Draft 2020 Draft & Undrafted Free Agent Thread: Part VII

[Amazing Kreiderman]

Andrae is a good one. Grans, Jurmo, and my other outlier choice is Johanessen are all good defensive prospects. With Wallinder being my top choice among the lot. Brisson's coming up as well. I heard he's a great skater. Johanessen in particular reminds me of a couple of defensemen that slid in the 2016 draft. He's another one with some very anomalous traits.

Anton or Samuel?

 

[Edge]

I understand the reservations for sure. He has to play that energy two-way C game against the best players in the world at 5'9" or a little taller.

Do you think that if he was a winger, his name would still be coming up as much on here? Because I suspect if him and Gunler switched positions, we'd be drooling all over ourselves for the Swede.

I think he'd likely still be coming up, much like a Perrault or some of the higher more exciting options out there.

I think either as a center or wing he'd have his share of fans.

 

[Edge]

Earlier this week I discussed the reach vs steal labels in the draft with someone and I always feel fans in general consider a player drafted lower than his consensus ranking a good thing while that's not always the case. Pavel Buchnevich, Robin Kovacs and Sean Day were all steals (drafted lower than where they were ranked) while Filip Chytil, Chris Kreider and Lias Andersson were all reaches (drafted higher than where they were ranked).

Khustnutdinov would be considered a reach according to these criteria, but is that really a bad thing? Online rankings are arbitrary

IMO, this draft is also going to be harder to assign labels to.

When I look at this draft, I see 14 players who stand out a little bit more, and then a large group from 15-45 who are all candidates to go anywhere in that range, and likely even beyond.

By many people's definition, we're likely see a disproportionate number of "reaches" and "steals" in a draft like this.

 

[Mikos87]

Anton or Samuel?

Anton.

 

[Mikos87]

IMO, this draft is also going to be harder to assign labels to.

When I look at this draft, I see 14 players who stand out a little bit more, and then a large group from 15-45 who are all candidates to go anywhere in that range, and likely even beyond.

By many people's definition, we're likely see a disproportionate number of "reaches" and "steals" in a draft like this.

Right. There's no consensus but there are a lot of valuable depth players in that range. To your point, they don't stand out. That's why when I looked at the aggregate rankings @bobbop shared a while back, I saw the uneven distribution across the player rankings. All except for one of the Ranger picks. Think that one was unanimous.

 

[Matz03]

Seeing the aggregate rankings now, I think some of the guys who were ranked in the 40+ range aren't hiding anymore. To me, I go upside all the way with the CAR pick. It would have been off the board earlier, but he's climbed up too many rankings. Unless you get a Dawson Mercer at that slot, I'm swinging for William Wallinder.

IMO- Best skating defenseman in the draft who is rail thin, with silky hands. He's 4 years away. Beyond the size issue, he was terrible defensively at times. If he ends up on a team like CLB, he will be a stud. To me, he's got Thomas Chabot like upside. I've watched a lot of hockey, and it is very rare that you see a 6'4" defensemen that can skate like that. I think he can end up pushing Sanderson and Drysdale as far as being top 3 defensemen from this draft class. But you may have to wait 6-7 years to say that.

Oh and he's smart with the puck. He's very very smart.

If we’re making the pick at 22 and no one note worthy drops down, I would not hesitate taking someone like a Wallinder. He has that franchise d potential. I wish we had a second and had a chance at someone like Mukhamadulin, he’s another possible boom D prospect.

Regarding Lapierre, I would not touch him anywhere in this draft, had a terrible year on top of injuries, horrible defensively. He’s the type that drops to the third, someone is happy to grab him there and he just never develops any further.

 

[bobbop]

Right. There's no consensus but there are a lot of valuable depth players in that range. To your point, they don't stand out. That's why when I looked at the aggregate rankings @bobbop shared a while back, I saw the uneven distribution across the player rankings. All except for one of the Ranger picks. Think that one was unanimous.

It all depends on who our guys like. And who is available.

 

[Mikos87]

If we’re making the pick at 22 and no one note worthy drops down, I would not hesitate taking someone like a Wallinder. He has that franchise d potential. I wish we had a second and had a chance at someone like Mukhamadulin, he’s another possible boom D prospect.

Regarding Lapierre, I would not touch him anywhere in this draft, had a terrible year on top of injuries, horrible defensively. He’s the type that drops to the third, someone is happy to grab him there and he just never develops any further.

