, but who would have thought Ryan Kesler would be having the career he has when he got drafted. Kesler was a more defensive minded player that had a tremendous understanding of the game, but the rest of his offensive skills were lacking.

As for Miller, I cant really make the claim that he can be the next Kesler. I like J.T, and what he brings to the table, but he doesnt wow you in any one area. Maybe that is Kesler like, but Miller has a ways to go before we compare the two.

Miller has solid size and soft hands, the kid is no slouch offensively. I can honestly see a Drew Stafford type player in him if anything. Has the size, uses it at times, but always leaves you wanting so much more. Everytime I see Stafford, I see the talent, but never the production. Though he looks to be turning the page a bit of late.

Miller should be a first round pick, but that all depends on what teams think he can one day turn into offensively...same thing happened with Kesler, Vancouver believed in him, and it has paid off.

Cheers.

I dont like the "leaves you wanting more statement", but that is usually the case with 18 year old kids.

I do however believe Kesler was drafted as a 2-way pivot with pretty good offensive skills though, it has just taken him time and work to get the offensive numbers. I always thought he would top out areound 30 goals (as a Canuck fan, I am pretty stoked at his development).

Kesler is a guy who works hard in the offseason, not just on his body, but also on his skills (see the ever improving wrister and more moves in the shootout than just the ol' leg-kick back hand).

Its for that reason I like Mark Mcneil, it seems he may have the capacity to put up good numbers in the NHL, and its his work ethic and desire to get better everyday (as I have read) that makes you feel he may have some Kesler/Richards like qualities to his game going forward.

I would love to see the Canucks land a player like Kesler, be it McNeil, JT Miller or any other hard working 2-way forward with decent size and speed. Im hoping Miller would be more of a Kesler than a Stafford though.

 

[Minister of Offence]

Yep, but which one would you choose from two potentially equal prospects; a player that you know in-side-out and like a lot, or a player that you have only seen on video and is been praised by a fellow scout. This could potentially affect the ranking, especially if several of the interviewed scouts are from the same area.

Yeah quite possibly...but I expect the scouts are more so just relaying the information that their scout teams concluded on. The list isn't to be taking too seriously anyways....so much changes from now until June, as it did last year.

 

[Le Golie]

My one question about these type of rankings I always have is this...If I'm a scout who loves a player (or a few), why would I give MacKenzie or anyone else a "REAL" basis for ranking, when all it does is alert competing teams / scouting departments about the likelihood a guy will be taken earlier or later? For me, I'd tell my scouts to drop the guys we love VERY low in the public rankings that go out like this, as to potentially throw off other teams (even just a bit). No upside to telling the truth, unless MacKenzie is just asking independent scouts for their rankings.

Journalists like McKenzie spend years cultivating relationships. They aren't just random sources, they are trusted friends and associates who share a mutual relationship based on trust.

The scouts are telling the truth. They are also telling him things that they ask him to keep under his hat. They have grown to trust him as much as he trusts them because he has spent years being respectful of the sensitivity of that information.

It's not a coincidence that he knows who 90% of teams are about to draft as they are on the way up to the podium, but he doesn't make his 'guess' until they are carrying a jersey towards the stage.

 

[Dr.Sens(e)]

Journalists like McKenzie spend years cultivating relationships. They aren't just random sources, they are trusted friends and associates who share a mutual relationship based on trust.

The scouts are telling the truth. They are also telling him things that they ask him to keep under his hat. They have grown to trust him as much as he trusts them because he has spent years being respectful of the sensitivity of that information.

It's not a coincidence that he knows who 90% of teams are about to draft as they are on the way up to the podium, but he doesn't make his 'guess' until they are carrying a jersey towards the stage.

That's the thing though. I'm not saying he would reveal the source, but what I'm saying if I were a scout, I'd fudge a few ratings just to throw the overall ranking system off. For instance, if my team was slated to draft 5th or 6th overall and my team felt Strome was the best player in the draft, the LAST thing I'd do is tell MacKenzie, as he is then going to publish that a team thinks Strome is #1...even if he doesn't say who, he creates some eye brow raising at Strome and gives an indication to other teams that love Strome he is on the rise in a serious way (perhaps drafting 7th or 8th). if I'm drafting 5th or 6th I don't want a team thinking they need to trade ahead of me to "my guy". I'd drop Strome to 8th or something, keep the rest of my rankings in the top 15 in line with what i really think, and sit back and hope I can still get "my guy".

the other thing of course, is that a lot of these scouts don't have the final say for their team, so they probably don't mind giving their personal ranking. Most are regional, so they will only get to see the guys outside of their area. But still, would love to hear Bob's take on that. I'm not doubting his sources - I know he is tapped in (although he doesn't get close to 90% right in his mocks...). But I wonder how many of each scouts rankings might be a bit of a ruse. I wouldn't be surprised if Bob acknowledges this in some way.

 

[Le Golie]

That's the thing though. I'm not saying he would reveal the source, but what I'm saying if I were a scout, I'd fudge a few ratings just to throw the overall ranking system off. For instance, if my team was slated to draft 5th or 6th overall and my team felt Strome was the best player in the draft, the LAST thing I'd do is tell MacKenzie, as he is then going to publish that a team thinks Strome is #1...even if he doesn't say who, he creates some eye brow raising at Strome and gives an indication to other teams that love Strome he is on the rise in a serious way (perhaps drafting 7th or 8th). if I'm drafting 5th or 6th I don't want a team thinking they need to trade ahead of me to "my guy". I'd drop Strome to 8th or something, keep the rest of my rankings in the top 15 in line with what i really think, and sit back and hope I can still get "my guy".

the other thing of course, is that a lot of these scouts don't have the final say for their team, so they probably don't mind giving their personal ranking. Most are regional, so they will only get to see the guys outside of their area. But still, would love to hear Bob's take on that. I'm not doubting his sources - I know he is tapped in (although he doesn't get close to 90% right in his mocks...). But I wonder how many of each scouts rankings might be a bit of a ruse. I wouldn't be surprised if Bob acknowledges this in some way.

Consider the mind set of the scouts as well. These guys have a pretty unglamourous life of travel, crappy arena food and half a year spent away from their families, etc. Yet they take so much pride in their work and all want to look smart. They talk about the prospects they love as if they are their own children - they are very proud to boast about the ones they like best.

They are proud of their evaluations, proud of their opinions and proud to share their thoughts anonymously with someone who uses the information appropriately. That might be the strongest motivation of all to tell the truth.

That, and the fact that they would never want to lie to a guy as well respected as McKenzie.

 

[Pancakes Pancakes]

That's the thing though. I'm not saying he would reveal the source, but what I'm saying if I were a scout, I'd fudge a few ratings just to throw the overall ranking system off. For instance, if my team was slated to draft 5th or 6th overall and my team felt Strome was the best player in the draft, the LAST thing I'd do is tell MacKenzie, as he is then going to publish that a team thinks Strome is #1...even if he doesn't say who, he creates some eye brow raising at Strome and gives an indication to other teams that love Strome he is on the rise in a serious way (perhaps drafting 7th or 8th). if I'm drafting 5th or 6th I don't want a team thinking they need to trade ahead of me to "my guy". I'd drop Strome to 8th or something, keep the rest of my rankings in the top 15 in line with what i really think, and sit back and hope I can still get "my guy".

the other thing of course, is that a lot of these scouts don't have the final say for their team, so they probably don't mind giving their personal ranking. Most are regional, so they will only get to see the guys outside of their area. But still, would love to hear Bob's take on that. I'm not doubting his sources - I know he is tapped in (although he doesn't get close to 90% right in his mocks...). But I wonder how many of each scouts rankings might be a bit of a ruse. I wouldn't be surprised if Bob acknowledges this in some way.

Other teams don't know which scouts from which teams are speaking to BMAC. What the hell would be the point of lying? All the teams he's poling might be in the top 15 in the league standings, therefore have no bearing on the top 8 picks since they won't be there to draft them.

Teams don't concern themselves with what other teams have as their rankings, they go by their own, which is proven repeatedly with the off the board picks we have seen every year. Sure teams need to put feelers out in case they have a player they are targetting and are looking to get him before a certain team, but that is generally after pick #10 anyways.

 

[OilerOlli*]

They forgot Rieder. And I don't think Grimaldi will be a Top 60 pick.

 

[danishh]

They forgot Rieder. And I don't think Grimaldi will be a Top 60 pick.

i dont think rieder was 'forgotten'.

ISS doesnt have him. CSS has him 74th in north america. Not a big surprise that he's not slotting into the top 60 overall.

 

[Dread Clawz]

They forgot Rieder. And I don't think Grimaldi will be a Top 60 pick.

Grimaldi will definitely be a top 60 pick. I'd pick him everyday of the week over Rieder.

