2016 NHL Draft

[Lanny_McDonald]

If we draft outside of the top three I'd be looking to deal with Phoenix (picks 7 and 22), Boston (picks 14 and 20) or Carolina (picks13 and 23) for both of their picks and try to grab some of the skilled big men available. I would still be very happy to walk away with two players like Brown and Gauthier than take another defenseman considering our depth and quality at that position.

[Poe969]

I'm almost on the same boat. I think if they can't get the big 3 or Dubois, look at what teams would give to trade spots. Brown, Gauthier, Tufte and Stanley are big stand outs IMO.

[VladtheImpaler]

Originally Posted by New Era

If we draft outside of the top three I'd be looking to deal with Phoenix (picks 7 and 22), Boston (picks 14 and 20) or Carolina (picks13 and 23) for both of their picks and try to grab some of the skilled big men available. I would still be very happy to walk away with two players like Brown and Gauthier than take another defenseman considering our depth and quality at that position.

Even though I would draft Juolevi, I agree with this sentiment. It just seems there are about 12-15 guys after THE 3 that could all easily turn out to be be the best player. Knowing nothing (other than what other people have written/said), I would be happy with Brown, Jost, the defensemen, plus the usual suspects discussed (Dubois, Tkachuk, Nylander). Thus, if I am offered another 1st to drop to 12, happy to oblige...

[GranteedEV]

Originally Posted by Itse

Okay, apparently I can't use a calculator.

So that's a fair point. I don't really agree it's enough to go saying that one is definitely a higher-end prospect than the other, but it'a fair argument.

I believe you can't say any of these 17 year old defensemen are definitely a higher end prospect than the other. Not even Juolevi over Bean. Defense is a pretty unpredictable position, only goalie is less predictable. Look back at any draft, while you can re-arrange the centers and wingers a bit, the order doesn't seem crazy. But you can go back, look at just about any draft, and find a Jack Johnson drafted at 3 and a Marc-Edouard Vlasic drafted at 35, or a Thomas Hickey drafted at 4 and PK subban drafted at 43, or a Erik Gudbranson at 3 and a John Klingberg at 131.

I'd prefer to draft a forward for that reason. The only reason I like Sergachyev as a top 10 pick is because he seems to a few extra tools to work with than Chychrun or Juolevi or Bean or Fabbro or Kylington. Doesn't mean I have any confidence in his likelyhood to pan out compared to any of the other guys. I don't "trust" defensemen to pan out. Even for every Doughty or Hedman there's a Phaneuf or JBo.

Originally Posted by JJ1532

Should we be looking for the guy with the greatest offensive potential? For me, to round out our top 4, I'd rather we prioritised a big bodied guy who is defensively sound in his own end, can shut down other teams offence and has the potential to match up well against the big centres he'll be facing in our division/conference. All 3 guys in our range are tall guys, so no issue there. But who projects to be the best defenceman in his own zone?

Impossible to guess. But I'd still lean towards Sergachyev in his own zone. Seems to have the intelligence to improve, to go with a big frame to battle in the corners and can still skate the puck out of trouble.

[Flames Draft Watcher]

If Juolevi turns into a Brodie type defender then you're laughing even if we don't necessarily need another defenceman of that style. Young high end dmen are extremely valuable commodities. You can trade a Brodie type for whatever you'd need.

[GranteedEV]

Originally Posted by Flames Draft Watcher

If Juolevi turns into a Brodie type defender...

The possibility exists, I agree. But I'd say that possibility exists in a relative nobody like Lucas Carlsson, too.

On the other hand I look at the potential, even of a guy like Nylander who I'm not crazy about, and I doubt we find a guy like that later on.

[Flames Draft Watcher]

Originally Posted by GranteedEV

I believe you can't say any of these 17 year old defensemen are definitely a higher end prospect than the other. Not even Juolevi over Bean. Defense is a pretty unpredictable position, only goalie is less predictable. Look back at any draft, while you can re-arrange the centers and wingers a bit, the order doesn't seem crazy. But you can go back, look at just about any draft, and find a Jack Johnson drafted at 3 and a Marc-Edouard Vlasic drafted at 35, or a Thomas Hickey drafted at 4 and PK subban drafted at 43, or a Erik Gudbranson at 3 and a John Klingberg at 131.

I'd prefer to draft a forward for that reason. The only reason I like Sergachyev as a top 10 pick is because he seems to a few extra tools to work with than Chychrun or Juolevi or Bean or Fabbro or Kylington. Doesn't mean I have any confidence in his likelyhood to pan out compared to any of the other guys. I don't "trust" defensemen to pan out. Even for every Doughty or Hedman there's a Phaneuf or JBo.

Defensemen taken in the top 15 are no more risky than forwards taken in the top 15 at least in the last 10 years. I did an analysis of this in the last month or so. But let's take another look.

http://www.hockeydb.com/ihdb/draft/nhl2006e.html

2006 - Biggest bust in the top 10? James Sheppard a forward.

http://www.hockeydb.com/ihdb/draft/nhl2007e.html

2007 - You say Thomas Hickey at 4 (which was a reach at the time)? I say Sam Gagner at #6. Biggest bust in the top 10? Zach Hamill, a forward. Alzner, McDonagh and Shattenkirk turned out just fine. Hickey disappointed relative to draft position but that was more the Isles reaching for him than anything, he wasn't rated to go anywhere near #4. Ellerby is a disappointment as well.

http://www.hockeydb.com/ihdb/draft/nhl2008e.html

2008 - Doughty, Bogosian, Pietroangelo, Schenn, Myers, Teubert and E. Karlsson all go top 15. Only Teubert busted. Meanwhile for forwards Filatov, Kyle Beach and Zach Boychuk were busts. Biggest bust in the top 10? Filatov a forward. So in this draft defensemen were FAR safer than forwards. And in the 2nd half of the first round as well you found d-men like Gardiner, Carlsson, Sbisa and Del Zotto. Meanwhile for forwards? Only Colborne, Ennis and Eberle. If you philosophically steered away from defensemen for forwards this draft you would have been making a fundamental mistake.

http://www.hockeydb.com/ihdb/draft/nhl2009e.html

2009 - Hedman at #2? Franchise D. OEL at #6? Franchise D. Ellis, De Haan, Kulikov and Leddy? All useful players. Only Jared Cowan is arguably a bust and injuries derailed him. Biggest bust in the top 10? Scott Glennie a forward.

Anyways we could go on but this idea that defensemen taken high are more risky is a total myth in the last 10 years. Your examples of defensemen who are taken high busting is easily matched by a list of forwards taken high who busted. Your examples of star defensemen taken in the 2nd and later are easily matched by examples of star forwards being taken in the 2nd and later. Those examples prove nothing. If you do an in depth analysis of the bust rate for defensemen taken top 10 in the draft its going to be very similar to the bust rate for forwards taken in the top 10. If anything recent history is showing forwards may be more risky overall.

Throw in the fact that top 3-4 defensemen hold crazy value in trade and shying away from them in the top 10 of the draft if they are the best player available would be a foolish strategy and philosophy.

[Lanny_McDonald]

Originally Posted by Flames Draft Watcher

If Juolevi turns into a Brodie type defender then you're laughing even if we don't necessarily need another defenceman of that style. Young high end dmen are extremely valuable commodities. You can trade a Brodie type for whatever you'd need.

And if he turns into a Brandon Gormley or a Colton Teubert? There are no guarantees with drafting and very few players reach their potential. This draft has always been a real wildcard. Three top end talents, then a bunch of players with some interesting, but incomplete, skill sets. If you're outside of the top three high end guys, then you're probably better off having a couple extra tickets and hope one them addresses a need. We really don't need another smallish skilled defender, we need some size that comes with some skill.

[dammage79]

Originally Posted by New Era

And if he turns into a Brandon Gormley or a Colton Teubert? There are no guarantees with drafting and very few players reach their potential. This draft has always been a real wildcard. Three top end talents, then a bunch of players with some interesting, but incomplete, skill sets. If you're outside of the top three high end guys, then you're probably better off having a couple extra tickets and hope one them addresses a need. We really don't need another smallish skilled defender, we need some size that comes with some skill.

Juolevi isn't that small though. He's 6'2" and close to 200 according to Eliteprospects. Meh, either way, I'd go with Juolevi ove Chychrun.

And if we're set on trading down if the Flames lose the Lottery, I'm still balls to the wall for McLeod.

[Flames Draft Watcher]

Originally Posted by New Era

And if he turns into a Brandon Gormley or a Colton Teubert?

There's a risk of busting with every prospect. Forwards and defensemen. Are you worried about Nylander being the next Filatov or James Sheppard?

If the Flames think Juolevi is the best player available I'll be quite happy with the pick. I think he's a better prospect than Gormley or Teubert were in their draft years.

Originally Posted by New Era

There are no guarantees with drafting and very few players reach their potential.

Thanks Captain Obvious.

Originally Posted by New Era

This draft has always been a real wildcard. Three top end talents, then a bunch of players with some interesting, but incomplete, skill sets. If you're outside of the top three high end guys, then you're probably better off having a couple extra tickets and hope one them addresses a need.

If the Flames can trade down and get two great prospects I'm fine with that. Not sure why this draft is a real wildcard, all drafts are real wildcards.

Originally Posted by New Era

We really don't need another smallish skilled defender, we need some size that comes with some skill.

So we don't need Jake Bean? He's the only smallish skilled defender at the top end of this draft. I tend to agree, I'd be surprised if we took Bean.

Juolevi is 6'2, not small.
Chychrun is 6'2, not small.
Sergachev is 6'2, not small.
Fabbro is 6'1, kind of average size for a defenseman.
Bean is 6'0. Smallish for a defender.

[Vulcan]

Juolevi is 6'2, not small.
Chychrun is 6'2, not small.
Sergachev is 6'2, not small.
Fabbro is 6'1, kind of average size for a defenseman.
Bean is 6'0. Smallish for a defender.

If we trade down we can take another defender in Logan Stanley. He's 6'6 which would make up for any height need from the other defenceman.

[GranteedEV]

Originally Posted by Flames Draft Watcher

Defensemen taken in the top 15 are no more risky than forwards taken in the top 15 at least in the last 10 years.

I'm not just talking about risk though. I'm talking about reward too. How many #1Cs or #1Ws can you name that weren't taken high in the draft? Probably not as many as you can name #1D.

There is risk of busting at any position but there's very little chance of reward outside the top picks at forward. If you went through the two or three best defensemen on most teams I think you'd find a very random spread in draft position. If you did the same for forward I think you'd be consistently looking at guys drafted top 5, top 10 (with the occasional "draft day faller" like Kopitar or Forsberg or Saad)

[Bingo]

Personally I think the risk of drafting a defenseman is higher if you have a weak or too public opinion conscious management team. They talk longer to develop short of freaks like Ekblad so you run the risk of it looking like a bad pick for two or three years then it catches up quick.

Hedman looked behind Duchene a few years ago now nobody would take the forward over the defender.

Pretty sure Treliving can ride it out.

[albertGQ]

Originally Posted by Flames Draft Watcher

2007 - You say Thomas Hickey at 4 (which was a reach at the time)? I say Sam Gagner at #6. Biggest bust in the top 10? Zach Hamill, a forward. Alzner, McDonagh and Shattenkirk turned out just fine. Hickey disappointed relative to draft position but that was more the Isles reaching for him than anything, he wasn't rated to go anywhere near #4. Ellerby is a disappointment as well.

The Kings drafted Hickey. Not the Islanders

[albertGQ]

Just curious if anyone would trade the 6th overall pick for Matt Barzal or Kyle Connor?

Just a fun question as that is who the Flames could have picked 15th overall last year. Had the Bruins wanted our 2016 first rounder instead of our 2015 first rounder instead.

I know we have the advantage of hindsight and Connor had a monster season but Barzal was supposed to go top 10 last year and fell to 16th.

So would you trade Alex Nylander for Matt Barzal? Who has the higher upside between these two?

[dammage79]

After the U-18's I've made some changes to my list after #3:

4. Tkachuk
5. Sergachev
6. Dubois
7. McLeod
8. Juolevi
9. Chychrun
10. Nylander

Nylander and Chychrun disappointed in the tournament. I saw a lot of "soft" and quite honestly, half hearted play from Nylander in the games I watched. Still put up points but man he left a ton to be desired on the table.

I didn't see anything that lived up to the hype from Chychrun either. Fabbro drove that pairing.

Jost and Fabbro put themselves on the map too.

[Itse]

Originally Posted by GranteedEV

But I'd still lean towards Sergachyev in his own zone. Seems to have the intelligence to improve, to go with a big frame to battle in the corners and can still skate the puck out of trouble.

For the record Sergachyov sounds like a great prospect. I like Juolevi because I've actually seen him play a few games, but it's not like I have a real opinion between the two.

I also think that the Flames will go with a forward unless there's clearly a situation where all the BPA's are D-men.

[Johnny Rotten]

Originally Posted by Bingo

Personally I think the risk of drafting a defenseman is higher if you have a weak or too public opinion conscious management team. They talk longer to develop short of freaks like Ekblad so you run the risk of it looking like a bad pick for two or three years then it catches up quick.

Hedman looked behind Duchene a few years ago now nobody would take the forward over the defender.

Pretty sure Treliving can ride it out.

Agreed. Looking at the 1993 NHL draft, one could argue Chris Pronger's first couple years were pretty rough especially compared with Paul Kariya's early career, and even Daigle's and Rob Niedermayer's first couple years.

http://www.hockeydb.com/ihdb/draft/nhl1993e.html

[dammage79]

Originally Posted by albertGQ

Just curious if anyone would trade the 6th overall pick for Matt Barzal or Kyle Connor?

Just a fun question as that is who the Flames could have picked 15th overall last year. Had the Bruins wanted our 2016 first rounder instead of our 2015 first rounder instead.

I know we have the advantage of hindsight and Connor had a monster season but Barzal was supposed to go top 10 last year and fell to 16th.

So would you trade Alex Nylander for Matt Barzal? Who has the higher upside between these two?

Sure, but I don't think WPG is going to move Connor anytime soon and Barzal may be more prized in NYI because of how Dal Colle kind of flatlined this year.

And I'll say I've been a huge advocate of keep ing the 1st this year. I do not think it is wise to trade away your first two years in a row when you're still rebuilding. Even if you're buying prospects from a draft the year prior.

[Lanny_McDonald]

Originally Posted by Flames Draft Watcher

There's a risk of busting with every prospect. Forwards and defensemen. Are you worried about Nylander being the next Filatov or James Sheppard?

Yes, I am. Which is why I've been a proponent of drafting a guy that will fill gaps in our system and not BPA off of some fictional list. I'd much rather take a couple guys that have potential to address a need than draft a guy that you hope develops so you have a great player to trade to address that same need.

If the Flames think Juolevi is the best player available I'll be quite happy with the pick. I think he's a better prospect than Gormley or Teubert were in their draft years.

If they don't? Because it seems like you've done an awful lot of work to convince yourself a defenseman would be a good pick, especially the Finn.

If the Flames can trade down and get two great prospects I'm fine with that. Not sure why this draft is a real wildcard, all drafts are real wildcards.

This draft is a little special. There has been a certain liquidity in the rankings for quite some time. There has been no clear stratification like we have seen in previous years. This draft is as wide open as I can remember. Great top three that everyone appears to agree upon, but then a a real mess after that. No consensus on anything.

So we don't need Jake Bean? He's the only smallish skilled defender at the top end of this draft. I tend to agree, I'd be surprised if we took Bean.

Juolevi is 6'2, not small.
Chychrun is 6'2, not small.
Sergachev is 6'2, not small.
Fabbro is 6'1, kind of average size for a defenseman.
Bean is 6'0. Smallish for a defender.

All of them are average to below average size. Potential to grow, but still at or below average size for a NHL defenseman. We have plenty of players of this ilk, we need bigger bodies. Peferabley bigger bodies on the forward lines with some skill, which is available in this draft, or bigger bodies on the blueline that like the physical play, which is available in the later rounds. No need to waste what could be one of the highest picks this team makes on a position or type of player we have an abundant supply of.