Official 2018 NHL Amateur Entry Draft Discussion Thread

[kipwinger 8,524]

10 minutes ago, Dabura said:

Skill comes in many forms. Lidstrom wasn't flashy like Doughty is, but he controlled the ice. Keith was never flashy like Subban is, but (in his prime) he controlled the ice.

Bouchard thinks the game and sees the ice as well as, if not better than, any of his Dman peers. His first pass is exceptional. His shot is exceptional. (Hughes barely has a shot. Boqvist needs to work on his accuracy.) He logs huge minutes. He's the best natural PP QB in this draft class. I don't see a real problem with his skating, beyond the fact that he doesn't skate ludicrously well like Hughes does. He can't stickhandle in a phone booth, but he's a defenseman.

Not hardcore disagreeing with you, just saying.

I'm cool with us taking any of Hughes, Boqvist, Bouchard, Dobson. I just don't think it's quite accurate to say Bouchard is less skilled than the others. I want *effective* players.

You're absolutely right.  I don't disagree with your assessment at all.  It does come down to a stylistic preference.  And while I'd rather have Lidstrom than Doughty, I'd also rather have Josi than Pietrangelo, or Karlsson than Ekblad, or Burns than Vlasic, or Byfuglien than Trouba, or OEL than Parayko, etc. etc. etc. 

Again, I'm not saying this kid is "unskilled".  Clearly he's good or we wouldn't be talking about him.  I guess my point is that certain skills may be more useful in today's game than others.  And given his draft position, I'd rather have a guy with dynamic offense than a guy who does everything well but nothing exceptionally well. 

Edited May 18, 2018 by kipwinger

[Dabura 12,207]

9 minutes ago, kipwinger said:

You're absolutely right.  I don't disagree with your assessment at all.  It does come down to a stylistic preference.  And while I'd rather have Lidstrom than Doughty, I'd also rather have Josi than Pietrangelo, or Karlsson than Ekblad, or Burns than Vlasic, or Byfuglien than Trouba, or OEL than Parayko, etc. etc. etc. 

Again, I'm not saying this kid is "unskilled".  Clearly he's good or we wouldn't be talking about him.  I guess my point is that certain skills may be more useful in today's game than others.  And given his draft position, I'd rather have a guy with dynamic offense than a guy who does everything well but nothing exceptionally well. 

TBH, I'm just kinda busting your balls because I'm bored. lol

As much as I hate our defense situation, I think I'd be ok with us taking Wahlstrom 6th overall. I admit that I've had the "What if he's the Kane to Larkin's Toews?" thought. It's probably a stupid thought, but oh well. Hope springs eternal!

[kipwinger 8,524]

Just now, Dabura said:

TBH, I'm just kinda busting your balls because I'm bored. lol

As much as I hate our defense situation, I think I'd be ok with us taking Wahlstrom 6th overall. I admit that I've had the "What if he's the Kane to Larkin's Toews?" thought. It's probably a stupid thought, but oh well. Hope springs eternal!

I mean, elite is elite ya know?  Like I said, I'd rather have an elite winger than a really good defenseman.  I've read just about every scouting report and mock draft available, and the consensus seems to be that Wahlstrom has that kind of upside and Bouchard doesn't.  So I think I'd take him and find my defenseman elsewhere.  Plus, I don't think our defense is in as bad of shape as others might going forward. 

Not to mention we're likely to have two 1st round draft picks again next year (assuming Nyquist gets traded), but no guarantee that they'll be as high as 6th.  Better to go with the high end skill guy on this one I think.

[krsmith17 7,191]

I'm really high on Wahlstrom as well. I think he has the potential to be an elite scorer at the NHL level within a year or two. Which is something we desperately need. Where I differ from you, kip, is that I think Bouchard also has the potential to be elite. For me, their ceilings and floors are around the same, and I'd take the elite defenseman over the elite winger. We need to fill holes all over the roster, but I still say defense is the biggest area of concern now and looking 2-3 years from now.

