Draft 2020 Draft & Undrafted Free Agent Thread: Part VII

[Edge]

even if Holloway is a Dubinsky lite at the end of the day I’ll take it. Would that be a good comparison???

Ironically enough, I kind of feel like Greig might be more in the Dubinsky mold in a lot of ways.

If we're looking for former prospect comparisons, Holloway might be closer to Malhotra based on size, wheels, offensive uncertainty, and maybe the debate as to whether you're looking at a top six forward or more of a third line forward --- especially if he ends up at center.

 

[Brooklyn Rangers Fan]

Ironically enough, I kind of feel like Greig might be more in the Dubinsky mold in a lot of ways.

If we're looking for former prospect comparisons, Holloway might be closer to Malhotra based on size, wheels, offensive uncertainty, and maybe the debate as to whether you're looking at a top six forward or more of a third line forward --- especially if he ends up at center.

I'm okay with *both* of those projections if that's the expectation picking them...

 

[aufheben]

What’s up with this Ridly Greig dude everyone wants to draft?

 

[eco's bones]

What’s up with this Ridly Greig dude everyone wants to draft?

Really good skater. Not big but likes to play physical and is very much an agitator. Versatile--can play center or wing though I'd expect him probably being more of a wing in the NHL. An all situations player. One of the youngest players in the draft--3rd on his WHL team in scoring but prorated he would have been first. NHL bloodlines.

 

[Gardner McKay]

Ironically enough, I kind of feel like Greig might be more in the Dubinsky mold in a lot of ways.

If we're looking for former prospect comparisons, Holloway might be closer to Malhotra based on size, wheels, offensive uncertainty, and maybe the debate as to whether you're looking at a top six forward or more of a third line forward --- especially if he ends up at center.

I could really live with both of those.

 

[KirkAlbuquerque]

even if Holloway is a Dubinsky lite at the end of the day I’ll take it. Would that be a good comparison???

If he’s another Dubinsky that’s a good pick at 22. Dubinsky lite? No thanks . That’s your average 3rd liner.

 

[Joey Bones]

I'd say thats his most likely projection, not the worst case.

But there are guys who have a similar profile and may not have the pedigree/hype available who will be available later who do those grindy things better than Holloway does. Holloway doesn't have a ton of physical maturation ahead of him either so what you see is likely what you're going to get.

Still think it's very early to tell with the circumstances that happened around him. I do think the grind style isn't necessarily his game, but the focus is on the power forward side of the offense. Nonetheless, I think it's great that a player could flip/flop between the two styles. Makes for good depth and shiftiness in the lineup. I doubt he tops out as that aforementioned bottom-6 and scouts see that, given he's consistently been ranked in the teens all year. Like most have mentioned, again, he's got to work the offense, but it'll come.

And he's a 19 year old who is 6'1"/203lbs., via eliteprospects. So the statement on physical maturity is nitpicking a bit. He'll grow more into his frame and hopefully become a menace for opponents in the pros.

 

[Joey Bones]

At worst he looks a lot like Tanner Glass. While that's not likely he does remind me a lot of Colton Gillies and that's not a good thing.

At this moment, the offense hasn't translated yet. It could be because he was one of the youngest player in the NCAA or because Wisconsin was a hot mess this year. Give him time to develop his offensive game and maybe you could have a Jordan Staal, instead.

Besides, for a playoff team, Staal or Gillies would be look nice in the lineup....

 

[Joey Bones]

Do you think we will hear from JD or Gorton before the draft?

Probably in the coming days beforehand....

 

[Joey Bones]

even if Holloway is a Dubinsky lite at the end of the day I’ll take it. Would that be a good comparison???

I see him more like a Jordan Staal-type if everything works out.

 

[RGY]

Really good skater. Not big but likes to play physical and is very much an agitator. Versatile--can play center or wing though I'd expect him probably being more of a wing in the NHL. An all situations player. One of the youngest players in the draft--3rd on his WHL team in scoring but prorated he would have been first. NHL bloodlines.

