Speculation: Draft and UDFA Thread 2018-19: Part IX (No Kakko/Hughes Talk)

[GoAwayPanarin]

I've heard Newhook is definitely on the list of trade up targets and i know Heinola is monitored closely for #20.

Anyone else?

 

[Edge]

Krebs is a guy that despite not having the ceiling of a top flight offensive dynamo, elevates the entire team when he is on the ice. He can create in almost every situation and reminds me a bit of Zuccarello, in that he is extremely adept at finding East-West seams with slot passes or feathered-backhands. Straw that stirs the drink type player.

His defensive abilities also make a perceived lack of high end flash easier to swallow. I like the allure of Newhook's skillset more, but if I was offered either player and it was set in stone they would become a Ranger, I'd really have to sit down and consider my choice. Krebs upside of a 60+ point defensive center/winger who can PK and jump throughout the lineup is extremely valuable, even more so in the post-season.

I'm really curious to see how different teams view Krebs.

I think there are some teams who view his offensive ceiling just as high as the other centers at the top of the draft. While not as flashy, I could see a scenario where a team that's high on him think his skill set is more likely to translate at the higher levels.

A lot of stems from just how highly some have talked about him. When they mention him, there's nothing about him not being having that higher offensive ceiling. Whereas I admit that I do have questions about it, it's surprisingly a non-issue for others. What I'm not sure about is the breakdown of who feels what.

But if there's one thing I am certain of, it's that the Rangers will have strong opinions of the kids from western Canada. Be it Cozens, Krebs, Dach, Newhook, Byram, kids at the lower levels, etc., the Rangers are going to have a "book" on them. Now they just have to make sure the book is as accurate as possible.

 

[Hunter Gathers]

I've always suspected it, and I think or two other people said he was on the short list, but he's never a name I specifically heard mentioned to me. Ditto for Newhook, though I'd put him in the "highly likely" category with Zegras.

I would be pissed if Kaliyev wasn't a target.

 

[Edge]

I would be pissed if Kaliyev wasn't a target.

The responses I've gotten have been kind of lukewarm. I mean for all I know, they could have ranked 20, but feel confident there are going to be guys they like more on the board. But I've never quite gotten the vibe that he's someone they are really digging deeper into.

 

[Lays]

I would be pissed if Kaliyev wasn't a target.

Doubt it. Doesn’t fit with our new mentality

 

[GoAwayPanarin]

Doubt it. Doesn’t fit with our new mentality

Doesn't really fit in with our old one either.

But I don't know, at what point do you roll the dice and say "50 goals is 50 goals?" I'd do it at 20, pretty sure that the Rangers wouldn't though.

 

[McRanger]

I can see that being a fierce one, and I can't rule it out as a possibility. Having said that, I could also see a scenario where someone like Krebs gets traded to a playoff bound WHL team and all of sudden he skyrockets up everyone's prospects list next season. He is a tougher one to judge because he really is an island out there. The intrigue is what he does whenever he is surrounded by talent --- tournaments, etc. So the question becomes, is he a guy capable of driving play when he's surrounded by good talent, or is he the guy who rises to the level of the top talent? That might be the difference between a team having him in their top 10, vs. having him in the mid-teens.

So they think Krebs might be this years Hayton?

 

[GeorgeKaplan]

So they think Krebs might be this years Hayton?

Feels more like a Dellandrea situation to me right now, Dellandrea is just still on a terrible team, which is the risk with taking these guys

 

[Trxjw]

Interesting to see Krebs coming up. Was talking to someone the other day about the optimal center in this draft outside of Hughes to play with Kakko. I mentioned Zegras and he smirked and just said, "Krebs and it's not even close."

I'm still unsure about his upside, but if the Rangers think he has top-six scoring potential then he certainly has all of the other ingredients they're looking for in a core player.

 

[GoAwayPanarin]

I don't understand the hate Krebs gets here.

If the Rangers trade up and snag him after taking Kakko they can punt the rest of their picks and I wouldn't care.

 

[Lion Hound]

I don't understand the hate Krebs gets here.

If the Rangers trade up and snag him after taking Kakko they can punt the rest of their picks and I wouldn't care.

Agree with this. Got to see a good amount of him. Love this kids game, and his moxy. He's on a crap team and he is the team. One of the best Charachter players in the 2019 draft, and he has a really good head for the game. Claude Giroux comparable

 

[Edge]

So they think Krebs might be this years Hayton?

He could be, he very well could be.

Krebs has had an interesting trajectory thus far.

He's a former number one pick in the WHL draft who has played for a team that's won a combined 54 games, over three seasons since being drafted. So the team has been nothing short of abysmal, and now they've moved.

On the one hand, he hasn't been a savior who has lifted the team to a higher plateau. On the other hand, I'm not sure if anyone but a truly exceptional talent could undertake that task. Even then it would be an uphill battle.

He's been so busy trying to do everything the team needs, and doing it rather well, that I'm not really sure there's a consensus on the offense. That's really what the dividing line is going to be --- the offense. He's a high probability NHL player, and so it's easy to call him a "safe" kid. But the reality is that you can make an argument that might not be totally true and there's more skill there than people might give him credit for.

 

[McRanger]

Feels more like a Dellandrea situation to me right now, Dellandrea is just still on a terrible team, which is the risk with taking these guys

I'd say Dellandrea is probably the other side of that coin. Like you said, he's still in Flint.

With Hayton his absence from Soo and subsequent production quieted most of the "wtf Hayton at 5?!?" crowd. If a team takes Krebs with sexier names on the board, you'll probably have a fair amount of irate fans... but it might look like a good move in a year if he moves from Kootenay.

 

[Edge]

I don't understand the hate Krebs gets here.

If the Rangers trade up and snag him after taking Kakko they can punt the rest of their picks and I wouldn't care.

I think it's a combination of other names being repeated over time, and the fact that certain kids were in spotlight positions.

Everyone knows I love the US program, especially this season. But one of my moderate concerns is that these kids are playing on an allstar team that definitely inflates the numbers and makes it easier to overlook the flaws. Not unlike what we see in the NHL, with higher powered offensive teams like Tampa, Toronto, Winnipeg, etc., the question is how that talent translates when they're now the best player on their college team, and not one of 7 players who are studs.

In other words, if I put Brinks in a similar position to Caufield, what do the results look like? What if Newhook is from Boston, and we put him in the Zegras or Turcotte slot? I think there's a very good possibility that those guys are more widely seen by fans as being on that level.

When we switch to the WHL, what does Krebs look like in the slots occupied by Cozens or Dach? Obviously he's not as big as either of those guys, but you can make the case the production and results are right there.

In Krebs case, I think he also still has the leftover feelings that he wasn't necessarily the preferred choice if the Rangers remained at 6. So when the talk centers on the Rangers wanting to get someone they may have eyed with their original draft pick, there's probably a little bit of pushback there.

I freely admit that for me, it is a little harder to judge Krebs because of the situation he's found himself in. There are flashier options out there. And those options have delivered in a big way and taken advantage of the opportunities they've been given. So its human nature to lean towards the tangible, even if a deeper dive reveals that there's more to the end result than meets the eye.

 

[Tawnos]

I think some of the negativity towards Krebs around here came from the Tankathon generator.

 

[Leetch3]

aside from pointing out that he's not on a good team, I think this convo has me way more interested in Krebs then I was yesterday is the idea that he is viewed as a center. I was under the impression that he was more of a LW...not that we can't use wingers too but if he's a center that helps his value

 

[GoAwayPanarin]

I think it's a combination of other names being repeated over time, and the fact that certain kids were in spotlight positions.

Everyone knows I love the US program, especially this season. But one of my moderate concerns is that these kids are playing on an allstar team that definitely inflates the numbers and makes it easier to overlook the flaws. Not unlike what we see in the NHL, with higher powered offensive teams like Tampa, Toronto, Winnipeg, etc., the question is how that talent translates when they're now the best player on their college team, and not one of 7 players who are studs.

In other words, if I put Brinks in a similar position to Caufield, what do the results look like? What if Newhook is from Boston, and we put him in the Zegras or Turcotte slot? I think there's a very good possibility that those guys are more widely seen by fans as being on that level.

When we switch to the WHL, what does Krebs look like in the slots occupied by Cozens or Dach? Obviously he's not as big as either of those guys, but you can make the case the production and results are right there.

In Krebs case, I think he also still has the leftover feelings that he wasn't necessarily the preferred choice if the Rangers remained at 6. So when the talk centers on the Rangers wanting to get someone they may have eyed with their original draft pick, there's probably a little bit of pushback there.

I freely admit that for me, it is a little harder to judge Krebs because of the situation he's found himself in. There are flashier options out there. And those options have delivered in a big way and taken advantage of the opportunities they've been given. So its human nature to lean towards the tangible, even if a deeper dive reveals that there's more to the end result than meets the eye.

Yeah the NTDP kids all benefited from playing with one another, even Hughes though he absolutely drove the bus on that team (they were still pretty dominant when he didn't play though.)

I think Krebs' skill gets undersold because he isn't as "sexy" as some of the other players. Theres a ton of Stepan in his game, and he moves better than Stepan.

I'd love to have Zegras, but I don't think he's falling beyond Detroit.

 

[Edge]

I'd say Dellandrea is probably the other side of that coin. Like you said, he's still in Flint.

With Hayton his absence from Soo and subsequent production quieted most of the "wtf Hayton at 5?!?" crowd. If a team takes Krebs with sexier names on the board, you'll probably have a fair amount of irate fans... but it might look like a good move in a year if he moves from Kootenay.

And that's the gamble a little bit. A team taking Krebs is essentially betting on the idea that he is better than his surroundings. Kootenay (now Winnipeg) has been a hot mess since the 2015-16 season.

They drafted Krebs off a season in which they won 12 games. In the three years since drafting Krebs, they've won 14, 27 and 13. They gave up more than 320 goals three times over the last four years.

Krebs, who is more of a play maker than a goal scorer, didn't break 20 goals but scored 10 percent of of the team's collective total. I don't remember the number, but he scored/assisted on an insane percentage of his teams goals.

But the international play, the tournaments, etc. have all been great for him.

So now the question is, how high does one think the ceiling goes?

Does a team project him as a 20-25 goal scorer who can net 60-70 points? If so, with the other attributes, that's a top 10 pick pretty easily.

Do you see him sub-20 goals, and maybe more in the 50-60 point range? In that case, now you start thinking outside the top 10 in a forward-heavy draft.

But what makes the whole draft dynamic crazy is that for every riser, there must also be a faller. So if Caufield climbs, if Newhook climbs, if Broberg goes to Vancouver, if Podkolzin stays in the top 10, if Zegras doesn't slide, suddenly guys start getting squeezed out. Who are those guys who slide? Boldy? Krebs?

There's a lot of wiggle room in this draft.

 

[Kaapo Cabana]

I think some of the negativity towards Krebs around here came from the Tankathon generator.

I'd be willing to bet this is true.

 

[Edge]

Yeah the NTDP kids all benefited from playing with one another, even Hughes though he absolutely drove the bus on that team (they were still pretty dominant when he didn't play though.)

I think Krebs' skill gets undersold because he isn't as "sexy" as some of the other players. Theres a ton of Stepan in his game, and he moves better than Stepan.

I'd love to have Zegras, but I don't think he's falling beyond Detroit.

Admittedly, I have Zegras and Newhook ahead of Krebs. I just love the dynamics they bring. Where they go? Who the hell knows at this point.

But so much is about where we set the goal posts when it comes to trade proposals and outcomes.

Is the starting point 20? Yeah, we're not getting higher than 15.

Is the starting point 14? Yeah, moving up a few slots is possible. Or the Rangers feel perfectly content to stay there if indeed they have guys scored close enough together.

I'd say the one thing we want to open to is that there are names that are starting to emerge, and will continue to emerge, that are not the names we've necessarily beaten to death over the last six months. So that's part of my motivation to at least throw them out there. We could end up with none of them. We could end up with four of them. But the names are at least worth talking about either way.

 

[McRanger]

And that's the gamble a little bit. A team taking Krebs is essentially betting on the idea that he is better than his surroundings. Kootney (now Winnipeg) has been a hot mess since the 2015-16 season.

They drafted Krebs off a season in which they won 12 games. In the three years since drafting Krebs, they've won 14, 27 and 13. They gave up more than 320 goals three times over the last four years.

Krebs, who is more of a play maker than a goal scorer, didn't break 20 goals but scored 10 percent of of the team's collective total. I don't remember the number, but he scored/assisted on an insane percentage of his teams goals.

But the international play, the tournaments, etc. have all been great for him.

So now the question is, how high does one think the ceiling goes?

Does a team project him as a 20-25 goal scorer who can net 60-70 points? If so, with the other attributes, that's a top 10 pick pretty easily.

Do you see him sub-20 goals, and maybe more in the 50-60 point range? In that case, now you start thinking outside the top 10 in a forward-heavy draft.

But what makes the whole draft dynamic crazy is that for every riser, there must also be a faller. So if Caufield climbs, if Newhook climbs, if Broberg goes to Vancouver, if Podkolzin stays in the top 10, if Zegras doesn't slide, suddenly guys start getting squeezed out. Who are those guys who slide? Boldy? Krebs?

There's a lot of wiggle room in this draft.

And does that wiggle room, aka uncertainty, make teams more or less likely to move a pick?

How this draft unfolds should be interesting.

 

[HockeyBasedNYC]

If the Rangers somehow get Cozens and Kakko in this draft ill be doing very badly coordinated cartwheels in the streets.

 

[GoAwayPanarin]

And does that wiggle room, aka uncertainty, make teams more or less likely to move a pick?

How this draft unfolds should be interesting.

I think there are a few teams who would 100000% move their picks for now help.

Philly, Arizona, Colorado (16th OA) and maybe even Edmonton and Buffalo.

We need to package AV favorites together to get the #11

 

[Kaapo Cabana]

I think there are a few teams who would 100000% move their picks for now help.

Philly, Arizona, Colorado (16th OA) and maybe even Edmonton and Buffalo.

We need to package AV favorites together to get the #11

Sign & trade

Tanner Glass, Jimmy Vesey, and a truckload of Doublemint gum for the 11OA

 

[Edge]

And does that wiggle room, aka uncertainty, make teams more or less likely to move a pick?

How this draft unfolds should be interesting.

It depends. Personally, I think wiggle room means more likely to move a pick in this draft. I think the flexibility of how teams view players is going to extend beyond the top 10 or top 15.

Look at a guy like Lavoie. You could have a team that has him just outside the top 10, you could have another that his him well into the 20s. Same with Kaliyev, or even Seider who could be a team's guy just outside the top 10 or still be there when the Rangers are up at 20. A guy like Dorofyev could go in the teens, or be around in the 30s.

I also think its important to note that the Rangers could do absolutely nothing. They could very well stay at 20, and make their two selections in the second round.

While I have absolutely no doubt in my mind the Rangers are interested in moving up, potentially adding another first, and will leave no stone unturned in their quest to determine what is and what is not available, they also don't operate in a vacuum. The right deals for the right slots might not be there, certain costs could be prohibitive, and they very well might find themselves in a spot where they have guys clustered together and would rather hold onto an extra asset or two.