Prospect Info: Tanner Molendyk - D | 24th Overall | 2023 NHL Draft

[Scoresberg]

Our second 1st rounder. It's not about Molendyk for me at this spot but I just think there were better options if we went BPA. This somewhat signals a desperation pick as the cupboard on defense is bare.

Tanner Molendyk at eliteprospects.com

Click to read more...

 

[Bringer of Jollity]

Our second 1st rounder. It's not about Molendyk for me at this spot but I just think there were better options if we went BPA. This somewhat signals a desperation pick as the cupboard on defense is bare.

Tanner Molendyk at eliteprospects.com

Desperation? Nah, I don't see that. Fleshes out an area of need? Sure. I know we throw the term out there a lot but I don't think objective BPA really exists outside of a specific talent tier at the top of the draft. Once outside of that, BPA becomes a very subjective exercise and is frequently slanted by existing organizational depth. If you ask all 32 GMs who they saw as #24 in the draft I'd wager you get at least 20 different answers. There are some non-Preds fans I'm seeing that are really positive on this pick.

 

[adsfan]

Our second 1st rounder. It's not about Molendyk for me at this spot but I just think there were better options if we went BPA. This somewhat signals a desperation pick as the cupboard on defense is bare.

Tanner Molendyk at eliteprospects.com

Del Gaizo, Statsney and Wilsby are all 22 years old.

They played on a team that finished in the top 4 in the AHL this year. A team that was running at 33% on the Power Play during the playoffs.

I don't think that the cupbard is bare.

 

[Armourboy]

Del Gaizo, Statsney and Wilsby are all 22 years old.

They played on a team that finished in the top 4 in the AHL this year. A team that was running at 33% on the Power Play during the playoffs.

I don't think that the cupbard is bare.

None of those guys are going to be #1 Dmen and I think that is what this pick is about. I think there was something they saw they thought could be special.

That pick wasn't about finding another #4 defenseman.

 

[herzausstein]

Currently id say we have 14 d prospects (Stastney, Del Gaizo, Wilsby, Matier, Prokop, Chistyakov, Kulonummi, Olsson, Sward, Ufko, Yeryomenko, Livingstone, Molendyk, and Reid).

Matier, Prokop, Sward, and Livingstone only ones over 6'0"

Olsson, Wilsby, Kulonummi, Yeryomenko, and Reid are 6'0".

Rest are below.

We could use a big skilled guy but Molendyk does have alot of potential in his game so ill play wait and see with him.

 

[Enoch]

I just don't see reason for angst.

Looking at the prospect profile, this screams back end of the first round selection.

Fastest skater, good tape against elite prospects, projectable, projected end 1st/2nd round. These guys always go according to scout recommendation. Essentially: "We can't miss this guy, pull the trigger."

 

[Enoch]

If you want players that can break things open, you look for guys like this. Just be prepared for them to bust as well lol

 

[LCPreds]

We're basically in the range where the projectable variance between guys is so small it's kind of silly to react strongly about the specific player. I can see some annoyance in going D vs. C but at the same time I'm assuming the Preds have some kind of tiering system and must have assumed the drop off in D vs. C between 24th and 46th meant going D at 24 was the best play. They might also have some type of trade in place to move up that will not be announced until today (drama!).

 

[glenngineer]

At first I was like, who is this kid. A friend sent me a link to an article and highlight reel.

His offense was hampered by the team he was on as he was third on the depth chart on the PP and bumped to fourth because of someone they acquired. Because of his skating, the coach asked him to be a PK specialist and shut other teams best players down, one of which was Bedard, who he didn't let score in two games. He still put up .5 ppg with limited PP time.

Then I watched his highlight reel and while I know it's his best clippings, the kid was by far the best skater on the ice in every clip. He reminded me of Josi, Karlsson and Girard all throw into one skater because of his moves, creativity and control of the puck. He also has a little Darius Kasparaitus with the way he throws his body.

It will be interesting to see how he pans out but from watching the reel, I'm way more excited than disappointed.

Tanner Molendyk - 2023 NHL Draft Prospect Profile

 

[LCPreds]

From Elite Prospects:

There are smooth skaters, there are explosive skaters, and there’s Tanner Molendyk. A quick series of crossovers launch Molendyk past multiple opponents; it doesn’t matter if he’s moving forwards, backwards, or laterally. At full speed, he changes directions with sudden outside edge cuts, heel-to-heel skating, and tight turns. Even speedier, skilled opponents struggle as he instantly claims the middle, forces them wide, then darts across for the steal in a blink of an eye. His stick work’s precise, and his hits are heavy. -EliteProspects 2023 NHL Draft Guide]

I like going for something like this. You're not going to teach the skating aspect and given the development arc of a typical defensemen there is more than enough time to refine the other aspects of his game.

 

[Kat Predator]

This is what "swing for the fences" is. He wasn't the guy the prognosticators—who felt our winger prospect pool was weakest —suggested. He's a guy with an exceptional attribute, his skating. One of the reports on him suggested he was the best skater in the entire draft. On the other hand, there are some questions: why, if he is an offensive-defenseman, are his numbers not great? He's on the small side. Why was he relegated to 3rd pairing on his WHL team?

But he has that one truly exceptional talent that jumps off the tape. He can skate like Roman Josi. Now we just have to see if all the rest of his game can be shaped on the potter's wheel into some truly exceptional complete package.

I believe the LHD ahead of him are leaving Saskatoon this season so he might get a lot more ice time this next season and show his offensive game.

 

[LCPreds]

 

[Porter Stoutheart]

None of those guys are going to be #1 Dmen and I think that is what this pick is about. I think there was something they saw they thought could be special.

That pick wasn't about finding another #4 defenseman.

Well, I think all of them... and Molendyk also... project in to the #4-6 range moreso than any top-pairing range. Which is why the pick feels a little redundant to me.

As herzaussetein and ads note above, we have no shortage of smooth-skating undersized defensemen in that range of our depth chart on the way.

I think it's inevitably what happens every year when a team picks a player the fans weren't expecting and the fans scurry off to read some scouting reports or find the person who likes the player and validates the pick, so we all feel better and go off filled with hope and optimism. That is just part of the draft, every team's fans do it, every year, every time a pick like this occurs.

When I parse through the draft-speak and hyperbole of the scouting reports I've read so far (and there have been several very good detailed lengthy ones posted), then it sounds a lot to me like Molendyk just isn't ever going to have the offensive knack to be a top-pairing guy on offense, nor the size and strength to be a top-pairing guy for defense. But instead, he'll use his skating and gap control and compete level to still be a solid middle-pairing guy. Sort of like we already have with Stastney coming, and like a Fabbro, a player in that range. Which is a good player. Just like I said, more redundant with what we already have than people seem to realize.

So yeah, I like the player, can see how he was a fair pick for that spot in the draft in general, but still question why we wouldn't have gone for the area of greater need in our organization, since there were players who might play Center (like Ritchie or Stenberg) on the board in the same spot, who were also fair picks at that spot in the draft in general.

I go back to what I said on Wood, how he really impressed me with how he handled himself in interviews. I didn't catch any interview of Molendyk. But if he is like that, and has that kind of composure, intelligence, self-awareness, and comes over well in an interview, then that to me could easily be the difference-maker. I watched a lot of these kids get interviewed, a lot were... well kids. Fair enough, they are 17 and 18 years old and play hockey, they aren't running for Congress. I think there is also a lot of stuff off the ice and in the interview process teams have at the Combine that really sets teams in favor of certain players too. Maybe that also played a factor here. Maybe those Centers did not come across well, and Molendyk did.

 

[Armourboy]

If you want players that can break things open, you look for guys like this. Just be prepared for them to bust as well lol

Exactly. He may never amount to anything but with his speed he might be something special. It really is more or a less a boom or bust pick which is what Trotz said he was going to do more of.

 

[Armourboy]

Well, I think all of them... and Molendyk also... project in to the #4-6 range moreso than any top-pairing range. Which is why the pick feels a little redundant to me.

As herzaussetein and ads note above, we have no shortage of smooth-skating undersized defensemen in that range of our depth chart on the way.

I think it's inevitably what happens every year when a team picks a player the fans weren't expecting and the fans scurry off to read some scouting reports or find the person who likes the player and validates the pick, so we all feel better and go off filled with hope and optimism. That is just part of the draft, every team's fans do it, every year, every time a pick like this occurs.

When I parse through the draft-speak and hyperbole of the scouting reports I've read so far (and there have been several very good detailed lengthy ones posted), then it sounds a lot to me like Molendyk just isn't ever going to have the offensive knack to be a top-pairing guy on offense, nor the size and strength to be a top-pairing guy for defense. But instead, he'll use his skating and gap control and compete level to still be a solid middle-pairing guy. Sort of like we already have with Stastney coming, and like a Fabbro, a player in that range. Which is a good player. Just like I said, more redundant with what we already have than people seem to realize.

So yeah, I like the player, can see how he was a fair pick for that spot in the draft in general, but still question why we wouldn't have gone for the area of greater need in our organization, since there were players who might play Center (like Ritchie or Stenberg) on the board in the same spot, who were also fair picks at that spot in the draft in general.

I go back to what I said on Wood, how he really impressed me with how he handled himself in interviews. I didn't catch any interview of Molendyk. But if he is like that, and has that kind of composure, intelligence, self-awareness, and comes over well in an interview, then that to me could easily be the difference-maker. I watched a lot of these kids get interviewed, a lot were... well kids. Fair enough, they are 17 and 18 years old and play hockey, they aren't running for Congress. I think there is also a lot of stuff off the ice and in the interview process teams have at the Combine that really sets teams in favor of certain players too. Maybe that also played a factor here. Maybe those Centers did not come across well, and Molendyk did.

Tend to think they saw something there that led them to believe he was going to be more than just a #4, if that was the case you just move up in the 2nd and take him, not take him well above what most outfits were predicting he would go. You aren't going to find whatever that was in a scouting report.

 

[glenngineer]

Well, I think all of them... and Molendyk also... project in to the #4-6 range moreso than any top-pairing range. Which is why the pick feels a little redundant to me.

As herzaussetein and ads note above, we have no shortage of smooth-skating undersized defensemen in that range of our depth chart on the way.

I think it's inevitably what happens every year when a team picks a player the fans weren't expecting and the fans scurry off to read some scouting reports or find the person who likes the player and validates the pick, so we all feel better and go off filled with hope and optimism. That is just part of the draft, every team's fans do it, every year, every time a pick like this occurs.

When I parse through the draft-speak and hyperbole of the scouting reports I've read so far (and there have been several very good detailed lengthy ones posted), then it sounds a lot to me like Molendyk just isn't ever going to have the offensive knack to be a top-pairing guy on offense, nor the size and strength to be a top-pairing guy for defense. But instead, he'll use his skating and gap control and compete level to still be a solid middle-pairing guy. Sort of like we already have with Stastney coming, and like a Fabbro, a player in that range. Which is a good player. Just like I said, more redundant with what we already have than people seem to realize.

So yeah, I like the player, can see how he was a fair pick for that spot in the draft in general, but still question why we wouldn't have gone for the area of greater need in our organization, since there were players who might play Center (like Ritchie or Stenberg) on the board in the same spot, who were also fair picks at that spot in the draft in general.

I go back to what I said on Wood, how he really impressed me with how he handled himself in interviews. I didn't catch any interview of Molendyk. But if he is like that, and has that kind of composure, intelligence, self-awareness, and comes over well in an interview, then that to me could easily be the difference-maker. I watched a lot of these kids get interviewed, a lot were... well kids. Fair enough, they are 17 and 18 years old and play hockey, they aren't running for Congress. I think there is also a lot of stuff off the ice and in the interview process teams have at the Combine that really sets teams in favor of certain players too. Maybe that also played a factor here. Maybe those Centers did not come across well, and Molendyk did.

Go watch his highlights. He's not a smooth skater, he's an elite skater. There's one part where he's skating sideways/crablike for lack of a better term and then turns up ice and it's like he's shot out of a cannon. I don't know that I've ever seen anything like that.

Also, go read why his offensive production was down and what. he was asked to do. The kid did what the coaches asked of him and did it well. Was this is a stretch, possibly. At the same time, you can't teach some of the things I saw in that video. 24th OA you are never assured of anything. I was skeptical at first and the more I researched, the more excited I became because Trotz said he wanted guys that will pull you out of your seat and this kid does just that.

 

[Flgatorguy87]

He has elite gap control, because of his skating. In a world where you have to play Mckinnon and Bedard on the regular, having a guy that can hang is going to be a huge asset.

 

[Porter Stoutheart]

Go watch his highlights. He's not a smooth skater, he's an elite skater. There's one part where he's skating sideways/crablike for lack of a better term and then turns up ice and it's like he's shot out of a cannon. I don't know that I've ever seen anything like that.

Also, go read why his offensive production was down and what. he was asked to do. The kid did what the coaches asked of him and did it well. Was this is a stretch, possibly. At the same time, you can't teach some of the things I saw in that video. 24th OA you are never assured of anything. I was skeptical at first and the more I researched, the more excited I became because Trotz said he wanted guys that will pull you out of your seat and this kid does just that.

"Go watch his highlights"? Dude, I spent all night watching them, we all did. We all read the reasons his offensive production was down too. And you just have to add all those things up. And if you read the scouting reports, you'd see the questions about offense and the projections to being more of a defensive style player are in there too.

But anyway, all that said, I like Molendyk a lot too. I think if anybody objects to my descriptions, it's not because of the video highlights or the scouting reports we've all digested, I think it's because maybe you underestimate just how good our other D prospects are? Words like "elite" and "smooth" are just semantics, no need to argue about those. Fabbro was a #17 pick, Stastney and Ufko have played on Team USA on the World U18 and WJC stage, so have Chistyakov and Matier for their countries, these guys aren't chopped liver. I just don't feel like it's any slight whatsoever to suggest a #24 overall pick might slot in with this caliber of prospect, as opposed to a Josi or whoever.

 

[Porter Stoutheart]

Tend to think they saw something there that led them to believe he was going to be more than just a #4, if that was the case you just move up in the 2nd and take him, not take him well above what most outfits were predicting he would go. You aren't going to find whatever that was in a scouting report.

I bet we'd find it in the Nashville scouts' scouting reports.

Anyway, as long as folks are satisfied with using "he could be more than just a #4" instead of making it sound like a sure thing, all good.

But in case nobody has noticed yet, I'm not a guy who pins my hopes to the max upside. I've been watching drafts and following prospects for over 40 years now. I just temper my expectations automatically now. A #24 pick on defense is not often more than a #4-6 on an NHL defense. There are more Jonathan Blums and Ryan Parents picked in this range than there are even Dante Fabbros. I'm not wholly convinced yet that Fabbro is even more than a #4. So folks might think it's a slight to project a player into this range, but I really don't see it that way at all.

I doubt the Preds would have picked him there, though, if they really thought they could get him a little later by trading up one of their 2nds. The teams on the floor I think have a pretty good read on who the other teams like. I suspect the way you saw Bonk, Lindstein, Gulyayev getting into the bottom of that 1st round, teams knew that the "favorite" next batch of D were going to go relatively early. So probably if he was a guy we liked, we had to take him there at #24, he might not have lasted much longer for any later pick.

 

[Soundgarden]

This is a swing for the fences pick, a little off the board but I'm not mad at it.

 

[Flgatorguy87]

I said it with my hopes for Oliver Moore, but skating is such a huge piece for translating to the next level. I will never be upset with an elite skater.

This is the same reason I have some pause on Wood, but if they are projecting him at Center as well as his other traits, then the upside is undeniable.

 

[Kat Predator]

I bet we'd find it in the Nashville scouts' scouting reports.

Anyway, as long as folks are satisfied with using "he could be more than just a #4" instead of making it sound like a sure thing, all good.

But in case nobody has noticed yet, I'm not a guy who pins my hopes to the max upside. I've been watching drafts and following prospects for over 40 years now. I just temper my expectations automatically now. A #24 pick on defense is not often more than a #4-6 on an NHL defense. There are more Jonathan Blums and Ryan Parents picked in this range than there are even Dante Fabbros. I'm not wholly convinced yet that Fabbro is even more than a #4. So folks might think it's a slight to project a player into this range, but I really don't see it that way at all.

I doubt the Preds would have picked him there, though, if they really thought they could get him a little later by trading up one of their 2nds. The teams on the floor I think have a pretty good read on who the other teams like. I suspect the way you saw Bonk, Lindstein, Gulyayev getting into the bottom of that 1st round, teams knew that the "favorite" next batch of D were going to go relatively early. So probably if he was a guy we liked, we had to take him there at #24, he might not have lasted much longer for any later pick.

Part of any draft is dealing with the way the draft unfolds in front of you. Going in, this draft was said to be loaded with centre possibilities. D-men weren't considered to be as deep.

But the way this draft has unfolded, teams started taking d-men earlier than expected. That sort of run means two things: some of the centres who were slotted higher in mocks are pushed down. It's why we got Wood and Wood didn't get nailed in the top 10, for example.

Secondly, it means that if we had a d-man rated high enough and the group he was in was evaporating, you have to take him sooner than you may have ideally wanted in order to get him. For all we know, the Blues or Sharks were hot to trot on Molendyk and the next kid on our board had a significantly lower grade. The next group of centres with similar grades might still be big enough to sit on. Or maybe Barry is working a shock-and-awe move on his shoe phone...

 

[PredsV82]

At the end of the day, I have to fall back on the fact that our scouts are generally awesome with the defenseman picks

 

[Porter Stoutheart]

Part of any draft is dealing with the way the draft unfolds in front of you. Going in, this draft was said to be loaded with centre possibilities. D-men weren't considered to be as deep.

But the way this draft has unfolded, teams started taking d-men earlier than expected. That sort of run means two things: some of the centres who were slotted higher in mocks are pushed down. It's why we got Wood and Wood didn't get nailed in the top 10, for example.

Secondly, it means that if we had a d-man rated high enough and the group he was in was evaporating, you have to take him sooner than you may have ideally wanted in order to get him. For all we know, the Blues or Sharks were hot to trot on Molendyk and the next kid on our board had a significantly lower grade. The next group of centres with similar grades might still be big enough to sit on. Or maybe Barry is working a shock-and-awe move on his shoe phone...

I also think another significant factor is that a good #3-4 defenseman is actually better than most top-6 forwards. Aside from the real star forwards, you can usually find ways to pretty easily add some adequate skill on the wings, or even in a 2C slot, to round out a scoring line. But those 2nd pair D are going to play 20 minutes a night and can be even more valuable. So if you did your scouting homework and really just couldn't see any likelihood that those Ritchie/Stenberg/Musty options would ever be more than fairly generic top-6 players (and that's upside, if all went well), then I think there's sound hockey logic to taking the guy whose upside is even just a good #4D with a special skill trait. Quality D is still a rarer asset IMO.

 

[Flgatorguy87]

If he turns into a 20 min a night guy then this pick is a hit without a doubt