Everything 2004 Draft

Pages : [1] 2

Greg
12-01-2003, 09:16 PM
Read this (http://hfboards.com/showthread.php?threadid=32368) thread on the prospects board. I guess at the time of the post we were in the 7 hole. They chose big (6'2 176) Czech defenseman named Ladislav Smid. He's not rated that high by most scouting rags. And even CSB has him the 3rd best Czech player behind Olesz and Kaspar.

Looking at the big picture, we have more depth than we've had in a long time. Even among prospects. Couple of questions to get some draft talk going; 1) what organizational need do you see right now? I know BPA, but give your answer anyway. 2) If we do end up in the top 10, do you take Hoot's advice and go for the homerun by taking a chance on a skilled offensive type?

Lauri Tukonen, Wojtek Wolski, Wes O'Neil - Some projected top 10 guys that me be of Coyote interest. Hey Stevex, who was the WHL defenseman you liked a lot? Fistric? Green?

And our 2004 draft picks look like this: Our own first rounder, two second rounders (ours and philly from amonte deal), no third rounder (traded in briere deal), two fourth rounders (ours and buffalo in briere deal), no fifth rounder (traded to bos for dmac), our own sixth rounder, our own seventh rounder, no eighth rounder (traded to Dallas for 9th rounder in 2003), and our own ninth rounder. Add in the conditional from the Teppo deal, the Pepe deal, and the DesRochers deal. Also, Carolina has the right to choose either the Coyotes' third-round pick in 2005 or their fourth-round pick in 2004.

Gwyddbwyll
12-02-2003, 12:59 AM
Looking at the big picture, we have more depth than we've had in a long time. Even among prospects. Couple of questions to get some draft talk going; 1) what organizational need do you see right now? I know BPA, but give your answer anyway. 2) If we do end up in the top 10, do you take Hoot's advice and go for the homerun by taking a chance on a skilled offensive type?

Lauri Tukonen, Wojtek Wolski, Wes O'Neil - Some projected top 10 guys that me be of Coyote interest. Hey Stevex, who was the WHL defenseman you liked a lot? Fistric? Green?


Mark Fistric yeah. But I meant more in a late 1st :). I would be shocked if they passed up on a top 7 guy for Fistric.. who's stock has dropped anyway

As for Smid, that's surely unlikely.. I perceive the org need to be forwards rather than defensemen with Taffe/Sjostrom's potential graduation. Though we have been saying we need stud D prospects.. we have since gotten Tanabe and Knyazev. Wolski would be my favorite pick since he is still available on that thread.

If we're going to miss the playoffs I really hope we make the top 7 picks.. the quality seems to tail off by then. Ovechkin, Schremp, Barker, Olesz, Malkin, Wolski, Tukonen look to be a class of their own..

Is Kaspar that good? I didnt realise he was the 2nd best Czech.

hbk
12-02-2003, 04:48 AM
Robbie Schremp's name is bound to come up sooner or later if it is a skill player we are looking for. He's rumored to have some character faults (the big controversy in Mississagau was his decision not to stay in school which is seen as a priority by the Ice Dogs hierarchy) and doesn't have the size that Phoenix seems to covet.

Obviously if we have the first pick we know who we end up with. It's if we land in that grey area 6-13 where there will actually be some heated debate. Scremp is likely to be available in that range. My preference if for a forward but I'm also a fan of future top 2 NHL defensemen. We certainly don't need another goalie and we seem to be well stocked with third and fourth line guys. We have a young pro defense as well and given the number of early picks that we do have we should be able to use a pick in the second round to acquire a defensive prospect.

One name I'd like to throw out there is that of Drew Stafford. He's a guy I kind of hope falls to us in the second round. I'm partial to bigger players though.

Dan
12-02-2003, 05:16 AM
One name I'd like to throw out there is that of Drew Stafford. He's a guy I kind of hope falls to us in the second round. I'm partial to bigger players though.
As Pierre McGuire would say, let's draft a player with some jam. If we have a top 10 pick, could there possibly be a forward with size and skill who plays a physical game? I don't know about Stafford falling to the second. I've seen his game and it's tough to judge off a few games, but he looks like a complete package, raw, but complete. He has a lot of talent around him, but he plays with a lot of poise for a frosh. If we end up with three second rounders, maybe we can use those to move up??

PhoPhan
12-02-2003, 02:58 PM
The guy I really like is Wojtech Wolski.

Dan
12-04-2003, 01:17 PM
Just read the latest Hockey News with Vinny on the cover. They have an article about Robbie Schremp on page 35. Likely to be a top 10 draft selection, he has an interesting mix of skills.

The good- "Amazing vision" and "good when he has the puck on his stick." One scout said, "I don't know anyone in the 2004 draft who can saucer a puck the way he does." Obviously, the kid is an offensive player that can create scoring chances. He's not a tiny guy at 6'0 195. Dale Hunter is his new coach in London.

The bad- Reading the article, they don't say it, but they imply his hockey sense is a weakness. Does not play defense. A scout said, "He needs to be more concerned with the team getting it's two points, rather than him getting his two points." Having trouble grasping London's system, but Schremp says, "It takes more than a few weeks to make the adjustment to a system."

The odd- Demanded a trade from Mississauga because "he was attempting to better his career." One scout questions if that's the truth. Not to mention playing for the US U-18 controversy (see this (http://slam.canoe.ca/Slam031001/chl_mis-sun.html) article for more). Some say he used the US a bargaining chip to get what he wanted. He's playing in London now and was recently left off of the US WJC team selection list.

Matzel
12-05-2003, 05:06 AM
Robbie Schremp has an interesting mix of skills.
I like skill, but I LOVE character! - He might lack the latter...

Dancin' Gabe rules! :bow:

edit: Why does the name Eric Lindros come to mind?! Hmmmmm..:dunno:

PhoPhan
12-05-2003, 08:37 AM
Schremp doesn't hold a candle to Lindros.

I will go on record right now and say that Robbie Schremp will be a bad choice for this team. I believe after Ovechkin, one of Wolski, Olesz or Barker will be the best choices.

Matzel
12-06-2003, 04:54 AM
Schremp doesn't hold a candle to Lindros.

I made this comment regarding Schremp's lack of character and the fact that Lindros didn't want to report to the team that originally drafted him, just like Schremp didn't want to play for the ice dogs because he didn't think it was going to help his own agenda. Sounds very 'primadonna-like' to me and I don't think he's good for the locker room...

Dancin' Gabe rules! :bow:

Dan
12-16-2003, 05:57 AM
One name I'd like to throw out there is that of Drew Stafford. He's a guy I kind of hope falls to us in the second round. I'm partial to bigger players though.
Good call on Stafford. I see he's shooting up the charts on some of the scouting rags (mid first round right now). And he was recently promoted to the top line at ND over Brady Murray. Playing with Zach and Hobey hopeful Bochenski. UND site lists him at 6'2 200.
http://www.fightingsioux.com/photos/834.jpg

Dan
12-18-2003, 08:10 AM
Do we owe Philly a draft pick for Paul Ranheim? Was looking at this (http://www.hfboards.com/showthread.php?postid=593432#post593432) thread on the Flyboard and they say it could be a sixth???

Guest
12-18-2003, 10:06 AM
Do we owe Philly a draft pick for Paul Ranheim? Was looking at this (http://www.hfboards.com/showthread.php?postid=593432#post593432) thread on the Flyboard and they say it could be a sixth???

I don't even remember what it was, conditional I know that, and worse for us if we re-signed him which we fortunately avoided. I think it was a 4th rounder if we signed him.

Gwyddbwyll
12-18-2003, 02:07 PM
I don't even remember what it was, conditional I know that, and worse for us if we re-signed him which we fortunately avoided. I think it was a 4th rounder if we signed him.

I was pretty sure it was only if we re-signed him. It better be.

hbk
12-18-2003, 05:54 PM
I was pretty sure it was only if we re-signed him. It better be.


it was a conditional pick. there is nothing going to Philadelphia. Here's our picks as I have things recorded. Please correct me if I am incorrect.

Phoenix picks
Pho - 1st round pick
Pho - 2nd round pick
Phi - 2nd round pick (Amonte)
Buf - 4th round pick (Briere)
Pho - 6th round pick
Pho - 7th round pick
Pho - 9th round pick

* conditional pick for Teppo Numminen deal is also coming Phoenix's way from Dallas. Could be as high as a 2nd round pick. Lots of conflicting stories about the conditions and Dallas's performance thus far this season along with Teppo's injuries likely don't help the status of this pick.

We have traded the following picks:
3rd round pick (Gratton)
4th round pick (Markov) * note: I beleive this pick is conditional.
5th round pick (McLachlan - Boston)
8th round pick (Dallas for a 2003 9th round pick - Loic Burkhalter?)

kenabnrmal
12-18-2003, 10:27 PM
I'd give my pinky finger for the Yotes to get Barker. Personal connection aside, he's just got a great combination of skill, grit, and character. I see him forming into a top-2 dman in the league, and I'd love to see him land in Phoenix.

And I wouldn't criticize these kids too much for not going freely to whatever junior team drafts them. First, we're talking about 15-16 year olds. The decisions aren't made by them, its made by the parents based on what they think is best for them. Secondly, its far more common than you think. There is a great deal of politics where junior drafts are concerned, and parents often engineer where their highly-touted kids end up. Labelling Schremp anything based upon (his parents) not wanting him to play for the Ice Dogs is misguided imo, and has nothing to do with how he is in the lockerroom.

For instance, I've heard the parents of the Manitobans Barker, Barnes, and Boyd all had a hand in where their kid ended up on Bantam draft day. Sometimes these things work out without complication, as they did in these three's cases, and sometimes they dont and the media picks up on it, like in Schremp's case. Either way, the last person to blame is the kid.

Matzel
12-19-2003, 07:54 PM
...And I wouldn't criticize these kids too much for not going freely to whatever junior team drafts them. First, we're talking about 15-16 year olds. The decisions aren't made by them, its made by the parents based on what they think is best for them. ... parents often engineer where their highly-touted kids end up. Labelling Schremp anything based upon (his parents) not wanting him to play for the Ice Dogs is misguided imo, and has nothing to do with how he is in the lockerroom.

I am sorry kenabnrmal, but I have to disagree:

I compared Schremp with Lindros (who refused to play for the Nordiques). Might have very well been his neurotic dad, who pulled the strings at the time, but who cares?! I don't think I would want a kid, whose father is trying to influence every other decision that may or may not involve his son, on my team. IMO, you don't enter the draft, without being willing to report to any team that may draft you. If you have reservations about some teams you can go undrafted and sign with the team of your choice, provided they want you...

For many kids, being drafted to play major junior hockey, is the first part of the hockey dream they dreamed while playing in bantam leagues for years. For most of them, that's where the dream ends. For the elite, the dream continues and they move on and get a chance to play professionally. If the player (or his family) feel that a team isn't 'good enough' for them, that says a lot about their character, IMO.

Also, the way for a horrible team to improve is through the entry draft. If the best players always refuse to report to the weak teams, who pick them high, these teams will always stay horrible... :dunno:

I have to admit, that I am somewhat concerned about the level of involvement by some hockey parents:

When parents take junior leagues to court, because they want to win the MVP title for their 'highly-touted' son, then we all should be concerned...

Dancin' Gabe rules! :bow:

PS.:

What about this trade?

Eric Lindros (QC Nordiques)

for

Peter Forsberg, Steve Duchesne, Kerry Huffman, Mike Ricci, Ron Hextall, Philly's 1st Rd choice in '93 (Jocelyn Thibault), $15,000,000 and future considerations (Chris Simon and Philly's 1st Rd choice in '94 (Nolan Baumgartner)

Of course the Nords (Avs) went on to win a few cups, while the big E(go) went on to become a primadonna... :D

kenabnrmal
12-19-2003, 11:32 PM
I am sorry kenabnrmal, but I have to disagree:

I compared Schremp with Lindros (who refused to play for the Nordiques). Might have very well been his neurotic dad, who pulled the strings at the time, but who cares?! I don't think I would want a kid, whose father is trying to influence every other decision that may or may not involve his son, on my team. IMO, you don't enter the draft, without being willing to report to any team that may draft you. If you have reservations about some teams you can go undrafted and sign with the team of your choice, provided they want you...

For many kids, being drafted to play major junior hockey, is the first part of the hockey dream they dreamed while playing in bantam leagues for years. For most of them, that's where the dream ends. For the elite, the dream continues and they move on and get a chance to play professionally. If the player (or his family) feel that a team isn't 'good enough' for them, that says a lot about their character, IMO.

Also, the way for a horrible team to improve is through the entry draft. If the best players always refuse to report to the weak teams, who pick them high, these teams will always stay horrible... :dunno:

I have to admit, that I am somewhat concerned about the level of involvement by some hockey parents:

When parents take junior leagues to court, because they want to win the MVP title for their 'highly-touted' son, then we all should be concerned...

Dancin' Gabe rules! :bow:

PS.:

What about this trade?

Eric Lindros (QC Nordiques)

for

Peter Forsberg, Steve Duchesne, Kerry Huffman, Mike Ricci, Ron Hextall, Philly's 1st Rd choice in '93 (Jocelyn Thibault), $15,000,000 and future considerations (Chris Simon and Philly's 1st Rd choice in '94 (Nolan Baumgartner)

Of course the Nords (Avs) went on to win a few cups, while the big E(go) went on to become a primadonna... :D

Alright, there are a lot of notes I have to make here.

I think you ignored my point entirely. My main point is that there are a great number of parents who have a hand in where their kid gets picked in the draft. Scouts are at bantam games on a very regular basis, and converse with the parents of the highly touted kids to guage how likely/interested the parents are in having their kids go to that team. Its not a matter of whether or not the team is "good enough" for the kid, its whether or not its in the 15 YEAR OLD's best interests to live in that town. Personally, I can't blame the parents one bit for not wanting to send their kids anywhere at the whim of scouts who have the team's, not the kid's best interests at heart. THIS HAPPENS ALL THE TIME, WITH A GREAT NUMBER OF THE KIDS DRAFTED. My point was that if you want to criticize Schremp and call him a primadonna, you'd better be prepared to criticize each and every kid that who has a parent who has an interest in where they live the last 3 years of their 'childhood'. I'd suggest not overreacting to the fact that Schremp didn't go where he was drafted and resist labelling him a primadonna unless you do in fact know what kind of character he has and what he's like in the dressing-room.

Its rare that a player doesn't report to a team because the team is "bad".

I'm not concerned with the amount of involvement parents have in their kid's lives. I'm concerned with the amount of parents who get overwhelmed by thoughts of their kids being future NHLers and losing sight of their child's best interests. I know first-hand how cut-throat Canadian junior hockey is, and I certainly wouldn't send my son out to the wolves without being pretty damn sure of where he was headed.

The parents who took the MINOR HOCKEY league to court was an incredible exception. They didn't take the CHL, or any other junior league to court, it was a local minor hockey league I believe. I don't know anything about the situation, so I won't say too much, but I'll assure you that its an exception.

As for Lindros, I'll be the first to say that Carl Lindros did his son a whole lot more harm then good in his NHL career. However, the notion that Lindros is a "primadonna" is pretty much false. You won't find many teammates or ex-teammates who considered him to be a bad teammate or a cancer in the dressing-room. If you ask Rangers fans, they'll rave about how accomidating and good-soldier-like he's been there. Lindros has gotten a horrible rap for a couple of unfortunate incidents, but you won't find too many people who know him in hockey who has many bad things to say about him. Its mostly fans who carry a monter-sized grudge against the guy. To me, life's too short.

As for the trade, we all know the Nords got the better of that deal, but thats hardly Lindros' fault. The Avs went on to do quite well after the deal, but one would argue that they were well on their way as it was. Lindros, however, went on to be far more than a "prima-donna". He was one of the very best players in the league, possibily the most dominant all-around player. He was (and I believe he still is) among the top point-per-game players in NHL history. He also lead the Flyers to the Cup finals, where they fell short against a dominant Wings team (fingers can be pointed directly at Clarke for repeatedly failing to address the team's needs, namely on defense and in goal). Point is, because of his concussions the trade looks awfully lopsided. However, if you ask Flyers fans, more than likely they'll tell you that Lindros turned the Flyers around and was one of the truely dominant forces in the league for years. The trade wasn't quite as lopsided before the concussions as it appears to be now.

Lindros didn't report to Quebec...personally I think he should have, and I think he got terrible advice from his family in this issue. However, just as with Schremp in juniors, if you're going to call Lindros a primadonna for not coming to terms with the team that drafted him, you should do the same for the numerous players who re-enter the draft each season because they couldn't come to terms either.

