Toggle sidebar

Prospect Info: 2025 NHL Entry Draft

TheDarkWingThatDucks said:
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.
Click to expand...

Time to sign prospects
  • CHL: two years
  • NCAA: four years
  • USHL+NCAA: five years
  • European: four years
  • Russian: indefinitely
If a CHL prospect isn't signed within two years and are young enough, then they go back into the NHL draft.

Going to the NCAA doesn't preclude a signed prospect going to the AHL. Nesterenko, Helleson, and Colangelo have gone to the AHL in their first, full pro season. Colangelo didn't explode until his senior year. Imagine if Colangelo was a CHL product and didn't have a great first two seasons, then we wouldn't have signed him and he would have gone back into the draft.

The ELC slide rule ends once a prospect turns 20 years old prior to Jan 1st. We finished this season with 48/50 contracts. We have a lot of CHL prospects in 2026 that need to be signed if we're to retain their services.

2025, Time to Sign Date
Port (WHL)
Francis (NCAA)

2026, Time to Sign Date:
Blaise (QMJHL)
Massé (QMJHL)
Procyszyn (OHL)
Tarin Smith (WHL)
Kukkonen (NCAA)

Now, I would prefer we start drafting in the NCAA and/or European leagues because we have a longer time to retain their rights. If the org feels comfortable enough to sign them earlier than their "time to sign date", then the org is confident that prospect can take the next step. That step could be the AHL or NHL.
 
Hockey Duckie said:
Time to sign prospects
  • CHL: two years
  • NCAA: four years
  • USHL+NCAA: five years
  • European: four years
  • Russian: indefinitely
If a CHL prospect isn't signed within two years and are young enough, then they go back into the NHL draft.

Going to the NCAA doesn't preclude a signed prospect going to the AHL. Nesterenko, Helleson, and Colangelo have gone to the AHL in their first, full pro season. Colangelo didn't explode until his senior year. Imagine if Colangelo was a CHL product and didn't have a great first two seasons, then we wouldn't have signed him and he would have gone back into the draft.

The ELC slide rule ends once a prospect turns 20 years old prior to Jan 1st. We finished this season with 48/50 contracts. We have a lot of CHL prospects in 2026 that need to be signed if we're to retain their services.

2025, Time to Sign Date
Port (WHL)
Francis (NCAA)

2026, Time to Sign Date:
Blaise (QMJHL)
Massé (QMJHL)
Procyszyn (OHL)
Tarin Smith (WHL)
Kukkonen (NCAA)

Now, I would prefer we start drafting in the NCAA and/or European leagues because we have a longer time to retain their rights. If the org feels comfortable enough to sign them earlier than their "time to sign date", then the org is confident that prospect can take the next step. That step could be the AHL or NHL.
Click to expand...
How is the time to sign effected when they jump from NCAA to CHL or vice versa? Like if they are drafted from the USHL play a year in college then go to the CHL, does that mean we need to sign them within 2 years or do we have 5 years? What if they jump back and forth, college to CHL and back to college?

I think the Hurricanes like the indefinite contracts so they draft a ton of Russians, maybe hoping for a late bloomer.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TheDarkWingThatDucks
Hockey Duckie said:
Time to sign prospects
  • CHL: two years
  • NCAA: four years
  • USHL+NCAA: five years
  • European: four years
  • Russian: indefinitely
If a CHL prospect isn't signed within two years and are young enough, then they go back into the NHL draft.

Going to the NCAA doesn't preclude a signed prospect going to the AHL. Nesterenko, Helleson, and Colangelo have gone to the AHL in their first, full pro season. Colangelo didn't explode until his senior year. Imagine if Colangelo was a CHL product and didn't have a great first two seasons, then we wouldn't have signed him and he would have gone back into the draft.

The ELC slide rule ends once a prospect turns 20 years old prior to Jan 1st. We finished this season with 48/50 contracts. We have a lot of CHL prospects in 2026 that need to be signed if we're to retain their services.

2025, Time to Sign Date
Port (WHL)
Francis (NCAA)

2026, Time to Sign Date:
Blaise (QMJHL)
Massé (QMJHL)
Procyszyn (OHL)
Tarin Smith (WHL)
Kukkonen (NCAA)

Now, I would prefer we start drafting in the NCAA and/or European leagues because we have a longer time to retain their rights. If the org feels comfortable enough to sign them earlier than their "time to sign date", then the org is confident that prospect can take the next step. That step could be the AHL or NHL.
Click to expand...
I think we are saying similar things. Now would be the time to start drafting more college / European players outside your top 10 picks. (Cause those are just best player).

But to build organizational depth with no prospects in the AHL, the first couple years is probably better to take swings on the CHL players like Sidorov / Luneau / Gaucher etc to try and get some AHL players ready for the next two years as players who they should be called up if injuries occurr. Rather than calling up a Harkins.

I just don’t think it’s as simple as Verbeek learned his lesson, but more it could have been done as part of a plan, because that makes sense to me, that a GM would want young talent coming up through the AHL and NHL for the first 3-5 years of the rebuild. Then the next 5 years you want contracts room and start to build the European / college prospects to delay the ELC signings until you start losing NHL middle and bottom 6 players.

Like the lightning have lost a lot of those guys on their championship teams, because they pay top end talent and can’t afford the fringe guys. Edmonton just lost good players for the same reason, and the Maple leafs may lose Marner.

we will see how he drafts this year, but if it’s a more college / European draft with a couple CHL guys, I would think it’s more by design than Verbeek learning a lesson.
 
TheDarkWingThatDucks said:
I think we are saying similar things. Now would be the time to start drafting more college / European players outside your top 10 picks. (Cause those are just best player).

