The top of a draft class is usually a place for optimism, featuring the stars of tomorrow. Consider Steven Stamkos vs. Drew Doughty (2008), John Tavares vs. Victor Hedman (2009), Taylor Hall vs. Tyler Seguin (2010), Connor McDavid vs. Jack Eichel (2015) or Auston Matthews vs. Patrik Laine (2016). However, that is not always the case. Numerous classes in the past decade have lacked that shine.
The 2017 NHL draft class also lacks superstars. There are more questions at the top of the class than optimism. The top two projected prospects, Nolan Patrick from Brandon of the WHL and Nico Hischier from Halifax in the QMJHL, have a tenuous hold on their draft positions.
While the average person tends to be drawn to the A vs. B debate at the top of a class, that framework does not exist in 2017. While Hischier and Patrick are my top two prospects, it's perfectly reasonable to argue any of the following over either of them at No. 1 overall: Gabriel Vilardi, Cody Glass, Nick Suzuki, Eeli Tolvanen, Owen Tippett, Klim Kostin or Miro Heiskanen.
So who should the New Jersey Devils take with the No. 1 pick? Let's examine the landscape:
Bunching up at the top of the class
If you adjust for the fact that Vilardi is seven months younger than Hischier, Vilardi's adjusted point production comes out ahead, never mind the fact the OHL is slightly tougher than the QMJHL. The same goes for Suzuki, whose production is identical to what Patrick's was last season, which is relevant since Suzuki is about a full year younger than Patrick. Glass' production was equivalent to Patrick's this season, despite being much younger as well. Tippett had a better shot generation rate than Hischier. When I've seen Tolvanen and Hischier play in the same events during the past two seasons, Tolvanen has played at about the same level, if not better. The same applies, albeit to a lesser degree, to Kostin and Heiskanen.
Essentially, Hischier and Patrick are hanging on by a thread, and there are a multitude of arguments for other players, which is unlike a typical situation at the top of the draft. While these two remain my top two prospects and most scouts agree, there is some hesitation.
By way of example, here are some recent draft classes that have seen several CHL forwards drafted near the top, which is how my final draft rankings look, with CHL production displayed. Slots for 2017 are my rankings, not projected actual slot on draft day:
This is a basic statistical display, without accounting for luck, team effects and birth month, but it illustrates a simple point that I've been building toward: The top of the 2017 class is compact and underwhelming.
"Underwhelming" does not mean "disastrous," though. This draft, including the top picks, will likely produce several very good NHL players. However, expectations should be tempered to a realistic level of impact. Hischier, Patrick, Vilardi, Glass, Suzuki and similarly ranked players have the potential to be useful top-six forwards but probably will not be stars.
Who should be No. 1?
Turning the debate back to the No. 1 pick, I have narrowed down the options to Hischier and Patrick, but not without serious deliberation for Vilardi, Glass or Suzuki.
On a scouting level, I will use the 20-80 scale to represent my opinions on the major attributes for each of the top prospects. The scale is commonly seen in baseball discussions. Some NHL teams have adopted various versions of this scale (I've seen teams use 30-90 or 10-70, for example). In this case, 40 is at the fringe of the league, 50 projects as NHL average, 60 is among the top third in the league, 70 is among the very best and 80 is generational.
This will help clarify my analysis of both players. Top forward prospects from the past are shown with grades I assigned at the time of their draft, for illustration purposes:
The argument for Hischier
Hischier's promise is in his skill level. Unlike arguably any other player in this class, he has the rare combination of great hands and hockey IQ while being a competent skater, although his small frame stands out as a weakness. Patrick, on the other hand, does not have one key offensive attribute that rises to a 70 level. Whether in the QMJHL or in international play, such as the World Juniors or under-18 levels, Hischier has shown the ability to elevate his game to carry typically poor Switzerland teams. To be fair, he does not always do that, but the potential is clearly there.
Given the close similarities between the top prospects, I looked to see which players followed similar statistical paths. For example, Hischier has followed a path that is amazingly similar to Winnipeg's Nikolaj Ehlers, who scored 60 points as a 20-year-old in the NHL this season. Team strengths differed between the two, and Hischier is a center while Ehlers is a winger, but it's an interesting comparison regardless:
The picture I end up seeing for Hischier is a chance to be a No. 1 center, but if not, he'll likely be a quality top-six center for a long time.
The argument for Patrick
By far the strongest argument for Patrick is his track record.
While Hischier outplayed Patrick this season, that has not been the case the past few seasons, even though Hischier was also a top-end prospect in that time. For example, while Patrick ripped up the WHL and earned the league's playoff MVP last season, Hischier was putting up similar numbers in the Swiss junior league. It would have been nearly absurd to make an argument for Hischier above Patrick at that time. Thus, one could make an argument that Patrick's lesser production this season was an aberration, not reality. It was his injuries, his poor supporting cast, etc. I'm not sure I buy the arguments, but they are reasonable.
Finding a statistically comparable player for Patrick is nearly impossible due to his unique path: a late birth-date player who posted a point-per-game in the CHL at 16, was great at 17, but got injured at 18. However, at 17, he looked about as promising as Ryan Nugent-Hopkins did at the same age in the same league.
The final call
Whichever option the Devils choose in Chicago, he will have a high probability to be a good player down the middle for a long time, but probably not a star center.
While one can make the arguments of sample size and longevity for Patrick, I could also argue that Hischier is trending up; in my experience, that is a significant signal for NHL success. I am less persuaded by a sample size bias in the evaluations, since Hischier's production this season was not a byproduct of lucky shooting percentages. Rather, he was one of the top shot generators in the CHL.
While there are several persuasive arguments for Patrick to be the top overall prospect -- and despite all the data I've looked at, breaking down their tools numerically -- the deciding factor for me came down to when I've scouted the players. I've been wowed by Hischier. I've seen flashes of elite-level play, even if it isn't always there. I haven't seen that from Patrick. When I've watched him, he has never blown me away or given me the impression that he can be an NHL star. While this part of my evaluation may be subject to severe sample bias, I will note that once I knew I was leaning toward Hischier, I went back and re-watched many of Patrick's games on video to see if I could convince myself otherwise. That didn't happen, and I continued to come away with the conclusion that he's a very good and well-rounded player, but not a game-changer.
With the first overall pick, or at any slot, really, I will almost always be persuaded to take a player who has the ability to hit another level. That quality defines championship-winning teams, the quality of having star-level players in your lineup, particularly down the middle. As a result, my call is for Hischier.