2022 NHL Draft Rankings

[LGR4GM]

 

[Taro T]

5 hours ago, Thorny said:

You had me at “centre”! 

So, it's actually autoincorrect, right?  😉

 

[Crusader1969]

48 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

 

instant reaction ... Seamus Casey is much lower here than I've seen elsewhere   Him and Ty Nelson look to be the two RHD who could be available mid to late RD 1. I haven't heard too much about Jiricek but he is often ranked near the bottom of the lottery picks.

Brad Lambert is the 2022 version of Raty as he falls down the rankings. I doubt he falls as far as Raty but its definitely something to keep an eye on.  He still has to rank top 5 in dynamic offensive players but I prefer Cooley and Savoie.

If the Sabres once again lean towards Russians - Gleb Trikozov is a name to watch   He hasnt done to much at the VHL level but has 7 goals in 8 MHL games. Described as a smooth skating two way forward, competitive and plays with pace.

Ruslan Gazizov is ranked 50th by Craig and isn't on that many ranking lists. Plays for the knights and from what little I've seen of him, Im going to guess that he will be appearing on more and more as the season continues.

 

 

 

 

[Thorny]

1 hour ago, Taro T said:

So, it's actually autoincorrect, right?  😉

 

Usually it's me, spelling it the proper canadian way, but in this case I had used quotations so tried to get it the way he had it 😄

[Huckleberry]

3 hours ago, Crusader1969 said:

instant reaction ... Seamus Casey is much lower here than I've seen elsewhere   Him and Ty Nelson look to be the two RHD who could be available mid to late RD 1. I haven't heard too much about Jiricek but he is often ranked near the bottom of the lottery picks.

Brad Lambert is the 2022 version of Raty as he falls down the rankings. I doubt he falls as far as Raty but its definitely something to keep an eye on.  He still has to rank top 5 in dynamic offensive players but I prefer Cooley and Savoie.

If the Sabres once again lean towards Russians - Gleb Trikozov is a name to watch   He hasnt done to much at the VHL level but has 7 goals in 8 MHL games. Described as a smooth skating two way forward, competitive and plays with pace.

Ruslan Gazizov is ranked 50th by Craig and isn't on that many ranking lists. Plays for the knights and from what little I've seen of him, Im going to guess that he will be appearing on more and more as the season continues.

 

 

 

 

Hoping we take a gamble on Lambert with one of our late picks.

[Curt]

10 minutes ago, Huckleberry said:

Hoping we take a gamble on Lambert with one of our late picks.

If he is there outside the lottery, it could be a steal, but I’m not sure if he is the type of guy that Adams is looking for.

[Buf4alo]

I know Lambert's had a rough season so far, but he is still one of the most skilled and talented players in the draft. His highlight videos are really incredible. I'd be thrilled if he falls into our lap on draft day, whichever pick that may be.

[LGR4GM]

31 minutes ago, 7Fun6 said:

I know Lambert's had a rough season so far, but he is still one of the most skilled and talented players in the draft. His highlight videos are really incredible. I'd be thrilled if he falls into our lap on draft day, whichever pick that may be.

I wouldn't currently be looking at Lambert with a top 10 pick. 

[PerreaultForever]

On 11/15/2021 at 11:15 AM, LGR4GM said:

Grit matters but size, meh. Lots of tall guys who suck at hockey. 

Don't take offense at this, but I really wish you'd stop equating height with size. When I talk about size (and I think this holds for most people) I'm talking about shoulders, chest, muscle mass. Overall body not height. Now many big guys are also tall, but that's not the main criteria. 

As we used to say back in the olden days guys built like a brick sh*thouse. 

[LGR4GM]

25 minutes ago, PerreaultForever said:

Don't take offense at this, but I really wish you'd stop equating height with size. When I talk about size (and I think this holds for most people) I'm talking about shoulders, chest, muscle mass. Overall body not height. Now many big guys are also tall, but that's not the main criteria. 

