Senator Stanley
Registered User
Somebody get Don Boyd an Athletic subscription.
"They switched their draft focus from size to skill."
"They switched their draft focus from size to skill."
NHL Entry Draft 2024 NHL Draft Talk
- Thread starter GermanSpitfire
- Start date
BondraTime
Registered User
Year after year it’s like this. Though this years is especially magnifiquè
Freij and Jiricek as the #1 and #2 D is the icing on the cake
(Obviously a personal ranking is a personal ranking, doesn’t need to conform to the norm, but this is party central)
Sens in Process
Registered User
- Oct 1, 2012
- 582
- 864
The Dallas D-core:
Hartley: Height 6.04 -- Weight 206
Heiskanen: Height 6.02 -- Weight 197
Lindell: Height 6.03 -- Weight 216
Tanev: Height 6.02 -- Weight 193
Suetr: Height 6.01 -- Weight 201
Petrovic: Height 6.05 -- Weight 208
Dallas is a big team. They have several monster forwards as well with skill, including recently drafted Wyatt Johnson, who is big and fast.
Yes I am all for having a big, fast, and skilled team like Dallas. All that size allows them to incorporate some smallish players.
And they took a guy like Stankoven at 47, for a player of his size, I think it is an appropriate place to gamble.
Sens in Process
Registered User
- Oct 1, 2012
- 582
- 864
There are three three sources I generally avoid: Elite Prospects(Cam Robinson included), Scouching and Wheeler.
Senator Stanley
Registered User
Nobody is saying it has to be one or the other. It's about striking the right balance. We haven't valued skill highly enough for years.
"We’ve made mistakes, too. But we’ve self-evaluated and we changed our philosophy a little bit. We started to see a shift in the game and we started to focus a little bit more on the skill side." - Jim Nill
BigRig4
Registered User
- Feb 22, 2014
- 3,137
- 2,273
I think size is much more important on defence than on forward. At forward I'd place the same level of emphasis but on foot speed.
BondraTime
Registered User
I wouldn't use any of the lists other than looking at them to see what they're doing this time around.
Listening to the Elite Prospects guys describe their rankings in 2020 was one of the worst I've ever heard, it's like I was in a Dungeons and Dragons campaign instead of talking about scouting hockey.
Them describing Stutzle was like someone who has never played hockey before trying to use buzz words to seem like they had any idea what they were talking about
Last edited:
The RIGHT balance is key. The RIGHT balance is not 50/50. Balance implies 50/50.
Meh. They all watch more of these prospects than me. Which is the argument I use every year. I know sens scouts won’t have the same lists. But still fun to watch their videos and of these players
Micklebot
Moderator
- Apr 27, 2010
- 53,361
- 38,488
It's interesting, I look at that list, and I don't think it's that far off from what we'll look like next season (in terms of size). Using Hockey Db for size:
Chabot 6'2 203
Sanderson 6'2 203
Zub 6'3 204
Kleven 6'4 200 (I kind of suspect he'll be a bit bigger after a summer of training)
Chychrun is likely gone, but he's listed at 6'2 205 which seems light given how ripped the guy is.
Brannstrom is also likely gone.
JBD is a bit small at 6'0 and 190,
Hamonic is 6'1 200
I hope/suspect we add someone on the right side, I really hope it's Pesce or Matt Roy, who would both add some more size, but Tanev would be great too even if he'd be the smallest outside of JBD?
aragorn
Do The Right Thing
- Aug 8, 2004
- 28,571
- 10,658
Getting lucky in the draft & having the right kind of players is sooooo tricky, some turn out as projected & some don't ..... c'est la vie. Injuries have derailed a lot of good players as well as we know. I like size at both forward & defence especially when guys also have skilled associated with their size (Stone/Tkachuk). When we watch the playoffs especially that Florida/Rangers series we can see how tough it is, how hard they hit & how they are constantly trying to intimidate skilled players. Some guys like Marner seem to get intimidated in the playoffs while others revel in it. You need guys who can adjust their game to play it anyway it tends to flow & that's not easy with some skilled smaller players.
I think the Sens will take a D in this draft & I think it could come down to Parekh RD, Dickinson LD & Yakemchuk RD. I expect that Levshunov RD, Silayev LD & Buium LD might all be gone by 7th but if not will also be in the discussion. My Draft has Ott taking Parekh RD at 7th OA & Parascak RW at 25th OA, Parekh is a RD which Ott need & Parascak is a RW which Ott need to replace Giroux some day. Both are on the small side, but both are also very skilled. Should be a very interesting draft for the Sens especially the first 3 picks. Should also be interesting if Staois trades a player or two for picks at the draft.
I think the Sens will take a D in this draft & I think it could come down to Parekh RD, Dickinson LD & Yakemchuk RD. I expect that Levshunov RD, Silayev LD & Buium LD might all be gone by 7th but if not will also be in the discussion. My Draft has Ott taking Parekh RD at 7th OA & Parascak RW at 25th OA, Parekh is a RD which Ott need & Parascak is a RW which Ott need to replace Giroux some day. Both are on the small side, but both are also very skilled. Should be a very interesting draft for the Sens especially the first 3 picks. Should also be interesting if Staois trades a player or two for picks at the draft.
2024 NHL Mock Draft | 2024 NHL Draft | NHL Draft
2024 NHL Mock Draft and NHL Draft History. 2024 NHL Draft prospect videos, stats, and written profiles updated throughout the year.
www.mynhldraft.com
You passed on Yakemchuk with our #7 pick and on Charlie Ellick with Boston's pick; I am surprised by that.
Agent Zub
Registered User
- Jan 2, 2015
- 14,417
- 13,792
More than anything it's about two way play. We actually have size and skill.
But our guys don't value two way play and that is why they have been underperforming. Not because lack of skill or size.
Dallas, Vegas, Avalanche, Tampa etc etc all two way clubs. All understand that is the way you have to play if you want to win.
Skill or size means nothing if you lack that. You're just point chasers. Which is what our guys have been.
But our guys don't value two way play and that is why they have been underperforming. Not because lack of skill or size.
Dallas, Vegas, Avalanche, Tampa etc etc all two way clubs. All understand that is the way you have to play if you want to win.
Skill or size means nothing if you lack that. You're just point chasers. Which is what our guys have been.
aragorn
Do The Right Thing
- Aug 8, 2004
- 28,571
- 10,658
My draft passed on them, I would have taken both. I actually think they should consider trading down to acquire another 2nd rd pick & still get Yakemchuk. I see him as an explosive offensive defenceman who needs work defensively to round out his game to being more dependable in all three zones. Ottawa needs to address hiring a former NHL defenceman to coach their defence, a guy like Luke Richardson would really help Ottawa's defence.
Another option I would entertain would be to make a trade for a good young RD like Oliver Bonk in Philly. Chychrun for Bonk & their 2nd rd pick, something like that.
Last edited:
JungleBeat
Registered User
Did we upgrade from this bozo of a scout?
Bozo is an unfair description since Mann's tenure as head scout was decent, but it was definitely a bad look for him to come out and say this after the 2021 draft, which was a huge bunt and a miss.
I got the sense that Mann and the staff kind of got too full of themselves after a great 2020 draft. There was a major shift after that draft when size and toughness became the overwhelming focus and it was obvious they tried to be the smartest people in the room far too often.
Lol, was this in response to the Boucher selection?
I'm not even sure why they thought they had earned the right to be full of themselves. Sanderson and Greig hadn't played an NHL game, and Stutzle had a decent but not spectacular rookie season.
I'm not even sure why they thought they had earned the right to be full of themselves. Sanderson and Greig hadn't played an NHL game, and Stutzle had a decent but not spectacular rookie season.
Micklebot
Moderator
- Apr 27, 2010
- 53,361
- 38,488
To be fair, if I recall he was responding to the claim that we should have moved back if we wanted Boucher. The point was the team had insight into other teams plans to take Boucher so moving back wasn't really an option
Picks don't work out all the time even when they aren't off the board, Boucher may be an extreme example (in part due to his health imo) but he's far from the only mid round pick to bust.
I think that quote was more referring to the criticism that Boucher was ranked as a late 1st or early 2nd, and the Senators should have traded down to get him.
He was referring to the intel that at least one other team (rumoured as NYR at 16) were going to select him high. So there wasn't a realistic chance to trade back and get him.
In that respect, the quote is perfectly reasonable. Most fans tend to have a confirmation bias towards players who were ranked high earlier in the process (or for a longer time) and hate when their team selects a riser or goes off the board because they both have a bias towards the players they read about more, but they also have a false perception that trading down and getting your guy works like a PS3 NHL game where the rankings are static.
Teams can usually only trade down when they have wide tiers of players who offer a similar result. Like, a team really needing a puck moving LHD, and there are 3 of them on the board, and half of the next five teams are stacked at D. Yes, they could move down a few spots and still get one of their guys.
Anaheim missed on Karlsson in 2008 because they moved down. If you go by consensus, Ottawa reached on Karlsson. The reality is that more than one team had him high.
Although, it's debatable how high Anaheim in particular were on Karlsson, they missed him by trading down and maximizing their picks. With that said, there were a lot of D on the board so their strategy may have been closer to my second example where they may have seen him as being comparable to Gardiner, which might be why they moved down.
The point is, if a player is the top player on the internal list, teams cannot just move down because a TSN's list has that player as a second rounder. That's not reality, and it doesn't work that way. That's what Mann was referring to.
He was referring to the intel that at least one other team (rumoured as NYR at 16) were going to select him high. So there wasn't a realistic chance to trade back and get him.
In that respect, the quote is perfectly reasonable. Most fans tend to have a confirmation bias towards players who were ranked high earlier in the process (or for a longer time) and hate when their team selects a riser or goes off the board because they both have a bias towards the players they read about more, but they also have a false perception that trading down and getting your guy works like a PS3 NHL game where the rankings are static.
Teams can usually only trade down when they have wide tiers of players who offer a similar result. Like, a team really needing a puck moving LHD, and there are 3 of them on the board, and half of the next five teams are stacked at D. Yes, they could move down a few spots and still get one of their guys.
Anaheim missed on Karlsson in 2008 because they moved down. If you go by consensus, Ottawa reached on Karlsson. The reality is that more than one team had him high.
Although, it's debatable how high Anaheim in particular were on Karlsson, they missed him by trading down and maximizing their picks. With that said, there were a lot of D on the board so their strategy may have been closer to my second example where they may have seen him as being comparable to Gardiner, which might be why they moved down.
The point is, if a player is the top player on the internal list, teams cannot just move down because a TSN's list has that player as a second rounder. That's not reality, and it doesn't work that way. That's what Mann was referring to.
Senovision
Registered User
- May 23, 2011
- 2,507
- 2,311
The difference between Anaheim moving back and missing out on Karlsson and Ottawa moving back and potentially missing out on Boucher, is that Karlsson deserved to go high in the draft while Boucher absolutely did not.
This talk about the Rangers being interested in him always ignores the obvious - the Rangers are the most spoiled team in the league in terms of being able to attract skilled talent to their team, and if there was any team in the league that could have reached for a niche player like Boucher it was them.
Meanwhile as one of the least attractive destinations in the league we are one of the last teams that should have spent a high pick on a player like Boucher. It didn't make any sense at the time and certainly doesn't now with the benefit of hindsight.
And who cares if they have the intel that the Rangers want him, if they don't have the intel that there are better players to draft in that position?
dumbdick
Galactic Defender
- May 31, 2008
- 11,271
- 4,342
Users who are viewing this thread
Latest posts
-
-
Prospect Info: Draft 2025: Is it too late to tank? Asking for a friend (29 Viewers)- Latest: CheckingLineCenter
-
Pre-Game Talk: Week of Regular Season End (Tue vs. VGK, Thu vs. VAN, Sat @ LAK, Sun @ ANA) (23 Viewers)- Latest: Ararana
-
