If OBrien falls to us I have a hard time seeing us passing on him. He is a total Verbeek player with a great motor and good enough size at 6’2. If he fills out he will be a great playoff style player with enough skill and iq to play up and down the lineup.
Prospect Info: 2025 NHL Entry Draft
- Thread starter WhatTheDuck
- Start date
Some very divergent views of him on the prospects board thread. I don't think he is what you think he is.
People arguing he isn’t physical, which I agree, but every time I watch him he is a puck hound and constantly taking away time and space. Cagliari never hit anyone but was great defensively because of his motor and effort. Ritchie would hit people but was horrible defensively because he had zero motor.
Very talented but to me he is a top six or bust player. And his inability to produce 5x5 is very concerning. That said, he could go anywhere from 5-12 in the draft.
Anaheim4ever
Registered User
- Jun 15, 2017
- 9,272
- 6,548
Different type. His bust scenario is based on his health.
Not sure if that makes it better or worser, but forsure different.
I think it does but McQueen is light years more physical and can more easily play up and down the lineup than O'Brien. O'Brien is very much like Zegras in a lot of ways...both good and bad.
I disagree because he still has good size (will have to fill out) and a great motor. Those guys usually have high floors and if things don’t work out well they can effectively play the 3rd line. He is known to be very good defensively, despite not being a big hitter. At 8 I would prioritize iq/shot/playmaking over hitting.
OK but that's not a Verbeek type player IMO. We'll see what happens though. This draft is going to be very unpredictable after the first few picks.
Hockey Duckie
Registered User
Verbeek chose Carlsson over Fantilli, who was assumed to be Verbeek's ideal type player. For first two drafts under Verbeek, our late first/early 2nd were tall, shutdown forwards. Last year, we went with an offensive jitterbug in 5'11 C Lucas Pettersson.
So really then there is no verbeek type player...that’s fair as long as we are consistent.
Hockey Duckie
Registered User
Let's say that Verbeek has slowly been evolving in his draft picks. He has had time to reflect on the Gaucher pick and who was still available after him as well as Myatovic. Now, if we can only get him to start investing in NCAA guys in the first three rounds, then that would help the team out better because they can develop better physically, play at a higher level, and can take 4 to 5 years time to develop if a 2nd rounder or below.
Collegiate drafted prospects that are promising or could be promising:
2019, Rd 2: LD Jackson LaCombe... spent 4 years in college
2019, Rd 4: LD Henry Thrun... spent 4 years in college and traded away for a 2024 3rd round pick (RW Maxim Massé)
2020, Rd 2: RW Sam Colangelo... spent 4 years in college
2020, Rd 3: RD Ian Moore... spent 1 year in USHL and 4 years in college
2021, Rd 3: F Pastujov (He was drafted going to the NCAA, but then switched to the OHL to get training with renown skating coach Barb Underhill)
Hockey Duckie
Registered User
Like almost every prospect in this draft, Mrtka has his share of detractors or, more accurately, those that just don't see anything particularly great about him at the next level. Grant McCagg (who I generally like) was less enthusiastic about him and seemed to prefer Smith. I would love for Mrtka to be "the guy" b/c 6'6" RHD with talent are unicorns. I can see Buffalo potentially interested in him but I suspect he'll drop to the Ducks if they want him. Oh to be a fly on the wall when the Ducks are discussing these players...
Our scouting staff's ability to pull NHL dmen outside of the first round with such regularity would really push me to go forward at 8/9.
I think if we jumped on a Dman at #8, I could see it not being either Smith or Mrtka.....our staff is going to get a good close look at Aitcheson going head to head with Sennecke next round. I could see them becoming enamored, for a lot of the same reasons as Solberg. Very athletic and explosive but also a physical menace.
There is something about Aitcheson's game that just hasn't made believers out of scouts (or at least those who compile draft lists). Not sure if it is his size or that he's an 06 or that people just don't think his game will translate. Maybe he'll be a late riser with his playoff performance but taking him 8OA is definitely a choice.
