Draft and UDFA Thread 2018-19: Part II

[Edge]

I think 4 D-men at least will go top 10 and my guy will be one of them.

Four might be a challenge, I’d say 3 is a more likely possibility.

Hughes, Kakko, Cozens and Dach have to be considered locks.

Then you have a mix of names like Podkolzin, Boldy, Turcotte and Zegras are all in the mix - saying nothing about a potential late riser. So you’d have to have at least half those guys slip out of the top 10 to fit 4 into the top 10. That’s certainly doable, but would likely take some serious shuffling.

Byram is a consensus in most top 10s, but there’s some variation as to who the second best defenseman in the draft - Soderstrom, Broberg, Harley, and York have all been floated. Right now, Broberg might be higher on more lists.

 

[Edge]

Byram should be elite.

Pronman is still... an asshat.

I’m curious about Pronman’s longevity.

You can have your own criteria and approach, but at some point people are going to start judging the track record. And that is when people either show they have staying power, or become the subject of “what ever happened to...” conversations.

 

[Amazing Kreiderman]

Four might be a challenge, I’d say 3 is a more likely possibility.

Hughes, Kakko, Cozens and Dach have to be considered locks.

Then you have a mix of names like Podkolzin, Boldy, Turcotte and Zegras are all in the mix - saying nothing about a potential late riser. So you’d have to have at least half those guys slip out of the top 10 to fit 4 into the top 10. That’s certainly doable, but would likely take some serious shuffling.

Byram is a consensus in most top 10s, but there’s some variation as to who the second best defenseman in the draft - Soderstrom, Broberg, Harley, and York have all been floated. Right now, Broberg might be higher on more lists.

But how many teams outside the top-3 go for a positional need? Montreal went with a positional need at 3rd overall last year with Kotkaniemi

 

[GeorgeKaplan]

But how many teams outside the top-3 go for a positional need? Montreal went with a positional need at 3rd overall last year with Kotkaniemi

Arizona also did, Detroit was going to, Vancouver went in focused on getting a defenseman and I guess you could make an argument for Chicago

 

[Mikos87]

I’m curious about Pronman’s longevity.

You can have your own criteria and approach, but at some point people are going to start judging the track record. And that is when people either show they have staying power, or become the subject of “what ever happened to...” conversations.

He's been around long enough to know what he favors, and where the shortfalls are. Good on him to get some journalistic integrity, he's definitely got a stance. There are other (former) HF posters here who ended up Radio shows in a major hockey city, jobs as professional scouts, etc. Pronman isn't one of them, but he's made his mark.

Our old buddy who was a big Toby Enstrom fan 15 years ago ended up with a scouting job, and another old timer has a radio show with his old HF screen name. Among others.

 

[Edge]

But how many teams outside the top-3 go for a positional need? Montreal went with a positional need at 3rd overall last year with Kotkaniemi

Varies. I think it tends to happen in drafts where there’s more toss ups.

However, in a draft where defense isn’t considered a premium, and the forward crop is considered particularly strong, I have a harder time envisioning more teams going that direction.

At this point, I’d say Dorofeyev or another forward has a better shot of sliding into the top 10, than having 4 defenseman taken.

 

[Edge]

He's been around long enough to know what he favors, and where the shortfalls are. Good on him to get some journalistic integrity, he's definitely got a stance. There are other (former) HF posters here who ended up Radio shows in a major hockey city, jobs as professional scouts, etc. Pronman isn't one of them, but he's made his mark.

Our old buddy who was a big Toby Enstrom fan 15 years ago ended up with a scouting job, and another old timer has a radio show with his old HF screen name. Among others.

Yeah, I’m aware.

It’ll be interesting to see where he ends up.

 

[Mikos87]

There are 3 defensemen that I think will be absolute home runs. At least 1 will be available if the Rangers don't draft in the lottery slot. Another will be available with a late 1st.... but he's on the radar more and more, and I'm not sure he'll last until the 2nd where a lot have him ranked.

The only downside is that they are all LHDs, and the Rangers have plenty of those.

 

[Edge]

There are 3 defensemen that I think will be absolute home runs. At least 1 will be available if the Rangers don't draft in the lottery slot. Another will be available with a late 1st.... but he's on the radar more and more, and I'm not sure he'll last until the 2nd where a lot have him ranked.

The only downside is that they are all LHDs, and the Rangers have plenty of those.

