Prospect Info: The 2019 Entry NHL Draft Thread - Part VIII

[The Abusement Park]

Can I get a link to where Cozens' IQ is questioned, much less zero???

It’s cuz he’s a north south player like our 0 IQ north south player Mack

 

[Avs_19]

The Avs possibly trying to move up is interesting. That's not something they do so they must really like someone if that's true. Just a complete guess on my part but if they go Byram at #4, I could see them trying to grab someone like Krebs or Newhook.

 

[Meeqs]

Can I get a link to where Cozens' IQ is questioned, much less zero???

Watch any game of his ever, Cozens biggest flaw is his IQ/Skill. Dude has all the tools in the world to be a top 2 pick but just plays the most oversimplified game in the world. Really all he does is skate and shoot and there is no creativity to his game at all. Its what makes him a winger instead of a center, dropped out of the top 5 talk on pretty much every mock and what makes him a risky prospect to take and evaluate.

Like what we are talking about with Cozens are the same warning signs that could be seen with Yak or Poolparty. I think Cozens will be a great 30g power forward winger, but this isn't some regurgitated link, this is coming from me as someone who has watched 17-20ish of his games.

 

[Foxtail]

The Avs possibly trying to move up is interesting. That's not something they do so they must really like someone if that's true. Just a complete guess on my part but if they go Byram at #4, I could see them trying to grab someone like Krebs or Newhook.

Especially since Montreal like Newhook at 15

 

[AvsCOL]

The Avs possibly trying to move up is interesting. That's not something they do so they must really like someone if that's true. Just a complete guess on my part but if they go Byram at #4, I could see them trying to grab someone like Krebs or Newhook.

Could someone provide what Friedman said exactly? I'm hoping it just means they're willing to move it. Rather draft Turcotte/Byram at 4, then trade for an impact player with 16. (Zucker/Karlsson)

 

[henchman21]

Watch any game of his ever, Cozens biggest flaw is his IQ/Skill. Dude has all the tools in the world to be a top 2 pick but just plays the most oversimplified game in the world. Really all he does is skate and shoot and there is no creativity to his game at all. Its what makes him a winger instead of a center, dropped out of the top 5 talk on pretty much every mock and what makes him a risky prospect to take and evaluate.

Like what we are talking about with Cozens are the same warning signs that could be seen with Yak or Poolparty. I think Cozens will be a great 30g power forward winger, but this isn't some regurgitated link, this is coming from me as someone who has watched 17-20ish of his games.

I think it is a mistake to confuse creativity with IQ. Many, many smart players out there who are not creative.

 

[cgf]

I think it is a mistake to confuse creativity with IQ. Many, many smart players out there who are not creative.

See Boldy, Matthew

 

[henchman21]

See Boldy, Matthew

Or best Avs example... Landeskog. Not at all a creative player, but very smart and effective.

 

[Avs_19]

Could someone provide what Friedman said exactly? I'm hoping it just means they're willing to move it. Rather draft Turcotte/Byram at 4, then trade for an impact player with 16. (Zucker/Karlsson)

Him and Marek were talking about how teams are looking to move around in the draft and then Friedman said he's heard the Avs are one of the teams possibly looking to move up from their second 1st round pick.

 

[The Abusement Park]

Delete.

 

[LTC Pain]

Watch any game of his ever, Cozens biggest flaw is his IQ/Skill. Dude has all the tools in the world to be a top 2 pick but just plays the most oversimplified game in the world. Really all he does is skate and shoot and there is no creativity to his game at all. Its what makes him a winger instead of a center, dropped out of the top 5 talk on pretty much every mock and what makes him a risky prospect to take and evaluate.

Like what we are talking about with Cozens are the same warning signs that could be seen with Yak or Poolparty. I think Cozens will be a great 30g power forward winger, but this isn't some regurgitated link, this is coming from me as someone who has watched 17-20ish of his games.

Ahh, your opinion. Google "Cozens' IQ". You will find your opinion of Cozens' IQ is polar opposite of several hockey writers/pundits. In fact, I couldn't find anything regarding Cozens having less than a stellar IQ.

 

[cgf]

Or best Avs example... Landeskog. Not at all a creative player, but very smart and effective.

True. I think Landy's at least picked up enough creative solutions over the years to not be as extreme an example as Boldy, but he's certainly another guy with elite hockey IQ who does not show standout creativity with the puck.

 

[AvsRobin]

Still waiting to gain something from the times we moved down in the past.

What do you mean? Like with #31 a few years ago? We got a pretty good return for that. But draft picks are never a guarantee. Like I have said multiple times. You can end up with a Siemens at #11, but it doesn't dimish the return at the time itself.

 

[UncleRisto]

What do you mean? Like with #31 a few years ago? We got a pretty good return for that. But draft picks are never a guarantee. Like I have said multiple times. You can end up with a Siemens at #11, but it doesn't dimish the return at the time itself.

I just feel like your suggested moves are always trading down, and not buying or buying low. and waiting around. They trade down from mid first to late first, they most likely end up with two players with a longer road to the NHL, and a much higher chance of whiffing completely.

 

[henchman21]

What do you mean? Like with #31 a few years ago? We got a pretty good return for that. But draft picks are never a guarantee. Like I have said multiple times. You can end up with a Siemens at #11, but it doesn't dimish the return at the time itself.

There is knowing who you are and playing to those strengths too. If you're San Jose, Tampa or Ottawa and know you can hit on your later picks... by all means you can prioritize it. When you're the Avs and haven't realized gains from a pick beyond #10 since 2010 and it has been since 2009 since you had real success. Maybe you are better off condensing towards the top as much as possible knowing your scouting/development (whereever you want to pin it) staff isn't good enough. IMO the odds of the Avs getting 2 impact players are much higher with say 4 and 10 than they are with 4, 20, 47, and 49 (just throwing the Rangers out there).

 

[LTC Pain]

I've read that some purport Knight is not "good value" at #16. What is the draft slot where "good value" for a goalie of Knight's talent, athleticism, and ability is acceptable to select him???

 

[AvsRobin]

I just feel like your suggested moves are always trading down, and not buying or buying low. and waiting around. They trade down from mid first to late first, they most likely end up with two players with a longer road to the NHL, and a much higher chance of whiffing completely.

Well sure, you have a bigger chance at 15 than at 20. Of course. But if we look at charts over how likely a draft pick is to succeed, the difference when we go down a bit is very small. Having 35 and 40 for example gives you a bigger chance as a whole than having one pick at 30. I think history shows that trading down in the draft is a good idea. Because as I understand it, there isn't a huge drop off in talent at a certain position except for after 1-2.

 

[UncleRisto]

I've read that some purport Knight is not "good value" at #16. What is the draft slot where "good value" for a goalie of Knight's talent, athleticism, and ability is acceptable to select him???

It's just people afraid of high goalie picks. If Knight is a #1 and you get him at 16, that's a lot more value than someone like Kaut or Lavoie. The question is, can you get a #1 out of someone like Kochetkov at #63 if he's there. All I know is, Hepple could do a better job drafting goalies if he just chose a name blindfolded.

 

[AvsRobin]

There is knowing who you are and playing to those strengths too. If you're San Jose, Tampa or Ottawa and know you can hit on your later picks... by all means you can prioritize it. When you're the Avs and haven't realized gains from a pick beyond #10 since 2010 and it has been since 2009 since you had real success. Maybe you are better off condensing towards the top as much as possible knowing your scouting/development (whereever you want to pin it) staff isn't good enough. IMO the odds of the Avs getting 2 impact players are much higher with say 4 and 10 than they are with 4, 20, 47, and 49 (just throwing the Rangers out there).

Ok, fair point. I'm not sure I would do 10 for 20+47+49 but, I get what you mean.

But this whole issue is more about our development process and fixing that then trying to work around it in the draft.

 

[Avs_19]

Victoria Grizzlies GM/coach Craig Didmon on Newhook: “He has great endurance, he doesn’t tire and wears his opponents down. He can attack in a variety of ways. He has great speed, a great shot on the fly and sees the ice very well. He can play 200 feet.”

“But NHL scouts tell me his skating is a 5/5, his IQ is a 5/5 and I know his character is a 5/5 so he’s got the parts.”

'He's 18 going on 30': 2019 NHL draft prospect Alex Newhook...

Sounds like an Avs type of player to me. Both Pronman and Wheeler have Newhook ranked 11th.

 

[UncleRisto]

Well sure, you have a bigger chance at 15 than at 20. Of course. But if we look at charts over how likely a draft pick is to succeed, the difference when we go down a bit is very small. Having 35 and 40 for example gives you a bigger chance as a whole than having one pick at 30. I think history shows that trading down in the draft is a good idea. Because as I understand it, there isn't a huge drop off in talent at a certain position except for after 1-2.

I think going down from 16 to the late round is a terrible idea, personally.

 

[AvsRobin]

I think going down from 16 to the late round is a terrible idea, personally.

Luckily I didn't suggest that.

 

[UncleRisto]

Luckily I didn't suggest that.

So what, from 16 to 18? Good luck finding that trade partner.

I get it, you live for asset management, but teams don't want "someone from a group", they'll have a preference. Just take your guy.

 

[cgf]

Ok, fair point. I'm not sure I would do 10 for 20+47+49 but, I get what you mean.

But this whole issue is more about our development process and fixing that then trying to work around it in the draft.

That would be nice...would also be cool if we were a top FA destination...

 

[AvsRobin]

So what, from 16 to 18? Good luck finding that trade partner.

Well those are usually the ones we see? If we are on the clock and a team 2-3-4 slots down really wants a player and fear that someone right above is gonna take him. And obviously, if we feel that we can still get the guy we want or one of the two guys we want or something like that. That is always something to explore I think. Friedman says he thinks a lot of teams are interested in "moving around" at the draft so we will see.