Prospect Info: Current #2 overall poll and discussion

[Guadana]

I just Don't see Habs selecting Slafkovsky, The draft is being held in Montreal and I think that if they don't pick Wright or atleast Cooley the fans will Boo.

I just don't see a new front office liking the idea of getting on their fanbases bad side so early. Add the viciousness of the Montreal sports media, Slafkovsky would be the 1st OV pick with the most pressure to succeed in a long time. Anything Less then turning into Rantanen 2.0 would be seen as a bust.

Meanwhile if Wright only turned into an adequate 2nd line center I think the fans would be fine.

There is a bigger chance they will. There were not so many voices(and The Mighty Great Me was the one who started rank Slaf higher than Wright earlier) who thinks Slaf is number 1 on this draft. And now look at us - most of the fans trying to think and stay calm that mtl will pick Wright anyway. 5 steps, you know.
The media stuff was starting even before the Bob's list. Bob was very good in what he did before. Slaf was obviously much better in the end of the season, and his skill pack is visibly better for his role and style of play. He is... let's remember how people are calling it... BPA. Gm's love player like him, because they know what is working in nhl and they have a lot interview and know something about personalities. Its a case, when you see not only talent in player, you see the star potential.
Everybody loves 15 yo Shane Wright, but he isn't 15yo anymore. 2 years of covid did happened, onne year without practice did happened, Slafkovsky did happened.
I'm not saying there are no chances that they will not draft Wright. But Slaf is more realistic pick for now. And its a better pick for them. Like picking Raymond before Rossi for Detroit who had huge need in center.

 

[HBK27]

It'd be awkward, but we could just take Wright and milk the ELC years and see where things are in 2025. Might be a decent spot for a teenaged Wright to start in a bottom six role and work his way up. Hopefully he'd have a chip on his shoulder about not going #1.

If he's unhappy about his role in three years, we could look into a trade a la Nashville / Seth Jones. Or something like the Dubois for Laine swap.

The question then becomes Does the guy playing 3C want to stay long term when his contract is up and if he doesn't can we get good trade value for them. If the guy thinks he is worth more then 3C money and think his roles is harming his value he will want to bolt.

If we knew Wright was the ultimate team player then I'm all for picking Wright if he's available.

If the Devils take Wright and he's unhappy with his role within 3 years, then he comes across as an entitled prick. Falling to NJ would probably be excellent for his career. Immediately takes a ton of pressure off of him and puts him in a much better environment to succeed on a team that should be very good very soon. If he's as good as advertised, you find a way to get him his minutes. He also gets to feast on bottom pairing defensemen.

I know Jordan Staal wasn't crazy about being 3rd line center behind Crosby and Malkin, but he stuck it out 6 seasons and was rewarded with a Cup and two Finals appearances. His stats (particularly goal scoring) were also better in Pittsburgh. He probably also missed out on at least another Cup or two by wanting a bigger role elsewhere.

 

[youryeah]

me falling asleep to the thought of the devils picking a great player at 2OA regardless who it is

 

[Jack Be Quick]

It's a thing, it's real, I've seen it, not only on my son's team, but also on his high school soccer team where the goalie was 5'11" in 8th grade and 5'11" as a senior. He was still the starter as a senior but more on reputation by that point. It didn't hurt that the backup never grew past 5'9". But even if you see it, it plays out over a long period of time, and you have to know the kid and his mental makeup as well. A smart kid will adapt and be able to hide it longer. For most kids they are just trying to get a college landing spot, but I imagine in hockey with a high draft pick at issue, it's more important to evaluate.

I've been 6'0" since I was 12. People were convinced I was going to be a giant but I never grew another inch.

 

[StevenToddIves]

Damn, someone on Habs forum just compared Slaf to Petteri Nokelainen, a career 20 goal scorer in 245 games.

This shit over there is gold.

Is it just me, or is arguing about Slafkovsky with a person who obviously has never watched him play just as annoying as someone arguing with you about a book or movie they have never seen?

I just don't get it, how someone can read two blogs on a fan page about a player and think they are an expert on them. On Twitter today I saw Slafkovsky described as "big and slow" and "not very skilled" while I saw Wright described as "the next Nolan Patrick" and "not having much upside".

You can't watch these players for a single game and get that impression, you just can't. They're both terrific players. It's okay to like one better than the other -- most experts would agree it's close at the top between Slaf and Wright -- but why can't people promote the player they want by explaining why they are good instead of going the idiot route and trying to slag the other player?

I guess the obvious answer is that it's far easier to put something down hysterically than to laud something eloquently. Putting a hockey player -- or movie or book -- you've never seen is as simple as comparing them or it to something else bad, or finding an easy trait to put down in a cursory way.

But you can't explain why something is good without having experienced why it is good by actually taking the time to witness it. How do you know why a book is good without reading it? I can talk all day about why Catch-22 was awesome because I read it, but I couldn't tell you why War & Peace was awesome because I never had the patience to read all 12,000 pages of that novel. But an idiot won't want to admit they didn't read Tolstoy so they'll just say "oh it's just another Russian war novel, they're all so boring."

So, the idiots are gonna idiot, trying to say Slafkovsky and Wright lack skill or upside even though Slafkovsky has the best combination of playmaking/puckhandling in the draft and Wright has the best combination of playmaking/shooting in the draft and they're both great prospects and players in virtually any imaginable respect. It's easier than actually taking the time and effort to watch the players, I guess.

Anyway, sorry to rant as a response to you, @Lou is God -- I'm just trying to explain away a lot of the nonsense I've been reading.

 

[Lou is God]

Is it just me, or is arguing about Slafkovsky with a person who obviously has never watched him play just as annoying as someone arguing with you about a book or movie they have never seen?

I just don't get it, how someone can read two blogs on a fan page about a player and think they are an expert on them. On Twitter today I saw Slafkovsky described as "big and slow" and "not very skilled" while I saw Wright described as "the next Nolan Patrick" and "not having much upside".

You can't watch these players for a single game and get that impression, you just can't. They're both terrific players. It's okay to like one better than the other -- most experts would agree it's close at the top between Slaf and Wright -- but why can't people promote the player they want by explaining why they are good instead of going the idiot route and trying to slag the other player?

I guess the obvious answer is that it's far easier to put something down hysterically than to laud something eloquently. Putting a hockey player -- or movie or book -- you've never seen is as simple as comparing them or it to something else bad, or finding an easy trait to put down in a cursory way.

But you can't explain why something is good without having experienced why it is good by actually taking the time to witness it. How do you know why a book is good without reading it? I can talk all day about why Catch-22 was awesome because I read it, but I couldn't tell you why War & Peace was awesome because I never had the patience to read all 12,000 pages of that novel. But an idiot won't want to admit they didn't read Tolstoy so they'll just say "oh it's just another Russian war novel, they're all so boring."

So, the idiots are gonna idiot, trying to say Slafkovsky and Wright lack skill or upside even though Slafkovsky has the best combination of playmaking/puckhandling in the draft and Wright has the best combination of playmaking/shooting in the draft and they're both great prospects and players in virtually any imaginable respect. It's easier than actually taking the time and effort to watch the players, I guess.

Anyway, sorry to rant as a response to you, @Lou is God -- I'm just trying to explain away a lot of the nonsense I've been reading.

I was thinking that last night reading these posts, they have no real clue about a prospect which is fine, but just don't do two minutes of research on them and spout off like you've been watching them play since forever. Mostly the takes are he's just a big guy with some skill.

 

[StevenToddIves]

Basically, the three players could not be more different despite all having similar upside. Slafkovsky is a special player with his potential as a playdriving 200 ft winger with size who competes hard and also has exceptional skill. He really lfkes the way he wears down teams with his ability to draw your attention and dish to make goalies and defenders have to constantly shift to keep up. Says that's one of the big things that gets talked about in front offices that doesn't get a lot of public attention.

He thinks Cooley's biggest drawback is hockey sense, and that he's not the cerebral players that Slaf and Wright are, which will ultimately limit his ceiling. He relies on his individual skill, whereas Wright and Slaf can play well in a structure and work with their teammates more. Also points out that Cooley was playing in a system that's basically Harlem Globetrotters on ice, which makes it difficult to compare him to other players.

He spends a lot of time breaking down what exactly was so worrisome about Wright's most recent season, and offers a very interesting caveat about recent #1 draft picks and how the social media microscope is worse than it's ever been. But he pretty much says to not count him out because he's such a technically gifted passer and shooter.

This is interesting -- and it's kind of what @Guadana and I have been saying about Slafkovsky all year long.

The Cooley thing is also interesting. I disagree to a degree. Though Slafkovsky and Wright are clearly higher IQ players than Cooley, I'd still say Cooley is pretty smart, especially with the puck.

I've said for awhile that it's pretty absurd to me when people rank Cooley over Slafkovsky or Wright, but that doesn't mean he's not a terrific prospect. He plays with great effort and skill, and his pace is just so high end. But it was really close for me in my #5-#7 range with Cooley, Gauthier and Nazar -- I feel you can order these three in any permutation and it will still make sense. But also, this was my foremost caveat with Cooley -- to me he wasn't the best player on his own US-NTDP team, and either Slafkovsky or Wright easily would have been. Ultimately, to me Cooley is a great prospect, but I don't consider him on the same tier as Wright or Slaf, and the biggest reason is upside because Cooley's upside isn't really close to the top two in this draft. I'd go so far as to say that on the US-NTDP, Nazar and Gauthier have more upside, but I ultimately ranked Cooley higher because he has such a high floor. Again, if someone were to rank Nazar or Gauthier highest on the US-NTDP, I'd get it too.

I think I agree with him on Shane Wright. The scariest thing for me with Wright was a plateau in his development curve at an age when players should be improving stratospherically, but again we must factor in he didn't play last year and the huge amount of pressure on him all season long. It's not easy being a kid playing under a bajillion media microscopes. Conversely, we can say that we expect a #1 overall pick to still thrive under such difficult adversities. But again, I agree with the scout in that it will be difficult for Wright to fail -- his passing/shooting/IQ combination is simply dazzling and elite, and he has no discernible weakness as a player to conceivably hold him back at the highest levels.

The Devils can not mess up this pick. I only wish Slaf had put up some decent numbers this past season in the Finnish league. I still can't wrap my head around that he was outproduced by Kakko, Rantanen, Puljujarvi, and Kotkaniemi in Liiga league play and its not even close. TPS Turku finished 8th in offense out of 15 teams. Maybe Slaf didn't have too much support. I also think he got decent ice time throughout the season. Someone had mentioned earlier today that he got 14 minutes and change this past season. Where were the goals and assists throughout the regular season?

More importantly does anyone have his shots on goal stat for the this past season? Shane Wright had 260 shots on goal in 63 games for Kingston this past season. As StevenToddlves pointed out Slaf would have put up similar number if he had played in the OHL this past season, but please tell be he got at least lets say 75 shots in goal in the 31 regular season games that he played this season.

The Devils actually cannot mess up the pick, because Montreal will be making the decision for them. The top 2 is Wright and Slafkovsky, and the Canadiens are taking one of the two.

 

[StevenToddIves]

The Draft simulator site updated and now have Mckenzies rankings selectable so have at it guys!

Draft Simulator

Ran one as NJ with Habs still selecting Wright and

2OA-Slafkovsky

37OA somehow Gaucher fell and the only other player that was tempting was RD Noah Warren. I picked Gaucher and hope to get an RD later on!

70OA- Lots of the Big named RD are gone. Decide to pick RD Artyom Barabosha early

102OA I go RD again and pick Mastrodomenico

110OA- Go entirely off of StevenToddIves list and pick LW Hejduk

126OA do the same as last time and pick C/LW Ilya Kvochko

141OA doing a StevenToddIves again and picking RD Ryan Healey

166OA Picked Goalie Nicolas Kokko because the thought of fans chanting the name makes me happy

I have decided to stop there as I now see I'm out of my depth in later picks.

Decided to run it again just to see if the 37OA pick was just very luck and got LW Perevalov instead. According to Ive's rankings I got...Luckier?

Nice job! Next time take Logan Morrison over Hejduk or Kvochko. He's probably ranked pretty low over there.

 

[ninetyeight]

Falling to NJ would probably be excellent for his career. Immediately takes a ton of pressure off of him and puts him in a much better environment to succeed on a team that should be very good very soon.

