ISS/CS Draft Rankings - 2014 NHL Entry Draft

[stawns]

He was a fluke, even the GM of the Red Wings admitted it himself.

Ken Holland even said that if they knew initially how good he was gonna turn out, they wouldn't have drafted him in the later rounds.

they did know, and they kept quiet about it. It was a bure-esque kind of situation

[Provost]

What is with all of the Pyatt comments?

I think Pyatt is used as an example of a big guy who did not fulfill his potential, considering his size and skill level.

That doesn't really have anything to do with his draft ranking.

There were games when he simply decided to play and showed he "could" be an elite player in the league. He just didn't have the temperment or mindset to do that regularly.

Anyone out of the top 5 who becomes an NHL regular is certainly not a bust. TSN has done a few great statistical analyses showing that 1st round picks are worth a lot less than most people think/

Why not a second line of Higgins / Kesler / Nylander?

Nylander is very near Santorelli's size, a whole lot faster and more skilled... It gives Nylander, a guy with great pucks skills, speed, serious grit and two likely 30 goal scorers off his play making.They could skate circles around some of the "big" California lines instead of trying to match size.

I know some guys want a size advantage, but between Kesler and Nylander, Higgins is nothing to sneeze at, there is that serious speed advantage. And we still have Mathias, Kassian, Horvat, hypothetically Santorelli and Booth, Hansen and BUrrows from which to craft an agitating defensive line with combinations of speed and size to take on big match ups defensively.

It is easy to pick up small, skilled guys in later rounds and on the UFA market. It is very hard to pick up big, skilled guys unless you draft them.

Also, Kesler needs to be moved because his value is at a peak at the moment. He has years left on a reasonable contract and teams still drool over a recent Selke winner.

A year or two from now, he will be worth much less or will walk at the end of his contract for nothing.

A return that we can turn into a top 10 pick; a blue chip prospect; and a serviceable roster player... that helps the organization a lot more than having Kesler does.

[BurgerKing]

I'd like to know more about Jared Mccann, his numbers are average, not great size either, yet ranked pretty high.

[Honky Cat]

I'd like to know more about Jared Mccann, his numbers are average, not great size either, yet ranked pretty high.

He seems to be a good solid pick,ranked around 9-12..

[Canuck Surfer]

I think Pyatt is used as an example of a big guy who did not fulfill his potential, considering his size and skill level.

That doesn't really have anything to do with his draft ranking.

There were games when he simply decided to play and showed he "could" be an elite player in the league. He just didn't have the temperment or mindset to do that regularly.

Anyone out of the top 5 who becomes an NHL regular is certainly not a bust. TSN has done a few great statistical analyses showing that 1st round picks are worth a lot less than most people think/

It is easy to pick up small, skilled guys in later rounds and on the UFA market. It is very hard to pick up big, skilled guys unless you draft them.

Also, Kesler needs to be moved because his value is at a peak at the moment. He has years left on a reasonable contract and teams still drool over a recent Selke winner.

A year or two from now, he will be worth much less or will walk at the end of his contract for nothing.

A return that we can turn into a top 10 pick; a blue chip prospect; and a serviceable roster player... that helps the organization a lot more than having Kesler does.

Geez lots of debates here?

First Nylander is 5'11", not 5'4". Its easy to pick up small skilled players? Cheap also??? 2knd and 3rd liners sure. Ask what it would take to trade for Patrick Kane or Giroux. Nylander is bigger than both. Hey, even Derek Roy, smaller again, has $30 mill in career earnings. Nylander appears to be capable of what Shinkaruk can goal scoring wise, plus has a big enough shot to play point on the PP, is a pivot, shoots right, offers deft play making and extra gears of quickness / speed. This is a very good prospect.

Second Kesler. Look if he wants out fine. But you will set us back years before we recover if not. This is not trading Linden after he lost a step. Kesler still makes the team much better.

[motzaburger]

[youngdad]

Of all the players getting hype around here I would put my absolute highest chance of a complete bust on Nylander.

Euro league that gives him TONS of room on the ice. Looks as soft as a baby's backside.

Plenty of talent, but high risk of folding in the NHL IMO.

A big winger like Ritchie may not have as high of a potential ceiling as a guy like Nylander, but seems to me he is bust proof. At worse he would probably top out as a physical 2nd line 20 goal guy in the NHL who stands up for his teammates.

[Absent Canuck]

Geez lots of debates here?

First Nylander is 5'11", not 5'4". Its easy to pick up small skilled players? Cheap also??? 2knd and 3rd liners sure. Ask what it would take to trade for Patrick Kane or Giroux. Nylander is bigger than both. Hey, even Derek Roy, smaller again, has $30 mill in career earnings. Nylander appears to be capable of what Shinkaruk can goal scoring wise, plus has a big enough shot to play point on the PP, is a pivot, shoots right, offers deft play making and extra gears of quickness / speed. This is a very good prospect.

Second Kesler. Look if he wants out fine. But you will set us back years before we recover if not. This is not trading Linden after he lost a step. Kesler still makes the team much better.

I keep trying to tell you guys that all they are doing is spinning the negative, downplaying their ability to invalidate the prospect and even outright make crap up .

I have no idea why. Its like they think the Canucks are reading these posts and will influence their decision on who they will draft. This is my only guess as to why they would do it.

Elite level speed and skill is far better than good skill , speed and size. What they do is simply downplay the 6ft guys skill to be equal to the 6ft 2 guys skill and ergo they have an advantage with the size.

And its true. However, when talking about Nylander or Ehlers , both are 6ft tall and barely 18. They will fill out and gain 20 pounds . These guys have abnormal skill , and there is no way you just pass that up unless the big guy you are talking about has the same skill.

Any and all players can be had as UFAs. Not just second or third round drafted under achieving small guys. You can find superstars in the later rounds, but they come in all shape and sizes.

Bottom line.

Size is an advantage. However, if its not matched with the same skill as the smaller players, its doesnt matter.

[Fred65]

Everyone seems to keep referring to Bob Mckenzie’s and Craig Button’s draft rankings, but why? They are two people who definitely have not been around and have not watched all these players. Everyone is just jumping to conclusions using these rankings from two people who speculate from behind a desk all day.

Why most follow McKenzie is his ratings are actually based on polls he does with a large number of NHL scouts. He's had the inside track with these guys for a long time. I'm not sure if he has them on a retainor or they just do it as a favour but by the time hae's sifted through the conclusions he comes up with a list....History tells us he never far off and frequently spot on

[motzaburger]

I keep trying to tell you guys that all they are doing is spinning the negative, downplaying their ability to invalidate the prospect and even outright make crap up .

I have no idea why. Its like they think the Canucks are reading these posts and will influence their decision on who they will draft. This is my only guess as to why they would do it.

Elite level speed and skill is far better than good skill , speed and size. What they do is simply downplay the 6ft guys skill to be equal to the 6ft 2 guys skill and ergo they have an advantage with the size.

And its true. However, when talking about Nylander or Ehlers , both are 6ft tall and barely 18. They will fill out and gain 20 pounds . These guys have abnormal skill , and there is no way you just pass that up unless the big guy you are talking about has the same skill.

Any and all players can be had as UFAs. Not just second or third round drafted under achieving small guys. You can find superstars in the later rounds, but they come in all shape and sizes.

Bottom line.

Size is an advantage. However, if its not matched with the same skill as the smaller players, its doesnt matter.

Well said. We need more thinkers like you around here.

[motzaburger]

Why most follow McKenzie is his ratings are actually based on polls he does with a large number of NHL scouts. He's had the inside track with these guys for a long time. I'm not sure if he has them on a retainor or they just do it as a favour but by the time hae's sifted through the conclusions he comes up with a list....History tells us he never far off and frequently spot on

He had a poll from 12 scouts. We don't know who these scouts are or where they have been watching. Wouldn’t surprise me if the scouts are only OHL games. The bottom line is the CS and ISS rankings are a lot more than just 12 un-named scouts they are the scouts. From everywhere. Rankings will change even more from April to May and May to June. They ISS rankings are far more accurate over the years than Bob’s ever will be and they show clear cut drops and climbs that are even more spot on..

[DrChill]

He had a poll from 12 scouts. We don't know who these scouts are or where they have been watching. Wouldn’t surprise me if the scouts are only OHL games. The bottom line is the CS and ISS rankings are a lot more than just 12 un-named scouts they are the scouts. From everywhere. Rankings will change even more from April to May and May to June. They ISS rankings are far more accurate over the years than Bob’s ever will be and they show clear cut drops and climbs that are even more spot on..

Who is more accurate on actual draft order? In past years

[Fred65]

Who is more accurate on actual draft order? In past years

McKenzie has been remarkably accurate over the years, evey now and then a team goes off the board which then throws other picks out of order. But on the whole he's pretty reliable year after year.

As to the scouts .... during the period of a season it is my understanding that scouts are shuffled by their teams simply to see if their reports coincide with the scouts in a particular area. ie the Ontario scout will come out west and do the Dub & the WHL scout witl do a spell in the "Q" it averages out the peaks and valleys that would result if a scout for instance really takes a shine to one player....just as an example. So scouts although positioned in say the OHL always know and judge/report on players in other areas. It's essential all scouting lists are cross referenced. I believe this holds true for local scouts and EU scouts too. After that I'm sure the GM takes a look at thier own top 30 players and also travels to EU to look at those youngsters too

[Honky Cat]

Of all the players getting hype around here I would put my absolute highest chance of a complete bust on Nylander.

Euro league that gives him TONS of room on the ice. Looks as soft as a baby's backside.

Plenty of talent, but high risk of folding in the NHL IMO.

A big winger like Ritchie may not have as high of a potential ceiling as a guy like Nylander, but seems to me he is bust proof. At worse he would probably top out as a physical 2nd line 20 goal guy in the NHL who stands up for his teammates.

That's the catch..high risk/high reward..I bet Nylander will be gone no later than 8th...There's plenty of low risk/low reward players ,even into the second round....Personally,I would take the high risk with the #6...

[youngdad]

That's the catch..high risk/high reward..I bet Nylander will be gone no later than 8th...There's plenty of low risk/low reward players ,even into the second round....Personally,I would take the high risk with the #6...

If we go that route please please please go Ehlers before Nylander. I can't even look at Nylander with a straight face. He looks like a tender lass.

[DeNiro]

If we go that route please please please go Ehlers before Nylander. I can't even look at Nylander with a straight face. He looks like a tender lass.

So did Backstrom when he was younger.

I doubt anyone on here would pass on him with a 6th overall pick though.

Not saying I want him, but looks should not be a factor for drafting a player.

[Provost]

Geez lots of debates here?

First Nylander is 5'11", not 5'4". Its easy to pick up small skilled players? Cheap also??? 2knd and 3rd liners sure. Ask what it would take to trade for Patrick Kane or Giroux. Nylander is bigger than both. Hey, even Derek Roy, smaller again, has $30 mill in career earnings. Nylander appears to be capable of what Shinkaruk can goal scoring wise, plus has a big enough shot to play point on the PP, is a pivot, shoots right, offers deft play making and extra gears of quickness / speed. This is a very good prospect.

Second Kesler. Look if he wants out fine. But you will set us back years before we recover if not. This is not trading Linden after he lost a step. Kesler still makes the team much better.

Maybe 5'11" in skates,

Regardless, pointing out the relatively few exceptions for smaller player being successful... you completely ignore the fact that Europe and the AHL is filled with small, skilled guys who ended up just not good enough to be top producers in the NHL.

If they can't produce points, they can't contribute. They are high risk picks, and you are better off grabbing guys way later with that skillset and hoping they develop.

You talk like Nylander is a "can't miss" prospect... that is just not true, there is a reason people aren't picking him as the odds on favorite to go as the top pick in the draft. He "could" be a great player... but he could be Thomas Hickey

[Rush17]

Maybe 5'11" in skates,

Regardless, pointing out the relatively few exceptions for smaller player being successful... you completely ignore the fact that Europe and the AHL is filled with small, skilled guys who ended up just not good enough to be top producers in the NHL.

If they can't produce points, they can't contribute. They are high risk picks, and you are better off grabbing guys way later with that skillset and hoping they develop.

You talk like Nylander is a "can't miss" prospect... that is just not true, there is a reason people aren't picking him as the odds on favorite to go as the top pick in the draft. He "could" be a great player... but he could be Thomas Hickey[/quote

Who is Thomas Hickey? Lol

[motzaburger]

Ill post this link here too but this is a good interview with the head scout. Some good points made about Nylander, Ritchie, Kapanen, and a few others.

http://www.isshockey.com/tsn-radio-toronto-1050-interview-ross-maclean-iss-hockey-head-western-scout/

[Honky Cat]

Maybe 5'11" in skates,

Regardless, pointing out the relatively few exceptions for smaller player being successful... you completely ignore the fact that Europe and the AHL is filled with small, skilled guys who ended up just not good enough to be top producers in the NHL.

If they can't produce points, they can't contribute. They are high risk picks, and you are better off grabbing guys way later with that skillset and hoping they develop.

You talk like Nylander is a "can't miss" prospect... that is just not true, there is a reason people aren't picking him as the odds on favorite to go as the top pick in the draft. He "could" be a great player... but he could be Thomas Hickey

Nobody is saying picking Nylander is without risk..but he is in the top 10 for a reason..If he was 6'2 he would most likely be in the top 3.

Europe and the AHl are also filled with large physical players lacking in skill..