2016 NHL Entry Draft Discussion

[Jetabre]

Go Jets Go!

 

[Jetabre]

McKeen's newest ranking has McLeod at 2. Also McAvoy at 6.

 

[Daximus]

McKeen's newest ranking has McLeod at 2. Also McAvoy at 6.

Anyone that see's the kid play thinks he's awesome. Scouts just love him. His speed, his skating, shot, IQ, two way play, work ethic, compete level, physicality. He's the all around package. Outside of Matthews he's the best center. Most scouts say Toews upside with more speed.

He has McAvoy ranked petty high. I wonder about him couldn't find much. Boston U. Good program from what I read.
He also has Nylander listed as as C but every other thing I've read or watched he's a winger.

 

[CaptainChef]

We were 8th in possession but 20th in goals for while being 21st in the league in shots on net which tells me we are a great possession team that doesn't take much good shots and can't capitalize on them when we do probably because we have absolutely no elite shooters or we shoot into traffic far to much.

That tells me we have guys with absolutely no skills (ie, Thorbs and Peluso) playing regularly, and skill guys like Petan & yes I'll include Armia on the bench or in the AHL because coach is too silly to use them appropriately. Oh did I mention our best skill guy is playing on Thorbs line

 

[Daximus]

That tells me we have guys with absolutely no skills (ie, Thorbs and Peluso) playing regularly, and skill guys like Petan & yes I'll include Armia on the bench or in the AHL because coach is too silly to use them appropriately. Oh did I mention our best skill guy is playing on Thorbs line

I honestly don't think the difference in us being in the top 10 or top 20 in scoring will be a rookie Petan and Armia. Not yet. I think Petan needs more time. A competent skill rookie should be able drive play on the 4th line, he couldn't even drive play better than Copp, Peluso or Thorburn. Armia remains to be seen yet. Though I do think he should draw in against Toronto.

 

[Aavco Cup]

That tells me we have guys with absolutely no skills (ie, Thorbs and Peluso) playing regularly, and skill guys like Petan & yes I'll include Armia on the bench or in the AHL because coach is too silly to use them appropriately. Oh did I mention our best skill guy is playing on Thorbs line

Petan was our worst possession player. Are you forgetting that? He lost a lot of puck battles against 4th liners.

 

[Daximus]

The more and more I look at this draft and our lineup I hope we come out with one of Matthews, McLeod, Chychrun or Sergachev at this point.

We need an elite two-way center or a shutdown defencemen. I look at the teams that have won a cup and they have a number of things in common.

1. An elite two-way center that plays big minutes against top lines
2. A power forward winger that has two-way talent and scores clutch goals
3. A fast highly skilled goal scoring winger that mostly gets ozone starts
4. A offence driving centerman that gets mostly ozone starts
5. A least 2 defensive pairs one that is a heavy shutdown pairing.

I do think the depth that surrounds them is important too.

IMO we have;

1. Little - I don't think he is on the level that Toews, Kopitar, Bergeron or Datsyuk are on. Matthews and McLeod have this kind of upside.
2. Wheeler - Absolutely fits the bill so A+ there.
3. Ehlers definitely has Kane, Gaborik, Marchand like speed and offensive upside.
4. Scheifele - I think Scheif has more pure offensive upside than two-way upside and can play right along with the Carters and Krejci's.
5. We have Enstrom-Buff who are good but not on the Keith-Seabrook, Doughty-Muzzin, Chara-Seidenberg level. I think Chych and Sergachev are our best bets here.

 

[lanky]

@Dax
There's a clear top 3 in OHL draft eligible D and you mentioned two of them. Why leave out Juolevi?

 

[Daximus]

@Dax
There's a clear top 3 in OHL draft eligible D and you mentioned two of them. Why leave out Juolevi?

I like Juolevi has huge offensive upside like Fabbro but what we lack is a shutdown guy, I don't think Enstrom will cut it in the playoffs. Chych and Serg have that beastly shutdown potential IMO.

 

[Duke749]

The biggest thing about the defense is those teams all ad one guy that at any point was a top 5 two way defenseman. Trouba is our best shot if he continues to develop. Him and someone could be a huge pairing(Morrissey) and Buff-Enstrom would be a great complimentary or offensive pairing. But all these guys have to be playing very good at the same time. Trouba and Morrissey can't become a great pairing after Buff and Enstrom fall way off.

 

[garret9]

Petan was our worst possession player. Are you forgetting that? He lost a lot of puck battles against 4th liners.

I do wonder if role played a factor in that.

Petan is not one for the grinding game and perhaps he would do worse on a 4th line than Thorburn but better than Thorburn in a middle six line.

Purely hypothesis about roles and chemistry. So, it would be due to the linemates and their skillsets/playstyle, not the minutes themselves.
Could be over exaggerating a small impact or could be100% wrong. I've had that one for a long time but never tried to work it out myself.

 

[garret9]

I like Juolevi has huge offensive upside like Fabbro but what we lack is a shutdown guy, I don't think Enstrom will cut it in the playoffs. Chych and Serg have that beastly shutdown potential IMO.

Ends > means.
Overall impact > style.

To me looking for "shutdown" defender is the wrong way to go. You get the best defender if you want a defender.

Out scoring 6/3 or 2/1 over x mins is (nearly) the same thing.


Besides, Enstrom IS our best shutdown d-man, and unfortunately due to Pavelecian sv% in the POs, most forget that Enstrom out performed most of our D.

 

[Bob E]

Ends > means.
Overall impact > style.

To me looking for "shutdown" defender is the wrong way to go. You get the best defender if you want a defender.

Out scoring 6/3 or 2/1 over x mins is (nearly) the same thing.


Besides, Enstrom IS our best shutdown d-man, and unfortunately due to Pavelecian sv% in the POs, most forget that Enstrom out performed most of our D.

Folks will agrue we didn't go far enough to find out. 4 games, without the other team facing elimination, hard to tell how guys would have done facing an opposition on the ropes.

 

[Daximus]

Ends > means.
Overall impact > style.

To me looking for "shutdown" defender is the wrong way to go. You get the best defender if you want a defender.

Out scoring 6/3 or 2/1 over x mins is (nearly) the same thing.


Besides, Enstrom IS our best shutdown d-man, and unfortunately due to Pavelecian sv% in the POs, most forget that Enstrom out performed most of our D.

Over the past 3 season Enstrom ranks 90th (97th last season) according to HockeyAnalysis in driving possession from the back end and probably won't get any better.
Keith and Doughty are in the top 10 and Chara is just outside of it along with most of their partners.
Sorry but I'd prefer a Keith or a Doughty over a Karlsson.
Who do you think is more likely to shut down the opposing team in the playoffs on the way to a Cup?
Doughty and Keith or Karlsson?

I'm starting to think there is a pattern here that people often overlook. Certain teams that win cups have a lot in common, every single one of them since the '05 lockout has a top 10 shutdown defencemen. I just don't think Enstrom will cut it. Trouba is our best bet at this point. Having another offensive guy to go along with the other 3 offensive guys we have, just gives us a bunch of offensive guys. I'd prefer to have another shutdown guy in the barn.
Especially if the difference between the offensive and defensive guy is negligible.

 

[Bob E]

The more and more I look at this draft and our lineup I hope we come out with one of Matthews, McLeod, Chychrun or Sergachev at this point.

We need an elite two-way center or a shutdown defencemen. I look at the teams that have won a cup and they have a number of things in common.

1. An elite two-way center that plays big minutes against top lines
2. A power forward winger that has two-way talent and scores clutch goals
3. A fast highly skilled goal scoring winger that mostly gets ozone starts
4. A offence driving centerman that gets mostly ozone starts
5. A least 2 defensive pairs one that is a heavy shutdown pairing.

I do think the depth that surrounds them is important too.

IMO we have;

1. Little - I don't think he is on the level that Toews, Kopitar, Bergeron or Datsyuk are on. Matthews and McLeod have this kind of upside.
2. Wheeler - Absolutely fits the bill so A+ there.
3. Ehlers definitely has Kane, Gaborik, Marchand like speed and offensive upside.
4. Scheifele - I think Scheif has more pure offensive upside than two-way upside and can play right along with the Carters and Krejci's.
5. We have Enstrom-Buff who are good but not on the Keith-Seabrook, Doughty-Muzzin, Chara-Seidenberg level. I think Chych and Sergachev are our best bets here.

I think you've just described the Washington Capitals.

Throw in quality, clutch goaltending (Holtby) and they may be my SC favorite 1/3rd of the way into the season.

 

[Daximus]

I think you've just described the Washington Capitals.

