Prospect Info: Coyotes Top Prospects 2017 - #4 (Poll closes at 4:30)

[XX]

Was anyone here touting Oliver as a potential impact D prior to the draft?

What kind of lame logic is that? Was anyone pumping up Wood the third rounder? They're both no Michael Rasmussen, sadly.

 

[hbk]

What kind of lame logic is that? Was anyone pumping up Wood the third rounder? They're both no Michael Rasmussen, sadly.

If anyone else had selected Oliver were there be anyone here clamouring to trade AHL all star Wood for him? When Oliver accomplishes something on the ice I will gladly re-examine my list. I think Wood actually earned the ranking.

I nailed the Rasmussen draft ranking btw. You're welcome.

 

[XX]

If anyone else had selected Oliver were there be anyone here clamouring to trade AHL all star Wood for him? When Oliver accomplishes something on the ice I will gladly re-examine my list. I think Wood actually earned the ranking.

That's not how trades are weighed and valued. David Rundblad was also an AHL All Star. It's really nothing to sing about. But okay. POJ can't close whatever gap you feel exists in three years? You know, despite his raw tools being better than Wood right now, except for the shot and the physical development. Really uhh... interesting argument.

I nailed the Rasmussen draft ranking btw. You're welcome.

The most important thing is that he didn't end up here.

 

[hbk]

That's not how trades are weighed and valued. David Rundblad was also an AHL All Star. It's really nothing to sing about. But okay. POJ can't close whatever gap you feel exists in three years? You know, despite his raw tools being better than Wood right now, except for the shot and the physical development. Really uhh... interesting argument.

what did Joseph accomplish this year again?

I'm not arguing he doesn't have good attributes. I'm saying it's premature to put him ahead of Wood today.

It's a legitimate argument. I'd love to be wrong. I'm hoping Joseph becomes an impact player. I'd just like to see how this season pans out and how his development curve goes in year 1 prior to anointing him a top 5 prospect.

 

[XX]

what did Oliver accomplish this year? I'm not arguing he doesn't have good attributes. I'm saying it's premature to put him ahead of Wood today.

It isn't reasonable to compare a 21 year old to an 18 year old that just got drafted straight up. You have to factor in potential, likelihood of the player to reach it, and where they are at developmentally. We do this easily with top 10 consensus picks but once you get out of the HF hotness, it takes some reflection.

POJ is way ahead of Wood at the same age. That's why he went in the first round and the Coyotes scouts were passionate about him. That makes him the 'better' prospect to me. Same argument I had with Perlini vs Duclair. Wood's AHL season was very inconsistent. When things got tough for the Roadrunners, he faded. Prior to that, he didn't do much with North Bay* or play on the big stage with Canada, so he hasn't accomplished all that much to me. He'll absolutely make the roster first and might even flash a bit with that shot, but POJ is the better prospect in my eyes, and I'm not even particularly enthusiastic about the use of that pick.

Teams (and fans) value things like contract status, age, handedness, role etc... when evaluating a trade so invoking "Would you trade X for Y" as a defense of Wood is really nonsensical and you know that.

The question should be: "In 3 years time, do you feel POJ can be a better player than Wood is now?" If the answer is yes, he's the better prospect. If you're unsure, by all means vote no.

 

[hbk]

It isn't reasonable to compare a 21 year old to an 18 year old that just got drafted straight up. You have to factor in potential, likelihood of the player to reach it, and where they are at developmentally. We do this easily with top 10 consensus picks but once you get out of the HF hotness, it takes some reflection.

POJ is way ahead of Wood at the same age. That's why he went in the first round and the Coyotes scouts were passionate about him. That makes him the 'better' prospect to me. Same argument I had with Perlini vs Duclair. Wood's AHL season was very inconsistent. When things got tough for the Roadrunners, he faded. Prior to that, he didn't do much with Brampton or play on the big stage with Canada, so he hasn't accomplished all that much to me. He'll absolutely make the roster first and might even flash a bit with that shot, but POJ is the better prospect in my eyes, and I'm not even particularly enthusiastic about the use of that pick.

Teams (and fans) value things like contract status, age, handedness, role etc... when evaluating a trade so invoking "Would you trade X for Y" as a defense of Wood is really nonsensical and you know that.

The question should be: "In 3 years time, do you feel POJ can be a better player than Wood is now?" If the answer is yes, he's the better prospect. If you're unsure, by all means vote no.

It was a mediocre draft and we reached on a player. If you want to anoint him a top 5 ranking based on that. Go to town. If he had been taken at 35 instead would he still be a top 5 prospect?

We wouldn't even bat an eye if we was drafted by another organization and offered straight up for Wood. We'd argue handedness, all star pedigree, exceeding expectations, etc. I don't think I'm wrong here. If your draft list had wording that said "I love this player because of x, y, or z" it would have some credibility but he wasn't really loved here by anyone. I understand giving the scouts the benefit of the doubt and yes they must have loved him to pass on players that I thought were at least one tier ahead of Joseph. Overall this board gave the scouting staff a free pass on this pick when we could have and probably should have been more critical. I myself took the stance, "we will have to see how this plays out" so I at least feel my prospect rankings should reflect that. If you feel that we should just give the Coyotes scouts a free pass and pump the tires on a player that you aren't even sure on then have at it. That's your prerogative I guess.

 

[rt]

I don't think POJ was much of a reach. Button had him going to TO until Liljegren fell and there was plenty of speculation that POJ was their guy. Bobby Mac had him at 33 but this draft was so all over the place with no consensus that I bet some of his ten teams had him ten or fifteen spots higher and some had him ten or fifteen spots lower.

 

[XX]

It was a mediocre draft and we reached on a player. If you want to anoint him a top 5 ranking based on that. Go to town. If he had been taken at 35 instead would he still be a top 5 prospect?

Nobody is 'anointing' anyone here. You continue to drone on about trade examples when that's clearly not appropriate, as well as 'lists', as if POJ being ten slots too high or low has any relevance in a comparison to a player that's three years his senior. You responded with a whole lot of feels and little logic, just like with Rasmussen. It gets really old. We may as well rank guys based on how close they are to the NHL, how tall they are, or how many AHL points they've scored because your argument for your list, as presented, has no internal consistency.

If we use lanky's "AHL is the best" method, Fischer should clearly be #1 here, having accomplished the most in the highest league of anyone on the list. Wood would be #2. That doesn't make any sense because we actually have to judge the player for who they are, who they might become, and at what rate they are progressing. The only tire-pumping going on here is the narrow focus on one AHL season to the exclusion of all else. If we just judge prospects for how strong they are as a prospect, that allows for players that are younger/more talented/not in the show to be ranked more appropriately. If we drafted Patrick, you'd have no problem rating him high, yet that same logic suddenly becomes a mental roadblock when applied to POJ because the gap isn't as obvious.

Nuance is hard I guess.

 

[hbk]

I don't think POJ was much of a reach. Button had him going to TO until Liljegren fell and there was plenty of speculation that POJ was their guy. Bobby Mac had him at 33 but this draft was so all over the place with no consensus that I bet some of his ten teams had him ten or fifteen spots higher and some had him ten or fifteen spots lower.

I think it was a touch of a reach. Mainly because I had several players who went after Joseph well ahead on my draft list. That's my opinion. I don't doubt that some would argue. I just don't recall anyone here really pumping Joseph's tires for our pick at 23 and i put my list out there and Joseph's name wasn't on it. He was a skinny puck moving D that will take 3-5 years before he arrives. A project pick. In fact he may be out of waiver exemption status prior to becoming a regular NHL D. I'd be lieing if I painted a rosier picture than that because that's what my draft list reflected.

I don't think it's unreasonable to have a wait and see perspective with Joseph at this point in time. I hope I'm wrong here.

 

[hbk]

Nobody is 'anointing' anyone here. You continue to drone on about trade examples when that's clearly not appropriate, as well as 'lists', as if POJ being ten slots too high or low has any relevance in a comparison to a player that's three years his senior. You responded with a whole lot of feels and little logic, just like with Rasmussen. It gets really old. We may as well rank guys based on how close they are to the NHL, how tall they are, or how many AHL points they've scored because your argument for your list, as presented, has no internal consistency.

If we use lanky's "AHL is the best" method, Fischer should clearly be #1 here, having accomplished the most in the highest league of anyone on the list. Wood would be #2. That doesn't make any sense because we actually have to judge the player for who they are, who they might become, and at what rate they are progressing. The only tire-pumping going on here is the narrow focus on one AHL season to the exclusion of all else. If we just judge prospects for how strong they are as a prospect, that allows for players that are younger/more talented/not in the show to be ranked more appropriately. If we drafted Patrick, you'd have no problem rating him high, yet that same logic suddenly becomes a mental roadblock when applied to POJ because the gap isn't as obvious.

Nuance is hard I guess.