My bottom line...don't judge the kids' character unless you know a bit about the kid, or have some inside knowledge of what he's truely like in the room and with his teammates. I know I certainly am not the same person at 25 that I was at 15 or even 18. I wouldn't rush to judgement on these kids' character without knowing them, or hearing from someone who does.

hbk
12-20-2003, 06:54 AM
Very good debate. I have a couple of comments/observations:

I'm a big beleiver in education. Part of that is because I have a degree and am currently working on my Masters so I am biased. Schremp's difficulties with the Ice Dogs stem from his desire to solely concentrate on hockey and dropping out of school. His belief is he is going to make a living by playing hockey and doesn't want the other distractions to disturb his development. However, the Ice Dogs are an organization that pushes their players to pursue an education and when a big fish like Schremp says no, it has a ripple effect through the rest of the team. The Ice Dogs can't sit idle and have two sets of rules; one for star players and one for the rest of the team. The reason for that concern is those players who do not go on to the NHL will be disservicing themselves. To have a whole group of kids grow up working manual labour jobs for little money does little for Canadian society and sets a poor example for future players. It doesn't take too long before parents of future players start looking more and more towards the NCAA system as a preferred playing ground for their son.

From Schremp's perspective, I can understand it but I don't think he saw the rationale for the Ice Dogs decision and made what some would call a very selfish decision. It's easy for me to sit here and criticize but I have a few years of life and businesss experience where and I'm sure I see a much bigger picture than what Schremp's focus was during this period. Schremp was trying to look out for himself and at seventeen, I'm sure I would have been looking at such a decision and its impact on my life and would have little regard to the effects of my actions on other organizations, people, and society in general.

I'm not sure the role of Schremp's parents in all of this either. Banking on a NHL career holds some risk even for a potential top ten pick. They would have had to have known this was going to have a negative effect on his draft position and cost him thousands of dollars. He's also just a ice crack or one Vaclav Varada hit away from never playing hockey again. Families should protect one another and in this case I'm not sure that Schremp's parents did that.

Matzel
12-20-2003, 06:29 PM
Thanks for responding to my post, kenabnrmal. I am enjoying this debate!

You have made a couple of good points:

Of course, the parents have a say in where their kids end up playing. Before the actual draft, the team's officials will talk to any players (and their families) they have targeted. This is especially the case for the earlier rounds of the draft. At this point, the parents and players should voice their concerns about not wanting to be on a specific team. Smart front office staff will only draft players who really want to put on their team's sweater...

The subject of 'protective' hockey parents hits a nerve with me check this link for info on misguided hockey parents (http://i.tsn.com/voices/dave_kindred/20021111.html) I agree, parents have to look out for their kids best interest, but at times they hurt where they want to help.

Eric Lindros announced immediately after he was drafted 1st overall, that he would not sign with Quebec. He sat out the 1991-'92 season, until GM Page was able to work out a deal worthy of Eric's huge buildup. In retrospect, it was the best deal in franchise history - Hands down! Heck, Lindros for Forsberg straight up would've been an awesome deal!

Personally, I think Lindros is the proto type of a prima donna, but that's neither here nor there. One thing is for sure, besides Mario Lemieux, no other player has ever entered the NHL with as much advance hype as the big 'E'. He had (some may argue he has) all the tools (brute strength, speed, finesse, soft hands, guts, etc.), but he also has a big ego. Sitting out, demanding to be traded to specific teams and so on and so forth. I really don't like the guy, but I guess you gathered that by now... ;)

You are right, kenabnrmal, I don't know Schremp. I also don't know his parents, but as I said before, the fact that he refused to play for the team that drafted him does concern me. If I was GM, I would not neccessarily draft him, because of it... As I said, talent is good, character is great. He might have both, but he will have to show it, to make me believe it.

hbk, you added a good point to the debate. Looking at the big picture, education is a big part in the decision whether to play here or there. I hadn't thought of it that way. Top end talent players (like Schremp) certainly are role models for other young players and with that comes a certain responsibility.

Dancin' Gabe rules! :bow:

kenabnrmal
12-20-2003, 08:25 PM
Great debate all-around.

Now obviously hbk has a lot more information on Schremp than I do. I really know nothing about the situation specifically, so perhaps the kid is a primadonna and I just don't know it. My only problem is assuming he is based upon him not playing for the CHL team that drafted him. You're exactly right, Matzel. Smart teams won't draft a kid that doesn't want to play for their organization, for whatever reason. I just have to wonder if the Ice Dogs were smart in this situation...I'm not ready to blame Schremp just because the two sides were in the situation to begin with.

Overly protective parents bother me immensely, just as overly protective parents of "regular" kids do. I'm the uncle of a 17 year old hockey/football player. He was an elite hockey player, played AAA his whole life and went to the WHL camps for two years until he decided it wasn't for him. He's been the focus of a number of the WHL scouts, and I've personally had a number of conversations with them (his parents aren't hockey-oriented, and wanted me to talk to the scouts so they don't get the wool pulled over their eyes). My nephew got into football pretty heavily, and presently hockey is on the backburner (he's currently fielding interest from a number of Canadian colleges for football), but in my time watching his hockey I've seen numerous examples of the overly protective parent. It drives me nuts. Theres just a fine line there...I've also seen parents do it the right way (Barker's parents, for one...).

As for Lindros, we'll never come close to being in agreement. You hate the guy, I'm a supporter of his. Obviously the trade to the Flyers was a great deal for the Avs. However, my point was that it was also pretty good for the Flyers. Lindros turned the franchise around, and was the league's most dominant physical force for a number of seasons. Lindros in his prime vs. Forsberg in his prime (arguably, right now) is a very close race, imo. As for his "off-ice" maneuvers, I agree with some, not as much with others.

Sault Ste. Marie: Didn't want to play that far from home, Greyhounds drafted him anyways, blame squarely on the Greyhounds, imo.

Quebec: Personally, I think he should have gone. He, or more specifically, his father didn't like the Nords' gm (or was it the owner) at the time. They didn't trust him, and therefore they didnt want Eric to sign. It was never a French-Canada issue (he stated he'd gladly play for the Canadiens), it wasn't a money issue, and it wasn't a matter of him not wanting to play for a bad team. It was a personal problem with the brass of the hockey club. A mistake on Carl Lindros' part, imo, and I think Eric has payed dearly for his father's mistake. His reputation has never recovered.

Philly: Personally, I find Clarke to hold the lion's share of the fault here. I don't know that there'd be a player in the league that wouldn't look for a deal once their contract was up. Pressuring Lindros to return from concussions before he was ready, attempting to force Lindros to travel with the team when he was suffering with a collapsed lung. I don't necessarily agree with Eric limiting the teams Clarke could trade him to, but I think that had more to do with holding onto whatever professional freedoms he had at that time...whatever leverage he could possibly get a hold of.

Look, those of us outside the game will always say that we'd do anything to be an NHLer, that we'd play anywhere, and play for peanuts. But, these guys put in the work. They've earned thier place in the league, and they have their rights. I don't see Lindros as being a primadonna...if he was, he wouldn't have some of the classiest individuals in hockey in his corner (Gretzky, Yzerman, the late Roger Neilson, among many others). I see him as being very conscious of what his rights as a professional hockey player is (the right not to sign with the team that drafts you, the right not to re-sign with the team that holds your RFA rights), and has chosen to exercise them when he feels the situation warrants it. I haven't agreed with all his decisions, but I'd blame that more on his father/agent than on him.

He's always seemed gracious and genuine in any interview I've ever seen him in. You rarely hear someone who actually knows him utter a bad word about him. Those who dislike him are usually hockey fans who don't actually know him, but who simply don't like the fact that he didn't just accept whatever was handed to him his entire career (as if playing in the NHL is a favour paid to him instead of something earned). I dunno, I've always liked the guy, and I've never come across a reason to change that opinion...including "business" decisions that I might not necessarily agree with.

Phew, another monster post. Again, great discussion. I don't post on team-specific boards too often, but I'll likely post more on here...being a Coyotes fan and all. Obviously there are some pretty good discussions to be had here.

Matzel
12-20-2003, 09:31 PM
Kenabnrmal, it seems as if we are in agreement about the hockey parents. Therefore, I won't beat the dead horse any longer... ;)

It also seems as if we will never agree on what type of player Eric Lindros is. However, I would like to add a couple of thoughts to the subject:

I can see, that Carl's influence hurt early on, during the junior years. I can also take into account, that it is a lot more difficult to get rid of your agent, if he also happens to be your dad. What I can't understand, is the fact that Eric kept on being a 'prima donna' when he was well into his NHL career. Sure, his dad would still be trying to influence his son's decisions, but Eric is the one, who ultimately gets the blame. So why would he come out and say: I want to be traded to Toronto! Period! Trade me there or nowhere!

I can understand that a player can come to a point, where he does not want to play for a team anymore. Things can happen and professional relationships do not usually last for a lifetime, even in everyday life. Asking to be traded to one team only is not the right way to end a tenure with a team that has payed you millions (!) either, though. He has earned his money you say - Sure he has, but with taking the money comes a responsibility, also.

I am dealing with staff everyday. I have some truly great people working for me, but I have to say that some of them lack commitment to their employer. While they scream and shout for all the things the employer should do, they will let their co-workers or employers hang high and dry without any consideration. Once again, people like Eric Lindros (and others in the public eye) set the tone. They are role models. There is no doubt in my mind, that he could have dealt with the situation a lot more professional. Sure, you can find excuses: Clark told him to play while he was injured; The team wanted him to go on a road trip while he was injured; etc, etc; That may all be true, but in my eyes that does not justify his actions. Staying home and acting like a toddler, whose sucker has been taken away, demanding a trade AND dictating WHERE he wanted to be traded was not a classy move. NHL players have rights and they have ways of exercising them: NHLPA, NHL, he could've taken a lawyer, if he thought it was worth it...

While I am not a fan of Clark, I thought it was great, that he made Lindros sit out an entire season, before he traded him. :D

Also, you mentioned, that Lindros is still among the points/game leaders. He was indeed scoring at a rate of 1.52 p/g during 1994-'95 and 1996-'97. That is a little better than half the average of Gretzky (2.77 p/g in 1983-'94) or Lemieux (2.69 p/g in 1992-'93). However, today, Lindros is a shadow of his former dominating self. He doesn't play like a power forward on most nights and his scoring is well below a point per game, now. He is still a good player, but now more a little 'E', than among the league's elite...

Dancin' Gabe rules! :bow:

_Del_
12-20-2003, 10:15 PM
First off, I can't stand Bobby Clarke...

Now that that's out of the way, I'm going to take something of the middle ground on the issue. While it is completely within Lindros's rights to reject a contract from his team (PHI) or anyother team (as a FA), including holdout, which I have no problem with (assuming one is not under contract) though I wouldn't encourage it, I think the act of publicly calling for a trade (in this case to one specific team) was odius, and furthermore, counter productive.
It put Clarke in the position of having to deal with Toronto, and Quinn holding all the cards. Clarke can't move him without a decent return, and Toronto has no incentive to give him what he wants, knowing that there isn't a market for Lindros, b/c Lindros will simply refuse to sign with/report to anyother team.
This actually delayed his departure from Philly, and ultimately, sent him to New York (which is now the hockey purgatory that Tampa used to be). Nevermind the money he lost for the season holdout as a further oppurtunity cost.
Further, apart from not winning any fans and hurting his own pocket, it affected Philly both as a unneeded distraction and his (or his replacement's) precence on the ice, and then ultimately with arguably lower market value at trade time. I know he has to look out for his own best interest, but it seems to me that most adults would be mindful of the how the situation effects others, and also that one's actions may, in fact, hinder your ticket out of town.
I don't feel at all bad for Lindros in the entire affair, and the fact it fits a pattern of behaviour throughout his career, doesn't make it any more pallateable. I think his father is much to blame for the situation, but ultimately, Lindros (rightly) bears the brunt of the scorn heaped his direction.

kenabnrmal
12-21-2003, 09:13 AM
First off, I can't stand Bobby Clarke...

Now that that's out of the way, I'm going to take something of the middle ground on the issue. While it is completely within Lindros's rights to reject a contract from his team (PHI) or anyother team (as a FA), including holdout, which I have no problem with (assuming one is not under contract) though I wouldn't encourage it, I think the act of publicly calling for a trade (in this case to one specific team) was odius, and furthermore, counter productive.
It put Clarke in the position of having to deal with Toronto, and Quinn holding all the cards. Clarke can't move him without a decent return, and Toronto has no incentive to give him what he wants, knowing that there isn't a market for Lindros, b/c Lindros will simply refuse to sign with/report to anyother team.
This actually delayed his departure from Philly, and ultimately, sent him to New York (which is now the hockey purgatory that Tampa used to be). Nevermind the money he lost for the season holdout as a further oppurtunity cost.
Further, apart from not winning any fans and hurting his own pocket, it affected Philly both as a unneeded distraction and his (or his replacement's) precence on the ice, and then ultimately with arguably lower market value at trade time. I know he has to look out for his own best interest, but it seems to me that most adults would be mindful of the how the situation effects others, and also that one's actions may, in fact, hinder your ticket out of town.
I don't feel at all bad for Lindros in the entire affair, and the fact it fits a pattern of behaviour throughout his career, doesn't make it any more pallateable. I think his father is much to blame for the situation, but ultimately, Lindros (rightly) bears the brunt of the scorn heaped his direction.
Good input del,

For the most part, I agree. I don't think Lindros has made all the right decisions in his career. I think he got caught up in the emotion (read, hate) in the conflict with Clarke (something somewhat understandable considering Clarke's actions towards him where injuries are concerned), and yeah...it lead to him being out longer than he should have been and lead to him being on the receiving end of even more scorn. Whether or not the actions follow a pattern of behavior is another matter...Everything he's done has been under the microscope, far moreso than any other player in the league, and I'd argue that the time he spent between the Quebec affiar and the holdout was pretty uneventful as far as off the ice matters go. Similarly, he's been the good-soldier his entire time in New York. So, do the two affairs overshadow the heaps of charity work he does and the fact that its difficult to find many in hockey who actually know the guy or has been his teammate who have a bad word to say about him? In the fans eyes, it does...but I'm not sure it should.

Lindros got off to a bad start with hockey fans, and they've never let him redeem himself. One of the most dominating players of our time, lead a very flawed team to the Stanley Cup finals, and won a gold medal. Yet fans can't get over the fact that he a) didn't sign with the team he was drafted by, and b) had a conflict with Bobby Clarke (certainly not the only one). Doesn't seem to balance to me, but I'm biased. My main point is that Lindros isn't the villian that most make him out to be. He deserves some of the criticism, but no where near all of it. Its in the NHL's best interest that he find his game again (in the few Rangers games I've seen this year, it appears he is improving), as he's certainly one of the game's best when he's AT his best.

_Del_
12-21-2003, 09:38 AM
Good input del,

For the most part, I agree. I don't think Lindros has made all the right decisions in his career. I think he got caught up in the emotion (read, hate) in the conflict with Clarke (something somewhat understandable considering Clarke's actions towards him where injuries are concerned), and yeah...it lead to him being out longer than he should have been and lead to him being on the receiving end of even more scorn. Whether or not the actions follow a pattern of behavior is another matter...Everything he's done has been under the microscope, far moreso than any other player in the league, and I'd argue that the time he spent between the Quebec affiar and the holdout was pretty uneventful as far as off the ice matters go. Similarly, he's been the good-soldier his entire time in New York. So, do the two affairs overshadow the heaps of charity work he does and the fact that its difficult to find many in hockey who actually know the guy or has been his teammate who have a bad word to say about him? In the fans eyes, it does...but I'm not sure it should.

Lindros got off to a bad start with hockey fans, and they've never let him redeem himself. One of the most dominating players of our time, lead a very flawed team to the Stanley Cup finals, and won a gold medal. Yet fans can't get over the fact that he a) didn't sign with the team he was drafted by, and b) had a conflict with Bobby Clarke (certainly not the only one). Doesn't seem to balance to me, but I'm biased. My main point is that Lindros isn't the villian that most make him out to be. He deserves some of the criticism, but no where near all of it. Its in the NHL's best interest that he find his game again (in the few Rangers games I've seen this year, it appears he is improving), as he's certainly one of the game's best when he's AT his best.

I'll be the first to admit he may, in fact, be a swell guy. I have no reason to suspect otherwise,really. But there still seems to me to be a pattern of behavior that when things don't go the way he wants, he pouts until he gets his way. This might be unfair of me, but I'd like to think that a young man (and parents in this case) could accept a healthy contract without bucking the system. I'm no big fan of Clarke, and frankly, I don't blame Eric for wanting out of Philly after all that occured there, but it again boils down to the 'how' and not the 'what' of the subject that irritates me.
He was a great player, there is no doubt, but I think his dad and everyone else filled his head a little too big with all the 'next one' talk. There is a way to advance one's career and even be traded without rocking the boat as severely has he has managed to do.

All IMVHO, of course... ;)

kenabnrmal
12-28-2003, 09:30 AM
I'll be the first to admit he may, in fact, be a swell guy. I have no reason to suspect otherwise,really. But there still seems to me to be a pattern of behavior that when things don't go the way he wants, he pouts until he gets his way. This might be unfair of me, but I'd like to think that a young man (and parents in this case) could accept a healthy contract without bucking the system. I'm no big fan of Clarke, and frankly, I don't blame Eric for wanting out of Philly after all that occured there, but it again boils down to the 'how' and not the 'what' of the subject that irritates me.
He was a great player, there is no doubt, but I think his dad and everyone else filled his head a little too big with all the 'next one' talk. There is a way to advance one's career and even be traded without rocking the boat as severely has he has managed to do.

All IMVHO, of course... ;)

I'll agree with most of what you said, except for the final point...that he could have advanced his career and be traded without rocking the boat as much as he did. Personally I don't think theres anyway he could do anything without rocking the boat severely. The media infatuation with him started when he was 15 years old, and was relentless. He couldn't do anything without the entire hockey world knowing about it, and therefore I believe everything he's done in his career has been blown out of proportion.

Anyone picked up the "Ultimate Gretzky" DVD thats out now? I got one for Christmas, and its just fantastic. I really believe that Walter Gretzky is the quintessential sports father. A nice role model for all the "problem" parents we touched upon earlier.

Matzel
12-28-2003, 04:20 PM
Nice discussion, guys! I am with _Del_ for the most part in this one (see my earlier posts)...

I'll be looking for the "Ultimate Gretzky" DVD, kenabnrmal!

Dancin' Gabe rules! :bow:

Gwyddbwyll
01-27-2004, 11:23 PM
bumping this up.. any chance of making this a sticky so the draft info is always here?

Boomhower
01-28-2004, 01:10 AM
You are right, kenabnrmal, I don't know Schremp. I also don't know his parents, but as I said before, the fact that he refused to play for the team that drafted him does concern me. If I was GM, I would not neccessarily draft him, because of it... As I said, talent is good, character is great. He might have both, but he will have to show it, to make me believe it.

hbk, you added a good point to the debate. Looking at the big picture, education is a big part in the decision whether to play here or there. I hadn't thought of it that way. Top end talent players (like Schremp) certainly are role models for other young players and with that comes a certain responsibility.


Where to start, so many misconceptions........
First off a US player agent sold himself to the Schremp family and won over their trust, the family signed with him and ever since that time, (before Schremp was even drafted into the OHL) the agent has made 100% of Rob Schremp's hockey related decisions. His parents just go along with whatever decisions the agent makes and know very little about hockey/business themselves and don't pretend to either.

Schremp also never refused to play for the team that drafted him! He reported and not only did he play, Schremp won the rookie of year and helped Missisauga earn their first ever OHL playoff berth.
Quotes from Schremp on the day he was drafted:
"It's an honour to be selected," Schremp said. "It's an exciting day and I'm looking forward to being a part of the organization.
"I'm an offensive minded player but I just want to work hard and do what I can to help the team."
-These quotes proved to be true, he did help the organization.

Now onto the the "falling out", if you weren't already aware, any player with any talent at all that has played for the Ice dogs, (prior to this season) has demanded a trade, from Patrick Jarrett, to Jason Spezza and even their best current player.... Patrick O'Sullivan. Of course Rob Schremp had legitimate reasons for wanting to be moved, but he has been flamed much more than any of the aforementioned players, for some reason.

Those reasons were:
-Schooling, but not the way some posters on this thread have portrayed it!
Yes, the Ice Dogs were pushing him to attend regular high school, as they do every player. However it wasn't as though Schremp was fighting to avoid education all together, he is an American and wanted to be home-schooled under the American high school's curriculum. I can understand and respect that, but Missy tried to push him away from that route and although Schremp got his way, it was definitely the first rift.

-Coaching change, this was the big problem.
Steve Ludzig did an excellent job to turn around the Ice Dogs and Schremp loved playing for him. The team than chose not to re-sign Ludzig because they wouldn't meet his contrct demands, Schremp's agent saw this as a terrible move. His client flourished under Ludzig and so did the entire team, to let him go demonstrated the organization wasn't willing to do what it takes to win (It's now been proven otherwise), and the agent than decided it was the best move to ask for a trade.
You may say that's brash but it happens all the time, AAMOF just last mounth two NHL drafted players (currently in the OHL) demanded to be traded unless their coach was fired...... the coach was fired and as a result, a completely different player walked out on the team because he felt the coach was wronged and wanted nothing more to do with the team, but I'm sure you couldn't name those players?
Also keep in mind this is JR., where players are supposed to develop, if put in a position where they feel there developement is being compromised, what can they do? Keep in mind if a pro player's coach is let go or he doesn't like him, atleast he can keep telling himself, the check is going to be in the mail next week, just the same as last week.

Now I know you didn't say anything in this quote, but reading through all this I remember you said something about Schremp pouting for a trade...... that simply wasn't the case. Even though Missy didn't accomodate his trade request in the off-season, Schremp showed up to camp and continued to play for Missy so they could get a fair return for him. Missisauga failed to trade him, so his agent than set a firm date (two weeks from that day) that his client had to be moved by. All the while Schremp was still playing hard for the Ice dogs and not letting the 'business' affect his play, he actually went out his last game and scored 2 goals and an assist, was the first star and skated out and smiled to the hometown crowd, than packed his stuff and went home.... I'm not sure that would constitute "pouting", seems like a business decision that he and his agent followed through on.

Hope this can shed some light on the situation for you..... I understand some of you will still think he has attitude problems and that's your choice to make, but some of your arguments were without base, so I thought I would add this.

ParisSaintGermain
01-28-2004, 01:30 AM
What kind of draft day trade do you think the Coyotes will need to make to have access to a top seven pick? :dunno:

hbk
01-28-2004, 10:46 PM
What kind of draft day trade do you think the Coyotes will need to make to have access to a top seven pick? :dunno:

their first and a second rounder (possibly two depending on their position). essentially, they will have to overpay.

Greg
01-29-2004, 01:44 AM
Top Prospects Skills competition

Top 5 60' dash
David Bolland, London Knights, 2.965
Bruce Graham, Moncton Wildcats, 2.971
Aki Seitsonen, Prince Albert Raiders, 2.976
Andy Rogers, Calgary Hitmen, 2.994
Bryan Bickell, Ottawa 67's, 3.002

Top 5 180' dash
Chad Painchaud, Mississauga IceDogs, 5.820
Adam Berti, Oshawa Generals, 5.896
Bryan Bickell, Ottawa 67's, 5.904
Andy Rogers, Calgary Hitmen, 5.910
Alexandre Picard, Lewiston MAINE-iacs, 5.944

Top 5 Puck Control
John Lammers, Lethbridge Hurricanes, 16.154
Wojtek Wolski, Brampton Battalion, 16.393
Peter Pohl, Gatineau Olympiques, 16.410
Chad Painchaud, Mississauga IceDogs, 16.509
Tyler Haskins, Toronto St. Michael's Majors, 16.514

Top 5 Full Lap
Mike Green, Saskatoon Blades, 14.644
Blake Comeau, Kelowna Rockets, 14.703
Brett Carson, Calgary Hitmen, 14.710
Adam Berti, Oshawa Generals, 14.810
John Lammers, Lethbridge Hurricanes, 14.818

Top 5 Hardest Shot
Andy Rogers, Calgary Hitmen, Shot 1- 96.8
Andy Rogers, Calgary Hitmen, Shot 2- 95.5
Boris Valabik, Kitchener Rangers, Shot 2- 93.3
David Laliberte, PEI Rocket, Shot 1- 92.7
Boris Valabik, Kitchener Rangers, Shot 1- 92.5

Top 5 Hardest Shot AVG
Andy Rogers, Calgary Hitmen, 96.2
Boris Valabik, Kitchener Rangers, 92.9
Roman Tesliuk, Kamloops Blazers, 91.6
Brett Carson, Calgary Hitmen, 91.1
Michael Sersen, Rimouski Oceanic, 90.8

Edit- Recent draft article posted at NHL.com, good read found here (http://nhl.com/futures/2004draft/scouting012604.html)

Dan
01-29-2004, 06:16 PM
Coyotes like big boys that can skate. Bryan Bickell and Adam Berti seem to jump out in those skill tests.

hbk
01-30-2004, 03:48 AM
I see that McKeens has three goalies in their top 12. If we can't move down, it may very well be worth our while to move back in the draft and pick up some picks or players/prospects who can make a more immediate impact.

Dan
01-30-2004, 01:48 PM
I see that McKeens has three goalies in their top 12. If we can't move down, it may very well be worth our while to move back in the draft and pick up some picks or players/prospects who can make a more immediate impact.
In that scenario, if we pick in the 13-16 range, we might have Chipchura or Andrew Ladd fall our way.

Gwyddbwyll
01-31-2004, 11:11 PM
I see that McKeens has three goalies in their top 12. If we can't move down, it may very well be worth our while to move back in the draft and pick up some picks or players/prospects who can make a more immediate impact.

I agree.. that could be potentially very helpful for Phoenix.

Unfortunately I dont think its going to benefit our pick at around 13th. I only see Chicago and Edmonton in the top 14 that are weak in their goaltending future. Chicago wont spend their lottery pick on a goalie. Edmonton have Philly's pick to use on a goalie if they need to. I think the real beneficiaries of this will be Dallas, Boston and San Jose picking 21st, 22nd, 23rd.

15 Los Angeles
17 Nashville
18 St.Louis
19 Montreal
20 Tampa
27 Toronto

Those are the teams I think could easily pick a goalie. Perhaps if one of them gets desperate enough to leapfrog the others we could move down. I dont think the prospects outside the top 7 are all that different from those rated around 20th or 30th and I would be more than happy to give Draper more 2nd and 3rd rounders.

ParisSaintGermain
01-31-2004, 11:30 PM
I agree. Or we make a big push for one of the top 5 (which I believe could be worth it to get for once a potentially star prospect) or we try to get more second or third rounders (which means picks between 31st to 90th). I heard that the draft isn't even near as deep as 2003' one but with a good scouting preparation+ a few good decisions on draft day, you can always get a few excellent prospects even late in the draft. Draper has a good reputation in managing all that. We will see!

Gwyddbwyll
02-02-2004, 10:12 PM
Mike Green impresses me more and more. I am starting to think he will be a top ten pick and out of our grasp. :( I just saw today that he is the leading scorer on his team, the Blades. Leading scorer and he is a defenseman! So he has skill, he can skate (fastest lap), has reasonable size and scouts say he plays with a nasty edge.

Greg
02-03-2004, 12:22 AM
Mike Green impresses me more and more. I am starting to think he will be a top ten pick and out of our grasp. :( I just saw today that he is the leading scorer on his team, the Blades. Leading scorer and he is a defenseman! So he has skill, he can skate (fastest lap), has reasonable size and scouts say he plays with a nasty edge.
The Blades have won six games (6 out of 53). They should have never got rid of Huxley. Just kidding. For he or Joe Barnes to get the respect they are getting on this awful team speaks to their talent. He's putting up good numbers, near Phaneuf, but the word is he needs to play more physical. Obviously, his strength is the outlet pass and what he can do in the offensive zone. And his wheels too. It speaks to his character that he's wearing the C. If you think he can play sound defense and be more physical at the next level, he's a solid choice mid first round (right now).

Greg
02-15-2004, 07:40 PM
To PhoPhan and Stevex, you have said that Wolski is one of your favorites. A good read here (http://www.nhl.com/futures/2004draft/wolski_wojtek021304.html) if you have not seen it.

For the record, it's VOY-teck Vohl-skee, although his coach calls him "W-Squared."
At 6-foot-2, 182 pounds, Wolski has the size it takes to be an effective player in the Ontario Hockey League. He has high-end skill. He is strong along the boards and is hard to budge from in front of the net, which are all things scouts like. Wolski is ranked third among North American skaters in the latest poll by the NHL's Central Scouting Service and he's pegged to be a top-10 pick in the draft in June.

Dan
02-17-2004, 10:42 AM
With all the talk about our poor defense, what is your opinion of taking a defenseman with our first rounder? Let's say we draft 9-13, who could be there that would be worth the pick?

Personally, I think there will be several forwards that would be considered BPA than the defenseman in this draft.

ParisSaintGermain
02-17-2004, 01:20 PM
With all the talk about our poor defense, what is your opinion of taking a defenseman with our first rounder? Let's say we draft 9-13, who could be there that would be worth the pick?

Personally, I think there will be several forwards that would be considered BPA than the defenseman in this draft.

I think we need defensive help now, but we need one or two experienced D to help our young defensice corpse and I have changed my mind about the draft. I hope we get a good position at the draft and that we take a real strong prospect forward instead of a D.

Dan
02-18-2004, 02:06 PM
At this point, who would you pick if the following players have already been selected by the time the Coyotes pick?

These players will be gone: Alexander Ovechkin, Evgeny Malkin, Rostislav Olesz, Cam Barker, Rob Schremp, Wojtek Wolski, Lauri Tukonen, Marek Schwarz, Kyle Chipchura, and Wes O'Neill.

To name a few, these players would be available for our pick: Lukas Kaspar, Evan McGrath, Alvaro Montoya, Alexandre Picard, Ladislav Smid, Andrew Ladd, Drew Stafford, Mike Green, Devan Dubnyk, Enver Lisin, David Bolland, AJ Thelen, Andrej Meszaros, and Jakub Sindel.

POS Ht Wt Player GP G A Pts
LW 6-1' 188 Picard, Alexandre 57 33 34 67
LW 6-2' 199 Ladd, Andrew 60 21 37 58
C 6-0' 175 Boland, David 55 34 24 58
C 6-0' 175 McGrath, Evan 56 15 34 49
D 6-1' 193 Green, Mike 53 14 23 37
D 6-3' 215 Thelen, AJ 33 10 18 28
F 6-2' 200 Stafford, Drew 25 7 14 21

Gwyddbwyll
02-18-2004, 03:23 PM
For me it would be between Stafford, Ladd and Green. I'd probably take a stab in the dark and pick Ladd ahead of Green. Stafford has a lot of hype but he does play on a powerhouse team doesnt he?

I dont know that so many of those will be gone by our pick. I think Tukonen, Schwarz or O'Neil could easily be taken 9-13th. If our pick continues to improve we may even have a shot at Schremp or Chipchura.

I'm happy to tank the season not only for the 1st but also for an all-important 2nd round pick. Leneveu was a golden 2nd round pick and guys like Spiller, Numminen and Vaananen come to mind as other good early 2nd round picks. The Coyotes were disappointed to miss out on Pushkaryov. I'd like us to be in position to grab another at 37-40th.

ParisSaintGermain
02-18-2004, 04:05 PM
[QUOTE=Stevex] If our pick continues to improve we may even have a shot at Schremp or Chipchura.[QUOTE]

I hope that we will be able to pick before 10th. I feel that Olesj may drop from the 3rd predicted pick because of Phaneuf hit during the WJC and if he goes beyond 5th, he could be a steal. :dunno:

Dan
02-18-2004, 04:15 PM
For me it would be between Stafford, Ladd and Green. I'd probably take a stab in the dark and pick Ladd ahead of Green. Stafford has a lot of hype but he does play on a powerhouse team doesnt he?
My pick would be between Ladd and Stafford if that scenario played out. And I don't think it will, just trying to see who people liked if we are presented with that. BTW, I read Red Line has Stafford at #7 this month.

I dont know that so many of those will be gone by our pick. I think Tukonen, Schwarz or O'Neil could easily be taken 9-13th. If our pick continues to improve we may even have a shot at Schremp or Chipchura.
Yes, I will be surprised if a goalie is taken in the top ten and will be wearing a big smile if one is taken before our pick. I could see Chipchura falling to us, but would be surprised if Schremp does. I guess that's if we stay in the 9-13 range.

I'm happy to tank the season not only for the 1st but also for an all-important 2nd round pick. Leneveu was a golden 2nd round pick and guys like Spiller, Numminen and Vaananen come to mind as other good early 2nd round picks. The Coyotes were disappointed to miss out on Pushkaryov. I'd like us to be in position to grab another at 37-40th.
Agreed, second rounders are gold. Many good players that you don't have to pay first round money.

hbk
02-18-2004, 06:22 PM
originally I was hoping that we could land Smid or Stafford but we may have the opportunity to select potentially higher touted prospect.

PhoPhan
02-18-2004, 06:48 PM
Granted, because these rankings are by posters, a lot of it is based on hype, but:
http://hfboards.com/showthread.php?t=53246

hbk
02-18-2004, 07:00 PM
McKeens has Stafford at the # 10 position. Smid has dropped to 20th on their list.

hbk
02-20-2004, 08:31 AM
Radulov has leaped up to the number 3 spot on Redline (previously ranked in the 30's) while Stafford has progressed to number 7.

Right now I would say we will likely finish in the bottom 7.

Question is what is our preference: forwards (which position) or defense?

If it's defense, I'm not sold on Barker. This is does not look to be an elite year for defensemen while the initial indication on the 2005 draft appears to be much more favorable for acquiring blueline help.

Personally, I think we will look towards a forward. We are deep at center but but desperately need some wingers coming up the pipe. Perhaps Radulov or Stafford will receive long and hard looks. Something about Stafford. Could be I'm a sucker for powerforwards. Although is he the next Eric Rasmussen?

Gwyddbwyll
02-20-2004, 06:31 PM
Have you watched Barker's progress?

