NHL Entry Draft 2022 NHL Draft Thread - Part 2

[ReginKarlssonLehner]

He’s who I want assuming Jiricek is off the board.

Which he won’t be. Because we’re drafting him.

Nemec/Jiri would be a perfect(since the top 3 are almost for sure out of reach).

The reason I say that is because I truly believe our greatest strength will come from our defense--if we become a perennial contender. We will need to ensure we have remarkable D to handle the powerhouses in our division/conference.

Chabot and Sanderson are a brilliant start. Zub, even if short term, will be excellent there, and we need one more notable piece to really pop. I feel Thomson/JBD will be 4th D, we need a replacement for Zub if he doesn't stay.

 

[PlayOn]

I think the issue isn't that the team doesn't have good prospects or hasn't had good years draft wise. Its that we've seen already a two year chunk where we missed on every pick (2013-2014) and how this came back to bite us years later. At the time people said have faith when the picks looked rough on the surface because of past success but it didn't work out.

The truth is if we looked at the last 10 years of 1st rounders we have:
Boucher
Stutzle (A)
Sanderson (A)
Greig (A)
Thomson (C)
Tkachuk (A)
Jacob Bernard-Docker (C)
Bowers (F)
Brown (F)
Chabot (A)
White (C)
Lazar (F)
Ceci (C)
Zibanejad (A)
Noesen (F)
Puempel (F)

It's great that we've had some good years but our record does have blemishes too and almost every time we've had a bad 1st round pick it has been picking someone 'toolsy' above highly talented offensive players. It is our blind spot. Only time it was a swing was Logan Brown and he was an injury machine.

The other thing - if you're gonna pick a big forceful power winger then pick one who actually stays healthy and is physically intimidating...

We have a good record outside of the 1st round generally. But I don't understand why the best scouted round (1st) we don't use some analytics etc... to help make sure we're not making mistakes or missing Gems.

I think our drafting got noticeably better once Mann took over in 2017. Bowers was a bad pick and we don’t need to get into Boucher but hard to complain about the other six picks. Every single one looks like good to great value for where they were drafted as of now, although it’s still too early to know on some.

 

[Burrowsaurus]

We need a lot to become a perennial playoff team including:
1. Top 4 D (assuming Sanderson becomes one too)
2. Top 6 F
3. Top G

Chabot zub and Sanderson are our top 4 guys. How many teams have 4 good d men. Like true “top 4” guys. Not many.

 

[Agent Zuuuub]

I think our drafting got noticeably better once Mann took over in 2017. Bowers was a bad pick and we don’t need to get into Boucher but hard to complain about the other six picks. Every single one looks like good to great value for where they were drafted as of now, although it’s still too early to know on some.

Stutzle, Sanderson, Tkachuk were easy picks high in the draft.

Which leaves Greig, JBD, Thomson, Bowers, Boucher

Greig is a great prospect but could have had Peterka who is a better prospect, and if not with Greig pick they should have taken him with Jarventie pick.

JBD is good prospect but could have gotten Miller who is way better.

Thomson looking good but a lot of talented players taken near him too.

Bowers and Boucher: yikes


we could have had.

Tkachuk, Sanderson, Stutzle, Peterka, Greig, Miller, Sillinger, Thomson,Tolvanen

 

[PlayOn]

Stutzle, Sanderson, Tkachuk were easy picks high in the draft.

Which leaves Greig, JBD, Thomson, Bowers, Boucher

Greig is a great prospect but could have had Peterka who is a better prospect, and if not with Greig pick they should have taken him with Jarventie pick.

JBD is good prospect but could have gotten Miller who is way better.

Thomson looking good but a lot of talented players taken near him too.

Bowers and Boucher: yikes


we could have had.

Tkachuk, Sanderson, Stutzle, Peterka, Greig, Miller, Sillinger, Thomson,Tolvanen

I’ll give you Stützle as an obvious pick, but not Tkachuk or Sanderson. Lots of teams miss on top 5 picks, and there were other options the Sens could’ve reasonably taken. They deserve full credit for those two.

Assuming JBD pans out, a top four dman at #26 overall is a good pick no matter who we could have had.

You can play the “we could have had” exercise with any team in the league. Not really a fair way to evaluate drafting by critiquing the team for not taking the absolute best possible player available every time, no team in the NHL can do that.

