Prospect Info: 2016 Draft | Trading Down From #4 Less Likely Now According to Stauffer

[Raab]

Or they could bust or top out as 4/5 guys and Tkachuk/Puljujärvi become dominant physical wingers and the media asks why the Oilers tried to play smartest guy in the room.

No scout is claiming any of the top D have top pairing potential. If they did they would be higher ranked. If any of the top D from this draft become a 1/2 guy, it will be a surprise.

That doesn't mean none of them could. Few thought OEL was a 1D before his draft. But the scouts have to be damn sure if they are going to pass on Tkachuk/Puljujärvi for a D widely regarded as a less promising prospect at the time of the draft.

The top 3 dmen are all virtually locks to be top 4 dmen at the NHL level. Sergachev definitely has top pairing/franchise potential IMO, Chychrun and Juolevi both have top pairing potential as well. All 3 of them are better then anyone in our system.

Also were not passing on Puljujarvi, no way he drops to 4th. He's on another level compared to the guys ranked 4-10. If I had to make groups I'd say its Matthews, Laine, Puljujarvi in a elite group, then Sergachev/Tkachuk in the next group followed by the rest of the top 10. In saying that, not much separating Sergachev and Tkachuk from that next group. Definitely not as much of a drop as from Puljujarvi to Tkachuk.

 

[Raab]

Tkachuk probably makes the mose sense as a piece to build with mcd.

Won't be upset if that's the pick.

I think Dubois helps us more next year but you're adding a potential franchise center to a team that has 3 of those.

The D are intriguing. Love me some serg but the OBC is strong and may push chychrun.

I'm fine with Tkachuk because he's a player we'll all love for the next decade. Plays the game similar to Smyth in a lot of ways. But it just doesn't give me hope of the Oilers becoming a contender in the next few years. I feel like if we take Sergachev and he hits, we are locks to at least be contenders for a SC within 5 years, probably sooner.

 

[snipes]

If we get back to the tried and true trade NHL players for picks at this draft I'm about done with these clowns.

We need help NOW, not another 4 years from now when a guy we drafted at 25 is finally ready to play.

Hell Hall, RNH, Eberle and the boys will be 30 years old, McDavid will be off his ELC and we will still be eagerly looking at getting an extra draft pick.

This is especially true of #4. If we trade that pick for only other picks I'll blow a gasket.

Me too. Use the pick and take BPA, whether that's Pulju/Tkachuk/Dubois/Sergachyov I don't care.

Trade the pick outright for help right now on D, or just take BPA at #4.

 

[suddeninterest]

Well, maybe we should pull the ol EA NHL trick and just look around the league for which team we think is gonna be the most **** next season and try to get their 2017 1st. My bet is on Van or Tor again. Hope we win next year's lottery and draft Liljegren, he looks like the real deal . But so did Chychrun.

 

[s7ark]

The top 3 dmen are all virtually locks to be top 4 dmen at the NHL level. Sergachev definitely has top pairing/franchise potential IMO, Chychrun and Juolevi both have top pairing potential as well. All 3 of them are better then anyone in our system.

Also were not passing on Puljujarvi, no way he drops to 4th. He's on another level compared to the guys ranked 4-10. If I had to make groups I'd say its Matthews, Laine, Puljujarvi in a elite group, then Sergachev/Tkachuk in the next group followed by the rest of the top 10. In saying that, not much separating Sergachev and Tkachuk from that next group. Definitely not as much of a drop as from Puljujarvi to Tkachuk.

I am sure scouts thought all these top ten D drafted were locks to be top 4 D. I left out the two most recent drafts because it's too soon to really tell. Thirteen clear top 4 D out of twenty seven D taken. A bit under 50%. And of those 13, 8 were taken in the first 5 picks, something none of the top three ranked D this year are likely to achieve. That means, going by history, that we have a 5/27 (18.5%) chance that any of the top three D this year will be clear top four guys.

