Celebrini is no Mathews and I am not even sure Smith will be as good as Marner or Nylander nor that they have a 3rd forward prospect that ends up in the zip code of any of those 3 Leafs forwards. But absolutely....If Celebrini, Smith hit their realistic ceilings and Dickinson ends up on par with Reilly, San Jose will be a poor man's Leafs (minus one elite forward).
Team Trajectory
- Thread starter Dr Salt
- Start date
Beukeboom Fan
Registered User
Agree SJ is getting to much love, but they're in the same space as the Hawks in that they'll still likely get 2 more high lottery picks. Neither organization is a finished product at this point.
belfour30
Connor Bedard Fangirl
- Dec 14, 2019
- 1,702
- 1,544
I'm not sure that the gap between Celebrini and Bedard is as big as everyone thinks it is. Bedard vs Celebrini might end up being a Crosby v Toews debate. And at one point, it was a debate.
Beukeboom Fan
Registered User
Just going from memory, but Toews was the straw that stirred the drink. Whichever line he was on was Canada's best line. Pretty sure he received the "most outstanding forward" award, but could be having a senior moment.
And agrees in general with CB vs. MC. Need to see how both guys develop.
Putt Pirate
Registered User
- Dec 15, 2015
- 5,379
- 3,148
I guess we will see how they progress. Bedard was referred to as generational. Cell was top of the draft, but not generational. Will be fun to watch as they grow.
DisgruntledHawkFan
Blackhawk Down
A really stupid one.
idk I think if youre a hockey fan you have to be able to acknowledge that Celebrini has the potential to have a similar overall impact as Bedard. he might be the most polished 2 way player coming out of the draft in recent memory with 90-100 point upside. i get that most ppl here are Hawks or bust which is fair
I hate comparing prospect pools... You can compare the Top of the teams as they are known, but going down to the Boisverts and Kantserovs of all teams?
We may have lots of Top 6 players already that we don't know about yet, same with all the other teams.
Hawks strength is D prospects and need another Elite Forward talent. After that it's fair game.
Kyle has done a good job signing NHL talent and helping them to grow/not getting rushed.
If all they lack will be one Elite Winger they can hope for a Free Agent or make a trade. If anything, you can add Top Line Forwards if you pay enough. Right now, Hawks have lots of picks and prospects to trade and by the time they need that forward, they will have enough young and cost controlled players.
We may have lots of Top 6 players already that we don't know about yet, same with all the other teams.
Hawks strength is D prospects and need another Elite Forward talent. After that it's fair game.
Kyle has done a good job signing NHL talent and helping them to grow/not getting rushed.
If all they lack will be one Elite Winger they can hope for a Free Agent or make a trade. If anything, you can add Top Line Forwards if you pay enough. Right now, Hawks have lots of picks and prospects to trade and by the time they need that forward, they will have enough young and cost controlled players.
Agree with all this. Biggest hole for us is clearly a top line winger, but besides that we are super strong at C, very strong at D and have very good depth from which you never know who surprises in development.
My current projection of the pool:
1st line caliber: X - Bedard - X
Top 6 caliber: Moore - Nazar - X
Mid 6 caliber: Vanacker - Boisvert - Kantserov
Mid 6 hopeful: Lardis - Greene - Hayes
Legit bottom 6: Slaggert - Dach - Guttman
Legit bottom 6: Savoie - Safonov - Spellacy
Legit bottom 6: Mustard - Misiak - Pridham
Bot. 6 hopeful: Luypen - Ludwinski - Rolston
Bot. 6 hopeful: Marcel - Thompson - James
Likely AHL: Stjernborg - Felcman - Pharand
Likely AHL: Svenson - Tohila - Oscarson
Likely AHL: X - Saarela - Juntorp
Top pair potential: Vlasic - Levshunov
Top pair potential: Korchinski - Rinzel
Mid pair: Del Mastro - Jones (including him since he's a mainstay)
Bottom pair: Kaiser - Allan
7th D: Phillips - Crevier
Tweeners: Harding - Kelley
Tweeners: Peltonen - Henry
Likely NHL goalies: Commesso, Gajan
Honestly this is really good. And actually very ignorant of me to have all the international forwards as the likely NHL players. I dont know much about them and a few likely could be higher like Stjernborg for example.
Top line wing is sticking out, but between the 25 draft, FA, and the all those guys in the mid 6 range developing, the odds are really good to have it filled very soon. And whats good about drafting hard working fast skaters, is that they will be very good 3rd fiddles to any top line, in the mold of a Hagel for instance.
So yeah, we are in a really good position going forward.
pvr
Leather Skates
- Jan 22, 2008
- 4,780
- 2,212
Like your list. At least a couple of these are going to surprise, and likely a bunch will never make it. The D looks really good.
My most likely to become impact players and key pieces are Spellacy, Vanacker, and possibly Mustard.
Obviously Hagens is the guy to get in 2025 but by all accounts it seems like Porter Martone is the winger Bedard deserves and I'd love that.
I don't disagree but do you guys ever remember having a few guys you would like to draft going into the season and then that completely changes come draft time a year later?
belfour30
Connor Bedard Fangirl
- Dec 14, 2019
- 1,702
- 1,544
I would be super happy.
We are looking for a Demidov in next year's draft basically, and he was BPA for me anyways.
Would've been getting the guy a year earlier too.
Hattrick Kane
Registered User
- Oct 8, 2018
- 9,468
- 13,975
Gotta get the defense first since they take longer to develop. Like with those Hawks cup teams, Keith and Seabrook were finally ready when Kane and Toews came along.
This is so there’s no glaring holes when you’re ready to be competitive. Like San Jose, whose forwards will be ready but the defense won’t be even close.
belfour30
Connor Bedard Fangirl
- Dec 14, 2019
- 1,702
- 1,544
Their D is pretty much set imo. There's not a lot of reasons to draft a D in the 1st two rounds going forward. Despite as much as I have complained about the trade ups this summer, I think that doing that again is fine. We'll have to see where the Leafs pick ends up but I doubt it is as high as the picks the Hawks got for Hagel.
pvr
Leather Skates
- Jan 22, 2008
- 4,780
- 2,212
Second round ok. Take a project and let him replace an older dman in the future after extended development.
Well if Sam Rinzel is ONLY #16 in the Top 25 under 25 in the Hawks system,then tge 3RD is still UNCERTAIN ...plusxtgecdeptg at RD overall in the pipeline is still THIN ...so IF there is a top RD available Iin the 2025 or 2026 drafts then YES he would have to be considered for a id to earlier target if Hawks geta chance to land that guy.
If Rinzel was rated as a top 5 guy under 25 in tge Hawks system Then no need to draft anotger RD next 2 drafts in round one..but thatcapiarently is not the case given some poill rankibks of the yutes ubderc25 in Hawks pipeline.
YES. HAWJS STILL have a primary system need in a top Big Power Forward winger. IF a Rantanen type was available methinks that would be priority 1 over next 2 drafts..
If Rinzel was rated as a top 5 guy under 25 in tge Hawks system Then no need to draft anotger RD next 2 drafts in round one..but thatcapiarently is not the case given some poill rankibks of the yutes ubderc25 in Hawks pipeline.
YES. HAWJS STILL have a primary system need in a top Big Power Forward winger. IF a Rantanen type was available methinks that would be priority 1 over next 2 drafts..
No Fun Shogun
34-38-61-10-13-15
Hopefully upwards, and not just in the sense that a body that fell from a great height bounces after hitting the ground.
Curious...just read Hawks still empty 12 staff in their Hockey Analytics and Strategy Dept.
A dozen people for that?This even after John Greenberg left !
.It seemscto me 1 to 3 people on Analytics and Strategy woukd be sufficient..3 would seem even a lot tonme..but 12?
Is this not overkilkand redundancy?
Sure..if this depth. Needs onevotcwo interns to do secretarial "work"..ie. make photocopies of reports.. make the coffee and buy tge donuts,or a travel secretary to arrange trios for analytical "live"' viewings (though I cannot see how tgat differs from actual scoutibg) then maybe you could inflate the staffing by upto 3 ...So at most tgere should be no more that 6 tops in such a department.
It is supposed to ve a different department than amateur or pro scoutibg..
Why you need 12 people for "Staategy" is beyond me..As for Analytics.. you can buy data from other sources If Hawks have theirviwn proprietary model,tgen supposedly itbis already built...Andtge model woukd spit out optimal data resukts once you plug in alk the information of pkayer targets..So once tge model is built,why do you need 12 hangers on anymore?
Maybe initially you need lots of heads to construct the noodles,but t once built ,I do not hjink you need 9-12 to run the operation anymore..
Anyway for all that money involved in employing 12 people for this Dept...Hawks had better measure and justify the return on investment for this grandiose Dept.
It would be very interesting to compare Hawks A&S Dept. Size to the resources all otger NHL teans devote to this.
We know Hawks focus on sjatobg first...Bu t if this all results in jaw-drooibg skaters who just cannot finish enough or cannot prevent goals enough,then 1 gjy or 22 guys in the Dept. Will not matter...because the model woukd be flaws from the get-go.
So just curious how big other teams' Analytucs and Strategy Departments are.
I woukd be shocked if they were anywhere near a dozen staffers.
A dozen people for that?This even after John Greenberg left !
.It seemscto me 1 to 3 people on Analytics and Strategy woukd be sufficient..3 would seem even a lot tonme..but 12?
Is this not overkilkand redundancy?
Sure..if this depth. Needs onevotcwo interns to do secretarial "work"..ie. make photocopies of reports.. make the coffee and buy tge donuts,or a travel secretary to arrange trios for analytical "live"' viewings (though I cannot see how tgat differs from actual scoutibg) then maybe you could inflate the staffing by upto 3 ...So at most tgere should be no more that 6 tops in such a department.
It is supposed to ve a different department than amateur or pro scoutibg..
Why you need 12 people for "Staategy" is beyond me..As for Analytics.. you can buy data from other sources If Hawks have theirviwn proprietary model,tgen supposedly itbis already built...Andtge model woukd spit out optimal data resukts once you plug in alk the information of pkayer targets..So once tge model is built,why do you need 12 hangers on anymore?
Maybe initially you need lots of heads to construct the noodles,but t once built ,I do not hjink you need 9-12 to run the operation anymore..
Anyway for all that money involved in employing 12 people for this Dept...Hawks had better measure and justify the return on investment for this grandiose Dept.
It would be very interesting to compare Hawks A&S Dept. Size to the resources all otger NHL teans devote to this.
We know Hawks focus on sjatobg first...Bu t if this all results in jaw-drooibg skaters who just cannot finish enough or cannot prevent goals enough,then 1 gjy or 22 guys in the Dept. Will not matter...because the model woukd be flaws from the get-go.
So just curious how big other teams' Analytucs and Strategy Departments are.
I woukd be shocked if they were anywhere near a dozen staffers.
Ad
Latest posts
-
OT: The Pittsburgher Thread: Sneaking up onto training camp- Latest: NewAgeOutlaw
-
-