 

[Agent Zuuuub]

I’ll give you Stützle as an obvious pick, but not Tkachuk or Sanderson. Lots of teams miss on top 5 picks, and there were other options the Sens could’ve reasonably taken. They deserve full credit for those two.

Assuming JBD pans out, a top four dman at #26 overall is a good pick no matter who we could have had.

You can play the “we could have had” exercise with any team in the league. Not really a fair way to evaluate drafting by critiquing the team for not taking the absolute best possible player available every time, no team in the NHL can do that.

Sanderson was easy pick at that spot. Too good at too many things. And even if we didn't take him we have what Lundell or Quinn or Drysdale? I wanted Hughes or Dobson in Brady's draft and those would look pretty great as well.

Using top 5 picks as proof of good drafting is weak.

I'm just playing the "we could have had" game with players that were slated to go near the picks. Players that would have raised less eyebrows to take at those spots.

And we would have had a much better prospect pool if they just made those more obvious picks.

 

[Wallet Inspector]

It's great that we've had some good years but our record does have blemishes too and almost every time we've had a bad 1st round pick it has been picking someone 'toolsy' above highly talented offensive players. It is our blind spot. Only time it was a swing was Logan Brown and he was an injury machine.

Bingo.

I really can't emphasis how much I dislike the strategy of aiming for "safe" players with 1st rounders.

It usually results in getting guys who are borderline NHLers and even if they reach their "ceiling" of a good middle 6 player, it's really not that hard to get similar players via trade or free agency.

 

[PlayOn]

Sanderson was easy pick at that spot. Too good at too many things. And even if we didn't take him we have what Lundell or Quinn or Drysdale? I wanted Hughes or Dobson in Brady's draft and those would look pretty great as well.

Using top 5 picks as proof of good drafting is weak.

I'm just playing the "we could have had" game with players that were slated to go near the picks. Players that would have raised less eyebrows to take at those spots.

And we would have had a much better prospect pool if they just made those more obvious picks.

Considering Sanderson wasn’t ranked 5th by most, I don’t think you can call it an easy pick. But yeah obviously it’s easier to get good players in the top 5, I don’t think that means you discredit any good picks - they’re all part of a bigger picture.

If Greig is a third liner and Thomson/JBD are third pairing, I will revisit my views of our first round drafting. But if you told me going into the rebuild we’d walk out with three star players, a top six forward and two top 4 dmen with 6 of our 8 picks I would have a very hard time complaining. Right now that looks very possible. We’ll see what Boucher becomes.

 

[aragorn]

If the Sens select Gauthier LW with thier 1st rd pick they could use a 2nd & a 3rd or prospect to move back into the late 1st rd to draft Tristan Luneau RD. He's not Jiricek or Nemec, but he's still a very good RD with some size who could add some offence from the backend. I also like Noah Warren RD & Devin Kaplan RW in the 2nd or 3rd rd with their next two picks.

 

[DJB]

Bingo.

I really can't emphasis how much I dislike the strategy of aiming for "safe" players with 1st rounders.

It usually results in getting guys who are borderline NHLers and even if they reach their "ceiling" of a good middle 6 player, it's really not that hard to get similar players via trade or free agency.

We went for a homerun swing on Brown. It didn't work out either

 

[Ice-Tray]

Boucher wasn’t a safe pick at all. No one they drafted last season was a safe pick. They swung for the fences at each spot.

If Boucher is able to hit the peak they think he can, he’ll be a tremendously valuable player.

Ostapchuk is already starting to shine.

All these picks will need time to blossom.

Sillinger looks good right now no doubt, Boucher can still be just as valuable if he hits his mark.

 

[Wallet Inspector]

We went for a homerun swing on Brown. It didn't work out either

One example(in which injuries played a big part) vs 4 (White,Lazar,Bowers, Boucher).

 

[R2010]

We went for a homerun swing on Brown. It didn't work out either

Yeah I mean I'm in favor of going for more talented players but not swinging for home runs with top picks. End of the 1st I think you need to start looking for talented players who dropped. Robertson is a great example of a guy whose numbers said he should have been middle of the 1st round but had slow feet. Was a much much better pick than Bowers. In fact Bowers looks like one of the worst picks of the 1st two rounds that draft.

I'm more in the thought process that I like sure things in the sense that we should see evidence of producing at a high level in recent history for 1st round picks.

 

[R2010]

Boucher wasn’t a safe pick at all. No one they drafted last season was a safe pick. They swung for the fences at each spot.

