Prospect Info: The 2017 NHL Entry Draft: Part IV

[CalderKing21]

*shrug* Zadorov-Johnson gave us a legit first pairing for the first time since Foote-Blake; and neither was drafted by the Avs.

Both of which were taken with 1st round picks. So you are saying that our legit 1st pairing were taken with 1st round picks then? Hmm...

Yes, and that's why Pittsburgh drafted Letang, Maata, and Dumoulin with top ten picks, and didn't do anything cosmically stupid like spending consecutive top 3 picks on Malkin, Crosby, and J. Staal like a bunch of chumps. That explains why they've never won anything, after they so botched their rebuild years by squandering top picks.

There's more than one way to build a winner.

We are not the Pens. Mack is not Crosby, Jost is not Malkin.

 

[cgf]

Both of which were taken with 1st round picks. So you are saying that our legit 1st pairing were taken with 1st round picks then? Hmm...



We are not the Pens. Mack is not Crosby, Jost is not Malkin.

Yeah, but we didn't spend our first on them. So obviously they can be acquired in ways other than being drafted by our team. Should we be drafting them as well as trading for them? Sure, but that doesn't we can't trade for them.

 

[Pacman33]

I understand the point of we need to draft defense early but you cant do it at any cost. If there was a top level guy that everybody agreed would be a no doubt top pairing guy then yes we need to draft them. But theres not always players like that in every draft. Heiskanen is viewed by a good amount of people as having first pairing upside. If avs view him that way then yes i would be upset if we dont take him if hes still on the board. After that you have lilj and makar who have almost as much chance of busting as being near a top pairing guy. Everybody after that is middle pairing guys. If heiskanen is gone i feel we have to take vilardi. He can be a #2 center or i believe a first line winger if he plays there. Both have more value then a middle pairing defenseman. To summarize, if avs believe a top pairing dman is there than by all means take him but we cant force there to be better prospects in the draft then there actually is. Just not a great year for high end dmen

 

[Balthazar]

Yeah, but we didn't spend our first on them. So obviously they can be acquired in ways other than being drafted by our team. Should we be drafting them as well as trading for them? Sure, but that doesn't we can't trade for them.

No but we spent another defenseman drafted in the 1st round to get EJ.

 

[McMetal]

We are not the Pens. Mack is not Crosby, Jost is not Malkin.

Chicago drafted Keith and Hjalmarsson in the 2nd, Byfuglien in the 8th, and only Seabrook in the 1st, with 14OA. They're not a bad team either, and they somehow managed to build a winner by spending their top picks on forwards and getting their top D through other means. They must be idiots too, though.

All I'm saying is that there are more than one ways to build a team and use top picks, because the "pick forwards with all your early firsts" model has been borne out on occasion.

 

[Pierce Hawthorne]

You can't fix something if you never spend the top draft resources on it. It is literally ****ing insane to continuously draft forwards over and over again and ignore the defense in the top of the first.

Not really.


Arizona has only selected one Dman in the Top 10 ever, OEL all the way back in 2009. They've had 7 Top 10 1sts in the last 15 years.


Edmonton also has only done it once in the last 15+ years. Darnell Nurse in 2013. They've had 9 Top 10 picks in the last 15 years.

Calgary has drafted a Dman in the Top 10 in15 years(Dion Phaneuf in 2009). They also had 5 Top 10 1sts in that span.




The Avs have had 5 Top 10 selections in the same 15 year span. And although they haven't drafted a Dman with any of those picks, they did take Duncan Siemens at #11 in 2011, and Kevin Shattenkirk at #14 in 2007.


So they're not the only team that has shown to heavily prefer forwards with high picks in the draft. One thing that really does stand out though is the significance of that complete misspick that Siemens turned out to be. Had he developed like we anticipated when we took him at #11, he's probably a good shutdown #3D right now and all of a sudden our Defense looks a hell of a lot closer to being competitive then it does.


At the end of the day I think the obvious thing is that this high in the draft teams are always going to pick whoever they have as the BPA. Team need does not factor into it at all which is how it should be. If Heiskanen/Makar/ whoever is the BPA on the Avs board when the go up to pick, then that's who they should pick. But if its a forward then it shouldn't matter.


Now, if we get a 2nd 1st rounder in a Duchene trade or something. That's where I think we really need to look at drafting a Dman almost 100%. It's in that 11-20 range where good Dmen seem to be found lately. McAvoy and Chychun last year. Chabot the year before that, and Honka + Sanheim in 2014. I'd be willing to bet in a couple of years time you can add Liljegren and Valimaki to that list as well. Hopefully the Avs can be one of the two teams who snag those two with another 1st later on in the draft.



EDIT: Chicago is another good reference. From 2000-2008 they had basically 7 Top 10 picks as well, and only selected one Dman with those picks. Cam Barker in 2003.

It does seem like eventually the Avs are going to need to use a high pick on a Dman. But I dont think it HAS to be this year by any means. If there's a forward they like the most at #4 then that's who they should take.

 

[landy92mack29]

Both of which were taken with 1st round picks. So you are saying that our legit 1st pairing were taken with 1st round picks then? Hmm...



We are not the Pens. Mack is not Crosby, Jost is not Malkin.

Look at the other team in the finals as well. Only 1 is a 1st rounder

 

[tigervixxxen]

I still don't believe any of these D are top pairing. One could develop very well and it's not impossible but considering our development system doesn't work miracles, I'm not counting on guys finding a higher ceiling. My plan would be attacking the issue from all angles over a 3 year span, but I've yammered on enough about that.

 

[Balthazar]

In all seriousness, though, you are putting way, way too much emphasis on one pick in one draft year as if that's our only pick in the last ever NHL Entry draft. This will be a multi-year process of rebuilding

Multi-year processes still need structure. When are we going to draft the top pairing guys that will eventually join Mack and Rants? In 2 years? In 6 years? Never?

This team don't want to ruin the new core on a team with no defense yet again does it? I don't understand how people don't see the urgency of the situation. Defensemen drafted this year and next year are still years away from their prime. We need to start now what we should have started 3-4 years ago.

 

[cgf]

Multi-year processes still need structure. When are we going to draft the top pairing guys that will eventually join Mack and Rants? In 2 years? In 6 years? Never?

This team don't want to ruin the new core on a team with no defense yet again does it? I don't understand how people don't see the urgency of the situation. Defensemen drafted this year and next year are still years away from their prime. We need to start now what we should have started 3-4 years ago.

How about next year? When the top 10 should be littered with not just potential top pairing guys, but potential #1s.

 

[McMetal]

I still don't believe any of these D are top pairing. One could develop very well and it's not impossible but considering our development system doesn't work miracles, I'm not counting on guys finding a higher ceiling. My plan would be attacking the issue from all angles over a 3 year span, but I've yammered on enough about that.

I think Heiskanen has the tools to be top pair. You can't really ask for more in a defenseman besides an extra inch or two. Valimaki too, I think he'll be this year's McAvoy. I get your skepticism about our development, but it's been a long time since we had a top notch D prospect in the system, too.

 

[tigervixxxen]

I think Heiskanen has the tools to be top pair. You can't really ask for more in a defenseman besides an extra inch or two. Valimaki too, I think he'll be this year's McAvoy. I get your skepticism about our development, but it's been a long time since we had a top notch D prospect in the system, too.

I don't think his shot is good enough to have the offense for top pair. Agree on Valimaki, he's probably the one flying under the radar a bit, I think he's the one who has the tools to be the best D in the class.

 

[Balthazar]

I still don't believe any of these D are top pairing.

That would be the ********* draft in modern history.

 

[Balthazar]

How about next year? When the top 10 should be littered with not just potential top pairing guys, but potential #1s.

Next year too.

 

[McMetal]

Multi-year processes still need structure. When are we going to draft the top pairing guys that will eventually join Mack and Rants? In 2 years? In 6 years? Never?

This team don't want to ruin the new core on a team with no defense yet again does it? I don't understand how people don't see the urgency of the situation. Defensemen drafted this year and next year are still years away from their prime. We need to start now what we should have started 3-4 years ago.

And what if Heiskanen is picked at 3? What if there are no top pairing potential defensemen available to us there? You can't just say "I would like to spend my 4th overall pick on a defenseman of commensurate value, please" and have one found for you. This draft is rather weak on D, and most people don't see a lot of top pair talent in it. We have to play the hand we're dealt. There's a lot of merit to using this forward-heavy draft to get a forward and using next year's draft to get a potential #1.

It's going to take multiple drafts to fix this, so the reason nobody feels any urgency is because we understand that reality.

 

[tigervixxxen]

That would be the ********* draft in modern history.

I'm sure someone will be but good luck figuring out which one is the right one. I should say I don't think the guys at the top are. Not like top 4 D are anything to turn our noses up at but a sure top pairing guy I don't think is what we are getting at the top here.

I get the stop kicking the can down the road argument but it has to be the PLAN that stops getting kicked down the road.

 

[McMetal]

I don't think his shot is good enough to have the offense for top pair. Agree on Valimaki, he's probably the one flying under the radar a bit, I think he's the one who has the tools to be the best D in the class.

Your shot is only one part of generating offense. He passes so well that I think he can cover for that weakness, and besides, that's something that can be worked on in the next couple years. Defensemen these days just need to get it through to create rebounds.

 

[Balthazar]

And what if Heiskanen is picked at 3?

Pick the next best one in the 2nd tier. Probably Makar in this case.

It's going to take multiple drafts to fix this, so the reason nobody feels any urgency is because we understand that reality.

I agree it's going to take multiple years to fix this, which is one reason why we need to start now.

 

[Pierce Hawthorne]

Agreed with Valimaki. I think coming out of this draft with Vilardi + Valimaki would be amazing.


I'm also sure in a few years more than one Dman drafted in the 2nd round + will turn out to be a Top pairing Dman as well. But like tv said, good luck picking out exactly who those couple of Dmen are exactly.

 

[cgf]

Next year too.

If Duchene and/or Landeskog are traded for young dmen adn we draft one in these next 2 drafts, how many more dmen would we really need? Potential 2-3's Zadorov, Meloche, Barrie, & Bigras are already in the system; with a long term project like Clurman also having legit top 4 potential; Mironov, Barberio, Lindholm, and Boikov are potential third pairing guys who looking pretty legit at this point. Add a Duchene trade return to that first group as well as our 1st pick in either this draft, or the next one; and that D-corps has more than enough talent to win a cup if the development staff is even marginally competent.

And if the developmental staff is truly inept enough to f*** that up, then why keep throwing good money after bad? If they suck at their jobs that hard then we just can't trust them to develop dmen and shouldn't be wasting our time drafting any more dmen in the first round. Instead banking on putting ourselves in position to make the next ROR for Zads+, Hall for Larsson, or RyJo for Seth Jones trade; while filling the pipeline with the next tier of defensive prospects that they seem to be doing an alright job with.

 

[McMetal]

Pick the next best one in the 2nd tier. Probably Makar in this case.

This really puts the lie to your mantra of "We need to get our top pair D from this pick". If there is a top pairing D in this draft, it's not Makar (at least not without a ton of risk) What you're really saying is "Pick D no matter what", which is shortsighted and poor strategy, ignoring the stronger player in favor of somebody ranked much lower just because they have a D next to their name. That's an awful way to build a team.

 

[tigervixxxen]

I totally agree pick 10-20 is the sweet spot for defenseman and if we get another first we really do need to take a D there. I'd also argue that we aren't on the road to fixing anything until we get another first anyway.

For me, I believe Vilardi is the type of player you only find in the top 5 of a draft. I don't see him as interchangeable with the other forwards. That's why I'm more set in this position, I understand if others don't see it that way then it's not giving up much to draft for need. I think Glass is going to be a very good player. If either of those are gone or the Avs won't take them for whatever reason then I can see it's going to start to make more sense to take the top D on their board.

 

[Balthazar]

If Duchene and/or Landeskog are traded for young dmen adn we draft one next year, how many more dmen will we need?

That's different. If we get a young LHD like Hanifin or even Ryan Murray I'll be OK with drafting Vilardi this year and a D next year.

 

[Pacman33]

Pick the next best one in the 2nd tier. Probably Makar in this case.



I agree it's going to take multiple years to fix this, which is one reason why we need to start now.

Then if makar busts, we are set back even further. Were not good enough offensively to pass on clearly better forwards for a dman. We cant just draft a guy that is say 10th on our board just because he is a dman. Thats how you make mistakes in a draft. I without a doubt would prefer to take d with our first pick but cant reach like that. If a dman is say 6th on our board then im ok with using the 4th pick on them but cant say d no matter what. Theres going to be a wide variety of rankings for makar and lilj. It wouldnt shock me at all if they arent top 10 on a majority of boards

 

[tigervixxxen]

Agreed with Valimaki. I think coming out of this draft with Vilardi + Valimaki would be amazing.


I'm also sure in a few years more than one Dman drafted in the 2nd round + will turn out to be a Top pairing Dman as well. But like tv said, good luck picking out exactly who those couple of Dmen are exactly.

I think Valimaki might sneak into the top 10 but yeah that's pretty much my dream scenario.