Also though his lack of compete in the playoffs has been brought up, he seems very competitive based on the interviews. He wants to be the best and wants to be 1OA. He's been the best for so long that getting picked 2nd could reignite his passion to show everyone he should have went #1.

And yeah the Montreal board is a mess, I tried to check it out to see how they feel about all of this, but got a giant headache from it. Some compared Slaf as worse version of Joel Armia, and few people insisted that NJ would trade 2OA pick straight up for Josh Anderson. I find it hard to believe that the fanbase of the all time most successful hockey team and one of the hockey capitals in world, is so out of touch with this sport.

 

[StevenToddIves]

I see Wrights Ceiling to be Hischier personally.

Hard to put a Floor(basically what he is right now) for Wright but basically a high end 3C? Perhaps Better Shooter but less playmaking Zajac?

Wright is a better playmaker and shooter than Nico, so I'd put the ceiling higher on Wright. Nico has a higher compete level, and they're both very high IQ players.

I think Nico scores around 80 next year (if healthy, of course). I'd put his ceiling a little higher than that, offensively, and he's already a great two-way center. But I think Wright's offensive upside is even higher.

Just for giggles, I ran a 4 rounder.

Habs took Slaf.

I traded #2 to Columbus for #6 and #12.
Traded #12, #37 and a 4th rounder to Buffalo for #16 and #28.

Picked Jiricek at 6.
Picked Miroshnichenko at 16
Picked Chesley at 28
Picked Mastrodomenico at 110
Picked Barabosha at 126

I'd be pretty damned happy if we actually got the first three, but of course, it's just fantasy.

Super creative, props to you.

 

[hidek91]

Option 2: Montreal takes Slafkovsky
I feel in this scenario, the Devils should at least entertain the idea of a trade. However, they need to be blown away by an offer. For instance, Columbus needs a #1C pretty badly -- if they were to offer #6 and #12 overall, I'd even be willing to add in a middling prospect like Edwards or Salminen. The Devils would have a chance to fill two needs here, with a shot at Jiricek or Gauthier at #6 and then several options with #12 based on whether they get a forward or RD at #6. I don't think I'd trade down past #6 or deal with Philadelphia, but Arizona and Seattle might be tempted to move up. I'd probably ask Seattle to add in Adam Larsson in any deal. With Arizona, I'd be willing to add Johnsson to the #2 pick to acquire Lawson Crouse and the #27 overall pick. The Devils could have their choice of Jiricek/Nemec at #3 and grab a high-upside forward at #27 -- who knows, maybe Miroshnichenko or Perevalov will still be available?

Few posts earlier you were explaining other posters how amazing asset a top 2 pick is based on the history of drafting and now you want to move out from this to a way riskier #6, while only getting a #12 as a sweetener?

Historically #2 gives you higher chance of getting a franchise or at least a star player than combination of the #5-#7 and #11-#13 picks, and I mean NHL drafting in general rather than Devils in specific because bringing McLeod, Zacha and Holtz to this discussion would be unfair because it's also possible to make a good pick here but nevertheless, the value isn't there IMO.

I think that the optimal thing from value point of view would be to simply take Wright, run 3 great centers, limit McLeod's/Boqvist's 5v5 time, run all 3 of them on PP1 and then when opportunity comes (and young centers are the most valuable entities in the league) pull Johansen - Jones (or Dubois - Laine if you want a winger) type of trade. This is hard, given that we tend to get emotionally attached to players but centers are so valuable that banking on Wright become a #1C (talking about a level, not an actual slot in the lineup here), which would allow us to trade one of our three centers for a legitimate #1D is a better strategy than hoping Jiricek/Nemec become a #1D or that Gauthier becomes a top line winger or that we get super lucky with a sweetener to make it all worth it.

I also think that #2 pick is an asset of a such caliber that Larssons, Crouses and Miroshnichenko's don't really matter when giving it up.

That's just my 0.02$, you may disagree with me but in my humble opinion, our strategy should be simple:

If Habs take Wright, we take Slaf.
If Habs take Slaf, we take Wright.
Either way, we worry about holes at all different positions via other routes than using this asset.

