Draft 2020 Draft & Undrafted Free Agent Thread: Part V

[Edge]

I would put Lundell's and Jarvis's range anywhere between 9 and 17 and Mercer somewhere between 12 and 17. I think Lundell's a fairly safe to presume 2nd line center with a potential to be a tweener 2nd-1st line C or a 1st line C. Two years in Liiga already and done well for himself. With Jarvis you're wondering if you have the next Barzal and with Mercer--he sounds like a young Justin Williams to me. You might not get huge production but you're likely to get consistent production and good play for a long time.

I think the Rangers also have to be careful about their goaltending going into next year. If I'm moving Georgiev I'm looking for another goalie other than Lundqvist as backup. Lemieux is kind of a dumb player but that physical element isn't something I'd want to give up. Howden is probably replaceable but jumping directly into the NHL from the CHL isn't an easy thing to do and as a player I expect he's going to get better and actually I think he played fairly well against Carolina. The problem with Hajek is the offensive part of his two way game never made the jump to the pros--he also seems at times physically shy.

Buch or DeAngelo are guys that might move a 23/24 pick into that 13-16 range. If you're going to do that though you really have to believe in the guy you're getting. Because of cap issues we might have to move one or both of them in the next year or two anyway though so that could be an avenue to explore.

Truth be told, I could see any one of Lundell, Mercer or Jarvis sneaking into the top 10. I think this draft is just that open right now. Likewise, I could see any one of them sitting on the board at 15-17 as well.

The only part I disagree with is the Buch and ADA thing. I think both guys are more than a trade up, especially the latter. No team is trading a 24 year old, 60 point defenseman to move up 7 spots in the draft.

At that point, you might as well trade him for a high pick and keep the Canes pick. While I don’t think they would be the best value and use of ADA, it would be an option.

I don’t see that being an approach by the Rangers though.

Now, if the Canes pick is 21, could the Rangers dangle that pick along with 72 and Howden/Hajek, for 15-17? Possibly.

 

[The Sweetness]

Safe is not always best.

See: Lias Andersson. Go for BPA. Go for another Chytil type pick.

Totally agree. I actually feel “safe” and “high floor” picks are more risky as I just feel those types of players are often less likely to play in the NHL as they don’t have any stand-out skills.

This is obviously a huge generalization but just go BPA with every pick. Playing it safe is a great way to pick poorly and slowly kill a team.

 

[The Sweetness]

I would put Lundell's and Jarvis's range anywhere between 9 and 17 and Mercer somewhere between 12 and 17. I think Lundell's a fairly safe to presume 2nd line center with a potential to be a tweener 2nd-1st line C or a 1st line C. Two years in Liiga already and done well for himself. With Jarvis you're wondering if you have the next Barzal and with Mercer--he sounds like a young Justin Williams to me. You might not get huge production but you're likely to get consistent production and good play for a long time.

I think the Rangers also have to be careful about their goaltending going into next year. If I'm moving Georgiev I'm looking for another goalie other than Lundqvist as backup. Lemieux is kind of a dumb player but that physical element isn't something I'd want to give up. Howden is probably replaceable but jumping directly into the NHL from the CHL isn't an easy thing to do and as a player I expect he's going to get better and actually I think he played fairly well against Carolina. The problem with Hajek is the offensive part of his two way game never made the jump to the pros--he also seems at times physically shy.

Buch or DeAngelo are guys that might move a 23/24 pick into that 13-16 range. If you're going to do that though you really have to believe in the guy you're getting. Because of cap issues we might have to move one or both of them in the next year or two anyway though so that could be an avenue to explore.

TDA is the finished product of basically the best case scenario from a pick in the 13-16 range.

Giving up our late first and TDA to pick 13-16 would be disastrous asset management and is a typical case of overvaluing then value of draft picks.

 

[Edge]

Makes sense. I guess it's also the Rangers tendency to go off board and it not working for them that adds a bit of fuel to the fire. He was for sure no McIlrath. And it doesn't help how it turned out with Lias. Hoping he still pans out and becomes a decent player for us.

It just goes to show, outside of consensus top 3-5, the rest of the first round is generally a crap shoot other than a 2003/2015 caliber draft.

Sometimes I wonder if it’s a matter of the Rangers going off the board, so much as our board having its own list and falling in love with it.

On the one hand, it’s awesome that we can have in-depth discussions and debates about prospects. On the other hand, sometimes we can get into a group-think mentality and develop tunnel vision as well.

We’re ready to fire our scouting staff for every mistake, and yet our farm system ranked at the top or near the top of most major lists coming into this season. We want boom prospects, and apparently accept the risk, but then have panic attacks when someone like Kravtsov is doing what those type of picks can do.

We focus on Andersson over Chytil, and then we almost take for granted the early promise of the 2018 draft.

I’ll be honest with ya. I think our perception as a fan base is in far greater need of a tune-up than our scouting department.

 

[Edge]

Totally agree. I actually feel “safe” and “high floor” picks are more risky as I just feel those types of players are worse hockey players.

This is obviously a huge generalization but just go BPA with every pick. Playing it safe is a great way to pick poorly and slowly kill a team.

I don’t think the Rangers go into a draft picking “safe.”

I think they take who they believe is the BPA. The problem is that a lot of fans assume BPA equals offensive ability. Or should I say perceived offensive ability.

Just because we think a guy is a 30 goal/60 point player, doesn’t mean the Rangers do. And likewise, sometimes the better player is the two way right wing and not the flashy center.

I hope people don’t think that the Rangers are skipping the 10th guy on their list to take the 15th guy because they are having some kind of panic attack about “risk.”

 

[qwertyaas]

Sometimes I wonder if it’s a matter of the Rangers going off the board, so much as our board having its own list and falling in love with it.

On the one hand, it’s awesome that we can have in-depth discussions and debates about prospects. On the other hand, sometimes we can get into a group-think mentality and develop tunnel vision as well.

We’re ready to fire our scouting staff for every mistake, and yet our farm system ranked at the top or near the top of most major lists coming into this season. We want boom prospects, and apparently accept the risk, but then have panic attacks when someone like Kravtsov is doing what those type of picks can do.

We focus on Andersson over Chytil, and then we almost take for granted the early promise of the 2018 draft.

I’ll be honest with ya. I think our perception as a fan base is in far greater need of a tune-up than our scouting department.

Well said. They did a great job on re-building the prospect pool. For every Hank, there are 200+ prospects that aren't Hank.

It's easy to get hung on passing over players like Kucherov or Point until you realize even TBL passed on them a couple times until they picked them up.

And sometimes, it's just not a match or we get on a player too early. Look at JT Miller in Vancouver. Prospects are just that, prospects.

 

[Graves94]

Scouting is difficult because you're projecting what an 18 year kid will be as a final product 5-10 years after he's selected. For me, the best scouting teams are the ones that can consistently draft NHL players, from rounds 1-7. All teams screw up first round picks, especially after the 3rd pick, but it's the later round picks that can become just as valuable and out perform even first rounders.
Having said that, developing the drafted player is another thing, and in my opinion the most crucial part of how that player will turn out. Again, in my opinion, I believe we have rushed all our first rounders since the rebuild began, and it's somewhat stalled their development. All the guys under 21 on our roster should have played minimum 1 year in the AHL and/or junior hockey, if they weren't eligible for the AHL.
Talent is important of course, but confidence is just as important and rushing players that are not ready, mentally and/or physically, is wrong and can stunt a players development and turn him into a "bust"...

 

[eco's bones]

TDA is the finished product of basically the best case scenario from a pick in the 13-16 range.

Giving up our late first and TDA to pick 13-16 would be disastrous asset management and is a typical case of overvaluing then value of draft picks.

Think you have to look at it this way though--there was the pre-covid economic dynamic--the covid economic dynamic and some day whenever...the post covid economic dynamic. Being able to negotiate through the covid flat cap is going to be somewhat more dependent than it has been on any given team's ability to work its ELC's and second contracts. Arbitrated RFA contracts could become a huge problem for teams that are top heavy with expensive and/or long term contracts. If the Rangers had had some pre-knowledge before the deadline about the pandemic IMO they probably let Kreider go. The problem with arbitrated RFA contracts is that arbitrators are most likely to compare a player's new salary to comparable players around the league in the pre-covid economic dynamic and not the way things are going to be when the cap goes flat for however long a period that is.

The Rangers are actually in a much better position than other teams with a backlog of top rated prospects but IMO you make cuts where you can or at least if you have to. At the end of the day the Rangers will have to have enough cap for Mika in a couple years--and maybe Kakko and/or Igor and Fox too. If Tony or Pavel score big long term contracts that could become a problem.

 

[Mikos87]

The NBC crew called him NHL ready. They also called him a safe pick. I honestly don't know if there is ever a safe pick in the draft. Especially once the top guys are gone. Fans always get excited about a player labeled as a steal when that player drops for a reason sometimes. A steal isn't always a positive. For that same reason, a reach isn't always a negative.

