The Athletic 2019 NHL Re-Draft

[BrooksBurner]

https://theathletic.com/3690768/2022/10/19/nhl-redraft-2019/?source=user_shared_article
 

Quote

1. Jack Hughes, C (No. 1 pick)
2. Moritz Seider, RHD (No. 6 pick)
3. Trevor Zegras, C (No. 9 pick)

4. Dylan Cozens, C (No. 7 pick)
5. Bowen Byram, LHD (No. 4 pick)
6. Matt Boldy, LW (No. 12 pick)
7. Cole Caufield, RW (No. 15 pick)
8. Arthur Kaliyev, RW (No. 33 pick)
9. Spencer Knight, G (No. 13 pick)
10. Kirby Dach, C (No. 3 pick)
11. Peyton Krebs, C (No. 17 pick)

12. Kaapo Kakko, RW (No. 2 pick)
 

Kaapo Kakko, the second overall pick from the draft being represented here will, I’m sure, be a point of contention. Could you reasonably argue him higher? Sure. I see a very skilled winger with size who can play a power or finesse game successfully. With his skating the debate has become about how much offense he can generate. If he had a big season it wouldn’t shock me though.

Kakko 12th, but kind words. I guess the glimmer of hope is better than a verifiable bust. He has looked a bit flashier at times this year. More willing to try subtle higher skill moves with the puck.

[BrooksBurner]

Quote

25. Zac Jones, LHD (No. 68 pick)

Zac Jones and Drew Helleson are two defensemen also who have developed well since their draft day. Jones is a highly mobile and intelligent defenseman who lacks size and who has continued to get better every year. 

 

[Pete]

The issue with these re-drafts is that they don't take into account who was picking. The Rangers wouldn't have taken Seider over Zegras, IMO. 

[BrooksBurner]

7 minutes ago, Pete said:

The issue with these re-drafts is that they don't take into account who was picking. The Rangers wouldn't have taken Seider over Zegras, IMO. 

Yeah, it’s really just a ranking of the player values. It did say in the article that it wasn’t intended to be a mock draft.

[Pete]

10 minutes ago, rmc51 said:

Yeah, it’s really just a ranking of the player values. It did say in the article that it wasn’t intended to be a mock draft.

Oh gotcha. I was skimming. Obviously no issues with the re-rank. Looks right. 

[Sod16]

13 hours ago, Pete said:

The issue with these re-drafts is that they don't take into account who was picking. The Rangers wouldn't have taken Seider over Zegras, IMO. 

 

I don't think anyone looks at this and says the Rangers should have drafted any of these players over Kakko.  Given the No. 2 pick, every GM in the league probably would have drafted Kakko.  It's disappointing that he hasn't turned out better so far, especially considering that he was considered more NHL ready than Hughes, due to his physical maturity.

[Pete]

1 hour ago, Sod16 said:

 

I don't think anyone looks at this and says the Rangers should have drafted any of these players over Kakko.  Given the No. 2 pick, every GM in the league probably would have drafted Kakko.  It's disappointing that he hasn't turned out better so far, especially considering that he was considered more NHL ready than Hughes, due to his physical maturity.

That's got nothing to do with what I said. 

[Dunny]

I like Kakko, and hope he excels. Here's my issue.

 

How many Ranger scouts watched him 25-30 times that year, in person? Did any? By the time he became a thing, did they just see what they wanted to see? Did they just ride the hype train? Making the consensus pick is easy. Any of us could have did that. 

 

There were red flags with this player, had he been looked at with a skeptical eye. I'm splitting hairs a bit, because he's an obviously productive NHL player, but I'd really be interested to see the dissenting views in that FO, or others orgs opinions pre draft.

 

 

[Sod16]

The insider opinions you heard from scouts for teams with later picks often indicated that they thought Kakko might be a better pick than Hughes.  I don't recall any talk from such sources that Kakko should go later than No. 2.

[BrooksBurner]

I don't think the purpose of this was to say the Rangers did anything wrong. It's just how the cookie crumbles. Slam dunk, "no holes in their game", #2 picks don't actually always work out as expected. Kakko could develop into a successful two-way 60 point player and that's still short of what he was billed as.