Proposal: Hagens Schaefer Misa NYI SJS CHI

[ALEXIVICH CHULKATURI]

Kudos to the effort but prosperous. If the Islanders want Hagens at 3 it’s going to be Musty from San Jose and Moore or Nazar from Chicago. Engvall has 5 years left at 15 million. Duclair has 3 left at 10.5. Mayfield has 5 left at 17.5. Hardly anchors. Ty Dellandrea, this kid is worse than Oliver Wahlstrom. Seriously what are we doing here. It’s all for not anyway cause they are picking Schaeffer unless Grier offers something that hurts.

 

[HawksDub89]

Kudos to the effort but prosperous. If the Islanders want Hagens at 3 it’s going to be Musty from San Jose and Moore or Nazar from Chicago. Engvall has 5 years left at 15 million. Duclair has 3 left at 10.5. Mayfield has 5 left at 17.5. Hardly anchors. Ty Dellandrea, this kid is worse than Oliver Wahlstrom. Seriously what are we doing here. It’s all for not anyway cause they are picking Schaeffer unless Grier offers something that hurts.

I mean, your suggestion is more off base than the original. Nazar to move up two spots? Gtfo lol

Fwiw I agree the overwhelming odds are the Isles take the best player in the draft (Schaefer)

And like others have mentioned, if they even entertain moving down teams will know they plan on taking Hagens. So there’s basically no leverage.

Stay at 1 and take your future 1D, smartest play Imo.

 

[ALEXIVICH CHULKATURI]

I mean, your suggestion is more off base than the original. Nazar to move up two spots? Gtfo lol

Fwiw I agree the overwhelming odds are the Isles take the best player in the draft (Schaefer)

And like others have mentioned, if they even entertain moving down teams will know they plan on taking Hagens. So there’s basically no leverage.

Stay at 1 and take your future 1D, smartest play Imo.

If Schaeffer is considered a franchise altering defenseman my Islanders will have plenty of leverage. If Hagens wants to play for the Islanders we will have plenty of leverage. If Bedard wants to play with Barzal my Islanders will have plenty of leverage. GTFO with the no leverage crap.

 

[Golden_Jet]

I’m a leafs fan…….not a fan of either team. I’m assuming you think this is bad for Islanders? I know a lot of people think Schaffer will be a tier above Makar but it’s not a guarantee. Vlasic is a really good #2/3 and that 3rd overall should land a nice player. Yes Schafer could be a physical 100+ point 2 way dman but he could also be a bust

I haven’t seen that anywhere, do you have any evidence people are thinking that.

 

[HawksDub89]

If Schaeffer is considered a franchise altering defenseman my Islanders will have plenty of leverage. If Hagens wants to play for the Islanders we will have plenty of leverage. If Bedard wants to play with Barzal my Islanders will have plenty of leverage. GTFO with the no leverage crap.

Nice tantrum, very NY like.

If Schaefer is a franchise D and your team passes you have bigger problems than leverage. And I don’t think Chicago or SJ have any interest in Hagens. (I like Hagens, but we have too many small forwards)

And I have no idea what you’re talking about with Barzal, Chicago isn’t ready for that kind of trade.

Anyway, I look forward to your level headed rational response.

 

[ExtraLoveSauce]

Islanders would need another decent prospect fwd or dman coming back coming back like cherysonov or bystedt and maybe EDM on top of that to justify going back two spots Islanders would need a package of edm,Allen,cherysonov along with an extra 2nd from each team to move back two spots missing out on a potential no.1 franchise caliber d-man who is considered in a higher tier than everybody else this draft

 

[Hawkaholic]

I'd rather the Hawks draft Martone than Misa, so no point in making this trade.

