Jump to content
The Official Site of the Carolina Hurricanes
remkin

NHL Draft 2020

Recommended Posts

15 hours ago, spockrock said:


To think an 18 year old goalie will be ready for primetime NHL action in 1.5 yrs is lunacy.

Marc-André Fleury

Carey Price

Cam Ward

Carter Hart

Edited by Canesfanforever

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Even if he's 3 or 4 years out I go with Askarov if he's there. Sure, it's a bit of a raffle ticket. But a skater at #13 isn't a sure thing either, we've already got nice depth in our forward prospect pool, and even though the odds of a goalie hitting are lower, that could be viewed as a good reason to get the best odds possible on the goalie raffle ticket you do buy. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Canesfanforever said:

Marc-André Fleury

Carey Price

Cam Ward

Carter Hart

Cam  21

Carey 20

Fleury 19  (4-14 in 21 games)

Carter 20

 

So 3 years is about the ceiling for expectations.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I haven't been keeping up with the draft prospects at all but if Askarov is the real deal and is available at 13OA, man, take him.  Our prospect pool is looking good and we have a decent number of mid-20s-core-players who will become veterans over the next few years.  I mean if the impossible happens and Lafreniere is still sitting there available (he won't be) then of course you take him, but G is the one position that can turn a contender into a champion and the one position i feel the Canes have struggled with.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Canesfanforever said:

Marc-André Fleury

Carey Price

Cam Ward

Carter Hart


All North Americans, adjusted to playing here already. You’re kidding yoursellf if you think Askarov will be ready that quickly 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Canesfanforever said:

These links are one year old. In current KHL season which started a week ago there still 3 types of sizes. But they moved to a "hard" salary cap this year though players under 21 or 22 are completely exempt. So hope that our prospects who are in KHL will get more ice time

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, coastal_caniac said:

A goalie ready in 1.5 years.....that's laughable, imo.  3 years is being hopeful, more likely 4 years, particularly a Russian prospect.

I'm with you here coastal, and this argument put up by some is ridiculous IMHO. I've got neither the time nor patience to mount an argument pro or con, although I applaud those who have/are but I'd interject that "phenoms" in sports as well as anything occur. The 4 being pointed out are legit, BUT thats out of HOW MANY(i.e. the denominator portion of this equation)? Also as spockrock notes later, those are North American goalies, a fact ignored by some conveniently even though "the KHL is switching over to NHL size ice"? And I think it could be argued that we had a front row seat to what happens too often when any player is rushed to the Bigs, particularly a goalie, before their time. I'm not suggesting that I'd pass of Askarov if he's there at our pick, nor that I'm not drooling to finally have a shot at who could become a franchise goalie for many years, but at the same turn, I'd like him to be ready when he hit NHL ice. The draft cannot get here quick enough guys.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, KJUNKANE said:

I'm with you here coastal, and this argument put up by some is ridiculous IMHO. I've got neither the time nor patience to mount an argument pro or con, although I applaud those who have/are but I'd interject that "phenoms" in sports as well as anything occur. The 4 being pointed out are legit, BUT thats out of HOW MANY(i.e. the denominator portion of this equation)? Also as spockrock notes later, those are North American goalies, a fact ignored by some conveniently even though "the KHL is switching over to NHL size ice"? And I think it could be argued that we had a front row seat to what happens too often when any player is rushed to the Bigs, particularly a goalie, before their time. I'm not suggesting that I'd pass of Askarov if he's there at our pick, nor that I'm not drooling to finally have a shot at who could become a franchise goalie for many years, but at the same turn, I'd like him to be ready when he hit NHL ice. The draft cannot get here quick enough guys.


Yep, if they feel Askarov is the BPA, then that’s the pick. I don’t see it happening though, I see them going with a forward, particularly Holloway or Jarvis.

Edited by spockrock

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Looking over the potential forwards, it would be interesting to see who we like. It occurs to me that there could be a subtle difference in taking a forward with Askarov gone, and Askarov there, but we pass on him. If Askarov is still there, then A. We have to actively not take him. B. There will likely be one less top forward available to pick from as the team that passed on Aksarov probably takes a forward. If he's gone, likely there will be one more top forward on the board that would have gone if the team that took Askarov had taken someone else. I guess really all of this just says that trading up is probably not going to happen. If he's still there at 13 though, that's one less forward there, and so it will also depend on what our scouts think of the available forwards. 