It’s funny, the whole LHD thing doesn’t bother me too much. I’m okay walking away with 2 or 3 of the best, and then doing what we need to with the rest.

It’s why the thought of drafting Byram was never really a negative for me.

If Byram and Miller tap into even 80 percent of their potential, I’ll happily accept the challenge of trying to get value for the players in the organization they passed.

 

[Mikos87]

It’s funny, the whole LHD thing doesn’t bother me too much. I’m okay walking away with 2 or 3 of the best, and then doing what we need to with the rest.

It’s why the thought of drafting Byram was never really a negative for me.

If Byram and Miller tap into even 80 percent of their potential, I’ll happily accept the challenge of trying to get value for the players in the organization they passed.

Yeah, I'm more than okay with that. Especially if you get a Brodie type who is better on the off-side. Byram is 3rd in my books. It's rarer and rarer to get a defenseman that's the total package.

 

[McRanger]

The only thing I’m certain about with this draft is we need to find a way to get another top 1o or top 15 pick.

 

[Edge]

Yeah, I'm more than okay with that. Especially if you get a Brodie type who is better on the off-side. Byram is 3rd in my books. It's rarer and rarer to get a defenseman that's the total package.

I have him at 5 on my list, but I can make a strong case for third. He’s certainly in that tier of players I wouldn’t hesitate to take third.

Personally, I feel he is almost criminally overlooked on this board. Based on a combination of potential/risk, he’d easily compare favorably (at the same age) to any defenseman the Rangers have taken since Zubov. Maybe even Leetch.

That’s not to compare his talent to those guys, that’s unfair for just about any 17 year old kid. It’s merely to give context as to the balance of finding upside and likelihood of reaching said upside. Some guys have had high upside, others have had good odds of taping into most of their potential. But having both, at a higher level, is noteworthy.

 

[I Eat Crow]

There are 3 defensemen that I think will be absolute home runs. At least 1 will be available if the Rangers don't draft in the lottery slot. Another will be available with a late 1st.... but he's on the radar more and more, and I'm not sure he'll last until the 2nd where a lot have him ranked.

The only downside is that they are all LHDs, and the Rangers have plenty of those.

Cam York and who else?

 

[Joey Bones]

With Byram, Cozens and Dach (and Krebs) potentially sitting around the post-lottery top 10, there is a decent chance of the Rangers taking a WHLer in the 1st round, which is pretty rare for them.

The WHL has really not been kind to the Rangers in the 1st round. McIlrath, Blackburn, Brendl, Lundmark, Cherneski, and Jayson More. That's a pretty impressive list of bad picks and bad injuries.

Or a reach for someone like York or Dorofeyev....

 

[Joey Bones]

wow i do not see this at all. seriously, this video shows me very little concern.

in fact, i have seen this kid play a 200 ft game regularly and defensively hes hardly a concern. i would say hes very engaged defensively and physically as well and away from the puck, hes responsible and reliable. i just dont see the problem here at all ?

just like you can cherry pick vids making said player look like a superstar, the opposite can also happen.

criticizing the kid for not being physically engaged enough away from the puck seems a bit over the top using this video to highlight that, as I'm not seeing that at all.

i see a kid making good smart crisp passes, blowing by defenders and winning his share of face-offs clean. everything runs through this kid on the pp. no question, hes their on ice leader. kids head is always on a swivel.

like any young kid, hes got work to do defensively and away from the puck but i just do not see these glaring holes in his game. hes hardly lazy, his compete level isn't an issue nor is his willingness to back check. seems a bit severe to use this video to proclaim hes substandard away from the puck. kids always got he puck ?

hes productive, dynamic and skates like the wind. every thing I've seen with this kid shows me a very good understanding of the game and his on ice intuitiveness is top notch. BC is getting a good one here. i have him my 3rd best centerman after hughes and cozens.

imo, as far as skating, shooting, passing and stickhanding, hes scores as well as cozens perhaps better and nearly as well as hughes.

The Draft Analyst | 2019 Draft Profile: C Alex Newhook

"He can also play physical and doesn’t get intimidated by bigger, stronger players. Newhook has superstar potential thanks to off-the-charts hockey sense with the sublime skill to match it".

not sure what player steve is watching ???

NHL Prospect Profile: Alex Newhook
Future Potential:

Alex Newhook’s NHL outlook appears to be as a first-line center who can drive offence in multiple ways and be relied upon as a power-play weapon. He is a point-producing machine and a game-changer each night. Comparables include Nathan MacKinnon and Matt Duchene. Newhook projects to be a top-5 selection at the 2019 NHL Draft heading into the ’18-19 campaign.

For starters the links you posted were on summer analysis. I was raving about the kid over the summer, too. Things change once the season starts....

I'm not saying he isn't crafty. He's got a very good eye and knack for playmaking. I'm simply just noting some glares where he seems a bit sketchy for growth. Lots of bad habits if you look closely enough. Puck play, grittiness, positioning on transition, etc. He could be a No. 1 center. He could also continue the bad habits and put himself in a position similar to Buchnevich down-the-road. He could also develop a one-dimensional game and be waiver-fodder, similar to Spooner.

We obviously see a different view on him, so we'll have to agree to disagree, ATM. But what I will say is that offensively, he's gifted. Defensively he's, like you said, playing in a junior league. He's a 17 year old kid and only he can work on attributes that can make him a better pro for the future. If he is a Ranger come the end of the draft, then I'm happy and will root for him to get better. But, ATM, there are better prospects to rave about for the top end of this draft. I don't see him excelling over those other players, right now.

 

[FireGerardGallant]

What do people think of Kaliyev?
Ik he doesn't help us with our issue at center but we could use a pure goalscorer like him

 

[Joey Bones]

I think 4 D-men at least will go top 10 and my guy will be one of them.

Which 4 D-men do you think?

 

[Joey Bones]

What do people think of Kaliyev?
Ik he doesn't help us with our issue at center but we could use a pure goalscorer like him

Much concern about being one-dimensional, but has a really good, accurate shot....

 

[Blue Blooded]

Much concern about being one-dimensional, but has a really good, accurate shot....

FWIW he is being used on the PK in Hamilton and scored an unassisted shorthanded goal the other night.

Considering how good his offence is and how young he is (late June birthday), I struggle to rank him lower than 4th (it's currently between him and Byram for 3rd) even though it makes me uncomfortable to be so far off a pretty unanimous consensus.

He has 28 SOG in his past three games, ridiculous.

 

[Ola]

C Caufield is more in the Cam Atkinson mold from my POV.

Atkinson is the 5th highest scoring forward from his draft and when others are tending down Atkinson is going in the other direction, when everything is said and done he could be top 2-3 after Stamkos.

I don’t see Caufield as a potential franchise forward, albeit I wouldn’t cap his potential, but more likely an Atkinson type of player.

 

[True Blue]

Much concern about being one-dimensional, but has a really good, accurate shot....

Same concern as me. I can see where he would make a good candidate for a "swing for the fences" pick in the middle of the first round, but I would stay away. Him and Laouvie scare me as first rounders.

 

[True Blue]

Then you have a mix of names like Podkolzin, Boldy, Turcotte and Zegras are all in the mix - saying nothing about a potential late riser. So you’d have to have at least half those guys slip out of the top 10 to fit 4 into the top 10. That’s certainly doable, but would likely take some serious shuffling.

I have a hard time seeing 4 defensemen in top 10. But truth be told, I have a hard time seeing 2 as well. Broberg is rising fast, but I would not take him ahead of the 4 forwards that you mention.

 

[Edge]

I have a hard time seeing 4 defensemen in top 10. But truth be told, I have a hard time seeing 2 as well. Broberg is rising fast, but I would not take him ahead of the 4 forwards that you mention.

Personally, I only have Byram in my top 10. I'm just a really big fan of his. The rest of my top 10 is all forwards --- at the very least I find them to be one of the more intriguing groups in a long time.

 

[True Blue]

Personally, I only have Byram in my top 10. I'm just a really big fan of his. The rest of my top 10 is all forwards --- at the very least I find them to be one of the more intriguing groups in a long time.

As do I. I just have Byram a bit higher than you. I have him third and am praying he drops to wherever Rangers draft.

 

[Edge]

As do I. I just have Byram a bit higher than you. I have him third and am praying he drops to wherever Rangers draft.

Have him fifth, but in the same tier as numbers 3 and 4 --- so that means I tend to view them as fairly interchangeable.

Outside of getting Hughes or Kakko, I freely admit my next dream scenario involves taking Byram and then seeing someone like Turcotte, Newhook or Zegras fall a little into a position where the Rangers could trade up and grab one of them.