Prospect Info: Ives Devils Day One Draft Review

dls

Registered User
Jan 20, 2009
100
58
While I'm going to stick to my narrative that the Devils took it a bit too "pick by pick" instead of strategizing the entire draft, I'll defend the picks to the degree that Holtz will be lethal alongside Hughes -- I'd say you're understating his goal-scoring upside -- and Mukhamadullin (though questionable asset management at #20) at least has a great deal of upside.
When dealing with upside --- Perreault vs Mukh who has the better upside to project to (not in fantasy land but reachable), and what would be an honest discount off of that upside.

I am not fundamentally opposed to too high upside picks... But everything is relative to the value, if we had ONLY the 20th pick in this draft, and this was our pick, we would be calling for Fitz's head.

He got cute with 3 shots and went for the lottery - my point is simply all of these are lottery tickets to a certain extend, successful hockey teams are built through finding value in the draft. Mukh in a later round great sign me up!, the perspective floors and pedigree of the other "high upside" picks available at that spot (Gulner and Perreault too name 2!) have a far better pedigree a track record to potentially translate that upside to NHL
 
  • Like
Reactions: StevenToddIves

Forge

Blissfully Mediocre
Jul 4, 2018
11,834
13,981
Vegas
I checked his thread on the prospects board and there is a claim there that the points are because Ufa's roster has been decimated by Covid and that moved him up to the top powerplay, which is stacked.

I was going to bring this up, but didn't really want to get into it. Amirov has also benefited some from this. It is what it is; this decision should have been based on last year anyway.
 
  • Like
Reactions: StevenToddIves

StevenToddIves

Registered User
May 18, 2013
10,461
25,048
Brooklyn, NY
When dealing with upside --- Perreault vs Mukh who has the better upside to project to (not in fantasy land but reachable), and what would be an honest discount off of that upside.

I am not fundamentally opposed to too high upside picks... But everything is relative to the value, if we had ONLY the 20th pick in this draft, and this was our pick, we would be calling for Fitz's head.

He got cute with 3 shots and went for the lottery - my point is simply all of these are lottery tickets to a certain extend, successful hockey teams are built through finding value in the draft. Mukh in a later round great sign me up!, the perspective floors and pedigree of the other "high upside" picks available at that spot (Gulner and Perreault too name 2!) have a far better pedigree a track record to potentially translate that upside to NHL

Perreault, to me, has more upside than any player taken out of the top 5 in the 2020 draft. The question is his compete and 200-foot game. We all have out own criteria, but it's tough to argue the sheer dynamism of Perreault's shot/skating/vision combination.

Conversely, 26 NHL teams passed on him in the first round, so perhaps this is just my own bias. It's tough to say, ultimately.
 

Forge

Blissfully Mediocre
Jul 4, 2018
11,834
13,981
Vegas
Perreault, to me, has more upside than any player taken out of the top 5 in the 2020 draft. The question is his compete and 200-foot game. We all have out own criteria, but it's tough to argue the sheer dynamism of Perreault's shot/skating/vision combination.

Conversely, 26 NHL teams passed on him in the first round, so perhaps this is just my own bias. It's tough to say, ultimately.

I think the problem for us is that we have nothing to help us judge how we think the compete level will play out. We acknowledge the issue...but we don't get to talk to him, speak with him.....see where he is and whether we think that will continue to be a problem. We don't get to talk with coaches, teammates, etc, so it's really hard for us to judge factors like that as fans. Maybe he didn't convince anyone that it wasn't going to be an issue moving forward.
 

Emperoreddy

Show Me What You Got!
Apr 13, 2010
130,530
76,108
New Jersey, Exit 16E
I was going to bring this up, but didn't really want to get into it. Amirov has also benefited some from this. It is what it is; this decision should have been based on last year anyway.

Idk, if you have fresh data on these players I don't see why you wouldn't use it.

And I imagine the scouts are watching him play, not just looking at a statline. They must have seen something they really liked over there.
 

