Confirmed with Link: - 2025 NHL DRAFT Thread: The Isles Have Won the 2025 Draft Lottery | Page 15 | HFBoards - NHL Message Board and Forum for National Hockey League
Toggle sidebar

Confirmed with Link: 2025 NHL DRAFT Thread: The Isles Have Won the 2025 Draft Lottery

mm11 said:
would like to see a hungry kid that thinks he is as skilled and fast as Matt Barzal and as tough as Matt Martin but for some reason scouts are not sure and he drops. Kid with a chip on his shoulder to say F it, i'm making this team. Who is my guy my resident hockey nerds?
Click to expand...
I think that’s actual a decent description of Eklund. He’s a great (but not Barzal) skater, but he’s super fiesty and has a great motor. And for a smaller guy (if that’s what we call 5’11”), he really gets dirty in the corners and digs for pucks. I also think he’s has a great shot which has transferred to the pro league. He’s definitely not Matt Martin tough but I think he’s got about as much of that dawg in him as you can get for a lighter winger.
Personally I think one of Eklund, McQueen, or O’brien will fall to us, and I’d pick them in that order. Really hope we’re able to grab the kid.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bill Herlyn
mm11 said:
would like to see a hungry kid that thinks he is as skilled and fast as Matt Barzal and as tough as Matt Martin but for some reason scouts are not sure and he drops. Kid with a chip on his shoulder to say F it, i'm making this team. Who is my guy my resident hockey nerds?
Click to expand...

Angel Reese?
 
  • Haha
Reactions: thedonger
McQueen scares me.

If Martone is dropping to Buffalo at #7 and I am running to their booth to trade up and offer them a sweetener.
 
Chapin Landvogt said:
I think this early mock draft article is unlocked for now:
www.nytimes.com

2025 NHL Mock Draft: Pronman projects all 32 first-round picks before the lottery

We don't have a draft order yet, but why should that stop us from doing our first mock of 2025?
www.nytimes.com www.nytimes.com

I will say this already at this early point....

I think the Islanders are the team in the top 15 that can least afford to select McQueen.

I don't know what exactly his upside is (the highlights haven't necessarily wowed me - his size and Hlinka last summer have).

But this team cannot, at this point, afford to take someone who is looking like he may very well go down the Nolan Patrick route with his back problems.

***
In the mock draft here, I realized that all six of the players I'd most want from the concensus top 12 are gone by pick 9.

With 1st or 10th possible, my list is:
Hagens
Frondell
Martone
Eklund
O'Brien
Mrtka
Click to expand...
Man, I HATE seeing Aitcheson being picked right after the Isles pick an injury risk. Would have to watch him be a star with the Rangers every year. I would love to see Aitcheson to the Isles at 10.
 
Question about the "injury risk" thing. How many teams have been burned by picking a player who dropped due to injury concerns (or concerns about a Russian player coming over or not, etc.) versus the number of teams that struck gold by taking the risk? My unscientific guess is that it's worth the risk to get a more talented player. In the NFL, the Eagles just won a Super Bowl by doing that time and time again (and they just did it again last night getting a possible top 10-15 pick at #31 due to injury concerns).

Drafting is all about doing a risk benefit analysis. The guys at the very top of the draft are there because they have a high ceiling and a relatively low risk of not achieving it. As you move out of the top 3 or 5, the risk increases and the upside decreases. Yeah, a guy may have an injury, or a guy's skating could need work, or maybe they have intensity/work ethic concerns. Teams have to weigh all of that. But if the injury is something that can be fixed, versus a chronic thing, that would be a worthwhile risk, IMO.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bill Herlyn and Throttle
Except if you are Philly and take a known often injured player in Nolan Patrick after winning the lotto…
 
Throttle said:
Except if you are Philly and take a known often injured player in Nolan Patrick after winning the lotto…
Click to expand...
Yeah, there is that. I think it comes down to whether it's merely an "injury" or is more like a "condition".
 
scott99 said:
Man, I HATE seeing Aitcheson being picked right after the Isles pick an injury risk. Would have to watch him be a star with the Rangers every year. I would love to see Aitcheson to the Isles at 10.
Click to expand...
Aitcheson has a 10 cent head. Drafting him in the top 10 would be a huge waste.

That said, McQueen is far too risky for my taste. I am still on the Martin train. He's a smart all-around player and if you want physicality, he brings it. I also think he has bigger offensive potential than he's credited for. When it's all said and done, I think he'll end up being one of the best players from the draft.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Chapin Landvogt
leeroggy said:
If Angel Reese married Josh Ho-Sang . . . do I dare say this . . .
Click to expand...
He wouldn’t have to worry about doing the hairloss commercials anymore.
(Photo for reference)
IMG_2093.jpeg
 
  • Like
Reactions: thedonger
doublechili said:
Question about the "injury risk" thing. How many teams have been burned by picking a player who dropped due to injury concerns (or concerns about a Russian player coming over or not, etc.) versus the number of teams that struck gold by taking the risk? My unscientific guess is that it's worth the risk to get a more talented player. In the NFL, the Eagles just won a Super Bowl by doing that time and time again (and they just did it again last night getting a possible top 10-15 pick at #31 due to injury concerns).

