2015 NHL Entry Draft

[CarltonTheBear]

Schenn was hardly the quality of prospect that Marner/Strome/Hanifin are now.

I remember some publication called Schenn the best defensive defenceman prospect in 20 years, or something like that. He was being compared to Scott Stevens and Adam Foote.

 

[herman]

Schenn was hardly the quality of prospect that Marner/Strome/Hanifin are now.

I remember some publication called Schenn the best defensive defenceman prospect in 20 years, or something like that. He was being compared to Scott Stevens and Adam Foote.

It's a pity the game was already changing away from stay-at-home defensemen and our management team at the time was stuck in that previous era of thinking.

 

[Frank E]

Leaving aside how incredibly unrealistic it is to expect a team to be able to have 3 #1 centers, what team out there has actually been successful doing what you suggest? Having a player good enough to be a #1 center on their 3rd line?

My argument is about drafting high-ceiling talent being an important factor whether or not you're Chicago or Toronto in 2015.  If we're using the Pittsburgh example, the team needs a 2008 Jordan Staal in their lineup...there, not that impossible.

There's a lot of room between an elite 1st line player and Mike Santorelli. Again, guys like Saad and Toffoli and Kreider and those are guys who you can get picking where Philly will have those picks.

I'm not referring to Philly.  I'm arguing that teams should be looking to draft in the top 10-15 (high-ceiling) whenever possible, and good teams and bad teams should value that almost equally.

After that, I'd say that it gets grayer...I can see teams trading later 1st round picks for multiple seconds, or whatever.  I maintain that that high-ceiling talent is just too important for longer term competitiveness.

Neither of those are depth guys.

What's that got to do with the price of eggs?  They're high-ceiling talent on cheaper deals that were drafted high while the team had "elite talent" established on the roster.

You should really tell Anaheim how useless guys picked at #19 and #28 like Getzlaf and Perry are.

Oh good, this argument.

You should really have said Zetterberg and Datsyuk to bring this point home.

 

[Chev-boyar-sky]

We're talking about moving into the top 5 here, so I think it's not that crazy of a return but maybe I'm wrong.

When the Leafs moved from 7 into the top 5 to take Schenn it cost them a second and a third. Here, to move down one more spot it's a first and a second. In a draft, mind you, where it seems like people are pretty high on its overall quality.

Schenn was hardly the quality of prospect that Marner/Strome/Hanifin are now.

I think that's an almost entirely after the fact interpretation of things. There was very much a consensus top 5 in that draft class and people on this board were very excited when Schenn was chosen.

I don't think that's an uncommon thing. Most draft have a consensus top 3-5. Whether teams follow them is another story.

Put Schenn (the prospect) in this draft class and he's lucky to crack the top 10 IMO.

 

[Chev-boyar-sky]

Schenn was hardly the quality of prospect that Marner/Strome/Hanifin are now.

I remember some publication called Schenn the best defensive defenceman prospect in 20 years, or something like that. He was being compared to Scott Stevens and Adam Foote.

"Some publication". Ok then. He went 5th so I guess the teams that took Doughty, Bogosian and Pietrangelo thought otherwise. Turns out they were right.

 

[Frank E]

Schenn was hardly the quality of prospect that Marner/Strome/Hanifin are now.

I remember some publication called Schenn the best defensive defenceman prospect in 20 years, or something like that. He was being compared to Scott Stevens and Adam Foote.

"Some publication". Ok then. He went 5th so I guess the teams that took Doughty, Bogosian and Pietrangelo thought otherwise. Turns out they were right.

Not to speak for C, but I think he's referring to "defensive prospect" in the strict terms of his defense what touted as being dominating...not his offense.  That's why the comparisons to Foote and Stevens were made.

That's why the guys you mentioned were picked higher, or likely were picked higher.

 

[CarltonTheBear]

"Some publication". Ok then. He went 5th so I guess the teams that took Doughty, Bogosian and Pietrangelo thought otherwise. Turns out they were right.

The publication was McKeen's, does that add some legitimacy? Bobby Orr called him the next Larry Robinson. Trash today's Luke Schenn all you want, but he was very highly thought of as a prospect. The 3 defencemen that went ahead of him all did so because they had more well-rounded games. And 2 of them ended up being franchise defencemen so the 2008 draft had a pretty good class up top.

 

[Kin]

My argument is about drafting high-ceiling talent being an important factor whether or not you're Chicago or Toronto in 2015.  If we're using the Pittsburgh example, the team needs a 2008 Jordan Staal in their lineup...there, not that impossible.

Jordan Staal scored 49 points that year. You don't need to find that at the top of the draft.

I'm not referring to Philly.  I'm arguing that teams should be looking to draft in the top 10-15 (high-ceiling) whenever possible, and good teams and bad teams should value that almost equally.

But that doesn't make any sense. A top line center is more valuable to a team that doesn't has one, and can play them 20 minutes a night and on the #1 PP, than to your fantasy team that will play him 15 minutes a night and struggle to get him PP time.

The more you have of something, the less value you'll place on it. That's just one of the fundamental concepts of supply and demand.

What's that got to do with the price of eggs?  They're high-ceiling talent on cheaper deals that were drafted high while the team had "elite talent" established on the roster.

This is starting to sound like your "The Oilers did a good job drafting" argument all over again. Your point is that teams should draft good players when they can?

Again, name a team that has a top flight center on their third line. Name a successful team that desperately tries to get into the top 10 of the draft. Good teams, teams that can draft and develop well, know they can fill out their roster with guys who can contribute what Jordan Staal did in 2008 without having to trade high up in the draft to do it. There's no value there. It's like saying that a guy who owns a Ferrari shouldn't look for a Minivan but instead buy a second Ferrari to take his kids to school because Ferraris are awesome.

Oh good, this argument.

You should really have said Zetterberg and Datsyuk to bring this point home.

Except drafting superstars in the 7th round isn't reasonable or realistic. Drafting good players in the back half of the first round is. Bennett's failure to be a contributor for Pittsburgh isn't a factor of the Penguins only having the #20 pick available to them. Rather, the fact that Pittsburgh got very little out of the #20 pick is symptomatic of the lousy job they've done drafting everywhere in the draft.

If a team is looking to add depth, they don't need top 10 picks to do it. What separates Pittsburgh from Chicago isn't elite talent, it's depth.

 

[Kin]

I don't think that's an uncommon thing. Most draft have a consensus top 3-5. Whether teams follow them is another story.

Put Schenn (the prospect) in this draft class and he's lucky to crack the top 10 IMO.

Sure, knowing what we know about how the game has changed and Luke Schenn now, that's easy to say. But at the time people were huge on him. It's entirely revisionist to say that wasn't the case and the issue is how valuable he was at the time.

 

[Bender]

Schenn was hardly the quality of prospect that Marner/Strome/Hanifin are now.

I remember some publication called Schenn the best defensive defenceman prospect in 20 years, or something like that. He was being compared to Scott Stevens and Adam Foote.

"Some publication". Ok then. He went 5th so I guess the teams that took Doughty, Bogosian and Pietrangelo thought otherwise. Turns out they were right.

Doughty and Bogosian went ahead of him and were always ranked ahead of him as prospects.

2008 was a spotty draft at best, with many more misses than hits coming outside of the top 4 in the first round. The only player I would say anyone picking 5-14 would want back is Erik Karlsson.

 

[Chev-boyar-sky]

Schenn was hardly the quality of prospect that Marner/Strome/Hanifin are now.

I remember some publication called Schenn the best defensive defenceman prospect in 20 years, or something like that. He was being compared to Scott Stevens and Adam Foote.

"Some publication". Ok then. He went 5th so I guess the teams that took Doughty, Bogosian and Pietrangelo thought otherwise. Turns out they were right.

Doughty and Bogosian went ahead of him and were always ranked ahead of him as prospects.

2008 was a spotty draft at best, with many more misses than hits coming outside of the top 4 in the first round. The only player I would say anyone picking 5-14 would want back is Erik Karlsson.

Well that's kind of my point. NY traded out of the 5th spot for a 2nd and a 3rd likely because they had their eye on someone else, and because they didn't believe Schenn was the love-child of a Robinson/Foote combo like some others did (for the record, virtually everyone in the top 10 is "the next-insert top end player here-". Barzal has been compared to Sakic this year).

This draft is deeper, and has 5-6 of franchise level players at the top. After that there's a lot of solid guys who will be very good complimentary pieces.

Philly's interested in the pick if Hanifin is available when the Leafs are picking. Their defence is terrible and he's reportedly one of the few defensive prospects that could play in the NHL next year.

 

[Chev-boyar-sky]

We're talking about moving into the top 5 here, so I think it's not that crazy of a return but maybe I'm wrong.

When the Leafs moved from 7 into the top 5 to take Schenn it cost them a second and a third. Here, to move down one more spot it's a first and a second. In a draft, mind you, where it seems like people are pretty high on its overall quality.

Schenn was hardly the quality of prospect that Marner/Strome/Hanifin are now.

That is strong statement for three kids who never played a game of professional hockey. Just because some one ranks them 3 to 5 does not mean they are going to make it in the NHL. It is a crap shot.

I think he means Schenn wasn't as highly touted before being drafted as those three guys are now. So his value prior to being drafted was less than these three guys' value is now prior to being drafted.

Bingo

 

[Kin]

Well that's kind of my point. NY traded out of the 5th spot for a 2nd and a 3rd likely because they had their eye on someone else, and because they didn't believe Schenn was the love-child of a Robinson/Foote combo like some others did.

This draft is deeper, and has 5-6 of franchise level players at the top. After that there's a lot of solid guys who will be very good complimentary pieces.

Philly's interested in the pick if Hanifin is available when the Leafs are picking. Their defence is terrible and he's reportedly one of the few defensive prospects that could play in the NHL next year.

But you're the one who justified the trade from the Leafs' perspective by saying that Barzal/Provorov are "almost as good" as who the Leafs could take at #4. If the Leafs are trading out of taking a "franchise level player" then that's reason 1A in big capital letters why the Leafs shouldn't do it. A "very good complimentary player" is not almost as good as a franchise player.

If this draft is the draft of the century you're making it out to be than Strome/Marner/Hanifin being "more valuable" than Schenn is balanced out by Barzal/Provorov being more valuable than Josh Bailey.

 

[Chev-boyar-sky]

I don't think that's an uncommon thing. Most draft have a consensus top 3-5. Whether teams follow them is another story.

Put Schenn (the prospect) in this draft class and he's lucky to crack the top 10 IMO.

Sure, knowing what we know about how the game has changed and Luke Schenn now, that's easy to say. But at the time people were huge on him. It's entirely revisionist to say that wasn't the case and the issue is how valuable he was at the time.

He wasn't unanimously loved. I remember concerns about his skating and lack of offence.

As a point of reference, Provorov and Bogosian had nearly identical draft year numbers (Provorov had more goals and was better to the tune of +28) and is projected to go 6-8th in this draft. Schenn was drafted 2 spots after Bogosian in 2008.

Anyway there's no point arguing it to death. If there's a team willing to meet the price the Leafs set then I think the 4th should be in play, but that's probably the case anyway in the eyes of management.

I wouldn't, however, move the 4th for the 7th and 2 seconds or something. It'd be a minimum of a top 10 pick and another first rounder (could be a 2016 first too) and a 2nd this year. Otherwise they should be perfectly happy to select a very good player in the #4 spot.

 

[herman]

Just a slightly off-topic FYI: much of this thread lately has been talking about the value of complementary players (players that complete the set), rather than complimentary players (players that are very positive and encouraging to others).

Carry on.

 

[Chev-boyar-sky]

Well that's kind of my point. NY traded out of the 5th spot for a 2nd and a 3rd likely because they had their eye on someone else, and because they didn't believe Schenn was the love-child of a Robinson/Foote combo like some others did.

This draft is deeper, and has 5-6 of franchise level players at the top. After that there's a lot of solid guys who will be very good complimentary pieces.

Philly's interested in the pick if Hanifin is available when the Leafs are picking. Their defence is terrible and he's reportedly one of the few defensive prospects that could play in the NHL next year.

But you're the one who justified the trade from the Leafs' perspective by saying that Barzal/Provorov are "almost as good" as who the Leafs could take at #4. If the Leafs are trading out of taking a "franchise level player" then that's reason 1A in big capital letters why the Leafs shouldn't do it. A "very good complimentary player" is not almost as good as a franchise player.

If this draft is the draft of the century you're making it out to be than Strome/Marner/Hanifin being "more valuable" than Schenn is balanced out by Barzal/Provorov being more valuable than Josh Bailey.

I guess I'm more in the "hedging your bets" camp.

Let's say Hanifin becomes a Doughty. Provorov a Shattenkirk. Harkins a Kesler and the 2nd we'll leave as a question mark (that's if they all an out). I would say Shattenkirk is a tier lower than Doughty, and therefore "almost as good". Absolutely not as good but the other players can make up the difference. That's what trades used to be about.

Now there's no guarantee with any of the picks right?

So you trade the potential of a Doughty for the potential of a Shattenkirk, Kesler and whatever the 2nd could become (which could be pretty good actually).

Is that worth it for either team? From a Cap standpoint (cheap controllable contracts) and a "not putting all your eggs in one basket" it makes sense for the Leafs to make that kind of deal. They also lack good high-ish end prospects.

For the Flyers? Well they have 2 great players and some depth up front (Giroux, Voracek, Couts, Schenn, Simmonds). They lack a great D-man and they like most teams have a window. They trade potentially better assets and controllability for an NHL ready defender who's very highly touted (hell he might not even make it to #4).

Anyway, food for thought is all...

 

[Chev-boyar-sky]

Just a slightly off-topic FYI: much of this thread lately has been talking about the value of complementary players (players that complete the set), rather than complimentary players (players that are very positive and encouraging to others).

Carry on.

Yes you are correct. Afternoon beers taking their toll. Buzzkill.

 

[Frank E]

Jordan Staal scored 49 points that year. You don't need to find that at the top of the draft.

You do if you want it to be a 20 year old.
 

 

[Kin]

I would say Shattenkirk is a tier lower than Doughty, and therefore "almost as good". Absolutely not as good but the other players can make up the difference. That's what trades used to be about.

Except the Leafs are in the mess they're in precisely because Burke thought he could build a team around guys who are just a "tier lower" than the elite talents in the league. I've seen what happens when teams think they can get by without elite talent and "make up the difference" elsewhere. Shattenkirk, who's been sheltered to a degree in St. Louis by virtue of being #3 on their depth chart, is not head and shoulders a better player than Phaneuf.

Trading for a bushel of guys who have the potential to be good but not great players leaves the Leafs exactly where they already are if everything goes right. They don't have Franchise level players and you can't win without them. That's the shot they need to be taking.

It's not about hedging your bets, it's about whether they're betting to win or betting to show.

For the Flyers? Well they have 2 great players and some depth up front (Giroux, Voracek, Couts, Schenn, Simmonds). They lack a great D-man and they like most teams have a window. They trade potentially better assets and controllability for an NHL ready defender who's very highly touted (hell he might not even make it to #4).

Which is why even if this deal did make sense it would be Philly talking to Arizona, not Toronto. You're not going to invest a ton into something like this and just cross your fingers that Hanifin falls.

 

[Kin]

He wasn't unanimously loved. I remember concerns about his skating and lack of offence.

Nobody is unanimously loved, outside of guys like McDavid and Eichel. There are concerns about Strome's skating. There is concern about Marner's size. Despite the fact that we're all focused on those three guys being available at #4, not every scouting report has that top five set in stone as the top five in the draft, to say nothing of them being "franchise level" players.