Just got home from the game a little while ago. York had a heck of a game. Unfortunately, he delivered a questionable hit on a Youngstown player near the boards with under 2 minutes left to taint things somewhat. Not a good way to finish a memorable night.
York doesn’t have elite puck skills and he’s not that big either. Teams will be hesitant to pick him that high, but he could rise in a re-draft. He’s a very productive hockey player.
York doesn’t have elite puck skills and he’s not that big either. Teams will be hesitant to pick him that high, but he could rise in a re-draft. He’s a very productive hockey player.
He has good Hockey IQ though. He reminds me of Ty Smith who also fell further than he should have (in my opinion).
I compared him to Keith Yandle. York is really good, but he’s not as flashy as a player like Hughes or Boqvist and he’s not considered the all situations player that a Byram or Dobson is.
I think he’ll have a similar type of NHL contribution to Smith though.
I think this is true, but I also think it's a mistake underrating someone because of that. You look at guys like Heiskanen and Jokiharju and they were both pretty similar in that their biggest strengths were they hockey IQ, skating and puck-moving skills. Look at them now. Well at least Heiskanen so far but Jokiharju will be a good one too. I think York is in a similar mold. You don't need to be flashy to be successful, just efficient and that's where those guys excel.
EDIT: Actually thinking about it Thomas Chabot is another example. Heavily underrated in his draft year because he wasn't a flashy guy. He was just a very smart and mobile puck-moving defenseman. Already in his 2nd year in the NHL he's thriving as a top pair D.
Whoa!He's currently the top D on my board and I have him #5 overall.
Whoa!
I like York, but 5th best player in the draft? I don't think he'll produce well enough to warrant going that high.
I agree with all of this. I just think #5 is too high.We'll see. He has everything I'm looking for a in a modern-day defenseman.
I have no concerns about him being able to produce at the next level. He's great in the offensive zone. He's got the mobility, smarts, vision, puck and passing skills and a decent enough shot (that he'll hopefully improve as he matures to make himself a bigger threat from the blueline) to produce.
Like I said before, I think his style of play compares to guys like Heiskanen and Chabot. Two guys whose offensive upside was heavily underrated in their respective draft years. Cerebral and mobile puck-moving D is the name of the game today.
I agree with all of this. I just think #5 is too high.
Fair enough. To be clear, I have #1-2 as tier 1, #3-4 as tier 2 and at #5-7 I have York together with Boldy and Krebs in a 3rd tier and it's very close between those guys for me, but with everything else being equal, York being a D gives him slightly higher value on my board.
Where do u have byram?