Definitely similar in their shiftiness. Not just knowing where to be, but showing up there with real timing -- getting to the right spot at the right moment. I feel like "strong positional game" is a bit of a groaner for most fans, but when you have elite positional skills, you're determining the way people are situated on the ice, either affecting where people are moving or a step ahead of the play.
Parascak is that guy. The downside of that guy is that you need similarly talented/smart guys to leverage that ability. He'll need to play with talent to get the most from him. His skillset won't be nearly as valuable deeper in the lineup. So he either develops into a top-6 guy (maybe good as a 3rd liner on a deep team) or he might fizzle. It's a risk, but it's the same type of risk you typically get picking outside the top 12 or so spots.
Yes, and what you saw this year was him playing alongside guys that got that about him. They were always looking for him, or moving pucks to space knowing he'd be there. A Miro/Leo/Parascak line could be lots of fun -- lots of skill and big motors across the board, with brains to boot.
Strong legs and body control. This is why the knocks on his skating don't bother me. His stride is unconventional, but a lot of times that just speaks to how someone's body is put together. It can mean less than nothing as long as the speed and mechanics are sound, and they are. It also speaks to his work ethic, which suggests good things about his character.
Oshie is one of the uglier skates you'll ever see. Hell, Gretzky's skating was for shit. Oshie got by on motor and hand-eye, and Gretzky by being super cerebral. Parascak's got those traits. His stride won't hamper him.
What board? I mean seriously, whose board do you trust that much? There isn't a web draft board backed by a fraction of the insight that any NHL club has. If you're trusting ANY web source more than your team's scouting, something is seriously wrong.
After the first half of the first round, look at how drastically the "expert draft boards" differ from one another. That alone should tell you how subjective NHL draft rankings are. This isn't the NFL or NBA where most players are coming from the same places. NHL feeder leagues are in wildly different countries where the game is just plain different -- sometimes the rules, sometimes the ice surface, sometimes just the regional flavors (more physical here, faster there, etc.).
So you can generally trust corroborated rankings from each league, but then how do you combine them? And that gets increasingly difficult the further you go down the list. Who's better -- the 22nd best guy from this Canadian league or the 22nd best guy from this Euro league? That Russian goalie or that Swiss defenseman?
It's mind-boggling, and that's why it takes a pretty big staff of scouts and FO guys to sort it all out. So when your team goes "off the board" from the second round on, it's REALLY not a big deal most of the time.
It's rebuild time. Their last 3 drafts have been very strong, this one included. Prior to our window closing, you saw us leaning toward need, hoping we'd land early breakouts. With no cap space for a decade, that's the best we could hope for as perpetual contenders. So we had lots of gambles or were just drafting for depth.
Now we're drafting like a team that's rebuilding -- first by actually keeping our picks and using them, and second by trusting our scouting and drafting for upside; for the future.
I'll take Leonard and Parascak over Benson and Eiserman *as prospects* every day of the week. Hard to quantify and compare what they are right now, but the potential ceilings definitely work in our favor, in my opinion.
So you don't want Tiny F'in Defensemen but you'll take a center the exact same size? Why do you need big D if they're defending tiny forwards?
Hutson and Muggli are admissions that the game is changing, and Muggli has a frame you can build on. Both good picks. I like Stiga too, but there was a lot of D at those draft positions that project as well as any of the forwards left. Drafting for need is a taboo phrase here, but it makes sense when the the talent levels are a tossup. If BPA is a question at your current spot and you're on the clock, take the guy that fits best.
Nick Offerman. Not only is he good casting for BMac, but if an NHL team was built by Ron Swanson, they would never lose.
Smart kid for sure. Not sure he'd have stood out all that much to me without the family connection raising my interest, but I'd say he's a comparable prospect overall. He could make it.