Draft and UDFA Thread 2017-18

[bobbop]

I sifted through 8 or 9 mock drafts yesterday and one thing that jumped out me was that I saw Calen Addison going anywhere from 21st to not in the first three rounds. Pretty wide range variety of opinions there.

 

[True Blue]

Do you think Farabee has a higher potential ceiling than Wahlstrom or Kotkaniemi?

I think it has come to the point that Farabee has actually become underrated. People here the term "motor & 200 foot game" and automatically see a plumber.

 

[True Blue]

My gut feeling remains that the pick is either going to be Boqvist or Kotkaniemi. Nothing concrete, just the feeling I get. I also believe the Rangers are trading up to take Kravtsov.

Going with Farabee. He seems to fit the narrative that both Gorton & Quinn espouse. Not saying that he would be my choice over a Dobson or Whalstrom, but that is where I am coming out.

 

[Kupo]

This is an interesting point.

For example I think Kotkaniemi will almost certainly play in the NHL in a top six role. What I'm not sure about is whether he's a first line center.

I think Wahlstrom has 30+ goal potential, but if he's not a scoring winger, I'm not sure he makes it in another role.

I think Farabee is more likely to be a first line player than Kotkaniemi, but Kotkaniemi is a center who has the size and maybe a shot to be a first line center.

I think Dobson has slightly more upside than Bouchard, but Bouchard is the best defenseman now.

Neither of those guys strike me as guys who can take over a game and change it's direction, but their floors are higher than Hughes and Boqvist.

Depending on how one values certain elements, you can come up with different answers to the question.

For starters, what is ceiling? What is the best?

Is it the most points? Most goals? Best CORSI?

Is it the best spurts? The longest spurts?

Is it steady or danger?

Is it peak or longevity?

How do we measure points vs. a complete game? What's the exchange rate?

All things being equal, two players score the same for you, what position do you value more?

How do you value pure skill vs. likelihood of being able to use those skills in real-world, NHL settings?

How important do you think skating is?

Is said player closer to the finished product? Further? Is today's better prospect the guy you pick 5 years from now?

How much risk is too much? How "safe" is too safe"

Is one prospect benefiting from their environment more than another?

Etc. etc. etc.

If one isn't asking themself these questions, and more, they probably should be.

Jesus Christ this is a good post.

We’re lucky to have you here Edge.

 

[Off Sides]

I think it has come to the point that Farabee has actually become underrated. People here the term "motor & 200 foot game" and automatically see a plumber.

I don't think I am underrating him, I just don't see the ceiling... the specialty he is likely to provide that others possibly could. He skates very well, he is a pain in the butt to go against, he has some offensive tools, but I think the offensive tools some of the other have show more promise.

It's all subjective, but I just do not get the top line ceiling feel from his game. I think it's possible people really want those high end tools to be there because the other parts of his game are very attractive.

 

[Brooklyn Rangers Fan]

If the draft plays out the way most mocks had it going as recently as May, then I'm fine if management thinks the guy at 9 needs to be Farabee (or Kotkaniemi or Bouchard, etc.). If, however, it plays out in line with the more recent rumors regarding guys falling and as many as 3 centers entering the top 10 and we take Farabee over Wahlstrom, Hughes, or Boqvist, I'll be irritated. Not 2010-like enraged, but irritated.

 

[Edge]

I don't think I am underrating him, I just don't see the ceiling... the specialty he is likely to provide that others possibly could. He skates very well, he is a pain in the butt to go against, he has some offensive tools, but I think the offensive tools some of the other have show more promise.

It's all subjective, but I just do not get the top line ceiling feel from his game. I think it's possible people really want those high end tools to be there because the other parts of his game are very attractive.

Interestingly enough, I get that because I kind of feel that way about Kotkaniemi.

He plays a mature game, he doesn't look out of place playing alongside men. But he also doesn't look like a driver to me, especially in the center position, and while a lot of the skills seem to be in place for a good, long NHL career, they also don't scream top line to me. So in that regard, I know what it's like to look at a prospect and not quite really love him or feel like people want him to be more than he is because they really like what they see.

