GDT: 2024 NHL Draft Thread

[Aaaarrgghh]

@Viqsi - You stated you thought Pronman was Bat S*** Crazy (I presume) because he projected Demidov at #8 while most of the other scouts projected him #2 while some had him #3. Demidov fell to #5 in the draft. Last time I checked my math homework #2 and #8 are equally distant from #5.

Rankings are not the same as mock drafting. He also mock drafted him to Calgary at #9.

 

[Viqsi]

@Viqsi - You stated you thought Pronman was Bat S*** Crazy (I presume) because he projected Demidov at #8 while most of the other scouts projected him #2 while some had him #3. Demidov fell to #5 in the draft. Last time I checked my math homework #2 and #8 are equally distant from #5.

That was one of the reasons why that stood out. The others were Yakemchuk at #3 and Silayev at #4.

 

[koteka]

Dunno, I've loved CBJ drafts in 2022 and 2023. Maybe people kinda assumed they're going with heavy analytics since they drafted smaller players? Who knows how the decisions were actually made. I don't recall any actual reports on such things.

Anyone complaining about Brindley at 2nd or Dumais at late 3rd because they're small can identify themselves now for some good old public shaming. Both are A+ picks at those draft positions

The problem isn’t picking Brindley on his own or Dumais on his own or Malatesta on his own or even those three guys over a period of three years. It is when you use so much draft capital on short wings. Last year we drafted Brindley (no problem with that), Whitelaw (hmmm, another short forward), and Pinelli (holy crap, our defense sucks and all we do is draft short forwards). So we ended up with a crapload of short wings in the pipeline. And we really had no defensive D in the pipeline. Last year the only defenseman we drafted was a 5’11” offensive left D. Do you know which positions that you can easily add through trades or free agency? Short wings and offensive left D.

 

[Ice9]

Still say Whitelaw will be a pesky, hard to play against type guy when fully matured.

 

[koteka]

Still say Whitelaw will be a pesky, hard to play against type guy when fully matured.

Possibly, but how many short pesky wings can you have on a team? Malatesta and Brindley seem like pesky hard to play against guys, too. Are we sitting Chinakhov and going with 3 pesky wings? And those guys don’t have much trade value. If you have an extra 6’4” right D that can defend, teams will be calling and making nice offers. If you have an extra pesky 5’9” guy, teams might offer a late third rounder.

 

[stevo61]

Possibly, but how many short pesky wings can you have on a team? Malatesta and Brindley seem like pesky hard to play against guys, too. Are we sitting Chinakhov and going with 3 pesky wings? And those guys don’t have much trade value. If you have an extra 6’4” right D that can defend, teams will be calling and making nice offers. If you have an extra pesky 5’9” guy, teams might offer a late third rounder.

Some teams drafted size looking for the next Chara, we were out here looking for the next Marchand .

But Peeke is a good example. Horrible for us in our garbage system but he still had value and a team actually wanted him and had him playing decently well.

 

[DoingItCoolKiwi]

The problem isn’t picking Brindley on his own or Dumais on his own or Malatesta on his own or even those three guys over a period of three years. It is when you use so much draft capital on short wings. Last year we drafted Brindley (no problem with that), Whitelaw (hmmm, another short forward), and Pinelli (holy crap, our defense sucks and all we do is draft short forwards). So we ended up with a crapload of short wings in the pipeline. And we really had no defensive D in the pipeline. Last year the only defenseman we drafted was a 5’11” offensive left D. Do you know which positions that you can easily add through trades or free agency? Short wings and offensive left D.

95% of players in those ranges wont even get close to NHL, therefore have zero value, no matter their height, position, or physicality.

CBJ has picked players that can make the NHL and provide value in trade or in the lineup. Sure, results in many wingers, but that's a better issue than to have than tall trash prospects that peak at AHL.

And it's extremely easy to add 6'2" 3rd pair Dmen or 4th line players. Tortz said it the best

https://x.com/i/web/status/1663981518526529566

 

[koteka]

95% of players in those ranges wont even get close to NHL, therefore have zero value, no matter how tall theyre.

CBJ has picked players that can make the NHL and provide value in trade or in the lineup. Sure, results in many wingers, but that's a better issue to have than tall trash prospects that peak at AHL

That strategy is why we have so many Cups.

The goal is to build a team to win Cups. The goal is not to find the next Emil Bemstrom and impress people that you found a NHL-quality wing in the 4th round. Let’s draft guys that might help us win Cups.

Some teams drafted size looking for the next Chara, we were out here looking for the next Marchand .

Exactly. And people fail to realize that the reason Marchand can be Marchand is guys like 6’5” Brandon Carlo. Check out the Bruins roster. There is one 5’9” guy. There are a bunch of guys 6’3” or taller. They aren’t playing 3 small but pesky guys.

 

[DoingItCoolKiwi]

That strategy is why we have so many Cups.

The goal is to build a team to win Cups. The goal is not to find the next Emil Bemstrom and impress people that you found a NHL-quality wing in the 4th round. Let’s draft guys that might help us win Cups.

Good thing CBJ drafted 6'5" Kale Howarth after Bemström though! That really boosted the Stanley Cup chances since the lack of size on late round CBJ draftpicks is the main reason why they havent won the cup

 

[Fred Glover]

95% of players in those ranges wont even get close to NHL, therefore have zero value, no matter their height, position, or physicality.

CBJ has picked players that can make the NHL and provide value in trade or in the lineup. Sure, results in many wingers, but that's a better issue than to have than tall trash prospects that peak at AHL.

And it's extremely easy to add 6'2" 3rd pair Dmen or 4th line players. Tortz said it the best

https://x.com/i/web/status/1663981518526529566

And this is why I have no problem with the Texier trade
He is not a top 6 forward
Yes he has potential but it has been just that, potential
Trotz thinks that 3-4 line guys are a dime a dozen
I agree, in fact the problem with the current roster is we are loaded with third and fourth line players
We need players who will bring us out of our seats because of their exceptional performance, not bring us out because of boredom

 

[stevo61]

And this is why I have no problem with the Texier trade
He is not a top 6 forward
Yes he has potential but it has been just that, potential
Trotz thinks that 3-4 line guys are a dime a dozen
I agree, in fact the problem with the current roster is we are loaded with third and fourth line players
We need players who will bring us out of our seats because of their exceptional performance, not bring us out because of boredom

We have those guys too, they are mostly just young and need to be allowed to be creative and make plays. Last year they werent allowed, hoping moving forward a coach can get more from them on both ends of the ice

 

[koteka]

Tortz said it the best

https://x.com/i/web/status/1663981518526529566

First of all, you are quoting Barry Trotz. Second of all, Trotz didn’t draft a single 5’9” or shorter guy. Third of all, Trotz loves defense.

You are not swinging for the fences with a guy like Luca Pinelli as a 4th round pick. If Pinelli hits, he’ll be a marginal player. Waddell seemed to be swinging for the fences with his 4th round pick Tanner Henricks. If you hit on a 6’3” right D, now you have something valuable. Cup teams look for 6’3” right D. Peeke has been awful for the last two seasons and Boston still gave us a 3rd round pick for him. Nobody called us asking about Trey Fix-Wollansky and he has really outplayed his draft position.

 

[DoingItCoolKiwi]

First of all, you are quoting Barry Trotz. Second of all, Trotz didn’t draft a single 5’9” or shorter guy. Third of all, Trotz loves defense.

You are not swinging for the fences with a guy like Luca Pinelli as a 4th round pick. If Pinelli hits, he’ll be a marginal player. Waddell seemed to be swinging for the fences with his 4th round pick Tanner Henricks. If you hit on a 6’3” right D, now you have something valuable. Cup teams look for 6’3” right D. Peeke has been awful for the last two seasons and Boston still gave us a 3rd round pick for him. Nobody called us asking about Trey Fix-Wollansky and he has really outplayed his draft position.

Let's take a look at the best 2nd-7th picks from 2015 and 2016. Might be missing someone, but the general point will get through

1. Aho 6'0
2. Hintz 6'3
3. Dunn 6'0
4. Andersson 6'0
5. Cirelli 6'0"
6. Garland 5'8"
7. Kaprizov 5'10"
8. Terry 6'0"
9. Gavrikov 6'3" (CBJ pick!)
10. Mangiapane 5'10"
11. Kuroy 6'0
12. DeBincat 5'8
13. Girard 5'10
14. Hronek 6'0
15. Fox 5'11
16. Bratt 5'10
17. Hagel 5'11

Small (< 6'0) = 8/17
Mid (6'0 - 6'2) = 7/17
Big (> 6'2) = 2/17

Funnily enough, half of the tall players that have hit are picked by CBJ. No cups though despite this great drafting of big Dman

 

[CBJx614]

It's not just the CBJ. It was the entire league

https://x.com/i/web/status/1807445574121079152

 

[koteka]

Funnily enough, half of the tall players that have hit are picked by CBJ. No cups though despite this this

Now do very small <=5’9” after round two vs very big >= 6’3”. Those repeated very short picks is what I am against repeatedly drafting and you seem to be arguing for. If we draft a 5’11” guy, that is fine. If we draft several 5’9” guys in the same draft like last year, that is stupid. Where the Jackets under Jarmo have done well with later picks, it has not been Angle and TF-W. Those guys both outplayed their draft position but amounted to nothing in the NHL. The best later Jarmo picks were Bjorkstrand, Gavi, Bemstrom, Nuti, and Voronkov. None of those guys was short.

