6th Pick: 2014 NHL Entry Draft

[TOMapleLaughs]

Does anybody else think Sonny Milano is equal to Ehlers i do and no i dont want him at 6 but he is very talented and NA ta boot.

Milano is a skilled winger with good hands who likes to carry the puck and have it on his stick. He has a quick first step as well as good straight line speed and able to use his edges well to elude and evade. He uses finesse puck skills and change of direction to beat defenders. (August 2013)

Tuch is a lot closer to 6th than Milano, mainly because of his monster frame. He's above Ritchie in rankings lately. Milano is below Ehlers, so pretty far away from 6th. But he will be a good player. The Americans being largely overlooked here is interesting, considering we've had eight in our lineup this season and several more in our prospect pool.

[Hedman]

you just proved my point. What round were those guys drafted in?

How the fuck does that prove your point? That's irrelevant.

[Ossi Vaananen]

Why are Nylander and Ehlers even in this conversation still? Nylander isn't even the top Euro on McKenzie, Button, or the CSS list. Ehlers isn't even ranked in the top 10 on either of the CSS or ISS lists. Yet someone CDC gets a boner for a guy who plays with Drouin and weighs all of 165 lbs.

Kapanen is ranked higher across the board than Nylander and by most scouting services Ehlers too.

Ritchie and Virtanen however, are consensus top 10 picks (on ISS, CSS, Button,and McKenzie's list). So many of you make the argument that taking Nylander or Ehlers is taking the better player, but clearly they are not the best pick available, and don't even have the size to compensate.

The only way to truly determine a consensus pick at 6 is to assign values to each ranking. As such, from 6-10 will be assigned points from 5 points for 6th to 1 point for 10th. I am of course ignoring the consensus top 5, believing that whoever drops will be taken at 6th. The list with numerical values is as follows:

From left to right (ISS, McKenzie, Button, CSS)

Nylander – 5 0 0 0 = 5 points
Ehlers - 0 4 1 0 = 5 points
Ritchie – 2 5 3 4 = 14 points
Kapanen – 0 2 4 2 = 8 points
Virtanen – 1 3 5 5 = 14 points
Tuch – 3 0 0 0 = 3 points
Perlini – 2 0 2 3 = 7 points
Fleury - 0 1 0 2 = 3 points

By ranking BPA:

Virtanen - 14 points (6th overall twice)

Ritchie - 14 points (6th overall once)

Kapanen - 8 points *

Perlini - 7 points

Nylander - 5 Points (5th overall in ISS)

Ehlers - 5 points

Fleury - 3 points

* Kapanen was given 2 points for the 1st ranking in CSS Euro. regardless of the value assigned to this ranking the gap between 2nd and 3rd is too great to make a difference.

So, as a consensus from the scouting services and TSN analysts, Virtanen and Ritchie are the best picks available.

[Goal:thecup]

Bang on Ossi, as usual. +1

[Hedman]

Why are Nylander and Ehlers even in this conversation still? Nylander isn't even the top Euro on McKenzie, Button, or the CSS list. Ehlers isn't even ranked in the top 10 on either of the CSS or ISS lists. Yet someone CDC gets a boner for a guy who plays with Drouin and weighs all of 165 lbs.

Kapanen is ranked higher across the board than Nylander and by most scouting services Ehlers too.

Ritchie and Virtanen however, are consensus top 10 picks (on ISS, CSS, Button,and McKenzie's list). So many of you make the argument that taking Nylander or Ehlers is taking the better player, but clearly they are not the best pick available, and don't even have the size to compensate.

