Top 10 Safest Defensemen in the 2015 NHL Draft (First Round)
AMMENDMENT: Thanks to Tiranis for noticing a discrepency. Noah Hannifin was incorrectly unlisted due to a transcription error. This article has been updated to reflect this.
Last week we outlined the top 10 safest forwards expected to go in the first round of the 2015 draft. This week we’ll be doing the same exercise with defensemen.
The idea of “safe” is even more heavily applied to defensemen than forwards by the scouting community. So let’s see how many “sure bets” crack the list from a statistical perspective…
MASSIVE CAVEAT: Scoring should be held at a lower standard for defensemen than for forwards. That being said, it has been proven to be a good indicator of future success. Please keep in mind that our “tiers” of NHL defensemen are based on scoring. This is obviously not the best way to do this but does give a decent picture of what a player could be expected to become.
Cohort Criteria: +/- 4 NHLE’s in their DRAFT YEAR ONLY(excluding DY-1, projected upon an 82 game schedule). +/- 2 inches in height.
1. Mitchell Vande Sompel
CSS NA RANK: 34
Cohort size: 3
NHL %: 100% (3)
Third Pair/Depth %: 0%
Top Four or better %: 100% (3)
Top Pair or better %: 100 % (3)
Elite %: 0%
The small high scoring Vande Sompel makes for a very interesting case this year. While his scoring was off the charts, he was also sometimes used as a center. From a statistical standpoint though, Vande Sompel’s comparables all became top pairing (via point production) defensemen.
2. Ivan Provorov
CSS NA RANK: 7
Cohort size: 27
NHL %: 67% (18)
Third Pair/Depth %: 7%(2)
Top Four or Better: 59% (16)
Top Pair or Better: 33 % (9)
Elite: 7% (2)
Ivan Provorov has been one of the highest rated defensemen in this years draft and with good reason. At 67% success rate including Elite potential, there’s a lot to like about Provorov. To boot, scouts are in love with his defensive game and he could actually be the “safest” defenseman in the draft.
3. Jeremy Roy
CSS NA RANK: 21
Cohort size: 36
NHL %: 58% (21)
Third Pair/Depth %: 6% (2)
Top Four or Better: 53% (19)
Top Pair or Better: 31% (11)
Elite %: 15% (4)
Projected to go in the back half of the first round, Jeremy Roy represents a 58% chance of becoming an NHL player from statistical standpoint. With a 53% chance of being a strong top 4 defensemen Roy could represent great value in the late first.
4. Vince Dunn
CSS NA RANK: 32
Cohort size: 36
NHL %: 58% (21)
Third Pair/Depth %: 6% (2)
Top Four or Better: 53% (19)
Top Pair or Better: 31% (11)
Elite %: 15% (4)
Vince Dunn’s statistical production catapults him from unlikely first round pick to one of the safest defensemen ranked in the top 40. Dunn pulled an identical cohort to the higher ranked Jeremy Roy. With both being seen as late first/second round talents it will be interesting to see how many picks separate these two defenders.
5. Noah Hanifin (AMMENDMENT)
CSS NA RANK: 3
Cohort size: 44
NHL %: 55% (24)
Third Pair/Depth %: 9% (4)
Top Four or better: 45% (32)
Top Pair or better: 23% (17)
Elite %: 7% (6)
The highest ranked defensemen in this years draft drops to number five (much better then the previous omission). Hannifin DOES in fact project as a likely NHL caliber defensemen at 55% success. Whether or not he provides more value then some of the forwards available will be the question come draft day.
6. Jakub Zboril
CSS NA RANK: 12
Cohort size: 64
NHL %: 42% (27)
Third Pair/Depth %: 3% (2)
Top Four or Better: 39% (25)
Top Pair or Better: 20% (13)
Elite %: 8% (5)
Jakub Zboril’s statistical production puts him as the 6th safest defenseman, behind 3 skaters CSS ranked far after him. Zboril represents a 20% chance of becoming a top pairing defenseman and is the first on the list to show a below 50-50 shot at being a top 4 defender. Scouts see a lot to like in his game, and his statistics are not low enough to raise serious concerns about his viability as mid 1st round pick.
7. Noah Juulson
CSS NA RANK: 22
Cohort size: 67
NHL %: 39% (26)
Third Pair/Depth: 6% (4)
Top Four or Better: 33% (22)
Top Pair or Better: 16% (11)
Elite : 8% (4)
Ranked to go in the top half of the second round, Noah Juulson is in a three way tie with the next defenders based on their projections. With a 33% chance of being an effective top 4 defenseman, teams picking in the 25+ range could do a lot worse than Noah Juulson.