Having said that, I don't really know if there's anything else Farabee could really have done different to make himself look like a legit offensive threat. The results are there.

But I "get" what it's like to look at a prospect and feel the way you do.

 

[I Eat Crow]

Interestingly enough, I get that because I kind of feel that way about Kotkaniemi.

He plays a mature game, he doesn't look out of place playing alongside men. But he also doesn't look like a driver to me, especially in the center position, and while a lot of the skills seem to be in place for a good, long NHL career, they also don't scream top line to me. So in that regard, I know what it's like to look at a prospect and not quite really love him or feel like people want him to be more than he is because they really like what they see.

Having said that, I don't really know if there's anything else Farabee could really have done different to make himself look like a legit offensive threat. The results are there.

But I "get" what it's like to look at a prospect and feel the way you do.

I have to agree with you regarding Kotkaniemi. A lot of his rising on draft boards has to do with recently bias. He had a great U18 tournament. He didn't exactly set the world on fire points wise in Liiga. Alex Barkov, for reference, was almost a point per game player in Liiga in his draft season. Kotkaniemi barely cracked 0.5 PPG.

Like you, I see a nice prospect, but not a dominating force like Barkov is. If Kotkaniemi goes top 5, I think it's a big reach and the team taking him would have drafted for need or position when better players are available on the board at that slot.

 

[Off Sides]

Interestingly enough, I get that because I kind of feel that way about Kotkaniemi.

He plays a mature game, he doesn't look out of place playing alongside men. But he also doesn't look like a driver to me, especially in the center position, and while a lot of the skills seem to be in place for a good, long NHL career, they also don't scream top line to me. So in that regard, I know what it's like to look at a prospect and not quite really love him or feel like people want him to be more than he is because they really like what they see.

Having said that, I don't really know if there's anything else Farabee could really have done different to make himself look like a legit offensive threat. The results are there.

But I "get" what it's like to look at a prospect and feel the way you do.

I would not be surprised to see either of them end up middle 6 players instead of top line players, but like you also said above, being a center may give that player a bit more leeway to prove or not be able to prove he belongs on a top line.

Also I am not here to proclaim I know as much about the prospects as any one else does, in fact I probably know less about them but from all the reading, You-tubing, recency bias, only seeing and reading mostly the good from all that, I'd just prefer a different selection at #9. But that certainly does not mean I am not totally wrong.

 

[NYR Viper]

I would not be surprised to see either of them end up middle 6 players instead of top line players, but like you also said above, being a center may give that player a bit more leeway to prove or not be able to prove he belongs on a top line.

Also I am not here to proclaim I know as much about the prospects as any one else does, in fact I probably know less about them but from all the reading, You-tubing, recency bias, only seeing and reading mostly the good from all that, I'd just prefer a different selection at #9. But that certainly does not mean I am not totally wrong.

You sir have been a joy to discuss with, I will be honest. Most people can't formulate their thoughts and opinions like you have done so far even with the questioning that has taken place of your opinions. Need more of this on these boards

 

[Edge]

I have to agree with you regarding Kotkaniemi. A lot of his rising on draft boards has to do with recently bias. He had a great U18 tournament. He didn't exactly set the world on fire points wise in Liiga. Alex Barkov, for reference, was almost a point per game player in Liiga in his draft season. Kotkaniemi barely cracked 0.5 PPG.

Like you, I see a nice prospect, but not a dominating force like Barkov is. If Kotkaniemi goes top 5, I think it's a big reach and the team taking him would have drafted for need or position when better players are available on the board at that slot.

I think Kotkaniemi has a high probability of being a good, or even very good NHL player for a decade or more.

He plays a mature game and one that locks very steady on the ice. But I don't know if the shot is there, or the skating, or the creativity. I think he's incredibly smart, I think he's going to be an efficient player, I think he'll be a guy who can adapt to different styles. I think he looked very good playing against kids, after spending his time against men. But what about when those kids catch up to him?

