You keep terming Silayev as a shutdown D with little offense. Others who know a lot more than you about him are calling him a unicorn on D who can potentially approach Chara/Hedman levels. That's a cornerstone player in my book and a player you take every single day of the week. I'll take their opinion over yours on this one.
Speculation: With the third pick in the 2024 NHL draft the Anaheim Ducks select...(Draft is June 28th @ 4pm PT. ESPN. ESPN+)
- Thread starter Rasp
- Start date
-
Work is still on-going to rebuild the site styling and features. Please report any issues you may experience so we can look into it. Click Here for Updates
- Status
Key term is potentially. If there were not questions about his game, he'd go first overall. Chara/Hedman level dmen are more valuable than almost all 1C's in the league. Why are you taking offense to him being labeled a shutdown D, when he has yet to statistically show otherwise?
I find him to be a thrilling prospect, but there has to be questions on if he can develop his game to produce offensively in the NHL.
- Sep 29, 2016
- 12,939
- 6,552
Chara may be the best case scenario but not a very likely one. Silayev doesn't have the hands or vision to drive offense the way Hedman does. Not even close. There's zero Hedman in Silayev. Not every big, smooth skating defenseman is gonna turn into Victor Hedman. It takes a bit more than that. Doesn't mean Silayev can't still turn into a top pairing or even franchise defenseman but that shouldn't be the expectation of the team drafting him. Silayev reminds me quite a bit of Andrew Peeke. Very solid 2nd pairing stay at home defenseman with amazing wheels and mobility, solid tools overall but lacking the vision and creativity to drive play or provide consistent offense from the back end. Silayev is still young and has room for improvement but as I said already, at this point Chara isn't more than a rather unlikely best case scenario.
It all depends on what you're looking for I guess. If you're looking for an offensive defenseman, you'll have better options available in the 2024 draft.
Last edited:
I don't take offense to calling him a shutdown D...I've called him that myself. But he's just scratching the surface of his game and shutdown only D's don't get top 2-3 rankings by CSB or McKenzie. There is a TON of potential to his game that scouts are seeing. And no, he isn't as developed as Celebrini which is why he won't go 1OA. But he is in the mix to go anywhere from 2-5 because his potential is sky high. When CSB and McKenzie both have him as a top 2-3 prospect I take notice. I just don't want this label of "shutdown only" to be how he is commonly described unless it is to say that that is his absolute floor.
So you're saying that CSB and McKenzie would be stupid enough to put an Andrew Peeke type player at the top of their rankings? Got it. What does that make literally every other player in this draft except for Celebrini? AHL level players?
- Sep 29, 2016
- 12,939
- 6,552
We'll see where McKenzie is gonna have him listed in a month or so in his final ranking. I don't think Silayev will or should go top5 and therefore, getting an Andrew Peeke type of player would be completely fine. If you exclude top5 picks that's a pretty good outcome. Even top5 picks (eg Juolevi) can easily bust. I don't think Silayev is gonna bust so he's a good pick to make in the 1st round. I just don't think he's top5 material for the reasons I've just explained.
McKenzie's list is a direct representation of his scout survey, not his own thoughts. Unless there is another one I'm missing
That is correct which is why I find his ranking among the most credible (as do many others).
Yes if he is bumped down I will lower my expectations accordingly.
Hockey Duckie
Registered User
I think McKenzie is akin to Pronman, where he gathers info from scouts and then formalizes a ranking based upon his preference. I cited an article where McKenzie stated there is no consensus after #1. If there's no consensus, then it can't be a direct representation at that point. It becomes what McKenzie prefers.
Actually that might not be true. I believe he uses a weighted average approach based upon the scout rankings. He gives how the ten scouts ranked each player and that is computed into a ranked average. The difference between Silayev and Levshunov is very slight but the former got a higher average ranking as follows:
Silayev 2 2nds, 3 3rds, 2 4ths, 0 5ths, 3 "other"
Levshunov 3 2nds, 1 3rd, 1 4th, 3 5ths, 2 "other"
The numerical average for Silayev is slightly better than Levshunov based on weighting the above numbers. It's very close though. Demidov with 5 2nds and 2 3rds was the clear 2nd ranked prospect.
Last edited:
What gives me hope for Silayev is that last year the consensus was that PV would take Fantilli...until he didn't. He felt Carlsson had the higher long term ceiling. This year the consensus is that PV will take Levshunov but we'll see if he goes with the higher ceiling theory again.
If Madden likes Silayev that’s more than enough for me to be onboard. My preference after watching more and more videos is Demidov, Silayev, Dickinson, Levshunov, Lindstrom. I really like Biuim I just don’t see that being the pick so I am refraining from putting too much effort into getting familiar with more of his game.
Ducks DVM
sowcufucakky
Out of curiosity, because I really have no idea, has anyone tracked McKenzie’s lists to see how well the players do in the subsequent decade? I care far less about how close he is to the actual draft order than he (and his scouts) actually do at predicting NHL talent.
Deuce22
Registered User
Basing your opinion during arguments about who Ducks should draft on SOMEONE ELSE'S list puzzles me.
Assuming that the SOMEONE ELSE'S list is put together by scouts who have actually seen these guys play, it makes perfect sense to me. That would be the CSB and McKenzie lists. Relying on a list put together by some teenager on HF is not a good idea though.
Dr Johnny Fever
RIP Grizzly 399
My understanding (based on Bob explaining it once on TSN) is that he has absolutely nothing to do with the rankings he publishes other than to compile them from anonymous NHL scouts (I believe it is 10 or 11) and publish them. However the rankings come out is based on some mathematical formula that does not change nor does he put his finger on the scale in any way (according to him).
That said, scouts are not infallible and IMO having as few as he does hardly constitutes a consensus of NHL scouts. We don't know if the scouts are from bottom feeders or cup contenders. Does anybody really think cup contenders spend as much time as we, the sharks, and the hawks do on all these top 5 to 10 prospects? I don't. What if half those scouts came from the Bruins, Panthers, Rangers, Canucks, Avs, and Stars? How much time do you think they spend agonizing over ranking the 3 Russians that they will not be drafting?
I enjoy reading different scouting reports including Bob's, but without knowing a lot more of the details that he will never make public, I don't consider his report anything special.
That said, scouts are not infallible and IMO having as few as he does hardly constitutes a consensus of NHL scouts. We don't know if the scouts are from bottom feeders or cup contenders. Does anybody really think cup contenders spend as much time as we, the sharks, and the hawks do on all these top 5 to 10 prospects? I don't. What if half those scouts came from the Bruins, Panthers, Rangers, Canucks, Avs, and Stars? How much time do you think they spend agonizing over ranking the 3 Russians that they will not be drafting?
I enjoy reading different scouting reports including Bob's, but without knowing a lot more of the details that he will never make public, I don't consider his report anything special.
MMC
Global Moderator
Dr Johnny Fever
RIP Grizzly 399
Anyone whose last name doesn’t end with a “v”.
For those of you that have suriusxm there is a great segment on hockey prospects. Right now they are doing 10-15 minute segments on each of the top prospects. They talk in good and honest detail about their strengths and weaknesses. Worth listening to if you are a subscriber.
Hockey Duckie
Registered User
welp, if we follow McKenzie...
2023 draft
1. Bedard
2. Fantilli
3. Carlsson
2024 draft
1. Celebrini
2. Demidov
3. Silayev
4. Lev
shouldn't the pattern be that Lev be taken by the Ducks at #3? Or do we pick and finagle a version to where we end up with Silayev?
Does it help that I wanted Carlsson over Fantilli last year, even shared many reasons why that included scouting reports, EP score cards, and my own findings?
Dr Johnny Fever
RIP Grizzly 399
The NHL channel is 91. I got on my laptop and searched for the hockey prospect show. They have some of the recent past player segments available to listen to. I'm still getting the hang of sirius but I was able to get that far. I listened to the Silayev, Dickinson, Parekh, and Levshunov profiles.
Dr Johnny Fever
RIP Grizzly 399
I’ve had it for years in the car but only listened to music. I know there’s an app too and some “shows” can be heard on replay. I’ll have to look into it.
- Sep 29, 2016
- 12,939
- 6,552
Yeah, I think that's important to understand. Lists from independent scouts or scouting services are trying to determine the NHL talent/upside of prospects while McKenzie is a journalist trying to predict the outcome of the NHL draft via polls among NHL scouts.
I can't answer your question but for the reasons stated above McKenzie is definitely more likely to make the same "mistakes" as NHL teams because it's not really his goal to avoid them (like identifying busts or hidden gems). McKenzie had Juolevi at 6 for example and I'm sure there are scouts or scouting services who were way lower on Juolevi.
Last edited:
- Status
Latest posts
-
-
-
Salary Cap: '24-'25 Salary Thread: Crosbicles Volume MMXXV - Poolman and Poolparty?!?- Latest: Big Friggin Dummy
-
-
