Hossa
Registered User
It's time for that annual series where we look back at our successes and failures from drafts' past, to fill us with, or drain us of, confidence before this year's event. Let's go.
1st Round, 28th overall: Thomas Chabot
Status: NHL Star
I had Chabot a fair bit higher, and he was the last true first rounder I had on my list, not being particularly sold on Joel Eriksson Ek or Denis Gurianov, who went just before him. The fallback was Jack Roslovic, which would have worked out ok, but Chabot felt like a win at the time and has turned out even better, as he and Jakub Vrana - selected 28th the year before - are now core players in the HFNHL.
At the time of the draft, Chabot was a toolsy but raw defenceman who had crept into the late first round on most lists by the end of the year, aided by a good showing at the U18s. The skating was always evident, and the frame projectable, but he slipped a bit on our list, perhaps because defenceman out of the Q who put up only 41 points in 66 games tend not to jump out on paper. To understand the appeal of Chabot as a possible first rounder, you had to watch him.
Since then Chabot's development curve has been shooting straight up. Two outstanding junior seasons and trips to the WJC, with his 2016-17 season one of the more impressive trophy hauls I have ever seen: WJC MVP and Best Defenceman, CHL Defenceman of the Year, QMJHL Champion and Playoffs MVP. Fast forward a couple years and he's a #1 d-man in the NHL, who will start a long-term extension in the fall.
The Lesson: Sometimes tools are more important than production
2nd Round, 41st overall: Zach Senyshyn
Status: NHL Prospect, sort of
Does a guy going from mid-2nd round in the HFNHL draft to mid 1st a week later in the NHL make it a successful pick? That is the question Senyshyn poses when reviewing him. On value, at least, it was a good pick, even if Senyshyn probably maxes out as a bottom six checker at this stage.
It was down to Senyshyn and Dermott here, and Senyshyn was the easy choice after going D in the first. In retrospect it was a mistake. Senyshyn did evolve into an elite goal scorer in the OHL, but his overall game did not round out and the issues with his vision and playmaking have never improved. As a result, the power and skating that led to so much goal scoring in the OHL has not translated to the AHL, where he has been developed increasingly as a role player.
Senyshyn has had a few call-ups to Boston in more of an energy role and has played well enough. He can kill penalties now and use his size and skating on the forecheck well. The effort is there to carve out a career, and Senyshyn will likely stick next year, whether in Boston or elsewhere, but it would be surprising if he ever scores much.
The Lesson: Sometimes tools alone are not enough
2nd Round, 58th overall: Dennis Yan
Status: AHL Depth Player
The draft had started to thin out by this point, and Yan was not necessarily a guy I had targeted. He was an upside play, a skilled goal scorer who had the tools to be a second line scorer with some good development, but had red flags about his work ethic and perimeter play. As such, the projection was he either puts it all together and becomes a good complimentary winger, or ends up a scorer in Europe.
Five years later, that is about how things have panned out. He played well enough in junior, including 46 goals in his last season, to earn a contract, but has not been able to earn regular top six minutes in three AHL campaigns. Review of his play are fine, and Tampa does have a deep system, but also a meritocratic one. Absent a change of scenery and a surprising emergence, Yan likely will not have an NHL career.
The Lesson: Red flags fly forever
3rd Round, 88th overall: Tobias Lindberg
Status: Middling Allsvenskan player
There were two re-entries I targeted here, Danton Heinen, who went the pick before, and Lindberg. Although I probably preferred Heinen, Lindberg appeared to be a fine consolation prize at the time, having gone from unknown 4th rounder to import star with Oshawa, including scoring the winning goal at the Memorial Cup a few weeks before our draft.
I liked Lindberg's tools when I watched him at the Senators development camp. He had very good hands and decent mobility for a player his size, even if he had not produced at the SuperElit level. The move to the OHL earned him a contract, and his pro career started well, even earning a call-up as a 20 year old after a trade to Toronto. But he got lost in the depth of that system and bounced around for a few more years before returning to Sweden, where he put up a pretty pitiful 5 goals in the Allsvenskan league this past year.
The Lesson: Judge D+2 production very carefully
4th Round, 116th overall: Will Borgen
Status: NHL Prospect
On paper, a late birthday high school defenceman without huge offence is not a guy to target in the middle rounds, but Borgen came with great skating and some raw tools. A year later he played his way onto the US WJC team and was extremely effective in a defensive role, later earning a spot on the US Olympic team, albeit never actually seeing the ice.
As a pro, Borgen has had a couple cups of coffee in Buffalo, to good reviews of his play, but he has been caught behind one-way contracts and more intriguing prospects. The offence never developed, but he still defends, skates and moves the puck well, and could have a career as a third pairing guy. I am still a fan, but the upside is limited.
The Lesson: Minnesota has good high schoolers
4th Round, 118th overall: John Marino
Status: NHL Player
Borgen and Marino had similar profiles, but for a while Marino looked like the lesser prospect. Drafted out of the USPHL - as a sixth round pick in the NHL draft - he then was just fine in the USHL before having a good but unremarkable college career at Harvard, showing the skating and defensive ability to play as a pro, but nowhere near to the level he showed last year as a rookie in Pittsburgh.
