2024 NHL draft - A New Hope

[conundrumed]

O'Reilly (#23) is going to have to dial it back if we're getting both him and Dickinson...

 

[jjgallow]

3 hours ago, conundrumed said:

 

We'll get a solid prospect. Then complain about who we should have taken instead. lol

 

[cberg]

5 hours ago, conundrumed said:

It won't be my list. lol

Just a vast guess at who might take whom. There's normally someone no one saw coming in the top 10.

So this is entirely guesswork. If I were to explain, this post would never end...

SJ-Celebrini

CHI-Levshunov

ANA-Buium

CBJ-Lindstrom/Catton

MTL-Demidov

ARI-Catton/Helenius

OTT-Parekh/Dickinson

SEA-Silayev/Dickinson

CGY-

ARI could well go with Eiserman. Lindstrom's IR history could be a factor. The fitness tests and meetings will all play into results, undoubtedly...if Parekh is the fall guy, we should let him fall. It'll depend on whether teams think Quinn Hughes or Tyson Barrie.

So at D, I'd take Jiricek if all but Parekh are gone. But Helenius/Catton/Lindstrom change the conversation.

We'll get a solid prospect. Then complain about who we should have taken instead. lol

OK, Thanks.  So Celebrini, Levshunov, Buium & Demidov are gone before options start happening.  I would agree they are at the top and any of them falling would be unlikely and a steal for a lower team, if available.  Of course, last year Michkov was arguably #2 rated and fell to #7.  Things happen.  Perhaps the "Russian factor", perhaps a team falls in love with someone else... That leaves Lindstrom, Catton, Helenius, Parekh, Silayev and Dickenson.  I'd add Iginla, Yakemchuk, Eiserman and perhaps Jiricek and Greentree, making eleven in total, also meaning at least 7 of these guys will be available at the Flames pick at 9.  This seven is a pretty great pack to choose from, and if one of the top4 drop, its even better.  Flames NEED TopD, which should be at least one of Parekh/Silayev/Dickenson/Yakemchuk/Jiricek(Levshunov/Buium), and if picks 5-8 are all D, likely we're left with Jiricek.  The Flames also NEED TopC, which should be at least one of Lindstrom/Catton/Helenius/Iginla(?), unless picks 5-8 are all C, and then there would be no C left in this grouping, we'd have to look lower, perhaps to Hage... or one of the listed D.  Odds are we'll pick a D because there are more D than anything in the Top15, but then again, WHOSE Top15?  There are always surprises.  Next stop, next week, the draft Lottery.

[jjgallow]

12 hours ago, cberg said:

Heard a radio interview of Wranglers’ Jeremie Poirier, talking about his draft-eligible brother, Justin R shot RW in the Q. 51 goals… 2/3 rounder?

 

181 lbs at 5'8?    That's no Gaudreau.   That's a low center of gravity.

 

16 goals in 12 playoff games?  

 

RHS?

 

I think you take him for sure if he's available in the 2nd round.   Really don't know if he will be.    just based on stats, of course.     bit of a qmjhl deduction.   

 

The guys who show that level of skill, and then Raise it come playoff time, that's special.

 

I say you take him.     For every 5 of these guys you draft, 4 will never amount to anything, but the 1 that does will change everything.

 

So draft 5 of them.

 

[cberg]

1 hour ago, jjgallow said:

 

181 lbs at 5'8?    That's no Gaudreau.   That's a low center of gravity.

 

16 goals in 12 playoff games?  

 

RHS?

 

I think you take him for sure if he's available in the 2nd round.   Really don't know if he will be.    just based on stats, of course.     bit of a qmjhl deduction.   

 

The guys who show that level of skill, and then Raise it come playoff time, that's special.

 

I say you take him.     For every 5 of these guys you draft, 4 will never amount to anything, but the 1 that does will change everything.

 

So draft 5 of them.

 

That’s what I thought too, he’s solid.  And if he’s got similar skill and determination of his brother, he’s a keeper.

[conundrumed]

53 minutes ago, cberg said:

That’s what I thought too, he’s solid.  And if he’s got similar skill and determination of his brother, he’s a keeper.

Could be a player like Denver Barkey. Fell to 95th last year solely due to size. Good player.

Slapped down 35/67 102pts in 64 games for the Knights this year. 3/10 13pts in 12 playoff games so far.

