Prospect Info: Current #2 overall poll and discussion

[severian]

Actually, Slafkovsky looked quite good at the end of the Liiga and in the playoffs, if you watched him. There was notable improvement.

I'll post this again, because we can split Slafkovsky's season into several parts:

1) Finnish Juniors: Slaf dominated
2) Liiga, Part One: Slaf played a bottom 6 role and struggled
3) Olympics: Slaf dominated to an historic degree
4) Liiga, Part Two: Slaf played well
5) World Championships: Slaf dominated

Why are we focusing on one section of the season, a section which Slafkovsky clearly progressed from? What we should be doing -- instead of picking apart Slaf's play in literally November -- is using our scouting acumen to estimate how many points Slafkovsky would have scored had he played in the CHL or for the US-NTDP.

Does anyone -- anyone -- think he wouldn't have approached Cooley's 78 points for the US-NTDP? I also think most people would agree Slafkovsky would have challenged Wright's 94 points in the CHL, as well. Because I think it's pretty clear he would have been a top-line LW on the US-NTDP or every team in the CHL.

I’m not disagreeing with you. I just am saying that I understand where concerns about the bust potential come from. If Slaf is there at #2, he better be the Devils pick.

 

[njdevils1982]

Yeah, but Kakko and Wright are both righties and Slafkovsky is a lefty, so I would say Kakko and Wright are more similar players.

But then we should take into account that Kakko and Cooley both like ketchup on their hot dogs while Wright and Slafkovsky prefer mustard, so maybe the best comparison for Kakko is Cooley.

i once knew someone that got mad/irritated at anyone who put ketchup on a hotdog if they were over 12 years old

 

[Hisch13r]

Yeah, but Kakko and Wright are both righties and Slafkovsky is a lefty, so I would say Kakko and Wright are more similar players.

But then we should take into account that Kakko and Cooley both like ketchup on their hot dogs while Wright and Slafkovsky prefer mustard, so maybe the best comparison for Kakko is Cooley.

Kakko is a lefty.

 

[StevenToddIves]

Kakko is a lefty.

Haha, right. I mean left. But does he like ketchup on his hot dogs?

 

[Guadana]

Actually, Slafkovsky looked quite good at the end of the Liiga and in the playoffs, if you watched him. There was notable improvement.

I'll post this again, because we can split Slafkovsky's season into several parts:

1) Finnish Juniors: Slaf dominated
2) Liiga, Part One: Slaf played a bottom 6 role and struggled
3) Olympics: Slaf dominated to an historic degree
4) Liiga, Part Two: Slaf played well
5) World Championships: Slaf dominated

Why are we focusing on one section of the season, a section which Slafkovsky clearly progressed from? What we should be doing -- instead of picking apart Slaf's play in literally November -- is using our scouting acumen to estimate how many points Slafkovsky would have scored had he played in the CHL or for the US-NTDP.

Does anyone -- anyone -- think he wouldn't have approached Cooley's 78 points for the US-NTDP? I also think most people would agree Slafkovsky would have challenged Wright's 94 points in the CHL, as well. Because I think it's pretty clear he would have been a top-line LW on the US-NTDP or every team in the CHL.

Slafkovsky would laugh in the face of Wright if he would play in OHL, boarding him out of the puck. And everybody else. He didn't need to do it. Because he worked and progressed in better league with much better competition in different roles.

Its ok. Its not a question of stats. We know what we saw. He is unique player. He can play on the higher pace, he can slow the game, he is very helpful in cycling, he can create on the rushes. If he will adapt, he is a new star player. His potential duo with our centers is something, that can't give me sleep. He is my favorite forward on the draft in the last 4-6 years after Jack. I love skills, level, intense, compete level, trajectory of his development, how he works on his weaknesses.
I did start with skepticism, because of shot and skating, but he show big improvements. In one year. This is what you wanna see from your top prospect. Not a good to mediocre play off with meh two way game. Slaf ripped the world. I think we are very close to lose him. Because I would easily draft him 1OA. Wright is good, but the ceiling is a ceiling. And the floor of Slafkovsky is much better, because of compete level. People are trying to talk about bust potential because of Jesse and Kakko but they are what they are. Slafkovsky is an absolutely different player.
Anyway its a question of Hughes and Fitz now. Not the fan preferences. I would trade up 2nd and 37th for 1oa, if Hughes would say "I would draft Slaf, if you not gonna give me your 2nd round pick". I know its a blackmail, but I don't fun with it.

 

[StevenToddIves]

I’m not disagreeing with you. I just am saying that I understand where concerns about the bust potential come from. If Slaf is there at #2, he better be the Devils pick.

There is an upside and downside to every prospect; a ceiling and a floor. Focusing on one as the gross probability is detrimental to the scouting process, in my opinion.

