Prospect Info: 2023 Draft Thread (Yotes picking #6 & #12)

[GhostofYotesFan47]

My order of priority

1) Growth mindset (what you called work ethic)
2) Hockey sense
3) Size
4) Skating
5) Motor
6) Puck skills

The trouble is that us arm chair scouts can't evaluate 1) and evaluating 2) isn't easy.
The others are pretty straight forward - I have size at the top of them.

I think Garland succeeded because he had a growth mindset. He learned that he needed to evolve his game to make it to the big leagues, so he did.

I think Dylan Strome disappointed because he didn't have a growth mindset. He knew he had a special combination of skills, size and hockey sense. He found a ton of success at the junior level based on that and he never felt like he needed to grow later in his career.

I like the way you did that.

I’d have my list a bit different.

1. Growth Mindset
2. Hockey Sense
3. Motor
4. Skating
5. Size
6. Puck Skills

I love high motor players even if they're slow, though I do prefer they be at least adequate skaters. I'd also take a smaller stature player with a huge motor and adequate skating to a bigger one with less motor.

It's why Benson is such a high draft pick in my mind, he checks every box but size.

 

[PainForShane]

My best understanding is there are two separate draws for picks #1 and #2.

In your scenario:

- Once #12 (Ottawa) wins the lottery draw for the first pick the #1 team (Anaheim) has won 1st overall. Ottawa can move up at most 10 draft positions, but are not guaranteed the second pick.
- If Arizona or any other team lower than #12 wins the lottery draw for the second pick then Ottawa drops to the third pick.

The only way Ottawa can hold onto that second pick in your scenario is if a team seeded lower than Ottawa (#13-#16) wins the lottery for the second pick.

Apologies for jumping into this particular convo a few days late, but most of this is incorrect -- The second part of the bolded above is incorrect and is the root cause of the mistaken conclusion(s).

From Tankathon:
"The 1st overall pick is awarded by a drawing of ping pong balls. A team can only jump ten spots, so only the top 11 teams are eligible for the 1st pick. If a team in the 12-16 range wins the first drawing, the first pick will be awarded to the worst team. The 12-16 seed team that won the first drawing is also locked into their new position.

A second drawing is held to determine the other lottery winner. Like the first drawing, the second winner can only jump ten spots, but this time it is using the re-seeded order following the first drawing. This second drawing will not affect the team(s) with locked-in positions from the first drawing. If a ten spot jump is to a pick that is already locked-in, this team will receive the next available pick."

***

So what does this mean.

1. If Ottawa wins the first lottery drawing they move up ten spots and are guaranteed the second pick
2. If a team below Ottawa (that is not Buffalo) wins the first lottery drawing, then that team jumps 10 spots and all the teams are re-seeded so Ottawa drops to 13 rather than 12. In this case, if Ottawa wins the second drawing then they jump 10 spots, so they'd pick #3 (0.1% chance)
3. If Buffalo wins the first lottery then Buffalo jumps 10 spots and picks #3. Then the teams are re-seeded so Ottawa falls a spot to 13. In this very weird situation, if Ottawa wins the 2nd drawing they'd ordinarily jump 10 spots to #3, but Buffalo would already be locked into spot 3 so OTT would slide one spot to #4 (0.1% chance)

And also, if any team with a more favorable draft position than Ottawa wins the first drawing, then after the re-seeding OTT would still be at 12, so if they win the second drawing they'd jump 10 spots to pick 2nd overall. That's why Tankathon has OTT at 5.1% to pick second, unless something weird happens (points 2 or 3 above) that 5.1 represents the combined chance for OTT to win either of the two drawings.

***

TLDR, let's just hope Ottawa doesn't win the lottery. Overwhelmingly likely that if they do win a drawing (either the first or second drawing), they'll be picking #2 this draft

 

[che]

What's the worst case scenario? OTT pick moves to '24? How much can our own pick drop?

I need to prepare myself

 

[PainForShane]

What's the worst case scenario? OTT pick moves to '24? How much can our own pick drop?

I need to prepare myself

"Worst" case with OTT pick is OTT wins either of the lottery drawings and then we get their unprotected 2024 first (too early to tell how this will turn out, obvi depends how Sens do next year). Worst case is our own pick drops to 8.

If you're really a doomsday person, it's possible (but unlikely) that both of these things happen

 

[Jakey53]

For me and this is preference but I value character and leadership above all. In this day and age everyone can skate and play with the puck. Give me the guy that makes those around him better and creates culture. With that said I do lean towards playmakers in general. Although these days seems like there’s a lot more shoot first centers so maybe that’s changing for me as well. I would probably say having an elite shot and the ability to create a good one.

Character has to be right up there, with hockey IQ and skating.

 

[Bonsai Tree]

1. Skating. If a player can't skate at NHL speed the rest doesn't really matter, as he will get left behind in transition to either offense or defense. Skating has to be better than NHL average for top 2 lines.
2. Projectable skill set. A player who dipsy-doodles his way through juniors will have a much harder time scoring at the NHL level.
3. Stellar production at every level. Past is prologue.
4. Size. Size may be very important in drafting projected 3rd and 4th line players, but for scoring forwards and scoring D, less so. Skill players overcome lack of size. 5-10 is fine for me on the top 2 lines.

 

[Vinny Boombatz]

1) Brett Hull couldn't skate a lick and is a HOFer
2) Patty Kane dipsy-doodled his way through juniors and dipsy-doodled his way through the pros...hands are hands, they don't go away just because players transition to pro level - what you're interjecting here is hockey IQ - can the player carry good hockey IQ into the pros - to know when to dipsy-doodle and when to play it simple
3) With this we agree...at least it's a leading indicator
4) With this we also agree...anything in the top 6, size doesn't matter as long as the player can play adequate defense and isn't a liability

 

[Arizonatah Coyetis]

Character has to be right up there, with hockey IQ and skating.

What's your order of preference/importance for the three, Jakey? No criticism, just curious.

 

[Arizonatah Coyetis]

Brett Hull couldn't skate a lick and is a HOFer

That's why hockey sense is at the top of my list. I feel hockey sense can make up for some skating issues and also shortcomings in other areas. It's all about reading the game quickly and getting in the right spots before the guys with lesser hockey IQ have figured it out. That fraction of a second that gives players an edge. Playing smarter, not harder. Don't always need to skate as good as the other guy if you're a step ahead of them or making smart decisions faster.

However, in my mind, the importance of each individual skill is going to fluctuate by how good they are in another area. There is no one size fits all, just a checklist in which importance of the next question is dictated by the results of the one before it.

 

[Vinny Boombatz]

definitely hockey IQ is #1

 

[lanky]

Seeing Sale and Barlow go head to head, I think I like Sale better. He's more of a play driver, more involved.

Barlow has that special something that lets him get the puck behind the goalie.

I'd be a little disappointed with either at 7 OA but really excited with either at 12 OA.

 

[Vinny Boombatz]

I agree...neither should be considered for 6th...oops 8th overall selection.

 

[Bonsai Tree]

1) Brett Hull couldn't skate a lick and is a HOFer
2) Patty Kane dipsy-doodled his way through juniors and dipsy-doodled his way through the pros...hands are hands, they don't go away just because players transition to pro level - what you're interjecting here is hockey IQ - can the player carry good hockey IQ into the pros - to know when to dipsy-doodle and when to play it simple
3) With this we agree...at least it's a leading indicator
4) With this we also agree...anything in the top 6, size doesn't matter as long as the player can play adequate defense and isn't a liability

Different time, different game from when Hull played. Those were the days of clutch and grab. Patrick Kane - he's pretty much a unicorn. Even the best hands players don't do "the Michigan" or 360 spin moves or shoot between their own legs very often in the NHL. There is so little "dipsy-doodle" that such plays make the highlight reels.

 

[Vinny Boombatz]

Different time, different game from when Hull played. Those were the days of clutch and grab. Patrick Kane - he's pretty much a unicorn. Even the best hands players don't do "the Michigan" or 360 spin moves or shoot between their own legs very often in the NHL. There is so little "dipsy-doodle" that such plays make the highlight reels.

I just wanted to say that "shiftyness" i.e. Quickness is more important than speed. Maccelli & Keller are both not fast skaters but they are extremely shifty and are able to navigate the offensive zone without impunity as a result.

Strome was neither a speedster or shifty...the double whammy

 

[Jakey53]

What's your order of preference/importance for the three, Jakey? No criticism, just curious.

That's hard to answer because every player is different, and can contribute differently. For me, it would have to be a point system. I would put character high, hockey IQ, and skating would be my top three, and maybe followed by motor and size. I don't see how you can take a player off a list if he is average in one area. What I'm trying to say is just because a player might have great character, great hockey IQ but is only average at skating is better or worse than a player with above average in all three areas. I would love to see how BA grades his players. It's not an easy job.

 

[Jakey53]

Different time, different game from when Hull played. Those were the days of clutch and grab. Patrick Kane - he's pretty much a unicorn. Even the best hands players don't do "the Michigan" or 360 spin moves or shoot between their own legs very often in the NHL. There is so little "dipsy-doodle" that such plays make the highlight reels.

Maybe stop watching only the Coyote's.

 

[Bonsai Tree]

Maybe stop watching only the Coyote's.

Shirley, you must be smoking.

 

[Half Clapper]

I really hope the Yotes get Matt Wood!

 

[Sinurgy]

If you're really a doomsday person

We just call them "Coyote fans"

 

[lanky]

I really hope the Yotes get Matt Wood!

It would be exciting. The guy has produced as a 17 y.o. freshman like very few ever have.
It would also be nerve racking, wondering if he'll get faster and wondering if his success could carry over.

 

[hbk]

I really hope the Yotes get Matt Wood!

He’s someone i think we have in the mix at 12.

 

[Half Clapper]

It would be exciting. The guy has produced as a 17 y.o. freshman like very few ever have.
It would also be nerve racking, wondering if he'll get faster and wondering if his success could carry over.

He kinda reminds me of Geekie. Boom or bust prospect. I think this is type of player BA and co are looking for. Right handed shot as well, which the team will need in the top six.

Wood - Cooley - Keller
Guenther - Hayton - Maccelli
Moore - Geekie - Crouse
Lipkin - Mcbain - Doan

I think that is a well balanced forward group that can contend if everything pans out.

 

[rt]

I really hope the Yotes get Matt Wood!

I’ve got him 14 or 15 currently. Could move up on my list. I’m a fan. Would be happy at 12th.

 

[Schemp]

Right now all I can think about is winning 1 of the lotteries. Fantilli - Cooley- Hayton - McBain is solid down the middle for years to come!

Bedard can play anywhere in the line up and attract free agents.

 

[Freddy Sjostrom]

Kid is a beast.