Team Board Mock Draft

[HighLifeMan]

Swing for the fences here. Give me Sale.

 

[Figgy44]

I have this odd feeling that scouting wise, barring an inexplicable monumental drop of some player that should be in the top 10, we are thinking we either trade up, trade down or trade out of this draft position (ie: top prospect from previous couple drafts 2015 style).

 

[Deen]

Should go with Ritchie, then sign Brett Ritchie and re-sign Nick Ritchie so they can have the all Ritchie line: Ritchie/Ritchie/Ritchie.

We would be Ritchie Rich!

 

[pucksfeedthewolf]

Especially a defenseman under 6' that has never thrown a hit in his life.

There's only room enough for one smooth skating Swedish bluelining sex man on this team and that position is filled.

That’s the kind of attitude that makes you miss on great defencemen…

 

[Figgy44]

That’s the kind of attitude that makes you miss on great defencemen

Flames often draft these kind of dmen and seem to hit, we just don't draft these types in the first round. Valimaki isn't of that ilk and rumors are we'd have drafted Chabot in 2015 if we didn't trade for Hamilton. Again, not of that ilk.

Kylington 2nd round. Fox and Poirier 3rd round.

I don't believe ASP tracks to be a Karlsson at that draft position, right?

 

[pucksfeedthewolf]

Flames often draft these kind of dmen and seem to hit, we just don't draft these types in the first round. Valimaki isn't of that ilk and rumors are we'd have drafted Chabot in 2015 if we didn't trade for Hamilton. Again, not of that ilk.

Kylington 2nd round. Fox and Poirier 3rd round.

I don't believe ASP tracks to be a Karlsson at that draft position, right?

I mean, what the Flames do and what should be done aren’t any sort of argument for what is right, and what is wrong.

Did Erik Karlsson track to be a Karlsson at that position? Not a chance.

ASP’s game looks very similar to a Heiskanen to me. Most likely less offence at the NHL level, but who knows.

Anyways, the prerequisite for being a 1st round D shouldn’t be 6’+ and hits. That’s just ridiculous.

 

[Figgy44]

I mean, what the Flames do and what should be done aren’t any sort of argument for what is right, and what is wrong.

Did Erik Karlsson track to be a Karlsson at that position? Not a chance.

ASP’s game looks very similar to a Heiskanen to me. Most likely less offence at the NHL level, but who knows.

Anyways, the prerequisite for being a 1st round D shouldn’t be 6’+ and hits. That’s just ridiculous.

We're just saying that's the track record for Flames drafting. BPA is the criteria, but Conroy when he was AGM said that the Flames when drafting have BPA tiers. If the dman isn't 6' and hits, then the risk of the dman, unless he has some other crazy attributes that seemingly guarantees being great at the NHL right away and isn't the last guy on his BPA tier there is risk. The scouts might decide against drafting that calibre of player at that level to avoid a higher risk dman at that range who could turn out like Karlsson (less likely), or like Brannstrom (more likely) where there's concerns about regular NHL contribution 3-4 seasons after drafting. It's not ridiculous, it's risk management.

If ASP tracks as Heiskanen and is ranked in the top 10 but somehow falls to 16, then likely he's one of the last of his BPA tier and we'd be dumb not to draft him. However, I don't think that's necessarily the case, so the Flames track record might be to draft a forward (ie: Barlow) in that BPA tier instead of an undersized smooth skating dman like ASP. But we could be wrong. However, as Conroy described it, positional need is not a consideration until BPA tier is addressed. Based on BPA tier, they may decide to trade up or trade down prior to drafting.

 

[Bounces R Way]

That’s the kind of attitude that makes you miss on great defencemen…

I mean, what the Flames do and what should be done aren’t any sort of argument for what is right, and what is wrong.

Did Erik Karlsson track to be a Karlsson at that position? Not a chance.

ASP’s game looks very similar to a Heiskanen to me. Most likely less offence at the NHL level, but who knows.

Anyways, the prerequisite for being a 1st round D shouldn’t be 6’+ and hits. That’s just ridiculous.

Here's the exhaustive and extensive list of sub 6' dmen drafted in the 1st round in the last 15 years to average 20 minutes or more in their NHL career :

Cale Makar
Quinn Hughes
Ryan Ellis

In fact since the start of the 2010 season there's only been 66 out of 454 defenseman listed at below 6' to play in the NHL. I'm not one of these size over everything hockey guys but the data is very clear, size still matters on the blueline.

This is supposed to be the deepest drafts for forwards since the turn of the century. Could ASP be a Swedish Quinn Hughes? Maybe, sure ya that could happen. But the recent returns on Swedish dmen taken in the 1st round haven't exactly been great. Boqvist, Brannstrom, Soderstrom, Broberg, etc haven't amounted to much.

 

[pucksfeedthewolf]

We're just saying that's the track record for Flames drafting. BPA is the criteria, but Conroy when he was AGM said that the Flames when drafting have BPA tiers. If the dman isn't 6' and hits, then the risk of the dman, unless he has some other crazy attributes that seemingly guarantees being great at the NHL right away and isn't the last guy on his BPA tier there is risk. The scouts might decide against drafting that calibre of player at that level to avoid a higher risk dman at that range who could turn out like Karlsson (less likely), or like Brannstrom (more likely) where there's concerns about regular NHL contribution 3-4 seasons after drafting. It's not ridiculous, it's risk management.

If ASP tracks as Heiskanen and is ranked in the top 10 but somehow falls to 16, then likely he's one of the last of his BPA tier and we'd be dumb not to draft him. However, I don't think that's necessarily the case, so the Flames track record might be to draft a forward (ie: Barlow) in that BPA tier instead of an undersized smooth skating dman like ASP. But we could be wrong. However, as Conroy described it, positional need is not a consideration until BPA tier is addressed. Based on BPA tier, they may decide to trade up or trade down prior to drafting.

I mean, I answered this poll based of what I would do - not off Flames history, track record, or strategy so that’s irrelevant to me.

But, what makes a 5’11” defenceman with incredibly transferable skills (skating, IQ, puck movement, etc.) more risky than players with question marks about their actual abilities? Does that 1 inch really make that much of a difference?

 

[pucksfeedthewolf]

Here's the exhaustive and extensive list of sub 6' dmen drafted in the 1st round in the last 15 years to average 20 minutes or more in their NHL career :

Cale Makar
Quinn Hughes
Ryan Ellis

In fact since the start of the 2010 season there's only been 66 out of 454 defenseman listed at below 6' to play in the NHL. I'm not one of these size over everything hockey guys but the data is very clear, size still matters on the blueline.

This is supposed to be the deepest drafts for forwards since the turn of the century. Could ASP be a Swedish Quinn Hughes? Maybe, sure ya that could happen. But the recent returns on Swedish dmen taken in the 1st round haven't exactly been great. Boqvist, Brannstrom, Soderstrom, Broberg, etc haven't amounted to much.

Covering a single player with a blanket based on nationality, or size is hilarious to me. Thankfully, NHL teams pay people to evaluate skills, not put forward a sub-par “statistical” argument for why a single inch will determine the success of a player who has all the skills a modern NHL defenceman needs to succeed:

- Mobility
- IQ
- Efficient puck moving

That’s what opinions should be based on.

 

[Bounces R Way]

Covering a single player with a blanket based on nationality, or size is hilarious to me.

It's not covering a player with any blanket to say they are Swedish or are under 6'. That's just pertinent information for a prospect.

Thankfully, NHL teams pay people to evaluate skills, not put forward a sub-par “statistical” argument for why a single inch will determine the success of a player

They sure do. And those same paid professionals don't draft sub 6' defenseman in the first round very often, and when they do those picks hit even less often. Those are the facts, and putting "statistical" in quotes doesn't change that.

who has all the skills a modern NHL defenceman needs to succeed:

- Mobility
- IQ
- Efficient puck moving

That’s what opinions should be based on.

Personally prefer my defenseman capable of playing defense too, but hey maybe I'm just old school like that.

The reason I'm not that high on ASP is that he coughs it up under forecheck pressure, and is generally brutal in his own end off the puck. Excellent skater yes, and all those tight turns, hands, and edgework will translate fine when and if he makes it. But on a smaller ice surface that pressure forwards put on a dman retrieving pucks is much much higher than it would be in a Swedish junior league, where he already struggles. Whether or not this is a fatal flaw is TBD, but it already has been a fatal flaw for countless smaller speedy skilled dmen before him. Hughes & Makar are the exceptions in this, not the rule.

