*Disclaimer: This thread is about draft eligible players for the 2012 NHL Entry Draft, not to discuss where we'll finish in the standings, our legitimacy as a play-off team or anything of that matter.*
I thought I would kick off our first official 2012 draft thread with my own Top 10.
One player that I keep hearing great things about is Radek Faksa. His stock has quickly risen this year as a rookie and plays all elements for his team, including the point on the PP. I wonder how high he eventually finishs in rankings, and ends up going?
I would love for him to be the final piece of our top 6, but just don't see how it could happen. 6'3, over 200 pounds already, plays a physical game and plays a very good 2 way game. He is also known for having high hockey IQ, very good speed and good set up and finishing skills.
Has there been anyone seen him play?
Quote:
Originally Posted by dnicks17
When I think of Murray, I always run into two questions.
Is he going to be much better than a guy like Nick Schultz? And...is that a bad thing?
They're very similar in size, skating and defensive positioning/stickwork. Schultz has also shown he has some offensive ability when he isn't playing in Minnesota's system.
Murray seems like he could improve our D next season and beyond. Dumba might take a bit longer, but has the potential to be a game breaker. Then there's Galchenyuk who could easily end up being the best player from the draft.
I'm really not a fan of Grigorenko or this draft.
Quote:
Originally Posted by joestevens29
I'd think if you are drafting in the top 5 or 10 for that matter you are hoping for more than a Schultz.
Buttons latest. I don't think he even tries anymore.
Side note, I'd assume this year is as good as any for the Devils to give up their first. If they do and you are drafted 30th overall do you consider yourself a first rounder or second rounder?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skimmingswerth
Neither am I, too many variables and questions to firmly decide who I want to take anywhere from 1st-5th. Crazy how the draft is shaping up considering the hype it was getting a year ago.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dnicks17
He's out to lunch on Finn, Ceci and Subban, in my opinion.
Other than that though, it doesn't look too bad to me.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mohaj
Ideally, Murray has a lot of room to grow whereas Shultz has been playing for a decade.
that said, I've been sold on the Murray hype for a full year now...so in some ways I go
"Holy ****! he skated backwards they need to draft this guy"...
"Holy **** he just made a pass...they need to draft this guy" ....
"Holy **** he is on the shutdown pairing...they need to draft this guy" ...
and then
"Holy **** he just ****ed up the WJC tourney...oh well...Schiefele and Visintin suck...they need to draft this guy!"
Quote:
Originally Posted by ponokanocker
Agreed. There seems to be a lot of big holes being punched in every prospect that I don't remember from previous years.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dnicks17
Yup. Last year was so easy.
#1C(RNH), #1D(Larsson) or #1W(Landeskog). All with no question marks.
This year, I see a big question marks for pretty much everyone in the top 5.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oilbleeder
I think for me it's Murray if we're taking a D-man, and if Nail isn't available, then for me it's probably Galchenyuk if we're taking a forward.
If there is even a slight risk of Grigorenko's work ethic, I honestly don't wanna take a risk.
Quote:
Originally Posted by I am the Liquor
Unlike you or me, he watches all these players. Live.
Quote:
Originally Posted by I am the Liquor
There were question marks for all of those players.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BoredMan
Doesn't change the fact that anything Burron writes/says is purposely controversial in order to get hits/viewers. Having Grigorenko and Murray so low will get that done. Again.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Reimer
This is what is so bush league about the Devils getting to choose when they get to forfeit their pick over the next three years. They either should have lost their pick last season or else they should have had to pick from the start when in the next three seasons that they wanted to forfeit that pick. Obviously this year would be the year to forfeit it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by I am the Liquor
Ive seen him give explanations for why he has who ranked where. I dont think he trifles in order to stir up the pot. He is a scout with over 20yrs experience. I doubt he wants to risk his reputation playing games like that.
I suppose it is possible, but it would be highly doubtful imo.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Reimer
There are always questions. However last years assessment by dnicks is pretty bang on. This year who is the top d? Who is the top winger? Who is the top C?
Only one that's really a lock is Yakupov for top winger, however he does have the Russian factor and the fact that he just got laid out this past weekend doesn't help his draft stock either. So it really is tough to judge.
But last year, many people said RNH was the guy, we all knew Larsson was the best d-man available and everyone was in consensus that Landeskog was the most NHL ready prospect.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skimmingswerth
New thread soon? Title: "Our Losing Endeavor for Whoever"
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mohaj
Maybe Grigorenko and Murray fall but I doubt it. I think the locks are still there.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Neilio
I haven't heard anything about this until now. I don't think it will affect Nail so much, but I can't remember a draft that had so many question marks due to injury.
Agreed, it's just nuts, I wonder if he starts to drop on the rankings, someone gets him as a monster steal at around 5 to 7, that would be crazy.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BoredMan
That's the thing. He's spent so much time scouting that the only reason I think of for him to make such weird statements is to boost ratings.
For example, this past summer he did a one-year-later look at the 2010 draft. Hall was #2 because apparently he can't excel without a good centre. Jarred Tinordi moved up fourteen spots to 8. Might my inner Narnia talking but something isn't kosher about Button's lists.
Disclaimer: I am not a professional scout. That is to say, I am an Edmonton Oilers fanatic that is obsessed with CHL hockey and the tank that is the Oilers. I rely heavily on other scouting services for video and reports on European players. I love watching these young professionals and providing an independent service that incorporates the rankings of other scouts while stating my own personal opinion. Although most scouts are very good at gathering primary data, I find that they often misinterpret it. If you do not agree with me, you are intitled to your opinion as well. Having said I will provide a rational explanation for all my rankings and interpreting secondary data.
Scouting Philosophy:
1. Player Types: Scouts tend to fall in love with certain types of players rather than focusing on top end potential and the individuals skill set.
Example: Tom Wilson brings the size and toughness teams need down the road. Everyone pegs him as the next Lucic despite struggling offensively. It makes very little sense to pick a player who is pegged as a third line winger rather than someone who is capable of being a second line center.
2. Past Rankings: Rather than focusing on the individual, scouts often project the success rate of certain players based on previous results. This is similar to the gamblers fallacy.
Example: Erik Johnson was a 1st overall selection and never met expectations. Although this is true, it has no implication that any future defencemen selected 1st overall will bust.
3. Comparisons: Just because something is similar between players, doesn't mean that everything is similar between players.
Example: Matt Dumba has been compared to PK Subban because of the style of game he plays. Yet, Subban has questionable character issues. Matt Dumba is Matt Dumba and no one else. Comparisons are great but aren't perfect.
4. Best Player Available: I always found this to be a term that people use in false dilemmas. They try and polarize BPA from need. Rather, team dynamics, depth charts systems, mentors, etc all play important parts of a kids development. Some players play better under different situations. Rather, I don't focus on just need or BPA but BVA- best value available. If a player is clearly on another level, you go with the player that is significantly better. However if they are nearly equal you pick the player that addresses the teams long term need.
Example: Its not a good idea to take a guy like Plante (projected 2nd rounder) over a guy like Max Paciorrety because at the time we needed defence. But at the same time someone like Gagner was the BPA but hasnt addresses any kind of long term void.
Last edited by DousedInOil: 03-29-2012 at 02:11 AM.
I just came on to say that I'm surprised that so many posters find this to be such a weak draft. I still think this is an incredibly deep draft with probably some of the best defencemen and goaltenders we have seen in a long time. The only downside is the lack of top 6 northamerican forwards. I think their will be a lot of good players taken in rounds 3-5.
It's strong for goaltenders if you're buying into the Subban hype.
Vasilevski, Dansk, Gillies and Subban are definitely less enticing than Hellberg, Gibson, Gibson and Perhonen.
Not really.
There was lots of talk from fans and talking heads saying RNH was too small and Larsson/Landeskog didn't have the offense.
But, anyone who watched them knew that that wasn't the case.
So there were questions then.
There was lots of discussion about Hopkins not being ready/physically mature, Larsson not being "offensive" enough, and similar questions about the offensive upside of Landeskog's game.
There is no doubt about Yakupov going first overall. Probably the biggest lock for first overall in the last few years.
Most people feel Grigorenko is #2, and after that most people feel it is Murray at #3.
It's strong for goaltenders if you're buying into the Subban hype.
Vasilevski, Dansk, Gillies and Subban are definitely less enticing than Hellberg, Gibson, Gibson and Perhonen.
Vasilevski is going to be a beast. I'll stake my reputation on it. (not that I really have one... but still it sounds good to say that. ) I bet he even goes higher than #3 ranked Ebert from the top of this thread.
Seriously though, he just seems like such a solid, mature talent in net. Good reflexes, great angles.. all around package. Love to get him with a late 1st rounder in the Oilers get another one... or if he drops to the 2nd round (very doubtful).