The only way to truly determine a consensus pick at 6 is to assign values to each ranking. As such, from 6-10 will be assigned points from 5 points for 6th to 1 point for 10th. I am of course ignoring the consensus top 5, believing that whoever drops will be taken at 6th. The list with numerical values is as follows:

From left to right (ISS, McKenzie, Button, CSS)

Nylander – 5 0 0 0 = 5 points

Ehlers - 0 4 1 0 = 5 points

Ritchie – 2 5 3 4 = 14 points

Kapanen – 0 2 4 2 = 8 points

Virtanen – 1 3 5 5 = 14 points

Tuch – 3 0 0 0 = 3 points

Perlini – 2 0 2 3 = 7 points

Fleury - 0 1 0 2 = 3 points

By ranking BPA:

Virtanen - 14 points (6th overall twice)

Ritchie - 14 points (6th overall once)

Kapanen - 8 points *

Perlini - 7 points

Nylander - 5 Points (5th overall in ISS)

Ehlers - 5 points

Fleury - 3 points

* Kapanen was given 2 points for the 1st ranking in CSS Euro. regardless of the value assigned to this ranking the gap between 2nd and 3rd is too great to make a difference.

So, as a consensus from the scouting services and TSN analysts, Virtanen and Ritchie are the best picks available.

ISS had Horvat at 10th. Bob had Horvat at 13th. Bonehead Button (not even credible) had Horvat at 19th. CSS had Horvat at 15th for NA skaters. Don't look into rankings too much, especially not non credible ones.

[73 Percent]

ISS had Horvat at 10th. Bob had Horvat at 13th. Bonehead Button (not even credible) had Horvat at 19th. CSS had Horvat at 15th for NA skaters. Don't look into rankings too much, especially not non credible ones.

button had virtanen in the second round like a month ago. what a nob.

[Hedman]

button had virtanen in the second round like a month ago. what a nob.

lol yeah it's ridiculous

[aGENT]

button had virtanen in the second round like a month ago. what a nob.

*knob

[TGokou]

Although I really like Ehlers as a pick, I am starting to see the wisdom in drafting Ritchie and he is probably ahead in my own rankings now. I've come to realize that almost all the teams that have won the stanley cup post lockout have not done so because they had 90+ point players on their team. In fact if you look at the top scorers for each team I believe only Selanne and Patrick Kane were 80+ players in the last four years. In fact, Boston only had 2 60 point players when they won the cup that year. Most teams now have 5-6 60-80 point players and can succeed. Based on this fact, I've come to realize that we do not need an elite skill level player to succeed.

This now brings me to my main point about why we should take a chance on Ritchie. He will likely never reach 70+ points but I can realistically see him in the 20-30 goal range throughout his career with about 30-35 assists. However, besides his point production he can also create space for his teammates such as Shinkaruk who is on the lighter side. When it comes to forward lines I truly believe the best combo is a power forward/playmaker(big is a plus)/speedy sniper. With Kassian developing the way he is I believe he is ready to hit the 40-50 point mark next year and with Ritchie in development we could potentially have 2 power forwards with one on each of the top 2 lines.

A few additional points to add his value:

1.) Since he already has a brother that will likely play in the NHL I believe that they will push each other to succeed especially since they play the same role. Yes, players should be motivated to play in the NHL but this will further Ritchie's motivation to beat his brother

2.) Hodgson was developing quite nicely when he was traded for Kassian who had proven nothing. This just goes to show you how deeply the GMs value their power forwards. If Ritchie for whatever reason was not working out for the Canucks, they could always trade him for a proven goalscorer down the road with potential. Nobody could've anticipated Hodgson to suck so badly after being traded to Buffalo and most expected him to hit 60-70 points consistently. My point is he has a high intrinsic value for trading should the need arise.

3.) At his current weight of 230 he would most likely need to shed a few lbs to be effective in the NHL. In addition he is currently 6'3'' and will likely be at least 6'4'' when he's done growing. What this means is his speed will improve and his conditioning will get better allowing him to play without taking shifts off. One misconception I've heard is that he is fast. That isn't true when we're talking straight line speed but he has good acceleration with a long reach and that will allow him to win 10-15 ft puck battles. Scouts say he already has a quick release and an NHL ready shot so that is one thing he won't have to work on.

4.) This is a plus or negative depending on how you look at it but people are mostly afraid of his injury problems. Yes this is a risk but I'm sure scouts have factored in his injury risk when they made their final lists. If he truly is ranked 6th than I believe he would be ranked 4th or 5th if not for his injury problems in the past. Lastly he's had a full season with no injuries and that is a huge plus. With proper conditioning I am confident he can put his past behind him.

After all is said and done, I really believe Ritchie may not even be available because either Edmonton/Calgary/NYI could go off the board and draft Ritchie. Obviously if this is the case than one of the top five will drop to us but if not, Ritchie definitely makes an intriguing case. He is not a sexy pick but I don't believe the Canucks necessarily need it.

[aGENT]

Personally I'd go any of Perlini, Tuch or Virtanen before Ritchie but I'm still holding out hope for Draisaitl.

[JE14]

Why are Nylander and Ehlers even in this conversation still? Nylander isn't even the top Euro on McKenzie, Button, or the CSS list. Ehlers isn't even ranked in the top 10 on either of the CSS or ISS lists. Yet someone CDC gets a boner for a guy who plays with Drouin and weighs all of 165 lbs.

Kapanen is ranked higher across the board than Nylander and by most scouting services Ehlers too.

Ritchie and Virtanen however, are consensus top 10 picks (on ISS, CSS, Button,and McKenzie's list). So many of you make the argument that taking Nylander or Ehlers is taking the better player, but clearly they are not the best pick available, and don't even have the size to compensate.

The only way to truly determine a consensus pick at 6 is to assign values to each ranking. As such, from 6-10 will be assigned points from 5 points for 6th to 1 point for 10th. I am of course ignoring the consensus top 5, believing that whoever drops will be taken at 6th. The list with numerical values is as follows:

From left to right (ISS, McKenzie, Button, CSS)

Nylander – 5 0 0 0 = 5 points

Ehlers - 0 4 1 0 = 5 points

Ritchie – 2 5 3 4 = 14 points

Kapanen – 0 2 4 2 = 8 points

Virtanen – 1 3 5 5 = 14 points

Tuch – 3 0 0 0 = 3 points

Perlini – 2 0 2 3 = 7 points

Fleury - 0 1 0 2 = 3 points

By ranking BPA:

Virtanen - 14 points (6th overall twice)

Ritchie - 14 points (6th overall once)

Kapanen - 8 points *

Perlini - 7 points

Nylander - 5 Points (5th overall in ISS)

Ehlers - 5 points

Fleury - 3 points

* Kapanen was given 2 points for the 1st ranking in CSS Euro. regardless of the value assigned to this ranking the gap between 2nd and 3rd is too great to make a difference.

So, as a consensus from the scouting services and TSN analysts, Virtanen and Ritchie are the best picks available.

The same scouting services who had Jensen, Gaunce and Shinkaruk in the top 15 while Horvat didn't even make the top 10. How often are scouting services actually correct? They provide a rough estimate but are usually a bit off (because GMs pick players they feel will help the team). Everyone here is allowed to have their own opinion as long as they can reasonably back up their opinion (IE no saying let's pick Goldobin 6th overall because he is Russian).

[Smashian Kassian]

Why are Nylander and Ehlers even in this conversation still? Nylander isn't even the top Euro on McKenzie, Button, or the CSS list. Ehlers isn't even ranked in the top 10 on either of the CSS or ISS lists. Yet someone CDC gets a boner for a guy who plays with Drouin and weighs all of 165 lbs.

Kapanen is ranked higher across the board than Nylander and by most scouting services Ehlers too.

Ritchie and Virtanen however, are consensus top 10 picks (on ISS, CSS, Button,and McKenzie's list). So many of you make the argument that taking Nylander or Ehlers is taking the better player, but clearly they are not the best pick available, and don't even have the size to compensate.

The only way to truly determine a consensus pick at 6 is to assign values to each ranking. As such, from 6-10 will be assigned points from 5 points for 6th to 1 point for 10th. I am of course ignoring the consensus top 5, believing that whoever drops will be taken at 6th. The list with numerical values is as follows:

From left to right (ISS, McKenzie, Button, CSS)

Nylander – 5 0 0 0 = 5 points
Ehlers - 0 4 1 0 = 5 points
Ritchie – 2 5 3 4 = 14 points
Kapanen – 0 2 4 2 = 8 points
Virtanen – 1 3 5 5 = 14 points
Tuch – 3 0 0 0 = 3 points
Perlini – 2 0 2 3 = 7 points
Fleury - 0 1 0 2 = 3 points

By ranking BPA:

Virtanen - 14 points (6th overall twice)

Ritchie - 14 points (6th overall once)

Kapanen - 8 points *

Perlini - 7 points

Nylander - 5 Points (5th overall in ISS)

Ehlers - 5 points

Fleury - 3 points

* Kapanen was given 2 points for the 1st ranking in CSS Euro. regardless of the value assigned to this ranking the gap between 2nd and 3rd is too great to make a difference.

So, as a consensus from the scouting services and TSN analysts, Virtanen and Ritchie are the best picks available.

Why does this even matter? You cherry pick some meh sources to prove a point that really means nothing? Pre-draft rankings mean nothing.

None of those sources had Mark Schiefele in the top 10 in 2011. Bob Mackenzie (the best source you brought up) was the only one who had him his top 15. And CSS didn't even have him in there top 15 NA skaters.

Bob McKenzie's most recent rankings (best source as I said) had Ehlers at #7 ahead of all of those guys besides Ritchie. And here your expert list has him as 2nd to last. I'll take Bob's list.

There are plenty of other examples of the rankings being horrible. And I also don't understand how you can use CSS as a source, they seperate Euro/NA.

Everyone has an opinion, but there is no consensus at this point in time, 10 years from now we may have a concenus on who the 6th best player in this draft is, but who knows right now.

[Hedman]

Why does this even matter? You cherry pick some meh sources to prove a point that really means nothing? Pre-draft rankings mean nothing.

None of those sources had Mark Schiefele in the top 10 in 2011. Bob Mackenzie (the best source you brought up) was the only one who had him his top 15. And CSS didn't even have him in there top 15 NA skaters.

And there are plenty of other examples of the rankings being horrible.

I also don't understand how you can use CSS as a source, they seperate Euro/NA.

Everyone has an opinion, but there is no concenus at this point in time, 10 years from now we may have a concenus on who the 6th best player in this draft is, but who knows right now.

That's because he would love to "prove" to everyone that Virtanen is the best guy available, since they had him at 6th overall

[Connauton]

Nylander's tournament ended today with a loss to the Americans. He led the tournament in scoring, but the majority of the points came in meaningless fashion while his team trounced some weaker competition.

He won't be in the top-5 in this draft based on what we've seen. I don't think he'll even be in the top-10.

The kid looks like the Swedish Coho to me.

Here's what i mean:

Player in question: Coho - Nylander

Right-Shooting Winger/Center: Check - Check

Offensively Skilled: Check - Check

Good shot: Check - Check

Speed looks good at junior level: Check - Check

Skating still not elite: Check - Check

Top point-scoring threat in U18 tournament: Check - Check

Not big: Check - Check

Not physical: Check - Check

Not a defensive factor: Check - Check

Reported to not have attitude issues: Check - Check

Still has had team/attitude-related issues: Check - Check

Rich kid: Check - Check

Father directly involved in career: Check - Check

Looks like a girl: Not really - Check

I don't think the Canucks want or need another Cody Hodgson, let lone a frail Swedish Cody Hodgson who looks like a girl.

Pass please.

Woah, since when are we drafting based on looks? People these days... makes me wonder why I keep coming back to this thread lol.

[Ossi Vaananen]

Wow, how is such a basic point lost on you mooks. I did the closest the to a qualitative answer, providing 4 sources of scouting services and analysis that far outweigh your personal preference. Instead of approaching the argument rationally, I'm faced with being called a cherry picker, even though my sources are actual source and not some ramblings that begin with "I think".

If you guys have different sources of rankings, be it HF or MyNHLMockDraft, then supplement them and we'll add this to the average. If this proves difficult, as the math being as basic as it is is sometimes lost on 12 y/os then I suggest you rethink your approach.

In the meantime, I'll save my responses for someone deserving of them.

[Smashian Kassian]

That's because he would love to "prove" to everyone that Virtanen is the best guy available, since they had him at 6th overall

6th in NA.

Jeez I'm just looking at that list & its horrible. Ehlers at 14? Yikes.