 

[Hawkaholic]

Kudos to the effort but prosperous. If the Islanders want Hagens at 3 it’s going to be Musty from San Jose and Moore or Nazar from Chicago. Engvall has 5 years left at 15 million. Duclair has 3 left at 10.5. Mayfield has 5 left at 17.5. Hardly anchors. Ty Dellandrea, this kid is worse than Oliver Wahlstrom. Seriously what are we doing here. It’s all for not anyway cause they are picking Schaeffer unless Grier offers something that hurts.

lol Nazar

 

[Rehabguy]

Wingers, sure, but it is nearly impossible to get a franchise center outside of the top-5 of the NHL draft and those players do not get moved. Thornton and Eichel are the only ones in the last 20 years, and Eichel had circumstances.

Meanwhile, like 50% of legitimate #1 NHL defensemen come from outside the top-10 of the draft, and most from outside the top-5. You aren’t wrong that it’s harder and takes longer to develop them, but the point is that you don’t need a top-5 pick to get a #1D and you very much do to get a true franchise center.

Edmonton traded for Ekholm and Walman and got Bouchard at like 8th overall. Carolina got Slavin outside the first round. Harley, Karlsson, and Morrissey were mid-1st round picks. Florida got Forsling off waivers and traded for Jones. Hughes was taken 6th and is better than the defenseman drafted 1st overall in his draft year (Dahlin). Fox wasn’t a 1st round pick. Jackson LaCombe came out of nowhere, Brock Faber was a second round pick, Roman Josi too, Mackenzie Weeger was like a seventh rounder. Obviously your Doughtys, Hedmans, Dahlins, Heiskanens, and Makars were top-5 picks, but the point is that a lot of true #1D are acquired outside the premium draft spots.

Meanwhile, star centers are not. Here’s every single NHL center I could think of who is, has been, or may become true #1Cs, and I went very liberal on the definition of “true #1C” to prove the point (bolded are guys I think are undeniable):

Top-5:
McDavid
Matthews
Mackinnon
Draisaitl
Crosby
Malkin
Toews
Backstrom
Hughes
Hischier
Pettersson
Bedard
Carlsson
Fantilli
Celebrini
Beniers
McTavish
Stutzle
D. Strome
Eichel
Tavares
Duchene
Cooley
Smith
Byfield

Top-10:
Scheifele
Kadri
Zibanejad
Horvat
Lindholm
Monahan
Couture

Rest of 1st round:
Kopitar
Suzuki
Thomas
Barzal
Larkin
Miller
Johnston
Thompson
Hertl

2nd or later:
Aho
Hintz
Point
Bergeron

Basically, it’s nearly impossible to get franchise centers outside of the top-5 of the NHL draft. So there is an opportunity cost associated with drafting a defenseman in the top-5 if there is a potential star centerman available. And in short, that is the only reason the Isles may (and should seriously) consider Misa over Schaefer.

and this is my reply from the Isles board:

I think this is a very good write up but I question the premise that since it is rare to get a franchise center outside the top 5 of the NHL draft and a true #1 defenseman can be found outside the top doesn't mean you should choose the center over the defender. Regardless of where they are chosen true #1 defenders are extremely rare in the NHL. How many true #1 defensemen can you think of in the league? Not many. How many Lidstrom's, Coffey's, Bourques, Larry Robinsons, Al MacInnis, have we come across in the game? Or generational franchise players like Bobby Orr and Denis Potvin. Just because Paul Coffey was drafted 6th overall or Lidstrom drafted 53rd overall or Al MacInnis 15th overall doesn't mean they are a dime a dozen. They are extremely rare. Some teams like the NY Islanders and the Colorado Avalanche understood this choosing Potvin at #1 and Makar at #4. The greatest defenseman to have ever played the game Bobby Orr signed with the Bruins when he was 12 years old. Yes 12 years old! I don't think the Bruins regretted that decision.