 

This is one situation where BPA is more of a side issue. At 13, there is not much doubt that Askarov is, by far, the BPA. It's just the whole goalie thing. Also, we are not taking a D man. So really, if he's there, it's BFA or Askarov. If he's gone, BFA.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So I kind of skewed off the point I started with, which is this. Which forward do we like? Of course we won't know until we pick, and maybe not even then.

 

This draft tends to cluster pretty tightly around the top 8 players anyways. But even then, there are definitely outlier scouts. Mostly it has settled down to the top 9, including someone taking Drysdale on D, and Sanderson on D has climbed in a lot of mock drafts. Even Lundell has dropped in some to outside top 10, and Button has Holtz at #13 while just about everyone else has him in the top 8. So, similar to my original posts on here the top 10 seems pretty widely agreed on:

 

LaFren, Steutzle, Byfield, Rossi, Drysdale, Raymond, Holtz, Perfetti, Lundell, in some order at least similar to that. Many have Sanderson going around #10, or at some point ahead of us anyways. That would leave two teams picking ahead of us for the remainder of the forwards or another D man. (Guhle is pushing up as a D man). 

 

Most drafts see at least one guy fall that was expected to go high. Button putting Holtz #13, some having Lundell fall a bit. Or someone higher up reach for a guy, say Quinn because he's a goal machine. So, obviously, we shan't know until it plays out. 

 

But of who's left, it is as confusing as ever. Outside of a few games, none of these guys have played in forever too. So it is fascinating watching guys move up and down the draft projections with no new data. 

 

Anyways, while many like Quinn going high because of the goal scoring thing, it is possible that we could pick from any of these guys with an outside chance that a guy slides down such as Lundell, or less likely Holtz. Still, this is a pretty big diversion after that top 10. There is a case to be made for at least 8 forwards of which at least 6 will likely be there to pick from with Askarov still there, and 7 of these 8 likely there if Askarov is gone. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Since nothing much has materially changed from my original posts on these guys, this is the combined mock/scouting rankings in order. The spaces are where there is a significant gap. 

 

Mercer

Quinn

 

Holloway

Zary

Amirov

 

Gunler

 

Jarvis

LaPierre

Bourque

 

That's a lot of guys to potentially pick from. One could theoretically argue for trading down, but that is only if we can't put one ahead of the other.

 

Overall, Jarvis seems to be moving up, and Zary moving down.

 

IMO Mercer and Quinn are the most consistently ranked "best of the rest". Quinn put in a ton of goals and is often referred to as the best goal scorer in this draft. Mercer can snipe too though. Scouting phrases:

 

Mercer: He has high end passing and sniping. He has above average, but not blinding speed. But he has a very good first step. He has very good edge work. He plays PK and PP and does both well. Accurate tape to tape passes in one motion. High end offensive instincts. Wins battles. Smart around the net. "owns silky smooth hands, soft hands". Can look flashy like a 10 year vet in the o zone, then smothering checker. Good playmaker, but also a natural sniper. Finishes Checks. Quick on the forecheck. Good puck protection. Creates turnovers. 

 

Quinn: "ticket to the league is shot" (voted 3rd best shot in OHL). "talented offensive playmaker". "dynamic puck skill and creativity". "keeps puck on string". "maneuvers in and out of traffic". "good vision" "high IQ". "hands quite good". "anticipates where teammates will be". "strong motor" "hardest working player on team". "underrated as 200 foot player". Voted #3 player in OHL as dangerous around the net.

 

Jarvis is small but stout and scored in massive bunches, especially to close out the year. He was the #2 scorer in the WHL, with 1.69 ppg, but finished with 63 points in his last 26 games (2.42 ppg), which is off the charts (LaFren did 2.15, albeit over the whole year). This is where scouting comes in big time. Was he tapping a bunch of easy set ups into the net, or was he driving that offense? Synopsis of positives: Deceptively powerful and gritty for size. Goes to net. Wins battles. Excellent hands. Elite vision and puck control. Slippery as they come. Great lateral movement. Quick off the puck and good acceleration. Quick, accurate shot. Good forechecker. 2 way player. Hard worker in all 3 zones. 

 

He would be seen by some as a reach, but might not be there if we trade down.

 

Holloway and Gunler seem less likely because they've not produced in their higher leagues. Holloway seems to be a big power forward energy disruptor, but offensive upside is questioned (was there in Juniors, not in Wisconsin). Gunler has the tools but has questionable work ethic. He produced at age very well, but not in the SHL vs men, which was his last year. Still both have scout fans for sure. And the junior production could be a sign that they have a lot more offense than they've shown as freshman/rookie. And both are listed by scouts as "having the tools". Again, scouting is key.

 

Zary is considered an all around player. Although he seems to have dropped in recent lists, he was listed high by Pronman and Morreale. Scouting phrases: Excellent Vision. Hard working. Never quits. Always one of the best players on the ice. Great speed. Deft puck skills. Dangerous with shot and pass. Two way player. Wants puck on his stick at key times. Plays in all situations. 

 

Amirov: A bit like Holloway and Gunler, very high end in age group, but not so much in men's leagues. But the KHL is the best non NHL league by a decent margin. Scouting blurbs: Extremely elusive in tight places, excellent puck control in all three zones. Competes for every puck and usually wins. Very good work ethic. High hockey IQ. Good skater. Plays all 3 zones. While not physical is thought of as very good D player: anticipates, good positioning and good stick. He steals a lot of pucks. Can impact game effectively 5 on 5. Makes many subtle plays that all add up. 200 foot game. Agile with excellent edge work.  Excellent wrist shot with quick release. Very effective on forecheck.

 

LaPierre: This is an entirely different kettle of fish. This is a guy with dazzling, "eyes in the back of his head" playmaking skills who dropped. He has Teuravanen upside, but downside of a very weak shot, and 3 concussions and injury prone to date. If he can't develop at least a credible scoring threat, guys will just fall off him and dare him to shoot. If he has continued concussion problems he may never even play in the NHL. He really seems like a bigger gamble than a goalie at #13 to me. But his upside is sky high, ppg NHL playmaker.

 

Bourque: Though he finds himself ranked closer to #20, his scouting reports read well enough to at least include him here. And he's a center.

 

Scouts:  Skating highlighted by edgework and agility, he moves well laterally with quick cuts and direction changes. Strong on skates. Undersized, but low center of gravity and strong lower body make him hard to knock off puck. Protects puck well down low. Above average speed, but not super fast. Decent first few steps. Very good puckhandling skills. High hockey IQ. Quick hands open up passing lanes. Good vision, smart passes. Bread and butter is goal scorer. Quick release. Excellent wrist, strong snap, and very good one timer let him score in variety of ways. Soft hands to finish in close to net. Can change angle just before shot to confuse goalies. Plays and thinks extremely well at high speed.  A couple of scouts compare him to Travis Konecny. Not bad. D game "extremely well developed". Willing and effective back checker. Strong positionally and anticipates well. Active stick breaks up passes and steals puck. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OK. I have never been a fan of trading down in the first round. But I do have to say this: there are a lot of good forwards in the 12-20 range if one is generous even lower as some D men will sprinkle in there.

 

Personally I like Quinn and Mercer with a soft spot for Jarvis if the scouts think he scoring was for real, and I'd pick one of them if Askarov is gone. I still pick Askarov if he's there. 

 

But I'd be intrigued with what we could pull off trading down. What would we get? Really have to be a top second or even better depending on how far down we went. Overall I like the BPA model with forwards heavily biased, but man getting a high second in this draft will be a very high end potential roll of the dice type guy. 

 

I find myself pretty flexible as it turns out. 

 

My order of preference:

 

1. Aksarov

2. Mercer or Quinn

3. Trade down. (Can't believe I'm saying that, but of course, as always, depends on return). 

 

Love to hear trade down scenarios. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, remkin said:

OK. I have never been a fan of trading down in the first round. But I do have to say this: there are a lot of good forwards in the 12-20 range if one is generous even lower as some D men will sprinkle in there.

