Jaime Drysdale

[newfy]

Guys that have been on the radar longer seem to get picked apart more. Drysdale was so good in his -1 year that he was put under a microscope this year even more. I think the same thing happened to an extent with both Lundell and Zary as well.

I like all 3 of those guys a lot, personally.

Yeah that definitely happens every year. I remember it happening with Tavares as well.

A guy like Drysdale is known as the top Din the class for a couple years ahead of time, plays internationally and ends up playing really well as a 2 year underager essentially at the WJC. Gets picked apart and then somehow people like the shiny new toy that had about 2 months of hockey where he played at a first round level in Sanderson. No need to try to be the smartest person in the room, Drysdale has been dominant in his age group for a long time to the point hes now playing out of his age group for Canada

 

[MBH]

Yeah that definitely happens every year. I remember it happening with Tavares as well.

A guy like Drysdale is known as the top Din the class for a couple years ahead of time, plays internationally and ends up playing really well as a 2 year underager essentially at the WJC. Gets picked apart and then somehow people like the shiny new toy that had about 2 months of hockey where he played at a first round level in Sanderson. No need to try to be the smartest person in the room, Drysdale has been dominant in his age group for a long time to the point hes now playing out of his age group for Canada

All that sounds like politicking.

What matters is who will be best.
Based on size, skating, skill, defense, IQ and potential to control play and dominate games, I give that edge to Sanderson.

Theodore vs Barrie, is how I see it.

 

[HisNoodliness]

All that sounds like politicking.

What matters is who will be best.
Based on size, skating, skill, defense, IQ and potential to control play and dominate games, I give that edge to Sanderson.

Theodore vs Barrie, is how I see it.

I think the problem is that many of us simply have different impressions. I say this every time- I think Sanderson is better at covering guys in front of the net and stripping them of the puck in the corners. And that's it. I think passing, shooting, skating, positioning, reading the play, "dominating," Drysdale is better, and in some ways significantly so. The more I watch Sanderson, the more strongly I feel this way. I just don't see a top line player. I see a number one D in Drysdale.

 

[Bench]

I think the problem is that many of us simply have different impressions. I say this every time- I think Sanderson is better at covering guys in front of the net and stripping them of the puck in the corners. And that's it. I think passing, shooting, skating, positioning, reading the play, "dominating," Drysdale is better, and in some ways significantly so. The more I watch Sanderson, the more strongly I feel this way. I just don't see a top line player. I see a number one D in Drysdale.

The difference between the two is that you need to project Sanderson to justify the pick. Which is fair, that's sort of the point of drafting. You are projecting. But you have to take a leap of faith to anticipate him developing into the next Suter. If you believe that, it makes total sense to value him more. Landing a Suter is massive.

Drysdale, on the other hand, demonstrates every skill required for a modern NHL defender in the mold of Hughes and Makar. The skating is too good. The vision is too good. The puck movement and ability to jump into the rush... it's all there. You aren't left wanting or projecting, you're left knowing that he's going to be an impact player in some regard. Is all of that better than the next Suter? Well, that's a tough one. But I don't have to hope he develops certain qualities - they are already overwhelmingly on display.

And that's why I'm pretty damn confident Drysdale is the first defender off the board and could be the one to steal a top 3 selection.

 

[Tetsuo]

The difference between the two is that you need to project Sanderson to justify the pick. Which is fair, that's sort of the point of drafting. You are projecting. But you have to take a leap of faith to anticipate him developing into the next Suter. If you believe that, it makes total sense to value him more. Landing a Suter is massive.

Drysdale, on the other hand, demonstrates every skill required for a modern NHL defender in the mold of Hughes and Makar. The skating is too good. The vision is too good. The puck movement and ability to jump into the rush... it's all there. You aren't left wanting or projecting, you're left knowing that he's going to be an impact player in some regard. Is all of that better than the next Suter? Well, that's a tough one. But I don't have to hope he develops certain qualities - they are already overwhelmingly on display.

And that's why I'm pretty damn confident Drysdale is the first defender off the board and could be the one to steal a top 3 selection.

Yeah this pretty much. I prefer Sanderson to Drysdale slightly but I think Drysdale has shown enough that one of LA or Ottawa will probably grab him. Teams value D more than fans do. But don't forget that Sanderson's last few months of play were much better offensively and it looked like things had finally clicked into place on that front for him. No more player's draft stock was more negatively impacted than Sanderson's due to the pandemic.

 

[Bench]

Yeah this pretty much. I prefer Sanderson to Drysdale slightly but I think Drysdale has shown enough that one of LA or Ottawa will probably grab him. Teams value D more than fans do. But don't forget that Sanderson's last few months of play were much better offensively and it looked like things had finally clicked into place on that front for him. No more player's draft stock was more negatively impacted than Sanderson's due to the pandemic.

Or... no player's draft stock was positively impacted as much. What is Sanderson's late offensive surge wasn't sustainable?

I like everything I hear about Sanderson from his coaches. He has some nice film. He's clearly a top defensive talent in this draft. I don't know, though, it really does require one to fill in a lot of gaps to take him at #4. I get why people are into it (how could I not, I'm the damn goalie guy), but it's a little too spooky for me.

 

[Tetsuo]

Or... no player's draft stock was positively impacted as much. What is Sanderson's late offensive surge wasn't sustainable?

I like everything I hear about Sanderson from his coaches. He has some nice film. He's clearly a top defensive talent in this draft. I don't know, though, it really does require one to fill in a lot of gaps to take him at #4. I get why people are into it (how could I not, I'm the damn goalie guy), but it's a little too spooky for me.

That question is exactly why I think it might prevent Sanderson from going top 5. Too much uncertainty due to the abridged season. If he was able to play prior to the draft maybe we can get a better feel for where he's at, but the situation in the states made that impossible. When I saw him after the 5 Nations, where he lead all players in scoring, it didn't feel like a hot streak FWIW.

Drafting him at 4 would be the second spookiest pick after Askarov for us. I would be on board but totally nervous.

 

[Voodoo Glow Skulls]

Or... no player's draft stock was positively impacted as much. What is Sanderson's late offensive surge wasn't sustainable?

I like everything I hear about Sanderson from his coaches. He has some nice film. He's clearly a top defensive talent in this draft. I don't know, though, it really does require one to fill in a lot of gaps to take him at #4. I get why people are into it (how could I not, I'm the damn goalie guy), but it's a little too spooky for me.

Honestly, I don't see how Guhle isn't in the conversation if Sanderson is.

 

[Voodoo Glow Skulls]

That question is exactly why I think it might prevent Sanderson from going top 5. Too much uncertainty due to the abridged season. If he was able to play prior to the draft maybe we can get a better feel for where he's at, but the situation in the states made that impossible. When I saw him after the 5 Nations, where he lead all players in scoring, it didn't feel like a hot streak FWIW.

Drafting him at 4 would be the second spookiest pick after Askarov for us. I would be on board but totally nervous.

I'd take Askarov before Sanderson.

If you're going to swing....

 

[silkyjohnson50]

Drafting him at 4 would be the second spookiest pick after Askarov for us. I would be on board but totally nervous.

I disagree about Sanderson being the 2nd spookiest. In fact, I view both him and Drysdale as the safest picks. Defensively I believe Sanderson is almost a sure thing - his combination of skating, size, and stick work are high, high end. I think you’re looking at a Slavin type player with potentially more offensive upside. Nothing about that spooks me at 4, especially when considering that Perfetti, Raymond, and Rossi are likely the forward options - all who have bigger question marks and lower floors to me.

 

[Tetsuo]

I'd take Askarov before Sanderson.

If you're going to swing....

If we truly believe in BPA, then Askarov absolutely needs to be in the conversation. He has already made his debut in the KHL as a 17 year old. If you think he can become the best goalie in the game can you really pass him up?

Don't get me wrong, I would prefer one of the forwards if I had to make the pick, but after the top 3, based on talent alone, Askarov is as good as any other player available.

 

[Tetsuo]

I disagree about Sanderson being the 2nd spookiest. In fact, I view both him and Drysdale as the safest picks. Defensively I believe Sanderson is almost a sure thing - his combination of skating, size, and stick work are high, high end. I think you’re looking at a Slavin type player with potentially more offensive upside. Nothing about that spooks me at 4, especially when considering that Perfetti, Raymond, and Rossi are likely the forward options - all who have bigger question marks and lower floors to me.

It's why I love Sanderson, his floor is super high already, but I've seen enough from Raymond and Perfetti to have me believe in their top end being more realistically attainable. I wouldn't be upset with Sanderson by any means, but he would leave me more anxious to see him play than most of the other expected picks at 4.

 

[newfy]

Yeah this pretty much. I prefer Sanderson to Drysdale slightly but I think Drysdale has shown enough that one of LA or Ottawa will probably grab him. Teams value D more than fans do. But don't forget that Sanderson's last few months of play were much better offensively and it looked like things had finally clicked into place on that front for him. No more player's draft stock was more negatively impacted than Sanderson's due to the pandemic.