In my years of analyzing draft eligibles and prospects, I found there is no 100% indicator, but there are a few elements which change the probability for the better or the worse. Foremost among them would be the intangible combination of hockey IQ/compete level. Or quite simply, players who give utmost effort and think the game at a high level are less likely to fail.

All of the top 5 prospects for this draft -- which I would consider to be Wright, Slafkovsky, Jiricek, Nemec and Cooley -- combine high level IQ and compete level. Does this mean they will all reach their ceiling? No, and I would add that it's highly unlikely. But I would be willing to bet all 5 become good, productive NHLers.

There are elements which scare me off first-round eligibles and elements which attract me to later round sleepers, and these have to do with singular skills which can potentially elevate or sabotage a prospect. Usually, these are more pronounced for defenders, but they also appear in forwards. For instance, I have the highest ranking of Alexander Perevalov I have seen, because he has a litany of elite or high-end skills: shooting, passing, puckhandling, IQ and compete. I'm probably the only person around who has Perevalov ranked over Lekkerimaki, but to me Lekkerimaki has just one elite skill -- shooting. Granted, I still have Lekkerimaki in my first round, because he might have the best shot in the entire draft, and he's pretty good in every other offensive category. But to me, Perevalov will be the likely better player in the NHL.

If either Perevalov or Lekkerimaki were high-end skaters, I would likely have them in my top 10. But they're not, so Perevalov is #12 and Lekkerimaki #20. Because this is a factor which can singularly turn a great prospect into a borderline player.

Both Wright and Slafkovsky are very good but not high-end skaters. But also, neither player has a red flag whatsoever in their scouting reports which would lend to the thinking they could bust. They both have excellent intangibles, they're both high end passers, playmakers and puck handlers. I think we can say with some confidence that Wright possesses the best combination of playmaking/shooting in the entire 2022 class, while Slafkovsky possesses the best combination of playmaking/puckhandling in the entire 2022 class. When I factor in these elite abilities with a lack of discernible weaknesses, it's easy to see why I have them both ranked top 2 overall.

Essentially, any player can bust. I don't think we'll ever be able to 100% explain away why Cody Glass washed out or why Nail Yakupov washed out. There's always a top 10 pick or two who fails to meet expectation, and sometimes even a top 5 pick. In 2019 there was Alex Turcotte -- who still can become a good middle-6 center, but certainly shouldn't have been picked before Zegras and Cozens. In 2018, Kotkaniemi and Hayton were reaches where they were taken, but Zadina has certainly fallen short of expectation. 2017 -- Patrick and Glass. 2016 -- Juolevi and Nylander. 2015 of course would feature Pavel Zacha atop the list. And so on.

Some of these players are cautionary tales -- Alex Nylander had all the skill and pedigree in the world, but lacked compete level to an almost absurd degree. A Zacha or Broberg were the penultimate "big & fast & hard shot" picks who lacked hockey IQ and just weren't that great at hockey when they were drafted. But what about Glass and Turcotte and Zadina? I still can't understand how they failed to meet expectation, and I've yet to meet anyone with a reasonable explanation.

I will finish by saying that none of these players were top 2 picks, and I think we have a pretty defined top 2 forwards for 2022 with Wright and Slafkovsky. I am very confident that both of these players will be, at the very least, good NHL top 6 forwards. And they both have the upside to be dominant superstars at the highest level. Therefore, I think it's counterproductive to be focusing on the perhaps real but ultimately very very slim chance that either will somehow bust at the NHL level.

 

[Guadana]

There is an upside and downside to every prospect; a ceiling and a floor. Focusing on one as the gross probability is detrimental to the scouting process, in my opinion.

In my years of analyzing draft eligibles and prospects, I found there is no 100% indicator, but there are a few elements which change the probability for the better or the worse. Foremost among them would be the intangible combination of hockey IQ/compete level. Or quite simply, players who give utmost effort and think the game at a high level are less likely to fail.

All of the top 5 prospects for this draft -- which I would consider to be Wright, Slafkovsky, Jiricek, Nemec and Cooley -- combine high level IQ and compete level. Does this mean they will all reach their ceiling? No, and I would add that it's highly unlikely. But I would be willing to bet all 5 become good, productive NHLers.

There are elements which scare me off first-round eligibles and elements which attract me to later round sleepers, and these have to do with singular skills which can potentially elevate or sabotage a prospect. Usually, these are more pronounced for defenders, but they also appear in forwards. For instance, I have the highest ranking of Alexander Perevalov I have seen, because he has a litany of elite or high-end skills: shooting, passing, puckhandling, IQ and compete. I'm probably the only person around who has Perevalov ranked over Lekkerimaki, but to me Lekkerimaki has just one elite skill -- shooting. Granted, I still have Lekkerimaki in my first round, because he might have the best shot in the entire draft, and he's pretty good in every other offensive category. But to me, Perevalov will be the likely better player in the NHL.

