Prospect Info: Devils Win #2 Overall -- Slafkovsky vs. Jiricek vs. Nemec

[Poppy Whoa Sonnet]

I would say if you're into this type of evaluation, then check out Will Scouching, who relies on heavily statistical models but also actually watches and can scout hockey.

But Bader's model is based on "you don't have to watch a single game in order to evaluate the prospects", which is simply absurd. No one needs his model to evaluate players, because they can just look at the statistics on eliteprospects.com. Combined with his ludicrous "star probability" and constantly begging for an NHL job in his Twitter feed despite minuscule hockey knowledge -- well, the guy just bugs me. I think he makes a mockery out of what many people work hard doing, simply printing up useless charts and then Tweeting them out as some sort of gospel. He's a snake oil salesman.

Apologies for the vitriol, but I was trying to answer your question of "what's with the hostility?"

Recently, Bader was disputing Cam Robinson on a comparison between two 2022-eligible defensemen. This led to a Twitter debate which was absurd -- Cam Robinson is one of the best in the business, not only considering statistical models, but also watching countless hours of prospects playing hockey, and writing about it brilliantly.

Yet on Twitter, people would side with Bader as if his opinion was equally valid. I couldn't believe it. It was like having an argument on quantum physics and saying: "yeah sure, you can believe this Einstein guy all you want, but I think this illiterate 4 year old's opinion is equally valid!"

Sorry, more vitriol.

I just don't think you have to go with a single guy as your source of opinion, I mostly read a bunch of people (including you) in part cause it's fun and I'm a dork but also because I think it's a good way to collect information and ID players with strong potential, everyone has blindspots including a NHLe model.

To illustrate, I guess my ideal vision for Fitz's draft room is he's sitting down with team of traditional scouts, and a team of analysts, and they talk to each other but mostly work alone predraft and come up with their own evaluations, and when a pick comes along they fight, and every so often a guy bangs a table and says "you cannot pass on this player based on this" and Fitz has to make the call.

Having multiple sources of opinion, and in particular if those sources are relatively orthogonal to each other (instead of the internet scouting world which heavily involves people copying each other) is valuable if they are based on useful signals. Traditional scouts have good signal, and mathematical models based on production have good signal. Both could be better, but Bader's model is the public one so we use it to debate and I actually LIKE that the numbers have nothing to do with actual scouting reports.

You can imagine a scenario where Bader bangs the table and demands Fitz take Zellweger at the end of the first last year because his model says so. You could also imagine a scenario where he bangs the table and says you can't take McTavish as well, but I'm glad that he's not just copying what everyone else online is saying cause that's pretty boring, and not adding much to the discussion. He's banging the table right now saying NJ should take Nemec, and it's worth a further look I say, Guttersniped seems to have deciphered the model's output as being not consequential but the next time he does maybe it is.

 

[Stephen Gionta]

It's not a matter of BPA vs Need, I hate this false dichotomy. Every draft board is unique and the criteria for ranking those players will vary depending on what the organizations likes.

If a team really values speed or size or passing or any other specific attribute, then that is going to be reflected on their board. I think this is most obvious when looking at later round picks when you're going to see a lot more variation with draft boards.

Under Shero the later (after the 2nd) round picks were guys like Bratt, Gritsyuk, Gignac, Anderson, Walsh, Zetterlund, Studenic - clearly an emphasis on speed over size. Even the guys that didn't have super great speed (Moynihan, Talvitie, McCarthy) had pretty high floors because of their intangibles + "good enough" talent. Whereas looking at Fitz's later round picks it's guys like Pytlik, Salminen, Hurtig, and while he's not ignoring raw offensive talent he's clearly emphasizing size, versatility, and tenacity over production.

Fitz seems to like more traits-y/tools-y project guys, whereas Shero split between guys with safe floors and guys that were being overlooked due to their lack of size.

Point is that "Best Player Available" is purely subjective and that team needs and priorities are already going to baked into those lists. So arguing for one or the other doesn't really make sense.

There really is no "Best Player Available" once you start getting into the late 1st round. Even in the middle of the first round, BPA varies greatly depending on the reasons you stated.

But in the top 10ish of the draft, especially the top 5, you have to take the best player available.

If Logan Cooley is deemed the best player available by the Devils scouts, then that's who the Devils should select.

Look no further than the 2018 draft. Montreal badly needed a center at the time. They had the best player available in LW Brady Tkachuk sitting there for the taking at 3rd overall. They passed on him to take a player that played a position of need in C Jesperi Kotkaniemi. Not even 3 years later and they are kicking themselves for doing so.

Always, always take the BPA at the beginning of the draft.

In my opinion, none of Slafkovsky, Jiricek, Cooley, or Nemec have separated themselves from the pack. They are all essentially even right now in my book. That's where this #2 overall pick gets tough. I do not envy being Fitzgerald/Dennehy/Castron/Harris right now.

 

[Devils731]

I'll guess those models were really high on Ty Smith as well. Doesn't mean they are always wrong but I'm sure you can find instances where the results don't translate to the NHL easily.

Agreed. I take those models as a double check system.

Sort of, “Hey, our in-house production models screams about this guy, did we look at him enough?” Or “Our production model hates this guy, are we comfortable with how the production or effectiveness will come together in the future?”

 

[Devs3cups]

There really is no "Best Player Available" once you start getting into the late 1st round. Even in the middle of the first round, BPA varies greatly depending on the reasons you stated.

But in the top 10ish of the draft, especially the top 5, you have to take the best player available.

If Logan Cooley is deemed the best player available by the Devils scouts, then that's who the Devils should select.

Look no further than the 2018 draft. Montreal badly needed a center at the time. They had the best player available in LW Brady Tkachuk sitting there for the taking at 3rd overall. They passed on him to take a player that played a position of need in C Jesperi Kotkaniemi. Not even 3 years later and they are kicking themselves for doing so.

Always, always take the BPA at the beginning of the draft.

In my opinion, none of Slafkovsky, Jiricek, Cooley, or Nemec have separated themselves from the pack. They are all essentially even right now in my book. That's where this #2 overall pick gets tough. I do not envy being Fitzgerald/Dennehy/Castron/Harris right now.

That's the thing though, maybe KK was the BPA on their board, before Tkachuk. Truth is, no one knows who BPA is. No one knows team's lists.

 

[Stephen Gionta]

I just don't think you have to go with a single guy as your source of opinion, I mostly read a bunch of people (including you) in part cause it's fun and I'm a dork but also because I think it's a good way to collect information and ID players with strong potential, everyone has blindspots including a NHLe model.

To illustrate, I guess my ideal vision for Fitz's draft room is he's sitting down with team of traditional scouts, and a team of analysts, and they talk to each other but mostly work alone predraft and come up with their own evaluations, and when a pick comes along they fight, and every so often a guy bangs a table and says "you cannot pass on this player based on this" and Fitz has to make the call.

Having multiple sources of opinion, and in particular if those sources are relatively orthogonal to each other (instead of the internet scouting world which heavily involves people copying each other) is valuable if they are based on useful signals. Traditional scouts have good signal, and mathematical models based on production have good signal. Both could be better, but Bader's model is the public one so we use it to debate and I actually LIKE that the numbers have nothing to do with actual scouting reports.

You can imagine a scenario where Bader bangs the table and demands Fitz take Zellweger at the end of the first last year because his model says so. You could also imagine a scenario where he bangs the table and says you can't take McTavish as well, but I'm glad that he's not just copying what everyone else online is saying cause that's pretty boring, and not adding much to the discussion. He's banging the table right now saying NJ should take Nemec, and it's worth a further look I say, Guttersniped seems to have deciphered the model's output as being not consequential but the next time he does maybe it is.

This.

 

[JimEIV]

I don't think it's clear cut. Cooley's production certainly projects a little better, but Slafkovsky had limited minutes and a limited role that impacted the production. He thrived when given a larger role. Definitely too close to call one way or the other.

I think this upcoming World Championship will definitely change direction of these conversations. I'm sure for a lot of people this will be the first opportunity to see both of these players up close.

 

[Stephen Gionta]

That's the thing though, maybe KK was the BPA on their board, before Tkachuk. Truth is, no one knows who BPA is. No one knows team's lists.

That is fair, but no one can deny the Kotkaniemi pick was off the board and seemed like a selection that was simply based on positional need.

 

[My3Sons]

Agreed. I take those models as a double check system.

Sort of, “Hey, our in-house production models screams about this guy, did we look at him enough?” Or “Our production model hates this guy, are we comfortable with how the production or effectiveness will come together in the future?”

I like the idea of blending traditional scouting and eyeballs with some analytics and trying to compare across leagues is an interesting tool. The mystery box to the public seems to be the interview process which has some leaks from time to time but my guess is that teams learn a lot from those.

 

[StevenToddIves]

There really is no "Best Player Available" once you start getting into the late 1st round. Even in the middle of the first round, BPA varies greatly depending on the reasons you stated.

But in the top 10ish of the draft, especially the top 5, you have to take the best player available.

If Logan Cooley is deemed the best player available by the Devils scouts, then that's who the Devils should select.

Look no further than the 2018 draft. Montreal badly needed a center at the time. They had the best player available in LW Brady Tkachuk sitting there for the taking at 3rd overall. They passed on him to take a player that played a position of need in C Jesperi Kotkaniemi. Not even 3 years later and they are kicking themselves for doing so.

Always, always take the BPA at the beginning of the draft.

In my opinion, none of Slafkovsky, Jiricek, Cooley, or Nemec have separated themselves from the pack. They are all essentially even right now in my book. That's where this #2 overall pick gets tough. I do not envy being Fitzgerald/Dennehy/Castron/Harris right now.

I actually do envy the Devils brass right now, because had they fallen to #6 instead of risen to #2, they'd have only a remote shot of any of those players.

But I'm still sticking with my initial assessment that the choice has to be Slafkovsky, Jiricek or Nemec. I can't see any professional scouts having Cooley (or Nazar) so far above Slafkovsky, Jiricek and Nemec that they would pass on a desperate organizational need in order to stack the deck with another similar-type player at a position they are already loaded in.

In 2018 the Canadiens made a mistake because Kotkaniemi was not only not the #3 pick, he was also not a pick at #4, #5, or #6 or #7. They reached for a center in a draft which was particularly thin at center. In the Devils case, they would be taking a power F in a draft which is pretty good for power Fs or a RD in a draft which is loaded at the top at RD. The Devils would be taking players seen as high end picks -- the latest McKenzie scout poll has Slafkovsky #2, Nemec #4 and Jiricek #6 -- and we all know Jiricek's injury is a factor in him falling (barely) shy of the top 5.

We can go back further to 2016, and site the Columbus Blue Jackets as the opposite of the 2018 Canadiens. Jesse Puljujarvi was seen as a slam dunk to be the #3 overall pick, but Columbus went in another direction, taking a player of great positional need with center Pierre-Luc Dubois. In retrospect, Dubois is a better player and was the better pick. For all we know, Dubois was higher on the CBJ draft board, but I'm just playing devil's advocate.

 

[Tretyak 20]

Nemec is cemen backwards.... just sayin'...

 

[Lottery Lucky]

I don't like the idea of drafting a guy whose ceiling tops him as our 3rd line center with that pick.

You lose a lot of value that way

You dont draft BPA with the idea of slotting him on your third line. If you take Cooley its because you think hes the best ceiling/player available and figure the rest out later. Maybe he can play wing, maybe someone gets moved, maybe you run three deep lines.

Devils fans are getting carried away by size. Im not suggesting Slafkovsky and Jiricek are busts by any means, but people immediately discrediting Cooley (or Kemell for that matter) because theyre 5'10" is simply the wrong way to go about it and is exactly how you draft a lesser player at 2nd overall

We dont need to go and look at past drafts to see how many times size or drafting purely for need fooled a team. Its engrained in NHL scouts heads.

 

[glenwo2]

There really is no "Best Player Available" once you start getting into the late 1st round. Even in the middle of the first round, BPA varies greatly depending on the reasons you stated.

But in the top 10ish of the draft, especially the top 5, you have to take the best player available.

If Logan Cooley is deemed the best player available by the Devils scouts, then that's who the Devils should select.

Look no further than the 2018 draft. Montreal badly needed a center at the time. They had the best player available in LW Brady Tkachuk sitting there for the taking at 3rd overall. They passed on him to take a player that played a position of need in C Jesperi Kotkaniemi. Not even 3 years later and they are kicking themselves for doing so.

Always, always take the BPA at the beginning of the draft.

