2017 Draft discussion- Sabres pick 8th. Part 2

[Chainshot]

Hague in front of Timmins I can see because of recency bias yeah. Tough call either way.

Eh, he had Hague as #3 on his OHL list behind Vilardi and Tippett all the way back in August.

 

[EichHart]

I haven't watched any of the prospects for this years draft, just saw this on the prospect thread. Any worries at all? Talking about Makar.

I don't get the high rankings.

1 - He's small. Being a defenseman, this is usually a massive knock against him.
2 - He a late birthday. Older than most in the draft.
3 - He's playing Jr. A hockey.

For comparison's sake, Samuel Girard put up more impressive numbers (relative to league) in his draft year and went #47.

 

[Heraldic]

I haven't watched any of the prospects for this years draft, just saw this on the prospect thread. Any worries at all? Talking about Makar.

I think the league he plays in puts massive question marks on how his play translates on higher level and eventually on NHL. There are plenty of players whose skill sets seems superior against lesser competition, but who just can't translate their game on higher levels for whatever reasons.

It's not like Makar is playing in a tier-b league. There are plenty of leagues, where players are usually drafted, which are above Makar's league:

KHL
Liiga/SHL/NLA
Ekstraliga
Mestis/Allsvenskan
NCAA
CHL
USHL

It's going to be really interesting to see where Makar lands. I'm not actually that surprised to see him going anywhere in the first round.

 

[hizzoner]

Sabres would like but do not need a home run here. They cannot afford a strike out and a single is of little help. Swing for the fences in rounds 2 and three--but we need a top 6 forward or top 4 D. I recognize the risk of" settling" for some one--we have done enough of that. If we get to 8 and we are "settling" for someone we do not think is clearly going to make the nhl as regular top 6 F or top 4 D then trade down or deal for young viable prospect if you can. Mr. Botterill show us your stuff!

 

[Crazy Tasty]

Sabres would like but do not need a home run here. They cannot afford a strike out and a single is of little help. Swing for the fences in rounds 2 and three--but we need a top 6 forward or top 4 D. I recognize the risk of" settling" for some one--we have done enough of that. If we get to 8 and we are "settling" for someone we do not think is clearly going to make the nhl as regular top 6 F or top 4 D then trade down or deal for young viable prospect if you can. Mr. Botterill show us your stuff!

Getting to 3rd base would make me happy.

 

[Chainshot]

I haven't watched any of the prospects for this years draft, just saw this on the prospect thread. Any worries at all? Talking about Makar.

Funny, but I love Girard too -- and seeing Nashville continue to stockpile quality PMD's year upon year just makes me all the more envious. Makar does raise some questions, however his brain and feet are so very noticeable that with the right molding, he could be something special. Heiskanen is further along the curve developmentally -- he's going to be some form of top-4 guy -- but with the right development Makar could be special.

 

[AustonsNostrils]

whoa Pronman ranked Makar 19th and Liljegren 13th.

13.Timothy Liljegren, D, Rogle (SHL) DOB: 4/30/99 | Ht: 6' 0.0" | Wt: 191 2016-17 stats: 19 GP | 1 G | 4 A Liljegren missed a sizeable chunk of the season due to mono. When healthy, he's one of the most dynamic offensive defensemen of the past few draft classes. You can tell when Liljegren has the puck. "He was able to quarterback a SHL power play when he was 16. You just don't see that," noted one scout. He's quite creative and quite skilled. He can make the in-tight plays and control the puck in ways that distinguish him as a puck mover. LIljegren skates very well and can get up in a rush, but it's his skill and offensive mind that elevate him to the highest levels. Although he's a very imaginative and effective puck mover, he can get himself into trouble. He gives the puck away a lot going for the one extra play. His defense isn't elite, but it's decent, as he can make a check and not get completely killed in his own end without the puck; however, there are times when he is a clear negative on that side on the puck.

