W Ilya Protas - Windsor Spitfires, OHL (2024, 75th, WSH)

Neither did Michael Misa and he’s leading the league in scoring. Didn’t get invited either.

Greentrees stock absolutely has gone way up. He was a projected top 15-17 on some lists I believe and fell to LA at 26. He’s still not a complete player and will be back in the OHL next year- needs to work on skating and defence in particular but he’s absolutely a steal

Some guys that went ahead of him and have either had injuries or off years are:

Lindstrom, Iginla, Levshunov, Luchanko, Parascak, Connelly, Solberg, Letourneau

Not that he would be higher than Lindstrom, Levshunov or Iginla in a re draft after this year but for starters you’d have to think he’s higher than the other 5 and it’s just 1 year- with Greentrees skating and defence still to have been worked on, Greentree when it’s all said and done could be a top 10 player from this strong draft class and LA got him at 26. To me that’s a steal.
I really don’t think teams are changing their idea of their pick in 7 months, unless the change of a player is seismic after those 7 months. If we’re being serious, Greentree would go no higher. Probably not much lower (unless there’s someone who has dismantled their draft position, can’t think of too many, maybe Cole Hutson?), but I don’t see how scoring a lot of junior points is going to move the needle at this point. Doesn’t mean he’s not playing well either.
 
I had a feeling that you would comment on that. You had the same anwser the last time I post this.

Don't you think it kind of ironic that you compare Protas to Greentree, both in the top 3 leading scorer in the NHL ?

Like @Frolov 6'3 said, a 6"5 body, with hand, vision and this kind of production is a clear first rounder.

So, you would have taken guys like :

- letourneau
- Beaudoin
- Vanacker
- Gridin
- Hemming
- emery
- Danford
- O'reilly

All them before Protas in a redraft ?

Hutson and Prostas is two completly different players. Back in 2019, would you take A.Protas or S.Poulin in a redraft. More the time past, player lose or gain value. In this case, I have a hard time telling me I.Protas would have fall in the second round.

You have the right of your opinion, I just don't agree.
Because nothing has changed.

You went to pat yourself on the back that a terrible skater who has always put up junior points is putting up more junior points.

Serious question, has his scoring changed since your last post?

I don’t get the victory lap, which is why I responded here. I don’t think NHL teams have changed their mind after 7 months. They already liked his scoring. They didn’t like his skating.

Is it true that likely a few teams would want a do-over of the 74 picked ahead of him? Potentially, but I don’t think NHL teams look at it the way you are doing so. They don’t change their mind so quickly on who is the right pick based purely on comparing PPG of players playing in different leagues at different positions with different skillsets.
 
Because nothing has changed.

You went to pat yourself on the back that a terrible skater who has always put up junior points is putting up more junior points.

Serious question, has his scoring changed since your last post?

I don’t get the victory lap, which is why I responded here. I don’t think NHL teams have changed their mind after 7 months. They already liked his scoring. They didn’t like his skating.

Is it true that likely a few teams would want a do-over of the 74 picked ahead of him? Potentially, but I don’t think NHL teams look at it the way you are doing so. They don’t change their mind so quickly on who is the right pick based purely on comparing PPG of players playing in different leagues at different positions with different skillsets.
Quite a lot has changed! He has not always put up junior points. He put up a respectable but not amazing 51 points in 61 USHL games last year. 74 in 41 in the tougher OHL is a completely different stratosphere of scoring.

He's gone from a toolsy but project big guy with maybe some underrated playmaking skills (like his brother) to one of the more dynamic offensive players in all of worldwide junior hockey. Yes, the big flaw that is his skating remains the same, but the ceiling has been significantly raised in these seven months. That absolutely would make NHL teams reconsider where they took him.

Comparing the PPG of players in different leagues in different positions with different skillsets has been proven time and again to be a much better way of evaluating drafted players than you would think!
 
Because nothing has changed.

Serious question, has his scoring changed since your last post?

I don’t get the victory lap, which is why I responded here. I don’t think NHL teams have changed their mind after 7 months. They already liked his scoring. They didn’t like his skating.
They liked his scoring ? His USHL stats were far from “eye catching”.

How is it not a big improvement to go from 14 goals to 40-50 goals within a few months. Quite much has changed…which doesnt mean its a certainty he will ever hit NHL surface.

Saying its just junior hockey, which is basically right, is a given. Well than we can better delete this section here too.

I agree that it is nonsense to compare his stats with undrafted prospects.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Topcheese31
Quite a lot has changed! He has not always put up junior points. He put up a respectable but not amazing 51 points in 61 USHL games last year. 74 in 41 in the tougher OHL is a completely different stratosphere of scoring.
I'm talking about what has changed since the last time this poster made this point.

Comparing the PPG of players in different leagues in different positions with different skillsets has been proven time and again to be a much better way of evaluating drafted players than you would think!
So you think NHL teams are just going to read off the spreadsheet and decide a re-draft by who has the highest PPG? How do you even account for players who are playing in significantly better or worse leagues than others? How do you account for a defenseman? Or a goaltender?

They liked his scoring ? His USHL stats were far from “eye catching”.
They actually did like his scoring. If he was just a big guy who is a project due to being big and didn't produce, he wouldn't have been drafted, especially with his skating. He's not as big as his brother, for instance.

His USHL stats weren't eye catching (he was getting outscored by Ben Kevan a draft behind if I'm remembering correctly), but they were pretty good, all things considered.
 
He won’t need to be a good skater, this is the type of player that is the exception.
Sure maybe but I wonder if part of this line of thinking is because of his brother?


His Vision, shooting and anticipation are clearly enough to make up for his lack of pace, Mark Stone/Ja Rob is who he really reminds me of.
Once again these 2 guys are somewhat exceptions and lots of guys can do this without great skating while having a physical advantage and other extremely good skills in junior, I just wonder how he translates to the NHL.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Pavel Buchnevich
I know you’re patting yourself on the back for this, but I don’t think it’s true, when you said it or now.

He has essentially the same stats on the same team as the dude who went 26OA, who actually has a lot of general similarities to him. And I’d argue Greentree’s stock has went down, if anything, not up.

NHL teams are often unwilling to relent on their positions of their precious first round choices.
isn’t the premise of a redraft that those original choices go out the window and players are chosen with their full body of work in mind?

What’s the point of a “redraft” at all if you’re going to lend weight to the inertia of teams’ original selections?
 
Pavel said Protas the younger was not worth a draft pick, and when he makes an evaluation on a player, he is very stubborn to come off it.

Here is how I felt about him almost a year ago

For what it's worth, Protas the elder wasn't listed on the McKenzie Mid-Season Top 80 list and didn't receive an HM. Not sure where 6'5 at the Draft for Protas the elder came from as I don't see his height/weight listed at the NHL combine for that year. 2019 NHL Draft Combine Heights and Weights

Not sure what Protas the younger would measure in at or how much a couple inches will matter (or if his brother being a pretty solid NHL Player will matter at all to begin with, but NHL teams can be weird about that sometimes) as both are big guys that did or will fill out nicely. I've seen Protas the younger play once in person. The size and passing ability is definitely an intriguing combination. No doubt the skating needs to improve, which was similar for Protas the elder. I'm not enough of an expert to know how projectable the skating is for improvements between now and five years from now to know if, with the other stuff, there's some good bottom six projectable traits there.

The size and production warrants a late round pick, imo. One of the youngest players in the draft class and wouldn’t be surprised if he’s raw compared to North American players considering he developed in Belarus until this year. Kind of player if he went undrafted and comes back next year with better skating would go way higher as a second go around and based on that could be worth a speculative grab.

This is where conversation on him starts in that thread:


Obviously he ended up going quite a bit higher than thought at that time, and would go undoubtedly higher if players were drafted this year as a big guy with the 4th best goal per game and 3rd best point per game in the OHL. He's only 3 months older than Porter Martone.
 
So you think NHL teams are just going to read off the spreadsheet and decide a re-draft by who has the highest PPG? How do you even account for players who are playing in significantly better or worse leagues than others? How do you account for a defenseman? Or a goaltender?
They're not just going to read off a spreadsheet but yes, lots of NHL teams do (and should!) heavily weight actual scoring production when they evaluate prospects at lower levels. If you are not scoring against much weaker competition, it is unlikely that you have the puck skills/hockey IQ/physical traits to be even a bottom of the lineup player in the NHL.

As for accounting for better/worse leagues, NHLe is a widely accepted method/statistic for trying to estimate these differences (a great article explaining what it is and how it's calculated here NHL Equivalency and Prospect Projection Models: Building the NHL Equivalency Model (Part 2)). It has also been repeatedly found that scoring rates are very important for defenseman as well.
 
I always flip-flop with prospects like this. Skating is the most important skill in a prospect imo, but at the same time I also feel it's the most teachable/coachable.

I'd love to take the gamble, personally.
 
isn’t the premise of a redraft that those original choices go out the window and players are chosen with their full body of work in mind?

What’s the point of a “redraft” at all if you’re going to lend weight to the inertia of teams’ original selections?
You can’t forget at least two years of evidence for maybe seven months of evidence. The goal isn’t to find the best player of the 2024-25 season, it’s to find the best eventual NHL player.

The idea of a re-draft seven months after the draft is stupid, as I said. It’s not a real concept. Nobody with any real conviction changes their mind on the whole pool of available draft talent based on seven months, unless something seismic happens in those 7 months, and for the overwhelming majority it won’t.
 
You know who else’s skating sucked? Aliaksei Protas, who has only scored on about 100 breakaways so far this year
This is such dangerous logic. That’s how Alex Nylander was picked way higher than he should’ve and amounted to one of the biggest busts of the 2016 draft.

You need to evaluate players on their own merits. They are different people. You can’t transplant an outcome. For all we know, Aliaksei doesn’t succeed with Ilya’s circumstances.
 
I don't think Ilya is a clear 1st rounder, but his stock has definitely been bumped up, probably closer to the 35-50 range.

I agree with the sentiment that 7 months doesn't change that many teams opinions unless the player they picked is not progressing the way they expected.
 
The idea of a re-draft seven months after the draft is stupid, as I said. It’s not a real concept. Nobody with any real conviction changes their mind on the whole pool of available draft talent based on seven months, unless something seismic happens in those 7 months, and for the overwhelming majority it won’t.
A redraft is just a thought exercise that sets out to quantify how prospects have performed x-amount of months/years after the draft, and speculate how that additional data would affect their value.

If you’re going to assign weight to teams’ original choices then that really defeats the whole purpose of a redraft.

And yes, you’re right that a “redraft” is not an actual thing that happens. Do you object to “mock drafts” being done early too? All a redraft or a mock draft is, is a way of ranking players according to their speculated value to NHL teams
 
This is such dangerous logic. That’s how Alex Nylander was picked way higher than he should’ve and amounted to one of the biggest busts of the 2016 draft.

You need to evaluate players on their own merits. They are different people. You can’t transplant an outcome. For all we know, Aliaksei doesn’t succeed with Ilya’s circumstances.

Being largely facetious there. Point remains though that the Caps have had success with his brother who had largely the same profile. Not a huge stretch to think they stand a good chance of doing the same with Ilya.

Alex Nylander’s issues (effort/motor, IQ) seem much more difficult to address. Also, we’re talking about a guy who was drafted in the 3rd and should now maybe be considered a top 35-40ish player. Not the same as rolling the dice on an 8OA
 
A redraft is just a thought exercise that sets out to quantify how prospects have performed x-amount of months/years after the draft, and speculate how that additional data would affect their value.

If you’re going to assign weight to teams’ original choices then that really defeats the whole purpose of a redraft.

And yes, you’re right that a “redraft” is not an actual thing that happens. Do you object to “mock drafts” being done early too? All a redraft or a mock draft is, is a way of ranking players according to their speculated value to NHL teams
I don't see what the big hang up here is then. Of course there's value to what you're seeing for the 7 months of a season. In a way, you can say a re-draft is a power rankings of who is in what form, but of course it's only one small piece of the puzzle. There are many considerations at play.
Being largely facetious there. Point remains though that the Caps have had success with his brother who had largely the same profile. Not a huge stretch to think they stand a good chance of doing the same with Ilya.

Alex Nylander’s issues (effort/motor, IQ) seem much more difficult to address. Also, we’re talking about a guy who was drafted in the 3rd and should now maybe be considered a top 35-40ish player. Not the same as rolling the dice on an 8OA
Okay sure, but I have seen this said enough that not everyone is just kidding. Plenty actually believe in this argument.

I think there's merit to the idea that brothers who are related and play the game the same way might be under/overrated for the same reasons, and can get to a similar outcome for similar reasons. At the same time, I think it's at best the "in hindsight, we could've seen this pattern" as opposed to using it as an actual reason for or against a different human being with a different set of circumstances.
 
So you think NHL teams are just going to read off the spreadsheet and decide a re-draft by who has the highest PPG? How do you even account for players who are playing in significantly better or worse leagues than others? How do you account for a defenseman? Or a goaltender?
Is this serious or am I missing some humor? If serious this is different levels of extreme bad faith interpretation and putting words in someone else's mouth.

