The Hockey PDOcast - Episode 243: One Last Mock Draft

Episode Date: June 22, 2018

Jonathan Willis joins the show to help run through the case for and against each of the top prospects available in this year's entry draft, and make picks for each of the teams selecting in the lottery.  Every episode of the podcast is available on iTunes, Soundcloud, Google Play, and Stitcher. Make sure to subscribe to the show so that you don’t miss out on any new episodes as they’re released. All ratings and reviews are also greatly appreciated. Thanks for listening! See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices If you'd like to gain access to the two extra shows we're doing each week this season, you can subscribe to our Patreon page here: www.patreon.com/thehockeypdocast/membership If you'd like to participate in the conversation and join the community we're building over on Discord, you can do so by signing up for the Hockey PDOcast's server here: https://discord.gg/a2QGRpJc84 The views and opinions expressed in this podcast are those of the hosts and guests and do not necessarily reflect the position of Rogers Media Inc. or any affiliate.

Are you ready for the most ridiculous internet sports show you have ever seen? Welcome to React, home of the most outrageous and hilarious videos the web has to offer. So join me, Rocky Theos, and my co-host, Raiders Pro Bowl defensive end, Max Crosby, as we invite your favorite athletes, celebrities, influencers, entertainers in for an episode of games, laughs, and of course the funniest reactions to the wildest web clips out there. Catch React on YouTube, and that is React, R-E-A-X-X. Don't miss it. This podcast episode is brought to you by Coors Light.

These days, everything is go, go, go. It's nonstop hustle all the time. Work, friends, family, expect you to be on 24-7? Well, sometimes you just need to reach for a Coors Light because it's made to chill. Coors Light is cold-loggered, cold-filtered, and cold-packaged. It's as crisp and refreshing as the Colorado Rockies. It is literally made to chill. Coors Light is the one I choose when I need to unwind.

So when you want to hit reset, reach for the beer that's made to chill. Get Coors Light and the new look delivered straight to your door with Drizzly or Instacart. Celebrate responsibly. Coors Brewing Company, Golden Colorado. Regressing to the mean since 2015, it's the Hockey PEDEOCast with your host, Dmitri Filipovich. Welcome to the Hockey PEDEOCast. My name is Dimitri Filipovich. my good buddy Jonathan Willis.

Jonathan, happy draft day to you. NHL Christmas, Dimitri. It is. Well, it's between this and July 1st is also a pretty awesome day itself. But you're right.

No, this is great. You know, we've been reading draft profiles and analysis and seeing mock drafts done for weeks and weeks on end. And it's really,

every year it seems to kind of grow as an industry and that's for the better. and we're recording this on the Friday morning, the day of the draft. So we're going to try and get this out there as soon as possible so people can hopefully listen to it before tonight's festivities. But if not, even if people are listening to this after, I think there's still going to be some good nuggets in here to take from it.

So hopefully it works out. So here was the plan. You and I will go through the top 15 picks, the lottery picks, and we're going to go team by team pick by pick, and we're going to, I don't know, what do you think our methodology for this be? Should we kind of classify it as what we think should happen based on what we know? Because it's always tough to sort of put yourself in the heads of these GMs and these teams and try to say what we think will happen.

So I think it's always kind of the dilemma when you're doing a mock draft like this. Yeah, it's, I think that sounds good. We can go through and, you know, see what we think will happen and see what we think should happen. and yeah, that sounds good to me. Yeah, okay. Well, I mean, luckily for us here, I don't think there's too much deliberation atop the draft.

It's always fun when you know exactly how it's going to go. And I don't know, I think the more interesting question here for the Buffalo Sabres when it comes to Rosmonds Dahlian is, you know, we know that he's kind of pegged right now as this generational player. We haven't really seen a defenseman like him coming into the league since, I'd say,

Victor Hedman and that comparison has been drawn for a variety of reasons. I think the more interesting question to me, though, is like we know that Dallon's going to be the first pick. We know that he's going to step right into the Sabres lineup from day one. Do you think there's a chance that right out of the gate he's already the best defensemen the Sabres have without having even seen him play at NHL level? Yeah, I think so. Well, I mean, who else do the Sabres have who's really in contention?

Like, it's Bristol-Linen? It's bleak. I know that I think on a per game basis, we're Slinan and led them in 5-15 ice time last year for defensemen, but on a raw total, just because he didn't really miss any games, they were leaning on Marco Scandella very aggressively. Then there's like Jake McCabe, Nathan Boyu,

Justin Falk, and not even the good one, Victor Antipan. Like, it was, they had the worst defense core in the league last year, and that's even after having added a few guys, like, like, uh, like Scandela and Bolu to bolster it last off season. So I mean, adding it's perfect because obviously every team would love to have Dahlin,

but in this case, it really was one of those where it's like the perfect fit because they so desperately needed a game-changing guy like this at that position. Yeah, I did an interview with a Buffalo station last week. I was asked, you know, kind of how I would handicap Dahlene as an NHL defenseman out of the gate. And I said, well, you know, if you want a conservative estimate, which is what you should do, because, you know, you just don't know when a guy is a first time NHLer. I'd say expect sort of a second pairing level defenseman in his first year. And I thought that was a fairly safe bet.

And if you apply that to the Sabres, the only guy on there who I think you can say has a decent chance of exceeding that is Ristelainen. And Ristelainen is one of those players who, he's so controversial because he does some things really well and then he does other things very poorly. And then you wonder about usage. and yeah I mean and what a god sent to this franchise

and honestly I mean speaking of Rissalina I think it could be a bit of a you know a domino effect here in the positive for the sabres because I just think you know without with how limited the rest of the core around him has been over the past few years I feel like they maybe

asked too much of him and it's sort of exposed some of those flaws in his skill set and what he's capable of and maybe having a guy like Dala now I mean we'll see how it shakes out but it might kind of, you know, it bumps him a bit down the depth chart. It takes a bit off his plate and he might be much more productive because of that. So, I mean, that's something to look forward to as well beyond just the fact that Dahlin himself will obviously be a game changer. Yeah, absolutely, because, I mean, either Ristelainen has the best partner he's ever had at the NHL level or, you know, he's on a, he's on a different pairing.

And this enables the sabers to just to diversify and spread the load a little bit. So it's good for them either way, regardless of what happens. I know there was a lot of speculation when the lottery occurred that people were like, oh, well, maybe the Sabres will trade risk the line in now. But, you know, when you look at their defensive core, I mean, aside from the fact that the two players played different sides of the ice, when you look at their defensive core, they don't have three or four other good defensemen to push somebody out. They need all the help they can get there. Yeah, absolutely.

I guess obviously it would depend on what teams would be willing to give. it's always tough when you're talking about hypothetical trades like that but you're right um i think uh yeah this is this is great obviously we're not breaking any ground here and and let's move on because i feel like this is a little boring well it's a little boring like i'm very excited to watch him play i think he's going to live up to the hype but beyond that i mean at this point his game has been um you know dissected and covered to the point since we've known that this was going to happen for so long now that it's it's there's nothing new we can really add to it um and and similarly i'd say you know the second pick with the carolina

of hurricanes. It's going to be on Drew Suchtakov unless that ownership group just does something absolutely crazy and they trade out of that pick, but I can't really see that happening at this point. It really feels like he has sort of cemented himself as being a tier below Dahlene, but in one of his own after that. And it's got everything you'd like to see. I mean, he's kind of shaping up to be this skilled power forward and he fits a need because the hurricanes should, assuming they get anything resembling league average goaltending, and I know for that franchise, that's a big if. But if they get that, there's no reason why they can't compete for a playoff spot next season.

And we expect that Svechnacal, like Dali, and will step right into the lineup from day one and could instantly be a productive player for them. Now trying to sort of handicap and figure out who he'll be playing with and where he'll be in that lineup seems like a bit of a fool's error. And just because they've been rumored to be making so many trades, whether it's Skinner or now Elias Linhoves name has come up and the defenseman. So we're not really sure what that roster is going to look like, but it's probably going to feature Andre Satchnikov in, I'd say something resembling a middle six role.

Yeah, the only uncertainty here is that Don Waddell has been out of the NHL for quite a while, and it's kind of difficult to gauge from afar what the philosophy is going to be in Carolina going forward. But, I mean, Svetnikov's sort of a no-brainer there based on what everybody has said, based on his offensive production in junior, there really isn't a comparable forward in this draft. Yeah, it's, and I mean, Carolina has kind of come out and said that they're after this guy, so it's pretty close to a no-brainer.

Yeah, I know, you know, our friends at Canucks Army did a great prospect profile series, and they, you know, do some really groundbreaking, innovative stuff there. They do. They were looking at the statistical comparisons, and you know they call them cohorts and try to figure out sort of based on what we've seen in the past guys with similar production their draft years in those leagues what their success rate is and what we can glean from that and you know for svetnikov i mean he's a bit below like the likes of a stephen stamp coast but he's right

there with tyler sagan and bobby ryan and other um really successful players at that league at that level who have gone on to the nchl and thrived so um yeah there's there's nothing to to not like here. I don't really see any red flags. I know he had an injury in his draft year, but it was a broken bone, I believe. So it wasn't anything that would lead you to believe that he's injury prone or anything like that. So this seems like a no-brainer slam dunk and the hurricane should consider themselves. I was lucky that they moved up in the draft order the way that they did. Yeah, when I did the, uh, uh, my big draft piece saw the athletic, that was, that was the same, same sort of approach. And, you know, you can't expect, you mentioned Stamco,

so I mentioned Tavares as well. He's just a little bit below those guys, but he's in the Sagan range. He's in the Brian Little Range. He's in the David Leguanguan range. And so your only question with him is whether he's going to be really, really good or just really good. Like, it's pretty certain what we're getting there.

Yeah. Yeah. Okay. And this is where, see, this is where things really do get interesting because there's a lot of dissenting opinions on this third overall pick, what the Canadians will do,

whether they'll keep it, whether they'll, you know, try to trade it and move down and recoup some other assets, whether if they do keep it, which way they're going to go, because, you know, it's clear that they have two organizational needs, and they've even referenced that, and it's the center, it's some help down the middle, and it's on the blue line, and the top player here that I would be targeting is a winger. Now, we've heard, I'm very curious for your take on this, because as this draft process has gone

along the obvious big riser has been yesbury concanemi and he's really made a spirited late push here to the point where if you look at most mock drafts right now um analysts have the montreal canadians taking him largely because he's sort of the de facto number one center out of this year's class and i'm i'm not sure how i feel about that because you know in a vacuum um his profile and his resume as a prospect certainly looks fine and I think he's going to be a really good player but I just wonder if that's the smartest

way to go about doing business here for the Canadians trying to fill a organizational need with this pick when you know realistically who knows what the team will look like a couple years from now and whether Mark Berger and himself will even be around to reap the rewards of that yeah that's

fair I think what makes this really interesting is that Philip Zadena who was sort of the consensus third best player in this grouping. It feels like he's kind of fallen down into the pack, and there are maybe 10 players in this general range that there isn't much separation between any of them. And when Kotkinemi's name came out in connection to Montreal,

at that point, kind of the consensus was that he wasn't going to be a top five guy. And so if Montreal wanted to address need, you could imagine them trading down and picking him. But what's made that complicated is that Kotakeney has seen his profile and improved to the point where if Montreal trades down to, you know, like just for the sake of arguments, say to seven, they very well may not get him. Even if they were to trade down to five, they wouldn't be certain of getting him. When I look at his numbers, I'm not wild about Kotka Niyami. I like that he's younger than most of his draft class. but I mean the guys he compares to statistically are people like Joel Armia and yes, they believe RV, you know, both both solid players, but not necessarily the guys that you look at

and say, okay, this guy's going to be a number one center. Like if you compare him to Alexander Barkov, Barcov basically scored at double the rate that Kotkenyemi did in the same league at the same age. So he's not a guy who necessarily projects as a true number one center. But just because there's not a lot of separation in this group, I kind of think that's what Montreal would do. It's not necessarily what I would do, but having said that,

I wouldn't necessarily take Zadina either. So who would you take here if you're the Canadians? My favorite guy of the second tier, and this is from a guy who's looking at it mostly from a numbers perspective, because I've seen most of them play, but not enough to, you know, really overrule, like an actual expert.

I like Queenieus. Hmm. Yeah, no, that's, I mean, that's certainly fair, and obviously, I mean, we mentioned that One of the reasons the Canadians are super into Kalkanemi is because they have this organizational need, et cetera, and another one is on defense. And, you know, that would make sense. And we're going to talk about Quinn Hughes a bit more here in a second. I just, you know, with Kalkanemi, let's wrap up a discussion on him.

I know that a couple things he obviously has going for him is that, you know, he really took off as the year went along, especially in some of these international tournaments and really turned people's heads. And I believe he also grew a bit as the year went along, which obviously isn't surprising for a person of that age. But I remember, you know, like a classic example of that was one of his countrymen and Henrik Borkstrom a few years ago really grew in his draft year. And people weren't really accounting for that. And now all of a sudden, not that height is the be all end all. And especially when we're, when we also talk about Quinn Hughes here, but it's, it doesn't hurt. And it's, it might change the trajectory or the ceiling or the development of a player like that. those are a few things to kind of take into mind

but I don't know like I I keep coming back to Zadina here and maybe that's a flawed way of looking at it just because we really should adjust our opinions as the process goes along maybe you shouldn't be so rooted in your ways and just because you know at the start of the year everyone just expected that Zadina was sort of the third obvious guy there you know things change and as information presents itself you need to be malleable you can't just be stuck in your ways but I just look at them and I just think I feel pretty comfortable

that Philips Zadena will be a very good goal score at the NHL level. And I feel like I know what you're getting there. And as this process has gone along, people have kind of nitpicked some of his individual skills and how it will transit to the NHL level. But I don't know, I just, you know, you look at a lot of these teams and they have a bunch of needs. Obviously, there's a reason why the Canadians and the Sabres

and the senators are picking this high up the draft. But goal scoring is very important. And especially after having traded Gal Chenya, and now patch ready might be gone and they were already 29th in the league last year in goals. Like just getting a guy with that type of a skill set that projects to be such a good goal score at this level, I think is too much to pass up on, in my opinion. Well, you know, it's a legitimate point. There's a reason that Zadena was sort of the consensus number three for a long, long time. I have trouble with players out of the queue just because sometimes big numbers there don't really.

really project. I don't like that Zadena is at the older end of his class. So there's a couple of reasons for me to be a little bit wishy-washy about him, but I mean, you're talking about a guy who's basic, like he's not in the Jonathan Huberto range, but he's kind of in the Jacob

Voracek range. He's a player who should be really good. If Montreal were to take him at three, I don't think anybody would have any argument. And he is going to be, you would expect a top five pick.

I just, I'm a little less certain about him than I am about a couple of other players here, but he's really good. And I think if you were to take him ahead of Kotakhanemi based on the scoring, you would be entirely justified in doing that. Well, okay, so let's say. But I think Kotkenyemi is kind of the consensus what Montreal would do at this point, right? Yes, which makes me believe that it's the wrong pick. if history has taught us anything.

What do people think Mark Bergevan's going to do? Well, that's probably wrong. Yes. Well, I mean, listen, a few years for now when he gets traded, I'm sure he'll thrive in his next landing spot. So, okay, let's, this is tough. This is why this process is obviously, you know, if we decide on the haps taking one of these guys,

then all of a sudden there's this trickle-down effect. And it's like, it affects what the senators will do, what the coyotes will do and so on and so, forth. But, you know, if you get to the senators at four, and it sounds like they're keeping this pick, where do you stand on keeping this pick versus trading it and going for next year's approach instead? Like, I've looked at a bunch of pieces recently about the math on it, and, you know,

there's so many factors to consider here. I mean, just from a PR perspective and sort of giving your fan base something to hold on to hope for this year. but at the same time man I guess the elephant in the room is what's going to happen with Eric Carlson and if you do wind up trading him then maybe it changes the equation like where do you stand on the whole thing yeah I think if you're trading Eric Carlson you know what I I hate that Ottawa is in this situation it's it's baddening Pierre Dorian has has made this this miserable situation for himself and And, you know, if I were in his shoes today, I'd be hard pressed to make either decision. But when I thought about it, I kind of came to the conclusion that if I were going to trade Carlson, I would send Colorado this pick. And if I'm able to somehow keep Carlson, then I would gamble and keep this pick and give Colorado's next year's selection.

Yeah, it's, I mean, especially assuming if you trade Air Carlson, what you're getting back, futures and you're not really going to get anyone that's going to step into your lineup. Now, the complicated, yeah, go ahead. I was going to say when we look at the Mike Hoffman return, it seems pretty clear that Ottawa, not that they got futures for Hoffman, but the price point on Bodker versus his cap, it seems pretty clear that Ottawa is going to be very much a budget team next year. And if they do trade Carlson, I don't expect that we're going to see, you know, massive expenditures anyway to try and make up for it.

we're going to see lesser players coming back. Yes, absolutely. And I mean, so the one complicating factor is, I mean, a part of the reason why they bottomed out so badly last year was their goaltending just completely fell apart. And I'm not sure, you know, how much of that is sort of Craig Anderson at this point of his career. And given his age, it's possible that he's on that down swing and this is just going to be a recurring trend. But even if it normalizes a little bit, it's conceivable, but they won't be the worst team in the league. at the same time, if you do subtract Dar Carlson from that equation and you don't

add anyone to immediately help on paper, I think they're going to have the worst roster in the league. And, you know, if someone like Jack Hughes coming on his way, if you have a 20% chance, or I guess it's like 18 something percent, if you finish last of getting him, at least you're assured of a top four pick again

and that 20% chance that Jack Hughes might be high enough just based on how good he is that it kind of tilts the equation in favor of giving away this year's pick and hoping to hit a home run next year. But that's, that's tough. Like if you're a fan of the senators right now, you don't have much to cheer for,

then all of a sudden, let's say you play this game out, you're trading Eric Carlson, you already traded Mike Hoffman, you might even trade some other guys there. And then you don't even have a prospect or a pick to cheer for or follow this season as well because you, and then you're watching the abs with all their guys select, I want it for there. Like, that's a pretty demoralizing thing in and of itself. It's really kind of a, it's, they're caught between a rock and a hard place. That's the only way to put it.

Absolutely. And I think when you, like you talk about the fans having something to cheer for, it's always kind of a double-edged sword with the fans because to run a good hockey team, you have to tune them out. Like you have to be able to say, okay, this is what the fans want and I really don't care. I'm going to do this because it's better and they'll appreciate it in time. But the problem is if you're Ottawa, I mean, there's no reason for fans to, think you know better than they do. Things have gotten so sour there and rightly so. Like I

appreciate and I understand why there's skepticism. And if, you know, Pierre Dorian, because like, ideally, perfect world, what I would do is as the GM putting on my Pierre Dorian hat would be to say, okay, guys, we're not going to be able to keep Carlson, so we're going to have to trade him. We have to do a retooling thing here. Jack Hughes is tremendous. Well, you know, I wouldn't necessarily say that. I'd be thinking it for sure, though. And I saw him at the under 17s and that guy. Man, he's such a good player. Anyway, but you'd say, okay, so our definite goal for next year is a rebuild.

And because we've traded this year's pick to Colorado and we've kept next year's pick, we're able to just focus on that and there's no ifs, sands or buts about it. But I don't think you can sell that in that market because people are going to look at you and say, okay, well, you're the guy who traded for Matt Dushain, so I don't trust you. I've been screaming about Eugene Melnick for years, so I don't trust him. And I have no faith in the organization that this is anything more than a temporary cost-saving measure, because that's what I believe you value. And it becomes very difficult to sell that sort of thing in Ottawa.

Well, I mean, and they're not alone. I mean, if you look at some of the other Canadian teams there as well, whether it's the Oilers or the Canadians, as we just discussed, like part of the reason why they're in the position that they are is because of the people who will be dependent on to make these future decisions. decisions so you're a fan of those teams it's uh it's a pretty uneasy position but okay let's so let's let's let's let's play this the mock draft out so i'm gonna i took zadena at three uh we both matched on the top two picks i'm gonna you you said you wanted to

take quinn hues there for the canadians yes yeah just took your guns that's fair i think uh it'll be more interesting as opposed to us just agreeing on every pick um yeah yeah let's let's do that so because we generally agree but see for the senators here it's interesting because you know they've been sort of uh uh link to one of the defensemen at this spot. And, you know, with Hughes already off the board here, whether it's Sedina or whether it's Cocheneh or someone else, do you go that route now for the senators,

or do you still stay with a defenseman and then you get into the whole debate on Evan Bouchard versus Noah Dobson, versus Adam Boulquist versus even Ty Smith? I think if Ottawa has a longer timeline, I think it makes sense to go with one of Bouchard, Dobson. But, you know, if we're really playing this out, like, what I would do is send it to Colorado. And if I'm Colorado, I take Philip Zadena. Okay, well, we're not going to let you send it off. We're not, okay, I'm not going to send it off. Okay, that's going to complicate things.

Yeah, you're right. You're right. Okay, well, in that case, uh, because otherwise, I have some pretty crazy trades for you coming up. Okay, poor Zadena, who does not deserve to slide to five, but if I'm, if I'm, if I'm Ottawa, I think I'm taking Bushard. Well, I'm glad you said, that because I do want to get into that debate on trying to figure out how we value those defensemen and I don't necessarily think there's a right answer I mean obviously as their careers play out it'll wind up we'll learn what the right answer was but you know just looking at them right now I mean they do have different skill sets and I'm kind of focusing here on on bushard versus Dobson because I think that's the most interesting debate so you prefer bushard as a prospect

to Dobson, I'm assuming because of the way he generated offense at the OHL level? Bouchard Dobson's really, really tough to me because when I watch them play, I saw Dobson at the Memorial Cup and I like him better. Right now, if I had to pick a junior defenseman to play for me, I'd rather have Dobson play for me. But when I look at Bouchard, I see a guy who has more high-end upside. And I think I like Bouchard's long-term upside a little bit more than I like Dushar's long-term upside a little bit more than I like Dobson's.

I think he's going to have a better chance of being a really game-breaking defenseman for you, but Dobson to me is kind of a safer pick, if that makes sense. And so I'm penalizing him a little bit because I don't think he is the ceiling, even if his floor is a little bit better. Well, I believe both guys are right-shot defensemen, right? Yeah. Oh, yeah. They're both big right-shot defensemen.

So teams are salivating over that. Obviously, you know, one of the concerns about Bouchard, you know, his when he has the puck on a stick uh he's tremendous whether it's shooting or or playmaking uh his skating from what i've seen is is a bit of an issue although i don't think it's necessarily you know the be all end all but obviously with dobson it's a massive plus for him and it's it's it's tricky because with dobson for example i mean you've mentioned so far that you're not really sure what to make of the queue sometimes and it can you know bleed the funny results and that's a bit of a concern obviously in the back of your mind and also you don't want to you don't want to put too much

stock into something like a Memorial Cup run, right? Because it ultimately is, you know, an extra handful of games or whatever. And it's on a bigger stage, obviously, and that could be a positive thing. But also it can kind of deceive you a little bit because you're putting too much stock into it. But it's clear that Dobson has benefited quite a bit from how he looked through that playoff run and playing in the Memorial Cup and winning it because he's obviously risen up the draft boards quite a bit so far to a point where I'm going to take him at number four here for Ottawa. But you're right. I mean, it's ultimately kind of a coin flip between those two guys.

And I think that both are going to both are very good prospects. I think the thing that separates Dobson from the other guys here, and I understand, you know, I'm usually with you. We know that for all positions, really, like the best indicator of future success is past success. And if you're going to generate points at that NHL level, it typically means you generated points at the level you were playing at before and that bodes very well for ever bushard with dobson everything i've read about him what he really stands out against his peers in is the sort of the two-way play i feel like he's kind of isn't a bit of a class in his own in terms of neutral zone play

and defensively without the puck so i could see a team like ottawa here really especially based on how much his stock has risen being really infatuated with with that and then teams valuing that type of a skill set may be a little bit more than what brouchard brought to the table yeah um i i agree with all that i i think i think your reasoning there is is is is accurate um just with regard to offensive generation in junior for defensemen i i don't know i'm a little bit torn because i i sometimes feel this is like an illogical way of looking at it but but i also wonder if you just need to get to a certain level and then you know like if you're a a hundred on our hypothetical scale and then the difference between 100 and 110 doesn't really mean anything.

And sometimes stylistically, the things you have to do to get to 110 on offense mean that you're maybe not as good a defenseman. For me, the reason I take Bouchard over Dobbson is just because the things Bouchard can do with the Bacconnistic, like, since this is my list and I'm allowed to move away from sort of my statistical model a little bit and move into the folly that is me scouting these guys. Like, Bouchard's got a mind with that. And not that, not the Dobson's bad because he's not. He's a wonderful defenseman and you'd be thrilled to get him.

But Bouchard just has superior, a superior brain with the buck on his stick. And that makes the difference. Yeah. No, 100%. I think that's very fair. So Arizona here at 5, they must, on your mock, they must feel very excited to Philips Zina's following. Oh, yeah, thrilled. Thrill.

So are you giving them Zadina? Yes, absolutely. And not only because of skill, because I think arguably either of the last two picks, I maybe should have taken Zadena, but it's a beautiful fit of organizational need and skill because Arizona could really use an offensive guy like this, and I mean, you can't argue the value at five.

So if it plays out the way you have it, I think it's very clear that Arizona would take Philips Zidina. Now, if we go out based on the way that, I've done mine so far, going Zina three, Dobbs, and four. They're in a weird spot here because I think they're going to have to fight the urge to take Brady Kachuk. And he's sort of a divisive prospect here in the top 10 because, you know, for a while, it sort of seemed like he was the natural fourth guy after Philips Zadina there. Now more recently, as people have really kind of dug into the numbers and evaluated everything,

I think there are some red flags. I mean, he seems to have a lot of the physical tools, and I'd say that he has a very high floor as a prospect. I think it's pretty clear that he will be a regular in each other, and he'll be a productive one. Now, the question is sort of how high that ceiling is, and if you're picking fourth or fifth or even Montreal at three, sort of as a score and as an offensive talent,

how high that ceiling is and what level he'll really be able to take. take his game to and it seems like he will be uh i know that coming up as a prospect people thought that he might be a center but he played at the wing and it seems like that will be what he is so i don't know it's i just think that there's highs with higher upside that at number five if i was arizona they i would really feel the need to take and you know under john chico we believe that they're going to take a more sort of statistical approach to this and and count that in more than sort of reading the traditional scouting ports that rant and rave about kachucks, you know, size and speed. So I think that'll be ultimately sort of a very fascinating decision for them make.

And then you get into the fact that, you know, they made 14 picks under John Chike over the past two years. And I think nine or ten of them have been a defenseman, including two first round picks in there. So, you know, there's some other very interesting names here at that position on the board. But I think the organizational need does go for more before. and so right now I'm between personally I mean whereas you had it with obviously was itina I'm in between Kotkinemi and maybe even Oliver Wallstrom at this point I'm just not sure how much what's what things the coyotes will be looking at when making this pick yeah um in your shoes you can you can definitely argue Kotkanemi at this position I kind of agree with a lot

of what you said about Brady Kachak. I like him a lot of lot but you know in a draft like this so so wallstrom's going to be a high end goal score like i think there's a decent chance i mean not that anything's guaranteed but there's a decent chance that oliver wallstrom's a first line player i don't think brady kitchuck is going to be a first line player but having said that i think brady kichick can step in and be a third line winger for you probably next year if if that's the road that you go down and maybe he tops out as a second line winger and if he brings all the other things that you know that he brings that that's valuable to because you look at his brother and and you look at all the things that his brother brings to the

lineup that aren't just his offensive ability and i don't think Brady um rates quite as highly as his brother does but that that's a very useful player and that's a player who somebody with an analytics mindset might look at and say okay you know i i rate him higher than i i rate a 60 or 70 point guy who is a more one dimensional talent. So I think that's the argument you can make in favor of Kachuk. And in your shoes, it really isn't easy. See, you should have had Zadena slide that would have made it a simple selection. It would have made it easier for me.

Yep. I'm going to, I'll give them Kachuk here. I just think it'll be too tough for them to pass up on it. I don't love the pick. I think there's guys with the higher upside, like I said. You know, obviously comparing him to his brother is the natural. way to go here for a lot of people but i think matthew um they're different players and i think matthew had a much higher upside and obviously i'll produce them at every level although it's kind of

it's difficult to know for sure because brady played at the college level whereas matthew played it in the oh hl in his draft year but but the year before they definitely they played at the same level and matthew produced yeah yeah so i'll give them kachuk here just to make my life a bit easier because and this is a segue to our next pick. I just want Detroit to take Quinn Hughes because it's the easy Michigan connection and I like it. It's a nice storytelling option here.

And I think the Red Wings will once again suck next year and then their fans can sort of salivate the thought of potentially pairing the Hughes brothers and getting Jack the following year. And there's a lot to like that. I think from a, you know, I am a sports journalist after all, so I'm going to have to go with that. It seems like a nicer story for me.

But I think, you know, on my board, Hughes is still available. I think Arizona would consider him as well, even though I mentioned it. They have been very defenseman heavy so far in their drafts under Chico. Yeah, I think that all makes sense. So who do you have Detroit taking then? So Kachuk is an obvious target. Dobson is an obvious target. Wallstrom is an obvious target.

I think those are kind of the three guys. And I'm, you know what? I'm going to have them take. Dobson. I think that this is, this really is a defenseman draft. I think that's where the most value is at this point on the board. And, and I think Detroit has been kind of, I hate to do the team need thing because, I mean, a lot of these people are going to look at it and just ignore team need entirely. And that's pretty much what I would do in their shoes. But I think from a team need perspective, Dobson's a wonderful fit for Detroit. Yeah. Yeah. And I think he's the most value at this point on the board, too. Yep. I would agree with that. We didn't really talk about Quinn Hughes. I feel like we've talked about Jack Hughes more on this podcast than Quinn. He's obviously an awesome player.

I mean, you had him going third overall or Montreal. I have him going six to Detroit here. You know, at this point, we don't even need to get into the conversation about size because we've seen so many guys start to buck that trend. And it really is sort of those concerns are from a bygone era. And all things being equal, obviously, you'd much rather the guy who's built like a dobs. or a Bouchard, but at the end of the day, the skill set itself is what really matters,

and what we've seen from Quinn Hughes from so far, leads us to believe that he will be a very, very effective NHL defense regardless of how tall he's listed at. Yep, absolutely. So we get to the Canucks here at 7. You're taking the obvious choice on your board, right? Well, here's the thing with the Canucks. They're in a weird spot because, and we're not doing trade,

in this in this mock draft and I don't necessarily think they will trade it but for a team that's in the position they are and where they're picking like there's been a ton of buzz about them looking to move out of the slot whether it's up or you know down and get a roster player like I don't I don't know which direction they take it but I think they ultimately will make the pick who is who's the obvious who am I who am I who's the obvious player that I'm missing here that you just alluded to Bouchard. Oh, yeah, that's right. Yeah, yeah. No, you're absolutely right. I thought I'd take him to this point, honestly. Yes, I think they're going to take a defenseman here. And this is sort of the cautionary tale, I'd say, of, you know,

when we talk about organizational need. And once we're getting into this point of the draft, we're probably talking about players who are at least a year or two away from really contributing. You know, in 2016, they viewed defense as a big-time organizational need for that. and they took Oli Uolee Levy over Matthew Kachuk. And that obviously looks horrible in hindsight and now they're back to once again

really needing a defenseman in their organizational hierarchy. You know, fortunately for them, there are promised to be some really high-end defense prospects available here. And so it makes sense that they would go that way anyways. But when we talk about some of these teams and especially as you move down the draft and it's like, oh, you know,

they really need a defenseman. Well, that just maybe take the best player available and let stuff figure itself out because you never know what's going to happen in the years ago. Yep, but it sure is easy if the best player available is having Bouchard. Yes, no, that definitely helps.

Without intending to do this, I have left the Canucks in a terrible situation on my draft board because Hughes is gone, Dobson's gone, and Bouchard is gone. So, do you take Kotkenyemi? Do you take Wallstrom? Or do you reach a little bit?

Oh, yes. Yes, yes, yes. Now, they've also been, I know you're not, and let's once again plug the fine work you did in your own mock draft where you sort of looked at this from a statistical perspective at the athletic, but I know you made a point in there about how you weren't that high on Adam Bucharest. Yes. And you sort of, you know, you wrote it in there why that's the case. they have been linked fairly heavily to him so far. Yes.

And, you know, all the defensemen that are available. I mean, I really like Ty Smith, and we'll get into some of the other names as we get down this list. But, you know, he definitely has the highest upside, I'd say. And there are the obvious concerns. I mean, the concussion concerns, the late birthday, the defensive concerns. I mean, you pointed out while people like to compare him to Eric Carlson, there's a bunch of other guys who no one has ever really heard of, who could also very easily be statistically linked to him. So it's a very boom or bust pick.

And if it doesn't work out, then the Canucks really, really are in trouble after the past few years they've had. But he does provide them with a very, very interesting, high upside option, similar to sort of what they got with Elias Pedersen and number five last year. And, of course, everybody's going to emphasize Vancouver's connection

to Swedish players. You know, there's not a chance I would do this, but, you know, I kind of think that if it plays out the way it is on my board, if you're Vancouver, you do take Bochfist. If you're Jim Benning. You have to put on your Jim Benning hat to make this back. So do you, for your mock draft, I'm keeping making value. You know what? The problem is that I love anarchy, so Bochfist it is. and we'll have the outrageous scenario of both Kachuk and Kachanemey's sliding to eight.

Man, yeah, this is interesting. So, you know, Chicago coming up here at eight, see on my board, you know, a lot of mock drafts I've seen have them going with Oliver Wallstrom, but I think at this point I just find it hard to believe that Kodkanemi will continue slipping. You know, not that I think about it. I don't even necessarily think he, like he'll probably go number three to Montreal and this all wind up looking silly in hindsight, but we are sort of doing what a combination of what we think should happen versus what we think will happen.

So it's going to look slightly different than real life, but I'm going to give Chicago Clark Nami here. And for the first time since the number two pick, you and I are on the same age. Wow. Poor Brady Kachak falling. falling big time. Yes, but not for long. So do you, okay, well, before we get off Chicago here, you know, we're not doing trades,

but let's say there was a team out there that would take this pick. From your hands, all it would cost is, you know, you have to give up the Brent Sebrough contract. You have to take on the Brett Sebril contract, but you get this eighth overall pick, I should say. If you're another team, would you consider that depending on your financial situation? and if you're Chicago, would you also consider that? If I'm Chicago, I don't think I do. Because, and that's not to devalue, well, I just look at where Chicago is, and I think I don't know how much left in them the core has.

You deal C, Brooke, and the eighth overall pick, and that gets you out of a contract problem, but then you still have to somehow find a way to inject some talent. on the back end and and and and also probably up front and and uh you don't have the eighth overall pick to do it because you used it to get out of cap hell i don't think i do it as chicago yeah it's it's a tough one um and to be honest i don't i mean what teams out there would even do that um well can i give you a what if yeah go for just just because you know chaos anarchy love it uh

chicago edmonton calls up chicago and says we will trade you milan luchiche in the 10 for the 8 in seabrook do you do that um like i wouldn't do that if i were edmonton

because i think the seabrook contract is that toxic and it's two spots but if you're chicago do it or or you know if you're edmonton do it it depends i mean if if the draft is going the way it is here I think I think a cock canemone or a kachuk if you're Chicago

is just is the difference between that level of prospect and who you'd get at 10 assuming those are the next two guys off the board I think doesn't really make that worth it from their perspective but yeah it's an interesting discussion might be one of those rare trades

or both teams say no you know that's a well-crafted trade when that happens Yes. Okay, so we have Chicago taking Cockanami here. Now, New York Rangers, who sneakily have three first round picks. So they have 9, 26, and 28. They have two picks in the second round and two picks in the third round.

So that's a nice piece of work for them at the trade deadline, especially, you know, last year they picked 7th and 21st after that step-end trade with Arizona. But before that, here were the first picks that they made in each draft prior to that. that 81st in 2016, 41st in 2015, 59th in 2014, and 65th in 2013. So they, if any team needs first round picks, it's them. And I know they've drafted college free agents and assigned college free agents and such in those years. But yeah, an infusion of young talent.

And it really seems like if they do keep these picks that they are embracing that rebuild, as they said in their letter at the trade deadline. And I don't fault them for it all. I think it's probably one of the first kind of prudent things that they've done in a long time assembling this team. And luckily for them, I mean, on your board, if they get Brady Kachuk falling into their lap, I think they're going to be really, really happy. They're going to race up to the podium as soon as they can. Yeah, you'll see Jeff Gorton just running for the podium to make that pick.

And that's obviously what they do on my board. I think just because it's sort of a no-brainer pick for me and I think we all kind of know what Kachuk brings is a power forward with defensive ability who your only question is really how much he's going to score and maybe a little bit about his foot speed but I think everybody knows he can overcome that. Yeah, yeah. I'm kind of a fan of Jeff Gordon. I feel like the Rangers have been in a tough spot just because Henrik Lundquist lets them

do so well all by himself regardless of how the team in front of him has been and I think for a few years it hasn't been that good of a team in front of him but it's been hard to move away from the win now mode because you know they have elite they've had elite level goaltending for ages and now that he's getting up into his late 30s it's it's the right move to embrace a route like most of the time when a GM takes a team into a rebuild I say you should fire the GM because the guy who gets you into a rebuild is not the guy you want cleaning it up but I think with the Rangers, it's just such a cyclical thing and a factor of where they're at that I don't, I don't necessarily blame their current management for the predicament that they're in. Absolutely not. Yeah, I know 100%. I will have them taking Oliver Wallstrom, who I believe is the best forward available on the board here. And I think the only concern you really have with him at this point is how much of his

prolific production was. was because of Jack Hughes. How do you feel about that question? So this is, you're going to advertise this as the Jack Hughes podcast, right? It is, yeah. I feel like I don't want to undersell how amazing Jack Hughes is because Jack Hughes is legitimately amazing and pay attention for our 2019 mock draft forthcoming. But I,

Wallstrom is a year older and I kind of find it hard to say, you know, this 16 year old guy, no matter how good he is, propped up to 17 year old, to me it's probably more of a partnership. And, you know, as difficult as it is to sometimes gauge why a guy on the U.S. national team is producing just because there is so much talent, I'm very comfortable looking at Wallstrom and saying this is a guy who's legitimate. a high-end goal scorer. I think he's going to be sneaky, good value anywhere later in the top 10. And if he was a guy who rose,

I think he could make an argument for it. Yeah. Yeah, no, I think obviously he didn't hurt, but he seems like he's just one of those guys that's going to score goals wherever he plays with or whoever he plays with. And I love the shot generation metrics from him as well. And I think, yeah, he's a very smart pick here for the Rangers at 9. For the 10, the Edmonton Oilers,

stop me if you've heard this before. but the Hamilton Oilers are in a hunt for a defenseman. Wait, what? I know. I know. Shocking. I have them taking Ty Smith here. Yeah.

He's someone who I've been really becoming more and more enamored with as I've done more research. You know, I know your colleague, Mitch Brown at the athletic put together this piece looking at sort of the underlying numbers for defensemen in Major Jr., particularly, you know, zone exits, defending zone entry, stuff like that, shot generation metrics. And Ty Smith was up there with anyone really in Major Junior last year. And then obviously just based on the traditional offensive metrics, I believe he's there with Ivan Prove Rob and Morgan Riley

is the most productive draft eligible defenseman in the WHL over the past decade or so. So there's a lot to like there. And I think he's the best prospect still available. and fits a need for the oilers, and it seems like a no-brainer for me. So in my board, it's a little bit more complicated because Wallstrom has fallen to 10,

and to me, if that happens, it's very difficult not to take him. But I would also have the Oilers taking Smith, because I'm going to do the same thing to them that I did to Vancouver and say, this is kind of a, it's maybe, I wouldn't take Smith over Wallstrom, and I really like Smith for all the reasons you said, but it's a combination thing, and I think that they're pretty enamored of Smith.

I was listening to Oilers now in Edmonton the other day, and they had Bob Green on, who's a big part of their amateur procurement department, and I'm just going to read you something that he said about Ty Smith. He said he's a left shot, but like it better on the right side. I think he's way more effective over there. I'm skipping ahead a little bit. He just does everything well.

He's got leadership ability. beat the forecheck with his feet he can move the puck his transition game is good he has he's got leadership ability so i i think that he's a guy when when you listen to them kind of emphasis when you listen to somebody like bob green emphasizing the leadership ability the the other things he does well other than generate offense um his ability to play on the right side which has been a consistent concern in edmonton for ages i think he's a guy they really like and and i think rightly so you know like he's a he's a very very good player and um it would surprise me at all if he's the pick there yeah no uh sound logic um well you know just like the rangers were or uh stoked to get kachuk

fall to them i think the islanders are very excited that all our waltstrom's still on the board yeah there's a lot of team i don't know what this says about your rock draft but i feel like the recurring themes there's a lot of teams that are very excited about the guy that's fallen to them. I can't decide if I'm a genius for down, well, yes. I can decide. I'm a genius. Everything is working out perfectly. I'm a genius, Dimitri. I have called this correctly. Everybody is thrilled. No, I think it's unlikely they go this way because I think I'm probably selling you know, Montreal and Vancouver and maybe even Edmonton a little bit short. But having said that historically, you don't usually go wrong betting against those management groups. Yeah. No. And

And, well, hopefully as we round out this top 15, we start disagreeing a bit more. I feel like now, you know, we both had Chicago taking Cockney and Emmy. We both have Edmonton taking Ty Smith. Oh, you know what? We had massive disagreement from picks. Which I don't think anybody tunes in and expects to hear, so I feel like we've really done the listeners of service by. Okay, good. In disagreement.

But who do you have the Islanders take? Because I don't think there's a really clear pick in your shoes at 11. So let's go 11. I'll do 11 and 12 here. 11 and 12 together, right? Now I think in the real world, I think it's just as likely that they don't make both of these picks as they do. Yes.

I think we could very likely see a trade for Philip Grubauer, for example, this weekend. Or maybe they're going to, you know, now that Robin Leonard is going to hit the UFA market after he wasn't qualified, maybe they'll go that route instead and keep the picks, I'm not sure. But I feel like they will do something and make some sort of splash. So they probably won't keep both of these, but assuming they do, I think they're going to take, at this point, I think the reward outweighs the risk with a guy like Adam Ballquist. And I think I would give them, I would have him going with one of these picks.

And then the other guy, I'd say just based on sort of what I've seen on mocks and sort of how I think and HL teams think, like I think like Joe Villano is, it seems like the next guy here. But you're right. I mean, there isn't an obvious pick. There's a bunch of different ways you could go. and they were getting into the tier here where there's like I'd say almost 10 guys that are kind of interchangeable and it's sort of a subjective personal preference thing.

Yeah, because I'm really big on Rasmus Sandine. I don't think he's really in the conversation here. But certainly not on your board where Bokevist is there. I like Kraftstov. I like Lundasdrum. I like Kott. The Lino is obviously a very good player. At some point we're going to see Barrett Hayton go.

For me, There's one obvious pick here and it's Wallstrom and then after that it's very difficult, especially if you kind of subscribe to the traditional NHL mentality of, well, if you've got two first round picks and you're keeping them both, you should diversify and pick both the forward and a defenseman. And particularly if you're the New York Islanders where maybe you have more of a need for, well, depending on what happens with Tavares. So Wallstrom's the one obvious pick for me.

The second one is tough. I don't think Velino is so ahead of everybody else that he has to go here. Yeah, no, I agree with that. And I don't think they're going to take another winger.

Let's go through some of the names. Let's talk this out then. Sure. So we've got like, I think in this range, you've got Rasmus Kupari. Yeah. You got Barrett Hayden,

uh, Joel Farabee. Um, you know, I've seen Vitali Kraftstov, uh, Isaac Lundstrom, like these are some of the names that I feel like have generally popped up in these next handful of picks. I don't know. Is there anyone else that catches your eye around here? I think that's most of them. I don't think Gregori Denesenko goes this high, although some people are really, really high on him.

Maybe Sarah and Noel is another guy we'd mention. Yeah, that's about it. You know what? I think I'll take Hayton with the other, the island. the other islanders pick yeah no that's fair i mean he's sort of in a in a weak center class um he's an intriguing prospect especially since you know everything i've read suggests that he was one of those guys that just because the the sue greyhounds were so stacked maybe his role was in as big so his counting numbers aren't as impressive but it could be one of those things similar to morgan frost uh from the year before where in a bigger role next season he could explode and then people as the year goes along we'll be like wow what a good

great pick by whoever took him. Look at how his numbers have just ballooned. So I think I'm always intrigued by prospects like that. We just kind of have to actually dig a bit deeper beyond just looking at how many goals and assistive generator. Yeah, I think if you're looking at centers, it's probably either Kupari or Hayton at this point. And the argument against Hayton, of course, is that he just didn't produce. But when you look at that team, they had a lot of 19-year-olds and he was, it would have been hard to push past them. But historically, you know, guys who score like Barrett Hayton,

generally don't have really, really high-end offensive potential in the NHL. But you're right. He could be a sleeper pick, or not a sleeper pick. Everybody knows about him, but he could be a guy who the numbers really undersell. And if that's the case, you're getting a really good player because everything else that he does, it rates really high according to everybody out there who's writing about the draft. Dallas at 13 here, I had a few notes for like every team. in terms of, you know, stuff they've done in the past or intriguing storylines to follow that could dictate this pick for them.

I just have a bunch of question marks. I don't know. I don't know what they need or what they want or which way they're going to go. I think of the names available, Rasmus Kupari, who I mentioned earlier, intrigues me from sort of a, I feel like he's got a pretty high baseline, but also an intriguing enough ceiling that warrants a pick around here. so I'm just going to give them him but as Hayden would be a perfectly fine pick I think they're they're just going to go that route like I don't I don't there isn't really a name at this point

that really stands out to me so I'm going to give them good party yeah and on my draft board Valino drops one spot to them I'm I'm a little bit skeptical about Volino but he you know he's he's fast and he's a he's a center and he does he does a lot of good things and when you get down to 13 like I really feel like this is where the drop-off happens.

Somewhere in the Islanders range of picks, that's kind of where you move into the, I guess it's the third tier of the draft, with Svetnikov and Dahl and at the top and this wide range of like 10 guys. And now we're into the next group where any of these players could be picked anywhere between 15th and 35th.

Yeah, no, I agree. Yeah, so we get into Philly here at 14. I think they've sneakily drafted, very well under Ron Hextall and they've also shown a willingness to dip into the European pipeline and I'm going to give them Vitaly Kravstov here and you know

you mentioned his countryman Gregory Dennisenko is also an intriguing name I think he's going to fall a bit I think he should fall a bit I don't know if he will well I'm not I'm not sure how to value him because obviously you know his production with his

club throughout the year wasn't necessarily overwhelming but then He's one of those guys that showed really well in tournaments. And like I said, with the Memorial Cup, it's a much smaller sample, so you don't want to put too much stock into it. But it's like, it's clear that he's also got the talent. It's not necessarily, like he's got something going for him. But with a guy like Kravstov, I think everything I've seen and everything I've read,

the pure talent is just, it's too overwhelming. And the upside is too high once we get to this point of the draft to pass up. So I'm just going to go with him, I think, Philly. would be the type of team that would be willing to take that plunge and I'm just going to give them him. Yeah, I'm a little torn here and it's between Kupari.

Like to me, it's actually, this is a European slot and I'm looking at Kravstov and I'm looking at Kupari and I'm looking at Isaac Lundastrum and I think... Are you worried about Lundstrom? Like what's his... He seems like he's going to be really solid. I just, like what...

And maybe we're getting to the point of the draft where if you're going to get like a third line center, like a really good one like that's that's fine but i just wonder what his upside is it seems like he's not necessarily the most dynamic of players yeah and and that's like numbers wise i think he's fine um like he he scored he scored better this year than because abanajad did at the same age and at the same level so he's but you know the numbers really are not bad um but yeah that when you read this outing reports that's that's that's that's That seems to be a consistent thing where people wonder about how high-end he's going to be.

I think he'll play for you, and then I think you can gamble a little bit that he might have a bit more of a ceiling. Anywhere in this 10 to 20 range, I think you can gamble on him because there just aren't a bunch of guys who you look at and say, that guy is going to be a top-end NHL player. I think Kravsov is maybe the last of those guys on, probably on either of our boards that you look at. And you say this is a guy who really brings a dynamic quality. So I take Kravsav as well, just because I think he's the best of the three. But Kupari and Lundstrom are both really interesting.

Yeah. So with Florida then, I'm going to give them Barrett Hayden. I think he seems like a type of guy that is a nice little mix of what the computer boys would like and what Dale Tallon would like. So it seems like the best of both worlds. but I don't know, like what, which way do you think they would go at this point at the 15th pick? At this point, I mean, the draft is such a mess. You can take anybody.

I'm going to take Rasmus Sandine because I love him and I know we're coming to the end of our. You just want to sneak him in here? Yeah, I want to sneak him in. And I actually think he kind of makes sense for the, for the Panthers. He's, he does lots of things well. And like Hayton, he's a guy who I think you can make a case for from a true. traditional scouting perspective, and I think he can make a case for from an analytics perspective. He's a smart guy. He's playing in North America. Teams are very comfortable

with Swedish defensemen as a rule. I'm just rattling off a bunch of stuff now. I like him at this lot. Yeah. I feel if you take Sandine after 15, you're getting insane. Well, I shouldn't say insane value, but I think you're getting really good value with him anywhere after 15. And I think he will be available after 15, to be honest, based on the way. Oh yeah, I think there's a good chance you get them late in the first round. And if you do, I think you're probably doing really well. All right. Well, that's something for listeners to look forward to. All right, Jonathan, let's get out of here so we can post this and so people can have time to listen to it before the draft actually happens. We did the top

15. We made it. I feel like there was enough diversity here. We mixed it up a little bit. I think we only agreed on like four or five picks in total. So it's pretty good, better than I thought. And obviously once Montreal takes Yisbury Cook and Naomi third and just throws everything for a loop, I'll know why it's we're going to wind up looking silly. But you know what? I'd much rather it turns out the way we did it, especially yours.

I feel like somehow all 15 teams are very happy about the guy that's lit of them. Should we throw in a thing about Ryan Merckley before we leave? Or should we just ignore him entirely? Because he's not really a top 15 pick, but he, like, he's not going to be, we don't think. He's a top 15 talent. He will not be a top 15. He may be a top 5 talent. Yes.

Yeah, I mean, it's tough because I think anyone that has been following the draft at all or preparing for it sort of knows everything about him right now in terms of the concerns and why picking him makes it a bit of a gamble. But at the same time, once you start getting, especially into like, the mid-20s i feel like you know the names they're going to be available there just don't provide nearly enough upside to warrant passing up on what murkly could be if he gets his head on right and all of those off-ice concerns um kind of stabilize and maybe i mean listen he's a young kid as a teenager like it's attitude problems and stuff like that um sometimes stick and sometimes don't and

he can very clearly play. So I think if you're just building a hockey team and you have a good culture in place and you believe in your organizational structure and hierarchy, I think he'll be a very intriguing name. I think that's why he's been linked so heavily to a team like Toronto or 25, for example.

Yeah, I think he probably falls in that 25 to 28 range. I don't, like Toronto's always depicted as this very analytics-heavy organization because they are, but I don't think that means they discount character concerns or things in the same. that nature. So I don't think it's a lock that they pick them at 25, but maybe they do. But then you get

into that 26 to 28 range and you have two New York picks and New York has shown a willingness to, and maybe that works against them with Anthony DeAngelo where maybe they are willing to take a gamble on a guy like that. And because they have three first round picks, it makes some sense for them. And then when I look at Chicago, I think at 2070 might be a sneaky good pick for Chicago just because the Blackhawks are in a position where they need a real talent infusion. and it makes more sense for them to kind of swing for the fences there than it does for a lot of other teams. Yeah, no, 100%. Sorry, I didn't want to derail your graceful exit from this pod.

Oh, that's okay. I thought we should at least mention Berkeley. You're right, 100%. I'm glad we did. Jonathan, so what, plug some stuff. What are you working on now? I know obviously we mentioned that statistical mock draft that you did or a ranking set, and everyone should absolutely go in to vote.

six hours to reading that because that's how long it'll take to get through all of it. But is there anything else that you want to direct people's attention to? You know, because we're in a fluid news situation, I don't really have anything that's immediately coming up that I know is coming up. So obviously you'll be writing about the draft and free agency and we'll just see what happens. I will plug my 2018 statistical draft piece because it took me the better part of two weeks. The first draft was over 15,000 words. So I cut it down to 10, but it's, uh, it's a, it's a, it's a, it's a, it's a lot of fun and very deep or it's a merciless slog. In either way, you should check it out. Absolutely. I, uh,

100% co-sign. Um, all right, man, let's, uh, enjoy the draft, enjoy a free agency and we'll chat sometime down the road. Thanks a lot, Dim, T.O.cast with Dmitri Filipovic. Follow on Twitter at dim philipovich and on SoundCloud at soundcloud.com slash hockey pdocast. Acast powers some of the world's best podcasts. Here's a show we recommend. There's so much going on in Latin America. Literally, they're going to die because

absolutely, all is collapsed. The quantity of deram is impressive. It's a colossal. In Elil, we help you understand the most important stories from across the region. It's necessary that the people precarized, we organize, us un-ed us.

We started to say that nobody and I knew where we were we were that we didn't let us to tell. Listen to Elilo every Friday morning on Acast, Spotify, or your favorite podcast app. ACAS, recommends.