Prospect Info: 2020 Devils-Centric Mock Draft, Conference Finals Edition

[Ripshot 43]

I feel like I've said this a kajillion times (no slight on you), so I will say it again. (This is not to you in particular, and if it sounds aggressive it's not meant to be. I'm just trying to dispel these recurrent and utterly false depictions of Jake Sanderson as some sort of low upside, safe defenseman.).

If you're betting in Las Vegas on the first defenseman to be taken in the 2020 draft, Jake Sanderson is the guy to put your money on.

The reasons why are simple.

1) while draft-writers were consumed with showing you charts of why "defensive defensemen" should not be ranked in the top 10, NHL scouts were busy watching Miro Heiskanen completely dominate the NHL playoffs. And Sanderson's closest comparable in the past half-decade of drafts is certainly Heiskanen. I would say Sanderson is more polished and slightly better at the same age.

2) the team drafting #4 is organizationally thinner at LD than any other team in the entire NHL, and they have a GM in Steve Yzerman who would not give two f**ks what the folks at The Athletic or The Hockey Writers said if they took Sanderson at #4 overall.

3) the teams drafting #5 and #6 draft with size in mind -- and the numbers back this up -- more than any other team in the entire NHL. The 6'1-185 Jake Sanderson not only is bigger than the 5'11-180 Jamie Drysdale, but he plays a bigger game. This is not a dismissal of Drysdale, whom I love and have advocated for the Devils drafting since pretty much November. But facts are facts -- the last time the Ducks used their top pick on a player under 6'0 was Kyle Palmieri (I feel like I've heard of that guy) in 2011. The last time the Senators did so? Patrick Eaves in 2003. I can't remember the last time either team relied on a defenseman under 6'0. These are "old school" scouts, and Sanderson is their type of player.

4) the argument that Jake Sanderson is the best defenseman in the 2020 draft is not difficult to make. As one scout (Mark Edwards) said about Sanderson: "We think the best way to summarize his offensive game, is that he’s a lot closer to Drysdale offensively, than Drysdale is to him defensively." Edwards' hockeyprospect.com ranks Sanderson #5 overall.


Ultimately, I have not hovered around these Devils threads advocating Sanderson at the #7 pick because, in my mind, there's no chance he will be there. I've been mostly discussing guys the Devils might actually have a shot at, like Raymond and Rossi and Drysdale. But the important thing to remember about Sanderson is he's not the "stay-at-home, low upside" player lazier draft writers will have you believe. Far, far from it. He's a potential carry-his-team-on-his-back, two-way superstar defenseman. And likely to be the first one taken in the 2020 draft.

Oh, on an alternate earth somewhere when Covid didn’t happen and the season played out fully. The Coyotes continued on their free fall and ended up with a pick lower than the Devils. Maybe our own pick ends up closer to 10 but still I was convinced the Yotes pick would be closer to 4-5 and all we would have to worry about was them not winning the lottery. They don’t win and neither do the Rangers. Lafreniere goes to Detroit and we draft Sanderson and Quinn and have a top pairing D and a great top 6 winger to compliment Hughes or Hischier.

Ok ok, fantasy over and back to reality where the world is ending and we draft 3 top 20 players that end up being 3 of the top 5 players drafted from this class

 

[Nicomo Cosca]

As much as I Iove Rossi, if one of the two dmen are on the board, that’s who you take.

My top #4 at our spot, in that order, is...

Sanderson, Drysdale, Rossi and Raymond.

I would be super happy with any these 4. Little less so with Holtz or Perfetti.

 

[MartyOwns]

I feel like I've said this a kajillion times (no slight on you), so I will say it again. (This is not to you in particular, and if it sounds aggressive it's not meant to be. I'm just trying to dispel these recurrent and utterly false depictions of Jake Sanderson as some sort of low upside, safe defenseman.).

If you're betting in Las Vegas on the first defenseman to be taken in the 2020 draft, Jake Sanderson is the guy to put your money on.

The reasons why are simple.

1) while draft-writers were consumed with showing you charts of why "defensive defensemen" should not be ranked in the top 10, NHL scouts were busy watching Miro Heiskanen completely dominate the NHL playoffs. And Sanderson's closest comparable in the past half-decade of drafts is certainly Heiskanen. I would say Sanderson is more polished and slightly better at the same age.

2) the team drafting #4 is organizationally thinner at LD than any other team in the entire NHL, and they have a GM in Steve Yzerman who would not give two f**ks what the folks at The Athletic or The Hockey Writers said if they took Sanderson at #4 overall.

3) the teams drafting #5 and #6 draft with size in mind -- and the numbers back this up -- more than any other team in the entire NHL. The 6'1-185 Jake Sanderson not only is bigger than the 5'11-180 Jamie Drysdale, but he plays a bigger game. This is not a dismissal of Drysdale, whom I love and have advocated for the Devils drafting since pretty much November. But facts are facts -- the last time the Ducks used their top pick on a player under 6'0 was Kyle Palmieri (I feel like I've heard of that guy) in 2011. The last time the Senators did so? Patrick Eaves in 2003. I can't remember the last time either team relied on a defenseman under 6'0. These are "old school" scouts, and Sanderson is their type of player.

4) the argument that Jake Sanderson is the best defenseman in the 2020 draft is not difficult to make. As one scout (Mark Edwards) said about Sanderson: "We think the best way to summarize his offensive game, is that he’s a lot closer to Drysdale offensively, than Drysdale is to him defensively." Edwards' hockeyprospect.com ranks Sanderson #5 overall.


Ultimately, I have not hovered around these Devils threads advocating Sanderson at the #7 pick because, in my mind, there's no chance he will be there. I've been mostly discussing guys the Devils might actually have a shot at, like Raymond and Rossi and Drysdale. But the important thing to remember about Sanderson is he's not the "stay-at-home, low upside" player lazier draft writers will have you believe. Far, far from it. He's a potential carry-his-team-on-his-back, two-way superstar defenseman. And likely to be the first one taken in the 2020 draft.

haha no slight detected, i trust your opinions. ok, so say sanderson is gone and drysdale, rossi and raymond are on the board. to me that’s an easy decision, i’m going drysdale. you?

 

[StevenToddIves]

haha no slight detected, i trust your opinions. ok, so say sanderson is gone and drysdale, rossi and raymond are on the board. to me that’s an easy decision, i’m going drysdale. you?

My list is Sanderson or Drysdale pretty much tied for #1, but chances are that won't be a choice the Devils must make. My #3 is Rossi, then Raymond at #4. I'm pretty confident one of those four will be on the board, but if not I think my #5 is a toss-up right now between Quinn/Perfetti/Holtz/Jarvis.

 

[Spoiled Bratt]

My list is Sanderson or Drysdale pretty much tied for #1, but chances are that won't be a choice the Devils must make. My #3 is Rossi, then Raymond at #4. I'm pretty confident one of those four will be on the board, but if not I think my #5 is a toss-up right now between Quinn/Perfetti/Holtz/Jarvis.

If none of Drysdale, Sanderson, Rossi or Raymond available at #7, that means one of Byfield or Stuztle is there at our spot, which won’t happen.

Out of the players you listed as option #5, Holtz should be the guy, hands down. I really like Quinn but Holtz is just a notch above. Perfetti I would’ve been happy with if Arizona’s pick would’ve remained at #10 but I can’t see us taking him over the 5 players we just talked about.

 

[Guadana]

If none of I really like Quinn but Holtz is just a notch above. Perfetti I would’ve been happy with if Arizona’s pick would’ve remained at #10 but I can’t see us taking him over the 5 players we just talked about.

I don`t think that Holtz is above. Quinn is much better two way player and is more creative player.

 

[Spoiled Bratt]

I don`t think that Holtz is above. Quinn is much better two way player and is more creative player.

You’re probably right but Holtz is the best sniper of the draft and his 2 way game is pretty solid.

It comes down to adding the best super with solid 2 way play or a very good sniper with a better 2 way game.

There has to be a reason why Holtz has been labeled a top #8 pick for over a year and Quinn hasn’t

 

[StevenToddIves]

I don`t think that Holtz is above. Quinn is much better two way player and is more creative player.

You're not alone here. I would not be shocked if the Senators took Jack Quinn at #5 overall.

 

[StevenToddIves]

You’re probably right but Holtz is the best sniper of the draft and his 2 way game is pretty solid.

It comes down to adding the best super with solid 2 way play or a very good sniper with a better 2 way game.

There has to be a reason why Holtz has been labeled a top #8 pick for over a year and Quinn hasn’t

I'll say this: Quinn's complete game is more superior to Holtz's complete game than Holtz's scoring ability is superior to Quinn's scoring ability. So, there's that.

I will also say, because it needs to be said, that although his complete game leaves a great deal to be desired, Jacob Perreault's overall offensive upside is higher than both Holtz and Quinn. It's a crazy draft for RWs. Throw in Jarvis, Mercer and Gunler and it's just ridiculous. There could conceivably be 6 RWs drafted between #8 and #18.

 

[Guadana]

You’re probably right but Holtz is the best sniper of the draft and his 2 way game is pretty solid.

It comes down to adding the best super with solid 2 way play or a very good sniper with a better 2 way game.

There has to be a reason why Holtz has been labeled a top #8 pick for over a year and Quinn hasn’t

Because Holtz was in the ranks years ago, and Quinn is Jack in the box.
Quinn doesn`t have outstanding shot like Holtz has, but Quinn is using his sniper abillity in much more different situations. And Holtz has some troubles with hockey sense. He doesnt read game well and shot stat talk about that pretty clear. Anyway i dont think Holtz talk is real deal, because i think devs will choose between D, Rossi and Raymond.

 

[Guadana]

You're not alone here. I would not be shocked if the Senators took Jack Quinn at #5 overall.

When I think about how hard it was to achieve team success for all the snipers who come to my mind quickly , I think that, despite the obvious benefits of such a player, devs should pay more attention to betting on a clean sniper.

 

[KovalSNIPE]

Even if Rossi is available, I can't help but draw myself to choosing Holtz. We need his style of game and shot in our system.

 

[Guttersniped]

Even if Rossi is available, I can't help but draw myself to choosing Holtz. We need his style of game and shot in our system.

Name checks out

 

[Blackjack]

We don't need a "sniper". Palmieri is one of the best finishers in the league and Bratt is well above average. We need more playmaking ability to move the puck out of the defensive end, through the neutral zone, and to maintain possession in the attacking zone.

 

[Zajacs Bowl Cut]

We don't need a "sniper". Palmieri is one of the best finishers in the league and Bratt is well above average. We need more playmaking ability to move the puck out of the defensive end, through the neutral zone, and to maintain possession in the attacking zone.

strong disagree

Hughes can do that
Gusev can do that
Bratt can do that for the most part

and Palmieri has 1 more year left on his deal. We don't really have many pure snipers in our organization past Nolan Foote who has a tremendous shot

 

[RememberTheName]

We don't need a "sniper". Palmieri is one of the best finishers in the league and Bratt is well above average. We need more playmaking ability to move the puck out of the defensive end, through the neutral zone, and to maintain possession in the attacking zone.

Lol what. We had literally one player in the top 100 in goals per game last year (Palms at 39) and one in the top 150 (Bratt at 125). I don't care how bad our team was last year, having only 2 players in the top 150 in goal scoring is absolutely horrid. If we actually want to win games, we are going to need players who can actually put the puck in the net. That's the objective, after all. You cannot say that we don't need snipers, because we absolutely do.

 

[Guttersniped]

We don't need a "sniper". Palmieri is one of the best finishers in the league and Bratt is well above average. We need more playmaking ability to move the puck out of the defensive end, through the neutral zone, and to maintain possession in the attacking zone.

I think people may have PTSD from Hughes deception free muffin shot and microscopic 5v5 shooting % and may lash out at any prospect described as “more of a shooter than a playmaker” purely as a emotional reaction. (Goose ain’t exactly Ovechkin either.) Goal scoring is an incredibly valuable skill on its own so guys like Holtz can make bank on it and you eventually need guys to put the puck in the net but we may not realize that we actually are 1) pretty lucky to have some playmakers on our team 2) it’s very valuable skill you don’t have too much of typically.

The thing about Raymond is he’s been described as having a strong two way game, the advantage I believe you might be pointing to is both in possession and defensively. Having a sniper is fun but Raymond’s defensive awareness and back-checking plus possession sounds pretty useful since this team gets bent over regularly while endlessly hemmed in our own zone. I’d like a shooter if we draft three guys as much as anyone and I’m pretty fixated on Holtz but you don’t pass on a more elite offensive talent like Raymond for him. I assumed Raymond would be gone by 7 but @StevenToddIves historical size argument is convincing.

 

[KovalSNIPE]

We don't need a "sniper". Palmieri is one of the best finishers in the league and Bratt is well above average. We need more playmaking ability to move the puck out of the defensive end, through the neutral zone, and to maintain possession in the attacking zone.

"We don't need a sniper."

looks at stats...

We were 24th in goals per game this year at a rate of 2.68/game; 22nd in shots/game. Our power play was 21st at 18%. We are literally below average in every regard.

Nico is a two way playmaker. Jack is a speedy playmaker. Bratt while not afraid to shoot when he has the opportunity, is a shifty playmaker. Gusev is a deceptive playmaker. They are all pass-first players. Palmieri is our only shoot-first top 6 forward. Our 2nd best option is now on Tampa Bay and he wasn't even top 6 for us.

We need a sniper. We need players who can finish and Holtz can do that. Foote possibly too. But to say we need more playmaking ability is being ignorant towards the major deficiencies our team current suffers from. Goal-scoring is just one of many problems.

 

[Blackjack]

Lol what. We had literally one player in the top 100 in goals per game last year (Palms at 39) and one in the top 150 (Bratt at 125). I don't care how bad our team was last year, having only 2 players in the top 150 in goal scoring is absolutely horrid. If we actually want to win games, we are going to need players who can actually put the puck in the net. That's the objective, after all. You cannot say that we don't need snipers, because we absolutely do.

I think people may have PTSD from Hughes deception free muffin shot and microscopic 5v5 shooting % and may lash out at any prospect described as “more of a shooter than a playmaker” purely as a emotional reaction. (Goose ain’t exactly Ovechkin either.) Goal scoring is an incredibly valuable skill on its own so guys like Holtz can make bank on it and you eventually need guys to put the puck in the net but we may not realize that we actually are 1) pretty lucky to have some playmakers on our team 2) it’s very valuable skill you don’t have too much of typically.

The thing about Raymond is he’s been described as having a strong two way game, the advantage I believe you might be pointing to is both in possession and defensively. Having a sniper is fun but Raymond’s defensive awareness and back-checking plus possession sounds pretty useful since this team gets bent over regularly while endlessly hemmed in our own zone. I’d like a shooter if we draft three guys as much as anyone and I’m pretty fixated on Holtz but you don’t pass on a more elite offensive talent like Raymond for him. I assumed Raymond would be gone by 7 but @StevenToddIves historical size argument is convincing.

"We don't need a sniper."

looks at stats...

We were 24th in goals per game this year at a rate of 2.68/game; 22nd in shots/game. Our power play was 21st at 18%. We are literally below average in every regard.

Nico is a two way playmaker. Jack is a speedy playmaker. Bratt while not afraid to shoot when he has the opportunity, is a shifty playmaker. Gusev is a deceptive playmaker. They are all pass-first players. Palmieri is our only shoot-first top 6 forward. Our 2nd best option is now on Tampa Bay and he wasn't even top 6 for us.

We need a sniper. We need players who can finish and Holtz can do that. Foote possibly too. But to say we need more playmaking ability is being ignorant towards the major deficiencies our team current suffers from. Goal-scoring is just one of many problems.

How do you know that we're not scoring enough goals because of a lack of finishing rather than a lack of playmaking? Nobody is arguing that our offense isn't good enough, the question is whether the problem is getting enough dangerous opportunities, or finishing the opportunities we get. @KovalSNIPE mentioned our powerplay, the way I remember it, our powerplay rarely even got setup in the zone. I thought Palmieri, Bratt, Hischier, and even Hughes did fine finishing when they got opportunities, I thought the problem was that there wasn't enough opportunities.

 

[My3Sons]

How do you know that we're not scoring enough goals because of a lack of finishing rather than a lack of playmaking? Nobody is arguing that our offense isn't good enough, the question is whether the problem is getting enough dangerous opportunities, or finishing the opportunities we get. @KovalSNIPE mentioned our powerplay, the way I remember it, our powerplay rarely even got setup in the zone. I thought Palmieri, Bratt, Hischier, and even Hughes did fine finishing when they got opportunities, I thought the problem was that there wasn't enough opportunities.

Sadly I think you both probably correct. Ruff has multiple and complex problems to fix to move the offense forward. Hopefully maturation from the young players takes care of some of it.

 

[Eggtimer]

My list is Sanderson or Drysdale pretty much tied for #1, but chances are that won't be a choice the Devils must make. My #3 is Rossi, then Raymond at #4. I'm pretty confident one of those four will be on the board, but if not I think my #5 is a toss-up right now between Quinn/Perfetti/Holtz/Jarvis.

I am in the same boat as you with the exception of Perfetti . He would be the last behind Jarvis .
I put Drysdale sligihtly ahead of Sanderson in tier 1 , then Rossi and Raymond a toss up , then toss up between Holtz and Quinn , Jarvis then Perfetti

If we manage to get one of the two D , I hope the Devils sign a RFA winger like Dadanov .

 

[RememberTheName]

This was posted on the prospect board a little earlier in the day.

One of the posters on a Hawks message board (not HF) who more times than not seems to have reliable inside info says he heard the Hawks are high on Perreault with the #17 pick. I read a while back that skating was sub par, but after reading through this thread I come away with a better understanding of his supposed skating deficiency is more about the effort/motor than the stride. The fact that his father works for the Hawks is a little intriguing too. Hopefully he has more "want to" than his dad did when he played.

Obviously this could be completely wrong but this a scenario I wouldn't mind given that I don't love Perrault's game and he'd probably be considered a slight reach at 17, giving a greater chance of one of the better forwards slipping down to our spot like Seth Jarvis

 

[Monsieur Verdoux]

An interesting answer by Corey Pronman:

Q: "Have any prospects that have started playing this season significantly changed where they will get drafted?" A: "One exec texted me last night 'If Amirov gets past 15 it's a steal'."

Live Q&A: Corey Pronman answers questions about the NHL Draft (paywall)

 

[xigon]

Would people be very upset if the devils took Quinn at #7?

 

[youryeah]

@StevenToddIves steven- if you could put a % on it, what percentage would you give the scenario where seth jarvis is available at 18? feels like it's dwindling as each day goes. trying not to set myself up for disappointment but I love this guy.