2016 NHL Draft - Part 3 - June 24th

[cactus shake]

Drop down to 9-10, pick up another 2 + 4 (to flyers) and take Sergacheven and one of Gauthier or Jones at 20?

Yeah that's my favourite scenario (bearing in mind I really know nothing about these players). Reading the Sabres board it seems Murray might be as wary of Russians as Maloney was, most expect them to take Chychrun.

With the caveat that my opinion's worthless as it's based solely on a few youtube clips so I miss seeing the defensive lapses - doesn't Sergachev just have a really languid playing style? He looks direct in the offensive zone, at times driving to the net with speed. He just appears endlessly patient with the puck on his stick. I think that vision combined with size should translate well to the NHL, and I'd be optimistic of defensive improvement with that having been his first season on smaller ice. Looks to be in a good environment for development, too.

It looks like neither Gauthier or Jones could be there at 20, so I would rather trade back with that pick too, if possible. Jones just went at 19 in the board mock draft. Should be an interesting selection at 20, which is imminent: http://hfboards.mandatory.com/showthread.php?t=2085687

 

[hbk]

Yeah that's my favourite scenario (bearing in mind I really know nothing about these players). Reading the Sabres board it seems Murray might be as wary of Russians as Maloney was, most expect them to take Chychrun.

With the caveat that my opinion's worthless as it's based solely on a few youtube clips so I miss seeing the defensive lapses - doesn't Sergachev just have a really languid playing style? He looks direct in the offensive zone, at times driving to the net with speed. He just appears endlessly patient with the puck on his stick. I think that vision combined with size should translate well to the NHL, and I'd be optimistic of defensive improvement with that having been his first season on smaller ice. Looks to be in a good environment for development, too.

It looks like neither Gauthier or Jones could be there at 20, so I would rather trade back with that pick too, if possible. Jones just went at 19 in the board mock draft. Should be an interesting selection at 20, which is imminent: http://hfboards.mandatory.com/showthread.php?t=2085687

Sabres aren't taking Chychrun at 8. I would bet money on it.

 

[lanky]

Which is one of the reasons that Sportsnet article made me laugh at their scouting department even more than i already do because they somehow think he has top pairing potential but Chychrun doesn't.

I believe the scouts mentioned in the article are employed by NHL teams. I don't think Sportsnet has any scouts of their own.

I have Chychrun as the top D in the draft, though I think there's a firm top 7 prospects in this draft and they're all forwards. I'm very happy the Coyotes have #7 and I hope they use it (and not on a D).

 

[tucknroll]

Chychrun is physically mature. Juolevi is not. Sergachev playing with 16 year olds on a team destined to get slaughtered.

Chychrun was awful at the most important scouting event of the year. Discount it all you want but a top 10 selection isn't happening. He's falling.

So Chychrun is done growing at 17-18? If he's mature now he's only going to get bigger still, the same arguments were made about Eklbad and he's maintained his play the exact same playing style. Juolevi's style is going to stay the same regardless of his maturity when in the NHL, he will never be a bigger "mature" player compared to others there and he is always going to need his brain (which should be as mature as Chychruns) to make his plays like he does now and play positionally responsible. Chychrun has the benefit of a body and brain though, I'd feel more comfortable knowing a player already has this maturity and will continue to grow rather than HOPE that a player can develop his in the future.

I understand that U-18 is a big scouting event but how on earth do you justify that a player who was great for 2 years isn't as good anymore because of 7 games, the same goes the other way with Brown (just the best example), solid player i like him but he has a great 7 games and jumps up 10 spots on every mock draft because clearly he's a different player than he was before those 7 games, were the scouts not watching him all season. There is such an illusion created by these short tounries that skewer peoples judgment.
There is no good argument to say he's not a top 10 draft pick

 

[tucknroll]

I believe the scouts mentioned in the article are employed by NHL teams. I don't think Sportsnet has any scouts of their own.