I agree we'll look for a forward. I'll be really happy if we get a top six pick because (imo) that means one of Ovechkin, Malkin, Olesz, Barker, Wolski or Schremp is ours. I would be happy though with Barker if he is the one that falls to us. The lottery could also put us 2nd overall if we happened to win it?

hbk
02-20-2004, 08:26 PM
i haven't seen any games directly this year. I taped the prospects game and will likely watch it prior to the draft. I'm taking my Master's degree part time and between work, Coyotes, and my family life the draft has taken a bit of a back seat this year (although I do subscribe to McKeens and Redline).


Edit - forgot to make my point.

Bob McKenzie of TSN and formerly of the Hockey News was on between intermissions of the Detroit/Blues game and he indicated that Malkin (out for the rest of the year) and Ovechkin are battling for first over all this year and they are head and shoulders above the rest of the eligable players. Something to think about.

ParisSaintGermain
02-20-2004, 09:42 PM
. I'm taking my Master's degree part time and between work, Coyotes, and my family life the draft has taken a bit of a back seat this year


Do you really think that we will accept those reasons as an excuse for skipping your unofficial draft scouting duties? :shakehead :joker:
Good luck for your degree! :handclap:

ParisSaintGermain
02-20-2004, 09:49 PM
Have you watched Barker's progress?

I agree we'll look for a forward. I'll be really happy if we get a top six pick because (imo) that means one of Ovechkin, Malkin, Olesz, Barker, Wolski or Schremp is ours. I would be happy though with Barker if he is the one that falls to us. The lottery could also put us 2nd overall if we happened to win it?

I wonder how much Malkin's injury is going to weight in the draft decisions.
I agree that the top 6 looks quality and any of those guys could make their future teams very happy. It is intriguing.

Gwyddbwyll
02-21-2004, 06:01 AM
Cheers hbk.. just curious as Barker seems a very controversial prospects. Some seem convinced he has all the tool to be an elite player and others are not quite as excited. Seems an intriguing prospect anyway.

Question about the lottery.. I know that every team in the bottom 14 have a chance to win it. The winner moves up 4 places right? But only the bottom 3 may move all the way to the #1 pick.. So if the #4 or #5 team wins it do they move to 2nd pick instead of the 1st? Irrelevant to us I know but just curious.

hbk
02-21-2004, 08:50 AM
Cheers hbk.. just curious as Barker seems a very controversial prospects. Some seem convinced he has all the tool to be an elite player and others are not quite as excited. Seems an intriguing prospect anyway.

Question about the lottery.. I know that every team in the bottom 14 have a chance to win it. The winner moves up 4 places right? But only the bottom 3 may move all the way to the #1 pick.. So if the #4 or #5 team wins it do they move to 2nd pick instead of the 1st? Irrelevant to us I know but just curious.


In the latest redline they wondered out loud if Barker was a lazy player. He has speed but overhandled the puck at times during the prospect game.

In terms of the lottery. Maximum you can move up is four slots. So if your tenth, the max and you win it, you move up to fifth. If you are number five and you win it, you can move up to number one.

What the NHL should do to build up some excitment around the event is to do the whole draft as a lottery much like the NBA handles it.

Gwyddbwyll
02-21-2004, 09:06 AM
What the NHL should do to build up some excitment around the event is to do the whole draft as a lottery much like the NBA handles it.

Not this year though :D Not when we finally have a prospective top 10 pick..

Im interested to see how the new CBA might restructure the draft. If there is a lockout that would give them the opportunity to increase the age by a year as has been brought up before.. that would create more pressure on the scouts to get it right with an extra year to judge these prospects.

It would be nice to have another defenseman with speed to follow Tanabe. Overhandling can be coached out of him? As you said with Jersey, having the defense corps they do keeps teams honest.. having Tanabe / Barker / Mara could do that for us too. Vaananen / Hulse / Spiller / Ference down the other side for the stay at homers. Looking at that now I want Barker heh.

Greg
02-22-2004, 09:16 PM
We stand at 8th right now and project to finish 8 or 9. Go Ducks, go Rangers, go Thrashers! As always, the Memorial Cup and Under 18's will definetly change NHL scouts minds. HBK alluded to Radulov jumping into the 3 hole at Red Line. Wait until the U-18's, Russian players always make a statement there. Tunik and Shafgulin last year, Semin and Grebeshkov in 2002. Those were not considered top 10 guys though. Looking at the last four years, the top 10-15 changes little from February to June. Example, in February 2002 Red Line, they had six players in their top ten who were selected top ten in the draft. The other four were Lupul (#32), Bouchard (#49), Taticek (#13), and Nystrom (not in top 50). Last year, Red Line had seven of ten on their February rankings. The other three were knocking on the door in Suter (#12), Phaneuf (#18), and Vanek (#15). Could Tukonen, Bolland, Lisin, Sindel, Smid, or Ladd be our guy? Could Wolski drop to us? Drew Stafford has been talked a bit on this thread, but I do not think he will opt-in. I think the chances are very slim unless he gets the word he could be drafted very high. He does not want to lose his college eligibility. And he sees how Parise and other have developed under Dean Blais' coaching. At any rate, I think we'll have a shot at a solid selection and hopefully a player that will have a positive impact on the organization.

ParisSaintGermain
03-04-2004, 05:35 AM
Well, the Rangers are now loaded of first round picks and I can see them get Ovechkin by moving up on draft day. Can the franchise that will have the first overall pick resist to a charge or two or three first round draft picks- including one pretty high, the rangers legitimate pick- that the rangers may offer?
Washington could try to do the same thing too.

X-SHARKIE
03-04-2004, 09:13 AM
Could call. I dont think the Rangers would be the team with the shot at it though.

Caps could possibly get the Penguins thinking about that one. The problem is they well have low 1st round picks. Yes the #3 pick is in Washington at the moment, but Detriots 1st and Bostons 1st well be no higher then 25. I think Washington would also have to let go a 2nd or two to fit the deal. Ovechkin is the "next one" Now I think he's is the best player in this draft... and mabey the best in a while..he can not single handily turn a franchise upside down....expecially the Pens....Mabey the Penguins would except 3 1st rounders and two 2nd in return...thats probally the asking price folks.

Could be the Lindros deal of this century.

Dan
03-04-2004, 10:19 AM
unreadable gibberish snipped
What was that?

eye
03-04-2004, 11:52 AM
It's just our luck. We finally get a high 1st round pick but according to my source this may be the weakest draft in the past 10 years. My source believes that at least 75% of the 2004 1st round picks will have difficulty getting signed. He feels that North American prospects are really in tough this year.

ParisSaintGermain
03-04-2004, 02:15 PM
It's just our luck. We finally get a high 1st round pick but according to my source this may be the weakest draft in the past 10 years. My source believes that at least 75% of the 2004 1st round picks will have difficulty getting signed. He feels that North American prospects are really in tough this year.

Well, to be honest, with the CBA timebomb ahead, it isn't only the first round draft picks that will be difficult to sign. A reality check by players and agents is waiting round the corner. I still think that in terms of quality the top 6 prospects look good. The draft fade after that probably, yes, but as in any other draft there are always some good guys to pick even late.

Gwyddbwyll
03-04-2004, 06:33 PM
It's just our luck. We finally get a high 1st round pick but according to my source this may be the weakest draft in the past 10 years. My source believes that at least 75% of the 2004 1st round picks will have difficulty getting signed. He feels that North American prospects are really in tough this year.

Yep I was just complaining in another thread that the Coyotes have twice gotten set up with 2 first round picks and both times they have been in absolutely terrible draft years (1996 and 2002).

I hope our European and college scouting is up to scratch.

ParisSaintGermain
03-04-2004, 06:37 PM
I hope our European and college scouting is up to scratch.

:(, let's hope so!

hbk
03-04-2004, 10:50 PM
Yep I was just complaining in another thread that the Coyotes have twice gotten set up with 2 first round picks and both times they have been in absolutely terrible draft years (1996 and 2002).

I hope our European and college scouting is up to scratch.

Probably a lot harder to get first round picks in years where the draft is of higher quality. Let's just say that the first round picks of the contenders seem to be a lot more available this year then they were last year.

Point well taken though.

Gwyddbwyll
03-05-2004, 02:28 AM
Yeah, the long-range scouting should be in place (ie/ people know about Crosby, Brule, Bertram, Esposito etc already)

I think the 1sts flying around this year are more because of the CBA expiry than because the draft is so terrible. Contenders are going for it.. The draft isnt THAT terrible surely.

Dan
03-05-2004, 01:38 PM
Our first rounder top 10, our second rounder around 37 or 38, NJ second rounder around 50-53, and Philly second rounder around 62-65. And no word on the Teppo compensation from Dallas. If it's a second rounder, could be around 50-53.

Gwyddbwyll
03-06-2004, 07:20 PM
I know its a weak draft but we shouldnt be too discouraged..

Some 2002 2nds: Deslauriers (31) Harding (38) Daley (43) Leneveu (46) Kaigorodov (47) Koltsov (49) Stajan (57) Hudler (58) Boychuk (61) Fleischmann (63)

Some 1996 2nds: Sarich, Garon, Bulis, C.White, Cullen, Dagenais, J.Green, Lacouture, Begin, Cisar.. okay okay not that exciting a list lol but Chara and Poti were drafted in the top 60 (57th and 59th respectively in the 3rd round). Daniel Briere was two picks away from falling into the 2nd round as well if we hadnt picked him.

The percentages are tougher but there is talent. Interestingly a lot of it seems to be goalies.

Waldo
03-06-2004, 07:38 PM
Can't provide a source because I read this quite some time ago but the numbers of 1st rounds picks that actually end up playing in the NHL is about the same each year over the last 10 years even when comparing "bad" draft years with "good" draft years. In any event, the more picks you have the better the chances so I'll really enjoy draft day this year. Last year was a real bummer not having picks in the 1st two rounds. Draft day has always been my favourite day of the year. I hope that we get another 2nd from Dallas but in any event, Draper will find us some players. In the past we've lost a few spots in the 1st round lottery. Maybe we'll be REALLY lucky this tear and fall upon the 1st or 2nd pick.

hbk
03-06-2004, 08:40 PM
Can't provide a source because I read this quite some time ago but the numbers of 1st rounds picks that actually end up playing in the NHL is about the same each year over the last 10 years even when comparing "bad" draft years with "good" draft years. In any event, the more picks you have the better the chances so I'll really enjoy draft day this year. Last year was a real bummer not having picks in the 1st two rounds. Draft day has always been my favourite day of the year. I hope that we get another 2nd from Dallas but in any event, Draper will find us some players. In the past we've lost a few spots in the 1st round lottery. Maybe we'll be REALLY lucky this tear and fall upon the 1st or 2nd pick.


I'd trade our first and all three of our second to land the first overall pick.

ParisSaintGermain
03-06-2004, 08:48 PM
I'd trade our first and all three of our second to land the first overall pick.

That would be gutsy. I like the idea even if in the long term this could really backfire big time. But gutsy moves probably makesgutsy teams, ambitious teams.
And HBK, what would you do if we had the first pick overall after the lottery and to have it the Rangers offers us three first round draft picks including theirs which should be high? Do you keep the first overall or get the three rangers first picks??

hbk
03-06-2004, 08:51 PM
That would be gutsy. I like the idea even if in the long term this could really backfire big time. But gutsy moves probably makesgutsy teams, ambitious teams.
And HBK, what would you do if we had the first pick overall after the lottery and to have it the Rangers offers us three first round draft picks including theirs which should be high? Do you keep the first overall or get the three rangers first picks??



I keep the pick. I wouldn't even think twice about it.

ParisSaintGermain
03-06-2004, 09:00 PM
I keep the pick. I wouldn't even think twice about it.

And you take Ovechkin?
I would definitely as to have a guy like him would make the Coyotes a much more marketable brand, would fill the Glendale Arena up, would increase the TV coverage of the team at the same time as it would really improve the team in the short as in the long term. Just what this franchise needs IMO.

hbk
03-06-2004, 09:05 PM
And you take Ovechkin?
I would definitely as to have a guy like him would make the Coyotes a much more marketable brand, would fill the Glendale Arena up, would increase the TV coverage of the team at the same time as it would really improve the team in the short as in the long term. Just what this franchise needs IMO.

no question Ovechkin.

He's money in the box office. It's a great story to build up interest. He's a superstar player and easily the top player in this draft class. Everything you say is true. It's a no-brainer.

XX
03-06-2004, 10:39 PM
no question Ovechkin.

He's money in the box office. It's a great story to build up interest. He's a superstar player and easily the top player in this draft class. Everything you say is true. It's a no-brainer.

Lebron James... of the NHL

Theres still some good guys past him, that should have a big impact on the team. Olesz and Malkin come to mind.

Waldo
03-07-2004, 12:18 AM
Lebron James... of the NHL

Theres still some good guys past him, that should have a big impact on the team. Olesz and Malkin come to mind.

I'd be very happy with Malkin or Ovechkin.

Greg
03-07-2004, 11:48 AM
So M*Keen's top 5 for March is, Ovechkin, Malkin, Olesz, Barker and Ladd. That means based on what they think we might have a shot at Schremp, Wolski or Tukonen. Not bad.

Dan
03-11-2004, 05:25 PM
Our 2nd rounder, who you got? Size like Bruce Graham or Alberta boy Jeff Shultz. Two Swedes might still be there in Johannes Salmonsson and 6-3' Carl Soderberg. David Booth or Johan Fransson. Anyone following a certain kid?

Gwyddbwyll
03-11-2004, 05:40 PM
I think that 2nd rounder is going to be much harder than the 1st.

A few solid defensemen I have an eye on are Mark Fistric, Boris Valabik, Kiril Lyamin.. all have been mentioned as 1st round talent but could be there at our 2nd round pick. Of the Swedes there is also Demen-Willaume but he seems too risky.

There seem to be a ton of Russians that could go 2nd round.. they are hard to quantify and we've had bad experiences in the past (Safronov, Tatarinov). Other than Lyamin there is Alexandrov, Lemtyugov, Karetin, Makarov, Khonutiov and more as guys to watch out for.

Hoot
03-11-2004, 05:54 PM
Our 2nd rounder, who you got? Size like Bruce Graham or Alberta boy Jeff Shultz. Two Swedes might still be there in Johannes Salmonsson and 6-3' Carl Soderberg. David Booth or Johan Fransson. Anyone following a certain kid?

Lauri Korpikoski, TPS, (5'11 170ish) made an impression on Red Line during the Five Nations Cup.

"Next up on the Surprise-O-Meter is Finland's Lauri Korpikoski. And if you're asking, "Lauri who?," join the club. RLR had never seen or heard of the Flying Finn until the Five Nations, but he made a believer of us in less than two periods. He's got plenty of flash, dash, and dangle to his game, but mixes in plenty of grit and jam as well. In the first game of the tournament he combined with linemate Lauri Tukonen to physically dominate and pulverize the Czechs down low along the walls as they won every battle and snared every loose puck on their way to piling up four goals in a 5-4 victory that was essentially a two-man effort with the rest of the club just along for the ride."


Brock has an interesting first round mock here (http://hfboards.com/showthread.php?t=56553)

Hoot
03-13-2004, 07:32 PM
So M*Keen's top 5 for March is, Ovechkin, Malkin, Olesz, Barker and Ladd. That means based on what they think we might have a shot at Schremp, Wolski or Tukonen. Not bad.

Or Stefford. We are fortunate that this draft seems top heavy on offensive talent. Not that I would mind Barker at all.

Greg
03-13-2004, 10:48 PM
Or Stefford. We are fortunate that this draft seems top heavy on offensive talent. Not that I would mind Barker at all.
Stafford just scored a huge OT goal for North Dakota, kid is clutch. And clutch is...

PhoPhan
03-13-2004, 11:10 PM
I just had a thought. Anyone else think the Coyotes could try to get another pick in the first round, in one of two ways.

A) They could trade down. A lot of teams have two picks, and if someone were to offer the Coyotes to later 1sts and a decent prospect for the 5th overall, it might garner some thought

B) Keep the 5th overall, and use a 2nd, a prospect, and another body to move it into the first round

ParisSaintGermain
03-14-2004, 08:13 AM
I just had a thought. Anyone else think the Coyotes could try to get another pick in the first round, in one of two ways.

A) They could trade down. A lot of teams have two picks, and if someone were to offer the Coyotes to later 1sts and a decent prospect for the 5th overall, it might garner some thought

B) Keep the 5th overall, and use a 2nd, a prospect, and another body to move it into the first round

I don't want option A to happen but I would be happy with option B. I could even be happy with an option C: Trade the fifth pick up to try to get Malkin or...

PhoPhan
03-17-2004, 08:19 PM
Just threw together a mock draft:

http://hfboards.com/showthread.php?p=1061510#post1061510

Hoot
03-17-2004, 08:39 PM
No offense but mockdrafts without commentary aren't the real thing imo.

PhoPhan
03-17-2004, 09:41 PM
No offense but mockdrafts without commentary aren't the real thing imo.

I didn't have time for that, sorry.

Kimahri
03-17-2004, 10:13 PM
Am I the only one who actually would like the yotes to draft Schremp? If we cant get one of the obvious two in Ovechkin and Malkin then my third choice is Schremp.

Gwyddbwyll
03-18-2004, 04:04 AM
Nope.. I have Schremp 5th myself. Wolski or Tukonen are much more solid but both dont really project as the stud gamebreaker we need. Schremp is riskier but could be that guy. He dominated the prospects game easily. Its going to be a tough choice.

Gwyddbwyll
03-18-2004, 04:09 AM
Just threw together a mock draft:

http://hfboards.com/showthread.php?p=1061510#post1061510

Just going by trends but Ladd's stock is really rising and McGrath's has really fallen.. personally I would flip those two.

Im expecting AJ Thelen to go in the 1st... perhaps do a Ballard and get selected much higher than expected.

Interesting.. it is really tough to do past the top 8 or so.

Hoot
03-18-2004, 06:50 AM
Nope.. I have Schremp 5th myself. Wolski or Tukonen are much more solid but both dont really project as the stud gamebreaker we need. Schremp is riskier but could be that guy. He dominated the prospects game easily. Its going to be a tough choice.

I'm not sure about Schremp. Tukonen reminds me a bit of how Hossa looked when he was drafted. I wouldn't mind a Hossa type even if he isn't quite a gamebreaker. The sad truth is that outside of Ovechkin this draft is as difficult as they come. But there is talent, no doubt about that. Tukonen might not get the hype but I have a feeling he could be one hell of a player in five years or so.

PhoPhan
03-18-2004, 06:56 AM
Nope.. I have Schremp 5th myself. Wolski or Tukonen are much more solid but both dont really project as the stud gamebreaker we need. Schremp is riskier but could be that guy. He dominated the prospects game easily. Its going to be a tough choice.

For me, I have Wolski, then Shremp, then Tukonen in my rankings. Shremp has the skills but is smaller than Wojtech. Wojtech, IMO, does have the potential to be a first liner, even a power forward, but more likely he will be a rangy two-way complement to his other two linemates.

hbk
03-18-2004, 08:36 AM
For me, I have Wolski, then Shremp, then Tukonen in my rankings. Shremp has the skills but is smaller than Wojtech. Wojtech, IMO, does have the potential to be a first liner, even a power forward, but more likely he will be a rangy two-way complement to his other two linemates.


Wojtech has been free falling in Redline's rankings. He is now closer to the bottom end of the top 20 then the top.

Hoot
03-18-2004, 09:10 AM
I didn't have time for that, sorry.

What's the big hurry? The draft isn't until June ;)

Hoot
03-18-2004, 09:17 AM
Wojtech has been free falling in Redline's rankings. He is now closer to the bottom end of the top 20 then the top.

At least in 2001 I thought the Coyotes scouting staff had a remarkably similar list to what Redline had. I'm not impressed by the reports of inconsistency (and laziness?) associated with Wolski.

Gwyddbwyll
03-20-2004, 02:15 PM
Our 2nd rounder, who you got? Size like Bruce Graham or Alberta boy Jeff Shultz. Two Swedes might still be there in Johannes Salmonsson and 6-3' Carl Soderberg. David Booth or Johan Fransson. Anyone following a certain kid?

Duff88 did a second round mock and Coyotes were given Michal Sersen, Travis Zajac and Jeff Shultz. (Think he meant the Calgary defenseman not the goalie) Wolski was the 5th overall.

Personally Im not keen on Sersen at 35th when Booth and Pineault were still there. A czech defenseman from the Q does not fit Draper's profile either. We just acquired a top puckmover d-prospect as well.

Travis Zajac is a BCHL kid who has put up some impressive numbers in 59 games he has 43-69-112. Draper has been known to pick BCHLers.

Schultz is a possibility. Being a Hitman they should have scouted him lots.

Greg
03-20-2004, 03:12 PM
At least in 2001 I thought the Coyotes scouting staff had a remarkably similar list to what Redline had. I'm not impressed by the reports of inconsistency (and laziness?) associated with Wolski.
Red Line February report on USA Today said:
Wojtek Wolski — It's not that he hasn't shown scoring ability, but he's sooooo laid back. Maybe the expectation isn't fair, but with that body, you'd like to see him throw a hit at least once a month.
USAToday.com (http://www.usatoday.com/sports/hockey/columnist/woodlief/2004-02-26-woodlief_x.htm)
So, he has good size, but rarely uses it. I wonder if he avoids taking a hit to make the play? Or gets his nose dirty in traffic? Or at least try to ride his man off the puck playing defense? His offensive potential sounds very good. At five or six, it just seems like we can get a better all-around player than Wojtek. I could be wrong.

ParisSaintGermain
03-20-2004, 05:47 PM
Red Line February report on USA Today said:
Wojtek Wolski — It's not that he hasn't shown scoring ability, but he's sooooo laid back. Maybe the expectation isn't fair, but with that body, you'd like to see him throw a hit at least once a month.
USAToday.com (http://www.usatoday.com/sports/hockey/columnist/woodlief/2004-02-26-woodlief_x.htm)
So, he has good size, but rarely uses it. I wonder if he avoids taking a hit to make the play? Or gets his nose dirty in traffic? Or at least try to ride his man off the puck playing defense? His offensive potential sounds very good. At five or six, it just seems like we can get a better all-around player than Wojtek. I could be wrong.

I think that for players like Wolski or Schremp, the interviews pre-draft with all the interested franchise managements might play an important role in their position on draft day. I suppose that will help them to see a little bit through supposed lazyness or cockyness.

hbk
03-20-2004, 06:03 PM
I think we will be leaning towards Stafford or Tukonen myself. It's my first pick prediction.

Hoot
03-20-2004, 07:09 PM
I think we will be leaning towards Stafford or Tukonen myself. It's my first pick prediction.

This is a difficult draft. Outside of us winning the lottery and picking Ovechkin I would love to get Malkin if he is healthy. But that if is a huge one. We all know how scary concussions can be.

Olesz might have stalled a bit in his development. Is he this years Gratton/Svitov?

Barker sounds great but as with some Canadian kids it is difficult to get a real grip on his talent level (too much hype occasionally). Some people on these boards say he is practically on the level with Bouwmeester while others say his upside is a #2 or 3 d-man or a bust altogether.

Ladd has had a good run the last few months and his stock is rising. He seems to be highly regarded by people who value character, grit and drive in their prospects over pure talent. I would not be surprised in the least if the Coyotes pick him at # 5 if that is our spot. Barnett's first draft saw us pick Koreis and Eager in particular over more talented players like Steen.

On the other hand if we go by the first draft under the new regime (2001) Tukonen would be a great fit here as he seems to be an upgrade on Sjöström. Tukonen plays a physical two way game, he has good size, he's a great skater and has excellent hands. Much will depend on his interview with the Coyotes staff I guess.

Stafford to me is a possibility but as he is slightly older I think he is more a dark horse at this point. Another dark horse is A.J Thelen.

Schremp is the joker pick. To me he seems to be the prototypical boom or bust pick. Maybe the downside is too big to ignore. On the other hand the Coyotes have similar types in Langkow and Comrie. If Gretzky likes Schremp's game...

Anyway my point is that my guess is that if we pick at # 5 we will go with either Ladd or Tukonen. But I wouldn't be surprised at all if Schremp's name is called.

ParisSaintGermain
03-20-2004, 08:17 PM
It is always difficult to assess players like Malkin, Olesz or Tukonen as they actually play in the top senior leagues of their respective countries and they aren't really having much ice time per game. This is what makes Ovechkin so ahead of the pack as he is actually already a factor at top senior russian level (he was one of the three stars in a playoff game three days ago for example).

I read Malkin concussion wasn't as bad as first thought. It is important to note as well that it wasn't a concussion consecutive to a hit but by sliding very hard in the boards. VH SMITH may contradict me but I think that Malkin was playing on Pestunov line in the Magnitogorsk team so maybe we can use this Pestu'-Malki' connection with the Coyotes ;) .

I don't think Olesz progress has been as bad as advertised. Sure, he looks like he had a bit of a slow start of the season but he had to adjust. He was not bad at the WJC in a disappointing team. Phaneuf hit left everyone wondering but Olesz bounced back: He posted pretty decent numbers in the playoffs of the Czech extraleague this month and I doubt he was on the ice very often. From what i read I like what he brings on the table but as Hoot mentioned he can always end up being a Gratton type of player. Maybe a Koreis-Olesz connection in Phoenix :p .

Tukonen is playing in the finish league and the Espoo Blues are pretty inconsistant. He is playing in a team with a few former NHLers like Ladislav Kohn and... Juha Ylonen!
Maybe a Tukonen-Ylonen connection in the Coyotes :D .

Greg
03-20-2004, 08:29 PM
I think we will be leaning towards Stafford or Tukonen myself. It's my first pick prediction.
I've been watching the 2001-2003 drafts on and off lately. There is something about the top of the draft, usually the first three or four picks, which inspire GM's to shuffle. They want to be in position to take "their" guy. At five or six, I'm not sure the Coyotes would be among the movers and shakers, unless they were sold on a kid outside the top spot (Ovechkin). Rick Dudley talks about "assets" every year at the draft, I think the Coyotes have the assets to move up if they covet a player.

Looking at the scouting rags, there are eight players that have been ranked in spots 4-8 in February and March. They are; Barker, Olesz, Schwartz, Wolski, Tukonen, Radulov, Ladd and Stafford. Could we be looking at our guy in that list? I think so, like I stated earlier in this thread, not much changes in the top ten from now until June. The U-18's and Memorial Cup games might change the order though.

Looking at the Coyotes current roster, the blueline is young. Add to that promising prospects like Ballard, Jones, Callahan and Kynazev. My BPA brethren are saying, take him and then you can trade those other assets from strength. That's true, but if Cam Barker fell to our spot, would you take him? I guess that depends on how you think he will develop. He already has good size at 6-3' 200+. Gifted with hockey sense and excellent vision. Can lead the rush, quarterback the PP, and plays in the rough and tumble WHL. But his own coach thinks he needs to pay more attention to defense. And needs to be a presence in front of his own net. I like Stafford a lot, even though he's never been above 7 on anyone's list. If the NCAA does not change the rules, will he opt-in and forgo his college eligibility? With the impending lockout and playing for a prestigious program at UND, that's a tough decision for him. Dean Blais will be the US WJC coach next year and the tourney will be in Grand Forks. Red Line speculates he will opt-in regardless. I hope the NCAA will change the rule so Drew can go back to UND if he wants to. After being ranked in the 30's and 40's all year, Red Line and McKeen's vault Alexander Radulov into the top of their lists. I can't remember a late riser that jumped that high. But the 5 Nations is just one tournament. And Bill Lesuk is long gone (see Dan Focht). Marek Schwartz? Let's move on. Like Cam Barker, Rostislav Olesz is considered a player that probably will not fall to where the Coyotes will choose. But we know Draper/Karpan will draft players from the Czech Republic. If he's there, I would be shocked (right now) if they passed on him. A budding power forward who has a nice skill set. Pro style body, a lot to like. Injuries are a concern. Lauri Tukonen is a player that should be on the board when the Coyotes pick. He's already been talked about in this thread, but he's consistently been a top 10 pick all year. Good size and offensive potential. Like most Finnish player, he's said to be responsible at both ends of the ice and hard to knock off the puck. Andrew Ladd has had a great year, but I'm not sure he's a top 5 or 6 guy. Even some dub fans say he'll be a third liner in the NHL. Not what you want out of a top pick.

ParisSaintGermain
03-20-2004, 08:45 PM
I feel it is really a Draper's type of draft this year. Not very well rated overall but with probably a few great underated prospects. As you say Greg, I wouldn't be surprised to see the management chasing the guys they want to pick including for our first rounder. They have shown through trades and signings that they will not hesitate to make bold moves to get what they want. That may well apply to this year draft.
As many guys on this board have mentioned, it is very nice to have a few second rounders. I am very intrigued about who we will going to get but overall I feel fairly confident.

hbk
03-20-2004, 09:00 PM
The thing about Radulov that excites/scares me is whether or not he's an unheralded guy who is projected to go late first/early second who is suddenly selected early in the first round based on strong play in the final stretch part of his draft year. Similar to Peter Forsberg or to even go from Coyote experience when we selected Kolanos.

ParisSaintGermain
03-20-2004, 09:16 PM
The thing about Radulov that excites/scares me is whether or not he's an unheralded guy who is projected to go late first/early second who is suddenly selected early in the first round based on strong play in the final stretch part of his draft year. Similar to Peter Forsberg or to even go from Coyote experience when we selected Kolanos.

Radulov really sounds like a wild card. HBK, do you think the management would be keen to take such a risk by taking him over at number 5/6?
If they do, It would make me think they have seen something really really special in this kid.

hbk
03-20-2004, 10:17 PM
Radulov really sounds like a wild card. HBK, do you think the management would be keen to take such a risk by taking him over at number 5/6?
If they do, It would make me think they have seen something really really special in this kid.

our rankings usually resemble Redline (although not always - see Eager selection). If they've seen it, you can bet we've seen it.

Gwyddbwyll
03-21-2004, 05:24 AM
IIRC Jakub Koreis was a late-rising prospect. He and Klepis both rose quite rapidly through the ranks in the final months. The Coyotes also reportedly wanted Konstatin Pushkaryev who was another late-riser. They have the form to select these guys with early picks.

Greg
03-21-2004, 10:18 AM
IIRC Jakub Koreis was a late-rising prospect. He and Klepis both rose quite rapidly through the ranks in the final months. The Coyotes also reportedly wanted Konstatin Pushkaryev who was another late-riser. They have the form to select these guys with early picks.
I was curious about Koreis being a late riser, so I checked it out:

September 2001
Red Line-44
October 2001
Red Line-36
November 2001
Red Line-17
Central Scouting-3 in Czech Republic (1- Hudler 2- Nemec)
December 2001
Red Line-14
Mid-Term Central Scouting-8 in Europe
January 2002
Red Line-11
February 2002
Red Line-9
March 2002
Red Line-9
April 2002
Red Line-9
Final Central Scouting-10 in Europe
May 2002
Red Line-11
Hockey News-17
Bob McKenzie-22
June 2002
Red Line-12

Konstatin Pushkaryev definetely came out of nowhere. He was off the radar until late in the year when Central Scouting had him at 37 on their final list. Klepis was a late riser to a lesser extent. He went from Mid Term CSS #24 to Final CSS #16. Red Line did not have him ranked in September, October, November. He entered Red Line's list in the top 50 in December. And was around the 40's until they had him 37 in June. Point taken though, I don't have any doubt that our staff would select a late riser.

Edit- Just thought about Joe Callahan being a late riser. Mid Term Cental Scouting #111 to Final Central Scouting #69. We took him at 70. Seems like Red Line said the light bulb went off for him at Christmas and he improved from there.

Gwyddbwyll
03-21-2004, 10:58 AM
Yeah I only remember Koreis and Klepis arriving after December really as I was always mixing them up. Arriving in the sense they were getting talked about on here first as possible late 1st rounders then definite top 20 guys. Koreis was obviously noticed a couple months earlier by Red Line. That does fit with hbk's saying the Coyotes scouts' rankings closely following those of Red Line.

Greg
03-21-2004, 10:53 PM
HF article, ISS rankings (http://www.hockeysfuture.com/article.php?sid=6786&mode=threaded&order=0)
1. ALEXANDRE OVECHKIN, LW, 6-2/205, R, 9-17-85, Dynamo Moscow
2. EVGENI MALKIN, C, 6-3/185, L, 7-31-86, Magnitogorsk
3. ROBBIE SCHREMP, C, 6-0/ 200, L, 07-01-86, London
4. CAM BARKER, D, 6-3/206, L, 4-4-86, Medicine Hat
5. WOJTEK WOLSKI, LW, 6-3/188, L, 2-24-86, Brampton
6. ROSTISLAV OLESZ, C, 6-2/200, L, 10-10-85, Vitkovice
7.ALVARO MONTOYA, G, 6-1.5/193, L, 02.13.85, Univ. Michigan
8. LAURI TUKONEN, RW, 6-2/ 198, R, 09-01-86, Espoo Blues
9.ANDREW LADD, LW, 6-2/200, L, 12-12-85, Calgary
10. DREW STAFFORD, RW, 6-2/200, R, 10-30-85, Univ. of North Dakota
Red Line, USA Today posted 3/20/04 (http://www.usatoday.com/sports/hockey/columnist/woodlief/2004-03-19-woodlief_x.htm)
1. Alexandre Ovechkin LW 6-1/195 R 9-17-85 Dynamo Moscow
2. Evgeni Malkin (injured) C 6-3/186 L 7-31-86 Magnitogorsk
3. Cam Barker D 6-3/206 L 4-4-86 Medicine Hat
4. Rostislav Olesz (injured) C 6-2/191 L 10-10-85 Vitkovice
5. Alexander Radulov RW 6-1/178 L 7-5-86 Dynamo Moscow
6. Lauri Tukonen (injured) C 6-2/196 R 9-1-86 Espoo
7. Drew Stafford RW 6-2/200 R 10-19-85 Univ. of North Dakota
8. Marek Schwarz G 5-11/165 R 4-1-86 Sparta Praha
9. Andrew Ladd LW 6-2/199 L 12-12-85 Calgary
10. Enver Lisin RW 6-1/189 L 4-22-86 Dynamo Moscow

ParisSaintGermain
03-21-2004, 11:02 PM
HF article, ISS rankings (http://www.hockeysfuture.com/article.php?sid=6786&mode=threaded&order=0)
1. ALEXANDRE OVECHKIN, LW, 6-2/205, R, 9-17-85, Dynamo Moscow
2. EVGENI MALKIN, C, 6-3/185, L, 7-31-86, Magnitogorsk
3. ROBBIE SCHREMP, C, 6-0/ 200, L, 07-01-86, London
4. CAM BARKER, D, 6-3/206, L, 4-4-86, Medicine Hat
5. WOJTEK WOLSKI, LW, 6-3/188, L, 2-24-86, Brampton
6. ROSTISLAV OLESZ, C, 6-2/200, L, 10-10-85, Vitkovice
7.ALVARO MONTOYA, G, 6-1.5/193, L, 02.13.85, Univ. Michigan
8. LAURI TUKONEN, RW, 6-2/ 198, R, 09-01-86, Espoo Blues
9.ANDREW LADD, LW, 6-2/200, L, 12-12-85, Calgary
10. DREW STAFFORD, RW, 6-2/200, R, 10-30-85, Univ. of North Dakota

Schremp and Wolski before Olesz??

hbk
03-23-2004, 08:41 AM
Interestingly enough, despite our horrible slide, with our win last night we catapulted into the 6th pick and now sit with zero chance (barring a trade) at being able to move up to the first pick overall via the draft lottery.

