Toggle sidebar

NHL Entry Draft 2022 NHL Draft Thread - Part 2

Status
Not open for further replies.
BondraTime said:
Jiricek is currently playing against men and looking unbelievable, and has fantastic hockey sense.

Cowen had rocks in his head
Click to expand...

Good to know, throught Jiricek was still injured. cowen also had rocks on his skates
 
BondraTime said:
There is nothing wrong with his game thats making me not be high on him. He's a solid prospect that you see taken in the mid/late 1st every year.

Even just looking at this tournament, excluding all the guys who weren't there, I'm not sure how we would think McGroaty was a better option than Nazar, Lekkerimaki, Kemell, Ohgren or Gauthier, all of whom looked just as good if not better. Then you have guys like Pickering, Ostlund, Snuggerud (who I also wouldn't be looking at for 7), Chesley, Howard, Kulich etc who all had good tournaments. These guys all had as good/better tournaments, most/all will not be making large jumps.

This was probably the weakest U-18 tournament I have seen in ages, which is to be expected eliminating a top team and a whole league of the CHL from competing.

I expect him to be ranked in the late teens, he'll be a solid pickup for a team in that range. The Sens have a whole group of prospects available to them at 6-10 who project to be better players.

If anyone's stock should rise for the Sens, it should be Lekkerimai and Kemell, who were much better than Mcgroaty, were/are ranked much higher than him, and have been top end picks all season long. 1 of those guys at minimum will be available at 7th (or one of the top 5), and would be very hard to pass for a guy like Mcgroaty, it would not make much sense.

There are at least 10/12 guys after, the obvious top 5 guys we should want, I'd be looking towards before getting to Mcgroaty. If that's the route the Sens take, I'll live with it, but it will be another questionable at best pick.

Take the best player available high in the first, there is no way I could be convinced Mcgroaty is the best player available, not even close. Though I'd have said the same thing about Boucher, so who knows with the Sens, hopefully they've learned from that mistake

Drafting for style of play in the high first is a very big mistake
Click to expand...
Ok but what I am unclear of is whether this kind of opinion is specifically applicable to the traits of Rutger McGroarty or a more general profile of a certain type of player. I am uncertain of whether a certain player profile is just undervalued on here and whether that can lead to an inaccurate devaluation of players who fit that profile type. For example when the Sens drafted Brady Tkachuk, the general consensus on here was that he was picked way too high and there was quite a bit of pessimism of what his projected upside would be. Since being drafted Tkachuk has demonstrated his worthiness at being drafted so high and would even be in serious consideration for 1st overall in a hypothetical re-draft. That is an example where a certain player profile lead to a devaluation of the player and an inaccurate assessment of their projected upside. If the Senators would have picked a player more aligned with the general consensus on here they would have taken an inferior player.

What I don't know is what people on here learned from that draft. I find it unclear as to whether they have learned some valuable insights about how to properly evaluate players with a profile like Tkachuk or whether they are repeating the same process of devaluation based on a player profile. As a consequence I am finding it difficult to separate accurate assessments of McGroarty's projected upside with the general pattern of devaluation of players who fits that profile type.

I think this is a pretty important topic given the kinds of discussions that have occurred here. We have seen arguments that a certain player profile can be overvalued and lead to a poor drafting decision. But we also have evidence of almost the exact same player profile being undervalued around here and the consequence of it would have lead to a poor drafting decision. It seems to me that we need further analysis of that player profile type. That we need to clearly differentiate the conditions under which that specific player profile can be overvalued and undervalued. Otherwise we can't make very accurate assessments of such players. Not only will we be unable to know whether any prospect who meets that player profile should be legitimately considered at any given pick, we also won't be able to know whether the opinions on such a player are an accurate assessment of their abilities and upside, or an overvaluation or undervaluation based on being a prospect who meets that player profile.
 
RAFI BOMB said:
Ok but what I am unclear of is whether this kind of opinion is specifically applicable to the traits of Rutger McGroarty or a more general profile of a certain type of player. I am uncertain of whether a certain player profile is just undervalued on here and whether that can lead to an inaccurate devaluation of players who fit that profile type. For example when the Sens drafted Brady Tkachuk, the general consensus on here was that he was picked way too high and there was quite a bit of pessimism of what his projected upside would be. Since being drafted Tkachuk has demonstrated his worthiness at being drafted so high and would even be in serious consideration for 1st overall in a hypothetical re-draft. That is an example where a certain player profile lead to a devaluation of the player and an inaccurate assessment of their projected upside. If the Senators would have picked a player more aligned with the general consensus on here they would have taken an inferior player.

