Is it really Bobrov/Lapointe?
It seems more like when scouting teams No Drafted David Fischer, but here it would be a novel kind of No Draft, not emanating from the scouts themselves but a top down No Draft approach similar to the Charles Wang school of drafting. While the results were mitigated with the Islanders, maybe this is the time and place where it works.
I'm not sure what happened to David Fischer, but I'm pretty sure that if both Bobrov and Lapointe want Michkov, then Hughes is drafting Michkov.
Except we haven't reached on anyone. Every one of our picks last year was in range of their consensus rankings +/- 5 spots.
Our last real reach was probably Kotkaniemi.
I was mainly talking about the Slaf pick and if we pick Leonard next week as they're the most important picks. I have to give you Slaf though since he was actually the consensus pick.
For Leonard though, there's clearly a separation between the top 5 and the rest, so even if it's just a pick after, it'd still be a reach IMO.
I'd also say that although Mesar was the consensus pick around our pick last year, both Kulich and Lambert were ranked higher and technically should've been the pick before Mesar if we went BPA.
Again, I'm fine with giving them the benefit of the doubt and hope they prove me wrong.
They are passing on Michkov mainly because the risk factor is too high and because there are question marks about his 3 zones play. If a player is offensively minded only and has notable flaws in his game, some scouts will lean toward more complete players even if the upside isnt as high. The goal is to win hockey games, the show comes 2nd.
I understand why they would pass on Michkov, but that still goes against what Hughes said: That they'd draft for talent first.
And again, despite Michkov's flaws, you can't say that he has way more talent than any after the consensus top 5. To win hockey games, you have to score more goals than your opponents and Michkov does this better than arguably anyone not named Bedard in this draft. You're leaving A LOT of talent on the table even if his floor might be lower than Dvorsky or Leonard or Reinbacher.