Prospect Info: Caps Top Prospects General Discussion Thread Vol. 2 - 2021-22

[Langway]

The two top goalies are late 2nd/3rds...I'd be interested in taking one of them somehow. After them it falls off a cliff. Trade back in the 2nd and pickup another decent pick? Draft them both?

I don't know that they need to draft one of them. They're the best this draft has to offer but they're still a bit marginal. Brennan is the best I guess but ultimately I don't know if Dyck in the 4th/5th round is that much worse.

They could maybe draft the RD Havelid in the second round and then his twin brother the shorter goalie in the 5th/6th. It's probably not a year to telegraph a goalie pick relatively early and I don't know about trading down. The later round depth overall doesn't seem that strong. Better at 46 to just pick whoever slides unless there's a wealth of options they're equally comfortable with a bit later. 14 picks into the second round there's bound to be quality options left. Arizona is slated to pick four times in the second before 46(!). If they don't use some of them to trade up in the first they may be the team that takes one of the goalies. But I'd just stay put and probably target another middle of the lineup type talent.

 

[Cush]

Sportsnet's 2022 NHL Draft Prospect Rankings: Final Edition

In his final draft rankings of the season, Sam Cosentino keeps Shane Wright at the top, but it's really tight with the top three. The NHL Draft is up next on July 7-8.

www.sportsnet.ca

 

[Holtbyisms]

I don't know that they need to draft one of them. They're the best this draft has to offer but they're still a bit marginal. Brennan is the best I guess but ultimately I don't know if Dyck in the 4th/5th round is that much worse.

They could maybe draft the RD Havelid in the second round and then his twin brother the shorter goalie in the 5th/6th. It's probably not a year to telegraph a goalie pick relatively early and I don't know about trading down. The later round depth overall doesn't seem that strong. Better at 46 to just pick whoever slides unless there's a wealth of options they're equally comfortable with a bit later. 14 picks into the second round there's bound to be quality options left. Arizona is slated to pick four times in the second before 46(!). If they don't use some of them to trade up in the first they may be the team that takes one of the goalies. But I'd just stay put and probably target another middle of the lineup type talent.

I like Leinonen more than Brennan from what I've seen. Wouldn't be opposed to either in the 2nd or 3rd. I like some of the goaltending prospects we've got especially Chase Clark and Clay Stevenson but Leinonen would be a potential high reward addition with a pick that typically turns into nothing anyways. I never really buy the narrative that there's no elite goaltenders in a class when there's not a surefire stud at the top of everyone's charts. Look at '17 when supposedly only Oettinger was only a potential 1st round pick. Lots of great goaltenders in that class with more still on the cusp of the NHL.

 

[Langway]

Logically there will be goalies that play. I just haven't been won over by any and if it's more of a lottery ticket do it later. Trading down five or ten spots from 46 and adding a third could be sound. As-is there's a solid dozen prospects that maybe aren't first rounders but are pretty solid: Lindgren, Lutz, Schaefer, Pickering, Lorenz, Bystedt, Havelid, Hutson, Goyette, Sykora, DBB & Ingram. There's the secondary Russian forwards, a number of D from the Q (Warren, Luneau & Lamoureux) and a number of other European forwards so there's a wealth of options to choose from. Some could sneak into the first round but that'll push others down.

They should be able to sit tight and net a prospect roughly comparable to Iorio at 46, maybe a bit better. They should be able to add two top five prospects to the system and then maybe another in the third comparable to Protas. Who knows what else they may have cooking re: trades to add/subtract from that. But that's my expectation level as-is. It may not be a heralded draft at the top-end but the depth seems pretty solid through rounds 4/5. I'd really lean into that and what the draft more readily looks to yield than force anything.

 

[Marshall]

If Mocks are your thing:

RLR
1st Mock: D.Yurov
2nd Mock: B.Lambert

McKeens
1st Mock: D.Mateychuk
2nd Mock: L.Ohgren

 

[Langway]

I have a hard time seeing Mateychuk getting past Los Angeles. He's exactly what they're after and need structurally (aside from maybe height). Bichsel could throw a wrench into things. Maybe he's what allows Mateychuk to be available. That said, three of the four conference finalist have very distinguished top four defenses. You wonder if that won't help create a run on defensemen in this draft. Does it give Chesley some helium? Rinzel? RD are hard to come by. Pickering could also benefit.