 

Ah, before I forget, you have a new subscriber!:) Haven't gotten far...composting!! Awesome.👍

[The_People1]

11 hours ago, conundrumed said:

So at D, I'd take Jiricek if all but Parekh are gone. But Helenius/Catton/Lindstrom change the conversation.

We'll get a solid prospect. Then complain about who we should have taken instead. lol

 

Jiricek over Yakemchuk?  Why?

[cberg]

13 minutes ago, conundrumed said:

Could be a player like Denver Barkey. Fell to 95th last year solely due to size. Good player.

Slapped down 35/67 102pts in 64 games for the Knights this year. 3/10 13pts in 12 playoff games so far.

 

Ah, before I forget, you have a new subscriber!:) Haven't gotten far...composting!! Awesome.👍

Oh Thanks!  Once it warms up I'll likely put out a few more videos... Snow blizzard yesterday and cold... boo... And again, those small guys keep getting put down, hope more are able to break through and be consistent NHL performers.  

[conundrumed]

13 minutes ago, cberg said:

Oh Thanks!  Once it warms up I'll likely put out a few more videos... Snow blizzard yesterday and cold... boo... And again, those small guys keep getting put down, hope more are able to break through and be consistent NHL performers.  

I'm luckier, our lows barely creep below 10C. I've got everything out of the house windows full time now, so I'm back in the good books. lol I've got the radish in already and prolly a busy wkend getting everything out of my hair and seeding. Danger of frost is virtually zero. I do the tire trick with my potatoes and love it. Do you do that one?

Usually 6-7 tires high by harvest time. We get snails and slugs like you wouldn't believe, so it alleviates that. I have a separate kale area where the rabbits can go ham. It works pretty well.

It's pickerel season in the lake, so I really need to scream the garden into place. lol

@The_People1 I'm a huge fan of both Jirecek's. I want one. lol I think the Czechs are on a roll for developing very well-rounded dmen.

Yakemchuk's skating is going to be a problem. I'd coach to expose him wide at speed personally. His lateral isn't great, his edges are meh. He's an average skater. That's great in jr as a dman. You can get by with it.

[robrob74]

15 hours ago, jjgallow said:

 

I question the defensive vision, many aspects of defense, like position can be taught and instructed.   Very hard to convince me that this guy isn't talented enough to learn it.   

 

Is he high risk high reward?  yeah.

 

When you've got the picks that we do, and you know only the top 5 will be near guaranteed stars, you have to take that high risk high reward.  have to.

 

 

 

Well, I see it as a half-truth.  He's 6 months older than Parekh, as an example.   He's got that extra season in junior, yes, but with very limited minutes.   I see this mattering maybe slightly more with forwards.   But with D, their development is so much further out I think it really loses its relevance.   You're looking for trajectory and you're looking for no plateauing.   Here's the thing.   Of these 7 or so D that we think are special in this draft, about half of them will show zero improvement next year.   basically.  Just how it goes.   And whoever drafted that half will get a little nervous.    Dude's showing an insane improvement curve.   

 

If we can all agree on one thing here, it's that the current draft eligibility ages are ridiculous.   We wouldn't be having 90% of these debates if they just pushed the ages out a year like a normal sports league.

I dunno if that's the case all the time, if it was that easy guys would learn it. phaneuf's downfall was that he felt the team should be happy with him as is and he wasn't willing to grow beyond that. 
 

if they're willing to learn, or are able to pick it up is one thing, but you waste a pick if they don't catch on. Similar with E. Poirier, he had all kinds of speed, but wasn't able to put it to use. He was a goal scorer, but when shutting it down he had nothing else.

 

[cberg]

31 minutes ago, conundrumed said:

I'm luckier, our lows barely creep below 10C. I've got everything out of the house windows full time now, so I'm back in the good books. lol I've got the radish in already and prolly a busy wkend getting everything out of my hair and seeding. Danger of frost is virtually zero. I do the tire trick with my potatoes and love it. Do you do that one?

Usually 6-7 tires high by harvest time. We get snails and slugs like you wouldn't believe, so it alleviates that. I have a separate kale area where the rabbits can go ham. It works pretty well.

It's pickerel season in the lake, so I really need to scream the garden into place. lol

@The_People1 I'm a huge fan of both Jirecek's. I want one. lol I think the Czechs are on a roll for developing very well-rounded dmen.

Yakemchuk's skating is going to be a problem. I'd coach to expose him wide at speed personally. His lateral isn't great, his edges are meh. He's an average skater. That's great in jr as a dman. You can get by with it.

