2016 NHL Draft

[dissentowner]

Originally Posted by New Era

Problem is you have added 23 pounds to Nylander that doesn't exist. The Steelheads have him listed at 172. The heaviest I've seen him listed is 179. That's a far cry from 195. And Alex Nylander is not a big burly guy that is going to provide any level of truculence. He doesn't check off many boxes the Flames are looking for. In today's NHL he is small and he plays small. Pass in a big way.

Ok, well then obviously the site I got his stats from were mistaken. Maybe that is what they project him to play at in the NHL.
http://www.mynhldraft.com/2016/NHL-D...ander-Nylander


New Era, you kind of remind me of the past theories on drafting that the Flames had and it set us back years. Size over skill. The game is changing, it is becoming more of a skill and speed game than a bruiser affair. In todays NHL 6 feet tall is not small for a forward, this is not the early to mid 2000's. I have news for you, there is nobody in this draft at forward near that draft position that is a giant bone crushing power forward. If you think that is what Tkatchuk is you obviously have not watched him that much. Yes, he can throw hits and he is a good playmaker but he is never going to be Lucic. I go to a lot of Knights games so I see a lot of OHL action and a lot of Tkatchuk and he is going to be a good player but I see a guy who does benefit from the linemates he plays with a lot and first and foremost a better passer than shooter. When I see Nylander play I see a guy that has Gaudreau like creativity. Can you imagine two guys with that much creativity playing on a line with Sam Bennett or Sean Monahan? That would be very hard to contain for the opposition! There is nothing wrong with drafting guys that can go out there and bang like a Ferland but on your top 3 I believe skill is a much more important factor to have there. I am not advocating you take Nylander in the top 3, I think those guys are the cream of the crop but I solidly have Nylander as my number 4 based on his skill set.

[MrMastodonFarm]

Nylander isn't small but he sticks out a bit at the top of the draft. 2016 has some big guys leading the way. Matthews, Laine, Puljujurvi, Chychrun, Dubois, Gauthier are all over 6'1 and 200 pounds.

On a team like the Flames, that needs size in its top 6 it's no wonder he's being overlooked here.

[Flames Draft Watcher]

Teams that value skill by far above all other attributes will likely have Nylander top 5. Wouldn't surprise me if some teams do.

But size does play a role. It's undeniable. Big guys with skill are almost impossible to shut down because you can't physically hold them, push them down, contain them along the boards, etc. Small guys with skill can be pushed down, contained along the boards, held back.

Little Johnny is obviously one of the most skilled players in the entire league. He has elite elusiveness, stick handling and agility and it allows him beat larger players fairly regularly. Little Johnny negates his size disadvantage through skating, agility, puck handling, hockey sense, etc. But that size disadvantage does exist.

Nylander is extremely skilled. And he isn't that small. But going against NHL defenders he will be pushed down, leaned on, dominated along the boards, crushed in the crease, etc. Will he still succeed? It's likely he will.

But guys like Laine, Puljujarvi, Tkachuk, Gauthier are bigger, stronger players. They are not going to be easily pushed down, leaned on, moved out of the crease, dominated along the boards. In fact they may hold the size/strength advantage on some smaller defenders in the NHL and be able to shrug them off. Their size/strength gives them an advantage in puck protection if they use their size to their advantage properly. And the bigger they are (Laine, Puljujarvi, Gauthier) the more the advantage could be over more medium sized guys like Tkachuk. Is Nylander more skilled than some of those guys? Yeah. But because of their size their game can translates more easily against NHL defenders.

Now obviously there's a tipping point where the skill ends up completely erasing any size disadvantage. Nylander is going to be a top 10 pick for sure and will probably go ahead of some big, skilled players like Gauthier. He has elite skill and average size. He fits our needs but ideally he'd be bigger because we're stuck in the Pacific against some fairly big lineups. You prefer him over Tkachuk thats fine, but lots of people like Tkachuk ahead of Nylander and he'll end up a beefier, stronger, more physical player it would appear. Dubois is skilled but has better size and strength as well. So who's best? Pure skill (Nylander)? A blend of skill, size, physicality (Tkachuk/Dubois)?

I think Nylander definitely should be in consideration if we're drafting in the 5-8 range. I don't see him being in our top 4 though.

[Canuck-Hater]

@tsnjamesduthie:
Odds of where last place team will pick in NHL draft:

1st: 20%
2nd: 17.5%
3rd: 15%
4th: 47.5%

I swear to god if the anti-Oiler rule backfires...

[PeteMoss]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

I have no thoughts on this, but Conroy sure seemed to think he'd rather see him in the CHL or college (I think in that order). For all that "playing against men" elevates him, playing against a thin talent pool, bigger ice and a generally less physical game seems to weigh heavily on Conroy's mind.

That said, it seemed like he was their number one without a doubt.

I get them being annoyed because they can't see him all that often but honestly too bad for them.

Guy has the option to go ride buses in the CHL for $50/week, playing 30 games in the NCAA or go to Switzerland, get coached by an ex-NHL coach and earn some real money ($500k I've seen) - doesn't strike me as a tough decision.

And considering tons of players come out of Europe each year - I'm pretty sure he can figure out the big/small ice issue pretty quick.

[Poe969]

This is stupid. If you finish last you have less than a 50% chance of drafting in the top 3. I mean I guess you have the highest odds of getting the first but this is just a joke now. Just another thing the oilers have screwed up for everyone else.

[GranteedEV]

Tkachuk = Landeskog
Nylander = Winger Nugent-Hopkins

If we have the first OA in 2011 which do you pick?

Trick Question, answer is Johnny Hockey.

[GranteedEV]

Originally Posted by shotinthebacklund

Conroy is on Fan960 and also mentioned Matthews in Switzerland is a annoyance as they have limited chances to view him.

He also mentioned Pulju is more consistent, Laine the higher ceiling.

[saillias]

Originally Posted by GranteedEV

Tkachuk = Landeskog
Nylander = Winger Nugent-Hopkins

If we have the first OA in 2011 which do you pick?

Trick Question, answer is Johnny Hockey.

In hindsight I'd rather trade the pick then pick either guy with a 1st overall.

edit: you got me with the white text.

[Since1984]

Originally Posted by GranteedEV

Tkachuk = Landeskog
Nylander = Winger Nugent-Hopkins

If we have the first OA in 2011 which do you pick?

Trick Question, answer is Johnny Hockey.

At that point in time I would definitely take Landeskog, you win with players if his ilk.

But Johnny was the steal of the decade.

[Lanny_McDonald]

@dissentowner

Can you imagine Gaudreau, Bennett and Nylander against the Kings or Ducks? Like it or not, size does matter. But it is not like we're talking about guys with no skill. We're talking big time goal scorers that come with size. Would Nylander be fun to watch? Yes. Would he lead us to greater success in our division? I'm not so sure. We need more size. There are guys available that provide both size and skill. You take that every time. Hopefully this discussion will go for naught and the Leafs will pick him before us. Wouldn't that be an interesting development?

[Racki]

Originally Posted by Canuck-Hater

I swear to god if the anti-Oiler rule backfires...

I have a really, really bad feeling about this lottery. The anti-Olier is almost certain to backfire. I run three different simulator's sveral times a day. It turns out bad for us more than it works out for us.

[Calgary4LIfe]

Another reason to what has already been added as to why Conroy was a little bit perturbed at Mathews in Switzerland, is that the organization has to spend their time scouting Mathews ONLY. I don't think there are many guys in the Swiss League that are draft eligible. Probably more in the Finnish league - and the Flames can still catch a junior game with more ranked prospects in the junior leagues in Finland than they could in Switzerland.

Even when the Flames were scouting Jankowski - in a league that normally doesn't receive a whole lot of attention scouting wise - there are other games in close proximity that they could see.

As for Nylander - he most definitely is on Calgary's list, but as FDW put it so diligently - probably further down than some other teams probably have him. Watch any Anaheim-Calgary game, and you see the Flames dominated along the boards and in front of the net for 60 minutes. They also happen to be out-skilled, but the skill that Calgary does have Anaheim negates it rather well by shutting down the boards and area in front of the net.

Can't contain Gaudreau? That's ok - just play him safe using zone coverage, and force him to take a bad shot. Have guys on top of Monahan and covering for a late pinching d-man.

