Kraken 2024 draft

[RainyCityHockey]

 

[kihei]

^^^^^^^^
Level-headed analysis.

Funny thing, the more information that I am taking in, the more I have been musing almost involuntarily that Dickinson, the unsexy pick, would actually be very high value at #8.

 

[majormajor]

^^^^^^^^
Level-headed analysis.

Funny thing, the more information that I am taking in, the more I have been musing almost involuntarily that Dickinson, the unsexy pick, would actually be very high value at #8.

I've come around on Dickinson, but not on Silayev or Levshunov. I hope those two are gone before us.

 

[Fistfullofbeer]

^^^^^^^^
Level-headed analysis.

Funny thing, the more information that I am taking in, the more I have been musing almost involuntarily that Dickinson, the unsexy pick, would actually be very high value at #8.

I've come around on Dickinson, but not on Silayev or Levshunov. I hope those two are gone before us.

I was watching some scouting videos yesterday and felt the same. Dickinson has the least offensive upside among all of the top 6 D-man minus Silayev, but its not like he is completely ineffective on offense. I think it speaks more about how good the other 4 are.

I agree that Dickinson would be a great value at 8. Yesterday, I watched an Emerald Hockey video reviewing the D-men, and Dylan seems to think that Levshunov is in a tier of his own. I have come around to Yakemchuk as well, though he was not in the top-5 list (likely 6th) and there is no doubt in my mind that Silayev will be a defensive juggernaut but I think we need more well rounded D-men.

 

[kihei]

One of the nice side effects of drafting Dickinson is that because of the relative maturity of his game in contrast to the other D in the draft, he may make the Kraken line-up at roughly the same time that many of our other earlier-drafted prospects are ready to join the team. That alone could speed up our competitiveness in the league.

 

[Fistfullofbeer]

One of the nice side effects of drafting Dickinson is that because of the relative maturity of his game in contrast to the other D in the draft, he may make the Kraken line-up at roughly the same time that many of our other earlier-drafted prospects are ready to join the team. That alone could speed up our competitiveness in the league.

True. I can see Dickinson starting, or atleast getting a few games, in the NHL in 2025-26 and will have a real shot to earn a spot. The coming season, 2024-25, is going to be really interesting to see where our prospects are with Nyman, Firkus, Goyette, Nelson starting in Coachella and players like Ottavainen, Melanson, Morrison pretty close to getting some NHL time.

 

[RayMartyniukTotems]

^^^^^^^^
Level-headed analysis.

Funny thing, the more information that I am taking in, the more I have been musing almost involuntarily that Dickinson, the unsexy pick, would actually be very high value at #8.

Dickinson will be long gone by Numero otto(8) but maybe Tij Iginla may a good consolation Prize!

 

[RayMartyniukTotems]

I hear Dickinson is not good or not as good as other D-men Offensively...well he has 22 goals and 83 points(Regular and Play-offs combined) in 86 games so I'm really wondering where that comes from...not scouts that's for sure. It will be fun watching the CHL Memorial Cup starting today(Friday May 24th,2024) with host Saginaw Spirit taking on Circus Firkus' team Moose Jaw Warriors...Then tomorrow we'll get to watch Sam Dickinson and London Knights...they are the favorites to Win the Memorial Cup

 

[majormajor]

I hear Dickinson is not good or not as good as other D-men Offensively...well he has 22 goals and 83 points(Regular and Play-offs combined) in 86 games so I'm really wondering where that comes from...not scouts that's for sure.

Try reading a few more scouting reports.

Dickinson's numbers are great, but that's him taking advantage of breakdowns created by his teammates. He is very good at jumping into the play and wiring the puck. Just don't expect him to be creative and make things happen when no one else is. There are a few D in this class who can make something out of nothing - Parekh, Buium, and Yakemchuk. That's my opinion from watching them but you can find the same view in many scouting reports.

Parekh's Spirit will be playing tonight vs Firkus' Warriors.

Personally I'd rather have Dickinson than Parekh, but if you want to see someone create offense go Parekh.

 

[RayMartyniukTotems]

Try reading a few more scouting reports.