Greg
04-04-2004, 02:33 PM
Dan was asking about Wojtek Wolski's skating in another thread. I was curious about to see how he compared in the Top Prospects Skills competition:

60' Dash- Wolski finished 27th out of 39 skaters (3.154)
180' Dash- Wolski finished 13th out of 39 skaters (6.058)
Puck control- Wolski finished 2nd out of 39 skaters (16.393)
Full Lap- Wolski finished 10th out of 39 skaters (14.929)

His puck control time is impressive.

Waldo
04-04-2004, 04:12 PM
Dan was asking about Wojtek Wolski's skating in another thread. I was curious about to see how he compared in the Top Prospects Skills competition:

60' Dash- Wolski finished 27th out of 39 skaters (3.154)
180' Dash- Wolski finished 13th out of 39 skaters (6.058)
Puck control- Wolski finished 2nd out of 39 skaters (16.393)
Full Lap- Wolski finished 10th out of 39 skaters (14.929)

His puck control time is impressive.

Puck control is a good thing but this team needs more Novo and Tanabe type speed. Can't say I rightly know which top draft prospect has blinding speed but that's what they should be considering.

Hoot
04-04-2004, 05:31 PM
Ok. On Saturday I went and saw a game between Finland u18 and Sweden u18 as the two teams played a friendly before the u18 WCs in Minsk. I got a look at Tukonen, Korpikoski, Nokelainen and Jesse Joensuu (2005 draft). Unfortunately Oscar Hedman did not play for the Swedes.

From a scouting perspective the game did not give much as both teams, and Finland especially, did not give 100 per cent. Tukonen definitely did not look like a man amongst boys but still showed that he was the most talented player on the ice. His line with Nokelainen and Korpikoski did not play very hard but they were the best line on the ice and will be a good force for the Finns in Minsk. Apart from Tukonen the player that impressed me most was Joensuu. Joensuu's game looks tailor made for the NHL. He's a powerforward and should go in the first round next season.

hbk
04-04-2004, 05:57 PM
Woloski seems to be slipping in the rankings (although a strong CHL playoff will rectify that). On most lists he appears to be outside the top 10.

I beleive their is a lot of hope that we can hit a home run with this selection. Stafford is a safe pick but is likely a second line winger.

Radulov, Tukonen, and Schremp are home run potential selections. Radulov is the real wild card who is burning up the lists just in time for the draft. If Phoenix follows Red Line's line of thinking (and on occasion they have) then I think it could be Radulov. IMO it's between Radulov, Tukonen, and Stafford.

Hoot
04-04-2004, 06:11 PM
I think they will go with the player that has the most attitude. My guess is Schremp will be taken if we have the fifth pick on draft day.

ParisSaintGermain
04-04-2004, 07:00 PM
I think they will go with the player that has the most attitude. My guess is Schremp will be taken if we have the fifth pick on draft day.

Schremp has attitude and probably a winner attitude. The CHL play offs will show if he is clutch. If so, It wouldn't surprise me if he was to be taken before the fifth pick. His big problem as far as I can understand is that he is very much one way. Not much defense. And this could put the Coyotes off. All the other predicted top 6 forward prospects appear to work much harder in their own zone.
I really think Olesz could fall in fifth and if so, I really hope he would be taken by us.
I am not enthusiastic on Stafford. Radulov came a bit from nowhere and I still need to be convinced.

XX
04-04-2004, 07:29 PM
The same was said about Kovalchuk and while its still true to an extent, its not nearly as bad as it used to be. All prospects have trouble being responsible in the NHL, I wouldnt let it scare me away from a potential gamebreaker type player, which is what the coyotes need.

ParisSaintGermain
04-04-2004, 07:36 PM
The same was said about Kovalchuk and while its still true to an extent, its not nearly as bad as it used to be. All prospects have trouble being responsible in the NHL, I wouldnt let it scare me away from a potential gamebreaker type player, which is what the coyotes need.

Oh I have got nothing against Schremp, I was just mentionning it as it is one different characteristic to other prospects apparently. I will be happy if Draper chooses him.
To be honest I will be happy with anyone Draper selects as I like what he has done for us so far.

Hoot
04-04-2004, 08:05 PM
Draper's strength is finding solid talent. My impression is that he hasn't done as well in the first round with gamebreaking talent. When I said the Coyotes would take a player with attitude it is because I believe that Barnett is impressed by that (case in point, Ballard). But quiet guys can be clutch and gamebreakers too (Jari Kurri e.g.).

We need gamebreaking talent but outside of Ovechkin nothing is certain in this draft. Tukonen is solid but does he have the drive and mental strength to become another Jari Kurri? Malkin has already had a serious concussion. Schremp could end up being the second coming of Langkow etc. etc.

(As an aside I never worried about Kovalchuk's so called "attitude problems". To me at the time of the draft he was the most talented player to enter the NHL since Lemieux, and I felt that his immense level of talent and his equally immense drive would see him through).

Gwyddbwyll
04-08-2004, 05:31 PM
I am definitely wavering on Schremp. Langkow was a vastly superior prospect stats-wise. If we take Schremp and he manages to tick all the boxes and reach his upside and if we're lucky, he might actually become another Comrie or Langkow, a 2nd line center. Lots of "ifs" in there for not such a great upside. Its not what I want from a top 5 pick.. the depth in this draft sucks :mad:

Tukonen sounds very very similar to Sjostrom if not as fast.. but Sjostrom was not even in the Top 10 in his year. Someone called Tukonen the best prospect since Ruutu, who went 9th. And we're going to take a Sjostrom Lite at 5th overall? Its annoying. Thats kinda the problem we're all having picking I guess.. its strange to pick so high but not quite in the elite group.

Gwyddbwyll
04-08-2004, 06:18 PM
What about someone we havent brought up yet.. - Alexandre Picard? He compares pretty well:

Left winger. Leader on his team. 6-1, 180.
69 39-41-80pts (clutch playoffs 7 games 7-4-11)

Just to get the stats all in the same place:

Andrew Ladd - 71 30-45-75pts (7gp 1-6-7)

Rob Schremp - 63 30-45-75pts (8gp 6-3-9)

Drew Stafford - 36 11-21-32pts

Dave Bolland - 65 37-30-67pts (8gp 1-8-9)

Lauri Tukonen - 35 3-3-6pts

Alex Radulov - no stats -
- he's off to a good start in the U18s though with 1-1-2 in Russia's first game.

-----

Cam Barker - 69 21-44-65pts (9gp 1-5-6)

Rostislav Olesz - 35 1-11-12pts (and in 02-03 40gp 6-3-9pts)

PhoPhan
04-08-2004, 07:33 PM
Picard isn't a top 10 guy. I really like him, but I'd want to trade down before I took him.

Hoot
04-08-2004, 09:39 PM
I am definitely wavering on Schremp. Langkow was a vastly superior prospect stats-wise. If we take Schremp and he manages to tick all the boxes and reach his upside and if we're lucky, he might actually become another Comrie or Langkow, a 2nd line center. Lots of "ifs" in there for not such a great upside. Its not what I want from a top 5 pick.. the depth in this draft sucks :mad:

Tukonen sounds very very similar to Sjostrom if not as fast.. but Sjostrom was not even in the Top 10 in his year. Someone called Tukonen the best prospect since Ruutu, who went 9th. And we're going to take a Sjostrom Lite at 5th overall? Its annoying. Thats kinda the problem we're all having picking I guess.. its strange to pick so high but not quite in the elite group.

I wouldn't say Tukonen is Sjostrom lite. I'd say that Tukonen is more physical and has softer hands and plays a more well rounded game. I would say Hossa lite. Tukonen is a more naturally gifted player than Ruutu (softer hands for example) but Ruutu's real strength is his heart, drive and determination. If Tukonen has 80 per cent of Ruutu's heart I wouldn't worry at all about him if he was a Coyote prospect.

Tukonen to me is a safe pick in that imo he will play in the NHL and be a solid modern two way player. His offensive upside might not be as great as Wolski's or Radulov's but the latter two to me sounds like projects with a higher bust potential. On the other hand Tukonen's Finnish coaches are developing him to become a modern team oriented player while Wolski and Radulov to me sound like offensive minded individualists.

But I agree that it is annoying not to have a more clear cut choice with the #5 pick in a draft.

Gwyddbwyll
04-09-2004, 05:16 AM
Picard isn't a top 10 guy. I really like him, but I'd want to trade down before I took him.

I agree.. I'd find it hard to take Picard with our pick. Why do you think he isnt a top 10 pick though? He has size, character and better stats than all the other contenders and he showed up for his team in the playoffs. Wonder if he is at the U18s.

Gwyddbwyll
04-09-2004, 05:20 AM
I wouldn't say Tukonen is Sjostrom lite. I'd say that Tukonen is more physical and has softer hands and plays a more well rounded game. I would say Hossa lite. Tukonen is a more naturally gifted player than Ruutu (softer hands for example) but Ruutu's real strength is his heart, drive and determination. If Tukonen has 80 per cent of Ruutu's heart I wouldn't worry at all about him if he was a Coyote prospect.

Tukonen to me is a safe pick in that imo he will play in the NHL and be a solid modern two way player. His offensive upside might not be as great as Wolski's or Radulov's but the latter two to me sounds like projects with a higher bust potential. On the other hand Tukonen's Finnish coaches are developing him to become a modern team oriented player while Wolski and Radulov to me sound like offensive minded individualists.

But I agree that it is annoying not to have a more clear cut choice with the #5 pick in a draft.

I know the term Sjostrom lite is somewhat insulting :) I was having a rant. Definitely leaning towards Tukonen in this draft and hoping Radulov continues to emerge (maybe Chicago takes him and we get one of Olesz/Barker).

ParisSaintGermain
04-09-2004, 07:28 AM
Definitely leaning towards Tukonen in this draft and hoping Radulov continues to emerge (maybe Chicago takes him and we get one of Olesz/Barker).

I would really hope we get Olesz because I believe he is one of the few real gem in the top 10 prospects. But if he is still available when Columbus pick, I am worried a franchise trades up to have him. As everyone say, it is stressful to have no clear 5th pick so far and this is because it appears that the 2004 draft is just normal draft which for all of us look incredibly weak because of last season marvel where we had no first or second rounders :banghead: .
I bet most of the players of this first round will find it hard to get into the top two lines of any NHL franchise in the future. Last year was an exception. This year draft is going to be extremely volatile IMO and I expect most of our mock drafts to be dynamited.

ParisSaintGermain
04-09-2004, 08:17 AM
BTW Spector reports today :

-----------------
PENGUINS TO SHOP SECOND OVERALL PICK?

PITTSBURGH POST-GAZETTE: Dave Molinari recently reported Penguins head scout Greg Malone believes there are "three or four choices" the club could make with their first round pick, second overall. It's believed the Washington Capitals will select forward Alexander Ovechkin, whom the Pens were hoping to select if they'd won the first overall pick in the recent draft lottery. Russian centre Evgenii Malkin appears the likely target for the Penguins, but Malone didn't rule out the possibility of the club shopping their pick.

Spector's Note: My thanks to "Clarion Mullett". If the 2004 draft is as thin as the experts are claiming, the Pens may not find much interest in their pick. Still, if they were to get an interesting offer they may be willing to listen.
-----------------

PhoPhan
04-09-2004, 10:55 AM
I agree.. I'd find it hard to take Picard with our pick. Why do you think he isnt a top 10 pick though? He has size, character and better stats than all the other contenders and he showed up for his team in the playoffs. Wonder if he is at the U18s.
Oh, I certainly think he could warrant a top 10 selection, I just think that due to hype and what not, he will fall to 11 or 12. That being said, I think that if Olesz and Barker are gone at 5, I would have no problem trading down to 9 or so and taking Picard. My only problem with that is that I think he is somewhat limited in his offensive upside. I think his potential puts him as a #1 center who is defensively responsible. I think LW is a more pressing need, but depending on what else the Coyotes get by trading down, I could be all for it.

PhoPhan
04-09-2004, 10:58 AM
Oh, I certainly think he could warrant a top 10 selection, I just think that due to hype and what not, he will fall to 11 or 12. That being said, I think that if Olesz and Barker are gone at 5, I would have no problem trading down to 9 or so and taking Picard. My only problem with that is that I think he is somewhat limited in his offensive upside. I think his potential puts him as a #1 center who is defensively responsible. I think LW is a more pressing need, but depending on what else the Coyotes get by trading down, I could be all for it.

To add to all that, I think the best thing to do would be take someone at #5, and hope Picard falls a bit, then use a 2nd rounder or two to move up into the first round.

I think LA, Atlanta, Nashville and NYI all could be interested in giving up their 1st rounder for a 2nd and a player.

Hoot
04-09-2004, 11:34 AM
I know the term Sjostrom lite is somewhat insulting :) I was having a rant. Definitely leaning towards Tukonen in this draft and hoping Radulov continues to emerge (maybe Chicago takes him and we get one of Olesz/Barker).

Tukonen had a statpadding hattrick, plus an assist, against Norway in Minsk today. Finland won 9-0. Could be that Tukonen will be better than Olesz/Barker etc. :dunno:

Didn't the Coyotes say that they had Sjostrom ranked fifth when he was drafted? That is higher than some darn good players. As Tukonen is a similar player the Coyotes should have him very high on their list.

ParisSaintGermain
04-09-2004, 11:36 AM
To add to all that, I think the best thing to do would be take someone at #5, and hope Picard falls a bit, then use a 2nd rounder or two to move up into the first round.

I think LA, Atlanta, Nashville and NYI all could be interested in giving up their 1st rounder for a 2nd and a player.

Yep, I agree. It would be nice to have one pick in the second part of the first round as some propsects look really interesting there.

Dan
04-09-2004, 11:42 AM
Tukonen had a statpadding hattrick, plus an assist, against Norway in Minsk today. Finland won 9-0. Could be that Tukonen will be better than Olesz/Barker etc. :dunno:
That's the rap on Tukonen right now. Shows up against the weak teams, but is average to silent versus the tough teams. Still, good to see him scoring!

XX
04-09-2004, 02:32 PM
That's the rap on Tukonen right now. Shows up against the weak teams, but is average to silent versus the tough teams. Still, good to see him scoring!

What about his linemates? 1 player can only do so much without support

Hoot
04-09-2004, 02:55 PM
Korpikoski and Nokelainen are solid. They are projected to go in the second round (Nokelainen at least), some have him early first round which shows that the draft is not that deep in elite talent. There might be plenty of players from this draft but perhaps not that many top line players. K and N might not have the greatest upside but they are skilled, fast, hardworking, physical, grinding two way wingers. Korpikoski, while more enigmatic, might have the better upside but Nokelainen has the more obvious drive. Nokelainen might be seen as Radivojevic plus.

hbk
04-09-2004, 05:26 PM
Tukonen is doing the one thing that he needs to do to justify a top 5 selection and that is finish strongly and put up points. Someone mentioned that he may even go before our selection. I guess that depends on who you think has the biggest potential to drop out of the top 4 (Ovechkin, Malkin, Barker, Olesz). Ovechkin and Malkin will be gone guaranteed. It's very likely that Barker will be gone as well. Really, Olesz concussion that he suffered at the World Juniors may be enough to let him slip all the way to our selection.

If I had to redo the poll today I'd go with Tukonen at 5th. Radulov is still a wildcard at this point in time. Can you justify a Top 5 selection on two games in one tournament because that is really what you would be doing. Tukonen played one game in the same tournament and everyone was salivating over his game play as well. I want the player with the physical dimension.

PhoPhan
04-09-2004, 05:38 PM
Tukonen is doing the one thing that he needs to do to justify a top 5 selection and that is finish strongly and put up points. Someone mentioned that he may even go before our selection. I guess that depends on who you think has the biggest potential to drop out of the top 4 (Ovechkin, Malkin, Barker, Olesz). Ovechkin and Malkin will be gone guaranteed. It's very likely that Barker will be gone as well. Really, Olesz concussion that he suffered at the World Juniors may be enough to let him slip all the way to our selection.

If I had to redo the poll today I'd go with Tukonen at 5th. Radulov is still a wildcard at this point in time. Can you justify a Top 5 selection on two games in one tournament because that is really what you would be doing. Tukonen played one game in the same tournament and everyone was salivating over his game play as well. I want the player with the physical dimension.

I'll stick with my choice of Tukonen.

I'm happy to say that at least one of Malkin, Olesz, Barker and Tukonen will be there at 5, and depending on the U-18's, we may end up picking none of them.

Hoot
04-09-2004, 06:08 PM
Yeah, I have added my vote for Tukonen so Stevex was right in his unwitting prediction. :)

ParisSaintGermain
04-09-2004, 07:31 PM
Tukonen had a statpadding hattrick, plus an assist, against Norway in Minsk today. Finland won 9-0. Could be that Tukonen will be better than Olesz/Barker etc. :dunno:

The difficulty here is that during this tournament in Minsk a guy like Tukonen is playing against guys from the same age and I don't expect anything else than great domination for a potential top 10 pick. This is just necessary to prove that you are one of the top 10 hockey players in the world for the guys born in 86.
Now he can finish with 15 points in this tournament but that would never mean that he could be better that Olesz who is a year older but have already two full and very decent years of professional top adult hockey league as experience.
Olesz was as well a big part of Czech republic under 20 in the WJHC in january. So for me, as on today, I would definitely take Olesz. But Tukonen has made the type of start of tournament I expected. Lets see what he can do against the big boys.

Greg
04-11-2004, 11:48 AM
The 2004 draft got stronger as the NCAA paved the way to let it's opt-in candidates retain their college eligibility. Stafford and Thelen would have probably opted in anyway, but there are some others who wanted to keep their commitment. Great job by the NCAA to address this issue.

insidecollegehockey.com website (http://www.insidecollegehockey.com/7Archives/News/optin_0232.htm)

PhoPhan
04-11-2004, 11:57 AM
Good news in general, but not really germane to the Coyotes. I didn't see them drafting any college players in the 1st round this year.

Gwyddbwyll
04-11-2004, 12:35 PM
Could have a significant effect on our 2nd round picks.

Three college guys should go in the 1st (Stafford, Thelen, O'Neill) and maybe three or four more that I know of early 2nd (Pineault, Sigalet, Hensick, Birnstill). I was worried if they all opted out of an already low quality draft, our 2nd round picks would look more like mid rounders.

Hoot
04-11-2004, 05:37 PM
Now he can finish with 15 points in this tournament but that would never mean that he could be better that Olesz who is a year older but have already two full and very decent years of professional top adult hockey league as experience.
Olesz was as well a big part of Czech republic under 20 in the WJHC in january. So for me, as on today, I would definitely take Olesz. But Tukonen has made the type of start of tournament I expected. Lets see what he can do against the big boys.

Tukonen played with the men in the Finnish top professional league this past season. As you say he is a year younger so he still has a season "extra" to grow and get more experience. Moreover the Finnish league has a higher tempo and is much more physical than the Czech league. Tukonen is a natural talent much like Pitkänen and Ruutu so if he can follow in their footsteps he could be a great young player in three years time.

I wouldn't say that Olesz is an automatic choice over Tukonen unless Olesz has recovered completely from the concussion.

PhoPhan
04-11-2004, 05:44 PM
A week or two ago, I would've said the Coyotes would be stupid to pass on Olesz. Now, I think it's a tossup between him, Tukonen and Ladd. I personally think Ladd could be the best choice, as he is a LW.

ParisSaintGermain
04-11-2004, 09:05 PM
A week or two ago, I would've said the Coyotes would be stupid to pass on Olesz. Now, I think it's a tossup between him, Tukonen and Ladd. I personally think Ladd could be the best choice, as he is a LW.

For the immediate LW needs, the management will use free agency to fix the situation. But for long term, we need more wingers, it is true.
I am not sure about Ladd, I am not convinced about his long term potential. True, he is working his socks off every shift and if it is nice to see, I am not sure about his overall hockey attributes. Being a power forward in CHL doesn't ever mean much IMO. McLeod is one of the many examples of guys who looked great and strong at junior level but who are really struggling in north america senior hockey.
Reading a couple of Ladd's interviews in the last two months, It gave me this awkward feeling that he thinks he is already a NHL all star. I know that those guys are young and fired up but in this case I was not really recognising this.
My opinion unfortunatly can't really change now as the Hitmen has been eliminated of the WHL playoffs. I may be completely wrong but I find many warning signs about Ladd.

ParisSaintGermain
04-11-2004, 09:19 PM
Moreover the Finnish league has a higher tempo and is much more physical than the Czech league.

I genuinely don't know: which of the finnish or the czech league is the tougher to play into? :dunno:
I take your point about Tukonen being younger than Olesz but following the same step in terms of senior experience. Tukonen is doing no harm to his reputation with his current performances at the u18 in Minsk.

I wouldn't say that Olesz is an automatic choice over Tukonen unless Olesz has recovered completely from the concussion.

Olesz had some good playoff games in march so I assume he recovered from his concussion. But I agree that Olesz isn't an automatic choice over Tukonen as apart from Ovechkin and partly due to Olesz and Malkin concussions, there isn't any other prospect as sure lock in draft position. It is a very opened draft.

PhoPhan
04-11-2004, 09:30 PM
For the immediate LW needs, the management will use free agency to fix the situation. But for long term, we need more wingers, it is true.
I am not sure about Ladd, I am not convinced about his long term potential. True, he is working his socks off every shift and if it is nice to see, I am not sure about his overall hockey attributes. Being a power forward in CHL doesn't ever mean much IMO. McLeod is one of the many examples of guys who looked great and strong at junior level but who are really struggling in north america senior hockey.
Reading a couple of Ladd's interviews in the last two months, It gave me this awkward feeling that he thinks he is already a NHL all star. I know that those guys are young and fired up but in this case I was not really recognising this.
My opinion unfortunatly can't really change now as the Hitmen has been eliminated of the WHL playoffs. I may be completely wrong but I find many warning signs about Ladd.

I get the complete different vibe about him. It seems like he doesn't think he is that talented a player, and has had a fluke of a year (which worries me too). That being said, I don't think you can compare him to other bust players. There have been busts at all positions and all styles of play.

Greg
04-12-2004, 01:12 AM
ontariohockey.com (http://www.ontariohockey.com/ohn/article_details.asp?League_No=482&Player_No=242643&Team_No=15879)

This article was done last October, thought it was interesting reading the profiles of what some scouts were thinking then:

Schremp: Schremp’s decision to bolt from the IceDogs Oct. 29th can be best described as precarious. Wisely, for all parties, this situation came to a quick resolution with his trade to the London Knights. He is a phenomenal offensive wizard with elite skills and vision.

Olesz: A very talented highly skilled player, who has had the scouting community buzzing since he played 11 games in the Czech Elite League as a 15-year old. A future power forward who can play the game at top speed and has explosive speed. A real team leader type, he doesn’t take shifts off and plays with lots of heart. Plays a rugged style of game and is very aware defensively.

Wolski: Wolski has been slotted 6th overall by ISS at the start of this season but the gap between him and the No. 2 spot is pretty slim. Has the size and skills to be a complete player. A very good skater with short, fast strides along with great agility and acceleration. He possesses great hands in close and has a real nose for the net. An offensive threat every time he’s on the ice. He already has a pro shot that’s hard and accurate.

Barker: Blue chip potential. He has the potential to be a “top two” NHL defenseman. He will be expected to continue to build on his strong play from last season, not only defensively but also offensively. Strong skater, very physical, good transition game. Makes a good first pass and can carry the puck out of the defensive zone. Shuts down his man and finishes his checks. He’s a difficult guy to play against.

Tukonen: Terrific skater with lots of explosiveness for a big man, and is very hard to knock off the puck. Blessed with a massive frame, Tukonen likes to be physically challenged and is a punishing hitter who has no trouble handling the rough stuff. Also highly skilled, he is a shifty puckhandler with a lethal shot and solid passing skills. One of his main assets is his good hockey sense and vision.

Greg
04-12-2004, 01:16 AM
Slam! - McKEEN'S TOP 15 RANKINGS (http://www.cfl.ca/HockeyNHLDraft/top15.html)
1 Alexander Ovechkin RW Dynamo Moscow (Rus) 6-2/200 Russia
2 Evgeni Malkin C Magnitogorsk (Rus) 6-3/205 Russia
3 Rostislav Olesz C Vitkovice (Cze) 6-1/200 Czech
4 Cam Barker D Medicine Hat (WHL) 6-3/210 Canada
5 Andrew Ladd LW Calgary (WHL) 6-2/210 Canada
6 Marek Schwarz G Sparta Praha (Cze) 6-0/175 Czech
7 Rob Schremp C London (OHL) 5-11/200 USA
8 Wojtek Wolski LW Brampton (OHL) 6-3/200 Canada
9 Lauri Tukonen RW Espoo Blues (Fin) 6-2/200 Finland
10 Alvaro Montoya G Michigan (CCHA) 6-2/190 USA
11 A.J. Thelen D Michigan State (CCHA) 6-3/210 USA
12 Alexandre Picard LW Lewiston (QMJHL) 6-2/190 Canada
13 Wes O'Neill D Notre Dame (CCHA) 6-4/215 Canada
14 Drew Stafford C North Dakota (WCHA) 6-2/200 USA
15 Alexander Radulov RW Tver (Rus 2) 6-1/175 Russia

XX
04-12-2004, 01:32 AM
Schremp
Olesz
Wolski
Barker
Tukonen

Since we will end up with one of these guys, anyone want to take a stab at comparing them to current NHLers? I know the Schremp = Comrie comparison has been made but what about the others?

Hoot
04-12-2004, 02:25 AM
I said earlier that Tukonen reminds me a bit of Hossa.

Dan
04-14-2004, 11:51 AM
Just making sure everyone saw this......

Question – What is the concept behind the NHL’s Draft Lottery, which was held on Tuesday, April 6.

Laurence Gilman – The NHL’s Draft Lottery is a system in which all non-playoffs teams have a chance to move up in the draft order. The bottom five teams in the NHL standings during the regular season have the chance to move up and earn the top overall pick in the Entry Draft. The Coyotes finished 26th overall this season, so as part of the draft lottery, we had an 8.1% chance of earning the first overall pick in the 2004 Entry Draft. The Pittsburgh Penguins, who finished 30th overall in the standings this season, had the highest percentage of earning the first pick at 25.0%.

With that said, it would obviously be nice to move all the way up to the number one spot for the 2004 draft, but at the same time we are guaranteed a very high first round selection. At the same time, we also have three selections in the second round, compared to last season when we didn’t have a pick until the third round. Speaking with Vaughn Karpan, who is our director of amateur scouting, we feel really good about this year’s draft. We are going to have the highest first round selection this franchise has had in 10 years and we are going to select, what we believe, will be an impact player.
phoenixcoyotes.com (http://www.phoenixcoyotes.com/news/story_details.php?op=details&ID=3116)

ducky
04-18-2004, 02:27 PM
latest rankings by McKeens from canoe.ca ...noteworthy is where Ladd is...and Radulov!

2004 NHL ENTRY DRAFT - McKEEN'S TOP 15 RANKINGS


Rank Player Pos Team Ht/Wt Born
1 Alexander Ovechkin RW Dynamo Moscow (Rus) 6-2/200 Russia
2 Evgeni Malkin C Magnitogorsk (Rus) 6-3/205 Russia
3 Rostislav Olesz C Vitkovice (Cze) 6-1/200 Czech
4 Cam Barker D Medicine Hat (WHL) 6-3/210 Canada
5 Andrew Ladd LW Calgary (WHL) 6-2/210 Canada
6 Marek Schwarz G Sparta Praha (Cze) 6-0/175 Czech
7 Lauri Tukonen RW Espoo Blues (Fin) 6-2/200 Finland
8 A.J. Thelen D Michigan State (CCHA) 6-3/210 USA
9 Alexander Radulov RW Tver (Rus 2) 6-1/175 Russia
10 Alvaro Montoya G Michigan (CCHA) 6-2/190 USA
11 Rob Schremp C London (OHL)( 5-11/200 USA
12 Wojtek Wolski LW Brampton (OHL) 6-3/200 Canada
13 Alexandre Picard LW Lewiston (QMJHL) 6-2/190 Canada
14 Drew Stafford C North Dakota (WCHA) 6-2/200 USA
15 Wes O'Neill D Notre Dame (CCHA) 6-4/215 Canada

hbk
04-18-2004, 06:21 PM
I said earlier that Tukonen reminds me a bit of Hossa.

The more reading I do the more it comes down to Tukonen, Stafford, and Ladd. I've soured on Radulov to some extent due to what I've read regarding his work ethic. I really think we need size and skill and whichever prospect offers the best combination should be our guy.

Edit - of course now I've just finished reading another article indicating that Radulov may go top 3 with comparisons to Mogilny. Too many small snippets and not enough true scouting reports in my mind to get a good feel on who to take at number 5. Just seem to be going around in circles.

Gwyddbwyll
04-18-2004, 07:06 PM
Im just hoping one of Olesz or Barker falls just one spot. Then its an easy decision.

Im favoring Tukonen slightly but Ladd, Radulov, Wolski, Thelen all seem good possibilities too. The one thing Ive decided (as I suspect most of the board has) is I dont want the Coyotes to pick Schremp.

ParisSaintGermain
04-18-2004, 07:54 PM
Im just hoping one of Olesz or Barker falls just one spot. Then its an easy decision.

Im favoring Tukonen slightly but Ladd, Radulov, Wolski, Thelen all seem good possibilities too. The one thing Ive decided (as I suspect most of the board has) is I dont want the Coyotes to pick Schremp.

I totally agree. I don't want Schremp. And I would try to get Olesz even if it is costly and means moving up. One of my worry is that Olesz be available at fifth pick but we go for Wolski or Schremp.

Dan
04-27-2004, 01:33 PM
Red flag on Schremp (http://www.canoe.ca/Slam040427/chl_lon2-sun.html)
I guess the questions are; 1) Is he so one-dimensional that he is considered a liability? or 2) Is he being wronged by a coach that does not give him a chance?

Gwyddbwyll
04-27-2004, 02:37 PM
Ironic to see the Ice Dogs in the final and Schremp sitting at home.

prärievarg
04-27-2004, 05:43 PM
I am all for not drafting Schremp although i do like Andrew Ladd.
It seems like nobody likes Schremp. Would it be possible if everyone passed him and Schremp fell to us in the 2nd round?

PhoPhan
04-27-2004, 05:57 PM
It seems like nobody likes Schremp. Would it be possible if everyone passed him and Schremp fell to us in the 2nd round?

I've been thinking about that. It had always seemed possible for someone like Sindel or Lisin to fall to us at 35, but its seeming more and more plausible that someone like Schremp or Wolski could fall to the 35th.

Gwyddbwyll
04-27-2004, 06:07 PM
I really doubt it.. there's not a lot of talent and a severe drop off as you approach the middle of the 1st round. O'Sullivan had a lot bigger problems than Schremp and in one of the deepest drafts ever he still only fell to about the 45th pick. Schremp and Wolski are the most talented two North American forwards with the biggest hype.. after all they were the stars of the all-star prospects game.

XX
04-27-2004, 06:20 PM
Minny will definately take one of the two, and Im sure if Schremp falls low enough we can trade for a late 1st rounder. Might as well go for the home run, if it doesnt work out oh well.

hbk
04-27-2004, 07:20 PM
Red flag on Schremp (http://www.canoe.ca/Slam040427/chl_lon2-sun.html)
I guess the questions are; 1) Is he so one-dimensional that he is considered a liability? or 2) Is he being wronged by a coach that does not give him a chance?


I think Schremp will free fall on draft day into the teens a la Josh Holden in 1996. The timing of this incident is absolutely horrible for Schremp. I can't see Phoenix using their first rounder on him. We're an organization that has focused tremendously on size in our selections under Gretzky (who took a more hands on approach because he wasn't happy with the development of Sjostrom in his first year in the WHL). I think we'll shy away from prospects who have been concussed given the lack of success with Kolanos's development. I suspect Tukonen will be the man.

prärievarg
04-28-2004, 04:14 PM
I think Schremp will free fall on draft day into the teens a la Josh Holden in 1996. The timing of this incident is absolutely horrible for Schremp. I can't see Phoenix using their first rounder on him. We're an organization that has focused tremendously on size in our selections under Gretzky (who took a more hands on approach because he wasn't happy with the development of Sjostrom in his first year in the WHL). I think we'll shy away from prospects who have been concussed given the lack of success with Kolanos's development. I suspect Tukonen will be the man.
I hope your right, Tukonen sounds awesome from what I have read. But I still have a feeling that Radulov will be huge.

hbk
04-28-2004, 06:46 PM
I hope your right, Tukonen sounds awesome from what I have read. But I still have a feeling that Radulov will be huge.


