Prospect Info: NHL Draft 2018 - Friday...Friday...

[Bonsai Tree]

Interesting philosophical debate. We'll see how it plays out. Given equal talent, which I think is the issue here, RD, F or C? Is it an absolute or dependent upon current and projected team make up?

 

[Summer Rose]

I thought Westlund was not coming over? IIRC, there was the report that had both Anton Karlsson and Westlund as not being re-signed or agreeing to terms, but I could be very wrong. Dineen is really the only one who will graduate to Tucson, as far as I see. We added Gross last year. Mermis is an RFA, along with Murphy and Hanley.

The Roadrunner depth looks like this right now:

Gross
Lyubushkin
Capobianco
Smereck
Dineen
Mayo
Campbell

Free agents: Murphy (RFA), Mermis (RFA), Hanley (UFA)

I am envisioning that one of those defenseman may stick on the NHL roster as the 5/6/7 D - maybe Lyubushkin or Capobianco. I do think we wind up making some 1 or 2 year depth signings while Jospeh and our potential picks work their way up. In the last two drafts, we have taken 14 players and 9 of them are defensemen. Seems like we are letting some of these individuals take their time (2nd/3rd round picks and later) and see what develops. Good strategy, but we also became blessed with Chychrun making the team right out of the draft. Still doesn't mean that we should be only looking at D later than the 2nd round and this may be that point where we clear out some players now to open ourselves up to Joseph next year, followed by Crotty and Hoefenmeyer, then whichever D we take this year.

Don't forget Kevin Ekman-Larsson.

 

[hbk]

Don't know yet, but we don't need a top 10RD with that kind of LD talent. What I do know is that we need a top 10 scorer. We have the chance to draft a Wahlstrom or Zedina. We have to do it and hope to get good RD talent later or in upcoming drafts. I would take an RD over Tkachuk as I don't think that his upside is top ten point scorer. The other two, I would pick over a RD.

Where do I start?

First off Tkachuk is going top 5. He’s a fantastic prospect that doesn’t get nearly enough love because his point totals are deflated because he didn’t garner favourable ice time in prime situations as a rookie. I’d gladly take him at 3.

Secondly, I think if we upgrade our playmaking at C (either through maturation of Strome and Dvorak or through a trade) the stats for our wingers will improve. Their is offensive upside on Fischer, Domi, Crouse, Merkley, Keller, Perlini, etc.

I like Zadina a ton and have him at 4 on my list. I think he would give us an option to move Keller back to C where I think he will be dynamite as he as well physically matures. I’ve been indicating for awhile now that Zadina could fall to us at 5.

As for our RD situation. We have struggled for the better part of a half decade to find a top pairing RD. I love our LD but right now we are that body builder who never remembers to do sets on both sides of his body. We play players in positions where they don’t excel and as a result they struggle and the team struggles along with it. If you don’t have Balance teams can more easily prepare to play you and take advantage of players. If we have a chance to add a player that our scouts are convinced can play a top pairing role at RD, given the shortage of these players throughout the league, I would hope that we as an organization take the time to properly assess if filling that long term need is worth it at that slot position. I have Bouchard at 5. I think his passing is amazing. I’d be happy with the pick. I’d be slightly disappointed on passing either Tkachuk or Zadina but in the end I would believe that the organization as a whole will be a much better team with that selection. i Don’t view that as an absurd possibility.

 

[BUX7PHX]

I believe you are confusing Westlund and Westerlund. I did the same thing when I first read the report.


David Westlund hockey statistics and profile at hockeydb.com

Filip Westerlund hockey statistics and profile at hockeydb.com

Phoenix Coyotes Draft History at hockeydb.com

Its more than a little early to be cutting bait on a second rounder from last year's draft.

The person referenced Westlund and not Westerlund. I thought the ship had sailed on Westlund and Karlsson (again citing a story that I thought I had read a few months ago, but maybe I am wrong).

Westerlund, we still have some time with.

 

[rt]

B

P

A

 

[BUX7PHX]

I'll be disappointed with any pick at 5 that isn't a C or a RW.