All of which is to say I wouldn't be at all surprised if there's a quality winger or two available at 20. They're the least central components generally and whether it's Lambert or Yurov there are enough questions where it may not take much for them to slide. The question may be whether anyone wants to trade up for them. VAN & NSH don't currently have second round picks. They could be candidates to move down, as could PIT/STL after the Caps. It's really hard to say how coveted those two end up being. I think Geekie & Nazar may also end up being wild cards but those two are likely the biggest ones when it comes to the mid stage of the first round.

 

[Langway]

Dueling two-round mock draft: Corey Pronman and an NHL source predict the 2022 NHL Draft

The Athletic's Corey Pronman and an anonymous NHL hockey ops source predict what they think will happen at the 2022 NHL Draft.

theathletic.com

Gaucher over McGroarty, Mateychuk & Kulich would be a waste. Korchinski to BUF at 9, Bichsel to CBJ at 12 and both Russians gone by 20 would be surprising. To reach for a Gaucher would be regrettable. I don't think he has the vision and playmaking needed to flip CMM/Lapierre at center down the line. He conceivably could fit better on a scoring-line on the wing. If not, it would be drafting essentially a 3C barring an offensive jump. As one of the older players in the draft that's not a bet I'd look to make. Good size, some good skills but he's a fringe first rounder IMO. Then in the second they've got Perevalov, which is fine. Lorenz, Hutson, Warren, Odelius, Lindgren or Goyette would be my inclination. I would tend to go Mateychuk & Lorenz probably. Two strong combinations of work ethic and IQ.

 

[Marshall]

Dueling two-round mock draft: Corey Pronman and an NHL source predict the 2022 NHL Draft

The Athletic's Corey Pronman and an anonymous NHL hockey ops source predict what they think will happen at the 2022 NHL Draft.

theathletic.com

Gaucher over McGroarty, Mateychuk & Kulich would be a waste. Korchinski to BUF at 9, Bichsel to CBJ at 12 and both Russians gone by 20 would be surprising. To reach for a Gaucher would be regrettable. I don't think he has the vision and playmaking needed to flip CMM/Lapierre at center down the line. He conceivably could fit better on a scoring-line on the wing. If not, it would be drafting essentially a 3C barring an offensive jump. As one of the older players in the draft that's not a bet I'd look to make. Good size, some good skills but he's a fringe first rounder IMO. Then in the second they've got Perevalov, which is fine. Lorenz, Hutson, Warren, Odelius, Lindgren or Goyette would be my inclination. I would tend to go Mateychuk & Lorenz probably. Two strong combinations of work ethic and IQ.

Is it really a mock draft if the Caps don't draft a Russian in it?

 

[usiel]

Dueling two-round mock draft: Corey Pronman and an NHL source predict the 2022 NHL Draft

The Athletic's Corey Pronman and an anonymous NHL hockey ops source predict what they think will happen at the 2022 NHL Draft.

theathletic.com

Gaucher over McGroarty, Mateychuk & Kulich would be a waste. Korchinski to BUF at 9, Bichsel to CBJ at 12 and both Russians gone by 20 would be surprising. To reach for a Gaucher would be regrettable. I don't think he has the vision and playmaking needed to flip CMM/Lapierre at center down the line. He conceivably could fit better on a scoring-line on the wing. If not, it would be drafting essentially a 3C barring an offensive jump. As one of the older players in the draft that's not a bet I'd look to make. Good size, some good skills but he's a fringe first rounder IMO. Then in the second they've got Perevalov, which is fine. Lorenz, Hutson, Warren, Odelius, Lindgren or Goyette would be my inclination. I would tend to go Mateychuk & Lorenz probably. Two strong combinations of work ethic and IQ.

I always like to have more upside with the 1st round pick but do not have a problem drafting a future 3c especially in the 2nd half of the first round though admittedly have not looked close at Gaucher as a possible pick.

 

[AlexModvechkin8]

Yurov at 4 is what stands out the most to me at first glance.

 

[kicksavedave]

I think the Caps should draft Rutger McGroarty or Jimmy Snuggerud. Mainly because I want to hear Locker say those names when he's drunk.

 

[AlexModvechkin8]

I think the Caps should draft Rutger McGroarty or Jimmy Snuggerud. Mainly because I want to hear Locker say those names when he's drunk.

He’d definitely call Snuggerud, “Snuggy.”

