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

[ameselare]

I'm still pretty high on Eiserman. His shot is insane, he skates well, he's a big guy, and has a very late birthday. Watched a lot of BU games this season and don't always love Pandolfo's coaching choices but they have a strong development program there with some good kids for him to be around. Hoping he develops well.

 

[seafoam]

I'm still pretty high on Eiserman. His shot is insane, he skates well, he's a big guy, and has a very late birthday. Watched a lot of BU games this season and don't always love Pandolfo's coaching choices but they have a strong development program there with some good kids for him to be around. Hoping he develops well.

He's stocky and has huge hands for someone his height.

Not that that means anything, but the projectability is there.

 

[Nogatco Rd]

Steves son?

Best father son combo since Jeremy and Filip Hronek

 

[SI90]

He's stocky and has huge hands for someone his height.

Not that that means anything, but the projectability is there.

2 of his brothers are also around 6’2. He’s already good size at 6’0 195lbs.

Hes one of the youngest in this years draft class. Still just 17. Even if he grows another inch. By the time he’s 22 he could be playing at 6’1 205lbs-210lbs

 

[Thrasymachus]

Call it drafting winger PTSD, but I have healthy skepticism. He really does remind me a bit of Dal Colle, Bellows, Wahlstrom...

Yknow come to think of it maybe the isles just at developing wingers xD

 

[DollardStLaurent]

Hearing NTDP and sniper gives me PTSD and I don’t want to have to explain to more people how one dimensional players aren’t a good idea to draft ever. This team has picked Ho-Sang, Bellows, Wahlstrom and Dal Colle. All of which turned out to wonderful minor leaguers.

Mike Bossy? Al Arbour told Bill Torrey on drafting Bossy - "I can teach a player how to play defense but I can't teach a player how to score."

 

[Peasy]

Mike Bossy?

Definitely a good idea to always bring up the one exception rather than the hundreds thats failed. What do you think is a more likely outcome? Hes the next Mike Bossy, or the next bellows/wahlstrom? You'll be waiting decades to hit on the next "Bossy".

 

[57special]

Eiserman is a terrific gamble at 20. There is a minority, but still strong opinion, that he can be an elite goal scorer in the NHL. You might not want to pick him in the top 10 in this draft, or even top 12-13(depending on how much you want to replenish your prospect D pool), but given his age, talents, size, and skating, there is a decent chance he becomes a legit top 6 goal scoring wing, if not better than that. At #20, you take that every time.

It's even possible that his game rounds out in college, and if the offense doesn't transfer, he can be made into more of a grinder. Not likely, but possible.

 

[miscs75]

Mike Bossy? Al Arbour told Bill Torrey on drafting Bossy - "I can teach a player how to play defense but I can't teach a player how to score."

Bo Horvat and Matt Barzal also aren’t Bryan Trottier and Clark Gillies. If you want to push that quote, explain why Wahlstrom is lost 3 coaches later when he isn’t standing in one spot in the offensive zone?

 

[Garbageyuk]

The next Angelo Esposito.

 

[MichaelFarrell]

Eiserman is a terrific gamble at 20. There is a minority, but still strong opinion, that he can be an elite goal scorer in the NHL. You might not want to pick him in the top 10 in this draft, or even top 12-13(depending on how much you want to replenish your prospect D pool), but given his age, talents, size, and skating, there is a decent chance he becomes a legit top 6 goal scoring wing, if not better than that. At #20, you take that every time.

It's even possible that his game rounds out in college, and if the offense doesn't transfer, he can be made into more of a grinder. Not likely, but possible.

He’s a phenomenal bet for the Islanders at 20. Personally, I thought he was a steal at that range.

Not only is Eiserman one of the youngest players in the draft, he put up over a goal a game this year without playing 5v5 with Hagens. That’s not a fluke and it’s an incredible accomplishment. In addition, he wants to be a physical presence out there and is looking to kill guys. By all accounts, he’s a guy who is really hard on himself. I think he is going to be a player that we see a ton of improvement from in the next 3 years.

I believe he had the highest upside of anybody you could’ve picked after 15. I’m still shocked Philly didn’t draft him.

I don’t necessarily agree with the Oliver Wahlstrom comparisons but I see where they are coming from. It is very important the Islanders do not rush Eiserman out college like they did with Wahlstrom.

 

[mm11]

Definitely a good idea to always bring up the one exception rather than the hundreds thats failed. What do you think is a more likely outcome? Hes the next Mike Bossy, or the next bellows/wahlstrom? You'll be waiting decades to hit on the next "Bossy".

Well considering the isles have waited decades they are due. Long shot but they are due

 

[KirkAlbuquerque]

Islanders need the high upside swing and at 20 it’s a worthwhile gamble

 

[Leafshater67]

I don’t see the Wahlstrom comparisons tbh. He is a much better skater and nowhere near as soft plus a better shooter. Time will tell but at 20th, I like the pick. I especially like the pick for a team starved of offense.

 

[boredmale]

I don’t see the Wahlstrom comparisons tbh. He is a much better skater and nowhere near as soft plus a better shooter. Time will tell but at 20th, I like the pick. I especially like the pick for a team starved of offense.

I said this before but Wahlstrom has an awesome shot(both wrister and slapshot) his big problem which doesn't seem to be an issue with Eiserman is he can't seem to get in the right place at the right time where it seems Eiserman seems to find the right places.

I guess the compariosn is because both scored a lot of goals, but Eiserman does seem to score at a slightly better pace.

 

[Leafshater67]

I said this before but Wahlstrom has an awesome shot(both wrister and slapshot) his big problem which doesn't seem to be an issue with Eiserman is he can't seem to get in the right place at the right time where it seems Eiserman seems to find the right places.

I guess the compariosn is because both scored a lot of goals, but Eiserman does seem to score at a slightly better pace.

Yeah and Eiserman will actually go to the dirty areas to get those goals. Time will tell but I think this is a good pick. He won’t win a selke but I’d be surprised if he wasn’t an effective goal scorer to some degree at least. Like 20-30g. Maybe Hoffman in his prime

 

[Michoulicious]

Eiserman at #20 is a HUGE steal and many will look foolish in as soon as 3 years from now.

 

[Oak]

I'm sure everyone has seen Eiserman score a zillion goals at this point, I know I have...but I took a look at him shift by shift, focusing on his mental game and his reads in this video below. Again, I'm not a highlights guy...so it's not strictly a "everyone that gets drafted is awesome" style of video...

Excellent analysis. Loved your video.

Kind of a head scratcher here but I thought the NTDP is a development program? You'd think they could fix a few of the mistakes he makes that in my opinion can be coached out of squirt aged players. I mean just attacking a player from the wrong side is so basic that it can be explained in one sitting.

 

[Michael Farkas]

Excellent analysis. Loved your video.

Kind of a head scratcher here but I thought the NTDP is a development program? You'd think they could fix a few of the mistakes he makes that in my opinion can be coached out of squirt aged players. I mean just attacking a player from the wrong side is so basic that it can be explained in one sitting.

Thanks for the note. This is a common thing and it's entirely reasonable to say. Forgive me, as I'm going to use a large sample from a YT comment in this response because I believe it's valid.

I played (poorly), I coached up to the collegiate level. Not everything is just a coach away. That's why so many draft picks - even first rounders - don't pan out. Not all players are coachable, not all traits are coachable. So, people look at a prospect and go, "ah, he stinks at this...but it's teachable." Ok, but that assumes that every other coach he has/had - including the coaches who are in charge of America's top prospects - not only permit this, but promote it.

There isn't a magic wand to this or else everyone would pan out. So you look at the tendencies, you look at how the player sees the game, and you can determine - to a point - what's going to stick with him coaching wise and what might not. Then you extrapolate that out on his three primary development arcs to try to ascertain his upside with reasonable accuracy.

I mentioned this in the Levshunov video too...everyone just goes, "ah, you can coach defense" and that's true to an extent. But only certain types of defense.

"I'll tell Eiserman to backcheck" ok, great. When you look at the video, he can backcheck because he's capable of skating the other direction. But what about the execution?

"Well, they'll coach that too." All right, so everyone in the NHL knows the score? No one picked on Marc-Andre Bergeron for his defense his whole career? He had 2.4 zillion coaches. But he didn't have the head or the desire to do it. So, he didn't. He played in the NHL for a while because he could shoot it at the speed of light.

Some talent is worth working around. Eiserman is that level of scoring talent. But it's not automatic. He's going to have to get more into his game just to score in the NHL. Forget everything else. He has to work on his processing ability just to find the ice he needs. That's not a gimme right there. And frankly, that's what I'd be working on first and foremost. Get my first round pick into a situation where his one skill translates, first and foremost.

 

[BelovedIsles]

I can overlook the defensive deficiencies. That said, if he doesn’t have the hockey sense to use his main weapon, and maximize its potential, that will limit his upside. That does concern me. Hopefully he gets enough guidance over the next few years to know where to go and when to in the offensive zone.

He does look like a better skater than Wahlstrom and has almost double the goals, so I’m not exclusively judging him through the Wahlstrom prism.

I do believe one can develop hockey sense (to an extent).

 

[Boxscore]

Eiserman at 20 is a great pick for the Islanders, considering many teams who draft 20 opt for the "safe" player who could be a bottom-six contributor for many years. It's my opinion that swinging for the fences is the way to go when someone with hands like Eiserman is on the board. If he hits, the Islanders stole a 40-goal scorer late in the draft. If he busts, oh well. The Isles can always add a bottom-six depth player via free agency down the line.

 

[Nogatco Rd]

Call it drafting winger PTSD, but I have healthy skepticism. He really does remind me a bit of Dal Colle, Bellows, Wahlstrom...

Yknow come to think of it maybe the isles just at developing wingers xD

Not saying your cynicism isn’t justified, curious though who you would have preferred they take at 20?

 

[Islesfan22]

I can overlook the defensive deficiencies. That said, if he doesn’t have the hockey sense to use his main weapon, and maximize its potential, that will limit his upside. That does concern me. Hopefully he gets enough guidance over the next few years to know where to go and when to in the offensive zone.

He does look like a better skater than Wahlstrom and has almost double the goals, so I’m not exclusively judging him through the Wahlstrom prism.

I do believe one can develop hockey sense (to an extent).

Cole has a better shot than Wahlstrom. One timer especially. Cole also knows how to find space to get his shot off something Wally is not good at.

 

[Kevin27NYI]

Cole has a better shot than Wahlstrom. One timer especially. Cole also knows how to find space to get his shot off something Wally is not good at.

Whaley would be an excellent top nine right wing if he knew how to get open

 

[57special]

Thanks for the note. This is a common thing and it's entirely reasonable to say. Forgive me, as I'm going to use a large sample from a YT comment in this response because I believe it's valid.

I played (poorly), I coached up to the collegiate level. Not everything is just a coach away. That's why so many draft picks - even first rounders - don't pan out. Not all players are coachable, not all traits are coachable. So, people look at a prospect and go, "ah, he stinks at this...but it's teachable." Ok, but that assumes that every other coach he has/had - including the coaches who are in charge of America's top prospects - not only permit this, but promote it.

There isn't a magic wand to this or else everyone would pan out. So you look at the tendencies, you look at how the player sees the game, and you can determine - to a point - what's going to stick with him coaching wise and what might not. Then you extrapolate that out on his three primary development arcs to try to ascertain his upside with reasonable accuracy.

I mentioned this in the Levshunov video too...everyone just goes, "ah, you can coach defense" and that's true to an extent. But only certain types of defense.

"I'll tell Eiserman to backcheck" ok, great. When you look at the video, he can backcheck because he's capable of skating the other direction. But what about the execution?

"Well, they'll coach that too." All right, so everyone in the NHL knows the score? No one picked on Marc-Andre Bergeron for his defense his whole career? He had 2.4 zillion coaches. But he didn't have the head or the desire to do it. So, he didn't. He played in the NHL for a while because he could shoot it at the speed of light.

Some talent is worth working around. Eiserman is that level of scoring talent. But it's not automatic. He's going to have to get more into his game just to score in the NHL. Forget everything else. He has to work on his processing ability just to find the ice he needs. That's not a gimme right there. And frankly, that's what I'd be working on first and foremost. Get my first round pick into a situation where his one skill translates, first and foremost.

It drives me crazy when i hear, " Skating is the easiest thing to improve", or "Defense is the easiest thing to teach."

No, no they aren't. 99% of these players have been coached extensively on both things since they were 6-8 yo. These are not kids found out on the river or pond at the age of 14. That just doesn't happen anymore. If the kids are poor at defense by the time they are 18, then odds are they will always be poor at defense.