 

[JacketsFanWest]

I wonder if Anton Silayev's "unicorn status" put more emphasis on taller/bigger players.

It's not that players like that frequently panned out - the Jackets have a long list of oddball draft picks selected for their size that never panned out (Kiel MacLeod, Per Mårs, Thomas Larkin, Kale Howarth, Anton Blomqvist).

Development could be the key and now far more effort is being placed on individual attention to players with develop coaches keeping in contact with draft picks during the season and not just letting the players develop on their own.

Who gets that type of development is what may have changed. Tanner Henricks has the size, but he didn't have a single goal and only 9 assists in 59 USHL games. There's dozens of under 6'0 defensemen in the CHL, Sweden and US that have higher production and may end up being very productive AHL defensemen. Those types of players can be invited to development camps and signed if they develop but maybe it's worth the chance to see if unicorns can be developed.

It may end up being a waste of draft picks, but I think the element that was missing before was actually developing the players.

 

[DoingItCoolKiwi]

Now do very small <=5’9” after round two vs very big >= 6’3”. Those repeated very short picks is what I am against repeatedly drafting and you seem to be arguing for. If we draft a 5’11” guy, that is fine. If we draft several 5’9” guys in the same draft like last year, that is stupid. Where the Jackets under Jarmo have done well with later picks, it has not been Angle and TF-W. Those guys both outplayed their draft position but amounted to nothing in the NHL. The best later Jarmo picks were Bjorkstrand, Gavi, Bemstrom, Nuti, and Voronkov. None of those guys was short.

Ah I misunderstood your point a bit, maybe. I despise skipping on smaller players because of an obsession on adding size, so I was arguing against that idea in general. Got the impression that you dislike picking any smaller players, but if I understood correctly you mean only the <= 5'9 gambles?

That I can understand much better, so won't argue with you further . I'm personally still happy with the past few drafts. Gotta take risks to hit a homeruns like Kaprizov, Marchand or Johnny. A lot of these guys like Krug, Zuccarello and Marchessault have also gone undrafted in the past, so they're definitely out there.

 

[koteka]

Ah I misunderstood your point a bit, maybe. I despise skipping on smaller players because of an obsession on adding size, so I was arguing against that idea in general. Got the impression that you dislike picking any smaller players, but if I understood correctly you mean only the <= 5'9 gambles?

Yes. And I don’t mind drafting the occasional small guy. Like Malatesta or Brindley. I just think you can’t keep drafting them over and over and over like Jarmo did last year.

 

[majormajor]

I agree, in fact the problem with the current roster is we are loaded with third and fourth line players
We need players who will bring us out of our seats because of their exceptional performance, not bring us out because of boredom

I will come out and say, that no, that is not the problem with our current roster. Our veteran bottom six wings outperformed their comparables on other clubs. They got vastly better results (GF - GA) than the cheap 4th liners who went to the cup finals (Stenlund, Lomberg, Perry, etc..)

We have an overabundance of exciting but incomplete or immature players actually. We have to be one of the most dangle-happy clubs in the league.

 

[BenchBrawl]

Was there a post-draft interview of head scout or Timmins?

 

[EDM]

It seem to me that this draft will give us at least 3 legit NHL player after the 2-3 year development process.

 

[CalBuckeyeRob]

It seem to me that this draft will give us at least 3 legit NHL player after the 2-3 year development process.

Define "legit NHL player"? Is Foudy one? Was Peeke? Or does he have to be a guy that is not just filling in while you hope for a productive player to come along?

 

[squashmaple]

Define "legit NHL player"? Is Foudy one? Was Peeke? Or does he have to be a guy that is not just filling in while you hope for a productive player to come along?

Yes, Peeke is a legit NHL player. Just because he was misused in a bad system by a bad coach does not mean he isn't NHL caliber when used correctly. See his usage in Boston. Bottom pair and bottom-6 guys are NHL players too.

 

[Double-Shift Lasse]

Yes, Peeke is a legit NHL player. Just because he was misused in a bad system by a bad coach does not mean he isn't NHL caliber when used correctly. See his usage in Boston. Bottom pair and bottom-6 guys are NHL players too.

I think the point was to establish a threshold.