Quite often, as soon as that puck is shot - and especially if it goes along the boards - Anaheim re-takes possession. I can't really imagine Nylander is going to be able to neutralize that tactic too much, but a big guy like Laine or Puljujarvi - or even Tkachuk - could at least force more turnovers along the boards (or just keep possession along the boards) and helping to provide 2nd and 3rd chances in front of the net. Flames don't get those 2nd and 3rd chances as often against Anaheim it seems as compared to teams like Vancouver (and not just because Anaheim is good, though it obviously helps).

Flames are desperate for a really big guy to try and re-gain possession along the boards on that top line. Just look at who they have rotated through that spot - Colborne, Ferland, Jones - heck, they even tried Bollig.

Flames obviously need more talent as well. If they play themselves out of a top 5 pick, I can see them picking Nylander with the 6th-10th pick - and probably closer to 10th. A team like Anaheim might be looking at Nylander right around 4 if they feel he has more skill than Chychrun, or Dubois. Difference is, they already set themselves up for a nice decade when they drafted Perry and Getzlaf, and continued to add average + guys on the roster through trades and the draft.

Cogliano is the smallest Duck forward at 5'10", and followed by Hagelin at 5'11" (according to hockeydb). Everyone else is 6'0" and up - including Getzlaf at 6'4", and Perry at 6'3".

Skill is still more important than size. As Flames fans, we can attest to that after witnessing the revolving door on RW for the top line. However, also as Flames fans, we can attest to how humbled this team gets when facing teams that have a few guys in their top 6 that are both big and skilled. Flames need to at least close the gap somewhat to be competitive, and that is why I wouldn't think they have Nylander ranked anywhere in their top 5, even if he arguably had top 3 or 4 skill.

Guys who are both big and skilled are so very difficult to acquire. Flames have a golden opportunity to find one now in what looks like a top 5 pick. I doubt the squander it.

[Ashasx]

Some stats on Tkachuk

Primary points per game (goals + primary assists): 2nd in the OHL among draft eligible forwards
Even strength primary points per game: 7th in the OHL among draft eligible forwards

In total, he has 58 primary points and 41 secondary assists.

In contrast, his linemates have 85 (Marner) and 82 (Dvorak) primary points.

http://www.prospect-stats.com/

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by Ashasx

Some stats on Tkachuk

Primary points per game (goals + primary assists): 2nd in the OHL among draft eligible forwards
Even strength primary points per game: 7th in the OHL among draft eligible forwards

In total, he has 58 primary points and 41 secondary assists.

In contrast, his linemates have 85 (Marner) and 82 (Dvorak) primary points.

http://www.prospect-stats.com/

One has to be careful with that. There is a reason they dole out 2 assists on goals.

If a guy digs the puck out of the corner and sends it to a 2nd guy standing alone on the half boards, and he then passes it to the goal scorer, was the primary assist a better or more important play?

[Ashasx]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

One has to be careful with that. There is a reason they dole out 2 assists on goals.

If a guy digs the puck out of the corner and sends it to a 2nd guy standing alone on the half boards, and he then passes it to the goal scorer, was the primary assist a better or more important play?

I'm not using them to say Tkachuk is better or worse than anyone. His primary production is also above Nylander's.

His situation as a whole seems very similar to Landeskog. Many fans are lukewarm because of his production, but most scouts love and adore him.

I'd still have him at 6 after Dubois, but I wouldn't be too upset if the Flames took him at 4 or 5.

[genetic_phreek]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

One has to be careful with that. There is a reason they dole out 2 assists on goals.

If a guy digs the puck out of the corner and sends it to a 2nd guy standing alone on the half boards, and he then passes it to the goal scorer, was the primary assist a better or more important play?

Last person to touch it will always be the better or more important play because it's results based.

[Crumpy-Gunt]

I've run this simulator over a hundred times. Ive come to the conclusion - if the standings stay as they are, which they probably wont.. then Toronto will likely pick first, Edmonton 2nd and us 3rd. But hopefully my simulator was junk and Edmonton doesnt pick in the top 3 and we do. I am not to concerned with the 1st OA tbh. Im happy with 2nd or 3rd even. Just as long as edmonton doesnt pick in the top 3. That would be total BS. Especially if they win the lotto because of the rule that was put in because of them.

The worst part about it is I can see them benefiting from the rule this season and us being hurt by it.

Whatever. I just want Laine. Matthews and Pulju can go in the top 2 to whoever as long as we get Laine. Please

[Flames Draft Watcher]

Originally Posted by Ashasx

Some stats on Tkachuk

Primary points per game (goals + primary assists): 2nd in the OHL among draft eligible forwards
Even strength primary points per game: 7th in the OHL among draft eligible forwards

In total, he has 58 primary points and 41 secondary assists.

In contrast, his linemates have 85 (Marner) and 82 (Dvorak) primary points.

http://www.prospect-stats.com/

He's also younger than them, a year or more behind in development. Pretty dang impressive stuff from Tkachuk.

[Crumpy-Gunt]

Originally Posted by GranteedEV

Tkachuk = Landeskog
Nylander = Winger Nugent-Hopkins

If we have the first OA in 2011 which do you pick?

Trick Question, answer is Johnny Hockey.

Very interesting comparison. And the answer definitely is Johnny Hockey.

I want to touch on something else though in another post above. People comparing size/skill vs BPA. Its true we are in division of big bodied players. We certainly need to get bigger everywhere.

BUT do our skill players need to be big ? Can we not have a roster of 6'3 215 players, some 6'5, 230, and have 3 skill players who arent huge?

Bennett
Gaudreau
2016 1st round pick

Gaudreau literally never gets touched - so i dont worry about him contributing to our size disadvantage. Sure he wont throw big checks but hes mastered how to be effective while being very undersized.

Bennett is no #####-cat. He takes a lickin and keeps on tickin. He thrives on that kind of game. Hes going to the dirty areas regardless of his size, and he will win a lot of battles based on speed, agility, tenacity and hockey IQ. So im not too concerned with him.

Say we take a small player in the top end of this draft who has off the charts skill. Can we not cover these players up with bigger bodies every where else? Or do we need to apply that get bigger philosophy to the top of the 1st round.

I'd like to know what people think.

Personally I get it - we need to be bigger. But I think its dangerous rating players higher or lower because they are smaller or bigger. These are kids. They can grow 2 inches and 20lbs, in fact many do after draft day. Not to mention you can get bigger in free agency, and via trade. The draft is serious business, you can pass on a super talented player who is 5'11 and will play in the all star game one day and take a career AHLer who is 6'3. It would make me sweat and lose sleep more than a lot of other things. More than anything but giving contracts out and making trades. After that i would be very wary of passing on people because they are normal sized human beings.

But also I'd hate to be a franchise/GM who had a scout telling them this undersized player has out of this world skill, and it will translate to the NHL - plus he could grow, but the GM goes with the less talented player, with the bigger frame - hoping instead that this larger player offensive talent / skating / whatever grows instead of drafting a small skill player and praying they grow.

I think its dangrous. Im sure some team in the NHL had a scout raving about johnny and a lot of other players who arent even as small as johnny, but slightly undersized like 5"10 185. or a 5'11 190 dman with all types of skill being skipped over for a 6'4 220 kid who has skating and passing issues but hits hard and has a big shot.. Both kids have played maybe 2 seasons in junior. Little guy has tons of points, tons of good reviews from scouts, big guy has a few big holes in his game but projects to be a 5-6 dman at the worst. If im a GM I take that smaller guy who is more skilled, not every time...but when it makes sense and hes very very skilled and you can see him being able to compete and play his game in the NHL, then you take him.

Not to the point you have a roster of 5'10 185 players going against the kings, but in the top of the 1st round - elite talent levels, future superstars and franchise players... i would certainly not ignore size, but i wouldnt look at it as much as others or i would certainly factor in potential and ceiling not just floor and ability to step in right away.

My point is we can carry 3 small offensively gifted forwards if they compete and carry their weight. It can actually be a good technique to snipe players falling for no reason other than size as the GMs go for safe big framed picks.

We cant do it too much - but its a great way to snag high level talent outside the top picks or top rated picks.

I think in 5 years people will look at what marner, gaudreau, nylander, drouin, etc do and will draft differently.

PS.. I want Tkatchuk over Nylander as well - for a variety of reasons...but its an interesting discussion