Speculation: 2016 NHL Entry Draft Discussion (Part III)

[surixon]

Chych wasn't particularly good in the 2nd period though. Too bad Fabbro is a right shot. I like what I see.

The Stanley Quenneville pairing looks just like Myers and Toby

Disappointed that Bean and Jost are not dressed.

Yeah he definitely didn't have a great 2nd.

I thought he was solid In the third.

He has all the tools, he just needs some polish and to not try to do too much when he has the puck at times.

 

[Aavco Cup]

Yeah he definitely didn't have a great 2nd.

I thought he was solid In the third.

He has all the tools, he just needs some polish and to not try to do too much when he has the puck at times.

The D corps looks pretty solid for Canada. Forward group is not at the same level but I believe some of the younger players will be replaced from 2nd rd eliminated CHL teams.

 

[Jeti]

I know I'll be in the extreme minority here, but I don't want a winger. If we get the 2/3 pick, it would be nice, don't get me wrong, and Laine or Puljujarvi would be great, but I don't think we require a winger. Anywhere in our lineup. I believe that Brendan Lemieux has top-6 upside. I'm probably nuts, but I do believe he can be a Lucic-ish/Jenner-ish big wing. Factor in Wheeler, Perreault, Ehlers and Connor, not to mention Dano and Petan and I just don't think we are hurting for a wing.

I think the Jets have the pieces necessary to be a very, very good hockey team. Where we need assistance is high-end depth on the blueline, on the left side. This draft has a couple of players that fit the bill, right where we are likely to select.

I'd be over the moon if we landed one of Juolevi, Chychrun or Sergachev. I feel that their respective upsides are on par with everybody not named Matthews. Obviously, D are harder to project based on history, so there is that downside, but I'm not going to be upset taking Juolevi instead of Puljujarvi, hypothetically. I might even consider it a slight win.

This is my thinking as well (aside from seeing top-6 upside in Lemieux - it's a longshot and it's not necessary anyways). Obviously take Matthews with a lottery win, Laine if you can't trade down, otherwise I'd take one of the D as early as third (again, if you can't trade down). With how little there is to separate prospects ranked 3-9 this year, I'd look to trade down and pick up another asset.

I'm not pretending to be an expert on any of the prospects, I just don't see a need for wingers at all. Besides, decent middle-6 wingers aren't hard to come by in free agency.

 

[Zhamnov10]

This is my thinking as well (aside from seeing top-6 upside in Lemieux - it's a longshot and it's not necessary anyways). Obviously take Matthews with a lottery win, Laine if you can't trade down, otherwise I'd take one of the D as early as third (again, if you can't trade down). With how little there is to separate prospects ranked 3-9 this year, I'd look to trade down and pick up another asset.

I'm not pretending to be an expert on any of the prospects, I just don't see a need for wingers at all. Besides, decent middle-6 wingers aren't hard to come by in free agency.

I think there is quite a bit of difference in caliber between the forwards and D available in the top 10.I think there are 6 better forwards before a defenceman should be picked the only one in the mix is Chychrun and a team would have to be taking him banking on his upside which is a big gamble in my eyes.draft BPA make trades to suit later,especially early in the first round.

 

[powder88]

Have I got it right that the absolute best pick that we could get for Chicago's 1st is the 22nd? If they bust out before the conference finals along with all of WASH, DAL, STL, and PIT, does that put them at 22?

 

[Whileee]

Regardless of where they pick they'll end up with a shot at a good player - but I want a potentially great player after this mess of a season.

I'm hoping they can find that witha lottery win, PLD or one of the big three D men. All three defenders make me nervous, but there is huge upside across the board.

I agree, but there's no guarantee that PLD becomes a great player. There's still a lot of development and many variables that will determine which, if any of the forwards outside of maybe Matthews and Laine are destined to be great. D are harder to project historically, but I think scouting and development have been improving and I am less concerned than I would have been a decade ago.

 

[Gil Fisher]

Why is lack concensus concerning? To me that is opportunity.

Because of the higher bust rate of D at the top of the draft. I'd feel better about selecting a D if everyone could agree which one was better.

 

[Boxertim]

Because of the higher bust rate of D at the top of the draft. I'd feel better about selecting a D if everyone could agree which one was better.

Nobody is saying that they think any of the dmen are bad, they can't agree which is best

 

[Aavco Cup]

Because of the higher bust rate of D at the top of the draft. I'd feel better about selecting a D if everyone could agree which one was better.

