Ola's Top 31 for the 2019 Draft

[SoundwaveIsCharisma]

I don’t know how you can watch Pod play and call him the most offensively gifted player in the draft. He has two moves, shoot it off the rush, or try to jam the puck in by powering it to the net.

 

[Ola]

A few comments:

The placement of guys like Dach are criminal

I really like Dach, for me all players from 5 to 14 are really close. Maybe I am suffering from some recency bias against Dach, but among that group there are so many good looking players. And I also have Dach ahead of some really good players; Korcak, Södeström, Lavoie, Seider, Spiridonov and co.

But I certainly wouldn't take poison on Cozens becoming better than Dach, on Boldy becoming becoming better than Dach, on Caufield becoming better than Dach, on Zegras becoming better than Dach -- and so forth. They are close. JMHO.

I like these a lot. I’m a big newhook fan. I will say that some guys are way too low, but I like some of the players you’re high on.

Yeah, Newhook is just really good. He can be a little raw/naive in some situations, but from my POV he does make up for a lot of that with his focus offensively.

Krebs at 28 and Heinola a 2nd rounder? lol

I am not the biggest fan of the type of player Heinola is. I can also see what he can do, but there is -- today -- just so many guys that can do the same out there. Heinola isn't a very big threat from the blueline and in and could be better suited of playing defense in the NHL.

Krebs is not the only offensively gifted forward I have low. Zegras is lower than some. Nikolayev is not very high. Suzuki is not ranked. Neither is another category of really gifted offensive forwards like Bobby Brink, Pelletier and co, and neither is guys like Kalyiev and co.

I currently believe that the pay-off will be greater from other types; defenders with size that I believe can keep up with the pace in the NHL game (Korcszak, Vlasic, Helleson and co); the real speedsters (Newhook, Turcotte, Henriksson, Aaltonen and co); the gritty kids who can skate (Rees, Washaruk, Grewe and so forth).

Just looking around the NHL, all over the league guys that are really fast and can play with the puck find roles and do as well if not better than what is expected. Guys like Hinostroza, Perron, Arvidsson, Rocco G, and so many others.

Will Krebs become better than Ryan Nugent-Hopkins? Nah, that is a stretch right? When I evaluate what value a kid should have to a NHL team, I have opted to go a little higher with some kids than someone that somewhat could become a poor-mans RNH.

I appreciate your honesty and the effort you put into it. I have to say i highly disagree with almost all of it though. Rankings have already been mentioned so i'll say i really don't understand a lot of your stylistic comparables. Most notable ones for me:

Zegras as Eberle - Pure passer w/ speed & creativity vs opportunistic sniper

Podkolzin as Pettersson - I mean idk how you could even see the two as remotely similar in any regard. E Kane is who i'd choose as stylistic comparable for Podz at least offensively

Broberg as OEL - nowhere near the offensive creativity nor skating ability

Byram as McAvoy
&
Soderstrom as Ellis
-- if you reversed the comparables for these two i'd say its pretty accurate

Yeah, and I get what you mean with many of your comments. I was pretty uncertain of including that part of the text. Didn't do it last season. Making a good comparison just requires that you give it some thought, it takes time. Its also always not clear what you mean, is it style, potential impact or what? I don't think I made it all the way with some of those names.

Some clarifications:
-You are right on OEL's skating vs Broberg's skating. Good catch! Some might say, but Broberg can certainly fly up ice, can't he? Yeah but he doesn't have the agility and lateral movement that OEL has. I do think that Broberg can become a No 1 D in the NHL.

-Podz vs Petersson: Yeah, that is one that can look pretty bad/odd looking back at it in a few years. Its made because Podz does have that multi-dimensional/unconventional side to his offensive game.

-Zegras vs Eberle: All your observations are correct, but its made because I think that it is an important take-way that overall Zegras isn't from a raw talent POV not far above Eberle. I think many overrate Zegras skating, ability to carry the puck and play in traffic. He gets a ton of open ice with Hughes and Caufield. I have Zegras really highly ranked from my POV, I decided to keep a somewhat 'negative' comparison to give some perspective to that.

I don’t know how you can watch Pod play and call him the most offensively gifted player in the draft. He has two moves, shoot it off the rush, or try to jam the puck in by powering it to the net.

This is a fair comment.

To put it in a bit of a context, I think Podkolzin has a lot of potential all across the board. He can shoot the puck really well, which nobody would accuse Hughes and co of. I is really good at moving with the puck in traffic. He can also distribute the puck really well.

I also believe that many are underrating Podkolzin. Russia always keep its defenders very deep, they don't join the rush just to cause havoc like for some other teams. Russia's top line has also done a lot of damage in previous tournaments, so many teams have played them really close. You can't look too much on production in a small sample size. Podkolzin is also physically really strong, and can skate really well.

 

[My3Sons]

I'm guessing he meant to rank Kakko 4th and then changed it without updating the text, which fits in with a good 2/3 of this wall of words being an unreadable mess of irrelevant metaphors (see the description of Newhook, which could easily be condensed to "great skater comparable Barzal").

To me it read like someone whose primary language is not English but was giving it their best shot.

 

[Ola]

To me it read like someone whose primary language is not English but was giving it their best shot.

Yeah that is about it, and the text just became too darn long for a proper proof read.

I have a busy day today and next week is more than full and I wanted to get it out before the U18 ended because there usually are a few new rankings announced right after it.

 

[Pavel Buchnevich]

I find your posts to be pretty intelligent, so I definitely read what you thought Ola. I agree with some, and disagree with others.

A few things that I'd like to comment on.

I don't disagree all too much with where you have Podkolzin ranked, but I can't understand the comparison to Pettersson. The playmaking and hockey IQ is almost polar opposite.

As for some of the American defensemen, I think you are completely over-ranking Vlasic, Helleson and McCarthy. Here's my opinion about some of them. Feel free to disagree.

Vlasic is tall with average puck skills and offense. Thats about it. He can't skate or defend. He's a project, at best. At worst, he's incredibly overrated due to being tall and not being awful when his team has the puck. He's a lot more potential than current results. He has very few good games, and is often one of the worst defenseman on a bad defense core.

Helleson can't move the puck and has no offense to his game. He could be a 5 or 6D in the NHL because he can skate at an alright level and is good defensively with good size, but there's very little upside there, and I can't justify him being a top two round selection.

I think McCarthy is borderline undraftable. If he was Slovakian with his skill-set, I don't think he'd be drafted. He isn't a bad skater and he doesn't have bad size either, but his game has completely regressed since last season to the point where he deservedly was playing as a 7th defenseman on the worst NTDP defense in years. He's awful with the puck and he's bad defensively.

 

[teddygmr]

Lots of great info. However, Im wondering if you could expand on statements like this: "Nobody have put 300 lbs in front of him and asked him to squat it 10 times."
Are you saying that in the pros, teams are going to want him to build up his leg power and so that is going to slow him down? Or???

 

[Cap'n Flavour]

To me it read like someone whose primary language is not English but was giving it their best shot.

I'm not picking on the spelling or grammar. It's the extra paragraph or two of mostly unnecessary asides that make this a chore to read. For example:

Canada is hockey, and hockey is, to a large extent, Canada. But while Canada always will produce great players, its program will also have ups and downs. The last years, we have seen many impressive talents from Canada not quite hit it off in the NHL. Even if its too early to close the book on any of these kids, guys like the following have at least been slow out of the gates: Sam Reinhart, Sam Bennet, Dal Colle, Jake Virtanen, Dylan Strome, Lawson Crouse among others. NHL teams have taken notice and it certainly shows in the number of top 3/5/10 picks made out of the CHL the last years. The reason for this is not because Canadian kids today are born with less talent or because the CHL teams are doing stuff worse than they used to, its simply because others are improved their programs a great deal. The CHL is the core of a very decentralized program. A great number of teams run by a great number of tremendously experienced and accomplished hockey personalities. It has its pros, but a con is that it is not easy for anyone at the top to ensure that all programs keep up with the modern development of the game. OTOH the USNDP is a formidable success. It collects the top talent in the US and ensures that all these kids are coached and trains as well as is known at any give time. If a new development is made in any field, it can be implemented in the USNDP’s approach instantly and instantly reach all top US kids. Sweden has considered adopting a similar program to not be left in the dust behind US hockey, but has – for now – after much consideration decided to not do it but instead adopt a hybrid model with 4 full time advisors employed that will visit the top programs and kids to ensure that they are developed with state of the art methods.

This doesn't add anything to one's understanding of the prospect this is supposed to be about, who isn't even mentioned by name in that quote (Cozens, incidentally). I'm not trying to be mean here but it's important (and difficult) to learn how to write concisely if you want to keep your audience engaged. One good method is to follow a simple template like LWOH does - skating/offense/defense/projection/comparison, pretty much everything you'd want to know about a prospect in a format that takes a minute or two to read.

 

[Ola]

I'm not picking on the spelling or grammar. It's the extra paragraph or two of mostly unnecessary asides that make this a chore to read. For example:

This doesn't add anything to one's understanding of the prospect this is supposed to be about, who isn't even mentioned by name in that quote (Cozens, incidentally). I'm not trying to be mean here but it's important (and difficult) to learn how to write concisely if you want to keep your audience engaged. One good method is to follow a simple template like LWOH does - skating/offense/defense/projection/comparison, pretty much everything you'd want to know about a prospect in a format that takes a minute or two to read.

Calling someone out for spelling and grammar can be a bit touchy, but I want to thank you for pointing out the above.

Disciplined writing is a big part of what I do for a living, and my text in this ranking is an orgy of this is what I do on my free time and I am not going to kill my babies. But I don't write for myself or because its fun to hammer away on a key-board, I write for the reader and it must be possible to read it too.

I have tried to go back and change the lay-out a bit by using two font sizes, the normal size for core information on the player and a smaller size for information used to explain how I view the background. Does that help? Since the text wasn't written with this technique originally, it might not be perfectly implemented. The main thread can be lost. But I hope it will still help.

There are still many flaws in the text, but the hard truth is that I can only remove more of them by putting in more hours that I don't have right now.

 

[Sens of Anarchy]

Good work here Ola

 

[Breakers]

I couldn't fathom taking a goalie that high.

 

[Ola]

Good work here Ola

Thanks!

 

[Ola]

Lots of great info. However, Im wondering if you could expand on statements like this: "Nobody have put 300 lbs in front of him and asked him to squat it 10 times."
Are you saying that in the pros, teams are going to want him to build up his leg power and so that is going to slow him down? Or???

Yes, nobody is trying to get these guys to add weight just for the sake of it. When they work out, a much bigger focus is put on training more muscle groups in the same drill to avoid getting imbalances.

In the NHL and just about everywhere, getting leaner or staying lean is always mentioned alongside becoming stronger nd improving your physic.

 

[Buf fan in Nash]

I like it as it isn't the same recycled vanilla rankings. Some guys will be surprise picks and some will fall like they do every year.

 

[theVladiator]

Just wanted to say thank you. I do not really pay much attention to particular order, that's secondary to the thoughts behind it. So for me this is a true treasure trove.

 

[bert]

I like that you have your own opinions and appreciate the detail however some of your player comparisons are really really really far off which takes away from your list. Leave em out next time!

 

[Ola]

Thanks guys!

I like that you have your own opinions and appreciate the detail however some of your player comparisons are really really really far off which takes away from your list. Leave em out next time!

Yeah I will do that, I made it too complicated wanting to get a few pts across but it’s just so unclear. I know how it is reading odd comparisons...