If either Perevalov or Lekkerimaki were high-end skaters, I would likely have them in my top 10. But they're not, so Perevalov is #12 and Lekkerimaki #20. Because this is a factor which can singularly turn a great prospect into a borderline player.

Both Wright and Slafkovsky are very good but not high-end skaters. But also, neither player has a red flag whatsoever in their scouting reports which would lend to the thinking they could bust. They both have excellent intangibles, they're both high end passers, playmakers and puck handlers. I think we can say with some confidence that Wright possesses the best combination of playmaking/shooting in the entire 2022 class, while Slafkovsky possesses the best combination of playmaking/puckhandling in the entire 2022 class. When I factor in these elite abilities with a lack of discernible weaknesses, it's easy to see why I have them both ranked top 2 overall.

Essentially, any player can bust. I don't think we'll ever be able to 100% explain away why Cody Glass washed out or why Nail Yakupov washed out. There's always a top 10 pick or two who fails to meet expectation, and sometimes even a top 5 pick. In 2019 there was Alex Turcotte -- who still can become a good middle-6 center, but certainly shouldn't have been picked before Zegras and Cozens. In 2018, Kotkaniemi and Hayton were reaches where they were taken, but Zadina has certainly fallen short of expectation. 2017 -- Patrick and Glass. 2016 -- Juolevi and Nylander. 2015 of course would feature Pavel Zacha atop the list. And so on.

Some of these players are cautionary tales -- Alex Nylander had all the skill and pedigree in the world, but lacked compete level to an almost absurd degree. A Zacha or Broberg were the penultimate "big & fast & hard shot" picks who lacked hockey IQ and just weren't that great at hockey when they were drafted. But what about Glass and Turcotte and Zadina? I still can't understand how they failed to meet expectation, and I've yet to meet anyone with a reasonable explanation.

I will finish by saying that none of these players were top 2 picks, and I think we have a pretty defined top 2 forwards for 2022 with Wright and Slafkovsky. I am very confident that both of these players will be, at the very least, good NHL top 6 forwards. And they both have the upside to be dominant superstars at the highest level. Therefore, I think it's counterproductive to be focusing on the perhaps real but ultimately very very slim chance that either will somehow bust at the NHL level.

Seriosly? the only one?

I was surprised Turcotte was picked so high. But I will not make a smart words when everything was done after time.
Anyway sometimes it’s a question of personality, psychological aspect and how player can live with The pressure from other side and from himself.
Reason I love Slaf, because I see good and strong personality.

 

[My3Sons]

Seriosly? the only one?

I was surprised Turcotte was picked so high. But I will not make a smart words when everything was done after time.
Anyway sometimes it’s a question of personality, psychological aspect and how player can live The pressure from other side and from himself.
Reason I love Slaf, because I see good and strong personality.

That’s some excellent word pack.

 

[Guadana]

That’s some excellent word pack.

Is it some kind of irony? Don’t mess with me, fella.
sometimes the jumper in my head doesn't work and I stumble over words and can't find them, using them rather awkwardly and crookedly.

 

[My3Sons]

Is it some kind of irony? Don’t mess with me, fella.
sometimes the jumper in my head doesn't work and I stumble over words and can't find them, using them rather awkwardly and crookedly.

And those are my favorite posts. You always get your point across and it’s fun to read your messages that have unusual diction. Most of us are just posting different variations of the same thing but your posts at times are fantastically different. Word pack just struck me as a great metaphor for vocabulary.

 

[Guadana]

And those are my favorite posts. You always get your point across and it’s fun to read your messages that have unusual diction. Most of us are just posting different variations of the same thing but your posts at times are fantastically different. Word pack just struck me as a great metaphor for vocabulary.

Yeah. I forgot “vocabulary” word. and change it by… “word pack”. This is literally show how limited my vocabulary is.

 

[glenwo2]

That’s some excellent word pack.

That's because @Guadana loves to Hockey like Nico.

Everyone here loves guadana.

 

[My3Sons]

Yeah. I forgot “vocabulary” word. and change it by… “word pack”. This is literally show how limited my vocabulary is.

It’s the searching you do to get your point across and the substituted words you use that makes it fun. I promise you that we all understand your points. You are very direct and easy to understand. Don’t change a thing. I can barely put together a paragraph in English and I’ve been speaking that my whole life. For you to address nuanced topics in a second language is really impressive. I hope you aren’t insecure?