Still a while for outside transplanting as still 3-4 weeks before frost-free.  Potatoes are dug into a bed, but have done grow bags and garbage cans before.

 

I’ll have to check out the Jireceks.  As for Yakemchuk, perhaps his skating needs improvement, most players do, but he has several years to get there.  He does several other things that are exceptional.  

[jjgallow]

31 minutes ago, robrob74 said:

I dunno if that's the case all the time, if it was that easy guys would learn it. phaneuf's downfall was that he felt the team should be happy with him as is and he wasn't willing to grow beyond that. 
 

if they're willing to learn, or are able to pick it up is one thing, but you waste a pick if they don't catch on. Similar with E. Poirier, he had all kinds of speed, but wasn't able to put it to use. He was a goal scorer, but when shutting it down he had nothing else.

 

 

It's never clear cut, you take a risk either way for sure.

 

Phaneuf is interesting because we're at the 10 year mark, and a little past.

https://bleacherreport.com/articles/10084254-re-drafting-patrice-bergeron-and-the-top-10-from-the-historic-2003-nhl-draft

https://www.sportsnet.ca/2010/20-years-of-hindisight-the-great-2003-nhl-re-draft/

 

on the other hand Phaneuf is not interesting in the sense that he had a whole lot of unrelated off-ice issues.

 

Basically in a redraft, he's unchanged.   Would we have drafted him again knowing what we do now?  Hell no.  But assuming all the other teams also had hindsight, we wouldn't have gotten much better in that spot.

 

It was a very low scoring era for D.    No 30-goal scoring defencemen to compare to.    So sadly, the "wait 10 years and look at the redraft) is also frought with difficulties.    but adjusting, generally the D who could put the puck in the net did better.   Just, 15 goals was a lot back then instead of 30.

 

Not a lot of strike-outs that year.   but, the ones that did strike out are interesting.

Brayden Coburn:   6'5 giant, with great defensive intelligence and skating.
                               -Couldn't score a goal to save his life
                               -NHL career was same.  Loads learned these skills later and surpassed him.

 

Beware the giant mature players in the top 10 who can't score.  We have a few of them this year, and most will probably go onto have long NHL careers.   The question is, will they be remarkable.

 

The real story of that draft, the big learning, is how Weber got drafted so low imho

 

 

[robrob74]

44 minutes ago, jjgallow said:

 

It's never clear cut, you take a risk either way for sure.

 

Phaneuf is interesting because we're at the 10 year mark, and a little past.

https://bleacherreport.com/articles/10084254-re-drafting-patrice-bergeron-and-the-top-10-from-the-historic-2003-nhl-draft

https://www.sportsnet.ca/2010/20-years-of-hindisight-the-great-2003-nhl-re-draft/

 

on the other hand Phaneuf is not interesting in the sense that he had a whole lot of unrelated off-ice issues.

 

Basically in a redraft, he's unchanged.   Would we have drafted him again knowing what we do now?  Hell no.  But assuming all the other teams also had hindsight, we wouldn't have gotten much better in that spot.

 

It was a very low scoring era for D.    No 30-goal scoring defencemen to compare to.    So sadly, the "wait 10 years and look at the redraft) is also frought with difficulties.    but adjusting, generally the D who could put the puck in the net did better.   Just, 15 goals was a lot back then instead of 30.

 

Not a lot of strike-outs that year.   but, the ones that did strike out are interesting.

Brayden Coburn:   6'5 giant, with great defensive intelligence and skating.
                               -Couldn't score a goal to save his life
                               -NHL career was same.  Loads learned these skills later and surpassed him.

 

Beware the giant mature players in the top 10 who can't score.  We have a few of them this year, and most will probably go onto have long NHL careers.   The question is, will they be remarkable.

 

The real story of that draft, the big learning, is how Weber got drafted so low imho

 

 

I don't mean to imply he was a bad player, just that if he wanted to work on his game he maybe could have been more dominating.

[The_People1]

3 hours ago, conundrumed said:

Yakemchuk's skating is going to be a problem. I'd coach to expose him wide at speed personally. His lateral isn't great, his edges are meh. He's an average skater. That's great in jr as a dman. You can get by with it.

 

If Yakemchuk can pop in over 20G on the PP year after year, then does that forgive some average edge work?  I've watched him live a couple of times and while I was never wowed by his skating, I never felt like it was holding him back.  He's kind of a calm and steady presence.

