Draft best player available or positional need

[93LEAFS]

Always BPA. It can be a tie-breaker at the top. But, considering almost all players drafted aren't going to make a serious impact for 3 years (and projecting your needs 3 years down the line is nearly impossible), you always go BPA.

Take Carolina in the 2014 draft where they took Fleury. They felt they needed a defender because they were very weak at the back, passing on Ehlers and Nylander, but they had both Staal brothers up the middle and Skinner on the wing. All of sudden Pesce and Slavin emerge as legit players, and they end up drafting the next year in a spot where the consensus BPA is a defender. Now, they have a bunch of defenders, traded Eric Staal as he was an upcoming UFA, and lack forward depth.

 

[93LEAFS]

Positional would have made edmonton so much better lol

Not really. If you want to say they take a defender over Yakupov (such as Murray, the highest rated defender) then yes, it helps. But, what if they reached for need over Draisaitl and took Haydn Fleury? You could also imply Seguin over Hall, but one, that one is still close and two, at that point Edmonton needed everything.

 

[sandysan]

These would be the things I am not considering not being an expert and all.

I would however focus my scouting staff to get me the best goalie prospect available and/or would be willing to make significant sacrifices to secure that spot.

I am a big fan of building from the net out, but if the overwhelming majority of goalie picks are risky, spending lots of resources on what ends up being a big fat maybe seems like a poor plan.

If you want to have good goaltending, what you need is a more than competent goalie who is on the tail end of their career and take the promising kid and let him spell the vet. A whole year of development to play 10-12 games in the NHL. It allows them to acclimate without having too much pressure on them, because nhl pressure chews up young goalie prospects. its the only position you really cannot shelter and the league is ripe with young goalies coming up, making big waves and then getting run out of the league pretty quick.

for example, when carey price got hurt we called up lindgren who initially went on a tear. people were saying that we should ride him because he was cheaper and not that much worse than price. that would have been a disaster, an unmitigated disaster. he might one day turn into a solid number one, he has the skills and the pedigree but the question is how long can we string him along behind price ? I am not sure that him playing multiple more years in the ahl will do wonders for his development. Being a number 2 seems to be better for development than an #1 in the ahl seeing a lot of pucks.

so I think that although draft position can help some, the best way to develop goalies is to have a reasonable system in place and low initial expectations for the new kid so that they have time to find their nhl legs. its also why I am not a fan of 1A/1B systems unless both goalies are proven nhl commodities.

but that is just me

 

[grieves]

I am a big fan of building from the net out, but if the overwhelming majority of goalie picks are risky, spending lots of resources on what ends up being a big fat maybe seems like a poor plan.

If you want to have good goaltending, what you need is a more than competent goalie who is on the tail end of their career and take the promising kid and let him spell the vet. A whole year of development to play 10-12 games in the NHL. It allows them to acclimate without having too much pressure on them, because nhl pressure chews up young goalie prospects. its the only position you really cannot shelter and the league is ripe with young goalies coming up, making big waves and then getting run out of the league pretty quick.

for example, when carey price got hurt we called up lindgren who initially went on a tear. people were saying that we should ride him because he was cheaper and not that much worse than price. that would have been a disaster, an unmitigated disaster. he might one day turn into a solid number one, he has the skills and the pedigree but the question is how long can we string him along behind price ? I am not sure that him playing multiple more years in the ahl will do wonders for his development. Being a number 2 seems to be better for development than an #1 in the ahl seeing a lot of pucks.

so I think that although draft position can help some, the best way to develop goalies is to have a reasonable system in place and low initial expectations for the new kid so that they have time to find their nhl legs. its also why I am not a fan of 1A/1B systems unless both goalies are proven nhl commodities.

but that is just me

Makes perfect sense. So what you are saying is that "getting a good goalie" is easier said than done, and to think that way might even be a pitfall. I can buy that. Especially with the psychological aspect of success and failure being a one man department who can easily be blamed for the whole team's failure (and you would be in a position to facilitate your team's demise no less).

Ok so then it seems to me that you might want to invest in large goalies that you can develop yourself. From a surface perspective it seems that having a large surface area covered with your body is a good thing, unless you lose athleticism to a point where it is a problem.

But this is just throwing around ideas about a subject I know very little about so take it as such .

 

[Yasuo]

This man knows the answer

Jahlil Okafor?

 

[FlyTimmo]

Jahlil Okafor?

sssshhhh....

 

[SI90]

BPA all day

 

[WhatWhat]

BPA always. As you get later in the draft there might not be a BOA according to your ranking so go for need at that point but chances are in the 6th you have a guys with a 4th round grade still kicking. Take the best player whenever possible

 

[sandysan]

Makes perfect sense. So what you are saying is that "getting a good goalie" is easier said than done, and to think that way might even be a pitfall. I can buy that. Especially with the psychological aspect of success and failure being a one man department who can easily be blamed for the whole team's failure (and you would be in a position to facilitate your team's demise no less).

Ok so then it seems to me that you might want to invest in large goalies that you can develop yourself. From a surface perspective it seems that having a large surface area covered with your body is a good thing, unless you lose athleticism to a point where it is a problem.

But this is just throwing around ideas about a subject I know very little about so take it as such .

taller goalies is definately a trend but at some point there is a law of diminishing returns kicks in. You still need to move and track the puck and because most goalies play a lot on their knees, the higher the center of gravity the longer it take to get down. but I think it fair to say that the days of darren pang are pretty much behind us.

Getting a good goalie prospect is pretty easy, seeing that that prospect becomes a good NHL goalie is a hell of a lot harder. I am sure that some guys spend their entire careers as " unproven" simply because they are in a log jam behind known commodities and goalies with little to no NHL experience have essentially zero trade value. it kind of sucks but for a lot of these guys, they pretty much have to hope the guys in front of them get injured in order to get a shot.

for example, lets look at montreal. we signed price to an 8 year contract, he is likely expected to be a 1A for at worst the first three or four. Charlie lindgren will likely back him up next year and play a dozen or so games a year for the next three years ( unless price gets hurt). So in his 5th year in the league he will have 50-80 games under his belt and no one is going to give up assets for a player with such a spotty record like that. So the question is, can the team keep lindgren happy while not making the best of his " prime" as he waits his turn. If he has stretches where he shows he could be a good starting NHL goalie, we might trade him but we still wont get much back.

playing goalie takes people with a certain type of personality ( i,e it helps if you are crazy) and even world class goalies go through funks where they can't stop a beachball. but established goalies seem to have the ability to work though it and come out the other side, unproven goalies are more likely to see their ticket to the show rescinded and its back to the bus for them.

 

[SI90]

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.

You can do this for any team. It’s up to the scouts.

For NYI

09-Tavares
09-CDH
10- Skinner instead of Nino
11- Scheifele instead of Strome
12- Reilly instead of Reinhart
13- Pulock
14- Nylander instead of Dal Colle
14-Ho-Sang
15- Barzal
15-Beauvillier


Skinner -Tavares - Nylander
Lee - Scheifele- Ho-Sang

Reilly-Pulock
CDH-****


I didn’t include Barzal or Beauvillier in the Line up because without Reinhart we probably don’t get them.

 

[shortfuze]

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

Why top 50? Where did that number come from?

 

[93LEAFS]

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.

A couple things here. One, Rielly is a LHD. So, if you took based on absolute need it would be Dumba most likely. Again, if you draft for need and it makes you better it may change your future draft order. Also, if you have Seguin and Nuge, Draisaitl and McDavid aren't needs anymore, as you have two top 6 centerman. You might need a LWer instead of Hall to compliment them, so maybe you take Dal Colle over Drai or you need a RWer so you take Virtanen. You also have a need at LHD, so maybe you take Haydyn Fleury.

Those are currently needs, your needs would have altered if you drafted for need. The 2009 and 2010 Oilers has needs absolutely everywhere on the roster.

You can't choose the best possible outcome of need and then keep the guys where you went BPA.

Also, really surprised at how high regard Mike Reilly is held in around here.

 

[boredmale]

11- Scheifele instead of Strome

I hate this suggestion. Nobody was claimoring for Scheifele at 5 in 2011, so to use 20/20 hindsight is stupid. You would have a better argument saying Couturier or Hamilton(ie 2 guys who were projected to go in that range). if we are going to randomly pick people why not just say Kucherov or Gaudreau, both were picked in 2011

 

[SI90]

I hate this suggestion. Nobody was claimoring for Scheifele at 5 in 2011, so to use 20/20 hindsight is stupid. You would have a better argument saying Couturier or Hamilton(ie 2 guys who were projected to go in that range). if we are going to randomly pick people why not just say Kucherov or Gaudreau, both were picked in 2011

I was showing how ridiculous it is to use hindsight. The poster used it for the oilers and I pointed out that any team could do that.

As far as Scheifele, I laughed when the Jets picked him over Couturier and Hamilton. The jokes on everyone else.

Also, it was all within a few draft spots. Scheifele was picked 7th. If I were doing it that way I would have taken Taresenko over Skinner.

I’m sorry you got so offended Boardmale lol.

I was just trying to make a point. You can make the same point and pick the players you want lol. My point was that any team can do that in hindsight. Read my post.

 

[grieves]

taller goalies is definately a trend but at some point there is a law of diminishing returns kicks in. You still need to move and track the puck and because most goalies play a lot on their knees, the higher the center of gravity the longer it take to get down. but I think it fair to say that the days of darren pang are pretty much behind us.

Getting a good goalie prospect is pretty easy, seeing that that prospect becomes a good NHL goalie is a hell of a lot harder. I am sure that some guys spend their entire careers as " unproven" simply because they are in a log jam behind known commodities and goalies with little to no NHL experience have essentially zero trade value. it kind of sucks but for a lot of these guys, they pretty much have to hope the guys in front of them get injured in order to get a shot.

for example, lets look at montreal. we signed price to an 8 year contract, he is likely expected to be a 1A for at worst the first three or four. Charlie lindgren will likely back him up next year and play a dozen or so games a year for the next three years ( unless price gets hurt). So in his 5th year in the league he will have 50-80 games under his belt and no one is going to give up assets for a player with such a spotty record like that. So the question is, can the team keep lindgren happy while not making the best of his " prime" as he waits his turn. If he has stretches where he shows he could be a good starting NHL goalie, we might trade him but we still wont get much back.

playing goalie takes people with a certain type of personality ( i,e it helps if you are crazy) and even world class goalies go through funks where they can't stop a beachball. but established goalies seem to have the ability to work though it and come out the other side, unproven goalies are more likely to see their ticket to the show rescinded and its back to the bus for them.

I value your insight on this. I think Kiprusoff would be a good example of a high-end goalie that emerged because of necessity, not necessarily because he was scouted to be that good.

 

[boredmale]

Also, it was all within a few draft spots. Scheifele was picked 7th.

From my memory their was a clear cut top 8(9 if you count Zibanejad) and Scheifele was in the next tier. If Scheifele didn't pan out the Jets would look stupid for trying to be different(say compared to taking the 2 guys I mentioned and they didn't pan out)

 

[MasterMatt25]

From my memory their was a clear cut top 8(9 if you count Zibanejad) and Scheifele was in the next tier. If Scheifele didn't pan out the Jets would look stupid for trying to be different(say compared to taking the 2 guys I mentioned and they didn't pan out)

who was in the top tier?

 

[boredmale]

who was in the top tier?

RNH, Landeskog, Huberdeau, Larsson and Couturier were sort of the top 5, Strome, Hamilton and (Ryan) Murphy were a slight notch down and you can throw Zibanejad as a clear cut #9

TSN Top 30 Archive: 2011 NHL Entry Draft

 

[sandysan]

I value your insight on this. I think Kiprusoff would be a good example of a high-end goalie that emerged because of necessity, not necessarily because he was scouted to be that good.

i'm not sure how much values there is in it. But there are lots of late bloomers ( timmy thomas for sure, but others as well) and a lot of guys go from a #2 to a 1B or to a 1A on another teams because they guy ahead of them was injured.

Good goalies need to play, which means that teams often develop guys and when they can't slot them in, move them for some other asset or keep them as insurance in case the #1 goes down. goalies that are thrown into the cauldron, even if they do well initially, often have a hard time sticking ( with some exceptions).

 

[grieves]

i'm not sure how much values there is in it. But there are lots of late bloomers ( timmy thomas for sure, but others as well) and a lot of guys go from a #2 to a 1B or to a 1A on another teams because they guy ahead of them was injured.

Good goalies need to play, which means that teams often develop guys and when they can't slot them in, move them for some other asset or keep them as insurance in case the #1 goes down. goalies that are thrown into the cauldron, even if they do well initially, often have a hard time sticking ( with some exceptions).

You have raised many good points. Clear value.

Hellebuyck is a good example of funky goalie progression. He went to get some "muscle-movement optimization training" or something like that, which was new even for the Jets' goalie coach. And because of that he is in Vezina talks.

I think it's awesome that we are still finding "gems" in areas we thought were mundane.

 

[member 157595]

BPA.

Most draftees take years to reach the NHL, and by the time that happens the team needs may well have changed significantly.

 

[sandysan]

You have raised many good points. Clear value.

Hellebuyck is a good example of funky goalie progression. He went to get some "muscle-movement optimization training" or something like that, which was new even for the Jets' goalie coach. And because of that he is in Vezina talks.

I think it's awesome that we are still finding "gems" in areas we thought were mundane.

he also does the holtby " zen" deal before games. visualization I think they call it. he has been great this year but a lot of goalies can be flash in the pans ( not saying he is one, we will just have to wait and see)

Devin dubnuyk is another guy with a non traditional path to a 1A.

 

[DaveG]

BPA with a caveat that if there's not a clear difference in the caliber of player you take the position you need.

 

[grieves]

he also does the holtby " zen" deal before games. visualization I think they call it. he has been great this year but a lot of goalies can be flash in the pans ( not saying he is one, we will just have to wait and see)

Devin dubnuyk is another guy with a non traditional path to a 1A.

Could be.

I don't think Hellebuyck will be a flash in the pan just because of his style. He is like the antithesis of flopping around. He just optimizes his huge body to be in perfect position with as little movement as possible. It looks extremely sustainable.

 

[sandysan]

BPA.

Most draftees take years to reach the NHL, and by the time that happens the team needs may well have changed significantly.

if you have no current center depth and no center prospects, I can tell you what montreal's needs will be today, tommorrow, next year, two years from now and three years from now.

but I'm sure drafting another winger will be the salve for a decade of crappy center depth.