Would rather the Flames draft a big fast athletic centerman than a project PPQB but if you feel differently that's fine. A discussion board would be pretty boring if everybody just agreed on everything.

 

[Figgy44]

I mean, I answered this poll based of what I would do - not off Flames history, track record, or strategy so that’s irrelevant to me.

But, what makes a 5’11” defenceman with incredibly transferable skills (skating, IQ, puck movement, etc.) more risky than players with question marks about their actual abilities? Does that 1 inch really make that much of a difference?

And that's perfectly fine. You voted on the poll based on how you'd do it and not how the scouts would do it. I think 99% of the votes were like that. I'm just saying that since this poll and "game" is typically used by HFBoards to try and predict the draft. I'm not saying that ASP is bad. I'm just saying that without hindsight, drafting ASP at that range is just seemingly objectively higher risk than drafting a forward.

I'm just throwing information out there that I think Calgary Flames management might actually decide to try and draft a forward at that position or trade up/down or out of this draft similar in nature to what we did in 2015. That way, if another team's posters think their team might do something like that and is looking for a partner to tango, maybe they stumble on this information which will help them attempt to predict draft floor moves like trading down and trading out.

I don't know if the inch in height makes that much of a difference, but the track record of other dmen in that size range seems to dictate that somehow it does make enough of a difference. The same is commonly had with goalies. Due to the Huberdreau, Kadri, Markstrom and Weegar contracts, NHL readiness is a huge facet that the team may ask of the scouting department so that they can retool and compete ASAP. Management may want higher chances of a sure fire NHL graduate in 2-3 years vs still more question marks at year 3-5.

Using 2017 as an example, Brannstrom, Valimaki, Liljegren, Foote, Vaakanainen, POJ were all in that range. You'd think there would be at least one surefire NHLer of that group 6 years later, right? 6 years later, due to combinations of misusage, post draft injuries, NHL graduation logjams etc. None of those guys are seemingly NHL graduates of the calibre described when they were drafted.

Using 2017 again as an example with hindsight, if Flames have a chance to hit Branstromm at 16OA (190 GP) but as of today he is still kinda not conclusive as a permanent NHL player (6 years after drafting) vs 250+ GP players (Chytil, Jokiharju, Thomas*, Yamamoto etc.), then that's perhaps why we see what we see for the way they do things.

* = LOL, we only wish to get that lucky.

If the BPA floor is wide and a lot from 16 to 25 feel about the same risk/reward to the scouts, then maybe trading down and nabbing a 2nd would allow them to aim for guys like Hague, Boqvist, Lindstrom, Robertson*, Luostarinen, Texier, Ferraro, Comtois etc. wouldn't be a bad idea. (ie: See 2017 drafted 14-28 band of which only 3-4 look pretty good). That gamble could make it a lot more interesting than drafting at 16th only.


IF we're comparing this draft to 2015 which was a sexy draft, we have bigger issues selecting a dman at 16. From 13-31: Zboril, Chabot, Juulsen, Larsson, Carlsson and Roy. Chabot is the only good one (and thank goodness that the rumors were Flames really hoped for Chabot at 16 before trading out for Hamilton which means we have great scouts). If this draft is indeed like 2015, look at everything else in the 13-31 range. Swing for the fences via drafting forwards, not an undersized dman. The odds of hitting a high GP player at that range is higher (higher ceiling and higher floor). That second round was a hell of a fun place to play though and we walked away with two prizes in Andersson and Kylington. This is why I think trading down might be possible.

 

[Mobiandi]

A team this starved of gamebreaking offensive talent shouldn’t be taking Dmen in this sort of draft. A mid-1st forward could 2-3 years away from making the jump but a Dman could be anywhere from 4-6.

 

[pucksfeedthewolf]

They sure do. And those same paid professionals don't draft sub 6' defenseman in the first round very often, and when they do those picks hit even less often. Those are the facts, and putting "statistical" in quotes doesn't change that.