Apparently giving me an actual opinion on Joseph's play is also hard. what is it about his play that sets him apart?

years ago I used to rate our prospects for Hockey Prospects.

I remember we took Patrick Deslaurier at 14 OV in 1998. He was very underwhelming. Mediocre stats. I kept ranking him ahead of another netminder who we took two years earlier in the 6th round and I even commented that the goalie we selected in the sixth round had the numbers that we wish the guy we took in the first would have. Deslauriers ended up playing 11 games in the show. The other goalie? That was Robert Esche.

I'm sure our scouts were patting themselves on the back for the Deslaurier selection. Deslaurier didn't earn the rankings I had given him. Esche did. I was wrong then.

Btw I was right on Rasmussen. He went in top 10 as I had said he would. Should I apologize for being right? You might not like my opinion. You may not agree with it. But I was correct on how that would play out. I was also correct Chychrun would drop like a stone on his draft day. I would like to think I know a bit about what the heck I'm talking about. Some calls are better than others but I don't apologize for making them.

 

[jacobhockey13]

Joseph and I don't think Wood is close, again. People are getting a player that's 3 years older and thus closer mixed up with a guy that's just a straight up better prospect.

Yep. I'll admit to pretty much never having seen Wood except in highlights, but I'd say that Joseph is the talent and you can never underrate talent.

 

[jacobhockey13]

Nobody is 'anointing' anyone here. You continue to drone on about trade examples when that's clearly not appropriate, as well as 'lists', as if POJ being ten slots too high or low has any relevance in a comparison to a player that's three years his senior. You responded with a whole lot of feels and little logic, just like with Rasmussen. It gets really old. We may as well rank guys based on how close they are to the NHL, how tall they are, or how many AHL points they've scored because your argument for your list, as presented, has no internal consistency.

If we use lanky's "AHL is the best" method, Fischer should clearly be #1 here, having accomplished the most in the highest league of anyone on the list. Wood would be #2. That doesn't make any sense because we actually have to judge the player for who they are, who they might become, and at what rate they are progressing. The only tire-pumping going on here is the narrow focus on one AHL season to the exclusion of all else. If we just judge prospects for how strong they are as a prospect, that allows for players that are younger/more talented/not in the show to be ranked more appropriately. If we drafted Patrick, you'd have no problem rating him high, yet that same logic suddenly becomes a mental roadblock when applied to POJ because the gap isn't as obvious.

Nuance is hard I guess.

I think it was a touch of a reach. Mainly because I had several players who went after Joseph well ahead on my draft list. That's my opinion. I don't doubt that some would argue. I just don't recall anyone here really pumping Joseph's tires for our pick at 23 and i put my list out there and Joseph's name wasn't on it. He was a skinny puck moving D that will take 3-5 years before he arrives. A project pick. In fact he may be out of waiver exemption status prior to becoming a regular NHL D. I'd be lieing if I painted a rosier picture than that because that's what my draft list reflected.

I don't think it's unreasonable to have a wait and see perspective with Joseph at this point in time. I hope I'm wrong here.

I think the solution here that satisfies all parties would be to get a good look in training camp. XX is giving POJ the benefit of the doubt based on what we've heard/read whereas hbk is more reluctant to assume that he has talent just based on his draft-eligible position, so seeing them in a competitive environment should help. Personally, if I had to wager right now I'd choose XX's method but I understand hbk's reluctance to an extent. If POJ looks almost as good or better than Wood with his abilities, then clearly he's the better prospect as he's only 18 (and just recently turned it).

 

[Jormungandr]

Apparently giving me an actual opinion on Joseph's play is also hard. what is it about his play that sets him apart?

years ago I used to rate our prospects for Hockey Prospects.

I remember we took Patrick Deslaurier at 14 OV in 1998. He was very underwhelming. Mediocre stats. I kept ranking him ahead of another netminder who we took two years earlier in the 6th round and I even commented that the goalie we selected in the sixth round had the numbers that we wish the guy we took in the first would have. Deslauriers ended up playing 11 games in the show. The other goalie? That was Robert Esche.

I'm sure our scouts were patting themselves on the back for the Deslaurier selection. Deslaurier didn't earn the rankings I had given him. Esche did. I was wrong then.

Btw I was right on Rasmussen. He went in top 10 as I had said he would. Should I apologize for being right? You might not like my opinion. You may not agree with it. But I was correct on how that would play out. I was also correct Chychrun would drop like a stone on his draft day. I would like to think I know a bit about what the heck I'm talking about. Some calls are better than others but I don't apologize for making them.

