Prospect Info: Isles Prospect Talk 2018-19

Status
Not open for further replies.

Chapin Landvogt

Registered User
Jul 4, 2002
19,875
5,926
Germany
What's the consensus on Kotkoniemi vs. Wahlstrom. I know K is a good prospect, but the acclaim I'm reading seems a bit much. Wasn't Wahlstrom ranked higher? I didn't go very deep into the predraft data and reporting, but it seemed like Wahlstrom was the better prospect. Is Wahlstrom really 2nd fiddle between these two?

The Isles got the better player.

Montreal was so doggone center-happy (ended up taking 7 of them), that passed on a number of better prospects to get a guy who had actually spent all season playing on the wing.

Who knows, Kotkaniemi may be a good player, but I think his best upside is that of a new Islander, Valteri Filppula.

Wahlstrom on the other hand is a scoring machine. Like others have pointed out, I think he'll play one season of college hockey, then become our Brock Boeser.
 

Chapin Landvogt

Registered User
Jul 4, 2002
19,875
5,926
Germany
The Canadiens chose Kotka because of

1. Need
2. The difference between Kotka and everyone else in the top 10 was so minuscule that it wouldn't have made a big difference (career-wise) either way and they can use a centre whereas a winger wouldn't help their situation enough.

Gonna be interesting to see what the mood in Montreal will be like when Zadina and Wahlstrom are putting up 30+ a year while Kotkaniemi is one of 3 centers who are all doing 'alright' while chipping in 16-29-45 each season.
 

saintunspecified

Registered User
Nov 30, 2017
5,974
4,294
Gonna be interesting to see what the mood in Montreal will be like when Zadina and Wahlstrom are putting up 30+ a year while Kotkaniemi is one of 3 centers who are all doing 'alright' while chipping in 16-29-45 each season.

That 3,4,5 or Koktaniemi, Tkachuk, Hayton just continues to astound me, and I think among those three the Koktaniemi pick was the least bad. IMO the option that would have hit it out the park for Montreal would have been Hughes.
 

PWJunior

Stay safe!
Apr 11, 2010
42,751
22,569
Long Island, NY
That 3,4,5 or Koktaniemi, Tkachuk, Hayton just continues to astound me, and I think among those three the Koktaniemi pick was the least bad. IMO the option that would have hit it out the park for Montreal would have been Hughes.

I was thrilled at those 3 picks because it meant more players that I wanted would be falling into our range. Detroit was almost forced to take Zadina at #6 despite everyone and their grandmother's knowing that they were going with defense. Vancouver became the pivot point at #7 and that's when the 2nd guessing about the d-men starts with Hughes, Boqvist, Bouchard, Dobson debate. The Rangers made a questionable pick at #9 and that is another factor in this. A lot of Rangers fans wanted Wahlstrom, like they wanted Barzal when they thought they could get that #16 pick from Edmonton for Talbot. They go Russian, a wild card gamble with Wahlstrom sitting there. If Wahlstrom is our Boeser, Rangers fans are just going to love watching Barzal and Oliver tear them a new one for years and years. I think Edmonton should have taken Dobson and will regret that decision.
 

saintunspecified

Registered User
Nov 30, 2017
5,974
4,294
I was thrilled at those 3 picks because it meant more players that I wanted would be falling into our range. Detroit was almost forced to take Zadina at #6 despite everyone and their grandmother's knowing that they were going with defense. Vancouver became the pivot point at #7 and that's when the 2nd guessing about the d-men starts with Hughes, Boqvist, Bouchard, Dobson debate.

Man, did the Nucks ever luck out at 7. I guess they might have gotten Hughes anyway if Detroit had gone Boqvist. But still, to have that guy drop to 7 was, IMO, just as bad if not worse than Dobson dropping to 11.

I disagree with you about the Ranger's pick. I think they knew exactly what they were doing, which was drafting the best overall offensive player available. They scouted both players thoroughly, and they couldn't trade down.
 

PWJunior

Stay safe!
Apr 11, 2010
42,751
22,569
Long Island, NY
Man, did the Nucks ever luck out at 7. I guess they might have gotten Hughes anyway if Detroit had gone Boqvist. But still, to have that guy drop to 7 was, IMO, just as bad if not worse than Dobson dropping to 11.

I disagree with you about the Ranger's pick. I think they knew exactly what they were doing, which was drafting the best overall offensive player available. They scouted both players thoroughly, and they couldn't trade down.

It will be interesting to see how things play out. The Rangers do love the Euro's with Andersson and Chytil. I understand your reasoning behind their decision, but it's still going to be a long running debate. Wahlstrom will have Barzal to help elevate his game to it's peak, Kravtsov is going to have to be the one who runs his line when he comes over. It's a risk, they're banking on projection.
 
  • Like
Reactions: dano16

Chapin Landvogt

Registered User
Jul 4, 2002
19,875
5,926
Germany
That 3,4,5 or Koktaniemi, Tkachuk, Hayton just continues to astound me, and I think among those three the Koktaniemi pick was the least bad. IMO the option that would have hit it out the park for Montreal would have been Hughes.

I believe Tkachuk was fairly fine where he went.

I'm not sure what Ottawa has planned for the long run, but the Tkachuk brothers are a certain type of player than doesn't grow on trees and even if Brady is just a 20-30-50 player and say Zadina becomes a regular 30-goal guy, I'm certain Brady will be bringing a lot of intangibles that will influence hockey games, much like Matthew is already doing. I understand that pick.

For Montreal and Arizona, we're talking about two teams who were looking to fill a VERY specific need as opposed to taking the BPA, no matter what they want to say. Now, both Kotkaniemi and Hayton may become good players, but the premium Dmen available should not have been passed up on for #2/3 centers. It's just poor business.

And there's a reason why everyone and their mother is saying that DET and NYI had the best drafts. They just sat there quietly and pounced on the other teams' mistakes. I'm certainly happy about it. And I know that each of our first three picks have many of the prerequisites of high impact NHL players.

As for Hughes, he was a real fave going in. I expect him to do good things at the NHL level and make a lot of other teams wish they had him.
 
  • Like
Reactions: dano16

Chapin Landvogt

Registered User
Jul 4, 2002
19,875
5,926
Germany
Man, did the Nucks ever luck out at 7. I guess they might have gotten Hughes anyway if Detroit had gone Boqvist. But still, to have that guy drop to 7 was, IMO, just as bad if not worse than Dobson dropping to 11.

I love Hughes. I really do.

But even despite the Kotkaniemi and Hayton picks, it's not like everyone was standing around saying he's a top 3 or 5 pick. Maybe the Nucks have it good by adding him (I mean, he's gonna be a good NHLer), but they didn't luck out nearly as much as we did with the two guys we got, nor should Detroit per se have taken anyone more than the suddenly available Zadina, who can really help change their fortunes!

Kotkaniemi, Hayton, and Kravtsov remain the only picks who likely were taken earlier than they should have been.

I disagree with you about the Ranger's pick. I think they knew exactly what they were doing, which was drafting the best overall offensive player available. They scouted both players thoroughly, and they couldn't trade down.

The best overall available? Or the best overall STILL available?

Let this be known!: It doesn't matter WHAT he did as a 17-year old in the KHL playoffs, his track record to date elsewhere hardly detracts from the possibility that it may have been little more than a flash in the pan. You can maybe place him in that Nichushkin/Buchnevich classification of player if you will, but that sure as shit doesn't tell me he's gonna do more in this league than Wahlstrom will be.

Heck, we might be justified in thinking that Farabee will produce more than Kravtsov will.

Fact is, Kravtsov was a truly, truly risky pick and we every right to be SOME TYPE of happy that it allowed us to get who we got AND was made by our arch rival!
 

Chapin Landvogt

Registered User
Jul 4, 2002
19,875
5,926
Germany
It will be interesting to see how things play out. The Rangers do love the Euro's with Andersson and Chytil. I understand your reasoning behind their decision, but it's still going to be a long running debate. Wahlstrom will have Barzal to help elevate his game to it's peak, Kravtsov is going to have to be the one who runs his line when he comes over. It's a risk, they're banking on projection.

The Rags will still get a few nice NHLers out of this draft. Most experts feel their turnout was underwhelming considering where they were picking and who they picked. I agree. They got less out of this draft than they could have.

I also fortunately feel that Wahlstrom will be better than Kravtsov while Dobson and Wilde will surely amount to more than Miller (who I like) and Lundkvist, if we're comparing.

Heck, Skarek has a good shot at being a better goalie than Lindbom, even if both are decent goaltending prospects.

As for the rest of our draft, Iskhakov is of course our homerun swing and I don't care how talented you are, his size will work heavily against him, one way or the other. The Gaudreaus and Debrincats of the world are true exceptions, not a rule. But other than that, the team took decent picks of which we really shouldn't expect anything. I wouldn't expect any of the other four guys to make it, but I do think that Jenkins is a better prospect than say Koivula and Pivonka has plenty of time at Notre Dame to turn into a Riley Sheahan type, which would be outstanding for where he was picked. I also think that the team really targeted Krygier with the hope of him becoming an Eric Cairns type down the line. If it turns out that way, then that's great for a 7th rounder.

What's interesting is that A LOT of kids with good possibilities have gone undrafted in recent years. San Jose is a team that likes to grab these guys. I'd really hope that Lou jumps on that train along the way. We had several at our camp and adding i.e. Eansor last fall was a move in this direction. Adding Rathgeb as well. But there are many out there.
 
  • Like
Reactions: dood

saintunspecified

Registered User
Nov 30, 2017
5,974
4,294
The best overall available? Or the best overall STILL available?

Obviously the best available at the time. That's what they thought.

Heck, we might be justified in thinking that Farabee will produce more than Kravtsov will.

We might be justified in thinking Farabee will produce more than Wahlstrom will. Farabee could end up the best forward in the draft, because the guy seems to have a veteran understanding for using his teammates.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Chapin Landvogt

PWJunior

Stay safe!
Apr 11, 2010
42,751
22,569
Long Island, NY
I think Bouchard will be a fine NHL defenceman, but Dobson's ceiling is so much higher. Plus, I get a sense the Oilers will push Bouchard's development faster than the Isles on ND.

I have some serious concerns about Bouchard's ability to play defense and thus I question his hockey IQ. He's clearly talented offensively and he should thrive on the PP in the NHL. I think he'll be a liability in his own zone so I don't think he ever becomes a top pairing guy. I see his upside as Shattenkirk or Ellis from Nashville.

Dobson is the best d-man defensively in the class. His skating ability and length makes him tough to beat. He may not have dynamic offensive tools, but he should be a solid contributor offensively. Big, swift, skilled and smart RD's elicit dreams of Pietrangelo, Jones, Hamilton. Maybe Dobson is another Bouwmeester? I'll take that if that's his floor. I think he'll be a big presence at ES and on the PK. He'll also be on the #2PP unit. Basically replace Hamonic's role and I think Dobson is much better offensively. A 25+ minute RD that is out there in any key situation and tilts the matchup in your favor.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sleestack

Poliz24

Registered User
Jun 25, 2012
1,116
93
LI
Out of all our prospects, which one do you see exceeding expectations? Conversely, which prospect do you see not living up to expectations?
My answer- Exceeding- Toews
Disappointing- Not including MDC, my answer is Bellows. (I hope I am wrong)
 

Sleestak Nation

Registered User
Jul 6, 2009
329
188
Land of the Lost
I have some serious concerns about Bouchard's ability to play defense and thus I question his hockey IQ. He's clearly talented offensively and he should thrive on the PP in the NHL. I think he'll be a liability in his own zone so I don't think he ever becomes a top pairing guy. I see his upside as Shattenkirk or Ellis from Nashville.

Dobson is the best d-man defensively in the class. His skating ability and length makes him tough to beat. He may not have dynamic offensive tools, but he should be a solid contributor offensively. Big, swift, skilled and smart RD's elicit dreams of Pietrangelo, Jones, Hamilton. Maybe Dobson is another Bouwmeester? I'll take that if that's his floor. I think he'll be a big presence at ES and on the PK. He'll also be on the #2PP unit. Basically replace Hamonic's role and I think Dobson is much better offensively. A 25+ minute RD that is out there in any key situation and tilts the matchup in your favor.
I'd agree with all that, plus Dobson was no passenger on a very good junior team. Drove play more and more as the season moved on. Watched every minute of his Memorial Cup games and his footwork and gap control were very impressive, not to mention his contributions on the offensive end during the tournament. Did not expect to find him lurking at the 11-12 spots where the Islanders were picking.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CRYHAVOC

