2024 NHL draft - A New Hope

[conundrumed]

4 hours ago, The_People1 said:

 

Well, how high would you draft someone like Tanev?  Gives you 2-goals a year and 10-points.  Skates decent and can move the puck out the zone but mostly doesn't do anything in the offensive zone.  Yet, he will get the most important assignments, first unit PK, defending a lead in final minutes of a game, etc. 

 

Would you swing for the next Tanev with a late first rounder?  I would.  A second rounder, for sure.

Rd 6-7 without question. Whichever rd we have 2 picks in.

Is that shrine almost completed, or what's the hold up?

[sak22]

5 hours ago, The_People1 said:

 

Well, how high would you draft someone like Tanev?  Gives you 2-goals a year and 10-points.  Skates decent and can move the puck out the zone but mostly doesn't do anything in the offensive zone.  Yet, he will get the most important assignments, first unit PK, defending a lead in final minutes of a game, etc. 

 

Would you swing for the next Tanev with a late first rounder?  I would.  A second rounder, for sure.

I would go for the round Tanev himself was drafted.  

[The_People1]

47 minutes ago, conundrumed said:

Rd 6-7 without question. Whichever rd we have 2 picks in.

Is that shrine almost completed, or what's the hold up?

 

18 minutes ago, sak22 said:

I would go for the round Tanev himself was drafted.  

 

Kekistan guys.  The lack of appreciation for a top tier shut down D is alarming.  They don't grow on trees.  Tanev himself was recently traded for a 2nd rounder + mid tier prospect.

[conundrumed]

47 minutes ago, The_People1 said:

 

 

Kekistan guys.  The lack of appreciation for a top tier shut down D is alarming.  They don't grow on trees.  Tanev himself was recently traded for a 2nd rounder + mid tier prospect.

His path was quite unique. I'm not sure how you replicate that.

[cross16]

On 6/1/2024 at 7:24 PM, The_People1 said:

 

 

Kekistan guys.  The lack of appreciation for a top tier shut down D is alarming.  They don't grow on trees.  Tanev himself was recently traded for a 2nd rounder + mid tier prospect.

I don’t think you’re seeing the point. The point is not a lack of appreciation it’s pointing out there are a multitude of ways to find these guys, including developing it. 
 

The idea of just that drafting lower ceiling players reduces your probability theh actually make it. If you take a player whose upside is a 4-6 defensive dman what’s the plan B? What now take someone with a higher ceiling and then develop them as a 4-6 if it doesn’t work out? I don’t think the profile you are suggesting here is near as easy to draft as you make it seem 

 

It’s not the role it’s a discussion around ceilings and probability 

[cberg]

Well, there goes the last of our conditional draft improvements.  All fails.  I’ve got no problems trying to get a bit more, conditionally, but I have to wonder how many times finagling for an extra condition put teams off from the actual trade?  We’ll never know.

[The_People1]

1 hour ago, cross16 said:

I don’t think you’re seeing the point. The point is not a lack of appreciation it’s pointing out there are a multitude of ways to find these guys, including developing it. 
 

The idea of just that drafting lower ceiling players reduces your probability theh actually make it. If you take a player whose upside is a 4-6 defensive dman what’s the plan B? What now take someone with a higher ceiling and then develop them as a 4-6 if it doesn’t work out? I don’t think the profile you are suggesting here is near as easy to draft as you make it seem 

 

It’s not the role it’s a discussion around ceilings and probability 

 

4-6 "floor" though like "for sure NHLer".  No plan B required because the role and skills required are pretty straight forward.  Off the glass and out kind of stuff.  Play solid X and O.  Box out well.  Has size to succeed at the next level.

 

And the ceiling is secretly 1-2... Complementary top pair like Mathias Ekholm type.

 

It's boring to take a Schneider with a late first, I get that.  Again I don't know Elick enough but is he more Ekholm than Gudbranson?  If so, then that's what I'm saying.

[conundrumed]

6 hours ago, The_People1 said:

 

4-6 "floor" though like "for sure NHLer".  No plan B required because the role and skills required are pretty straight forward.  Off the glass and out kind of stuff.  Play solid X and O.  Box out well.  Has size to succeed at the next level.

 

And the ceiling is secretly 1-2... Complementary top pair like Mathias Ekholm type.

 

It's boring to take a Schneider with a late first, I get that.  Again I don't know Elick enough but is he more Ekholm than Gudbranson?  If so, then that's what I'm saying.

That's where I'd be more intrigued by Pulkkinen. As much as I think overagers should be knocked down in rounds, there is a difference between D+1 still in jr vs logging 20mins/gm in a solid men's league (liiga).

He went from ripping the u20 league like hot butter to 4 pts in 6 games in Mestis (their AHL) to "jfc, just get this guy up here already" (Liiga).

Guys get offended by not being drafted, on occasion, one will just rip it wide open. He appears to be that guy, and I don't think anyone will be too surprised if someone jumps him into the bottom of the 1st round.

Cole Hutson's another intriguing one. If everyone loves how shifty Lane is, his brother isn't much different.

Then in the late 2nd/early 3rd rd, I wouldn't shy away from Lukas Fischer. He's still developing/growing, and I'm sure dad Jiri and Derian Hatcher will bring him along just fine. Strahan is also a nice pick for a punishing D-minded guy that will be hard to play against.

[conundrumed]

So now I have:

9. Buium/Dickinson/Silayev - who falls just enough?

28. Pulkkinen

41. Hutson

62. Fischer

74. Strahan

 

lol. j/k

[cross16]

9 hours ago, The_People1 said:

 

4-6 "floor" though like "for sure NHLer".  No plan B required because the role and skills required are pretty straight forward.  Off the glass and out kind of stuff.  Play solid X and O.  Box out well.  Has size to succeed at the next level.

 

And the ceiling is secretly 1-2... Complementary top pair like Mathias Ekholm type.

 

It's boring to take a Schneider with a late first, I get that.  Again I don't know Elick enough but is he more Ekholm than Gudbranson?  If so, then that's what I'm saying.

 

That's the rub, " for sure NHLer" is not a thing. I think your making it seem like hey draft this guy who is awesome Defensively because he'll make it to the NHL for sure but it doesn't work that way. 

 

To shorten the point the only prospects I have a problem with are the guys that produce no offense as prospects because you have to ask why. Schneider is not what i'm getting at it because while yes he was a defensive first guy he still showed the abillity to move the puck and generate some offense. I didn't think he was worth a top 20 pick and wasn't good value but he's not the type of dman i'm saying don't draft. 

 

Yan Kuznetsov is a better example of what i'm talking. No need to draft a player like that IMO. 

[sak22]

10 hours ago, The_People1 said:

 

4-6 "floor" though like "for sure NHLer".  No plan B required because the role and skills required are pretty straight forward.  Off the glass and out kind of stuff.  Play solid X and O.  Box out well.  Has size to succeed at the next level.

 

And the ceiling is secretly 1-2... Complementary top pair like Mathias Ekholm type.

 

It's boring to take a Schneider with a late first, I get that.  Again I don't know Elick enough but is he more Ekholm than Gudbranson?  If so, then that's what I'm saying.

Remember Gudbranson was a #3, but top of my head Luke Schenn, Ryan Murray, Olli Juolevi, Hadyn Fleury, Slater Koekoek, Dylan McIlrath, Sam Morin, and have to throw this name out too despite the payday Darnell Nurse, were all more d first or safer dmen and high picks, some of those guys are bottom pairing at best and some are not NHL dmen.  Ekholm for example was more of a late bloomer as he went undrafted his first year of eligibility and went 4th round as a 19 year old.  I still say its hard to project most of these kids at 18, the only safe picks are the guys who stand head and shoulders above their draft class, so shoot for guys with the most upside, rather take the high risk-high reward route than the high risk-low reward.  Tim Erixon was also deemed a safe pick and his loss didn't sting as much as the 3rd rounder who also only wanted to be a Ranger.

[travel_dude]

12 hours ago, cberg said:

Well, there goes the last of our conditional draft improvements.  All fails.  I’ve got no problems trying to get a bit more, conditionally, but I have to wonder how many times finagling for an extra condition put teams off from the actual trade?  We’ll never know.

 

2 of the 3 conditionals were quite achievable.  VAN making the WCF.  VGK winning a round.

The brackets made it tougher.  Dallas vs VGK in round 1.  VAN facing EDM after an easy first round (LA).

Dallas having to go through VGK, COL and EDM. 

 

I guess the point is we made 3 trades of expiring players that doubtful would sign here.

We got a couple of 1sts and 2nd.

The VAN picks doesn't move to a late 3rd from an early 4th.

We get this year's VGK pick.

We actually only lost one pick (Dallas).

[conundrumed]

Here's Scott Wheeler's top 100. In the link, the players are boxed. On your bottom right, within each box, you'll see an arrow pulldown that shows his take on said player.

So it's just another list, he's nothing special, but it gives you some insight to read one guy's opinion on the top 100. It gives a good indicator of what might be hovering around our first 6, likely 8, picks:

https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/5521848/2024/06/03/2024-nhl-draft-rankings-top-100-prospects/

[cberg]

1 hour ago, travel_dude said:

 

2 of the 3 conditionals were quite achievable.  VAN making the WCF.  VGK winning a round.

The brackets made it tougher.  Dallas vs VGK in round 1.  VAN facing EDM after an easy first round (LA).