According to what? This is just untrue. Here’s a list of sub-6’ D that have been taken in the first round since 2010:

Julius Honka
Anthony DeAngelo
Erik Brannstrom
Cale Makar
Quinn Hughes
Ty Smith
Rasmus Sandin
Nikolas Beaudin
Nils Lundqvist
Cam York
Jamie Drysdale

If we operate off the 74% of 1st round picks who play > 99 games, this group pretty much tracks right with that number. They sit at 64% right now, but Lindqvist and York are pretty much locks to break that 100 games.

That’s why I put “statistical” into quotations.

Now, if you want to argue that 100 games isn’t the barometer for a pick “hitting” that’s fine, but you’ll have to drop that 74%, and I’m confident that groups tracks with any measure you want to go with.

Do we want to get into a list of guys that were picked because they were “big and hit” that didn’t turn out?

Personally prefer my defenseman capable of playing defense too, but hey maybe I'm just old school like that.

The reason I'm not that high on ASP is that he coughs it up under forecheck pressure, and is generally brutal in his own end off the puck. Excellent skater yes, and all those tight turns, hands, and edgework will translate fine when and if he makes it. But on a smaller ice surface that pressure forwards put on a dman retrieving pucks is much much higher than it would be in a Swedish junior league, where he already struggles. Whether or not this is a fatal flaw is TBD, but it already has been a fatal flaw for countless smaller speedy skilled dmen before him. Hughes & Makar are the exceptions in this, not the rule.

Would rather the Flames draft a big fast athletic centerman than a project PPQB but if you feel differently that's fine. A discussion board would be pretty boring if everybody just agreed on everything.

From what I’ve seen, ASP handles pressure extremely well. Skating helps him retrieve pucks, IQ lets him make some impressive first passes.

18 year old D that need refinement in their own zone is the rule, not the exception. Not to mention he’s not near as lost as you claim.

With his skill set, projecting him as a PPQB is weird - especially considering he didn’t even WB the PP at the U-18’s. If that’s what he was projected as, and ranked top 15, surely he would’ve been the D up top on the first unit, no?

 

[Bounces R Way]

According to what? This is just untrue. Here’s a list of sub-6’ D that have been taken in the first round since 2010:

Julius Honka
Anthony DeAngelo
Erik Brannstrom
Cale Makar
Quinn Hughes
Ty Smith
Rasmus Sandin
Nikolas Beaudin
Nils Lundqvist
Cam York
Jamie Drysdale

If we operate off the 74% of 1st round picks who play > 99 games, this group pretty much tracks right with that number. They sit at 64% right now, but Lindqvist and York are pretty much locks to break that 100 games.

That’s why I put “statistical” into quotations.

Ok well now you're just proving my point for me. 11 names in 12 drafts and 368 first round picks. That's a 3% rate, so unless you count that as 'very often' I don't see how you can conclude the paid professionals think differently.

Of those names there's 3 that have done really anything at the NHL level, although sure I'll allow guys like Drysdale and York could be something eventually.

Now, if you want to argue that 100 games isn’t the barometer for a pick “hitting” that’s fine, but you’ll have to drop that 74%, and I’m confident that groups tracks with any measure you want to go with.

I consider hitting on a 1st Rd pick getting a top 4 D or a top 6 F. Maybe a great 3rd liner. You can pull most bottom 6 fwds or bottom pairing D off any heap. Just playing 100 games doesn't mean much other than wasnt a total bust.

Do we want to get into a list of guys that were picked because they were “big and hit” that didn’t turn out?

Surely plenty of those too. They tend to have higher floors though.

From what I’ve seen, ASP handles pressure extremely well. Skating helps him retrieve pucks, IQ lets him make some impressive first passes.

18 year old D that need refinement in their own zone is the rule, not the exception. Not to mention he’s not near as lost as you claim.

With his skill set, projecting him as a PPQB is weird - especially considering he didn’t even WB the PP at the U-18’s. If that’s what he was projected as, and ranked top 15, surely he would’ve been the D up top on the first unit, no?

That's my issue, with his skating he should be great at retrieving pucks and avoiding the forecheck. But he's not. Makes the odd nice move that makes people think he's good at it, but is routinely pushed off the puck on the boards and a total non factor in front of his net.

Very talented player, great in transition, and maybe in a different draft I'd be happy to pick someone like him at #16. Not this draft and not when we have players like Weegar, Kylington, and Poirier in the organization already.

I can't speak to why Sweden didn't use him in the PP. They should have considering he has one of the better shots in this draft.

 

[pucksfeedthewolf]

Ok well now you're just proving my point for me. 11 names in 12 drafts and 368 first round picks. That's a 3% rate, so unless you count that as 'very often' I don't see how you can conclude the paid professionals think differently.

Of those names there's 3 that have done really anything at the NHL level, although sure I'll allow guys like Drysdale and York could be something eventually.

Your point was that sub-6’ defencemen are rarely selected in the first round, and even more rarely hit, no?

While the first part looks to be true, that’s really just an appeal to authority. There would be a lot of teams happier with their first selections if they took a prospect who slipped because of size rather than prioritizing size.

The second part the second part was completely disproven. looks. Even if you want to switch the standard to top pairing D, that’s 18%, which can’t be much different when doing the same comparison.

I consider hitting on a 1st Rd pick getting a top 4 D or a top 6 F. Maybe a great 3rd liner. You can pull most bottom 6 fwds or bottom pairing D off any heap. Just playing 100 games doesn't mean much other than want a total bust.



Surely plenty of those too. They tend to have higher floors though.

Because this is a good debate and you do bring up some solid points, I do have a genuine question about this.

If you can pull any bottom 6 F or bottom pair D off any heap, why are you concerned with a prospects floor is? Doesn’t that attitude lend itself more to swinging for the fences on every pick?

That's my issue, with his skating he should be great at retrieving pucks and avoiding the forecheck. But he's not. Makes the odd nice move that makes people think he's good at it, but is routinely pushed off the puck on the boards and a total non factor in front of his net.

Very talented player, great in transition, and maybe in a different draft I'd be happy to pick someone like him at #16. Not this draft and not when we have players like Weegar, Kylington, and Poirier in the organization already.

I can't speak to why Sweden didn't use him in the PP. They should have considering he has one of the better shots in this draft.

I don’t know what else to do but completely disagree with this assessment. Routinely makes those subtle 5 foot passes to the slot, uses the net to avoid forechecker, a quick move to open up a lane to the wall or curling C rather than rimming a puck. Subtle things that are hard to pick up on for most people.

Surely he can use some work in the D zone, but none of that is a size issue. He defends the rush well and closes on the puck carrier, and seals well enough on the cycle. I agree he runs into some trouble in front, but not because of size, because he’s a young D that need to improve reads.

 

[Bounces R Way]

Your point was that sub-6’ defencemen are rarely selected in the first round, and even more rarely hit, no?

While the first part looks to be true, that’s really just an appeal to authority.

My man(or woman), what do you think this is? :

Thankfully, NHL teams pay people to evaluate skills, not put forward a sub-par “statistical” argument for why a single inch will determine the success of a player

In this case though it appears that the authorities have it right.

There would be a lot of teams happier with their first selections if they took a prospect who slipped because of size rather than prioritizing size.

The second part the second part was completely disproven. looks. Even if you want to switch the standard to top pairing D, that’s 18%, which can’t be much different when doing the same comparison.

Not sure you can point to 2 players out of 11 in 12 years disproving that particular point. Both were top 10 picks and in a re-draft Hughes goes top 5. If you wanted the actual sample size you would have to take every 1st round defenseman taken since 2010. That would be two out of I'm too lazy to look it up.

If ASP had that kind of talent we would not be having this discussion. Makar even on draft day was also much more physical and much stronger on his skates.

Because this is a good debate and you do bring up some solid points, I do have a genuine question about this.

If you can pull any bottom 6 F or bottom pair D off any heap, why are you concerned with a prospects floor is? Doesn’t that attitude lend itself more to swinging for the fences on every pick?

Because even low ceiling high floor 1st Rd picks retain their value.

Luke Schenn returned picks at the TDL. Somebody is paying Gudbranson over 4 million a year to play professional hockey. Griffin Reinhart landed the Islanders Barzal and a 2nd from the Oilers(lol). Marc Staal is playing in his 2nd Cup final and he's 36. Hall for Larsson etc.

