2017 NHL Draft -- General NHL Thread

[Thorny]

Mittlestadt!

Then just trade Reinhart or Kane for a top D man, right?

[rakish]

Chychrun, McAvoy, Sergachev, Hanifin, Provorov, Werenski....

 

Ryan O'Reilly

[Crusader1969]

Bob McKenzie said today that one out 10 scouts surveyed had Makar going #1, so there's that

 

His final rankings come out on Monday.

Edited June 13, 2017 by Crusader1969

[3putt]

There is no such thing as a universal BPA.  To illustrate why this is true, just look at the "rankings" published by the various reliable services, sites and commentators.  They all attempt to rank who are the BPA, but none are even close to the same and none are very accurate to how the draft actually goes.  Why, because the 31 teams lists are also completely different, based upon unique criteria for that team.  These criteria should include long-term team positional needs.   If an organization doesn't look at need, then you end up with what Buffalo has become under the two prior administrations.  Regier, for some stupid reason, never seemed to draft centers in the 1st rd between 2001 and 2012 except for the great Marek Zagrapan.  Hard to develop well down the middle if you don't have any.  exGMTM did the same thing with D, only drafting 1 with 8 1st & 2nd rd picks.

 

IMHO good GM's take need into account and tier the prospects rather then sit with a firm list number 1-400.  This way you can look at the tiers and decide on position, size, speed etc... from highest tier with players when you draft.

 

Lets take this draft for example.  Here are my updated tiers.

Tier 1 Patrick and Hischier

Tier 2 Heiskanen, Vilardi, Mittelstadt, & Glass 

Tier 3 Makar, Tippett, Necas, Pettersson & Liljegren

Tier 4 Tolvanen, Andersson, Vesalainen, Rasmussen, Valimaki & Suzuki

Tier 5 Kostin, Brannstrom Poehling and Foote. 

 

I don't think Makar or Heiskanen will fall to us at 8.  Based on need, I have no problem with taking Liljegren over the other forwards in the same tier. Although if Jbot wants Liljegren I think he could trade down a few places and still get him, because I believe there are some teams behind us that might covet someone like Necas or Tippett. 

Connor McDavid, Sidney Crosby Gretzky.  There is a universal BPA.  You don't pass on them for need that is measured in the present but not addressed until the future.

[tom webster]

I disagree. A good GM would be able to come up with a reasonable projection of where our team will be in 2/3 years, and what players we'll need for that time. We are going to need a top 2/4 defender in 2/3 years. If we want that guy, we have to draft him. It's ridiculously hard to trade for those guys now, or anyone for that matter.

 

Besides that, it often comes down to simple math and the law of averages. Take a look at our prospect pool for example. If we already have 5/6 RW prospects that have a shot at the NHL, and 1/2 D men in the prospect pool that do, it makes sense to add a dman to the pool, that way it maximizes the chances that both prospect depth charts have a decent chance of producing NHL players, through sheer numbers.

 

You have to stack the deck in your favour, and add blue chip prospects to the pipeline at all positions. We benefit much more from adding a blue-chip D man prospect to our ranks than another right-shot forward, as we already have strength in numbers there.

You can try and diversify your selections but ultimately it's about projecting who has the highest upside and hoping to hit a home run. I'd rather have too many top end forwards then have ten low end defenseman. A good GM should be able to flip depth and adjust on the fly.

[Thorny]

You can try and diversify your selections but ultimately it's about projecting who has the highest upside and hoping to hit a home run. I'd rather have too many top end forwards then have ten low end defenseman. A good GM should be able to flip depth and adjust on the fly.

It just seems like there is a premium on good Defenceman right now. It's like the only way to get one is through the draft. My personal view is to draft one as high as possible at this time, so as to maximize the chance of success. You don't want to reach and end up with 10 low end guys, like you say, but at the same time, I find it unlikely that pick 8 is on such an island that there are no appropriate Defenceman available in that range.

 

At worst, I think position should be the deciding factor in close evaluations.

[Guest]

Connor McDavid, Sidney Crosby Gretzky. There is a universal BPA. You don't pass on them for need that is measured in the present but not addressed until the future.

Really? So your universal BPA is a once in a lifetime player. So what about the drafts without one or if you have pick no 2 or later?

[Thorny]

Connor McDavid, Sidney Crosby Gretzky.  There is a universal BPA.  You don't pass on them for need that is measured in the present but not addressed until the future.

