Toggle sidebar

Prospect Info: 2017 NHL Draft / Pick #7 - Lias Andersson (C)

  • Xenforo Cloud has upgraded us to version 2.3.6. Please report any issues you experience.
Status
Not open for further replies.
I think people play fantasy football and apply that concept of a reach to the real world. To me, it's only a reach if it's essentially indisputable that you could have traded down and still landed the guy. Given the ranking spread for LA, I seriously doubt this could have been done.

I would have preferred a more offensive guy with a "premium" pick like this but I'm not unhappy with LA. This sure as shit is not a McIlrath situation.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Samuel Culper III
There was not a single (public) list on the planet that had LA as high as #7. I don't know how you can argue he wasn't a reach to some degree.

I'm far more upset with Gorton for choosing '17 to move a vet for a top-10 pick and for the overall assets he got from Phoenix than I am with the selection. Even if I still am not thrilled with the selection (Suzuki). Draft board break didn't help either, because why would it.

Either way exciting to see how LA fares in Hartford.
 
HatTrick Swayze said:
There was not a single (public) list on the planet that had LA as high as #7. I don't know how you can argue he wasn't a reach to some degree.

I'm far more upset with Gorton for choosing '17 to move a vet for a top-10 pick and for the overall assets he got from Phoenix than I am with the selection. Even if I still am not thrilled with the selection (Suzuki). Draft board break didn't help either, because why would it.

Either way exciting to see how LA fares in Hartford.
Click to expand...
Rumor has it the Kings wanted him at 11. So it’s not crazy.
 
HatTrick Swayze said:
There was not a single (public) list on the planet that had LA as high as #7. I don't know how you can argue he wasn't a reach to some degree.

I'm far more upset with Gorton for choosing '17 to move a vet for a top-10 pick and for the overall assets he got from Phoenix than I am with the selection. Even if I still am not thrilled with the selection (Suzuki). Draft board break didn't help either, because why would it.

Either way exciting to see how LA fares in Hartford.
Click to expand...

Draftbuzz did...
draftbuzzhockey.com/2017-final-ranking/
 
HatTrick Swayze said:
There was not a single (public) list on the planet that had LA as high as #7. I don't know how you can argue he wasn't a reach to some degree.

I'm far more upset with Gorton for choosing '17 to move a vet for a top-10 pick and for the overall assets he got from Phoenix than I am with the selection. Even if I still am not thrilled with the selection (Suzuki). Draft board break didn't help either, because why would it.

Either way exciting to see how LA fares in Hartford.
Click to expand...
I prefer to look at who was a reach in hindsight, after some real development and fleshing out of the prospects. It shows if the Front Office reached and had a bad understanding of the draft picks, or if it was the right pick and not a reach at all based on their personal draft board.
 
Does it matter if he was a reach? How many guys drafted later in the 1st these past 5 years are huge impact players? More than guys drafted in front of them? If a team had taken McAvoy 3rd or 4th overall people would have said “damn, that’s a reach” but that team would look pretty smart today. How about if Barzal went 4th instead of 16th? Or if Pastrnak went 6th instead of 20-something? If the team believes LA is going to be the next Ryan O’Reilly than it doesn’t mater if it’s a “reach” or not. What matters is, do you trust your scouts? McIlrath debacle clearly sewed some doubt but everything I’ve seen of LA, I believe in this pick. Just because he isn’t flashy doesn’t mean he won’t drive play and be productive. I think he’s going to be Landeskog as a center, with a less heavy game essentially.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: belford222, Off Sides, CenturionOne and 2 others
Blake wheeler was a huge reach when the coyotes picked him at 5 or so. Lias andersson being picked a few spots earlier than where a lot of analysts had him isn't a reach imo. Lias andersson will probably be a very good jack of all trades 2nd liner for a long time in this league.
 
HatTrick Swayze said:
I'm far more upset with Gorton for choosing '17 to move a vet for a top-10 pick and for the overall assets he got from Phoenix than I am with the selection. Even if I still am not thrilled with the selection (Suzuki). Draft board break didn't help either, because why would it.
Click to expand...
Just half in response to this and mostly wanting to sort this out of my head and onto some kind of record:

From all the anecdotal reports I've heard in the past year or two (going back to before the 2016 draft) I think the timeline for the Stepan trade was kind of something like this:
Prior to the 2016 draft: Coyotes called about Stepan*, Gorton wanted (at least) their first round pick (#7OA)**, Chayka decides to wait to see how the draft shakes out before pulling the trigger
Draft day comes around Keller is still on the board and the Coyotes keep their pick and draft Keller***
Year goes by, Chayka comes back around asking about Stepan, weaker draft agrees to giving up the 7th OA pick
Rangers reportedly high on Patrick****, Pettersson, Glass, Andersson, Suzuki, and I'm forgetting the 5th, but the first 4 are in order of their board*****
Patrick, Pettersson, and Glass all taken before #7 thanks to Middlestadt and Vilardi dropping, Rangers go with their top guy left on the board.