Drafting is all about doing a risk benefit analysis. The guys at the very top of the draft are there because they have a high ceiling and a relatively low risk of not achieving it. As you move out of the top 3 or 5, the risk increases and the upside decreases. Yeah, a guy may have an injury, or a guy's skating could need work, or maybe they have intensity/work ethic concerns. Teams have to weigh all of that. But if the injury is something that can be fixed, versus a chronic thing, that would be a worthwhile risk, IMO.
Click to expand...

Well, if you are drafting in the first round every year and you've already stockpiled a certain amount of talent in your system, I'd say eff the risk, grab the talented young man, and exit the building while you can!

But if you've only had one first rounder in the past 5 years and you have a notoriously thin prospect system, then you're best served taking a sure thing with less upside, but no such problems to worry about (you can't see the future in that department anyways).

I think this is thing that makes the "Isles should select McQueen at 10 if he's there" situation a loaded scenario.

***
In other news, I've been getting serious Jesper Bratt vibes out of L.J. Mooney at the U18 Worlds.

Boy, that young man has some shake 'n bake and sees the ice as well as anyone at this tournament.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: iggy, Arsenalogist24 and mm11
Chapin Landvogt said:
Well, if you are drafting in the first round every year and you've already stockpiled a certain amount of talent in your system, I'd say eff the risk, grab the talented young, and exit the building while you can!

But if you've only had one first rounder in the past 5 years and you have a notoriously thin prospect system, then you're best served taking a sure thing with less upside, but no such problems to worry about (you can't see the future in that department anyways).

I think this is thing that makes the "Isles should select McQueen at 10 if he's there" situation a loaded scenario.

***
In other news, I've been getting serious Jesper Bratt vibes out of L.J. Mooney at the U18 Worlds.

Boy, that young man has some shake 'n bake and sees the ice as well as anyone at this tournament.
Click to expand...
Tiny kid he looks like but a shakin and bakin for sure
 
Chapin Landvogt said:
Well, if you are drafting in the first round every year and you've already stockpiled a certain amount of talent in your system, I'd say eff the risk, grab the talented young man, and exit the building while you can!

But if you've only had one first rounder in the past 5 years and you have a notoriously thin prospect system, then you're best served taking a sure thing with less upside, but no such problems to worry about (you can't see the future in that department anyways).

I think this is thing that makes the "Isles should select McQueen at 10 if he's there" situation a loaded scenario.

***
In other news, I've been getting serious Jesper Bratt vibes out of L.J. Mooney at the U18 Worlds.

Boy, that young man has some shake 'n bake and sees the ice as well as anyone at this tournament.
Click to expand...

LJ has always been supremely talented. Easily the most pure talent on the U18 roster this season.

I feel like he underperformed this year, but I didn't follow the team too closely so I'm not sure why. His numbers are decent, but I guess I expected more out of him.
 
boredmale said:
If he falls to 10 I take him. I get why teams ahead of us might be a bit weary and will go with a safer pick, but I think 10 is about the point you have to take a chance. Very good chance if he played a full season he would be a top 5 pick
Click to expand...
Exactly, if he puts his injuries behind him as he builds muscle he could be a powerhouse. His skill set is so unique.
 
Chapin Landvogt said:
But if you've only had one first rounder in the past 5 years and you have a notoriously thin prospect system, then you're best served taking a sure thing with less upside, but no such problems to worry about (you can't see the future in that department anyways).
Click to expand...
I know you know this, but there are no sure things. Of course, there are pretty certain bets that a guy will play in the NHL and become, say, at least a 3rd liner. But then you're talking about someone you can get with a later pick and that takes away the "you haven't had 1st round picks" argument. If you haven't had 1st round picks, isn't getting a legit top 10 talent the goal?

My main point was that the draft is all about risk-benefit analysis, and only the top few picks generally have high benefits and low risk, especially in a supposedly shallower draft like this one. So, if you're at #10, do you take the guy with questions about his decision-making, or his motor, or the guy who was talked about as a top 3 pick and then had an injury? Again, if he's had back issues that's a different story, but if they do due diligence and come to the conclusion that this is an injury that can be put in the rearview mirror, then maybe it's a worthwhile risk.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Throttle and Bill Herlyn
Anyone interested in trading down?

Couple names I really like that are projected to go in the back half of the 1st round are Schmidt, Ravensbergen, and Reschny..
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 15 (members: 0, guests: 15)

Latest posts

Ad

Ad

Top Bottom