Our panel weighs in:

Jeff Osborn:

Stan Bowman went a little off the script and picked the big center from Saskatoon. Dach is big, has great hands, and very good (but not top) speed for his size. He projects as a Ryan Getzlaf type of player, which is definitely something they could use. They immediately get a rare combination of size and creativity up the middle, behind Dylan Strome and Jonathan Toews. He could very well be the number one center of the future and has a pretty good mentor to show him the ropes. The Blackhawks picked from an area of need rather than best player available

The downside of this kid is that he is not quite as talented as maybe Turcotte or Byram. I feel like Bowman bought into the mock draft hype and maybe made an emotional pick. This pick will define Stan Bowman’s legacy in Chicago. He might not be as responsible in his own end as some might like just yet. When he does make it to the NHL, it also might be on the wing rather than his natural position. He said in his interviews that he feel like he’s able to make the jump to the NHL this fall, and he has a better shot than Byram might have.

Juliana Nikac:

There’s a significant amount of upside to Kirby Dach’s game. He’s one of those rare players who skates exceptionally well for his size (6-foot-4, 200 pounds) and doesn’t look awkward while accelerating. He has fantastic edge work and mobility that allows him to maneuver anywhere on the ice and protect the puck easily. Dach’s size also provides him with the ability to be physical when he has the puck, shouldering off defenders much like Rick Nash in his prime. He’s also reliable defensively, playing heavy minutes every game and often finding himself on the penalty kill utilizing his great backcheck.

The one downside of Dach’s game is that he doesn’t use his size effectively as he could. His lack of physicality is very visible during games and teams know this and target him, taking him out of plays and battles he should win more often than not. But the good news is that he’s already improved on this area of his game.

It’s clear Dach projects to be a good NHL center, but it’s difficult to determine what his ceiling is. If he can play a similar style to Nash, I think the Blackhawks will be happy and fans should be, too. But don’t expect Dach to be an elite player, because he probably will not reach that level when he’s finished developing. He’ll be in the tier below that, though, and that’s what makes him a valuable

John Jaeckel:

Love the pick.

Stan Bowman head-faked the entire fanbase and took a center—just not the hometown player. everyone expected.  Still Hawk fans are going to love every inch of 6’4” Kirby Dach, who possesses the hands and moves of much smaller players—in a big body that may allow him to be a dominant physical force in the league, as well as a reliable scorer.

He has a dazzling array of shots, and that unique ability and quick soft hands to roof a puck in tight on a goalie. He also is an incredibly graceful, agile skater. Thinks the game at a high level and exhibits a 200-foot awareness that will support him as a center in the NHL. Think of all the big, skilled centers the Hawks face in the Central. Stan Bowman went for the move that favors the Hawks matching up to win playoff series.

He’ll likely be a center, and once he grows into his large frame, he should be a complete power centerman with elite skill.

Kudos to Stan Bowman, he filled a glaring team need and resisted the pressure to grab the smaller center with Chicago “roots.”

Ray Napientek

Upside: At 6-foot-3 and 200 pounds, Dach has the size and skill that the Chicago organization is lacking at the forward position pipeline. Dach plays a smart game. He can use his linemates with excellent vision or beat you with his physical play in front of the net and use his reach to hold off defenders, much like Jonathan Toews can. His shot is strong and crazy accurate. For his size, Dach is a fine skater that plays well on his edges and can make players miss.

Downside: This is not a sexy pick in Chicago. Until late, Dach was not a name on many Blackhawks “experts” picks. Stan Bowman would have to keep his fingers crossed that Bowen Byram and Alex Turcotte do not turn into legends. John McDonough would also make sure to let everyone know he could have sold millions of local boy Turcotte jerseys.

Summary: Dach has the size and strength to maybe squeeze into the NHL next season. That would help Bowman but should not be expected. Bowman still needs to find forwards that will play in their own end and kill penalties.

Ron Luce

Upside: Have you ever heard about size in the NHL? How about speed? Willingness to go to the net? All of those things describe what Kirby Dach was in the WHL this past season. The 6’4” pivot had a nice season with the Blades in the WHL. He was better than a point per game and all of his goals, if you watch his highlights, were in deep slot. Dach showed he can go into the “high traffic areas” and make things happen, something that this Blackhawks team desperately needs.

Downside: Dach may be a bit of a reach at number three. He is a very nice player, and the size is incredibly appealing, but he never scored more than 25 goals in the WHL. That said, Joe Thornton was never a huge goal scorer but knew how to set everyone else up for success. If Dach can become that type of player, this is certainly a win. Outside of that, the only concerns for Dach are can he use his size effectively in the NHL? If he can, he will be a forced to be reckoned with, if he cannot, then we may see the second coming of a great bust for a number three pick.

How this affects the team’s plans: Much like any player in this draft besides Hughes and Kakko, teams have to wonder are these kids ready for the NHL this year? If Dach indeed needs another year in the WHL, which is completely possible and highly likely, then the Blackhawks still need another centre to round out the Toews, Strome, Kampf group. Without another centre, the lines will be a bit shaky. Sure, Anisimov could fill that void, but I anticipate AA being moved after July 1st.

What do you think? Join the discussion and comment below.

The post Instant Reaction Roundtable: Blackhawks select Kirby Dach appeared first on The Rink.

So who ya got at No. 3 overall? Alex Turcotte (“the next Patrice Bergeron”), Bowen Byram (“Paul Coffey 2.0”) or, say, Dylan Cozens (“a not-so-poor man’s Auston Matthews”)?

For the sake of perspective, here are the last 10 players selected at No. 3 overall in the NHL draft:

2009  Matt Duchene

2010  Erik Gudbranson

2011  Jonathan Huberdeau

2012  Alex Galchenyuk

2013  Jonathan Drouin

2014  Leon Draisaitl

2015  Dylan Strome

2016  Pierre Luc Dubois

2017  Miro Heiskanen

2018  Jesperi Kotkaniemi

Mostly good players, maybe two or three potentially or already great players. But overall, through the last decade of drafts, the No. 3 overall pick has produced as many sorta duds as true studs especially in terms of the pre-draft expectations and scouting reports for each. With maybe 50 percent or more who will never fully live up to their pre-draft hype.

And that’s the issue. Every year, the glowing accolades and projections accompanying all the top prospects are as often as not left unfulfilled over time.

In 2009, some said Duchene was the best player in the draft, ahead of John Tavares, and compared him to Sidney Crosby. Duchene has become a nice player, but…

Gudbranson has battled injury and is on his third NHL team.

Galchenyuk was sold as a “can’t miss center”—who has been relegated to the wing and underperformed expectations pretty much throughout his career.

Drouin can be a force at times, but has not really lived up to pre-draft billing.

Strome had a nice second half of the season last year, but his limitations will also likely prevent him from being a legitimate first line center on a good NHL team.

And here’s the thing to remember—as you click through raves about Turcotte’s 200-foot game, edge-work and speed, Byram’s elite mobility and moves or Cozens’ borderline freakish size/speed combination—any player remotely worthy of top 10 consideration in the NHL draft is going to look amazing against, and in the context of, other 16–18-year-olds.

And all of the players listed above—as well as many drafted around them in their individual years—had the same kind of glowing scouting reports.

Sure, there are stronger drafts and there are weaker drafts. There are also miscalculations by GMs (and “draft experts,” and fans and fans who become “draft experts”). For every Jonathan Toews, there’s a Cam Barker. For every Draisaitl, there’s a JP Dumont. Or an Aki Berg. Or an Alexander Svitov.

Each (and ALL) of whom, was going to ride in to his respective NHL city on a pink unicorn, billowing confetti and giving away winning Power Ball tickets—because he lit it up in the WHL (or similar) and someone said he was going to be “the next” this or that.

Here’s the point: don’t despair, but also don’t necessarily believe the hype.

Great players can be unearthed at pick No. 3 and at pick No. 33. Same with “meh” players. The quality of scouting has a lot to do with the relative success or failure of high picks, but so does something else: a little luck. So many factors (character, injuries, coaching, etc.) go into the real-life process of turning a can’t-miss prospect into some kind of actual NHL player.

Everything we hear at The-Rink suggests the Hawks are doing extreme diligence on this pick, and that they may not have settled yet, even if some keep saying:

“Turcotte’s the pick.”

“Byram is the guy.”

“I think they’re gonna go with (Kirby) Dach.”

Everyone has an opinion. Damn few, next to no one, actually know the Hawks plans. Hell, I had an opinion—until I decided that as a Hawk fan, I just want them to get a great player at No. 3, hopefully an elite cornerstone player a la Toews—because the risk of not getting one quite that good is high.

In spite of the hype and “YouTubes.”

And don’t kid yourselves; the Blackhawks have needs all over the ice. So, they could even end up trading down a few spots and filling more than one hole in the process.

Social media and fan message boards have a way of creating beliefs and narratives about players or a direction the team might go (especially at this time of year) that aren’t always firmly rooted in reality.

For example, the Byram narrative: “The Hawk defense stunk last year, he’s the best defenseman, no brainer.” The problem is, Stan Bowman has added a lot of first and second round defensemen the last few years—so where does Byram really fit into the team’s plans (or not)?

The Turcotte narrative: “He’s from Chicago, the Hawks love Chicago players, he’s a center. USNTDP cred. Boom.” The problem there is with as much as is riding on this pick, a Chicago connection should be utterly meaningless one way or the other. And while the Hawks took Patrick Kane first overall out of the USNTDP, they took Jack Skille seventh overall out of the same program. Perspective.

The Cozens narrative: “He’s big and fast, something the Hawks need more of upfront.” But, big and fast doesn’t always translate to great in the NHL.

Every top player seems to have some soundbyte narrative, with varying amounts of validity attached to it. But the actual decision for the Hawks needs to be a lot more patient, considered and nuanced—because it has to be the best decision for the future of the franchise.

So sit back, take a deep breath and move away from the keyboard. The draft is still 15 days away. When the Blackhawks will draft…

Someone.

Comment below.

The post NHL Draft: No guarantee at Number 3 appeared first on The Rink.

But clearly, Chicago Blackhawks General Manager Stan Bowman will have options afforded by this high pick. As always, the outcome will depend on which door he chooses. That is what we will discuss here.

The fact is, Bowman not only “lucked out” in getting the third overall pick in the draft lottery last month—he also got a ton of added pressure. It is easier for a GM to slide out from under the responsibility of a missed 18^th overall selection (Mark McNeill) than it is at a pick position where Jonathan Toews was selected.

Another fact: this is a pick, if Bowman handles it properly, that could not only accelerate the Hawks’ rebuild, but could have a positive and significant impact on the franchise for the next decade or more.

So here, dear readers, are all the options (as we see them today):

BEST AVAILABLE ATHLETE

This was a draft strategy coined by the Dallas Cowboys in the 1970s. Gil Brandt and Co., did not just draft the best available defensive tackle because his team couldn’t stop the run the previous year. The Cowboys always thought two or three years out. And there is a strong argument for this philosophy in the NHL.

Sure, more and more, because of the Collective Bargaining Agreement, salary cap, more and more former European pros coming to North America and improvement in NCAA hockey, players now tend appear more often in the NHL the year after they are drafted. Still, overall, most players are a mere 17 years old when drafted and even some of the best typically require development in junior, college and/or the minors before debuting in the NHL. Sometimes, young players rushed to the NHL can be ruined by high expectations, followed by early struggles on bad teams.

All that said, let’s follow the conventional wisdom that Jack Hughes and Kappo Kaako are off the board when the Hawks go on the clock. Who, then, is the best available athlete?

Again, we will not presume to tell you that. We are not NHL scouts. And we put far more credence in those opinions than “YouTubes” and mock drafts put out by people who get their information from…YouTubes and internet-based mock drafts.

What we can say is this: there does not appear to be any position on the Hawks, except perhaps left wing (Alex DeBrincat, Brandon Saad), that you can say with any certainty is “set,” right now, or, more importantly, three to four years from now.

And for the record, our opinion is, the Hawks should be looking for the highest potential impact player at No. 3 this year—regardless of position—with one important caveat (that we will get to later).

The Hawks need elite young prospects all over the ice. Some may disagree and point to a defense pipeline that includes Adam Boqvist, Ian Mitchell and Nicolas Beaudin, all of whom are good-to-very-good prospects. However, until proven otherwise, all of these players are small and have documented defensive deficiencies that raise some valid questions as to where and exactly how they project in the NHL.

Aside from Henri Jokiharju, who is perhaps the most well-rounded defensive prospect (because that is really what he still is), the Hawks do not have a legitimate high-end defense prospect who plays a two-way game. Jokiharju, at this point appears to be a top-four defenseman in the future. But, where in the top four? Probably not an elite, No. 1 defenseman.

There is one defenseman, Bowen Byram of the Vancouver Giants (WHL), who scouts say stands head and shoulders above the rest in this draft class. At 6-foot-1, 195 pounds, he is more Jokiharju-sized than the smaller Boqvist (for example), skates exceptionally, can defend in space, shoots and passes with aplomb, has off the charts hockey sense and a nasty streak to boot.

So if the Hawks braintrust sees Byram as the best available athlete and a future elite player at No. 3, slam dunk. He is the pick.

While Bowman now appears to have stolen Dylan Strome from Arizona last season, and Jonathan Toews had a solid rebound season, Toews is now north of 30, the Hawks are still weak overall on faceoffs and—especially in the playoffs—you can never have enough quality centers.

From 3–8 in this draft, center is well-represented. Take your pick from Alex Turcotte, Dylan Cozens, Kirby Dach, Payton Krebs or Trevor Zegras. We will not try to fake our way through telling you which should be “the guy” at No. 3. Again, that is up to the Hawks, and that would also be assuming that any of the above are better players than say Byram or Vasili Podkolzin.

Easy for us to say.

Seriously though, Podkolzin, the enigmatic Russian right wing has perhaps “fallen” in the eyes of “internet hockey experts,” but it is hard to imagine serious hockey people dismissing his obvious set of talents and disposition: fast, über-competitive, physical, a great shot (you miss Panarin? This guy could potentially solve that) and defensively responsible.

We hesitate to project 17-year-olds, but watching him on tape in the top Russian junior league, it is hard not to see elements of Panarin and another great current NHLer from Russia, Vladimir Tarasenko.

Sure, there are potential transfer issues from Russia. Sure, he did not flash gaudy offensive numbers in a recent international tournament. Important considerations, but relative blips on the bigger radar picture. Let scouts figure it out based on a much greater set of metrics and time spent watching the player, talking to coaches, etc.

The bigger point is this, it appears that the Hawks have four or five (minimally) viable choices at No. 3 from whom to take the best available athlete—assuming they feel that player is clearly better than who they might take at pick 6, 7 or later.

Which leads to what, for some fans, might be a less comfortable scenario.

TRADING DOWN

“What? Why would you do that? You lucked out and got the third overall pick.”

Here is why. Two words: Cam Barker.

2004 was a two-player draft, perhaps not unlike this one. After Alex Ovechkin and Evgeni Malkin, there was a clear drop off to the next player who most, but not all, thought was Cam Barker of the Red Deer Rebels in the WHL. The Hawks held that pick, took Barker and the rest is history.

I wanted the Hawks to take Andrew Ladd instead, who was picked fourth by Carolina, and ironically, ended up hoisting the Cup with the Hawks in 2010—while Barker did not. But, the point is, sometimes in a two-player draft, your scouting might not see much difference in the quality of the player you would take at No. 3 than the one you could get at No. 7 or 8.

Perhaps, the grade you have on all the players left on the board are good to very good, but not elite future NHLers. But, as so often happens in all major sports’ drafts, another GM may have someone targeted that they want at No. 3—and they want him enough to give up a lot to move up and take him.

Here is a purely hypothetical scenario:

On draft night, Hughes and Kaako go first and second as expected. At No. 3, the Hawks are leaning toward taking Turcotte—a sturdy, skilled all-around center prospect—but they do not necessarily grade him much higher than Cozens or Krebs. And they grade none of those players as future, true elite players (a la McDavid, Crosby, Toews).

Thus, the Hawks know if they trade down a few slots, they will very likely get one of those comparable players.

Enter the Buffalo Sabres, picking seventh. Or, perhaps new Edmonton GM—and noted Russophile—Ken Holland, who might absolutely knock the door down to grab Podkolzin at No. 3. Edmonton picks eighth, where the Hawks would still be positioned to snag a future quality NHL center.

But, of course, Holland would need to further sweeten the pot for Chicago. Perhaps quite a bit.

Again, it depends on how much the other team’s GM wants that player at No. 3—how much would they give up?

Could the Hawks not only get a really good center at 7 or 8 who can be a difference maker for another decade, but also, for example, fill a glaring need on the blueline as well?

We can debate whether the Hawks could pry an Adam Larsson or an Evan Bouchard out of Holland in return for a five-slot swap to get a player he loves.

Likely not. But you never know.

The point is, if GMs come to Bowman with those kinds of offers—unless he is thoroughly convinced his guy at No. 3 is “can’t miss” elite— then he is dumb not to at least listen and evaluate.

WHERE IT COULD ALL GO WRONG

Broken record time: Cam Barker.

Say the Hawks hold the No. 3 pick, even though there is (hypothetically) a drop off from 1–2 to 3–7, and take, say, Turcotte.

Let’s even say Turcotte ends up being a better player than Barker, more along the lines of, say, Matt Duchene (a pretty good pro comparable for Turcotte). Duchene has become a nice player. But in the history of the NHL, is he ever going be mentioned in the same breath with Toews? No.

Or, let’s say, Turcotte, like another high first round, former USNTDP player, Jack Skille, ends up significantly underperforming in the NHL. Would that happen? Probably not.

But, over and over, time has a way of defying our initial expectations. Typically, everyone feels good about the pick the morning after the first round, when it is all sunshine and roses, but often not so much three or four years out.

And that is when the second guessing starts, or someone saying: “they should have traded down.”

In the end, no one knows right now—and no one can predict the future. But, this is why NHL scouts are paid to go to places like Nisku, Alberta, in January to watch hockey players, talk to coaches, etc., and you hope yours are as good as or better than anyone else’s…and that your GM has the judgement and courage to, when presented with good data, do the right thing for the franchise—not just temporarily placate the masses.

Please comment below.

The post ANALYSIS: The blessing (and the curse) of the third overall draft pick appeared first on The Rink.