In special cases, of course. But I see no reason that position should not be taken into account, when evaluations are close.

 

Also, Wayne wasn't drafted ;)

[kas23]

BPA, as a term we throw around, is an invention of the media and the fans to give themselves something to write/talk about. No such consensus exists. There's 1 person per team who decides which player to draft. This selection will be colored by not only personal preference, but also system, need (yes, need) of players to fit that system, and positions within that system. So, BPA really means BPA for that team. There's going to be some "need" baked into that decision.

[LGR4GM]

I would say that Centers and Defenders are more valuable in todays NHL. Granted an elite winger is better than a mediocre center. 

[3putt]

Really? So your universal BPA is a once in a lifetime player. So what about the drafts without one or if you have pick no 2 or later?

Every has scouts and talent evaluators.  They don't read top 100 lists from talking heads who are simply reporting on what they hear crom those same scouts.  If the reputable lists had people good at evaluating talent they would be working for an NHL team.  Every team has a list and knows who the BPA is at anytime.  They have been watching these kids since before they were known to anyone else.  Two players may grade out similarly but the pros know where the talent disparity is and select accordingly. But as TW said, you accumulate talent in the draft and spend it or develop it to address roster needs.  It is foolish to pass on a more talented player for a lesser talent in a position of need.  Today there is banter about Reinhart for Hanifin on this and other threads.  A deal can be made if necessary though I think the Pens proved elite offense and speed can cure a lot of defensive ills.

[LGR4GM]

Every has scouts and talent evaluators.  They don't read top 100 lists from talking heads who are simply reporting on what they hear crom those same scouts.  If the reputable lists had people good at evaluating talent they would be working for an NHL team.  Every team has a list and knows who the BPA is at anytime.  They have been watching these kids since before they were known to anyone else.  Two players may grade out similarly but the pros know where the talent disparity is and select accordingly. But as TW said, you accumulate talent in the draft and spend it or develop it to address roster needs.  It is foolish to pass on a more talented player for a lesser talent in a position of need.  Today there is banter about Reinhart for Hanifin on this and other threads.  A deal can be made if necessary though I think the Pens proved elite offense and speed can cure a lot of defensive ills.

I do not agree. If that were the case then teams wouldn't miss players so regularly. Edmonton drafted Darnelle Nurse over Rasmus Ristolainen even though all the talking heads and Kevin Devine knew Risto was better.  

[3putt]

I do not agree. If that were the case then teams wouldn't miss players so regularly. Edmonton drafted Darnelle Nurse over Rasmus Ristolainen even though all the talking heads and Kevin Devine knew Risto was better.  

And the Sabres drafted Sam over Leon.  While many are ready to annoint Leon the better player, I think time will show Sam the better player.  And the jury is still out on all sub 4 year draftees.  Nurse may very well turn out to be the correct choice.  

[LGR4GM]

And the Sabres drafted Sam over Leon.  While many are ready to annoint Leon the better player, I think time will show Sam the better player.  And the jury is still out on all sub 4 year draftees.  Nurse may very well turn out to be the correct choice.  

I will bet you Darnelle Nurse will not be the better player. 

 

As for the 2014 draft, Leon, Samson, and Sam were all so close it was basically dealers choice. 

[rakish]

Bob McKenzie said today that one out 10 scouts surveyed had Makar going #1, so there's that

 

His final rankings come out on Monday.

 

I think people underestimate how close the top players in this draft are. While it's a really weak draft picking 1, it's a really strong draft picking 12, because you could be getting the same player. For instance, in the end, Lilgegren or Pettersson could be the best player in the draft, they could each also be picked outside the top 10.

[GASabresIUFAN]

I think people underestimate how close the top players in this draft are. While it's a really weak draft picking 1, it's a really strong draft picking 12, because you could be getting the same player. For instance, in the end, Lilgegren or Pettersson could be the best player in the draft, they could each also be picked outside the top 10.

I agree.  That's why tiers make more sense then a rigid BPA.  People act like the internal rating for a player ranked 9th is so substantially greater then the player ranked 10th.  It's not.  It's probably the 3rd decimal point, and this is why a strict adherence to BPA makes no sense.  