 

Personally I like Quinn and Mercer with a soft spot for Jarvis if the scouts think he scoring was for real, and I'd pick one of them if Askarov is gone. I still pick Askarov if he's there. 

 

But I'd be intrigued with what we could pull off trading down. What would we get? Really have to be a top second or even better depending on how far down we went. Overall I like the BPA model with forwards heavily biased, but man getting a high second in this draft will be a very high end potential roll of the dice type guy. 

 

I find myself pretty flexible as it turns out. 

 

My order of preference:

 

1. Aksarov

2. Mercer or Quinn

3. Trade down. (Can't believe I'm saying that, but of course, as always, depends on return). 

 

Love to hear trade down scenarios. 

The Canes have an affinity for trading down.  If their man is not on the board, I can see them trading down 3-4 spots with an eye on Amirov.  When they were set to pick at #19, I saw a few mocks predicting Amirov at that slot.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/10/2020 at 3:31 PM, beboplar said:

The Canes have an affinity for trading down.  If their man is not on the board, I can see them trading down 3-4 spots with an eye on Amirov.  When they were set to pick at #19, I saw a few mocks predicting Amirov at that slot.  

They might. It's not been a first round affinity though. 

 

That said, some years, and in some ways this seems like one of them, there is just a big chunk of players with high upside in that 12-20 range. It really comes down to how much separation our scouts and ultimately the committee put between those guys. If it's close, trading down might make sense.

 

I heard on XM today a guy who covers LA. He said two things that caught my interest. He said that it's harder and harder to trade up in the first round. That is borne out by how few of those trades happen. The other thing could be trade related and sounded interesting, but I'll put that elsewhere. His point on trading up was LA has 3 second rounders and would love to package them to get into the bottom of the first round with their second pick. They like to trade up. They're not a candidate for us to trade up in draft except trading second rounders maybe, but mainly it's harder to make moves in the first round because more and more GM's are realizing how important it is to draft and develop among other reason, so as to have some entry level guys who can contribute. 

 

This does get me thinking about what the price to move up might be these days, if we assume that our boy Tuslky's table undervalues the cost of moving up since it was easier during the timeframe he got his data from. I'll try to figure that out and post separately.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Canesfanforever said:

Here is a trade idea ,   If Askarov is not on the board  and picked up already ,   How about trading  Brady Skjei   and our 1st round pick this year   and prospect for Kevin Fiala ?


why?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Canesfanforever said:

Here is a trade idea ,   If Askarov is not on the board  and picked up already ,   How about trading  Brady Skjei   and our 1st round pick this year   and prospect for Kevin Fiala ?

You want to trade Skjei, 13OA, and a prospect for a guy who’s had one strong season?  Not a good idea.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, gocanes0506 said:

You want to trade Skjei, 13OA, and a prospect for a guy who’s had one strong season?  Not a good idea.

It's not just  a strong season ,  The guy  hustles ,  stripes players of the puck , he has  a good shot ,  a strong 2nd line winger if anything  and  his 2 way game is really really good .   his point total  could increase   over the years and   on top of that  he kinda plays a lot like Rod Brind'amour  .   Strong on the boards ,   checks people  . and good high hockey iq .    It is a Fantastic idea !     

 

Im only for this move if    and i repeat if   the canes miss out on getting Askarov . 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Canesfanforever said:

It's not just  a strong season ,  The guy  hustles ,  stripes players of the puck , he has  a good shot ,  a strong 2nd line winger if anything  and  his 2 way game is really really good .   his point total  could increase   over the years and   on top of that  he kinda plays a lot like Rod Brind'amour  .   Strong on the boards ,   checks people  . and good high hockey iq .    It is a Fantastic idea !     

 

Im only for this move if    and i repeat if   the canes miss out on getting Askarov . 

He has had a combined 147 hits over 287 games. Im not sure where you are getting your info.

 

i’ll pass on that overpayment.

Edited by gocanes0506
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let me rephrase  that ,   Fiala  does not play like brind'amour  , that was a bad comparison on my part   he plays a lot like   a TJ  Oshie in his prime when that dude was with the blues . 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, gocanes0506 said:

He has had a combined 147 hits over 287 games. Im not sure where you are getting your info.

Did you not watch any of the playoff games when the wild were in ? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...