I could see him being a kid who comes in at a very good level at 19 or 20 years old and posts 20 goals and 50+ points, but then also kind of maintains that level for the next 10 years. And that's not a bad thing by any stretch of the imagination. But I think people might have a somewhat different fantasy when it comes to taking a center this high and seeing a guy come into the league with greater success at a a younger age.

Does he have that 20 goal/70 point season in him like one of the Koivus? Or is he more like their median season for those guys: 15-20 goals, and 50-55 points. A core player, but not necessarily a focal point.

I just get the feeling that the expectation for Kotkaniemi leading up the draft might be a half-a-step to a step above where it should be. As if we're putting him just slightly ahead of some of the other guys in his group, whereas I see him more towards the middle or latter portion of that grouping.

 

[Edge]

I would not be surprised to see either of them end up middle 6 players instead of top line players, but like you also said above, being a center may give that player a bit more leeway to prove or not be able to prove he belongs on a top line.

Also I am not here to proclaim I know as much about the prospects as any one else does, in fact I probably know less about them but from all the reading, You-tubing, recency bias, only seeing and reading mostly the good from all that, I'd just prefer a different selection at #9. But that certainly does not mean I am not totally wrong.

What's I find curious is that even in reports that have him higher, a lot of people stop short of calling him a top center. I've not really heard too many established observers declare him in that range. They acknowledge he might be the best center heading into the draft, they acknowledge the skill, but there's almost this feeling of uncertainty with him.

 

[Ola]

What is potential? How many players ‘can take over a game’ in the NHL today? 1? 2? 3? Yeah it’s safe to say that Farabee won’t become that good.

Johan Klingberg is one of the best Ds in the NHL right now. Like maybe not top 5-10, but up there at least. He was 0+5 in 27 games for Frolunda in the U20 league in Sweden his draft year. Did he have potential?

Henrik Zetterberg was when he peaked up there among like at least top 10-15 MVP in hockey, he was seen as a jack of all trades when drafted.

The NHL game is a 200 feet game. Scoring and dominating is so much about playing that 200 feet game. And even if there maybe is a bit more room for offensive cherry pickers in the game today than 10 years ago, it’s still not a 70 feet game but at least a 140 feet game if you get what I mean.

I still think we are way to much focused on ‘top end’ ability when looking at potential. I don’t for a second think there are any fundamental reasons for why a Farabee should be deemed to have less potential than say a Wahlstrom or Kupari or Kotkaniemi or someone like that.

But with that said, it can’t go in the other direction either. The player that can push himself and develop tremendously well will become the best. I love Farabee — but I am not 100% sold on that he is the best kid available at 9.

 

[NYR Viper]

To me, winning battles all over the ice is what I would be looking for. It's those same battles that eventually lead to winning games. Points will come

 

[Lion Hound]

Wonder how many times McKenzie stopped, rewound, reviewed, texted scouts and changed his thinking on his rankings this week?

 

[kovazub94]

I understand.

But define talent for me.

It's kind of the same questions I posted above:
.....
Each of us has a pretty good idea of how we define talent. Most of us would be surprised as to how much room for interpretation there is when we get below the surface.

It becomes even more interesting if you have to evaluate forwards vs. defensemen.

 

[Off Sides]

What is potential? How many players ‘can take over a game’ in the NHL today? 1? 2? 3? Yeah it’s safe to say that Farabee won’t become that good.

Johan Klingberg is one of the best Ds in the NHL right now. Like maybe not top 5-10, but up there at least. He was 0+5 in 27 games for Frolunda in the U20 league in Sweden his draft year. Did he have potential?

Henrik Zetterberg was when he peaked up there among like at least top 10-15 MVP in hockey, he was seen as a jack of all trades when drafted.

The NHL game is a 200 feet game. Scoring and dominating is so much about playing that 200 feet game. And even if there maybe is a bit more room for offensive cherry pickers in the game today than 10 years ago, it’s still not a 70 feet game but at least a 140 feet game if you get what I mean.

I still think we are way to much focused on ‘top end’ ability when looking at potential. I don’t for a second think there are any fundamental reasons for why a Farabee should be deemed to have less potential than say a Wahlstrom or Kupari or Kotkaniemi or someone like that.

But with that said, it can’t go in the other direction either. The player that can push himself and develop tremendously well will become the best. I love Farabee — but I am not 100% sold on that he is the best kid available at 9.

I think drafting a kid with a less than stellar all around game who has some trait that is outstanding just gives me more hope the Rangers could develop the rest of that kids game and he'd still have that outstanding trait.

In my mind, the goal scoring prowess, and or the knack for being able to beat a couple defenders going up ice (a transition game) are kind of stuff a player has or does not have and there is no developing those much beyond what is there.

Similarly for motor and defensive awareness and while I like those traits very much I just put it lower on the scale of things.

For an example, I think Jeff Carter absolutely always had some goal scoring ability, but it took him some time to even get to a 125 foot game, and even now I'm not sure he plays an honest 200 foot game, but he was pretty darn good in all the on ice areas in the runs he had with the Kings and was still a scoring threat.

Another example would be Gomez, the guy could break a trap, he could skate in the neutral zone like no ones business, but once he got there things often went astray, I think he had something that was pretty valuable even though there was some deficiency.

Nylander, the Jagr one, he had that something, the guy could play keep away.

More recent examples Barzal can do stuff, Debrincat has something with that scoring, Connor, Aho, there is just something that type of player has and that is what I'd be hoping for. If that is not available to me the next best thing is not really safe, it would probably be defensemen who I though eventually could log a ton of minutes and do well trying to limit the first type of player I'd be looking for.

 

[Off Sides]

You sir have been a joy to discuss with, I will be honest. Most people can't formulate their thoughts and opinions like you have done so far even with the questioning that has taken place of your opinions. Need more of this on these boards

Thanks, I appreciate a good debate and I try not to be a jerk, mostly by deleting a bunch of stuff I wrote before I post it.

 

[Edge]

It becomes even more interesting if you have to evaluate forwards vs. defensemen.

Exactly. Which is why I think most people would be surprised to learn how close a lot of team rankings are. For example, you could have Boqvist and Kotkaniemi on the same level, but for completely different reasons. So in the case of a "tie" you start looking at other factors --- age, position, risk factor, injury histories, personality, etc.

 

[Gardner McKay]

So... First round of the mods mock draft went like this for the Rangers:

9. Boqvist
26. Thomas
28. Kaut

How would we feel if this was our first round results on June 22?

Some other popular names here like Miller, Sandin, Kupari, Kravtsov, Denisenko, Bokk, Lundestrom, Dellandrea, Veleno, Wilde, were already selected.

 

[Thirty One]

Wonder how many times McKenzie stopped, rewound, reviewed, texted scouts and changed his thinking on his rankings this week?

They're not really his rankings. He just polls scouts and compiles the results.

 

[NYR Viper]

So... First round of the mods mock draft went like this for the Rangers:

9. Boqvist
26. Thomas
28. Kaut

How would we feel if this was our first round results on June 22?

Some other popular names here like Miller, Sandin, Kupari, Kravtsov, Denisenko, Bokk, Lundestrom, Dellandrea, Veleno, Wilde, were already selected.

That looks like a good 1st round to me

 

[RangerBoy]

Bob McKenzie said the draft structure has changed. The 3 wingers are not a sure thing to go 2-4. Some scouts have Zadina outside of their top 5. Zadina didn't do anything wrong but teams are putting more emphasis on the centers and D. Hayton and Kravstov have moved up. Montreal could take Kotkaniemi at #3. It's not a reach according to Bob.

Latest Bobcast.

1-Dahlin
2-Ruskie

After that is fair game.

 

[NYR Viper]

Bob McKenzie said the draft structure has changed. Some scouts have Zadina outside of their top 5. Zadina didn't do anything wrong but teams are putting more emphasis on the centers and D. Hayton and Kravstov have moved up. Montreal could take Kotkaniemi at #3. It's not a reach according to Bob.

Latest Bobcast.

Thanks for filling us in. This would make sense based on what we have heard from other sources as well. I hope people reach for Kotkaniemi and Hayton that high

 

[GregSirico]

According to Bob McKenzie, multiple scouts have Zadina falling out of the top 5.