Crzy's 2020 NHL Draft Thread

[Crzydrvr]

Quick crib notes for the uninitiated: Style comparables are not be all end alls,they do not reflect a player's upside. Prospect grades are tied to Aggregate scores, with a max of 10 allocated to each skill. I reused my old categories for consistency. I would say the scaling goes roughly as such:

 

10: Generational level of ability, compared to the median draft-eligible player across all professional, collegiate, Jr. A and Major Junior leagues

9: Elite, compared to the median draft-eligible player across all professional, collegiate, Jr. A and Major Junior leagues

8: Good, compared to the median draft-eligible player across all professional, collegiate, Jr. A and Major Junior leagues

7: Average, compared to the median draft-eligible player across all professional, collegiate, Jr. A and Major Junior leagues

6: Below average, compared to the median draft-eligible player across all professional, collegiate, Jr. A and Major Junior leagues

5: Average Midget AAA/Jr. B level quality

4: Below average Midget AAA/Jr. B level quality

3: Average Bantam AAA quality (if you're draft eligible and still here, good luck)

2. Hobby player

1. You and me

 

You will, obviously, not see anybody who has a rating below 6 ever. I haven't to my memory even had a player with a rating below 6.5 anywhere near the top 50 prospects (and I've never revealed the breakdowns for guys below that because I don't have that kind of time).

 

I added draft ranges for a more detailed explanation, as I feel like a lot of times people want to know the why: why would teams draft certain players high, why did a guy fall, etc. I have added that in specifically for the high picks to give you guys some insight into the draft ranges of certain players, and how they can get bumps or docked from certain teams' evaluations to put them within specific areas of the draft.

 

I will place a forewarning that my job requires me to focus on Bantam and Midget players as well as lower level junior players, so I don't feel as confident as far as my rankings this year and have had to rely on words from friends more than usual. But then again, I've never been the most accurate anyways. 😂

 

I'll update this section here with the future posts linked for easy access:

Top 10 Rankings

11-31 Rankings

31-50, Overagers, Goalies

Mock Draft(s)???

 

1. LW Alexis Lafreniere, Rimouski Oceanic (QMJHL) [11/10/2001]

[6'1", 194 lbs][Shoots Left][PROSPECT GRADE: S]
[52 GP, 35 G, 77 A, 112 Pts, 50 PIM, +41][Style Comparable: Jaromir Jagr]
Potential Peak: Hockey Hall of Famer and franchise savior
Projection: Elite top line forward, perennial 85+ point player in his prime

Bust Factor: None; barring injuries, will spend at least a decade in the NHL

Offense: 9.5
Defense: 8.0
Physicality: 8.5
Skating: 9.0
Intangibles: 9.0
NHL-Readiness: 9.0
Potential: 9.5

Aggregate Score: 62.5

 

Report: The clear cut number 1. The best Quebecois draft product since Vincent Lecavalier without hyperbole (and the cream of the 2001-borns, one of the best QMJHL draft crops in history), Lafreniere is as close to a sure bet as you can get. There’s a possibility that one or two prospects eventually surpass him in this draft class as he’s not insurmountable and his potential is “just” franchise-altering, and not generational like a Connor McDavid, but a player who can anchor your franchise for 15 years is well within expectations. He’s on the same level as a Matthews/Eichel/MacKinnon level draft prospect. If your equivalent talents are all franchise players at such young ages, that bodes well.

 

Talent-wise, he can do it all. The guy will score, will dish, will hit, will dazzle and his biggest limitation to his overall potential, skating, is still strong enough to be considered elite. Whenever next season starts, he will be in someone’s lineup (and in a top 6 role) and should be considered a frontrunner for the Calder.

 

Draft Range: Some guys might believe he needs more work on his skating, which takes his skating down a notch. Even with that, his ranking is so secure he will go 1st overall regardless without much fuss, but those scouts will believe he isn’t quite at the level of previous franchise-caliber prospects like Matthews or MacKinnon. Which is always a possibility, considering that they’re basically Hart-level players at 23-25, and that is hard to guarantee for anyone. Either way, it's almost a certainty that Lafreniere goes 1st so the only question is which lucky team gets that 1st pick.

 

2. C Quinton Byfield, Sudbury Wolves (OHL) [19/08/2002]

[6'4", 215 lbs][Shoots Left][PROSPECT GRADE: A+]
[45 GP, 32 G, 50 A, 82 Pts, 44 PIM, +26][NHL Comparable: Evgeni Malkin]
Potential Peak: Hockey Hall of Famer and franchise savior

Projection: Top line scoring forward, 80+ point player in his prime

Bust Factor: Low; might need some developmental time and may underachieve compared to potential

Offense: 9.0
Defense: 8.0
Physicality: 8.5
Skating: 9.0
Intangibles: 8.0
NHL-Readiness: 8.5
Potential: 9.5

Aggregate Score: 60.5

 

Report: Byfield is as big a question mark for a guaranteed top 3 draft pick as there’s been in the last decade. In terms of raw potential, there is no one in this draft who has more “unicorn” rarity, as a guy who could be a future Hart candidate while sitting 6’4” and being arguably the most talented/gifted center in the draft. Think Evgeni Malkin levels of pure potential. He’d be a solid number 1 pick in many other drafts, but his weak finish to the season and his overall inconsistency make it difficult to see his floor beyond being an NHL player in some capacity.

 

Generally, he’s smart, uses his body really well, and has slick hands. Byfield can score, and he’s well-rounded overall. He's also generally an engaged defensive player and backchecks hard, using his stick well and being effective positionally. If there’s a criticism of his overall skillset in particular, he probably doesn’t have the same level of hockey sense and decision-making as some other top prospects, but it’s still very high-end so at this point we’re just nitpicking and he does have excellent vision when making plays offensively. He’s not as polished as we normally see at the top of this draft, but for that very reason I’m putting him 2nd overall because if he’s this good already, imagine what he can do with a good development team? He can probably play in the NHL next season, (kinda like Kirby Dach played in the NHL this season) but for his development he could really use a year absolutely destroying the OHL and WJCs.

 

Draft Range: If certain teams think he’s more of an 8.0 in terms of NHL-readiness, or feel his skating isn’t quite among the top skaters in the draft, he has a chance to slip anywhere from 3 to as low as 5 or 6. I don’t feel that’s likely, because his position and skillset are at a huge premium in this league, but crazier things have happened. The betting odds are strongly that he falls no lower than 3.

 

3. LW/C Tim Stutzle, Adler Mannheim (DEL) [15/01/2002]

[6'0", 179 lbs][Shoots Left][PROSPECT GRADE: A+]
[41 GP, 7 G, 27 A, 34 Pts, 12 PIM, +4][NHL Comparable: Mitch Marner]
Potential Peak: All-Star scoring forward, franchise face type
Projection: Top line scoring forward, 80+ point player in his prime

Bust Factor: Moderate; lots of skill, will need to adapt to the NHL-style of play

Offense: 9.5
Defense: 7.5
Physicality: 7.5
Skating: 9.5
Intangibles: 8.5
NHL-Readiness: 8.5
Potential: 9.5

Aggregate Score: 60.5

 

Report: The biggest riser among the elite prospects in this draft class, Stutzle is one of 3 prospects who have really put the DEL on the map as a real prospect development league. His bread and butter are his acceleration and pure playmaking instincts; nobody else in this draft is as electrifying offensively, with his ability to rush the puck, create chances either with his sniping and playmaking, and general control of the puck. He’s got the best acceleration/first steps in the draft, he’s got a ton of creativity and offensive awareness, and he will be a gamebreaker in the NHL very soon.

 

He needs bulk first and foremost if he’s to continue playing against pros, and his defensive awareness is decent but not exceptional, but he brings so much else to the table that there’s nobody out there that wouldn’t take a chance on him. His balance is good but he gets bullied by bigger, older players sometimes, and more strength overall would help him stay on his feet and boost his skating speed to NHL-elite levels. The defense did improve over the year so as long as he continues to progress there he’s fine, and he already has a consistent motor and feel for the game. The biggest thing is he will need to utilize his shot more, and be more efficient with his game; he’s so dynamic as a playmaker that I think sometimes he passes up good chances looking for the perfect play. It is a thing to note, though we’ve seen plenty of players in that vein continue to succeed at the NHL level.

 

Draft Range: I think most scouts have him rated pretty closely to what I have him at. A lot will depend on how scouts see Byfield and Drysdale, and whether they ding them or boost them more heavily for reasons, than anything with Stutzle. There’s a chance a team goes for the defenseman and Stutzle drops to 4, but there’s just as likely a chance that Byfield drops and Stutzle rises to fill the 2 spot. At this point he has basically an equal chance to go anywhere from 2 to 4, but no lower than 5.

 

4. D Jamie Drysdale, Erie Otters (OHL) [08/04/2002]

[5'11", 170 lbs][Shoots Right][PROSPECT GRADE: A+]
[49 GP, 9 G, 38 A, 47 Pts, 24 PIM, +9][NHL Comparable: Duncan Keith]
Potential Peak: Elite two-way defenseman and franchise player
Projection: Top pairing two-way defenseman, perennial 45+ point player in his prime

Bust Factor: Low; good puck moving defensemen will find homes in today’s NHL

Offense: 9.0
Defense: 8.5
Physicality: 7.5
Skating: 9.5
Intangibles: 8.5
NHL-Readiness: 8.0
Potential: 9.0

Aggregate Score: 60.0

 

Report: The best defenseman in this draft in my mind, and it really isn’t that close. Drysdale is the prototypical modern NHL defenseman; not big, but smart, skilled and fast. His mobility and acceleration are elite and his passing and IQ make him an elite player on the breakout. He’s a strong positional defender with good gap control, and his performance at the WJCs has boosted his stock to the point that anywhere below top 5 would be a huge drop. Cale Makar recency bias also plays a little into this, as Makar and Quinn Hughes’ instant success has opened up doors for a lot of undersized, mobile defensemen who previously may have been undervalued in the draft. I would hazard a guess and say that the days of Erik Karlsson going 15th overall are going away, as those types of skill players are increasingly sought after.

 

He needs to be stronger, obviously, as his limitations come from his stature (though he does get into the dirty areas). It also limits his offensive zone play, as his shot is not very threatening on its own (which is the biggest ding on his offense rating). But overall, he will be a top pairing RHD and those players are arguably the most valuable assets in the NHL. I don’t necessarily foresee him having the offensive upside of a guy like Quinn Hughes or Cale Makar (he’s not a phenomenal power play guy), but he’s got a lot of Scott Niedermayer in him and he’ll be a top pairing defenseman someday.

 

Draft Range: A team that really likes Drysdale (and doesn’t love Byfield) might have him 2nd overall in their final rankings. He might lose marks if teams knock off points on his defense or NHL readiness (I wouldn’t but I can see some teams thinking he’s closer to an 8.0 on the D), which would put him in that 5-8 range with the likes of Perfetti and Rossi. That latter scenario isn’t super likely, however, but he’s the first elite prospect ranked to have a bit of a wider range in terms of draft possibilities. Expect him to go 4th or 5th, but keep in mind there’s always a small chance he might jump or slide a bit depending on individual team needs and opinions.

 

5. LW/RW Lucas Raymond, Frolunda HC (SHL) [28/03/2002]

[5'11", 161 lbs][Shoots Right][PROSPECT GRADE: A+]
[33 GP, 4 G, 6 A, 10 Pts, 4 PIM, +6][NHL Comparable: Artemi Panarin]
Potential Peak: All-Star scoring winger, perennial PPG player
Projection: Top Line playmaking winger, 80+ point player in his prime

Bust Factor: Moderate; needs to simplify and adapt to a smaller rink

Offense: 9.5
Defense: 7.5
Physicality: 7.5
Skating: 9.0
Intangibles: 8.5
NHL-Readiness: 8.5
Potential: 9.5

Aggregate Score: 60.0

 

Report: Raymond started the year as a top-3 prospect, and he held pretty steady there in terms of his own personal development. An elite offensive talent, with good feet and a good motor, Raymond has a flair for the dramatic and has been a staple of Swedish national teams as a focal point of their offense. His hands are silky and while his numbers don’t stand out, a large part of that was due to the minutes he received on a strong team meant to win rather than develop younger kids.

 

Like Stutzle, Raymond needs to be stronger. His actual defensive IQ is not bad, though I wouldn’t classify him as elite, but part of his struggles at the pro level in that end are due to his lack of strength. His balance is very good and he can fight through checks pretty well if needed, but he doesn’t initiate contact as well. If he were playing in the CHL he’d likely be considered a more well-rounded player with his speed and stick, and everything else is considered to be NHL ready right now. More importantly, he has shown a bit of a negative propensity for playing on the perimeter at times, especially against older competition, which could limit his actual effectiveness.

 

Draft Range: Part of what hurts Raymond’s rankings are the fact that there’s another player playing in Europe who has a very similar skillset, is a little more explosive as a skater, has a better engine and consistent motor, and has already shown the ability to produce playing against men. For that reason, it’s hard to see Raymond rise above Stutzle as they fill the same archetype but Stutzle has shown more at this stage on a regular basis in a very underrated league (the DEL gets a weak rap for not producing prospects in the past, but that's because hockey isn't a big sport in Germany yet. It's arguably as good if not better than the Swiss and Czech leagues at this point thanks to the money and caliber of players). That being said, in any other draft Raymond is a near guaranteed top 3 caliber player so that just speaks to the quality at the very top of this particular draft (after the top 10 or so, it slides back into a regular draft in terms of quality). If teams don’t like Raymond's penchant for playing on the perimeter, he could also slide into the 6-8 range. He’s a bit of a wildcard in that regard, but at the very least he should go somewhere in the top 6, and no lower than 8 or 9.

 

6. LW Cole Perfetti, Saginaw Spirit (OHL) [01/01/2002]

[5'10", 180 lbs][Shoots Left][PROSPECT GRADE: A]
[61 GP, 37 G, 74 A, 111 Pts, 16 PIM, +49][NHL Comparable: Logan Couture/Sebastian Aho]
Potential Peak: All-Star scoring forward, perennial PPG+ player
Projection: Top Line scoring winger, 70+ point player in his prime

Bust Factor: Moderate; has a lot of good qualities but a few that need improvement

Offense: 9.5
Defense: 8.0
Physicality: 8.0
Skating: 8.5
Intangibles: 8.0
NHL-Readiness: 8.0
Potential: 9.0

Aggregate Score: 59.0

 

Report: Whatever you feel about skillset and projections, there’s no denying that Perfetti can produce (at the junior level) like no one else in the draft besides the guy sitting number 1. People started the year thinking he was a pure goalscorer, and while he can definitely finish Perfetti has shown this year that he is more than just a shooter. His hands, IQ, and ability to make space and capitalize on opportunities are NHL-caliber. On offense alone, he could be a top-6 NHL forward immediately.

 

Defensively, he’s fairly intelligent and has potential to get better with his smarts and effort level. He battles and while he isn’t big he’s pretty good at leveraging his balance and driving the net or playing in the tough areas of the zone. Basically, anything related to scoring he has pretty much down. His skating is good, overall, but he will need to work on his top speed and acceleration. Right now he uses good edgework to create opportunities, a la Jeff Skinner, but it bears watching as he lacks a real top gear. An elite talent who, like you’ll be reading a couple more times, in almost any other draft is likely a guaranteed top 4 or 5 pick.

 

Draft Range: Depending on how you feel about Perfetti in terms of intangibles and NHL-readiness, he might be a 4 or 5 overall pick (although this also requires a bit of a down opinion on a number of players ahead of him in my rankings). His sheer offensive dominance should keep him in the top 8, but he’s fairly equal to a number of players in that particular tier and a lot will come down to team preference. I could see him slipping as low as 9 if teams feel that Perfetti is more likely to be a winger rather than a center. I think the most likely option is that he, Rossi and Raymond are fighting for that 5 spot and Perfetti is most likely to be drafted anywhere from 5 to 7.

  

7. D Jake Sanderson, USA-U18s (USNTDP) [08/07/2002]

[6’1", 170 pds][Shoots Left][PROSPECT GRADE: A]
[47 GP, 7 G, 22 A, 29 Pts, 12 PIM, +13][NHL Comparable: Ryan McDonagh]
Potential Peak: All-Star two-way defenseman, in the mold of Ryan Suter
Projection: Top pairing two-way defenseman, 35+ point player in his prime

Bust Factor: Moderate; hard to gauge where he is in development compared to peers

Offense: 8.5
Defense: 8.5
Physicality: 8.0
Skating: 9.0
Intangibles: 8.5
NHL-Readiness: 7.5
Potential: 9.0

Aggregate Score: 59.0

 

Report: This might be your first big surprise, but Sanderson is a guy who has done everything he could to pressure Drysdale as the best defenseman available. A local kid, I actually remember watching Jake (and older brother Ben) play within the NWCAA organization before Jake headed to the Edge program and then the US National Development team. An excellent all-around player, Jake is not likely to be an elite scorer, but his skillset is very promising as a potential minute muncher top pairing defender and play driver in the vein of a Charlie McAvoy.

 

Sanderson skates well in all 4 directions and has very good top speed and footwork; he plays a very good defensive game predicated on a mixture of physicality and smarts. He gaps well, and any mistakes he makes are covered by his skating. Offensively, he doesn’t have the game breaking ability of a Drysdale but he moves the puck well, has an accurate pass, jumps into the play and is intelligent in his decision-making. He doesn’t have a huge weakness overall, but there is a lot of rawness to his game that makes you feel like he has even more to give. His potential is skyhigh as a result and more than a few NHL teams feel that they can be the organization to really unlock that potential.

 

Draft Range: If you value bloodlines, he gets an even bigger intangibles bump. If you like something about him in his offense, defense, or physicality, and he gets another bump there, he can easily push into a team’s top 5. On the flip side, if you feel he’s more of a project in terms of readiness or his potential isn’t quite as high as some people have him, he could also be a guy who slides down into that 14-15 range. I think that lack of consensus is what makes him a bit of a riskier selection at the top, as we don’t really know what he will be. There’s a lot of volatility in his draft position and a whole lot will come down to fit and need in addition to his potential. I feel like Sanderson is a good bet to be a top 10 pick, but anything could happen really. Regardless, he’s going to need some time before he hits that potential so expect a few years before he makes an NHL lineup.

 

8. C Marco Rossi, Ottawa 67s (OHL) [23/09/2002]

[5'9", 187 pds][Shoots Left][PROSPECT GRADE: A]
[56 GP, 39 G, 81 A, 120 Pts, 40 PIM, +69][NHL Comparable: Claude Giroux]
Potential Peak: Elite scoring forward and perennial All-Star
Projection: Top line forward, 70+ point player in his prime

Bust Factor: Moderate; likely to play in the NHL, but isn’t well suited to a lower line role

Offense: 9.0
Defense: 8.0
Physicality: 8.0
Skating: 9.0
Intangibles: 8.0
NHL-Readiness: 8.0
Potential: 9.0

Aggregate Score: 59.0

 

Report: Ignore the size, because Rossi doesn’t need it. The kid is built like a wild boar, thick and low to the ground and that gives him all the power he needs. A top talent who had a huge breakout year, Rossi is a fantastic playmaker first and foremost. His hands, smarts and balance also allow him to break open defenses and make him a very well rounded offensive threat. Besides Lafreniere, Rossi might have the most overall polish to his offensive game, as he doesn’t rely on sheer athleticism or raw skill to the same degree as a Perfetti or Raymond.

