Prospect Info: Draft 2025: Is it too late to tank? Asking for a friend

I think there's a slight chance someone like Martone or Hagens falls to 7th--not a good chance, but it's still probably within realistic bounds. I think at 9th, you're in that worst case scenario spot where even if a few teams up high take a McQueen, Desnoyers, or O'Brien early, you're still out of range of landing one of the "next tier" like Hagens or Martone. But like others have said, the real issue is that this team could've been sitting 4th or 5th.

I dunno. It is what it is. I'm not like, livid or anything (buddy I can't muster anything but borderline apathy with this dogshit org anymore lol), but it's tough not to be a little annoyed by this self inflicted bullshit, year after year. We're nearly a decade removed from the last playoff round win. It's damn likely we don't see Sid play playoff hockey again, and if we do, it'll be a "thanks for showing up, enjoy golfing in a week" appearance. We have a loser coach who simply cannot be held accountable for his role in the decline, because ownership and Sid love him. We had years of JR chasing 3rd liners and paying 1st liner prices. We had whatever the f*** Hextall did while he was here. Now we've got Dubas/FSG doing more of this "we're still gonna try and compete with Sid" PR-speak trash while they hover around the bottom of the league, refusing to accept reality and do what needs to be done to try and mitigate the misery of the post-Sid years.

You trade Rakell at the TDL for a 1st+prospect, you trade Rust once the FA dust settles and his NTC drops off, you trade EK once his bonus has been payed--this team could pretty realistically be looking at like Martone this draft and McKenna next. I know, I know "they're not centers or RHD!" That's still an exceptional haul for a team like the Pens.
 
Every draft has a different down tick in talent. The perception is that the top 7-8 were a solid step or two above the rest. We happen to pick right after that cutoff. We're still gonna get a good player, but maybe not a future piece in the core.
And every year some dude falls because of injury or there is a surprise in the top 10. I can almost guarantee one of those 8 guys you have in your head, will be there.

And truthfully you just never know who or what you are getting when you draft. Capitals got Leonard at 8 (although his results in his first 10ish NHL games are ugly).

I just think it is pointless to sit around and fret about something you don’t have control over and could potentially end up positively either way.
 
2015 - Rantantan was taken 10th after Meier
2016 - Charlie McAvoy was 14th and Jakob Chychrun was 16th
2017 - Necas was 12th and Nick Suzuki 13th. Robert Thomas was 20th.
2018 - Bouchard was 10th. K'Andre Miller 22nd
2019 - Matt Boldy was 12th, Cole Caufield 15th
2020 - Perfetti 10th. Lundell 12th.

Just a sampling.

The talent is there. You just need to make the right selection and then develop that player.
I have a fear that our GM is incapable of making such a selection.

I fear the reaching. All the players they talked about being interested in being gone at that point.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Andy99
Here are the 4/5 pics vs 9/10 for the "4th pick can't be franchise-altering" heroes.

2024:
Cayden Lindstrom/Ivan Demidov vs Zayne Parekh/Anton Silayev

2023:
William Smith/David Reinbacher vs Nate Danielson/Dalibor Dvorsky
*7th Matvei Michkov

2022:
Shane Wright/Cutter Gauthier vs Matthew Savoie/Pavel Mintyukov

2021:
Luke Hughes/Kent Johnson vs Dylan Guenther/Tyler Boucher
*7th William Eklund

2020:
Lucas Raymond/Jake Sanderson vs Marco Rossi/Cole Perfetti

2019:
Bowen Byram/Alex Turcotte vs Trevor Zegras/Vasili Podkolzin
*6th Moritz Seider

2018:
Brady Tkachuk/Barrett Hayton vs Vitali Kravtsov/Evan Bouchard
*7th Quinn Hughes

2017:
Cale Makar/Elias Pettersson vs Michael Rasmussen/Owen Tippett

2016:
Jesse Puljujarvi/Olli Juolevi vs Mikhail Sergachev/Tyson Jost
*6th Matthew Tkachuk/7thClayton Keller

2015:
Mitch Marner/Noah Hanifin vs Timo Meier/Mikko Rantanen
*8thZach Werenski

2014:
Sam Bennett/Michael Dal Colle vs Nikolaj Ehlers/Nick Ritchie
*8th William Nylander


Just admit that you're wrong and move on.
 
I think you can reasonably acknowledge that the Penguins would have been better off picking #4/5 while also not going to insane hysteria levels about it like saying that they've made a "franchise altering mistake" by not losing a couple of more games to end up picking #4/5.

I was very vocal about Martone over Eklund yesterday, and I don't think anyone should argue that Martone is simply a better prospect than Eklund. But if those guys hit their upside, you're talking about Brady Tkachuk vs William Nylander. Neither of those guys is going to impact a franchise larger than the other one would. Schaefer and Misa definitely have that upside to have that massive franchise impact, but that's really about it in this draft.

That said, a lot depends on who they can actually get at #9. I really like Eklund, so I have no concerns if that's who they end up getting with their 1st. If it's Desnoyers or Martin? That changes things. I like what I've seen from those two, but it's very reasonable to question their upside IMO.
 
Here are the 4/5 pics vs 9/10 for the "4th pick can't be franchise-altering" heroes.

2024:
Cayden Lindstrom/Ivan Demidov vs Zayne Parekh/Anton Silayev

2023:
William Smith/David Reinbacher vs Nate Danielson/Dalibor Dvorsky
*7th Matvei Michkov

2022:
Shane Wright/Cutter Gauthier vs Matthew Savoie/Pavel Mintyukov

2021:
Luke Hughes/Kent Johnson vs Dylan Guenther/Tyler Boucher
*7th William Eklund

2020:
Lucas Raymond/Jake Sanderson vs Marco Rossi/Cole Perfetti

2019:
Bowen Byram/Alex Turcotte vs Trevor Zegras/Vasili Podkolzin
*6th Moritz Seider

2018:
Brady Tkachuk/Barrett Hayton vs Vitali Kravtsov/Evan Bouchard
*7th Quinn Hughes

2017:
Cale Makar/Elias Pettersson vs Michael Rasmussen/Owen Tippett

2016:
Jesse Puljujarvi/Olli Juolevi vs Mikhail Sergachev/Tyson Jost
*6th Matthew Tkachuk/7thClayton Keller

2015:
Mitch Marner/Noah Hanifin vs Timo Meier/Mikko Rantanen
*8thZach Werenski

2014:
Sam Bennett/Michael Dal Colle vs Nikolaj Ehlers/Nick Ritchie
*8th William Nylander


Just admit that you're wrong and move on.

It's hilarious that you posted a list that has an overwhelming majority of #4/5 picks not being "franchise altering" players and somehow act like you're right because of it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Dominance
I have a fear that our GM is incapable of making such a selection.

I fear the reaching. All the players they talked about being interested in being gone at that point.
This GM acquired Koivunen and McGroarty, drafted Yager, Pieniniemi, Brunicke, and Howe, all of whom look promising. Even late round picks like Vaisanen and Harding are performing above expectations with a long way to go.
 
Ah well, onto the lotto.

Here's to another 5 months of your random HFBoards poster throwing together ambitious plans to try and save this team from its incessant need to be in no man's land, only for October to roll around and the same loser coach to be behind the bench, and the roster being largely unchanged. :laugh:
 
It's hilarious that you posted a list that has an overwhelming majority of #4/5 picks not being "franchise altering" players and somehow act like you're right because of it.
lol, ok chief. Great argument.

Just a bunch of losers who've won Cups, Norris trophies, have 100-point seasons and/or made their respective 4 nations teams. Total losers all around.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Honour Over Glory
lol, ok chief. Great argument.

How is that not a great argument? You're acting like they're going to miss out on some "franchise altering" player by picking at #4 rather than #9. Of the decade of drafts you posted, there are only like 3 "franchise altering" players taken at #4 or #5. It's Marner, Makar and maybe Pettersson, with Demidov looking like he has that upside.

Yes, the Penguins will get a worse prospect at #9 than at #4. No, that doesn't mean they're going to have a "franchise altering mistake" by picking at #9 rather than #4. The most likely scenario from the drafts you posted is that they'll get Rossi/Ehlers/Guenther upside player, while #4 will be a Tkachuk/Sanderson/Johnson upside player with a bit lower of a bust risk than the group at #9.

Getting William Nylander (Eklund's upside) instead of Brady Tkachuk (Martone's upside) is not "franchise altering". Missing out on Schaefer and Misa would be "franchise altering", because those guys actually have the upside to warrant that kind of statement.
 
I'm not going to act like picking #9 instead of #7 isn't a bummer, but man some of you need to drink a beer and take a Xanax :laugh:

At #9, I think they're probably looking at Eklund with Martin as the fallback option. At #7, I think it would have been O'Brien with Eklund as the fallback option. Would it have been nicer to be at #7 to have more options? Sure, but acting like it's a "franchise altering mistake" is just purely hysteria.

The big impact of their pick being at #9 is that it basically eliminates the chance of someone like Martone sliding to their pick. I think it was unlikely at #7, but there was still a chance there. At #9, I think it simply will not happen.
I'd love O'Brien 0r Eklund at 9th overall, but I'm afraid of McQueen being their at the penguins pick. I'm hoping he going before the 9th pick.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Andy99
I'd love O'Brien 0r Eklund at 9th overall, but I'm afraid of McQueen being their at the penguins pick. I'm hoping he going before the 9th pick.

I'm not worried about that at all. McQueen just doesn't fit at all with the kind of picks Dubas and Clarke have made.

I think their pick will be one of O'Brien, Eklund or Martin. Those guys all fit Dubas' track record with picks far more than McQueen. If it's not one of those three, I'd throw out Smith as a guy that fits well based on the Sandin and Niemela picks.
 
How is that not a great argument? You're acting like they're going to miss out on some "franchise altering" player by picking at #4 rather than #9. Of the decade of drafts you posted, there are only like 3 "franchise altering" players taken at #4 or #5. It's Marner, Makar and maybe Pettersson, with Demidov looking like he has that upside.

Yes, the Penguins will get a worse prospect at #9 than at #4. No, that doesn't mean they're going to have a "franchise altering mistake" by picking at #9 rather than #4. The most likely scenario from the drafts you posted is that they'll get Rossi/Ehlers/Guenther upside player with a higher bust risk, while #4 will be a Tkachuk/Sanderson/Johnson upside player with a slightly lower bust risk.
I think you forgot what I actually said because you were too scared to quote me. Now you're made up in your head that I'm guaranteeing that it'll be a franchise-altering mistake when I said no such thing.

What I said was: "We won't know for a few years, but falling to 9th when they were on track for 4th or 5th could be a franchise-altering mistake."

That statement is 100% true and what I post 100% proves me to be correct.

And a huge LOL at not considering Hughes, both Tkachuks, Nylander or Werenski franchise-altering players. Awesome talent analysis there, chief.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ryder71
I think you forgot what I actually said because you were too scared to quote me. Now you're made up in your head that I'm guaranteeing that it'll be a franchise-altering mistake when I said no such thing.

What I said was: "We won't know for a few years, but falling to 9th when they were on track for 4th or 5th could be a franchise-altering mistake."

That statement is 100% true and what I post 100% proves me to be correct.

The Penguins could also win the draft lottery because they ended up in the #9 spot and get a better prospect than if they would have been at #4/5.

And a huge LOL at not considering Hughes, both Tkachuks, Nylander or Werenski franchise-altering players. Awesome talent analysis there, chief.

None of those guys were taken at #4/5? If you're arbitrarily giving credit for those guys at #4/5, why can't I pull guys who went at #10-#15 who ended up at that?

The thing those drafts showed is that drafting is largely a crapshoot and guys who go #4/5 may not end up the 4th/5th best player in the class. This isn't even saying that the difference doesn't matter, it's just that you're making a stupid argument by saying it "could be franchise altering" by them not picking #4/5.

They could make a "franchise altering mistake" if Martone ends up the next great NHL power forward while whoever they take at #9 ends up nothing. They could also make a "franchise saving act" if Martone ends up a bust due to his skating and Eklund ends up William Nylander 2.0. They could also win the draft lottery solely because they finished at #9, where the exact lottery sequence they got for finishing at #9 is the one that won the lottery. That's why it's nonsensical hysteria.
 
It's fine they'll jump up to 2nd overall and take Misa. Then win the McKenna lotto after Sid decides to get wrist surgery a calendar year after his injury, and end up with the 5th overall pick as well from the Rangers punting to next year.
 
The Penguins could also win the draft lottery because they ended up in the #9 spot and get a better prospect than if they would have been at #4/5.



None of those guys were taken at #4/5? If you're arbitrarily giving credit for those guys at #4/5, why can't I pull guys who went at #10-#15 who ended up at that?
lol, another banger argument. "Guys picked at 6 or 7th don't count because they're not available at 4th or 5th!!!!!"

Also, which has better odds of winning the lottery, 4th or 9th?
 

Users who are viewing this thread

  • Ad

    Ad