In my opinion, none of Slafkovsky, Jiricek, Cooley, or Nemec have separated themselves from the pack. They are all essentially even right now in my book. That's where this #2 overall pick gets tough. I do not envy being Fitzgerald/Dennehy/Castron/Harris right now.

If that happens, that means that Slaf had absolutely a horrible showing of EPIC proportions to the point of looking more like Rod Pelley on the ice.

Of course that won't happen, Slaf will look fine and get selected at #2.

 

[StevenToddIves]

I like the idea of blending traditional scouting and eyeballs with some analytics and trying to compare across leagues is an interesting tool. The mystery box to the public seems to be the interview process which has some leaks from time to time but my guess is that teams learn a lot from those.

I factor in the numbers as well, but in context.

I can still hear the echoes of all the analytic-based draft guys saying Jake Sanderson was not a top 10 pick. I can still hear the echoes of these guys ripping Steve Yzerman for taking Moritz Seider #6 overall, as well as saying Miko Rantanen and Lucas Raymond were overrated based on their production.

I also want to thank you, because "Mystery Box" may be the name of my next rock band.

 

[Lottery Lucky]

Its just wild to me that every organization employees dozens of scouts, because it would be impossible to take a good look at every player fairly, and then we have people here emphatically claiming certain players are going to be the best pick available.

Reality is that no one knows, not even scouts. However they use risk management in their decision process.

Yeah I notice that as well. But I get it though. Slafkovsky Nemec and Jiricek fill big needs for NJ and are the most appealing archetypes available

But anyone who discredits Cooley or Kemell is fooling themselves and will be sorely disappointed when both could possibly end up better than the aforementioned three.

Certainly not the draft for a worry-free pick. And if it ends up Cooley or Kemell, I expect major outrage from the fanbase (which wouldnt be fair to either nor a true representation of their talent)

 

[Hisch13r]

Yeah I notice that as well. But I get it though. Slafkovsky Nemec and Jiricek fill big needs for NJ and are the most appealing archetypes available

But anyone who discredits Cooley or Kemell is fooling themselves and will be sorely disappointed when both could possibly end up better than the aforementioned three.

Certainly not the draft for a worry-free pick. And if it ends up Cooley or Kemell, I expect major outrage from the fanbase (which wouldnt be fair to either nor a true representation of their talent)

Kemell doesn't belong. I don't even like Slaf that much and I still have him ahead.

 

[My3Sons]

I factor in the numbers as well, but in context.

I can still hear the echoes of all the analytic-based draft guys saying Jake Sanderson was not a top 10 pick. I can still hear the echoes of these guys ripping Steve Yzerman for taking Moritz Seider #6 overall, as well as saying Miko Rantanen and Lucas Raymond were overrated based on their production.

I also want to thank you, because "Mystery Box" may be the name of my next rock band.

I agree. It all starts with traditional scouting and eyeballs. As another poster suggested, analytics has its place as a cross check tool. And definitely name your band Mystery Box. I think that's a much better name than "Stop Nagging Me About Sleeper Right Handed Defensemen For The Upcoming Draft". Although "Enough With The Lovejoy Stuff Already, Don't Make Me Put @Guttersniped On A Plane To Then Rent A Car And Drive To Your House And Bitch Slap You" does have a catchy ring to it.

 

[Lottery Lucky]

Kemell doesn't belong. I don't even like Slaf that much and I still have him ahead.

Kemell has had rankings around the #1-3 European prospect over the last year and a half, and in Liiga scored 16 in 15 with 10 goals before injuring his shoulder. His shot fan be gotten off from anywhere and he plays with a heavy tenacity for only 5'10" (though hes 170), used his body more than youd expect

While I personally have him as the #5 ceiling behind Wright Cooley Jiricek and Slafkovsky, I do have him higher in floor than Jiricek and Slafkovsky.

I dont take anyone or anything for granted when it comes to scouting and Lucas Raymond is a great, recent example of what undersized Euro talent can do when slept on. And Kemell, before his injury, was on a trajectory to score Barkov-numbers in SM-Liiga

 

[Hisch13r]

Kemell has had rankings around the #1-3 European prospect over the last year and a half, and in Liiga scored 16 in 15 with 10 goals before injuring his shoulder. His shot fan be gotten off from anywhere and he plays with a heavy tenacity for only 5'10" (though hes 170), used his body more than youd expect

While I personally have him as the #5 ceiling behind Wright Cooley Jiricek and Slafkovsky, I do have him higher in floor than Jiricek and Slafkovsky.

I dont take anyone or anything for granted when it comes to scouting and Lucas Raymond is a great, recent example of what undersized Euro talent can do when slept on. And Kemell, before his injury, was on a trajectory to score Barkov-numbers

Kemell's SH% was absurd. That production was always a mirage.

 

[My3Sons]

Kemell's SH% was absurd. That production was always a mirage.

He looked to me like he had a somewhat better shot than Holtz when I watched a few games. He adjusts his feet better for the one timer to my eyes. That said, he didn't pass as well as Holtz did at the same age.

 

[Lottery Lucky]

Kemell's SH% was absurd. That production was always a mirage.

Using a sh% from a 15-game sample size that wasnt even above 25% isnt exactly a fair critque considering it was always likely to go down over the entire season, one in which he played the remainder of reeling from an injury.

Yes it was high during his hot start but that doesnt disqualify him from still showing more at that age than you normally see from a 5'10" forward. Also PP goals will alwats inflate SH% totals, especially for his usage at 5v5. Take a peek at historical 17yo seasons in SM-Liiga and youll notice all but one are 6'2" and taller (the great Fin Mikael Granlund)

Id still take Cooley over him but Kemell is a serious talent who shouldnt be forgotten.

 

[StevenToddIves]

You dont draft BPA with the idea of slotting him on your third line. If you take Cooley its because you think hes the best ceiling/player available and figure the rest out later. Maybe he can play wing, maybe someone gets moved, maybe you run three deep lines.

Devils fans are getting carried away by size. Im not suggesting Slafkovsky and Jiricek are busts by any means, but people immediately discrediting Cooley (or Kemell for that matter) because theyre 5'10" is simply the wrong way to go about it and is exactly how you draft a lesser player at 2nd overall

We dont need to go and look at past drafts to see how many times size or drafting purely for need fooled a team. Its engrained in NHL scouts heads.

Exactly how you draft a player wrong is not by factoring in size but by simply drafting for size. Slafkovsky is a player with skills which are right there with Cooley, if not better. Where Cooley has the obvious edge in skating ability, Slafkovsky has an obvious advantage in play down low, on the cycle, and in the crease. Because he does not simply have size -- Slafkovsky also knows how to use it effectively.

These reasons contribute to why Slafkovsky will end the year as the #2 pick in the consensus. He was #2 in my April rankings, and he was #2 in the McKenzie NHL scout poll released yesterday.

Now, Cooley is an outstanding prospect in his own right, and no one is dismissing this. But I think it's a stretch to think he'll be happy to move to the wing, or to play a 3C role behind Hughes and Hischier. You're asking for potential problems with the #2 pick with Cooley, where you're addressing solutions to problems with Slafkovsky, Jiricek or Nemec.

Again -- were Cooley the surefire #2 pick? Then sure, it would be a consideration. But why stretch for the #3 guy at #2 when you can just take the #2 guy who fills a greater need? It makes no sense.

I know I'm repeating myself a bit, but it's very close at the top of the draft. I'd say it's a slim margin between all of my top 2-6:

2 Slafkovsky
3 Jiricek
4 Nemec
5 Nazar
6 Cooley

I think there's a drop off after Cooley at #6. If someone wants to argue Nemec is better than Jiricek? Fine. If someone wants to argue Cooley is better than Slafkovsky? Fine. They're not unrealistic stretches of imagination. I think differently, also fine. But there's no way someone could argue that one of these players is so far ahead of the rest that we can't factor in anterior facts, like: the Devils need a Jiricek, they need a Nemec, and they need a Slafkovsky far, far more than they need a Nazar or Cooley.

Therefore, I think the argument is simply who do the Devils draft, Slafkovsky, Jiricek or Nemec? As terrific as he is, I do not foresee Cooley factoring into the Devils decision very much at all.

 

[Hisch13r]

Using a sh% from a 15-game sample size that wasnt even above 25% isnt exactly a fair critque considering it was always likely to go down over the entire season, one in which he played the remainder of reeling from an injury.

Yes it was high during his hot start but that doesnt disqualify him from still showing more at that age than you normally see from a 5'10" forward. Also PP goals will alwats inflate SH% totals, especially for his usage at 5v5. Take a peek at historical 17yo seasons in SM-Liiga and youll notice all but one are 6'2" and taller (the great Fin Mikael Granlund)

Id still take Cooley over him but Kemell is a serious talent who shouldnt be forgotten.

Using a 15-game sample to say he was going to produce like Barkov doesn't make sense either.

 

[PWiz30]

So far I've been waffling between Slafkovsky, Cooley, and Nemec. I'm pretty sure I'll be happy with the pick on draft day if we take any of those three but so far I don't think any of them is the obvious pick.

Slafkovsky looks like he might be the best finisher out there which would be great to have on Hughes' wing. IMO big forwards are hard to project at that age though because it's hard to tell how much of their success so far is attributable to being able to physically overmatch opponents in a way that they won't be able to in the NHL. Maybe he develops into another Mikko Rantanen but I could see him having a career like Val Nichushkin. Nichushkin finally had a great year with the Avs as a 27-year-old, but I think we'll be pretty disappointed if that's the kind of career our 2OA pick has.

Cooley might be BPA. Looking at an NTDP kid as a potential pick this high, I like to separate their numbers against NCAA and international competition and by my count, he tallied 39 points in 27 games during the non-USHL portion of their schedule. My concern is that we'd probably end up moving him to the wing and it's unknown how well he would make the transition.

I've got even more to learn about Nemec than the other two, but Byron Bader's tweet thread about him caught my attention. Adding him to the D prospects we already have is extremely tempting. Similar to Slafkovsky, my reluctance on him is mostly about difficulty projecting his value. It seems like the skating and offensive ability are there, but the defensive side of the game is so hard to project and at 2OA, you really want to be sure that you're going to hit.

I understand that you always want to pick the BPA as a rule but when you have 3 options who are as close as I think these three are, then eventually organizational need has to enter the equation as a tiebreaker.

 

[StevenToddIves]

Yeah I notice that as well. But I get it though. Slafkovsky Nemec and Jiricek fill big needs for NJ and are the most appealing archetypes available

But anyone who discredits Cooley or Kemell is fooling themselves and will be sorely disappointed when both could possibly end up better than the aforementioned three.

Certainly not the draft for a worry-free pick. And if it ends up Cooley or Kemell, I expect major outrage from the fanbase (which wouldnt be fair to either nor a true representation of their talent)

It won't end up Cooley, and Kemell has no shot at the top 3, much less #2 overall.

 

[Hisch13r]

So far I've been waffling between Slafkovsky, Cooley, and Nemec. I'm pretty sure I'll be happy with the pick on draft day if we take any of those three but so far I don't think any of them is the obvious pick.

Slafkovsky looks like he might be the best finisher out there which would be great to have on Hughes' wing. IMO big forwards are hard to project at that age though because it's hard to tell how much of their success so far is attributable to being able to physically overmatch opponents in a way that they won't be able to in the NHL. Maybe he develops into another Mikko Rantanen but I could see him having a career like Val Nichushkin. Nichushkin finally had a great year with the Avs as a 27-year-old, but I think we'll be pretty disappointed if that's the kind of career our 2OA pick has.

Cooley might be BPA. Looking at an NTDP kid as a potential pick this high, I like to separate their numbers against NCAA and international competition and by my count, he tallied 39 points in 27 games during the non-USHL portion of their schedule. My concern is that we'd probably end up moving him to the wing and it's unknown how well he would make the transition.

I've got even more to learn about Nemec than the other two, but Byron Bader's tweet thread about him caught my attention. Adding him to the D prospects we already have is extremely tempting. Similar to Slafkovsky, my reluctance on him is mostly about difficulty projecting his value. It seems like the skating and offensive ability are there, but the defensive side of the game is so hard to project and at 2OA, you really want to be sure that you're going to hit.

I understand that you always want to pick the BPA as a rule but when you have 3 options who are as close as I think these three are, then eventually organizational need has to enter the equation as a tiebreaker.

If you can get Slaf to be the Nuke that he's been in Colorado for his entire prime then I'd be absolutely f***ing thrilled. He'd be put in a better position to produce here than Nuke has been for most of his time in Colorado and Nuke's been one of the very best two way play drivers in the league for years. I don't know if he gets there but I'd take it.

You're underrating Jiricek here by not even including him