2007 - Hickey(4), Alzner(5), Ellerby(10)
2008 - Doughty(2), Bogo(3), Petro(4), Schenn(5)
2009 - Hedman(2), OEL(6), Cowen(9)
2010 - Gudbranson(3), McIlrath(10)
2011 - Larsson(4), Hamilton(9), Brodin(10)
2012 - Murray(2), Reinhart(4), Reilly(5), Lindholm(6), Dumba(7), Pouliot(8), Trouba(9)
2013 - Jones(4), Nurse(7), Ristolainen(8)
2014 - Ekblad(1), Fleury(7)

Think you might be going a bit overboard with your predictions?

 

[Raoul Duke]

Or they could bust or top out as 4/5 guys and Tkachuk/Puljujärvi become dominant physical wingers and the media asks why the Oilers tried to play smartest guy in the room.

No scout is claiming any of the top D have top pairing potential. If they did they would be higher ranked. If any of the top D from this draft become a 1/2 guy, it will be a surprise.

That doesn't mean none of them could. Few thought OEL was a 1D before his draft. But the scouts have to be damn sure if they are going to pass on Tkachuk/Puljujärvi for a D widely regarded as a less promising prospect at the time of the draft.

If the oil draft a D that busts while Tkachuk turns into a dominant winger, the media will say the oilers took a swing at a top pairing D because they have several high end forwards.
There have been projections of Sergachev and Juolevi as potential top pairing.
If we draft a forward it won't break my heart but I'd prefer chasing another chance at a top pairing D.
This fan base knows we need D but never wants to draft them high. There's always a reason to chase another forward.
If we continue down this road, in the offseason three years from now this board will be filled with surprise that no top pairing D are available for trade (again) while we eye up another young high end winger and blame the past high picks for not getting it done.

 

[Raab]

I am sure scouts thought all these top ten D drafted were locks to be top 4 D. I left out the two most recent drafts because it's too soon to really tell. Thirteen clear top 4 D out of twenty seven D taken. A bit under 50%. And of those 13, 8 were taken in the first 5 picks, something none of the top three ranked D this year are likely to achieve. That means, going by history, that we have a 5/27 (18.5%) chance that any of the top three D this year will be clear top four guys.

2007 - Hickey(4), Alzner(5), Ellerby(10)
2008 - Doughty(2), Bogo(3), Petro(4), Schenn(5)
2009 - Hedman(2), OEL(6), Cowen(9)
2010 - Gudbranson(3), McIlrath(10)
2011 - Larsson(4), Hamilton(9), Brodin(10)
2012 - Murray(2), Reinhart(4), Reilly(5), Lindholm(6), Dumba(7), Pouliot(8), Trouba(9)
2013 - Jones(4), Nurse(7), Ristolainen(8)
2014 - Ekblad(1), Fleury(7)

Think you might be going a bit overboard with your predictions?

Bogosian, Murray, Gudbranson, Brodin, are all top 4 dmen as well. Nurse is projecting to be. And its to early to really say anything on Fleury. When I say top 4 dmen I include guys like all the above. Most of the guys you have highlighted would be considered top pairing dmen. Only guys who I'd say aren't top pairing dmen that you highlighted would be Trouba and Hamilton.

Also you could go through the past drafts and do a similar thing with the forwards. Remember guys like MPS, Gagner, Glennie, Yakupov, etc...

Edit: Why discount the top 5 picks? If we take a dman at 4 its because he deserves to go top 5 not because we need a dman. I'd take Sergachev above Tkachuk and Dubois on pretty much any team in the league not just the Oilers. And if we look at the above math subtracting Fleury & Ekblad who were taken less then 2 years ago and adding the guys I figure are all top 4 dmen. We come out with right around 65% of the men taken top 10 turn into top 4 defenders. Of those 65% approximately 63% of them become top pairing dmen. So using history as a predictor one of Sergachev, Chychrun, Juolevi will become a top pairing dman, one will become a top 4 dman, and one will bust.

 

[Lacaar]

I am sure scouts thought all these top ten D drafted were locks to be top 4 D. I left out the two most recent drafts because it's too soon to really tell. Thirteen clear top 4 D out of twenty seven D taken. A bit under 50%. And of those 13, 8 were taken in the first 5 picks, something none of the top three ranked D this year are likely to achieve. That means, going by history, that we have a 5/27 (18.5%) chance that any of the top three D this year will be clear top four guys.

2007 - Hickey(4), Alzner(5), Ellerby(10)
2008 - Doughty(2), Bogo(3), Petro(4), Schenn(5)
2009 - Hedman(2), OEL(6), Cowen(9)
2010 - Gudbranson(3), McIlrath(10)
2011 - Larsson(4), Hamilton(9), Brodin(10)
2012 - Murray(2), Reinhart(4), Reilly(5), Lindholm(6), Dumba(7), Pouliot(8), Trouba(9)
2013 - Jones(4), Nurse(7), Ristolainen(8)
2014 - Ekblad(1), Fleury(7)

Think you might be going a bit overboard with your predictions?

I see two current Oilers on that list that aren't bolded.

*In Yoda's voice*
And that is why we fail.

 

[CupofOil]

The top 3 dmen are all virtually locks to be top 4 dmen at the NHL level. Sergachev definitely has top pairing/franchise potential IMO, Chychrun and Juolevi both have top pairing potential as well. All 3 of them are better then anyone in our system.

Also were not passing on Puljujarvi, no way he drops to 4th. He's on another level compared to the guys ranked 4-10. If I had to make groups I'd say its Matthews, Laine, Puljujarvi in a elite group, then Sergachev/Tkachuk in the next group followed by the rest of the top 10. In saying that, not much separating Sergachev and Tkachuk from that next group. Definitely not as much of a drop as from Puljujarvi to Tkachuk.

Absolutely not. None of these guys are elite D prospects. Prospects like Ekblad and Hanifin were virtual locks to be a top 4 Dman, not this group.
This is a weak top end D class compared to years past so while Sergachev has a lot of upside, his game is still pretty raw and thus, there's some bust potential. Same with Chychrun. Juolevi seems like the safer bet but with limted upside compared to the other two. None are virtual locks to be a top 4 Dman. Granted, I've had limited viewings of Sergachev but from what I've seen, his defensive game is very raw. Tons of tools though but definitely some bust potential.

The only virtual locks to be top 6/top 4 players are Matthews, Laine and probably Pulju. This isn't an exceptionally strong draft after those 3 so each prospect has question marks outside of those three.

The one thing I would agree with is that the separation is after 3 and 4-10 are pretty closely grouped together although Tkachuk and Dubois seem to have a slight separation on the rest of the top 10 but not the level of drop off after 3. I'm sure the BPA list of 4-10 varies wildly from team to team.

I see two current Oilers on that list that aren't bolded.

*In Yoda's voice*
And that is why we fail.

Nurse and Reinhart aren't the reasons why the Oilers fail, the reasons are the draft picks from Round 2-7 over the years as far as the draft is concerned and the Yak draft was a major fail. The other non-draft failures are well documented.

 

[SDig14]

Absolutely not. None of these guys are elite D prospects. Prospects like Ekblad and Hanifin were virtual locks to be a top 4 Dman, not this group.
This is a weak top end D class compared to years past so while Sergachev has a lot of upside, his game is still pretty raw and thus, there's some bust potential. Same with Chychrun. Juolevi seems like the safer bet but with limted upside compared to the other two. None are virtual locks to be a top 4 Dman. Granted, I've had limited viewings of Sergachev but from what I've seen, his defensive game is very raw. Tons of tools though but definitely some bust potential.

The only virtual locks to be top 6/top 4 players are Matthews, Laine and probably Pulju. This isn't an exceptionally strong draft after those 3 so each prospect has question marks outside of those three.

The one thing I would agree with is that the separation is after 3 and 4-10 are pretty closely grouped together although Tkachuk and Dubois seem to have a slight separation on the rest of the top 10 but not the level of drop off after 3. I'm sure the BPA list of 4-10 varies wildly from team to team.

Well, I think most scouts still feel their floors are top 4 guys. Otherwise, why would you be taking them in the top 10?

I don't think you need to be an elite D prospect, i.e. some of the best in the last decade, just to be close to a lock to be a top 4 guy.

 

[CupofOil]

Well, I think most scouts still feel their floors are top 4 guys. Otherwise, why would you be taking them in the top 10?

I don't think you need to be an elite D prospect, i.e. some of the best in the last decade, just to be close to a lock to be a top 4 guy.

Of course, but that doesn't make this particular group a lock to be top 4, not all three at least.
This top end group has more question marks than top end groups of the past.

Sergachev had the strongest draft year of the three (or more if you consider one of the other guys as top three) but even Sergachev has major question marks about his defensive game that might never translate.

 

[SDig14]

Here is a list from what I can see are top 10 picks for D in the last 10 years. I don't think I have missed any:

Hanifin, Provorov, Werenski, Ekblad, Fleury, Jones, Nurse, Risto, Larsson, Brodin, Hamilton, Gudbranson, McIlrath, Hedman, OEL, Lindholm, Murray, Reilly, Reinhart, Dumba, Trouba, Koekkoek, Bogo, Schenn, Pietro, Myers, Hickey, Johnson and Alzner.

I feel the odds are in our favor to get a top 4 guy if we take a D in the top 10.

 

[SDig14]

Of course, but that doesn't make this particular group a lock to be top 4, not all three at least.
This top end group has more question marks than top end groups of the past.

Sergachev had the strongest draft year of the three (or more if you consider one of the other guys as top three) but even Sergachev has major question marks about his defensive game that might never translate.

True.

But I feel like even guys in the top 5 tend to have some question marks.

There are very few true 100% "locks" IMO.

As good as I think Pulji will be, some may argue his finishing ability is a question mark to be top 6 lock.

 

[s7ark]

Bogosian, Murray, Gudbranson, Brodin, are all top 4 dmen as well. Nurse is projecting to be. And its to early to really say anything on Fleury. When I say top 4 dmen I include guys like all the above. Most of the guys you have highlighted would be considered top pairing dmen. Only guys who I'd say aren't top pairing dmen that you highlighted would be Trouba and Hamilton.

Also you could go through the past drafts and do a similar thing with the forwards. Remember guys like MPS, Gagner, Glennie, Yakupov, etc...

Edit: Why discount the top 5 picks? If we take a dman at 4 its because he deserves to go top 5 not because we need a dman. I'd take Sergachev above Tkachuk and Dubois on pretty much any team in the league not just the Oilers. And if we look at the above math subtracting Fleury & Ekblad who were taken less then 2 years ago and adding the guys I figure are all top 4 dmen. We come out with right around 65% of the men taken top 10 turn into top 4 defenders. Of those 65% approximately 63% of them become top pairing dmen. So using history as a predictor one of Sergachev, Chychrun, Juolevi will become a top pairing dman, one will become a top 4 dman, and one will bust.

The only person advocating taking a D at 4 is you. None of the scouting services have a D that high. Even adding your names(which are all debatable as top 4 D) doesn't change the fact that D are iffy-er picks in the top 10 than forwards. As for how many of those names became top pairing D, how many of those top pairing D were taking in the 1-5 picks vs the 6-10 picks? Almost all top pairing D were taken in the top 5, and were predicted to be taken in the top 5 before the draft.

https://bluebulletreport.com/2016/06/01/blue-bullet-draft-pick-value-chart/

 

[Raab]

The only person advocating taking a D at 4 is you. None of the scouting services have a D that high. Even adding your names(which are all debatable as top 4 D) doesn't change the fact that D are iffy-er picks in the top 10 than forwards. As for how many of those names became top pairing D, how many of those top pairing D were taking in the 1-5 picks vs the 6-10 picks? Almost all top pairing D were taken in the top 5, and were predicted to be taken in the top 5 before the draft.

https://bluebulletreport.com/2016/06/01/blue-bullet-draft-pick-value-chart/

If you look at that chart taking a dman at 5, 6, 7, or 8 have equal to or better chance of turning out then the forwards. Sure forwards may be the "safer" pick, but even still there is a percentage of them that don't work out. And as for the dmen in the top 5, I don't ever remember a dman like Sergachev coming into the OHL and improving from a projected 2nd/3rd round pick into the top 10 in less then a year. I think if he had played last year in North America he would easily be ranked higher then he is.

Edit: Im also not the only one who thinks taking Sergachev at 4 might look real good in a year or two. Lowetide's quote on Sergachev "His NHLE is 22 points, and he delivered 57 points in 67 games on a team that lacked elite-level offensive talent up front. If the Oilers took him No. 4 overall—ahead of Matt Tkachuk and Pierre-Luc Dubois—there would be fire in the streets. I have Sergachev No. 6 overall, and will tell you that (for me) choosing him at No. 4 may look brilliant down the line. Carry on."

http://lowetide.ca/2016/06/02/better-learn-how-to-pronounce-tkachuk/comment-page-1/

And another article coming out today from the hockey writers saying that Sergachev could go to either Edmonton or Vancouver. http://thehockeywriters.com/draft-preview-windsor-spitfires-mikhail-sergachev-soars/

 

[Qubax]

If the top 3 picks go how we think they will, then I believe the best move for the Oilers is to trade down to somewhere in the 8-10 range and take the best available of the 3 main Dmen.

There are arguments for any of the 3 D to be the best, and I'm very torn on who I think is the best. I kind of lean towards Chychurn, but although he could become Ekblad/Pronger you fear he'll be Gudbranson.

I see the other D as Zubov or Vlasic type Dmen (which are lower end then Pronger) but still easily #1/top pairing dmen.

So to me, why draft Tkachuk or Dubois who are the 2nd tier of forwards and it's debatable whose better (plus in 5 years maybe Clayton Keller is playing like Johnny Gaudreau and you passed over him).

Rather, move from #4 down to 8-10. One or two of the dmen will be there and you'll get to add a 2nd and 3rd rounder (approx value) or more for your efforts in moving down.

I'm a Flames fan and draft guru, these are just my opinions. Please be nice!

 

[SDig14]

The only thing I do NOT want to do is move down to 10 and take "whoever is left". That's a strategy for the weak IMO.

Just decide what forward after the top 3 you like the most. If you stay at 4, take him. If that's Tkachuk or Dubois, then be happy about it.

If you decide it is worth it to move down and take a D, then pick the ONE D that you want and go get him. Make sure you do not move down too far.

I want the Oilers to leave the draft with either the forward or D that they believe will be the best in 5 years.

I want nothing to do with the "Oh well, he was one of the 4 guys we had in this tier, and we were comfortable getting any of them" nonsense.

 

[Supermassive]

My concern is that the sweetener included in the trade won't be enough to justify dropping from #4 to 8-10. We need a PP RD and without one, there's no reason to trade down.

 

[Qubax]

The only thing I do NOT want to do is move down to 10 and take "whoever is left". That's a strategy for the weak IMO.

Just decide what forward after the top 3 you like the most. If you stay at 4, take him. If that's Tkachuk or Dubois, then be happy about it.

If you decide it is worth it to move down and take a D, then pick the ONE D that you want and go get him. Make sure you do not move down too far.

I want the Oilers to leave the draft with either the forward or D that they believe will be the best in 5 years.

I want nothing to do with the "Oh well, he was one of the 4 guys we had in this tier, and we were comfortable getting any of them" nonsense.

These are fair points.

