Prospect Info: NHL 2017 Entry Draft - Part II

[portamoral]

looking back... makar reminds me of connor in his draft year in some ways.

connor also had similar things brought up (staying in the USHL for an extra year, stagnating production) that ended up effecting his position even though if you looked at his game, there were absolutely no holes to be seen. he should have went much higher. hopefully the same thing happens with makar..

 

[Whileee]

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.

Sat next to a NYI scout on a flight. Saw him fill in his scouting report on Steel. Let's just say it wasn't very complimentary.

 

[Channelcat]

Sat next to a NYI scout on a flight. Saw him fill in his scouting report on Steel. Let's just say it wasn't very complimentary.

Lol Really? Now that sounds like an interesting story. He didn't really catch my eye either, but my word......what a season he had!

 

[Whileee]

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.

He was on pace for 46 goals as a 17 year old in the WHL. That's not a fluke, and by all accounts his character is the opposite of Virtanen.

 

[portamoral]

Sat next to a NYI scout on a flight. Saw him fill in his scouting report on Steel. Let's just say it wasn't very complimentary.

too soft. way too small. doesn't have that big body to grind and cycle in the corners like cal clutterbuck. disregard hockey IQ, skilll, skating, basically everything that matters + make up some imaginary red flags that have no impact on his actual ability to play hockey..... boom. we have a faller.

 

[Whileee]

too soft. way too small. doesn't have that big body to grind and cycle in the corners like cal clutterbuck. disregard hockey IQ, skilll, skating, basically everything that matters + make up some imaginary red flags that have no impact on his actual ability to play hockey..... boom. we have a faller.

Also produced less than Rasmussen in his draft year, so...

 

[portamoral]

Also produced less than Rasmussen in his draft year, so...

probably not at even strength

 

[Mortimer Snerd]

I honk Chevy specifically mention3d that Patrick was much more than his performance this year and it's true. While he had an injury plagued up and down year what he showed the previous two years where he had 100 plus points and won the WHL playoff MVP is more impressive than what really any of the draft eligible players this year has accomplished. He also had 30 goals and over a ppg as a 16 year old. He has a pretty darn good track record that shouldn't be negated by a tough year.

His production this year was also the same as last despite not being fully healthy.

Don't disagree that Patrick has ability. I've seen a few negative comments about his personality/character and his injury history is a legitimate concern. It wasn't just one injury that took a long time to heal. Its been a few.

The big one was the dreaded Sports Hernia. The book on that one is that over 30 YO players do not recover well so maybe it is not too big a concern at his age. IDK. There is cause to hesitate/uncertainty though.

If he is taken first he will set a new record for most games lost to injury in a draft year by a first OA pick. The current record holder is Gord Kluzak. He managed 299 NHL games over 9 seasons. 2 of those he did not play. He also had seasons with 2, 8 and 3 games. I don't know if all those games were lost to injury or not. Just by looking at his record it appears that way. Would you want to risk a similar result with your precious 1st OA pick? I would be inclined to let another team assume that risk. JMO. Of course there is also risk in not doing something.

His production was down, very slightly but since when is matching D-1 production in draft year been a recommendation?

 

[Mortimer Snerd]

They would have to have bust after bust to start questioning there drafting strategy.

Would you want to wait that long with a management team that doesn't do much besides draft and develop?

If Stanley is a bust and this year's 1st is also a bust, that is 'bust after bust'. I think your statement implied more than that though. Do we have to wait 4-5 years to be certain that they are busts before we can evaluate?

How long should we keep Chevy if he loses his drafting mojo? That is assuming that he doesn't compensate by suddenly becoming a trading wizard.

 

[Mortimer Snerd]

Pettersson

There are 2-3 C's who might have that top 6 ceiling and who also might go later in the first, Pettersson is 1. But at 12 the likelihood of a lesser potential is higher. Pettersson probably goes top 10.

 

[surixon]

Don't disagree that Patrick has ability. I've seen a few negative comments about his personality/character and his injury history is a legitimate concern. It wasn't just one injury that took a long time to heal. Its been a few.

The big one was the dreaded Sports Hernia. The book on that one is that over 30 YO players do not recover well so maybe it is not too big a concern at his age. IDK. There is cause to hesitate/uncertainty though.

If he is taken first he will set a new record for most games lost to injury in a draft year by a first OA pick. The current record holder is Gord Kluzak. He managed 299 NHL games over 9 seasons. 2 of those he did not play. He also had seasons with 2, 8 and 3 games. I don't know if all those games were lost to injury or not. Just by looking at his record it appears that way. Would you want to risk a similar result with your precious 1st OA pick? I would be inclined to let another team assume that risk. JMO. Of course there is also risk in not doing something.

His production was down, very slightly but since when is matching D-1 production in draft year been a recommendation?

Well I'm taking into consideration that he didn't have an offseason to train. He wasn't even ready at the start of camp, nor did he play the first handful of games. That right there will have an impact on performance. Having said that he got off to a terrific start and it was really the injury he suffered in the first half of the year that really slowed him the second half of the year. So his production should really shouldn't be taken at face value. There most certainly should be some concern on his injuries and imo the combine will be pretty telling one way or the other

 

[Edgar Halliwax]

Would you want to wait that long with a management team that doesn't do much besides draft and develop?

If Stanley is a bust and this year's 1st is also a bust, that is 'bust after bust'. I think your statement implied more than that though. Do we have to wait 4-5 years to be certain that they are busts before we can evaluate?

How long should we keep Chevy if he loses his drafting mojo? That is assuming that he doesn't compensate by suddenly becoming a trading wizard.

Last year was a Bust? #29?

 

[Mortimer Snerd]

Green is small by D standards, and plays even smaller. Meanwhile, the genius Leafs management bracketed the Green pick with Greenway and the human Stonehenge named Keaton Middleton. He makes Cederholm look like Karlsson.

That fits a size bias 'pattern'. But that late in the draft I don't mind so much.

No figures, but I don't think 6'1 is small for D. Maybe just slightly below average but there are lots under 6'. There are quite a few in the Clitsome mold. Only 5'11 but at 215 he wasn't easy to push around. Size was not his issue.

Morrissey is 3" shorter than Postma but the same weight. I think Morrissey plays bigger than Postma does. Weight is not a predictor at draft time because it is too unpredictable when talking about 17-18 YO kids but it does matter when actually playing against men of size.

 

[Maukkis]

This thread is going downhill real quick.

 

[Daximus]

Last year was a Bust? #29?

#29 was a gimme and IMO has virtually no reflection on our organizations drafting unless of course they didn't take him. I don't give points for not screwing up an easy pick. I also don't give them much credit for Connor. After Boston screwed the pooch all they had to do was take whichever of Barzal/Connor were left.

 

[Daximus]

That fits a size bias 'pattern'. But that late in the draft I don't mind so much.

No figures, but I don't think 6'1 is small for D. Maybe just slightly below average but there are lots under 6'. There are quite a few in the Clitsome mold. Only 5'11 but at 215 he wasn't easy to push around. Size was not his issue.

Morrissey is 3" shorter than Postma but the same weight. I think Morrissey plays bigger than Postma does. Weight is not a predictor at draft time because it is too unpredictable when talking about 17-18 YO kids but it does matter when actually playing against men of size.

Yeah Morrissey plays way bigger than 6'0. Height doesn't always mean physical. Hell Morrissey bangs and crashes more than Myers. Strength also isn't determined by height.

 

[Maukkis]

#29 was a gimme and IMO has virtually no reflection on our organizations drafting unless of course they didn't take him. I don't give points for not screwing up an easy pick. I also don't give them much credit for Connor. After Boston screwed the pooch all they had to do was take whichever of Barzal/Connor were left.