Thats the thing though, the stoppage could have just as easily helped Sandersons draft stock. He could've just had a hot streak where the offense was working for him and he could've went back to what everyone has seen the last few years including the start of this one.

With Drysdale theres none of this guessing game. Hes been dominant for years and projecting as a number one type dman for years. No way Sanderson should knock him off that pedestal after a couple hot months where realistically he matched what Drysdale has been doing consistently for years.

 

[AD1066]

If we truly believe in BPA, then Askarov absolutely needs to be in the conversation. He has already made his debut in the KHL as a 17 year old. If you think he can become the best goalie in the game can you really pass him up?

Don't get me wrong, I would prefer one of the forwards if I had to make the pick, but after the top 3, based on talent alone, Askarov is as good as any other player available.

If he does become the best goalie in the game, are we comfortable shelling out the salary that would command and trying to build around it? I know you can say that about any position, but the mega contracts for goalies rarely seem to work out, and I think you're more likely to build a contender around a handful of elite skaters and an above-average goalie.

 

[Tetsuo]

Thats the thing though, the stoppage could have just as easily helped Sandersons draft stock. He could've just had a hot streak where the offense was working for him and he could've went back to what everyone has seen the last few years including the start of this one.

With Drysdale theres none of this guessing game. Hes been dominant for years and projecting as a number one type dman for years. No way Sanderson should knock him off that pedestal after a couple hot months where realistically he matched what Drysdale has been doing consistently for years.

I understand that to an extent, but I am not in love with Drysdale's game to game consistency. I've seen him be brilliant and I've seen him be almost invisible. Which is the real Drysdale? If he's the pick I hope he will find a way to play with gumption day in and day out. Sanderson, at least, I have zero concerns about his effort level, I've seen him a lot and he always plays hard.

 

[ArmChairGM89]

I think at the top of the draft GM’s value pre D-1 seasons and a long history of sustained success much more than fans do. They’ve been watching these kids for 4-5 years. Most knowledgeable prospect fans have been following these guys for one year and in some cases two years. I think Sanderson showing a little offense for the first time in his life over a six week span isn’t going to effect real scouts analysis when comparing him to a guy that’s been at the top of his age group for 3-4 years.

 

[Tetsuo]

If he does become the best goalie in the game, are we comfortable shelling out the salary that would command and trying to build around it? I know you can say that about any position, but the mega contracts for goalies rarely seem to work out, and I think you're more likely to build a contender around a handful of elite skaters and an above-average goalie.

In short, yes.

If he's the best goalie in the game and plays like it, he will be worth every penny of a $10M a year contract. Goal tending is the most important position, full stop. You need good goaltending to get the 16 wins to win the Cup. That said, there are plenty of solid goalies that are usually available thru various means, it is a a matter of finding the one who can be hot enough in the post season. Goalies are absolutely inconsistent beasts, but their counting stats are oftentimes dictated by the team in front of them so they can be hard to evaluate. But even so, generational players are rarely not-worth the money. If the Wings identify Askarov as the BPA, I would hope they view him as the 'next one' in net.

 

[Bench]

If he does become the best goalie in the game, are we comfortable shelling out the salary that would command and trying to build around it? I know you can say that about any position, but the mega contracts for goalies rarely seem to work out, and I think you're more likely to build a contender around a handful of elite skaters and an above-average goalie.

I don't think people realize how expensive above average goaltending can cost. At least, unsurprising above average goaltending.

If you're looking for a random Binnington to emerge from your AHL team, yeah, you can pray for cheap options. If you want someone steady with any kind of track record of production? $6-7 million. Then you need a backup. That's $1-2 million. Maybe more. Howard and Bernier cost $8 million combined this season. That's only $3 million less than Price, the highest paid, and his backup.

Tampa will be paying almost $11 million in goaltending next year. Boston pays over $9 million. Vegas is paying $8.4 million prorated, but they have $13 million total in cap hit there presently.

So when I see it costs Florida, Montreal, and Tampa $11 million or less to have elite goalies signed and the Red Wings paid $8 million this year...

Yeah, I think we can swing it.

 

[AD1066]

I don't think people realize how expensive above average goaltending can cost. At least, unsurprising above average goaltending.

If you're looking for a random Binnington to emerge from your AHL team, yeah, you can pray for cheap options. If you want someone steady with any kind of track record of production? $6-7 million. Then you need a backup. That's $1-2 million. Maybe more. Howard and Bernier cost $8 million combined this season. That's only $3 million less than Price, the highest paid, and his backup.

Tampa will be paying almost $11 million in goaltending next year. Boston pays over $9 million. Vegas is paying $8.4 million prorated, but they have $13 million total in cap hit there presently.

So when I see it costs Florida, Montreal, and Tampa $11 million or less to have elite goalies signed and the Red Wings paid $8 million this year...

Yeah, I think we can swing it.

Good analysis, thanks!

 

[Bench]

Good analysis, thanks!

Of course! I was always interested in how much goalies really did hamper a team's ability to build the rest of the core. And league wide, the numbers between your average goalie tandems and elite goalie tandems comes out to around that $3-4 million mark.

I think there's some incredible contract values with goalies, such as Ben Bishop, Connor Hellebuyck, and Semyon Varlamov. When people talk about getting an above average guy without breaking the bank, I think these are the types of names they think of. Grabbing a guy like that in the $5-6 range is a massive get. But I can really only find a handful of these guys. They are less common than one might think. So if you do end up with consistent, great goaltending - it's worth paying the extra if you can spare it.

It's important to note that it's absolutely vital if you're going to pay a goalie $10 million that it is someone truly elite like Price, Lundqvist, or Vasilevskiy. I was never a big fan of the Bob contract, although I do believe he will bounce back ultimately.

So in conclusion, if you can snag a Connor Hellebuyck for $6 million, that's damn great. But if you find yourself with an elite guy, don't go hunting for Hellebuyck to save a few million bucks, because it could be another decade or more before you find anyone as good.

 

[MBH]

The difference between the two is that you need to project Sanderson to justify the pick. Which is fair, that's sort of the point of drafting. You are projecting. But you have to take a leap of faith to anticipate him developing into the next Suter. If you believe that, it makes total sense to value him more. Landing a Suter is massive.

Drysdale, on the other hand, demonstrates every skill required for a modern NHL defender in the mold of Hughes and Makar. The skating is too good. The vision is too good. The puck movement and ability to jump into the rush... it's all there. You aren't left wanting or projecting, you're left knowing that he's going to be an impact player in some regard. Is all of that better than the next Suter? Well, that's a tough one. But I don't have to hope he develops certain qualities - they are already overwhelmingly on display.

And that's why I'm pretty damn confident Drysdale is the first defender off the board and could be the one to steal a top 3 selection.

Right now, without a doubt in my mind, Jake Sanderson is more NHL ready than Jamie Drysdale.
It's not even close.
Sanderson plays defense with the size and skill of a pro.

The only projection with Sanderson comes on the offensive side of the puck, where's got all the raw skills to make it happen.

 

[Lil Sebastian Cossa]

Or... no player's draft stock was positively impacted as much. What is Sanderson's late offensive surge wasn't sustainable?

I like everything I hear about Sanderson from his coaches. He has some nice film. He's clearly a top defensive talent in this draft. I don't know, though, it really does require one to fill in a lot of gaps to take him at #4. I get why people are into it (how could I not, I'm the damn goalie guy), but it's a little too spooky for me.

You're "a" goalie guy, Bench. Don't try that all for yourself.

 

[Lil Sebastian Cossa]

Right now, without a doubt in my mind, Jake Sanderson is more NHL ready than Jamie Drysdale.
It's not even close.
Sanderson plays defense with the size and skill of a pro.

The only projection with Sanderson comes on the offensive side of the puck, where's got all the raw skills to make it happen.

The only projection with Sanderson is the projection that you have to make to justify him as #4OA. His defensive game is very good. But what makes him worthy of a top 5 pick is that you think he's going to grow to become a top end offensive D too.

Let's assume he doesn't continue to grow his offensive game. Wouldn't be the first guy with the tools who didn't develop. Are you happy taking, at the upper end, a Marc Edouard Vlasic at 4OA? Judging by defenders have been trending, I'd hitch my wagon to a guy like Drysdale who has clear skills similar to Hughes and Makar who are becoming two of the biggest hits in the draft in recent memory.

Lastly, I'm not going to take a guy because he's more NHL ready right now on a team that is flat garb. I think Drysdale has a large chance to be elite. Sanderson should be a very good player for a very long time... but I don't want that out of the highest pick my team has had since 1990 and a pick that we earned through being absolute dogshit.

E: Also, given the choice, I'd rather have a guy who I have to round out defensively to make a complete stud than hope that he picks up another offensive level to his game when he enters the league. Particularly when you already seemed to have gotten lucky by taking Seider and having him be better offensively than you though.

 

[ZDH]

I'd take Askarov before Sanderson.

If you're going to swing....

Absolutely

 

[MBH]

Honestly, I don't see how Guhle isn't in the conversation if Sanderson is.

Hockey sense.
His physical tools ensure he won't be around at 32.
But his hockey sense keeps him out of the top 10.