2017 Draft Discussion - Sabres Pick 8th

[CatsforReinhart]

Does anyone feel that drafting college prospects is a huge risk and all things being equal drafting the player that does not go the college route is a better option? With Vesey, maybe Peterson and Bjork, Schultz are some players who don't sign with their teams and go UFA route.
Should the NHL tag on an extra year control after college to solve the problem of college players bolting the team they were drafted? Is it something teams should be concerned about?

 

[Jim Bob]

Does anyone feel that drafting college prospects is a huge risk and all things being equal drafting the player that does not go the college route is a better option? With Vesey, maybe Peterson and Bjork, Schultz are some players who don't sign with their teams and go UFA route.
Should the NHL tag on an extra year control after college to solve the problem of college players bolting the team they were drafted? Is it something teams should be concerned about?

It may be in the later rounds and you expect guys to slow cook up until the point that going UFA becomes a viable option.

But, it won't affect the early round picks that are only going to college for a year or two and then turning pro.

I'm sure Arizona and Boston aren't unhappy that they took Keller and McAvoy where they did last year and Columbus is happy with taking Werenski where they did in 2015.

 

[MackAttack26]

Can anyone tell me why Makar is so much higher rated than Valimaki (non-sarcastic question, I don't watch juniors - youtube highlights dont prove anything)?

His skating is miles better. Also his overall offensive ability is sky high (though Valimaki is pretty good in that regard as well)

 

[Rasmus CacOlainen]

His skating is miles better. Also his overall offensive ability is sky high (though Valimaki is pretty good in that regard as well)

I was under the impression that Makar was doing his thing against much lower competition at the moment. Could that be slightly deceiving when comparing him versus Liljegren and Valimaki? Or is it sure fire that he is better. Also how do they compare, you know, defensively?

 

[sabrebuild]

If we go forward over D at 8, the only pick that won't make me lose my mind is Glass.

Having just watched his highlights, he looks light. Two years away from the league or less?

 

[Jame]

Having just watched his highlights, he looks light. Two years away from the league or less?

I would assume, that given our depth, we would slow cook a forward.

 

[LetsDoughBuffalo]

If I had to make a way too early-early-early guess, I think that one of Makar or Liljegren will be there for us at 8, and I'm fine with that.

NJ - Patrick
PHI - Hischier
DAL - Valardi
COL - Heiskanen
VAN - Mittlestadt
LV - Glass
ARZ - Makkar
BUF - Liljegren
DET - Tippett
FLA - Valimaki

 

[26CornerBlitz]

 

[CatsforReinhart]

It is interesting sabres fans all have Makar going top 5 when most scouting reports dont.

 

[OkimLom]

If I had to make a way too early-early-early guess, I think that one of Makar or Liljegren will be there for us at 8, and I'm fine with that.

NJ - Patrick
PHI - Hischier
DAL - Valardi
COL - Heiskanen
VAN - Mittlestadt
LV - Glass
ARZ - Makkar
BUF - Liljegren
DET - Tippett
FLA - Valimaki

If it comes down to being @ #7 looking as having the choice of Makar vs Liljegren, I'm calling Arizona and asking if an extra draft pick will entice them to switch places.

I'm then taking Makar if they agree. If not then Liljegren.

 

[Doug Prishpreed]

If I had to make a way too early-early-early guess, I think that one of Makar or Liljegren will be there for us at 8, and I'm fine with that.

NJ - Patrick
PHI - Hischier
DAL - Valardi
COL - Heiskanen
VAN - Mittlestadt
LV - Glass
ARZ - Makkar
BUF - Liljegren
DET - Tippett
FLA - Valimaki

Yeah, I'm fine with that too.

3-8 could go in any order though...if Mittlestat falls to us (it would definitely be considered a "fall"), then I bet teams behind us would give up a king's ransom for him. That's the only guy who I think would fetch a return that's worth trading, on top of us not really needing that type of player right now, relative to other teams.

 

[NotABadPeriod]

While it appears Heiskanen/Makar have become the top 2 D in this draft, a team like Colorado or Arizona could still take Liljegren or Valimaki ahead of them. Especially if one of them has real doubts about the level of competition for Makar.

