Draft and UDFA Thread 2017-18

[Dijock94]

My ideal scenario if we hold our first round picks

Wahlstrom
Woo
Addison

 

[Ola]

People keep saying that and it still hasn't translated on the ice.

We talk about attitude and maturity, but even if we throw those out the window and look just at play, he really didn't have a spectacular season.

I say that because I think there's this narrative surrounding Merkley that he had a Hughes/Dobson/Bouchard kind of season, but only has questions about the head on his shoulders.

That's inaccurate.

He has concerns about the head on his shoulders AND his play on the ice.

He was still the top PMD for Canada in the U18, top PP unit etc. he played really well in the U18 overall. Wasn’t a monster on the stat sheet, but D scoring is what it is. On some units you get 0.5 PPG by just playing a steady game and on other teams and units you have to play really well on the PP and make spectacular offensive plays to get those 0.5 PPGs...

 

[offdacrossbar]

you cannot teach what merkley has. period. he's the best playmaking dman in the entire draft and certainly top 5 overall and that includes forwards. his offensive abilities are high high end.

he's that rare right handed gifted skating offensive Dman with hockey IQ for days. and ill build a case for him here.

there isnt any defenseman in this draft thats better in the offensive zone with the puck on his stick and that includes dahlin. this kid is an absolute monster when controlling the puck in the attacking zone. his understanding of time and space in the O zone and creating chances is off the charts.

his year for the storm wasnt as bad as your are making it out to be. he's a PPG player from the blue line and he continue that pace in the playoffs as well.

he had 25 goals and 100 assists the last 2 seasons. thats production and pretty close to PPG for 2 seasons from a defenseman is solid.

his production numbers with a very s0-s0 -( and thats being kind) guelph storm team were excellent actually. he was 5th in PPG for all defenseman in the O. his guelph team wasnt good yet he was 5th in the O and thats impressive considering he's one of the younger players and these kind of numbers from a 17 yr old are in fact impressive.

all his offensive metrics are through the roof per mitch browns numbers. he compares favorably with evan bouchard and bouchard is over a year older and has played 1 more season.

every single offensive metric shows merkley was the top play making Dman in the OHL last season.

he isnt perfect, defensively he's got holes and his attitude sucked at times, but talent wise, he's surely worth our last pick in round 1.

there isnt a bigger boom pick in the draft. not one.

 

[Savant]

My ideal scenario if we hold our first round picks

Wahlstrom
Woo
Addison

You dont want Woo. Concussion issues.

 

[Dijock94]

You dont want Woo. Concussion issues.

I am enamored with his pedigree. He also clearly keeps himself in amazing shape. I see a lot of potential there.

 

[Ola]

The Rangers already have Tony DeAngelo--attitude wise he seemed alright last year at least when he was with the Rangers. In Hartford he seemed to be slogging through and I think he could have done better there. When a guy gets demoted you like to see him respond better. Just saying. Tony's defense still needs a lot of work and to me drafting Merkley would be getting a similar player to DeAngelo with a lot of the same issues. And do we want to do that? Isn't one enough? Not every D needs to be a PWP quarterback type either. Between Shattenkirk and how Pionk or DeAngelo shake out--if we draft a d-man at 9 (Boqvist, Hughes, Dobson, Bouchard)--what Skjei can do or Hajek or Rykov when they're ready. It seems to me the Rangers will have a goodly amount of puck moving D who can play on the power play.

On the ice TDA was very energetic in the AHL. Can’t comment on how he was in the room or off the ice, but he definitely delivered on the ice.

I think we look too much at stats from parts of the year down there in the AHL. New team, nobody had any chemistry, plenty of strong destructive players — good or even very good individual initiatives just didn’t pay off a ton for TDA or Pionk.

Also, remember that that team early had all three of TDA, Pionk and Gilmour and later added Sproul (albeit all four didn’t play a ton together). Gilmour is an Allstar D in the AHL. If you play someone who the pucks don’t go in for until he drops the pucks will start to go in sooner rather than later. We had many alternatives to put on the ice for PPs in the AHL, besides 3-4 Ds we also had several capable forwards on the point.

I think the views on these kids would be different if we had more advanced stats available. They definitely played fairly well down there.

 

[Edge]

He was still the top PMD for Canada in the U18, top PP unit etc. he played really well in the U18 overall. Wasn’t a monster on the stat sheet, but D scoring is what it is. On some units you get 0.5 PPG by just playing a steady game and on other teams and units you have to play really well on the PP and make spectacular offensive plays to get those 0.5 PPGs...

you cannot teach what merkley has. period. he's the best playmaking dman in the entire draft and certainly top 5 overall and that includes forwards. his offensive abilities are high high end.

he's that rare right handed gifted skating offensive Dman with hockey IQ for days. and ill build a case for him here.

there isnt any defenseman in this draft thats better in the offensive zone with the puck on his stick and that includes dahlin. this kid is an absolute monster when controlling the puck in the attacking zone. his understanding of time and space in the O zone and creating chances is off the charts.

his year for the storm wasnt as bad as your are making it out to be. he's a PPG player from the blue line and he continue that pace in the playoffs as well.

he had 25 goals and 100 assists the last 2 seasons. thats production and pretty close to PPG for 2 seasons from a defenseman is solid.

his production numbers with a very s0-s0 -( and thats being kind) guelph storm team were excellent actually. he was 5th in PPG for all defenseman in the O. his guelph team wasnt good yet he was 5th in the O and thats impressive considering he's one of the younger players and these kind of numbers from a 17 yr old are in fact impressive.

all his offensive metrics are through the roof per mitch browns numbers. he compares favorably with evan bouchard and bouchard is over a year older and has played 1 more season.

every single offensive metric shows merkley was the top play making Dman in the OHL last season.

he isnt perfect, defensively he's got holes and his attitude sucked at times, but talent wise, he's surely worth our last pick in round 1.

there isnt a bigger boom pick in the draft. not one.

I don't think he was bad per say. But I don't think it was this amazing production that somehow trumps all the concerns and that ultimately is what a decision on Merkley will come down to.

At what point do the positives actually outweigh the negatives?

You can talk about maturing.

You can talk about potential.

You can talk about teaching defense.

But until you actually have those things happening, until you actually see it, it's still a risk.

So the question for every team is at what point do you feel the risk is worth it?

Merkley will get drafted. There's no doubt about that. It's just a matter of when, and who else is still on the board.

The challenge for Merkley is that none of his challenges live in isolation. They're all connected.

It's not like we're talking about a kid who is working on skating, but otherwise checks out okay.

When you need to improve, and you're not listening to people trying to help you improve. Those two become very connected.

When you're a defenseman, and your defense is really sub-par, and you're already on the smaller side, you're calling card (offense) is going to get looked at.

In this case, for as good as his calling card was, it really wasn't seen as spectacular enough to outweigh the other things. Not for a lot of people.

So now you're left with talent, but not necessarily results that match said talent. He's not the only kid you can say that about, and it's not as big of a deal if you're doing other things. But in Merkley's case, he wasn't doing those other things. So what are you left with? Promise, but not necessarily the traits you like to see when determining if someone is going to cash in. And frankly, there really wasn't a heck of a whole lot of progress throughout the year.

We talk about a kid finishing strong or working on the areas of concern --- there wasn't a heck of a whole lot of that with Merkley. If anything, he tended to double down on some things. That is going to cause concern for a lot of teams.

In the end, Merkley very well could be a late first round pick. He could also be a second round pick.

But wherever you draft him, it's going to be more about the potential than the current product.

 

[Savant]

I am enamored with his pedigree. He also clearly keeps himself in amazing shape. I see a lot of potential there.

That's all fine and good but I'm not taking a concussion risk in the 1st.

 

[offdacrossbar]

I don't think he was bad per say. But I don't think it was this amazing production that somehow trumps all the concerns and that ultimately is what a decision on Merkley will come down to.

At what point do the positives actually outweigh the negatives?

You can talk about maturing.

You can talk about potential.

You can talk about teaching defense.

But until you actually have those things happening, until you actually see it, it's still a risk.

So the question for every team is at what point do you feel the risk is worth it?

Merkley will get drafted. There's no doubt about that. It's just a matter of when, and who else is still on the board.

The challenge for Merkley is that none of his challenges live in isolation. They're all connected.

It's not like we're talking about a kid who is working on skating, but otherwise checks out okay.

When you need to improve, and you're not listening to people trying to help you improve. Those two become very connected.

When you're a defenseman, and your defense is really sub-par, and you're already on the smaller side, you're calling card (offense) is going to get looked at.

In this case, for as good as his calling card was, it really wasn't seen as spectacular enough to outweigh the other things. Not for a lot of people.

So now you're left with talent, but not necessarily results that match said talent. He's not the only kid you can say that about, and it's not as big of a deal if you're doing other things. But in Merkley's case, he wasn't doing those other things. So what are you left with? Promise, but not necessarily the traits you like to see when determining if someone is going to cash in. And frankly, there really wasn't a heck of a whole lot of progress throughout the year.

We talk about a kid finishing strong or working on the areas of concern --- there wasn't a heck of a whole lot of that with Merkley. If anything, he tended to double down on some things. That is going to cause concern for a lot of teams.

In the end, Merkley very well could be a late first round pick. He could also be a second round pick.

But wherever you draft him, it's going to be more about the potential than the current product.

its called the draft.

the only guarantee is there are no guarantees.

 

[Sarge13]

its called the draft.

the only guarantee is there are no guarantees.

I don't know o d c, George Burnett being his gm/coach may guarantee him not going to the Rangers.

 

[JimmyG89]

Not sure what to make of this, but I think this is the kind of player Gorton could use a 2nd or maybe a 3rd on.

Has anyone ranked him in the 1st at this point? You're getting a guy who has improved his stock since being drafted in the 2nd AND he's got a decent shot of being in the NHL next season (depending on the team).

I know we have 26 and 28, but is that too high for a player like this? Someone who was overage (Tanner Pearson) went 30th in the next draft.

 

[Edge]

its called the draft.

the only guarantee is there are no guarantees.

Well yes.

But not all risks are equal.

I can throw ziplock bag with a $500 into a pool and tell you that if you retrieve it, you keep it.

There's a slight risk you drown because, well...crap happens. But you probably take off your shoes and dive in.

I put the ziplock bag in a safe and throw the key into pool. The risk goes up a little.

I do all of the above, turn down the water temperate to 40 degrees and turn off the lights. The risk goes up considerably.

I have some gators placed in the pool, on top of everything else, and suddenly going back inside the house and forgetting about $500 seems like a pretty good idea.

#Risk

 

[Ola]

This is a very good scenario:
9 Jesperi Kotkaniemi
26 K’Andre Miller
28 Bode Wilde
39 Jonathan Berggren

And we would also get a very good young player at 48th...

 

[offdacrossbar]

you draft wahlstrom or dobson at 9

lauko or bokk next or some how maybe farabee

and merkley or alexeyev with that last pick in the 1st round and thats a terrific draft.

its all risk.

 

[Harbour Dog]

Not sure what to make of this, but I think this is the kind of player Gorton could use a 2nd or maybe a 3rd on.

Has anyone ranked him in the 1st at this point? You're getting a guy who has improved his stock since being drafted in the 2nd AND he's got a decent shot of being in the NHL next season (depending on the team).

I know we have 26 and 28, but is that too high for a player like this? Someone who was overage (Tanner Pearson) went 30th in the next draft.

I don't think I'd touch him in either of the first two rounds.

There's always been questions of how well he could translate to the pros, and as far as I know, his skating is still a concern?

I'm also a little biased, because aside from maybe a swing at O'Brien, Foudy, or a dropper, I'm hoping we lean towards D with our second round picks.

 

[Edge]

I'm not completely opposed to taking Merkley, but it depends on the circumstances.

I'm considerably more comfortable taking him with a second than I am a first in this particular draft.

 

[Ola]

Edge- For me with Merkley it’s more like, I’ve not seen any negatives myself.

If we think his attitude will prevent him from developing as a player — stay away no questions asked. But I’ve only seen one kid who took a very bad penalty on one occasion (3 game suspension) and was suspended by his team on another occasion for taking a misconduct penalty. I’ve not seen anything substantial besides that. And in itself I cannot read much into that. If there is more to it — sure close the book. Slam it shut.

He is also one of the younger kids in the draft, obviously had a lot of growth potential physically.

For us as a team, I rather stay away from smaller RDs unless we think they will be really special. We talk about BPA, it’s BS IMO. Are we going to take Boqvist 9, Merkley 26, Nils Lundqvist 28 and Woo at 39? There is a line. It’s one thing to not draft for need, that is usually a recipe for disaster. But looking at extreme differences in the depth chart is another thing.

 

[Off Sides]

I think a rebuilding team, one who is in need of some sort of elite, near elite talents in order to eventually take the final step towards real contention needs to take risks at the draft, by drafting those who may have that sort of ceiling.

Everything else leads down the same road they were on, they end up having a pretty talented team who is full of character/leadership whatever one wants to call it but it still gets eliminated by the teams who plain drafted talent that came out of a higher tier previously.

Does not have to be Merkley specifically, but the general idea of giving more weight to prospects who have a higher ceiling versus those who are less likely to bust, or could play lower on the depth chart should they not reach their highest potential (are safer) has to fit into this "rebuild" somewhere for the eventual team to end up better than just good, doesn't it?

 

[offdacrossbar]

I'm not completely opposed to taking Merkley, but it depends on the circumstances.

I'm considerably more comfortable taking him with a second than I am a first in this particular draft.

wahlstrom
merkley
alexeyev

or

dobson
lauko
merkley

im happy.

 

[Levitate]

So who are the Rangers going to take instead of Wahlstrom when he's on the board at 9

 

[Gardner McKay]

So who are the Rangers going to take instead of Wahlstrom when he's on the board at 9

Taro Tsujimoto.

 

[Harbour Dog]

I never wanted either at 28 in our poll, but it came down to Wise and Noel, which Wise won handily in the tiebreak.

Now with Mackenzie's rankings released, Noel is at #19 and Wise is at #52.

I think that's a bit high for Noel, but looks about right for Wise. I regret not asking the question weeks ago, but what exactly is it that people see in Wise to think he would be a solid first round pick?

 

[Brooklyn Rangers Fan]

I'm not taking Merkley or Woo in the first two rounds. I'm all for upside, but in this draft with so much quality and depth there are too many other good players you can get with those five picks who don't have the same negatives attached.

Once we get into the the third round (if they slip that far), it's a different story.

 

[NYR]

My draft day prediction.

I think Boqvist ends up dropping all the way to us due to his concussion issues and we end up taking him and his soft coconut @ #9..

 

[Harbour Dog]

I'm not taking Merkley or Woo in the first two rounds. I'm all for upside, but in this draft with so much quality and depth there are too many other good players you can get with those five picks who don't have the same negatives attached.

Once we get into the the third round (if they slip that far), it's a different story.

I'd be okay with Merkley in the second round, depending on how the board looks. I really don't want to take Woo that early though; he doesn't have the game-breaking skillset that I'd like to see for how much of a gamble that concussions have turned him into.