I like to see that final Bob McK list, always most interested to see what the NHL scouts will say. But yeah 8 would be a reach by the current rankings. I do think he's going top 15 if he continues this strong playoff run
Agreed. I do feel like the best talent in the 7-10 range are forwards and not defensemen but we'll see what happens.
Yeah the way I picture it setting up, we will have some good forward options as BPA, but there are always those late risers, surprise picks etc
FWIW Cam Robinson did refer to him as his favourite prospect in this class, but that's of course open to interpretation
Hockey Duckie
Registered User
Forwards drafted in the top-10 in Ducks rebuild
2019, 9th: C Zegras
2021, 3rd: C Mac
2022, 5th: LW Cutter
2023, 2nd: C Carlsson
2024, 3rd: RW Sennecke
Defensemen drafted in the top-10 in Ducks rebuild
2022, 10th: LD Minty
To add to that forward grouping are RW Terry and a potential gem in RW Colangelo, who just finished his rookie season in the pros.
Right now, we have only one top-4D man in LaCombe. Minty, Zell, and Luneau are still in their infancy stages of learning how to play defense. Solberg is still refining his defensive play b/c he's more focus on big hits. Helleson has looked good as a bottom-pairing RD. Moore could be a dark horse due to his speed, height (6'3), and poise. Yet, we're still hoping.
We're relying on a lot of luck with our drafted defensemen. I wouldn't mind spending a top-10 pick on a defenseman b/c at least we're finding talent that is deemed in the top-10.
If we're stuck at 8th overall, then grabbing 6'6 Mrtka would be great for me. A couple of scouting reports have identified him as a top-end, shutdown defenseman with some offense. Can you imagine how much he can boost our PK in the near future?! His half season in the WHL has been a boon for him defensively and, surprisingly, offensively. Playing on a weak WHL team and thriving on it should give his value a bit more weight than a defenseman on a loaded team. It was a great decision on his part to move from the Czechia league over to North America's WHL this season.
Quote from The Hockey Writers
TheDarkWingThatDucks
Registered User
- Mar 20, 2025
- 248
- 188
This is not a combative post, just more of a thought exercise.
But doesn’t that make a ton of sense to draft OHL and such players early when rebuilding since they can get to the AHL sooner. Our prospects (who were regulars) on the 2021-2022 Gulls when Verbeek took over late in the season.
Perrault / Tracey / Dostal / Groulx / Larson / (helleson played 17 games after being traded for by Verbeek).
The next year were the same guys sans Larson, (because all our other prospects were in collge) but helleson and regenda both pcs added via trade from Verbeek.
This year we had …. Luneau / Pasta / Colangelo / Sidorov / Hinds / Warren / Nesty / Judd / Gaucher / Myatovic / Clang …. helleson was called up, Moore / Stain / Rodwin with cups of coffee.
So as we suck, and get top 10 picks, trade assets for more late 1sts / 2nds / 3rds…. Wouldn’t it be ideal for the early stages to draft players who will be in the AHL for 3-4 years helping and developing there ? Then you start drafting the college kids, so when some of those bottom 6 players pop, and some outplay their contract and you can’t afford them, you have college seniors ready to take their place on the big club 3-5 years down the line, while still having some decent AHL prospects as well. Plus you don’t have to sign them to their ELC as college players so you save contracts for the current clubs.
That to me, makes the most long term sense, rather than get a bunch of AHL vets and try to win down there while the big club isn’t ready to compete.
The funny thing to me, is you mention Verbeek should draft college players so they have 4-5 years to develop, when Gaucher and Myatovic just finished year 3 after their draft year. Shouldn’t they get the same rope of 1-2 more years of development before we write them off ?
I could be wrong, but this kinda seems like the ideal way to build organizational depth at an NHL / AHL / Prospects level.
Hockey Duckie
Registered User
Users who are viewing this thread
Latest posts
-
-
Inside Laval’s Playoff Run: Who’s the Habs’ Most Impressive Prospect? | Canadiens Connection ep 350- Latest: The Hockey Podcast Network
-
-
