Toggle sidebar

Prospect Info: 2023 NHL Draft - Part 2 (Who Do You Want To Draft At #2)

  • Work is still on-going to rebuild the site styling and features. Please report any issues you may experience so we can look into it. Click Here for Updates

Who Do You Want To Draft At #2

  • Total voters
    254
  • Poll closed .
Status
Not open for further replies.
Ducks said:
A team would have to be crazy to move 33 + 59 just to move ahead 4 spots to 29. That would be terrible asset management.
Click to expand...
The only way it really makes sense to me... is a player falling that we like (i think in the zegras draft there was a lot of talk of us moving up for krebs)

Personally i trust the scouts in our system enough to use assets to go after a guy the really like, and if its someone high on our board and hes falling but were not confident hell fall to our next pick im all for trading up for him.

Not saying do it for the sake of doing it, but if a guy falls out of top 20 that we have high on our board i dont mind the aggressiveness to get "our guy"
 
The Midnight Burrito said:
Sure. I'm just saying I hope it isn't us. If people find my updates tedious or overly fixated, tomd style, I can stop.
Click to expand...
Wouldn't be opposed if there is something we don't know about that the teams do. Some kind of assurance or contractual out. Good thing we didn't risk trading for Eichel, that guy was damaged and wouldn't listen to Buffalo doctors.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DuckRogers10
Zegs2sendhelp said:
The only way it really makes sense to me... is a player falling that we like (i think in the zegras draft there was a lot of talk of us moving up for krebs)

Personally i trust the scouts in our system enough to use assets to go after a guy the really like, and if its someone high on our board and hes falling but were not confident hell fall to our next pick im all for trading up for him.

Not saying do it for the sake of doing it, but if a guy falls out of top 20 that we have high on our board i dont mind the aggressiveness to get "our guy"
Click to expand...
Was the last time we moved "up" Hinds? (Although, I think that was a pick a year later in the same round). When Ducks make a move for a pick, I feel good about it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Zegs2sendhelp
lwvs84 said:
Was the last time we moved "up" Hinds? (Although, I think that was a pick a year later in the same round). When Ducks make a move for a pick, I feel good about it.
Click to expand...
I think there was a rumor we tried to move up for krebs at the zegras draft, but then Vegas took him.

But idk if it counts as moving up( time I suppose), to get hinds
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ducks DVM and lwvs84
Zegs2sendhelp said:
I think there was a rumor we tried to move up for krebs at the zegras draft, but then Vegas took him.

But idk if it counts as moving up( time I suppose), to get hinds
Click to expand...
lwvs84 said:
Was the last time we moved "up" Hinds? (Although, I think that was a pick a year later in the same round). When Ducks make a move for a pick, I feel good about it.
Click to expand...

In the 2019 draft, we had a contingent deal in place with Dallas' 18th overall pick for the 29th and 39th picks. If the player we wanted was there, Krebs, then the deal would go through. Unfortunately, Vegas drafted Krebs at 17th and the deal was off.

With Hinds, we traded our 2022 third round pick to Montreal for their third round pick, 76th overall. My theory on this is that with our own third round pick, the 66th overall, we were set on drafting Hinds that early in the draft. Then high scoring, RW Pastujov fell like a rock in the draft like Henry Thrun from a first round projection to the fourth round in the 2021 draft because both have slow skating issues. We used the 66th pick on Pastujov instead of Hinds. But our scouts loved Hinds too much that they thought he wouldn't last until the next round at pick 98. Hence, a trade was made.

The last time we traded back into a round for a defenseman using a future pick was back in 2011. Anaheim traded a 2012 sixth round pick to Toronto and selected D Manson at 160th overall.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ducks DVM, Zegs2sendhelp and lwvs84
Zegs2sendhelp said:
The only way it really makes sense to me... is a player falling that we like (i think in the zegras draft there was a lot of talk of us moving up for krebs)

Personally i trust the scouts in our system enough to use assets to go after a guy the really like, and if its someone high on our board and hes falling but were not confident hell fall to our next pick im all for trading up for him.

Not saying do it for the sake of doing it, but if a guy falls out of top 20 that we have high on our board i dont mind the aggressiveness to get "our guy"
Click to expand...

Yeah for me it's all about the specific prospect you are targetting and a simple matter of whether you believe they are worth the price. There are some statistical attempts at assigning value to each pick but generally speaking it's still a case by case decision, because you are making the decision not based on what number you'd be selecting, but rather on how you have the particular target ranked and rated.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Dr Johnny Fever
Hockey Duckie said:
In the 2019 draft, we had a contingent deal in place with Dallas' 18th overall pick for the 29th and 39th picks. If the player we wanted was there, Krebs, then the deal would go through. Unfortunately, Vegas drafted Krebs at 17th and the deal was off.

With Hinds, we traded our 2022 third round pick to Montreal for their third round pick, 76th overall. My theory on this is that with our own third round pick, the 66th overall, we were set on drafting Hinds that early in the draft. Then high scoring, RW Pastujov fell like a rock in the draft like Henry Thrun from a first round projection to the fourth round in the 2021 draft because both have slow skating issues. We used the 66th pick on Pastujov instead of Hinds. But our scouts loved Hinds too much that they thought he wouldn't last until the next round at pick 98. Hence, a trade was made.

The last time we traded back into a round for a defenseman using a future pick was back in 2011. Anaheim traded a 2012 sixth round pick to Toronto and selected D Manson at 160th overall.
Click to expand...

Lacombes development is starting to make me relieved that the trade up for krebs didn’t come to fruition
 
  • Like
Reactions: Kalv
Boo Boo said:
Lacombes development is starting to make me relieved that the trade up for krebs didn’t come to fruition
Click to expand...

I really do like how LaCombe's developed thus far. He really did overcome that WJC-20 game against Russia. I thought he got rocked mentally, but his game took off after that tournament, both offensively and defensively. Blocking shots is one metric to where it shows LaCombe's dedication to being better defensively shows up and he showed that in just 2 games with the Ducks at the end of the season. We took a big swing with LaCombe and knew he was always going to be a long project because he's a high school product.

Talking about long term project, Tracey, the 29th pick in that would be trade, is still developing. Tracey's first year in the WHL was his D+0 season, where he won WHL rookie of the year with most rookie goals, assists, and points. He was held back from joining the WHL because he wasn't physically ready yet. When COVID hit and the WHL shutdown, Tracey looked overwhelmed in the AHL. The following year, he showed he can produce and produce at a high clip. Last year Tracey stagnated, but the whole team sucked.

Next year will be good for both prospects. LaCombe might start as a top-4D on the NHL club. Tracey will be getting a lot of talent help on the roster and we get a new coach who's like Eakins 5.0.
 
What do we think the minimum height will be of our draft picks this year. Do you think we'll draft anyone that isn't 6'+? Our shortest guy last year was 6' 2".
 
91Fedorov said:
What do we think the minimum height will be of our draft picks this year. Do you think we'll draft anyone that isn't 6'+? Our shortest guy last year was 6' 2".
Click to expand...
6'3... and we move anyone that isnt 6'3 on the roster out.

Screw those small inferior players

I also wonder if other forums spend as much time talking about height as we do here
 
Zegs2sendhelp said:
6'3... and we move anyone that isnt 6'3 on the roster out.

Screw those small inferior players

I also wonder if other forums spend as much time talking about height as we do here
Click to expand...
Probably not but I see on a SJ board they talk about GM Mike Grier drafting mostly 6'2+ guys.
In the short term i think both teams just wanting to add more size to mix in with soft/undersized skill guys.
Ducks had Zegras/Drysdale/Zellweger/Terry when Verbeek tookover and Grier inherited a SJ team who's best prospects is under 6'0 in Eklund and Bordeleau.
 
Zegs2sendhelp said:
6'3... and we move anyone that isnt 6'3 on the roster out.

Screw those small inferior players

I also wonder if other forums spend as much time talking about height as we do here
Click to expand...
I don't care how tall Ducks draft picks are, just so they can play. I've seen some tall guys that are horrible, and some short guys that are great. This isn't basketball.
 
Have this strange feeling we are going to select Carlsson, based on how the interviews will go. I will be fine with that, if that’s the case.
 
Leonardo87 said:
Have this strange feeling we are going to select Carlsson, based on how the interviews will go. I will be fine with that, if that’s the case.
Click to expand...
I kind of expect it, that extra 1 inch is gonna carry a lot of weight with Verbeek.
Columbus is gonna get the better player in Fantilli.
When it happens, I hope they don't rush him because keeping him in AHL or SHL would allow him to work on his skating, 2way play and shot since he is a project type prospect.
 
Fantilli will interview better than Carlsson based on Fantilli having loads of mentoring, leadership ability and his existing interviews and that Carlsson has a stutter.
 
  • Like
Reactions: robbieboy3686
Leonardo87 said:
Have this strange feeling we are going to select Carlsson, based on how the interviews will go. I will be fine with that, if that’s the case.
Click to expand...

Rasp said:
Fantilli will interview better than Carlsson based on Fantilli having loads of mentoring, leadership ability and his existing interviews and that Carlsson has a stutter.
Click to expand...
Ya if there’s one area where Fantilli has a clear edge on Carlsson, it’s probably in speaking. Definitely have sympathy for Carlsson, though. I used to have speech issues when I was a kid and I can’t imagine having to go through critical interviews with something that.
 
  • Like
Reactions: lwvs84
Anaheim4ever said:
I kind of expect it, that extra 1 inch is gonna carry a lot of weight with Verbeek.
Columbus is gonna get the better player in Fantilli.
When it happens, I hope they don't rush him because keeping him in AHL or SHL would allow him to work on his skating, 2way play and shot since he is a project type prospect.
Click to expand...
After drafting everyone 6'2+, Pat went out and gave long-term deals to Strome and Vatrano. Height alone will not be an argument :) Carlsson uses his body well to block off players well but Fantilli plays a "bigger" game
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Top Bottom