NHL Entry Draft 2018 Draft - Prospect Discussion (Poll added)

[benjiv1]

I had this long post with names and where they were drafted all typed out on my phone, and when I hit post, it told me the server was down for maintenance. :s

Anyways, I don’t like drafting a defensemen in the the top 10 and here’s why...

How many legit #1 defensemen have been drafted in the top half of the 1st round, that weren’t previously ranked as the #1D in the draft?

For every OEL there is a Cowen or Reinhart. Heck, you still get players like Murray and Larson that were the #1 ranked D.

In all likelihood if you aren’t drafting the top D in the draft, you aren’t getting getting a 1D, instead you will likely have to settle for 2D or 3D, in which case the 2nd half of RD 1 is better time to take a D.

 

[Neiler]

I had this long post with names and where they were drafted all typed out on my phone, and when I hit post, it told me the server was down for maintenance. :s

Anyways, I don’t like drafting a defensemen in the the top 10 and here’s why...

How many legit #1 defensemen have been drafted in the top half of the 1st round, that weren’t previously ranked as the #1D in the draft?

For every OEL there is a Cowen or Reinhart. Heck, you still get players like Murray and Larson that were the #1 ranked D.

In all likelihood if you aren’t drafting the top D in the draft, you aren’t getting getting a 1D, instead you will likely have to settle for 2D or 3D, in which case the 2nd half of RD 1 is better time to take a D.

This is really interesting. Never thought about it before.

I like Tkachuk with 4OA and Noel with 22OA. That's a solid pair to add in round one.

 

[Sens in Process]

I had this long post with names and where they were drafted all typed out on my phone, and when I hit post, it told me the server was down for maintenance. :s

Anyways, I don’t like drafting a defensemen in the the top 10 and here’s why...

How many legit #1 defensemen have been drafted in the top half of the 1st round, that weren’t previously ranked as the #1D in the draft?

For every OEL there is a Cowen or Reinhart. Heck, you still get players like Murray and Larson that were the #1 ranked D.

In all likelihood if you aren’t drafting the top D in the draft, you aren’t getting getting a 1D, instead you will likely have to settle for 2D or 3D, in which case the 2nd half of RD 1 is better time to take a D.

I was going to post something very similar. D-men drafted in the top ten often fail to live up to expectations.

Larsson, Hanifin, Juolevi and Fleury are recent examples. There are many more from the last 10 to 15 years.

 

[BigRig4]

I had this long post with names and where they were drafted all typed out on my phone, and when I hit post, it told me the server was down for maintenance. :s

Anyways, I don’t like drafting a defensemen in the the top 10 and here’s why...

How many legit #1 defensemen have been drafted in the top half of the 1st round, that weren’t previously ranked as the #1D in the draft?

For every OEL there is a Cowen or Reinhart. Heck, you still get players like Murray and Larson that were the #1 ranked D.

In all likelihood if you aren’t drafting the top D in the draft, you aren’t getting getting a 1D, instead you will likely have to settle for 2D or 3D, in which case the 2nd half of RD 1 is better time to take a D.

I generally agree with this sentiment, unless its a no-brainer #1 overall kinda guy on D. Goalies, needless to say, are even more risky. I would add that it seems like forwards can play at younger age as well, especially wingers with less defensive responsibilities.

 

[BondraTime]

I had this long post with names and where they were drafted all typed out on my phone, and when I hit post, it told me the server was down for maintenance. :s

Anyways, I don’t like drafting a defensemen in the the top 10 and here’s why...

How many legit #1 defensemen have been drafted in the top half of the 1st round, that weren’t previously ranked as the #1D in the draft?

For every OEL there is a Cowen or Reinhart. Heck, you still get players like Murray and Larson that were the #1 ranked D.

In all likelihood if you aren’t drafting the top D in the draft, you aren’t getting getting a 1D, instead you will likely have to settle for 2D or 3D, in which case the 2nd half of RD 1 is better time to take a D.

That goes for forwards too. For every Ehlers you get a Hodgson, and leave a guy like Forsberg out.