If Boucher is able to hit the peak they think he can, he’ll be a tremendously valuable player.

Ostapchuk is already starting to shine.

All these picks will need time to blossom.

Sillinger looks good right now no doubt, Boucher can still be just as valuable if he hits his mark.

I mean he wasn't a good pick either. He's having one of the worst post-draft seasons of a top 10 pick in the last 10 years. He's producing at a level equivalent of a mid-round pick this year. So no he wasn't safe. He was risky and the risk looks really bad right now. We've already lost one year of a productive NHL player.

Sillinger was a far better player at 16 years old in the WHL than 19 year old Boucher was this year in the OHL. Boucher will very likely never be as valuable as Sillinger because he is just less talented, doesn't work any harder and is not really any bigger than Sillinger. I would not be surprised if at 25 years old Sillinger could also beat Boucher in a fight.

This isn't meant to be negative really though. Boucher would have been a good late 1st or 2nd round pick project. We'd probably be disappointed in his season but we'd hope he keeps developing. The problem is we picked it well above a position that he will be able to live up to. He's never going to be Tom Wilson for many reasons but one of them is he's not that big and he's basically fully developed physically.

 

[edguy]

If I remember correctly, even Doirion said we didn't draft Boucher for his skill, we drafted him for his play away from the puck and his (I know people hate this word but still) intangibles. So to me its not surprising he's not putting up the numbers, but I have also not watched him play enough to judge his play away from the puck.

I think everyone in the organization and fan base knew this was gonna be a project, but he has the tools to fill out an awesome 3rd line with Grieg and (probably) Pinto.

 

[Big Muddy]

Chabot zub and Sanderson are our top 4 guys. How many teams have 4 good d men. Like true “top 4” guys. Not many.

That's true. Let's hope we can resign Zub, otherwise we are only half way (2 of 4).

 

[Akrapovince]

That's true. Let's hope we can resign Zub, otherwise we are only half way (2 of 4).

Once you have the staples the rest of the pieces really fall into line.

You can tinker and find a DeMelo for Chabot or the Methot to Karlsson. If Sanderson is what we think he is, Chabot and Sanderson are the type that will be able to cement players in the top four that aren’t typically top four defenders.

Just having Chabot and Sanderson on the ice (if on different pairs) for 45-50 odd minutes of the game will be great.

 

[Big Muddy]

Once you have the staples the rest of the pieces really fall into line.

You can tinker and find a DeMelo for Chabot or the Methot to Karlsson. If Sanderson is what we think he is, Chabot and Sanderson are the type that will be able to cement players in the top four that aren’t typically top four defenders.

Just having Chabot and Sanderson on the ice (if on different pairs) for 45-50 odd minutes of the game will be great.

On your last sentence, yes I agree. But, it seems to me that teams that have been successful in the playoffs lately tend to have a very strong defense. It seems like only a smaller subset of teams actually manage to achieve this. So, imho, it's not nearly as easy as it seems.

 

[Big Muddy]

I mean he wasn't a good pick either. He's having one of the worst post-draft seasons of a top 10 pick in the last 10 years. He's producing at a level equivalent of a mid-round pick this year. So no he wasn't safe. He was risky and the risk looks really bad right now. We've already lost one year of a productive NHL player.

Sillinger was a far better player at 16 years old in the WHL than 19 year old Boucher was this year in the OHL. Boucher will very likely never be as valuable as Sillinger because he is just less talented, doesn't work any harder and is not really any bigger than Sillinger. I would not be surprised if at 25 years old Sillinger could also beat Boucher in a fight.

This isn't meant to be negative really though. Boucher would have been a good late 1st or 2nd round pick project. We'd probably be disappointed in his season but we'd hope he keeps developing. The problem is we picked it well above a position that he will be able to live up to. He's never going to be Tom Wilson for many reasons but one of them is he's not that big and he's basically fully developed physically.

Having these heavy players for the playoffs is great. Sill need enough talent and goal scoring to be able to make it into the playoffs as well you'd think.

 

[Akrapovince]

On your last sentence, yes I agree. But, it seems to me that teams that have been successful in the playoffs lately tend to have a very strong defense. It seems like only a smaller subset of teams actually manage to achieve this. So, imho, it's not nearly as easy as it seems.

I think we have molded our team quite similar to the St. Louis cup winning team.

Scoring by committee up front, with hard to play against, heavy-hitting forwards with skill sprinkled throughout the top nine.

All of this put together by the back-end of
Pietrangelo, Parayko, Bouwmeester & Edmundson.

I agree with you it’s hard to find, but it’s a lot easier to have Pietrangelo & Parayko and look for Edmundson & Bouwmeester than vice versa.

I think we’re looking for our Bouwmeester, because we have our Edmundson in Zub. These players are a lot easier to find in free agency and trades, and I hope we are able to do it.

 

[Big Muddy]

I think we have molded our team quite similar to the St. Louis cup winning team.

Scoring by committee up front, with hard to play against, heavy-hitting forwards with skill sprinkled throughout the top nine.

All of this put together by the back-end of
Pietrangelo, Parayko, Bouwmeester & Edmundson.

I agree with you it’s hard to find, but it’s a lot easier to have Pietrangelo & Parayko and look for Edmundson & Bouwmeester than vice versa.

I think we’re looking for our Bouwmeester, because we have our Edmundson in Zub. These players are a lot easier to find in free agency and trades, and I hope we are able to do it.

Hope so. Not sure who are Parayko equivalent would be. Big, strong 6 ft. 6 inch, 228 lbs. guy, very good defensively with 100 mph slap shot.

Questions remain with ownership and budget, so we'll have to see how it unfolds. One step at a time I suppose. Making the playoffs will be a first step before more grandiose accomplishments occur.

 

[PlayersLtd]

Boucher wasn’t a safe pick at all. No one they drafted last season was a safe pick. They swung for the fences at each spot.

If Boucher is able to hit the peak they think he can, he’ll be a tremendously valuable player.

Ostapchuk is already starting to shine.

All these picks will need time to blossom.

Sillinger looks good right now no doubt, Boucher can still be just as valuable if he hits his mark.

I guess it's to be expected but it is a little bit naive when people judge picks before giving them time to pan out. Some criticism is due of course but not without a very large caveat, that time will ultimately tell. Thomson is a good example. We reached a bit, there was criticism and it accelerated after his wasted season back in Finland and now he is looking like the top 4 D we had hoped with potential even to be a top pairing guy. And Boucher is the obvious current one being written off by so many.

I think that is probably the biggest difference between armchair GM's/ scouts and the actual pros. The latter understand the process and have no need to argue these things until they are blue in the face.

 

[Ice-Tray]

If I remember correctly, even Doirion said we didn't draft Boucher for his skill, we drafted him for his play away from the puck and his (I know people hate this word but still) intangibles. So to me its not surprising he's not putting up the numbers, but I have also not watched him play enough to judge his play away from the puck.

I think everyone in the organization and fan base knew this was gonna be a project, but he has the tools to fill out an awesome 3rd line with Grieg and (probably) Pinto.

He actually said that potential scoring was one of the reasons the took him, said he was a guy who could shoot the puck well and score from a distance or something like that. They also liked his skating.

 

[Ice-Tray]

I mean he wasn't a good pick either. He's having one of the worst post-draft seasons of a top 10 pick in the last 10 years. He's producing at a level equivalent of a mid-round pick this year. So no he wasn't safe. He was risky and the risk looks really bad right now. We've already lost one year of a productive NHL player.

Sillinger was a far better player at 16 years old in the WHL than 19 year old Boucher was this year in the OHL. Boucher will very likely never be as valuable as Sillinger because he is just less talented, doesn't work any harder and is not really any bigger than Sillinger. I would not be surprised if at 25 years old Sillinger could also beat Boucher in a fight.

This isn't meant to be negative really though. Boucher would have been a good late 1st or 2nd round pick project. We'd probably be disappointed in his season but we'd hope he keeps developing. The problem is we picked it well above a position that he will be able to live up to. He's never going to be Tom Wilson for many reasons but one of them is he's not that big and he's basically fully developed physically.

Totally understandable position to take, no arguments from me, though I don’t really agree. If you look at the statistics, what fans expect of a 10oa pick is not what usually comes from 10oa picks; expectations vs reality is skewed.

Looking at Sillinger makes things sting a bit, because many of us wanted him to be picked, but Boucher still has time to become a good NHLer, which is what you realistically hope for from a 10oa. He has his work cut out for him, and he seems to know it.

I’ll back our kid, give him time to develop, and I don’t agree that the 19 year old kid is done physically developing, and see how it all pans out.

Cheers!

 

[dumbdick]

How do people feel about trading down? What would it take for you to drop down into the 12-15 range?