 

With the puck, I've seen him shake-n-bake at the point to move off shot blockers and then shoots and scores.  Defensively, he tracks well and keeps tight coverage.  He has a good stick and always pins players to the boards.

 

It's not Elite edge work but I have to ask what is expected of his type?  He's not TJ Brodie or Quinn Hughes at 6'-3" and 195 lbs.  He probably wants to play closer to 220 lbs at the NHL level for his game to have success.  His lateral is supposed to be limited at that size, no?

[Sarasti]

2 hours ago, jjgallow said:

 

It's never clear cut, you take a risk either way for sure.

 

Phaneuf is interesting because we're at the 10 year mark, and a little past.

https://bleacherreport.com/articles/10084254-re-drafting-patrice-bergeron-and-the-top-10-from-the-historic-2003-nhl-draft

https://www.sportsnet.ca/2010/20-years-of-hindisight-the-great-2003-nhl-re-draft/

 

on the other hand Phaneuf is not interesting in the sense that he had a whole lot of unrelated off-ice issues.

 

Basically in a redraft, he's unchanged.   Would we have drafted him again knowing what we do now?  Hell no.  But assuming all the other teams also had hindsight, we wouldn't have gotten much better in that spot.

 

It was a very low scoring era for D.    No 30-goal scoring defencemen to compare to.    So sadly, the "wait 10 years and look at the redraft) is also frought with difficulties.    but adjusting, generally the D who could put the puck in the net did better.   Just, 15 goals was a lot back then instead of 30.

 

Not a lot of strike-outs that year.   but, the ones that did strike out are interesting.

Brayden Coburn:   6'5 giant, with great defensive intelligence and skating.
                               -Couldn't score a goal to save his life
                               -NHL career was same.  Loads learned these skills later and surpassed him.

 

Beware the giant mature players in the top 10 who can't score.  We have a few of them this year, and most will probably go onto have long NHL careers.   The question is, will they be remarkable.

 

The real story of that draft, the big learning, is how Weber got drafted so low imho

 

 

 

Weber was not the best skater but overcame that with tenacity, a big body and that legendary slapshot. 

If I remember correctly he also wasn't more than average defensively until his mid 20s. Which helps perpetuate the idea that defensive instincts can be taught later on, but being gifted in other areas cannot.

 

Man I miss Weber. Fun guy to watch.

[jjgallow]

17 minutes ago, Sarasti said:

 

Weber was not the best skater but overcame that with tenacity, a big body and that legendary slapshot. 

If I remember correctly he also wasn't more than average defensively until his mid 20s. Which helps perpetuate the idea that defensive instincts can be taught later on, but being gifted in other areas cannot.

 

Man I miss Weber. Fun guy to watch.

 

Nothing to learn from that I am sure lol

[The_People1]

56 minutes ago, Sarasti said:

 

Weber was not the best skater but overcame that with tenacity, a big body and that legendary slapshot. 

If I remember correctly he also wasn't more than average defensively until his mid 20s. Which helps perpetuate the idea that defensive instincts can be taught later on, but being gifted in other areas cannot.

 

Man I miss Weber. Fun guy to watch.

 

If I had a choice between Yakemchuk and Parekh, then I'm going with Yakemchuk.

[cberg]

3 hours ago, jjgallow said:

 

It's never clear cut, you take a risk either way for sure.

 

Phaneuf is interesting because we're at the 10 year mark, and a little past.

https://bleacherreport.com/articles/10084254-re-drafting-patrice-bergeron-and-the-top-10-from-the-historic-2003-nhl-draft

https://www.sportsnet.ca/2010/20-years-of-hindisight-the-great-2003-nhl-re-draft/

 

on the other hand Phaneuf is not interesting in the sense that he had a whole lot of unrelated off-ice issues.

 

Basically in a redraft, he's unchanged.   Would we have drafted him again knowing what we do now?  Hell no.  But assuming all the other teams also had hindsight, we wouldn't have gotten much better in that spot.

 

It was a very low scoring era for D.    No 30-goal scoring defencemen to compare to.    So sadly, the "wait 10 years and look at the redraft) is also frought with difficulties.    but adjusting, generally the D who could put the puck in the net did better.   Just, 15 goals was a lot back then instead of 30.

 

Not a lot of strike-outs that year.   but, the ones that did strike out are interesting.

Brayden Coburn:   6'5 giant, with great defensive intelligence and skating.
                               -Couldn't score a goal to save his life
                               -NHL career was same.  Loads learned these skills later and surpassed him.

