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

[MadDevil]

To address the actual question, I don't think anybody is opposed to adding some size, but I think when you have the 2nd overall pick you should be looking BPA every time. Now, if the BPA happens to have size, great. But I don't think you should pass on a potentially better player just because he's small or too similar to what we already have.

I'm speaking generally here because I admittedly know very little about any of these prospects, and all that really matters is how the Devils draft board looks.

 

[TrufleShufle]

I just think it's dumb when people act like any player archetype is good or bad in the playoffs. There will be small and soft players who excel and some who underperform. There will be small and "gritty" players who excel and some who underperform. There will be big and soft players who excel and some who underperform. There will be big and "gritty" players who excel and some who underperform. Tkachuk is probably the easiest example of the type of player that given his profile would be expected to excel in the playoffs but he's continually underperformed. A guy like Thornton as well pretty much always underperformed compared to the regular season. A current example of a guy that's expected to underwhelm a bit would be Kane but he's been one of the best playoff performers. A guy like Brierre stepped up his game massively come playoff time.

I mean, you seem really focused on size for someone who is this upset with an idea they made up about "drafting for size."

 

[beekay414]

Again...someone explain to me what makes Logan Cooley BPA? I've asked and haven't gotten an answer. The only thing I've seen is that "you don't pass on a player for size" and not why he's BPA. The resident draft guru says otherwise and has full-on explained what makes Slafkovsky his #2 aka BPA (and even then, he still hasn't made the decision on whether he'd take Slaf or Jiricek) but I haven't heard from the Cooley supporters what makes him the BPA and why he's so worth avoiding the better fit for?

 

[Captain3rdLine]

Again...someone explain to me what makes Logan Cooley BPA? I've asked and haven't gotten an answer. The only thing I've seen is that "you don't pass on a player for size" and not why he's BPA. The resident draft guru says otherwise and has full-on explained what makes Slafkovsky his #2 aka BPA (and even then, he still hasn't made the decision on whether he'd take Slaf or Jiricek) but I haven't heard from the Cooley supporters what makes him the BPA and why he's so worth avoiding the better fit for?

The only two things I’ve really heard thrown around are skating and production. I’m really not too worried about Slafkovsky’s lack of production in LIIGA and you can’t really compare production too much of prospects in completely different leagues and situations.
And, while Cooley is a better skater, Slafkovsky’s skating is actually good and anyone who’s been watching the world championships has seen that.

 

[beekay414]

The only two things I’ve really heard thrown around are skating and production. I’m really not too worried about Slafkovsky’s lack of production in LIIGA and you can’t really compare production too much of prospects in completely different leagues and situations.
And, while Cooley is a better skater, Slafkovsky’s skating is actually good and anyone who’s been watching the world championships has seen that.

Cooley is 5'10" I would hope he'd be a better skater than a 6'4" forward. We've already gone over why comparing production across youth leagues doesn't compare to players that play in men's leagues and it's not like Cooley tore up the USHL like some of his USNTDP predecessors did.

Slaf is a damn good skater for someone his size. He has powerful strides and can play at multiple tempos. He'll have no problem skating with Jack for the same reasons Dawson Mercer has no problem skating with him.

I just don't see the appeal of Cooley over a unicorn like Slafkovsky. You're not drafting someone for what their production was at 17/18 either. You're drafting them for what they're going to do in the pros and Slafkovsky's game translates no matter how you wanna break it down.

Cooley is a jack-of-all-trades, master of none type for me. He's a fine pick and will be a fine player but I have absolutely no idea where this idea that he's BPA comes from. I've said it, what feels like a million times, the difference between this forward group is razor thin. You could make an argument for any one of Slafkovsky, Nazar, Savoie or Cooley as the #2 forward. This is why it was brought up that you take organizational fit into account when making a final decision. The only way you don't is if someone distances themselves from the pack and, if any of the forwards are likely to do that, it's going to be Slafkovsky. I think people need to brace for the fact that he's going to be our pick.

 

[Captain3rdLine]

Cooley is 5'10" I would hope he'd be a better skater than a 6'4" forward. We've already gone over why comparing production across youth leagues doesn't compare to players that play in men's leagues and it's not like Cooley tore up the USHL like some of his USNTDP predecessors did.

Slaf is a damn good skater for someone his size. He has powerful strides and can play at multiple tempos. He'll have no problem skating with Jack for the same reasons Dawson Mercer has no problem skating with him.

I just don't see the appeal of Cooley over a unicorn like Slafkovsky. You're not drafting someone for what their production was at 17/18 either. You're drafting them for what they're going to do in the pros and Slafkovsky's game translates no matter how you wanna break it down.

Cooley is a jack-of-all-trades, master of none type for me. He's a fine pick and will be a fine player but I have absolutely no idea where this idea that he's BPA comes from. I've said it, what feels like a million times, the difference between this forward group is razor thin. You could make an argument for any one of Slafkovsky, Nazar, Savoie or Cooley as the #2 forward. This is why it was brought up that you take organizational fit into account when making a final decision. The only way you don't is if someone distances themselves from the pack and, if any of the forwards are likely to do that, it's going to be Slafkovsky. I think people need to brace for the fact that he's going to be our pick.

I don’t think they need to brace for it. I think they should be excited about it and I honestly think most are or would be.

He’s got 60% of the votes in here and I think even a good amount of the people who voted for someone else would be very excited about taking him.

 

[beekay414]

I don’t think they need to brace for it. I think they should be excited about it and I honestly think most are or would be.

He’s got 60% of the votes in here and I think even a good amount of the people who voted for someone else would be very excited about taking him.

Yeah, that was geared at a select few of those that haven't or will be slow to come around on it.

 

[kudla]

Why would you even consider drafting Cooley, when you already have Hughes and Hischier?

 

[McDuffz88]

Montreals GM is at the Slovakia game again. I’m actually starting to get a little worried that they’ll like him enough to take him #1. Especially if he keeps this play up.

Yeah I'm getting nervous myself. One of Montreal's scouts came out advocating against Wright. Said he was one of the worst performers on the ice when he watched.

 

[hidek91]

Again...someone explain to me what makes Logan Cooley BPA? I've asked and haven't gotten an answer. The only thing I've seen is that "you don't pass on a player for size" and not why he's BPA. The resident draft guru says otherwise and has full-on explained what makes Slafkovsky his #2 aka BPA (and even then, he still hasn't made the decision on whether he'd take Slaf or Jiricek) but I haven't heard from the Cooley supporters what makes him the BPA and why he's so worth avoiding the better fit for?

I can't speak for everyone but just because we believe that you should go BPA and not for team needs, means that the player who doesn't fit the need is our BPA. It just means that he should be taken into consideration and not tossed away because we already have two good centers.

 

[Captain3rdLine]

Yeah I'm getting nervous myself. One of Montreal's scouts came out advocating against Wright. Said he was one of the worst performers on the ice when he watched.

Grant Mckagg is a former scout. Not a current scout but yes he’s been advocating pretty hard against Wright and for Slafkovsky it seems. As it’s been said, if that happens we’re getting Shane Wright who is a damn good prospect we could never have dreamed of getting in the 5-7 range.

 

[beekay414]

I can't speak for everyone but just because we believe that you should go BPA and not for team needs, means that the player who doesn't fit the need is our BPA. It just means that he should be taken into consideration and not tossed away because we already have two good centers.

And my direct question is what makes him the BPA over the guy that is the better fit? Since we're arguing that you don't draft for fit over BPA. What's the differentiating factor in passing up on a unicorn like Slaf for more of what we already have? That's all I'm trying to get an answer on and, so far, I've gotten crickets.

 

[Eggtimer]

If this is in reference to the pick then yeesh this is something you never want to hear.

Why not? It’s exactly what I want to hear. It’s 100% true . If you are pro Jiricek / Nemec the yes it sucks but what he said is completly correct.

It's not nonsense. Thankfully the quote isn't about the pick but it was then yeah it's a really f***ing dumb way to look at things. You don't draft based off of size.

But it’s not drafting because of size… why do you think that?

 

[Lou is God]

Yeah I'm getting nervous myself. One of Montreal's scouts came out advocating against Wright. Said he was one of the worst performers on the ice when he watched.

Yikes. Where did you see this?

 

[hidek91]

And my direct question is what makes him the BPA over the guy that is the better fit? Since we're arguing that you don't draft for fit over BPA. What's the differentiating factor in passing up on a unicorn like Slaf for more of what we already have? That's all I'm trying to get an answer on and, so far, I've gotten crickets.

I'm arguing that you should always go BPA (and not fix team needs using top 10 draft picks). I never claimed that Cooley is BPA over Slafkovsky/Jiricek/Nemec. Also the first part, a drafting philosophy is more objective because you can objectively say that e. g. Devils need an elite d-man more than an elite center or that Arizona would need a franchise center, however comparing prospects is way more subjective and there's no universal truth.

 

[Eggtimer]

Yeah I'm getting nervous myself. One of Montreal's scouts came out advocating against Wright. Said he was one of the worst performers on the ice when he watched.

They always leak and say shit like that. They dont want to pigeonhole themselves into a decision in case the they want to consider other options. It always happens.

 

[beekay414]

I'm arguing that you should always go BPA (and not fix team needs using top 10 draft picks). I never claimed that Cooley is BPA over Slafkovsky/Jiricek/Nemec. Also the first part, a drafting philosophy is more objective because you can objectively say that e. g. Devils need an elite d-man more than an elite center or that Arizona would need a franchise center, however comparing prospects is way more subjective and there's no universal truth.

And how do you determine BPA? Do you truly believe that teams don't take organizational fit into account when building their boards? That's my point. Everyone just screams BPA! BPA! but can't tell me what makes one the BPA over the other. My spider senses tell me I'm right and that teams build their boards based on a vision and not just what can blindly be labeled as BPA.

 

[Captain3rdLine]

Yikes. Where did you see this?

It was a former scout Grant Mckagg. He’s been going at it for a bit now. No scout is gonna come out and say anything.

But ya, that guy has been hyping up Slafkovsky and kind of ripping Wright. But not saying he’s bad just saying he hasn’t been good enough I think and saying that he shouldn’t be the foreshore pick by Montreal and he has Slafkovsky ahead. Still seems to think Wright will be the pick.



There’s literally so many tweets and replies to look at.
But let me emphasize he’s a former habs scouts who still seems to cover the team.

 

[Eggtimer]

If the Habs pass on Wright ( they won’t) then I think we entertain trading down a spot or two or three (max three) .
I’m not worried about them not talking Wright but I’d be fine if they took Slafkovsky or one of the D instead.
They cannot afford to strike out on their pick. They go Wright. Especially at home when they make the pick. Habs fans would shit. If the Habs do pass on Wright , I would t even assume they take Slafkovsky. They have been after C‘s for decades . They reached on taking Kotkkanenememe to get a C , they lost him and habe shit C but they pass on Wroght or Cooley with their first #1 pick they have had in decades? No chance they go winger or D at #1.

 

[Captain3rdLine]

They always leak and say shit like that. They dont want to pigeonhole themselves into a decision in case the they want to consider other options. It always happens.

It wasn’t one of Montreal’s scouts. It was a former scout.

 

[Eggtimer]

I can see going BPA at #2 IF the BPA was miles better than any other choices. However , that is not the case. Take a massive need with Slaf at #2 or perhaps Jiricek or Nemec but no way Cooley or another C .
We have Jack , Nico , Mercer. Why take Cooley? Makes no sense.
We have Hamilton Severson Luke Shakir Okhotiuk Bahl on D .
For wingers we have one elite one. Bratt . That’s it . Holtz could likely be good as well but he is similar to our other forwards where his board play is “ok” at the very best. We are shoehorned into being a team to play off the rush as we don’t have the players to play any other way. The other team clogs the neutral zone and games like the Boston blowout this past season happens.
I just feel like the best pick is Slafkovsk , but yes , I am concerned about how he will develop. But same goes with any prospects in this draft. There are no guarantees in this draft .

 

[hidek91]

And how do you determine BPA? Do you truly believe that teams don't take organizational fit into account when building their boards? That's my point. Everyone just screams BPA! BPA! but can't tell me what makes one the BPA over the other. My spider senses tell me I'm right and that teams build their boards based on a vision and not just what can blindly be labeled as BPA.

I'll start with your second question, I actually believe that sometimes they do and it very often turns out to be mistake. I think that, ironically, teams try to reach for centers. Has Edmonton taken Broberg over Zegras because they already have Drai and McD? If so, it would be an example of BPA being the right way but of course we don't know if they considered Zegras a better prospect. So in other words, I believe that they sometimes ignore BPA in top 10 of the draft and IMO it's a mistake.

If I was a team, I'd determine BPA by the following criteria, all of them being subjective so again there will be no universal BPA:
- evaluation of current ability of the player,
- potential to become a star/very good player,
- how likely the player is to achieve that potential,
- trying to determine the personality of the player (is he hard working, are there any red flags that could prevent him from reaching the potential etc.).

Also, in my opinion, BPA is most important in top 10 of the draft because you lose a lot of value if you take, let's say, #6 prospect using #3 pick just to have the area of need filled. If you do that in 2nd or 3rd round, the value lost is definitely less significant.

 

[StevenToddIves]

Again...someone explain to me what makes Logan Cooley BPA? I've asked and haven't gotten an answer. The only thing I've seen is that "you don't pass on a player for size" and not why he's BPA. The resident draft guru says otherwise and has full-on explained what makes Slafkovsky his #2 aka BPA (and even then, he still hasn't made the decision on whether he'd take Slaf or Jiricek) but I haven't heard from the Cooley supporters what makes him the BPA and why he's so worth avoiding the better fit for?

"Slafkovsky is the BPA at #2 overall." -- resident draft guru

 

[Eggtimer]

Before we won the draft , there was no chance in hell we could have got Slafkovsky. At 5 we would be lucky to get one of Jiricek or Nemec , at #6 there was a chance we would miss out on all three. Now we win #2 , and we are not wantig to take Slafkovsky ? Why? Normally we would have shit ourselves if Slaf would have dropped to #5 and we could take him.
So if we stayed at #5 , Slaf and Jiricek both fall to that spot , people still would want to possibly go Cooley ? No. Jiricek I could still see people wanting but I just think Slaf is better than people are giving him credit for.
Its almost like people are expecting him to be a Zacha . I get it , that would suck . But what if he becomes a Svechnikov or Rantanen ?
We can’t pass on that can we?

 

[Devs3cups]

It wasn’t one of Montreal’s scouts. It was a former scout.

That 2nd tweet is reassuring.