Throw in quality, clutch goaltending (Holtby) and they may be my SC favorite 1/3rd of the way into the season.

Caps are at that point where the stars have aligned. They've been a playoff team for a number of years now but with the emergence of some of their younger guys into big roles they are definitely a contendor this year. Coaching change helped too.

 

[garret9]

Folks will agrue we didn't go far enough to find out. 4 games, without the other team facing elimination, hard to tell how guys would have done facing an opposition on the ropes.

The good news is there is a tonne of research that shows both team and player performance doesn't vary in the POs more than we expect due to small sample size.

The best still tend to be the best. The worst still tend to be the worst.

So, while Enstrom may be the exception, he has yet to show to be.

Over the past 3 season Enstrom ranks 90th (97th last season) according to HockeyAnalysis in driving possession from the back end and probably won't get any better.
Keith and Doughty are in the top 10 and Chara is just outside of it along with most of their partners.
Sorry but I'd prefer a Keith or a Doughty over a Karlsson.
Who do you think is more likely to shut down the opposing team in the playoffs on the way to a Cup?
Doughty and Keith or Karlsson?

I'm starting to think there is a pattern here that people often overlook. Certain teams that win cups have a lot in common, every single one of them since the '05 lockout has a top 10 shutdown defencemen. I just don't think Enstrom will cut it. Trouba is our best bet at this point. Having another offensive guy to go along with the other 3 offensive guys we have, just gives us a bunch of offensive guys. I'd prefer to have another shutdown guy in the barn.
Especially if the difference between the offensive and defensive guy is negligible.

That's his Corsi%, not his ranking in "driving possession". There are factors that go into those numbers outside of just the individual. Ex: Enstrom has had the joy of spending a lot of time with Bogosian and Myers. Check out where they rank in Corsi, it ain't 90th.

Toews, Kopitar, Bergeron... Turris?
That's just one player but it shows something. Keith, Doughty, and Chara also have played for exceptionally better teams than Karlsson. Would we be saying the same thing about Karlsson if the rest of the cast on the Senators was much better and not a penny pinching organization? Probably. Part of how good we view players to be is due to team success. Being on good teams impacts player value despite it not making the player actually be beter.

However, your example still fails to argue my point. I want the best players overall. Some players are good because they repress shots and goals against exceptionally well. Some players are good because they create shots and goals exceptionally well. Some players are good because they do both exceptionally well. Everyone has an impact on chances for and against, just some are especially good in one area vs another.
The thing is though, how good they are is how good they are overall. Not due to style. There are shutdown D more effective than offensive D, and vice versa. It has nothing to do with play style, but just overall impact.
Giordano, Stralman, Campbell, Subban, Karlsson, Muzzin, Spurgeon, Leddy, Shattenkirk, Keith, Niskanen, Vlasic, Hedman, Timonen, Boychuck, Letang, Doughty, Chara... These are some of the best players in impact. Note how some of them are very, very different in play style than others. Their impact though is comparable.

Trouba is actually not very good at shutting down, yet. Maybe that will change, but Trouba usually does well by sheer volume of chances for and sustaining pressure.

In the end, I honestly don't agree with what you view as offensive and defensive either. Which leads me to the ultimate point: defensive play and defensive impact are not the same.
Enstrom is our best defensive impact player and I don't know if Trouba will ever get to that level. Maybe he will, maybe he won't.

 

[ps241]

The good news is there is a tonne of research that shows both team and player performance doesn't vary in the POs more than we expect due to small sample size.

The best still tend to be the best. The worst still tend to be the worst.

So, while Enstrom may be the exception, he has yet to show to be.



That's his Corsi%, not his ranking in "driving possession". There are factors that go into those numbers outside of just the individual. Ex: Enstrom has had the joy of spending a lot of time with Bogosian and Myers. Check out where they rank in Corsi, it ain't 90th.

Toews, Kopitar, Bergeron... Turris?
That's just one player but it shows something. Keith, Doughty, and Chara also have played for exceptionally better teams than Karlsson. Would we be saying the same thing about Karlsson if the rest of the cast on the Senators was much better and not a penny pinching organization? Probably. Part of how good we view players to be is due to team success. Being on good teams impacts player value despite it not making the player actually be beter.

However, your example still fails to argue my point. I want the best players overall. Some players are good because they repress shots and goals against exceptionally well. Some players are good because they create shots and goals exceptionally well. Some players are good because they do both exceptionally well. Everyone has an impact on chances for and against, just some are especially good in one area vs another.
The thing is though, how good they are is how good they are overall. Not due to style. There are shutdown D more effective than offensive D, and vice versa. It has nothing to do with play style, but just overall impact.
Giordano, Stralman, Campbell, Subban, Karlsson, Muzzin, Spurgeon, Leddy, Shattenkirk, Keith, Niskanen, Vlasic, Hedman, Timonen, Boychuck, Letang, Doughty, Chara... These are some of the best players in impact. Note how some of them are very, very different in play style than others. Their impact though is comparable.

Trouba is actually not very good at shutting down, yet. Maybe that will change, but Trouba usually does well by sheer volume of chances for and sustaining pressure.

In the end, I honestly don't agree with what you view as offensive and defensive either. Which leads me to the ultimate point: defensive play and defensive impact are not the same.
Enstrom is our best defensive impact player and I don't know if Trouba will ever get to that level. Maybe he will, maybe he won't.

So Trouba could be more impactful than Toby while not defending quite as well?

Let see.....Toby has had to carry Bogosian and Myers over last season and this season. Jacob has had a much more challenging task of carrying Stu for two season in the top 4.....Wait I have an idea, why don't we just put Jacob and Toby together and play them 25 minutes a night for a while and nobody has to carry anyone? We have a pure top pair and Bob's your uncle.

 

[untouchable21]

Looking at the standings, Jets are 4 points out of 29th.

While I don't expect them to finish that badly, it isn't out of the question if the losses continue and Buff and or Ladd get dealt. This team is poised to bottom out.

The one saving geace may be the play of Hellebuyck, but hitching your playoff hopes to a rookie is risky business.

 

[Daximus]

That's his Corsi%, not his ranking in "driving possession". There are factors that go into those numbers outside of just the individual. Ex: Enstrom has had the joy of spending a lot of time with Bogosian and Myers. Check out where they rank in Corsi, it ain't 90th.

Toews, Kopitar, Bergeron... Turris?
That's just one player but it shows something. Keith, Doughty, and Chara also have played for exceptionally better teams than Karlsson. Would we be saying the same thing about Karlsson if the rest of the cast on the Senators was much better and not a penny pinching organization? Probably. Part of how good we view players to be is due to team success. Being on good teams impacts player value despite it not making the player actually be beter.

However, your example still fails to argue my point. I want the best players overall. Some players are good because they repress shots and goals against exceptionally well. Some players are good because they create shots and goals exceptionally well. Some players are good because they do both exceptionally well. Everyone has an impact on chances for and against, just some are especially good in one area vs another.
The thing is though, how good they are is how good they are overall. Not due to style. There are shutdown D more effective than offensive D, and vice versa. It has nothing to do with play style, but just overall impact.
Giordano, Stralman, Campbell, Subban, Karlsson, Muzzin, Spurgeon, Leddy, Shattenkirk, Keith, Niskanen, Vlasic, Hedman, Timonen, Boychuck, Letang, Doughty, Chara... These are some of the best players in impact. Note how some of them are very, very different in play style than others. Their impact though is comparable.

Trouba is actually not very good at shutting down, yet. Maybe that will change, but Trouba usually does well by sheer volume of chances for and sustaining pressure.

In the end, I honestly don't agree with what you view as offensive and defensive either. Which leads me to the ultimate point: defensive play and defensive impact are not the same.
Enstrom is our best defensive impact player and I don't know if Trouba will ever get to that level. Maybe he will, maybe he won't.

Build a team of purely offence driving defencemen. Karlsson, Buff, Myers. Guys like that. I guarantee you never win a Cup. Why?
Because even though those guys will get a tonne of points, they are suspect defensively. And we all know that losing games 2-1 or 6-5 is still losing games. You can generate all the offence you want but if you can't stop the other team from scoring more then you will obviously lose . I agree all the best defencemen are two-way players. I mean it's not like Doughty or Keith aren't scoring goals or getting any play in the offensive zone or getting PP time.

You're basically making a mountain out of a mole hill with players that aren't considered far enough apart to really even be able to split hairs about it. Which leads me to believe that you find Juolevi better than Sergachev. As you keep saying give me the "best" defencemen. Which will lead to my next question. Who do you think is the better of the two?

 

[Jetabre]

Wow nice we're sitting in the good ol' 9 slot right now. Can see Anaheim passing us in short order, think we'll be in tight to out suck the rest of the bunch though.