 

[Doug Prishpreed]

While it appears Heiskanen/Makar have become the top 2 D in this draft, a team like Colorado or Arizona could still take Liljegren or Valimaki ahead of them. Especially if one of them has real doubts about the level of competition for Makar.

I was going to say the same thing. There is no doubt that some teams have Liljegren higher than Makar...we just need to hope one of the the ones picks in front of us and are looking for D. Very real possibility.

And to be honest, I'm getting used to the idea of us taking Liljegren, so it's not a big deal either way. These guys are pretty close overall imo. All things considered.

 

[CatsforReinhart]

SO we can get one of Makar, Liljegren or Heiskanen.

 

[sincerity0]

Does anyone feel that drafting college prospects is a huge risk and all things being equal drafting the player that does not go the college route is a better option? With Vesey, maybe Peterson and Bjork, Schultz are some players who don't sign with their teams and go UFA route.
Should the NHL tag on an extra year control after college to solve the problem of college players bolting the team they were drafted? Is it something teams should be concerned about?

Is there a definite measurable risk there? Absolutely. Guys like Eichel, McAvoy, Keller, etc who go the college route are never going to come close to UFA because they are going pro after a year or two.

The real risk is later round picks like Vesey who, realistically, teams are taking a flier on. But then we are arguing about a couple 3rd rounders or later doing this.

To directly answer your question, no. Players that complete their college eligibility then go pro should absolutely be able to choose the UFA route if they want. The Vesey situation was odd because he refused to go pro over a year before he was eligible for UFA.

In that sense I understand the point you're trying to make. Take major junior players in Canada, who forgo their NCAA eligibility by playing and are essentially forced to go pro after juniors. NCAA players are taking a calculated risk by going that route. They should not be penalized for not forgoing their eligibility.

 

[Paxon]

Is there a definite measurable risk there? Absolutely. Guys like Eichel, McAvoy, Keller, etc who go the college route are never going to come close to UFA because they are going pro after a year or two.

The real risk is later round picks like Vesey who, realistically, teams are taking a flier on. But then we are arguing about a couple 3rd rounders or later doing this.

To directly answer your question, no. Players that complete their college eligibility then go pro should absolutely be able to choose the UFA route if they want. The Vesey situation was odd because he refused to go pro over a year before he was eligible for UFA.

In that sense I understand the point you're trying to make. Take major junior players in Canada, who forgo their NCAA eligibility by playing and are essentially forced to go pro after juniors. NCAA players are taking a calculated risk by going that route. They should not be penalized for not forgoing their eligibility.

Exactly. The majority of college guys who go to free agency were inherently risky picks in the first place because they were 2nd rounders or, mostly, beyond. It isn't all downside, either. Teams get more time to evaluate the growth of a player rather than being forced to either sign him or let him go after two years. Multi-year college players get pretty far down their development paths without taking up a spot on the AHL roster.

A 1st rounder staying in college long enough to become a UFA then choosing to do so is a rarity. It does not happen frequently enough to let it shade your decision-making. You at least get a compensatory 2nd round pick if it happens, which is something.

 

[hizzoner]

One might begin to think that after round 2 or so it is better to stay away from U.S. College players or college wannabes-at least until round 6 or 7. Later picks will usually need more time to develop and if any good will end up in a situation where they can choose their team. Too lazy to check the history if any on this.

 

[ek93]

SO we can get one of Makar, Liljegren or Heiskanen.

Or at the very worst, if something absolutely crazy happens, Valimaki (who I think is underrated, but that's just my opinion).

 

[Havok89]

How does Liljegren compare to Chychrun last year? Both starting their draft season looking like locks for the top 3, and then fell off as the year progressed.

I think both Makar / Heiskanen are off the board at 8, how would people feel about Liljegren at 8?

 

[NotABadPeriod]

The one advantage mid-to-late round college picks have is you get to see them develop for an extra 1 or 2 years before you have to decide if you want to use a contract spot on them.