 

[McJadeddog]

I am sure scouts thought all these top ten D drafted were locks to be top 4 D. I left out the two most recent drafts because it's too soon to really tell. Thirteen clear top 4 D out of twenty seven D taken. A bit under 50%. And of those 13, 8 were taken in the first 5 picks, something none of the top three ranked D this year are likely to achieve. That means, going by history, that we have a 5/27 (18.5%) chance that any of the top three D this year will be clear top four guys.

2007 - Hickey(4), Alzner(5), Ellerby(10)
2008 - Doughty(2), Bogo(3), Petro(4), Schenn(5)
2009 - Hedman(2), OEL(6), Cowen(9)
2010 - Gudbranson(3), McIlrath(10)
2011 - Larsson(4), Hamilton(9), Brodin(10)
2012 - Murray(2), Reinhart(4), Reilly(5), Lindholm(6), Dumba(7), Pouliot(8), Trouba(9)
2013 - Jones(4), Nurse(7), Ristolainen(8)
2014 - Ekblad(1), Fleury(7)

Think you might be going a bit overboard with your predictions?

your point is still completely valid, but i would include bogo as a legit top-4.... i agree with your overall point 100% though

 

[dustrock]

I am sure scouts thought all these top ten D drafted were locks to be top 4 D. I left out the two most recent drafts because it's too soon to really tell. Thirteen clear top 4 D out of twenty seven D taken. A bit under 50%. And of those 13, 8 were taken in the first 5 picks, something none of the top three ranked D this year are likely to achieve. That means, going by history, that we have a 5/27 (18.5%) chance that any of the top three D this year will be clear top four guys.

2007 - Hickey(4), Alzner(5), Ellerby(10)
2008 - Doughty(2), Bogo(3), Petro(4), Schenn(5)
2009 - Hedman(2), OEL(6), Cowen(9)
2010 - Gudbranson(3), McIlrath(10)
2011 - Larsson(4), Hamilton(9), Brodin(10)
2012 - Murray(2), Reinhart(4), Reilly(5), Lindholm(6), Dumba(7), Pouliot(8), Trouba(9)
2013 - Jones(4), Nurse(7), Ristolainen(8)
2014 - Ekblad(1), Fleury(7)

Think you might be going a bit overboard with your predictions?

I take your point s7ark but 2 points (1) it's hard to decide on d-men until we're 5 years out I think, so anyone 2012 and more recent the jury is out (2) if you throw out 2007 and 2010, there's some pretty great d-men each year.

Long term it makes sense to take one of the top 3 D, but it's going to take 3 years to know.

 

[SDig14]

We see it all the time. Teams lists vary drastically from scouting services.

Recent memory would be guys like Hampus Lindholm and Mark Scheifele. Lots of lists had Scheifele outside the top 10 and the rumor was Winnipeg had him inside their top 5 and were thrilled to get him at 7.

Same with Hampus Lindholm, who was in Anaheim's top 5 and outside lots of top 10s.

If we stay at 4, just take the guy who we think is the best and be happy. I don't care who it is because we will get a great player.

I will be a little annoyed and curious if they take like Brown or Nylander at 4, but I'd be fine with any of the other 4 guys.

 

[Stud Muffin]

I'm starting to like the thought of trading back and taking Sergachev.

 

[gordonhught]

I'm starting to like the thought of trading back and taking Sergachev.

If you like the player, just draft the player. Don't get cute and try to trade back and pick up a third round pick and risk losing the player you want.

Remember, after McDavid was drafted few expected the Oilers to be drafting again in the top 5. This year, take the best D (or forward) and run.

Trade a roster player for defensive help, or, upgrade defense in free agency.

 

[Stud Muffin]

If you like the player, just draft the player. Don't get cute and try to trade back and pick up a third round pick and risk losing the player you want.

Remember, after McDavid was drafted few expected the Oilers to be drafting again in the top 5. This year, take the best D (or forward) and run.

Trade a roster player for defensive help, or, upgrade defense in free agency.

Glad your not gm