2018 Draft Targets

[Kin]

In some cases it's less about filling the roster at the parent level and more about having enough currency to make the deals that you need to make.

That's true but you can't discount the importance just of having those high level prospects in the system.

Just as a for instance in 2008-2009 the Capitals had a great young core with Backstrom, Ovechkin, Semin and Green, none of whom were 25 years old. They were a pretty solid team too with 108 points.

But the cup they're about to win is going to be built pretty heavily around the talent they were able to find late in the first round with those guys already on the roster. Carlson, Kuznetsov, Wilson. Finding guys who aren't just bottom pairing defensemen or Brown/Hyman "top 6" types was necessary even with a bunch of young all-stars.

Chicago, LA...same story. It wasn't just about finding ok players. It was adding legit 20-30 goal scorers.

 

[rdowdall]

In some cases it's less about filling the roster at the parent level and more about having enough currency to make the deals that you need to make.

That's true but you can't discount the importance just of having those high level prospects in the system.

Just as a for instance in 2008-2009 the Capitals had a great young core with Backstrom, Ovechkin, Semin and Green, none of whom were 25 years old. They were a pretty solid team too with 108 points.

But the cup they're about to win is going to be built pretty heavily around the talent they were able to find late in the first round with those guys already on the roster. Carlson, Kuznetsov, Wilson. Finding guys who aren't just bottom pairing defensemen or Brown/Hyman "top 6" types was necessary even with a bunch of young all-stars.

Chicago, LA...same story. It wasn't just about finding ok players. It was adding legit 20-30 goal scorers.

True, and that's the phase that the Leafs are entering in to now, so this is the part where Dubas and the scouts have to hit on their picks.  It's not all doom and gloom, but they do have some work to do to sort of repair where they are at currently because of the course of action over the last couple of years.  Also, if the Leafs could avoid trading Forsberg for Martin Erat, that would also help them out.

Also, it should be noted, even with the Caps doing all that, this is still the first cup final they have made it too.  So not doing what you describe in you post puts the Leafs more in the position they were in during the early 2000's, where they were competitive, but in order to win the cup a lot of things were going to have to go right for them. 

 

[Kin]

True, and that's the phase that the Leafs are entering in to now, so this is the part where Dubas and the scouts have to hit on their picks.  It's not all doom and gloom, but they do have some work to do to sort of repair where they are at currently because of the course of action over the last couple of years.  Also, if the Leafs could avoid trading Forsberg for Martin Erat, that would also help them out.

Well, I think that's an important point though.The Caps didn't bat 1.000 from that point on. They had a few years with multiple firsts, some of which didn't pan out. That's why not doing that, not having those picks you'd have gotten through trading guys at the deadline represents a real blown opportunity.

You're right that it's not all doom and gloom but we should be real about them missing a real part of what they're probably going to need to do. If we're going to compare the Leafs to the Pens/Caps then we're counting on our young players not just being good but comparing favourably to some of the greatest players of all time. The teams that won without that built teams that were pretty good from top to bottom.

So if you want the Leafs to be like the Blackhawks or Kings, then finding a Keith or a Doughty becomes pretty important. If you want them to win like the Pens, then Matthews/Marner/Nylander need to be the equivalent of Crosby/Malkin/Kessel. Neither of those are easy paths.

 

[ZBBM]

Recalling the recent discussion on here about enthusiasm for hockey in a parity-league world, I have to wonder how much it's worth really dissecting lower-round picks.  If there is a single high road to a championship in the NHL, it seems to be to put together a really talented group of core players and then smart-manage around the margins of the rest, because when you spread the "rest" across 31 teams the results are not going to vary much among, say, the middle 20 teams.

I'm not saying draft schmaft, but I am saying it's a parity scouting world for the most part too, and everybody knows at a 95% confidence interval who the game-changing prospects are, and the 5% of game-changers who fall outside the first 2 rounds are going to accrue to teams pretty much randomly.

Of course, I realize that front offices get paid to obsess about the Timashovs of the world.

 

[Kin]

I'm not saying draft schmaft, but I am saying it's a parity scouting world for the most part too, and everybody knows at a 95% confidence interval who the game-changing prospects are, and the 5% of game-changers who fall outside the first 2 rounds are going to accrue to teams pretty much randomly.

Which is why it's so important for rebuilding teams to take as many swings at them as possible by means of accumulating extra draft picks and then using those draft picks with an eye towards prospects with higher upsides.

Because this isn't about the Timashovs of the world. It's about the guys getting picked 20-40.

 

[CarltonTheBear]

Because this isn't about the Timashovs of the world. It's about the guys getting picked 20-40.

