Prospect Info: 2025 Draft: We are #1….1

[Empoleon8771]

But until that happens there no such thing as taking that as an actual prospect to actually making that decision now.

Maybe if they traded him this offseason you'd have your scenario.

The Sharks lost their ability to withstand their injuries to Pavelski leaving.

Basically, you are praying for a miracle.

The discussion regarding the Rangers pick is about the risk of something going bad that results in their pick ending up high next year. The Sharks in 2019 had that exact scenario happen, they had a lot of serious injuries to core players and it caused them to completely collapse in the standings. Considering the Rangers are an insanely flawed team that has been propped up by Shesterkin, an injury to Shesterkin would be devastating to them and almost assuredly result in their pick next year being high.

I literally don't even know what your point here is. My point is that the risk of the Rangers handing over an unprotected 1st in a stacked draft with McKenna at the top is a legitimate point of consideration for the Rangers. It's not as simple as "we plan to be better next year so we'll definitely be better".

 

[Jacob]

Shesterkin sucked for most of this year and they still weren’t *that* bad.

 

[Ugene Magic]

The discussion regarding the Rangers pick is about the risk of something going bad that results in their pick ending up high next year. The Sharks in 2019 had that exact scenario happen, they had a lot of serious injuries to core players and it caused them to completely collapse in the standings. Considering the Rangers are an insanely flawed team that has been propped up by Shesterkin, an injury to Shesterkin would be devastating to them and almost assuredly result in their pick next year being high.

I literally don't even know what your point here is. My point is that the risk of the Rangers handing over an unprotected 1st in a stacked draft with McKenna at the top is a legitimate point of consideration for the Rangers. It's not as simple as "we plan to be better next year so we'll definitely be better".

A tier 3/4 drafted prospect is all the same, and your premise is looking to be top 5 and landing McKenna is all I see in your proposal. Their pick will be no more likely than this years #12 at best, but that also relies on a perceived draft being deeper when there's still no data to suggest it to be true. It's basically McKenna driving the draft.

 

[eXile3]

I’ve actually watched some Hagens games since they’re on ESPN+. Love his skating and vision.

Little worried about his production though. A PPG as a freshman is good but someone compared it to Berniers which has been meh in the NHL. I still would take #3? Maybe #4 behind Matrone?

 

[Jared Grayden]

Shesterkin sucked for most of this year and they still weren’t *that* bad.

Shesterkin concerns me way more than anything else. He plays up to his Vezina abilities and it doesn't matter how old the forwards are or how bad the defense is, he'll steal games regularly.

 

[Empoleon8771]

A tier 3/4 drafted prospect is all the same, and your premise is looking to be top 5 and landing McKenna is all I see in your proposal.

What are you talking about? I'm not proposing anything. I'm talking about the risk the Rangers have to consider when deciding whether to hand over that pick.

Their pick will be no more likely than this years #12 at best, but that also relies on a perceived draft being deeper when there's still no data to suggest it to be true. It's basically McKenna driving the draft.

Hilariously uneducated opinion.

Shesterkin sucked for most of this year and they still weren’t *that* bad.

Shesterkin had a +21.6 GSAx this year.

He didn't "suck for most of the year". The Rangers are just horrendous. If he gets injured and Quick takes over the starter's role, they're a bottom-5 team in the NHL next year.

 

[The Old Master]

What are you talking about? I'm not proposing anything. I'm talking about the risk the Rangers have to consider when deciding whether to hand over that pick.



Hilariously uneducated opinion.



Shesterkin had a +21.6 GSAx this year.

He didn't "suck for most of the year". The Rangers are just horrendous. If he gets injured and Quick takes over the starter's role, they're a bottom-5 team in the NHL next year.

for some strange reason i can see that pen's team not being able to stop on their way to the net when we play them.

 

[Peat]

IMO the actual "blue chip prospects" in this draft run out at #2. #5 is looking more like Frondell, Desnoyers, Martone or Hagens. I think you can argue Hagens is a blue chip prospect with a depreciated stock, but I don't think the others are legit "blue chip prospects".

Yeah, fair enough. But there is, or so I read again and again, a big tier stepdown there.

I can't find a solid looking study right now but the impression I always got was that draft success starts falling off rapidly very quickly. As pointed out a few times, you pretty much never see pick for pick trade ups in the top 10 in the NHL, and I think that's linked.

So in general, 5 for 11/12 seems unlikely in general, but in this draft?

 

[Big Friggin Dummy]

As a team with no significant prospects in the system, a core of like 38 year old dudes, a mess of a blueline and a shitshow in goal--there is no downside to committing to the tank. You're not sacrificing anything. There is no "now" for the Pittsburgh Penguins, regardless of what PR yinzer slop the team or sports media are feeding the fanbase.

If you miss out on the 1st overall, oh well. You're still positioned to land like a top 3 to 5 prospect until Sid retires, then it's sure fire last place territory.

As for the Rangers' pick; that team sucks. It's Shesterkin and Panarin, and if either has a bad season or gets a significant injury, they're pretty easily picking top 10, maybe top 5. Zero depth, aging core, and one (Perreault) prospect of significance that I'm sure Sullivan's gonna do wonders for. Not impressed with their blueline beyond Fox either, it'll be interesting to see what Sullivan's defensive structure does there.

 

[Empoleon8771]

Yeah, fair enough. But there is, or so I read again and again, a big tier stepdown there.

I can't find a solid looking study right now but the impression I always got was that draft success starts falling off rapidly very quickly. As pointed out a few times, you pretty much never see pick for pick trade ups in the top 10 in the NHL, and I think that's linked.

So in general, 5 for 11/12 seems unlikely in general, but in this draft?

I think there are 2 arguments to be made with that trade here:

1. The draft declined pretty clearly after the top of the draft, so you're getting a clear downgrade from #5 to #11
2. The top of this draft is also weak and falls off after Misa, so you're not really getting a true "#5 talent" by trading up from #11 and #12 to #5 unless you get Hagens

It depends largely on who is available at those picks, but based on the caliber of players with those picks, I think this trade in a normal draft would be something like #8 for #15 and #16 based on the prospects that will be there. Like Desnoyers is not a #5 pick in a decent draft, nor is Aitcheson a #11 pick in a decent draft. The fact that Brady Martin is a lock for a top-10 pick should make it pretty clear how shitty this draft class is, and I'm saying that when I absolutely love Martin as a prospect. He's simply not a legitimate top-10 prospect.

Basically I can see either team saying no and it making sense depending on who's there at #5. If it's Hagens, I think Nashville should absolutely say no to trading Hagens for say Eklund and Aitcheson. If it's O'Brien, I think the Penguins should absolutely say no to trading Eklund and Aitcheson for O'Brien. If it's one of Martone, Frondell or Desnoyers, it really depends on how you view those guys. Personally, I'm a slight yes on Martone but a slight no on Frondell and Desnoyers from the Penguins POV.

 

[Big Friggin Dummy]

I'm entirely on board with throwing somebody a 2nd rounder to move up and snag Martone if he's sitting at like 8 or 9. He's not a center, but he'd be the best prospect this team's had since Staal, on paper. Definitely the best prospect in over a decade. He's like a much better McGroarty imo.

I'd also try and trade up if Hagens is sitting a few picks ahead of the Pens if the asking price was reasonable. There's a lot of Jack Hughes' style in Hagens' game, minus the shot. Really great skater, fantastic puck skills. Not sure if he's a winger or center at the NHL level but it doesn't matter imo. Skill is skill.

 

[CheckingLineCenter]

Beauty of pre draft tiers and groups is that it’s almost a sure thing they will be dead wrong in a few years.

 

[Big Friggin Dummy]

Yeah, five years down the road some 2nd rounder is gonna be the steal of the draft and Misa's gonna be Poulin or some shit.

 

[Peat]

I think there are 2 arguments to be made with that trade here:

1. The draft declined pretty clearly after the top of the draft, so you're getting a clear downgrade from #5 to #11
2. The top of this draft is also weak and falls off after Misa, so you're not really getting a true "#5 talent" by trading up from #11 and #12 to #5 unless you get Hagens

It depends largely on who is available at those picks, but based on the caliber of players with those picks, I think this trade in a normal draft would be something like #8 for #15 and #16 based on the prospects that will be there. Like Desnoyers is not a #5 pick in a decent draft, nor is Aitcheson a #11 pick in a decent draft. The fact that Brady Martin is a lock for a top-10 pick should make it pretty clear how shitty this draft class is, and I'm saying that when I absolutely love Martin as a prospect. He's simply not a legitimate top-10 prospect.

Basically I can see either team saying no and it making sense depending on who's there at #5. If it's Hagens, I think Nashville should absolutely say no to trading Hagens for say Eklund and Aitcheson. If it's O'Brien, I think the Penguins should absolutely say no to trading Eklund and Aitcheson for O'Brien. If it's one of Martone, Frondell or Desnoyers, it really depends on how you view those guys. Personally, I'm a slight yes on Martone but a slight no on Frondell and Desnoyers from the Penguins POV.

I don't know the individuals well enough to comment on the specifics - I haven't really tracked the draft this year, and what I've read has made me a lil depressed about the idea of digging further - but I think there's two times when trading down appears particularly unappealing.

1) The top of the draft is unusually lit and you're drafting out of probable franchise talent
2) The draft tapers off quickly and, while the talent at the top mightn't quite be what you were hoping for, it represents one of a few good odds bets against getting a player who's more than just a guy

I think we're on number two. I think that, exact identity of the good odds bets aside, Nashville would have to be really stupid to trade down here even before considering their identity as pretty much never having elite forwards.

If, I don't know, it was something like how 2017 was viewed, with no real franchise talents but kinda interesting guys going deep (we'll ignore how that actually played out) I might get it. But this one? Nah.

 

[Gurglesons]

Hagens is gonna be the Logan Cooley of this draft.

No idea what teams are thinking if he isn't top three.