As we used to say back in the olden days guys built like a brick sh*thouse. 

Don't take offense but talking about muscle mass on 18 year olds is stupid. All of them can build muscle. Rosen for example at 190lbs would be a beast. Justin Bailey at 214, meh.

The easiest thing for a prospect to add is muscle and weight. 

[LGR4GM]

JJ Peterka at 190lbs is fun

Bjork at 197lbs, meh

Size doesn't matter until it does and almost 95% or more of prospects are not at their final NHL weight/size/muscle

[LGR4GM]

31 minutes ago, PerreaultForever said:

Don't take offense at this, but I really wish you'd stop equating height with size. When I talk about size (and I think this holds for most people) I'm talking about shoulders, chest, muscle mass. Overall body not height. Now many big guys are also tall, but that's not the main criteria. 

As we used to say back in the olden days guys built like a brick sh*thouse. 

Honestly I'd be more concerned a bulky u20 guy isn't as good as he looks because he's relying on that bulk which won't matter as much in the NHL 

[Hoss]

1 hour ago, LGR4GM said:

Don't take offense but talking about muscle mass on 18 year olds is stupid. All of them can build muscle. Rosen for example at 190lbs would be a beast. Justin Bailey at 214, meh.

The easiest thing for a prospect to add is muscle and weight. 

Both bold statements are wildly false. Teams definitely spend a good amount of time getting an idea what a player's body type/muscle mass is and how it could impact their ability to grow in the future.

[PerreaultForever]

2 hours ago, LGR4GM said:

Don't take offense but talking about muscle mass on 18 year olds is stupid. All of them can build muscle. Rosen for example at 190lbs would be a beast. Justin Bailey at 214, meh.

The easiest thing for a prospect to add is muscle and weight. 

You get a sense of which they will go though even at that age. Mitts for example. You're drafting him you know he isn't going to be "big". Arguing this is, I agree, "stupid". 

[PerreaultForever]

2 hours ago, LGR4GM said:

JJ Peterka at 190lbs is fun

Bjork at 197lbs, meh

Size doesn't matter until it does and almost 95% or more of prospects are not at their final NHL weight/size/muscle

Oh come on, there's all kinds of ways to project their future "size". 

I worked with Dave Andreychuk's dad, for example. One look at "Big Julie" and you knew Dave was going to be "Big Dave". (At this age he is the spitting image of his father too). 

This is why you hire scouts as well as analysts. Go meet the families, watch how they train, look at their work habits etc etc all of which aids you in your projections of who and what they will become. 

[Thorny]

10 hours ago, PerreaultForever said:

Don't take offense at this, but I really wish you'd stop equating height with size. When I talk about size (and I think this holds for most people) I'm talking about shoulders, chest, muscle mass. Overall body not height. Now many big guys are also tall, but that's not the main criteria. 

As we used to say back in the olden days guys built like a brick sh*thouse. 

To your point, Crosby is not tall, yet he's a truck. That strong, powerful lower base, ala Peter Forsberg

[LGR4GM]

10 hours ago, Hoss said:

Both bold statements are wildly false. Teams definitely spend a good amount of time getting an idea what a player's body type/muscle mass is and how it could impact their ability to grow in the future.

Wildly false? lol. Right, all 18 year old kids can't build muscle and to say otherwise is wildly false. 

Isak Rosen will always be 160lbs, the poor bastard... Jack Quinn should be traded now, he is only 176lbs, it would be "wildly false" to state he can add muscle. 

