Prospect Info: Round 1, Pick #19: Jay O'Brien, C, MA-USHS --> Providence U

Curufinwe

Registered User
Feb 28, 2013
56,940
45,314
I never cared for JOB

Only Flyer fans could whine about taking a fast, stout center who is scoring a PPG in his return to the college game because they passed on a good, but not great LHD.

Now if Miller was a 6'2 220 lb RHD with a similar skill package . . .
I‘d say this aged poorly, but it was a terrible take the moment you posted it.

Good and great dmen are good and great whether they are left or right handed. Obsessing over getting RHD didn’t work out for your old buddy, Chuck.
 

Magua

Entirely Palatable Product
Apr 25, 2016
38,530
160,501
Huron of the Lakes
I still remember how everone was yelling and hoping for Miller, Merkley or even Veleno and Hextall just punched us all in the face.

Well, everyone was certainly not yelling about Merkley and Veleno. If anything, if you were listening to the right people, they were yelling NOT to draft them. Miller, Sandin, Berggren were my top 3 names. Still feel good about that.

I’ll say it again: if a pick is not going to pan out, please give me a 2nd rounder over some guy uselessly plugging away on his ELC before being traded for future considerations. You wouldn’t return a 2nd for any former 1st in that range not named Miller, Lundkvist, Sandin. Really it’s not even close to worst case.
 

JojoTheWhale

2.5 Murrays Above Replacement
May 22, 2008
35,472
110,009
This is what it looks like when you do take a big swing and it doesn't work out. If we want them to do that, and most of us do, we have to understand that this is going to be the outcome sometimes. They navigated it well by not taking the easy road and signing him.

Do it again with the pick it created. Smart risks are good.
 

GKJ

Global Moderator
Feb 27, 2002
192,761
43,375
This is what it looks like when you do take a big swing and it doesn't work out. If we want them to do that, and most of us do, we have to understand that this is going to be the outcome sometimes. They navigated it well by not taking the easy road and signing him.

Do it again with the pick it created. Smart risks are good.
Hextall wasn’t trying to take a big swing. That’s not how the dude operates. Proper evaluations of players should never result in first round picks not being signed. That’s why it never happens.
 

JojoTheWhale

2.5 Murrays Above Replacement
May 22, 2008
35,472
110,009
Hextall wasn’t trying to take a big swing. That’s not how the dude operates. Proper evaluations of players should never result in first round picks not being signed. That’s why it never happens.

If you don’t think taking a guy with a handful of US games above New England High School hockey in the top 20 of a draft is a big swing, we just don’t look at things the same way. Frankly, we almost never agree because we don’t approach much of anything the same way. That’s ok. It is what it is.
 
Last edited:

GKJ

Global Moderator
Feb 27, 2002
192,761
43,375
If you don’t think taking a guy with a handful of US games above New England High School hockey in the top 20 of a draft is a big swing, we just don’t look at things the same way. Frankly, we almost never agree because we don’t approach much of anything the same way. That’s ok. It is what it is.
Hextall was risk-adverse in pretty much everything, that’s why I say that. What he was betting on was having what many people, around the league, proclaimed as a deep prospect pool and focused on taking a slew of college players because they held their rights longer should they have chosen to do that because they expect to not have enough pro spots for everyone. It carried over when it was insinuated that Nick Luukko was running the drafts because college players was his focus, and it’s what happened in Fletcher’s first draft.
 

JojoTheWhale

2.5 Murrays Above Replacement
May 22, 2008
35,472
110,009
Hextall was risk-adverse in pretty much everything, that’s why I say that. What he was betting on was having what many people, around the league, proclaimed as a deep prospect pool and focused on taking a slew of college players because they held their rights longer should they have chosen to do that because they expect to not have enough pro spots for everyone. It carried over when it was insinuated that Nick Luukko was running the drafts because college players was his focus, and it’s what happened in Fletcher’s first draft.

Do we know that they were focused on this lack of spots or is it how you’re reading the info that we have? That’s a question, not a statement. Exactly what they said and when is definitely something you would remember more than I would.

Sidenote, but for the sake of clarity, I’m assuming you mean Nick Pryor. If that’s wrong, please correct me. I don’t care about the typo. I just want to make sure I understand what you’re saying. There’s so damn much nepotism to remember with this team. :laugh:
 

GKJ

Global Moderator
Feb 27, 2002
192,761
43,375
Do we know that they were focused on this lack of spots or is it how you’re reading the info that we have? That’s a question, not a statement. Exactly what they said and when is definitely something you would remember more than I would.

Sidenote, but for the sake of clarity, I’m assuming you mean Nick Pryor. If that’s wrong, please correct me. I don’t care about the typo. I just want to make sure I understand what you’re saying. There’s so damn much nepotism to remember with this team. :laugh:
I believe it was their strategy. Hextall was betting on his prospects - all of them, and always was. With the amount of draft picks we had at the time, they needed the signing windows spread out because he was never planning to trade any of them. Organizationally, they were so deep with forwards and basically stopped drafting defensemen.

Nick Pryor, Luukko, it was one of them. He was the guy in those college circles and they kept going to him.
 

dats81

Registered User
Jan 22, 2011
5,719
1,648
Carinthia, AUT
When will we have clarity regarding the draft year of the compensatory pick?

Wasn't it depending on who expresses the wish not to sign - player or team- or just a matter of matching which deadline. Does anyone know the rules by heart?
 

Larry44

#FlyersPerpetualMediocrity
Mar 1, 2002
12,150
7,681
Weak draft, questionable pick, flatlined development - for once not primarily due to injuries but only on the player himself.
I still remember how everone was yelling and hoping for Miller, Merkley or even Veleno and Hextall just punched us all in the face.
Not entirely fair to JOB. He did get a bad concussion in his first freshman year, then left the school to go back to JrA in BC. Never panned out but that happens. The scouts thought they had a diamond in the rough, but he turned out to be a piece of coal. They should have taken Mattias Samuelsson, then they wouldn't have needed Ginning.
 

renberg

Registered User
Dec 31, 2003
7,206
7,448
Lewes Delaware
forums.hfboards.com
Hextall might have relied on ex-NHLers that he personally knew for player evaluations. The family with Nolan Patrick and Tony Amonte with JOB. When the GM overlooks scouting reports, bad thing’s usually happen.
 

deadhead

Registered User
Feb 26, 2014
50,625
22,119
If you don’t think taking a guy with a handful of US games above New England High School hockey in the top 20 of a draft is a big swing, we just don’t look at things the same way. Frankly, we almost never agree because we don’t approach much of anything the same way. That’s ok. It is what it is.
Question is when you take that swing, #19 or trade down and do so at say #29?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Hexy4

JojoTheWhale

2.5 Murrays Above Replacement
May 22, 2008
35,472
110,009
Question is when you take that swing, #19 or trade down and do so at say #29?

That's a fair question. But it's a tricky area in which to predict what other teams will do.

I would argue the answer to this depends on your evaluation of the player in question. When they drafted a high risk pick with Laberge at 36, my opinion of the decision likewise came down to how highly they evaluated him. In both cases, if they loved the player in particular, I think the pick makes sense. If they were taking rough BPA, I'd prefer a trade down and risking having to take someone else.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad