Prospect Info: NHL 2017 Entry Draft - Part II

[surixon]

Yes to both of you surix and ps, this will be a crapshoot. I have some good friends that I trust who saw many games live in Europe. I really think Heiskanen and Liljegren will both be good Dmen based on what I have seen and what they have told me. I liked Heiskanen as top D back in Dec. And if Lilj slips to us I would be ecstatic!

I'm not all that concerned about Liljegren. He's had a down year but we have time to develop him properly.

 

[Grind]

Who thinks the jets drafting is completely ruined by the Stanley pick?

I'd like to see a username attached to that statement as it seems pretty ludicrous.

I definitely recall some expressing concern over it possibly being a sign of departure due to Hillier (I'd say cederhom would support) but I don't recall anything so extreme as now we're garbage.

 

[Grind]

Also I take back the cederhom thing. I mean I do t like that pick but he's no more puzzling then nogier was.

I also dont think the jets abandoned all sanity for Stanley. I think they incorrectly overvalued him into a s
Certain tier and when he was the last guy left in that tiwr they made a stupid move.

 

[Whileee]

Who thinks the jets drafting is completely ruined by the Stanley pick?

I'd like to see a username attached to that statement as it seems pretty ludicrous.

I definitely recall some expressing concern over it possibly being a sign of departure due to Hillier (I'd say cederhom would support) but I don't recall anything so extreme as now we're garbage.

There have been several suggestions that the Jets entire scouting strategy is called into question by the Stanley pick, with some suggesting that it is indicative of a change in draft strategies due to Hillier taking over. It's not difficult to find illustrative posts in this thread.

I think the sentiment from some is that Chevy /TNSE are morons and the Stanley pick is the evidence, including the rhetorical flourish that the Jets draft is driven by the former equipment manager. Any other evidence of good drafting is conveniently ignored.

 

[Daximus]

Who thinks the jets drafting is completely ruined by the Stanley pick?

I'd like to see a username attached to that statement as it seems pretty ludicrous.

I definitely recall some expressing concern over it possibly being a sign of departure due to Hillier (I'd say cederhom would support) but I don't recall anything so extreme as now we're garbage.

Also I take back the cederhom thing. I mean I do t like that pick but he's no more puzzling then nogier was.

I also dont think the jets abandoned all sanity for Stanley. I think they incorrectly overvalued him into a s
Certain tier and when he was the last guy left in that tiwr they made a stupid move.

Yeah no one is saying our drafting is done now. Just stating that we will see if the strategy has changed at all. I'm really hoping it was more of a desperation move after all the defencemen that were taken prior. That would actually be good news rather than we have a change in strategy.

 

[Daximus]

There have been several suggestions that the Jets entire scouting strategy is called into question by the Stanley pick, with some suggesting that it is indicative of a change in draft strategies due to Hillier taking over. It's not difficult to find illustrative posts in this thread.

I think the sentiment from some is that Chevy /TNSE are morons and the Stanley pick is the evidence, including the rhetorical flourish that the Jets draft is driven by the former equipment manager. Any other evidence of good drafting is conveniently ignored.

But not one person has brought up Chevy or TNSE in any of this. It has always been about Hillier and whether he has a new approach to drafting. It's not a dumb question, it's entirely relevant to the discussion. And the only way we will really know is during this draft. It will be pretty easy to see if there is a pattern developing. No one is criticizing anything else. We have all celebrated our previous picks. The question isn't whether Comeau has been bad at drafting while with the Jets. We all know and understand he was great the question is whether Hillier has some different ideas about what he thinks the Jets need. It's impossible to judge him as head scout using previous picks because he wasn't running the program then. He is now and was last year so that is why no one is bringing up any of the previous drafts. It's just not relevant to him as the head scout, because he wasn't the head scout.

 

[Whileee]

But not one person has brought up Chevy or TNSE in any of this. It has always been about Hillier and whether he has a new approach to drafting. It's not a dumb question, it's entirely relevant to the discussion. And the only way we will really know is during this draft. It will be pretty easy to see if there is a pattern developing. No one is criticizing anything else. We have all celebrated our previous picks. The question isn't whether Comeau has been bad at drafting while with the Jets. We all know and understand he was great the question is whether Hillier has some different ideas about what he thinks the Jets need. It's impossible to judge him as head scout using previous picks because he wasn't running the program then. He is now and was last year so that is why no one is bringing up any of the previous drafts. It's just not relevant to him as the head scout, because he wasn't the head scout.

I think Chevy manages the draft process much more than people think. He won't just let Hillier change the way they assess prospects.

Some of the shots at the Stanley pick are clearly part of the overall criticism of Chevy and TNSE, including the role of the equipment manager. That may not be your position, but I wasn't generally referring to your posts.

 

[Daximus]

I think Chevy manages the draft process much more than people think. He won't just let Hillier change the way they assess prospects.

Some of the shots at the Stanley pick are clearly part of the overall criticism of Chevy and TNSE, including the role of the equipment manager. That may not be your position, but I wasn't generally referring to your posts.

Like I said we'll see if a pattern emerges in this draft. It will either be a one off or something has changed.

 

[JetsFan815]

There have been several suggestions that the Jets entire scouting strategy is called into question by the Stanley pick, with some suggesting that it is indicative of a change in draft strategies due to Hillier taking over. It's not difficult to find illustrative posts in this thread.

I think the sentiment from some is that Chevy /TNSE are morons and the Stanley pick is the evidence, including the rhetorical flourish that the Jets draft is driven by the former equipment manager. Any other evidence of good drafting is conveniently ignored.

Literally the only person mentioning "equipment manager" here is you. Most here are clearly saying that questions were raised about the Jets drafting philosophy last summer and this draft will be key in determining if that was an aberration or if there has been a bigger change in drafting philosophy. I don't know why that is a controversial position and why it's getting some people so defensive

 

[Whileee]

Literally the only person mentioning "equipment manager" here is you. Most here are clearly saying that questions were raised about the Jets drafting philosophy last summer and this draft will be key in determining if that was an aberration or if there has been a bigger change in drafting philosophy. I don't know why that is a controversial position and why it's getting some people so defensive

I'm sure I'm not the only one who's seen post on HF Jets about the equipment manager. There was even a post on the main board with that notion.

My point was that a single pick is less evidence of drafting philosophy than 5 previous drafts, and of course, the drafting of Green. The outrage over vague rumours that the Jets might not be interested in a mid-ranked defenseman were sort of over the top.

 

[Daximus]

I'm sure I'm not the only one who's seen post on HF Jets about the equipment manager. There was even a post on the main board with that notion.

My point was that a single pick is less evidence of drafting philosophy than 5 previous drafts, and of course, the drafting of Green. The outrage over vague rumours that the Jets might not be interested in a mid-ranked defenseman were sort of over the top.

It's not really outrage. It's just questioning whether the philosophy has changed considering Valimaki is a lot like Trouba and Morrissey. We should by all accounts be interested in him.

 

[portamoral]

how many pages is it possible to argue about the same thing for?

 

[Daximus]

how many pages is it possible to argue about the same thing for?

Well there was the Matthews vs. Laine threads so I'm going to say A LOT.

 

[Kaako Kappo]

how many pages is it possible to argue about the same thing for?

Dunno, Vancouver Canucks have had 4 threads about Markus Granlund.

 

[CorgisPer60]

I'm not all that concerned about Liljegren. He's had a down year but we have time to develop him properly.

Indeed. I would not be opposed to him at 12 if he's still there. He could be an exceptional value pick, and was originally a projected top 3.

 

[lanky]

Indeed. I would not be opposed to him at 12 if he's still there. He could be an exceptional value pick, and was originally a projected top 3.

I'd be thrilled if we got him at 12. He can put the puck on the tape of a stick 80 ft away. His skating is just the cherry on top.

 

[ps241]

If TNSE take Liljegren at #12 I will have faith they have scouted him enough to like him there. If they dodge him at #12 I am also fine with that for the same reasons.

I am starting to like other players more in that slot but I am fine with him if TNSE are fine with him.

 

[Rheged]

He's tall, skates well, and didn't score much this year.. Perfect TNSE pick :p

 

[puck stoppa]

If TNSE take Liljegren at #12 I will have faith they have scouted him enough to like him there. If they dodge him at #12 I am also fine with that for the same reasons.

I am starting to like other players more in that slot but I am fine with him if TNSE are fine with him.

Who do you like more there? I think he would be a great selection there. We would be laughing Connor style a few years down the road IMO.

 

[ps241]

Who do you like more there? I think he would be a great selection there. We would be laughing Connor style a few years down the road IMO.

If you are talking strictly D men

I have my groupings as:

Heiskanen

Foote Liljegren Makar Valimaki (second tier)

I think Foote carries less risk than Liljegren or Makar but that is where that whole scouting thing comes in. With Tim I am just a bit concerned with his tool box I don't want to end up with another Bogosian although I have not seen enough of him to be 100% sure that it is an issue. Last year I saw Chychrun live and thought the IQ warnings were way overblown and he was already smarter than Zachy Goj but this is where the viewings come in handy.

 

[puck stoppa]

If you are talking strictly D men

I have my groupings as:

Heiskanen

Foote Liljegren Makar Valimaki (second tier)

I think Foote carries less risk than Liljegren or Makar but that is where that whole scouting thing comes in. With Tim I am just a bit concerned with his tool box I don't want to end up with another Bogosian although I have not seen enough of him to be 100% sure that it is an issue. Last year I saw Chychrun live and thought the IQ warnings were way overblown and he was already smarter than Zachy Goj but this is where the viewings come in handy.

I think your tiers need a third. I like Valimaki or Foote there too but I see Makar and Liljegren in tier two, the other two in tier three. But at least scouts are catching up to my prediction of Heiskanen moving up the charts.

 

[ps241]

I think your tiers need a third. I like Valimaki or Foote there too but I see Makar and Liljegren in tier two, the other two in tier three. But at least scouts are catching up to my prediction of Heiskanen moving up the charts.

Foote and Valimaki both put up really big point totals in the CHL and that is why I feel comfortable with them in tier 2. Makar is 5'10", a late birthday, and plays in an inferior league which creates doubt. Liljegren might have some hockey IQ issues and has not progressed as planned this season and that creates some doubt. To me the net effect is these guys wash out and are on the same tier. I do like the upside of both Makar and Liljegren but they both come with some hair on them too.

 

[Mortimer Snerd]

I'm having a little trouble seeing why there is so much negative opinion on Rasmussen. Kid looks like he would be a real nice pick at #12. A big center who skates extremely well who has a nose for the net and doesn't shy from the tough areas. Add in a Scheifele type work ethic and I see a real valuable middle 6 center one day. He doesn't address an organizational need for defense prospects, but it isn't like we couldn't use another real good prospect down the middle.

Its really very simple. There are several prospects ranked lower who have much better stats. Not just 2-3-4 more points but 20-30-40 more points. But they are not 6'5. That certainly makes it appear that he is being overrated because of his size. Not to the Stanley extent because he does have decent production and specific attributes in his favour. But still enough to see that he is not BPA at 12. Doesn't mean he is a bad player, only that there will be several better ones to choose from there.

McKeen's now has him at #3. 3!

Now maybe the appearances are deceiving and his otherworldly work ethic is enough to elevate him to such levels, although if it is that great I have to question why it hasn't lead him to produce more than he has to date. Why isn't he head and shoulders above his contemporaries in production? Great skater, great hands, 6'5, why isn't he leading the league in scoring? He isn't missing anything, unless it is hockey IQ. I don't recall that being mentioned in the superlatives. Maybe I just forgot. Considering his positives it must be about the same as a box of cornflakes. Don't hold me to that, just speculating.

OK, I'm going a little overboard with the sarcasm. Sorry. The answer is in my first paragraph. There will probably be a dozen players available at 12 who I would take over him. At 25 I would probably take him.

 

[Channelcat]

Its pretty easy to say we should've taken Steele, there's about 10-15 teams that can say that in hindsight. It's pretty tough to get a "hit" even with a late 1st rounder. I m definitely OK with the Stanley pick, as there was plenty of good intangibles there on top of the size thing.

 

[portamoral]

Foote and Valimaki both put up really big point totals in the CHL and that is why I feel comfortable with them in tier 2. Makar is 5'10", a late birthday, and plays in an inferior league which creates doubt. Liljegren might have some hockey IQ issues and has not progressed as planned this season and that creates some doubt. To me the net effect is these guys wash out and are on the same tier. I do like the upside of both Makar and Liljegren but they both come with some hair on them too.

but those things are not even tangible. at least with the other guys you have legit criticisms such as IQ or skating issues. with makar he has no REAL red flags in his game. the things you listed and most people are worried about are not actually going to hold him back like having low IQ or poor skating would so it's hard for me to understand why it's being brought up as a knock on him and is lowering his ranking. it's entirely the "unknown" that people are worried about with him. but competition aside we can still see how he plays hockey. this is what scouting is for after all.

i dunno.. i know i keep going on about this guy but i truly believe he's going to be a superstar and the best D from the draft. i wouldn't be mad if a few other GM's shared your viewpoint and passed on him so he fell into our lap though