I would be less worried about Rosen at 160 than I am about Geekie at 205 for the record. Geekie is close to what his playing weight will be and he uses that advantage against smaller players because he plays in a kids league. While some of you will be like "LOOK! Geekie is 205lbs! He is what we need!" I look at it and ask, okay is Geekie actually good or does his size advantage give him a disproportionate advantage at his age? Will that size advantage translate to the NHL where just about everyone is 6ft and 195lbs? Might help some sure but it will not help to the same extent it does now. So we need to examine his other traits and we find highly skilled hands which is good. He has a decent hockey iq, also good. He is an average or below average skater who is easily knocked off the puck because of his balance... but he's big. Size doesn't matter until it does. Extremes matter like 5'8" and 6'6" those really matter because your size is still a sizeable advantage. However if you are a 5'11" 165lb kid, am I going to pass on your for the less skilled 6'3" 195lb kid? No, absolutely not because I know you will add muscle because adding weight for an 18 year old is going to happen and isn't "wildly false". 

 

I have been having this same argument for years. Everyone always wants a big guy because he is "bulky" or whatever other term you want to use. Do I wish Matthew Savoie was 6'3" 190lbs, yes! But I also recognize that having the bulk doesn't mean much if the skill isn't there. I also recognize that when you draft a 18yr old KID, child, young adult, they are not at the muscle mass or weight they will be at when they hit 22 and the NHL. That is not some wildly false thing, it is literally how 99% of NHL draft picks develop. Adding muscle is a lot easier than fixing their hockey IQ (risto) or teaching them to skate (Geekie) even though those things can also be improved in time (Draisaitl). If I am gambling on an 18yr old kid eating better and going to the gym or a mediocre skater suddenly fixing his muscle memory stride, I will probably go with the muscle part... or again we should trade Rosen right now because he is 160lbs. 

9 hours ago, PerreaultForever said:

You get a sense of which they will go though even at that age. Mitts for example. You're drafting him you know he isn't going to be "big". Arguing this is, I agree, "stupid". 

Mitts the 196lb center? That's the guy you are talking about correct? Is he big, no but he is average in size for the NHL. 

[LGR4GM]

9 hours ago, PerreaultForever said:

Oh come on, there's all kinds of ways to project their future "size". 

I worked with Dave Andreychuk's dad, for example. One look at "Big Julie" and you knew Dave was going to be "Big Dave". (At this age he is the spitting image of his father too). 

This is why you hire scouts as well as analysts. Go meet the families, watch how they train, look at their work habits etc etc all of which aids you in your projections of who and what they will become. 

Sure there are but you can't honestly say that because guys dad is 5'11" 185lbs that his 5'11" 170lb will only get that big. It would completely ignore how the body adds muscle or even how puberty and growth work. Not everyone is done growing at 18. I am a great example I was 2 inches shorter at 18 then I was at 20. My father is 2 inches shorter than me and weighs 25lbs less than I do. 

Again you are overvaluing size and it happens in the draft as well. I am just not going to be convinced that a 6'4" player who is 200lbs is adding some magical dimension to this team that the 5'11" 170lb kid isn't. JJ Peterka is a great example. I think Rosen will be a really great example because he won't always be his weight. Adding muscle is something that will happen for all these kids unless they don't have the work ethic, in that case you aren't drafting them. 

Jack Quinn is the perfect example. He did not work out until he was 15 and he immediately saw huge gains in his game and skill. I would bet money he is bigger than 176lb right now and that has helped him in Rochester. I wouldnt avoid him on draft day though because Perfetti was bigger (185lbs). 

My issue comes down to using either height or FAR less important weight as a determining factor in talent acquisition. Sure height and weight allow you to do things you might not be able to otherwise but weight means muscle and all prospects need to add that and height is constantly overcome by players that aren't 6'5". 

[Dr. Who]

13 hours ago, PerreaultForever said:

Don't take offense at this, but I really wish you'd stop equating height with size. When I talk about size (and I think this holds for most people) I'm talking about shoulders, chest, muscle mass. Overall body not height. Now many big guys are also tall, but that's not the main criteria. 

As we used to say back in the olden days guys built like a brick sh*thouse. 

In the olden days, I always equated that term with the likes of Sophia Loren and Raquel Welch. (And the groaner jokes in the early Bond films were cool, etc.) Sucks to get old . . . 

[dudacek]

Seems like 'size' is one of those trigger words.

Better to use 'strength' or 'length' which, if an individual has them, can be used as assets to enhance his game. And, if he doesn't, they can be detriments that he needs to compensate for.

They are useful tools — along with quickness, speed, hockey sense, and agility — that can help you get position and win contested space.

[LGR4GM]

13 minutes ago, dudacek said:

Seems like 'size' is one of those trigger words.

Better to use 'strength' or 'length' which, if an individual has them, can be used as assets to enhance his game. And, if he doesn't, they can be detriments that he needs to compensate for.

They are useful tools — along with quickness, speed, hockey sense, and agility — that can help you get position and win contested space.

They can be useful tools for sure. Power being 6'6" is going to be a useful tool. Strength or bulk at 18 is just such a questionable way to analyze these guys because of how much their bodies change and grow. Marco Rossi is absurdly strong at his 5'9" 183lbs but Jack Quinn at 6' 176lb is still needs to bring more strength to the table. 

[PerreaultForever]

4 hours ago, Thorny said:

To your point, Crosby is not tall, yet he's a truck. That strong, powerful lower base, ala Peter Forsberg

Exactly. Forsberg is a great example. He was strong and powerful. 

[PerreaultForever]

2 hours ago, LGR4GM said:

Mitts the 196lb center? That's the guy you are talking about correct? Is he big, no but he is average in size for the NHL. 

Mitts is soft as butter. 

[PerreaultForever]

2 hours ago, LGR4GM said:

Sure there are but you can't honestly say that because guys dad is 5'11" 185lbs that his 5'11" 170lb will only get that big. It would completely ignore how the body adds muscle or even how puberty and growth work. Not everyone is done growing at 18. I am a great example I was 2 inches shorter at 18 then I was at 20. My father is 2 inches shorter than me and weighs 25lbs less than I do. 

Again you are overvaluing size and it happens in the draft as well. I am just not going to be convinced that a 6'4" player who is 200lbs is adding some magical dimension to this team that the 5'11" 170lb kid isn't. JJ Peterka is a great example. I think Rosen will be a really great example because he won't always be his weight. Adding muscle is something that will happen for all these kids unless they don't have the work ethic, in that case you aren't drafting them. 

Jack Quinn is the perfect example. He did not work out until he was 15 and he immediately saw huge gains in his game and skill. I would bet money he is bigger than 176lb right now and that has helped him in Rochester. I wouldnt avoid him on draft day though because Perfetti was bigger (185lbs). 

My issue comes down to using either height or FAR less important weight as a determining factor in talent acquisition. Sure height and weight allow you to do things you might not be able to otherwise but weight means muscle and all prospects need to add that and height is constantly overcome by players that aren't 6'5". 

You're purposely ignoring my comment 

12 hours ago, PerreaultForever said:

This is why you hire scouts as well as analysts. Go meet the families, watch how they train, look at their work habits etc etc all of which aids you in your projections of who and what they will become. 

So yes, obviously genetics is only one thing and not a guarantee, it's a combination of things. There are always exceptions to every rule but overall you can tell but you have to look at the whole package, you have to consider EVERYTHING

and if you have players ranked similar in skills, I'm taking the bigger meaner ones cause we need more of that. 

[dudacek]

18 minutes ago, PerreaultForever said:

Exactly. Forsberg is a great example. He was strong and powerful. 

Peterka doesn't have a lot of "size" but he has a hockey player's low centre of gravity and powerful legs. Coupled with his speed and hockey sense, his lack of "size" will never be an issue.

Quinn is "bigger" but his lack of strength is a question mark. His hands, his skating and his sense certainly overcome that an AHL level, but might not at an NHL level. "Size" is not an issue. Strength is, but he has the size to add strength.

Ruotsalainen lacks size, but more importantly, he also lacks strength and quickness. Does he have the size to add enough strength without sacrificing quickness, or vice-versa?

Edited November 17, 2021 by dudacek