2018 NHL Entry Draft
- Thread starter GGpX
- Start date
GrandWazoo
Well-known member
Yeah those would pretty much be my top guys as well. I like Boqvist over Hughes for sure.
The Hughes I really want is coming next year.
Habsy
Not playing around anymore.
Sweet... tell him I said "wazzup?"
Would you have drafted him?
In the 3rd or 4th round... maybe even the 2nd. In the 1st though? His numbers would have to be insane.
worm
Well-known member
it is not binary though
you take the guy with the most skill
if somehow you find two players with the exact same level of skill....sure take the taller one
worm
Well-known member
i do not care about what skills are used so long as the skills keep the puck out of your net and put the puck in the other net
worm
Well-known member
i have no idea who that is but sure if he was the best player at the spot...yep
to use another extreme example i would have picked martin st louis in 1994 (i think that was his draft year) first overall
worm
Well-known member
johnny hockey was well known to be awesome
GGpX (i think it was him) was talking him up
that is the issue and potentially where the habs could benefit
take those guys that are small because others discount them...you can get them later in the draft
only position that gives me pause due to size is goaltending
No you would not have.
worm
Well-known member
maybe alfie
GrandWazoo
Well-known member
Are we mixing up skills and effectiveness? Skills is often associated with skating, puck skills and general offense. For forwards, that's often enough. Defensemen's game is more complex. If I look at guys like Weber and Pronger, I don't see the most skilled guys, but they're definitely effective. A guy like Keith Yandle for example is more skilled IMO, but I would never pick him before those guys.
There is just no a lot of under 6' top pairing defensemen in the league. I'm not even sure if there is any. That's because they can get overpowered by big forwards and it limits their effectiveness and ability to play in all situations. Ceiling for those defensemen is generally top 4 + PP specialist. It's not bad, but it's not what I'm hoping to get on a top 5 picks if other players available have higher ceilings.
For a forward, I don't care as much, but for a defenseman, it's a factor.
worm
Well-known member
sure...skills that translate into effectiveness
point being i do not care if a player is 4 feet tall so long as he has the skill to get it done
pronger has a lot more skill than those other two you mention (plus nobody will remember who is drafted number 2)
probability of a bigger player having more skill (harder shot, balance, etc) is higher but if a smaller player has more skill overall I still take him...faster skater, better shot, smarter, etc that outweighs balance, hard shot, etc i take that player
i find things like hard shot, bodychecking, get overrated for Dman and things like passing, positioning, skating get underated - ideally you have somebody with it all but i am thinking we are drafting in the 5-10 range so...the worry i have is when you draft cowan instead of ellis
GrandWazoo
Well-known member
Passing, positioning, and stick work along with decent mobility, are probably the most important traits of a defensemen, followed by strength and shot. Positioning and stick work can be taught to some extent while the others need to already be present at some degree.
I don't like defensemen that have limited mobility and passing game but are seen as tough, I can pass on those.
It also gets tricky when comparing defensemen with forwards. If I have the choice between two small equally skilled players, one being a forward, even a winger, and a defensemen, I take the forward.
You can be a 1st line small skilled winger, much rarer are top pairing small skilled defensemen. Karlsson comes to mind but he is still 6'0.
I don't like defensemen that have limited mobility and passing game but are seen as tough, I can pass on those.
It also gets tricky when comparing defensemen with forwards. If I have the choice between two small equally skilled players, one being a forward, even a winger, and a defensemen, I take the forward.
You can be a 1st line small skilled winger, much rarer are top pairing small skilled defensemen. Karlsson comes to mind but he is still 6'0.
I agree with Waz.
I appreciate it is only Bantam but my son is the tallest on his team (a problem in the first place) but at 5'9 he is still a decent size for Bantam. Two of the three biggest on the team are on D. oddly enough, two of the smallest are also on D. They cannot handle anyone in front of the net. My son is the only one who will actually move guys in front, and lay the body on them.
As a D parent, I have picked up from watching what Dmen need and it is the same in Atom as in the NHL. They need vision, ability to make an outlet pass (it is amazing how few in Bantam and even the NHL have trouble hitting a moving player on the stick), they need to keep head up going around the net, and the size the deal with forwards in the corner and front of the net.
While the actual height and weight is not the most important, guys like Bouillon at 5'6 couldn't handle behemoths like Lindros in the corners or front of the net.
Waz is right, you can be a midget like Gaudreau and be effective if you are a forward. You can't be an effective dman at 5'7 160.
I appreciate it is only Bantam but my son is the tallest on his team (a problem in the first place) but at 5'9 he is still a decent size for Bantam. Two of the three biggest on the team are on D. oddly enough, two of the smallest are also on D. They cannot handle anyone in front of the net. My son is the only one who will actually move guys in front, and lay the body on them.
As a D parent, I have picked up from watching what Dmen need and it is the same in Atom as in the NHL. They need vision, ability to make an outlet pass (it is amazing how few in Bantam and even the NHL have trouble hitting a moving player on the stick), they need to keep head up going around the net, and the size the deal with forwards in the corner and front of the net.
While the actual height and weight is not the most important, guys like Bouillon at 5'6 couldn't handle behemoths like Lindros in the corners or front of the net.
Waz is right, you can be a midget like Gaudreau and be effective if you are a forward. You can't be an effective dman at 5'7 160.
WeHaveMoreCupsThanYou
I will get banned again soon, worry not.
Gallagher would make a terrible defenceman but as a forward he's nothing if not effective. Boullion, like Gallagher, was a gamer and had the requisite heart and desire, but he wasn't nearly as effective a defenceman as Gallagher is a forward. Gally is a top 6 forward on most teams. Boullion was, at best, a bottom pairing defenceman on an average team and in the press box or sent to the farm if he was property of a good team.
Mete has some skill but with his size he's never going to be a top 4 defenceman. At some point a defenceman needs to be able to physically move opponents.
Sal_Butera
Well-known member
Boullion had very limited skill, and Mete’s skill lies in his skating, he’s never been a point producer and isn’t highly skilled at leading the rush & creating scoring opportunities. Mete is essentially a smaller built Bouillon with better foot speed & a little bit more skill level.
Last edited:
I know we stink but Mete has to eventually put some points on the board . He has great wheels but cant be considered even a marginal 4D if he cant produce .
Krug is a magician with the puck , so he can get buy . You cant have Mete and another 170 pounder in Hughes on the top 4 .
Even with the change in rules you will get smoked in the playoffs with 2 or 3 midgets on the backend.