By my own personal count, out of the 29 misses from the 2008-2016 NHL drafts, 12 have been D and 17 have been forwards. 12/29 vs 17/61. There are more misses by D for sure % wise, but take out the 2012 draft (a very bad draft, dominated by D with 6/10 misses in the top 10) and it becomes basically equal.

8/25 or 32% flop rate for D chosen in the top 10

vs

15/55 or 27% flop rate for F chosen in the top 10.


The days of drafting shut down D like Schenn/Gudbranson/McIlrath in the top 10 are over. I am 100% certain that you compare the miss rate from 2014 on for D it will be substantially better than every year prior. D's chosen this year will not have the failure rate of years like those.

2016 - Too Early
Parjarvi
Juolevi
Jost

2015 - Too Early
Meier
Zacha
Strome

2014
Bennett
Dal Colle
Virtanen
Ritchie
Fleury

2013
Nickushkin
Lindholm

2012
Yakupov
Galchenyuk
Murray
Reinhart
Pouliot
Koekkoek

2011
Strome
Larsson (If you want to consider him)
Hopkins (If you consider Larsson a miss at 4th you need to have him as a miss)

2010
Gudbranson
Connolly
Burmistrov
McIlrath

2009
Cowen
Glennie
Parjarvi

2008
Bogosion
Schenn
Filitov
Wilson
Boedker
Hodgson

 

[benjiv1]

That goes for forwards too. For every Ehlers you get a Hodgson, and leave a guy like Forsberg out.

By my own personal count, out of the 29 misses from the 2008-2016 NHL drafts, 12 have been D and 17 have been forwards. 12/29 vs 17/61. There are more misses by D for sure % wise, but take out the 2012 draft (a very bad draft, dominated by D with 6/10 misses in the top 10) and it becomes basically equal.

8/25 or 32% flop rate for D chosen in the top 10

vs

15/55 or 27% flop rate for F chosen in the top 10.


The days of drafting shut down D like Schenn/Gudbranson/McIlrath in the top 10 are over. I am 100% certain that you compare the miss rate from 2014 on for D it will be substantially better than every year prior. D's chosen this year will not have the failure rate of years like those.

2016 - Too Early
Parjarvi
Juolevi
Jost

2015 - Too Early
Meier
Zacha
Strome

2014
Bennett
Dal Colle
Virtanen
Ritchie
Fleury

2013
Nickushkin
Lindholm

2012
Yakupov
Galchenyuk
Murray
Reinhart
Pouliot
Koekkoek

2011
Strome
Larsson (If you want to consider him)
Hopkins (If you consider Larsson a miss at 4th you need to have him as a miss)

2010
Gudbranson
Connolly
Burmistrov
McIlrath

2009
Cowen
Glennie
Parjarvi

2008
Bogosion
Schenn
Filitov
Wilson
Boedker
Hodgson

It’s not even the misses that necessarily concern me, it’s more that specifically with D, because they are typically on a longer development curve, you really don’t know what you are getting when you draft them.

With a forward you have a better projection IMO of what that player is going to be, because they are typically closer to that stage when drafted.

Obviously there are anomalies, but I’m still of the opinion that you get better bang for your buck, drafting a defensemen in the 2nd half of the 1st Rd.

 

[Nac Mac Feegle]

That's why I'm leaning more towards Dobson in regards to the Bouchard vs Dobson matchup. Well, that and Dobson's better defensive game. But Dobson's name hasn't been linked to the Sens basically at all (that I know of).

At this point, it's pretty much a coin toss. So many kids are virtually equal in the projected 3-9 range....crazy.

 

[Karl Prime]

Of course Tkachuk's favourite player is Simmonds.

 

[BondraTime]

It’s not even the misses that necessarily concern me, it’s more that specifically with D, because they are typically on a longer development curve, you really don’t know what you are getting when you draft them.

With a forward you have a better projection IMO of what that player is going to be, because they are typically closer to that stage when drafted.

