Huge changes in Draft Rankings (Craig Button: Apr. 7th)

[fishbulb]

http://www.tsn.ca/craig-s-list-suspenseful-race-for-no-3-1.249965

 

Wow... some huge changes in Craig Button's most recent draft rankings.  

 

Noah Hannifan all the way down to 12th!

Ivan Provorov up to the 5th spot.

 

While it's only one person's opinion, and teams will have their own list, Button is usually fairly solid on talent evaluation.  Not Mike Milbury solid, but pretty solid nonetheless.

 

 

 

[OccamsRazor]

Noah Hannifan all the way down to 12th!

He did not look going in the playoffs in the elimination game he was -3 but neither did his goaltender Thatcher Demko...luckily for Demko he has already been drafted or he would have slide too.

[OccamsRazor]

Funny someone on here was talking about Connor and look he sits right there at #7. Interesting.

[mojo1917]

Button pegged the Flyers picking Morin two years ago, that was out of nowhere for me so since then I've paid attention to the stuff he says.

[Podein25]

Scouting is a crapshoot at best, but the one thing that you can be certain of is that risers rise and fallers fall. It's like momentum. Once the tipping point is reached, over she goes.

[fishbulb]

I'm interested in Timo Meier and Rantanen.  We seriously need some size/skill at forward.  Perhaps trading down a few spots, picking up an extra 3rd and grabbing Rantanen.

 

Provorov is apparently the most "nhl ready" player in the draft.  He's built like a brick **** house, but seems a bit limited in the 'skill' department.  I really don't think we can draft a dman  that early in the first round anyway considering the state of our farm system.

[Podein25]

 We seriously need some size/skill at forward.  

 

 

Especially after we trade the only guy that currently meets that description (Voracek) 

[Lunatic]

Button pegged the Flyers picking Morin two years ago, that was out of nowhere for me so since then I've paid attention to the stuff he says.

He  also rated Sanheim at eight by the end of the year. It looks like that call was solid as well. Having watched Hannifin, if I was GM, I would have a hard time not taking him at 7/8.

[J0e Th0rnton]

Hanafin at 12th? Sign me up. Somehow, I doubt he goes higher than 5th tho

[jammer2]

  I really like Button, he's a wealth of knowledge....knows as much as, or more than Pierre McGuire, which is saying something...but he does rank prospects according to where he thinks they will actually go...he ranks them in terms of impact and skill level, so even though he knows a TON...you have to take his rankings with grain of salt.

 

 

 I think he has Werenski in the right spot, and I like the idea of Hanfin and Crouse sliding and Meier gaining traction, he's moving up in almost everyones mock.

[J0e Th0rnton]

  I really like Button, he's a wealth of knowledge....knows as much as, or more than Pierre McGuire, which is saying something...but he does rank prospects according to where he thinks they will actually go...he ranks them in terms of impact and skill level, so even though he knows a TON...you have to take his rankings with grain of salt.

 

 

 I think he has Werenski in the right spot, and I like the idea of Hanfin and Crouse sliding and Meier gaining traction, he's moving up in almost everyones mock.

For comparison's sake, let's look at his 2011 list pre-draft

http://www2.tsn.ca/draftcentre/feature/?id=38615

 

 

And 2012

1. Nail Yakupov 1 Sarnia (OHL) 10/6/93 RW L 5'11/189 42 31 38 69 +15

2. Mathew Dumba 2 Red Deer (WHL) 7/25/94 D R 5'11/183 69 20 37 57 -6

3. Morgan Rielly 3 Moose Jaw (WHL) 3/9/94 D L 6'0/190 18 3 15 18 +6

4. Alex Galchenyuk 4 Sarnia (OHL) 2/12/94 C L 6'1/197 2 0 0 0 -4

5. Teuvo Teravainen 5 Jokerit (FIN) 9/11/94 RW L 5'11/165 40 11 7 18 -5

6. Griffin Reinhart 6 Edmonton (WHL) 1/24/94 D L 6'3/202 58 12 24 36 +23

7. Filip Forsberg 7 Leksands (SWE) 8/13/94 LW R 6'2/181 53 10 10 20 +1

8. Malcolm Subban 8 Belleville (OHL) 12/21/93 G L 6'1/188 39 25 2.50 .923 3

9. Matt Finn 9 Guelph (OHL) 2/24/94 D L 6'0/195 61 10 38 48 -13

10. Hampus Lindholm 10 Rogle (SWE) 1/20/94 D L 6'2/196 36 2 7 9 +7

11. Cody Ceci 11 Ottawa (OHL 12/21/93 D R 6'2/207 64 17 43 60 +21

12. Jacob Trouba 13 USNTDP 2/26/94 D R 6'2/193 54 9 23 32 -

13. Ryan Murray 12 Everett (WHL) 9/27/93 D L 6'0/205 46 9 22 31 E

14. Mark Jankowski 14 Stanstead (Quebec Prep) 9/13/94 C L 6'2/170 57 53 40 93 +51

15. Andrei Vasilevski 15 Ufa (KHL) 7/25/94 G L 6'3/204 27 - 2.23 .931 -

16. Zemgus Girgensons 16 Dubuque (USHL) 1/5/94 C L 6'1/198 49 24 31 55 +17

17. Radek Faksa 17 Kitchener (OHL) 1/9/94 C L 6'3/202 69 29 37 66 +19

18. Derrick Pouliot 18 Portland (WHL) 1/16/94 D L 5'11/186 72 11 48 59 +15

19. Ludvig Bystrom 19 MODO (SWE) 7/20/94 D L 6'1/208 42 8 25 33 -3

20. Mikhail Grigorenko 20 Quebec (QMJHL) 5/16/94 C L 6'3/200 59 40 45 85 +35

21. Tom Wilson 21 Plymouth (OHL) 3/29/94 RW R 6'4/203 49 9 18 27 +17

22. Tomas Hertl 22 Slavia Praha (Czech) 12/11/93 C L 6'2/198 38 12 13 25 -

23. Michael Matheson 24 Dubuque (USHL) 2/27/94 D L 6'1/178 53 11 17 28 E

24. Scott Laughton 25 Oshawa (OHL) 5/30/94 C L 6'0/177 64 21 32 53 +8

25. Gemel Smith 26 Owen Sound (OHL) 4/16/94 LW L 5'10/160 68 21 39 60 E

26. Brady Skeji 27 USNTDP 3/26/94 D L 6'2/200 60 4 19 23 -

27. Sebastien Collberg 28 Frolunda (SWE) 2/23/94 RW R 5'11/176 23 9 8 17 +2

28. Olli Maatta 30 London (OHL) 8/22/94 D L 6'1/202 58 5 27 32 +25

29. Henrik Samuelsson 54 Edmonton (WHL) 2/7/94 RW R 6'2/195 28 7 16 23 +18

30. Phillip Di Giuseppe 29 Michigan (CCHA) 10/9/93 LW L 5'11/176 40 11 15 26 +23

 

And 2013

http://www2.tsn.ca/draftcentre/feature/?id=98084

[JR Ewing]

Scouting is a crapshoot at best, but the one thing that you can be certain of is that risers rise and fallers fall. It's like momentum. Once the tipping point is reached, over she goes.

 

Yeah, I always get a good chuckle out of fans on boards saying things like "What?! Schornhoefer 5th?!?! Are they idiots?! Anybody can see he should be no more than 6th!!!"

 

Really? Do you actually think there's that big of a damned difference between them to get worked up over one place? Scouting is just what it is: attempting to peg down who the best prospects are going to be, but nobody can say with any authority exactly what a player will be when he's past the prospect stage.

 

You can always rely on the fact that some players will completely fail to deliver, while some will be better than thought. Some will face injury issues. Some are made to look better because of being part of a great team, and others not noticed for the opposite reason. For my part, since it IS a crapshoot, I (in the early portions of the draft at least) favor

 

-Can he create offense? If no, go to the next and repeat the question. If yes, proceed to ask

-Can he skate? If no, go on to the next. If yes, then ask

-Does he have decent size? If it's a yes, that's nice, since all things being equal, size is good.

 

Other than that, never EVER take a project, never draft a goalie number 1 overall, and unless he's producing eye popping offense, I'd be terrified of taking a defenseman #1 overall as well.

[jammer2]

<p>@J0e Th0rnton</p>

<p> </p>

<p> I'm gonna attempt to list my top 10 from Button's 2011 draft prospects</p>

<p> </p>

<p> In order...criteria...most successful career.....geez, the 2011 draft was fairly deep when you look at it.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>1)Andrei Vasilevski = Tampa Bay</p>

<p> </p>

<p>2)Jacob Trouba = Winnipeg</p>

<p> </p>

<p>3)Filip Forsberg = Nashville</p> Nashville

<p> </p>

<p>4)Alex Galanchyk = Montreal</p>

<p> </p>

<p>5)Derek Pouliot = Pittsburgh</p>

<p> </p>

<p>6)Scott Laughton = Philadelphia</p>

<p> </p>

<p>7)Griffin Rienhart = New York Islanders</p>

<p> </p>

<p>8)Nail Yakapov = Edmonton</p>

<p> </p>

<p>9)Zegmus Girgensons = Buffalo</p>

<p> </p>

<p>10)Ollie Matta = Pittsburgh</p>

<p> </p>

<p> Prospects not cracking my top 10....Hampus Lindholm = Anaheim, Tom Wilson = Washington, Codi Ceci = Ottawa, Thomas Hertl = San Jose, Matthew Dumba = Minnesota, Ryan Murray = Columbus (total and complete bust IMHO), Morgan Riley = Toronto, Teuvo Teravainian = Chicago, Mikael Grigorenko = Buffalo, Mark Janokawski = Calgary, Malcom Subban = Boston.</p>

[J0e Th0rnton]

Yeah, I always get a good chuckle out of fans on boards saying things like "What?! Schornhoefer 5th?!?! Are they idiots?! Anybody can see he should be no more than 6th!!!"

 

Really? Do you actually think there's that big of a damned difference between them to get worked up over one place? Scouting is just what it is: attempting to peg down who the best prospects are going to be, but nobody can say with any authority exactly what a player will be when he's past the prospect stage.

 

You can always rely on the fact that some players will completely fail to deliver, while some will be better than thought. Some will face injury issues. Some are made to look better because of being part of a great team, and others not noticed for the opposite reason. For my part, since it IS a crapshoot, I (in the early portions of the draft at least) favor

 

-Can he create offense? If no, go to the next and repeat the question. If yes, proceed to ask

-Can he skate? If no, go on to the next. If yes, then ask

-Does he have decent size? If it's a yes, that's nice, since all things being equal, size is good.

 

Other than that, never EVER take a project, never draft a goalie number 1 overall, and unless he's producing eye popping offense, I'd be terrified of taking a defenseman #1 overall as well.

Not only that, but there is a maturity process that works different in many individuals. Some kids don't realize how good they can be until they are pushed to excellence and dedication by the right people. It is no different than a grade 11 Student failing miserably under one teacher and doing exceptionally well under another teacher for the same subject because that teacher was better able to speak in a way he could make sense of. Some kids get more of the teacher's attention than others/Some coaches grant more icetime to people who catch on quicker.

 

You can see certain aspects of players games that should translate well to the NHL(Skating, size + mobility, IQ and ability to react properly without taking that extra second to think about it ). Judge their work ethic based on what you see. Opportunities given by the coaches, etc. But there are always those 5th, 6th round picks who put it all together a year or two or 10 after they are drafted. Or guys who find a Niche set of skills that ends up indispensable.

 

A very real fear is always size. "Derp* He's too small for the NHL. But guys like Martin StLouis prove it can be done.

 

Or guys with subpar skating. Well Logan Couture is one of the worst skaters on the Sharks.

 

But at the same time, you have guys drafted in the first round who you can see have the tools, but not the toolbox or work ethic. I saw that early with Nick Petrecki. I could see how lazy Setoguchi was, coasting on a line with Joe Thornton. I could see how good

 

Etc etc

 

Me? Yeah, I like to predict how some people will turn out. I'll never be an NHL scout, but I can throw opinions out when I see untapped talent, Hockey IQ and work ethic lol.

[Claude Monet]

He has Barzal dropping to 18. He must have read my review of him;)

Bitner at 25 good spot to grab him with the 2nd first.

Also, he has Ethan Bear rising big time! Small yet skilled dman.

[Podein25]

He has Barzal dropping to 18. He must have read my review of him;)

Bitner at 25 good spot to grab him with the 2nd first.

Also, he has Ethan Bear rising big time! Small yet skilled dman.

 

I was just asking about him! Might be in this thread even...

 

Yeah, I always get a good chuckle out of fans on boards saying things like "What?! Schornhoefer 5th?!?! Are they idiots?! Anybody can see he should be no more than 6th!!!"

 

Really? Do you actually think there's that big of a damned difference between them to get worked up over one place? Scouting is just what it is: attempting to peg down who the best prospects are going to be, but nobody can say with any authority exactly what a player will be when he's past the prospect stage.

 

You can always rely on the fact that some players will completely fail to deliver, while some will be better than thought. Some will face injury issues. Some are made to look better because of being part of a great team, and others not noticed for the opposite reason. For my part, since it IS a crapshoot, I (in the early portions of the draft at least) favor

 

-Can he create offense? If no, go to the next and repeat the question. If yes, proceed to ask

-Can he skate? If no, go on to the next. If yes, then ask

-Does he have decent size? If it's a yes, that's nice, since all things being equal, size is good.

 

Other than that, never EVER take a project, never draft a goalie number 1 overall, and unless he's producing eye popping offense, I'd be terrified of taking a defenseman #1 overall as well.

 

All good points JR.

 

I'd add: hockey IQ and competitiveness/character to the main criteria. But maybe that's just me.