I acknowledge that RD is a weakness in the organization but 5 OA is not the place to address that problem. Use 55 on RD Emberson and 65 on RD Regula.

When I originally posed the question, it was also with the idea that we picked up Tyler Johnson and used POJ as a means for that. So, we would be adding TyJo and reducing our D prospects by POJ, which would make RW less of a need, but open the door for a defenseman to be taken.

Let's say that the draft had no major changes and we had picked up TyJo:

#1 Dahlin
#2 Svechnikov
#3 Kotkaniemi
#4 Zadina (even though there is talk of him falling)

At #5, with D being another avenue to look at, I think that we could easily trade down and still get a player we wanted all along, considering RW is slightly less of a need at that point. Chicago could trade up for Wahlstrom or Tkachuk. Vancouver may even consider moving up from #7 for either of those Fs. The good news is that it would appear that Detroit and Vancouver at #6 and #7 would be looking toward Hughes and Dobson, respectively. If they take one of the forwards in Wahlstrom or Tkachuk, then we are in good shape to pick up one of Hughes, Dobson, or Bouchard, which are probably the top 3 D on our board, in some order. Hell, this could be the spot for the Islanders to trade us #11 and #12 for #5 - at worst, we lose POJ, but pick up TyJo, and then add a Ty Smith and Joe Veleno/Barrett Hayton.

 

[Summer Rose]

B

P

A

Z

A

D

I

N

A

 

[Jagged Ice]

Z

A

D

I

N

A

He's not going to be there. Ottawa is going to take him with Hoffman getting shipped. Everyone seems to be so certain that Montreal is going to pass on him. Not me. What a draft year this has been. Looking forward to it being over and hoping still that Tkachuk falls to us. I'll be happy with Hughes or Wahlstrom though.

 

[Kaizen]

The person referenced Westlund and not Westerlund. I thought the ship had sailed on Westlund and Karlsson (again citing a story that I thought I had read a few months ago, but maybe I am wrong).

Westerlund, we still have some time with.

My point exactly - very easy to conflate the two names as they are quite similar.

 

[Grimes]

Whoops, yep meant Westerlund. Had forgotten about Westlund to be honest.

 

[YotesFan47]

When I originally posed the question, it was also with the idea that we picked up Tyler Johnson and used POJ as a means for that. So, we would be adding TyJo and reducing our D prospects by POJ, which would make RW less of a need, but open the door for a defenseman to be taken.

Let's say that the draft had no major changes and we had picked up TyJo:

#1 Dahlin
#2 Svechnikov
#3 Kotkaniemi
#4 Zadina (even though there is talk of him falling)

At #5, with D being another avenue to look at, I think that we could easily trade down and still get a player we wanted all along, considering RW is slightly less of a need at that point. Chicago could trade up for Wahlstrom or Tkachuk. Vancouver may even consider moving up from #7 for either of those Fs. The good news is that it would appear that Detroit and Vancouver at #6 and #7 would be looking toward Hughes and Dobson, respectively. If they take one of the forwards in Wahlstrom or Tkachuk, then we are in good shape to pick up one of Hughes, Dobson, or Bouchard, which are probably the top 3 D on our board, in some order. Hell, this could be the spot for the Islanders to trade us #11 and #12 for #5 - at worst, we lose POJ, but pick up TyJo, and then add a Ty Smith and Joe Veleno/Barrett Hayton.

I'm actually really warming up to the idea of trading back to pick up Smith + another piece. 14 + 19 for 5 + 70 seems fair and we could then go Smith and Bokk.

 

[AZviaNJ]

B

P

A

Zadina or Hughes at 5, Wahlstrom at 8.

 

[rt]

I'm actually really warming up to the idea of trading back to pick up Smith + another piece. 14 + 19 for 5 + 70 seems fair and we could then go Smith and Bokk.

I wish I had a chance to see Smith outside of the U18. He didn't have a great tourney.

 

[lanky]

B

P

A

BPA doesn't mean much. When people tout BPA they're implying that position isn't a consideration when you make the pick. They're ignoring that position was definitely an influence when the list was built.