Now, if Bouchard goes in the top 5, and Wahlstrom is still available, as I've said before, I'd definitely consider taking him over any of the other defensemen in that range.

Holland really needs to figure out a way to get another top 10 (7th overall) pick so we can get both... Problem solved.

[kipwinger 8,524]

24 minutes ago, krsmith17 said:

I'm really high on Wahlstrom as well. I think he has the potential to be an elite scorer at the NHL level within a year or two. Which is something we desperately need. Where I differ from you, kip, is that I think Bouchard also has the potential to be elite. For me, their ceilings and floors are around the same, and I'd take the elite defenseman over the elite winger. We need to fill holes all over the roster, but I still say defense is the biggest area of concern now and looking 2-3 years from now.

Now, if Bouchard goes in the top 5, and Wahlstrom is still available, as I've said before, I'd definitely consider taking him over any of the other defensemen in that range.

Holland really needs to figure out a way to get another top 10 (7th overall) pick so we can get both... Problem solved.

I'm curious why you think Boucher has that kind of upside?  I haven't seen a single assessment of him which suggests that.  What do you see that everyone else is missing?

Edited May 18, 2018 by kipwinger

[LeftWinger 4,962]

This settles it, we need to get the #7 from Vancouver. 

Honestly, if he went with Wahlstrom,  I don't anyone would be angry. Flip a coin, Bouchard or Wahlstrom.

If we're going D, it has to be Bouchard, if we're going O, it has to be Wahlstrom.

The question is, how much is one of the teams behind us going to give us to NOT draft Wahlstrom?

[Dabura 12,207]

1 hour ago, kipwinger said:

I'm curious why you think Boucher has that kind of upside?  I haven't seen a single assessment of him which suggests that.  What do you see that everyone else is missing?

You haven't seen a single assessment that suggests Bouchard has the potential to be an elite defenseman at the NHL level?

I've been on the Bouchard bandwagon for a while now. While I don't think he's a lock to be a top-pairing defenseman at the NHL level, I do feel he's about as promising a prospect as you're going to find outside of the true marquee prospects like Ekblad, Dahlin, et al. Same with Wahlstrom: he's by no means a lock to become an elite winger at the NHL level, he's not in that Ultra Top-Tier class of prospects, but he's about as good a winger as you could hope to get with the 6th overall pick.

Between the two, Bouchard is probably the riskier pick, if only because defensemen are generally more of a crapshoot. But, yeah, I wouldn't say there's a big difference between the two in terms of their projectability. Either one would be a great pick, neither one is a sure thing.

[Dabura 12,207]

For the record: Bouchard is not slow. Like, this isn't an actual thing. In comparison to Hughes or Boqvist? Sure, he's "slow." And maybe Dobson has better technique. Maybe. But this "Bouchard's skating is a real point of concern" is overblown nuttiness, IMHO.

[krsmith17 7,191]

2 hours ago, kipwinger said:

I'm curious why you think Boucher has that kind of upside?  I haven't seen a single assessment of him which suggests that.  What do you see that everyone else is missing?

Most reputable draft rankings, including Bob McKenzie, Craig Button and NHL Central Scouting, all have Bouchard ranked above Wahlstrom. Not that that's the end all, be all, but it does give us some sort of indication. I've never seen Bouchard play a single game. I only have the highlights and scouting reports that everyone has seen to base an opinion. I'm not going to pretend to be an expert, but based on the way a lot of experts view him, I'd say he has just as much elite potential as anyone in this draft class, outside of Dahlin (and maybe Svechnikov).

I've read that he has elite hockey IQ and awareness, and he's one of, if not the best passers in this draft. He has a bomb of a shot, that is also accurate. His foot speed isn't the best, but can be improved upon, and he makes up for it with great positioning. Also, he can quarterback a power-play as good as any.