Dallas having to go through VGK, COL and EDM. 

 

I guess the point is we made 3 trades of expiring players that doubtful would sign here.

We got a couple of 1sts and 2nd.

The VAN picks doesn't move to a late 3rd from an early 4th.

We get this year's VGK pick.

We actually only lost one pick (Dallas).

True, but my point was rather that pushing for the “if, if, if success” upsides only makes it harder to consummate the primary deal, or causes reluctance of hassling with the minor details with some teams?

[sak22]

12 minutes ago, conundrumed said:

Here's Scott Wheeler's top 100. In the link, the players are boxed. On your bottom right, within each box, you'll see an arrow pulldown that shows his take on said player.

So it's just another list, he's nothing special, but it gives you some insight to read one guy's opinion on the top 100. It gives a good indicator of what might be hovering around our first 6, likely 8, picks:

https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/5521848/2024/06/03/2024-nhl-draft-rankings-top-100-prospects/

100 hockey players and not 1 named Connor what is going on in the world.  Yegor Surin sounds like a good target for the Flames, can never have enough Yegor's.

[The_People1]

5 hours ago, conundrumed said:

That's where I'd be more intrigued by Pulkkinen. As much as I think overagers should be knocked down in rounds, there is a difference between D+1 still in jr vs logging 20mins/gm in a solid men's league (liiga).

He went from ripping the u20 league like hot butter to 4 pts in 6 games in Mestis (their AHL) to "jfc, just get this guy up here already" (Liiga).

Guys get offended by not being drafted, on occasion, one will just rip it wide open. He appears to be that guy, and I don't think anyone will be too surprised if someone jumps him into the bottom of the 1st round.

Cole Hutson's another intriguing one. If everyone loves how shifty Lane is, his brother isn't much different.

Then in the late 2nd/early 3rd rd, I wouldn't shy away from Lukas Fischer. He's still developing/growing, and I'm sure dad Jiri and Derian Hatcher will bring him along just fine. Strahan is also a nice pick for a punishing D-minded guy that will be hard to play against.

 

Pulkkinen got the size but is he all size and no game?

[conundrumed]

3 minutes ago, The_People1 said:

 

Pulkkinen got the size but is he all size and no game?

Nope, he's not. Moves very well, really good hands, excellent defensively.

[The_People1]

30 minutes ago, conundrumed said:

Here's Scott Wheeler's top 100. In the link, the players are boxed. On your bottom right, within each box, you'll see an arrow pulldown that shows his take on said player.

So it's just another list, he's nothing special, but it gives you some insight to read one guy's opinion on the top 100. It gives a good indicator of what might be hovering around our first 6, likely 8, picks:

https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/5521848/2024/06/03/2024-nhl-draft-rankings-top-100-prospects/

 

Paywalled

[conundrumed]

Just now, The_People1 said:

 

Paywalled

No it isn't. Takes time to load.

[The_People1]

Just now, conundrumed said:

Nope, he's not. Moves very well, really good hands, excellent defensively.

 

Excellent defensively sounds good.  NHL is moving too far towards the hybrid two-way D.  Small and skilled.  Good old fashion shut down D with size and intimidation are actually what teams need.

[The_People1]

5 hours ago, conundrumed said:

9. Buium/Dickinson/Silayev - who falls just enough?

 

Nightmare scenario right now is,

 

1 Celebrini 

2 Demidov 

3 Levshunov 

4 Lindstrom

5 Buium

6 Dickinson

7 Silayev 

8 Iginla

 

Say it ain't so.

[Thebrewcrew]

4 minutes ago, The_People1 said:

 

Nightmare scenario right now is,

 

1 Celebrini 

2 Demidov 

3 Levshunov 

4 Lindstrom

5 Buium

6 Dickinson

7 Silayev 

8 Iginla

 

Say it ain't so.

I think you run to the podium to take Catton

[The_People1]

1 minute ago, Thebrewcrew said:

I think you run to the podium to take Catton

 

I'd rather Helenius but I really rather one of Buium, Dickinson, or Iginla.

[Thebrewcrew]

31 minutes ago, The_People1 said:

 

I'd rather Helenius but I really rather one of Buium, Dickinson, or Iginla.

I’m fine with Helenius too. There are six or seven players I would be happy with at nine and he’s one of them

[cross16]

For me in this draft there is no nightmare scenario. sure some will reply with "yeah but what if they go off the board" to which I will say they didn't go off their board. 

 

There isn't really a hard shelf here that creates a nightmare scenario. Don't think this is a franchise altering draft outside of pick 1 but it's a good one. 

 

Starting to remind me of 2008. 1 maybe 2, franchise altering talents at the top and then a lot of good players throughout that were good/key members of a franchise but not altering.