I got no problem with swinging for the fences on smaller talent like the Flames have in recent years. But do it in the later rounds. The top half of the 1st rd, and in particular THIS 1st Rd in 2023, should be reserved for as close to a sure thing as you can get. And with the fwd talent that should be available why gamble on a project?

I don’t know what else to do but completely disagree with this assessment. Routinely makes those subtle 5 foot passes to the slot, uses the net to avoid forechecker, a quick move to open up a lane to the wall or curling C rather than rimming a puck. Subtle things that are hard to pick up on for most people.

Surely he can use some work in the D zone, but none of that is a size issue. He defends the rush well and closes on the puck carrier, and seals well enough on the cycle. I agree he runs into some trouble in front, but not because of size, because he’s a young D that need to improve reads.

He's got some Brodie too him for sure. Like I said looks great in transition. I'm not going to claim to watch a ton of Swedish junior hockey but from the tape I've watched on him he's got a long way to go defensively.

You can say it needs refining and sure maybe he can do that in the next 3-4 years and put some weight on. But maybe not. History is littered with guys who didn't improve. You don't remember their names because no one does. Oliver Kylington was drafted in 2015 with many of the same concerns and is just recently putting it together as a NHL defenseman.

 

[Bjornar Moxnes]

My man(or woman), what do you think this is? :


In this case though it appears that the authorities have it right.



Not sure you can point to 2 players out of 11 in 12 years disproving that particular point. Both were top 10 picks and in a re-draft Hughes goes top 5. If you wanted the actual sample size you would have to take every 1st round defenseman taken since 2010. That would be two out of I'm too lazy to look it up.

If ASP had that kind of talent we would not be having this discussion. Makar even on draft day was also much more physical and much stronger on his skates.



Because even low ceiling high floor 1st Rd picks retain their value.

Luke Schenn returned picks at the TDL. Somebody is paying Gudbranson over 4 million a year to play professional hockey. Griffin Reinhart landed the Islanders Barzal and a 2nd from the Oilers(lol). Marc Staal is playing in his 2nd Cup final and he's 36. Hall for Larsson etc.

I got no problem with swinging for the fences on smaller talent like the Flames have in recent years. But do it in the later rounds. The top half of the 1st rd, and in particular THIS 1st Rd in 2023, should be reserved for as close to a sure thing as you can get. And with the fwd talent that should be available why gamble on a project?



He's got some Brodie too him for sure. Like I said looks great in transition. I'm not going to claim to watch a ton of Swedish junior hockey but from the tape I've watched on him he's got a long way to go defensively.

You can say it needs refining and sure maybe he can do that in the next 3-4 years and put some weight on. But maybe not. History is littered with guys who didn't improve. You don't remember their names because no one does. Oliver Kylington was drafted in 2015 with many of the same concerns and is just recently putting it together as a NHL defenseman.

If somehow ASP is available by 2nd round, we select him. Either way we need to select a Dman in the 2nd round.

 

[Haatley]

Really hoping for Barlow. I live in Owen Sound, watch him often. Very good young player.

 

[Tkachuk Norris]

Perrault, Barlow, ASP. Can’t really go wrong.

Skating is so important at the NHL level for defencemen. I feel draft eligible defencemen that play in pro or at the WJC in large roles are way over scrutinized. They are playing against men.

Draft skill and teach checking/defence. That’s when this team has had success in the draft.

 

[Figgy44]

Perrault, Barlow, ASP. Can’t really go wrong.

Skating is so important at the NHL level for defencemen. I feel draft eligible defencemen that play in pro or at the WJC in large roles are way over scrutinized. They are playing against men.

Draft skill and teach checking/defence. That’s when this team has had success in the draft.

Minor correction:

Draft skill + tenacity attitude combo. (ie: Bennett, Tkachuk, Pelletier, Coronato).

I think the tenacity facet combined with skill is also why we keep hitting or have interesting pieces in the late rounds. (ie: Mangiapane, Ruzicka, Beck, Ciona, MEP)

Skill no tenacity puts us back at risk of some of the Feaster/Sutter flubs (ie: Jankowski, Baertschi, Erixon). I feel like Zary and Valimaki are lower end on the tenacity stuff and when certain other things aren't working out (ie: Injuries) there's worry more things will derail.