 

Rossi’s intelligence also translates to his defensive positioning and stickwork. His low center of gravity is effective at both ends of the ice and he usually wins puck battles through lower body and core strength. When you watch him play, you really appreciate the little things he does to push play or generate opportunities, he's got so much nuance to his game. I don’t know whether he has the same gifts and raw potential of some of the other players in the top 8, but he will be an NHL scorer to some capacity. A top 5 caliber player in most other drafts.

 

Draft Range: Depending on where you/NHL teams view his offensive skillset (you could argue he gets a bump there) and his NHL readiness (he is an older prospect and with his polish could be in the show sooner rather than later), he could swing higher in a team’s rankings, maybe even into the top 4 or 5. If a team feels like they want to go for other positions or such, or that his potential is more of a 2nd line talent (there's an argument there among the scouts), Rossi has a small chance of falling lower in the draft, but that’s very unlikely and at worst he should be a top 10-12 selection. Expect Rossi to be in play anywhere from 5 to 9 whenever the draft occurs.

 

9. Alexander Holtz, Djurgardens IF (SHL) [23/01/2002]

[6'0", 181 pds][Shoots Right][PROSPECT GRADE: A]
[35 GP, 9 G, 7 A, 16 Pts, 12 PIM, -1][NHL Comparable: Patrik Laine]
Potential Peak: All-Star scoring forward

Projection: Top line scoring winger, 65+ point player in his prime

Bust Factor: Moderate; needs to continue to round out and polish his game

Offense: 9.0
Defense: 7.5
Physicality: 8.0
Skating: 8.5
Intangibles: 8.0
NHL-Readiness: 8.0
Potential: 9.0

Aggregate Score: 58.0

 

Report: A natural sniper first and foremost. Holtz gets plus marks for having a scorer’s touch (maybe the best in the draft) and playing a hard-nosed, interior game. He also shows good use of misdirection and angles and overall has shown a highly developed knack for scoring in a variety of ways. He has good hands to boot, which keeps him unpredictable and allows him to be a good playmaker when needed. His board work is above average for his age, which puts him opposite compatriot Raymond in terms of style of play. Overall, I would classify Holtz as a smart player, with very good offensive IQ.

 

Holtz will need to work on his skating, though he is good enough to play pro. While he is agile and elusive, his top speed and acceleration are just ok. He also will need to shore up his defense; the effort is consistently there, but he needs to iron out details in terms of positioning, aggressiveness (he tends to commit to the puck a little too far) and how to use his strength. Overall though, those limitations are normal and shouldn’t hold him back from being a top flight NHL scorer. He is one of those players with 40 goal potential, and you take that whenever you can get it.

 

Draft Range: A lot depends on how scouts and teams view the other players in a top-heavy top 10. If teams think Holtz is NHL ready sooner than later, and/or give him bumps on other areas (physicality or offense the most likely) that gives him a slim shot at pushing as high as 4 or 5. If they ding his skating and like other players just a little more, he could theoretically slide into the 14-15 range. Neither of those two options seem very likely, and the betting odds are that he falls no lower than 9 or 10 due to his potential as a goal scorer. I think he’s pretty secure in that range and he should be in play as soon as the 6th pick is on the clock.

  

10. C Anton Lundell, HIFK (Liiga) [03/10/2001]

[6'1", 188 pds][Shoots Left][PROSPECT GRADE: A]
[44 GP, 10 G, 18 A, 28 Pts, 18 PIM, +11][NHL Comparable: Bo Horvat]
Potential Peak: Elite two-way center, in the mold of a Bergeron/O’Reilly
Projection: 2nd line two-way center, 55+ point player in his prime

Bust Factor: Low; can play in a depth role if the offense never develops

Offense: 8.5
Defense: 8.5
Physicality: 8.0
Skating: 8.0
Intangibles: 8.0
NHL-Readiness: 8.5
Potential: 8.5

Aggregate Score: 58.0

 

Report: There’s no other center in the first round of this draft with the two-way certainty of Lundell, and it’s honestly not that close either. I would go so far as to say he’s in the shortlist for best two-way player in the draft, period, across all positions. Lundell gets underrated a lot for not having the fancy offensive moves that some of the other top prospects possess, but his hockey sense and intelligence is right near the top of the draft. That makes him a very strong bet to be a top 6 forward on a championship team, and there’s still a decent possibility he surprises us given his skills. Across the board he makes good decisions at the right times, playing fast or slow depending on the needs of the situation, and his hands are very good and allow him to move the puck to the right spots. He has good accuracy on his shot, too, allowing him to just pick corners on goalies on his best days.

 

His skating is solid, but he will need to work on his footspeed, acceleration and overall agility as he’s more of a north-south skater than an east-west player. That may be his biggest limitation; he’s strong and plays in the tough areas, and possesses a surprising amount of creativity that you might not expect seeing him at first. I think a lot of people think two-way centers mean they are lacking in that but Lundell really does have a strong sense of spacing and vision and that allows him to find open passing lanes or create space for his linemates. I don’t know if he’ll ever be the type of scorer that makes All-Star games, but he can be a coach’s dream and has the size and smarts to be an impact player in the NHL very soon.

 

Draft Range: Very hard to say. On one hand, he does possess elite traits (hockey sense). On the other hand, with so many of his rivals in the top grouping playing at historically significant levels, he is in tough to break into that top 5. Depending on how teams view his NHL-readiness and potential, if they believe he can be a true 1st line center in the mold of a Toews and is ready to jump into the NHL in a year or even less, I can see a team having him ranked as high as 6 and right there with Perfetti, Rossi and Holtz. There’s a decent chance teams view his skating as closer to average, and feel that he is closer to a 14 or 15 prospect in this draft. Otherwise, I think 10th among skaters is fairly close to his true value in a star-studded top 10, and I would be surprised if he isn’t drafted somewhere in that 8 to 12 range.

[jjgallow]

Woot!   You were missed!

[jjgallow]

@Crzydrvr    Liking the defence this year I take it?

 

I would love to see the Flames load up on defence and would love to see Sanderson fall to us.    

 

How does this year work anyway?  Is ranking mostly set in stone now or can we still rise/drop?  (other than lotto)

[Crzydrvr]

2 hours ago, jjgallow said:

@Crzydrvr    Liking the defence this year I take it?

 

I would love to see the Flames load up on defence and would love to see Sanderson fall to us.    

 

How does this year work anyway?  Is ranking mostly set in stone now or can we still rise/drop?  (other than lotto)

 

I would say that my rankings are pretty set. I don't foresee much changing as far as on ice components and I'm too lazy to go back if anything changes off the ice, so I'll make addendums of anything changes from that side and it'll reflect more on the mock drafts than anything.

 

The defense this year is normal, it's not really top heavy or deep or anything. It's more spread out throughout the first round as a whole. I don't see a Seth Jones, Drew Doughty or Victor Hedman standout but you'll get a safe contributor.

 

Would love to see Sanderson drop too but I don't see it happening, there's not enough guys with top pairing potential which gives him a ton a value and the only way we'd have a realistic shot without being undercut by someone else is to be knocked out in the qualifying rounds.

[cross16]

Happy to see we share a similar love affair with Drysdale Cyrdrvr. I think his upside is huge and i'm a bit surprised he's not talked about as a top 4 lock.  

[Crzydrvr]

4 hours ago, cross16 said:

Happy to see we share a similar love affair with Drysdale Cyrdrvr. I think his upside is huge and i'm a bit surprised he's not talked about as a top 4 lock.  

 

I agree, but I also think the hard part with Drysdale is it's difficult to see him as a big time offensive option. I think that scares guys because the expectation for a sub 6' defenseman is that he has to be super skilled, and Drysdale is more of a two way guy than an Erik Karlsson type even though he only weighs 170 pounds.

 

Drysdale should be a top 4 guy for a large chunk of scouts, but compared to previous top D there's more scouts this year who are a little conflicted on him and his overall upside so the consensus is a little shakier than we're used to seeing. 

[jjgallow]

On 7/30/2020 at 3:56 PM, Crzydrvr said:

 

the only way we'd have a realistic shot without being undercut by someone else is to be knocked out in the qualifying rounds.

[jjgallow]

This thread is not getting near the love it deserves.  And I know why.   Flames aren't picking in the top 10.  That ...likely...will change next year.

 

 

With that in mind, I'd like to add some other "Under the Radar" players to get opinions on them:    These are over-agers, and players in obscure leagues etc without a lot of exposure, or general low rating.  This is a copy and paste from another thread and I'm thinking it may be better served here.

 

 

Yeger Sokolov:  The highest scoring player in this draft is 6'4 and been passed up previously (this might be unprecedented):

https://www.eliteprospects.com/player/375742/yegor-sokolov    Projected to go in the 3rd round.  I repeat, 6'4.  Not a Defenceman, but ....  @The_People1  here is your RHS RW.     Essentially the highest goal-scorer in this draft.  That's right folks, the highest scorer in this year's draft is 6'4 and has already been passed up in previous drafts.    No idea why he wasn't drafted, there is a common thread here of Russians being overlooked and part of me feels perhaps a hint of lingering racism.   He is a goal-per-game player in junior.     He kept getting passed up, people presumably thinking he didn't have a high ceiling, and he kept pushing that ceiling to the point that it has become absurd.