Victor Hedman was considered the consensus #1 overall pick until the 2008 World Juniors when a shoulder injury may have hampered his play and Tavares had an overall great tournament. I would argue that Victor Hedman has had the more impactful career over Tavares. One could argue that the Islanders were in far worse shape than the Lightning but once he left the Island for the Leafs his weakness as a skater continued to hold him back and the argument cannot be raised that he simply played for a weak team. Hedman's play to this day continues to improve and on a weaker Lightning team. We can't just ignore the +213 rating he has over Tavares, the Conn Smythes, the Norris Trophy and multiple nominations as the best defenseman, and 2 Stanley Cup rings. When Hedman won the Conn Smythe, he clocked 26 minutes, played a pivotal role in key parts of the playoff series, blocked shots, and led all defensemen in points during the playoffs on their way to their second Cup. John Tavares has never led either team he played for just into the semi-finals- NOT ONCE. Those are not statistical aberrations or token awards. Hedman turned out to be the better player and we can't make the mistake again of choosing the glamour forward over and extremely rare potential franchise defender. We can't.

 

[Juxtaposer]

and this is my reply from the Isles board:

I think this is a very good write up but I question the premise that since it is rare to get a franchise center outside the top 5 of the NHL draft and a true #1 defenseman can be found outside the top doesn't mean you should choose the center over the defender. Regardless of where they are chosen true #1 defenders are extremely rare in the NHL. How many true #1 defensemen can you think of in the league? Not many. How many Lidstrom's, Coffey's, Bourques, Larry Robinsons, Al MacInnis, have we come across in the game? Or generational franchise players like Bobby Orr and Denis Potvin. Just because Paul Coffey was drafted 6th overall or Lidstrom drafted 53rd overall or Al MacInnis 15th overall doesn't mean they are a dime a dozen. They are extremely rare. Some teams like the NY Islanders and the Colorado Avalanche understood this choosing Potvin at #1 and Makar at #4. The greatest defenseman to have ever played the game Bobby Orr signed with the Bruins when he was 12 years old. Yes 12 years old! I don't think the Bruins regretted that decision.

Victor Hedman was considered the consensus #1 overall pick until the 2008 World Juniors when a shoulder injury may have hampered his play and Tavares had an overall great tournament. I would argue that Victor Hedman has had the more impactful career over Tavares. One could argue that the Islanders were in far worse shape than the Lightning but once he left the Island for the Leafs his weakness as a skater continued to hold him back and the argument cannot be raised that he simply played for a weak team. Hedman's play to this day continues to improve and on a weaker Lightning team. We can't just ignore the +213 rating he has over Tavares, the Conn Smythes, the Norris Trophy and multiple nominations as the best defenseman, and 2 Stanley Cup rings. When Hedman won the Conn Smythe, he clocked 26 minutes, played a pivotal role in key parts of the playoff series, blocked shots, and led all defensemen in points during the playoffs on their way to their second Cup. John Tavares has never led either team he played for just into the semi-finals- NOT ONCE. Those are not statistical aberrations or token awards. Hedman turned out to be the better player and we can't make the mistake again of choosing the glamour forward over and extremely rare potential franchise defender. We can't.

If it wasn’t clear, I’m not making any sweeping statements about never taking a defenseman over a forward in the top-5 or saying that the Isles shouldn’t take Schaefer. Just saying that there is an opportunity cost associated with taking defensemen top-5 given the fact that it is very possible to get franchise defensemen outside of the top-5 of the draft and it is nearly impossible to get a franchise centerman outside the top-5 of the draft.

Your Tavares vs. Hedman tirade seems a bit over-emotional, though. It sucks that Tavares left in free agency but that has nothing to do with whether or not he was the right draft pick and has even less to do with Schaefer vs. Misa. Do you actually think that Hedman would have two Stanley Cups, a Conn Smythe and a higher plus-minus than Tavares if the Isles had taken Hedman and the Lightning Tavares? Franchise defensemen can still have their teams spinning their wheels just like the Tavares Isles. Look at Quinn Hughes or Rasmus Dahlin.

 

[Rehabguy]

If it wasn’t clear, I’m not making any sweeping statements about never taking a defenseman over a forward in the top-5 or saying that the Isles shouldn’t take Schaefer. Just saying that there is an opportunity cost associated with taking defensemen top-5 given the fact that it is very possible to get franchise defensemen outside of the top-5 of the draft and it is nearly impossible to get a franchise centerman outside the top-5 of the draft.

Your Tavares vs. Hedman tirade seems a bit over-emotional, though. It sucks that Tavares left in free agency but that has nothing to do with whether or not he was the right draft pick and has even less to do with Schaefer vs. Misa. Do you actually think that Hedman would have two Stanley Cups, a Conn Smythe and a higher plus-minus than Tavares if the Isles had taken Hedman and the Lightning Tavares? Franchise defensemen can still have their teams spinning their wheels just like the Tavares Isles. Look at Quinn Hughes or Rasmus Dahlin.

It wasn't an emotional response regarding Tavares. Why does everyone assume an Islander fan discussing Tavares is some kind a "tirade". I happened to be a huge fan of his while he was on the Island. In fact I think that choosing Tavares was the move the Isles had to make to put a face to the franchise when we had no players to speak of and to put fans in the stands. I couldn't see Hedman doing that especially early in his career, but that does not take away Hedman's impact in the game. Looking back objectively however and it is clear to me that if there was a redraft, Hedman would be seen as the 1OA top prospect by the majority.

Tavares played on the high powered Toronto Maple Leaf's adding to an already stacked offensive roster yet he did nothing while still in his prime to move the needle. In fact if Toronto had allocated the cap space they spend on Tavares instead on trying to acquire a true #1 defenseman they probably would have won several cups by now. There is an opportunity cost associated with focusing primarily on offense or trying to win by overwhelming the other team with offense and paying very little attention to the defensive side of the game.

But the ultimately your argument is fundamentally flawed because it discusses percentages without discussing the number of players actually available. Building the argument that there is an opportunity cost since the majority of #1 centers are chosen 1-5 and 50% of #1 defensemen can be had after the top 5 is flawed when that 50% represents a very small group of players compared to the number of #1 centers. In every draft there might only be only 1 or 2 players who could be considered #1 defensemen whereas there could be a handful of prospects who could play #1 center for any team. In fact the 2025 NHL draft is being particularly noted as having a plethora of excellent centers to choose from. There is an opportunity cost to not choosing a #1 defenseman because they are extremely rare regardless of where they are chosen in the draft. If you have one in the top 1 or 2 it would be foolish not to take him.

 

[BillR10]

It wasn't an emotional response regarding Tavares. Why does everyone assume an Islander fan discussing Tavares is some kind a "tirade". I happened to be a huge fan of his while he was on the Island. In fact I think that choosing Tavares was the move the Isles had to make to put a face to the franchise when we had no players to speak of and to put fans in the stands. I couldn't see Hedman doing that especially early in his career, but that does not take away Hedman's impact in the game. Looking back objectively however and it is clear to me that if there was a redraft, Hedman would be seen as the 1OA top prospect by the majority.

Tavares played on the high powered Toronto Maple Leaf's adding to an already stacked offensive roster yet he did nothing while still in his prime to move the needle. In fact if Toronto had allocated the cap space they spend on Tavares instead on trying to acquire a true #1 defenseman they probably would have won several cups by now. There is an opportunity cost associated with focusing primarily on offense or trying to win by overwhelming the other team with offense and paying very little attention to the defensive side of the game.

But the ultimately your argument is fundamentally flawed because it discusses percentages without discussing the number of players actually available. Building the argument that there is an opportunity cost since the majority of #1 centers are chosen 1-5 and 50% of #1 defensemen can be had after the top 5 is flawed when that 50% represents a very small group of players compared to the number of #1 centers. In every draft there might only be only 1 or 2 players who could be considered #1 defensemen whereas there could be a handful of prospects who could play #1 center for any team. In fact the 2025 NHL draft is being particularly noted as having a plethora of excellent centers to choose from. There is an opportunity cost to not choosing a #1 defenseman because they are extremely rare regardless of where they are chosen in the draft. If you have one in the top 1 or 2 it would be foolish not to take him.

