Prospect Info: - Draft 2025 - Everyone is trading up, but no one seems to be trading down edition | Page 14 | HFBoards - NHL Message Board and Forum for National Hockey League
Toggle sidebar

Prospect Info: Draft 2025 - Everyone is trading up, but no one seems to be trading down edition

deakka said:
Seems a lot of us don't wanna draft Aitcheson. Which ofc means that what gonna happen.

I'm with the above poster. You don't draft for thoghness in the top half of the 1st, you just don't.

He's the oldest in the draft, early growth spurt beating up on smaller guys, wow? Home impressive!

Add to that questionable offensive upside and low hockey IQ.

My god. I'm already fuming and we haven't even drafted him yet.
Gonna have a strike when we actually pick him...
Click to expand...
Or you could, you know, just go with the flow since none of us knows how any of these prospects will pan out.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Kannu, CheckingLineCenter, Jacob and 1 other person
Aitcheson’s upside is a lefty Trouba, so I don’t think it’s fair to act like he’s somehow a bad pick at #11. They’d have to go way off the board for me to think they’d be making a bad pick, and it’s entirely possible I’m full of shit and it ends up a great pick.

This isn’t like the NYI at #1 where any pick outside of Schaefer is a mistake.
 
Eklunds size doesn’t bother me too much- he should play at 5’11 185 or so

Scoring upside is hard to get a read on. But it may just be a function of the league he plays in. But he is an ‘06 and didn’t light up the U20 league last lesson.

But stats aren’t everything. He has tools to be a top 6 forward and compete to play lower down the lineup. I don’t see him as a foundational piece but think he can be a 20-30 goal heart and soul guy that is part of your “core”.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jared Grayden
CheckingLineCenter said:
Eklunds size doesn’t bother me too much- he should play at 5’11 185 or so

Scoring upside is hard to get a read on. But it may just be a function of the league he plays in. But he is an ‘06 and didn’t light up the U20 league last lesson.

But stats aren’t everything. He has tools to be a top 6 forward and compete to play lower down the lineup. I don’t see him as a foundational piece but think he can be a 20-30 goal heart and soul guy that is part of your “core”.
Click to expand...

We pretty much fully agree on Eklund, but one thing I'd say is the primary concern I have with Eklund's offensive upside is that I'm not sure what traits I see there that scream high offensive upside. It's not about his production, he did have a very good U-20 WJC (6 points in 7 games) and had a strong season in Sweden. But what talents are there that scream a high end offensive upside? He has a good shot, good skating and good playmaking, but neither are standout traits like O'Brien's playmaking is.

That's why I view him as more of a safe but lower upside pick. Using the old HF scales, he feels like a 7.5B prospect, a guy Rakell type of upside (scoring complementary top-6 winger) and a Kapanen type of floor (energy 3rd line winger). But I just don't see the traits there that make me think his upside is much higher than that, I'd need to see something more there.

Big Friggin Dummy said:
Easy, just trade up to like 7th to snag Hagens and take O'Brien with the Rangers' 12th overall. Simple.
Click to expand...

I really like Hagens and think he's getting underrated in this draft, but I'm uncomfortable trading up for a guy I'm not 100% sure can stay at center in the NHL.

I'd ultimately do it but Dubas better be damn sure he can stick at center. Trading up and having Hagens end up a winger would stink.
 
Empoleon8771 said:
He has a good shot, good skating and good playmaking, but neither are standout traits like O'Brien's playmaking is.
Click to expand...
I think his standout trait (that is a huge deal in the NHL and very important) is his puck carrying ability. He could be a beast in terms of generating exits and entries on his own.

Also think his shot is high end he just doesn’t apply it super well.
 
  • Like
Reactions: LiffLaff and Empoleon8771
Thanks for the insights into what everyone has been discussing. I guess it doesn't change much for me. I didn't see Mrtka as a potential #1D, but think he has top half potential as a RD. And McQueen was probably really affected by his injury even when he did play so a huge wildcard that you have to project a bit more. I'd still be fine with either at #11, but understand why others aren't.
 
Empoleon8771 said:


FYI McKenzie's final rankings drop at 11:30 AM on Monday. They're the best rankings out there and am super curious to see how they look.
Click to expand...

Finally. I'm expecting a little drop from Hagens (not that I agree) and Spence and slightly bigger ones from Hensler and Ryabkin VS his January rankings.

Small jumps from Martin, Kindel and Nesbitt.

I think Brzustewicz, Nathan Behm and possibly Cole Mckinney have a good chance of scooting into the top 32.
NCAA magic man and pistoleer Shane Vansaghi should make a big jump into late first round territory as well, even as an older player in the draft.

Into his top 80 from the prospect abyss, I could see undersized but super skilled u-18 darling Ekberg and similarly undersized but also stuck on an island Veilleux showing up. Jamiro Reber who was passed over last year should break into the top 80 this season as well.

I dont think itll be a drastically different list otherwise. Few players moving around more than 2-3 spots in the top 40 vs his last ranking.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Tasty Biscuits and Randy Butternubs
Empoleon8771 said:
If you want to draft based on upside, Eklund probably isn’t the guy you want to pick there. At least not over Smith or Lakovic.
Click to expand...
Disagree. There is a difference between upside and projects. Eklund's ceiling is high imo, but he also has that high floor. That is what the first round should be all about.

Lakovic is a guy we all watched play when Yager was our prospect. I like him but if we are going to take a lottery ticket on a guy, I would not do so for a left-winger. There is no need. Eklund is a potential LW or RW, and has way more appeal to me. As for Smith, we can get left-shot D-men later on in this draft.

It's one of the 7 centers or Eklund for me (and even then, I am still not convinced about McQueen).

Hopefully, all of this is a moot point and Jake O'Brien winds up falling into our laps. He checks every box.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Le Magnifique 66
Empoleon8771 said:
Nah this is just an appeal to authority, a lot of people here have actually taken the time to watch McQueen and have come away unimpressed. I know Jesse did a deep dive on McQueen when he was throwing together his videos of prospects and came away super unimpressed, with noting that Lakovic actually looks like what McQueen is advertised to be.

McQueen is a skilled guy for his size, but he’s not that skilled in general and wouldn’t be a 1st round pick if not for his size. I think he’s more of a mid 2nd round talent that happens to be massive. I also don’t think he’s even the most skilled big guy in the draft, I think Lakovic has more natural talent than McQueen but Lakovic has major red flags that are honestly more scary to me than McQueen.
Click to expand...
I agree with your post, but this is also really funny coming from you after what you said about Sanders in the NFL draft.
 
Don'tcry4mejanhrdina said:
Isn't Eklund known for his relentless style of play? If so, sign me up. Sometimes players can be greater than the sum of their parts. Look at Hornqvist as a prime example. Horrible skater, poor vision, even his shot was nothing special. Yet he just wouldn't be stopped.
Click to expand...
Not just that, but guys like that seem to have a tendency to drag their team mates in to the fight with them. You cant really have enough guys that are willing to go through a wall to win.
 
CheckingLineCenter said:
I think his standout trait (that is a huge deal in the NHL and very important) is his puck carrying ability. He could be a beast in terms of generating exits and entries on his own.

Also think his shot is high end he just doesn’t apply it super well.
Click to expand...
That and his willingness to go in to battle areas. Having the skill to do something with the puck is well and good, but someones got to get a hold of it first. Eklund reminds me of a less violent Kunitz to be honest.
 
Turin said:
I am objectively and factually correct.
Click to expand...
Opinions vary and while that might be some semblance of a consensus for what WE need we shouldn't be opting for teenagers with coming off significant injuries nor defensemen who won't be potential difference makers. I'd rather go for skilled players upfront who can move the needle. I'd gladly take Reschny over any of those guys I discounted. Jesse echoed my sentiments today in as much as saying that he believes Reschny is the best playmaker in the draft! He has excellent vision. If JOB, Martin and Ek are gone he'd be a guy we should certainly consider. Highly skilled, fluid skater, great vision. We need skill!
 
Ryder71 said:
Opinions vary and while that might be some semblance of a consensus for what WE need we shouldn't be opting for teenagers with coming off significant injuries nor defensemen who won't be potential difference makers. I'd rather go for skilled players upfront who can move the needle. I'd gladly take Reschny over any of those guys I discounted. Jesse echoed my sentiments today in as much as saying that he believes Reschny is the best playmaker in the draft! He has excellent vision. If JOB, Martin and Ek are gone he'd be a guy we should certainly consider. Highly skilled, fluid skater, great vision. We need skill!
Click to expand...
While I get why people don't want McQueen, I still wouldnt be opposed to picking him. It's not like centers with first line upside are usually available at where we're picking, and even though I agree the back injury is worrisome, from everything ive read after the combine, it doesnt seem to be that much of an issue. Clearly a boom of bust though.
 
LiffLaff said:
While I get why people don't want McQueen, I still wouldnt be opposed to picking him. It's not like centers with first line upside are usually available at where we're picking, and even though I agree the back injury is worrisome, from everything ive read after the combine, it doesnt seem to be that much of an issue. Clearly a boom of bust though.
Click to expand...
I'm not necessarily risk averse but we're not exactly swimming in quality prospects as of yet. This really needs to be a hit here. McQueen certainly has question marks beyond the obvious health variable.
'
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

  • ... and 1 more.
    • Total: 22 (members: 14, guests: 8)

    Latest posts

    Ad

    Ad

    Top Bottom