 

Lets say a team give their top player a grade of 1 and then a fraction of 1 there after.  Lets say the players ranked 8, 9 & 10 are given a score of .985,.9845 and .984.  Now lets say the .985 is a RW, the .9845 is a center and the .984 is a D.  Should the Sabres take the RW over the D and C when our prospect depth at RW is the deepest of the 3 and there is only a .001 difference in the score?  I don't.  I'm taking the D because the grades are virtually the same and our pipeline needs a high quality D over RW and C.  

 

I'm also not strictly following BPA in later rounds.  There I'm looking for a specific NHL quality skills, such as speed, size, IQ, shot etc...  

[Two or less]

There is no such thing as a universal BPA.  To illustrate why this is true, just look at the "rankings" published by the various reliable services, sites and commentators.  They all attempt to rank who are the BPA, but none are even close to the same and none are very accurate to how the draft actually goes.  Why, because the 31 teams lists are also completely different, based upon unique criteria for that team.  These criteria should include long-term team positional needs.   If an organization doesn't look at need, then you end up with what Buffalo has become under the two prior administrations.  Regier, for some stupid reason, never seemed to draft centers in the 1st rd between 2001 and 2012 except for the great Marek Zagrapan.  Hard to develop well down the middle if you don't have any.  exGMTM did the same thing with D, only drafting 1 with 8 1st & 2nd rd picks.

 

IMHO good GM's take need into account and tier the prospects rather then sit with a firm list number 1-400.  This way you can look at the tiers and decide on position, size, speed etc... from highest tier with players when you draft.

 

Lets take this draft for example.  Here are my updated tiers.

Tier 1 Patrick and Hischier

Tier 2 Heiskanen, Vilardi, Mittelstadt, & Glass 

Tier 3 Makar, Tippett, Necas, Pettersson & Liljegren

Tier 4 Tolvanen, Andersson, Vesalainen, Rasmussen, Valimaki & Suzuki

Tier 5 Kostin, Brannstrom Poehling and Foote. 

 

I don't think Makar or Heiskanen will fall to us at 8.  Based on need, I have no problem with taking Liljegren over the other forwards in the same tier. Although if Jbot wants Liljegren I think he could trade down a few places and still get him, because I believe there are some teams behind us that might covet someone like Necas or Tippett. 

 

I think you're sleeping too much on Makar. I think he could go very well as high as #3, but if i don't think he gets past #5 Vancouver.

 

I also don't see Vaakanainen on your list. If i'm doing defense at pick #8, assuming both Makar and Miro are gone, i'm not sure im passing him over for Liljegren if we're going defense. He's an excellent skater, very high IQ, good puck mover, under rated offensive game. He couldve joined Windsor this past season but decided to stay in Finland. He's also the most NHL ready d-men in this draft.

[Thorny]

BPA, as a term we throw around, is an invention of the media and the fans to give themselves something to write/talk about. No such consensus exists. There's 1 person per team who decides which player to draft. This selection will be colored by not only personal preference, but also system, need (yes, need) of players to fit that system, and positions within that system. So, BPA really means BPA for that team. There's going to be some "need" baked into that decision.

Well said.

[I-90 W]

I'm nearly positive that were drafting d at #8 not BPA.

[LGR4GM]

I'm nearly positive that were drafting d at #8 not BPA.

what if we think the d we get at #8 is the BPA?

[Derrico]

I'm nearly positive that were drafting d at #8 not BPA.

If this is the case then it better be what Liger says below.  B.P.A. 

 

what if we think the d we get at #8 is the BPA?

[LGR4GM]

If this is the case then it better be what Liger says below.  B.P.A. 

What if need is determined as part of the BPA formula for us? 

[Derrico]

What if need is determined as part of the BPA formula for us? 

I don't see any D in this draft that will provide a huge contribution within the next two years.  If we still have a big need in 2 years then we're already in trouble. 

[LGR4GM]

I don't see any D in this draft that will provide a huge contribution within the next two years.  If we still have a big need in 2 years then we're already in trouble. 

We are already in trouble. We are in trouble because Tim Murray spent 3 drafts basically ignoring defense. 

[Derrico]

We are already in trouble. We are in trouble because Tim Murray spent 3 drafts basically ignoring defense. 

That's fair.  But I want the guy the Sabres think will turn into the best player.  Period.  Make some trades, sign some free agents to shore up the D. 

 

It wasn't long ago this franchise had the most depth on D.  It was starving for scoring forwards and centremen.  Teams needs change all the time.  Take the best player because whoever is chosen at 8th needs to be an impact player in 3 years, whether it's D or F.