19.Cale Makar, D, Brooks (AJHL) DOB: 10/30/98 | Ht: 5' 11.25" | Wt: 180 2016-17 stats: 54 GP | 24 G | 51 A Makar was lights-out this season in the AJHL, including a dominant performance at the World Junior A challenge. Small, old (he's a late 1998 birth date) defensemen from Junior A don't get me excited that often, but Makar deserves a ton of recognition, thanks to his talent level. Makar skates very well, with a good burst out of each stride. He's aggressive jumping into the play, and he can pressure opponents with his speed. He's also a highly skilled puck handler, with high-end offensive instincts. He can make tough offensive plays with consistency and quarterback a power play with the best of them. His defense was passable at the Junior A level, but scouts are concerned about him checking pros. His size is the main issue, as he has a short wingspan and can struggle to win battles or close gaps. He wasn't even on his Junior A team's penalty kill for a good chunk of the season. He has as much upside as any defenseman in the class, and though he might seem like a guy I usually tend to like, there's a bunch of alarm bells going off in my brain at the same time. He is committed to UMass-Amherst for next season. Ranking explanation: There has been no prospect from this draft class I've thought about more than Cale Makar. As discussed in his profile, an old, small defenseman from the AJHL raises serious flags. But at the same time, it's hard not to acknowledge his elite skill/skating combo, and the dominance he displayed at various Jr. A competition levels all season. The issue becomes how do I balance these factors. How do I balance the fact that his point production in the AJHL was equivalent to Robert Thomas (ranked directly below him) when they were the same age, but the latter was in the OHL? When these questions arise, I look back on research I did about balancing scouting and statistical analysis. In that column, I discussed how simply considering an average of scouting and stats opinions produces better results, and there is no better time for that then in Makar's case. The scouting analysis based on what he showed at various lower levels this season looks like a clear top-5 pick. The statistical analysis, adjusting for his late birth date and league quality, suggests a middle-round pick, as his production in the AJHL at age 17 was along the lines of Kyle Radke and Kevin Connauton and at age 18 this season, it was along the lines of Brinson Pasichnuk. However, while those worrisome statistical comparables stand out -- and give me reason to think simply being dominant the AJHL is not enough to be a first-rounder -- I caution against it, due to sample-size issues. There are only so many good, young defensemen to come out of that league, so there isn't much against which to measure Makar. This is why the scouting side of this equation is important, because the skills can be evaluated at a more frequent sample than the amount of statistical comparables you can acquire. And those skills look very promising. Nevertheless, the inherent risks I've pointed out cannot be ignored, and the chances of a significant pace and defensive adjustment to higher levels are real. With all that in mind, slotting him in at No. 19 is more than fair.

 

[AustonsNostrils]

I became enthralled by Makar off his YT videos, the offensive gifts jump off the screen, but I haven't seen anything of him defending so Pronman's comments do get me thinking. I've said I'd be happy with Liljegren, that's because I see his offensive gifts as well, beautiful powerful skater and loves to rush the puck plus I've seen him play defense against SHL competition. He doesn't look overmatched as an 18 year old playing against men - he's a solid 192 pounds so you know he's going to be 200+.

Pronman has Brannstrom ranked ahead of both Makar and Liljegren at 11th. He's an inch shorter than Makar. Like Lilejegren he played in the SHL as a 17 year old.

 

[Der Jaeger]

Funny, but I love Girard too -- and seeing Nashville continue to stockpile quality PMD's year upon year just makes me all the more envious. Makar does raise some questions, however his brain and feet are so very noticeable that with the right molding, he could be something special. Heiskanen is further along the curve developmentally -- he's going to be some form of top-4 guy -- but with the right development Makar could be special.

Right now, I've got 5 defensemen on my radar that I'd be OK with the Sabres taking in the first round (in order):

1.) Heiskanen. He reminds me of Lindholm. Does everything well in a men's league. He doesn't have the elite upside, but his floor is super high.

2.) Makar. High upside, but the team who drafts him must be certain they can mold him. I think rushing him would be a bad mistake. To draft Makar, you've got to be certain that his hockey IQ and skills translate to higher leagues.

3.) Liljegren. Has more upside than Makar. But he doesn't have the hockey IQ.... or at least hasn't shown it. It might be a confidence problem. He was much better last year, but played against men this season. Interviews will be key with Liljegren. It's possible that his boneheaded play was just a confidence thing.

4.) Valimaki. If you want an Ekholm clone, here he is. Low bust potential. Safe pick.

5.) Brannstrom. Does a lot of what Makar does, but in better leagues. Not quite as dynamic, but pretty close.

 

[MrMaster]

re: Makar
It's not about balancing factors like in the quote mentioned above.
It's about knowing. A good scout can tell the difference.

Of course there are factors involved, luck, trajectory and such, but a good scout recognizes a talent and how it will pan out no matter where it plays.

 

[AustonsNostrils]

re: Makar
It's not about balancing factors like in the quote mentioned above.
It's about knowing. A good scout can tell the difference.

Of course there are factors involved, luck, trajectory and such, but a good scout recognizes a talent and how it will pan out no matter where it plays.

Good scouts make mistakes all the time in predicting how players will pan out as pros. And that's with seeing them play live multiple times, video can't compare with watching live.

 

[MrMaster]

Good scouts make mistakes all the time in predicting how players will pan out as pros. And that's with seeing them play live multiple times, video can't compare with watching live.

I guess some scouts miss the human attribute, social skills are very important, so talking with the guy and being able to find out how he carries himself, his attitude, that would be called a huge asset if you are a scout.

 

[tsujimoto74]

re: Makar
It's not about balancing factors like in the quote mentioned above.
It's about knowing. A good scout can tell the difference.

Of course there are factors involved, luck, trajectory and such, but a good scout recognizes a talent and how it will pan out no matter where it plays.

Yeah, I've never trusted Pronman's assessment of defensemen. He's never been good at it. Makar may not be a sure-fire homerun pick, but Pronman is not the guy who's gonna sway me off taking him.

 

[Chainshot]

Right now, I've got 5 defensemen on my radar that I'd be OK with the Sabres taking in the first round (in order):

1.) Heiskanen. He reminds me of Lindholm. Does everything well in a men's league. He doesn't have the elite upside, but his floor is super high.

2.) Makar. High upside, but the team who drafts him must be certain they can mold him. I think rushing him would be a bad mistake. To draft Makar, you've got to be certain that his hockey IQ and skills translate to higher leagues.