 

Alex Cotton:  A big RHS D who has recently shown they had more skill than expected.  Doing better now than a lot of first-round D picks from 2019 (his original draft year).

https://www.eliteprospects.com/player/351538/alex-cotton

 

Robert Calisti:  Unfortunately a LHS, but a D who his risen his game too much to ignore.

https://www.eliteprospects.com/player/525975/robert-calisti

 

 

Other notables on forward:
https://www.eliteprospects.com/player/297757/pavel-gogolev
https://www.eliteprospects.com/player/392566/dmitri-rashevsky\
https://www.eliteprospects.com/player/514678/alexander-gordin

https://www.eliteprospects.com/player/514678/alexander-gordin

 

 

 

"Under The Radars:  Proper age, High ceiling, low ranking:

 

Special consideration to:  Timofei Spitserov   (not an over-ager but highly under-rated)  https://www.eliteprospects.com/player/528233/timofei-spitserov.    An actual Russian playing in the "US military prep".  Lol.  

The interesteing thing about Spitserov is that he was on pace to be the highest scoring player in this league, ever.   Surpassing the likes of Zach Parise, Ryan Donato, Duncan Keith.     At the same age.    So, normally you'd see this guy in the top 20.   But he's ranked 160.  Presumably because the sample size is too small, and there's just no precedent for a Russian in US military acadamy prep.

 

Veeti Miettinen:

https://www.eliteprospects.com/player/396163/veeti-miettinen

Unbelievably skilled RHS RW @The_People1 ranked in the third round due to size issues.    Not Gaudreau small, but small.  Also a RHS.   

 

Jackson Kunz:

https://www.eliteprospects.com/player/550361/jackson-kunz

I actually don't know why he's ranked so low.  Definitely in an odd league but I still don't get it.

[pikey7883]

I hope it is OK Crzydrvr that I post this here. 

I have been working on a numbers approach to ranking players for a couple years now, almost like a moneyball type of ranking, and thought I would try it or this upcoming draft. I used the very basic hockey stats to compile this table (It is not my draft order I will post that separately), but it provides some insight into the draft eligible players within the first two rounds or so. I appreciate feedback either good or bad.

Some notes on what I did, was gave them a point value ranking as compared to the other draft eligible players. For example I believe there is no doubt that Lafreniere goes first overall. But in 72 players ranked he placed 8th in GF/G, therefore he got 64 points in that category rather than the top 72.

 I also gave them points in regards to their position (which could be up for debate), but RH D getting the most points available at 6, ranking down to LH Leftwing at 1. Hardest to find to easiest to find.

I also gave them points for their age (12 being the oldest in the draft to youngest). Height with an average of 5'10" at 5 points (then gaining a point for every inch taller and losing a point for every inch smaller). Weight with an average of 180 lbs at 5 points (then gaining a point for every 2 pounds heavier and losing a point for every 2 pounds lighter).

Obviously this is not an exact science and there are so many more variables that come into play, but it helps to see some of the diamonds in the rough along with some high production guys that could potentially fall in the draft.

 

Sorry its blurry, if someone can let me know how to post a spreadsheet better, let me know, thanks.

 

[pikey7883]

I also thought that I would post my draft order after that.

 

1. Alexis Lafreniere

2.Quinton Byfield

3. Marco Rossi

4. Tim Stutzle

5. Jamie Drysdale

6. Cole Perfetti

7. Alexander Holtz

8. Jake Sanderson

9. Lucas Raymond

10. Seth Jarvis

11. Jack Quinn

12. Anton Lundell

13. Dawson Mercer

14. Connor Zary

15. Rodion Amirov

16. Mavrik Bourque

17. Braden Schneider

18. Noel Gunler

19. Dylan Holloway

20. Kaiden Guhle

21. Tyson Foerster

22. Brendan Brisson

23. Hendrix Lapierre

24. Jacob Perreault

25. Thomas Borderleau

26. Jan Mysak

27. Zion Nybeck

28. William Wallinder

29. Justin Barron

30. Ozzy Weisblatt

31. Yaroslav Askarov (I believe he goes in the 1st round, I have no idea where though)

[jjgallow]

7 hours ago, pikey7883 said:

I hope it is OK Crzydrvr that I post this here. 

I have been working on a numbers approach to ranking players for a couple years now, almost like a moneyball type of ranking, and thought I would try it or this upcoming draft. I used the very basic hockey stats to compile this table (It is not my draft order I will post that separately), but it provides some insight into the draft eligible players within the first two rounds or so. I appreciate feedback either good or bad.

Some notes on what I did, was gave them a point value ranking as compared to the other draft eligible players. For example I believe there is no doubt that Lafreniere goes first overall. But in 72 players ranked he placed 8th in GF/G, therefore he got 64 points in that category rather than the top 72.

 I also gave them points in regards to their position (which could be up for debate), but RH D getting the most points available at 6, ranking down to LH Leftwing at 1. Hardest to find to easiest to find.

I also gave them points for their age (12 being the oldest in the draft to youngest). Height with an average of 5'10" at 5 points (then gaining a point for every inch taller and losing a point for every inch smaller). Weight with an average of 180 lbs at 5 points (then gaining a point for every 2 pounds heavier and losing a point for every 2 pounds lighter).

Obviously this is not an exact science and there are so many more variables that come into play, but it helps to see some of the diamonds in the rough along with some high production guys that could potentially fall in the draft.

 

Sorry its blurry, if someone can let me know how to post a spreadsheet better, let me know, thanks.

 

 

 I think this is fantastic, and it's a shame this thread isn't more active.  I guess that's a result of us getting so many of our picks traded away.  I digress.

 

So  a couple comments, firstly, I really like your approach.  Others will hate it.  Haters hate.

 

 

 

Obviously this can get far more complex in a hurry.  Maybe some simple suggestions which could improve the rankings without adding tooo much complexity:

 

Points/Goals:

I find the goals are far more telling that points, in junior.  Sucks but true.   Points just have too many irrelevant variables baked in (linemates etc).     

    So...you can do a very elaborate points analysis (a weighted system basically evaluating the validity of the points), or...

     Far more simply,

     Put more weight on goals.   50%-100% more weight for goals.  If you backcheck this against previous years I think you will find that goals are a better indicator simply because points are muddied without deeper analysis.

 

PIM:   
I would take a lot of weight off of this.  The game is changing.  It tells you about their style of play but not about their ranking or value.   Was it a good penalty take or a stupid one?     I would reduce weighting on this by 50% or more.  You would need incredibly advanced analysis to get any reliability out of this imho.

 

Height: 
I would put more weight on this.  Three of your top 4 are guys 5'10 and under.  In reality they face a tremendous struggle to translate that to the NHL.  Maybe one of them actually will
           First of all, I might suggest 6'0 is the 0-point mark, going up or down from there.
           Secondly, yes I think the weighting could be massively upped.

 

Weight:   
So hard to read this with an 18 year old kid.      The only time this is useful is the "Martin St. Louis" theory.   Short stocky kids.     What you want isn't the weight, imho.  You want the Height/weight ratio.   Adjust the stat to give short stocky kids a major boost.  Because they have been shown to translate to the NHL and turn their low center of gravity into  an advantage.   So in theory, a player like Marco Rossi should get docked for his height, but then have that somewhat neutralized by is height/weight ratio, as he is short and stocky.

Outside of that, I don't know weight does much for you.  The kids are just too young.  Yes, more muscle is a good thing.  But then it also may be padding their numbers because of slight physical advancement that the other kids will catch up to.   So it's extremely hard to say whether it's good or bad.

 

Position/Shot:   

I like what you did and how you did it.  I would significantly increase the weighting.  Enough of an increase to move Jamie Drysdale, for instance, into the 5-6th spot, where he's likey to be drafted.  For these reasons.  

 

 

ok that's it :)  You could always go  Lot deeper, looking at leagues (AJHL, for instance), Teams (good ones and bad ones), Linemates, Plus-minus, blah blah.
     But I actually think what you have has value, and could be tweaked to be quite representative.   That's just me.

 

 

[pikey7883]

13 hours ago, jjgallow said:

 

 I think this is fantastic, and it's a shame this thread isn't more active.  I guess that's a result of us getting so many of our picks traded away.  I digress.

 

So  a couple comments, firstly, I really like your approach.  Others will hate it.  Haters hate.

 

 

 

Obviously this can get far more complex in a hurry.  Maybe some simple suggestions which could improve the rankings without adding tooo much complexity:

 

Points/Goals:

I find the goals are far more telling that points, in junior.  Sucks but true.   Points just have too many irrelevant variables baked in (linemates etc).     

    So...you can do a very elaborate points analysis (a weighted system basically evaluating the validity of the points), or...

     Far more simply,

     Put more weight on goals.   50%-100% more weight for goals.  If you backcheck this against previous years I think you will find that goals are a better indicator simply because points are muddied without deeper analysis.

 

PIM:   
I would take a lot of weight off of this.  The game is changing.  It tells you about their style of play but not about their ranking or value.   Was it a good penalty take or a stupid one?     I would reduce weighting on this by 50% or more.  You would need incredibly advanced analysis to get any reliability out of this imho.

 

Height: 
I would put more weight on this.  Three of your top 4 are guys 5'10 and under.  In reality they face a tremendous struggle to translate that to the NHL.  Maybe one of them actually will
           First of all, I might suggest 6'0 is the 0-point mark, going up or down from there.
           Secondly, yes I think the weighting could be massively upped.

 

Weight:   
So hard to read this with an 18 year old kid.      The only time this is useful is the "Martin St. Louis" theory.   Short stocky kids.     What you want isn't the weight, imho.  You want the Height/weight ratio.   Adjust the stat to give short stocky kids a major boost.  Because they have been shown to translate to the NHL and turn their low center of gravity into  an advantage.   So in theory, a player like Marco Rossi should get docked for his height, but then have that somewhat neutralized by is height/weight ratio, as he is short and stocky.

Outside of that, I don't know weight does much for you.  The kids are just too young.  Yes, more muscle is a good thing.  But then it also may be padding their numbers because of slight physical advancement that the other kids will catch up to.   So it's extremely hard to say whether it's good or bad.

 

Position/Shot:   

I like what you did and how you did it.  I would significantly increase the weighting.  Enough of an increase to move Jamie Drysdale, for instance, into the 5-6th spot, where he's likey to be drafted.  For these reasons.  

 

 

ok that's it 🙂 You could always go  Lot deeper, looking at leagues (AJHL, for instance), Teams (good ones and bad ones), Linemates, Plus-minus, blah blah.
     But I actually think what you have has value, and could be tweaked to be quite representative.   That's just me.

 

 

Thankyou very much for your analysis, and I like all of your suggestions and may implement them to see what happens. I was trying really hard to not weigh one individual stat over another in order to create as baseline a number as I could. But I appreciate all your input and appreciate you taking the time to read it. Cheers

[Crzydrvr]

Note: It's still being completed and edited so keep checking back as I update throughout the night. Sorry it took so long!

 

 

 

11. RW Seth Jarvis, Portland Winterhawks (WHL) [01/02/2002]

[5'10", 172 pds][Shoots Right][PROSPECT GRADE: A]
[58 GP, 42 G, 56 A, 98 Pts, 24 PIM, +53][NHL Comparable: Jonathan Marchessault]
Potential Peak: Top line scoring winger
Projection: 2nd line scoring winger, 55+ point player in his prime

Bust Factor: Moderate; needs to develop strength and adapt to the pro style game

Offense: 9.0
Defense: 8.0
Physicality: 7.5
Skating: 8.5
Intangibles: 8.0
NHL-Readiness: 7.5
Potential: 9.0

Aggregate Score: 57.5

 

Report: Opportunistic all-around offensive threat. Jarvis has excellent hands, and is able to stickhandle around defenders as well as catch errant pucks and passes with consistency. He uses this to create havoc both offensively and defensively and usually finds himself in scoring areas where he can capitalize on mistakes. His hockey sense is overall very good, although he has shown some propensity for forcing the play that bears watching as he moves up levels. Jarvis could use a bit more strength overall; he will drive the net and excels in the tough areas of the ice when he is in control, but he’s not very effective without the puck as he doesn’t have the strength or leverage to beat guys straight up which brings down his all-around effectiveness in those areas quite a bit. It would also bring his skating from very good to elite, as he lacks a little in terms of straight line speed for a player of his size. Jarvis has a lot of little qualities to his game that stand out that make him interesting, too, such as his ability to move through the neutral zone with fluidity. Overall, Jarvis is already arguably the biggest offensive threat in the WHL and should absolutely tear the league to shreds over the next 2 years.

 

 

Draft Range: Jarvis is one of the few players left at this draft range who have both the potential to become a top line scoring threat, and the resumé to back it up right now. There are minor questions, however, about his defense, physicality, and skating that could drag him to being a mid-late 1st round draft choice (not necessarily concerns, but differing opinions among the scouting community as a whole). He also has the potential to sneak into the tail end of the top 10 if teams feel his skating and potential are elite. I would classify him as a relatively safe pick overall; not necessarily likely to be the best player in the draft in 10 years but a pretty good bet to be some sort of useful NHL asset just on the basis of how he flows within the game and finds ways to contribute. Expect him to be in play anywhere from 8 to 25, with a strong expectation of somewhere in the mid-late teens depending on team needs and how the first half of the round shakes out.

 

 

12. LW Rodion Amirov, Salavat Yulaev Ufa (KHL) [02/10/2001]

[6'0", 168 pds][Shoots Left][PROSPECT GRADE: A]
[21 GP, 0 G, 2 A, 2 Pts, 4 PIM, -6][NHL Comparable: Max Pacioretty]
Potential Peak: Top line scoring winger
Projection: 2nd line scoring winger, 55+ point player in his prime

Bust Factor: Moderate; needs to develop strength and continue developing his offensive game

Offense: 8.5
Defense: 8.0
Physicality: 8.0
Skating: 9.0
Intangibles: 8.0
NHL-Readiness: 7.5
Potential: 8.5

Aggregate Score: 57.5

 

Report: A speedy scoring winger with a two-way flair. Amirov is one of the older prospects available, but has spent most of the year playing against men in the KHL. His main offensive tools are his excellent hands and natural finishing abilities, and he combines that with a willingness to get in front of the goal to generate scoring chances. He’s a good playmaker, but not a very creative player; he’s more likely to make the reliable support pass than wow you, but the flip side to that is that he plays a very pro-style offensive game as a result. Tenacious on the forecheck and while he’s clearly underweight for his age group he’s got above average defensive chops with his smarts and workrate.

 

 

Draft Range: A potential sleeper who doesn’t get a ton of attention from the general public due to his location, but could easily surpass his ranked position on draft day. I am a little higher than most on him but there’s a chance some guys will knock his hockey sense and IQ and possibly his skating, which would push him back into the 20s. He is a good bet in the middle of the 1st round though, due to his combination of upside and floor. Bear in mind that team lists vary wildly from here on out, and decisions will change based on the different lists and who s drafted where.

 

 

13. D Kaiden Guhle, Prince Albert Raiders (WHL) [18/01/2002]

[6'3", 187 pds][Shoots Left][PROSPECT GRADE: A]
[64 GP, 11 G, 29 A, 40 Pts, 56 PIM, +23][NHL Comparable: Jaccob Slavin]
Potential Peak: Top pairing two-way defenseman
Projection: 2nd pairing shutdown defenseman, 25+ point player in his prime

Bust Factor: Moderate; talent is there but the upside hasn’t quite been tapped into yet

Offense: 8.0
Defense: 8.5
Physicality: 8.0
Skating: 9.0
Intangibles: 8.0
NHL-Readiness: 7.5
Potential: 8.5

Aggregate Score: 57.5

 

Report: The former 1st overall WHL draft pick would be consistently ranked higher if he was playing on a lesser team and organization. Guhle, younger brother of Brendan, is an excellent skater and possesses all the mobility and puck skills required out of any modern defenseman. He’s not a very creative player (relative to some of his 1st round peers) but he does have good awareness overall and is a threat offensively, with his ability to pinch in deep and read the play. Defensively, he shines with his gaps and with his size and skating can control incredibly large areas of ice with his stick and physicality; however, he will need to pick his spots better on the big hits. Don’t expect an offensive dynamo, but he is the type of player teams need to win.

 

 

Draft Range: Bit of a wide spread, but if things break right Guhle could be an easy top 15 selection (and in my mind he is). Some teams might knock some points off on his skating or offensive chops which would put him into the mid 20s at the draft podium. The thing to remember with Kaiden is that he plays for a pro-style organization in Prince Albert and he doesn’t get the same opportunities and ice time that he would playing elsewhere, and I think that just looking at the stats doesn’t tell 100% of the value of his impact on and off the ice. That being said, expecting any large offensive totals at the NHL level would likely be a foolhardy venture.

 

 

14. (16) W Jack Quinn, Ottawa 67s (OHL) [19/09/2001]

[5'11", 176 pds][Shoots Right][PROSPECT GRADE: A]
[62 GP, 52 G, 37 A, 89 Pts, 32 PIM, +48][NHL Comparable: Kyle Palmieri/Jeff Carter]
Potential Peak: Elite scoring forward, All-Star sniper
Projection: 2nd line scoring forward, 55+ point player in his prime

Bust Factor: Moderate; late-bloomer who is highly rated partly based on projection rather than sheer skill

Offense: 8.5
Defense: 8.0
Physicality: 8.0
Skating: 8.5
Intangibles: 8.0
NHL-Readiness: 7.5
Potential: 8.5

Aggregate Score: 57.0

 

Report: A middling AA prospect turned potential NHL star, Jack Quinn is a pure sniper. His ability to finish in a variety of different ways makes him arguably the most dangerous goal scorer in the entire CHL. Improvements to his skating have enabled his offensive jump, as he has a combination of speed and mobility that allows him to get around defenders. Quinn has good hockey sense that allows him to be a pest at both ends of the ice. He’s a pretty good playmaker, but he plays a straightforward game that doesn’t lend itself to fancy assists or highlight-reel plays via passes or stickhandling. Overall, Quinn is a very well-rounded player and his skillset should translate well into the NHL in some capacity.

 

 

Draft Range: Some scouts are very high on him and it’s very telling that it’s the OHL-centric scouts and staff who are high on Quinn as a player. His sheer progress from a 17-year old rookie to now has a lot of teams wondering if his ceiling couldn’t be even higher. There’s a legitimate argument to be made that Quinn could be drafted earlier than Rossi, based on whether teams like Quinn’s potential more. A realistic estimate is that Quinn is going to go around the 8-12 range, with a possibility that some teams go for the boom-or-bust player instead that bumps Quinn a little lower.