 

[Duke749]

Keith's "style" is not that different from guys like Karlsson, Buff, and Myers. Keith is just arguably the best overall skater in the league and is elite at moving the puck out of the zone. Last year's playoffs was an absolute domination by Keith and those two factors were the biggest reason. It really is THAT simple. There are of course other small things, but his ability to skate and move the puck out of the zone successfully are the biggest reason why he's a top 5 defenseman.

So Trouba could be more impactful than Toby while not defending quite as well?

Let see.....Toby has had to carry Bogosian and Myers over last season and this season. Jacob has had a much more challenging task of carrying Stu for two season in the top 4.....Wait I have a idea, why don't we just put Jacob and Toby together and play them 25 minutes a night for a while and nobody has to carry anyone? We have a pure top pair and Bob's your uncle.

Gee PS. What a great idea! Why didn't I ever think of that?!?!

We can only dream man..

 

[garret9]

Build a team of purely offence driving defencemen. Karlsson, Buff, Myers. Guys like that. I guarantee you never win a Cup. Why?
Because even though those guys will get a tonne of points, they are suspect defensively. And we all know that losing games 2-1 or 6-5 is still losing games. You can generate all the offence you want but if you can't stop the other team from scoring more then you will obviously lose . I agree all the best defencemen are two-way players. I mean it's not like Doughty or Keith aren't scoring goals or getting any play in the offensive zone or getting PP time.

You're basically making a mountain out of a mole hill with players that aren't considered far enough apart to really even be able to split hairs about it. Which leads me to believe that you find Juolevi better than Sergachev. As you keep saying give me the "best" defencemen. Which will lead to my next question. Who do you think is the better of the two?

I just don't think you understand what I'm saying. I just mean conceptually the best is better than whether they are offensive, defensive, or two-way.

I'll use goals to make this example, but some of these numbers will be unrealistic just for simplicity sake (and too early to do hard math lol).

A team that wins (or player that outscores by) 3-2 vs 6-5 is not just more defensive but also better overall. They are outscoring by a larger proportion. If you want equal levels but higher scoring, it would be 3-2 vs 6-4.

So lets say you have a 3-2 team, a 6-4 team, 12-8. These teams are equal in ability to outscore and all 3 will win the same amount of games*.

Now, a 7-4 team is less defensive but more offensive AND better than the 3-2 team. They will win more games despite being less defensive. They have a better shot at the cup. A 5-4 team is less defensive but more offensive AND not better than the 3-2 team. They will lose more games and have a worse shot at the cup.

Now, lets say you have 3 pairings of d-men that take exactly the same amount of TOI on a team (20 mins each). Take the same ratios and say that each pair outscores their opponent by the same ratio; they are then equally good, but by differing degrees of offensive/defensive.

The more defensive d-man outscores his opponents 3-2 over 20 mins. The more offensive outscores opponents 12-8 over 20 mins. Both of them are helping their team equally in terms of winning and are equally good, even compared to the average 6-4 guy.

A better but more offensive d-man is one that outscores and helps outscore by a greater extent. I want a 3-1 d-man more than a 6-4. I want a 7-4 d-man more than a 3-2 d-man. That's what I meant. It's simply a conceptional point.

I do not have an opinion on those d-men enough to say which one is better, yet. But, if I truly believe the more offensive one is better, I want that one. If I truly believe the more defensive one is better, I want that one. Regardless of the team's makeup.


*It's actually not necessarily true. A high scoring team that outscores by the EXACT same proportion but more will tend to lose SLIGHTLY more often due to natural variance and goals tend to happen in bunches. However, the impact in decreasing scoring rates is far, far weaker than that in impact in outscore by a greater extent.

 

[Daximus]

So essentially all you're trying to say is always draft BPA?

 

[garret9]

So essentially all you're trying to say is always draft BPA?

I'm saying an offensive d-men can improve a team more than a defensive d-man and vice versa.

I'm also saying that the d-man that helps your team win more is better to have despite style.

I do not choose the d-man that does not help the team as much just because he fits my prefered style.

I should also note that higher scoring defensemen in junior/NCAA tend to be better on average than lower scoring defensemen. I always like to point out that more defensive d-men like Mitchell, Foote, Vlassic, and Hamhuis were all decent scorers in their time. Although this is a slightly separate subject.