Dickinson's numbers are great, but that's him taking advantage of breakdowns created by his teammates. He is very good at jumping into the play and wiring the puck. Just don't expect him to be creative and make things happen when no one else is. There are a few D in this class who can make something out of nothing - Parekh, Buium, and Yakemchuk. That's my opinion from watching them but you can find the same view in many scouting reports.

Parekh's Spirit will be playing tonight vs Firkus' Warriors.

Personally I'd rather have Dickinson than Parekh, but if you want to see someone create offense go Parekh.

Not sure what you are saying...he has 61 assists so I think he can create...is Parekh the explosive player maybe but...

 

[kihei]

Not sure what you are saying...he has 61 assists so I think he can create...is Parekh the explosive player maybe but...

I like both players, but I don't think their offensive skills are comparable. As far as I can see Dickinson's creativity depends on what other people are doing and how that sets him up to pass or shoot. In other words, he is more of a reactor than a creator. When he does create it is often with a hard, accurate shot from the point that his teammates can gobble up for rebounds. Unlike Parekh, there certainly isn't much deception in his game. Parekh creativity is a whole different world away from the kind offense that Dickinson generates. Parekh can single-handedly cause chaos with his elite skating, passing and shooting skills. There sometimes doesn't seem to be any area of the offensive zone that he can't exploit and he not infrequently seems to have eyes in the back of his head. There is so much variety in the ways that he can hurt a defense, plus he seems impossible to predict.

Looking at Makar and Quinn Hughes early videos, I don't think Parekh is going to become either. Makar's early skills, his speed, change of direction and power, are insane and remain so, and Hughes used his teammates at U of Michigan more intelligently than Parekh who sometimes tries to do too much. But in terms of pure offensive skill, those are the guys you have to look at to find some decent similarities to Parekh among not yet drafted players. After Celebrini and Demidov, he might have the highest ceiling in the draft.

 

[RainyCityHockey]

The Hockey Writers Mock Draft

THW 2024 Mock NHL Draft Round 1: Our Writers Make Their Picks - The Hockey Writers Latest News, Analysis & More

With the 2024 NHL Entry Draft about a month away, it’s time for the THW writing staff to make their picks in the annual mock draft.

thehockeywriters.com

 

[RainyCityHockey]

A guy I'd be interested in(if he falls to #40 or we trade up a bit into the late 1st or early 2nd round) would be Dean Letouneau.

He's a 6'7 forward with quite some skill that will need some extra time to develop but could become a unique offensive player.







Also, a couple more scouting videos by scouching.

Zeev Buium


Cayden Lindstrom


Dominik Badinka


Berkly Catton

 

[kihei]

We'd definitely have to trade up because Letourneau is not lasting to #40. Neither is my guy with this pick, Solberg.

 

[RayMartyniukTotems]

I've said who I like at 8...so 40,61-64 and 72 are really who we want and should focus on...I say a forward then some D-men with the next 2 picks and then a another forward...the rest should be just filling holes for the "Future"! That Lindstrom Lad looks really good but...

 

[majormajor]

If Yegor Surin or Jesse Pulkkinen are there at #40 I know who I want to take. I will be mighty salty if we pass on them.

 

[RayMartyniukTotems]

If Yegor Surin or Jesse Pulkkinen are there at #40 I know who I want to take. I will be mighty salty if we pass on them.

Haven't seen Surin but that Pulkkinen kid is 6-4 or thereabouts...Kraken have quite a few Finns drafted so it be good one to have plus the Kraken need more LD-men for the Future

 

[Fistfullofbeer]

I saw a video yesterday showing a shift-by-shift of Parekh and Dickinson in the Saginaw vs London playoff game. I have to say I was more impressed by Parekh than I expected but I feel like his biggest issue is his play away from the puck in his own zone. He struggles with dump-and-chase plays if they get against the boards. Easily gets physically overpowered and loses puck battles. It was very reminiscent to me of how Karlsson was on the Sharks.

Dickinson looked steady as expected. He made some good plays skating the puck out of his zone and his stretch passes were pretty solid but I feel he defers too much to his partner. He did make some mistakes in his own zone but he was good in front of the net, physical and in board battles.

