My thoughts on the draft.
1) I spent very little time watching almost any of the draft prospects who were drafted by any team this year, so I can't argue that one player should have taken over another, and I have very little faith that 99.9% of those on these boards who claim to have that kind of knowledge when it comes to most of the players available this draft are doing any more than talking out their butts. I have a little more faith in scouting agencies, although I feel that most of them just rank players according to the other rankings while shuffling a couple players up and down. However, even if those agencies are more rigorous than that they are still just making general pronouncements and are obviously not in line with the methodology that any specific team is going to use. So, if Dubas picked player X, while player Y is still on the board, I don't care because it is not like Dubas didn't know about player Y, it is because Dubas and the people working for him decided that X was a better fit for the Leafs organization than player Y for whatever reasons. That doesn't mean that Dubas can't be wrong, but the reality is that he has sold Shanahan on his vision (and, as a Dubas supporter I look forward to seeing where that goes - which to me means no half measures).
2) The whole Dubas is all hung up on SSM and has tunnel vision towards players from there. I disagree. The Leafs are set on a certain brand of hockey. SSM plays a similar way. When Dubas looks at players who are playing there he gets to see that they are players who are a good fit, and thriving in, a system similar to the what the Leafs have (it is essentially bonus development time both pre-draft and post-draft if the players return to SSM) His connections with SSM allow him to know more about specific players - the kind of person the player is, more about their work ethic, more about how they handle stress etc than other teams likely know, and than he would know about players from other teams. Knowledge is power. If Dubas can look at 5 potential candidates who are pretty even for a specific draft position, but because one of those players played in SSM he also knows that they player would be a fit for the Leafs style, and on a personal level is the kind of player that the Leafs wants, he would be a fool not to take that player. The whole purpose of interviews at the combine is to try to gain the types of knowledge that you don't see from the stands. That is why they are valuable. If, due to connections, you already know much more than an interview could tell you, you are way ahead.
3) Trading down was a great move. Dubas got a player who he felt was a valuable as any player he would have got with the initial pick (and probably the exact same player he would have picked) and on top of that he got another 3rd rounder. It boggles the mind that people complain about that.
4) Dubas burning a 2nd round pick on a player they could've signed last season is not on him. If anything it shows how incompetent those who preceded him were. Hunter could have easily drafted him with a 6th or 7th round pick, but instead wasted picks on players who not only seem inferior today, but appear to have been inferior a year ago. Dubas couldn't have signed him last summer, but Lou could have. I would be interested in seeing who pushed for him to be at the development camp last year.
5) Small players. So what? I was supportive of the drafting of the giants last year, only because I was hoping that one of those giants drafted in 2016 or 2017 might turn into a Josh Manson type player. I still think that Josh Manson is astronomically valuable, but have come to terms that while D like Spurgeon and Krug might be rare - there is only Josh Manson. So the odds are far worse trying for him.
6) The SDA is not only small but he can't score complaint. He scored 3 times as many goals as Brooks during his D year (and is much younger).
7) Did Dubas find value in his picks? How the hell could anyone know at this point? If it is was known, or obvious, that the players Dubas picked had more value they would have been picked earlier. Five - ten years down the road we will know. I would assume that Dubas and Shanahan feel that the additional information they have on these prospects tilts the ice in their favour. I would assume that the Leafs have looked at the flaws of prospects who were available, and determined which flaws the Leafs can correct or reduce. I would assume that the Leafs have looked at the prospects who were available and determined which ones have the attributes that the Leafs value highly, but which other teams perhaps don't value as much when making picks (such as hockey IQ) and therefore were the best fit for the Leafs going forward.
It is a very inexact science, but I certainly trust the organization to do a better job of it than hfboard posters. Of course, I agree with the direction Dubas appears to be taking the team (and has taken his previous teams), so if you don't agree with that direction then your position should be the opposite. Only time will tell.
For what it is worth: Points per game during their D+1 year, among D drafted by the Leafs in the last 5 years who played in the CHL:
Durzi 1.23
Nielsen 0.99
Hollowell 0.89
Sandin 0.88 (note - D year - and young for his draft class)
Dermott 0.84
Kral 0.65
Rasanen 0.54
Valiyev 0.51
Gordeev 0.37
Desrocher 0.35
Middleton 0.28
Mattinen 0.12
We have seen what Dermott can do. Nielsen has run into a wall with his skating and I don't see a future for him with the organization, but can likely be traded as part of a package for an asset. I don't see the bottom 4 ever returning anything. Durzi, Hollowell, Sandin and Kral look beyond damn good in comparison unless what you value is size. I understand people thinking that size is really valuable. That is my bias too, and I work to overcome it. None of the giants took a real step forward during their D+1.
