LW Cole Eiserman - Boston Univ., NCAA (2024, 20th, NYI)

[WarriorofTime]

If he posts a monster U18s I think he’s going top five. You don’t say no to a likely 40 goal scorer trying to be the smartest guy in the room. Look at the drafts throughout the period of 5-15 years ago, so many guys once you get to latter half of the top 10 are literally just ok.

 

[57special]

If he posts a monster U18s I think he’s going top five. You don’t say no to a likely 40 goal scorer trying to be the smartest guy in the room. Look at the drafts throughout the period of 5-15 years ago, so many guys once you get to latter half of the top 10 are literally just ok.

Is he, though? Or is he the next Wahlstrom?

I thought he was really good last season when i saw him, but I don't see the same standout quality this year. Obviously vg for his level - you don't get talked about as a top 10 pick otherwise - but his game doesn't make me sit up and go wow, and for his skillset, that's what you want to see.

 

[sigx15]

Is he, though? Or is he the next Wahlstrom?

This is the ultimate question. I don't see an effort issue nearly as bad with Eiserman the way I did with Wahlstrom though. I just don't think Eiserman has developed a ton of hockey sense unfortunately. Watching Wahlstrom at BC was one of the more frustrating experiences I've had as a BC fan. We'll really see next year at BU though on how engaged he is.

 

[Pavel Buchnevich]

I never liked Wahlstrom much. Dude could bomb it from anywhere. I think he had a better overall shot than Eiserman. If he connected like he wanted, he could be at the blue line and he had a good chance to score. He was also taller and probably as good of a skater as Eiserman.

But my problem with him was that he'd show up once every four games and he scores like two goals that make the difference. The other three games he was utterly useless. Eiserman is somewhat useless when he's not scoring, but he's scoring consistently. It's not like Wahlstrom where he decides to show up one out of every four. Eiserman is just one dimensional. Doesn't have the same problem where he takes a lot of games off.

 

[WarriorofTime]

Is he, though? Or is he the next Wahlstrom?

I thought he was really good last season when i saw him, but I don't see the same standout quality this year. Obviously vg for his level - you don't get talked about as a top 10 pick otherwise - but his game doesn't make me sit up and go wow, and for his skillset, that's what you want to see.

Possible of course but I think people sometimes forget he’s breaking NTDP records here.

 

[Corso]

This is the ultimate question. I don't see an effort issue nearly as bad with Eiserman the way I did with Wahlstrom though. I just don't think Eiserman has developed a ton of hockey sense unfortunately. Watching Wahlstrom at BC was one of the more frustrating experiences I've had as a BC fan. We'll really see next year at BU though on how engaged he is.

Well I've seen him go for large stretches in a game where he's been utterly useless and wonder what he's even doing on the ice, so for me there is a big question concerning his intensity and work ethic.

 

[wetcoast]

A little too one dimensional for a top 10 pick considering the competition but it only takes one team to think otherwise.

 

[Habsrule]

People just overthink it too much with Eiserman.

The goal for any team is to win. It is as simple as that. The way that you win is that you outscore your opponents. It’s that simple. With Eiserman you know what you are going to get and that is goals.

We can all debate the rest of his game and how he hasn’t evolved too much. I get that. But for any team who is looking for a goal scorer then look no further. I can see a team in the picking him early with how open the draft is after Celebrini.

 

[Dr Jan Itor]

By all means, fall to the middle of the round.

 

[SK94]

I don't think I've ever seen someone drop from a potential 1st overall pick this much in the projections. At the same time, I predict that most teams who passes him will make a big mistake. Goal scoring record is in serious trouble in the U18 Worlds.

 

[AnThGrt]

I don't think I've ever seen someone drop from a potential 1st overall pick this much in the projections. At the same time, I predict that most teams who passes him will make a big mistake. Goal scoring record is in serious trouble in the U18 Worlds.

Just the last few years

A. Lundell
A. Raty

Both discussed and seen as 1st overall for multiple yrs leading up and as late as early on in their draft years. Heck this draft not long ago A. Kiviharju. Nearly every year can find a similar situation

 

[Rabid Ranger]

A little too one dimensional for a top 10 pick considering the competition but it only takes one team to think otherwise.

He's really not. His game is geared towards scoring goals but he has good all-around skills. Seems like there's a stagnation/compete narrative popping up that's the issue. As for the competition, this isn't an exceptional draft, especially at forward. If teams want to overthink it and go with a plug or some random d-man over him so be it I guess.

 

[57special]

Just the last few years

A. Lundell
A. Raty

Both discussed and seen as 1st overall for multiple yrs leading up and as late as early on in their draft years. Heck this draft not long ago A. Kiviharju. Nearly every year can find a similar situation

Lundell? Seriously? He was called an awful skater by many on this board, and was downgraded pretty heavily. I never saw him talked about as a top 10 pick even in his draft year. I mean, i'm sure some did, somewhere, but it was by no means a consensus. He was thought to be a mid teens pick by most.

 

[Pavel Buchnevich]

Lundell? Seriously? He was called an awful skater by many on this board, and was downgraded pretty heavily. I never saw him talked about as a top 10 pick even in his draft year. I mean, i'm sure some did, somewhere, but it was by no means a consensus. He was thought to be a mid teens pick by most.

Lambert more than Lundell. Lundell got a little early 1OA discussion, but not that much.

 

[Mersss]

People just overthink it too much with Eiserman.

The goal for any team is to win. It is as simple as that. The way that you win is that you outscore your opponents. It’s that simple. With Eiserman you know what you are going to get and that is goals.

We can all debate the rest of his game and how he hasn’t evolved too much. I get that. But for any team who is looking for a goal scorer then look no further. I can see a team in the picking him early with how open the draft is after Celebrini.

You do realise that even if you score 3 goals a game, but you finish -2, you likely lose the game right?

Cant lose if you don't get sored on..
Took Ovie 8-10 years to figure that out. Defense wins championships, always.

 

[SK94]

Just the last few years

A. Lundell
A. Raty

Both discussed and seen as 1st overall for multiple yrs leading up and as late as early on in their draft years. Heck this draft not long ago A. Kiviharju. Nearly every year can find a similar situation

All of those guys were eliminated 1st overall discussions much earlier. Eiserman was a lock to go at least number two.

 

[WarriorofTime]

I don't think I've ever seen someone drop from a potential 1st overall pick this much in the projections.

We don't even know where Eiserman will drop to... There is still a good chance it is not that much.

 

[AnThGrt]

All of those guys were eliminated 1st overall discussions much earlier. Eiserman was a lock to go at least number two.

Meant Lambert not Lundell. They were all heading into their draft season #1 rated on at least one or more reputable rankings site.

 

[SK94]

We don't even know where Eiserman will drop to... There is still a good chance it is not that much.

I don't think he should drop that much. Case Eiserman is weirder probably because his game is mostly like it has been. All those other mentioned guys were Europeans who often get an early hype but then they can't keep that up when they jump to the pro game in Europe.

 

[BuiumSaveUs]

I actually feel like I was early on saying he was 2 high at 2. I didn’t see his skating or skill as high-end enough for that, but all the lists coming out with him in the 12-15 range are questionable imo. Top 10 talent all day.

 

[Doublechin]

If GMs think of him as a Laine type that's smaller I can see how they're reluctant to take him so high. I think interviews might help his case assuming he does well

 

[MuckOG]

I actually feel like I was early on saying he was 2 high at 2. I didn’t see his skating or skill as high-end enough for that, but all the lists coming out with him in the 12-15 range are questionable imo. Top 10 talent all day.

Skating is one of the skills that can easily improved with proper coaching.

I haven't been studying the prospects as much as everyone else on this forum has, so please forgive me if this comparison is weak....but from I can read and see, is he basically a 5'11" version of Cole Caufield? Someone who won't create all that much for his linemates, but is there mainly for his shot.

 

[57special]

Skating is one of the skills that can easily improved with proper coaching.

I haven't been studying the prospects as much as everyone else on this forum has, so please forgive me if this comparison is weak....but from I can read and see, is he basically a 5'11" version of Cole Caufield? Someone who won't create all that much for his linemates, but is there mainly for his shot.

Or a 5'11" version of Oliver Wahlstrom, or Kieffer Bellows.

 

[Michael Farkas]

He doesn't play like Caufield. Just because they're NTDP wingers that can shoot doesn't mean that they're a similar style of player.

 

[MuckOG]

He doesn't play like Caufield. Just because they're NTDP wingers that can shoot doesn't mean that they're a similar style of player.

NTDP had nothing to do with my comp. It was more about the one-dimensionality of their games. Both have an elite shot, not so elite at the other parts of their games.