 

[Langway]

NHL Staff Mock Draft 2.0 with scouts' audit: We select the entire first round

Who did The Athletic's NHL beat writers pick in their mock draft? Has Juraj Slafkovsky overtaken Shane Wright at No. 1?

theathletic.com

Tarik trades down for 26+62 and takes Gaucher, who is seemingly believed likely to go higher than 26. He's a raw talent to be sure and has the size they often prefer but I'd probably go Miro or Firkus. Not a bad idea to go center and at 26 it's more sensible. Not sure I'd pass on Mateychuk, Nazar or McGroarty at 20 to add a late second unless I'm of the belief there's little separating Gaucher from that group. There are flashes of upside. It's possible he blossoms and in some respects he's maybe not terribly far behind Geekie as far as bigger centers go. But I'd have liked to have seen more regular playmaking to be bullish on the depth of his offensive hockey IQ. As-is I'd have a tough time projecting him to be to dynamic enough offensively in a top six center role. Maybe if his defense becomes elite everything else funnels through that but I don't see the drive to elevate him firmly into the second tier. If he had that at his size we'd probably be talking about him as a borderline top 10 talent ala Kasper.

 

[AlexModvechkin8]

NHL Staff Mock Draft 2.0 with scouts' audit: We select the entire first round

Who did The Athletic's NHL beat writers pick in their mock draft? Has Juraj Slafkovsky overtaken Shane Wright at No. 1?

theathletic.com

Tarik trades down for 26+62 and takes Gaucher, who is seemingly believed likely to go higher than 26. He's a raw talent to be sure and has the size they often prefer but I'd probably go Miro or Firkus. Not a bad idea to go center and at 26 it's more sensible. Not sure I'd pass on Mateychuk, Nazar or McGroarty at 20 to add a late second unless I'm of the belief there's little separating Gaucher from that group. There are flashes of upside. It's possible he blossoms and in some respects he's maybe not terribly far behind Geekie as far as bigger centers go. But I'd have liked to have seen more regular playmaking to be bullish on the depth of his offensive hockey IQ. As-is I'd have a tough time projecting him to be to dynamic enough offensively in a top six center role. Maybe if his defense becomes elite everything else funnels through that but I don't see the drive to elevate him firmly into the second tier. If he had that at his size we'd probably be talking about him as a borderline top 10 talent ala Kasper.

I’m also not passing on some of those guys at 20 if they’re there. The likelihood of pick 62 being a solid NHL player is very low, so I’d rather go with the better odds of a better player at 20.

 

[twabby]

Yurov at 4 is what stands out the most to me at first glance.

I'm not going to pretend to know prospects but I do have faith the modelers and standardized point totals consistently outperform most scouts, especially for later picks. So I'll buy what this guy is selling over other experts.

 

[pman25]

Some people get so offended by Baders model but its still basically all the same guys everyone else has just in a slightly different order. Nothing that outlandish in my opinion! Wright, Nemec, Cooley all at the top just like everyone else. Even with Slaf lower, he's still top 15 which is probably about right since his rise has been from his play in international tournaments. Bader had Kucherov at #2 his draft year and had Torey Krug in the top 10 in his draft year, who went undrafted!! The model works and it's basically just looking at stats, it's fairly reliable

 

[Langway]

It's still a subjective ranking. The model appears to have Slafkovsky even lower than 16 and presumably Hutson even higher. (I mean, why not?) He also doesn't seem to believe Nichushkin would go until the mid-to-late teens in a redraft?

I get at least consulting analytics when stress-testing final lists but I'm not sure it's overly useful inside of the top 50-60 where there's already a wealth of info. Once teams have less crossover views or fewer views generally maybe it can help identify players that should be re-watched on video. But teams aren't really even trying to just draft the max offense player to begin with. The objectives aren't overly realistic. They're building teams and it requires a varying blend of skill sets. Such metrics can be helpful in attempting to build up an asset base primarily later on in drafts it's still a bit simplistic.

Did the model exist in 2011? If that's based on analysis done a decade later then good for him I guess.

 

[pman25]

I'm not sure when he actually built it, but it's using draft year NHLe production, so not really a hindsight observation. Just another tool like any other, kinda wacky but also not that different? I like to use it to study the guys who are seemingly outliers on other ranking lists, like Hutson or Trikosov. Seems like a good tool to identify value. I don't think the Detroit Red Wings should draft Lane Hutson at #8 but it might move the needle if you're in the back third of the 1st round for instance

 

[twabby]

It's still a subjective ranking. The model appears to have Slafkovsky even lower than 16 and presumably Hutson even higher. (I mean, why not?) He also doesn't seem to believe Nichushkin would go until the mid-to-late teens in a redraft?

I get at least consulting analytics when stress-testing final lists but I'm not sure it's overly useful inside of the top 50-60 where there's already a wealth of info. Teams also aren't really even trying to simply draft the max offense player to begin with. So the objectives aren't overly realistic. They're building teams and it requires a varying blend of skill sets. Such metrics can be helpful in attempting to build up an asset base primarily later on in drafts it's still a bit simplistic.

Did the model exist in 2011? If it is analysis a decade later then good for him I guess.

I think it should be the other way around though: you should come up with a list based on a model and then have to justify why you are going against the model. Drafting is still treated as an art when it really needs to be more scientific. There's just too much deference to scouts and subjective opinions. Scouts have biases that will never be eliminated. Sometimes a guy isn't drafted because he's small. Sometimes he isn't drafted because he skates funny. Sometimes a player has a bad tournament or a bad combine. Sometimes because he's Finnish, in Washington's case. Sometimes you just miss a guy because there are too many people to scout. Sometimes a guy has an awkward interview at age 17 or 18. None of these things are really predictive of how players will perform at the NHL level, while points are.

I don't have the article in front of me, but I recall reading something how if you just drafted by age- and league-adjusted point totals you would have overwhelmingly been more successful in drafting than what NHL teams have done. You'd love to have more info and stats of course, but the mere fact that simple point totals beat scouts is pretty damning of scouting in general.

Sure, with modeling there will be misses, but every method is going to have misses. But there'd be fewer misses.

There's a wealth of information available for NHL players and we still see players like Ben Chiarot and Rasmus Ristolainen valued way higher than they should be, for instance. I don't really buy that the amount of info available for top 50-60 picks makes it so that modeling and analytics isn't very useful for those picks. People are still idiots and get married to picks and player types.

 

[Langway]

It's hindsight in the sense of using it as evidence of validity. Looks like the model for 2011 also had Ryan Murphy at #3 and that didn't turn out too well. Plus, a fair amount of busts toward the end of the first round...predictably mostly slower, smaller junior producers. The 2012 results are really poor with Teravainan not in the first round and someone named Brendan Collier (?) at 21. I don't know that you'd really truly get more hits mindlessly deciding this way.

 

[pman25]

Ryan Murphy was also a consensus top 10-15 pick from regular scouting ranks as well. He was #8 on McKenzie's list. So that's an L for normal scouts too. It happens, some kids don't continue their pattern of development. His model definitely has something fishy going on with kids coming out of USHS, it seems to pull in some stinkers so I'm guessing that's where a guy like Collier comes in.

I would not advocate for blindly following the Model but you probably wouldn't do any worse than most drafts if you did

 

[twabby]

It's hindsight in the sense of using it as evidence of validity. Looks like the model for 2011 also had Ryan Murphy at #3 and that didn't turn out too well. Plus, a fair amount of busts toward the end of the first round...predictably mostly slower, smaller junior producers. The 2012 results are really poor with Teravainan not in the first round and someone named Brendan Collier (?) at 21. I don't know that you'd really truly get more hits mindlessly deciding this way.

Again, every model is going to have hits and misses. It's the frequency of these hits and misses that really matter, and from what I recall reading there was at least one model out there that significantly beat NHL teams using only point-equivalency as input. I'm pretty sure it wasn't this model, but I imagine this model is also better than scouting is.

 

[Random schmoe]

Don't forget that statistical models are themselves subjective. They are the creators opinion on what metrics make for the best player(s).

 

[Langway]

Locks (12): Wright, Slafkovsky, Cooley, Nemec, Jiricek, Gauthier, Kasper, Korchinski, Kemell, Savoie, Mintyukov
Maybes (7): Mateychuk, Nazar, Geekie, Lambert, Yurov, Bichsel, McGroarty
Field (4): Kulich, Miroshnichenko, Ohgren, Gaucher

Pre-McKenzie final list state of play. (His final rankings come out Tuesday.) This isn't 100% my ranking. I'd have Bichsel a bit later but he seems squarely in play to go top 20 and maybe fairly early. In general I'd order the Maybe group differently. It's ranked mostly based on expectation. McGroarty over Kulich may be my final slotting, in part due to intangibles/character, though Kulich offers more center potential should he get stronger and focus more defensively. McGroarty seems more likely to go earlier. There are others comparable to Ohgren/Gaucher as secondary considerations (namely Firkus/Ostlund) but should the Caps deviate slightly I'd guess they're most likely. Where Miroshnichenko comes in at on McKenzie's list will be fascinating. It's certainly possible he's gone before 20 if teams believe in him when healthy.

Mid-range stocks on the rise seem to be Bichsel & McGroarty. Pronman did believe Kulich would go top 20 a couple weeks ago but then in his more recent joint mock had him after Pickering & Gaucher. (He also had Mateychuk right after Kulich.) The majority of the maybes are stocks in decline. With three exceptions--Mateychuk, Bichsel, McGroarty--they're players that had top 5-10 billing that have faded. You'd think Mateychuk did enough to be off the board but if Bichsel rises or if scouts opt for Pickering's length you never know. The overall impression I get from players garnering late buzz is size and sandpaper being very highly valued. Korchinski doesn't have the grit but he had the big growth spurt allowing him to become a really dynamic attacking mobile D. You wonder if that trend won't play itself out favorably for the Caps. Do a number of smaller skilled players slide to them? Nazar is now seen to go 15-25. I don't doubt the Caps will have a number of high offensive upside options available. The question is maybe more whether they're after just offensive upside or do they want more well-roundedness? It's why Yurov is such a strong fit, as he realistically brings the best combo of skills in their range. There are other fits that can be developed into impact players perhaps but he seems like the easiest fit and the one that would best blend with their established players. Among the maybes IMO Yurov & Mateychuk most Get It and that's pretty valuable. That quality may also elevate Ohgren a bit. I can see some teams liking his profile over the likes of Nazar, Geekie or Lambert. Those three, the Russians and Bichsel seem like the biggest wildcards that will shape the landscape at 20.

 

[usiel]

Locks (12): Wright, Slafkovsky, Cooley, Nemec, Jiricek, Gauthier, Kasper, Korchinski, Kemell, Savoie, Mintyukov
Maybes (7): Mateychuk, Nazar, Geekie, Lambert, Yurov, Bichsel, McGroarty
Field (4): Kulich, Miroshnichenko, Ohgren, Gaucher

Pre-McKenzie final list state of play. (His final rankings come out Tuesday.) This isn't 100% my ranking. I'd have Bichsel a bit later but he seems squarely in play to go top 20 and maybe fairly early. In general I'd order the Maybe group differently. It's ranked mostly based on expectation. McGroarty over Kulich may be my final slotting, in part due to intangibles/character, though Kulich offers more center potential should he get stronger and focus more defensively. McGroarty seems more likely to go earlier. There are others comparable to Ohgren/Gaucher as secondary considerations (namely Firkus/Ostlund) but should the Caps deviate slightly I'd guess they're most likely. Where Miroshnichenko comes in at on McKenzie's list will be fascinating. It's certainly possible he's gone before 20 if teams believe in him when healthy.

Mid-range stocks on the rise seem to be Bichsel & McGroarty. Pronman did believe Kulich would go top 20 a couple weeks ago but then in his more recent joint mock had him after Pickering & Gaucher. (He also had Mateychuk right after Kulich.) The majority of the maybes are stocks in decline. With three exceptions--Mateychuk, Bichsel, McGroarty--they're players that had top 5-10 billing that have faded. You'd think Mateychuk did enough to be off the board but if Bichsel rises or if scouts opt for Pickering's length you never know. The overall impression I get from players garnering late buzz is size and sandpaper being very highly valued. Korchinski doesn't have the grit but he had the big growth spurt allowing him to become a really dynamic attacking mobile D. You wonder if that trend won't play itself out favorably for the Caps. Do a number of smaller skilled players slide to them? Nazar is now seen to go 15-25. I don't doubt the Caps will have a number of high offensive upside options available. The question is maybe more whether they're after just offensive upside or do they want more well-roundedness? It's why Yurov is such a strong fit, as he realistically brings the best combo of skills in their range. There are other fits that can be developed into impact players perhaps but he seems like the easiest fit. and the one that would best blend with their established players Among the maybes IMO Yurov & Mateychuk most Get It and that's pretty valuable. That quality may also elevate Ohgren a bit. I can see some teams liking his profile over the likes of Nazar, Geekie or Lambert. Those three, the Russians and Bichsel seem like the biggest wildcards that will shape the landscape at 20.

Appreciate the run down here at this point in time.