3.) Liljegren. Has more upside than Makar. But he doesn't have the hockey IQ.... or at least hasn't shown it. It might be a confidence problem. He was much better last year, but played against men this season. Interviews will be key with Liljegren. It's possible that his boneheaded play was just a confidence thing.

4.) Valimaki. If you want an Ekholm clone, here he is. Low bust potential. Safe pick.

5.) Brannstrom. Does a lot of what Makar does, but in better leagues. Not quite as dynamic, but pretty close.

Yep, same same.

 

[Rasmus CacOlainen]

whoa Pronman ranked Makar 19th and Liljegren 13th.

What's the write up on the other 3 D in the top 20? No access to the article obviously

 

[Jame]

Right now, I've got 5 defensemen on my radar that I'd be OK with the Sabres taking in the first round (in order):

1.) Heiskanen. He reminds me of Lindholm. Does everything well in a men's league. He doesn't have the elite upside, but his floor is super high.

2.) Makar. High upside, but the team who drafts him must be certain they can mold him. I think rushing him would be a bad mistake. To draft Makar, you've got to be certain that his hockey IQ and skills translate to higher leagues.

3.) Liljegren. Has more upside than Makar. But he doesn't have the hockey IQ.... or at least hasn't shown it. It might be a confidence problem. He was much better last year, but played against men this season. Interviews will be key with Liljegren. It's possible that his boneheaded play was just a confidence thing.

4.) Valimaki. If you want an Ekholm clone, here he is. Low bust potential. Safe pick.

5.) Brannstrom. Does a lot of what Makar does, but in better leagues. Not quite as dynamic, but pretty close.

Bolder. Does not compute.

 

[Ace]

I assume he means because he seems to have more to his game that he hasn't shown yet then Makar...but the hockey IQ has to be factored in as the reason that is, and may continue to, be the case.

I've seen all the lower hockey IQ defensemen I need. That's why Bogo can skate, shoot, pass, hit and carry a puck and it adds up to a bad defensemen.

 

[Der Jaeger]

Bolder. Does not compute.

Yeah, somewhat poorly worded. If Liljegren's issues are really the illness and lack of confidence, then his skating, shot, ability to run a PP, etc. add up to a better player to me.

If his issues are really poor hockey IQ, then I wouldn't pick him.

I don't think I can complete an assessment on Liljegren. I'd need access to talk to him. And his coaches. From what I can see, his decision making shows me lack of hockey IQ. But I can't tell if there are underlying issues from my couch.

 

[Tatanka]

Housley came out of Minn HS. Everyone is overthinking the competition issue. You either have the skill or you don't. Makar has the skill a d chose a path to maintain NCAA eligibility. He also isn't bound by CHL rules and can go directly to the AHL. Not saying he is the pick but his skating is already top tier NHL level.

 

[dotcommunism]

Housley came out of Minn HS. Everyone is overthinking the competition issue. You either have the skill or you don't. Makar has the skill a d chose a path to maintain NCAA eligibility. He also isn't bound by CHL rules and can go directly to the AHL. Not saying he is the pick but his skating is already top tier NHL level.

This is actually incorrect. Players drafted out of the CJHL (which includes the AJHL and the BCHL among others) are subject to the same rules as players drafted out of the CHL. This came up in the team board mock draft thread.

 

[Tatanka]

This is actually incorrect. Players drafted out of the CJHL (which includes the AJHL and the BCHL among others) are subject to the same rules as players drafted out of the CHL. This came up in the team board mock draft thread.

I am quite sure they have no legal means to enforce any such prohibition. The AJHL operates under the same model as fhe USHL. The players are not paid nor under contract. It is what keeps their NCAA eligibility. Once a player enrolls in school they have no right to them. Theoretically Makar can enroll at U Mass and drop the next day. Two head amateur scouts have sid the same thing.

 

[dotcommunism]

I am quite sure they have no legal means to enforce any such prohibition. The AJHL operates under the same model as fhe USHL. The players are not paid nor under contract. It is what keeps their NCAA eligibility. Once a player enrolls in school they have no right to them. Theoretically Makar can enroll at U Mass and drop the next day. Two head amateur scouts have sid the same thing.

This is part of an agreement with the NHL. It's absolutely 100% enforceable by the NHL. A player drafted out of the AJHL is subject to the same requirements for AHL eligibility as a player drafted out of the WHL.

 

[Tatanka]

This is part of an agreement with the NHL. It's absolutely 100% enforceable by the NHL. A player drafted out of the AJHL is subject to the same requirements for AHL eligibility as a player drafted out of the WHL.[/QUOTE
And as the 2 NHL amateur scouting professionals pointed out that ends and becomes unenforceable once he enrolls. Both said Makar won't play a game in the NCAA and won't be back to the AJHL.

 

[Tatanka]

Mark Kelley and Kevin McDonald were my sources. They could be wrong.

 

[Chainshot]

And the AHL doesn't seem like the best path for Makar. UMass for a year, make the adjustment and if he plays well enough, make him an offer at the end of his freshman season. If he doesn't progress far enough, send him back again.