2023 NHL Entry Draft Discussion

[Nucklehead Supreme]

It's absolutely incredible that you can read what I post and that's what you take from it. Holy shit, man.

Let me spell out for you what I'm actually posting :

We appear to have reasonably competent people making mostly reasonably competent decisions. The path/plan they've chosen is really the only thing they could realistically do given where the team was at in their competitive cycle and the quality of some of the young players here. I don't think they've been aggressive enough in enacting that plan, though, and they've also made some blunders - in particular the Boeser signing. The Boudreau situation was a disaster but that appears to be ownership's fault.

This was probably a bubble team last year (+/- 5 points from 8th seed) on merit, but were sunk by a generationally terrible goaltending event.

They might not be elite enough and the situation might be too f***ed by Benning to actually open a competing window here. If that's the case, we're looking at a full rebuild in 2 years. But until that point, pushing forward with some of the best players the franchise has ever had is the correct plan. And it's what literally any ownership/management group would be doing in the same situation.

But sure, 'Rutherford Bro'.

Wow, I feel like I've heard this before..... like for the last 10 years....I feel like that's the definition of insanity....but that's just me...

 

[PuckMunchkin]

Yes, I am saying that it's a good outlook to have if NHL drafting ability is perfectly accurate.

No.

The pick has intrinsic value.

Its like saying "Why would I want 15 dollars instead of 10 dollars, I can never know how I will spend those extra 5 dollars anyways."

 

[Diversification]

Some people dont understand that a 6.5% chance from 3% is more than doubling your odds.

Its like some people saying “nah I dont want more lottery tickets for free thank you - 1 is enough, theres not much difference anyways. You can keep the extra 100 lottery tickets”

It’s a fallacy to conflate managing a hockey team with managing odds at a casino. They’re not even remotely comparable.

With a hockey team, decisions are impactful and their effects can be felt years into the future and aren’t easily or cheaply undone.

As someone who in their job necessarily bases their decisions on incomplete information, I look at chances in the range of 3% to 6.5% as basically the same as 0%. That is, don’t count on it. Don’t get attached to it. If it hits, great. But base your decisions operating under the assumption that it’s not going to work out.

Then the cost benefit becomes clearer- 7 or 8 OA vs. the longer runway for Tocchet to implement his system and 11OA. Reasonable minds can differ on which is preferable, I suppose.

 

[ChilliBilly]

Except it's not poker. In poker you are playing multiple hands in a short period of time. The odds mean something.

The draft is a one of. Odds aren't meaningless, but they don't matter. You're talking about having a 97% chance of not winning vs a 93.5% chance. Winning from either spot is a "miracle" but it's also beating the odds for whomever wins so just be in the lottery and see what happens.

Lottery odds and draft position at the expense of developing out superstars is short sighted.

Wherever we end up drafting, I want a D or C, even if it means losing "value" on the pick. If there's a winger that falls, look to trade back, but draft a D or C.

But the draft is a double tap. So its a ... say 7% vs 14 % chance of getting up to 1st or 2nd. Still long odds, but we have seen it happen a number of times. I understand that we need to give our players some hope they will be competitive, but a the same time we have traded draft pick after draft pick to make us marginally better. To the point where we are now once again in cap hell. We need to shed salary, without giving up part of our core. We should not be trading our pick for a "decent" D man when we can't afford another guy making $3 - 4 M / yr. Hronek may be a fair trade value, but I would rather have had the picks. Yes, he may make enough of a difference that we improve enough that EP decides to stay. But that too is long odds. And we have real cap problems, and Hronek will we wanting a raise next year if he has a good year.

A lot of the posts on here are along the line of "trade the pick, we need to improve to keep Petey, and it will be too long before the player we draft makes a difference" without taking into account any trade we make just gives us more cap problems. Can you imagine where we would be now if we had not traded Horvat?

 

[PuckMunchkin]

It’s a fallacy to conflate managing a hockey team with managing odds at a casino. They’re not even remotely comparable.

With a hockey team, decisions are impactful and their effects can be felt years into the future and aren’t easily or cheaply undone.

As someone who in their job necessarily bases their decisions on incomplete information, I look at chances in the range of 3% to 6.5% as basically the same as 0%. That is, don’t count on it. Don’t get attached to it. If it hits, great. But base your decisions operating under the assumption that it’s not going to work out.

Then the cost benefit becomes clearer- 7 or 8 OA vs. the longer runway for Tocchet to implement his system and 11OA. Reasonable minds can differ on which is preferable, I suppose.

#VideoGameLogic

 

[sandwichbird2023]

1. Bedard
2. Fantilli
3. Carlsson
4. Michkov
5. Smith
6. Benson
7. Reinbacher
8. Moore
9. Dvorsky
10. Yager
11. Barlow

Who do you guys pick?
-Leonard
-Sale
-ASP
-Cristall
-Danielson
-Honzek

This is assuming we drop a spot… Ive been saying how we need to draft an impact forward but this was before our late season pointless winning streak. I think I would actually pick ASP if this scenario played out

Honestly this is my fear, not so much dropping a spot to #12, but that almost all the good C and Reinbacher are gone by the time we walk up to the podium.