Yeah I mean Lapierre has some passive qualities already, and while I don't know much about his defensive game, if you are drafting at 22, and can do better than Alexander Wennberg with brain and neck problems I think you go down that route. Wennberg's a good player. But not one that helps a team offensively. Players with some of these passive offensive qualities make the game easier to defend because they are so predictable. Heck Mathew Lombardi was a good player too with a similar situation.

I don't doubt the second line upside and productivity that a lot of people see with Lapierre, but I do get that comes with some caveats. Guys with these issues... head, neck, brain... that's different than a bone or a joint.

 

[Mikos87]

It all depends on who our guys like. And who is available.

Exactly. So my hopes are that they like some of these European kids that are getting more recognition now that more people have had a chance to catch up to the video.

 

[Edge]

Lapierre has his questions marks, but Wennberg he is not.

He's scored 18 goals and and 67 points in the 71 games Q games he's played prior to his draft day. And that's with what appears to be the lingering effects of whatever was going on with his neck.

Not hearing a lot of questions about the skills or the results, it's all about the health right now with him.

 

[eco's bones]

Speaking of Swedish players---I really like this one. The reviewer points out towards the end that all the things Heineman is best at would point to his game being benefited more playing on smaller North American rinks than on European rinks.

Between Anton and Samuel Johannesson I think you have to go with Samuel.

 

[RangerBlues]

This all point to the Rangers picking D at 22

 

[Edge]

This all point to the Rangers picking D at 22

Not out of the realm of possibility, but I think the 22nd pick is likely to be in a bit of no man’s land when it comes to defensemen. There’s the popular opinion that Drysdale, Sanderson, Guhle and Schneider will be off the board, while guys like O’Rourke, Wallinder, etc. are a little further back.

So it would be interesting if the Rangers went for one at 22.

 

[True Blue]

Not out of the realm of possibility, but I think the 22nd pick is likely to be in a bit of no man’s land when it comes to defensemen. There’s the popular opinion that Drysdale, Sanderson, Guhle and Schneider will be off the board, while guys like O’Rourke, Wallinder, etc. are a little further back.

So it would be interesting if the Rangers went for one at 22.

IMO, if those 4 are off the board, a pick for D would be nothing but a reach. I think that Drysdale & Sanderson go top-10, with Schneider not lasting past Toronto. Guhle may fall or at least slide into the 15-19 range, where I think there is a deal to be made. Lots depends on how teams view Georgiev (Toronto & Chicago specifically) and where Askarov goes. Many variables to consider. If they hold steady and grab a Mysak to go with the presumptive #1, that is a hell of a first round. I maintain my fantasies that a Schneider or Holloway fall, but that is not realistic and would be thrilled with Mysak.

Schneider and Toronto seem to be a tailor-made match at 15. But if Askarov is not off the table, then there seem to be a deal that can be done to slip in and grab a Schneider or a Holloway. Or if he is off the table, then a question of how Georgiev is viewed really becomes a focus.

 

[GoAwayPanarin]

Seeing the aggregate rankings now, I think some of the guys who were ranked in the 40+ range aren't hiding anymore. To me, I go upside all the way with the CAR pick. It would have been off the board earlier, but he's climbed up too many rankings. Unless you get a Dawson Mercer at that slot, I'm swinging for William Wallinder.

IMO- Best skating defenseman in the draft who is rail thin, with silky hands. He's 4 years away. Beyond the size issue, he was terrible defensively at times. If he ends up on a team like CLB, he will be a stud. To me, he's got Thomas Chabot like upside. I've watched a lot of hockey, and it is very rare that you see a 6'4" defensemen that can skate like that. I think he can end up pushing Sanderson and Drysdale as far as being top 3 defensemen from this draft class. But you may have to wait 6-7 years to say that.

Oh and he's smart with the puck. He's very very smart.

he also has ranger pick written all over him.

 

[Brooklyn Rangers Fan]

Not out of the realm of possibility, but I think the 22nd pick is likely to be in a bit of no man’s land when it comes to defensemen. There’s the popular opinion that Drysdale, Sanderson, Guhle and Schneider will be off the board, while guys like O’Rourke, Wallinder, etc. are a little further back.

So it would be interesting if the Rangers went for one at 22.