Holland made one thing clear when talking about this year's draft, and that is that we need to address the blueline, and we can't continue to draft all smallish defensemen. I'd personally take Bouchard over any of the other defenders available, and I do still say we should take a defenseman with that 6th overall pick. If Bouchard is off the board, I'd be completely okay with taking Wahlstrom. If both are gone, I'd highly consider trading back.

[ChristopherReevesLegs 7,022]

My impression of Bouchard is he isnt flashy. Hes boring but effective. Which is fine, you need those type of D, but goddamn can we plz have one flashy dman soon, we have ******* none.

[marcaractac 3,963]

22 minutes ago, ChristopherReevesLegs said:

My impression of Bouchard is he isnt flashy. Hes boring but effective. Which is fine, you need those type of D, but goddamn can we plz have one flashy dman soon, we have ******* none.

#teamboqvist

[krsmith17 7,191]

25 minutes ago, ChristopherReevesLegs said:

My impression of Bouchard is he isnt flashy. Hes boring but effective. Which is fine, you need those type of D, but goddamn can we plz have one flashy dman soon, we have ******* none.

Hronek is somewhat flashy, but I don't think he'll be a top end guy. Saarijarvi is flashy, but he might not even make the NHL. I prefer steady, two-way defensemen, which is probably why I like Bouchard so much. If you prefer flashy, you'd probably rather Boqvist or Hughes.

[Dabura 12,207]

17 minutes ago, krsmith17 said:

I've never seen Bouchard play a single game

I've seen all of Hughes, Boqvist, Bouchard, Dobson in person. I've also seen Wahlstrom, Tkachuk, Zadina, Svechnikov, Dahlin in person. I've also seen Smith, Wilde, Veleno, Farabee, Noel, in person. Et al.

Not that that confers any degree of expertise on me. But, point is: I SEEN SOME S***.

The highlight packages you can find for all of these players on YouTube are, by their very nature, kind of misleading. If you only knew Boqvist through one of these videos, you'd think he's the next Doughty, or at least the next Gostisbehere. If you only knew Bouchard through the highlights, you'd think his shot is the only thing he has going for him. "Truth" is, Boqvist, when he's not making pretty plays in the o-zone, spends a decent amount of his time not really getting much accomplished, sometimes getting worked over in the d-zone because he's small and slight (though, to be fair, he's only a month away from being eligible for the 2019 draft, so he's quite young). There are definitely times where he seems more Kindl than wunderkind. With Bouchard's highlights, all you see is him scoring goals with well-placed shots, and that actually sells his overall game quite short -- while, admittedly, also neglecting the fact that he often tried to do way too much by himself this season and it often bit him right in the ass.

Every one of these four defensemen (and Wahlstrom, and Zadina, and Svechnikov, and even Dahlin) has his strengths and his shortcomings. Of the four defensemen, the safest pick is probably Dobson, as he appears to have the highest floor of the four while also having very real NHL top-pairing potential. But I slightly favor Bouchard over any of the others. Why? Because I feel his best qualities match up almost perfectly with our most pressing needs on the back end, needs that have fundamentally and fatally handicapped our team in the absence of Rafalski and Lidstrom. The post-Lidstrom Wings struggle mightily on the breakout; Bouchard's first pass is "elite, elite." The post-Lidstrom Wings struggle mightily to string passes together; Bouchard's passing is "elite, elite." The post-Lidstrom Wings struggle mightily just to hold the offensive blue line, especially on the power play; the o-zone is Bouchard's kitchen, his office, his house The post-Lidstrom Wings struggle mightily to run a precise, consistently effective power play; Bouchard is a masterful PP QB.