Well again, they didn't even have Schiefele in there top 15 NA skaters in 2011 (final rankings).

Last year they had Zykov (7th) & Gauthier (8th) ahead of Mantha (10th), Horvat (15th), Zadorov (22nd), Morrisey (27th). Aswell as guys like Nastasiuk (13th), Lodge (21st) in there ahead of some of the prominent guys listed above.

no reason to over analyze some of these lists and use them as absolutes.

[JohnLocke]

Why are Nylander and Ehlers even in this conversation still? Nylander isn't even the top Euro on McKenzie, Button, or the CSS list. Ehlers isn't even ranked in the top 10 on either of the CSS or ISS lists. Yet someone CDC gets a boner for a guy who plays with Drouin and weighs all of 165 lbs.

Kapanen is ranked higher across the board than Nylander and by most scouting services Ehlers too.

Ritchie and Virtanen however, are consensus top 10 picks (on ISS, CSS, Button,and McKenzie's list). So many of you make the argument that taking Nylander or Ehlers is taking the better player, but clearly they are not the best pick available, and don't even have the size to compensate.

The only way to truly determine a consensus pick at 6 is to assign values to each ranking. As such, from 6-10 will be assigned points from 5 points for 6th to 1 point for 10th. I am of course ignoring the consensus top 5, believing that whoever drops will be taken at 6th. The list with numerical values is as follows:

From left to right (ISS, McKenzie, Button, CSS)

Nylander 5 0 0 0 = 5 points

Ehlers - 0 4 1 0 = 5 points

Ritchie 2 5 3 4 = 14 points

Kapanen 0 2 4 2 = 8 points

Virtanen 1 3 5 5 = 14 points

Tuch 3 0 0 0 = 3 points

Perlini 2 0 2 3 = 7 points

Fleury - 0 1 0 2 = 3 points

By ranking BPA:

Virtanen - 14 points (6th overall twice)

Ritchie - 14 points (6th overall once)

Kapanen - 8 points *

Perlini - 7 points

Nylander - 5 Points (5th overall in ISS)

Ehlers - 5 points

Fleury - 3 points

* Kapanen was given 2 points for the 1st ranking in CSS Euro. regardless of the value assigned to this ranking the gap between 2nd and 3rd is too great to make a difference.

So, as a consensus from the scouting services and TSN analysts, Virtanen and Ritchie are the best picks available.

Actually this is the consensus ranking.

http://www.mynhldraft.com/2014-nhl-draft-prospect-consensus-rankings/

[JE14]

Wow, how is such a basic point lost on you mooks. I did the closest the to a qualitative answer, providing 4 sources of scouting services and analysis that far outweigh your personal preference. Instead of approaching the argument rationally, I'm faced with being called a cherry picker, even though my sources are actual source and not some ramblings that begin with "I think".

If you guys have different sources of rankings, be it HF or MyNHLMockDraft, then supplement them and we'll add this to the average. If this proves difficult, as the math being as basic as it is is sometimes lost on 12 y/os then I suggest you rethink your approach.

In the meantime, I'll save my responses for someone deserving of them.

mynhldraft has the following:

5. Draisaitl

6. Perlini

7. Ehlers

8. Nylander

9. Ritchie

10. Fleury

11. McCann

12. Kapanen

13. Virtanen

[Hedman]

6th in NA.

Jeez I'm just looking at that list & its horrible. Ehlers at 14? Yikes.

Well again, they didn't even have Schiefele in there top 15 NA skaters in 2011 (final rankings).

Last year they had Zykov (7th) & Gauthier (8th) ahead of Mantha (10th), Horvat (15th), Zadorov (22nd), Morrisey (27th). Aswell as guys like Nastasiuk (13th), Lodge (21st) in there ahead of some of the prominent guys listed above.

no reason to over analyze some of these lists and use them as absolutes.

I know. But some people think that the European rankings doesn't even matter, NA players are "far more superior", small players or not. Therefore, Virtanen is the obvious 6th overall choice.

I'm also laughing at BanTSN for making the Hodgson comparison... omg does that look narrow-minded or what..

[Tom Sestito]

I wouldn't take perlini in the first or second round.