Imagine if you had that ability with some of the guys we've signed over the years (Jacobs, Kea, etc.). But we didn't--two years of juniors and then it was decision time.

 

[DJN21]

How does Liljegren compare to Chychrun last year? Both starting their draft season looking like locks for the top 3, and then fell off as the year progressed.

I think both Makar / Heiskanen are off the board at 8, how would people feel about Liljegren at 8?

I personally feel they are similar in that their stock dropped undeservingly. Chychrun is better though imo. Liljegren to me will be a safe bet top 4 dman who is good at everything but great at nothing. People who rather swing for the next karlsson on the potential of guys like makar etc...depends how apt you are yo swing for a home run or take a double...

 

[Moskau]

How does Liljegren compare to Chychrun last year? Both starting their draft season looking like locks for the top 3, and then fell off as the year progressed.

I think both Makar / Heiskanen are off the board at 8, how would people feel about Liljegren at 8?

Chychrun fell because of over exposure, a fear that his previous shoulder injuries could be something that hindered him in the future and a fear that he could have peaked too early. He like Ekblad had their man child status used against them as their draft season went on. Part of me thinks Zach Bogosian has had a negative effect on some of these guys but Ekblad and to a lesser extent Chychrun had off the charts Hockey IQ at the same age as Bogosian.

Liljegren I haven't seen much of this season. I think the worst thing that happened to him this season besides mono and playing against men was Rasmus Dahlin. There's such a huge gap between the two that you begin to question just how good Liljegren is. You start seeing posts and scouting reports recently where people say Liljegren is a terrible passer and shooter and you wonder how much of it is hyperbole. Now many Swedish posters are saying he should drop to the 2nd round and that Brannstrom is the superior prospect and you wonder how much of that is hyperbole too. Then you watch him a few weeks ago and he looks absolutely terrible and to me at least it becomes very clear that he's too much of a boom bust prospect to be using an 8th overall pick on. For every 10 prospects that have as big a downward trajectory in their draft year as Liljegren, maybe 2 or 3 prove scouts wrong. If Buffalo was drafting mid teens I would be more than happy to take him at that spot. But as an organization they can't afford to bungle an 8th overall pick at this point.

 

[Doug Prishpreed]

Liljegren I haven't seen much of this season. I think the worst thing that happened to him this season besides mono and playing against men was Rasmus Dahlin. There's such a huge gap between the two that you begin to question just how good Liljegren is. You start seeing posts and scouting reports recently where people say Liljegren is a terrible passer and shooter and you wonder how much of it is hyperbole. Now many Swedish posters are saying he should drop to the 2nd round and that Brannstrom is the superior prospect and you wonder how much of that is hyperbole too. Then you watch him a few weeks ago and he looks absolutely terrible and to me at least it becomes very clear that he's too much of a boom bust prospect to be using an 8th overall pick on. For every 10 prospects that have as big a downward trajectory in their draft year as Liljegren, maybe 2 or 3 prove scouts wrong. If Buffalo was drafting mid teens I would be more than happy to take him at that spot. But as an organization they can't afford to bungle an 8th overall pick at this point.

Are people really saying he's a "terrible passer and shooter?" I mean, he hasn't been a game changer of late but I'm guessing that's hyperbole.

And Brannstrom is just as much of a boom/bust prospect. Both seem to have huge upside.

 

[Moskau]

Are people really saying he's a "terrible passer and shooter?" I mean, he hasn't been a game changer of late but I'm guessing that's hyperbole.

And Brannstrom is just as much of a boom/bust prospect. Both seem to have huge upside.

https://recrutes.ca/grants-slant/

 

[Doug Prishpreed]

https://recrutes.ca/grants-slant/

Yeah, I've read this before. Liljegren has his weaknesses for sure, and had an underwhelming few games that Grant was watching, but I don't agree on the severity of most of his flaws listed. He has so many traits that are translatable.

Brannstorm is listed 5'10" and looks even smaller, so he's not a top 10 pick either. Problem is, this isn't a great year to have a top 10 pick. Maybe Vilimaki is the answer here...I have them all in about the same tier so I'm cool with any of them.