I didn't hate the trades at the time, but this is where giving up 2nd rounders in consecutive drafts for a 4C really hurts (even if Pleks did end up playing a bigger role for us).

 

[CarltonTheBear]

I just realized that we don't have our 3rd round pick this year because of the Lou hiring. He's not even on our team anymore. Putting that rule in and then taking it out almost just as quickly was such a bush league move.

 

[Kin]

Just as an example, I mean, imagine for a second the Leafs don't land Tavares. Wouldn't it be nice to have a 19 or 20 year old C who had just scored 90+ points in the CHL? Sure, that kid isn't going to be a "game-changer" like Tavares but he's someone who you could maybe look at and say "He could step in for Bozak maybe next year or the year after and hopefully be somewhere between a Bozak and Tavares". That sort of prospect would actually come in real handy right now and because of some odd choices both with the picks they had and, as CtB points out, their weird desire to give picks away in the service of these sweet first round exits the Leafs really had to strain to not have any of those guys.

 

[ZBBM]

Because this isn't about the Timashovs of the world. It's about the guys getting picked 20-40.

I didn't hate the trades at the time, but this is where giving up 2nd rounders in consecutive drafts for a 4C really hurts (even if Pleks did end up playing a bigger role for us).

While not death-spiral decisions, that and not trading JVR (and/or 42 & 47) were, to be frank, very bad decisions by Lou.  And Shanahan, who had to have acquiesced. (apologies to the dead horse)

 

[ZBBM]

Because this isn't about the Timashovs of the world. It's about the guys getting picked 20-40.

Exactly.  The name of the game is not whiffing on your 1-20 opportunities, but right after that is hitting, say, .500 on getting NHLers destined for multi-hundred-game careers with 20-40.  (Which is why Dubas & Co. need to live up to the hype with #25 or whatever it is this year.)

I'm sure some stats hound has broken down all past drafts by career longevity.  Should be a good indicator of overall team success.

 

[CarltonTheBear]

While not death-spiral decisions, that and not trading JVR (and/or 42 & 47) were, to be frank, very bad decisions by Lou.  And Shanahan, who had to have acquiesced. (apologies to the dead horse)

I know this is somewhat using the benefit of hindsight (although it didn't take a genius to think the Leafs weren't winning the Cup in the past 2 seasons) but we could easily have had 5-6 extra picks in the first 2-3 rounds of the last 2 drafts and our current roster as of July 1st wouldn't have been worse in any way. That stings.

 

[Kin]

Exactly.  The name of the game is not whiffing on your 1-20 opportunities, but right after that is hitting, say, .500 on getting NHLers destined for multi-hundred-game careers with 20-40.  (Which is why Dubas & Co. need to live up to the hype with #25 or whatever it is this year.)

I'm sure some stats hound has broken down all past drafts by career longevity.  Should be a good indicator of overall team success.

Well, without wanting to repeat myself it's not just about hitting .500. It's about maximizing your at-bats and occasionally swinging for the fences.

Because right now it looks like the Leafs have more or less hit .500 on their high second round picks. Dermott looks like he could very well be a legit #4 kind of defenseman. That's a good use of that pick.

But for a team to have essentially gone through a rebuild and only had two of those picks feels like a seriously missed boat.

 

[ZBBM]

Exactly.  The name of the game is not whiffing on your 1-20 opportunities, but right after that is hitting, say, .500 on getting NHLers destined for multi-hundred-game careers with 20-40.  (Which is why Dubas & Co. need to live up to the hype with #25 or whatever it is this year.)

I'm sure some stats hound has broken down all past drafts by career longevity.  Should be a good indicator of overall team success.

Well, without wanting to repeat myself it's not just about hitting .500. It's about maximizing your at-bats and occasionally swinging for the fences.

Because right now it looks like the Leafs have more or less hit .500 on their high second round picks. Dermott looks like he could very well be a legit #4 kind of defenseman. That's a good use of that pick.

But for a team to have essentially gone through a rebuild and only had two of those picks feels like a seriously missed boat.

Just to add a minor point, I guess I consider drafting a multi-hundred-game player a home run, even if he isn't a superstar.

 

[Kin]

Just to add a minor point, I guess I consider drafting a multi-hundred-game player a home run, even if he isn't a superstar.

Well, this is probably where we reach the limit of the metaphor because a homerun is, just literally speaking, the absolute best possible outcome of any at-bat. I'm not sure there's much meaning here if we can't make any distinction between Nick Spaling and PK Subban.

 

[ZBBM]

Just to add a minor point, I guess I consider drafting a multi-hundred-game player a home run, even if he isn't a superstar.