Obviously there are anomalies, but I’m still of the opinion that you get better bang for your buck, drafting a defensemen in the 2nd half of the 1st Rd.

Here's a list of the best D chosen outside the top 10 of the 1st for each year, with the guys inside the top 10 bolded:

2016 - McAvoy (Sergachev)
2015 - Chabot (Hanfin/Provorov/Werenski)
2014 - Sanheim (Ekblad)
2013 - Morrissey (Nurse/Jones/Risto)
2012 - Ceci/Matheson (Rielly/Trouba/Dumba/Lindholm)
2011 - Klefbom (Hamilton/Larsson)
2010 - Pysyk (None)
2009 - Leddy (OEL)
2008 - Karlsson (Doughty/Pietrangelo)

Outside the top 10, The best D from each draft you have a superstar in Karlsson, a top pairing guy in McAvoy and likely top pairing guy in Chabot, 4 2nd pairing guys in Ceci/Matheson, Leddy and Morrisey, and then 2nd/3rd tweeners in Sanheim, Klefbom, Pysyk.

The only years the best D was picked outside the top 10 was 2008 and 2010 (McIlrath and Gudbranson, drafts don't work like that anymore), and then 2016 we have McAvoy, with Sergachev the guy inside the top 10. If you want quality D, you pick them in the top 10.

You get the same bang for your buck with D/F inside the top 10. Actually, you get much better bang for your buck with forwards in the back 2/3 of the 1st.

 

[SAK11]

I had this long post with names and where they were drafted all typed out on my phone, and when I hit post, it told me the server was down for maintenance. :s

Anyways, I don’t like drafting a defensemen in the the top 10 and here’s why...

How many legit #1 defensemen have been drafted in the top half of the 1st round, that weren’t previously ranked as the #1D in the draft?

For every OEL there is a Cowen or Reinhart. Heck, you still get players like Murray and Larson that were the #1 ranked D.

In all likelihood if you aren’t drafting the top D in the draft, you aren’t getting getting a 1D, instead you will likely have to settle for 2D or 3D, in which case the 2nd half of RD 1 is better time to take a D.

Personally, I see plenty of quality d-men from recent drafts that were drafted high in the draft, after the #1 ranked d-man. Guys like Hamilton, Rielly, Lindholm, Pietrangelo, OEL, and while it's still a little early, I think highly of Werenski, Provorov and Sergachev.

You're doing a disservice to potential high quality players if you avoid taking them because of the reason you've put forth. I think you're better off evaluating the players for who they are and who they project to become, instead of thinking "guys like Reinhart and Cowen busted in the past, I'm probably better off avoiding d-men at this point in the draft."

 

[Sens of Anarchy]

IMO every draft is different as to the quality of players at a certain position. Generally bad to generalize

 

[benjiv1]

Personally, I see plenty of quality d-men from recent drafts that were drafted high in the draft, after the #1 ranked d-man. Guys like Hamilton, Rielly, Lindholm, Pietrangelo, OEL, and while it's still a little early, I think highly of Werenski, Provorov and Sergachev.

You're doing a disservice to potential high quality players if you avoid taking them because of the reason you've put forth. I think you're better off evaluating the players for who they are and who they project to become, instead of thinking "guys like Reinhart and Cowen busted in the past, I'm probably better off avoiding d-men at this point in the draft."

That isn’t what I am saying at all.
I’m trying to say that projections for defensemen are much harder to establish outside of the #1 ranked D, and that as such it is more of a crapshoot as to what you are actually getting with them.

 

[SAK11]

That isn’t what I am saying at all.
I’m trying to say that projections for defensemen are much harder to establish outside of the #1 ranked D, and that as such it is more of a crapshoot as to what you are actually getting with them.

Well that's not how I and a few others read your post, seemed like you were generalizing that picking a d-men in the top 10 that wasn't the #1 ranked d-men from the draft class was a mistake because of examples in prior drafts.

