Pronman's latest mock

[Pierre McGuire]

I'd be ecstatic if it worked out like this....

https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/639306 ... 5-pronman/

[noted]

Realize should always take the best player available, but another winger? Really? When have organizational need at RHD and center, seems that would be more pragmatic route to go.

[STL fan in MN]

Barf. Lakovic is the Charlie Stramel/Logan Brown of this draft IMO. Tantalizing tools but I doubt he has the toolbox to be able to properly utilize them.

[HighStick]

I'm not always a fan of the bpa approach. Sometimes I think it's better to go for a more direct organizational needs kind of approach. Especially if its only a matter of a few spots. Obviously that changes or adjusts with the circumstances every year but I do think it's a mistake to go in there automatically knowing you are picking bpa no matter what.

[Blueston]

I'm not always a fan of the bpa approach. Sometimes I think it's better to go for a more direct organizational needs kind of approach. Especially if its only a matter of a few spots. Obviously that changes or adjusts with the circumstances every year but I do think it's a mistake to go in there automatically knowing you are picking bpa no matter what.

Agreed. I prefer incorporating positional value into BPA analysis too. It's so much easier to acquire middle 6 wingers and bottom 4 LHD, that I lean towards drafting C and RD unless winger or LD are clearly superior. Especially in 1st round.

[bluetunehead]

I'm not always a fan of the bpa approach. Sometimes I think it's better to go for a more direct organizational needs kind of approach. Especially if its only a matter of a few spots. Obviously that changes or adjusts with the circumstances every year but I do think it's a mistake to go in there automatically knowing you are picking bpa no matter what.

I think if the guys left on the board at #19 are the Blues #19, 20, 21, etc. ranked players then yeah you're probably talking about positional need. Like if there is a LW available and an RHD available that the Blues see as equally talented they're probably taking the RHD.

But what usually happens is that teams will all rank players differently. A guy the Blues had at #12 might still be there at #19, and that's when BPA becomes the strategy.

[stlblues1979]

Barf. Lakovic is the Charlie Stramel/Logan Brown of this draft IMO. Tantalizing tools but I doubt he has the toolbox to be able to properly utilize them.

Always appreciate yours & Pierre's thoughts on the draft & amateur hockey. You guys are seldom this far apart in your opinion of a player. I think it's kind of interesting. You see Logan Brown & Pierre sees Tage Thompson(?) .

So especially to kimzey, Hockey Pete, & seattle, & others as well, what say ye on Lakovic?

[Pierre McGuire]

Barf. Lakovic is the Charlie Stramel/Logan Brown of this draft IMO. Tantalizing tools but I doubt he has the toolbox to be able to properly utilize them.

Always appreciate yours & Pierre's thoughts on the draft & amateur hockey. You guys are seldom this far apart in your opinion of a player. I think it's kind of interesting. You see Logan Brown & Pierre sees Tage Thompson(?) .

So especially to kimzey, Hockey Pete, & seattle, & others as well, what say ye on Lakovic?

I don't see Tage Thompson but he's nowhere near Logan Brown. Lakovic is tremendously underrated in this class.

[stlblues1979]

Barf. Lakovic is the Charlie Stramel/Logan Brown of this draft IMO. Tantalizing tools but I doubt he has the toolbox to be able to properly utilize them.

Always appreciate yours & Pierre's thoughts on the draft & amateur hockey. You guys are seldom this far apart in your opinion of a player. I think it's kind of interesting. You see Logan Brown & Pierre sees Tage Thompson(?) .

So especially to kimzey, Hockey Pete, & seattle, & others as well, what say ye on Lakovic?

I don't see Tage Thompson but he's nowhere near Logan Brown. Lakovic is tremendously underrated in this class.

My fault for assuming that. I think I read where maybe some "experts" or scouts had made that "potential" comp.

[STL fan in MN]

Barf. Lakovic is the Charlie Stramel/Logan Brown of this draft IMO. Tantalizing tools but I doubt he has the toolbox to be able to properly utilize them.

Always appreciate yours & Pierre's thoughts on the draft & amateur hockey. You guys are seldom this far apart in your opinion of a player. I think it's kind of interesting. You see Logan Brown & Pierre sees Tage Thompson(?) .

So especially to kimzey, Hockey Pete, & seattle, & others as well, what say ye on Lakovic?

I don't see Tage Thompson but he's nowhere near Logan Brown. Lakovic is tremendously underrated in this class.

Fine. I’ll be nice and say he has Zach Sanford potential.

[skilles]

I'd never ever go organizational need but I would consider higher valued positions which currently line up and probably will line up quite often.

[hockey jedi]

I'm not always a fan of the bpa approach. Sometimes I think it's better to go for a more direct organizational needs kind of approach. Especially if its only a matter of a few spots. Obviously that changes or adjusts with the circumstances every year but I do think it's a mistake to go in there automatically knowing you are picking bpa no matter what.

I'm with you. I buy into that theory when you need everything, but getting Broberg and Holloway shortened the rebuild two years. I want a defenseman that is the closest to being NHL ready.

[Old_Goat]

I'm not always a fan of the bpa approach. Sometimes I think it's better to go for a more direct organizational needs kind of approach. Especially if its only a matter of a few spots. Obviously that changes or adjusts with the circumstances every year but I do think it's a mistake to go in there automatically knowing you are picking bpa no matter what.

I tend to agree, particularly outside the Top 3-5.

[John Cocktoastin]

“We’re always looking for the best player available,” said Doug Armstrong regarding his team’s draft philosophy. “Because these players are so young, usually when they get to the NHL, unless you are picking in the top two or three, your dynamics of your team have changed from where they are today. So we take the best-player approach. At the same time, you look at moving up or moving down, so you can explore to maximize your picks.”

[Frank Underwood]

Barf. Lakovic is the Charlie Stramel/Logan Brown of this draft IMO. Tantalizing tools but I doubt he has the toolbox to be able to properly utilize them.

Always appreciate yours & Pierre's thoughts on the draft & amateur hockey. You guys are seldom this far apart in your opinion of a player. I think it's kind of interesting. You see Logan Brown & Pierre sees Tage Thompson(?) .

So especially to kimzey, Hockey Pete, & seattle, & others as well, what say ye on Lakovic?

I don't see Tage Thompson but he's nowhere near Logan Brown. Lakovic is tremendously underrated in this class.

Fine. I’ll be nice and say he has Zach Sanford potential.

Savage response!

[TBone]

Fine. I’ll be nice and say he has Zach Sanford potential.