Unless one of the big four falls (IMO, extremely doubtful), I'd be shocked. You'd be going for a player 10-20 spots higher than he should be picked (according to pretty much every outside observer) to add to an existing surplus at the position. Doesn't makes sense either from a BPA or position of need perspective.

 

[Edge]

he also has ranger pick written all over him.

Well, earlier in the year he was a name that came up from the Rangers.

The early names were Holloway, Lundell, Sanderson, Zary, Wallinder, O’Rourke and a few others.

Zary fell off from conversations. Can’t speak to Wallinder and O’Rourke.

 

[Edge]

Unless one of the big four falls (IMO, extremely doubtful), I'd be shocked. You'd be going for a player 10-20 spots higher than he should be picked (according to pretty much every outside observer) to add to an existing surplus at the position. Doesn't makes sense either from a BPA or position of need perspective.

My expectation is they go with a forward. I’d be surprised, but not necessarily shocked if they go defenseman.

 

[Ola]

IMO, if those 4 are off the board, a pick for D would be nothing but a reach. I think that Drysdale & Sanderson go top-10, with Schneider not lasting past Toronto. Guhle may fall or at least slide into the 15-19 range, where I think there is a deal to be made. Lots depends on how teams view Georgiev (Toronto & Chicago specifically) and where Askarov goes. Many variables to consider. If they hold steady and grab a Mysak to go with the presumptive #1, that is a hell of a first round. I maintain my fantasies that a Schneider or Holloway fall, but that is not realistic and would be thrilled with Mysak.

Schneider and Toronto seem to be a tailor-made match at 15. But if Askarov is not off the table, then there seem to be a deal that can be done to slip in and grab a Schneider or a Holloway. Or if he is off the table, then a question of how Georgiev is viewed really becomes a focus.

Guhle could even be a top 10 pick if a GM really knows what he wants and Guhle fits that bill. Or fall quite a bit if GMs for depth charts reasons or whatever want something else.

 

[Lime]

I like the Lapierre gamble if he's still there

 

[Matz03]

Unless one of the big four falls (IMO, extremely doubtful), I'd be shocked. You'd be going for a player 10-20 spots higher than he should be picked (according to pretty much every outside observer) to add to an existing surplus at the position. Doesn't makes sense either from a BPA or position of need perspective.

Not really, in that 20 range you can easily make a long term case for a bpa Wallinder against some of the small forwards more commonly ranked in the 20s. It all really depends on who drops down to 22 if I would personally go D. I fully expect the 4 d and Askarov to go top 20, and do we really expect only 4 d to go in that range? Teams with multiple picks will go with need as well so I can easily see a Wallinder or another D sneak into the top 20. We could really use centers, not sure we have a huge need for wingers, and I can see a case where 3-4 year down the road someone like Wallinder is look at as a huge steal of the draft.

 

[Edge]

I think you could make the argument that someone like Perrault would become the most natural goal scorer of our young forwards/prospects. You could make the argument that a healthy Lapierre is as good as any young center we have. There are a few other options who would compare favorably in our system.

Wallinder is steady, but not necessarily someone who jumps out as a better prospect than Miller, Robertson and company. I think he'll be good, but I don't know if he's the type I'd pass on some of the other options for --- at least not at 22.

 

[Edge]

Guhle could even be a top 10 pick if a GM really knows what he wants and Guhle fits that bill. Or fall quite a bit if GMs for depth charts reasons or whatever want something else.

Right now, as a guess, I'm thinking Drysdale, Sanderson, Guhle and Schneider all go in the top 15.

 

[nsvoyageurs]

Now that the Canes pick is set, several of you have sent me draft questions via PM. I think it's just easier to answer them on here.

Q: Any chance the Rangers take someone other than Lafreniere?
A: Slim to none. Other than playing center, Lafreniere is everything the Rangers need and is the best player in his class. He's clearly "the man" in the 2020 draft.


Q: Any chance the Rangers trade the top pick?
A: Unlikely, but not an absolute certainty. I think they'd entertain a crazy stupid offer. But short of that, Lafreniere will hear his name called by the Rangers in a month.


Q: Any chance the Rangers try to acquire another top 10 pick?
A: Possible, but highly unlikely at this point. Last year, Zegras was a very specific target the Rangers loved from their research for the sixth overall pick. I don't get the sense they desire anyone on that level this year. Additionally, I don't think they have a desire to trade an established NHL player for a pick.


Q: Who do the Rangers like in this draft?
A: Names that have come up repeatedly are Lundell and Holloway. How much they like those guys is unknown, there could be other prospects ahead of them. That's why I always hesitate to say, "THIS GUY will be the pick." I suspect they also like Guhle a lot as well. I will need need to confirm that when I have a chance.

Names I suspect/hope they like include Mercer and Jarvis, but that's on my end not based on anything I've heard from the Rangers. There are of course others they like, it's just that Lundell and Holloway are easier for me to confirm.


Q: Will the Rangers trade down in this draft?
A: Possible, but unlikely. That hasn't typically been the Rangers M.O. They tend to identify their guys and draft them without much fuss. I think this draft is the type of draft where you can trade down and still be in the same range of player, but I just don't know if the Rangers go that route.

Q: Will the Rangers trade up in this draft?
A: Possible, depending on who they like and who is in their range. They don't have a second, which complicates things. But I wouldn't rule out one of the third round picks, or some younger roster players/players in the system being on the table. So I would not be surprised if names like Howden, Hajek, Andersson, or even Lemieux come up.

Q: Will the Rangers trade the pick for a roster player?
A: Possible, though that approach has its share of challenges. I don't know if a lot of teams that are going to be dangling young, NHL-level talent on cheap contracts for picks. I think those teams are more likely to want to move guys who are a little older and thus a little more expensive.

Considering the Rangers are still trying to figure out their own salaries for next season, the timing might not be a fit. But all things being equal, I think this is the Rangers preference.


Q: Who are potential trade-up partners for the Rangers?
A: To start, you have to identify the typical move-up range in the draft, which is 1-6 spots. Moving one spot is rare, unless the Rangers want to block a team behind them from leapfrogging. Generally speaking, this isn't the Rangers approach. Moving six spots is also a stretch, but it happens.

Right off the bat, we can rule out New Jersey at 18 and 20. (One of the negative impacts of the Canucks losing is that we don't leapfrog the Devils' third pick and we thus lose another potential tradable slot.) I'd further say that Columbus is unlikely as both a division rival and because I don't think the Rangers are going to move assets for one spot in the draft.

So that leaves Calgary 19, Chicago at 17, and Montreal at 16. People have floated Toronto as a possibility at 15, and that is true if there's an interest in Georgiev. However, I think The Leafs' have a defenseman targeted there. So let's focus on the remaining three.

Calgary and the Rangers have engaged in many conversations, though they've all involved roster players. It's possible picks could be exchanged if the teams connect on a larger deal, or they shelf those talks for later and just focus on a smaller swap. Either way, there's familiarity here and I think there exists a potential window (assuming either team wants to make a move).

Chicago is an interesting trade candidate because like the Rangers I think they're looking to move into the next phase of their team building. There's a desire for a goalie, so the question is whether the Hawks view Georgiev as someone who can grow into the role, while also serving as a capable backup to Crawford. I think their interest will be similar to Toronto's interest. Georgiev could be a worthy replacement for a second round pick that might normally convince them to trade down 5 spots. I'd keep an eye on this one.

Montreal, in theory, has advertised their desire to shop the pick. Now I think they're probably looking for NHL-ready help. But like the Rangers desire, that might be easier said than done. They've expressed the belief that there's little difference in the quality of prospect when you get past the top 9. Is that posturing? Are they serious? We don't know. Moving six spots ahead is a bit of a stretch for the Rangers, and I don't think Montreal has a huge interest in adding another third rounder. They're pretty set with picks this year. So I think you're looking at a roster player in this scenario. I think Brendan Lemieux looks very attractive to them. But that's not going to be a popular option on here.


Q: Who do you think the Rangers will take at 22?
A: My cop-out answer is that I think there are a ton of possibilities that make sense. But, put me on the spot, I'm going to go with a darkhorse candidate whom I can't shake. I think if he's sitting on the board at 22, Lapierre might just be the pick. But that's assuming he gets past Montral and both of the Devils picks. Both teams have a wealth of picks and I think they might be willing to gamble with them.

Thanks, Edge for this post. You have added greatly to this forum. We are fortunate to have you on here.

 

[Oscar Lindberg]

No chance I’m taking a defenseman at 22. You can find a quality defenseman in the later rounds

They should be taking another forward with that pick