Forge

Blissfully Mediocre
Jul 4, 2018
11,834
13,981
Vegas
Idk, if you have fresh data on these players I don't see why you wouldn't use it.

And I imagine the scouts are watching him play, not just looking at a statline. They must have seen something they really liked over there.

I actually messed up something. Someone posted the quote about the team discovering Muk while watching Amirov...for some reason, have no idea why, I just thought that was last years games. Like, they did that review earlier in 2020 (for last year tape). I really don't know why I thought that, but don't think the quote actually said that and I don't know why I didn't think that they could have been watching them the last few weeks lol. When I said "should be based on last year" its because I actually thought that is when the tape they watched was from...didn't mean it as a perspective of ignoring this years performances.
 
Last edited:

Alex NJD

Registered User
Apr 28, 2015
4,974
4,839
Parsippany, New Jersey
Regarding the whole trade trade up fiasco, I would have been absolutely livid if we took Schneider at 18 and the Rags took Mercer at 19. I don't even like Schneider and didn't want him at 20. I feel like he his ceiling is pretty low. Don't love the Muk pick but I can see that they're swinging for the fences.



When you consider Smith prefers to play his offside and next years draft is full of top Dmen, Schnieder could create a real logjam at RHD in a few years when we will already have Severson and Pieterangelo on the right side :sarcasm:
 

beekay414

Registered User
Jul 1, 2016
3,116
3,672
Milwaukee, WI
This draft, so far, is whatever. I'm going to root harder than anyone for the guys we took. I called the Holtz pick dumb because of how I felt about the scoring wingers that would've been available at 18/20 (and I was right there) and that I felt, as @StevenToddIves did, that it was poor asset management. I'm down on Holtz, more than most, but I'm past the pissed off stage and moving on to the "hope he works out" stage.

Mercer, I was fine with. I had him at 22 on my board but, as I said, I would adore Mercer if he was a Devil. Guess what? Looks like I've found someone to adore.

Mookie, I was less a fan of because I feel just as STI did that they went with their highest ranked defenseman for the sake of taking a defenseman. He has his pluses, for sure, and fits the home run principle. You can't teach his shot, size or skating. I'll give him his due time.

My biggest issue here is everyone piggybacking off of what others say and then shitting on people who have the balls to put their necks out and form their own opinions. At least I put the time in to form my own opinions and didn't regurgitate what someone else said about someone. It's okay that I think lesser of Holtz than the norm. That's the beauty of scouting. Everyone sees stuff different or looks for certain things. I made it known that I was down on him in my rankings so piling on when I make it known in the thread just made me laugh. Lots of keyboard warriors that can't form their own opinions and that gave me a hearty chuckle.
 

StevenToddIves

Registered User
May 18, 2013
10,461
25,048
Brooklyn, NY
This draft, so far, is whatever. I'm going to root harder than anyone for the guys we took. I called the Holtz pick dumb because of how I felt about the scoring wingers that would've been available at 18/20 (and I was right there) and that I felt, as @StevenToddIves did, that it was poor asset management. I'm down on Holtz, more than most, but I'm past the pissed off stage and moving on to the "hope he works out" stage.

Mercer, I was fine with. I had him at 22 on my board but, as I said, I would adore Mercer if he was a Devil. Guess what? Looks like I've found someone to adore.

Mookie, I was less a fan of because I feel just as STI did that they went with their highest ranked defenseman for the sake of taking a defenseman. He has his pluses, for sure, and fits the home run principle. You can't teach his shot, size or skating. I'll give him his due time.

My biggest issue here is everyone piggybacking off of what others say and then shitting on people who have the balls to put their necks out and form their own opinions. At least I put the time in to form my own opinions and didn't regurgitate what someone else said about someone. It's okay that I think lesser of Holtz than the norm. That's the beauty of scouting. Everyone sees stuff different or looks for certain things. I made it known that I was down on him in my rankings so piling on when I make it known in the thread just made me laugh. Lots of keyboard warriors that can't form their own opinions and that gave me a hearty chuckle.