 

Beware the giant mature players in the top 10 who can't score.  We have a few of them this year, and most will probably go onto have long NHL careers.   The question is, will they be remarkable.

 

The real story of that draft, the big learning, is how Weber got drafted so low imho

 

 

Yeah, and how about Pavelski?  I looked at the article, amazing how many of the redraft Top10 were not even first rounders.

[conundrumed]

11 hours ago, The_People1 said:

 

If Yakemchuk can pop in over 20G on the PP year after year, then does that forgive some average edge work?  I've watched him live a couple of times and while I was never wowed by his skating, I never felt like it was holding him back.  He's kind of a calm and steady presence.

 

With the puck, I've seen him shake-n-bake at the point to move off shot blockers and then shoots and scores.  Defensively, he tracks well and keeps tight coverage.  He has a good stick and always pins players to the boards.

 

It's not Elite edge work but I have to ask what is expected of his type?  He's not TJ Brodie or Quinn Hughes at 6'-3" and 195 lbs.  He probably wants to play closer to 220 lbs at the NHL level for his game to have success.  His lateral is supposed to be limited at that size, no?

There have been a couple of games I've watched that have made me feel like things are moving in slow-motion when he has the puck. That kind of time with the puck is going to be eradicated at the pro level. He is literally sauntering with it, while hardly even being challenged. His puck-handling is not great. He's given a surprising amount of space to do it, though. Maybe because his team is so bad that the opponents are lulled to sleep.

I wasn't expecting him to be that lumbering, but it's what I saw. I watch the O a lot, so it left me feeling that there is no way he's putting up those numbers in better coverage.

Watch Dickinson. He's 6'2". So size is an afterthought. Heck, watch Fischer, he's 6'3" and growing. The difference in skating abilities are almost night and day.

That's what I mainly have against him, and why I use the, "1st year midget vs 2nd year Bantams" analogy.

I don't understand why he's given so much time and space. It's not like he's a fantastic passing threat, he's fairly tunnel vision carrying the puck.

Weber was mentioned, that was 20 years ago. The game has changed. Forechecking has become vastly faster.

20 years ago forechecking looked like a line change vs today. Over-stated, but it is way faster now, and getting faster.

Almost dangerously fast to quote Mickey Redmond. "Flying around out there like a bat out of hell. There are landmines everywhere, and you're moving too fast to see them". Speaking, in particular, about Jack Hughes, but also generally.

I wish him and Ken Daniels could do all the playoff games for balance and insights. lol

[conundrumed]

I might as well say it now. TML are going to scream O'Reilly right up the rankings into a 1st rder. Whereas I want him with our Dallas pick. He's been really good, all situations, these playoffs. Urgency near every shift. He'll explode next year, given a top role.

They had Mark Hunter, why didn't they just keep him? lol

Now they just pick the kids that he scouts and develops.

Kyle Dubas, genius. I have no idea why the SSM GM became some hockey guru. lol

Oh right. Stat-trending means that you're way smarter. Nice to see that working out as anticipated.

[cross16]

Shea Weber is also a case of how circumstances come together at different times for different players. He was a late bloomer, big growth spurt as a teen, and didn't become a full time dman until bantam age. When he first played for the Rockets they were also a very good and deep team, particularly on defense.  Josh Gorges, who was a fantastic junior dman and pretty decent NHler too, was there as was a certain hall of fame dman named Duncan Keith.  Kelowna was gearing up for the Memorial Cup in 04 so they had brought in a lot of good players and Weber got pushed down the depth chart as a rookie and needed to carve our more of a physical almost enforcer type role early on. The fact he was a 2nd rounder, in one of the deepest drafts in history too BTW, given he was a 3rd pairing dman, speaks to the potential that was there. 

 

Think if your looking for a lesson there it's that circumstances matter and how do you balance talent, production and circumstances. Why this is as much an art as it it science. 

[redfire11]

Love this write up,

https://www.lines.com/nhl/drafts/player/petr-sikora-40927

[The_People1]

6 hours ago, conundrumed said:

There have been a couple of games I've watched that have made me feel like things are moving in slow-motion when he has the puck. That kind of time with the puck is going to be eradicated at the pro level. He is literally sauntering with it, while hardly even being challenged. His puck-handling is not great. He's given a surprising amount of space to do it, though. Maybe because his team is so bad that the opponents are lulled to sleep.

