OHL Mock Draft
- Thread starter TcNorth
- Start date
Mark Scheig, media for Erie, has said that he fully expects the team to draft forward at 3. He didn’t say that on his own personal belief but rather it’s likely the indication or word he got from Dave Brown. Plus after Drysdale last year.. don’t expect Erie to go defense again. I would question when the last team to draft a defender, within the top 10 of the draft, in back to back years was
OHLTG
Registered User
Does that count? Yes technically but since Mete NEVER played a 1 single game and was traded, it sort of changed the landscape of that team
Even that example doesn’t exactly work because Mete obviously never ended up suiting up for the attack.
1. Wright - Kingston
2. Othmann - Flint
3. Lockhart - Erie
4. Clarke - Barrie
5. McTavish - Petes
From everything I’ve gathered talking to people... this is how the top five is shaping up.
2. Othmann - Flint
3. Lockhart - Erie
4. Clarke - Barrie
5. McTavish - Petes
From everything I’ve gathered talking to people... this is how the top five is shaping up.
FireBird71
Registered User
- Aug 6, 2015
- 3,113
- 1,212
OHLTG
Registered User
AttackSound
Junior Hockey Fan Since Birth
From a Owen Sound fan POV Mete was the best available player at the time to select, him choosing to decline reporting to OS allowed the Attack to recover there selection with Phillips and pick up Suzuki.
Flashing forward to now managment did the best possible outcome they could this year. Giving a chance for both of them to make a run while giving the team the best chance of building forward with Kirwin and Woolley as well as assets in the draft cupboard.
If that is indeed how it goes, great for Barrie; and, the Cyulle pick/defect/trade was a work of art by Oke.
I wouldn’t go that far... Cuylle is a stud and McTavish hasn’t proven anything quite yet .
True, none of the upcoming draft class has proved anything at the OHL level yet. But a season past, I cannot definitively state Cuylle is better than 10 in his draft class.
A comp pick amounting to the #2-6 ranked MacTavish, a 2nd comp pick plus pick excess from Cuylle trade used in Merkley trade, and still 3-4 more high picks remain from Cuylle deal to likely supplement a run with the 11 returning 2000 born; that just might be the best planned abuse of the defect rule yet.
Clearly my point was directed at teams building that way in the draft
Yes OS did but their plans quickly changed when he didn’t report and was traded. So the following year they no longer had that young elite defender in their system and opted to go defense again. My point was that Erie already does in Drysdale. So their next focus should be on a forward.
Generalsupdates
@GeneralsUpdates on Twitter
- Sep 4, 2017
- 7,301
- 4,369
Uhhh, you're going to need to explain how that was a work of art.... Next year is when the Petes should be good. Lockhart or McTavish would be good next year as a rookie but nowhere near as good as a 2nd year Cuylle would've been. Based on their window (next year) Oke really messed that one up bad. By the time Lockhart or McTavish are ready to dominate, the Petes are probably ready to trade them to rebuild becuause Merkley/Jones/SDA/Chisholm/Gallant/Kirk/Hinz are all graduating the year before
Merkley, Kirk, Grondin, Little all 2000 born all acquired this season for their window of oppurtunity next season. Some of that was paid for with 2nd comp pick and available pick excess due to Cuylle deal. There is still excess to add an OA or whatever Oke deems necessary. [Use 8/9 picks from Cuylle deal to (get vets for run; and, use comp 2003 1st) to go along with 2003 1st and 2-2nds in top 8 for re-tooling period (all for the price of 2002 1st). Also, there will be excess 2000 as OA to trade for the rebuild]. That’s art, imo.
Last edited:
Not really. If the Petes are good next year, the following year they'll trade excess 00's and possibly Nick Robertson since he's the sole good 01 on the team, and get picks and younger players that complement Lockhart/McTavish, who will still only be 17, and whoever they take with their second first round pick (and pick 21, and Butler and Spearing, and Austin, etc...)
The guys they draft this year is more about the Petes next window, when those players are 18/19, then it is about next season. I don't think Cuylle vs. McTavish will be the defining factor in whether they win or lose next season and they undeniably have a ton more assets as a result of the defection.
In fact, if they had Cuylle, his 18/19 year old years would likely be wasted because of the rebuild following next season, so deferring a year in that sense may be better.
Last edited:
DeGray knew Mete wouldn't report when he drafted him . He talked to other hockey people about picking him.
His plan was set in advance . Either Mete played for him, or someone else was going to pay large for the priveledge.
He even told us at the draft who the team was.
Regardless of it being planned, the point still remains that them drafted 2 defenders in back to back years has an asterisk since the first one they took they never saw play a game for them.
But it was a good plan to take him. And good plan by the Petes to take Cuylle. Make other teams pay for it when players bluff
OHLTG
Registered User
Brock
Registered User
Full first round mock coming very soon with some MM experts and myself.
How do Lockhart and McTavish compare? Reading a bit about them and I think I prefer McTavish but seems like Erie may be leaning towards Lockhart.
Brock
Registered User
Ad
Upcoming events
-
-
-
-
-
Game 3 Florida Panthers @ Tampa Bay Lightning - Florida Panthers leads series 2-0Wagers: 1Staked: $100.00Event closes- Updated: