Prospect Info: Ives Final 2020 Draft Rankings -- Top 100

[beekay414]

Also, another thing that separates the two for me is that Greig is nearly a full year younger than Holloway.

 

[StevenToddIves]

Also, another thing that separates the two for me is that Greig is nearly a full year younger than Holloway.

These are very good points, and like you I'm a big backer of Ridly Greig. I just don't know if I'm taking him at #20 overall.

 

[StevenToddIves]

I didn't ask about it, but 1-4 certainly ran thu my head.
I think you wrote up Evangelista, so I'm not surprised by him.

I wanted to mention Luke Evangelista again, so I'm glad you brought him up.

Evangelista is important in the discussion of just how important "hockey IQ" is when discussing a prospect.

When we are breaking down the physical tools of a forward prospect, it's all stuff we can easily see. Skating? You note the edgework, the acceleration, the straightaway speed. Shooting? You note the power, the quickness of the release, the accuracy. With hockey IQ, it's far more difficult, and far more subtle.

Luke Evangelista's top qualities are all very subtle, but they are stunningly good. His positioning is impeccable, he's always in the right place. His anticipation is also elite. The combination of these two traits (which is rare at his age) cannot be understated. When you have a player who always is in the right position and reads the play so well, you're constantly raising your eyebrows that he made this great defensive play or kept that play alive in the offensive zone or somehow got to that loose puck first. Luke Evangelista is always on the play because he's always reading it before it happens and he's in the right place when it does. It's simple, but the acuity with which Evangelista accomplishes this is simply astounding, especially when you factor in that he's on the younger side of 2020 draft eligibles.

Hockey IQ is not limited to anticipation and positioning. It extends to poise with the puck, and decision making both with and without it. Again, Evangelista shines in all of these categories. He's remarkably cool with the puck on his stick, and he's a very cerebral player. He has the ability to anticipate and bait the defense into committing in a direction, and then quickly and calmly react with precision and skill. He does not make mistakes with the puck and does not take unnecessary risks, he always adjusts his game to react to the game situation. This makes Evangelista the guy you want out there in a close game late, whether you're winning or losing. It also makes him a weapon in any situation: 5x5, power play, penalty kill.

The last factor of hockey IQ I would call "support of your teammates". Evangelista is always reading not only the play itself, but where his teammates are on the ice. He's willing to help his defense down low if they're caught flat-footed, he anticipates well on the cycle, he anticipates well on break-outs and break-ins. He's literally the guy any player in the CHL wishes they had on their line with them.

Talent wise, Evangelista is not elite... but he's very good. I'd say he is "very good" when it comes to skating, passing and puck handling -- though not necessarily dynamic. His shot is solid in release and accuracy, and should improve in power as he gains muscle on his 5'11-165 frame. But when you combine a very good skill-set with an elite hockey mind, I think you get a kid who could become one of the best two-way, second-line forwards in the NHL. An all-situations stud capable of 20-40-60 stat lines. I also think Evangelista's intelligence gives him a very high "talent floor" -- this is a kid who will be smart enough to fit into any role the coach gives him, so any coach is going to want him out there. I'd say at the very least, Evangelista will be a Swiss army knife type forward who a coach can flip line to line in any circumstance.

Luke Evangelista was one of my biggest risers for my final rankings, simply because I would watch two games in a row of him where -- and this is a teenager -- he did not make a single mistake and always seemed to be one step ahead of the play. My final ranking of him is #27, but I'd feel comfortable drafting him even higher than that.

 

[My3Sons]

I wanted to mention Luke Evangelista again, so I'm glad you brought him up.

Evangelista is important in the discussion of just how important "hockey IQ" is when discussing a prospect.

When we are breaking down the physical tools of a forward prospect, it's all stuff we can easily see. Skating? You note the edgework, the acceleration, the straightaway speed. Shooting? You note the power, the quickness of the release, the accuracy. With hockey IQ, it's far more difficult, and far more subtle.

Luke Evangelista's top qualities are all very subtle, but they are stunningly good. His positioning is impeccable, he's always in the right place. His anticipation is also elite. The combination of these two traits (which is rare at his age) cannot be understated. When you have a player who always is in the right position and reads the play so well, you're constantly raising your eyebrows that he made this great defensive play or kept that play alive in the offensive zone or somehow got to that loose puck first. Luke Evangelista is always on the play because he's always reading it before it happens and he's in the right place when it does. It's simple, but the acuity with which Evangelista accomplishes this is simply astounding, especially when you factor in that he's on the younger side of 2020 draft eligibles.

Hockey IQ is not limited to anticipation and positioning. It extends to poise with the puck, and decision making both with and without it. Again, Evangelista shines in all of these categories. He's remarkably cool with the puck on his stick, and he's a very cerebral player. He has the ability to anticipate and bait the defense into committing in a direction, and then quickly and calmly react with precision and skill. He does not make mistakes with the puck and does not take unnecessary risks, he always adjusts his game to react to the game situation. This makes Evangelista the guy you want out there in a close game late, whether you're winning or losing. It also makes him a weapon in any situation: 5x5, power play, penalty kill.

The last factor of hockey IQ I would call "support of your teammates". Evangelista is always reading not only the play itself, but where his teammates are on the ice. He's willing to help his defense down low if their caught flat-footed, he anticipates well on the cycle, he anticipates well on break-outs and break-ins. He's literally the guy any player in the CHL wishes they had on their line with them.

Talent wise, Evangelista is not elite... but he's very good. I'd say he is "very good" when it comes to skating, passing and puck handling -- though not necessarily dynamic. His shot is solid in release and accuracy, and should improve in power as he gains muscle on his 5'11-165 frame. But when you combine a very good skill-set with an elite hockey mind, I think you get a kid who could become one of the best two-way, second-line forwards in the NHL. An all-situations stud capable of 20-40-60 stat lines. I also think Evangelista's intelligence gives him a very high "talent floor" -- this is a kid who will be smart enough to fit into any role the coach gives him, so any coach is going to want him out there. I'd say at the very least, Evangelista will be a Swiss army knife type forward who a coach can flip line to line in any circumstance.

Luke Evangelista was one of my biggest risers for my final rankings, simply because I would watch two games in a row of him where -- and this is a teenager -- he did not make a single mistake and always seemed to be one step ahead of the play. My final ranking of him is #27, but I'd feel comfortable drafting him even higher than that.

If you could see his shot improving enough to be a 30 goal player he sounds like a great fit with Nico. Find them a similar left wing and they can play in any scenario in any game at any time.

 

[StevenToddIves]

If you could see his shot improving enough to be a 30 goal player he sounds like a great fit with Nico. Find them a similar left wing and they can play in any scenario in any game at any time.

30-goals might be on the high side for Evangelista, but believe me when I tell you what a smart and likable player he is. Here's a new video, where you get some highlights and interview clips:

 

[My3Sons]

30-goals might be on the high side for Evangelista, but believe me when I tell you what a smart and likable player he is. Here's a new video, where you get some highlights and interview clips:

I'm sure McMichael has him on the WAS radar.

 

[PKs Broken Stick]

Glad to see you have Jarvis high. I really like him. Why does it seem every year, the players I really like just shoot up the rankings
Remains to be seen if Jarvis and Quinn actually do get picked in the top 10, but I wasn't expecting Seider to get picked #6 either (another one who I liked a lot).

 

[StevenToddIves]

Glad to see you have Jarvis high. I really like him. Why does it seem every year, the players I really like just shoot up the rankings
Remains to be seen if Jarvis and Quinn actually do get picked in the top 10, but I wasn't expecting Seider to get picked #6 either (another one who I liked a lot).

I'm going to be perfectly honest, here -- if Rossi, Drysdale and Sanderson go #4 through #6 (which is very possible), I'd be happy with the Devils taking Jarvis at #7. He's more of a line-driver than Holtz or Quinn, and as much of one as Raymond and Perfetti. He's a shade less dynamic than Raymond, but I think he's more dynamic than Perfetti (although Perfetti would top the trio in shooting and hockey IQ). I would also say that Jarvis has the best compete level of the three and is a future 1st-line RW, which the Devils sorely need.

In my final rankings I had Raymond #7, Jarvis #8 and Perfetti #9, but it's very close between the three. They're all great players and I'd be thrilled with any of them, but I feel Jarvis has gone a bit under-appreciated.

 

[ScottyK]

if mynhldraft.com 's mock is right I'd be f***ing ecstatic lol

 

[StevenToddIves]

if mynhldraft.com 's mock is right I'd be f***ing ecstatic lol

It never, ever is though.

 

[PKs Broken Stick]

but I feel Jarvis has gone a bit under-appreciated.

Definitely.

 

[StevenToddIves]

Best way I can describe Seth Jarvis is that he changes his game to fit the situation, but is a game-changer no matter what the situation.

This is a rare attribute. Even some of my favorite offensive players in the draft show signs of frustration when playing a team who defends them well. With Jarvis, if something is not working he'll adjust. I think this lead to his huge development upswing over the course of 2019-20. By the unfortunately abbreviated season end, I feel Jarvis was in the mix for second best draft-eligible player behind Lafreniere in the entire CHL along with Byfield, Rossi and Quinn.

Normally, I'm not a huge fan of highlight videos, but this is just so fun to watch:

 

[Nubmer6]

Best way I can describe Seth Jarvis is that he changes his game to fit the situation, but is a game-changer no matter what the situation.

This is a rare attribute. Even some of my favorite offensive players in the draft show signs of frustration when playing a team who defends them well. With Jarvis, if something is not working he'll adjust. I think this lead to his huge development upswing over the course of 2019-20. By the unfortunately abbreviated season end, I feel Jarvis was in the mix for second best draft-eligible player behind Lafreniere in the entire CHL along with Byfield, Rossi and Quinn.

Normally, I'm not a huge fan of highlight videos, but this is just so fun to watch:

I won't be impressed untill @Bleedred goes over the video and tells us how many of his goals were unstoppable

 

[StevenToddIves]

I wanted to share this video of Connor McClennon highlights, because he's a kid a really like for the Devils annual 6th-round steal. He's super skilled and the classic case of the talent who falls on draft day for the singular reason that he's small. I understand that it's tough for kids Connor's size in the NHL game without elite skating (though he skates very well), but he's a very smart, tough and competitive player.

 

[Eggtimer]

I’m so torn when it comes to who to take at 7.
I need someone to break it down so my tiny brain can decide better. This done by using NHL comparisons .
I know that no two players are exactly alike and it’s unfair to minimalize it like this , but what are the best NHL comparisons for the players that might be there at 7?
Sanderson - Heiskanen
Drysdale - Makar
Raymond - ????
Rossi - ???
Perfetti - ???
Holtz - ???

I have read that the two D compare to Makar and Heiskanen , but is this just because of play style and lesser versions of those players , or can Drysdale and Sanderson actually be as talented and effective as their comparisons ?
If Sanderson could very well be as good as Heiskanen .... sign me up !!
I have no clue who the forward prospects are similar to in the NHL.
If Holtz for example could be as good as Laine ..... it would be hard not to want that player as well....

I just want the Devils to improve as much as possible and these picks are hugely important moving forward .
I would think a stud D is one of the hardest pieces to acquire , but it’s not as sexy as a goal scoring forward....
I’m leaning toward Sanderson and Drysdale just because of how hard it is to get a true top pairing D and how important it is to have a legit #1 in order to be successful

 

[beekay414]

I just want to say, @StevenToddIves, you should have the job at The Athletic over Scott Wheeler. His rankings are absolutely abysmal and have no rhyme or reason to it. Personally, I feel his rankings are different just for the sake of being different and to get clicks because there's really no other reasoning for them. They are brutally bad, in my humble opinion.

 

[RememberTheName]

I just want to say, @StevenToddIves, you should have the job at The Athletic over Scott Wheeler. His rankings are absolutely abysmal and have no rhyme or reason to it. Personally, I feel his rankings are different just for the sake of being different and to get clicks because there's really no other reasoning for them. They are brutally bad, in my humble opinion.

I don't subscribe to the Athletic, so I cannot view Scott Wheeler's rankings. Would you mind giving me an example of a couple that you found particularly bad? I am personally of the belief that no rankings can truly be considered bad unless its completely and utterly obvious (ex. if a ranking had Seth Jarvis first and Byfield out of the top 20; a bit extreme, but you get the point). No one can truly know who is going to be the best players from the draft as of right now, and its really a guessing game for everyone involved. People see things differently.

 

[beekay414]

I don't subscribe to the Athletic, so I cannot view Scott Wheeler's rankings. Would you mind giving me an example of a couple that you found particularly bad? I am personally of the belief that no rankings can truly be considered bad unless its completely and utterly obvious (ex. if a ranking had Seth Jarvis first and Byfield out of the top 20; a bit extreme, but you get the point). No one can truly know who is going to be the best players from the draft as of right now, and its really a guessing game for everyone involved. People see things differently.

Won't quote the article but I'll link the pic to his top 100. Article goes in-depth and even gives 50 honorable mentions.

There's a lot I don't agree with. I could probably pick it apart for hours but I'd rather just say they are piss poor and are just different to be different.

 

[beekay414]

I personally feel Wheeler is a hack but what do I know.

 

[Ripshot 43]

Won't quote the article but I'll link the pic to his top 100. Article goes in-depth and even gives 50 honorable mentions.

There's a lot I don't agree with. I could probably pick it apart for hours but I'd rather just say they are piss poor and are just different to be different.

If Sanderson is falling to 17 I would be blowing up their phone and call waiting to make sure we got the trade to draft him

 

[RememberTheName]

Won't quote the article but I'll link the pic to his top 100. Article goes in-depth and even gives 50 honorable mentions.

There's a lot I don't agree with. I could probably pick it apart for hours but I'd rather just say they are piss poor and are just different to be different.

At first glance, in my personal opinion, these rankings look fine. While I don't necessarily agree with some of the rankings, just to quote a few, Rossi at 3, Holtz at 6, Stutzle at 7, Quinn at 15, O'Rourke at 44, and Mukhamadullin at 56, I do like a few, but not many, in particular Perfetti at 4 and Gunler at 10. While I don't agree with some of them, I'd argue he has just as good odds at being right as someone like @StevenToddIves. I greatly respect both of their opinions as scouts, and one of the joys of scouting is that scouts don't see everything the same way. It's not an exact science, and that's what makes scouting truly so difficult. Some scouts may see something in a guy like Rossi that they just absolutely love, and some may watch his game and just don't think it will translate very well. Someone may see a player like Tristan Robins and think he is the next Brayden Point, while others may see him as just another undersized center who won't be able to make it. I'm sure the Devils would love to go back to 2016 and not draft Michael McLeod, thinking of his possible Larkin-like upside, instead of Charlie McAvoy or Jakub Chychrun. Scouts not only have to determine who the best players are, but also who the next Michael McLeod's and Jesse Puljujarvi's are. Wheeler has his opinion on that, and while it might seem a little out there now, we just wait and see if he is right.

 

[beekay414]

At first glance, in my personal opinion, these rankings look fine. While I don't necessarily agree with some of the rankings, just to quote a few, Rossi at 3, Holtz at 6, Stutzle at 7, Quinn at 15, O'Rourke at 44, and Mukhamadullin at 56, I do like a few, but not many, in particular Perfetti at 4 and Gunler at 10. While I don't agree with some of them, I'd argue he has just as good odds at being right as someone like @StevenToddIves. I greatly respect both of their opinions as scouts, and one of the joys of scouting is that scouts don't see everything the same way. It's not an exact science, and that's what makes scouting truly so difficult. Some scouts may see something in a guy like Rossi that they just absolutely love, and some may watch his game and just don't think it will translate very well. Someone may see a player like Tristan Robins and think he is the next Brayden Point, while others may see him as just another undersized center who won't be able to make it. I'm sure the Devils would love to go back to 2016 and not draft Michael McLeod, thinking of his possible Larkin-like upside, instead of Charlie McAvoy or Jakub Chychrun. Scouts not only have to determine who the best players are, but also who the next Michael McLeod's and Jesse Puljujarvi's are. Wheeler has his opinion on that, and while it might seem a little out there now, we just wait and see if he is right.

Oh, I get it, no doubt. I just don't think there is any rhyme or reason to these rankings. If he was consistent on anything other than over ranking Swedes, I'd give him his due. Thing is...there isn't. That's literally the only thing that he's consistent with.

 

[ChicksDigTheTrap]

If Sanderson is falling to 17 I would be blowing up their phone and call waiting to make sure we got the trade to draft him

Draft rankings and mock drafts are two different things.

 

[ChicksDigTheTrap]

At first glance, in my personal opinion, these rankings look fine. While I don't necessarily agree with some of the rankings, just to quote a few, Rossi at 3, Holtz at 6, Stutzle at 7, Quinn at 15, O'Rourke at 44, and Mukhamadullin at 56, I do like a few, but not many, in particular Perfetti at 4 and Gunler at 10. While I don't agree with some of them, I'd argue he has just as good odds at being right as someone like @StevenToddIves. I greatly respect both of their opinions as scouts, and one of the joys of scouting is that scouts don't see everything the same way. It's not an exact science, and that's what makes scouting truly so difficult. Some scouts may see something in a guy like Rossi that they just absolutely love, and some may watch his game and just don't think it will translate very well. Someone may see a player like Tristan Robins and think he is the next Brayden Point, while others may see him as just another undersized center who won't be able to make it. I'm sure the Devils would love to go back to 2016 and not draft Michael McLeod, thinking of his possible Larkin-like upside, instead of Charlie McAvoy or Jakub Chychrun. Scouts not only have to determine who the best players are, but also who the next Michael McLeod's and Jesse Puljujarvi's are. Wheeler has his opinion on that, and while it might seem a little out there now, we just wait and see if he is right.

As far as the top 10ish types he is not as high on Stutzle and Jake as the majority. Only time will tell if he is right.

 

[Ripshot 43]

Draft rankings and mock drafts are two different things.

Correct.

I was just having fun.