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

[McDonald19]

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.

Not exactly the same and it was 20 years ago, but the Ducks traded 36 and 54 for 28.

 

[Anaheim4ever]

Not exactly the same and it was 20 years ago, but the Ducks traded 36 and 54 for 28.

That worked out pretty good too. Same with dropping in 2011 and acquired an extra 2nd.

 

[Zegs2sendhelp]

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.

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"

 

[Deuce22]

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.

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.

 

[Boo Boo]

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.

I read and appreciate them for whatever it’s worth

 

[lwvs84]

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"

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.

 

[Zegs2sendhelp]

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.

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

 

[lwvs84]

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

Yeah, rather than moving up, I should say I feel better when we trade for a pick to select "our" guy.

 

[LePerilsofPerreault]

I want Daniil But and Gracyn Sawchyn

 

[Hockey Duckie]

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

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.

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.

 

[The Midnight Burrito]

I want Daniil But and Gracyn Sawchyn

These names look like someone put their hands on the wrong homekeys in the dark.

 

[WhatTheDuck]

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"

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.

 

[Boo Boo]

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.

Lacombes development is starting to make me relieved that the trade up for krebs didn’t come to fruition

 

[Anaheim4ever]

Lacombes development is starting to make me relieved that the trade up for krebs didn’t come to fruition

+ Krebs isn't that good, he was decent in his first year with Buffalo but then took a step back this past season.

 

[Hockey Duckie]

Lacombes development is starting to make me relieved that the trade up for krebs didn’t come to fruition

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.

 

[91Fedorov]

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".

 

[Zegs2sendhelp]

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".

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

 

[Anaheim4ever]

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

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.

 

[Deuce22]

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

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.

 

[70sSanO]

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.

Yeah. Just ask Brooks Koepka about Aaron Ekblad.

John

 

[Leonardo87]

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.

 

[Anaheim4ever]

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.

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.

 

[Rasp]

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.

 

[All Mighty]

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.

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.

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.

 

[Kalv]

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.

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