How many top 30 lists have we seen in the last few years that had a goalie in it? None. It's not because there haven't been any good goalie prospects. It's because the community has learned that drafting goalies early isn't worth doing. Player position bias is built into draft lists.

I agree that you shouldn't draft a player to fill a current roster slot. Prospects take time to develop and roster slots could change in the meantime. I do however think that you have to consider position strength through the pipeline. Also consider enduring trends in the UFA market and trade market. Let those considerations bias your draft list. If you pretend that they don't then you're not being honest with yourself.

 

[rt]

So what is the premium on position?

1. RC
2. LC
3. RD
4. LD
5. RW
6. LW

Is that right? So if I like Brady Tkachuk more than Dobson, I should take Dobson anyway?

 

[Jakey53]

Where do I start?

First off Tkachuk is going top 5. He’s a fantastic prospect that doesn’t get nearly enough love because his point totals are deflated because he didn’t garner favourable ice time in prime situations as a rookie. I’d gladly take him at 3.

Secondly, I think if we upgrade our playmaking at C (either through maturation of Strome and Dvorak or through a trade) the stats for our wingers will improve. Their is offensive upside on Fischer, Domi, Crouse, Merkley, Keller, Perlini, etc.

I like Zadina a ton and have him at 4 on my list. I think he would give us an option to move Keller back to C where I think he will be dynamite as he as well physically matures. I’ve been indicating for awhile now that Zadina could fall to us at 5.

As for our RD situation. We have struggled for the better part of a half decade to find a top pairing RD. I love our LD but right now we are that body builder who never remembers to do sets on both sides of his body. We play players in positions where they don’t excel and as a result they struggle and the team struggles along with it. If you don’t have Balance teams can more easily prepare to play you and take advantage of players. If we have a chance to add a player that our scouts are convinced can play a top pairing role at RD, given the shortage of these players throughout the league, I would hope that we as an organization take the time to properly assess if filling that long term need is worth it at that slot position. I have Bouchard at 5. I think his passing is amazing. I’d be happy with the pick. I’d be slightly disappointed on passing either Tkachuk or Zadina but in the end I would believe that the organization as a whole will be a much better team with that selection. i Don’t view that as an absurd possibility.

Great post.

 

[rt]

If the Coyotes like Zadina 3rd best and prefer Tkachuk and Dobson to Wahlstrom and Hughes, I really hope we trade up to 3rd overall. If they prefer Wahlstrom and Hughes to Tkachuk and Dobson, I really hope we stay at 5th.

 

[lanky]

So what is the premium on position?

1. RC
2. LC
3. RD
4. LD
5. RW
6. LW

Is that right? So if I like Brady Tkachuk more than Dobson, I should take Dobson anyway?

If we take the example to an extreme and assume Brady Tkachuk is a goalie and Dobson is a RC, then yeah, you should take Dobson even though you like Tkachuk better. It gets murky as you move away from the extremes.

 

[rt]

I’d be fine with never drafting a single goalie ever again. I’d be fine if goalies were all draft exempt and were all just UFAs at age 18.

 

[lanky]

I feel that way about LWs too.

Edit: I retract this comment.

 

[rt]

So your contention with my BPA comment was mostly about goalies?

 

[lanky]

I brought goalies into the conversation because they're the clearest proof that player position matters on the draft floor.

My contention with BPA comments (like yours, but not necessarily yours) is that they get used to shut down conversation about how player position influences draft lists.

 

[Heldig]

Well, trading Domi opens up a spot on LW (Tkachuk).

 

[YotesFan47]

I wish I had a chance to see Smith outside of the U18. He didn't have a great tourney.

Oh I have very little evidence to suggest we absolutely should do that, I work 70 hours a week and have a family so my assessments should probably be held at the same level of a 7 year old, this is built off a tiny sample size and some reading.

 

[RemoAZ]

Well, trading Domi opens up a spot on LW (Tkachuk).

And a need for the kind of sand paper Tkachuk brings. This team is just too soft right now.