8. Ryan Pilon
CSS NA RANK: 24
Cohort size: 26
NHL %: 39% (26)
Third Pair/Depth: 6% (4)
Top Four or Better: 33% (22)
Top Pair or Better: 16% (11)
Elite : 8% (4)
The second of the three way tie, Ryan Pilon pulled an identical cohort to Noah Juulson. Scouts seem consistent in their ranking of these two defenders, with CSS having them only 2 picks apart. It will be interesting to see how each skater develops given their similarities.
9. Nicolas Meloche
CSS NA RANK: 40
Cohort size: 26
NHL %: 39% (26)
Third Pair/Depth: 6% (4)
Top Four or Better: 33% (22)
Top Pair or Better: 16% (11)
Elite : 8% (4)
Nicolas Meloche is the third member of the tie. Ranked over 15 slots later then the previously mentioned Juulson and Pilon, Meloche is an identical match to the previous two based on cohort alone. If Juulson and Pilon represent good value at the back of the first, Meloche should be considered a steal if taken at his projected mid-second round location.
10. Sebastian Aho
CSS EU RANK: 13
Cohort size: 14
NHL %: 39% (5)
Third Pair/Depth %: 0%
Top Four or Better: 33% (5)
Top Pair or Better: 16% (3)
Elite : 8% (1)
Sebastian Aho is the 13th ranked European skater and the first to crack our top 10 lists. What does this mean? Well, in actuality it means Aho is probably even more likely to make the NHL then these numbers suggest (Pro euro leagues represent weak NHLE translations for prospects primarily due to the difficulty 17-18 year-olds face in getting ice-time on pro-level teams in non-development leagues).
Note: Aho is an Over-Age player. This comparison was done using his stats from his first year of eligibility. If we adjust to include his DY +1 production his NHL success rate drops to 30%. Please note that DY + DY+1 may not be a better indicator of success then Draft Year production alone
11. Thomas Chabot
CSS NA RANK: 16
Cohort size: 123
NHL %: 31% (38)
Third Pair/Depth %: 5% (6)
Top Four or better: 26% (32)
Top Pair or better: 14% (17)
Elite %: 5% (6)
Thomas Chabot, ranked 16 by CSS in NA, is the final defensemen on our list. Scouts love Chabot because of his defensive game and size, and while his comparisons are not as favorable as some of the smaller defenders ranked behind him, they are decent. Chabot is the type of defender scouts love to call “safe”, even if historically they are less likely to succeed then smaller, scoring defenders.
Honorable Mentions:
Just outside of the top 10 are swede Oliver Kylington and the big, mean, Brandon Carlo. While Kylington has seen his draft stock fall throughout the year, Carlo has been on the rise. Carlo is a decent prospect but his scoring does raise some flags about his value at his projected draft slot.
Kylington on the other hand is likely to be significantly undersold by these numbers due to the difficulty a 17 year-old defender can have earning ice time and scoring points in the non-developmental, pro-level SHL.
The Big Omissions:
The most interesting omission on the top 10 list is #3 ranked Noah Hanifin.
Hanifin’s scoring leaves a lot of questions, especially for a prospect so highly regarded. Still, playing a big roll on an NCAA team at 17 is no easy feat. The question remains, can a player succeed to a level equivalent of Hannifin’s ranking without scoring? or is this a classic case of scouts outsmarting themselves?
Originally not on the list due to a transcription error, Noah Hanifin is in fact a top 10 defenseman from a statistical standpoint.
Note: Zach Werenski has also been omitted due to errors in retrieving data. We will update this article appropriately in the future once that data is available.
Conclusions (ammended):
The most startling conclusions would be the extremely high success rate of the small, high-scoring, Vande Sompel, and the relatively low rating of the highest ranked defensemen in the draft, Noah Hanifin
While the scouts had the top 4 forwards accurately ranked in order by projection, there was far more disagreement with defensemen.
It will be an interesting study to keep tabs on the draft and the development of these players as teams have historically had far less success in identifying top flight defensemen in the draft as compared to forwards.
It is also important to note the disparity between “safe” forwards and defensemen. While the lowest ranked forward on our top 10 still held a nearly 50% chance of success, the lowest defenseman was a paltry 30%. This trend lines up with team’s history of struggling to identify defensive talent at the same level as forwards in the draft.
Furthermore, other research has shown that at least one other defenseman, who we’ll explore in our next article, was ranked so low by the css that we did not include him in this study even though he would have debuted at number 5.