I would be happy with either of those players at 8 but it really depends on what ownership hedges it bets on. Do they think Parekh can put on more muscle and get better defensively OR do they think Dickinson gets better at O once he is given a little more freedom to exercise and develop his offensive skill.

Though I have to say, I am really thinking we should "reach" and go for Yakemchuk instead, if he is available. His skating is an issue, but not enough to hold him back. Also, it is more about mechanics so hopefully can be fixed. He is unique in the sense that he has great hands, size and plays with physicality.

 

[kihei]

I saw a video yesterday showing a shift-by-shift of Parekh and Dickinson in the Saginaw vs London playoff game. I have to say I was more impressed by Parekh than I expected but I feel like his biggest issue is his play away from the puck in his own zone. He struggles with dump-and-chase plays if they get against the boards. Easily gets physically overpowered and loses puck battles. It was very reminiscent to me of how Karlsson was on the Sharks.

Dickinson looked steady as expected. He made some good plays skating the puck out of his zone and his stretch passes were pretty solid but I feel he defers too much to his partner. He did make some mistakes in his own zone but he was good in front of the net, physical and in board battles.

I would be happy with either of those players at 8 but it really depends on what ownership hedges it bets on. Do they think Parekh can put on more muscle and get better defensively OR do they think Dickinson gets better at O once he is given a little more freedom to exercise and develop his offensive skill.

Though I have to say, I am really thinking we should "reach" and go for Yakemchuk instead, if he is available. His skating is an issue, but not enough to hold him back. Also, it is more about mechanics so hopefully can be fixed. He is unique in the sense that he has great hands, size and plays with physicality.

I'd be happy with either Parekh or Dickinson at #8. Everything that I have read or seen suggests strongly that Yakemchuk is a project, a long-term project, with some flaws that might not be fixable at the NHL level. Plus, best case scenario, he is probably years away from making the Kraken line up. Do we want to wait that long? I'd love Parekh, but I recognize that he is a higher risk than Dickinson, one who will almost certainly take longer to develop, as well. Dickinson has at least a shot at making the team this season, the year after that at the latest. That's a big factor when dealing with an CEO who wants to win now. Plus, my sensible self says, well, really, do I want a defensemen who needs to learn to play more offense or a defenseman who needs to learn to play more defense? Seems kind of obvious that it should be the former and not the latter.

Hopefully all this is moot and we draft Buium.

Side note: for the life of me, I don't know why Levshunov is rated more highly among scouts than Dickinson. Levshunov is playing stiffer competition, but his defensive game sometimes give cause for concern, and I don't thinnk it is a slam dunk that he will be significantly better than the more well balanced Dickinson offensively in a few years.

 

[The Marquis]

I’ve definitely soured on Yakemchuk. More reading just leads to less certainty. I’m of the opinion that he’d be a poor choice at 8 for a team that’s not in full rebuild.

 

[Fistfullofbeer]

I'd be happy with either Parekh or Dickinson at #8. Everything that I have read or seen suggests strongly that Yakemchuk is a project, a long-term project, with some flaws that might not be fixable at the NHL level. Plus, best case scenario, he is probably years away from making the Kraken line up. Do we want to wait that long? I'd love Parekh, but I recognize that he is a higher risk than Dickinson, one who will very likely take longer to develop. Dickinson has at least a shot at making the team this season, the year after that at the latest. That's a big factor when dealing with an CEO who wants to win now. Plus, my sensible self says, well, really, do I want a defensemen who needs to learn to play more offense or a defenseman who needs to learn to play more defense? Seems kind of obvious that it should be the former and not the latter.

Hopefully all this is moot and we draft Buium.

Yakemchuk is a unique type of player. I heard a good comparison for him as a D-man with the hands of a forward. He has size and plays physical. I really struggle to find a good comparable for him. I want to say Burns but he had much better skating, though I think Yakemchuk has better hands. Buff might be someone comparable. I do think its easier to teach a D-man offense than the other way around.

I do think Buium has the best balance of offense/defense among the big-6 and would be thrilled if we can land him. If I were to rank them now I would have something like:

Buim = Levshunov > Dickinson > Yakemchuk > Parekh = Silayev

And there is a very good chance that we have a shot at one of the first 3.

Based on how mixed all the draft rankings are, the only two prospects I see us not having a chance at all are Celebrini and Demidov. After that, all bets are off.

 

[Fistfullofbeer]

I’ve definitely soured on Yakemchuk. More reading just leads to less certainty. I’m of the opinion that he’d be a poor choice at 8 for a team that’s not in full rebuild.

What about him has soured you? Even though players like Parekh and Yakemchuk will have longer timelines before making it to the NHL, they are the type of players that would make the wait worth it IF they end up reaching close to their ceiling. Its not like someone like Silayev or Dickinson who are most NHL ready among the D-men are likely to cause a massive positive impact right away. They both are likely atleast 1 season away from the NHL as well.

Yakemchuk is certainly not my first choice for D-man but to me he is like the Lindstrom of D-men this draft. A unicorn of sorts.

 

[kihei]

Yakemchuk is a unique type of player. I heard a good comparison for him as a D-man with the hands of a forward. He has size and plays physical. I really struggle to find a good comparable for him. I want to say Burns but he had much better skating, though I think Yakemchuk has better hands. Buff might be someone comparable. I do think its easier to teach a D-man offense than the other way around.

I do think Buium has the best balance of offense/defense among the big-6 and would be thrilled if we can land him. If I were to rank them now I would have something like:

Buim = Levshunov > Dickinson > Yakemchuk > Parekh = Silayev

And there is a very good chance that we have a shot at one of the first 3.

Based on how mixed all the draft rankings are, the only two prospects I see us not having a chance at all are Celebrini and Demidov. After that, all bets are off.

Do I think it is easier to teach a D-man offense than the other way around? Good question. I don't know, to be honest. But I would rather start with a D-man with defensive skills in place than a D-man who needed to be taught how to play elite defense. I mean, that's why they call them defensemen, right?

For what it's worth, and it is much less than a cup of coffee, here are my June top 16 rankings:

1. Celebrini
2. Demidov
3. Buium
4. Silayev
5. Lindstrom
6. Dickinson
7. Parekh
8. Iginla
9. Catton
10. Levshunov (yeah, I know. I just don't get the buzz)
11. Sennecke
12. Eiserman
13. Helenius
14. Yakemchuk
15. Brandsegg-Nygard
16. Jiricek

Lots of interesting players still on the board, so we should get a good one in the second round, too. I liked Solberg there, but word is out on him now so no chance. I would be fine with Letourneau, Misa, Freij, Pulkkinen, Stiga, Surin, lots to choose among. Hutson is also tempting, too, because, according to some observers, he looks a lot like his brother in some ways. who went #62 in 1922. Why make the same mistake twice, eh? Somebody else will figure that out before he falls to us, I suspect.

Late note: Put Dickinson ahead of Parekh after the Memorial Cup. Unfortunately for us, some GMs are possibly doing the same thing.

 

[majormajor]

I saw a video yesterday showing a shift-by-shift of Parekh and Dickinson in the Saginaw vs London playoff game. I have to say I was more impressed by Parekh than I expected but I feel like his biggest issue is his play away from the puck in his own zone. He struggles with dump-and-chase plays if they get against the boards. Easily gets physically overpowered and loses puck battles. It was very reminiscent to me of how Karlsson was on the Sharks.

Dickinson looked steady as expected. He made some good plays skating the puck out of his zone and his stretch passes were pretty solid but I feel he defers too much to his partner. He did make some mistakes in his own zone but he was good in front of the net, physical and in board battles.

I would be happy with either of those players at 8 but it really depends on what ownership hedges it bets on. Do they think Parekh can put on more muscle and get better defensively OR do they think Dickinson gets better at O once he is given a little more freedom to exercise and develop his offensive skill.

Though I have to say, I am really thinking we should "reach" and go for Yakemchuk instead, if he is available. His skating is an issue, but not enough to hold him back. Also, it is more about mechanics so hopefully can be fixed. He is unique in the sense that he has great hands, size and plays with physicality.

None of those guys are reaches at #8.

Peter Forsberg was a reach at #6, he didn't think he was going to get taken in the first round.
Tyler Boucher was a reach at #10, most people had him as a second rounder.

I've watched most of the London vs Saginaw games (the final is on in a couple hours). FWIW Parekh's defense was much worse earlier in the year. He's still bad at it but he's improved a lot. I'd still worry about him getting run over by the cycle, the way he holds himself is so weak. I have issues drafting a D like that even if I think he's going to be a 60-80 pt scorer. It is similar, as you say, to the Erik Karlsson issue, where even as great as he was at times for the Sharks, the downsides are significant.

I don't think Parekh will ever be good defensively or Dickinson very good offensively. Dickinson will chip in and get his points though, he just won't be the main catalyst. He could be a #2D next to a more creative D partner (like Yakemchuk).

I'd be happy with either Parekh or Dickinson at #8. Everything that I have read or seen suggests strongly that Yakemchuk is a project, a long-term project, with some flaws that might not be fixable at the NHL level. Plus, best case scenario, he is probably years away from making the Kraken line up. Do we want to wait that long? I'd love Parekh, but I recognize that he is a higher risk than Dickinson, one who will almost certainly take longer to develop, as well. Dickinson has at least a shot at making the team this season, the year after that at the latest. That's a big factor when dealing with an CEO who wants to win now. Plus, my sensible self says, well, really, do I want a defensemen who needs to learn to play more offense or a defenseman who needs to learn to play more defense? Seems kind of obvious that it should be the former and not the latter.

Hopefully all this is moot and we draft Buium.

Side note: for the life of me, I don't know why Levshunov is rated more highly among scouts than Dickinson. Levshunov is playing stiffer competition, but his defensive game sometimes give cause for concern, and I don't thinnk it is a slam dunk that he will be significantly better than the more well balanced Dickinson offensively in a few years.

I think Parekh is more of a project than Yakemchuk. Yakemchuk has NHL size and strength all day. We don't know if Parekh's body is going to hold up to it. He gets ragdolled enough already. Both have to learn how to play defense but Parekh also needs years in the gym and that might not be enough.

As far as timetable goes - Evan Bouchard wasn't even in the NHL until his D+4. That's the much more common way D develop. Usually D in the NHL before the age of 21 are not even good anyways. It's mostly guys like Jiricek or Korchinski who have been rushed by incompetent management. I don't care what they do before 21 or 22.

Saying that, Dickinson is just so polished in his movements that maybe he can be useful by D+2.

 

[majormajor]

Yakemchuk is a unique type of player. I heard a good comparison for him as a D-man with the hands of a forward. He has size and plays physical. I really struggle to find a good comparable for him. I want to say Burns but he had much better skating, though I think Yakemchuk has better hands. Buff might be someone comparable

My mind always goes to Buff and Burns with Yakemchuk. I didn't even remember it at first though that both of them started in the NHL with a lot of time at forward. I think Yakemchuk would be a good power forward, I don't know if that would be the best use of him but I wonder if it works as a fallback option. There's only one issue with him that I worry about and it's just the backward skating. Forwards don't need to be good at that.

I do think its easier to teach a D-man offense than the other way around.

From my experience as a D man it's the opposite. D is algorithmic. Forward goes to spot x you go to spot y. They make this move you put your stick at spot z. There's always a right way to hold yourself and a right spot to be in, it's just a matter of learning it.

Offense is about quick creativity, finding a combination that will break the D algorithm. There are elements in the offensive algorithm that you learn, but those are the elements that are countered in the D algorithm. It's the next level stuff that only good offensive players can do that there isn't a quick answer for, that's the creative stuff that's not very learnable.

I do think Buium has the best balance of offense/defense among the big-6 and would be thrilled if we can land him. If I were to rank them now I would have something like:

Buim = Levshunov > Dickinson > Yakemchuk > Parekh = Silayev

For me it goes

Buium > Yakemchuk > Dickinson > Levshunov > everyone else