 

[Puckluck11]

6 swedes in top20.

i think we are gonna seemany swedish draft busts in the next few years.

Or not. i'll stick with what prof. scouts are saying until proven otherwise.

 

[member 30781]

Grimaldi will definitely be a top 60 pick. I'd pick him everyday of the week over Rieder.

He might be a top 60 pick. Size is always a BIG question. In Grimaldi's case, as good as he is, his lack of size may hinder him. I hope he is a top 60 pick though. I like what I have seen of him.

 

[YEGJuniorFan]

with the number of small guys making it in the nhl today i think someone takes a chance on him mid second round. he has too much skill and drive to pass up on. a team like tampa (st.louis) or montreal (gionta) might be interested because he can learn and develop his game from players of a similar stature

 

[leoleo3535]

further to the discussion of scouts......

keep in mind the scouting world is a small circle
these guys travel together
have dinners together
exchanges notes
help each other

while they "compete" and work for different clubs they form bonds and trust others
that being said they also know who not to trust

 

[PensFan101]

Bob McKenzie knows what's up, definitely the most informed NHL journalist when it comes to things like the draft. Surprised to see Hamilton at #6, and slightly surprised to see RNH at #2. Looks like Larsson has a small lead on the #1 pick, but really I'm not overly blown away by any of the potential #1s this year. All good prospects, but not unreal prospects like 1st overall picks often are.

Well in the last ten years we've been really spoiled with fantastic #1 picks that are almost all future stars (DiPietro would be minus the injuries, as far as I'm concerned).

Sandwiched between Lindros and Thornton in the 1990's were the following 1st overall picks:
-Roman Hamrlik
-Alexandre Daigle
-Ed Jovanovski
-Bryan Berard
-Chris Phillips

All five were good players (Daigle being the worst and Berard leaving us to wonder "what if?") but none would fit the mold of 1st Overall Picks we've become accustomed to. This is also leaving out the worst First Overall since the modern draft in Patrik Stefan in 1999...

Maybe none of the Big 4 are future superstars (though I think Larsson has #1 Defenseman written all over him), having no clear cut #1 Overall could turn out a quality high end of the draft like 2006.

I'm sure all four teams are quite happy with Johnson, Staal, Toews, and Backstrom now and wouldn't do something differently now... Heck Boston didn't mind having Kessel fall to them at all at #5.

 

[oilsands]

Sandwiched between Lindros and Thornton in the 1990's were the following 1st overall picks:
-Roman Hamrlik
-Alexandre Daigle
-Ed Jovanovski
-Bryan Berard
-Chris Phillips

Funny, 4/5 are Dmen. I wonder if the pressure for #1/2 to play in the NHL right away is a factor in hurting development. Dmen take many more years to turn out, so maybe the top ones are actually set back compared to the "sleepers".... the guys given a long developmental 'leash'.

 

[Breakfast of Champs]

Is there any chance we can see Jonathan Huberdeau passing RNH? Although i have never seen RNH play i hear he is a very gifted offensive player that needs to put on some weight to play at the next level.....sounds a lot like huberdeau to me. I have seen huberdeau play a few times this year and was very impressed by him, just wondering how high his potential could take him in the draft this year?

 

[Minister of Offence]

Is there any chance we can see Jonathan Huberdeau passing RNH? Although i have never seen RNH play i hear he is a very gifted offensive player that needs to put on some weight to play at the next level.....sounds a lot like huberdeau to me. I have seen huberdeau play a few times this year and was very impressed by him, just wondering how high his potential could take him in the draft this year?

RNH is on another level skill wise IMO. By the sounds of it Huberdeau's already passed Couturier on some team's lists though.

When it's all said and done I think Huberdeau goes 4-6. Leading the Sea Dogs into the Mem Cup could cement that.

 

[SDig14]

with the number of small guys making it in the nhl today i think someone takes a chance on him mid second round. he has too much skill and drive to pass up on. a team like tampa (st.louis) or montreal (gionta) might be interested because he can learn and develop his game from players of a similar stature

Similar things were said about Brandon Kozun, you just never know how far they will slip until draft day comes. Whether it's proper or not, size trumps skill sometimes when guys are like 5'6-5'8.

 

[nanzenkills]

6 swedes in top20.

i think we are gonna seemany swedish draft busts in the next few years.

You mean, kind of like in 2009, when 7 Swedes were taken in the first round? 5 of them have already made the NHL, the other 2 are considered near-locks to make it in some capacity.

