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

[AvsRobin]

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

That first thing is a fixable problem. The other one is not. So I don't think you can compare the two.

 

[UncleRisto]

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.

Ah yeah, well that's true, I'll take that back, that's a dumb argument by me... But I don't think it's worth it at all. Not where we're picking (and how we've done with later picks).

 

[cgf]

That first thing is a fixable problem. The other one is not. So I don't think you can compare the two.

Is it? Is it really reasonable to continue expecting the same people to fix a problem that they haven't been able to fix for a decade now?

 

[AvsRobin]

Ah yeah, well that's true, I'll take that back, that's a dumb argument by me... But I don't think it's worth it at all. Not where we're picking.

I can't say if it's worth it or not. It all depends on who is at the board and who is not when it's our turn and what the potential offer is. (Point being, in theory you would take pick #180 for moving from #16 to #17 if the team behind us wants a player we are not taking anyway)

 

[henchman21]

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.

Probably worded it bad... trading 16 + 47 to get 10 vs trading 16 for 20 + 49 equates to those picks.

It is chicken vs egg, but to me, the Avs have much larger problems idenifying talent than developing it. In 2014... Bleakley taken right before a solid #3C and a superstar with the next two picks. Wood and Magyar before Arvidsson. Pepin before Heinen. An bunch of players before Kase. Lindholm was their singular best pick that draft. It is easy to point out misses with 20/20, but every pick basically had somebody good shortly after along with this huge miss in the first. 2015... hit with a top 10. Then trade back at 31 to end up missing Aho, Dermott, Carlo, and Fischer. Any one of those improves the team more than having Greer and Meloche in the minors. Then Beaudin over Cirelli. Mironov in front of Malgin. This story is able to be repeated over and over. They cannot effectively identify talent. We all love projecting our 2-4th rounders highly and there are a number I have liked and still like, but when results are clearly out there that are poor and many include just misses... they need to look at why they are missing that talent.

 

[AvsRobin]

Is it? Is it really reasonable to continue expecting the same people to fix a problem that they haven't been able to fix for a decade now? At what point do you acknowledge these people for who they are and where their limitations lie?

You don't think it's a fixable problem for an NHL organization to improve their development process? Why on earth wouldn't that be fixable? If other teams can do it, of course so can we. And no I don't have a blue print for who needs to be replaced or what needs to change, but just admit defeat at it?

 

[AvsRobin]

Probably worded it bad... trading 16 + 47 to get 10 vs trading 16 for 20 + 49 equates to those picks.

It is chicken vs egg, but to me, the Avs have much larger problems idenifying talent than developing it. In 2014... Bleakley taken right before a solid #3C and a superstar with the next two picks. Wood and Magyar before Arvidsson. Pepin before Heinen. An bunch of players before Kase. Lindholm was their singular best pick that draft. It is easy to point out misses with 20/20, but every pick basically had somebody good shortly after along with this huge miss in the first. 2015... hit with a top 10. Then trade back at 31 to end up missing Aho, Dermott, Carlo, and Fischer. Any one of those improves the team more than having Greer and Meloche in the minors. Then Beaudin over Cirelli. Mironov in front of Malgin. This story is able to be repeated over and over. They cannot effectively identify talent. We all love projecting our 2-4th rounders highly and there are a number I have liked and still like, but when results are clearly out there that are poor and many include just misses... they need to look at why they are missing that talent.

I think most teams (except Tampa) feels this way. In hindsight every team can basically look back at every draft and find a better player who was picked after the one your team picked. It's an incredibly hard process. I do however feel more confident in it now than when Roy had influence.

But also, historically, what is considered a good draft? If you get one career NHLer out of every draft (seven picks) that must be considered quite good yeah? The norm isn't exactly to end up with 2-3 players for you every year.

 

[UncleRisto]

I can't say if it's worth it or not. It all depends on who is at the board and who is not when it's our turn and what the potential offer is. (Point being, in theory you would take pick #180 for moving from #16 to #17 if the team behind us wants a player we are not taking anyway)

I suppose, but then you gotta know your preference isn't going to go, and the Avs staff will 100% miss on a 100+ pick. Personally, I like sitting still with stuff like this. But then you look at the Vegas expansion and know that GMs aren't like that, because what was everyone doing.

 

[UncleRisto]

I think most teams (except Tampa) feels this way. In hindsight every team can basically look back at every draft and find a better player who was picked after the one your team picked. It's an incredibly hard process. I do however feel more confident in it now than when Roy had influence.

But also, historically, what is considered a good draft? If you get one career NHLer out of every draft (seven picks) that must be considered quite good yeah? The norm isn't exactly to end up with 2-3 players for you every year.

Sure, but when did we end up with an NHLer past ~#35? Barrie ten years ago?

 

[AvsRobin]

This is a good article about the draft pick value and a litte something about goalies too from our current employee.

Don't Tell Me About Heart: NHL Draft Pick Value Chart

 

[AvsRobin]

Sure, but when did we end up with an NHLer past ~#35? Barrie ten years ago?

I agree, it's about time. I think a good move is maximizing your odds but giving yourself more picks and trading down is a good idea, in my opinion. I'm not here to convince anyone who disagrees.

But a lot of fanbases feel the way we do, but we have been bad at drafting and developing, no doubt. Bottom line is obviously just.. be smarter. (Look at 2014 and do the opposite)

 

[henchman21]

I think most teams (except Tampa) feels this way. In hindsight every team can basically look back at every draft and find a better player who was picked after the one your team picked. It's an incredibly hard process. I do however feel more confident in it now than when Roy had influence.

But also, historically, what is considered a good draft? If you get one career NHLer out of every draft (seven picks) that must be considered quite good yeah? The norm isn't exactly to end up with 2-3 players for you every year.

Of course you can look back and see misses, but missing every single year for a decade? That to me clearly points teh finger at scouting. The Avs simply are not good enough in that area.

 

[cgf]

You don't think it's a fixable problem for an NHL organization to improve their development process? Why on earth wouldn't that be fixable? If other teams can do it, of course so can we. And no I don't have a blue print for who needs to be replaced or what needs to change, but just admit defeat at it?

No one said just accepting defeat, just not delusionally expecting this to finally be the year where it magically fixes itself when this FO has shown no ability to do so

 

[UncleRisto]

It's pretty shocking honestly. No career NHLers outside the top-10 since 2009. I have faith in Kaut to make it top-16.

 

[AvsRobin]

No one said just accepting defeat, just not delusionally expecting this to finally be the year where it magically fixes itself when this FO has shown no ability to do so

Who is expecting that? I just said I think it was a problem that needs to be fixed.

 

[avsfan09]

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

I agree with this.

As for Cozens the IQ thing imo is due to having lesser vision. There are also times when he gets the puck but looks lost as to what to do with it. He can look a step behind the play at times as well. He's not an idiot but at the top end of the draft I can see the concerns.

I've only really watched him at the U-18's though and a couple of regular season games. I also heard he looked worse at the U-18's than he normally does.

 

[cgf]

Who is expecting that? I just said I think it was a problem that needs to be fixed.

Sure, but it's still a reality we need to deal with in the present

 

[Meeqs]

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.

I've seen more games of Cozens than 80% of the people who rehash all the same quotes about him in their articles. Look around for your confirmation bias all you want the Avs aren't taking him

 

[Meeqs]

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

I think that's fair and maybe saying his game is deliberately very very simple and that his decision making is a tad too slow as it is now is more accurate. I think he will be a very successful winger and has the tools you can fall in love with but I don't think he currently plays a NHL game at center.

 

[AvsRobin]

From one thing to another. Broberg has a different skill set than Bjornfot. But between the two swedish d-man, I wouldn't bet my house on Broberg becoming the better player. Björnfot gives you a Hampus Lindholm feeling. Broberg has been playing in the Allsvenskan. Björnfot played in the SHL but wasn't given many minutes due to Djurgårdens d-core staying fairly healthy and really going for it this year.

I like Björnfot.

Lukas Wernblom is almost Viktor Arvidsson exciting (the same excitement when I overposted here about taking him as an overager)

Sleeper picks from Sweden, Mattias Norlinder and Simon Lundmark.

 

[Hasbro]

Turcotte and Caufield.

 

[Murzu]

It's pretty shocking honestly. No career NHLers outside the top-10 since 2009. I have faith in Kaut to make it top-16.

Someone will butcher you for writing this.

 

[SoundwaveIsCharisma]

Turcotte and Caufield.

That would be beautiful. After spending a season together building chemistry, the Avs sign them and bring them in as an offensive boost for the playoff run.

 

[henchman21]

Someone will butcher you for writing this.

Well played sir

 

[AvsMakar08]

Avs will probably be picking Zegras with 4th OA pick. We need a little risky but a very high ceiling hockey player.