Which I love. Michkov is BPA. I think in the end they go that route when no suitable trade offer materializes. If one does though them let the fun begin.
Executive 1: “For me, he would absolutely be in the conversation with the No. 2 pick. He’s that good.”
Executive 2: “If I got my ownership’s approval, I’m taking him as high as No. 3 and possibly even No. 2.”
Executive 3: “I would let someone else pick him. Between his skating, frame, one-way play and his demeanor there’s too much risk for me at the highest points of the draft before you get into the obvious stuff with his contract and the war.”
Executive 4: “He’s a hockey genius. He’s the second-best player in the draft, and all things being equal, could push Bedard as a pure player. I get balancing the risks versus taking a very good center but once those guys are gone I would take Michkov.”
————————-
Scout 1: “I saw Tarasenko at the same age. Michkov is better.”
Executive 5: “He would have been the No. 1 pick in a lot of the past few drafts and that’s possibly with the Russia and contract situation included. You don’t want to overthink it with a talent like this.”
Scout 2: “Central has him at 5-foot-10, but that’s unofficial, I think he’s closer to 5-9. So you have a 5-9 not-amazing-skating, average-compete winger. The range of outcomes are narrow. Either he’s what you hope he becomes, which is a legit star scorer, or he’s closer to a very ordinary and replaceable piece if he doesn’t hit.”
Executive 6: “I get taking Fantilli over him. I think Michkov is a slightly better player, but Fantilli is a star, he’s Canadian, a center, I get it. I would have a hard time stomaching taking Carlsson over Michkov. I think you’re leaving too much talent on the table.”
Executive 7: “It’s a lot easier to just take somebody else. You may be waiting the full three years, you may be waiting longer. Meanwhile, the guys you passed on are helping your opponents win games against you.”
Scout 3: “Six to 10 is where the debate starts for me. Bedard, Fantilli, Carlsson, Smith are all studs, and you know they’re playing for you and likely going to be excellent. I would seriously wrestle with Reinbacher versus him too. But once all those guys are gone I think you would start to twist my arm to take him.”
Scout 4: “I just say put him where he belongs on talent and if he’s the best player I take him. Maybe if it’s close to someone else you take them instead. When was the last time a good Russian player didn’t come? I know the circumstances with the war are different than in recent years, but I have a hard time imagining him not coming. It may take longer than you like, but he looks like he has a chance to be a star. You win with stars, and if he becomes that good when he arrives he will instantly change your team. If he won’t sign with you, then you have a massive trade piece.”
———————
Scout 5: “I just don’t see him going at the very top parts of the draft. You guys in the media have overhyped him. An NHL team is not taking him top 5 given the myriad of risks in his profile.”
Executive 8: “Once Bedard, Fantilli, Smith, Carlsson go is when I start to think about it. Dvorsky versus Michkov, Reinbacher versus Michkov, that would be a real debate in our room. Once you get past guys like that it starts to get a bit ridiculous though. You can have real reservations about picking him for legit reasons, but he’s generational at the hardest thing to do: scoring goals.”
Executive 9: “You pass on him and you’re probably never going to find that kind of hockey sense again.”
Executive 10: “He’s very good, but “the best Russian prospect since Ovechkin” hype he gets is over the top. He’s a lot closer to Tarasenko as a prospect than Ovie.”
montrealhockeynow.com
outta Dodge ASAP.