So, if we go by this logic, Chevy acquiring a goalie this offseason nets him no credit, as it would be a choice of "acquire or don't acquire" and the right option is blatantly obvious?

 

[Daximus]

So, if we go by this logic, Chevy acquiring a goalie this offseason nets him no credit, as it would be a choice of "acquire or don't acquire" and the right option is blatantly obvious?

That's flawed logic. A goalie won't just be given to us. He has to make a deal. There is some negotiations to be had whether we approach a free agent or make a trade for one.

The 2nd overall pick has absolutely no reflection on our scouting group unless they screw it up. It's like handing out a participation trophy. Thanks for coming out guys easiest pick you've ever made...

 

[Tootsmagoo]

Chevy on the tv.

 

[Whileee]

That fits a size bias 'pattern'. But that late in the draft I don't mind so much.

No figures, but I don't think 6'1 is small for D. Maybe just slightly below average but there are lots under 6'. There are quite a few in the Clitsome mold. Only 5'11 but at 215 he wasn't easy to push around. Size was not his issue.

Morrissey is 3" shorter than Postma but the same weight. I think Morrissey plays bigger than Postma does. Weight is not a predictor at draft time because it is too unpredictable when talking about 17-18 YO kids but it does matter when actually playing against men of size.

Green plays like a small D. He's no more physical than Enstrom. They selected him for skill, not size. I think that should be pretty obvious.

 

[Whileee]

#29 was a gimme and IMO has virtually no reflection on our organizations drafting unless of course they didn't take him. I don't give points for not screwing up an easy pick. I also don't give them much credit for Connor. After Boston screwed the pooch all they had to do was take whichever of Barzal/Connor were left.

Roslovic is looking like a very savvy pick, as does Morrissey. Add that to Scheifele and you have a decent track record for identifying good talent. You could also look at other picks like Petan, Spacek, Foley, Poolman that look okay and the result of a balanced scouting strategy.

 

[puck stoppa]

Roslovic is looking like a very savvy pick, as does Morrissey. Add that to Scheifele and you have a decent track record for identifying good talent. You could also look at other picks like Petan, Spacek, Foley, Poolman that look okay and the result of a balanced scouting strategy.

Yup, I wouldn't have picked scheif roslo morrissey there back then.

 

[SCP Guy]

#29 was a gimme and IMO has virtually no reflection on our organizations drafting unless of course they didn't take him. I don't give points for not screwing up an easy pick. I also don't give them much credit for Connor. After Boston screwed the pooch all they had to do was take whichever of Barzal/Connor were left.

Sorry you can't pick and choose.... Both those picks count as pluses just like Standley might be a bad pick.....

 

[Mortimer Snerd]

Cederholm fit that same "big physcial dman who hits but cant put up points" profile. The main thing amplifying my concerns about the so caller Hillier era is a) How high they had Stanley and b) Hillier's post-draft interview where he was gushing about Stanley's size.

I am willing to give them the benefit of doubt. If they have a reasonable 2017 draft I promise to not complain about the Jets drafting for a year. As Daximus said, this draft will go a long way in determining what the Hillier era will look like, if we have a good draft we can probably sleep easy, if we have something like last season than we might be doomed

I know you've been saying that since draft day. I don't see it unless you are talking about a style of play. 6'3 just isn't particularly big. If Stanley hadn't already been taken would anyone have even noticed? How can you call it a pattern of bigness with Green taken in between?

I agree with both points a & b but not with any apparent pattern of bigness. That will have to wait for this year's draft.

If they return to the drafting success of earlier years I will still complain about Stanley but I just can't complain about their drafting in general until I see more of the same. BTW, I didn't much like Cederholm either but there wasn't a lot better to choose from by that point. Victor Mete was still on the board and he shows some potential.

 

[AWSAA]

Roslovic is looking like a very savvy pick,

Aho would've been a savvier pick at #25.

Let's wait & see if Roslovic turns out better than Beauvillier & Sprong.