 

[Eggtimer]

How much of Slaf’s production in league play more to do with the style of game or system his team plays and what he was asked to do play into his point totals ? We’re others on his team putting up way better numbers ? Maybe it was his role and gamecstuke he was asked to play that lead to somewhat lower points than previous prospects from that league ? I’m not sure , I’m just asking if that could be a part of it

 

[Forge]

How much of Slaf’s production in league play more to do with the style of game or system his team plays and what he was asked to do play into his point totals ? We’re others on his team putting up way better numbers ? Maybe it was his role and gamecstuke he was asked to play that lead to somewhat lower points than previous prospects from that league ? I’m not sure , I’m just asking if that could be a part of it

He was 13th on the team in ppg, 8th in gpg. I'm not sure where he was in per 60 and what kind of pp time he was getting

 

[Hockey Sports Fan]

How much of Slaf’s production in league play more to do with the style of game or system his team plays and what he was asked to do play into his point totals ? We’re others on his team putting up way better numbers ? Maybe it was his role and gamecstuke he was asked to play that lead to somewhat lower points than previous prospects from that league ? I’m not sure , I’m just asking if that could be a part of it

Todd Cordell looked into this recently. Slaf shot ~5% personally and also had similarly a dreadful on-ice sh%.

In defense of Juraj Slafkovsky

There's plenty of debate whether Slafkovsky's production warrants such a high selection.

infernalaccess.substack.com

 

[Forge]

Todd Cordell looked into this recently. Slaf shot ~5% personally and also had similarly a dreadful on-ice sh%.

In defense of Juraj Slafkovsky

There's plenty of debate whether Slafkovsky's production warrants such a high selection.

infernalaccess.substack.com

It's worth noting that apparently Liiga counts all shot attempts as shots, not just shots on goal. So his true shooting percentage as we know it would be higher. His 5.9% is not really out of whack. By my math, as a team, TPS shot about 5.5% based on all shot attempts, so slaf's shooting percentage wasnt really that skewed.

 

[Jack Be Quick]

I feel like all the downtalking Wright going on is kind of like when everyone talked about Hughes' wide turns and Rangers would be lucky if Kakko fell to them, or back when Buffalo fans talked loudly about Edmonton taking Eichel because of McDavid's lack of defensive acumen. Like, cmon.

If you think that's what's going on itt then you either haven't been reading it, have a poor understanding of what most posters are saying, and/or have a questionable memory of those drafts in regards to this board.

As far as I can tell most devils fans are debating whether or not to take him if he slips and figure out the slots later, or trade him for a haul. Then two Cooley weirdos.

And the only reason anyone is considering trading him is because we're set at 1 and 2c, not because he won't be great

 

[Guadana]

That's because @Guadana loves to Hockey like Nico.

Everyone here loves guadana.

It’s the searching you do to get your point across and the substituted words you use that makes it fun. I promise you that we all understand your points. You are very direct and easy to understand. Don’t change a thing. I can barely put together a paragraph in English and I’ve been speaking that my whole life. For you to address nuanced topics in a second language is really impressive. I hope you aren’t insecure?

Thanks, Guys. It’s really great to read and feel support.

At least you are having a training before calling to some technical support.

 

[TBF1972]

If it's a valid concern that Slafkovsky will be disappointing because Kakko was disappointing, then we can also say that it's a valid concern that Cooley and Wright and Gauthier will be disappointing because Kakko was disappointing.

After all, Wright and Cooley and Gauthier have the same amount in common with Kakko as players as Slafkovsky does. Which is next to nothing, but still.

can you give me an in-depth scouting report on cooley's turns? are they wide?

 

[TBF1972]

Yeah. I forgot “vocabulary” word. and change it by… “word pack”. This is literally show how limited my vocabulary is.

limited vocabulary but great word pack.

i am also not a native english speaker, but my lack in hockey knowledge is more egregious. so you are definitely in a better position to make meaningful posts on this board than i am.

 

[StevenToddIves]

can you give me an in-depth scouting report on cooley's turns? are they wide?

So so wide.

 

[TBF1972]

So so wide.

seems like i have to ask @Guadana to get a meaningful answer.

 

[Hockey Sports Fan]

Locked On Sens just did a massive 4-hour first round mock draft with a bunch of guests. Some Flyers/elite prospects writer said we'd take Cooley second because something something "they may think they're set at center but they shouldn't."

 

[HBK27]

Locked On Sens just did a massive 4-hour first round mock draft with a bunch of guests. Some Flyers/elite prospects writer said we'd take Cooley second because something something "they may think they're set at center but they shouldn't."

This mock draft also has us taking Cooley.

Personally, I want to see us go with Slaf...though Cooley (or Wright if Montreal somehow passes on him) would be be the other pick that I'd at least be OK with. I don't really have interest in going with D.