Well, this is probably where we reach the limit of the metaphor because a homerun is, just literally speaking, the absolute best possible outcome of any at-bat. I'm not sure there's much meaning here if we can't make any distinction between Nick Spaling and PK Subban.

Spaling is an inside the park homer in spring training. PK is a grand slam in G7 of the World Series.

 

[Kin]

Just to add a minor point, I guess I consider drafting a multi-hundred-game player a home run, even if he isn't a superstar.

Well, this is probably where we reach the limit of the metaphor because a homerun is, just literally speaking, the absolute best possible outcome of any at-bat. I'm not sure there's much meaning here if we can't make any distinction between Nick Spaling and PK Subban.

Spaling is an inside the park homer in spring training. PK is a grand slam in G7 of the World Series.

Their difference in value is not one of context.

 

[rdowdall]

On the radio the other morning they had a scout talking about how this draft was broken in to sections.  They were:

Section 1:
Dahlin

Section 2:
Two other guys (they didn't name who)

Section 3:
6 - 8 other guys ( they didn't name who)

Section 4:
The rest of the players projected to go in the first and second rounds.

Basically what they were saying is that after the top 11 or so players, there is a large group of good players that are largely interchangeable.  After the second round though the depth starts to fall off.

Take that for what it's worth because there are always varying degrees of opinions on drafts from scouts, but it sounds like if you want to try and get some good players in the draft, you want to try and draft as much as you can in the first two rounds.  That sounds like a pro tip from Captain Obvious, but maybe this is the year to try and trade down to get some more picks, or try and get something for the impending free agents, even if they are just picks in the 2nd round. 

 

[Kin]

Basically what they were saying is that after the top 11 or so players, there is a large group of good players that are largely interchangeable.  After the second round though the depth starts to fall off.

For what it's worth that actually feels like the description of a pretty typical draft. Consensus on the first 15 or so, then a mixed bag for 30 picks, then your usual mid-late round grab bag.

That sounds like a pro tip from Captain Obvious, but maybe this is the year to try and trade down to get some more picks, or try and get something for the impending free agents, even if they are just picks in the 2nd round.

It feels fairly unlikely that the Leafs could trade down to acquire additional 2nd rounders. There really aren't that many options available without the Leafs trading significantly downward.

And the ship has sailed on getting 2nd round picks for expiring contracts.

 

[CarltonTheBear]

Wonder if Dubas tries to trade down again this year to collect more picks like he did in 2015. For a refresher, these are the trades he made back then:

Traded the 24th overall draft pick to PHI for the 29th overall draft pick and 61st overall draft pick. Then traded the 29th overall draft pick to CBJ for the 34th overall draft pick and the 68th overall draft pick. So he turned the 24th into the 34th (Dermott), 61st (Bracco), and 68th (Dzierkals) picks.

This year, there's a few teams with multiple picks in the late 1st/early-to-middle 2nd rounds:

Detroit has the 33rd and 36th overall picks (plus three 3rd rounders). Montreal has the 35th and 38th overall picks. The Islanders have the 41st and 43rd overall picks. The Rangers have the 26th, 28th, 39th, and 48th picks. St. Louis has picks 29 and 45. And Washington has the 30th or 31st and 46th pick.

The Leafs have the 25th, 52nd, 83rd, 118th, 149th, 209th, and 211th overall picks.

 

[rdowdall]

Wonder if Dubas tries to trade down again this year to collect more picks like he did in 2015. For a refresher, these are the trades he made back then:

Traded the 24th overall draft pick to PHI for the 29th overall draft pick and 61st overall draft pick. Then traded the 29th overall draft pick to CBJ for the 34th overall draft pick and the 68th overall draft pick. So he turned the 24th into the 34th (Dermott), 61st (Bracco), and 68th (Dzierkals) picks.

This year, there's a few teams with multiple picks in the late 1st/early-to-middle 2nd rounds:

Detroit has the 33rd and 36th overall picks (plus three 3rd rounders). Montreal has the 35th and 38th overall picks. The Islanders have the 41st and 43rd overall picks. The Rangers have the 26th, 28th, 39th, and 48th picks. St. Louis has picks 29 and 45. And Washington has the 30th or 31st and 46th pick.

The Leafs have the 25th, 52nd, 83rd, 118th, 149th, 209th, and 211th overall picks.

He could do that.  Although the circumstances are a little different this year.  That pick he traded was the second they had in the first round, so they had already made a pick.  If he does that again this year it would mean that he wasn't picking in the first round at all.  Not a big deal if there isn't a player that they feel has significantly more upside than the players they could get in the second round.