2023 Draft Prospect Polls: Happy/Mad with Nate Danielson at #9?

[Frk It]

If you feel like he is not going to go this high or want a poll asking him taking him at #17, please direct all of that feedback to @jaster who asked for this thread.

Nate Danielson
Height: 6'1.5"
Position: Center
Weight: 186 lbs
Shoots: Right

Click to read more...

 

[norrisnick]

Boo @jaster

Big mad at 9.

 

[jaster]

Hey man, I'm just asking questions here!

Seems like Danielson has a little hype train going of late. Early returns in this thread suggest that train should be derailed. I don't follow undrafted prospects as much as ya'll, but the kid seems to have good makeup. What are his weaknesses that should preclude him from going at 9?

 

[Barry Amsterdam]

Very happy. Great 2 way game. Great skater Underrated offensively. Will be a center at the NHL level. If he had some talent to actually play with and he puts up 100 points this year

 

[Holden Caufield]

I’d be Mad.
He is a grenades to avoid this early. Especially in such a deep talented draft, it would be disappointing to take a pleb prospect like Danielson.

Pretty decent at everything, but doesn’t have those offensive skill traits that allow him to dominate at the junior level.

His offensive production in juniors indicates he probably won’t be a scorer or even used on the power play at the next level. He is also one of the older players in the draft.

I’d say he could be an Andrew Copp type upside player. With Sheehan type downside if his offense completely doesn’t translate at all.

While he is a good skater, in the games I watched, he appears to be gliding out there an awful lot.

I wouldn’t even be interested at 17.

 

[Frk It]

Hey man, I'm just asking questions here!

Seems like Danielson has a little hype train going of late. Early returns in this thread suggest that train should be derailed. I don't follow undrafted prospects as much as ya'll, but the kid seems to have good makeup. What are his weaknesses that should preclude him from going at 9?

The point of contention is how much offense does he bring.

I tend to side with the quote from an NHL source I believe newfy posted in that other thread that said he would have produced (a lot possibly) more if he was on a better team and had more support.

Some people will look at his stats and say he has low upside.

I think I stated the year a lot higher on him than most here, and I’m putting a final list together now and I think he stacks up well in this draft class . I think he’s a top 15 player, possibly top 10. I’d be happy to get him at either 9 or 17.

 

[RED WINGS STOMP]

Love it. He has a lot of things the Wings love in a forward and he is a right handed C, which we have to get one this draft.

I trust this org if they believe his offensive potential can be developed. Pair him up with a top line winger and you have something.

 

[norrisnick]

Hey man, I'm just asking questions here!

Seems like Danielson has a little hype train going of late. Early returns in this thread suggest that train should be derailed. I don't follow undrafted prospects as much as ya'll, but the kid seems to have good makeup. What are his weaknesses that should preclude him from going at 9?

Too much Glendening not enough Hudler.

 

[Hen Kolland]

I see a lot of people talking about Danielson as a prototypical 2nd line player in discussions all around the draft. What I will say is, if you told me I’m getting a prototypical second line player who can play center, is decent enough offensively, plays a complete game and has a pro frame, I’m happy with it.

The team doesn’t have enough top 6 forwards, so while this guy isn’t going to overhaul the team entirely, he’s the type of player that we still don’t have enough of.

 

[norrisnick]

I see a lot of people talking about Danielson as a prototypical 2nd line player in discussions all around the draft. What I will say is, if you told me I’m getting a prototypical second line player who can play center, is decent enough offensively, plays a complete game and has a pro frame, I’m happy with it.

The team doesn’t have enough top 6 forwards, so while this guy isn’t going to overhaul the team entirely, he’s the type of player that we still don’t have enough of.

That's his upside.

If you can guarantee an upside of a defensively sound 30/30 or 20/40 guy, by all means yes, draft him. But this is just as easily a 15/15 or 10/20 type of guy that peaks as a 3C or even less.

 

[lilidk]

I think he's third line center, second line wing in NHL. I whoud not draft him at 9, but I will be fine with 17.

 

[Frk It]

That's his upside.

If you can guarantee an upside of a defensively sound 30/30 or 20/40 guy, by all means yes, draft him. But this is just as easily a 15/15 or 10/20 type of guy that peaks as a 3C or even less.

How do you know that is his absolute upside?

How many centers with this type of profile have we seen exceed their perceived upside?

For fans of the team that drafted Dylan Larkin, this kind of black/white absolute thinking is so weird to me.

 

[norrisnick]

How do you know that is his absolute upside?

How many centers with this type of profile have we seen exceed their perceived upside?

For fans of the team that drafted Dylan Larkin, this kind of black/white absolute thinking is so weird to me.

Exactly. You think we're gonna luck out on a 2C projection exceeding expectations, twice? Or rather three times, since we're already banking on that for Kasper.

 

[OgeeOgelthorpe]

If you feel like he is not going to go this high or want a poll asking him taking him at #17, please direct all of that feedback to @jaster who asked for this thread.

Nate Danielson
Height: 6'1.5"
Position: Center
Weight: 186 lbs
Shoots: Right

Henkka's lack of emotion masking true happiness.

Here's the NHL draft class podcast where they interview Bedard. In it, Bedard was asked who were some of the best defensive players he played against and mentioned how tough Danielson is to play against and praised him for his speed.

 

[Frk It]

Exactly. You think we're gonna luck out on a 2C projection exceeding expectations, twice?

I think the black/white way you look at upside is significantly flawed and very arbitrary.

A lot of the players you think have better upside than Danielson have pretty significant flaws.

Danielson has very few flaws.

There is a wide range of outcomes for all these players and people should temper their expectations considering we are drafting at 9 and not top 3 or top 5.

 

[Henkka]

Mad, we could get him most probably at 17th overall.

 

[norrisnick]

I think the black/white way you look at upside is significantly flawed and very arbitrary.

A lot of the players you think have better upside than Danielson have pretty significant flaws.

Danielson has very few flaws.

There is a wide range of outcomes for all these players and people should temper their expectations considering we are drafting at 9 and not top 3 or top 5.

Flaws are a good thing. Those are things you can improve to make yourself better. If you don't have any flaws, how is Danielson going to dramatically improve?

Arbitrary could well be my middle name. It's actually Andrew, but both A's.

 

[Barry Amsterdam]

Mad, we could get him most probably at 17th overall.

hell be gone

 

[jaster]

Flaws are a good thing. Those are things you can improve to make yourself better. If you don't have any flaws, how is Danielson going to dramatically improve?

That's some quality spin right there, nick, I'll hand it to you.

 

[Frk It]

Flaws are a good thing. Those are things you can improve to make yourself better. If you don't have any flaws, how is Danielson going to dramatically improve?

Flaws are a good thing? Ok, I’m done here.

 

[OgeeOgelthorpe]

Hey man, I'm just asking questions here!

Seems like Danielson has a little hype train going of late. Early returns in this thread suggest that train should be derailed. I don't follow undrafted prospects as much as ya'll, but the kid seems to have good makeup. What are his weaknesses that should preclude him from going at 9?

One of the fastest skaters in the draft, very good wrist shot (top 10 in the draft in both, in my opinion) and one of the better defensive forwards in the draft. (somewhere between 5 and 10 here)
Great puck protection skills, great motor (top 5 in both, IMO)
Sometimes tries to do too much on his own and skates into coverage. Will try to beat 3 people at once instead of 2 and then making a pass, but I think experience will clean that out of his game.
Underrated offense and it's really hard to tell how good it would have been because his team was absolute crap this year. On a team like Seattle Thunderbirds I believe he'd have been a 90+ point player.

I think he's got low-end 1st line/high-end 2nd line upside like a Dylan Cozens. They are very similar as prospects. The downside is a 3rd line 30-40 point guy that can fill in on the 2nd line for the short term.

 

[norrisnick]

That's some quality spin right there, nick, I'll hand it to you.

I'll be here all season. Don't forget to belittle the Mods.

 

[SantosHalper]

Very happy, 2nd favourite after Dvorsky.

 

[norrisnick]

Flaws are a good thing? Ok, I’m done here.

It's stated a tad flippantly, but it makes total sense.

Say you've got a kid 6'2" 190lb great skater, hard worker, very physically fit and he's putting up 30G 40A 70P
Now you've got another kid 6'2" 170lb eh skater, a bit lax on defense, pretty soft physically and he's putting up 30G 40A 70P

Who can you work with and improve more? Is there a higher chance of complete failure? Absolutely. But if there are obvious factors that a coaching staff can work on to improve a player, the gains will be much bigger than a guy that's already playing a pro game with a pro body.

It shouldn't be a matter of who is the best 17-18 year-old playing against juniors. It's a matter of who has the most runway/best odds to become a better player in his 20s against pros. Some times you might want to pick a safer player. But we have safe coming out of the woodwork. Danielson has a much smaller chance of becoming a 1st line NHLer than say Matthew Wood, even though he has a much higher chance of becoming an NHLer at all.

 

[OgeeOgelthorpe]

On the Cozens comparison, here we go. Same league. 4 years apart.





Side by side they look very similar. I'd give Danielson the edge in speed though.

It's stated a tad flippantly, but it makes total sense.

Say you've got a kid 6'2" 190lb great skater, hard worker, very physically fit and he's putting up 30G 40A 70P
Now you've got another kid 6'2" 170lb eh skater, a bit lax on defense, pretty soft physically and he's putting up 30G 40A 70P

Who can you work with and improve more? Is there a higher chance of complete failure? Absolutely. But if there are obvious factors that a coaching staff can work on to improve a player, the gains will be much bigger than a guy that's already playing a pro game with a pro body.

Maybe that soft physically player, lax on defense guy is just f***ing lazy and has attitude problems?