I wasn't expecting him to be that lumbering, but it's what I saw. I watch the O a lot, so it left me feeling that there is no way he's putting up those numbers in better coverage.

Watch Dickinson. He's 6'2". So size is an afterthought. Heck, watch Fischer, he's 6'3" and growing. The difference in skating abilities are almost night and day.

That's what I mainly have against him, and why I use the, "1st year midget vs 2nd year Bantams" analogy.

I don't understand why he's given so much time and space. It's not like he's a fantastic passing threat, he's fairly tunnel vision carrying the puck.

Weber was mentioned, that was 20 years ago. The game has changed. Forechecking has become vastly faster.

20 years ago forechecking looked like a line change vs today. Over-stated, but it is way faster now, and getting faster.

Almost dangerously fast to quote Mickey Redmond. "Flying around out there like a bat out of hell. There are landmines everywhere, and you're moving too fast to see them". Speaking, in particular, about Jack Hughes, but also generally.

I wish him and Ken Daniels could do all the playoff games for balance and insights. lol

 

I think if we are comparing Yakemchuk's skating to Dickinson, then there's no comparison.  But I'm just saying, the type of D that Yakemchuk is... As long as he skates as well as Gubdranson... And then you've got a Gubdranson who can man the PP and score 20 a year.  There's value in this unique mix of skills regardless of the era of NHL we are playing in.

 

Yakemchuk scored nearly as much as Parekh and we also doubt Parekh can translate to the NHL successfully.  Parekh scored a lot of his goals on the rush... Yakemchuk scored a lot of his goals from point shots after establishing possession in the offensive zone.  It's complete different types of offense.  One requires blazing speed and the other requires overpowering shot and accuracy from distance.  Yakemchuk's game doesn't require the type of skating you are saying he's missing.

 

Defensively, again from what I've seen, his skating doesn't hold him back.  He's also got enough size and reach if guys go wide on him.  The skating is adequate.

[cberg]

1 hour ago, The_People1 said:

 

I think if we are comparing Yakemchuk's skating to Dickinson, then there's no comparison.  But I'm just saying, the type of D that Yakemchuk is... As long as he skates as well as Gubdranson... And then you've got a Gubdranson who can man the PP and score 20 a year.  There's value in this unique mix of skills regardless of the era of NHL we are playing in.

 

Yakemchuk scored nearly as much as Parekh and we also doubt Parekh can translate to the NHL successfully.  Parekh scored a lot of his goals on the rush... Yakemchuk scored a lot of his goals from point shots after establishing possession in the offensive zone.  It's complete different types of offense.  One requires blazing speed and the other requires overpowering shot and accuracy from distance.  Yakemchuk's game doesn't require the type of skating you are saying he's missing.

 

Defensively, again from what I've seen, his skating doesn't hold him back.  He's also got enough size and reach if guys go wide on him.  The skating is adequate.

Good points, and considerations for those evaluating him.  

[cross16]

3 hours ago, The_People1 said:

 

I think if we are comparing Yakemchuk's skating to Dickinson, then there's no comparison.  But I'm just saying, the type of D that Yakemchuk is... As long as he skates as well as Gubdranson... And then you've got a Gubdranson who can man the PP and score 20 a year.  There's value in this unique mix of skills regardless of the era of NHL we are playing in.

 

Yakemchuk scored nearly as much as Parekh and we also doubt Parekh can translate to the NHL successfully.  Parekh scored a lot of his goals on the rush... Yakemchuk scored a lot of his goals from point shots after establishing possession in the offensive zone.  It's complete different types of offense.  One requires blazing speed and the other requires overpowering shot and accuracy from distance.  Yakemchuk's game doesn't require the type of skating you are saying he's missing.

 

Defensively, again from what I've seen, his skating doesn't hold him back.  He's also got enough size and reach if guys go wide on him.  The skating is adequate.

 

At his current level no but as he moves up I don't think I'd agree with this. That's my concern with Yakemchuk. As he moves up and the game gets faster I think that's where he has the potential to struggle. Can he 1 on 1 defend in zone when the puck moves faster? Can he handle outside speed without having to give up a larger gap?

 

At least for me it doesn't make him a bad prospect or a bust but IMO his ceiling is not as high as the other dman being talked about in the top half of the draft. I'm personally not a fan of the Flames taking him.  it wouldn't  be a "WFT are you doing" type of reaction but I think there are better options for them.