Prospect Info: Way too early 2020 draft options

[Boom Boom Apathy]

Just for reference, if I've done this correctly, here are the highest goalies chosen in past drafts going back to Carey Price's draft. Only 2 times has a goalie been chosen before the 13th OA Pick in the draft, and those two times were 10 and 14 years ago. I'm not saying that because of this, Askarov won't be gone before our pick, but I think it does indicate that teams are reluctant to select goalies with top 10-15 picks. Also, given Dundon's comment about not picking a defensemen high first round, it wouldn't surprise me that if Askarov was available that the Canes didn't pick him either.

2019: Knight - #13
2018: Lindbom - #39
2017: Ottenger - #26
2016: Hart - #48
2015: Samsonov - #22
2014: McDonald - #34
2013: Fucale - #36
2012: Vasilevskie - #19
2011: Hellberg - #38
2010: Campbell - #11
2009: Koskinen - #31
2008: Pickard - #18
2007: Gistedt - #36
2006: Bernier - #11

 

[Unsustainable]

I hate to be stuck on a player for the draft, but Askarov has to be it.

 

[Anton Dubinchuk]

@Boom Boom Apathy and it’s not like that’s the most impressive list of names either. (I know not the point you were making but definitely what stuck out to me.)

 

[Boom Boom Apathy]

I hate to be stuck on a player for the draft, but Askarov has to be it.

I'll go against the grain here. I think you still pick BPA. If Askarov is who you deem as BPA, then you take him. If someone else slips and is BPA, you take that person.

I don't know anything about Askarov specifically (or any of the prospects for that matter), just I don't like drafting for need in the top half of the 1st round in the draft.

 

[CanesFanBudMan]

Just for reference, if I've done this correctly, here are the highest goalies chosen in past drafts going back to Carey Price's draft. Only 2 times has a goalie been chosen before the 13th OA Pick in the draft, and those two times were 10 and 14 years ago. I'm not saying that because of this, Askarov won't be gone before our pick, but I think it does indicate that teams are reluctant to select goalies with top 10-15 picks. Also, given Dundon's comment about not picking a defensemen high first round, it wouldn't surprise me that if Askarov was available that the Canes didn't pick him either.

2019: Knight - #13
2018: Lindbom - #39
2017: Ottenger - #26
2016: Hart - #48
2015: Samsonov - #22
2014: McDonald - #34
2013: Fucale - #36
2012: Vasilevskie - #19
2011: Hellberg - #38
2010: Campbell - #11
2009: Koskinen - #31
2008: Pickard - #18
2007: Gistedt - #36
2006: Bernier - #11

this list as also why goalies are not taken top 10.
If he is these at that point the decision will have already been made/ informed by Tulsky

 

[SvechneJerk]

I'll go against the grain here. I think you still pick BPA. If Askarov is who you deem as BPA, then you take him. If someone else slips and is BPA, you take that person.

I don't know anything about Askarov specifically (or any of the prospects for that matter), just I don't like drafting for need in the top half of the 1st round in the draft.

I completely understand this line of thinking & normally, completely agree with it. But this year, we didn't "earn" the 13th pick, in that our play didn't determine this position. Someone said a few weeks ago that this pick is like "found money" & this is where I think I'm at with it. Because of that, I look at this situation differently. Maybe it's just me. Perhaps Kochetkov or Makiniemi turns out to be THE GUY. I would just like some freaking solidity back there & someone capable a stealing some games for us.

Was it Bleed(?) that said watching our situation play out the same way every year was tiring? Yea, I'm there.

 

[Navin R Slavin]

I completely understand this line of thinking & normally, completely agree with it. But this year, we didn't "earn" the 13th pick, in that our play didn't determine this position. Someone said a few weeks ago that this pick is like "found money" & this is where I think I'm at with it. Because of that, I look at this situation differently. Maybe it's just me. Perhaps Kochetkov or Makiniemi turns out to be THE GUY. I would just like some freaking solidity back there & someone capable a stealing some games for us.

Was it Bleed(?) that said watching our situation play out the same way every year was tiring? Yea, I'm there.

The evidence is pretty clear: spending a first round pick on a goalie isn't an investment that pays off. If we want a good goalie, we're gonna have to draft a lot of goalies and hope one develops, or we're gonna have to pay through the nose for an established goalie. First round picks are too valuable to spend on goalies.

 

[Joe McGrath]

The evidence is pretty clear: spending a first round pick on a goalie isn't an investment that pays off. If we want a good goalie, we're gonna have to draft a lot of goalies and hope one develops, or we're gonna have to pay through the nose for an established goalie. First round picks are too valuable to spend on goalies.

Unless you’re Tampa and you have the reigning Vezina winner starting for you in the up final


.

 

[Caser]

@Caser probably has some info on him.

6'0" is indeed a bit on a smaller side for goalies, but i'd still consder him as a solid candidate for late rounds.

 

[Boom Boom Apathy]

I completely understand this line of thinking & normally, completely agree with it. But this year, we didn't "earn" the 13th pick, in that our play didn't determine this position.

We really didn’t earn the Svechnikov pick by our play either, we lucked into it. How we got the pick is irrelevant to me. If you have a pick this high, you take BPA. If the team feels it’s Askarov, then fine. If it’s someone else, then fine.

The “found money” pick imo simply allowed us to move our own pick, so it’s not exactly found money. We moved up 9 spots, but it’s our only first round pick.

I would just like some freaking solidity back there & someone capable a stealing some games for us.

Was it Bleed(?) that said watching our situation play out the same way every year was tiring? Yea, I'm there.

I think we all want stability back there. I just don’t want that desire to skew judgement.

on a side note, is Askarov that much of a sure thing? I know there is no such thing, but what makes him more likely to succeed (not being sarcastic, I don’t know enough about him)

 

[bleedgreen]

I completely understand this line of thinking & normally, completely agree with it. But this year, we didn't "earn" the 13th pick, in that our play didn't determine this position. Someone said a few weeks ago that this pick is like "found money" & this is where I think I'm at with it. Because of that, I look at this situation differently. Maybe it's just me. Perhaps Kochetkov or Makiniemi turns out to be THE GUY. I would just like some freaking solidity back there & someone capable a stealing some games for us.

Was it Bleed(?) that said watching our situation play out the same way every year was tiring? Yea, I'm there.

While I’m in complete agreement with him about it as a concept I believe it was tarheel that said it. I’m sick of doing the same thing over and over.

I’m conversely also with the overall draft concept Hank just said. Goalies are way too much of a crapshoot for the first round. Especially high to mid round imo.

Also like BBA said “ money” would be a second first round pick, which is to me a more acceptable time to take a goalie. Especially if it’s the later pick.

So I’m pretty useless in this argument. I’m ironically fine in the end with taking him if he falls to us because he’s a better prospect than the forwards there even though I think taking goalies are super risky at that point of the draft. I’m mostly concerned with the fallout of expectations that the kid does anything of note for at least three years, and also concerned we still need to find a goalie to protect the kid for 3-5 years.

 

[emptyNedder]

It is slightly less of a crap shoot to take BPA (pretty sure every team states that is their strategy in the top half of the 1st). In the decade 2006-2015 there are some solid role players (Tlusgy, Eller, Kassian, Faksa), some budding stars (Morrisey and Vrana), one role player who faded (Bärtschi), and two outright busts (Teubert, Gormley), and one, who if I am generous, the jury is out on (Zboril).

2006—Tlusty
2007—Lars Eller
2008—Teubert
2009—Kassian
2010—Gormley
2011—Bärtshci
2012—Faksa
2013—Morrisey
2014—Vrana
2015—Zboril
2016—Bean
2017—Suzuki
2018—Dellandrea
2019—Knight

I know others have argued that the Canes current spot means they will draft an important piece, but the truth seems to be that outside the top 8-10 most drafts have a significant drop off.

 

[Boom Boom Apathy]

It is slightly less of a crap shoot to take BPA (pretty sure every team states that is their strategy in the top half of the 1st). In the decade 2006-2015 there are some solid role players (Tlusgy, Eller, Kassian, Faksa), some budding stars (Morrisey and Vrana), one role player who faded (Bärtschi), and two outright busts (Teubert, Gormley), and one, who if I am generous, the jury is out on (Zboril).

2006—Tlusty
2007—Lars Eller
2008—Teubert
2009—Kassian
2010—Gormley
2011—Bärtshci
2012—Faksa
2013—Morrisey
2014—Vrana
2015—Zboril
2016—Bean
2017—Suzuki
2018—Dellandrea
2019—Knight

I know others have argued that the Canes current spot means they will draft an important piece, but the truth seems to be that outside the top 8-10 most drafts have a significant drop off.

It's true,but a lot of it depends on both scouting and depth of the draft. No doubt the odds get worse as you go on though.

In 2015, outside the top 10, the following guys were drafted.
#14 DeBrusk
#16 Barzal
#17 Kyle Connor
#19 Chabot
#22: Samsonov
#23: Boeser
#24: Koneckny

All those guys are arguably impact players in the NHL. Maybe not DeBrusk? and maybe projection on Samsonov, but they are close. On top of that, you got serviceable guys like
#11: Crouse
#20: Eriksson-Ek
#21: Colin White
#25: Roslovic
#28: Beauvillier

That's 7 impact players out of 20 and 12 Impact/serviceable players out of 20. The jury is still out on a couple more.

I keep hearing this is a deep draft, but I have no clue if it is or isn't, but the quality of the draft directly impacts the odds of getting an impact player at #13.

 

[BB88]

if there's any year to do it, this is the one. it's shockingly bereft of sure things in my opinion. the mandatory picks end after 3rd overall. 4th-10th can do whatever they want within reason. probably 5th overall if you consider drysdale as the best defense available a must at 4th overall but he seems more like a charlie mcavoy than a cale makar. i think he goes on riser watch at 5th with ottawa and 9th to minnesota could be a thing if teams are locked in. the problem with addressing center issues is there have to be centers available that you like better and that might be a challenge with what appears to be one of the best bets at the position in years. plus, even teams with young goalies already in say the 24-28 range could conceivably be on the back 9 by the time an 18 year old goalie is available to help you. especially since there's probably no chance you get him to north america before he's 22 or 23. i don't know if we have that kind of time. our need seems more immediate, but at 13th that proposition becomes more enticing just as it does to teams slightly above it. like a draft and stash player in the nba he's just over there in russia doing his thing waiting for time to pass until it would be acceptable to risk bringing him in. there's a lot of variables, but i think he goes higher. not saying it's right or wrong.

I have to disagree with those teams willing to trade down, I've followed them quite a bit and have a pretty good feel what their biggest roster needs are.

Any guy you pick at 13 you need to be ready to expect 2-3 years for them to make an impact, and Askarov is already playing in a men's league which is a big bonus for him being ready for NHL games(potentially) if you can just get him over, I understand the concern on that but it would not be something that made me not go with him.
If we expect Askarov to take 3-4 years to get there(I'd personnally expect less) it would fit in so well with your core guys contracts, having a potential franchise goalie on ELC+ RFA deal once those guys hit UFA contracts.

I'd pick one Lehner/Markstrom/Kuemper for today an pick Askarov for tomorrow.

You are forgetting about Detroit and Jersey. As @Vagrant is saying, after the 3rd pick, he could/should be anyone's BPA at that point. And there are several franchises that have more time to wait out a goalie with the "Russian factor" than we do realistically based on their "window". But, again as @Vagrant said, our decision will be easy....he won't be there.

I'm not forgetting them, just putting the chances on them picking him very low considering the draft situation/team needs.

 

[BB88]

We don't really have an unaddressed C issue. Staal was the 2C, he faltered. We moved a lot of assets to trade for Tro to fill that role and hasn't even been here long enough to show if he fills the role. Necas projects to a top-6 C role by most accounts...and if he sticks at the wing, we still have Suzuki, Rees, Drury in the system.

How many times over do we need to solve the same problem while neglecting our other needs?

I know the #2C is an issue but expecting there to be a strong run at F's+ C's ahead of you leaving more of midd6 potential prospects available rather than #2C's like Lundell.

So to me the forwards available wont be franchise level prospects where as Askarov is a franchise level prospect, buying more value with him than a forward at that point.
If for some crazy reason Lundell is there at 13 different talk but as said all of Minny/Florida/Jets are desperate for C help.

 

[emptyNedder]

The talk of goalies and Cs has me thinking—the fact is the Canes have not done well drafting wingers. Outside Svech, who was as close to a no-brainer as possible, the organization doesn't have a single winger on the current roster who was drafted and would be considered a home-run.

If you consider that Lindholm was likely drafted to be a center, it looks even worse.

Skinner, Foegele, and McGinn are the only wingers drafted since 2007 that have had "success."

Not sure the importance of this, but I found it interesting.

 

[GoldiFox]

Askarov wins again today with 1 GA and a 0.967 sv%. Not sure SKA will go away from him until he struggles. At this rate he will have another 5 KHL games under his belt by the draft.

 

[GoldiFox]

The talk of goalies and Cs has me thinking—the fact is the Canes have not done well drafting wingers. Outside Svech, who was as close to a no-brainer as possible, the organization doesn't have a single winger on the current roster who was drafted and would be considered a home-run.

If you consider that Lindholm was likely drafted to be a center, it looks even worse.

Skinner, Foegele, and McGinn are the only wingers drafted since 2007 that have had "success."

Not sure the importance of this, but I found it interesting.

Who have they missed on that should have been an NHLer? This metric is a bit skewed because most good forward prospects play center in juniors as it gets them more ice time and the puck on their stick more.

 

[CanesFanBudMan]

Askarov wins again today with 1 GA and a 0.967 sv%. Not sure SKA will go away from him until he struggles. At this rate he will have another 5 KHL games under his belt by the draft.

And at this rate he will not be there at 13

 

[A Star is Burns]

Askarov wins again today with 1 GA and a 0.967 sv%. Not sure SKA will go away from him until he struggles. At this rate he will have another 5 KHL games under his belt by the draft.

 

[Surrounded By Ahos]

 

[Boom Boom Apathy]

The talk of goalies and Cs has me thinking—the fact is the Canes have not done well drafting wingers. Outside Svech, who was as close to a no-brainer as possible, the organization doesn't have a single winger on the current roster who was drafted and would be considered a home-run.

If you consider that Lindholm was likely drafted to be a center, it looks even worse.

Skinner, Foegele, and McGinn are the only wingers drafted since 2007 that have had "success."

Not sure the importance of this, but I found it interesting.

Aho was drafted as a winger. Became a center almost out of necessity.

 

[GoldiFox]

He's got some incredible lateral push. Many shooters rely on beating a goalie with a slick first move which opens the net. Askarov can recover and block that second move at an elite level.

Beyond just the athleticism it takes to do that it takes a pretty high awareness as well on those split-second decisions.

I'm thinking Yzerman takes him at #4. Maybe Perfetti falls as a result.

 

[Boom Boom Apathy]

The talk of goalies and Cs has me thinking—the fact is the Canes have not done well drafting wingers. Outside Svech, who was as close to a no-brainer as possible, the organization doesn't have a single winger on the current roster who was drafted and would be considered a home-run.

If you consider that Lindholm was likely drafted to be a center, it looks even worse.

Skinner, Foegele, and McGinn are the only wingers drafted since 2007 that have had "success."

Not sure the importance of this, but I found it interesting.

Your post got me thinking about it so I went back and looked. Probably the reason they haven't done well drafting wingers, is that they haven't drafted that many high up in the draft. Going back to Skinner's draft here's how many wingers were drafted in each round. So what you have is:
2 top 10 picks (and both have been successful)
1 late 1st round pick
4 2nd round picks
18 3rd-7th round pick.

Not surprising the Canes haven't had a lot of success drafting wingers when they haven't drafted very many high up in the first round of drafts. The chances of getting an NHL regular, much less a strong contributor is pretty low once you hit later rounds.

1st round: 3 (Skinner-who was actually drafted as a C, Gauthier, Svech)
2nd round: 4 (PDG, McGinn, Aho, Kuokkanen)
3rd round: 4 (Foegele, Filipe, Mattheos, Puistola)
4th round: 6 (Shugg, Hofmann, Karlsson, Zimmer, Killanen, Tieksola
5th round: 4 (Pederson, Stevens, Smallman, Slepts)
6th round: 2 (Wall, Murray)
7th round: 2 (Sutter, Collier,

 

[emptyNedder]

Your post got me thinking about it so I went back and looked. Probably the reason they haven't done well drafting wingers, is that they have rarely drafted them high up in the draft.

I was thinking more in comparison to how well the organization has done with D (Faulk 2nd, Pesce 3rd, Slavin 4th) and centers (Rask 2nd, Wallmark 4th, Geekie 3rd, Roy 4th).

A3K makes a good point that many juniors play C so drafting "established" wingers is less likely.

As I stated, not sure if there is a bigger point, just interesting to look at all the things that have been mentioned.