The opportunity to have the D the Jets rank highest available when they pick is more likely this way. In some ways that's what happened in 2012 with Trouba.

D are always mire riskier

 

[drumzan]

Have I got it right that the absolute best pick that we could get for Chicago's 1st is the 22nd? If they bust out before the conference finals along with all of WASH, DAL, STL, and PIT, does that put them at 22?

20th. There's 6 teams that can go ahead of Chicago.

 

[Aavco Cup]

At the U18 game Last night I was really impressed by two 2017 draft forwards Michael Rasmussen and Maxime Comtois. Of the draft eligibles Will Bitten And Michael McLeod. Laberge didn't really catch my eye although he did get two assists. I wish Jost and Bean had played. Hope to see them tomorrow.

 

[Whileee]

The opportunity to have the D the Jets rank highest available when they pick is more likely this way. In some ways that's what happened in 2012 with Trouba.

D are always mire riskier

Agree with this. On the other hand, it's much easier to draft a top D than to trade for one. They are very expensive on the trade market.

The other option is to load up on D from the late 1st through the 3rd round and hope to hit a home run.

 

[Grind]

Agree with this. On the other hand, it's much easier to draft a top D than to trade for one. They are very expensive on the trade market.

The other option is to load up on D from the late 1st through the 3rd round and hope to hit a home run.

If there's a forward on the board that's still considered a home run at 6/we then I think your smarter to take you second option.

Either way at six I'm actually less anxious for the draft.

I now have no expectation of winning the lottery nor do I have to worry that one of my top 4 will still be on the board and the jets don't take him.

That being said if were picking 6-7-8 and one of those guys falls, and we DON'T take him I'll be really, really bummed.

 

[Whileee]

If there's a forward on the board that's still considered a home run at 6/we then I think your smarter to take you second option.

Either way at six I'm actually less anxious for the draft.

I now have no expectation of winning the lottery nor do I have to worry that one of my top 4 will still be on the board and the jets don't take him.

That being said if were picking 6-7-8 and one of those guys falls, and we DON'T take him I'll be really, really bummed.

Odds of winning the lottery haven't really fallen that much - 2% for #1, and 6% for a top-3 pick (compared to 4th lottery seed). We were always going to be a long-shot for winning Matthews or a top-3 pick.

I agree that if you have a "home run" forward on the board when you are picking in that range, you go for it.

Which of "those guys" would you consider to be a "home run"? More specifically, where does Tkachuk fit in your assessment of the top forwards? Most of the "draft analysts" have him in the top 4-5 forwards.

 

[Troub North]

20th. There's 6 teams that can go ahead of Chicago.

The Chicago pick has the odds of being as high as 20 if none of: Florida, Washington, Dallas, Anaheim, St. Louis or Pittsburgh make it to the conference finals. For each one of those teams that makes the conference finals, that pick will drop by one, up to a max for 4. Essentially, this means that our pick from Chicago will be somewhere between 20-24.

 

[drumzan]

The Chicago pick has the odds of being as high as 20 if none of: Florida, Washington, Dallas, Anaheim, St. Louis or Pittsburgh make it to the conference finals. For each one of those teams that makes the conference finals, that pick will drop by one, up to a max for 4. Essentially, this means that our pick from Chicago will be somewhere between 20-24.

That's basically what I explained a few pages ago.

Can't have 6 teams make conference finals, only 4. So that makes the max 24 if Chicago loses first two rounds.

 

[Guerzy]

Sounds like Edmonton would really like to draft a D

I have to wonder if Edmonton will do something bold and out of character, such as taking Chychrun at no. 2. They have always stuck to taking forwards in recent years, is it possible we see them take best defenceman available, if they believe Chychrun could be 'that guy', like an Ekblad? Certainly they could also trade the pick for defensive help, but if they use the pick...

Barring changes from the lottery..

1. Toronto - Matthews
2. Edmonton - Chychrun
3. Vancouver - Laine
4. Columbus - Puljujarvi
5. Calgary - Tkachuk
6. Winnipeg - Dubois

 

[Huffer]

I just ran the simulator 6 times and we were 7th each time. Worked out ok though as according to the rankings on the site, we picked PLD every time. I'm ok with that.

 

[Huffer]

I have to wonder if Edmonton will do something bold and out of character, such as taking Chychrun at no. 2. They have always stuck to taking forwards in recent years, is it possible we see them take best defenceman available, if they believe Chychrun could be 'that guy', like an Ekblad? Certainly they could also trade the pick for defensive help, but if they use the pick...

Barring changes from the lottery..

1. Toronto - Matthews
2. Edmonton - Chychrun
3. Vancouver - Laine
4. Columbus - Puljujarvi
5. Calgary - Tkachuk
6. Winnipeg - Dubois

They could, although I think if they're in the top 2 I would "think" they would make the pick (AM or PL). Those 2 just seem so dominant and will step in next year. I think they could then try to address their D with RNH and Eberle. At 2 they could also trade that pick for a very good D that could help them next year if they wanted to go that route.

 

[Rheged]

I have to wonder if Edmonton will do something bold and out of character, such as taking Chychrun at no. 2. They have always stuck to taking forwards in recent years, is it possible we see them take best defenceman available, if they believe Chychrun could be 'that guy', like an Ekblad? Certainly they could also trade the pick for defensive help, but if they use the pick...

Barring changes from the lottery..

1. Toronto - Matthews
2. Edmonton - Chychrun
3. Vancouver - Laine
4. Columbus - Puljujarvi
5. Calgary - Tkachuk
6. Winnipeg - Dubois

This is kinda my thought too, I feel like if the Oilers pick anywhere but 1 it'll be a D man.

 

[supersonic jet]

At the U18 game Last night I was really impressed by two 2017 draft forwards Michael Rasmussen and Maxime Comtois. Of the draft eligibles Will Bitten And Michael McLeod. Laberge didn't really catch my eye although he did get two assists. I wish Jost and Bean had played. Hope to see them tomorrow.

Mckeens top 30 list is out.
Has 6'4" Laine at #1comparing him to M. Lemeux and better than Nash at that age thinks he could be 50-60 goal scorer.
#2 is Mathews
#3 Michael McLeod best all around game fastest skater, 70% face off winner, 3g,6a in 7 games against Barrie
#4 Pujujarvi
#5 Juolevi
#6 Tkachuk
#7 Dubois
#8 Nylander
#9 Sergachev
#10 Chychrun
Info is on the prospects site.

 

[CaptainChef]

This is kinda my thought too, I feel like if the Oilers pick anywhere but 1 it'll be a D man.

Nope. Edmonton will be unable to avoid drafting a Finn if they pick #2. Only way they draft Chych is if they trade or get bumped down.

 

[CaptainChef]

Mckeens top 30 list is out.
Has 6'4" Laine at #1comparing him to M. Lemeux and better than Nash at that age thinks he could be 50-60 goal scorer.
#2 is Mathews
#3 Michael McLeod best all around game fastest skater, 70% face off winner, 3g,6a in 7 games against Barrie
#4 Pujujarvi
#5 Juolevi
#6 Tkachuk
#7 Dubois
#8 Nylander
#9 Sergachev
#10 Chychrun
Info is on the prospects site.

Totally out to lunch in so many ways (Matthews, McLeod!!, Dubois, Chychrun). Would be a dream come true having choice of Dubois, Serg or Chych at # 7 for sure).

Still far prefer & trust Prospects rankings
http://www.hockeyprospect.com/2016-nhl-draft-rankings/

 

[buggs]

They could, although I think if they're in the top 2 I would "think" they would make the pick (AM or PL). Those 2 just seem so dominant and will step in next year. I think they could then try to address their D with RNH and Eberle. At 2 they could also trade that pick for a very good D that could help them next year if they wanted to go that route.

Just jumping off from your post here...

Eberle and RNH are both making $6 million/year long term, yes? In the case of the Jets, acquiring one or the other would make that guy the second highest paid member of the Jets behind Buff, correct? So if you're Chevy, are you going to go into negotiations with your own guys (though UFAs of significance are a couple of years away) and having them looking at Eberle for example and saying "well, he's getting 6..."?

From my perspective, RNH, yeah, ok. But Eberle? I'm not wanting Eberle on the Jets as our second highest paid guy. Creates all sorts of headaches for management in terms of pay structure under the cap. And I'm not sure there's not a lot more GMs out there thinking the same thing. So just how movable are those guys at that pay rate?

Hall/Eberle/RNH are all $6 million and all are more likely to go from Edmonton than McDavid or Draisaitl I'd think. But who's going to jump at them at that pay range? I have a feeling that Edmonton's former management has done more long term damage than they are given credit for. That's not to say that Hall/Eberle/RNH aren't good hockey players, they are.

 

[Rheged]

Laine doing Laine things.