It is hard to overstate just how surprisingly good Marino was last year in Pittsburgh. He played in all situations except on the powerplay, produced counting stats that were supported by underlying numbers, including some Game Score indicators that graded him out like a first pairing defender. How did this happen? His mobility, intelligence and range all translated extremely well, and those who theorized there was more offence than he was able to show in Harvard were right.
The Lesson: Mobility and intelligence are what matter defensively in today's NHL
6th Round, 153rd overall: Fredrik Olofsson
Status: SHL Player
Olofsson was another re-entry who, like Lindberg, had been a surprise fourth round pick in the NHL, albeit in his case out of the USHL and with a brother who had more hype. I liked him because he was good as a D+1 player in the USHL, eventually having a solid college career, but did not sign in Chicago and instead went back to Sweden. He was actually traded a couple years ago for a pick that was then used to select Sammy Walker.
The Lesson: Sometimes guys pass through the HFNHL draft for a reason
6th Round, 179th overall: Janne Juvonen
Status: SHL Goalie, albeit not a great one
A double re-entry at the time, Juvonen was coming off a season in which he played 46 games in the Liiga and put up a .918 SV%, not bad for a token late round goalie lottery pick. Unfortunately that was his best season, as he has bounced around as a middling starter between Finland, Sweden and Austria since, never signing with Nashville in the NHL or coming over to North America
The Lesson: Goalies. Who knows.
Summary
Any draft where you hit on a late first with a player like Chabot is a successful one. Landing Marino in the mid rounds also goes down as one of my better picks in recent years, and his is a profile I have tended to target as well, with some success. Picks in subsequent seasons like Andrew Peeke, and to a lesser extent Jordan Harris, were in the same mould as Marino and Borgen.
On the other hand, those two second round picks have a combined 1 NHL goal and no guarantees of more, which hurts a lot, even in a draft that upon reflection was very strong in the first but not especially deep after the early second. Combined with three second rounders in 2014, Brendan Lemieux, Jack Dougherty and John Quenneville, none of whom have made a real impact, I wasted some real value in the second round in those drafts.
Senyshyn in particular is one of several wingers with great skating and power who I took around this time and did not really work out - Adam Erne, Emile Poirier, and Nick Baptiste being others. That is the biggest lesson I have taken away from those mid-2010 drafts, which is that my track record is pretty good on defenceman with size and mobility, and pretty bad with wingers whose profile are similar.
1st Round, 28th overall: Thomas Chabot
Status: NHL Star
I had Chabot a fair bit higher, and he was the last true first rounder I had on my list, not being particularly sold on Joel Eriksson Ek or Denis Gurianov, who went just before him. The fallback was Jack Roslovic, which would have worked out ok, but Chabot felt like a win at the time and has turned out even better, as he and Jakub Vrana - selected 28th the year before - are now core players in the HFNHL.
At the time of the draft, Chabot was a toolsy but raw defenceman who had crept into the late first round on most lists by the end of the year, aided by a good showing at the U18s. The skating was always evident, and the frame projectable, but he slipped a bit on our list, perhaps because defenceman out of the Q who put up only 41 points in 66 games tend not to jump out on paper. To understand the appeal of Chabot as a possible first rounder, you had to watch him.
Since then Chabot's development curve has been shooting straight up. Two outstanding junior seasons and trips to the WJC, with his 2016-17 season one of the more impressive trophy hauls I have ever seen: WJC MVP and Best Defenceman, CHL Defenceman of the Year, QMJHL Champion and Playoffs MVP. Fast forward a couple years and he's a #1 d-man in the NHL, who will start a long-term extension in the fall.
The Lesson: Sometimes tools are more important than production
2nd Round, 41st overall: Zach Senyshyn
Status: NHL Prospect, sort of
Does a guy going from mid-2nd round in the HFNHL draft to mid 1st a week later in the NHL make it a successful pick? That is the question Senyshyn poses when reviewing him. On value, at least, it was a good pick, even if Senyshyn probably maxes out as a bottom six checker at this stage.
It was down to Senyshyn and Dermott here, and Senyshyn was the easy choice after going D in the first. In retrospect it was a mistake. Senyshyn did evolve into an elite goal scorer in the OHL, but his overall game did not round out and the issues with his vision and playmaking have never improved. As a result, the power and skating that led to so much goal scoring in the OHL has not translated to the AHL, where he has been developed increasingly as a role player.
Senyshyn has had a few call-ups to Boston in more of an energy role and has played well enough. He can kill penalties now and use his size and skating on the forecheck well. The effort is there to carve out a career, and Senyshyn will likely stick next year, whether in Boston or elsewhere, but it would be surprising if he ever scores much.
The Lesson: Sometimes tools alone are not enough
2nd Round, 58th overall: Dennis Yan
Status: AHL Depth Player
The draft had started to thin out by this point, and Yan was not necessarily a guy I had targeted. He was an upside play, a skilled goal scorer who had the tools to be a second line scorer with some good development, but had red flags about his work ethic and perimeter play. As such, the projection was he either puts it all together and becomes a good complimentary winger, or ends up a scorer in Europe.
Five years later, that is about how things have panned out. He played well enough in junior, including 46 goals in his last season, to earn a contract, but has not been able to earn regular top six minutes in three AHL campaigns. Review of his play are fine, and Tampa does have a deep system, but also a meritocratic one. Absent a change of scenery and a surprising emergence, Yan likely will not have an NHL career.
The Lesson: Red flags fly forever
3rd Round, 88th overall: Tobias Lindberg
Status: Middling Allsvenskan player
There were two re-entries I targeted here, Danton Heinen, who went the pick before, and Lindberg. Although I probably preferred Heinen, Lindberg appeared to be a fine consolation prize at the time, having gone from unknown 4th rounder to import star with Oshawa, including scoring the winning goal at the Memorial Cup a few weeks before our draft.
I liked Lindberg's tools when I watched him at the Senators development camp. He had very good hands and decent mobility for a player his size, even if he had not produced at the SuperElit level. The move to the OHL earned him a contract, and his pro career started well, even earning a call-up as a 20 year old after a trade to Toronto. But he got lost in the depth of that system and bounced around for a few more years before returning to Sweden, where he put up a pretty pitiful 5 goals in the Allsvenskan league this past year.
The Lesson: Judge D+2 production very carefully
4th Round, 116th overall: Will Borgen
Status: NHL Prospect
On paper, a late birthday high school defenceman without huge offence is not a guy to target in the middle rounds, but Borgen came with great skating and some raw tools. A year later he played his way onto the US WJC team and was extremely effective in a defensive role, later earning a spot on the US Olympic team, albeit never actually seeing the ice.
As a pro, Borgen has had a couple cups of coffee in Buffalo, to good reviews of his play, but he has been caught behind one-way contracts and more intriguing prospects. The offence never developed, but he still defends, skates and moves the puck well, and could have a career as a third pairing guy. I am still a fan, but the upside is limited.
The Lesson: Minnesota has good high schoolers
4th Round, 118th overall: John Marino
Status: NHL Player
Borgen and Marino had similar profiles, but for a while Marino looked like the lesser prospect. Drafted out of the USPHL - as a sixth round pick in the NHL draft - he then was just fine in the USHL before having a good but unremarkable college career at Harvard, showing the skating and defensive ability to play as a pro, but nowhere near to the level he showed last year as a rookie in Pittsburgh.
It is hard to overstate just how surprisingly good Marino was last year in Pittsburgh. He played in all situations except on the powerplay, produced counting stats that were supported by underlying numbers, including some Game Score indicators that graded him out like a first pairing defender. How did this happen? His mobility, intelligence and range all translated extremely well, and those who theorized there was more offence than he was able to show in Harvard were right.
The Lesson: Mobility and intelligence are what matter defensively in today's NHL
6th Round, 153rd overall: Fredrik Olofsson
Status: SHL Player
Olofsson was another re-entry who, like Lindberg, had been a surprise fourth round pick in the NHL, albeit in his case out of the USHL and with a brother who had more hype. I liked him because he was good as a D+1 player in the USHL, eventually having a solid college career, but did not sign in Chicago and instead went back to Sweden. He was actually traded a couple years ago for a pick that was then used to select Sammy Walker.
The Lesson: Sometimes guys pass through the HFNHL draft for a reason
6th Round, 179th overall: Janne Juvonen
Status: SHL Goalie, albeit not a great one
A double re-entry at the time, Juvonen was coming off a season in which he played 46 games in the Liiga and put up a .918 SV%, not bad for a token late round goalie lottery pick. Unfortunately that was his best season, as he has bounced around as a middling starter between Finland, Sweden and Austria since, never signing with Nashville in the NHL or coming over to North America
The Lesson: Goalies. Who knows.
Summary
Any draft where you hit on a late first with a player like Chabot is a successful one. Landing Marino in the mid rounds also goes down as one of my better picks in recent years, and his is a profile I have tended to target as well, with some success. Picks in subsequent seasons like Andrew Peeke, and to a lesser extent Jordan Harris, were in the same mould as Marino and Borgen.
On the other hand, those two second round picks have a combined 1 NHL goal and no guarantees of more, which hurts a lot, even in a draft that upon reflection was very strong in the first but not especially deep after the early second. Combined with three second rounders in 2014, Brendan Lemieux, Jack Dougherty and John Quenneville, none of whom have made a real impact, I wasted some real value in the second round in those drafts.
Senyshyn in particular is one of several wingers with great skating and power who I took around this time and did not really work out - Adam Erne, Emile Poirier, and Nick Baptiste being others. That is the biggest lesson I have taken away from those mid-2010 drafts, which is that my track record is pretty good on defenceman with size and mobility, and pretty bad with wingers whose profile are similar.