PWJunior

Stay safe!
Apr 11, 2010
42,751
22,569
Long Island, NY
I'd agree with all that, plus Dobson was no passenger on a very good junior team. Drove play more and more as the season moved on. Watched every minute of his Memorial Cup games and his footwork and gap control were very impressive, not to mention his contributions on the offensive end during the tournament. Did not expect to find him lurking at the 11-12 spots where the Islanders were picking.

I was one of the biggest pro-Dobson people around here, I was over the moon that he dropped. Wahlstrom was icing on the cake, but I rate a #1RD as the 2nd most valuable asset behind a #1C. They carry insane value, another reason I like the Wilde pick as well.
 

PWJunior

Stay safe!
Apr 11, 2010
42,751
22,569
Long Island, NY
Dobson has that unicorn potential and it’s scary. He just needs to keep developing and we’re looking at Pietrangelo.

Of course I've been wrong before, but Dobson was my guy. I think everyone knows that.

My previous 'my guy'...

2008 - Pietrangelo - wanted him really bad, it still hurts today.
2009 - Judas, thought long and hard about Hedman.
2010 - Gudbranson - loved his size and RH shot, grit. Pietrangelo envy rears it's ugly head again.
2011 - Hamilton - wanted him badly, was my shot at Pietrangelo redemption AGAIN.
2012 - Forsberg - wanted him badly.
2013 - Ristolainen - stems from my Pietrangelo envy AGAIN.
2014 - Dal Colle - I was convinced he was going to be great. Crap.
2015 - None really. Loved the Barzal pick.
2016 - None really, happy with Bellows.
2017 - None really, no pick.
2018 - Dobson - FINALLY, the most similar to Pietrangelo out of all the previous candidates. Haha.

This goes back a decade for me. Safe to say that I've probably never been more all in on a prospect in a long time.

I even tried to convince myself that Wilde could work, we got him too. With Pulock and Mayfield (I actually wanted him in the 2nd round and was thrilled we got him), we are well stocked on the right side. Too funny how things work out.
 

SI90

Registered User
Jul 25, 2011
85,022
62,491
StrongIsland
Of course I've been wrong before, but Dobson was my guy. I think everyone knows that.

My previous 'my guy'...

2008 - Pietrangelo - wanted him really bad, it still hurts today.
2009 - Judas, thought long and hard about Hedman.
2010 - Gudbranson - loved his size and RH shot, grit. Pietrangelo envy rears it's ugly head again.
2011 - Hamilton - wanted him badly, was my shot at Pietrangelo redemption AGAIN.
2012 - Forsberg - wanted him badly.
2013 - Ristolainen - stems from my Pietrangelo envy AGAIN.
2014 - Dal Colle - I was convinced he was going to be great. Crap.
2015 - None really. Loved the Barzal pick.
2016 - None really, happy with Bellows.
2017 - None really, no pick.
2018 - Dobson - FINALLY, the most similar to Pietrangelo out of all the previous candidates. Haha.

This goes back a decade for me. Safe to say that I've probably never been more all in on a prospect in a long time.

I even tried to convince myself that Wilde could work, we got him too. With Pulock and Mayfield (I actually wanted him in the 2nd round and was thrilled we got him), we are well stocked on the right side. Too funny how things work out.

He’s just got so much potential. Obviously anything can happen and nothing is a sure thing but he just seems to be the complete package. Size,skill,skating, and hockey smarts.

Wilde is a Wild(e) card. I was higher on him than most but I also recognized his need to improve. His tools are tremendous. His combination of size and skating is awesome from a Defensman. He needs to really work on his decision making and effort on the defensive end.

The great news is we have 2 figure heads in Lamoriello and Trotz that Believe in defensive hockey. I trust Trotz will set the foundation for the organization to develop these guys the right way.
 
  • Like
Reactions: PWJunior

Chapin Landvogt

Registered User
Jul 4, 2002
19,875
5,926
Germany
Out of all our prospects, which one do you see exceeding expectations? Conversely, which prospect do you see not living up to expectations?
My answer- Exceeding- Toews
Disappointing- Not including MDC, my answer is Bellows. (I hope I am wrong)

Exceeding expectations: Cockerill, Pivonka

Not meeting expectations: Most everyone else
 

buud

Ping Pong Predator
Oct 3, 2017
2,159
1,303
43N -79
mostly based on my limited viewings and gut feelings...

exceeding: Durandeau. he picked it up in the POs, which is always a great sign. statistically improving every year. i cautiously predict decent career as (eventually) a 3rd liner. HM: Mirageas, Koivula, Pivonka, Iskhakov, Rathgeb, Salo.

not meeting: JHS. i remember reading that sports is 95% mental, and i think it's relatively true. we will all be disappointed when he just can't seem to turn the corner. he has the skills to have a good career, but i think he 'Brock Nelsons' us. kinda like that recipe that is just missing something, leaves us wanting more. HMs: Sorokin. he just doesn't feel comfortable coming over.
 

scott99

Registered User
May 13, 2005
10,997
1,520
Of course I've been wrong before, but Dobson was my guy. I think everyone knows that.

My previous 'my guy'...

2008 - Pietrangelo - wanted him really bad, it still hurts today.
2009 - Judas, thought long and hard about Hedman.
2010 - Gudbranson - loved his size and RH shot, grit. Pietrangelo envy rears it's ugly head again.
2011 - Hamilton - wanted him badly, was my shot at Pietrangelo redemption AGAIN.
2012 - Forsberg - wanted him badly.
2013 - Ristolainen - stems from my Pietrangelo envy AGAIN.
2014 - Dal Colle - I was convinced he was going to be great. Crap.
2015 - None really. Loved the Barzal pick.
2016 - None really, happy with Bellows.
2017 - None really, no pick.
2018 - Dobson - FINALLY, the most similar to Pietrangelo out of all the previous candidates. Haha.

This goes back a decade for me. Safe to say that I've probably never been more all in on a prospect in a long time.

I even tried to convince myself that Wilde could work, we got him too. With Pulock and Mayfield (I actually wanted him in the 2nd round and was thrilled we got him), we are well stocked on the right side. Too funny how things work out.
My hopes 6 months or so prior to the draft, was to land Dobson or Bouchard (my preference was Dobson due to the skating concerns with Bouchard) because I wanted a BIG talented dman instead of the small guys, and another D man or a forward like Wahlstrom or Farabee. Once it got closer to the draft, I thought for sure we were going to lose out on all 4. All were having excellent seasons, especially with Dobson winning the Memorial Cup, Wahlstrom having a great U18's, never thought any of those guys would be available, except possibly Farabee.

I was thinking we'd wind up with Hayton and Farabee. or Hayton and Dman Ty Smith (or Wilde), and I would've been fine with that, all fine prospects. But the hockey gods were with us, and Lou's 1st draft, hopefully, is one of the best in Isle's history.
 

Thrasymachus

Registered User
Jul 1, 2018
5,211
6,703
I am very keen on the following "non blue chip" prospects - I think all of our blue chips (Bellows, Dobson and Wahlstrom) are A-OK:

Bode Wilde, Ruslan Iskhakov, Jakbub Skarek and Blade Jenkins from 2018 (really hoping for a foundational draft here). Heck maybe throw in Pivonka

Aside from that:

Josh Ho-Sang
Otto Koivula

crickets



Golyshev and Sorokin are interesting, but who knows if either becomes an islander or if their KHL play is on par with the NHL
 
Last edited:

PWJunior

Stay safe!
Apr 11, 2010
42,751
22,569
Long Island, NY
Interesting video I found breaking down the top d-men in the draft during the NHL combine.



Dobson discussed @5:20 and Wilde discussed at @9:00.

Dobson is obviously lauded big time, the kid is a twig. Needs serious upper body development, he's got those Nina-esque noodle arms. This kid puts on 20+ pounds and gets to around 200, look out. I think he tops out around 210.

Wilde compared to Phaneuf, I can definitely see that. Great tools, questionable instincts and decision making. I've also seen Big Buff stylistic comparison.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->