I have Chychrun as the top D in the draft, though I think there's a firm top 7 prospects in this draft and they're all forwards. I'm very happy the Coyotes have #7 and I hope they use it (and not on a D).

True, they did do that. My mistake.
They do often have their guys make projections though (at least did), I stopped watching Sportsnet whenever the games aren't on because they are brutal.
I'm very happy at 7 as well, and fair, no problem will be solved by drafting a early this year because none will be in the NHL next year, Arizona has a #1 D and a partner for him already, so they can draft a D at #20 and #37 to improve their prospect pool like they need to do. I'm hoping for Dubois to fall and if he doesn't then my list goes Keller, Chychrun, Jost, Brown (in that order)

 

[lanky]

Jones just went at 19 in the board mock draft. Should be an interesting selection at 20, which is imminent: http://hfboards.mandatory.com/showthread.php?t=2085687

Logan Brown and Jake Bean would be a dream scenario. Might have to buy a vuvuzela if that actually happened.

 

[rt]

Logan Brown and Jake Bean would be a dream scenario. Might have to buy a vuvuzela if that actually happened.

Indeed. Best case right there.

 

[Jakey53]

Logan Brown and Jake Bean would be a dream scenario. Might have to buy a vuvuzela if that actually happened.

I second this.

 

[cobra427]

I second this.

It depends on what the scouting staff is thinking on both players. I believe they will take BPA at both spots, one of them being a D man. The BPA has a caveat, meaning which player has the most upside and will be the BP in 3 years. They could take a player less developed but will pay better dividends in 3 years as an example.

 

[lanky]

Both these guys are putting up serious points now, at this age. Goals and assists. And both are string beans that have a huge amount of growing to do. Big upside.

Perfect blend of new age Sham Sharron and old school scouting.

 

[PhoPhan]

I'd be pretty disappointed in Brown & Bean myself. I've got them ranked 11th and 36th, though I'm sure they'll both go earlier than that.

There are definitely flashes where Brown can look like an absolute force, but the same can be said about Hanzal and even someone like Bryan Boyle. Brown's main issue is consistency, and I think he's far more likely to top out as a 2nd line center who occasionally put together a dominant stretch than he is to turn into the next Lindros or Sundin. There's a reason those sorts of centers are as rare as they are. Brown is also the sort of player most hurt by the CHL/AHL eligibility rules, as he definitely needs more seasoning before he's ready for the NHL, but playing against much smaller players, he's liable to develop (or maintain) some bad habits. He'll only turn into a first line player worth a top 10 pick if he can become a more consistently driven player, and that's typically not a trait that changes much after a player is drafted.

As for Bean: yuck. Hard to argue against is productivity, but much easier to argue against just about everything else. His shortcomings are masked against junior competition, especially with Sanheim. He's got a lot of work to do before any NHL coach can give him playing time, and if he's a first round pick, I expect that coach to be working for his second (or third) NHL team. That is: he'd be best served to spend a couple years in the WHL and then a year or two in the AHL, but as a first round pick (especially if he goes in the top 15), there'll be pressure to move him along more quickly than that. He's about as wiry now as Turris was when he was drafted, and it took Turris a good five years to become an effective NHL player. The learning curve with defensemen tends to be a little longer, too. I've made the Michael Del Zotto comparison a few times now, but I don't see how Bean turns into a much better player than that.

 

[hbk]

So Chychrun is done growing at 17-18? If he's mature now he's only going to get bigger still, the same arguments were made about Eklbad and he's maintained his play the exact same playing style. Juolevi's style is going to stay the same regardless of his maturity when in the NHL, he will never be a bigger "mature" player compared to others there and he is always going to need his brain (which should be as mature as Chychruns) to make his plays like he does now and play positionally responsible. Chychrun has the benefit of a body and brain though, I'd feel more comfortable knowing a player already has this maturity and will continue to grow rather than HOPE that a player can develop his in the future.

I understand that U-18 is a big scouting event but how on earth do you justify that a player who was great for 2 years isn't as good anymore because of 7 games, the same goes the other way with Brown (just the best example), solid player i like him but he has a great 7 games and jumps up 10 spots on every mock draft because clearly he's a different player than he was before those 7 games, were the scouts not watching him all season. There is such an illusion created by these short tounries that skewer peoples judgment.
There is no good argument to say he's not a top 10 draft pick

The good argument is his hockey sense will prevent him from being anything more than a second pairing D as game increases in speed. Chychrun is closer to the player he is going to be than a player who is still physically maturing. He's a good player not an elite one. Not someone worthy of a top 10 pick.

Disagree with me all you like. I started down this path after I saw him play live. This is my opinion and I know for certainty that it matches the opinion of at least one team picking on top 10. A label of a Lack of hockey IQ or diminished hockey iq is the kiss of death at the draft.

 

[PhoPhan]

The good argument is his hockey sense will prevent him from being anything more than a second pairing D as game increases in speed. Chychrun is closer to the player he is going to be than a player who is still physically maturing. He's a good player not an elite one. Not someone worthy of a top 10 pick.

Disagree with me all you like. I started down this path after I saw him play live. This is my opinion and I know for certainty that it matches the opinion of at least one team picking on top 10. A label of a Lack of hockey IQ or diminished hockey iq is the kiss of death at the draft.

It only takes one team to disagree for Chychrun to go top 10. For all we know, that team could be the Coyotes. It's unlikely that any team drafting him didn't see his WJC performance, but they may have also seen him in other situations where he looked a lot better (and there have certainly been situations in which he looked dominant).

Hockey sense is the trait I put the most stock in, by far, when it comes to evaluating prospects, but it's also among the hardest to gauge. You can watch a player once or twice and have a pretty good idea of how well that player skates or how accurate his passing is. Hockey sense is much more subjective and circumstantial. The same player can look like a genius one game and a total dunce the next. Nail Yakupov went 1st overall in 2012 despite very limited hockey sense, for example. Landeskog went 2nd the year before, and the biggest knock on him at the time was his IQ. If it were black-and-white, the draft would be much less of a crapshoot.

With everything asked of Chychrun at the WJC and in Sarnia, it's no surprise to me that he doesn't show consistent decision-making. Though you and the GM you cite are of the opinion that he's just not that smart of a player, I suspect it's more likely a case of a good-not-great player trying to do too much. If he's brought along at the right pace, learns to simplify things a little and so on, he has as much potential as any defender in the draft, and a pretty high floor given the rest of his size/skills package. I've got him 12th for now, and if you can pull down an Erik Johnson or a Dion Phaneuf with the 12th pick, that's a pretty good return.

 

[tucknroll]

The good argument is his hockey sense will prevent him from being anything more than a second pairing D as game increases in speed. Chychrun is closer to the player he is going to be than a player who is still physically maturing. He's a good player not an elite one. Not someone worthy of a top 10 pick.

Disagree with me all you like. I started down this path after I saw him play live. This is my opinion and I know for certainty that it matches the opinion of at least one team picking on top 10. A label of a Lack of hockey IQ or diminished hockey iq is the kiss of death at the draft.

How many time did you see him play live? is U-18 it? Yeh, you heard Murray (forgive my assuming, but not a good GM in my opinion) say it, you constantly say he has no IQ but you have not made an argument to how he doesn't have a hockey sense. All you keep saying is he's JoVo, "he's free fall" "a GM doesn't like him". I get that this is your opinion and i welcome all opinions, but justify it. what parts of his game is he lacking to justify he has no sense?, when does he have mental lapses?, is he getting mixed up with his D partner? I get that sometimes he makes bad breakout passes but as i've talked to people with Sarnia and i got to know his game, i've come to understand maybe why sometimes he does that and i've said it to justify the argument that he's a good player. Like whats wrong with his hockey sence that keeps him from being a top pairing D, hows his mental ability mean he's going to be a second pairing or #4 as you say it?
What throughout his two years in the OHL all 111 games (90 points playing defence first hockey, 2nd and 3rd team OHL all-star) on an at best "decent" team where he's their go to guy has he shown he has no hockey sense? I'm not saying theres no chance he wont fall, theres always a chance for anyone to fall, i'm not saying theres no risk to drafting a player because every player has a risk
and if at worst he becomes a second pairing D thats awesome, because the other two D have lower floors to their game then that
Yeh he's more "mature", he's more NHL ready, he's more developed, he's bigger and stronger, already a great skater at NHL standards with an NHL shot, you know you're getting that when you Draft him and he's still getting better, Juolevi (who's in argument purely because he's suppose to be top 10) is a mystery box when it comes to that, he might never reach that level of maturity. It's not like Juolevi's IQ is MUCH ahead of Chychrun's either which would be the only reason someones drafting him first

 

[tucknroll]

It only takes one team to disagree for Chychrun to go top 10. For all we know, that team could be the Coyotes. It's unlikely that any team drafting him didn't see his WJC performance, but they may have also seen him in other situations where he looked a lot better (and there have certainly been situations in which he looked dominant).

Hockey sense is the trait I put the most stock in, by far, when it comes to evaluating prospects, but it's also among the hardest to gauge. You can watch a player once or twice and have a pretty good idea of how well that player skates or how accurate his passing is. Hockey sense is much more subjective and circumstantial. The same player can look like a genius one game and a total dunce the next. Nail Yakupov went 1st overall in 2012 despite very limited hockey sense, for example. Landeskog went 2nd the year before, and the biggest knock on him at the time was his IQ. If it were black-and-white, the draft would be much less of a crapshoot.

With everything asked of Chychrun at the WJC and in Sarnia, it's no surprise to me that he doesn't show consistent decision-making. Though you and the GM you cite are of the opinion that he's just not that smart of a player, I suspect it's more likely a case of a good-not-great player trying to do too much. If he's brought along at the right pace, learns to simplify things a little and so on, he has as much potential as any defender in the draft, and a pretty high floor given the rest of his size/skills package. I've got him 12th for now, and if you can pull down an Erik Johnson or a Dion Phaneuf with the 12th pick, that's a pretty good return.

awesome post

 

[hbk]

How many time did you see him play live? is U-18 it? Yeh, you heard Murray (forgive my assuming, but not a good GM in my opinion) say it, you constantly say he has no IQ but you have not made an argument to how he doesn't have a hockey sense. All you keep saying is he's JoVo, "he's free fall" "a GM doesn't like him". I get that this is your opinion and i welcome all opinions, but justify it. what parts of his game is he lacking to justify he has no sense?, when does he have mental lapses?, is he getting mixed up with his D partner? I get that sometimes he makes bad breakout passes but as i've talked to people with Sarnia and i got to know his game, i've come to understand maybe why sometimes he does that and i've said it to justify the argument that he's a good player. Like whats wrong with his hockey sence that keeps him from being a top pairing D, hows his mental ability mean he's going to be a second pairing or #4 as you say it?
What throughout his two years in the OHL all 111 games (90 points playing defence first hockey, 2nd and 3rd team OHL all-star) on an at best "decent" team where he's their go to guy has he shown he has no hockey sense? I'm not saying theres no chance he wont fall, theres always a chance for anyone to fall, i'm not saying theres no risk to drafting a player because every player has a risk
and if at worst he becomes a second pairing D thats awesome, because the other two D have lower floors to their game then that
Yeh he's more "mature", he's more NHL ready, he's more developed, he's bigger and stronger, already a great skater at NHL standards with an NHL shot, you know you're getting that when you Draft him and he's still getting better, Juolevi (who's in argument purely because he's suppose to be top 10) is a mystery box when it comes to that, he might never reach that level of maturity. It's not like Juolevi's IQ is MUCH ahead of Chychrun's either which would be the only reason someones drafting him first

Half dozen on line plus every u18 game including 2 live.

Go through my notes from the event. I posted them then. It's not like I just showed up and started spouting stuff. My viewpoint has been an evolution. Prior to u18s I had him in the mix at 7. I dropped him based on what I saw live. Poor pinches. Bad decisions with the puck including some jovoesque panics up the gut right on the tape of an opposing forward.

Bottom line Chychrun was at best the second best D at the u18's behind Fabbro. I expected Chychrun to be solid. He struggled against speed.

I was told "we can't draft Brown because he's so far down on the rankings" and "Chychrun is rated so high why don't you like him". Everything I said would happen in Brown materializing on top 10 lists and lists dropping Chychrun down has happened. Discount my opinion but I can assure you this isn't my first rodeo. Go through my previous draft lists and see if I have any semblance of knowing what I'm talking about.

If you read my thoughts on this draft you would know already that I'm struggling with the thought of taking a D at 7 and even in top 10. I'm far from in love with Juolevi.

 

[Matias Maccete]

The only two players I really wouldn't want at 7 wound be juolevi or nylander. I really liked nylander at the wjcs but from pretty much every source he's got an inconsistent motor, which is pretty bleh. Juolevi just looked very average every time I've seen him (granted not often). I get the impression that if he's on a less stacked team he's not in contention to go top 10.

 

[hbk]

It only takes one team to disagree for Chychrun to go top 10. For all we know, that team could be the Coyotes. It's unlikely that any team drafting him didn't see his WJC performance, but they may have also seen him in other situations where he looked a lot better (and there have certainly been situations in which he looked dominant).

Hockey sense is the trait I put the most stock in, by far, when it comes to evaluating prospects, but it's also among the hardest to gauge. You can watch a player once or twice and have a pretty good idea of how well that player skates or how accurate his passing is. Hockey sense is much more subjective and circumstantial. The same player can look like a genius one game and a total dunce the next. Nail Yakupov went 1st overall in 2012 despite very limited hockey sense, for example. Landeskog went 2nd the year before, and the biggest knock on him at the time was his IQ. If it were black-and-white, the draft would be much less of a crapshoot.

With everything asked of Chychrun at the WJC and in Sarnia, it's no surprise to me that he doesn't show consistent decision-making. Though you and the GM you cite are of the opinion that he's just not that smart of a player, I suspect it's more likely a case of a good-not-great player trying to do too much. If he's brought along at the right pace, learns to simplify things a little and so on, he has as much potential as any defender in the draft, and a pretty high floor given the rest of his size/skills package. I've got him 12th for now, and if you can pull down an Erik Johnson or a Dion Phaneuf with the 12th pick, that's a pretty good return.

Ideally Chychrun goes top 6. I'd love to be proven wrong provided it's not my favorite team doing it.

 

[PhoPhan]

Ideally Chychrun goes top 6. I'd love to be proven wrong provided it's not my favorite team doing it.

If it wasn't clear, there are a lot of guys I'd rather the Coyotes take at 7 (Brown included). But I'd rate Chychrun higher than any defenseman in the Coyotes system without a hyphen in his last name. I'd say the same thing about McAvoy, Fabbro and Sergachev, though.

 

[Jakey53]

I'd be pretty disappointed in Brown & Bean myself. I've got them ranked 11th and 36th, though I'm sure they'll both go earlier than that.

There are definitely flashes where Brown can look like an absolute force, but the same can be said about Hanzal and even someone like Bryan Boyle. Brown's main issue is consistency, and I think he's far more likely to top out as a 2nd line center who occasionally put together a dominant stretch than he is to turn into the next Lindros or Sundin. There's a reason those sorts of centers are as rare as they are. Brown is also the sort of player most hurt by the CHL/AHL eligibility rules, as he definitely needs more seasoning before he's ready for the NHL, but playing against much smaller players, he's liable to develop (or maintain) some bad habits. He'll only turn into a first line player worth a top 10 pick if he can become a more consistently driven player, and that's typically not a trait that changes much after a player is drafted.