He sad PPG has proven to be a pretty good measurement. Here already it's implied of course how age, role and league is a factor. Him omitting such blatantly obvious factors doesn't mean he is not aware of them or did not consider them implied. Then to even mention goaltenders. I mean what? The discussion level when you want to point out goalies can't be measured by using PPG, as if someone has claimed that...
 
  • Like
Reactions: qc14
Is this serious or am I missing some humor? If serious this is different levels of extreme bad faith interpretation and putting words in someone else's mouth.
Of course it's serious. You are the one that didn't even make enough of an effort to read what the discussion was about when you are missing paragraphs that state exactly what you claim was never said.
He sad PPG has proven to be a pretty good measurement. Here already it's implied of course how age, role and league is a factor.
Ah yes, "implied." The magic word where you can read into posts whatever you want them to mean as opposed to what they plainly say.

Maybe I gave you too much credit saying you didn't make an effort to read what the discussion was about.

You might instead be making intentionally bad faith arguments that you accuse others of making.

Him omitting such blatantly obvious factors doesn't mean he is not aware of them or did not consider them implied. Then to even mention goaltenders. I mean what? The discussion level when you want to point out goalies can't be measured by using PPG, as if someone has claimed that...
Except this is what I was responding to.

Comparing the PPG of players in different leagues in different positions with different skillsets has been proven time and again to be a much better way of evaluating drafted players than you would think!
This is asserting that PPG is the go to measurement. Of course, there's no easy way to compare the PPG of players in different leagues who play different positions with different skillsets.

Please, I don't need your lesson about what is and isn't implied. If one wanted to make the argument that it's part of the equation, they wouldn't in good faith argue that Protas is a first rounder in a re-draft.

The way to make him a first rounder in a re-draft is to not include it into the equation and just read from the top off the spreadsheet on who is scoring at what rate, regardless of position or league. That's basically the only way he measures up as a first round caliber player at this point.
 
This is asserting that PPG is the go to measurement. Of course, there's no easy way to compare the PPG of players in different leagues who play different positions with different skillsets.

Please, I don't need your lesson about what is and isn't implied. If one wanted to make the argument that it's part of the equation, they wouldn't in good faith argue that Protas is a first rounder in a re-draft.

The way to make him a first rounder in a re-draft is to not include it into the equation and just read from the top off the spreadsheet on who is scoring at what rate, regardless of position or league. That's basically the only way he measures up as a first round caliber player at this point.
Or actually watch the games. He have played excellent and other 1st round picks are struggling. Its added data some players have had worse development and not improved their weaknesses others have made bigger jumps in their development. Its a reason why mock drafts 1 year before the draft look different than mock drafts 1 week before the draft which at the top is starting to look quite similar as the eventual draft ends up. As some players have developed more during the year than others. The same happens after the draft that if teams had the data and seen what players was 7 months after the draft they would have picked diffrently than what they did on draft day.

That doesnt mean Protas would have been a 1st rounder if the draft happened today, but based on his production he would have been picked higher as production in juniors is in general a good indicator that there is a chance for NHL success. Of course you have examples of players with high production failing and players with low production succeeding, but in general very few who cant produce at the junior level are able to do so with the pros.
 
  • Like
Reactions: qc14
Of course it's serious. You are the one that didn't even make enough of an effort to read what the discussion was about when you are missing paragraphs that state exactly what you claim was never said.

Ah yes, "implied." The magic word where you can read into posts whatever you want them to mean as opposed to what they plainly say.

Maybe I gave you too much credit saying you didn't make an effort to read what the discussion was about.

You might instead be making intentionally bad faith arguments that you accuse others of making.


Except this is what I was responding to.


This is asserting that PPG is the go to measurement. Of course, there's no easy way to compare the PPG of players in different leagues who play different positions with different skillsets.

Please, I don't need your lesson about what is and isn't implied. If one wanted to make the argument that it's part of the equation, they wouldn't in good faith argue that Protas is a first rounder in a re-draft.

The way to make him a first rounder in a re-draft is to not include it into the equation and just read from the top off the spreadsheet on who is scoring at what rate, regardless of position or league. That's basically the only way he measures up as a first round caliber player at this point.
I'll step out of this as quickly as I poked my head into it. I wish you a good day :)
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad