Toggle sidebar

2019 NHL Draft - June 21st - With The 14th Selection, The Coyotes.......

  • Work is still on-going to rebuild the site styling and features. Please report any issues you may experience so we can look into it. Click Here for Updates
Status
Not open for further replies.
Bonsai Tree said:
Shooters. Goals. Shooters. Not passers, not puck movers. Shooters.
Click to expand...
What you're asking for is our biggest need for sure, but until we figure out how to transition this type of player to the NHL I want BPA. If Krebs, Boldy, Newhook and Caufield are all gone but say at 14 Broberg and Soderstrom are still available, do you pick a Lavoie or Kaliyev solely based on need over those two dmen?
 
all of them can't be gone unless none of the Dmen are taken. Byram will certainly be taken in the top 10, most likely top 5.

Broberg, Soderstrom, Harley, York all have the potential of being selected and there are several teams that have a hard need for Defense...Chicago/Detroit/Ducks/Florida all have a great need for Dmen.

one of Krebs, Boldy, Newhook, Caufield, Zegras should be there at 14.
 
Jagged Ice said:
What you're asking for is our biggest need for sure, but until we figure out how to transition this type of player to the NHL I want BPA. If Krebs, Boldy, Newhook and Caufield are all gone but say at 14 Broberg and Soderstrom are still available, do you pick a Lavoie or Kaliyev solely based on need over those two dmen?
Click to expand...
We've seen teams such as Edmonton and in the playoffs Toronto lose due to unbalanced rosters. Their problems were a lack of D. Our problem is a lack of offense, so yea, I include need as part of a BPA for us evaluation.
 
Jagged Ice said:
What you're asking for is our biggest need for sure, but until we figure out how to transition this type of player to the NHL I want BPA. If Krebs, Boldy, Newhook and Caufield are all gone but say at 14 Broberg and Soderstrom are still available, do you pick a Lavoie or Kaliyev solely based on need over those two dmen?
Click to expand...
Lavoie's playoff performance is jaw-dropping. Kaliyev's OHL production paces with elite first liners. There are warts, but I love the upside so, so much more than those slick D who don't actually produce much. That's not as much about need as it is about homerun swings. I want a homerun swing.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bonsai Tree
@rt I agree with your summary of Suzuki. It's very similar to the way I saw Barzal in his draft year (he was always engaged and involved though, only from the perimeter). I think Barzal evolved moreso than me being wrong about what he was. Some players grow balls. In the 20-25 range of the draft I'd be happy to bet that Suzuki will grow a pair. There will be better gambles at 14 OA.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ghostface Keller
I've been impressed with Brink. He looks a lot slower when I watch the USHL games. He looks much quicker now that he's on team USA and the kid has got some impressive hockey IQ, he's been making plays and in the right position. He would be ideal for a struggling PP unit, the kid has got some crazy vision out there.
 
ctwin22 said:
all of them can't be gone unless none of the Dmen are taken. Byram will certainly be taken in the top 10, most likely top 5.

Broberg, Soderstrom, Harley, York all have the potential of being selected and there are several teams that have a hard need for Defense...Chicago/Detroit/Ducks/Florida all have a great need for Dmen.

one of Krebs, Boldy, Newhook, Caufield, Zegras should be there at 14.
Click to expand...

Draftsite has their mock (we take Krebs at #14) with the following non-forwards going ahead of #14:

Soderstrom, Byram, Broberg, Harley, and Knight.

I think Knight goes after our pick, so slot a forward like Krebs ahead of our pick. That still leaves four defensemen ahead of our pick. I think Anaheim goes forward first, especially now that San Jose won that series, as Anaheim has the pick from Buffalo via San Jose. The later you slip in the first, I think there are far fewer forwards to be interested in. That now moves a player like Caufield or Newhook ahead of our pick.

I see the 1st round shaking out like this:

1. NJ - C Jack Hughes
2. NYR - RW Kaapo Kakko
3. Chicago - RW Vasily Podkolzin
4. Colorado - C Dylan Cozens
5. L.A. - C Kirby Dach
6. Detroit - D Bowen Byram
7. Buffalo - C Alex Turcotte
8. Edmonton - RW Cole Caufield
9. Anaheim - C Trevor Zegras
10. Vancouver - C Peyton Krebs
11. Philadelphia - RW Matthew Boldy
12. Minnesota - D Philip Broberg
13. Florida - D Victor Soderstrom

Who do we take of the next best players:

Newhook, Harley, Lavoie, Kaliyev, York, or McMichael?

I think Colorado goes with Knight at #16, so that eliminates a goalie. Las Vegas at #17 goes D since they just dealt Branstrom. I think that if we play the cards right, we could hypothetically get a deal going with a team behind us and still get a solid player that was ranked equally at #14.

What about #14 and Capobianco for #18 and Jason Dickinson from Dallas? We move back and can pick up one of York or Harley after trading Capobianco away. If both are gone, then it is likely that Montreal or Dallas took Harley at 14 or 15, Colorado took Knight at 16, and Vegas took York at #17. We get a similar choice of two of the three of Newhook, Lavoie, or Kaliyev - one of either Dallas or Montreal will take one of them.
 
ctwin22 said:
I take Newhook easily.

Capobianco is going to be a stud...no way I move him for Dickenson.
Click to expand...

I agree with taking Newhook, but I am not terribly certain that there is a large enough gap between Newhook and his peers to where trading back isn't a reasonable option.

My bigger question is what do we have in Capobianco after his injury and if he is this big of a stud, shouldn't we have been looking to get him on the NHL roster sooner? Not disagreeing with the idea that he could be very good, but we did deal for players like Oesterle and sign Lyubushkin without giving Capobianco the chance this past offseason. Seems a little odd that if we have a true stud on our hands, we would have added those players instead of making Capo the de facto 6/7/8 d-man.
 
I think, if healthy, and if Goligoski is moved, there is a spot for Capo at 3LD.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Heldig
BUX7PHX said:
I agree with taking Newhook, but I am not terribly certain that there is a large enough gap between Newhook and his peers to where trading back isn't a reasonable option.

My bigger question is what do we have in Capobianco after his injury and if he is this big of a stud, shouldn't we have been looking to get him on the NHL roster sooner? Not disagreeing with the idea that he could be very good, but we did deal for players like Oesterle and sign Lyubushkin without giving Capobianco the chance this past offseason. Seems a little odd that if we have a true stud on our hands, we would have added those players instead of making Capo the de facto 6/7/8 d-man.
Click to expand...

You're talking about a young player and our team figuring out how to develop/use him. That's all you need to know. I don't know if he's going to be a stud or not, especially after the injury but if he is, it probably won't be here.
 
I think they were thinking that we'd leave him in the AHL for the 2nd year to get further seasoning and he was playing well over 23 min TOI...and QB'ing the PP.

He was overlooked prospect, he was the 7th overall selection in the OHL draft, but he was drafted by Sudbury who were awful. He had really good stats on a very bad Sudbury team, so I don't think they, or anyone, knew how good he was. He just put up 32pts in 40games for the Roadrunners. He is basically Yandle with better defense and worse offense. My guess is that he can become a 40pt if not 50pt Dman in the show, which when added to OEL & Chychrun, we should be extremely formidable on the left side for a long long time.

He's the best D draft pick we've had since OEL. He's going to make POJ expendable. All conjecture on my part, but I'm really high on his game and I'd rather wait and find out if he's the real deal rather than trading him for another 3rd/4th line center which we have a ton of.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ghostface Keller, Matias Maccete, sundance74 and 2 others
BUX7PHX said:
Draftsite has their mock (we take Krebs at #14) with the following non-forwards going ahead of #14:

Soderstrom, Byram, Broberg, Harley, and Knight.

I think Knight goes after our pick, so slot a forward like Krebs ahead of our pick. That still leaves four defensemen ahead of our pick. I think Anaheim goes forward first, especially now that San Jose won that series, as Anaheim has the pick from Buffalo via San Jose. The later you slip in the first, I think there are far fewer forwards to be interested in. That now moves a player like Caufield or Newhook ahead of our pick.

I see the 1st round shaking out like this:

1. NJ - C Jack Hughes
2. NYR - RW Kaapo Kakko
3. Chicago - RW Vasily Podkolzin
4. Colorado - C Dylan Cozens
5. L.A. - C Kirby Dach
6. Detroit - D Bowen Byram
7. Buffalo - C Alex Turcotte
8. Edmonton - RW Cole Caufield
9. Anaheim - C Trevor Zegras
10. Vancouver - C Peyton Krebs
11. Philadelphia - RW Matthew Boldy
12. Minnesota - D Philip Broberg
13. Florida - D Victor Soderstrom

Who do we take of the next best players:

Newhook, Harley, Lavoie, Kaliyev, York, or McMichael?

I think Colorado goes with Knight at #16, so that eliminates a goalie. Las Vegas at #17 goes D since they just dealt Branstrom. I think that if we play the cards right, we could hypothetically get a deal going with a team behind us and still get a solid player that was ranked equally at #14.

What about #14 and Capobianco for #18 and Jason Dickinson from Dallas? We move back and can pick up one of York or Harley after trading Capobianco away. If both are gone, then it is likely that Montreal or Dallas took Harley at 14 or 15, Colorado took Knight at 16, and Vegas took York at #17. We get a similar choice of two of the three of Newhook, Lavoie, or Kaliyev - one of either Dallas or Montreal will take one of them.
Click to expand...

I don't think Dallas would move Dickenson after his recent playoff success. I also see Dickenson as more of what we already have. I wouldn't risk missing out on a forward who falls to 14 unless the offer is really enticing.

If Byram falls to Detroit I may throw more shoes at the television than when Zadina fell to them. But there is a good chance that happens is Chicago doesn't take him. Wouldn't Buffalo want to take a defenseman, they are stacked with forward prospects and with the Ristolanian rumors I could see them reaching for someone like York or Soderstrom.
 
Yes they could, they don't have any projected top 4 Dmen in the pipeline, so they could definitely go for one that high. But Zegras has been linked there to them at #7.
 
ctwin22 said:
I think they were thinking that we'd leave him in the AHL for the 2nd year to get further seasoning and he was playing well over 23 min TOI...and QB'ing the PP.

He was overlooked prospect, he was the 7th overall selection in the OHL draft, but he was drafted by Sudbury who were awful. He had really good stats on a very bad Sudbury team, so I don't think they, or anyone, knew how good he was. He just put up 32pts in 40games for the Roadrunners. He is basically Yandle with better defense and worse offense. My guess is that he can become a 40pt if not 50pt Dman in the show, which when added to OEL & Chychrun, we should be extremely formidable on the left side for a long long time.

He's the best D draft pick we've had since OEL. He's going to make POJ expendable. All conjecture on my part, but I'm really high on his game and I'd rather wait and find out if he's the real deal rather than trading him for another 3rd/4th line center which we have a ton of.
Click to expand...

I get it - definitely has quite a lot of upside to him. If not Dickinson, then who are the other players whom we could acquire in that type of scenario?

#18 and Nichushkin for #14?

I had thrown something like the Pittsburgh pick and Rust for #14. Maybe Hornqvist instead to give Pittsburgh some breathing room?

Bottom line is that between #14 and #25, there may not be a huge gap between these types of players, and the possibility exists to add some talent to the team as a cap dump or a movement of some young pieces to round us out. If we move back 3-8 spots, and still pick up a player like Lavoie, for example, while also adding something to round out our roster, I would be for that instead of only getting Newhook (I am making it sound like Newhook will not live up to an expectation, but if there is minimal difference between Newhook and Lavoie and where we see them developing to, then we'd be dumb not to try and find value in moving around and picking up additional assets, where possible.
 
But I think that Newhook is closer to the top tier than the players listed (Lavoie, Kaliyev), so I'd stick with Newhook. His movement with the puck is a lot like MacKinnon. He's extremely fast and has those quick cross overs that lets him zig & zag around guys, and so I'm extremely high on Newhook, so if he or Krebs is there at 14, I'm taking them rather than trading down to get other players that might be in the next tier below. aka (Lavoie, Kaliyev, Tomasino, McMichael, Brink, etc...)
 
Grimes said:
I don't think Dallas would move Dickenson after his recent playoff success. I also see Dickenson as more of what we already have. I wouldn't risk missing out on a forward who falls to 14 unless the offer is really enticing.

If Byram falls to Detroit I may throw more shoes at the television than when Zadina fell to them. But there is a good chance that happens is Chicago doesn't take him. Wouldn't Buffalo want to take a defenseman, they are stacked with forward prospects and with the Ristolanian rumors I could see them reaching for someone like York or Soderstrom.
Click to expand...

Buffalo still has the #20 pick as well, so which would you prefer if you are Buffalo:

# 7 Turcotte and #20 Seider
# 7 Zegras and #20 Robertson

or reverse and go D first, followed by F:

#7 Soderstrom and #20 McMichael
#7 Broberg and #20 Suzuki

If I am the GM, I go for the former almost 100% of the time, as I think the gap between Seider/Robertson and some of the D pegged in the 10-15 range is not as wide as the gap between Turcotte/Zegras and the forward you get at #20.

That's why I have been saying - this draft seems like a combination of the 2010 and 2014 drafts, the 2010 draft because I think that these defensemen that are projected to go before #14 are not as likely to go there, and teams will scoop up forwards first. As a result of that, it turns into the 2014 draft for the Coyotes, where we are kind of stuck with the "next tier" of players to choose from. IIRC, there was some feeling that once Fiala went, that was the last "high-end" prospect on the board, and then it was a matter of shaking out the haves and have nots from players like Perlini, Vrana, and Larkin. We went Perlini, mainly because of the shot and speed, but I think that is where some of the teams ahead of us swept a lot of forwards up and left us with a mix of about 5 or 6 guys to take, as opposed to being down to 1 or 2. Say a player like Honka was taken by one of the three teams ahead of us. We get one of Ehlers, Nick Ritchie, or Fiala, and are fine with it.
 
Am I the only one who finds it crazy that Caufield is consistently projected behind Turcotte? I get that Turcotte is a great player but whenever I watch Caufield he just seems to be productive no matter what. Plus, his 6 goal night was crazy...
 
  • Like
Reactions: BigDoaner
ctwin22 said:
But I think that Newhook is closer to the top tier than the players listed (Lavoie, Kaliyev), so I'd stick with Newhook. His movement with the puck is a lot like MacKinnon. He's extremely fast and has those quick cross overs that lets him zig & zag around guys, and so I'm extremely high on Newhook, so if he or Krebs is there at 14, I'm taking them rather than trading down to get other players that might be in the next tier below. aka (Lavoie, Kaliyev, Tomasino, McMichael, Brink, etc...)
Click to expand...

I can agree with that - I have Krebs ahead of Newhook, but then Newhook is the player that I would likely take in that scenario. But, if we have a consensus that no player is of any better or worse value between our pick and 8 picks later, then at least explore the market.

Maybe we get Vegas to move up, knowing they are looking D, and we are aware of Colorado's interest in Knight. Grab an extra 3rd round pick to move back around with and jump back into the late 2nd for a highly coveted player?

If Vegas gave us the #17 and #79 to move up to #14 for York, Montreal went with Lavoie at #15, and Colorado takes Knight at #16, we still get Newhook, and could do something along the lines of:

#17 Newhook
#45 Korczak

Package #74 and #79 to NJ for #60 and #189

#60 Teply
#76 Kallionkieli
 
I want Krebs only because I have the perfect nickname for him.......

bd37c080831adf22423f5755717726d4.jpg
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Top Bottom