As for Bean: yuck. Hard to argue against is productivity, but much easier to argue against just about everything else. His shortcomings are masked against junior competition, especially with Sanheim. He's got a lot of work to do before any NHL coach can give him playing time, and if he's a first round pick, I expect that coach to be working for his second (or third) NHL team. That is: he'd be best served to spend a couple years in the WHL and then a year or two in the AHL, but as a first round pick (especially if he goes in the top 15), there'll be pressure to move him along more quickly than that. He's about as wiry now as Turris was when he was drafted, and it took Turris a good five years to become an effective NHL player. The learning curve with defensemen tends to be a little longer, too. I've made the Michael Del Zotto comparison a few times now, but I don't see how Bean turns into a much better player than that.

I have never seen either player, only what I have read, so take my picks with a grain of salt. I still like both players.

 

[hbk]

If it wasn't clear, there are a lot of guys I'd rather the Coyotes take at 7 (Brown included). But I'd rate Chychrun higher than any defenseman in the Coyotes system without a hyphen in his last name. I'd say the same thing about McAvoy, Fabbro and Sergachev, though.

Given our D prospects that's a fairly easy statement though. Although I will disagree on Murphy who continues to develop into a top 2/3.

Our D isn't old. Most players are under 25 at this point and our cupboard is full of D today who are 4/5's. Stone, Connaughton, Tinodi, Dahlbeck. All 4-6 guys. Those guys are easier to acquire. My concern is upside is a 4 with Chychrun. I'd rather take a forward than a guy who's top end IMO is what we already have. Yep he might turn out to be the best of the names listed but I'm more confident in those other names on my list to be impact players. I want an impact player at 7.

 

[Jakey53]

Ideally Chychrun goes top 6. I'd love to be proven wrong provided it's not my favorite team doing it.

That's what I'm hoping for.

 

[Jakey53]

Given our D prospects that's a fairly easy statement though. Although I will disagree on Murphy who continues to develop into a top 2/3.

Our D isn't old. Most players are under 25 at this point and our cupboard is full of D today who are 4/5's. Stone, Connaughton, Tinodi, Dahlbeck. All 4-6 guys. Those guys are easier to acquire. My concern is upside is a 4 with Chychrun. I'd rather take a forward than a guy who's top end IMO is what we already have. Yep he might turn out to be the best of the names listed but I'm more confident in those other names on my list to be impact players. I want an impact player at 7.

I agree. This draft is really really important to the Coyotes. We can't screw this one up. As it stands now, Murphy is only top pairing because of chemistry with OEL. I would put Murphy in with the others you mentioned, and I don't think he will ever be a top pairing, ever.

 

[PhoPhan]

Given our D prospects that's a fairly easy statement though. Although I will disagree on Murphy who continues to develop into a top 2/3.

Our D isn't old. Most players are under 25 at this point and our cupboard is full of D today who are 4/5's. Stone, Connaughton, Tinodi, Dahlbeck. All 4-6 guys. Those guys are easier to acquire. My concern is upside is a 4 with Chychrun. I'd rather take a forward than a guy who's top end IMO is what we already have. Yep he might turn out to be the best of the names listed but I'm more confident in those other names on my list to be impact players. I want an impact player at 7.

I think we're mostly on the same page here. I think Chychrun has #2 upside but is more likely a very good #3, but even so, I prefer the upside (and likelihood of reaching it) of probably six other guys who will be there at 7 (only two of whom are defensemen). With any luck, this will be the best pick the Coyotes have for a while, so they need to get an impact player.

 

[rt]

I hope we can just trade the damned pick.

Trading Dylan Strome for Dougie Hamilton would've been idiotic.

Trading whatever warty "maybe" we're flipping a coin on at 7th for a real NHL D? Sign me the Feck up. Put my name down twice.