I also feel Ranger fans either forget or don't know how dominant Lias Andersson was pre-draft and why he was ranked so high by not just the Rangers, but other teams as well. And also how much uncertainty there was surrounding Mittelstadt in particular. Over 50% of his points in the USHL coming on the PP was a huge red flag. Vilardi had injury concerns, missing close to 20 games in his draft year. There were question marks surrounding almost everyone after Cody Glass was gone

Yes and it was a weaker draft as well. People also had major concerns about Rasmussen as well who went two picks later to Detroit for the same reasons. Boatload of PP points and not enough 5v5. Middlestadt avoided the USHL to play more high school hockey, and he was a kid who was very much a kid and needed to stay in college for 2-3 more seasons imo. Buffalo botching that is not a surprise.

Lias also had a monster playoff run where he played an important role. So I can see the safety in that choice. The swings came later with Necas and Suzuki, both guys were rated in the teens I believe as well.

 

[Mikos87]

Scouting is difficult because you're projecting what an 18 year kid will be as a final product 5-10 years after he's selected. For me, the best scouting teams are the ones that can consistently draft NHL players, from rounds 1-7. All teams screw up first round picks, especially after the 3rd pick, but it's the later round picks that can become just as valuable and out perform even first rounders.
Having said that, developing the drafted player is another thing, and in my opinion the most crucial part of how that player will turn out. Again, in my opinion, I believe we have rushed all our first rounders since the rebuild began, and it's somewhat stalled their development. All the guys under 21 on our roster should have played minimum 1 year in the AHL and/or junior hockey, if they weren't eligible for the AHL.
Talent is important of course, but confidence is just as important and rushing players that are not ready, mentally and/or physically, is wrong and can stunt a players development and turn him into a "bust"...

Scouts move around a lot these days- but I would development into that as well. Look at CLB, their top 4 has two home grown 4th (Savard) and 6th (Gavrikov) round picks. They hit on multiple 2nd round picks (Jenner, Texier, Peeke, Stenlund), 3rd rounders (Korpisalo, Bjorkstrand, Merzlikins), 4th rounders (Anderson, Mike Reilly, Bemstrom), they got Nutivaara in the 7th.

Of the 12 I listed, 11 are on their current playoff roster. No one makes more than $4.5M and 8 are below $2M. Good news is that the guy that built that team is sitting in same seat in the Rangers front office. JD was a fan of Jarmo since his broadcasting days since the Sens teams were so good in the late 90s and early oughts. Hired Jarmo as a AGM in STL, took him to CLB and made him GM.

Not a surprise that the Blue Jackets are one of the better scouting and development teams out there.

 

[Amazing Kreiderman]

Yes and it was a weaker draft as well. People also had major concerns about Rasmussen as well who went two picks later to Detroit for the same reasons. Boatload of PP points and not enough 5v5. Middlestadt avoided the USHL to play more high school hockey, and he was a kid who was very much a kid and needed to stay in college for 2-3 more seasons imo. Buffalo botching that is not a surprise.

Lias also had a monster playoff run where he played an important role. So I can see the safety in that choice. The swings came later with Necas and Suzuki, both guys were rated in the teens I believe as well.

Yeah, and I saw Necas play in Brno. He was good, but didn't really dominate games the way Lias did. It's easy to, in hindsight, cherry pick the ones who worked out but it's just not fair to judge draft that way

 

[Igor Shestyorkin]

Yeah, and I saw Necas play in Brno. He was good, but didn't really dominate games the way Lias did. It's easy to, in hindsight, cherry pick the ones who worked out but it's just not fair to judge draft that way

I'm personally not even the biggest Necas fan. At that 7th pick, I was screaming for the Rangers to take Suzuki or Brannstrom at the time. Especially Brannstrom.

 

[Amazing Kreiderman]

I'm personally not even the biggest Necas fan. At that 7th pick, I was screaming for the Rangers to take Suzuki or Brannstrom at the time. Especially Brannstrom.

Brännström was someone that should have been in the conversation in that 7-10 range but his size held him back. GMs still live in the 80s.

 

[Igor Shestyorkin]

Brännström was someone that should have been in the conversation in that 7-10 range but his size held him back. GMs still live in the 80s.

Yep. And on top of that, Nick Suzuki is looking like a star. He's really good, on both ends of the ice. Impressive player man.

 

[Joey Bones]

Would Antonio Stranges be likely to last until the 3rd, maybe to our later pick?

EDIT: And would he be worth it

Yes. He's got a lot of upside, just needs to work on the defensive side and consistency. Has a lot of flair, but for sure a boom/bust. I'd gamble on him in the 3rd round.

 

[Mikos87]

Yeah, and I saw Necas play in Brno. He was good, but didn't really dominate games the way Lias did. It's easy to, in hindsight, cherry pick the ones who worked out but it's just not fair to judge draft that way

I agree it's a decision that's a moment in time but really you have to look at everything about the situation to really improve and learn from it. Law of numbers- it happens with drafts. On sheer probability alone, you are going to see busts and disappointments in the top 10.

 

[Mikos87]

If the Carolina pick is in a slot where you can get a real boom pick who is maybe 3-4 years away and will need a lot of coaching and development, do you do it?

My philosophy has changed, you are getting the biggest boom with the safest pick, so taking another swing is not a bad idea. This is a very good draft imo, and one that does not seem to have the usual concensus you would see form with the end of year tourneys and playoffs.

There are guys I like a lot who are not universally rated as high players. Some I think will be available in the 2nd and 3rd.

So if the 21st pick is a player who can be one of the 2nd or 3rd best player at his position- and he is 3-4 years away with a lot of development needed, do you take it and wait?

Or do you take a player who has middle of the line-up upside that can play in 1-2 years?

 

[GoAwayPanarin]

If the Carolina pick is in a slot where you can get a real boom pick who is maybe 3-4 years away and will need a lot of coaching and development, do you do it?

My philosophy has changed, you are getting the biggest boom with the safest pick, so taking another swing is not a bad idea. This is a very good draft imo, and one that does not seem to have the usual concensus you would see form with the end of year tourneys and playoffs.

There are guys I like a lot who are not universally rated as high players. Some I think will be available in the 2nd and 3rd.

So if the 21st pick is a player who can be one of the 2nd or 3rd best player at his position- and he is 3-4 years away with a lot of development needed, do you take it and wait?

Or do you take a player who has middle of the line-up upside that can play in 1-2 years?

I'm taking the boom player.

 

[Joey Bones]

Anybody seen this guy’s channel before? Good stuff.

Will has a great channel!! I have had the pleasure to speak with him personally. He has a passion for creating realistic projections towards players (although some could be a bit bonkers), but his grading scale is something that no one I've seen from a free service, such as YouTube. If anyone is looking for legit looks a prospect tracking for free, Will is your guy!!

I wouldn't be surprised in the coming years that he becomes a professional source for searching draft eligible prospects.

 

[Joey Bones]

I’ve been posting this guys stuff basically since he started his channel a lot better than most hockey YouTubers who some literally just read a players eliteprospects bio and play it off as if that was their assessment of them. There are so many hockey youtubers, as well as HF posters who talk as if they know all about these prospects when you know damn well they haven’t spent any extensive time watching half of them play lmao. Some YouTubers who pretend they’re up at odd hours of the day watching a Russian junior leagues games

Likewise, Will has been consistently watching prospects within his grading scale. Watches all games in a specific time frame, which gives a better balance on a player's consistency. Way better of a look than most posters and Youtubers.

I'm sure he'll go professional very soon!! 10/10!!

 

[Joey Bones]

It’s not strange that someone like our @Steve Kournianos loses it on Twitter at times.

We should all just lower our expectations re these posters/YTers and what not.

Well, listen.... if one were to watch a prospect continuously it's easy to spot how they play (both pros and cons) and then base projections. That's why I try to read between the lines on posters here or elsewhere. Who really is talking out their ass? Luckily, I view the ones that post in this thread religiously have the passion to provide their input from viewings they've actually seen.

Some posters are legit, most aren't. I do see that the ones who come together in agreement, or have healthy debates, are the ones who actually pay attention.

 

[Mikos87]

I'm taking the boom player.

Yeah me too. The rankings this year are pretty wide, if you are slotted in the right sections you can take a reach on a boom before he would be considered elsewhere. You don't see it too often, and the example I'm going to use isn't a great one but it fits the bill in terms of what I mean by reach:

WPG took Rosclovic maybe 15 spots ahead, he was slated to be a mid 2nd rounder. Guy looks like he's going to end up being a good 3rd liner with some sparks of offense. So not a boom player, but in terms of that kind of a reach... this draft has plenty of talent if you are willing to wait.

 

[GoAwayPanarin]

Will has a great channel!! I have had the pleasure to speak with him personally. He has a passion for creating realistic projections towards players (although some could be a bit bonkers), but his grading scale is something that no one I've seen from a free service, such as YouTube. If anyone is looking for legit looks a prospect tracking for free, Will is your guy!!

I wouldn't be surprised in the coming years that he becomes a professional source for searching draft eligible prospects.

He's going to end up getting scooped up by Seattle or someone in an analyst role.

 

[Joey Bones]

He's going to end up getting scooped up by Seattle or someone in an analyst role.

Would love that for him, he's a great guy who works very hard!! Such a pleasure for the hockey community!!

 

[CTRanger]

Sorry delete