Even with this more specific stance of yours, I still disagree. As mentioned in my previous post, there are a number of high quality d-men that have been drafted in the range you're being cautious of. It's the jobs of these scouts to be able to project; they shouldn't be scared to take a d-man because their developmental path is typically a little bit longer. I certainly hope the Sens don't feel the same as you in thinking that drafting a d-men high is a crapshoot- that would be rather unsettling.

 

[benjiv1]

Alright, can't sleep so I will try type this up again from a computer...
D Men drafted in the top 10, excluding the #1 ranked defensemen (only the ones in bold would I consider worthy of a top 10 pick)

2008:
Bogosian
Pietrangelo
Schenn

2009:
OEL
Cowen

2010:
McIlrath

2011:
Hamilton
Brodin

2012:
Reinhart
Rielly
Lindholm
Dumba
Pouliot
Trouba
Koekkoek

2013:
Nurse
Ristolainen

2014:
Fleury

2015:
Provorov
Werenski

I'm not talking about players in the top 10 busting, I'm talking about getting the maximum value out of a top 10 pick, and that I think it is much harder to get a read on what a defensemen is going to be at the NHL level, vs a forward thereby having a preference to draft a forward earlier than a defensemen.

 

[Alf Silfversson]

I know a lot of folks on here don't like Tkachuk's skill level but watching his highlight packages I think he's got nice hands, excellent vision and a pretty darn good release. I have no issues with his skill level.

His skating looks pretty bad to me though. I think his edgework, agility, first step and stride are all concerns. He will need significant improvement to be even a top 9 forward, IMO.

 

[BondraTime]

Alright, can't sleep so I will try type this up again from a computer...
D Men drafted in the top 10, excluding the #1 ranked defensemen (only the ones in bold would I consider worthy of a top 10 pick)

2008:
Bogosian
Pietrangelo
Schenn

2009:
OEL
Cowen

2010:
McIlrath

2011:
Hamilton
Brodin

2012:
Reinhart
Rielly
Lindholm
Dumba
Pouliot
Trouba
Koekkoek

2013:
Nurse
Ristolainen

2014:
Fleury

2015:
Provorov
Werenski

I'm not talking about players in the top 10 busting, I'm talking about getting the maximum value out of a top 10 pick, and that I think it is much harder to get a read on what a defensemen is going to be at the NHL level, vs a forward thereby having a preference to draft a forward earlier than a defensemen.

I understand you, I still 100% undeniably disagree.

Dumba just put up 50 points averaging 25 minutes a game, Nurse put up 26 playimg 22 minutes a night. Brodin 21 points and 21+ in a shutdown role, all are/were worthy of top 10 picks.

Just because a guy isn't the top rated D that means squat about picking one in the top 10.

 

[benjiv1]

I understand you, I still 100% undeniably disagree.

Hanfin is certainly worthy of a top 10 pick. Dumba just put up 50 points averaging 25 minutes a game, Nurse put up 26 playimg 22 minutes a night. Brodin 21 points and 21+ in a shutdown role, all are/were worthy of top 10 picks.

I didn't mention Hannifin because he was the #1 ranked D prior to the draft.

Disagree about Nurse, Brodin I agree with, (I probably had him bolded in the first attempt)
Nonetheless, how many of the players above, would you trade the 4th Overall pick for?

 

[Sens in Process]

You are dealing with probabilities.
D-man have a higher rate of failure when taken in the top ten.

12/29, when not excluding 2012, is an alarming statistic for D-men missing the mark when taken in the top ten. That is 41%. I am not going to arbitrarily drop off 2012 to make a small sample even smaller.

Teams generally stay away from goaltenders in the 1st round. Why? Their development curve is longer and extremely difficult to forecast with any accuracy.

D-men pose more risk than forwards and less risk than goalies when projecting player development. This really is not a controversial statement.


Should it completely determine your draft strategy? No. However, it provides a framework for decision making.

When players are similarly graded, it probably makes more sense to take a forward over a D-man in the top ten.

Hopkins is not a miss. He was on pace for 63 points this season.

 

[BondraTime]

I didn't mention Hannifin because he was the #1 ranked D prior to the draft.

