Prospect Info: Caps Prospects General Discussion Thread - 2024-25

[Random schmoe]

Given the variability with goalie development and performance (and how decent ones can seemingly be found in later rounds) I generally don't like the idea of using a 1st rounder on one. But I recognize that we lack a high upside prospect at the position. I'm usually BPA, and if Ravensbergen is BPA at that point then I won't complain.

Plus, Ravensburger makes great puzzles, so I'll always think of them when thinking of him.

 

[qc14]

It's not a very good draft so typical rules probably shouldn't apply. IMO a case can be made for Ravensbergen as BPA as soon as around 18ish. Around then it seems like teams may be getting middle of the lineup players at best so I wouldn't count on him being available in the late 20's. But him not having as strong of a season behind a lesser team this year may help push him down. I don't know if there's a long list of alternatives that would manage to stand out from what's already in the system.

Ryabkin could be an upside play if available but there seem to be character concerns. Reschny or Schmidt may be too small. In contrast Wang is likely too much of a project. To categorically avoid a goaltender in some drafts requires going pretty deep in the bag and I'm not sure this one offers up enough quality to rule it out.

Trading up for Lakovic/Spence/Aitcheson would probably be my play if at all manageable but I doubt many GMs will fall for the depth of this class. Cootes and Nesbitt would be strong adds but mid 20's on it seems thin (again, particularly if looking for someone that would manage to rank very high in their system).

Nesbitt intrigues me and I'm sure they've seen quite a bit of him this year with the Little Pro connection. Wang seems like the exact kind of project that they like ... in the second round. I absolutely love Carter Bear but I think he's definitely played himself way out of the range they'll be picking in.

As for Ravensbergen, I'm pretty firmly in the "never take a goalie in the 1st round" camp. The uncertainty and longer development time just makes the opportunity cost not worth it to me.

 

[Silky mitts]

Goalies bust at a higher rate, in particular in the bottom half of the first round (graph from 1st link)

They take longer to develop than other positions, decline earlier, it’s easier to find all stars outside the first round - Hellebuyck, Shesterkin, Holtby, etc, and any positive statistics of drafting a goalie in the first round outside the top 5 are driven by Vasi and Oettinger (see 2nd link for numerous other examples of goalies drafted in that range) And the success stories of teams that drafted successful goalies in the top 5 - Penguins paid to get rid of MAF and Price’s deal killed Montreal for years.

NHL Draft Pick Probabilities By Position

After the first article about NHL Draft Pick Probabilities (link) was released, there were some asking for something similar but with different player positions being separated to see if there are any differences there. That raised my interest, so I decided to use the same data

dobberprospects.com

Drafting A Goalie In 1st Round Rarely Wise - SinBin.vegas

Before we even get into how good Spencer Knight is (and believe me, we will over the course of the next four weeks), I thought it was a good idea to take a look at highly drafted goalies to even begin to consider whether the match made in heaven should even be considered on June 21st.

sinbin.vegas

 

[trick9]

Rimpinen in the 3rd round >>>>> Ravensbergen in the 1st round.

I don't need our goalie to be 6'5. There are so many other traits in goalies that are next to impossible to track for goalies at 18 for me to draft one that early. Rimpinen has better resume and there are goalies that look statistically better than Ravensbergen even in the same league, but those guys aren't 6'5 so nobody would ever even consider them in the 1st round. And that's stupid. Rimpinen is 6'1 so exactly the same size as Igor Shesterkin for example. Not exactly a midget.

Jack Ivankovic has statistically been better than Joshua Ravensbergen in the OHL which is arguably a tougher league for a goalie. Unlike Rimpinen he's actually making the lists though because he atleast plays in Canada. But he's dropped to 2nd/3rd round is several lists because he's only 5'11 now. But he also turns 18 only month before the draft.

Goalie wise our situation is pretty good. Logan Thompson is only 27. They have Clay Stevenson -card that they should look into at some point. Lindgren might stay or might not, but he's getting older. They drafted Nicholas Kempf last summer. This isn't a situation where we desperately need to take a swing at a goalie. Depending on how they view Kempf's development, i'd be okay with taking a swing at another goalie later in the draft. Bob didn't have Rimpinen in his list so there is a decent chance he can be had with a late 2nd, 3rd round pick. If they view him really high i'd even be okay with Ivankovic or Rimpinen in the 2nd round.

I think the need for top-end talent at both forward and defense (Carlson -replacement) is way too big to take a swing at goalie late in the 1st round. It makes sense if you view him as a generational goalie. Ravensbergen really isn't one. It's a cool story since he's teammates with Parascak but from what i've seen from him mainly from watching Parascak, i don't really like the idea of spending a 1st rounder for him. I might change my mind if the Capitals plan was to let Thompson walk and keep Lindgren short-term instead but in my eyes that would be a really stupid plan.

 

[Langway]

From Bob's mid-season rankings:

Like pretty much every year, the scouts are enamored of the 2025 crop of talent available in the top 10. Actually, make that the top 15. Beyond that, though, the consensus seems to be that the class of 2025 lacks depth of talent....

“Nos. 1 to 8 are quite strong, but there’s a bit of a drop off after eight and then again a bigger drop off between 15 and 20,” said another scout.

One scout went so far as to say a lot of the players who will be drafted in the bottom half of the first round would in prior years be better suited to being second-round picks.

“It’s all relative of course,” the scout said, “but I’d say the second rounders this year would be third rounders in previous years where there was greater depth.”

All fine points re: Ravensbergen. All sound. But it's about their board, which definitely should not be categorically formulated. I don't have particularly high faith in this class providing meaningful value otherwise in the late 20's without a lot (a lot) breaking favorably. Things can change. Lots of players could finish strong. Plenty could develop considerably post-draft. But as-is anyway I'd still be inclined to take on the risk compared to a Reschny or Schmidt that probably won't meaningfully add top-end carrying talent (particularly if they struggle to earn PPTOI down the road).

Even better would probably be trading the pick in a package for a more proven impact commodity if possible. Perhaps it's the wrong lens to assess this class but it's a struggle to assess options that would manage to distinguish themselves from what they already have in the system. There could be useful depth. I wouldn't count on a Nesbitt or Cootes being available to at least fortify C depth with a bit of a contrasting skill set. Gastrin could be available, though I wouldn't count on it if he impresses at the U18s. Perhaps they'd be willing to take a chance on Ryabkin...but overall I'm pretty skeptical that these lofty core replacement objectives will be remotely possible within their current pick area.

 

[barriers]

THOMAS SETS NEW BULLDOGS SINGLE GAME SCORING RECORD IN 6-2 WIN - Brantford Bulldogs

BRANTFORD, ONTARIO. The Brantford Bulldogs hosted “BFD Night” on Wednesday night at the Brantford Civic Centre with the game, against the Niagara IceDogs in support of the Brant Community Healthcare System Foundation. The night began with the Bulldogs Foundation presenting a cheque for $100,000...

chl.ca

Thomas with a piece of all Brantford's 6 goals the other night

 

[Kolzilla]

From Bob's mid-season rankings:

All fine points re: Ravensbergen. All sound. But it's about their board, which definitely should not be categorically formulated. I don't have particularly high faith in this class providing meaningful value otherwise in the late 20's without a lot (a lot) breaking favorably. Things can change. Lots of players could finish strong. Plenty could develop considerably post-draft. But as-is anyway I'd still be inclined to take on the risk compared to a Reschny or Schmidt that probably won't meaningfully add top-end carrying talent (particularly if they struggle to earn PPTOI down the road).

Even better would probably be trading the pick in a package for a more proven impact commodity if possible. Perhaps it's the wrong lens to assess this class but it's a struggle to assess options that would manage to distinguish themselves from what they already have in the system. There could be useful depth. I wouldn't count on a Nesbitt or Cootes being available to at least fortify C depth with a bit of a contrasting skill set. Gastrin could be available, though I wouldn't count on it if he impresses at the U18s. Perhaps they'd be willing to take a chance on Ryabkin...but overall I'm pretty skeptical that these lofty core replacement objectives will be remotely possible within their current pick area.

Love this take. Given this draft and apparent lack of top tier talent, I think it would make more sense to move the first and one of Paraschak/Miro/Lapierre plus another small piece for a clear top 6 F or top 3 D upgrade. Rasmus Andersson (contingent on an extension come July 1st) or Alex Tuch for example.

Take a swing on a G in rounds 3-5 imo. Re: Rimpinen, Do we think WSH would actually draft a Finn???