Scenario: If YOU had to a pick a dman at 6 which one?

[jmac98]

Originally Posted by Bingo

Well I think that's why I called this a scenario.

It's a good way to get people's feeling on the defensemen available which is interesting to me.

Another Calgary takes a forward topic would be pretty much redundant.

I definitely understand what you were going for and meant no disrespect in my response. I more just couldnt' find a way to pick a definitive 'D' at 6 overall as there isn't a consensus player that stands out above the rest, so I tried to comment with what I would do with respect to taking a D man, which was as you saw, although of course not quite on topic. But I just wanted to chime in all the same and be a part of the discussion.

Thanks for the thread and all the others.

[Erick Estrada]

Originally Posted by Flames Draft Watcher

So you think we got a top 10 pick last year in Andersson? I dunno about that. Andersson is a good prospect but it seems like either we're overrating him or underrating this defense class. Do you project Andersson as a top pairing d-man? Because most scouts seem to believe there's 2-3 defensemen this year with top pairing potential.

Button has said the top d-men this draft remind him of John Carlson, Ryan McDonagh, Vlasic types. He calls Juolevi a potential 1/2 dman

Benning has said there are a couple dmen that could be good #2s. Worth noting that he believes there are only 8-10 true #1 defensemen in the entire NHL. So a good #2 defenseman for him is likely a top 40 defenseman in the NHL.

Here's the Draft Analyst on Chychrun, "Chychrun is the best of the three in our view, and passing up on him denies the Oilers of a possible franchise defenseman/Norris type". He compared the top 3 dmen of this year favorably to the top 3 dmen of last year. I'd be pretty happy with a Hanifin, Provorov or Werenski type at #6 this year.

Redline a few months ago had Chychrun in their elite 2nd grouping after Matthews/Laine along with Puljujarvi and Tkachuk but he's since fallen a bit in their rankings.

There are 3 defensemen who despite having a wide variance on their rankings are ranked top 10 in a draft that has a strong top 20.

So in summary, if we have our pick of the defensemen at #6 there should be a defenseman available who has a greater upside than Rasmus Andersson.

Where Andersson was picked and where any of these guys are picked is irrelevant as it's all about how they project as NHL players. The fact is that pretty well all the scouting outlets say these guys don't project to be number one defensemen which IMO is a low ceiling for a top 10 pick (like drafting a center at 6 that projects to a 2nd line center) as we are talking about guys that could be top pairing guys if everything falls into place but if not they may be lucky to be a solid 2nd pairing guy. Andersson looks like he has 2nd pairing potential so I just don't see the value of picking any of these guys at 6th overall. The fact that scouts are so divided over these defensemen tells me that none of them are truly outstanding. At 6th overall I expect Sean Monahan not Dennis Wideman.

If you look at the Flames blueline only Hamilton was a 1st round pick while Brodie and Gio were finds via later rounds/free agency. Meanwhile all their top forwards were from recent drafts (although Johnny was one of the steals of the last decade). IMO you can build your defense through 2nd round picks and later but to get those elite forwards it's easier to draft them in the first round.

[Gaskal]

Originally Posted by Bingo

Well I think that's why I called this a scenario.

It's a good way to get people's feeling on the defensemen available which is interesting to me.

Another Calgary takes a forward topic would be pretty much redundant.

Could do threads for Trade Up Scenarios and Trade Down Scenarios. I feel like we've explored the heck out of 'who do we pick at 6'.

[Cali Panthers Fan]

Juolevi. Best all-around defenseman who thinks the game well. No-brainer pick if you ask me.

[GranteedEV]

I always find peoples' assessments about defenseman "upside" amusing when draft position is brought into the mix. "X was picked 2nd round, Y will be a top 10 pick, Y therefore has more upside".

It's true that defensemen picked earlier are going to be closer to contributing soon than defensemen picked later.

But I see almost no correlation between draft position and upside. Erik Karlsson was drafted after Luke Schenn, Tyler Myers, and Zach Bogosian. We thought Bouwmeester (#3OA) / Phaneuf (#9OA) would be part of the best D-core in the league but it was Giordano (Undrafted) and Brodie (#114OA) who finally solved our Blue Line.

It's true that the sooner-drafted players won the race but they didn't win the marathon.

I feel the same way about Olli Maatta. Okay, so he got to the NHL quickly. Does that mean he had better upside than Shayne Gostisbehere or Colton Parayko? Even having all the tools means little, I think a few years from now Edmonton will be thinking "I wish we had Madison Bowey or Shea Theodore instead of Darnell Nurse".

So yeah, Rasmus Andersson can have more upside than Jacob Chychrun or Olli Juolevi because projecting 17/18 year old defensemen is a game of roulette. Scouts' opinions don't mean much because they've proven just about every single year that they failed to identify the guy with the most #1 potential, aside from no-brainers like Ekblad. Doughty and Hedman. That's even true of teams' own internal scouting.

Keith or Seabrook? Seabrook was picked higher.
Subban or McDonagh? McDonagh was picked higher.
Karlsson or Ceci? They were picked in the exact same spot.
Josi or Ellis? Ellis was picked higher.
Suter or Weber? Suter was picked higher.
Erixon or Brodie? Lol.

etc. Draft position for defensemen is a decent-ish indicator of NHL-readiness. It's a poor indicator of upside other than top 3 picked phenoms. You need clairvoyance to assess upside of defensemen.

If we take a Dman at #6, don't go wild expecting crazy upside. Expect a guy who can contribute sooner than later, and may just plateau.

[Flames Draft Watcher]

Originally Posted by New Era

@flamesdraftwatcher

Is it possible that maybe the defensemen in this class just aren't that good? I'll say it. I don't think any of these three are as good as Andersson. That is not saying that Andersson is a top pair defenseman in the future, that is just stating that the guys in this draft just aren't as good as Andersson. They are all a step down from Andersson IMO, and it was evident in their play this year. If these guys had that tops line potential they should have outplayed Mr. Andersson, which I don't think they did. I think this is just a bad class for defensemen. Sadly, there just isn't a high end player there.

I disagree. I think you're underselling them quite a bit.

I'm not in love with stat arguments but consider this for one minute.

Rasmus Andersson is born in OCT '96. Mikahil Sergachev is born in JUN '98. So almost a two year age gap despite being one draft apart. Andersson scored 9 goals, 51 assists for 60 points in 64 games to lead the OHL. Mikhail Sergachev scored 17 goals and 40 assists for 57 points in 67 games good for 3rd in OHL Defensemen Scoring. And that's at almost 2 years younger. He had almost twice as many goals and nearly as many points. He was the youngest player to ever be named OHL Defenseman of the Year. Oh and he's bigger than Andersson to boot. And he's not even the consensus best d-men this draft!

Chychrun meanwhile finished 4th in defenseman scoring with 11 goals, 38 assists for 49 points in 62 games. Has size, elite skating. These are mighty impressive totals for draft eligibles. Chychrun is about 1.5 years younger than Andersson.

Juolevi broke the record for points at the WJC by a 17 year old defenseman. Damn impressive. He's 6'2 as well.

I'm not sure why you are massively underrating this defensemen crop but it seems like you are. There are future top pairing guys for sure.

[Super-Rye]

I've seen Bean a lot and really like him, but not at 6.

I haven't seen much of anyone else but from what I have seen I really like Sergachev. If the Flames go defense at 6 I hope he's the guy. He has stud written all over him, in my mostly uninformed opinion.

[Sylvanfan]

Well if the Flames were the Washington Capitals...I'd be voting Sergachev. So I voted for Juolevi. He's actually a youngish player in terms of this draft, and what I saw of him at the WJC was pretty impressive for a defenseman that age. Same goes for Sergachev, but that Russian factor makes me hesitate. I've liked so many good talented Russians who seemed like they should fit in fine like Zherdev and Filatov...only to be so so badly wrong.

No doubt that teams do tend to be able to mine defenseman who become good contributors beyond the first round. Still a lot of teams have been anchored on the backend by guys who were high first round selections too.

[Flames Draft Watcher]

Originally Posted by jmac98

Yes, I understand. But I don't believe any of the D are considered 'better' than the forwards in the same grouping or 'ledge' or whatever its called. So if they're all within the same spectrum of perceived talent, you then consider more intricate details within the 'BPA' concept. This pole in itself pretty much shows 3 D are good but none are a runaway by perception. And I believe scouting ranks are all over the map as well by them. So it basically reaffirms what most say in that there's a ledge at 3, then 8, or whatever they all cut it off at.

I guess it depends how you view those groupings. It wouldn't surprise me if the Flames had 3 d-men in their top 8. I think they could easily have every forward outside of Tkachuk/Dubois behind the d-men. I could be wrong, maybe they have Nylander or Brown in their top 8, I wouldn't rule that out either. But I do think that the Flames organizationally value defensemen a bit higher than some other teams in the league and I think because of that all the d-men may be ahead of Nylander for them. Not because Nylander sucks, but because they view top pairing d-men as more valuable than finesse wingers if the players are close. I think Nylander is a very attractive prospect I just think 2-3 of the d-men may be even more attractive.

To me I think Tkachuk may stand alone as the BPA at #4. Consensus shows he's one of the only players after the big 3 that scouts seem to agree on. Then I think you get into a range where guys like Dubois, Chychrun, Juolevi, Sergachev are all pretty dang close. I think Dubois as a big, powerwinger would probably be in our top 6-8. But I think 2-3 of the d-men may be ranked ahead of a finesse winger in Nylander.

Anyways I know its not a popular opinion but I think we need to keep an open mind. I think ruling out d-men being in our top grouping is questionable. For Nylander to be in our top 6 he'd have to be the clear BPA available and I don't think that's the case. I think he's close enough to the d-men that they use their organizational philosophy of the tie going to the more valuable position, defense. Interesting discussion, wish the draft would come sooner!

[dustygoon]

Originally Posted by albertGQ

I honestly don't know but vited Chychrun since he has been ranked the highest defenseman for over a yaer now on most lists.

But I would like this to be like 2003, where our choice is made for us. So I would like to trade down. I want Nylander at 6 but wouldn't be opposed to trading it for 13 and 19. Then pick a combination of Jake Bean & Julien Gauthier/Kieffer Bellows

Is Chychrun viewed in a "meh" sort of way because he unfortunately has been ranked high for a while and scouts start to find holes and he actually is a top flight blueliner still? Or did he develop early and now others have caught up?

[Erick Estrada]

Originally Posted by Flames Draft Watcher

I guess it depends how you view those groupings. It wouldn't surprise me if the Flames had 3 d-men in their top 8. I think they could easily have every forward outside of Tkachuk/Dubois behind the d-men. I could be wrong, maybe they have Nylander or Brown in their top 8, I wouldn't rule that out either. But I do think that the Flames organizationally value defensemen a bit higher than some other teams in the league and I think because of that all the d-men may be ahead of Nylander for them. Not because Nylander sucks, but because they view top pairing d-men as more valuable than finesse wingers if the players are close. I think Nylander is a very attractive prospect I just think 2-3 of the d-men may be even more attractive.

To me I think Tkachuk may stand alone as the BPA at #4. Consensus shows he's one of the only players after the big 3 that scouts seem to agree on. Then I think you get into a range where guys like Dubois, Chychrun, Juolevi, Sergachev are all pretty dang close. I think Dubois as a big, powerwinger would probably be in our top 6-8. But I think 2-3 of the d-men may be ranked ahead of a finesse winger in Nylander.

Anyways I know its not a popular opinion but I think we need to keep an open mind. I think ruling out d-men being in our top grouping is questionable. For Nylander to be in our top 6 he'd have to be the clear BPA available and I don't think that's the case. I think he's close enough to the d-men that they use their organizational philosophy of the tie going to the more valuable position, defense. Interesting discussion, wish the draft would come sooner!

I'm starting to lean to Tkachuk over Dubois now as it seems like he may offensively translate better to the NHL as he has great vision and he ramped up his goal scoring in the playoffs which was a bit of a concern for me.

[GranteedEV]

Originally Posted by dustygoon

Or did he develop early and now others have caught up?

I think this is a fair call on Chychrun, but it doesn't mean he can't continue to develop. Development is not a straight line. Sometimes you hit a wall with a certain coach and need a change of scenery.

I will say that I thought Sergachyev and Fabbro have looked better than Chychrun in their draft years. But who knows, stagnant ol' Sean Day might be the best defenseman in the 2016 draft when it's all said and done.

[FanIn80]

Wow, that's a tough question. I guess, if we were to pick a D at #6... there's a few really good ones to choose from, but I think my preferred pick would be a new GM.

[Flames Draft Watcher]

Originally Posted by dustygoon

Is Chychrun viewed in a "meh" sort of way because he unfortunately has been ranked high for a while and scouts start to find holes and he actually is a top flight blueliner still? Or did he develop early and now others have caught up?

That's the real question. Scouts seem divided on the answer. 4/10 scouts Mackenzie talked to had him as the top blue liner still and still believe in his elite potential. One scout had him as high as #4. But 6/10 had him outside the top 10 and obviously their faith has been shaken and they doubt his elite upside.

We really don't know if the Flames are still believers or if they've lost faith. I think you can make a strong argument for both sides of the coin. Most of us haven't seen him enough to have an expert opinion so we're left to guess. It doesn't help that his U18s was mediocre and that's the only time some of us have seen him.

I think if the Flames are still believers then he's definitely in our top 6.

[Fighting Banana Slug]

Originally Posted by FanIn80

Wow, that's a tough question. I guess, if we were to pick a D at #6... there's a few really good ones to choose from, but I think my preferred pick would be a new GM.

I think people better be prepared for disappointment. Not a lock by any stretch, but if the top 5 picks are forwards, I would think it is pretty much 50/50 that the Flames pick a defenseman.

[Fire of the Phoenix]

Originally Posted by FanIn80

Wow, that's a tough question. I guess, if we were to pick a D at #6... there's a few really good ones to choose from, but I think my preferred pick would be a new GM.

Why? You'd probably just want the new guy run out of town in a couple of years over nothing too.

Time to fire Brad because he's not perfect, I'm sure the next guy will be lol.

[jmac98]

Originally Posted by Flames Draft Watcher

...

Anyways I know its not a popular opinion but I think we need to keep an open mind. I think ruling out d-men being in our top grouping is questionable. For Nylander to be in our top 6 he'd have to be the clear BPA available and I don't think that's the case. I think he's close enough to the d-men that they use their organizational philosophy of the tie going to the more valuable position, defense. Interesting discussion, wish the draft would come sooner!

Excellent response, well thought out and presented. Thank you for taking the time.

I just don't see a D-man sticking as the BPA either. Who knows where the Flames group has each player in their ranking, but it seems nothing is concrete for 5,6,7,8th amongst the masses. As such I just feel there's more value for the organization to get high profile forward over a high profile d based on what we have here and now within the organization.

And while you are right in that Calgary tends to put a higher priority on D (as evidenced by our existing core of D) than others, I would think to all things holy that if there's only 1 other team who might have adopted a similar mindset after such infamy, that it's Edmonton. And since they pick ahead of us and should they not trade it, you're now looking them taking one of the two perceived best dmen while you're then left with only 1 choice for consideration thereafter realistically. And should this happen, you're also now looking at either one of Dubois and Tkathcuk as being available to you, which is a different perceived tier than the Nylanders or Browns or whomever else at forward that would otherwise be the next BPA.

Exactly as you say, lots to consider and no wrong answers here. You've brought terrific insight and for all we know are 100% correct. My views are just that, and who am I but a handsome keyboard GM currently cheesed off at the 4-0 routing of Finland.

[Vulcan]

If the draft goes as generally predicted the next forward available to the Flames is Nylander and I could see the Flames passing on him as being too soft. The next set of forwards include
Jost - good but not outstanding, average size
McLeod - some like him a lot but low production
Keller - talented but too small
Brown - talented but too big?
Rubstov - Russian
Gauthier - production dropped off drastically in 2nd half

All of these are a bit of a gamble so taking a gamble on a defenceman could easily happen.

[dustygoon]

if scouts think the top player available is a blue liner, then take him. i don't see the problem. This pick isn't helping next year anyway. He hits his prime in 5 years at best. Gio will be old, Brodie will be 30. This is long range stuff. Plus these types of defensemen available this year are ones you win with (two way) while costing less than top flight high scoring guys that mess with cap picture. Vlasic is cheaper than Subban, but which one contributes more to winning? Kind of a toss-up.

You start picking positions, then you end up with chucko and pelech.

[Frank MetaMusil]

Originally Posted by dustygoon

if scouts think the top player available is a blue liner, then take him. i don't see the problem. This pick isn't helping next year anyway. He hits his prime in 5 years at best. Gio will be old, Brodie will be 30. This is long range stuff. Plus these types of defensemen available this year are ones you win with (two way) while costing less than top flight high scoring guys that mess with cap picture. Vlasic is cheaper than Subban, but which one contributes more to winning? Kind of a toss-up.

You start picking positions, then you end up with chucko and pelech.

Or Getzlaf/Carter/Richards instead of Phaneuf?