Disagree about Nurse, Brodin I agree with, (I probably had him bolded in the first attempt)
Nonetheless, how many of the players above, would you trade the 4th Overall pick for?

In this draft?

Provorov
OEL
Hamilton
Pietrangelo
Werenski
Rielly
Dumba
Ristolinen

Not really sure what that has to do with anything though. Using what past guys did to project guys like Dobson/Bouchard/Hughes/etc. seems very pointless.

 

[BondraTime]

You are dealing with probabilities.
D-man have a higher rate of failure when taken in the top ten.

12/29, when not excluding 2012, is an alarming statistic for D-men missing the mark when taken in the top ten. That is 41%.

Teams generally stay away from goaltenders in the 1st round. Why? Their development curve is longer and extremely difficult to forecast with any accuracy.

D-men pose more risk than forwards and less risk than goalies when projecting player development. This really is not a controversial statement.

Should it completely determine your draft strategy? No. However, it provides a framework for decision making.

When players are similarly graded, it probably makes more sense to take a forward over a D-man in the top ten.

Hopkins is not a miss. He was on pace for 63 points this season.

And look who a majority those D that were misses are....D that are not valued or drafted since ~2014

McIlrath
Schenn
Cowen
Gudbranson
Koekkoek
Reinhart
Murray
Fleury

Big, limited offensive, slow moving and thinking D. Something none of the D in the top 10 this year are.

Factoring these guys busting into drafting a guy like Hughes, Dobson or Bouchard is foolish.

 

[benjiv1]

In this draft?

Provorov
OEL
Hamilton
Pietrangelo
Werenski
Rielly
Dumba
Ristolinen

Not really sure what that has to do with anything though. Using what past guys did to project guys like Dobson/Bouchard/Hughes/etc. seems very pointless.

Because the realistic expectation is that maybe one of Dobson, Bouchard, Hughes and Boqvist will be as good as one of the above, one will likely flop and the others will be unworthy of a top 10 pick. (Statistically speaking)

At #4 overall, I don’t really like those odds. You may be right about the trend changing, but I don’t see enough evidence yet.

 

[BondraTime]

Because the realistic expectation is that maybe one of Dobson, Bouchard, Hughes and Boqvist will be as good as one of the above, one will likely flop and the others will be unworthy of a top 10 pick. (Statistically speaking)

At #4 overall, I don’t really like those odds. You may be right about the trend changing, but I don’t see enough evidence yet.

And they could end up like Olesz, Yakupov, Galchenyuk, R. Strome, etc....it's a draft. Nothing is certain.

You draft a player based on merit and scouting, not past trends and percentages. In this draft, there are 4 D that have merit to go in the top 10. What Gudbranson turned into has zilch to do with the decision to pick a D.

 

[Sens in Process]

And look who a majority those D that were misses are....D that are not valued or drafted since ~2014

McIlrath
Schenn
Cowen
Gudbranson
Koekkoek
Reinhart
Murray
Fleury

Big, limited offensive, slow moving and thinking D. Something none of the D in the top 10 this year are.

Factoring these guys busting into drafting a guy like Hughes, Dobson or Bouchard is foolish.

D-men are more inherently difficult to forecast than forwards in the top ten, which results in more misses.

Or there is trend away from slow, defensive d-men and that will reduce the number of misses when selecting d-men in the top ten.

It will be interesting going forward to see how things turn out.

 

[TheBradyBunch]

I really don't subscribe to this belief that DMen are more likely to bust, and I'd also argue that not a single D who is ranked in the top 10 has any similarity to the DMen who have busted over past several years with only one single exception, Derrick Pouliot, who has drastically underperformed his draft position but who, as a draft-eligible player, had all the tools of "the new NHL DMan".