While there are some good wingers available, you cannot keep drafting wingers and hope to build a good NHL team. At some point you need to fill your roster with quality C and D, and the best and most cost efficient way to do so is at the draft.

Assuming the top 10 of the draft goes as your listed, I would either take Danielson at #11, or trade down for Simashev. Yes, I realize there is a chance of passing on the BPA, and yes, there is a chance this becomes a OJ vs Tkachuk situation down the road. But with the way our blueline is constructed, and with the C depth we have in the organization, I don't see how we can actually build a "team" if we keep taking wingers. Not having our 2nd round pick this draft and next hurts a lot.

I would probably rank the rest of the field like this for now: Danielson, Honzek, Leonard, Barlow, Sawchyn, ASP, Simashev, Dragicevic. Not the final ranking, but combination of upside, play style and positional value. I would stay away from Cristall if drafting in the teens.

Or we trade the pick for a young C/D, that works better if we are in compete-now mode.

 

[lawrence]

Wouldn’t mind Andrew cristall. Those numbers are quite unprecedented for a whl draft year player. If it was the 5-8 range would have a no for me but 11th range it’s a go for me.

 

[Canucks LB]

Wouldn’t mind Andrew cristall. Those numbers are quite unprecedented for a whl draft year player. If it was the 5-8 range would have a no for me but 11th range it’s a go for me.

If we end up with cristall after that season, what a train wreck that would be.

He’s one of the few prospect that I believe is going to drop out of the 1st round.

Very little compete, average skater, whines on the ice.

Offensively, he has a elite vision, and playmaking, but his defensive play is also nonexistent

 

[Bgav]

Praying benson falls to us. I think he has superstar potential

 

[tradervik]

Button thinks Sandin Pellikka (10) and Tom Willander (15) are the two best defence men in the draft. Both are right-handed. Can’t wait to see where things stand when the rankings are updated.

 

[Dissonance Jr]

Looking at some of the other defensemen after Reinbacher... what do people think of Lukas Dragicevic?

Big RD, looks like a solid skater in clips, stats are crazy good. But he's consistently ranked as a low 1st/2nd rounder. All the complaints seem to be about his defensive game, although I wonder whether that's surmountable — iirc, there were a lot of similar complaints about K'Andre Miller, another forward who converted into a defensemen as a teenager, and he figured it out.

A lot of the smaller scoring wingers ranked around our spot don't seem super exciting. Sandin-Pellikka and Willander are more intriguing, although the former does look a bit small, idk.

 

[tradervik]

Looking at some of the other defensemen after Reinbacher... what do people think of Lukas Dragicevic?

Big RD, looks like a solid skater in clips, stats are crazy good. But he's consistently ranked as a low 1st/early 2nd. All the complaints seem to be about his defensive game, although I wonder whether that's surmountable — iirc, there were a lot of similar complaints about K'Andre Miller, another forward who converted into a defensemen as a teenager, and he figured it out.

A lot of the smaller scoring wingers ranked around our spot don't seem super exciting. Sandin-Pellikka and Willander are more intriguing, although the former does look a bit small, idk.

That’s an interesting point about changing from forward to defence. Hirose and McWard are both former forwards if I recall correctly. Anyone know why Dragicevic changed positions?

 

[SelltheTeamFrancesco]

Bedard tops Central Scouting North American ranking for 2023 NHL Draft | NHL.com

Regina center had 143 points in 57 games; Orebro forward Carlsson No. 1 among International skaters

www.nhl.com

Central scouting dropped their list today big fans of Matthew Wood (4), Nate Danielson (7), and Honzek (9) on the NA side. Reinbacher (5) ahead of ASP (7) for the first time and Stenberg (6) quite high on the international side.

 

[NomadSports94]

That’s an interesting point about changing from forward to defence. Hirose and McWard are both former forwards if I recall correctly. Anyone know why Dragicevic changed positions?

There was a story about how his bantam or midget team had injuries so he volunteered to play defense and just stuck with it. He has way to far to go defensively to be a top 20 pick imho

 

[Diversification]

#VideoGameLogic

The draft lottery is a single event. An improved 3.5% odds from 3 to 6.5% on a single event is not worth much - 1/30 to ~1/15. The notion that this should be a major factor in how you make your decisions isn't so much video game logic as it is being pennywise pound-foolish.

 

[NomadSports94]

Bedard tops Central Scouting North American ranking for 2023 NHL Draft | NHL.com

Regina center had 143 points in 57 games; Orebro forward Carlsson No. 1 among International skaters

www.nhl.com

Central scouting dropped their list today big fans of Matthew Wood (4), Nate Danielson (7), and Honzek (9) on the NA side. Reinbacher (5) ahead of ASP (7) for the first time and Stenberg (6) quite high on the international side.

If Wood had even average skating he would easily be a top 10 pick this year. The kid has size and talent but his skating is so clunky and the mechanics are awful.

 

[NomadSports94]

Looking at some of the other defensemen after Reinbacher... what do people think of Lukas Dragicevic?

Big RD, looks like a solid skater in clips, stats are crazy good. But he's consistently ranked as a low 1st/2nd rounder. All the complaints seem to be about his defensive game, although I wonder whether that's surmountable — iirc, there were a lot of similar complaints about K'Andre Miller, another forward who converted into a defensemen as a teenager, and he figured it out.

A lot of the smaller scoring wingers ranked around our spot don't seem super exciting. Sandin-Pellikka and Willander are more intriguing, although the former does look a bit small, idk.

If you absolutely must go RHD then at 11 you grab Reinbacher or ASP (neither is a reach and both are part of that tier) or you trade back to like Detroit for 18 and 43 and you grab Willander (much prefer reaching for him than Dragicevic) and then Strbak or Bonk at 43

 

[PuckMunchkin]

The draft lottery is a single event. An improved 3.5% odds from 3 to 6.5% on a single event is not worth much - 1/30 to ~1/15. The notion that this should be a major factor in how you make your decisions isn't so much video game logic as it is being pennywise pound-foolish.

We disagree.

Its not just about the lottery.

We played our selves out of position to draft one of the great players available this very special draft in the top 8.

The lottery is just a bonus. Its what you can sell the plebs.

 

[MS]

Wow, I feel like I've heard this before..... like for the last 10 years....I feel like that's the definition of insanity....but that's just me...

What on earth does what the team was doing in 2015 have to do with what they're doing now?

This 'doing the same thing for the last 10 years' is such a lazy take it's unbelievable.

From 2014-2018 they were trying to extend the Sedin window and failed miserably. They failed so miserably that they out-tanked teams actually trying to lose and accidentally ended up with a good core of young high draft picks.

They built around those young high draft picks for exactly 1 offseason (2019) and had reasonable success until their previous stupidity and terrible signings came back to bite them in the ass, and they spent the 2020 and 2021 offseasons going backwards.

Trying to build around Hughes/Pettersson/Demko isn't something that 'been happening for the last 10 years' and is in fact something that hasn't really even happened yet at all.

The draft lottery is a single event. An improved 3.5% odds from 3 to 6.5% on a single event is not worth much - 1/30 to ~1/15. The notion that this should be a major factor in how you make your decisions isn't so much video game logic as it is being pennywise pound-foolish.

You think this would be pretty obvious to anyone with critical thinking skills ... but apparently not.

 

[PuckMunchkin]

You think this would be pretty obvious to anyone with critical thinking skills ... but apparently not.

It is only apparent to you and your critical thinking cronies on these boards.

 

[MS]

Anyhow, back to actual NHL draft talk and it would be nice to keep it there.

This board has acted like there's a very set top 8 or 9 to this draft and has ranked some players extremely differently to consensus (especially Reinbacher, and I'm one of the highest on Reinbacher) and stuff like today's #4 NA Matthew Wood ranking should probably cause people to take a step back and realize that this draft will be more volatile than they're thinking.

 

[Vector]

Anyhow, back to actual NHL draft talk and it would be nice to keep it there.

This board has acted like there's a very set top 8 or 9 to this draft and has ranked some players extremely differently to consensus (especially Reinbacher, and I'm one of the highest on Reinbacher) and stuff like today's #4 NA Matthew Wood ranking should probably cause people to take a step back and realize that this draft will be more volatile than they're thinking.

From what I can tell there's a decent chance the top-4 is already decided. Then it looks like 5 & 6 is some combination of Benson and Smith but that's where the volatility starts. Then after that there's no actual consensus on where anyone is going. From 7-20 is very up in the air.

 

[NomadSports94]

Anyhow, back to actual NHL draft talk and it would be nice to keep it there.

This board has acted like there's a very set top 8 or 9 to this draft and has ranked some players extremely differently to consensus (especially Reinbacher, and I'm one of the highest on Reinbacher) and stuff like today's #4 NA Matthew Wood ranking should probably cause people to take a step back and realize that this draft will be more volatile than they're thinking.

There is a top 4. Those are the only guys set in stone. There wont be a single NHL team that has the same rankings from 5-100, and for all the experts who talk to scouts and stuff...no scout is telling the truth on where their team has a guy ranked.

 

[MS]

From what I can tell there's a decent chance the top-4 is already decided. Then it looks like 5 & 6 is some combination of Benson and Smith but that's where the volatility starts. Then after that there's no actual consensus on where anyone is going. From 7-20 is very up in the air.

There is a top 4. Those are the only guys set in stone. There wont be a single NHL team that has the same rankings from 5-100, and for all the experts who talk to scouts and stuff...no scout is telling the truth on where their team has a guy ranked.

There is a top 4 in ability but who knows what Michkov's situation does to his draft position. Reports were that both Montreal and Philly had a no-draft policy on Russians last year and they're at 5 and 7.

After that, there are *a lot* of players that teams could potentially like. A deep balanced draft like this probably means more volatility as the teams picking 5-10 could have any of about 10 different players at the top of their list and something like that Wood ranking is probably happening on multiple teams' internal lists.

 

[God]

I had not read up on Matthew Wood, but I can see why he's being ranked so high - 6'4, 34 points in 35 games in the NCAA, Feb 2005 birthday...wow