DesRochers

 

[XX]

I remember we took Patrick Deslaurier at 14 OV in 1998. He was very underwhelming. Mediocre stats. I kept ranking him ahead of another netminder who we took two years earlier in the 6th round and I even commented that the goalie we selected in the sixth round had the numbers that we wish the guy we took in the first would have. Deslauriers ended up playing 11 games in the show. The other goalie? That was Robert Esche.

I'm sure our scouts were patting themselves on the back for the Deslaurier selection. Deslaurier didn't earn the rankings I had given him. Esche did. I was wrong then.

That's a fun anecdote, but it's not one I'd use to strengthen your case here. Pi, myself, and others all pointed out to you that the evidence was overwhelmingly against taking a goalie high, yet you continued to mock the idea as a "stupid hard line in the sand." Esche is a mark in favor of being smart and following the evidence, even when it conflicts with your personal feelings. Marking DesRochers high then watching him bust doesn't invalidate that ranking; POJ and Wood could both bust, or one succeeds, the same as your goalies. DesRochers may well have been the better raw talent in every regard but he just busted. He wouldn't be the first high goalie to burn a team. Scouting has thankfully gotten markedly better since the 90s. Part of that is using evidence based reasoning. Chayka is certainly a fan.

There's a reason talent correlates with round taken for skaters, and why POJ went high. He is a much better talent than Wood was at the same age, and I don't see how he is any riskier either. That makes him the better prospect to me. You shouldn't anchor your opinion around one 'mistake' you made a long time ago. You also shouldn't use a scale that completely disadvantages recent draftees. It ends up not being internally consistent.

Btw I was right on Rasmussen. He went in top 10 as I had said he would. Should I apologize for being right? You might not like my opinion. You may not agree with it. But I was correct on how that would play out. I was also correct Chychrun would drop like a stone on his draft day. I would like to think I know a bit about what the heck I'm talking about. Some calls are better than others but I don't apologize for making them.

We never said that Rasmussen could never go top 10, only that all the evidence says that doing so is a bad idea, and the Coyotes shouldn't consider it. Happily, it all played out that way. You were also convinced Chychrun had a 10 cent noggin and was prone to panic, so you didn't want anything to do with him. You can't now turn around and say that "see, he was good all along! I knew it!" after saying such things AND saying he'd fall because teams would chill on him. I personally felt he was suffering from being in the spotlight and was having his game unfairly picked apart and said as much.

We've both been around long enough to have amassed lots of good and bad takes. I respect your opinion on prospects a great deal, and I am enthusiastic about Wood as you are. The problem here is that you are using a different grading scale than I am - one that is really heavily stacked in favor of a player like Wood. A scale that doesn't really give much room for recent draftees unless they are consensus top 10 picks or so by my estimate. We're speaking different languages at this point. It's just a team board poll, and it ultimately doesn't matter, but I feel that not being on the same page in terms of understanding the context that gives a player their value leads to things like homerism and outlandish statements. As a fanbase, we've been pretty good about accurately rating our guys recently. Wood is just getting a little too much enthusiasm at this point IMO. Your mileage may vary.

 

[absolute garbage]

There's a reason talent correlates with round taken for skaters, and why POJ went high. He is a much better talent than Wood was at the same age, and I don't see how he is any riskier either. That makes him the better prospect to me.

The emphasis on at that age, as players do get older and keep developing to some direction, changing their potential and projection. This is only more true with a guy who is 6'5. Wood has had 3 pretty impressive developmental seasons after his draft year that clearly raise his stock. He would easily be a 2nd rounder if that draft was remade right now. Possibly an early 2nd rounder, where POJ was expected to go.

I have no idea which one is the "better prospect", but your argument there is kinda foolish.

 

[PhoPhan]

Draft order should be ignored as much as possible when considering prospect rankings. I evaluate players relative to one another by two broad, complicated, subjective metrics: what is my expectation for the value this player will generate over his career, and how likely is that to happen?

I believe Joseph is more likely to be a more valuable player than Wood, especially given the direction the league is moving. Joseph is already a plus skater with a wiry, underdeveloped lower body, and it stands to reason that he could improve quite a bit as he adds strength and power. Wood is still a below average skater three years after the draft. He has the size to compensate somewhat, but it's still a liability.

Joseph's numbers are also a bit misleading. He was scoring at a staggering rate for the first couple months, but his production dropped when Charlottetown acquired a couple senior defensemen. 39 points in 63 games is more than solid for such a young defender (not to mention a 31-point increase over the previous season), but it's even more encouraging given his limited usage in the second half. Meloche and Neill have graduated from the QMJHL, so I'm expecting another major leap in Joseph's production. If he plays a full season, I think he could be close to a point per game. For what it's worth, his brother Mathieu (a forward, but also a lanky one) improved his point total by 31 from his draft year to his d+1.

Basically, Joseph is a much more dynamic player in comparison to Wood. I compared Wood to Franson earlier, and I'd probably compare Joseph to someone like Nick Leddy. Joseph is surely a rawer prospect at this point in time, but his natural tools and hockey sense make me think he'll be a better player overall.

 

[XX]

The emphasis on at that age, as players do get older and keep developing to some direction, changing their potential and projection. This is only more true with a guy who is 6'5. Wood has had 3 pretty impressive developmental seasons after his draft year that clearly raise his stock. He would easily be a 2nd rounder if that draft was remade right now. Possibly an early 2nd rounder, where POJ was expected to go.

I have no idea which one is the "better prospect", but your argument there is kinda foolish.

You can't just gift a player three seasons in a comparison without also considering where the other player will be after a similar amount of time. See Pho's post. I also wasn't the one to bring up draft lists as being relevant, that's on hbk.

I think Joseph has more tools now than Wood does, even after 3 seasons. That makes him the better prospect to me. If you're just going to use hindsight to gift guys higher spots than they deserve then why even bother to include recent draftees in the rankings? If we're just going to blindly follow what they've done at the AHL level (or higher), you may as well rank Fischer #1 over Keller and Strome. If you actually bother with looking at the player relative to their age and developmental curve, we can start to rank guys properly.

 

[Jakey53]

Was anyone here touting Oliver as a potential impact D prior to the draft? I think there's a lot of Monday morning quarterbacking based on where we picked Oliver. Not for anything he did on the ice.

Wood was an all-star in the AHL last season.

Correct. Oliver is our new shiny toy at the moment.

 

[rt]

I thought people were referencing Oliver Ekman-Larsson with this "Oliver" business. Are you guys talking about POJ? Why would you refer to him as Oliver? That's in no way his name. His name is Pierre Olivier Joseph and he goes by "PO". Do you guys call Pernell Karl Subban "Kurt"? Because it's a similar but wrong version of his 2nd name that he doesn't even go by? Or do refer to him as "PK" like the rest of the world? Can we start calling OEL "Ekbald"?

 

[Jakey53]

The emphasis on at that age, as players do get older and keep developing to some direction, changing their potential and projection. This is only more true with a guy who is 6'5. Wood has had 3 pretty impressive developmental seasons after his draft year that clearly raise his stock. He would easily be a 2nd rounder if that draft was remade right now. Possibly an early 2nd rounder, where POJ was expected to go.

I have no idea which one is the "better prospect", but your argument there is kinda foolish.

The draft is a crap shoot at the best of times. I have seen players taken in top ten never pan out and players taken in higher rounds making a big impact. Most times though, the odds of players taken after the first round making the NHL is very slim.

 

[absolute garbage]

You can't just gift a player three seasons in a comparison without also considering where the other player will be after a similar amount of time.

It's not "gifting". It is literally what has happened.

I think Joseph has more tools now than Wood does, even after 3 seasons. That makes him the better prospect to me.

You could argue he projects to be a better player than Wood for sure. Again, I never said that. It just seemed like you were blindly tunneling on draft position and ignoring how a player does afterwards (Wood has clearly done better than an average 3rd rounder).

If you're just going to use hindsight to gift guys higher spots than they deserve then why even bother to include recent draftees in the rankings? If we're just going to blindly follow what they've done at the AHL level (or higher), you may as well rank Fischer #1 over Keller and Strome. If you actually bother with looking at the player relative to their age and developmental curve, we can start to rank guys properly.

Huh? Have you not seen Wood's developmental curve?

Top tier straw man though.

 

[hbk]

XX, if you actually were pimping Joseph's (my bad by calling him Oliver rt) tires prior to the draft then I could see placing him in Top 5. Reality is though nobody here was touting this guy as anything but a project. Those that had him higher ranked weren't here saying this guy is going to be for sure a top 4D when we drafted him. Go back to the outrage when we took Conner Murphy. Who had Murphy in their top 20? Who was saying immediately after his selection that this was a really good pick and he would play in NHL?

Joseph pick it was crickets here. We cut the scouts slack because of the other deals that were made.

Should we put Westerlund in top 5 now because we reached by about 20-30 slots to select him?

I form my rankings based on what I see. Come back at me with an opinion on a player for once.

As for the goalie question. Again mediocre draft. But the goalie in question went at 26. Your draft philosophy is to never ever ever take a goalie in the first round. That's legitimate but to me it's a preference, not a hard rule. My argument remains it depends on the draft and the goalie. On my list I had Ottinger ahead of Joseph. I don't apologize for that. i wasn't alone. I think given some of the names that were on the board that it would have been unlikely that i would have fully supported an Ottinger pick at 23 but I'm mad at myself for giving the organization a free pass on Joseph's selection. I also do think there is further analysis required on how early is too early to target a winger in the draft.

 

[Bonsai Tree]

I think that we're overly concerned about Wood's speed. How many 6-5 defenders are plus skaters? A reasonable expectation is that he should be positionally sound, and strong both around the crease and on the boards. Wood needs to bring around his defensive game in order to be that top 4 defender, and that can happen.

Fleet defenders a wonderful assets, as long as that's not all a team has in its defensemen corps.

I would much rather have a big defender up against Matthew Tkachuk in the crease, for example, than OEL.

 

[rt]

I wasn't really in love with anyone at 23.

Yet another tiny LHS in Eeli Tolvanen? I guess. I mean it would've been good value at the spot but enough's enough. How many clones can we have? I'd probably have taken him over POJ but it's not a wide margin here. I certainly wouldn't bother trading POJ for him now.

Klim Kostin? Sure. Toolsy guy with a big frame and some intriguing upside. But also wildly inconsistent with wnourmous red flags. Extraordinarily risky even for a pick in the 20s. I don't have him far ahead of or far behind POJ. Toss a coin.

Vesalainen? Big, fast LHS winger. Fine. Limited upside. Just sort of okay I guess. Nothing very appealing. I'd rather have POJ. Even before the draft I'd have said that.

Jokiharju is a little more intriguing. Especially after moving DeAngelo. This probably would be my pick. But he's not big, not strong, and not as fast as you'd want. I like him better, but not by much. Not worth regretting.

Poehling would probably be my 2nd choice. Also ahead of POJ. But by very little. He's kind of the Kostin inverse. Another big center you'd be happy to have. But he's a limited upside safe pick. We don't need that wiith a prospect pool that loooks like ours. Burn a 1st rounder on a guy who's immediately soooo far down the forward prospect depth chart? I don't know.

As I've said all along. The 2017 draft sucked. We drafted a rangy, athletic D with all compass mobility, all around upside, and a huge focus on character and leadership. Given the big fat warts on other prospects available at 23, I really can't convince myself to worry about our decision. He seems fine. The pick is fine. There wasn't a great pick to be made, there. Not an apparent one anyway. Some kid will come out of nowhere but that always happens.

 

[PhoPhan]

XX, if you actually were pimping Joseph's (my bad by calling him Oliver rt) tires prior to the draft then I could see placing him in Top 5. Reality is though nobody here was touting this guy as anything but a project. Those that had him higher ranked weren't here saying this guy is going to be for sure a top 4D when we drafted him. Go back to the outrage when we took Conner Murphy. Who had Murphy in their top 20? Who was saying immediately after his selection that this was a really good pick and he would play in NHL?

Joseph pick it was crickets here. We cut the scouts slack because of the other deals that were made.

Should we put Westerlund in top 5 now because we reached by about 20-30 slots to select him?

I form my rankings based on what I see. Come back at me with an opinion on a player for once.

As for the goalie question. Again mediocre draft. But the goalie in question went at 26. Your draft philosophy is to never ever ever take a goalie in the first round. That's legitimate but to me it's a preference, not a hard rule. My argument remains it depends on the draft and the goalie. On my list I had Ottinger ahead of Joseph. I don't apologize for that. i wasn't alone. I think given some of the names that were on the board that it would have been unlikely that i would have fully supported an Ottinger pick at 23 but I'm mad at myself for giving the organization a free pass on Joseph's selection. I also do think there is further analysis required on how early is too early to target a winger in the draft.

I wouldn't have taken Joseph at 23 myself, but I had him ranked 28th predraft, so I wouldn't call it a reach, either. Philosophically, though, he's exactly the type of player you take at that stage of the draft: raw but toolsy, smart, young for his class, and high upside. I think he's a second pairing guy long term, which is more than acceptable for a late first, but I'll also concede that his limited usage makes me feel like I can defer to pro scouts on this one.