What I don't know is what people on here learned from that draft. I find it unclear as to whether they have learned some valuable insights about how to properly evaluate players with a profile like Tkachuk or whether they are repeating the same process of devaluation based on a player profile. As a consequence I am finding it difficult to separate accurate assessments of McGroarty's projected upside with the general pattern of devaluation of players who fits that profile type.

I think this is a pretty important topic given the kinds of discussions that have occurred here. We have seen arguments that a certain player profile can be overvalued and lead to a poor drafting decision. But we also have evidence of almost the exact same player profile being undervalued around here and the consequence of it would have lead to a poor drafting decision. It seems to me that we need further analysis of that player profile type. That we need to clearly differentiate the conditions under which that specific player profile can be overvalued and undervalued. Otherwise we can't make very accurate assessments of such players. Not only will we be unable to know whether any prospect who meets that player profile should be legitimately considered at any given pick, we also won't be able to know whether the opinions on such a player are an accurate assessment of their abilities and upside, or an overvaluation or undervaluation based on being a prospect who meets that player profile.
Click to expand...
Not really sure what to tell you, definitely not sure how that line of thinking works with regards to the draft

If McGroaty was ranked 3rd at the draft like Brady I’d agree, but he’s a late 1st type prospect.
 
Sens of Anarchy said:
Hugo Havelid .. wins the gold, wins MVP today, wins top goalie. He's eligible for the 2022 draft.. On the small side for goalies these days.
Post automatically merged:


I'd suspect there's a few that will be on their radar for sure.. How they rank them is another question.
Click to expand...
That top line was prolific for Sweden especially in the final game against USA.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sens of Anarchy
BondraTime said:
Not really sure what to tell you, definitely not sure how that line of thinking works with regards to the draft

If McGroaty was ranked 3rd at the draft like Brady I’d agree, but he’s a late 1st type prospect.
Click to expand...
I'm looking for a more detailed analysis of players who meet that specific player profile to more accurately categorize and appropriately order them in the rankings. This could be done in a much more complex way by breaking it down by round and sections within each round but for the purpose of this discussion we can go with something simpler. Brady Tkachuk has a specific player profile and he was worthy of a top five pick, other prospects who have a very similar profile have proven to not be worthy of such as high pick. How do we break down prospects that fit that profile into the Tkachuk types that are worthy of a top 5/top 10 pick and those prospects who fit a very similar profile who are not worthy of a top 5/top 10 pick?

It is about making sure we don't undervalue the prospects that should be in the first classification and don't overvalue the prospects who should be in the second classification. Clearly public rankings will play a role here but there also needs to be something more specific about their attributes, skills and abilities in order to make accurate projections on whether they could be a Tkachuk type or not. I guess I am looking for an explanation other than just looking at the rankings to differentiate between when a prospect who fits that player profile has similar upside to the impact and production of Tkachuk and when they have inferior upside.
 
I think you’re too hung up on trying to find the next Brady and are overthinking things a bit too much, it’s thinking like this that caused Ottawa to draft Tyler Boucher.

Ottawa should avoid taking McGroatry at #7/8/9, simply put there are better, more skilled players available and McGroatry will likely still he around in the late teens, early twenties. That’s where Ottawa should trade up from their early second and snag him if they like him that much.

I think it would be a mistake to take him in the top 10.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Deku, Cosmix, Hale The Villain and 2 others
GermanSpitfire said:
I think you’re too hung up on trying to find the next Brady and are overthinking things a bit too much, it’s thinking like this that caused Ottawa to draft Tyler Boucher.

Ottawa should avoid taking McGroatry at #7/8/9, simply put there are better, more skilled players available and McGroatry will likely still he around in the late teens, early twenties. That’s where Ottawa should trade up from their early second and snag him if they like him that much.

I think it would be a mistake to take him in the top 10.
Click to expand...

I hope I'm wrong but unless we win the lottery I think we're going to pick this cat. Feels like exactly our kind of pick in this range.

I always appreciate all the work that folks like @RAFI BOMB and @BondraTime put into discussing prospects in this thread (there are many others as well). It gives more casual draft viewers like myself a lot of great insight into the prospects that could end up on the team moving forward.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CuomosMoustache, RAFI BOMB and Loach
Be nice to get him at 7 but he's very likely gone.
This is his 2nd goal in the past 2 games playing with the Men's team. Very mobile, Athletic.. Strong, Good size, Reads the play well. Likes to hit. Can really jump in offensively.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Cosmix
My top 10 at the moment.

1. Wright
--------------------
2. Slafkovsky
3. Cooley
4. Nemec
5. Jiricek
---------------------------
6. Kemell
7. Lekkerimaki
8. Savoie
------------------------------
9. Yurov
10. Gauthier

I like my top 8 .. the order can change in those tiers somewhat .. Wright is #1 imo ..

9 , 10, 11, 12, 13 can change around quite a bit.
my HMs
Nazar, Lambert, Ostlund, Snuggerud

Geekie is probably in there too but I just haven't liked a lot of what I've seen from him
 
  • Like
Reactions: SquidNasty, DrEasy, Cosmix and 5 others
Sens of Anarchy said:
My top 10 at the moment.

1. Wright
--------------------
2. Slafkovsky
3. Cooley
4. Nemec
5. Jiricek
---------------------------
6. Kemell
7. Lekkerimaki
8. Savoie
------------------------------
9. Yurov
10. Gauthier

I like my top 8 .. the order can change in those tiers somewhat .. Wright is #1 imo ..

9 , 10, 11, 12, 13 can change around quite a bit.
my HMs
Nazar, Lambert, Ostlund, Snuggerud

Geekie is probably in there too but I just haven't liked a lot of what I've seen from him
Click to expand...
I don’t like Geekie in the top 15. Just screams bottom 6 to me. I was really impressed by Howard in the U18s even though I missed the Canada game where he scored 4. He seems very poised with the puck. I think we are taking Gauthier or Snuggerud unless one of your top 5 falls or we get 1/2OA.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DJB
RAFI BOMB said:
I'm looking for a more detailed analysis of players who meet that specific player profile to more accurately categorize and appropriately order them in the rankings. This could be done in a much more complex way by breaking it down by round and sections within each round but for the purpose of this discussion we can go with something simpler. Brady Tkachuk has a specific player profile and he was worthy of a top five pick, other prospects who have a very similar profile have proven to not be worthy of such as high pick. How do we break down prospects that fit that profile into the Tkachuk types that are worthy of a top 5/top 10 pick and those prospects who fit a very similar profile who are not worthy of a top 5/top 10 pick?

It is about making sure we don't undervalue the prospects that should be in the first classification and don't overvalue the prospects who should be in the second classification. Clearly public rankings will play a role here but there also needs to be something more specific about their attributes, skills and abilities in order to make accurate projections on whether they could be a Tkachuk type or not. I guess I am looking for an explanation other than just looking at the rankings to differentiate between when a prospect who fits that player profile has similar upside to the impact and production of Tkachuk and when they have inferior upside.
Click to expand...
I'm not sure there are answers to these questions to provide a definitive statement.

I can say that Brady was wrecking shop from the time I stayed seeing him and has carried that over. Haven't seen a player with his combination since (or prior really). He is a very unique player.

Last year was weird due to Covid but the standard tests usually separate players. Need some speed and a good IQ then if you have a plus shot/agility/physical play/passing you start to move up the rankings.

How you adjust as you move up levels also has an impact.

Feels like you may be tormenting yourself in searching for the unattainable.
 
  • Like
Reactions: GermanSpitfire and BondraTime
I'm mentally preparing for us to take Cutter Gauthier as long as we don't win a lottery pick. Fits our size and program "requirements" for a high pick. Has a ridiculous shot and nose for the net. Him and Stutzle on line 2 would be ridiculously good.
 
Sens of Anarchy said:
My top 10 at the moment.

1. Wright
--------------------
2. Slafkovsky
3. Cooley
4. Nemec
5. Jiricek
---------------------------
6. Kemell
7. Lekkerimaki
8. Savoie
------------------------------
9. Yurov
10. Gauthier

I like my top 8 .. the order can change in those tiers somewhat .. Wright is #1 imo ..

9 , 10, 11, 12, 13 can change around quite a bit.
my HMs
Nazar, Lambert, Ostlund, Snuggerud

Geekie is probably in there too but I just haven't liked a lot of what I've seen from him
Click to expand...

Looks like a decent list and in proper order. I sue hope we get one of the top 5 in this list with our pick, wherever it may be. Getting one of the 6-8 listed would be a bit of a letdown for me given the poor performance of the team over the last few years.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DrEasy
OD99 said:
I'm not sure there are answers to these questions to provide a definitive statement.

I can say that Brady was wrecking shop from the time I stayed seeing him and has carried that over. Haven't seen a player with his combination since (or prior really). He is a very unique player.

Last year was weird due to Covid but the standard tests usually separate players. Need some speed and a good IQ then if you have a plus shot/agility/physical play/passing you start to move up the rankings.

How you adjust as you move up levels also has an impact.

Feels like you may be tormenting yourself in searching for the unattainable.
Click to expand...

It's like trying to pick stocks that will have the highest growth in value each year. There are factors at work which are difficult to predict.
 
  • Like
Reactions: OD99
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Top Bottom