2021 NHL Entry Draft

[Alflives]

Just now, Jimmy McGill said:

oh for sure, that would be a fireable offence for me if Jim did that. 

Idea.  RNH as a UFA for our winger with Bo.  Trade 9OA (plus Bone?) for Jones.

Buy-out Jake (and whomever else needed) and don’t resign Edler or Sutter.  Sign Petey and Quinn to short bridges.

 

wonder if this is cap doable?  

[JM_]

1 hour ago, janisahockeynut said:

This is an interesting read on top 10 draft picks being traded since 2005

 

How often are top 10 NHL Draft picks traded in June? - Sportsnet.ca

 

Only twice since 2005 has the a 9th OA pick been traded............

 

1. Schneider  for NJ Devils 2013-9th OA............thank you NJ!

 

2. 2007-9th OA for 2007-13th OA, 2007-44th OA, and 2008-3 rounder

 

Take a read!

thats pretty telling.... some not great decisions there. Bo is at the top of the list (from a good pov)

Edited June 18, 2021 by Jimmy McGill

[JM_]

2 minutes ago, Alflives said:

Idea.  RNH as a UFA for our winger with Bo.  Trade 9OA (plus Bone?) for Jones.

Buy-out Jake (and whomever else needed) and don’t resign Edler or Sutter.  Sign Petey and Quinn to short bridges.

 

wonder if this is cap doable?  

I wonder if thats enough for CBJ.... I'd hate to lose Rathbone but from a hockey pov you do that deal all day assuming there's an extension in place.

 

Don't want Nuge. He's Western Marner. 

[JM_]

@Alflives instead of Nuge, why not make a run at Hyman? I think he'd fit Green's game much better, he's good on either wing and brings some bite. 

[204CanucksFan]

I think the best option is to just stand pat, no trades or buyouts, and sign our key RFA's. Keep our picks and draft heavy on C's and RHD to help us down the road in a few years and see how this group does in a more normal season as opposed to a knee jerk reaction to this very anomalous one we just finished.

 

Then after next season we will have a better idea of where exactly we need the most help and can fill holes via trade or UFA's when we have over $20 million in cap space cleared up by shedding Roussel, Beagle, Eriksson, Virtanen, Holtby and Luongo. Which will be more than enough to resign Boeser as well as the few other lower end RFA's that year like Lockwood, MacEwen and Rathbone and then go after at least one or two big ticket UFA's.

[MeanSeanBean]

2 hours ago, Jimmy McGill said:

I hear you, I didn't want that guy anywhere near this team. Fits Calgary perfectly. 

 

 

I remember back in the day Tkachuk was interviewed about the drafting process. He mentioned that Vancouver never did a in person interview with him. Clearly Benning heard everything he needed from coaches and other people around Tkachuk. That was one of the moments where I really started to stand behind what Benning was doing with the team. I wanted no part in him being a member of our future core.

[Warhippy]

5 hours ago, Eddie said:

Multiple things trouble me about Jones : 

- Cap Hit ( rumours of 9-10M)- we'd end up spending too much on D unless we can move some $$$ out.  

- Another Offence first D. Add that to Hughes, Rathbone, Myers, Schmidt - thats a lot of wanderings from the back end that leads to some of the disasters we saw early season. 

 

The dude is a great player for sure tho. 

 

Sam would be cheaper - he can play center as well giving us some different lineup options and injury backup and he adds a level of smarts and passing that currently only Petey really brings to our top 9.

Jones is going to Colorado.  They have cap space, it's his hometown and Sakic almost drafted him by all accounts.

 

I'd bet on the Avs being the home of Jones 

[DeNiro]

1 minute ago, Warhippy said:

Jones is going to Colorado.  They have cap space, it's his hometown and Sakic almost drafted him by all accounts.

 

I'd bet on the Avs being the home of Jones 

The Avs have cap space?

 

Might wanna check who they have to re-sign.

[Kenny Blankenship]

53 minutes ago, Jimmy McGill said:

@Alflives instead of Nuge, why not make a run at Hyman? I think he'd fit Green's game much better, he's good on either wing and brings some bite. 

Hyman might be a tad pricey for us, as well as Nuge. A name that keeps popping up for me is Armia, and you would think he would come a bit cheaper than those two. Though I think he probably re-signs in Montreal

[Warhippy]

3 minutes ago, DeNiro said:

The Avs have cap space?

 

Might wanna check who they have to re-sign.

I have.  I've also looked at assets they'll retain vs assets they'll either let walk or trade.

 

If Jones wants to go to the Avs they will absolutely be able to find room for him.  It's the following year they'll have the more serious issues.  My opinion only of course

[Kenny Blankenship]

9 minutes ago, Warhippy said:

Jones is going to Colorado.  They have cap space, it's his hometown and Sakic almost drafted him by all accounts.

 

I'd bet on the Avs being the home of Jones 

I think the Avs will probably want to get their guys signed before they start swinging for big name dmen, especially considering how good their back end was this year. 

[Nucker 67]

Don't think VAN is getting Jones. They'll re-sign Hamonic and Edler and hope we forgot they said "we'll be aggressive".  

Edited June 18, 2021 by NUCKER67

[Warhippy]

6 minutes ago, Kenny Blankenship said:

I think the Avs will probably want to get their guys signed before they start swinging for big name dmen, especially considering how good their back end was this year. 

They can dump a fair amount of weight it appears.

 

Shame they had such awful drafting outside of the top 10 or else they'd have had some ugly depth to be playing with

[DeNiro]

11 minutes ago, Warhippy said:

I have.  I've also looked at assets they'll retain vs assets they'll either let walk or trade.

 

If Jones wants to go to the Avs they will absolutely be able to find room for him.  It's the following year they'll have the more serious issues.  My opinion only of course

Doubt they have interest in making their cap situation worse.

 

They’ll have Byram full time next season, they don’t need Jones.

[Kenny Blankenship]

5 minutes ago, Warhippy said:

They can dump a fair amount of weight it appears.

 

Shame they had such awful drafting outside of the top 10 or else they'd have had some ugly depth to be playing with

I just think when you consider what the cost to acquire Jones would be (starting point would be Girard/Byram + ), he just doesn’t move the needle enough imo. For most defenses in the league, absolutely, but Colorado has some studs back there. 

[HighOnHockey]

4 hours ago, Junkyard Dog said:

I already acknowledged a lot of what you said initially. You missed this part of what I said.  
 

Overall it's how you build after you draft these players. Even with these players it still can take a while like in the Blues/Caps/Lightning's case. It's hard to win the cup, we should know that more than most teams given our 3 Finals appearances

 

 

I also pointed out that even with top picks it still is difficult and it still takes time. I pointed at the Blues/Caps/Lightning as examples. Even with two top 3 picks in the Sedona we tried and failed. 
 

I was mainly pointing at the fact of the matter. That these cup winners did have top picks, some of which helped a lot more than others, especially with the Hawks/Pens. It’s a significant part of their success. 
 

Never implied we should purposely suck but the fact of the matter in regards to these cup winners. 
 

You can point at the lot of teams that haven’t had success but I already pointed out that they do help if, key word I said was if, you build around them properly. Not to mentioned the fact that I brought up that even with those top picks it can take many years like in the Caps/Lightning/Blues where it took over 10 years after drafting some of these players and building properly. Also it’s still pretty early for some or those teams you mentioned in comparison to cup winners. Even Kings/Hawks/Penguins/Hawks took time with some of their runs. 
 

Nothing really changes the fact of the matter of what I said. Those teams won with those players. You could argue some helped more than others and that these teams had to build around them which I already acknowledged initially but it doesn’t change the fact of the matter. 

I read everything in your post, but nuance matters dude. You're saying that every team that wins Cups has gone through a rebuild in the past (lets say) decade. I'm saying that every team that is competitive has gone through a rebuild in the past decade. Again, it is precisely the nature and the stated intention of the reverse-standings draft-order system, especially under a cap. Teams are supposed to go through cycles of success and failure.

 

But only so many teams are going to be able to win Cups. Some major luck at the draft helps (winning lottery, and doing so in years with legit superstars at the top), but shrewd drafting is also crucial. You counted Boston among the teams that built from top picks, but they're actually a counter-example. Boston's high picks during their tank period had practically nothing to do with their Cup. I mean, OK, Marchand and Lucic were picked in 2006... in the 2nd and 3rd rounds. St. Louis and L.A. aren't such great examples either. The best examples of what you're pointing at would be Pittsburgh, Tampa and Chicago. Yup, they got incredibly lucky, and were also very well managed.

 

But here is the more subtle point I was trying to make: only a very select few teams are going to win Cups, so if that is your only measure of success, most teams are going to fail. Another measure of success of a franchise and how well it is managed, is how much do they rely on failure and the cyclical nature of the draft for success. To me, GMs who are able to find success with as little resort possible to failure and the luck of the draw, those are some of the most impressive. Doug Wilson, David Poile, Jim Nill, Chuck Fletcher, Kevin Chevaldayoff, Peter Chiarelli, Doug Armstrong.

 

Of course that is nothing against the GMs whose teams did suffer through tough rebuilds and turn lemons into lemonade. Steve Yzerman, Dean Lombardi, Ray Shero, Jim Rutherford, George McPhee, Dale Talon, Stan Bowman deserve all the credit they get. But it's not a binary opposition, Cup = good management, no Cup = poor management.

[HighOnHockey]

2 hours ago, Marv-the-wet-bandit said:

Oh I didn’t think you were off in value at all! They say it costs a 2nd rounder to move up 4 spots in the first round, top 10 the price is probably a tad bit higher then that so a 2nd to move up 3 spots is fair value. I just want to make as many early picks as possible so I would prefer to keep the 2nd and stay at 9. But you were bang on with your value prediction I think. Also my name isn’t Marvin, my username here is a Home Alone reference haha. Generally a 2nd rounder has about a 25% chance of hitting but Benning in particular has fared well in the 2nd, although this could be the year he gets a dud I’m personally willing to take the risk. To each their own though!

I'm sure wherever you got that number from they used more sophisticated modelling than I did, but just because I did the research and have the data available, I like to share it:

 

- picks between 32-41: 26.875%
- picks between 42-51: 25.625%
- picks between 52-62: 19.3181%

 

That's ~15 years of data, where a successful NHL player is defined as 400 NHL games OR 300 games and three full seasons (65 games) for skaters, and 150 NHL games OR 100 NHL games and three full seasons (20 games) for goalies.

Edited June 18, 2021 by HighOnHockey

[Marv-the-wet-bandit]

38 minutes ago, HighOnHockey said:

I'm sure wherever you got that number from they used more sophisticated modelling than I did, but just because I did the research and have the data available, I like to share it:

 

- picks between 32-41: 26.875%
- picks between 42-51: 25.625%
- picks between 52-62: 19.3181%

 

That's ~15 years of data, where a successful NHL player is defined as 400 NHL games OR 300 games and three full seasons (65 games) for skaters, and 150 NHL games OR 100 NHL games and three full seasons (20 games) for goalies.

I wish I remembered where I heard or saw the 25%. I’m sure your data is detailed enough and done over a more recent timeframe so I have no problem conceding the 25% for the round and taking your numbers. Which seem fairly close to 25, just a little shy over the whole round. But regardless I like the picks JB has made in that round, he just hasn’t made enough picks there 

[BarnBurner]

1 hour ago, HighOnHockey said:

I read everything in your post, but nuance matters dude. You're saying that every team that wins Cups has gone through a rebuild in the past (lets say) decade. I'm saying that every team that is competitive has gone through a rebuild in the past decade. Again, it is precisely the nature and the stated intention of the reverse-standings draft-order system, especially under a cap. Teams are supposed to go through cycles of success and failure.

 

But only so many teams are going to be able to win Cups. Some major luck at the draft helps (winning lottery, and doing so in years with legit superstars at the top), but shrewd drafting is also crucial. You counted Boston among the teams that built from top picks, but they're actually a counter-example. Boston's high picks during their tank period had practically nothing to do with their Cup. I mean, OK, Marchand and Lucic were picked in 2006... in the 2nd and 3rd rounds. St. Louis and L.A. aren't such great examples either. The best examples of what you're pointing at would be Pittsburgh, Tampa and Chicago. Yup, they got incredibly lucky, and were also very well managed.

 

But here is the more subtle point I was trying to make: only a very select few teams are going to win Cups, so if that is your only measure of success, most teams are going to fail. Another measure of success of a franchise and how well it is managed, is how much do they rely on failure and the cyclical nature of the draft for success. To me, GMs who are able to find success with as little resort possible to failure and the luck of the draw, those are some of the most impressive. Doug Wilson, David Poile, Jim Nill, Chuck Fletcher, Kevin Chevaldayoff, Peter Chiarelli, Doug Armstrong.

 

Of course that is nothing against the GMs whose teams did suffer through tough rebuilds and turn lemons into lemonade. Steve Yzerman, Dean Lombardi, Ray Shero, Jim Rutherford, George McPhee, Dale Talon, Stan Bowman deserve all the credit they get. But it's not a binary opposition, Cup = good management, no Cup = poor management.

And some have Jeremy Jacobs in their back pocket.

[Junkyard Dog]

1 hour ago, HighOnHockey said:

I read everything in your post, but nuance matters dude. You're saying that every team that wins Cups has gone through a rebuild in the past (lets say) decade. I'm saying that every team that is competitive has gone through a rebuild in the past decade. Again, it is precisely the nature and the stated intention of the reverse-standings draft-order system, especially under a cap. Teams are supposed to go through cycles of success and failure.

 

But only so many teams are going to be able to win Cups. Some major luck at the draft helps (winning lottery, and doing so in years with legit superstars at the top), but shrewd drafting is also crucial. You counted Boston among the teams that built from top picks, but they're actually a counter-example. Boston's high picks during their tank period had practically nothing to do with their Cup. I mean, OK, Marchand and Lucic were picked in 2006... in the 2nd and 3rd rounds. St. Louis and L.A. aren't such great examples either. The best examples of what you're pointing at would be Pittsburgh, Tampa and Chicago. Yup, they got incredibly lucky, and were also very well managed.

 

But here is the more subtle point I was trying to make: only a very select few teams are going to win Cups, so if that is your only measure of success, most teams are going to fail. Another measure of success of a franchise and how well it is managed, is how much do they rely on failure and the cyclical nature of the draft for success. To me, GMs who are able to find success with as little resort possible to failure and the luck of the draw, those are some of the most impressive. Doug Wilson, David Poile, Jim Nill, Chuck Fletcher, Kevin Chevaldayoff, Peter Chiarelli, Doug Armstrong.

 

Of course that is nothing against the GMs whose teams did suffer through tough rebuilds and turn lemons into lemonade. Steve Yzerman, Dean Lombardi, Ray Shero, Jim Rutherford, George McPhee, Dale Talon, Stan Bowman deserve all the credit they get. But it's not a binary opposition, Cup = good management, no Cup = poor management.

If you read everything then why would you make points on things I have already addressed and acknowledged? You don’t see redundancy in that? How do you expect me to respond other than like this? You’re arguing points I already acknowledge and agree with.
 

I also didn’t say that every team that has won cups went through a rebuild the past decade.  

 

You’re making assumptions based off what I was saying. I was pretty vague and careful not to take much of a side. 
 

I think you misinterpreted me being factual. Even the points I made were in out of line  with the facts I even presented. 

I literally meant what I said in face value. Teams that have won cups have had these picks on their roster.  I simply stated a fact. 

 

Hell the fact that I included players that were top 5 picks that some of these cup winners traded for like Kessel, Schenn, Gaborik and didn’t draft should have given you a way better indication that I didn’t solely think drafting top players was the way on top of saying this. 
 

My point is they do help a lot if you can build around them properly.

 

Overall it's how you build after you draft these players. Even with these players it still can take a while like in the Blues/Caps/Lightning's case. It's hard to win the cup, we should know that more than most teams given our 3 Finals appearances. 

In regards to the Bruins I was trying to make the implication that you could argue that they’re the exception when I stated this. 

 

You could argue that Seguin didn't make that much of an impact

 

The person I initially made that post towards stated that 1st overalls in the 2010s haven’t had playoff success which is a fact. I pointed out that the 1st overalls and top 5 picks from the 2000s have won cups in the 2010s.
 

Tried to make the subtle implication that it’s kind of early to tell for some of these teams like the Oilers, Leafs and perhaps Devils which is kind of true consider that these cup winners didn’t win right away after drafting these players, it look a long time for some of them. 
 

I acknowledged the fact that it takes more than just top players and then even then it’s tough to win. 
 

Perhaps I need to be a lot more elaborate instead of being vague and neutral-minded. This isn’t the first time this has happened.