Sounds like you just described Yanne Gourde

 

[carminejr]

I'd say thats his most likely projection, not the worst case.

But there are guys who have a similar profile and may not have the pedigree/hype available who will be available later who do those grindy things better than Holloway does. Holloway doesn't have a ton of physical maturation ahead of him either so what you see is likely what you're going to get.

What? Holloway is 19 y/o and played in the ncaa as the 2nd youngest player in the country last season. Not sure how that screams “what you see is what you get.”

 

[Joey Bones]

Greig, if everything pans out, reminds me of a Brayden Schenn offensively. Makes some great shots at top speed and has a good sense of vision. But I'm curious how offensive he'll become. He shows the snarl, but needs to get stronger and get a little faster. He's got to develop that for the NHL game.

With Holloway, I have similar questions with offense, but the way he plays shows a better jump to the NHL. Big, fast, has good vision, too, and gets pucks in on net. I like both players, and wouldn't be opposed to either at No. 22, but if it were between the two I'd go Holloway.

 

[QJL]

On the record for the possible picks at 22

Love - Jarvis, Gunler, Reichel

Like - Brisson, Amirov, Wallinder, Khusnutdinov, Andrae, Mercer, Zary

Okay - Niemela, Mysak, Bourque, Torgersson, Bordeleau, Holloway, Guhle Hirvonen

No - Everyone else including Quinn, Lapierre, Perreault, Foerster

 

[wafflepadsave]

I feel like Lafreniere is an amazing 10 oz. filet mignon. That 22nd pick might give us the chance to add a hell of a crab cake/lobster tail to go with.

I've always wanted that one draft where we really look back and it feels like we just nailed/aced it.

Not a B, or a B-plus, or even just an A. I want that A+ draft that we talk about 20 years from now. Something that looks like Montreal's 2007 draft, or Anaheim's or Nashville's 2003 draft.

I want the draft I feel like we should've had in 1990 if we didn't take Michael Stewart and instead went with Keith Tkachuk, or the draft we could've had in 1988 if we didn't trade our first for a coach and had instead managed to select Roenick, Selanne, or Brind'amour.

I feel like we've always flirted with that possibility. But I want that one draft where it feels like the outcome you'd want playing Franchise in the NHL video game series.

100% agree but for me only that means trading up from 22. Way up.

 

[HFsNumber1Heel]

Sounds like Hrivik. Literally and figuratively.

Hrivik was a big dude from what I remember. Like 6'3'' or 6'4''. He had the pace to keep with the NHL as an ok fourth liner but didn't really do much else.

I used to laugh every time I saw him, I have a friend who is a jacked physical therapist/metal head that has the same face as him, so I always viewed Hrivik as a "softer version."

 

[Amazing Kreiderman]

Sounds like Hrivik. Literally and figuratively.

He's playing with Rangers prospect Calle Själin now in Sweden for Leksands

 

[RGY]

100% agree but for me only that means trading up from 22. Way up.

I’m with you in that I want Lundell real bad but it doesnt sound like the Rangers are looking to trade the necessary pieces to move up to 8-12, which I can understand.

 

[Edge]

100% agree but for me only that means trading up from 22. Way up.

I honestly think there will be some really good choices on the board that could lead to a tremendous outcome.

I know we're focused on names like Lundell or Mercer, but I think there's quite a bit of runway with names that will be available at 22.

And frankly, with the depth we have in our system, who's to say they might not click with the right teammate and end up in a high profile role?

 

[Brooklyn Rangers Fan]

Great article on scouts' diverging takes on the more controversial prospects in this year's draft:

NHL Draft prospects up for debate: Who causes the biggest divide among scouts?

A couple of examples for the guys who've received a ton of coverage here:

Holloway:

Scout in favor: “He didn’t have a great season, but he was a very young freshman. I’ve watched this kid for years, and I know how much offense he has from his time in junior. I’ve seen that he has legit skill and playmaking to go with the skating. He’s going to be a great NHL forward. If he drops too far he’s going to make some teams look bad.”
Scout against: “He lacks hockey sense for me. Physically with his size, strength, speed and compete, he’s imposing, but I just don’t see top-six offense coming out of him.”

Gunler:

Scout in favor: “He’s grown on me. He’s got skill, he makes a lot of plays, he has a big shot and he can make himself known physically. This guy is going to score in the NHL and will help your power play.”
Scout against: “His compete is in and out, it’s hard to trust him. If the skill and speed were high-end and he could create his own chances, it would be one thing, but he needs someone to create for him and his effort is inconsistent. In the top 30-40, he wouldn’t be for me.”

Lapierre:

Scout in favor: “He has so much skill and he’s a very smart player. It’s first-round skill all day. At the Hlinka Gretzky, he looked like a top-10 pick. If he looks healthy again, I realize there’s some risk, but I think you got to go after him in the first round at some point; there’s too much player there.”
Scout against: “I wouldn’t use a top-50 pick on him. The injuries … the two goals in 19 games, his game lacks pace. He looks healthy now and then you use a high pick and in two or three years those issues always seem to pop back up again. At some point it becomes worth it, but that point will be later than where he’ll likely go.”

Others covered:

Kaiden Guhle
Tyson Foerster
Jeremie Poirier
Jack Quinn
Anton Lundell
Justin Barron
Tyler Kleven
William Wallinder
Will Cuylle

It's stuff like this why the Athletic is totally worth the price.

 

[Ghost of jas]

I honestly think there will be some really good choices on the board that could lead to a tremendous outcome.

I know we're focused on names like Lundell or Mercer, but I think there's quite a bit of runway with names that will be available at 22.

And frankly, with the depth we have in our system, who's to say they might not click with the right teammate and end up in a high profile role?

Say it with me...Hendrix Lapierre.

 

[Amazing Kreiderman]

Say it with me...Hendrix Lapierre.

 

[Harbour Dog]

Great article on scouts' diverging takes on the more controversial prospects in this year's draft:

NHL Draft prospects up for debate: Who causes the biggest divide among scouts?

A couple of examples for the guys who've received a ton of coverage here:

Holloway:


Gunler:


Lapierre:


Others covered:

Kaiden Guhle
Tyson Foerster
Jeremie Poirier
Jack Quinn
Anton Lundell
Justin Barron
Tyler Kleven
William Wallinder
Will Cuylle

It's stuff like this why the Athletic is totally worth the price.

I don't have an Athletic subscription mainly because I don't care what Carp or Pronman have to say.

This snippet, though, this is gold. And it's not an uncommon thing for them to have pieces like this?

 

[Edge]

Say it with me...Hendrix Lapierre.

At this point it's my 1B option, just a hair behind having Mercer sitting there at 17 and working out a trade for him.

But I would be very open to taking him at 22.

 

[Amazing Kreiderman]

Great article on scouts' diverging takes on the more controversial prospects in this year's draft:

NHL Draft prospects up for debate: Who causes the biggest divide among scouts?

A couple of examples for the guys who've received a ton of coverage here:

Holloway:


Gunler:


Lapierre:


Others covered:

Kaiden Guhle
Tyson Foerster
Jeremie Poirier
Jack Quinn
Anton Lundell
Justin Barron
Tyler Kleven
William Wallinder
Will Cuylle

It's stuff like this why the Athletic is totally worth the price.

It's a fun read but this made me chuckle, on Noel Gunler:


Scout in favor: “He’s grown on me. He’s got skill, he makes a lot of plays, he has a big shot and he can make himself known physically. This guy is going to score in the NHL and will help your power play.”

Scout against: “His compete is in and out, it’s hard to trust him. If the skill and speed were high-end and he could create his own chances, it would be one thing, but he needs someone to create for him and his effort is inconsistent. In the top 30-40, he wouldn’t be for me.”