As to how strong the draft is... just my very rough assessment but it looks strong when it comes to dmen. At this stage you could make arguments for maybe 15 dmen being picked in the 1st round. I doubt that many will actually be chosen because not every team goes for a dman that early... but you certainly could say that half of the top 30 prospects are dmen this year and people wouldn't look at you like you're crazy.
D Ryan Murray
D Mathew Dumba
D Morgan Rielly
D Jacob Trouba
D Griffin Reinhart
D Cody Ceci
D Matt Finn
D Slater Koekkoek
D Olli Määttä
D Derrick Pouliot
D Ludvig Bystrom
D Brady Skeji
D Michael Matheson
D Damon Severson
D Jordan Schmaltz
D Dalton Thrower
D Ville Pokka
D Hampus Lindholm
That's a list of 18 dmen who all have shots at going in the 1st. There will definitely be a few names on that list still available early in the 2nd and I have a feeling someone in the 2nd half of that list will likely be an Oiler come June.
It's certainly looking weaker for forwards with maybe only a half dozen or so forwards really riding high in the rankings.
It looks decent for goalies. If 2 goalies are picked in the 1st which could happen this year, that pretty much makes it a solid year for goalies.
Of course it's all relative... does the dmen pool look more promising just because the forwards are so weak in this draft by comparison or is this a truly strong year for dmen? Probably a bit of both.
As always the strength of the draft won't really be known for a few years as all the prospects make their way (or not) to their NHL clubs.
Button is "unique" with his rankings. He's one "rogue" voice so he is always going to have some off the wall picks. I'd much sooner look at the ISS rankings or Bobby Macs consensus list for a truer picture of what the scouts are thinking.
I do think though that in a year with a weak crop of forwards and a LOT of defensmen who are pretty close to each other (beyond the top handful of dmen prospects there are a lot of others that are close)... you are bound to get a lot of disparity on various draft lists.
I personally think you'll see Yakupov, Grigorenko, Galchenyuk, Murray, Dumba in the top 5... but the order could be any which way and any of them (outside Yakupov imo) may drop a few notches. After the top 5 or so, the draft order could be all over the board when it comes to the rest of the top prospects. It actually should make for an interesting draft because you don't really know where any prospect will end up... even more so than in most other years anyway.
Dumba scares the hell out of me.
There's no consensus about him. Some seem to think he'll be the best d-man in this draft. Others call him a wreck in his own end.
Without seeing him play, I'm inclined to think the truth is somewhere in the middle. And that's probably not good enough for such a high pick.
This. It's miles deeper as well. Guys like Murray, Drieger, and ever Bartosak all have the ability to be starters at the NHL level IMO. Their will be a couple steals for sure.
3 guys I'd be eyeing up in the 3rd/4th rounds if theyre still there. Murray, Whitney, Makarov, all have huge potential. Although Makarov is slightly undersized for a starting goalie in the NHL these days.
Grigorenko is the perfect fit for this team; they really need some size in the top six to go with Kid line/Hemsky.
Then they can package Sam "Mike Comrie" Gagner for some help on Defense.
The problem is that we have a lot of holes. In fact, so many that we can find a spot for all top-5 players from this draft. If injured Yakupov goes first, the management damn well better do their homework on who to draft.
I really feel we should draft a center either 2nd or 3rd overall. It's going to take 3 or so years for a drafted dman to make an impact most likely and even then it appears harder to evaluate defensmen at this stage. I'm hoping we'll draft a center and then trade Gagner in a package for a defensmen who can help us now. I don't think we should waste another year of the kids ELC's coming last and I think drafting a center helps us now more than anything especially if we can move what pieces we have in abundance at forward for areas that need help elsewhere. Galchenyuk and Grigorenko are my choices.
Is there a Justin Schultz to the Oilers thread? If the Oilers could sign this guy, wow. He has some sublime offensive ability for a d-man and has a well-rounded game.
Just my gut feeling but I now think the Oilers will pass on Grigorenko. It doesn't sound like he's a consensus #2 which makes me think they go with one of the Dmen instead.
Just my gut feeling but I now think the Oilers will pass on Grigorenko. It doesn't sound like he's a consensus #2 which makes me think they go with one of the Dmen instead.
I think it's Murray 100% love it or hate it.
A smooth skating D-man who has incredibly high hockey sense, can play in all situations and is ready to play in the NHL?
I think the guy fits what Stu and Tambo are looking for in a prospect IMO.
__________________ <-- Credit goes to The Nemesis.
_thumb.jpg)
) I bet he even goes higher than #3 ranked Ebert from the top of this thread. 
<-- Credit goes to The Nemesis.