But to build organizational depth with no prospects in the AHL, the first couple years is probably better to take swings on the CHL players like Sidorov / Luneau / Gaucher etc to try and get some AHL players ready for the next two years as players who they should be called up if injuries occurr. Rather than calling up a Harkins.

I just don’t think it’s as simple as Verbeek learned his lesson, but more it could have been done as part of a plan, because that makes sense to me, that a GM would want young talent coming up through the AHL and NHL for the first 3-5 years of the rebuild. Then the next 5 years you want contracts room and start to build the European / college prospects to delay the ELC signings until you start losing NHL middle and bottom 6 players.

Like the lightning have lost a lot of those guys on their championship teams, because they pay top end talent and can’t afford the fringe guys. Edmonton just lost good players for the same reason, and the Maple leafs may lose Marner.

we will see how he drafts this year, but if it’s a more college / European draft with a couple CHL guys, I would think it’s more by design than Verbeek learning a lesson.
Click to expand...

What are you blathering about? If we're saying the same thing, then there's nothing else to be said. We are excluding NCAA players in the first four rounds, which is limiting the talent pool available.

If we're talking about taking swings, then we missed out on NCAA Snuggerud or European Kulich over Gaucher in 2022. There were other players besides Myatovic in 2023. Another aspect of NCAA and European prospects is that they're eligible for the AHL at age 18, they don't have to wait until they are age 20. If you're really on this "go to the AHL" schtick, then why not more NCAA or Euros since they have that option sooner?

As for AHL call-ups, we want more Harkins type players to make sure our youths are properly sheltered and aren't rushed to the NHL level.
 
Hockey Duckie said:
What are you blathering about? If we're saying the same thing, then there's nothing else to be said. We are excluding NCAA players in the first four rounds, which is limiting the talent pool available.

If we're talking about taking swings, then we missed out on NCAA Snuggerud or European Kulich over Gaucher in 2022. There were other players besides Myatovic in 2023. Another aspect of NCAA and European prospects is that they're eligible for the AHL at age 18, they don't have to wait until they are age 20. If you're really on this "go to the AHL" schtick, then why not more NCAA or Euros since they have that option sooner?

As for AHL call-ups, we want more Harkins type players to make sure our youths are properly sheltered and aren't rushed to the NHL level.
Click to expand...
1745467536859.gif
 
AngelDuck said:
the lottery is 2 weeks from now.

I’m not holding my breath but it sure would be cool to jump up and steal Misa from the Hawks/Sharks

Rebuild would officially be over
Click to expand...
That's my wish as well they jump to #2 and draft Misa.
They should be able to run 3 deep lines with Misa in top6 and the 4th line is upgraded by 2 veterans being demoted.
Gauthier/Carlsson/Killorn - could try Colangelo here as net front presence.
Terry/Misa/Sennecke
Zegras/McTavish/Colangelo - could put Killorn there.
Vatrano/Gaucher(Washe?)/Strome
 
Static said:
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.
Click to expand...
I think there’s a pretty good chance

Mrtka or/and Jackson go before we pick… which would leave us with a pretty solid forward

I also think a lot of teams in picks before us need centers so I think McQueen/des will be gone before our pick

Think bruins will draft hagans and flyers will take 1 of des/mcqueen
 
Pronman released his first mock draft today. Here is how the top 10 shook out:

1. SJS - Schaefer
2. CHI - Misa
3. NSH - Desnoyers
4. PHI - Hagens
5. BOS - Frondell
6. SEA - O’Brien
7. BUF - Martone
8. ANA - Mrtka
9. PIT - Eklund
10. NYI - McQueen

Definitely feels like there could be a run on centers from 3-5, which would drop Martone. My guess is that he wouldn’t get past Seattle, though.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Anaheim4ever
All Mighty said:
Pronman released his first mock draft today. Here is how the top 10 shook out:

1. SJS - Schaefer
2. CHI - Misa
3. NSH - Desnoyers
4. PHI - Hagens
5. BOS - Frondell
6. SEA - O’Brien
7. BUF - Martone
8. ANA - Mrtka
9. PIT - Eklund
10. NYI - McQueen

Definitely feels like there could be a run on centers from 3-5, which would drop Martone. My guess is that he wouldn’t get past Seattle, though.
Click to expand...
Drafting Mrtka over Eklund and McQueen would be frustrating
 
All Mighty said:
Pronman released his first mock draft today. Here is how the top 10 shook out:

1. SJS - Schaefer
2. CHI - Misa
3. NSH - Desnoyers
4. PHI - Hagens
5. BOS - Frondell
6. SEA - O’Brien
7. BUF - Martone
8. ANA - Mrtka
9. PIT - Eklund
10. NYI - McQueen

Definitely feels like there could be a run on centers from 3-5, which would drop Martone. My guess is that he wouldn’t get past Seattle, though.
Click to expand...
Wheeler also posted a feature on Mrtka this morning:
 
All Mighty said:
Pronman released his first mock draft today. Here is how the top 10 shook out:

1. SJS - Schaefer
2. CHI - Misa
3. NSH - Desnoyers
4. PHI - Hagens
5. BOS - Frondell
6. SEA - O’Brien
7. BUF - Martone
8. ANA - Mrtka
9. PIT - Eklund
10. NYI - McQueen

Definitely feels like there could be a run on centers from 3-5, which would drop Martone. My guess is that he wouldn’t get past Seattle, though.
Click to expand...
If the draft falls the way that Pronman has it, having to decide between Mrtka, Eklund, and McQueen would be a good problem to have.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

  • ... and 1 more.
    • Total: 13 (members: 9, guests: 4)

    Latest posts

    Ad

    Ad

    Top Bottom