2021 NHL Entry Draft

[Isam]

5 minutes ago, Warhippy said:

I mean in general.

 

If I recall those leagues have played far deeper and longer a sample size this year than the north american ones.  wouldn't this lead to much greater focus/scrutiny towards those players than our leagues?

 

Kinda feeling that there's going to be some serious missed opportunities for a lot of teams past the 1st round

Good point man

[Isam]

Lucius is growing on me. He needs a world class gym though, which he will get at the university of minnesota, but you cant deny the kid has talent

[Isam]

Elite athlete for sure but has some flaws that can be corrected.

[hammertime]

12 hours ago, HighOnHockey said:

 

Well, I'm glad I could be the common enemy you two could rally around. But I just completely disagree. I love a good compromise on many things, but not this. Gimme that hard line BPA. Draft the best players, have the most valuable assets, and you can can build your team the right way through trade and free agency. Again, look at St. Louis adding O'Reilly and Schenn through trade late in their rebuild. Tampa adding "the missing piece" Patrick Maroon, reminiscent of Detroit adding Shanahan after being a dominant regular season team for years and choking in playoffs - what Dubas hopes Nick Foligno will be for the Leafs. Pittsburgh needed wingers to play with Crosby and Malkin, and for years I was like you guys, waiting for them to draft their future star winger - at one point I thought Beau Bennett would be that guy. Ultimately, they traded for Chris Kunitz, who would be Crosby's winger for the first Cup, and later for Phil Kessel for the next two Cups.

Enemy? Rallying?

 

Kind of a weird narcissistic comment bud. Just because I don't agree 100% with you on everything doesn't mean I don't respect your opinion. It's not like I got it out for ya just because I give a slight up tick to guys who play a role we NEED that traditionally you have to over pay for. Look at Sieder he was ranked mid 20s Det reached deep for the guy they needed they did their homework and got their man. FWD I bet half the league would pay 1st OA for Sieder right now. 

 

I have Mctavish ahead of Johnson seems like alot of scouts agree with me now where 2 weeks ago they didn't. whos right? When? All I know is we need a guy like Mctavish where a guy like Johnson would be pretty neat he scores goals does fancy stuff great player but I put him in the nice to have column and Mctavish in the need column.

Edited May 28, 2021 by hammertime

[J.I.A.H.N]

4 hours ago, HighOnHockey said:

Hmmmm. OK. There is something to what you're saying. But it gets tricky to differentiate here, because we'd have to get into pretty subtle distinctions and potential is a goddamn difficult enough concept to get your head around to begin with. What was potential after the fact? What is actuality before it comes to fruition?

 

I mean, yes. Huberdeau, Zibanejad, Dougie Hamilton, Couturier. Who goes first overall in a re-draft of 2011? When talking about it in the past, we can have a discussion about who is the BPA, and that discussion will be complicated enough, even with analytics to aid us. But to try to have that same discussion before the fact, appealing to potential, without detailed analytics available, the difficulties are multiplied exponentially.

 

I understand and appreciate the point you are making, but I absolutely refuse to concede, due to essentially the point I made to Sp3nny. It is difficult enough to pick the BPA when you're just trying to pick the BPA. If you start taking team need into account, forget about it.

 

Different GMs and scouts will put different weight into different skills, yes, absolutely. But first of all, I think we need to clarify a confusion that a lot of folks (not you) suffer from. When talking about BPA, we obviously don't mean according to some consensus or God knows what some of these people are thinking. You and your franchise need to pick who you think is the BPA. So, sure, it is subjective in a sense. But it also very much isn't  - as we've established, even in retrospect it isn't always clear, but it very often is. There are better and worse players, and there are better and worse prospects, and there are better and worse evaluations of those prospects.

 

And there are so many layers to it: it can also be subjective in that teams may make picks based on how they want to model their teams, but then that model is going to bump up against an objective reality: where is the game at a given time? Teams that had big defensemen and elite goalies were more successful in the dead puck era, from 2005 to 2010 there was a bit of an opening up where skill and speed were more valuable. Then came the corsi era where big teams like L.A. and Boston were successful by controlling zone possession largely with their size. But in more recent years teams are learning to adapt speed and skill to the corsi era, controlling possession more by passing it around and playing keepaway than grinding out in the corners. The next evolution seems to me a push back towards open ice back-and-forth hockey, where defensemen with elite skating agility and evasiveness are going to be disproportionately valuable due to their ability to make breakout plays out of nothing and disrupt zone possession. So I believe defensemen like Hughes, Heiskanen, Makar, Byram, Drysdale, to some extent Brandt Clarke, and soon Seamus Casey are becoming increasingly valuable. Again, I bring all this up just in regards to your point about different teams putting weight into different talents, and to point out that even though there is a subjective element to that, there is also an objective reality that has to be grappled with, and if a team invests all their eggs in building  a big, strong team, and then suddenly there are new developments in skills, rules, coaching strategies, and the game goes in a different direction, that team can get left in the dust.

 

Lots of things to consider when drafting. Team needs just can't be one of them.

First of all....and I say this in the form of friendship...............but man, I am glad I am not in your head! LOL.......I would get ran over!

 

So, to clarify........you are insane! LOL

 

No seriously, well put, and I agree some what...............but lets just take it to an extreme for a second........

 

So to clarify, if your evaluation was out of a 1000 , and you had 2 players ranked at 800 forward, 799 forward and 798 defenseman out of 1000, you take the 799 forward even though you need a Dman? IMO, team needs at that point means alot, and should be considered.

 

If the Dman was next up and ranked 500 out of a thousand, then no, you take one of the forwards

 

IMO, players are in tiers, and not really in numbers, so if a tier has 4 players, then any of those players could be considered equal.

 

I will even go as far as saying, the ranking system is flawed, and not exact, so if you find those 4 players mostly equal, then you absolutely go for your Dman

 

Take a look at either Pettersson's or Hughes's draft years, pre draft....there were tiers, and even then, they were not right................so, yes, I do agree with you in a general way, in that rankings will allow for groupings, but they are only a guide line...and almost always right when looking at tiers, but not actually their pre-draft rankings...........

 

As Hammer originally said, and as I took it to mean, rankings are general, and not exact, and should be used in general, but other factors are involved, including if they are Russian..................IU applaud Benning for taking Podkolzin, when an estimated 6 other GM's passed on him.....good on him!

 

But that just shows how screwed up it really is! Every scout will say they got their guy, but secretly all would have taken him if he was not Russian, despite position........

 

Lots and lots of factors! Team need being one of many!

Edited May 28, 2021 by janisahockeynut

[hammertime]

NHL central scoutings list is pretty exciting.  Beniers ripe for our picking sure dont mind if it do. Clarke too. Please may I have a crumb of Mctavish

Edited May 28, 2021 by hammertime

[TGokou]

Since everyone here is chiming in BPA and what that means I have a feeling to most teams BPA means the player with the most 'trade value' assuming he reaches their expected potential. There is a reason why teams typically draft centers and defensemen first. They also generally tend to gravitate towards 'safer' choices. By that I mean they will generally take the player that has shown more in their draft year (but are also a early Oct-Jan) birthday vs a young (May-August) birthday who has shown a little less but still just as highly skilled.  This trend is starting to shift however with more teams entering the analytics fold. Overall, this tends to leave more 'skilled' real BPA wingers fighting for the 5-10 spot. 

[HighOnHockey]

2 hours ago, Sp3nny said:

To start off, love you too buddy! Lol. Maybe I wasn't clear in making my point, as I wasn't necessarily debating BPA, and in fact I am in agreement with it. However, my point was almost rhetorical in nature. If we all have a BPA, then when we come on here and say "take the BPA!" does that imply Benning's BPA, your BPA, my BPA, Mackenzie's list etc? Hell, even TSN has a "best available" live on the screen while drafting! Of course there is an actual BPA, but my issue is with how easily we say it, but how broad of a statement it actually is.

 

For instance, you have Sillinger 6th, which I can certainly appreciate. It was your comments about him that made me watch tape on him to gather a better assessment  and I liked what I saw! So when you say "take BPA", you yourself would select Sillinger anywhere after 6th. If Benning's list has Sillinger at 15th, then he basically won't even consider him as he will have a almost assuredly have a higher BPA available. This is what I was trying to say.

 

I wholeheartedly agree with how picking for need even further muddies the water, but for certain teams, the BPA is a positional need. For instance, let's say Benning jumps on the Alf train and takes Morrow at 9th. Would we say he selected BPA? Cause to him, he did! But I guarantee 75% of us (minus Alf lol) would come on here and gripe about a wasted pick or at minimum, not getting proper value for the pick. This is where my point of "value is king" came from. If he truly is the BPA to Benning, would it not make the most sense from a value standpoint to trade back a bit, add an asset, and still get the BPA? Your point of nobody knows anyone else's list is of course true, so I can also understand the viewpoint of "shoot your shot" at your pick, but you don't necessarily get the most value by doing this.

 

An example that comes to mind for me. Bruins in 2015 had 13, 14, 15. A lot of people mock their picks, as they were all kind of reaches in a way, especially Senyshyn. I remember some people having him in the 1st round, but he was normally ranked in the 2nd. Boston took their own BPA here. Was that wrong? Should they not have traded back a couple spots if possible to maximize value?

 

It's a tough call to make, and it's truly fascinating how certain high ranked players fall off a cliff, and players on nobodies radar in the 5th turn into stars. It's what I love about watching prospects, identifying the small/overlooked things that can make a player great, that you can't see in highlights.

Oh ok,. Yeah I see your point now. I took you to be saying "nobody can agree on BPA, so there's no such thing as BPA." My issue is just that I've come across a good number of people on hockey forums who basically disregard all assessment of prospects, and claim picks that should be made based on positional need or size or grit or some other factor. And it basically just negates any discussion about prospect evaluations. But yeah, we know that NHL teams will pick BPA close to 100% of the time, at least in the first round. Goalies seem to be the most prominent exception. So I guess if I really think about my motives, I just want to promote the the primary focus of discussion on the prospects and evaluations. Of course I understand that fans of a team are going to want to try to figure out who their team might pick, but they ought to understand that the criteria they are using for their predictions is irrelevant.

 

The best predictor of teams' drafting is past draft history. Every year, after my final ranking I do a mock draft based on meticulous research of each team's hockey opps people who will be involved in making draft picks (director of amateur scouting, director of European scouting, GM or AGM or DPP if they have background in amateur scouting) and their draft records with current and previous teams. I refer to my own list, but primarily go off Bob McKenzie's and other trusted sources. And I make predictions based on what leagues and regions teams are most likely to draft out of, based on their history.

 

This is fairly accurate, because we know GMs aren't going out doing much scouting for themselves, and even the DAS can't see everyone themselves, rather they have a mix of seasoned veteran scouts who they know and trust, as well as an extended group who are less experienced or less familiar, and the most trusted scouts tend to get the most say in the first round. For example, the Ottawa Senators are the team I know the best (Canucks are my scond favorite team), and their most trusted veteran scouts are Don Boyd (London-based), Greg Janecyk (Northeastern USA), Mikkp Ruutu (Finland) and DAS Trent Mann (Maritimes), so in the first couple round they're most likely to pick from the OHL, USNTDP, Finland or QMJHL, particularly the maritimes. With most teams I'm only familiar with the head guys; for the Sens I know their scouting staff inside and out. Planning to better acquaint myself with Canucks staff leading up to the draft this year.

[HighOnHockey]

29 minutes ago, hammertime said:

Enemy? Rallying?

 

Kind of a weird narcissistic comment bud. Just because I don't agree 100% with you on everything doesn't mean I don't respect your opinion. It's not like I got it out for ya just because I give a slight up tick to guys who play a role we NEED that traditionally you have to over pay for. Look at Sieder he was ranked mid 20s Det reached deep for the guy they needed they did their homework and got their man. FWD I bet half the league would pay 1st OA for Sieder right now. 

 

I have Mctavish ahead of Johnson seems like alot of scouts agree with me now where 2 weeks ago they didn't. whos right? When? All I know is we need a guy like Mctavish where a guy like Johnson would be pretty neat he scores goals does fancy stuff great player but I put him in the nice to have column and Mctavish in the need column.

Well... I'm nothing if not narcissistic. I also try to make jokes sometimes, for levity's sake. They don't always come across properly in a digital context.

[Junkyard Dog]

2 minutes ago, HighOnHockey said:

Well... I'm nothing if not narcissistic. I also try to make jokes sometimes, for levity's sake. They don't always come across properly in a digital context.

Conversations online are the worst form of communication and the easiest form of communication for misinterpretation. Especially with jokes and debates/arguments. 

[hammertime]

19 minutes ago, HighOnHockey said:

Well... I'm nothing if not narcissistic. I also try to make jokes sometimes, for levity's sake. They don't always come across properly in a digital context.

Sure fair enough just seemed like a weird comment. If we aren't 100% in agreement with you somehow we are against you? Couldn't be further from the truth. I appreciate your input but I also have my own opinions. 

[Sean Monahan]

33 minutes ago, HighOnHockey said:

Well... I'm nothing if not narcissistic. I also try to make jokes sometimes, for levity's sake. They don't always come across properly in a digital context.

 

11 minutes ago, hammertime said:

Sure fair enough just seemed like a weird comment. If we aren't 100% in agreement with you somehow we are against you? Couldn't be further from the truth. I appreciate your input but I also have my own opinions. 

I think we can all agree that we hope we’re only right about the guy we draft and the rest bust, because screw the rest of the league. 

[Isam]

33 minutes ago, HighOnHockey said:

Oh ok,. Yeah I see your point now. I took you to be saying "nobody can agree on BPA, so there's no such thing as BPA." My issue is just that I've come across a good number of people on hockey forums who basically disregard all assessment of prospects, and claim picks that should be made based on positional need or size or grit or some other factor. And it basically just negates any discussion about prospect evaluations. But yeah, we know that NHL teams will pick BPA close to 100% of the time, at least in the first round. Goalies seem to be the most prominent exception. So I guess if I really think about my motives, I just want to promote the the primary focus of discussion on the prospects and evaluations. Of course I understand that fans of a team are going to want to try to figure out who their team might pick, but they ought to understand that the criteria they are using for their predictions is irrelevant.

 

The best predictor of teams' drafting is past draft history. Every year, after my final ranking I do a mock draft based on meticulous research of each team's hockey opps people who will be involved in making draft picks (director of amateur scouting, director of European scouting, GM or AGM or DPP if they have background in amateur scouting) and their draft records with current and previous teams. I refer to my own list, but primarily go off Bob McKenzie's and other trusted sources. And I make predictions based on what leagues and regions teams are most likely to draft out of, based on their history.

 

This is fairly accurate, because we know GMs aren't going out doing much scouting for themselves, and even the DAS can't see everyone themselves, rather they have a mix of seasoned veteran scouts who they know and trust, as well as an extended group who are less experienced or less familiar, and the most trusted scouts tend to get the most say in the first round. For example, the Ottawa Senators are the team I know the best (Canucks are my scond favorite team), and their most trusted veteran scouts are Don Boyd (London-based), Greg Janecyk (Northeastern USA), Mikkp Ruutu (Finland) and DAS Trent Mann (Maritimes), so in the first couple round they're most likely to pick from the OHL, USNTDP, Finland or QMJHL, particularly the maritimes. With most teams I'm only familiar with the head guys; for the Sens I know their scouting staff inside and out. Planning to better acquaint myself with Canucks staff leading up to the draft this year.

$&!#, i must be one those who disregard all assesment of prospects lol.  But good post

[Isam]

Oh well, decent discussion, even if we arent discussing guys like barr or stillman.

[Guest]

Well I've been avoiding this BPA talk like the plague but ... 

 

Who's the BPA between guys like Pavel Bure and Joe Niewendyk?  On one hand you have a much more talented player for a very short and inconsistent time, on the other hand you have excellence over 20 seasons and 3 Stanley Cups?  

 

Do you value a center or d-man more then a winger?  B in BPA stands for best, and how does position increase or decrease the value in that comparison?  

 

Goalies take forever to develop and having to project that many years into the future puts A LOT of extra variables in the BPA discussion.  You have to take into account the probabilities of a player panning out.  D-Men take the second longest, while forwards are quicker to make the jump.  

 

 

So I really think that all things being equal, the actual BPA will usually be a winger as other teams draft for needs and end up skewing the results.  That's why after having seen some prospects in the top 10-15 (not all), I am hoping that Dylan Guenther falls to us at #9 as I think he's definitely in the top 5 of the players available when not considering position.  

[Nave]

The Central Scouting lists have me giddy. If other scouts agree--and this is a sort of consensus--Clarke or Beniers might be ripe for the picking at our pick. 

If we draft first or second overall, however, I think we should take William Eklund. Would be hard to pass on Power though.

[YearoftheNuck]

Beautiful goal by Beniers at the world hockey championships today. 
 

https://www.iihf.com/en/events/2021/wm/gamecenter/video/24373/30-usa-vs-lat

Edited May 28, 2021 by YearoftheNuck

[Bertuzzipunch]

32 minutes ago, YearoftheNuck said:

Beautiful goal by Beniers at the world hockey championships today. 
 

https://www.iihf.com/en/events/2021/wm/gamecenter/video/24373/30-usa-vs-lat

Wow boyle still plays who knew lol

[stanleysteamersmyl]

A lot of you like this Clark guy.  Do you think the other fans of the teams above us like him too?  The other teams rates him in the top 5?

I don't think he will fall down to the 9-11 spot.  

[HighOnHockey]

Every year there are certain prospects that are good indicators of who is really paying attention. Jake Sanderson would be the prime example from last year. Anyone who was watching closely, or who had their ear to the ground, knew that Sanderson was a top ten (or close) prospect by fairly early in the season. But by around February, there was still a lot of rankings had him in the 20s.

 

This year Fyodor Svechkov is the best example of this: it is understandable that most people have been sleeping on him - he turned pro at 17 and whereas many centers start their pro careers on the wing, Svechkov was thrown to the wolves and relied on to be a 200 foot center. U18s will have opened people's eyes.

 

Mason McTavish is another one. I have to admit, I got it wrong when I saw him at U17s, and didn't really get to see him play all year until U18s. So I was late to the race on this one.

 

The other one is Cole Sillinger. Again, very good reasons for people to sleep on him: played in USHL instead of WHL, played for the second worst team in the league, and then he didn't get to play in U18s. He was already 13th on Bob's last list, so not too much more room to move up, but I just don't see him talked about much on here, and I suspect many here will be surprised how early he goes.

Edited May 28, 2021 by HighOnHockey