Draft Misses

[Marky9er]

I did want Valimaki, but to me that isn't the big miss. Samorukov is. Hindsight is easy though and I think I wanted Lipanov who looks very meh now. London fans were saying Samorukov was better than Bouchard, and the best defenseman of the series. Hard to say though, I think London was stacked on D and Guelph was higher end up front. They were ripping Bouchard a new one for poor defense that's for sure.

*I'm aware that Bouchard and Samorukov are from different draft classes but Samorukov definitely has a rising stock and we passed on him several times.

 

[Lampedampe]

I’m sorry, it’s a quote from the American office.

I understand what you are saying and you even said it correctly, I was just quoting a show.

Ahh okay, didn't get the reference. Always get so insecure about my english on this board hehe.

 

[Goalie guy]

You can only ooze two things. Sexuality and pus

And if you have it with the wrong one you will get the pus lol.

 

[Pavels Dog]

How so? We needed a dman it’s been years and Brannstrom was the next dman chosen , didn’t want him?foote and valimaki available

Shoulda been brannstrom

Brannstrom is a good prospect but nothing amazing. He was a reach at #15 and was later deemed expendable by Vegas.

 

[Hockeyfannnn91]

Brannstrom is a good prospect but nothing amazing. He was a reach at #15 and was later deemed expendable by Vegas.

Lmao if that’s what you believe I don’t know what to tell you , trust me it f***en killed Vegas to throw him in the deal for stone they didn’t want to lose him that’s why sens didn’t get an extra 1st or bonus picks if Vegas resigned stone , losing brannstrom was a big deal

He wasn’t a reach at 15 I find it funny people are saying we couldn’t take him at 9 cause he was 15 as if it’s a big gap, at that point picking 9 you just take who you like obviously as long as it’s not someone who’s projected 40-70 , flyers took jay o brien last year a lot sooner than projected , happens all the time it’s obvious as hell we took Rasmussen for his size , look at the 2017 draft we went for size and it shows , that whole draft overall for us looks mediocre and thank god we had a great 2018 draft and I’m even more confident now with yzerman back we’ll have a repeat draft outcome

 

[DatsyukToZetterberg]

Lmao if that’s what you believe I don’t know what to tell you , trust me it ****en killed Vegas to throw him in the deal for stone they didn’t want to lose him that’s why sens didn’t get an extra 1st or bonus picks if Vegas resigned stone , losing brannstrom was a big deal

He wasn’t a reach at 15 I find it funny people are saying we couldn’t take him at 9 cause he was 15 as if it’s a big gap, at that point picking 9 you just take who you like obviously as long as it’s not someone who’s projected 40-70 , flyers took jay o brien last year a lot sooner than projected , happens all the time it’s obvious as hell we took Rasmussen for his size , look at the 2017 draft we went for size and it shows , that whole draft overall for us looks mediocre and thank god we had a great 2018 draft and I’m even more confident now with yzerman back we’ll have a repeat draft outcome

Brannstrom is a very good prospect, he's likely in the top 10 or 15 of defensive prospects - that doesn't mean he would have been any less of a reach at 9. If you look at where he was ranked by most publications, Hockey Writers shows a compiled list, he would have been a reach at 9. I have the same issues with our player selection in 2017, but reaching for a defenceman wouldn't have been a good choice either. I think with the help of hindsight we can see he should have been rated a bit higher, likely in the top 10 or 15, as he had a fantastic draft year which was very comparable to that of Boqvist's in 2018.

I think a more egregious passing on a smaller sized dman was not taking Girard in 2016 and instead taking Smith. Smith isn't bad but Girard will likely be a top 4 dman for a long time in the NHL and he probably could even play at a top pairing level as he's still just 20.

 

[Roy S]

Sebastian Aho in the 2015 draft. I remember a number of posters wanting the Wings to pick him. In retrospect, that was a miss.

 

[Zetterberg4Captain]

Brannstrom is a good prospect but nothing amazing. He was a reach at #15 and was later deemed expendable by Vegas.

To be fair it was to land Stone, a guy better than anyone we have

 

[Pavels Dog]

Lmao if that’s what you believe I don’t know what to tell you , trust me it ****en killed Vegas to throw him in the deal for stone they didn’t want to lose him that’s why sens didn’t get an extra 1st or bonus picks if Vegas resigned stone , losing brannstrom was a big deal

He wasn’t a reach at 15 I find it funny people are saying we couldn’t take him at 9 cause he was 15 as if it’s a big gap, at that point picking 9 you just take who you like obviously as long as it’s not someone who’s projected 40-70 , flyers took jay o brien last year a lot sooner than projected , happens all the time it’s obvious as hell we took Rasmussen for his size , look at the 2017 draft we went for size and it shows , that whole draft overall for us looks mediocre and thank god we had a great 2018 draft and I’m even more confident now with yzerman back we’ll have a repeat draft outcome

I don’t know why you’re obsessing over Brannstrom since it’s still way too early and he hasn’t accomplished anything. He’d be a nice prospect to have but not so good that he’d solve our D issues.
There’s a reason everyone only talked Liljegren in the top 10-15, no one else was really rated that high.
For draft misses imo we should go back to at least 15 or 16 to make any realistic takes.

 

[Voodoo Glow Skulls]

How so? We needed a dman it’s been years and Brannstrom was the next dman chosen , didn’t want him?foote and valimaki available

Shoulda been brannstrom

Long time supporter of Brannstrom.

 

[Marky9er]

Sebastian Aho in the 2015 draft. I remember a number of posters wanting the Wings to pick him. In retrospect, that was a miss.

Agreed, 2015: miss.

 

[Voodoo Glow Skulls]

Ahh okay, didn't get the reference. Always get so insecure about my english on this board hehe.

I never noticed.

Not being a jerk.

 

[Hockeyfannnn91]

Brannstrom is a very good prospect, he's likely in the top 10 or 15 of defensive prospects - that doesn't mean he would have been any less of a reach at 9. If you look at where he was ranked by most publications, Hockey Writers shows a compiled list, he would have been a reach at 9. I have the same issues with our player selection in 2017, but reaching for a defenceman wouldn't have been a good choice either. I think with the help of hindsight we can see he should have been rated a bit higher, likely in the top 10 or 15, as he had a fantastic draft year which was very comparable to that of Boqvist's in 2018.

I think a more egregious passing on a smaller sized dman was not taking Girard in 2016 and instead taking Smith. Smith isn't bad but Girard will likely be a top 4 dman for a long time in the NHL and he probably could even play at a top pairing level as he's still just 20.

Bertuzzi was a reach where we took him and it worked out fine man, I’m not talking about taking someone who was 50 spots ahead


Found this quickly

https://thehockeywriters.com/2017-nhl-draft-final-consensus-rankings/


Rasmussen 12 and brannstrom 21 , not that big of a gap man ,Foote valimaki was also in there in between which would have been a much better pick. Like I said man at 9 you pick you like , who gives a f*** if you like someone projected 15-20 a lot more than some publication says that’s where they player should be taken it’s not like a top 5 pick at 8-12 you start taking who you like which explains someone like veleno dropping

The Draft Analyst | 2017 NHL Draft: Final Rankings

Another one brannstrom 12 and Rasmussen 23 , like I said f*** nhl rankings a lot were high on brannstrom , you follow your own rankings come draft day

We need defense badly and had 3-4 good ones to choose from and
Passed them all over , I disagree with you completely that choosing a dman wouldn’t have been a good call , any of those 4dmen would have been a much better selection for the redwings

It has nothing to do with hindsight man I believe this from day 1 of that draft, we’ve had problems since lidstrom retired in the back end and it continues I don’t know why it’s that hard to understand it’s not like we were drafting a top 3-5 pick at 9 we should have taken one of the top dmen(my preference that day was brannstrom but I’d have been happy with Foote or valimaki)

Taking Rasmussen over smith was a way bigger f*** up , smith at least will provide us with some toughness and grit for the playoffs, we don’t have any smiths on this team

We’ll have to agree to disagree , we ain’t changing each others minds on this one

 

[Hockeyfannnn91]

I don’t know why you’re obsessing over Brannstrom since it’s still way too early and he hasn’t accomplished anything. He’d be a nice prospect to have but not so good that he’d solve our D issues.
There’s a reason everyone only talked Liljegren in the top 10-15, no one else was really rated that high.
For draft misses imo we should go back to at least 15 or 16 to make any realistic takes.

Yes , whatever you say

 

[Hockeyfannnn91]

Long time supporter of Brannstrom.

It’s ok we didn’t make a mistake cause Rasmussen was 9th and brannstrom was taken 6 spots later and wasn’t projected to be a top pick

Amazing stuff here

 

[Pavels Dog]

It’s ok we didn’t make a mistake cause Rasmussen was 9th and brannstrom was taken 6 spots later and wasn’t projected to be a top pick

Amazing stuff here

Which of his 2 NHL games convinced you he should have been taken at 9?

 

[Hockeyfannnn91]

Which of his 2 NHL games convinced you he should have been taken at 9?

Which of Rasmussen’s 62 games playing 5 minutes a game convinced you we should have taken him at 9?

 

[Marky9er]

Which of Rasmussen’s 62 games playing 5 minutes a game convinced you we should have taken him at 9?

Probably November 1st watching Will Butcher try to defend him.

 

[DatsyukToZetterberg]

Bertuzzi was a reach where we took him and it worked out fine man, I’m not talking about taking someone who was 50 spots ahead


Found this quickly

https://thehockeywriters.com/2017-nhl-draft-final-consensus-rankings/


Rasmussen 12 and brannstrom 21 , not that big of a gap man ,Foote valimaki was also in there in between which would have been a much better pick. Like I said man at 9 you pick you like , who gives a **** if you like someone projected 15-20 a lot more than some publication says that’s where they player should be taken it’s not like a top 5 pick at 8-12 you start taking who you like which explains someone like veleno dropping

That link you posted was the same one that I had posted. When you're talking about early 1st round picks I think most people would say a difference of 9 spots is getting pretty close to "reach" territory. The whole point of creating a consensus tool like they did was to show where the players would fall on aggregate, so a 9 pick difference is somewhat significant. As well, when you look at McKenzie's rankings the difference is even larger, his rankings come from 10 different scouts so they typically capture the overall feeling NHL teams have towards players. I think had we taken any of the defenceman with Necas or Vilardi still on the board you would have seen a lot of people still dislike the pick, I'd have been one of them in all honesty.

The Draft Analyst | 2017 NHL Draft: Final Rankings

Another one brannstrom 12 and Rasmussen 23 , like I said **** nhl rankings a lot were high on brannstrom , you follow your own rankings come draft day

We need defense badly and had 3-4 good ones to choose from and
Passed them all over , I disagree with you completely that choosing a dman wouldn’t have been a good call , any of those 4dmen would have been a much better selection for the redwings

It has nothing to do with hindsight man I believe this from day 1 of that draft, we’ve had problems since lidstrom retired in the back end and it continues I don’t know why it’s that hard to understand it’s not like we were drafting a top 3-5 pick at 9 we should have taken one of the top dmen(my preference that day was brannstrom but I’d have been happy with Foote or valimaki)

Taking Rasmussen over smith was a way bigger **** up , smith at least will provide us with some toughness and grit for the playoffs, we don’t have any smiths on this team

We’ll have to agree to disagree , we ain’t changing each others minds on this one

I don't disagree that we need NHL level defenceman, but given how the board was playing out in 2017 I don't think the BPA was a defenceman. At that point in our rebuild, even today still, we need to select the players that will provide the most value regardless of their position. I think we have far different opinions on Smith vs Rasmussen and Girard vs Brannstrom, Girard is already playing at a level that would make Brannstrom look like a good pick. While I don't think Rasmussen was particularly effective this year, he has shown that he can play NHL minutes and that has value, at worst we know that he can be a #2PP net-front presence and play 4th line minutes. Ideally he is in the AHL next year and is able to continue to build and improve on the other areas of his game; he is still just 19 and has just finished his D+2 year so their should be some development left.

I'm still not in love with the Rasmussen pick you can get glimpses of why he was an interesting project pick, even at #9. We've seen all of his tools on display this year, it's just a matter of putting them all together and that takes time. I think the best comparable for him would be someone like Kevin Hayes who it took until he was in his D+5 season to make his NHL debut. Part of that was because he opted to go the College UFA route, but I think his progression is what we could expect of Rasmussen going forward. While it's not ideal, a 40-50 point forward is not a poor outcome for a #9 overall pick.

 

[Hockeyfannnn91]

That link you posted was the same one that I had posted. When you're talking about early 1st round picks I think most people would say a difference of 9 spots is getting pretty close to "reach" territory. The whole point of creating a consensus tool like they did was to show where the players would fall on aggregate, so a 9 pick difference is somewhat significant. As well, when you look at McKenzie's rankings the difference is even larger, his rankings come from 10 different scouts so they typically capture the overall feeling NHL teams have towards players. I think had we taken any of the defenceman with Necas or Vilardi still on the board you would have seen a lot of people still dislike the pick, I'd have been one of them in all honesty.



I don't disagree that we need NHL level defenceman, but given how the board was playing out in 2017 I don't think the BPA was a defenceman. At that point in our rebuild, even today still, we need to select the players that will provide the most value regardless of their position. I think we have far different opinions on Smith vs Rasmussen and Girard vs Brannstrom, Girard is already playing at a level that would make Brannstrom look like a good pick. While I don't think Rasmussen was particularly effective this year, he has shown that he can play NHL minutes and that has value, at worst we know that he can be a #2PP net-front presence and play 4th line minutes. Ideally he is in the AHL next year and is able to continue to build and improve on the other areas of his game; he is still just 19 and has just finished his D+2 year so their should be some development left.

I'm still not in love with the Rasmussen pick you can get glimpses of why he was an interesting project pick, even at #9. We've seen all of his tools on display this year, it's just a matter of putting them all together and that takes time. I think the best comparable for him would be someone like Kevin Hayes who it took until he was in his D+5 season to make his NHL debut. Part of that was because he opted to go the College UFA route, but I think his progression is what we could expect of Rasmussen going forward. While it's not ideal, a 40-50 point forward is not a poor outcome for a #9 overall pick.

You might have been pissed but you would have turned out to be wrong , those dmen drafted after ras all have great potential especially brannstrom and Foote, like I said at the end of the day you trust your own rankings as players picked in the first don’t all turn out to be the right calls or the fedorovs And lidstrom s wouldn’t have been picked later

love bob McKenzie but he’s not a professional scout so I take his stuff with a grain of salt over someone who watches junior games full time

Again who cares about “the board” the board didn’t say for the habs to take kotkaniemi and Arizona to take hayton

Rasmussen can play nhl minutes but for a 9th pick I’m not going for a bottom 6 forward , he’s 110% playing in Grand Rapids next season ,Again with a 9th overall pick I’m not going for someone who can get 40 pts that’s not a great pick to me

Again it’s cool you got your opinion which I disagree with and you disagree with mine and it’s all good I’m not gonna keep going back and forth with you over something we’ll never be on the same page about

 

[DatsyukToZetterberg]

You might have been pissed but you would have turned out to be wrong , those dmen drafted after ras all have great potential especially brannstrom and Foote, like I said at the end of the day you trust your own rankings as players picked in the first don’t all turn out to be the right calls or the fedorovs And lidstrom s wouldn’t have been picked later

love bob McKenzie but he’s not a professional scout so I take his stuff with a grain of salt over someone who watches junior games full time

Again who cares about “the board” the board didn’t say for the habs to take kotkaniemi and Arizona to take hayton

Rasmussen can play nhl minutes but for a 9th pick I’m not going for a bottom 6 forward , he’s 110% playing in Grand Rapids next season ,Again with a 9th overall pick I’m not going for someone who can get 40 pts that’s not a great pick to me

Again it’s cool you got your opinion which I disagree with and you disagree with mine and it’s all good I’m not gonna keep going back and forth with you over something we’ll never be on the same page about

Bob's list comes from 10 scouts from NHL teams, he just tallies up the results and provides the results. He doesn't do any of the scouting himself he just acts as an intermediary and provides the results to the public. It's why his list is typically the most accurate come draft day. Kotkaniemi was 5th on Bob's final rankings and Hayton was 11th, I think you could make the argument that both were reaches on draft day, but like you've alluded to NHL teams values players in different ways.

We'll have to agree to disagree, but I do think you should give Ras a little more time. I didn't like the criteria we used to make our picks in 2017 at all; overall I think it's a draft that we'll look back on with a pretty disappointing view and wonder if we could have allocated our draft picks in a more efficient manner.

 

[Hockeyfannnn91]

Bob's list comes from 10 scouts from NHL teams, he just tallies up the results and provides the results. He doesn't do any of the scouting himself he just acts as an intermediary and provides the results to the public. It's why his list is typically the most accurate come draft day. Kotkaniemi was 5th on Bob's final rankings and Hayton was 11th, I think you could make the argument that both were reaches on draft day, but like you've alluded to NHL teams values players in different ways.

We'll have to agree to disagree, but I do think you should give Ras a little more time. I didn't like the criteria we used to make our picks in 2017 at all; overall I think it's a draft that we'll look back on with a pretty disappointing view and wonder if we could have allocated our draft picks in a more efficient manner.

Yes which is why I don’t see the big deal between a guy picking 9th and 15 at the end of the day you pick who you like , flyers took O’Brien who was projected 30-40 at 16 I think , anyways

I hope Rasmussen turns out but I’m not counting on it , we been passing opportunities to take top dmen since lidstrom left and we had 3-4 good ones that year so I’ll always think we f’d up unless those d’s turn out to be shit(not convinced on liljgren being a good pick for leafs, we’ll see what happens)

Agree with you with the 2017 overall draft, overall I think it’s shit and we went for size and we’ll regret it but I love the 2018 draft and I’m hopeful this year will be a great one as well with Stevie back, no doubt in my mind we will find 2 or 3 promising dmen with our first 5 picks (counting 66 as it’s really a late second so I’m expecting a good selection)

 

[lilidk]

Some draft misses by Yzerman

2013 Drouin #3
2012 Koekkoek #10
2010 Connolly #6
Yzerman had some bad moves in early drafting , just to say ,don't expect to much, it's impossible to predict how kids will develop.

 

[Dotter]

love bob McKenzie but he’s not a professional scout so I take his stuff with a grain of salt over someone who watches junior games full time

And this comment is all I need to know about this poster and how I'll perceive their future posts going forward.

This is a "Hindsight is fun" thread. But nothing to take seriously... as pointed out in the quote above.

 

[Athana see you later]

People forget most guys in the 17 draft class are still in juniors. Ras was in the nhl. Dude is going to be a monster but still needs time to develop. You can’t call it quits on a 19 year old after one season in the nhl