2016 NHL Draft

[dammage79]

If Gauthier is getting consideration for #6, those that do give him consideration need to do some homework on Mike McLeod. Has the total "Flames" package. More so than most others when you scour the top ten-15 of the lists.

[Erick Estrada]

Originally Posted by dammage79

If Gauthier is getting consideration for #6, those that do give him consideration need to do some homework on Mike McLeod. Has the total "Flames" package. More so than most others when you scour the top ten-15 of the lists.

Like Gauthier I don't believe he's an option at 6th. We are discussing players that fans of the Bruins, Wild and Red Wings are discussing being available when their teams pick. Brown, Chychrun, or Jost are likely the only outliers that likely has a shot at being taken by the Flames.

[dammage79]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

Like Gauthier I don't believe he's an option at 6th. We are discussing players that fans of the Bruins, Wild and Red Wings are discussing being available when their teams pick. Brown, Chychrun, or Jost are likely the only outliers that likely has a shot at being taken by the Flames.

I don't disagree at all. I'm just making mention because we're finally seeing more posters explore other options that are down the list.

In the situation where guys like Jost, Gauthier, Keller, Brown and McLeod are high on CGYs list there'll be ample opportunity to trade down and gain some more assets to address other team needs while getting a guy they really like.

[cral12]

Originally Posted by cral12

E-Mac (THW) goes into the top players more in depth:


2016 NHL Draft War Room: Top 30 Impact Prospects - Part 1 - 1 to 15 (in tiers)
[Part 2 to follow plus some more on the 2nd rnd potentials]

As mentioned, Keller leads off at #16 - E-Mac explains why.
(I have him higher on my personal list)

Part 2 - Impact Prospects 16-30

[Flames Draft Watcher]

Originally Posted by jmac98

I'm actually making the assumption that most teams and their scouts would have a reasonably similar list this high up in the draft ranks. Of course it's not going to be identical from team to team as you read down the list, however, the same names and faces should be appearing in close proximity this high up in the draft, just in a different order, or otherwise not far removed from that placement. But if 1 team has a guy 6th and the general consensus is he's say 18th or whatever (not just Bob MacKenzie does rankings), then it raises eyebrows to the outlier group's scouting staff. See, Mark Jankowski.

I don't mind reaching for players, but that seems a strategy better utilized for later rounds, or if not, at least later in the first round. When you have the #6 pick, you have to hit a home run, not roll the dice.

It's a bad assumption to assume teams have similar lists at the top end. Fans would be shocked if they could see all the lists at how radically different they are after the first three names.

[Erick Estrada]

Originally Posted by Flames Draft Watcher

It's a bad assumption to assume teams have similar lists at the top end. Fans would be shocked if they could see all the lists at how radically different they are after the first three names.

I wouldn't say "radically" different. Sure the order of the players will vary and there will be some top ranked players that some teams aren't as enthusiastic about but if is was as radically different the first round wouldn't play out nearly as by the book as it typically does. Typically there's a slider player that drops but overall the top 10 picks of most drafts go almost according to the THN guide and most other final rankings give or take a spot or two for a couple of players.

[jmac98]

Originally Posted by Flames Draft Watcher

It's a bad assumption to assume teams have similar lists at the top end. Fans would be shocked if they could see all the lists at how radically different they are after the first three names.

I want to disagree with this, but wish to give you the benefit of the doubt that you've seen these lists?

I have never seen the lists to verify, so am just going off how the drafts typically play out with the early selections each year. The only question marks tend to be upon which order a generally understood group of players go.

I could be wrong, so please don't misconstrue my thoughts for ignorance. I'm merely a voice of non expertise making conversation.

[dammage79]

Originally Posted by jmac98

I want to disagree with this, but wish to give you the benefit of the doubt that you've seen these lists?

I have never seen the lists to verify, so am just going off how the drafts typically play out with the early selections each year. The only question marks tend to be upon which order a generally understood group of players go.

I could be wrong, so please don't misconstrue my thoughts for ignorance. I'm merely a voice of non expertise making conversation.

There is evidence to what FDW is saying actually. PHI in the '13 draft had their draft board open on their draft day video and had all the D men ahead of the FW's. I think that was the Sam Morin draft for them, and they went almost all D then too. They identified their BPA as positional. Now their D corps depth is enviable.