Maybe more than anything else, the post-Lidstrom Wings have desperately needed a true go-to guy on the blue line, a cornerstone player, someone who plays a ton of minutes and plays in all situations. A non-ancient leader. An engine. Someone who isn't just a skilled specialist. Someone who can help lift a team out of mediocrity instead of just being along for the ride. To me, Bouchard checks these boxes, and that's a really big deal. He was the London Knights' offense this season. He was counted on to lead a team that had just lost top talent to the NHL draft and he responded by owning the captaincy, playing big minutes, playing in all situations, being (mostly) accountable on the defensive side of the puck, and putting up 87 points in 67 games in the OHL.

tl;dr we're getting tkachuk

[krsmith17 7,191]

7 minutes ago, Dabura said:

I've seen all of Hughes, Boqvist, Bouchard, Dobson in person. I've also seen Wahlstrom, Tkachuk, Zadina, Svechnikov, Dahlin in person. I've also seen Smith, Wilde, Veleno, Farabee, Noel, in person. Et al.

Not that that confers any degree of expertise on me. But, point is: I SEEN SOME S***.

The highlight packages you can find for all of these players on YouTube are, by their very nature, kind of misleading...

How the hell have you seen all those players play in person? That's insane. Did you go to the WJC or something? I haven't seen a single one of them in person, and only a handful live on TV.

I completely agree regarding highlight videos. That's why I don't put a huge amount of stock into them. I more so base my opinion on reading articles written by, or quoted by the experts.

[kipwinger 8,524]

5 hours ago, Dabura said:

You haven't seen a single assessment that suggests Bouchard has the potential to be an elite defenseman at the NHL level?

I've been on the Bouchard bandwagon for a while now. While I don't think he's a lock to be a top-pairing defenseman at the NHL level, I do feel he's about as promising a prospect as you're going to find outside of the true marquee prospects like Ekblad, Dahlin, et al. Same with Wahlstrom: he's by no means a lock to become an elite winger at the NHL level, he's not in that Ultra Top-Tier class of prospects, but he's about as good a winger as you could hope to get with the 6th overall pick.

Between the two, Bouchard is probably the riskier pick, if only because defensemen are generally more of a crapshoot. But, yeah, I wouldn't say there's a big difference between the two in terms of their projectability. Either one would be a great pick, neither one is a sure thing.

I didn't say anyone was "a lock".  I said I've seen a number of scouting reports that suggest Wahlstrom has elite upside, I haven't seen any with the same suggestions about Bouchard.  Pretty much everything I read about Bouchard comes with a caveat.  Wahlstrom is generally regarded as the best pure goal scorer outside of Svechnikov.  Again, not a lock, but if people have said Bouchard has that kind of upside point me in that direction so I can get on the bandwagon too.

[kipwinger 8,524]

25 minutes ago, F.Michael said:

I agree Murphy was slow, but that's about it (I mean - the guy is in the  HHOF).

Bourchard apparently is similar with how easy he makes the little plays, but not so much with the foot speed.

 

My take as well.

Yeah, I was exaggerating a little too much.  Probably a stretch to say Murphy was unskilled.  He wasn't.  But I don't think he'd be nearly as effective in this day and age.  The game has changed away from that style of play while the Bobby Orr's and the Paul Coffey's would be just fine.  To hear Bouchard compared to Murphy doesn't inspire a lot of confidence in me when most of your better defensemen these days are excellent skaters with high end offensive ability to go with their defensive awareness. 

[Datsyukian-Deke 722]

On 5/18/2018 at 10:09 AM, krsmith17 said:

Hronek is somewhat flashy, but I don't think he'll be a top end guy. Saarijarvi is flashy, but he might not even make the NHL. I prefer steady, two-way defensemen, which is probably why I like Bouchard so much. If you prefer flashy, you'd probably rather Boqvist or Hughes.

In order to have that flashy defenseman that can jump up in the play, you need a solid stay at home defenseman that will cover for him, which the wings don’t really have either. So either way drafting Bouchard or Boqvist we are getting something the wings desperately need. I lean Bouchard myself because Bouchard is the more defensive defenseman and boqvist is the better offensive player but I think bouchards offensive capabilities are stronger than boqvists defensive capabilities if that makes sense.

[ChristopherReevesLegs 7,022]

On 5/18/2018 at 2:45 PM, Dabura said:

I've seen all of Hughes, Boqvist, Bouchard, Dobson in person. I've also seen Wahlstrom, Tkachuk, Zadina, Svechnikov, Dahlin in person. I've also seen Smith, Wilde, Veleno, Farabee, Noel, in person. Et al.

Not that that confers any degree of expertise on me. But, point is: I SEEN SOME S***.

The highlight packages you can find for all of these players on YouTube are, by their very nature, kind of misleading. If you only knew Boqvist through one of these videos, you'd think he's the next Doughty, or at least the next Gostisbehere. If you only knew Bouchard through the highlights, you'd think his shot is the only thing he has going for him. "Truth" is, Boqvist, when he's not making pretty plays in the o-zone, spends a decent amount of his time not really getting much accomplished, sometimes getting worked over in the d-zone because he's small and slight (though, to be fair, he's only a month away from being eligible for the 2019 draft, so he's quite young). There are definitely times where he seems more Kindl than wunderkind. With Bouchard's highlights, all you see is him scoring goals with well-placed shots, and that actually sells his overall game quite short -- while, admittedly, also neglecting the fact that he often tried to do way too much by himself this season and it often bit him right in the ass.

Every one of these four defensemen (and Wahlstrom, and Zadina, and Svechnikov, and even Dahlin) has his strengths and his shortcomings. Of the four defensemen, the safest pick is probably Dobson, as he appears to have the highest floor of the four while also having very real NHL top-pairing potential. But I slightly favor Bouchard over any of the others. Why? Because I feel his best qualities match up almost perfectly with our most pressing needs on the back end, needs that have fundamentally and fatally handicapped our team in the absence of Rafalski and Lidstrom. The post-Lidstrom Wings struggle mightily on the breakout; Bouchard's first pass is "elite, elite." The post-Lidstrom Wings struggle mightily to string passes together; Bouchard's passing is "elite, elite." The post-Lidstrom Wings struggle mightily just to hold the offensive blue line, especially on the power play; the o-zone is Bouchard's kitchen, his office, his house The post-Lidstrom Wings struggle mightily to run a precise, consistently effective power play; Bouchard is a masterful PP QB.

Maybe more than anything else, the post-Lidstrom Wings have desperately needed a true go-to guy on the blue line, a cornerstone player, someone who plays a ton of minutes and plays in all situations. A non-ancient leader. An engine. Someone who isn't just a skilled specialist. Someone who can help lift a team out of mediocrity instead of just being along for the ride. To me, Bouchard checks these boxes, and that's a really big deal. He was the London Knights' offense this season. He was counted on to lead a team that had just lost top talent to the NHL draft and he responded by owning the captaincy, playing big minutes, playing in all situations, being (mostly) accountable on the defensive side of the puck, and putting up 87 points in 67 games in the OHL.

tl;dr we're getting tkachuk

Now I want Bouchard

4 hours ago, Datsyukian-Deke said:

In order to have that flashy defenseman that can jump up in the play, you need a solid stay at home defenseman that will cover for him, which the wings don’t really have either. So either way drafting Bouchard or Boqvist we are getting something the wings desperately need. I lean Bouchard myself because Bouchard is the more defensive defenseman and boqvist is the better offensive player but I think bouchards offensive capabilities are stronger than boqvists defensive capabilities if that makes sense.

Id want a fast skating, hard-nosed, big bodied, shutdown Dman to pair with a guy like Boqvist.

Boqvist - Mckee ... would have made a great pair

[Dabura 12,207]

On 5/18/2018 at 2:58 PM, krsmith17 said:

How the hell have you seen all those players play in person? That's insane. Did you go to the WJC or something?

Caught some WJC action, which helped me check off a bunch of names on the "to-see list." Have some friends all across Canada and once every few years I go on a big trip to visit all of them where they're living and we'll typically catch some local CHL action. This year was one of those years.

Sometimes they'll send me "scouting reports" and/or crappy cell phone footage via the interwebz, because we're hopeless hockey nerds. Also have some friends in Scandinavia Land and it's the same basic dealy.

[ChristopherReevesLegs 7,022]

2 minutes ago, Dabura said:

Caught some WJC action, which helped me check off a bunch of names on the "to-see list." Have some friends all across Canada and once every few years I go on a big trip to visit all of them where they're living and we'll typically catch some local CHL action. This year was one of those years.

Sometimes they'll send me "scouting reports" and/or crappy cell phone footage via the interwebz, because we're hopeless hockey nerds. Also have some friends in Scandinavia Land and it's the same basic dealy.

Thank you for your service

[Dabura 12,207]

On 5/18/2018 at 5:58 PM, kipwinger said:

I didn't say anyone was "a lock".

Didn't mean to imply that you did. Was just saying.

On 5/18/2018 at 5:58 PM, kipwinger said:

I said I've seen a number of scouting reports that suggest Wahlstrom has elite upside, I haven't seen any with the same suggestions about Bouchard.  Pretty much everything I read about Bouchard comes with a caveat.  Wahlstrom is generally regarded as the best pure goal scorer outside of Svechnikov.  Again, not a lock, but if people have said Bouchard has that kind of upside point me in that direction so I can get on the bandwagon too.

I mean, it's largely a matter of personal interpretation. I guess there's also an element of semantics. That being said, I haven't noticed a big difference between the way people are projecting Wahlstrom and the way people are projecting Bouchard. For defensemen, people have Dahlin in a class of his own and then Hughes, Boqvist, Bouchard, Dobson making up the second tier. For wingers, it's pretty much Svechnikov & Zadina at the top and Tkachuk & Wahlstrom in a tier ever-so-slightly below them. (Personally, I might actually put Wahlstrom right alongside Svechnikov and Zadina.)

Some quick-read takes:

http://www.mynhldraft.com/2018/NHL-Draft-Profiles/Evan-Bouchard

http://www.mynhldraft.com/2018/NHL-Draft-Profiles/Oliver-Wahlstrom

I think it also comes down to wing vs. defense. Is a scoring winger scoring at an elite rate? If so, then you can comfortably call him an elite scoring winger (relative to his peers). It's not as easy to evaluate a defenseman. If we're talking point production, Bouchard's elite (relative to his peers). If we're talking hockey IQ and playmaking ability, Bouchard's elite (relative to his peers). Do these things plus a perfectly competent defensive game give him true elite upside (at the NHL level)? Hard to say. It's not like it is with scoring wingers, where you just care about their ability to put the puck in the net and you can boil it down to basic stats.

[ChristopherReevesLegs 7,022]

I like the Wahlstrom. I do. But Wahlstrom isnt clearly the better pick than Bouchard at this point.

And Im normally for drafting the best player available, but in the case Im siding with team need. And that is defense.

We have Larkin and Rasmussen down the middle and Mantha at wing. These are pretty much sure things. Who knows where the rest end up. We have no sure things at D. We need a sure thing at D.

Im a Bouchard guy.

[LeftWinger 4,962]

Dang, this is like the first time that all of us are on the same page with a draft pick. 

[Datsyukian-Deke 722]

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.blueshirtbanter.com/platform/amp/2018/5/18/17349830/blueshirt-banter-2018-nhl-draft-rankings-9-brady-tkachuk-boston-university-ncaa-scouting-report-usa

 

Good read on Tkachuk. Really hope we stay away. I like him, but not where we are drafting. We have bigger needs.

 

[Wheelchairsuperhero 1,453]

12 minutes ago, Datsyukian-Deke said:

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.blueshirtbanter.com/platform/amp/2018/5/18/17349830/blueshirt-banter-2018-nhl-draft-rankings-9-brady-tkachuk-boston-university-ncaa-scouting-report-usa

 

Good read on Tkachuk. Really hope we stay away. I like him, but not where we are drafting. We have bigger needs.

 

The use of Rasmussen as an example of an overrated draft prospect has me confused considering his recent playoff performance.