 

[StevenToddIves]

The outcome itself is decently significant. The fact that Bob’s list hasn’t ended up being wrong since it was back to back in 02 and 03 isn’t really significant though. It’s not like just because it ended up being right for all of those others it’ll be right again this time. It was 5-4 after 10 then he said he went and did an additional 5 and it was 3-2 in Wrights favor so that’s an even 7-7 split. Scouts are divided as even in Pronman’s article the scouts were pretty split. On the other hand every one of the executives in Pronman’s article said Wright. Scouts might think Slaf’s a slightly better option but I’d still suspect execs don’t believe that slight gap justifies passing up on the center for the winger. Hopefully they like Slaf more and trade for a center so they feel comfortable taking Slaf. There’s size there but I don’t suspect there will be too too much scoring.

I agree with you on the significance of the outcome, but I must dispute the idea Slafkovsky won't score. It's an easy argument that, along with Shane Wright, he has the most pure offensive upside in the draft. Upside is why you draft Slafkovsky, plain and simple.

 

[HBK27]

The Devils actually cannot mess up the pick, because Montreal will be making the decision for them. The top 2 is Wright and Slafkovsky, and the Canadiens are taking one of the two.

As long as we come away with one of Wright or Slafkovsky, I'll be happy.

Anything else and we riot.

 

[StevenToddIves]

I had a little trade fun after Slaf was picked by Mtl, and here's what I got, after trading down a couple times. I used the newly added McKenzie list.
View attachment 563177
View attachment 563178

Yes, I know some of these are far-fetched, but for the most part I tried to utilize STI's info, aside from Goaltender and Nail's little bro

That's quite a draft. I like that you got a bajillion RDs.

Your most unrealistic pick is actually Sykora at #70 -- the kid has as much helium as anyone in the later rounds of the 2022 class, and he's just an outstanding player. I fear Logan Morrison at #110 may be a pipe dream too, but I'll give you that one because he's a double over-ager.

I think we all need to talk more about Marcus Nguyen. The kid plays a million miles an hour with the heart of a lion and he's actually got an intriguing scoring touch, as well. Someone asked me who the Blake Coleman of the 2022 draft and Nguyen's name was the first one to come to mind.

 

[devilsblood]

Wright has nothing left to prove in the OHL. He looks bored there as it is.

I haven't watched a minute of Wright play.

But if this narrative has some truth to it, then that is a major red flag.

 

[StevenToddIves]

It's not ideal, but it's not as black and white either. No prospect is a sure thing and both of these top2 guys have concerns no matter what STI or anyone says.

To make you feel better about Slaf here's few things. TPS was one if not the most defensive teams in the league, their best player just barely makes into the top20 in Liiga scoring, and second best guy into the top30, and the next (and the rest) guy is far and away in the hundreds. Juraj has gone on record saying that he had to play more of a defensive heavy game in a bottom6 role. There was definitely an adjustment period coming from juniors into mens league. He scored just fine in liiga u20 league btw, had the 3rd best ppg for everyone who played 10 or more games, the two guys in front of him are older than him. But what is most important thing about Slaf is that if you look his stats and development it's in steep upward trajectory. The more time went by the better he got. While with Wright it's the other way around as he ended his season with what many call disappointing low compete effort in the playoffs.

With Wright it's possible that he peaked early, got used to being so much better than everyone else that maybe his development has slowed down a bit. It's also very likely that not playing for a year hurt his game and development. He seriously should have went somewhere to play, but I don't know if that was even possible.

This is a terrific post, and thanks for it.

I will add that Wright's playoffs were concerning enough that a few of my friends in the business wondered if he was hurt and hiding it. It's certainly a possibility.

Few posts earlier you were explaining other posters how amazing asset a top 2 pick is based on the history of drafting and now you want to move out from this to a way riskier #6, while only getting a #12 as a sweetener?

Historically #2 gives you higher chance of getting a franchise or at least a star player than combination of the #5-#7 and #11-#13 picks, and I mean NHL drafting in general rather than Devils in specific because bringing McLeod, Zacha and Holtz to this discussion would be unfair because it's also possible to make a good pick here but nevertheless, the value isn't there IMO.