I know it's only 1 example but its a pretty good one actually.

[jmac98]

1 example is better than no examples. Thank you for this.

[Bingo]

Plus I think you guys might be getting stuck in semantics or how things are worded.

I would bet if you listed each team's top 15 there would be 11 guys appearing on all 30 and there would be some huge agreement between 90% of them.

However, each team probably has at least three guys of the 15 in very different areas of their counterparts.

By numeric averages they are similar, but these adjustments point to some really different behaviour on draft day.

[Flames Draft Watcher]

Originally Posted by jmac98

I want to disagree with this, but wish to give you the benefit of the doubt that you've seen these lists?

I have never seen the lists to verify, so am just going off how the drafts typically play out with the early selections each year. The only question marks tend to be upon which order a generally understood group of players go.

I could be wrong, so please don't misconstrue my thoughts for ignorance. I'm merely a voice of non expertise making conversation.

I haven't seen the lists this year but in 20 years of following the draft closely I've noticed that surprises are the norm in the draft. The "consensus" list done by Bob Mackenzie might be the best guess at the draft order but his list does not closely resemble every team's lists.

For example I think all of the following may be true:
-Some teams have Nylander top 6 while others may not have him top 10
-Some teams have Chychrun top 6 while others may not have him top 10
-Some teams have Brown top 6 while others may not have him top 10
-Some teams have Jost top 8 while others may not have him top 12
-Some teams have Juolevi as the top dmen
-Some teams have Sergachev as the top dman
-Some teams have Chychrun as the top dman
-It's not inconceivable that certain teams may have Bean, Fabbro or McAvoy as the top dman
-Some teams have Gauthier top 10 while others may not have him top 15
-Some teams have Mike McLeod top 10 while others may not have him top 15
-Some teams have Keller top 10 while others may not have him top 15
-Some teams have multiple defensemen in their top 7 while other teams may have zero defensemen in their top 7

These are examples but I think we could do the same for most of the players in this draft. I think what we'd find if we could look at all the lists is that there is not very much consensus at all outside of the top 3 players this year.

Which players outside the top 3 do seem to have some consensus around them? Seems like Tkachuk is top 5 for most teams. Seems like Dubois is top 8 for most teams. Seems like Juolevi is top 10 for most teams. Outside of that I see almost no consensus at all.

[Erick Estrada]

Brown is probably a guy that varies wildly from team to team in rankings as I could see him being maybe top 5 on some and 15+ on others. All it takes is one or two team specific scouts to really fall in love with a non-consensus player or two to alter the landscape of their list. Scouts are human like fans in that some will have personal biases as will GM's. The consensus lists due to their larger scope are probably better indicators of a player's worth than individual teams that may have their own criteria although the individual teams may have more chance of unearthing gems because of their focus on a certain criteria. The Flames focused on talent above all else in the draft that Gadreau got taken in the 4th round while a lot of teams passed on him due to his size.

[Sylvanfan]

It would be interesting to do a study on first round picks and evaluate players that teams traded up to pick. It's been stated earlier that it's not worthwhile to determine if moving up was the right move because the players could have been available at that teams original spot. But I do think you could evaluate the players that teams felt so strongly about that they moved up to get them.

I can remember San Jose doing this in 3 straight drafts, 2005 they moved up to draft Setoguchi. He had an okay career with a 30 goal seasons in San Jose and proved to be a valuable trade chip as part of the Brent Burns deal. In 2006 they moved up to draft Ty Wishart, who never played a game for them, but was part of the Dan Boyle deal. In 2007 they moved up to get into the 9th spot and draft Logan Couture which I would have to think looks like a really good move now.

[jmac98]

Originally Posted by Flames Draft Watcher

I haven't seen the lists this year but in 20 years of following the draft closely I've noticed that surprises are the norm in the draft. The "consensus" list done by Bob Mackenzie might be the best guess at the draft order but his list does not closely resemble every team's lists.