* Interview with Chayka after the trade said he was trying to get Stepan for over a year and almost had a deal worked out at the 2016 draft
** Maloney mentioned during a game against the Coyotes (?) this year that the Rangers tried really hard to trade into the first round in 2016 to draft Keller
*** Chayka on Craig Custance's podcast was speaking about how hard it is to get elite top-10 in scoring level players when you're not picking 1/2 overall on draft day; when their pick came around and Keller was still on the board he felt Keller was that type of player and kept the pick
**** Edge mentioned a few times before or after the draft that the Rangers were really high on Patrick and if he fell to #3 they'd try whatever they could to trade up to get him
***** McKenzie tweeted on draft day that the Rangers had 5 centers they really liked with Pettersson, Glass, and Andersson being the first 3 mentioned and with the way the Rangers pick ended up being Lias, I think it's safe to assume Lias was their #3 guy

If there's anything information or evidence that can be added or seems at odds to this I'd love to hear it
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: lucky13, Glen Sathers Cigar and HatTrick Swayze
GeorgeKaplan said:
Just half in response to this and mostly wanting to sort this out of my head and onto some kind of record:

From all the anecdotal reports I've heard in the past year or two (going back to before the 2016 draft) I think the timeline for the Stepan trade was kind of something like this:
Prior to the 2016 draft: Coyotes called about Stepan*, Gorton wanted (at least) their first round pick (#7OA)**, Chayka decides to wait to see how the draft shakes out before pulling the trigger
Draft day comes around Keller is still on the board and the Coyotes keep their pick and draft Keller***
Year goes by, Chayka comes back around asking about Stepan, weaker draft agrees to giving up the 7th OA pick
Rangers reportedly high on Patrick****, Pettersson, Glass, Andersson, Suzuki, and I'm forgetting the 5th, but the first 4 are in order of their board*****
Patrick, Pettersson, and Glass all taken before #7 thanks to Middlestadt and Vilardi dropping, Rangers go with their top guy left on the board.

* Interview with Chayka after the trade said he was trying to get Stepan for over a year and almost had a deal worked out at the 2016 draft
** Maloney mentioned during a game against the Coyotes (?) this year that the Rangers tried really hard to trade into the first round in 2016 to draft Keller
*** Chayka on Craig Custance's podcast was speaking about how hard it is to get elite top-10 in scoring level players when you're not picking 1/2 overall on draft day; when their pick came around and Keller was still on the board he felt Keller was that type of player and kept the pick
**** Edge mentioned a few times before or after the draft that the Rangers were really high on Patrick and if he fell to #3 they'd try whatever they could to trade up to get him
***** Maloney talking while the Rangers were on the clock mentioned 5 centers they really liked with Pettersson, Glass, and Andersson being the first 3 mentioned and with the way the Rangers pick ended up being Lias, I think it's safe to assume Lias was their #3 guy

If there's anything information or evidence that can be added or seems at odds to this I'd love to hear it
Click to expand...
McKenzie tweeted out on draft day that the Rangers, at 7OA, were looking at Pettersson, Glass, Andersson, and Suzuki (didn't indicate order, but assuming that was the correct order).
 
  • Like
Reactions: GeorgeKaplan
Synergy27 said:
Again, it's only a reach if you could have traded down and still gotten your guy.
Click to expand...


The problem with using "trade down" as a metric is sometimes there's not another side to be had. There's not always a willing partner nor a partner willing to offer up sufficient value to trade picks. You hear it in football all of the time," hey we tried to trade down but couldn't find a partner". Now it could be smoke or maybe not but it really isn't quantifiable in a sense.

Still I think if there's a consensus, a player is in the upper teens, 20's or 30's on draft pundits lists and the player is then picked @ #7, yeah that's a reach. My problem with using the term reach with regards with Lias, there was no consensus. I understand that there were players with more perceived upside so maybe that skews opinions more towards using the term reach.
 
ManUtdTobbe said:
I sure as hell wasn't clamoring for Mittelstadt or Tippett...

I'm guessing most wanted Brännström or Liljegren honestly... Tippett would have been a mistake imo and i wasn't high on Mittelstadt...

Brännström, Liljegren or Vilardi were my picks, in that order.

Edit: CanucksArmys draft model rated Lias very highly, according to that he sure as hell wasn't a reach.
Click to expand...

The CanucksArmy draft model is very interesting and it is something I thought of before I discovered it. People always put too much value on just points, even when a player is in the SHL or Allsvenskan before being drafted.

That model finally takes that into account and compares competitions based on QoO.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ManUtdTobbe
Synergy27 said:
Again, it's only a reach if you could have traded down and still gotten your guy.
Click to expand...

I agree here. And reports stated LA wanted LA (LOL). That means you need to trade down max 3 spots. Did those 3 teams between us and LA want to move up?

5 years from now, people will mention *random late 1st rounder who breaks out* as the player we should have picked at 7.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TheTakedown
Red Wings were also high on Lias, that too is confirmed... So if Lias was the player NYR wanted (clearly he was) then trading down was not really an option.
 
ManUtdTobbe said:
Red Wings were also high on Lias, that too is confirmed... So if Lias was the player NYR wanted (clearly he was) then trading down was not really an option.
Click to expand...

Which means he wasn't a reach. BPA according to some blogger isn't the same as BPA according to professional scouts.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Ad

Ad

Top Bottom