 

[vippe]

6 swedes in top20.

i think we are gonna seemany swedish draft busts in the next few years.

Man, your hatred really has no limits

 

[Rob Nieds work ethic]

Why would they pick Larsson? They have no more offense at all. Parise could be going and all that is left is Ilya Kovalchuk. Nothing else. They need a 1st line centerman in Sean Couturier. He fits perfectly well with Jacques Lemaire's defensive system. And most importantly, I remember that most of top NJD's scouts are Quebecois: Claude Carrier, assistant director of scouting, and Marcel Pronovost, one of the oldest scout in the NHL and for the Devils and I also remembered from an interview that they're really high on SC. It's stupid too pass on a possible Jordan Staal that will complement well Kovalchuk for the next years. They have no need for Larsson, they need a franchise centerman and a replacement for Martin Brodeur.

Wow. The Devils "have no need for Larsson"?

First of all, Lemaire is not coaching the Devils next year. Are you one of those who still think Parise is leaving the Devils, or that we don't have enough cap space?

Larsson is the definition of what this team lacks and a player like him is what we need the most. The Devils are definitely picking Larsson if they go first. A PMD like him is the most pressing need for this club.

They already have promising center prospects in Josefson and Henrique, so that lowers the need for "a franchise center like Couturier" as you describe it. Also, a Jordan Staal-type player would not be the perfect complement to Kovalchuk. The Devils also have goalie prospects Frazee, Clermont and Wedgewood. Do think a Brodeur clone will just fall onto their lap? You can definitely get away with picking goalies in the later rounds.

 

[AmericanDream]

Similar things were said about Brandon Kozun, you just never know how far they will slip until draft day comes. Whether it's proper or not, size trumps skill sometimes when guys are like 5'6-5'8.

at no point in time was Kozun ever considered a top 30 pick for his draft. he simply is not on the same level as Grimaldi, who is the first 5'8 and under that I can recall being ranked in anyones top 30 the past 5 plus years. Grimaldi will go in the first round, cant wait to see him at the U18 tourney soon.

 

[arsmaster*]

at no point in time was Kozun ever considered a top 30 pick for his draft. he simply is not on the same level as Grimaldi, who is the first 5'8 and under that I can recall being ranked in anyones top 30 the past 5 plus years. Grimaldi will go in the first round, cant wait to see him at the U18 tourney soon.

Jordan Schroeder?

Tyler Ennis?

ITs all subjective, when you are that small, usually your height gets bumped up higher than it is anyways.

That said: Grimaldi has a different, tenacious element to his game....he goes to hard zones and competes much like Gilbert Brule did in junior. Hopefullly, Grimaldi gets brought along at a standard development pace to give him the best chance to suceed unlike Brule was.

 

[hawksfan50]

The complete list is already up, that was fast:

http://www.tsn.ca/draftcentre/feature/?id=36559

OK -this ranking by TSN is a ranking not necessarily who the provider of the ranking would choose in that spot himself,but rather who he thinks NHL teams have ranked in that spot.


THUS there are 2 VERY DIFFERENT types of rankings being posted:


1. A ranking you are trying to emulate what you think is a CONSENSUS view and so likekly willbe close to reality in matching what NHL teams actually select near those spots.

2. Your own idiosyncratic PREFERENCE TARGET LIST --who YOU personally would take in that spot.


Therefore I propose that any posting of a draft ranking state at the outset whether this is a CONENSUS EMULATION ranking attempt -or whether it is your own PREFERENTIAL TARGET LIST for each selection spot.

 

[Minister of Offence]

Therefore I propose that any posting of a draft ranking state at the outset whether this is a CONENSUS EMULATION ranking attempt -or whether it is your own PREFERENTIAL TARGET LIST for each selection spot.

Yeah there certainly are differences.

1. Mock draft
2. Personal list
3. Insider source list (McKenzie)

Bob's list is nice because you know it's credible and your getting information from the inside which no one here can give you in depth at all. It's my belief that once you get out of the top 10 and more so as you move down...you will see how this style of list has it's faults (not that I'm complaining).

As you move down the list you have a guy like Dan Catennacci who Bob explained, some people have him top 15-20 and some have him in the middle 2nd round or something. So Bob kinda has to start guessing. It's a good list but it's also a list he could make with the same method the day before the draft and still come out completely wrong with...because teams draft boards differ widely from each other.

I think it's a great method at the mid-term to give you a general idea of what the general interest in which players is at the time.