For example I think all of the following may be true:
-Some teams have Nylander top 6 while others may not have him top 10
-Some teams have Chychrun top 6 while others may not have him top 10
-Some teams have Brown top 6 while others may not have him top 10
-Some teams have Jost top 8 while others may not have him top 12
-Some teams have Juolevi as the top dmen
-Some teams have Sergachev as the top dman
-Some teams have Chychrun as the top dman
-It's not inconceivable that certain teams may have Bean, Fabbro or McAvoy as the top dman
-Some teams have Gauthier top 10 while others may not have him top 15
-Some teams have Mike McLeod top 10 while others may not have him top 15
-Some teams have Keller top 10 while others may not have him top 15
-Some teams have multiple defensemen in their top 7 while other teams may have zero defensemen in their top 7

These are examples but I think we could do the same for most of the players in this draft. I think what we'd find if we could look at all the lists is that there is not very much consensus at all outside of the top 3 players this year.

Which players outside the top 3 do seem to have some consensus around them? Seems like Tkachuk is top 5 for most teams. Seems like Dubois is top 8 for most teams. Seems like Juolevi is top 10 for most teams. Outside of that I see almost no consensus at all.

Thank you for this response. Very well presented and well thought out, I appreciate that you took this time.

To be honest though, it almost reads like now we're saying the same thing but just have different tolerances to the scale upon how far the range might extend.

I had noted that the same list of names should typically be found on the same rankings from team to team early on save for variance of order. There is no particular consensus of who is 6th as an exact, but from what I can tell, the discussions to date have centred around Nylander, Juolevi, Chychrun, etc. You read about Brown and Sergachev and a few others as outliers, but from what I have been following (not nearly as much as yourself mind you) there does seem to be a general grouping of players for consideration along with some secondary names, none of which have Gauthier in the mix. It just seems wherever the line is drawn for that particular ledge (or whatever term people are using) that Gauthier is not discovered on this side of it.

Thank you again for the great replies and excellent conversation. I've been reading about how some folks have been getting a bit rude in discussion but you've shown zero signs in refute, and that hasn't gone unnoticed. It's been a pleasure learning from you and consideration all your valid points to date. Thanks again.

[Erick Estrada]

Originally Posted by Sylvanfan

It would be interesting to do a study on first round picks and evaluate players that teams traded up to pick. It's been stated earlier that it's not worthwhile to determine if moving up was the right move because the players could have been available at that teams original spot. But I do think you could evaluate the players that teams felt so strongly about that they moved up to get them.

I can remember San Jose doing this in 3 straight drafts, 2005 they moved up to draft Setoguchi. He had an okay career with a 30 goal seasons in San Jose and proved to be a valuable trade chip as part of the Brent Burns deal. In 2006 they moved up to draft Ty Wishart, who never played a game for them, but was part of the Dan Boyle deal. In 2007 they moved up to get into the 9th spot and draft Logan Couture which I would have to think looks like a really good move now.

I know trading up is a mixed bag in the NFL. It's almost always a mistake when it comes to trading up to pick a QB and overall seems to be a 50/50 proposition at best which points to it not being worth it when you consider what you have to give up to move up in the draft. It doesn't happen as much in the NHL but I would think the same applies in that you are giving up a lot to draft a prospect that at the end of the day still has a decent probability of not working out especially in the NHL where it usually takes further professional development before a prospect is NHL ready.

[The Yen Man]

Has Calgary ever traded up in the first round? I've only ever remembered the disappointment of the Flames trading down numerous times.

[Roof-Daddy]

Originally Posted by The Yen Man

Has Calgary ever traded up in the first round? I've only ever remembered the disappointment of the Flames trading down numerous times.

1990

...and it ended up way worse than any time the Flames traded down.

Link

[SuperMatt18]

Originally Posted by Roof-Daddy

1990

...and it ended up way worse than any time the Flames traded down.

Link

Nope. Not clicking that link - I know what is behind that door.

[kyuss275]

Originally Posted by Roof-Daddy

1990

...and it ended up way worse than any time the Flames traded down.

Link

Why did i click on that?

[T@T]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

Like Gauthier I don't believe he's an option at 6th. We are discussing players that fans of the Bruins, Wild and Red Wings are discussing being available when their teams pick. Brown, Chychrun, or Jost are likely the only outliers that likely has a shot at being taken by the Flames.

The 6th pick isn't stapled to Trelivings arse, If both Dubois and Tkachuk are gone I would be in favor of trading it.
Maybe something like this:

#6 and #53
......for
#13 and #21

or

#6 and #55
......for
#14 and #29