 

 

15. C Dylan Holloway, Wisconsin Badgers (NCAA) [23/09/2001]

[6'1", 203 pds][Shoots Left][PROSPECT GRADE: A]
[35 GP, 8 G, 9 A, 17 Pts, 49 PIM, -3][NHL Comparable: Jonathan Toews]
Potential Peak: Top line scoring forward
Projection: 2nd line scoring forward, 45+ point player in his prime

Bust Factor: Moderate; a likely NHLer, but needs development time

Offense: 8.0
Defense: 8.0
Physicality: 8.5
Skating: 8.5
Intangibles: 8.5
NHL-Readiness: 7.5
Potential: 8.5

Aggregate Score: 57.5

 

Report: Holloway is the definition of “safe” pick, if such a thing exists. There is no major weakness to his game, and his drive and well-rounded skillset make him the type of player that wins games in the playoffs. His skating is very good, with a good mix of power and mobility. Offensively, he can be creative (as shown by his time in the AJHL, where he was the best player in the league at 17) but he’s shown the intelligence to adapt to a different role and style of play in the NCAA, where he plays a simpler, but more powerful game. His excellent puck handling and good vision allow him to find open players and open ice, and hint at more upside at the NHL level than perhaps initially would seem based on his raw numbers. A physical player with the frame to be a punishing force as he fills out, Holloway could be a great pickup for a contending team in need of depth and young potential up the middle.

 

 

Draft Range: The Calgary kid is very likely to go in the teens, if chatter means anything. A character player, Holloway is not likely to jump too high on just his well-roundedness and his off-ice work ethic, but he’s too good to fall too far just because of his ability to be a difference maker in the highest stake games. This is an intriguing one because any number of teams could use a player of his caliber but there’s no instant “that’s the one” team for him among the franchises in the middle of the draft.

 

 

16. C Hendrix Lapierre, Chicoutimi Sagueneens (QMJHL) [09/02/2002]

[6'0", 181 pds][Shoots Left][PROSPECT GRADE: A]
[19 GP, 2 G, 15 A, 17 Pts, 10 PIM, +1][NHL Comparable: Ryan Nugent-Hopkins]
Potential Peak: Top line, two-way center
Projection: 2nd line playmaking center, 50+ point player in his prime

Bust Factor: High; multiple major injuries in the last 2 seasons make him a huge risk

Offense: 8.5
Defense: 8.0
Physicality: 7.5
Skating: 9.0
Intangibles: 8.0
NHL-Readiness: 7.5
Potential: 8.5

Aggregate Score: 57.0

 

Report: Hendrix Lapierre has all the pure skill required to be a championship-caliber contributor to an NHL squad. The only question is whether he can physically handle the pro game. An excellent skater and puckhandler, Lapierre is a dynamic player through the neutral zone and is an excellent playmaker as well, making him a dangerous threat offensively. He is a strong defensive player relative to his league due to his hockey sense and skating, which allows him to be an aggressive player and focus on covering lanes and attacking the puck carrier. Overall, his lack of strength probably holds him back but in theory some more bulk would allow him to protect the puck better as well as be tougher to play against along the defensive boards.

 

 

Draft Range: Most scouts will like the player but more than a few teams will have Lapierre as a DND due to his aforementioned injury history. The lack of a scouting combine and individual workouts honestly could work either as a favor or a detriment depending on how Lapierre looks at it; if he’s healthy with no lingering conditions or muscle imbalances but cannot actually meet with performance staff to prove it, that might end up lowering his draft stock relative to his overall talent level, but if he’s struggling then teams will have no choice but to fall back on just his potential which can be good for draft position. I think there will be a team that takes him in that 20-25 range, but Lapierre could also just drop out of the 1st round entirely.

 

17. D Topi Niemela, Karpat (Liiga) [25/03/2002]

[6'0", 163 pds][Shoots Right][PROSPECT GRADE: A]
[43 GP, 1 G, 6 A, 7 Pts, 8 PIM, +4][NHL Comparable: T. J. Brodie]
Potential Peak: Top pairing two-way defenseman
Projection: 2nd pairing two-way defenseman, 30+ point player in his prime

Bust Factor: Moderate; slight of size and lacks a standout offensive skill

Offense: 8.5
Defense: 8.0
Physicality: 7.5
Skating: 9.0
Intangibles: 8.0
NHL-Readiness: 7.5
Potential: 8.5

Aggregate Score: 57.0

  

Report: A smooth-skating, heady and intelligent defenseman from Finland, in the mold of a Heiskanen. Niemela has excellent skating abilities and uses his feet, excellent reads, and passing skills to be an elite neutral zone defenseman. Highly intelligent, Niemela is able to use his shiftiness to open up driving and passing lanes. He’s also very good defensively as a result of his smarts and skating, being relied on in all situations when playing amongst his own age group. He needs strength in order to continue his growth in all facets of the game, and doesn’t have the booming shot that some other prospects at his position might have this year. Slight but not afraid of contact, Niemela has been a big contributor in all situations at the junior levels and could be a huge sleeper pick out of the Finnish league. A somewhat raw diamond, Niemela will definitely need 2 years of seasoning if not more.

 

 

Draft Range: Niemela is an interesting one, because by all accounts he should be a 2nd round selection based on consensus rankings. That being said, he stole a job in the top league on a team that is considered a top contender as a 17 year old, and like I said with Heiskanen 3 years ago that basically never happens. His skillset screams modern NHL defenseman, and though he played a relatively responsible game this year at the top level, in previous seasons he demonstrated a flair for the dramatic which tells me he has the intelligence to adapt and evolve his game as the situation requires. The best odds are still a likely 2nd round selection, but there are teams interested in Niemela (especially after watching this year’s playoffs) and there’s a chance he could sneak into the late 1st round.

 

 

18. C Mavrik Bourque, Shawinigan Cataractes (QMJHL) [08/01/2002]

[5'11", 185 pds][Shoots Right][PROSPECT GRADE: A]
[49 GP, 29 G, 42 A, 71 Pts, 30 PIM, -4][NHL Comparable: Travis Konecny]
Potential Peak: Top line playmaking center
Projection: 2nd line playmaking center, 50+ point player in his prime

Bust Factor: Moderate; not ideally suited for a bottom line role but plays with jam

Offense: 8.5
Defense: 8.0
Physicality: 8.0
Skating: 8.5
Intangibles: 8.0
NHL-Readiness: 7.5
Potential: 8.5

Aggregate Score: 57.0

  

Report: The QMJHL pivot has been the number 1 center in Shawinigan ever since he joined the team 2 seasons ago. An excellent playmaker with some scoring punch, Bourque’s hands, hockey sense and creativity make him one of the biggest threats in the QMJHL. He’s a little inconsistent, and I think that prevents him from breaking through into that true top grouping as he can leave you feeling like he was capable of more. Bourque is much improved defensively this year and I would be comfortable calling him above average, with his skating, hockey sense and competitiveness allowing him to cover a lot of room in the neutral and defensive zones. I really like Bourque because of his motor and hockey sense, both of which suggest a decent chance that he could outperform his expected draft position.

 

 

Draft Range: Unsure, but I would expect to see him starting to get some consideration somewhere around the 20 spot. While he shows a lot of good things on a relatively consistent basis, the times where he doesn’t put it all together makes teams give a bit of pause. I think certain teams will look at his smaller size and take some marks off on his overall physicality because of it. That being said, I would be shocked if Bourque fell below the early 2nd round based on his pedigree and skills.

 

 

19. W Noel Gunler, Lulea HF (SHL) [07/10/2001]

[6'2", 174 pds][Shoots Right][PROSPECT GRADE: A]
[45 GP, 4 G, 9 A, 13 Pts, 16 PIM, +12][NHL Comparable: Kyle Connor]
Potential Peak: Top line scoring forward
Projection: 2nd line scoring forward, 50+ point player in his prime

Bust Factor: Moderate; a likely NHLer, but needs development time

Offense: 9.0
Defense: 7.5
Physicality: 7.5
Skating: 9.0
Intangibles: 8.0
NHL-Readiness: 7.5
Potential: 8.5

Aggregate Score: 57.0

 

 

Report: Gunler, more than anyone else, likely missed out on the in-person interviews at the combine. As a player, there are very few forwards in this draft who possess more raw offensive ability, and all of them are sitting comfortably in the top of the draft. He’s a one shot sniper, has some good playmaking skills and good hands that allow him to set up shop in the offensive zone and be a threat. Outside of the offensive zone, Gunler is still a work in progress. However, his reads, lanes, positioning and overall aggressiveness are much improved and have helped make him more of a threat on the counterattack. Physically slight, Gunler needs to build up more strength as he isn’t very effective along the boards for a player of his size. The development in his all around game suggest he has more room for improvement which should excite the team that manage to pick him up.

 

 

Draft Range: I view him a little more favorably than some scouts in terms of his offensive prowess and skating abilities, and there’s also the question of why he is totally ignored by national teams. There is more to the concern than simply team building balance but without the ability to really delve into his personality it’s hard for me to make a judgment call, because by all accounts Gunler has been one of the most skilled players in his age group for at least 2 to 3 seasons now. There is a reasonable chance Gunler goes in the middle of the 1st round because he is one of the few players left with any real gamebreaking potential. There’s also a chance that teams don’t like the info they dig up with their research that could drop him into the 2nd or even off some lists entirely, though I would guess that there will be at least one team that will take him fairly high no matter what, at least late first or early second.

 

20. C Thomas Bordeleau, USA-U18s (USNTDP) [03/01/2002]

[5'9", 179 pds][Shoots Left][PROSPECT GRADE: A]
[47 GP, 16 G, 30 A, 46 Pts, 16 PIM][NHL Comparable: Brayden Point]
Potential Peak: Top line playmaking center

Projection: 2nd line playmaking center, 50+ point player in his prime

Bust Factor: Moderate; needs to continue to work on his consistency and two-way play

Offense: 8.5
Defense: 8.0
Physicality: 8.0
Skating: 8.5
Intangibles: 8.5
NHL-Readiness: 7.0
Potential: 8.5

Aggregate Score: 57.0

 

 

Report: The U.S./Canadian center is sliding under the radar due to a number of different factors, but he’s likely the best 17 year old center in the country. An elite playmaker, Bordeleau has the puck control and vision to be a great in-zone offense generator as well as the mobility to escape his defenders. Not an especially big player, Bordeleau has enough power and strength (as well as willpower) to protect the puck and create havoc. His defense comes and goes, although it has been on a steep trajectory upwards since roughly the start of the season and has allowed him to see regular PK time due to his mobility and smarts. He will need some time before he is ready for the pro circuits in all likelihood, but Bordeleau has the tools and pedigree to be a future top 6 forward.

 

 

Draft Range: The NTDP was not a great team from a win-loss perspective this year, and that tends to depress some of the expectations for this particular crop of players. That being said, Bordeleau was without question the most impactful forward on the team this year (I believe he also has the most potential, but your mileage may vary on that). Hailing from a prominent hockey family, Bordeleau is likely falling into the 2nd round, although there’s a chance a team really likes his game (and I wouldn’t be surprised to see him jump up into the mid to late 1st as a result).

 

 

21. D Braden Schneider, Brandon Wheat Kings (WHL) [20/09/2001]

[6'2", 209 pds][Shoots Right][PROSPECT GRADE: A]
[60 GP, 7 G, 35 A, 42 Pts, 42 PIM, +9][NHL Comparable: Brent Seabrook]
Potential Peak: Top pairing two-way defenseman
Projection: 2nd pairing two-way defenseman, 30+ point player in his prime

Bust Factor: Moderate; should turn into an NHLer, but needs to improve footspeed

Offense: 8.0
Defense: 8.5
Physicality: 8.5
Skating: 8.0
Intangibles: 8.0
NHL-Readiness: 7.5
Potential: 8.5

Aggregate Score: 57.0

 

Report: Braden Schneider is at this point arguably too big for the WHL. Due to his size and strength, Schneider can simply outmuscle guys defensively. That being said, Schneider is not a typical “coke machine” defender with just size. His ability to carry the puck is above average for his draft class and his ability to pass and create all point to a good deal of hockey sense and upside. Defensively, Schneider is very good at pressuring the puck and creating loose puck opportunities. Unlike Guhle, who can occasionally over commit to the hit, Schneider manages his opportunities to use his size better. And finally, while Schneider is a good skater with the mobility to play in the modern NHL, some more footspeed would help open up lanes and allow him to expand his defensive range.

 

 

Draft Range: Schneider is a very “safe” pick for the middle of the 1st round. While he may not possess the upside of some of the players ranked after him, there is enough to like that Schneider shouldn’t have to worry about falling past 25. He is an interesting take on a traditional “big man” player type, in that he shows how those types of players have adapted to be able to maintain their effectiveness in the modern game. As one of the few highly regarded right-shot defenders in this draft, expect him to maintain a position between 15 and 25; I think most teams have a pretty clear and identical outlook on Schneider.

 

 

22. C Connor Zary, Kamloops Blazers (WHL) [25/09/2001]

[6'0", 181 pds][Shoots Left][PROSPECT GRADE: A-]
[56 GP, 23 G, 45 A, 68 Pts, 64 PIM, -3][NHL Comparable: Mikael Backlund]
Potential Peak: Top line two-way center
Projection: 2nd line two-way forward, 40-50 point player in his prime

Bust Factor: Low; could translate his skills to a depth role if needed, but no dynamic abilities

Offense: 8.5
Defense: 8.0
Physicality: 8.0
Skating: 8.0
Intangibles: 8.5
NHL-Readiness: 7.5
Potential: 8.5

Aggregate Score: 57.0

 

Report: Connor Zary is the kind of player you bring in and keep around because of his intangibles and his influence on winning. Let’s be very clear here: Zary does have skill and he is a very effective player in the offensive zone, with very good scoring instincts, a very good shot, and hockey sense that allows him to create and make plays. But he is a meat and potatoes type of player first and foremost, and his ability to grind, work and just keep pushing are what will get him to the NHL. A strong defensive player, Zary will need to continue working on his skating but with improved strength he should see a corresponding boost in pure skating power and speed. With his hockey sense and work ethic, Zary is very close to being a surefire NHL player

 

 

Draft Range: Not an especially well-regarded prospect entering the WHL, Zary would be a great fit for a team in need of a 2nd line, shutdown type of center. His ceiling isn’t very high, but without any major holes to his game there are a lot of teams that would be happy to bring him on board. His late-birthday and relative polish make him a good bet to jump into the NHL sooner rather than later, unlike some of the other project picks available around this range. There’s a legitimate argument to be made that Zary could be a sneak-in-before-the-door-closes top 10 selection, but I would expect him to be selected no later than mid to late 20s, with the most likely result being a selection in the teens.

 

 

23. D Justin Barron, Halifax Mooseheads (QMJHL) [15/11/2001]

[6'2", 198 pds][Shoots Right][PROSPECT GRADE: A]
[34 GP, 4 G, 15 A, 19 Pts, 6 PIM, -19][NHL Comparable: Noah Hanifin]
Potential Peak: Top pairing two-way defenseman
Projection: 2nd pairing two-way defenseman, 30+ point player in his prime

Bust Factor: High; has had an injury and regression filled season

Offense: 8.0
Defense: 8.0
Physicality: 8.0
Skating: 9.0
Intangibles: 8.0
NHL-Readiness: 7.5
Potential: 8.5

Aggregate Score: 57.0

 

Report: Barron is a prototypical modern era top pairing defenseman in terms of his style of play. An excellent skater who is at his best when he is moving with the puck and joining the rush, Barron has the dynamic and fluid transition skills to be a major contributor to an NHL team’s offense and neutral zone game. An above-average defender with an active stick, Barron’s major improvements will need to be maintaining his focus and keeping in front of his man. Physically, he is not afraid to battle and has the size and strength to be a presence. Barron is generally a decently smart player, but his occasional headscratchers make him a pretty risky selection and he is not especially creative as a player.

 

 

Draft Range: Similar to Lapierre, there are at least 2 teams who have him off their board entirely; while he has the upside and talent to start being considered in that 20 range, Barron’s regression from the prior season and his own flaws could even conceivably drop him out of the 1st into the middle rounds of the draft. Justin was a potential frontrunner for best defenseman in the draft heading into the year but injuries and a terrible team have made him a true wild card in the draft. With teams prioritizing mobility and skating for modern defenders, Barron is still well in play, but it is no longer a sure bet that he goes anywhere in the top 3 rounds tonight and tomorrow.

   

24. F Tyson Foerster, Barrie Colts (OHL) [18/01/2002]

[6'1", 194 pds][Shoots Right][PROSPECT GRADE: A]
[62 GP, 36 G, 44 A, 80 Pts, 53 PIM, -17][NHL Comparable: Steven Stamkos]
Potential Peak: Top line scoring center
Projection: 2nd line scoring winger, 50+ point player in his prime

Bust Factor: High; best pure shooter in the draft, but will need a lot of polish and development

Offense: 9.0
Defense: 8.0
Physicality: 8.0
Skating: 8.0
Intangibles: 8.0
NHL-Readiness: 7.5
Potential: 8.5

Aggregate Score: 57.0

 

Report: The one standout skill Foerster has is his ridiculous shooting skills and feel for shooting and scoring goals. The way he adjusts his angles, the way he gets his shot off (any shot, wrist, snapper, onetimer….) are all pro quality at 17. He’s also an underrated playmaker and is going to be the biggest powerplay threat in the OHL next season. Defensively, Foerster is generally good and puts in the work and hustle to not be limited to just a powerplay guy. He’s also pretty good at using his size as leverage. The skating is just average, with above average mobility, but he’s strong on his skates and I think there’s room to improve and refine his stride and speed with more training. I suspect his hockey sense is better than initially would appear, because the nuances he shows in his scoring touch and his ability to find scoring seams point to a guy who gets it offensively in terms of utilizing and creating time and space.

 

 

Draft Range: I think that I am generally pretty favorable on Foerster, but there are scouts that ding him for his skating and well-roundedness on offense more than me which could drop him into the early second. Unlike some other wildcards in this draft, Foerster is a pretty safe bet to be a top 45 selection. Quite frankly, there just aren’t enough true blue chip scoring threats in this draft to overlook someone with his abilities. A huge boom or bust type pick, he starts getting on the radar roughly around the 20 pick but I would say he is most likely a 30-35 range player unless some teams really like him.

 

 

25. C/RW Dawson Mercer, Chicoutimi Sagueneens (QMJHL) [27/10/2001]

[6'0", 179 pds][Shoots Right][PROSPECT GRADE: A]
[42 GP, 24 G, 36 A, 60 Pts, 25 PIM, +5][NHL Comparable: Chris Kreider/Dustin Brown]
Potential Peak: A faster Milan Lucic
Projection: Borderline 2nd/3rd line power forward, 40+ point player in his prime

Bust Factor: Moderate; should translate into depth role if needed in theory

Offense: 8.5
Defense: 8.0
Physicality: 8.0
Skating: 8.5
Intangibles: 8.0
NHL-Readiness: 7.5
Potential: 8.5

Aggregate Score: 57.0

 

 

Report: A well-rounded player, Dawson Mercer is not likely to be a gamebreaking talent but his base level of ability makes him an intriguing pick in a draft that lacks a little in certainty. An above average skater overall (though he can fix his mechanics and polish it even further), Mercer plays pretty big for his weight class and is a capable defensive player. His ability to read and pressure the opposing teams is a huge plus, and his experience at both center and wing make him a flexible option anywhere in the lineup. Compared to a Jack Quinn, I would say Mercer is better defensively and is more likely to pressure shots and pick up the loose pucks partly due to that experience up the middle. I think his decision making offensively is generally good enough, but it is a point of concern that might limit his effectiveness in the pros.