"Mookie". Hahaha.
 

Auto Pilot

Registered User
Sep 7, 2019
3,909
3,794
This draft was a disappointment given what they left on the board at 7 and 20th

Leaving Rossi on the board was a gigantic mistake.

Unless the 20th pick actually comes here to play and turns into a top 2 dman, it will be a bad pick.
 

glenwo2

LINDY RUFF NEEDS VIAGRA!!
Oct 18, 2008
52,069
24,355
New Jersey(No Fanz!)
Okay, I just got home and I had a ton of messages and questions regarding the Devils draft which I felt I needed a thread in order to address,

7) RW Alexander Holtz
I can't dislike this pick. Holtz has the most are goal-scoring upside of any player in the 2020 draft. His shot is ridiculous, and his overall game -- while not superlative -- is certainly very good. He's going to be a player who contributes a bit to the team in every aspect -- two-way play, physicality, passing, puckhandling -- while being an absolute goal-scoring force.

However, I do not feel he was the right pick at #7 overall. Why not? Because it just so happened to be a draft where top-line scoring RWs were the most heavily available commodity. To me, it's bad asset management. There was only one Marco Rossi in the draft and only one Cole Perfetti in the draft, and the Devils went for a kid who a very comparable player was taken one pick later (Jack Quinn), a player at the same position with more line-driving ability was taken 6 picks later (Seth Jarvis), and a similar player with even more upside was taken 20 picks later (Jacob Perreault). The problem with taking Holtz was not Holtz at all -- he's surely deserving of being the #7 pick -- but rather the fact that the best available player at #18 and #20 both turned out to be comparative players at the same position. I feel the Devils showed a bit of myopia by not taking a Rossi or Perfetti here.

Ultimately however, my biggest concern with Holtz at #7 was that it would negatively affect the Devils pick at #18 or #20. At #18, this did not come to fruition. At #20, it did.

In the end, Holtz was a solid pick. Either Jack Hughes or Nico Hischier will greatly benefit from a sniping RW with the requisite talent to skate with them and the finishing ability to be a 40+ goal scorer at the NHL level. He just might not have been the best pick in terms of overall strategy and asset management.

18) RW/C Dawson Mercer
Our best pick of the round. Disregarding the fact that they took a RW 11 picks earlier, the Devils took the clear-cut best player available, a player who would have been considered a great pick if, say, Nashville had taken him at #11 overall. Mercer is a consummate, two-way power winger with off-the-charts IQ, character and compete level who also is a legitimate dual threat offensive talent with hands which are absolutely elite. He's a dynamic talent in every respect except for skating, where he is above average but certainly could use some improvements. However, the rest of Mercer's game is so flawless that I literally cannot see him NOT becoming an impact NHL-er. I've been lauding this kid forever, he's just the kind of player you win with.

20) LD Shakir Mukhamadullin
Okay, I'm going to theorize. I think the Devils really wanted Drysdale or Sanderson at #7 and just missed out. Then, I think the Devils really thought they would get Schneider at #20 and then the Rangers traded with Calgary to get him and left the Devils with their pants down. Instead of taking the "best available player" -- clearly Perreault, but with Khusnutdinov and Greig and Mysak not far behind -- they went for the highest D left on their draft board.

Why was this a bad pick? Well, if the Devils had strategized better, they could have traded down, acquired more assets, and still gotten Mukhamadullin. Washington gave up the #80 pick to move up from #24 to #22. I would have gladly taken that pick to move down to #24 and take Mukhamadullin there. Let's face it, there was little risk another team would take him between #20-#23. I feel it was a bit of a panic move to take Mukhamadullin at #20.