I think that the optimal thing from value point of view would be to simply take Wright, run 3 great centers, limit McLeod's/Boqvist's 5v5 time, run all 3 of them on PP1 and then when opportunity comes (and young centers are the most valuable entities in the league) pull Johansen - Jones (or Dubois - Laine if you want a winger) type of trade. This is hard, given that we tend to get emotionally attached to players but centers are so valuable that banking on Wright become a #1C (talking about a level, not an actual slot in the lineup here), which would allow us to trade one of our three centers for a legitimate #1D is a better strategy than hoping Jiricek/Nemec become a #1D or that Gauthier becomes a top line winger or that we get super lucky with a sweetener to make it all worth it.

I also think that #2 pick is an asset of a such caliber that Larssons, Crouses and Miroshnichenko's don't really matter when giving it up.

That's just my 0.02$, you may disagree with me but in my humble opinion, our strategy should be simple:

If Habs take Wright, we take Slaf.
If Habs take Slaf, we take Wright.
Either way, we worry about holes at all different positions via other routes than using this asset.

This is a very good series of points, thanks.

 

[StevenToddIves]

It's easy to win when you know their rankings, but it's a fun game anyway.

 

[Goptor]

There is a bigger chance they will. There were not so many voices(and The Mighty Great Me was the one who started rank Slaf higher than Wright earlier) who thinks Slaf is number 1 on this draft. And now look at us - most of the fans trying to think and stay calm that mtl will pick Wright anyway. 5 steps, you know.
The media stuff was starting even before the Bob's list. Bob was very good in what he did before. Slaf was obviously much better in the end of the season, and his skill pack is visibly better for his role and style of play. He is... let's remember how people are calling it... BPA. Gm's love player like him, because they know what is working in nhl and they have a lot interview and know something about personalities. Its a case, when you see not only talent in player, you see the star potential.
Everybody loves 15 yo Shane Wright, but he isn't 15yo anymore. 2 years of covid did happened, onne year without practice did happened, Slafkovsky did happened.
I'm not saying there are no chances that they will not draft Wright. But Slaf is more realistic pick for now. And its a better pick for them. Like picking Raymond before Rossi for Detroit who had huge need in center.

One thing of note is that its not going to be all HF boards prospect crazy people at the draft. The rumors need to spread from the HFboards people to their not as obsessed friends, then to those people's families. It will take time to get to everyone.

Right now they are still at the point of trying to influence people here. Can they really get the information spread over the next 8 days?

 

[MadDevil]

It's easy to win when you know their rankings, but it's a fun game anyway.

Geez, I see why Cangi left. He saw those names and was like "Nah. Good luck Dano. I'm out."

 

[beekay414]

I haven't watched a minute of Wright play.

But if this narrative has some truth to it, then that is a major red flag.

It's really not.

 

[glenwo2]

If they go Wright and he busts or Slaf is simply better, he'll survive it because it went with the fans choice, however, if he goes Slaf and he doesn't become the player he's projected and Wright on the other hand is tearing it up with us, it's going to be a huge hit for Hughes and his front office.

Either way......The Devils WIN.

 

[devilsblood]

It's really not.

A 17-18 year old who hasn't played in a year and is far from dominant is exhibiting a lack of drive?

Absolutely a red flag.

 

[RangerDoggo]

If someone like Wright falls to you at number 2, you take him. End of story.

 

[beekay414]

A 17-18 year old who hasn't played in a year and is far from dominant is exhibiting a lack of drive?

Absolutely a red flag.

lol no it's not. You ever been in a class that you were too smart for? Wright is a cerebral player and the talent in that league, especially his teammates, aren't the most cerebral or high hockey IQ guys. The OHL was shit this year as far as quality play goes. You put Wright with someone as cerebral as him or thinks the game as high as he does (like Jack Hughes or Jesper Bratt) and he's going to pop off.

Some of you guys latch on to the smallest shit and compound it. Wright's too damn good for the OHL and I don't blame him one bit for lack of interest.

 

[glenwo2]

I haven't watched a minute of Wright play.

But if this narrative has some truth to it, then that is a major red flag.

How is it a major red flag?

Someone saying that someone "looks bored" is pretty subjective as you don't know what their definition of "looking bored" is.