 

 

Draft Range: Mercer has had a lot of attention the last few years due to his productivity and the betting man would probably put him somewhere in that second grouping, somewhere in the teens. The general consensus is that his combination of floor and upside make him a pretty solid bet to be an NHLer at worst. Mercer is not going to be a s*xy pick, but with NHL teams in this particular range needing a sure hit, he’s very likely to hold to that range. That being said, there’s always a chance he drops like any other prospect.

 

 

26. C Brendan Brisson, Chicago Steel (USHL) [22/10/2001]

[6'0", 185 pds][Shoots Left][PROSPECT GRADE: A-]
[45 GP, 24 G, 35 A, 59 Pts, 50 PIM, +17][NHL Comparable: Rick Nash]
Potential Peak: Top line scoring winger
Projection: 2nd line scoring winger, 45+ point player in his prime

Bust Factor: High; proven to score at HS level, but adjustment to the USHL was not pretty

Offense: 8.5
Defense: 8.0
Physicality: 7.5
Skating: 8.5
Intangibles: 8.0
NHL-Readiness: 7.5
Potential: 8.5

Aggregate Score: 56.5

 

Report: The son of one of the most prominent NHLPA player agents ever, Brendan Brisson is one of the biggest risers on the draft board. The quick skating forward has a ton of hockey sense and creativity, and is able to use his smarts and his hands effectively in generating opportunities offensively. He’s also a very solid defensive player positionally, with active hands and solid back pressure. He is not a very physical player, not necessarily shying away but not engaging either. However, his smarts and good positioning allow him to get away with that particular weakpoint. More importantly, Brendan has a tendency to relax and play to the level of his competition, likely a side effect from playing on the league’s best team and not being challenged enough.

 

 

Draft Range: From what I can gather, odds are getting pretty good that Brendan will hear his name called on the first day. His performance at the WJACs really shone a light on what he can do when he is being pushed and playing higher stakes games. There’s a chance that a team might even chance him in the teens (as you might have guessed, this is starting to become a pattern for basically every prospect in that 20-30 range). I would be surprised to see him slip out of the 1st round but at worst he will be a 2nd round selection.

 

 

27. D William Wallinder, MODO Hockey (Swe-2) [28/07/2002]

[6'4", 192 pds][Shoots Left][PROSPECT GRADE: A-]
[18 GP, 0 G, 2 A, 2 Pts, 2 PIM, +4][NHL Comparable: Rasmus Ristolainen]
Potential Peak: Top pairing two-way defenseman

Projection: 2nd pairing offensive defenseman, 35+ point player in his prime

Bust Factor: Moderate; needs much more polish on the defensive end to get more than a cup of coffee

Offense: 8.5
Defense: 7.5
Physicality: 8.0
Skating: 8.5
Intangibles: 8.0
NHL-Readiness: 7.5
Potential: 8.5

Aggregate Score: 56.5

 

Report: Wallinder is the type of player you create when you design a modern defenseman in a video game. At 6’4” William has the ranginess to be a capable 1 on 1 defender, and combined with his above average skating and mobility he has all the tools needed to eventually become an elite defenseman in the NHL. Offensively, Wallinder excels at jumping into the rush or using his passing abilities to open up lanes on the attack. He also has a heavy shot and is willing to play modern, positionless hockey when making plays in the offensive zone. Not necessarily a physical beast, Wallinder will need to grow into his frame but is very much capable of playing physical. Defensively, he is marked with inconsistency and sometimes a lack of interest and focus. When he is locked in, he shows flashes of that great shutdown play, but at this point he is mostly average with plenty of room for growth.

 

 

Draft Range: A player who honestly is a good bet to be drafted higher than I would rank him, Wallinder has benefited greatly from the changes to the game and has the raw potential to be a star player in the mold of a (Conn Smythe winner) Victor Hedman. I think most NHL teams would look at an unfinished product like that and fully believe they can work with him on the details of the game. On the flip side, if he never really improves defensively he is likely to be a frustrating player in general due to his flaws and a general feeling that his potential is much higher than his performance. I expect him to be drafted in the middle (15 to 20) of the 1st round due to his ceiling, but I would be surprised to see him fall out of the round entirely and he becomes a major name to watch on the draft board starting somewhere in that 16 to 18 range if he hasn’t been selected already.

   

 

28. LW John-Jason Peterka, EHC Munchen (DEL) [14/01/2002]

[5'11", 192 pds][Shoots Left][PROSPECT GRADE: A-]
[42 GP, 7 G, 4 A, 11 Pts, 14 PIM, -6][NHL Comparable: T.J. Brodie]
Potential Peak: Top pairing two-way defenseman
Projection: 2nd pairing two-way defenseman, 25+ point player in his prime

Bust Factor: Moderate; needs to continue developing his all-round game

Offense: 8.5
Defense: 7.5
Physicality: 8.0
Skating: 8.5
Intangibles: 8.0
NHL-Readiness: 7.5
Potential: 8.5

Aggregate Score: 56.5

 

Report: A speedster who plays with energy and pace, JJ Peterka is the 2nd of 3 well-regarded German prospects in this year’s draft. With quick hands and good playmaking and passing abilities, Peterka can create chances off the rush and drive the net. He will need to work on his edges and overall mobility, though his speed is very good. Decision-making is general decent, although his penchant for turnovers and rushed decision making when he’s not feeling hot are a concern for the next level. Peterka has some edge to his game, and plays with some intensity which is very nice to see despite his smaller size. Defensively, he has improved, although he could continue to work on his positioning and avoid cheating for offense.

 

 

Draft Range: Peterka should be in line for a late 1st round selection, although at this range of the draft everything might as well be thrown out of the window. There’s some high-end skill there that leads me to believe he won’t slip too far if he does, in addition to his relentless motor. Some people might have him ranked higher if they feel his skating and skillset are underrated compared to his numbers here, but I don’t foresee him rising earlier than the middle of the 1st round.

[jjgallow]

Just in time!

[jjgallow]

I kind of feel like nobody likes this thread because it requires reading and thinking.

 

Maybe I need to say something totally out of line on here lol.   Let's see if people migrate to it tomorrow as @Crzydrvr's evaluations are put to the test.

[CheersMan]

21 minutes ago, jjgallow said:

I kind of feel like nobody likes this thread because it requires reading and thinking.

 

Maybe I need to say something totally out of line on here lol.   Let's see if people migrate to it tomorrow as @Crzydrvr's evaluations are put to the test.

I for one really appreciate this thread, particularly the work Crzydrvr puts into it. I found myself referring to it all evening, wondering who's left for us. Hope this thread and its quality contents live on!

[Heartbreaker]

This is one of my favourite threads of the year. I really appreciate the work that @Crzydrvr puts into it. It's an excellent reference. 

Love. 

[rocketdoctor]

Being the UK I have not the local knowledge to discuss the pros and cons of individual draft picks.  So do not comment.   But i find the thread informative and appreciate what Crzydrvr does each year.

[Carty]

Thanks for putting this thread together Crzydrvr...   Nicely done,,,   It's a great package of info and the work you put into it is appreciated....   +1's...   🍺🍺

[cross16]

Always enjoy reading this stuff and would echo the same that your work is top notch Cryzdrvr. I know you put a ton into these evaluations. 

 

Normally I love chatting about them with you but unfortunately my schedule doesn't really allow me to prep for the draft like I use to so I don't get to watch these kids as much so I relied on this even more this year. 

[jjgallow]

So who Hasn't been drafted yet out of the first round projections here?  Nybek....anyone else?

 

 

I must say there were not nearly as many surprises as we usually see

[jjgallow]

 

Keep up the great work @Crzydrvr, something tells me our interest in the draft will pick up again as of next year, and specifically I'm talking about that look you do of the top 10.

 

 

[travel_dude]

5 hours ago, jjgallow said:

 

Keep up the great work @Crzydrvr, something tells me our interest in the draft will pick up again as of next year, and specifically I'm talking about that look you do of the top 10.

 

 

 

Why? Are we trading for an unprotected 1st from EDM or NJ?

[jjgallow]

23 hours ago, travel_dude said:

 

Why? Are we trading for an unprotected 1st from EDM or NJ?

 

 

I admittedly have no idea if we'll pick top 10 next season.   but I'm pretty confident we'll flirt with it.

 

that doesn't have to be a bad thing

[travel_dude]

13 hours ago, jjgallow said:

 

 

I admittedly have no idea if we'll pick top 10 next season.   but I'm pretty confident we'll flirt with it.

 

that doesn't have to be a bad thing

 

The only way we could have been top 10 last draft was a lotto win after a play-in loss.

This year (barring a lotto win) we would absolutely have to fall off a cliff to be a top 10 pick.

As you can imagine, there is a push from GM's to better reward the terrible.

They did not like the movement of NY to #1.

And that was one of the least obnoxious results.

EDM, TOR, PITTS all could have been #1.

Every one of them was a playoff team.

I suspect that you will see something like previous rules of only advancing 5 spots or something like that.

 

Back to the Flames.

At worst, if everything fails, is a bubble team, not bottom 10.

At best, a return to tops in the Pacific.

While we didn't gain any real offense up front, we are adding Valimaki on the backend.

Between his offensive ability and more minutes from Ras, we should be the same or better there.