2025 draft has been noted as a weak draft. No one outside of the top 10 is considered to have a 1C potential ceiling. Most of this draft is considered to be middle 6 or worse.

Also I have to agree with Jux assessment. For an example let's look at NHL Networks top 20 defenseman going into last season. 7 of the top 20 dmen were drafted in the top 5 of drafts. 6 of the 20 weren't even drafted in the 1st rd. Compare that to the top 20 centers and 11 of the 20 were drafted in the top 5 while 17 out of the 20 were drafted in the top 20 picks. Only 3 were outside of rd 1.

Facts show that it's tougher to get a 1C outside the top of a draft than a top d. That's said I really hope the Isles keep the pick and take Schaefer and Misa falls to SJ. IMO that would be a huge win getting another top forward that can play C.

 

[ALEXIVICH CHULKATURI]

2025 draft has been noted as a weak draft. No one outside of the top 10 is considered to have a 1C potential ceiling. Most of this draft is considered to be middle 6 or worse.

Also I have to agree with Jux assessment. For an example let's look at NHL Networks top 20 defenseman going into last season. 7 of the top 20 dmen were drafted in the top 5 of drafts. 6 of the 20 weren't even drafted in the 1st rd. Compare that to the top 20 centers and 11 of the 20 were drafted in the top 5 while 17 out of the 20 were drafted in the top 20 picks. Only 3 were outside of rd 1.

Facts show that it's tougher to get a 1C outside the top of a draft than a top d. That's said I really hope the Isles keep the pick and take Schaefer and Misa falls to SJ. IMO that would be a huge win getting another top forward that can play C.

Your defense pipeline is putrid. Mike Grier knows this. You guys just want to steal the defenseman. Maybe you will be charitable and offer us a 2029 second round pick.

 

[BillR10]

Your defense pipeline is putrid. Mike Grier knows this. You guys just want to steal the defenseman. Maybe you will be charitable and offer us a 2029 second round pick.

Dickinson, Muk, Cagnoni, Wallenius are all LHD that will be NHL worthy with Dickinson looking to be that top pair LHD after the season he just finished. If Schaefer was an RHD which is the sharks weakness in the system then I'd say pony up what it would take but he's not. Therefore I'd rather have Misa in this draft.

 

[lanceuppercut75]

Dickinson, Muk, Cagnoni, Wallenius are all LHD that will be NHL worthy with Dickinson looking to be that top pair LHD after the season he just finished. If Schaefer was an RHD which is the sharks weakness in the system then I'd say pony up what it would take but he's not. Therefore I'd rather have Misa in this draft.

"Dahlin isn't right handed so I'd rather have Svechnikov at 2 than trade up."

That's not an exact comparison, but surely you understand the point I'm trying to make.

 

[Pinkfloyd]

"Dahlin isn't right handed so I'd rather have Svechnikov at 2 than trade up."

That's not an exact comparison, but surely you understand the point I'm trying to make.

If Schaefer is Dahlin then just like Dahlin, there is no actual path to pay up and get him. The team with the pick will select him and the Sharks will have to live with that result.

 

[Rehabguy]

2025 draft has been noted as a weak draft. No one outside of the top 10 is considered to have a 1C potential ceiling. Most of this draft is considered to be middle 6 or worse.

Also I have to agree with Jux assessment. For an example let's look at NHL Networks top 20 defenseman going into last season. 7 of the top 20 dmen were drafted in the top 5 of drafts. 6 of the 20 weren't even drafted in the 1st rd. Compare that to the top 20 centers and 11 of the 20 were drafted in the top 5 while 17 out of the 20 were drafted in the top 20 picks. Only 3 were outside of rd 1.

Facts show that it's tougher to get a 1C outside the top of a draft than a top d. That's said I really hope the Isles keep the pick and take Schaefer and Misa falls to SJ. IMO that would be a huge win getting another top forward that can play C.

I understand the point you guys are trying to make but the decision to choose a 1C over a 1D in this situation defies logic.

Most defenders are chosen in later rounds simply because they typically take longer to develop so their skill does not become as apparent until they have experience in the NHL. Teams were not choosing true #1 defenseman because they are sure they would be available in later rounds. They just simply had a harder time identifying them. Many of them perhaps are not true #1 defensemen but simply very good defensemen. As most in the business would agree there are very few true #1 defensemen in the league as it is

Nicklas Lidstrom was chosen in the 3rd round 53rd overall. Part of that was due to unfamiliarity with European players at the time but it supports my point. Do you seriously think GMs are going to wait past the first round if they knew what Nicklas Lidstrom- one of the greatest D-men in the history of the game was to become? They are not choosing him in the 3rd round, most likely he would have gone head to head with the 1OA with Mats Sundin that year.

What you guys are doing is making one of the most common lay person mistakes in interpreting statistics assuming "correlation equals causation". You are assuming since many top defensemen are chosen in the later round that it would be safe to assume they will be available in later rounds. This is not the case and would not be the case if teams were able to identify top defensemen better. You are observing the effect of longer development times and lesser identifiable skill sets.

The key thing to understand that if a potential skilled #1 defenseman is identifiable in an NHL entry draft they almost always are picked at the very top of the draft if not at times #1 because they are extremely rare. Makar, Orr, Dahlin, Coffey, Potvin, Hedman. and Bourque were chosen early on because their skill was readily identifiable. Teams don’t wait for these players to be available later in the draft. They take them right away simply because they are extremely rare and play a critical role in any cup contender’s success. Schaefer's skill set at 17 is readily identifiable so it would be absolutely crazy for the Isles not to choose him at #1.

 

[Pinkfloyd]

I understand the point you guys are trying to make but the decision to choose a 1C over a 1D in this situation defies logic.

Most defenders are chosen in later rounds simply because they typically take longer to develop so their skill does not become as apparent until they have experience in the NHL. Teams were not choosing true #1 defenseman because they are sure they would be available in later rounds. They just simply had a harder time identifying them. Many of them perhaps are not true #1 defensemen but simply very good defensemen. As most in the business would agree there are very few true #1 defensemen in the league as it is

Nicklas Lidstrom was chosen in the 3rd round 53rd overall. Part of that was due to unfamiliarity with European players at the time but it supports my point. Do you seriously think GMs are going to wait past the first round if they knew what Nicklas Lidstrom- one of the greatest D-men in the history of the game was to become? They are not choosing him in the 3rd round, most likely he would have gone head to head with the 1OA with Mats Sundin that year.

What you guys are doing is making one of the most common lay person mistakes in interpreting statistics assuming "correlation equals causation". You are assuming since many top defensemen are chosen in the later round that it would be safe to assume they will be available in later rounds. This is not the case and would not be the case if teams were able to identify top defensemen better. You are observing the effect of longer development times and lesser identifiable skill sets.

The key thing to understand that if a potential skilled #1 defenseman is identifiable in an NHL entry draft they almost always are picked at the very top of the draft if not at times #1 because they are extremely rare. Makar, Orr, Dahlin, Coffey, Potvin, Hedman. and Bourque were chosen early on because their skill was readily identifiable. Teams don’t wait for these players to be available later in the draft. They take them right away. Schaefer's skill set at 17 is readily identifiable so absolutely crazy for the Isles not to choose him at #1.

But it’s still accurate to say that it’s easier to find a 1D outside the top five because those identifiers are still being missed. They are being missed more than it occurs for a 1C.

 

[Rehabguy]

But it’s still accurate to say that it’s easier to find a 1D outside the top five because those identifiers are still being missed. They are being missed more than it occurs for a 1C.

Sometimes you cannot identify a high end skill set representative of a true potential #1 D man and because of those unknowns great defensemen have been missed until later rounds. It is never easy to find a true top 1D anywhere in the draft because they are so rare so it is not accurate to say it is easy to find a 1D outside the top 5. If you did you are simply very lucky. If you identify one grab him right away.

Think about folks how many Makars, Hedman, or players with the skillset of Dahlin do you find in the league?

 

[Pinkfloyd]

If you cannot identify a high end skill set representative of a true potential #1 D man because of those unknowns great defensemen have been missed until later rounds. It is never easy to find a true top 1D anywhere in the draft because they are so rare so it is not accurate to say it is easy to find a 1D outside the top 5. If you did you are simply very lucky. If you identify one grab him right away.

Think about folks how many Makars, Hedman, or players with the skillset of Dahlin do you find in the league?

Nobody said easy. That’s misleading the argument.

 

[Rehabguy]

Nobody said easy. That’s misleading the argument.

It is simply wrong to state as you did "that it is easier to find a 1D outside the top five." It is accurate to say (after the fact) that some teams were fortunate to select a player who would later manifest himself to be a 1D outside to top five. You are misinterpreting cause and effect.

Defenders with clearly elite talents are almost always taken early in the top five.

 

[wraith985]

The whole point is that there are basically zero players who 'later manifest (themselves)' to be a 1C, especially not outside the 1st round, whereas with defensemen that's not true by a long shot. That makes it easier by definition to find a 1D later on in the draft. Nobody said it was 'easy', nobody said it didn't take some luck for that to occur, and nobody said that that's the sole basis that the Isles should take Misa over Schaefer (or that they should even do that). You're misunderstanding the point and making it worse by digging your heels in.

 

[Rehabguy]

The whole point is that there are basically zero players who 'later manifest (themselves)' to be a 1C, especially not outside the 1st round, whereas with defensemen that's not true by a long shot. That makes it easier by definition to find a 1D later on in the draft. Nobody said it was 'easy', nobody said it didn't take some luck for that to occur, and nobody said that that's the sole basis that the Isles should take Misa over Schaefer (or that they should even do that). You're misunderstanding the point and making it worse by digging your heels in.

Yet my Islanders have a 1C named Barzal chosen at 16th. Yes still first round but not top 5- and this guy won the Calder.

You really need to identify 1D. Every team has a 1C. So what's your definition?

 

[BillR10]

It is simply wrong to state as you did "that it is easier to find a 1D outside the top five." It is accurate to say (after the fact) that some teams were fortunate to select a player who would later manifest himself to be a 1D outside to top five. You are misinterpreting cause and effect.

Defenders with clearly elite talents are almost always taken early in the top five.

Fox, McAvoy and Josi I would say are safely in conversation of elite talent taken well out of the top 5 of their drafts and thats just naming 3 when theres more. It's a lot harder to pull a Braden Point at center outside of the top 5. It's simply because Centers are drafted like QBs in football. They tend to go higher up in the draft because everyone wants a top center and knows they don't drop in drafts like a dman or winger so teams will trade up and take some earlier than expected.

We've given you examples of the past drafts. You can go through and look yourself if you'd like but what we are saying is true. Centers go early in drafts always where other positions tend to fall more often. Yes it's not "easy" to pull a 1d later in the draft but it's more plausible to get one than it is to get a 1C is the point.

 

[Pinkfloyd]

It is simply wrong to state as you did "that it is easier to find a 1D outside the top five." It is accurate to say (after the fact) that some teams were fortunate to select a player who would later manifest himself to be a 1D outside to top five. You are misinterpreting cause and effect.

Defenders with clearly elite talents are almost always taken early in the top five.

It isn’t when it is put in its proper context and not misrepresented as you seem to have a habit of doing right now. That is in comparison to a 1C. The reason why it happens is because it’s clearer with forwards earlier on than it is with most defensemen. I agree that clearly elite talents on defense get taken early as well but that happens considerably less frequently for many reasons. The biggest being that it takes longer to grow into that role than it does for a center to do their role.

That’s not misinterpreting cause and effect.