The DMen who have busted since 2008:
- Bogosian (#3, 2008)
- Schenn (#5, 2008)
- Cowen (#9, 2009)
- Gudbranson (#3, 2010)
- McIlrath (#10, 2010)
- Reinhart (#4, 2012)
- Pouliot (#8, 2013)
- Koekkoek (#10, 2013)
- Fleury (#7, 2014)

All of these guys (besides Pouliot) have traits in common that you won't find in a defender in this draft until around the #15-25 ranking. Bogosian and Pouliot were the only guys who were even slightly above average offensively in their pre-draft seasons and in Bogosian's case he would have gone only a few picks too early had he not run into injury trouble. He posted 30pts in 65 games as a 22 year old and had a hell of a nasty streak. Had he continued on that trajectory (that season is when his injury troubles really started), he'd hardly be spoken about as a bust.

In this draft, every high rated DMan is an offensive dynamo. None of them are valued primarily by size, nastiness, or physicality. They are all skilled, cerebral players, and those types of guys have tended to develop pretty consistently into #1-3 DMen.

Showing my work:

2008

DMen:
2. Doughty - elite #1
3. Bogosian - 2nd pair D when healthy
4. Pietrangelo - #1D
5. Schenn - bottom pair

Busts:
3. Bogosian (D)
5. Schenn (D)
6. Filatov
7. Wilson
8. Boedker
10. Hodgson

even Bailey @ 9 is arguable.

2009

DMen:
2. Hedman - elite #1
6. Ekman-Larsson - #1D
9. Cowen - bust

Busts:
8. Glennie
9. Cowen (D)
10. Paajarvi

2010

DMen:
3. Gudbranson - #4/5 DMan
10. McIlrath (off the board pick) - total bust

Busts
3. Gudbranson
6. Connolly
8. Burmistrov
10. McIlrath

Niederreiter @ 5 is arguable

2011

DMen:
4. Larsson - #2/3 DMan
9. Hamilton - top pair DMan
10. Brodin - #2/3 DMan

Busts:
5. Strome

2012

DMen:
2. Murray - top 4 DMan with room to grow
4. Reinhart - bust
5. Rielly - #1D
6. Lindholm - #1D
7. Dumba - top pair D
8. Pouliot - bottom pair D
9. Trouba - top pair D
10. Koekkoek - bottom pair D

Busts:
1. Yakupov
4. Reinhart
8. Pouliot

Arguably Koekkoek although he could still develop. Even Pouliot showed some upside this past season (although still not likely to meet expectations).

2013

DMen
4. Jones - #1 with room to grow
7. Nurse - solid 2nd pair with plenty of room to grow
8. Ristolainen - top pair

Busts
None. Lindholm @ 5 and Drouin @ 3 have underperformed expectations but both are still solid 2nd liners.

2014

DMen
1. Ekblad - top pair with room to grow
7. Fleury - bottom pair with room to grow

Busts (too early to call but I'll do it anyways)
4. Bennett
5. Dal Colle
6. Virtanen
7. Fleury
10. Ritchie

2015

DMen:
5. Hanifin - very solid #4, plenty of room to grow
7. Provorov - top pair/#1 with room to grow
8. Werenski - top pair with room to grow

 

[SAK11]

Because the realistic expectation is that maybe one of Dobson, Bouchard, Hughes and Boqvist will be as good as one of the above, one will likely flop and the others will be unworthy of a top 10 pick. (Statistically speaking)

At #4 overall, I don’t really like those odds. You may be right about the trend changing, but I don’t see enough evidence yet.

I'll continue to disagree with your theory as there are a ton of examples of top 10 forwards that haven't been worth the pick, plus plenty of examples of top 10 d-men that have been worth the pick.
Evaluate these players based on who they are and who they project to be. Is Koekkoek, the 7th d-men drafted in 2012 really worth bringing up to try to prove this point? Or guys like Reinhart, Cowen, Schenn and McIlrath, who were old school d-men drafted into a faster than ever NHL? McIlrath was obviously a bad pick, but had they taken the d-men most ranked 2nd in that draft, they would've taken Fowler, a worthy top 10 pick.
To assume, based on past drafts, that only 1 of those 4 d-men will be worth a top 10 pick seems silly. I mean we're only a few years removed from 2015, and while it's early, as of now all 3 of those top 10 d-men were worthy top 10 picks.