Beside Lindstrom (and maybe Demidov but he'll probably fall like all the small wingers do, even forgetting about the Russia factor) I don't see any forward in this crop being in the same tier as the top Ds (Silayev, Levshunov, Dickinson, Yakemchuk). I think Dickinson is superior to any forward not named Celebrini in this draft but that is me.
Smart teams will never go for a player in the top 5 because of need. But you KNOW a team will look at Lindstrom tools and draft him in the top 5.
The math is then that the odds are good one of the "big 4" D prospects will be there at #6. It is 100% sure one of them is there at #5.
Hence my point ods are good BPA will be a D there.
Edit: I see you didn't put Yakemchuk in the conversation as a top D in this draft. IMO he certainly is. Just broke WHL record for goals.
Smart teams always look at everything when they are drafting high. It really only is a matter of BPA, in the sense that if Pittsburgh had prime Crosby and Malkin, and won the Celebrini draft lottery for some reason, they'd take BPA because Celebrini is so clearly the best player in the draft, it would make NO sense to do anything else.
But subjectivity hits very early in drafts and you never see lists that are carbon copies of each other across the NHL, across amateur scouts and across draft publications. Last year had a pretty consensus top 4 but even the order of 2/3 was up for debate as far as who is actually BPA between Carlsson and Fantilli. In the Slaf draft, there were arguments between Nemec and Jiricek and Nemec went 2 while Jiricek went 6. That could have flipped with a different head scout in NJ and Jiricek could have gone 2 and you wouldn't see backlash on BPA there.
The math might bore out that one of the big 4 defenseman prospects will be there at 6 but the most accurate list in the world is Bob's and they had Dickinson at 7th overall, so how does that make Dickinson a BPA at 5 or 6? That would be a BPA according to your list and not necessarily anyone elses list.
The odds are always good that someone's BPA is there when we pick, but again, it's massively subjective when you are projecting teenagers.
I think Yakemchuk is a top defenseman in the draft but again I don't think that the Habs would broach the subject of picking him. Is there a massive difference between Mailloux and Yakemchuk? We could say that at this point in their careers, Yakemchuk is far more highly regarded.. but Mailloux is a shoot first right shot defenseman with size and snarl, who skates better than Yakemchuk while Yakemchuk is a far better defender at the same age but still has IQ arguments.
If you go up there and say ok we have Yakemchuk as the top guy on our board - but there's a tougher path to integrate him and he isn't a massive upgrade over Mailloux who is closer to the NHL, while we have Catton who is a spot lower on our list, but doesn't have any barriers in the system and would immediately be the top center on a Laval team, were he eligible.. it makes way more logical sense to take Catton than the guy at the top of your board.
It's easy in theory to say trade from the surplus, but in actuality, it is harder to accomplish. What happens on draft boards, and what we know the Habs do is they build out buckets, and tiers, so the only way they go for a defenseman is if that defenseman is the only one left in that tier and even then, they are far more likely to trade down or reach into the next tier than create a roster management issue when talent levels are very clearly close between players in this draft after Celebrini.
Its a philosophy first and foremost. A drafting mindset. And also a pretty subjective exercise.
Its a philosophy where taking the player with the highest upside prevail to other things like need, position and what might be available in next year draft.
And highest upside is also a subjective exercise so clamoring that one team didn't take BPA is very rarely true unless you are looking at Football where teams reach on QBs all of the time. Hockey the BPA is difficult to ascertain who the BPA is, you are just projecting many years down the line.
Yeah, if we get 5-7, it does not mean BPA is a D. Chances are high its a forward. Draft never goes the way people think it will anyway. No one expected Simashev to be the 1st Russian taken in 2023 draft nevermind taken at #6.
Exactly.. nor does it mean that the team has evaluated the draft class the same way as anyone else.
100% sure one of Dickinson, Silayev, Levshunov or Yakemchuk is there at #5.
Not 100 % at #6, but I really think a team will take Lindstrom in the top 5. Those 6'3 Cs that skate like the wind don't make it outside the top 5.
Mathematically yes - but again, you'll have a difference of opinion as to whether all of those 4 defenseman are better than Lindstrom, Demidov, Eiserman, Catton and Helenius.
I think Columbus takes Lindstrom and I do think he's the second forward off the board.
If you look at the various scouting reports, then one of Levshunov, Dickinson, Demidov, Silayev & Lindstrom are going #2, so that's your 2-6 group.
After that it's Catton, Buium, Huselius & Eiserman that you most often see in that 7-10 group with Iginla & Yakemchuk closing in on them. They're all so close though that I wouldn't say there's a definitive BPA. They're all vastly different players stylistically and they mostly all play different positions too.
In the 12 players mentioned above, 5 are D. 7 are forwards.
Bingo.
Demidov is racking up insane points though. He’s probably the 2nd forward gone.
Nah, teams will go with the large canadian kid first. I predict Demidov is the 3rd forward gone with Lindstrom quite clearly being the 2nd forward off the board.
If we looked at the draft today:
Chicago takes Celebrini
San Jose takes Levshunov
Anaheim takes Silayev
Columbus takes Lindstrom
Ottawa takes Dickinson
Buffalo takes Yakemchuk
Arizona takes Demidov
Leaving Montreal with a choice of Catton, Helenius, Eiserman and Iginla. They would obviously pass on Buium.
