Prospect Info: 2020 NHL Draft Part 2

[Gliff]

I would prefer Drysdale

Really? Last year Turcotte was who I wanted us to get before the Ducks dropped in the draft.
I think he and Z would be a fantastic 1/2 going forward.

 

[Smirnov2Chistov]

Stutzle vs Rossi if it came down to it? you'd have to go with Stutzle every time.

 

[Beckett]

Turcotte for #6, yeah I would... but not if Stutzle was available. I can't see him making it to pick 4, let alone 6.

 

[bsu]

You think Senators wouldn't take Stutzle with 2 picks.... yeah...no.

 

[Gliff]

You think Senators wouldn't take Stutzle with 2 picks.... yeah...no.

If they get Byfield at 3 I could 100% see it happening.

They could want a goalie or defensemen at that spot.

 

[WhatTheDuck]

If they get Byfield at 3 I could 100% see it happening.

They could want a goalie or defensemen at that spot.

If Ottawa let's him slip past #3, I'd have to think Detroit will gladly take him at 4.

 

[Kalv]

Really? Last year Turcotte was who I wanted us to get before the Ducks dropped in the draft.
I think he and Z would be a fantastic 1/2 going forward.

He is a great prospect, of course but I would be reluctant to spend a high pick on him for another smallish centre. I would pick Rossi though, so I am not sure if I am just biased towards this years class, or not

I am high on Drysdale as NHL is still transitioning to these modern defensemen and I think Dry will be better than Fowler

 

[Gliff]

If Ottawa let's him slip past #3, I'd have to think Detroit will gladly take him at 4.

I'm not saying it is going to happen. I'm just saying I can totally see it happening. It is possible.

He is a great prospect, of course but I would be reluctant to spend a high pick on him for another smallish centre. I would pick Rossi though, so I am not sure if I am just biased towards this years class, or not

I am high on Drysdale as NHL is still transitioning to these modern defensemen and I think Dry will be better than Fowler

He is 5'11 185. I wouldn't say that is small.

I also prefer Rossi though so lets just hope Rossi is available at 6.

 

[WhatTheDuck]

Have seen Malkin's name mentioned as a comparable for what one can dream about Byfield becoming if everything comes together. I thought it would be fun to try and dig up prospect videos of Malkin just to see how he looked in comparison.

This was all I could find, from Malkin's D+2 season, the year before he came over to join the Pens

 

[Anaheim4ever]

Stutzle vs Rossi if it came down to it? you'd have to go with Stutzle every time.

+1000. They are both playmakers with Stutzle being better at it, Stutzle also being the fastest skater in the top 5 of the draft ? and Stutzle is also a little bit bigger.

 

[ducks8]

Trade Gibson and draft another goalie when this org needs help at every forward position with a replacement potentially in the system?Hahahahahahaha literally makes 0 sense. Ducks are set in net

 

[bsu]

Trade Gibson and draft another goalie when this org needs help at every forward position with a replacement potentially in the system?Hahahahahahaha literally makes 0 sense. Ducks are set in net

Yeah I don't understand the logic at all if the Ducks drafted a goalie with the #6 pick right now I would stop watching that would be straight idiotic in a draft stacked with forwards and one of the best goalies already signed.

 

[Smirnov2Chistov]

Trade Gibson and draft another goalie when this org needs help at every forward position with a replacement potentially in the system?Hahahahahahaha literally makes 0 sense. Ducks are set in net

hahahaha yeah man you realize that Gibson has the most trade value over a majority of players and would bring in help in any area that we would need. Askarov (again) has high potential in this draft.

Yeah I don't understand the logic at all if the Ducks drafted a goalie with the #6 pick right now I would stop watching that would be straight idiotic in a draft stacked with forwards and one of the best goalies already signed.

you wouldn’t put Askarov in the net right away, you would let him develop for a year or two and then let him take the reigns. If this team wants to do a proper rebuild, do it that way. But again, like I stated above, they wouldn’t draft him (although I would love the play if they did)

 

[Static]

Why keep any NHL talent at all when we can move them for players who may become NHLers later.

I don't even think I'm comfortable moving rakell at this point.

 

[bsu]

Why keep any NHL talent at all when we can move them for players who may become NHLers later.

I don't even think I'm comfortable moving rakell at this point.

Trade Gibson to draft a goalie that may not even be a NHLer. Trade everyone with value that way we can raise all our prospects in a loser environment and end up like the Oilers but with no McDavid. Sounds promising.

 

[Sean Garrity]

IF the argument was trade Gibson because Dostal is tearing it up then you at least have a sliver of credibility, but either way doesn’t make much sense.

 

[Static]

Think I'd like brisson at 27 if he lasts. Drysdale/Brisson.

 

[MCB]

Stick with Gibson who is proven in net, we still have other goalie prospects who aren't half bad. Use the 6oa to take best available. Personally I want to see us take a forward that can lead their own line (eventually). I feel like if we do that we can fix the rhd hole in fa when we are ready to compete.

 

[Trojans86]

I'd love to try to trade up to get Sanderson

 

[dracom]

I'd love to try to trade up to get Sanderson

So give up assets to get a guy who most definitely isn’t going in the top 5, and who also doesn’t solve any pressing need and most certainly isn’t going to be the BPA...terrible idea in every aspect lol

 

[Boo Boo]

So give up assets to get a guy who most definitely isn’t going in the top 5, and who also doesn’t solve any pressing need and most certainly isn’t going to be the BPA...terrible idea in every aspect lol

nothing wrong with hearing people out. They could have meant trade up from our later pick to 10ish if sanderson is available there

 

[rlstine]

I've heard people who know way more about hockey than I do casually mention before that LW is generally considered the weakest position. And then I think I was reading some article that mentioned the Hart has only been won by a LW 7 times. The Conn Smythe has only been won by a LW twice, and one of those times was Ovechkin two years ago.

I'm going to try to look into this more quantitatively to see if there's any merit to it. Obviously I'm not saying you should never draft a LW (I think Lafreniere and Stutzle will be just fine), but I do kind of question how much value a really good LW brings compared to a C or D (for some reason I always come back to the 2000's Rick Nash Blue Jackets and Kovalchuk Thrashers). Even the great LWs in the game today (Marchand, Ovechkin) didn't really start to be competitive in the playoffs until their teams rounded out with better centers and defensemen.

So I ran the numbers on this and there might be a little truth to it. I took every skater from the 2002 to 2014 drafts and compared their value to the "expected value" of their draft position.

Expected value is a bit hard to explain, but essentially if you normalize the value of every draft class, the #1 overall pick is worth 7% of that total value, and then value drops with 1/(x^0.693) where x is draft position.

If a player performed significantly better (>1%) than their "expected value", I considered them a "steal". Out of 2617 skaters drafted from 2002-2014, there were exactly 200 "steals".

Of these 200, 32 were LW, 53 were C, 35 were RW, and 80 were D.

If you divide those numbers by the total number drafted at each position, the percentage chance of each position to be a "steal" is:

LW: 6.8%
C: 7.6%
RW: 7.6%
D: 8.1%

So you're most likely to get value out of your draft picks if you draft D and least likely to get value if you draft LW, but the difference is close enough that you shouldn't pass on a forward you like just because the numbers are slightly more favorable for D.

If anyone has a variable they'd like me to look into, let me know. I was going to look at height, weight, league, points, etc. and see if any correlate with extra value.

 

[ADHB]

So give up assets to get a guy who most definitely isn’t going in the top 5, and who also doesn’t solve any pressing need and most certainly isn’t going to be the BPA...terrible idea in every aspect lol

Almost certainly he wasn't talking about trading up from 6 to get Sanderson.

Guessing he will go somewhere in the 8-12 ish range. Might be a little too pricey, but if he somehow is still on the board at Toronto's pick, that would be something worth looking into.

 

[WhatTheDuck]

 

[ducks8]

hahahaha yeah man you realize that Gibson has the most trade value over a majority of players and would bring in help in any area that we would need. Askarov (again) has high potential in this draft.




you wouldn’t put Askarov in the net right away, you would let him develop for a year or two and then let him take the reigns. If this team wants to do a proper rebuild, do it that way. But again, like I stated above, they wouldn’t draft him (although I would love the play if they did)

Once again, why would you trade from a position of strength when you have much more massive holes to fill? Trading Gibson makes zero since when this team has bigger holes to fill. Like, I don't know, potential first line players

And no, just because he has potential doesn't mean he's going to pan out. There's plenty of examples of it not panning out