Draft best player available or positional need

[Klaus3154]

You always hear about teams drafting based on positional needs which I never understood considering that player most likely will be be 2-3 years away from playing in the NHL and your needs might be different at that point. I have always believed in drafting the best player available. Thoughts?

Click to read more...

 

[YoSoyLalo]

best player.

this isn’t the nfl.

 

[NJ DevLolz]

B

You always hear about teams drafting based on positional needs which I never understood considering that player most likely will be be 2-3 years away from playing in the NHL and your needs might be different at that point. I have always believed in drafting the best player available. Thoughts?

Bpa

 

[Peasy]

BPA, but if theres a marginal difference then position comes into play.

 

[AfroThunder396]

Top 50 picks are BPA, after that you can use whatever criteria you want.

 

[kingsholygrail]

Yes

 

[ck26]

Best players available. There are really only 3 hard positions, forward, defense, goalie, RW/C/LW is fluid. Most picks are 2+ years away from making the NHL, so you don't know exactly what your NHL needs are going to be.

 

[The Abusement Park]

In the first 2-3 rounds BPA, unless you have the players ranked the same then go for need. After round 3 I'd say go for boom/bust guys and hope they pan out.

 

[canucks4ever]

There's usually a massive drop off after the 2nd or 3rd pick in a draft. Many gms would take a defenseman over a 2nd line forward if they are truly aweful on d.

 

[oXo Cube]

BPA in the 1st round.

More talent than you have room for at a certain position is the exact opposite of a problem.

 

[94 Rangers]

Best player available, if you are truly loaded at a position. Trade out of the spot and accumulate assets, never reach for a position.

 

[General Disarray]

BPA

You can always trade from a position of strength for a position of need down the road like Nashville did.

If two players are near equal though then you take the center/defenseman first.

What are some examples when a team picked based on need?

Columbus picking PLD. Turned out to be a good move

 

[FlyTimmo]

This man knows the answer

 

[LeafGrief]

Unless you're picking in the top5 and/or get lucky, your player isn't playing in the NHL next year. Your positional needs might change in 12 months for a million reasons. Always pick the best player you can.

 

[olli]

bra

 

[boredmale]

Their is always exceptions but....

Play the odds, draft forward top 10, defense 2nd and 3rd round(look at previous draft chances of getting top end defensemen compared to forwards is higher this round), goalies high risk guys 4th+(strongly scout European leagues and US high school or Canadian lower levels)

11-31 is more of a judgement call(still some good forwards to be had but the later you get in the round defense comes a better option)

 

[Lays]

BPA, but if theres a marginal difference then position comes into play.

This.

 

[Atas2000]

First round it's best player available. Beyond that teams always start looking at positional needs. There is nothing odd about it.

 

[StatisticsAddict99]

Unless your team is overly stacked in one area(like Tampa’s forwards or Nashville’s D-core) you go BPA.

 

[Plural]

BPA, but if theres a marginal difference then position comes into play.

Pretty much. You don't pass on players of Eichel/Matthews caliber but picking Dubuois over Pulju is reasonable.

 

[Batrous]

best player is what your team should do

however in the case of a tie then it should be based on position with goalies first, defense second, then centre and finally winger being the last

 

[VoluntaryDom]

We’ve seen it go right and wrong both ways. Haydn Fleury was BPA for the Canes who needed offense and has just gotten buried, they would much rather have Ehlers or Nylander. But it has gone wrong for teams picking by need also, such as teams (WPG MIN but more so PIT and TBL) who passed on Forsberg in 2012 for dmen.

 

[Perfect_Drug]

Hate to say this. But NEED.
(Or BPA who isn't a winger).

Trades rarely happen, and nobody is gifting RHD or Centres without extreme overpays.

Oilers kept drafting undersized skilled smurf wingers when the need was clearly Dmen and Centres.

Hall had to be traded for Larsson. Instead we could have drafted Seguin.

If Oilers drafted (instead):
Ryan Ellis (RHD) instead of Paajaarvi (RW)
Seguin (C) instead of Hall (LW)
Hopkins (C)
Reilly (RHD) instead of Yakupov.
Risto (RHD) instead of Nurse (LHD)
Drai (C)
McD (C)


This woud be a very well rounded roster capable of competing for cups.

RNH-McDavid-Drai
**** - Seguin - Eberle

***** - Ellis
Klefbom - Reilly
Nurse or Risto lead 3rd pairing

I doubt Columbus regrets taking Dubois over Puljujaarvi. Even if Puljujaarvi breaks out and gets 60 points. Cbus wasn't going to get a #1Centre in the next 20 years without drafting one.

 

[Dr Jan Itor]

Hate to say this. But NEED.
(Or BPA who isn't a winger).

Trades rarely happen, and nobody is gifting RHD or Centres without extreme overpays.

Oilers kept drafting undersized skilled smurf wingers when the need was clearly Dmen and Centres.

Hall had to be traded for Larsson. Instead we could have drafted Seguin.

If Oilers drafted (instead):
Ryan Ellis instead of Paajaarvi
Seguin instead of Hall
Hopkins (or Larsson).
Reilly (RHD) instead of Yakupov.
Risto (RHD) instead of Nurse (LHD)
Drai
McD


This woud be a very well rounded roster capable of competing for cups.


I doubt Columbus regrets taking Dubois over Puljujaarvi. Even if Puljujaarvi breaks out and gets 60 points. Cbus wasn't going to get a #1Centre in the next 20 years without drafting one.

Ok, but if the first 5 things happen, you might not be in the position you were in 2014 or 2015.

 

[Perfect_Drug]

Ok, but if the first 5 things happen, you might not be in the position you were in 2014 or 2015.

So... what youre suggesting is drafting for need improves a team?

Interesting how that plays out.