Prospect Info: 5th Overall Pick 2020: Who Do The Sens Draft
- Thread starter JungleBeat
- Start date
- Status
What does best player available actually mean?
You look at an NHL team, you have
G
LH PMD
RH PMD
two way D
Shut down D
Point producing C
Two way C
Shut down C
Point producing W
Two way W
Checking W
So when all those roles are considered, how does the value of the role weigh on a BPA discussion. how does the rarity of the skill set weigh on the decision?
Is Drysdale a projected top 5 RH PMD? in a game that is increasingly valuing the PMD ability?
Where does a point producing W rank in a game where elite PMDs and elite Cs are more likely to drive offence? Where the Cs and Ds are more responsible to get the puck from point A the D zone to point B the O zone.
Seems to me that if your PMDs and Cs are better than the other side, your in good shape.
If Drysdale is projected as a top 5 RH PMD, it strikes me that to draft a W ahead of that, that W would have to be projected as being amongst the absolute tops in the league.
There is fluctuation amongst the top goal scoring Ws in the league year to year and some of that fluctuation relates directly to a team's PMDs and Cs.
You look at an NHL team, you have
G
LH PMD
RH PMD
two way D
Shut down D
Point producing C
Two way C
Shut down C
Point producing W
Two way W
Checking W
So when all those roles are considered, how does the value of the role weigh on a BPA discussion. how does the rarity of the skill set weigh on the decision?
Is Drysdale a projected top 5 RH PMD? in a game that is increasingly valuing the PMD ability?
Where does a point producing W rank in a game where elite PMDs and elite Cs are more likely to drive offence? Where the Cs and Ds are more responsible to get the puck from point A the D zone to point B the O zone.
Seems to me that if your PMDs and Cs are better than the other side, your in good shape.
If Drysdale is projected as a top 5 RH PMD, it strikes me that to draft a W ahead of that, that W would have to be projected as being amongst the absolute tops in the league.
There is fluctuation amongst the top goal scoring Ws in the league year to year and some of that fluctuation relates directly to a team's PMDs and Cs.
Sens of Anarchy
Registered User
- Jul 9, 2013
- 66,624
- 51,912
#TrackingTheDraft with Craig Button | Top Shelf Talent Episode 1 - Jake Sanderson LD @USAHockey
Re: BPA and ranking players. The importance of tiers. oh and Jake Sanderson
Re: BPA and ranking players. The importance of tiers. oh and Jake Sanderson
Rossi is a better prospect
Rossi is one of the best 67 I have seen in a long time would take him over couture Monahan and Konecy
I think the Giroux comparables might be on pt in terms of potential
FormentonTheFuture
Registered User
- Sep 29, 2017
- 7,761
- 3,732
Height is only one part of a persons size
turris isn’t short but he doesn’t have the frame compared to say Marchand
Sens Vader
Registered User
- Jan 23, 2016
- 7,496
- 5,334
Adele Dazeem
Registered User
aragorn
Do The Right Thing
- Aug 8, 2004
- 29,154
- 9,782
BPA is always a point of contention with me because IMO it can be in the eye of the beholder. Yes, every draft there are clearly players who are so much better than everyone else, this yr it's Lafreniere. But Byfield & Stutzle both have the potential to be as good at some point in their development as he is & there is no guarantee he will be better. When we look at different rankings & we have already seen some wild & large differences where some people rank some prospects. Obviously, it will come down to what our own scouts prefer in players & that at times becomes worrisome when they draft a player like Lodin. Hopefully, they do well in this draft & make us proud.
Today most teams place players in tiers & if PD is saying that the group of prospects from 4 to 12 are all in the same tier, that might just mean they value #12 as much as #4, or as close. If the decision comes down to two prospects who are equally as good would it not make sense to draft the guy that the team might need more & would improve the team overall? BPA IMO is becoming more & more clouded when fewer & fewer people can agree who that player is exactly & the differences become less obvious.
Today most teams place players in tiers & if PD is saying that the group of prospects from 4 to 12 are all in the same tier, that might just mean they value #12 as much as #4, or as close. If the decision comes down to two prospects who are equally as good would it not make sense to draft the guy that the team might need more & would improve the team overall? BPA IMO is becoming more & more clouded when fewer & fewer people can agree who that player is exactly & the differences become less obvious.
BondraTime
Registered User
Picking for need is a very prevalent thing in football, and for good reason. It’s not done with much success in hockey because the way the games are played are so different.
The difference between a good center, good winger or good D is so much smaller than the difference between a good QB and a good safety. Teams reach 20+ spots every year to get a guy in the position they need, that’s not something that is done in hockey. Look at the Chargers and Herbert this year, everyone knew they were going to go QB, and Herbert was the closest option for them picking at 6 as the 20th ranked guy overall on the big board. That doesn’t happen in hockey, and when it does, you pick guys like Brian Lee over Kopitar, Staal or Bourdon
The difference between a good center, good winger or good D is so much smaller than the difference between a good QB and a good safety. Teams reach 20+ spots every year to get a guy in the position they need, that’s not something that is done in hockey. Look at the Chargers and Herbert this year, everyone knew they were going to go QB, and Herbert was the closest option for them picking at 6 as the 20th ranked guy overall on the big board. That doesn’t happen in hockey, and when it does, you pick guys like Brian Lee over Kopitar, Staal or Bourdon
Sweatred
Erase me
- Jan 28, 2019
- 13,408
- 3,326
BoardsofCanada
Registered User
This is to all the posters (Bondra Time, Aragorn, Sens of Anarchy etc.) who covet Sanderson...
I am just curious; if you could have Quinn Hughes or Jake Sanderson... who would you take?
Micklebot
Moderator
- Apr 27, 2010
- 55,538
- 33,137
Huh, tough choice between a highly ranked offensive boom or bust dman that has now blown away expectations and proven himself able to translate to the nhl despite the risk associated with his size and a prospect who while similarly ranked is considered less boom or bust but has stiil got to prove himself.
The choice is somewhat absurd at this stage. You have hindsight available to confim that the far riskier choice met the high ceiling but have to use foresight to guess how the typically safer but likely lower ceiling pick will turn out.
BondraTime
Registered User
Quinn Hughes using hindsight pretty easily, not sure why that comparison is there. Much closer using their pre draft selves, probably Sanderson the same way I liked Dobson more than Hughes.
Do you expect Drysdale to be Hughes? 60 point guy in his rookie season? If so, yeah, can’t see anyone passing on Drysdale, even at 1st.
Drysdale is going to be a fantastic D, very, very good offensive and puck mover playing 25 minutes a night and on the #1pp.
Sanderson is going to be a fantastic D, will play 25 minutes a night against the other teams top players, play the PK, and play some pp time. See him being a 35-40 point guy on average.
We haven’t had a D like Sanderson in close to 2 decades. Last time I can remember not being nervous when for a D was the A-train-Phillips pairing for 2 seasons and Chara. Been well over a decade since we had a reliable minute muncher on the back end. Karlsson was beyond great as a #1 D, but anyone who wasn’t nervous defensively with him out there was kidding themselves.
Sanderson, unlike Phillips and A-train, is an effortless skater and one of the best at getting the puck through the neutral zone into the attacking zone in the draft.
I’m perfectly fine with Drysdale ahead of Sanderson, I like Sanderson more but completely understand others preferring Drysdale. I don’t think Sanderson will have the same numbers Drysdale does in the NHL, but I do think he will play more meaningful minutes.
What I don’t understand is the sentiment that Sanderson is a safe, low ceiling guy who isn’t worth a high pick.
Last edited:
BoardsofCanada
Registered User
I am not sure why you guys are so annoyed with my question. I am curious if you would still take Sanderson over Hughes with hindsight. It's just a question.. I am not trying to start a fight.
- Feb 5, 2010
- 20,803
- 9,641
It's a strange question because one guy hasn't been drafted and the other just had one of the best rookie seasons from a defensemen. The question as to why you would compare the two is a fair question.
I will disagree with the BPA only philosophy. If there is a very clear gap then sure take BPA but if the players are in the same tier on your board then go Org need. Example could be Drysdale over Rossi or Mercer over Askarov. These are just examples if Dorion has them in the same tiers.
BoardsofCanada
Registered User
I was trying to gauge how much people liked Sanderson. Fine... it was a stupid question.
Tuna99
Registered User
- Sep 26, 2009
- 15,445
- 7,398
I think Thomson was an organizational need draft by Ottawa last year. They needed RD depth and took the best RD available In the 1st round about 20 spots ahead of his projection. And I ageee with it. Last years draft wasn’t great, so take the player your team needs, especially when you had Pinto at #32 who looks like a Ryan Kessler clone.
Sens of Anarchy
Registered User
- Jul 9, 2013
- 66,624
- 51,912
I didn’t really watch the same way. This year I’ve watched more so from the Sens draft perspective.
I thought Monahan and Couture would be decent 2nd line centres if they met their potential. I see Rossi as more of a sure thing than either of those and a higher ceiling. I will say that if the Sens have Quinn rated higher than Rossi I won’t argue. The kid’s trajectory is mind boggling and it’s misinformed to say he was helped by playing with better players.
DJB
Registered User
Age is a huge factor as to why we see NFL teams draft for need. They are picking players aged 20-24 who will step into their lineup immediately and are already developed for the most part.
Most NHL prospects dont have that luxury being 17 and 18 years old and aren't close to being fully developed
It wasn’t a dumb question dude.
You didn’t ask, but I would take Hughes.
Yeah but it only became a pick for organization need when the players seemingly on their BPA board got taken.
- Status