That being said, I'm willing to look at the optimistic side. To me, Mukhamadullin has the third-most upside of any LD in the 2020 draft after only Sanderson (gone at #5) and Poirier (a disaster defensively). Mukhamadullin has the best shot of any D in the 2020 draft and he's 6'3 and skates extremely well. He's pretty physical and good with the puck when he's on his game. So, Mukhamadullin is far from a disaster at #20 -- he's just bad asset management at #20. You want a disaster? If the Devils took Cormier or Wallinder at #20 -- that's a disaster. Though routinely ranked higher than Mukhamadullin, Cormier has Will Butcher-like upside with more risk, while Wallinder grades out as "poor" in shooting, hands, decision-making, physicality, defensive play, puck management, etc etc etc. Mukhamadullin -- with all of the questions raised by a troublesome draft-eligible season -- was a guy who entered my 2020 draft rankings in the top 15 overall because of his tremendous upside. But again, I would have preferred to have traded down to get him and also gained some more assets in the process. To me, it's proof that the Devils did not have a solid contingency plan after Schneider went off the board.

Conclusion
I know Devils fans will be very unhappy with missing out on Drysdale, Sanderson, Rossi and Perfetti -- then missing out on guys like Perreault, Gunler, Greig, Khusnutdinov and Mysak. However, it's important to realize that the Devils likely have created a strength at RW for the next decade out of thin air while adding a nice, high-upside lottery ticket at LD. Do I think the draft could have gone better with a more experienced management team who strategized more comprehensively for the draft? Yes, I do. I think NJ got caught with their pants down with players who unexpectedly rose and fell, and if they knew who would be available at 18 & 20 they would not have taken Holtz at 7. But do I think the Devils gained three players with tremendous upside who could be part of a burgeoning franchise core going forward? Yes, I do.

I really believe that if Drysdale was there, the Devils would've selected him.

I was very surprised the Devils did not go with Rossi but I can understand Fitz's thought-process and that was that we needed a high-end goal-scorer and while the other players like Quinn were comparable, I think he believed (like I do) that Holtz was the best goal-scorer of them all, and this team NEEDS goal-scorers.

Oh yeah...as far as Sanderson goes (once more with feeling) :

4hkonx.jpg


:razz:
 

Sgt Brylin

Trade is one for one
Dec 28, 2012
794
302
It does amuse me slightly that almost every mock on the planet had Holtz in the top six and Rossi as the guy who'd "fall to us", and yet when we get an assumed higher ranked player at #7, people are so hung up on us getting Rossi that they're somehow still disappointed in getting a consensus better player.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Tretyak 20

Maine Fan

Defense Wins Chanpionships
Apr 19, 2015
6,857
5,651
Ocean Twp, NJ
I'm not an insider, so I'm not certain exactly what the nuances were, but I think the Devils clearly did not achieve what they planned and panicked a bit. Their draft certainly lacked strategy.



How do you know what their strategy and plan were? Do you have insider information?
 

BurntToast

Registered User
May 27, 2007
3,394
2,689
Saratoga, New York
My thoughts:

It was assumed by fans that the Devils would take Rossi, but most pundits had him slipping due to size and concerns with ceiling with his age. Unfortunately, as an organization the Devils are small and have got pushed around. Holtz checks every box. You look at Perf and that kid is slight, and has less wheels.

Mercer best player available. No complaints.

Shak Attack..this was a weird draft because you have older guys who miss last years draft by a few days/weeks all seemed to slip. Then you have guy who started new seasons and shot up boards. I hated Raymond last season and didn’t want the Devils to select him but he shot back up the rankings because of his great start to his season. Fast forward to Shak, maybe the Devils could get more assets or maybe the Rangers and Caps weren’t trading assets to a team in their playing group. The 3rd pick is our long shot take Gunler pick, why not take a shot on Shak. To me it’s no different. I also see this as we don’t have a second round pick therefore get the guy you want even if he was ranked in round 2. Oh and Shak won on the international stage, plays in a men’s league. His stats look good. I can’t complain. Boo they took the wrong upside guy..silly
 
Last edited:

MadDevil

HFBoards Sponsor
Sponsor
Feb 10, 2007
33,880
23,841
Bismarck, ND
Without knowing what our board actually looked like it's all but impossible to "know" what the strategy was or where they had any of these kids ranked. I think it was McKenzie that mentioned that at that point teams boards could vary quite differently and if there's a guy there you like, sometimes you just need to take him. You never know where some other team might have that player ranked.

We had 3 1st rounders so I'm okay with using the lowest one on a boom/bust type. It might have been better to use it on a more skilled boom/bust type, but it's not like we don't need a big defenseman either.
 

StevenToddIves

Registered User
May 18, 2013
10,461
25,048
Brooklyn, NY
How do you know what their strategy and plan were? Do you have insider information?

No, and I stated as much. But if you'll allow me to pose a question -- if Jake Sanderson or Jamie Drysdale fall to #7, do the Devils pick them?

And if your answer is yes, then: if the Devils get a D at #7, do they still take Mukhamadullin at #20?

We'll likely never know what the Devils went into the draft thinking. Every team is very smart and diplomatic after the draft, they all say they player they got is the one they wanted all along.

No one -- especially not me -- has the right to complain because the Devils draft board did not match their own draft rankings. The fact is, that the Devils scouts have done extremely well in recent drafts. But when I say their draft "lacked strategy", it's because Calgary was able to trade down from #22 to #24 because Washington really wanted Lapierre, and Calgary still took a consensus top 20 player in Zary while picking up the #80 overall pick in the process.

My concern is twofold -- the possibility that the Devils went for positional need, 1) taking the best available defenseman instead of the best available player; and 2) not maximizing the asset of the #20 pick by trading down upon the realization that their draft target would likely not be one of the next few players taken.

To me, this is not tragic. But in my opinion, it is a bit myopic. Was the Devils draft a flop? Absolutely not. The Devils had a need for scoring RWs, and they filled it in spades. They also picked up a very intriguing, if not proven, defense prospect with more upside than several of the LD routinely ranked above him. But -- again -- I feel the Devils went into the draft reacting instead of having a plan and contingencies mapped out. I'd certainly feel better about Mukhamadullin -- and I don't think I'm alone among Devils fans -- if they had traded down later into the 20s and picked up some assets in the process.

Ultimately, the Devils needed a scoring winger for Hughes/Hischier and got one at #7. They needed a power forward and got one at #18. They needed a defenseman and got one at #20. And this positional convenience -- combined with the consensus discrepancies -- makes me a bit suspicious that the Devils went into the draft with a bit too much of the "fill holes" mentality and not enough of the "maximize assets and get the best possible talent" mentality.

This is all subjective and perhaps I'm wrong. Maybe the Devils draft board had Holtz at #4 and Mercer at #11 and Mukhamadullin at #16. Ultimately -- while I remain optimistic about the prospects the Devils selected -- I just have a tough time believing that's the case.
 

StevenToddIves

Registered User
May 18, 2013
10,461
25,048
Brooklyn, NY
Without knowing what our board actually looked like it's all but impossible to "know" what the strategy was or where they had any of these kids ranked. I think it was McKenzie that mentioned that at that point teams boards could vary quite differently and if there's a guy there you like, sometimes you just need to take him. You never know where some other team might have that player ranked.

We had 3 1st rounders so I'm okay with using the lowest one on a boom/bust type. It might have been better to use it on a more skilled boom/bust type, but it's not like we don't need a big defenseman either.

I will say that -- in terms of upside -- Mukhamadullin was probably the #2 defenseman remaining after Jeremie Poirier, who is notoriously poor in his own zone. It could have been a lot worse -- some of the other LD mentioned as first round possibilities rank below Mukhamadullin in virtually every offensive category. Mukhamadullin has perhaps the best shot of any D in the 2020 draft, and he's also a big kid who skates well, defends, hits, and handles the puck pretty well.

But yes, I agree with you that "knowing" is just not possible.
 

ninetyeight

Registered User
Jun 3, 2007
2,009
2,987
Finland
I feel exactly the same with your assessment STI. Right now Rossi and Perfetti dropping looks like a big mistake for all teams involved. It has similar vibes to Barzal, Caufield, Debrincat etc going late, where the point totals are fantastic but the scouts have whatever concerns that in the end don't seem to matter. But at the same seems like almost every year a fan favorite drops and few years later we findout the scouts were right to pass him.

This draft could have gone so much more worse and I'm only disappointed because of who was still available. Holtz, Mercer and a good D prospect is a great result if you don't know who other teams picked. In my final rankings I had Holtz at #9 (But I think I had him close to top 5 last year). Mercer I had #14. Mukhamadullin I had #41. This is who we picked and now we gotta stop speculating and get behind these guys. I already love Holtz and Mercer, and if Muk keeps up or even improves the level he is playing right now I'll love him too. Also excited to be able to watch Shak and Alex play this week!
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: StevenToddIves

NJDevils17

Going Up?
Apr 21, 2013
4,229
2,612
Raleigh
The idea that the staff panicked is absurd speculation. These guys have been in drafts as key decision makers for a while.

It’s not like Schneider was some under the radar guy who the Devils got sniped on. He could’ve gone anywhere around our picks.
Also, if we wanted him, we would’ve taken him at 18.
 
  • Like
Reactions: StevenToddIves

Burner Account

Registered User
Feb 14, 2008
37,418
1,744
Without knowing what our board actually looked like it's all but impossible to "know" what the strategy was or where they had any of these kids ranked. I think it was McKenzie that mentioned that at that point teams boards could vary quite differently and if there's a guy there you like, sometimes you just need to take him. You never know where some other team might have that player ranked.
Columbus appeared to do the same thing right after us. It’s easy for people to say Fitz should’ve traded down but ultimately you need to give him the benefit of the doubt, trust that he hasn’t reached this position by being stupid, and assume he had a reason not to trade down. Now we hope for the best.
 

MachoDiablo

Registered User
Mar 12, 2012
1,334
1,889
Jersey City
I think I agree that the end result of last night was "good picks, possibly questionable process", with the massive caveat that none of us know what the Devils' draft board looked like, what their scouts were saying, or what deals Fitz may or may not have been trying to swing, hence the 'possibly'. I'll parrot what some others have been saying and reiterate that, yeah, some of what went down last night felt too much like drafting for positional need rather than going BPA, and BPA is really how most teams, particularly those in a rebuild like the Devils, should be approaching any draft.

However, it's entirely possible this was not the case. As others have said, the Devils got tons of looks at Rossi, for example, and made the choice to go with Holtz. If the only reason for that pick was "we like him with Nico and Jack", then I don't like the process, but if it was "we saw lots of Rossi, we like him, but due to X, Y, and Z we don't feel he's the ideal pick here" then I can dig it. Getting a potentially elite goalscorer who's also got skills outside of his shot is never a bad thing, and ultimately he was in that group of guys projected to go anywhere from #4-#9 for a reason.

With #20, I agree that my first instinct was "why didn't they trade down for him and nab a low 2nd or another 3rd from somewhere?", and yeah, the upside of some of the remaining forwards felt too good to pass up in my book...but again, I'm not a scout, I haven't seen any of these kids play, and it's entirely possible that Fitz did try trading down and didn't find anyone willing to match up with him. Given that the teams that traded up were the Rags and Caps, both fellow Metro teams, it's possible their offices didn't want to do intra-divisional deals and no one else was biting with anything of note in return.

So yeah, like the players we got, question the methods and game plan, but there's so much we don't know about what went into this that I'm not about to launch into some kind of tirade about it, not while I'm in the dark about just about everything concerning how the Devils planned things out.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad