Speculation: Draft Thread 2018-19: Part X (No Kakko/Hughes Talk) - Post Your Mock Draft

[Edge]

@Edge

Assuming what you reported is accurate and knowing that Bob uses us in his lists, I wouldn't be shocked if this was us.

"As one scout said, “It’s really close between [Hughes and Kakko] – almost too close to call.”
This scout, by the way, works for an NHL club that has Hughes No. 1 on its list."

Again, certainly possible. All I can say is that as of June 3, multiple people said Hughes was still number one on the Rangers list.

I can guess at least one of the teams that has him first, and is probably included in Bob's 10 that he cites. (FWIW - Bob talks to at least 25 teams, so the whole 10 thing is a combination of which teams are okay being anonymously included, and because he tends to focus on teams who are reasonably in a position to pick higher in a given draft.)

 

[Polar Bear]

Again, certainly possible. All I can say is that as of June 3, multiple people said Hughes was still number one on the Rangers list.

I can guess at least one of the teams that has him first, and is probably included in Bob's 10 that he cites. (FWIW - Bob talks to at least 25 teams, so the whole 10 thing is a combination of which teams are okay being anonymously included, and because he tends to focus on teams who are reasonably in a position to pick higher in a given draft.)

Always appreciate the insight. What's become clear regardless of rankings from Bob though is that this is VERY close and that Kakko is very much in the same league as Hughes as some from across the river tried to argue otherwise.

 

[Edge]

82 Doro
83 Henriksson
84 Spiridonov

Doro is a bit surprising, and a kid who I think might have a lot of variation depending on the team/list. The Rangers are high on him, though it remains to be seen where they would eye him.

Spiridonov isn't as terribly surprising to me. There are some big question marks there from teams.

 

[Lays]

82 Doro
83 Henriksson
84 Spiridonov

Bob also said that Henriksson got one first round vote. If he mentioned Henriksson, A.Johansson, Lundmark, and Struble as guys who received first round votes does this mean Dorofeyev got 0 first round votes? And aren’t the Rangers one of the teams that participate?

 

[Edge]

Always appreciate the insight. What's become clear regardless of rankings from Bob though is that this is VERY close and that Kakko is very much in the same league as Hughes as some from across the river tried to argue otherwise.

I would say that Kakko has definitely established that there are at least two guys with legit franchise/cornerstone potential.

Personally, in 2024 I believe this draft could very well be like debating Mackinnon vs. Barkov - if both guys hit their full potential.

 

[Edge]

Bob also said that Henriksson got one first round vote. If he mentioned Henriksson, A.Johansson, Lundmark, and Struble as guys who received first round votes does this mean Dorofeyev got 0 first round votes? And aren’t the Rangers one of the teams that participate?

Possible.

But also important to note that while teams share a lot with Bob, they don't necessarily open up their whole playbook either.

So, for argument's sake, the Rangers could've simply responded "we like [player] a lot" but not necessarily divulge where they have him.

The Rangers could very well be open to picking Dorofyev 20th, but they could also really hope to nab him in the second.

The challenge is often figuring where the Rangers have certain guys ranked.

 

[UnSandvich]

I would say that Kakko has definitely established that there are at least two guys with legit franchise/cornerstone potential.

Personally, in 2024 I believe this draft could very well be like debating Mackinnon vs. Barkov - if both guys hit their full potential.

If Kakko turns into our version of Barkov, even if just as a winger, we're gonna be set for a long time

 

[LaffyTaffy]

Puistola at 71 is shocking. I would love to grab Doro, Struble and Puistola outside of the 1st.

 

[Bluenote13]

Doro is a bit surprising, and a kid who I think might have a lot of variation depending on the team/list. The Rangers are high on him, though it remains to be seen where they would eye him.

Spiridonov isn't as terribly surprising to me. There are some big question marks there from teams.

I get that, then there's like 15 players at least ahead of him who have all kinds of 'question marks', from lack of skill, to skating, to compete level, etc.

I wouldn't hesitate to take the guys that didn't look at of place playing with or against the drafts top talents.

 

[GoAwayPanarin]

Bob also said that Henriksson got one first round vote. If he mentioned Henriksson, A.Johansson, Lundmark, and Struble as guys who received first round votes does this mean Dorofeyev got 0 first round votes? And aren’t the Rangers one of the teams that participate?

They have been the last few years, but I'm not sure if he polls the same scouts every year or if he cycles through them.

 

[Bluenote13]

Puistola at 71 is shocking. I would love to grab Doro, Struble and Puistola outside of the 1st.

IMO that would be amazing(kreiderman), but I think we only get one of Doro/Puistola in the 2nd round if they're still hanging around.

 

[JimmyG89]

Fagemo at 56 might be a player that we could get that is further along being an overage player. With 49 or 58, it's an option that could be there.

Also in his notes, he did not mention him as getting 1st round votes. His name got thrown a lot around here, and unless we move one of our 2nds and he checks a lot of boxes we like, I think we'll be in range to get him.

 

[GoAwayPanarin]

I'm not the least bit surprised Doro isn't the 1st round but 83?

 

[Edge]

I get that, then there's like 15 players at least ahead of him who have all kinds of 'question marks', from lack of skill, to skating, to compete level, etc.

I wouldn't hesitate to take the guys that didn't look at of place playing with or against the drafts top talents.

When you start getting to the lower picks, its not terribly dissimilar from what I deal with when rankings these kids. I might have a 58 that I could easily have in the 40s.

Likewise while a player could average out to a rankings in the 70s, you could have a bunch of teams that have a guy in the lower 50s and a bunch who have him in the lower 90s. And it only takes one or two stray teams to be willing to take a guy in the 40s.

 

[Edge]

They have been the last few years, but I'm not sure if he polls the same scouts every year or if he cycles through them.

So as a general rule, in past years McK talks to 20-25 teams to get a feel for the landscape.

Typically about 15 teams are okay being part of the "panel" he references when he puts together his "10 scouts surveyed" sections.

The 10 are usually selected based on a number of factors --- are they actually picking in the top 10, or close; are they an outlier; past relationships/dealings; etc.

At least that's how it's often be done over the years. To my understanding, there haven't been any substantial changes.

 

[Bluenote13]

When you start getting to the lower picks, its not terribly dissimilar from what I deal with when rankings these kids. I might have a 58 that I could easily have in the 40s.

Likewise while a player could average out to a rankings in the 70s, you could have a bunch of teams that have a guy in the lower 50s and a bunch who have him in the lower 90s. And it only takes one or two stray teams to be willing to take a guy in the 40s.

Case in point - last years draft and mackenzies rankings. Take a look at his 2nd to 3rd round names, they either moved up or moved back significantly from his ranking, with very few staying around where he had them.

 

[LaffyTaffy]

So as a general rule, in past years McK talks to 20-25 teams to get a feel for the landscape.

Typically about 15 teams are okay being part of the "panel" he references when he puts together his "10 scouts surveyed" sections.

The 10 are usually selected based on a number of factors --- are they actually picking in the top 10, or close; are they an outlier; past relationships/dealings; etc.

At least that's how it's often be done over the years. To my understanding, there haven't been any substantial changes.

At the end of the day 10/31 is still not a lot and the draft is wide open past a certain point, hence Minnesota's 1st round pick last year.

 

[Polar Bear]

@Edge How excited are you for Hughes/Kakko to join us in a few days? Do you think it's fair to say that they will instantly be the best prospect we ever had?

 

[GregSirico]

 

[Matt Rentfree]

Dorofeyev at 82 wow

Just finished going over the list and that was the biggest surprise for me.

 

[hi]

Kaliyev at 21? Yes please

 

[GregSirico]

Pavel Dorofeyev is literally all over the place on everyone's rankings. So wild.

 

[Oscar Lindberg]

There’s a lot of solid talent I’d like to add in the second round and third round based on the Bobfathers rankings

Hopefully they can acquire another pick or two in those rounds

 

[Edge]

@Edge How excited are you for Hughes/Kakko to join us in a few days? Do you think it's fair to say that they will instantly be the best prospect we ever had?

I think you can make a solid case that there was no prospect the Rangers have taken who was viewed as favorably at the time of the draft. Not even Leetch was ranked as high, or viewed quite as favorably at the same point in his journey.

Kakko or Hughes is a potential game-changer for this franchise.

At the end of the day 10/31 is still not a lot and the draft is wide open past a certain point, hence Minnesota's 1st round pick last year.

That's typically why he tries to talk to as many teams as part of his research (20+). He'll look to see if the trend continues, or if there's a group of teams that should be factored into what he presents. So let's say there's no teams picking in the top 10 who have Newhook in their top 10, but two teams picking in the 11-15 range with Newhook in their top 10. In the past, McKenzie would try to include that info because it's a potential factor. So he hedges a little bit to try to get things more accurate/representative.

 

[Levitate]

Kaliyev at 21? Yes please

I feel like Edge said the Rangers weren't too high on him? Or at least he didn't think that Kaliyev was the kind of player the Rangers usually like?