A decade ago, I likely would have agreed with you. Don't get me wrong, Radulov has incredible upside but so did a lot of other prospects (ie Volchenkov and Svejkovsky in 96, Novoseltsev) with similar offensive upside who couldn't adapt to the NHL game in that role. There are questions of character with Radulov and that strikes concerns of his willingness to put in the effort to become a dominant player in the NHL. True, he could be a forty or fifty goal guy. He could also never play in the NHL. A true high risk/high reward type guy. Again, I trust Draper and co.'s scouting team better than my forecasting at this point.

PhoPhan
04-28-2004, 07:31 PM
A decade ago, I likely would have agreed with you. Don't get me wrong, Radulov has incredible upside but so did a lot of other prospects (ie Volchenkov and Svejkovsky in 96, Novoseltsev) with similar offensive upside who couldn't adapt to the NHL game in that role. There are questions of character with Radulov and that strikes concerns of his willingness to put in the effort to become a dominant player in the NHL. True, he could be a forty or fifty goal guy. He could also never play in the NHL. A true high risk/high reward type guy. Again, I trust Draper and co.'s scouting team better than my forecasting at this point.

Ugh....Jaroslav Svejkovsky...I wish I had forgotten him.

Dan
05-12-2004, 03:26 PM
Final Central Scouting rankings released:

Top NA skaters:
1 Ladd
2 Barker
3 Picard
4 Chipchura
5 Wolski
6 Valabik
7 Stafford
8 Bolland
9 Green
10 Schremp

Top Euro skaters:
1 Ovechkin
2 Malkin
3 Olesz
4 Smid
5 Tukonen
6 Meszaros
7 Fransson
8 Alexandrov
9 Radulov
10 Nokelainen

http://centralscouting.nhl.com/

ParisSaintGermain
05-12-2004, 03:32 PM
Pocket size Alexandrov before Radulov, this is a big surprise to me.

Gwyddbwyll
05-12-2004, 03:37 PM
Alexandrov is back!? Didnt he take a big slide (like McGrath and Monych) Ladd all the way to the top.. impressive for someone undrafted out of bantams. Picard moving ahead of Wolski.

Saw on the forums a new prospect service - Young Guns hockey:
May's Top 15
1. A Ovechkin
2. E Malkin
3. A Montoya
4. A Radulov
5. D Stafford
6. L Tukonen
7. C Barker
8. AJ Thelen
9. A Picard
10. R Olesz
11. R Schremp
12. A Ladd
13. C Schneider
14. M Schwarz
15. K Chipchura

It has interesting original profiles and shows how widely opinions are differing.
http://younggunshockey.com/about.htm

Greg
05-13-2004, 09:56 AM
Rare Dave Draper quote:

Dave Draper, director of scouting for the Phoenix Coyotes, still rates Ovechkin the top prospect, but agrees that Malkin is "getting better and better."

Draper saw Malkin at the World Under-18 tournament and at the World Junior Championships.

"He just shows you more things every time out," Draper said yesterday. "Against a good U.S. team (in the Under-18 title game), he was very physical."

Draper also said that while Malkin doesn't have breakaway speed, he is a deceptively fast skater who is quick out of the corners and can fire the puck on the move.

source (http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/tribune-review/sports/s_193851.html)

Dan
05-25-2004, 04:01 PM
From a thread on the prospects board, the Hockey News Draft Preview is out. Draftman lists some rankings:

4- Tukonen
6- Schwartz
10- Schremp
11- Smid
12- Meszaros
15- Thelen
17- Dubnyk
19- Wolski
32- Green
80-Hedman

ducky
05-30-2004, 12:23 AM
from Mizrals annual draft preview on the mock board...of interest are a copule LW

Name: Andrew LaddPosition: Left Wing
Height: 6'2
Weight: 210
Birthdate: December 12th, 1985
Shoots: Left
Born: Maple Ridge B.C., Canada

Team: Calgary Hitmen
Year GP G A PTS +/- PIM
2003-04 71 30 45 75 +39 119

Ladd is a power forward who can do more than just hit and score. Ladd hits can sound like thunder crackling through the arena as he nails defenders on the forecheck, and his elite playmaking and vision translates into a potential NHL superstar. However, what perhaps is the most impressive thing about Ladd is his skating. A tremendous first step, very quick acceleration, and strong top speed gives Ladd not only the size to make huge hits, but the speed to give those hits the velocity that really makes players feel it. He is very good at understanding where he needs to go on the ice, and loves to drive the net. His overall commitment to the game is exceptional, and he truly loves to play hockey.

Flaws: When he hits, it's great, but you wish he would be even more physical. His shot lacks a snap that could take him to the next level. Play away from the puck could use some work.

NHL Potential: 1st line power forward
Player Comparisons: Bill Guerin

----------------
Name: Alexandre PicardPosition: LW
Height: 6'2
Weight: 190
Birthdate: October 9th, 1985
Shoots: Left
Born: Les Saules Que., Canada

Team: Lewiston (QMJHL)
Year GP G A PTS +/- PIM
2003-04 69 39 41 80 +4 88

Picard is just a pure unadulterated offensive player with a never-say-die attitude on the ice. Great shot and positioning makes Alexandre a great goal scorer, but Picard is not unfamiliar with physical play. While not a hitter, Picard uses his size and hard work to out-battle players all over the ice for loose pucks, or use his size to fend off attackers while getting into better scoring areas. Nicknamed 'Igor' by some fans due to the strange hunched-over way Picard skates on the ice, he can still get from point A to point B very fast. Proven himself to be a clutch scorer when his team needed him.

Flaws: Really bad defensively, cheats sometimes but this can be taught. I didn't think he was half the playmaker as he was a shooter.

NHL Potential: 1st line winger
Player Comparison: Patrick Marleau

-----------------

ducky
05-30-2004, 10:19 PM
from the New York Gazette:

Ovechkin is ticketed for the Capitals and the Penguins appear to be a near-lock to take Russian center Evgenii Malkin second. Although the outlook blurs considerably after that, Phoenix seems to have targeted University of Michgan goalie Al Montoya as its first-rounder.

Very interesting...

Greg
05-30-2004, 10:23 PM
from the New York Gazette:
Very interesting...
More like sickening. Hopefully it's just talk.

ParisSaintGermain
05-30-2004, 10:49 PM
More like sickening. Hopefully it's just talk.

Lets hope so!!

hbk
05-31-2004, 08:29 AM
well, iot's been awhile since I last posted. I can't really go into details but I just filed for divorce so this isn't the happiest of times in my household.

Onto the post. If Phoenix feels that highly about taking a goalie with the 5th overall pick then there must be a very good reason - ie that the player selected will be a sure fire franchise goaltender in the upper echelon of goaltenders such as Luongo or Brodeur. Behind LeNeveu, our depth is non-existent and there are still question marks about how good LeNeveu will actually be at the NHL level. He's certainly not a lock for superstar status at this point in time but I for one am very impressed with the stats he's put up since he was boo'd by yours truly at the 2002 Entry Draft. I have to admit though, there is nothing more depressing than the thought of selecting a goalie in the first round. It is definately not the "sexy" pick; however, it could be the right one for the future of the franchise.

ParisSaintGermain
05-31-2004, 08:40 AM
well, iot's been awhile since I last posted. I can't really go into details but I just filed for divorce so this isn't the happiest of times in my household.


Sorry to read this, HBK. :(
Hope things get better for you soon. Take care.

RangerBoy
05-31-2004, 09:06 AM
from the New York Gazette:



Very interesting...


PITTSBURGH POST GAZETTE had the Al Montoya to Phoenix at #5

There is no New York Gazette

http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/04151/324354.stm

Scroll down to the bottom of the article

andimgone
05-31-2004, 09:35 AM
Sure, it's nice to have more than one future starting goalie, but I don't think Montoya is really worth the 5th overall pick. I would go with a goalie with one of the 2nd round picks.

The way I sort of see it.
5th overall - Winger (hopefully Ladd)
35th - Winger
52nd & 53rd - Defenseman & Goalie

PhoPhan
05-31-2004, 10:52 AM
I personally feel that Montoya would be a bad pick for the Coyotes at #5.
First of all, not only do I feel that Schwarz is better than Alvaro Montoya, I also feel that guys like Schneider and Dubnyk are similar in talent level with Montoya.

Secondly, while there is no depth behind LeNeveu, at least we have LeNeveu. At forward, we have no top flight talent. We can gather depth in the later rounds, but upsides of the Radulovs, Tukonens, et. al. won't be available too long.

ducky
05-31-2004, 11:11 AM
PITTSBURGH POST GAZETTE had the Al Montoya to Phoenix at #5

:blush:

Oops.

Read it on the Rangers board...and made a quick assumption.

My bad.

Matzel
05-31-2004, 07:49 PM
well, iot's been awhile since I last posted. I can't really go into details but I just filed for divorce so this isn't the happiest of times in my household.


Sorry to hear, bro. Keep your stick on the ice and your head up...

Dancin' Gabe rules! :gman:

Dan
06-22-2004, 03:36 PM
Hockey News Second Round Mock Draft

link (http://www.forecaster.ca/hockeynews/hockey/extras.cgi?2004NHLDraft-MockDraft1)

31. Pittsburgh: Enver Lisin, RW, Dynamo Moscow 2 (Russia 2)
32. Chicago: Roman Voloshenko, LW, Krylja Sovetov (Russia 1)
33. Washington: Johan Fransson, D, Lulea HF (Sweden)
34. Dallas (from Columbus): Travis Zajac, C, Salmon Arm (BCHL)
35. Phoenix: David Shantz, G, Mississauga IceDogs (OHL)
36. NY Rangers: Jakub Sindel, C/RW, Sparta Praha (Czech Republic)
37. NY Rangers (from Florida via Colorado): Lukas Kaspar, RW, HC Litvinov (Czech Republic)
38. Carolina: Sami Lepisto, D, Jokerit Helsinki (Finland)
39. Anaheim: Tim Brent, C/RW, Toronto St. Michael's Majors (OHL)
40. Atlanta: Sergei Ogorodnikov, C, THK Tver (Russia 1)
41. Chicago (from L.A. via Philadelphia): Mark Fistric, D, Vancouver Giants (WHL)
42. Minnesota: Oscar Hedman, D, MoDo Hockey (Sweden)
43. Buffalo: Carl Soderberg, C/W, MIF Redhawks Malmo (Sweden)
44. Edmonton: Viktor Alexandrov, C, Metallurg Novokuznetsk (Russia)
45. Chicago (from Nashville): Ryan Garlock, C, Windsor Spitfires (OHL)
46. NY Rangers: Brett Carson, D, Calgary Hitmen (WHL)
47. NY Islanders: Aki Seitsonen, C, Prince Albert Raiders (WHL)
48. NY Rangers (from Edmonton): Nick Fugere, LW, Gatineau Olympiques (QMJHL)
49. St. Louis: Martins Karsums, RW, Moncton Wildcats (QMJHL)
50. Florida (from Dallas): David Booth, LW, Michigan State University (CCHA)
51. NY Rangers (from Montreal): Roman Tesliuk, D, Kamloops Blazers (WHL)
52. San Jose: Grant Lewis, D, Dartmouth College (ECAC)
53. Florida (from Calgary): Andy Rogers, D, Calgary Hitmen (WHL)
54. Chicago (from Dallas): Ryan Callahan, RW, Guelph Storm (OHL)
55. Colorado: Mikhail Yunkov, C, Krylja Sovetov (Russia 1)
56. Dallas: Kris Chucko, LW, Salmon Arm (BCHL)
57. Phoenix (from New Jersey): Juraj Gracik, RW, VTJ Topolcalny (Slovakia 1)
58. Ottawa: Kyle Wharton, D, Ottawa 67's (OHL)
59. Carolina (from Toronto): Vaclav Meidl, C, Plymouth Whalers (OHL)
60. Phoenix (from Philadelphia): Alexei Yemelin, D, CSK VVS Samara (Russia 1)
61. Pittsburgh (from Vancouver): Adam Pineault, RW, Boston College (Hockey East)
62. Washington (from Boston): Adam Berti, LW, Oshawa Generals (OHL)
63. San Jose: Chad Painchaud, LW, Mississauga IceDogs (OHL)
64. Boston (from Detroit via L.A.): Zdenek Bahensky, RW, HC Litvinov jr. (Czech Republic jr.)
65. Tampa Bay: Bryan Bickell, LW, Ottawa 67's (OHL)

Boomhower
06-23-2004, 04:54 PM
Deals Anticipated at the Draft (http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/news_story.asp?id=88690)
-From TSN, via the Canadian Press

The Phoenix Coyotes, drafting fifth overall, are among a number of clubs who have made the obligatory phone call to at least kick the tires.

"It obviously makes sense to see what the price is to try to move up,'' Coyotes GM Mike Barnett said Wednesday while en route to Raleigh. "But I don't really harbour any optimism that a deal will be consummated.

"The asking price has been too high so far. But it's still early in the week. The top two teams are surely getting bombarded with phone calls.''

Obviously Phoenix have made inquires about Malkin and Ovechkin. Barnett does indicate the prices are too high, but the "so far" means he's probably not ready to give up yet.

FROM ARTICLE:

Unless the Coyotes can move up, Barnett says his team will stick with its No. 5 pick.

"I'd be very surprised to see us move down because we really like the guys ranked where we are,'' Barnett said

A couple 'Yotes tidbits for ya anyways...

Dan
06-24-2004, 09:03 AM
AZ Republic - Coyotes Shopping list (http://www.azcentral.com/sports/coyotes/0624coyoteslist.html)
David Vest
The Arizona Republic
June 24, 2004

Editor's note: Barring a trade, the Coyotes will pick fifth in the first round of Saturday's draft. Russians Alexander Ovechkin and Evgeni Malkin are widely expected to be the first and second picks, respectively. Here are profiles of other top players who may be available when the Coyotes make their pick.

Lauri Tukonen, RW
Vitals: 6-foot-2, 198 pounds, born Sept. 1, 1986, shoots right.
Hometown: Hyvinkaa, Finland.
2003-04 team/league: Blues Espoo/Fin League.
2003-04 stats: Three goals, three assists, 16 penalty minutes in 35 games.
The rep: Powerful forward with solid puck-possession skills who put up respectable stats playing against older competitors.
Coyotes GM Mike Barnett says: "He reminds me of Shane Doan - a big, bulky, power forward. With Alexander Ovechkin, probably the best goal scorer in the draft . . . He's not an extraordinarily quick skater, but he's fast enough that he gets to the puck and, most importantly, knows where to go. He has really good hockey sense."
Coyotes Director of Amateur Scouting Vaughn Karpan says: "He's a hard-working kid with quick hands, a very good release, and a game better suited for North America than Europe. He plays well in traffic and has a physical element to his game."

Alvaro Montoya, G
Vitals: 6-1, 190, born Feb. 13, 1985, catches left.
Hometown: Chicago.
2003-04 team/league: Univ. of Michigan/Central Collegiate Hockey Association.
2003-04 stats: As a sophomore, went 26-12-2 with a 2.27 goals-against average and five shutouts.
The rep: Technically sound, durable and aggressive goalie who is poised to become the first Cuban-American in the NHL. His stock went way up after he led the U.S. team to its first gold medal at the World Junior Championships.
Barnett says: "He's had great experience playing in a high-profile, pressured environment where the expectations of the goaltender are always high. Beating Canada at the world championships was no small accomplishment . . . He handled the pressure and made the saves and emanated confidence in every game of that tournament."

Cameron Barker, D
Vitals: 6-3, 214, born April 4, 1986, shoots left.
Hometown: Winnipeg, Manitoba.
2003-04 team/league: Medicine Hat/Western Hockey League.
2003-04 stats: 21 goals, 44 assists, 105 penalty minutes in 69 games.
The rep: Big, offensive-minded blueliner who skates well, shoots hard and excels at running the power play.
Barnett says: "When everyone around him is losing their mind, he is poised and confident and making the right decisions. Gambling is not in his repertoire . . . His decision-making when he gains possession of the puck - on who to go to and when to make the pass - is already at an NHL level."
Karpan says: "He's probably the most skilled defenseman in this draft in terms of patience and poise."

Marek Schwarz, G
Vitals: 6-0, 180, born April 1, 1986, catches right.
Hometown: Mlada Boleslav, Czech Republic.
2003-04 team/league: Trinec-Plzen/Czech League.
2003-04 stats: Posted a 7-11-2 record and a 2.83 goals-against average. His GAA was 1.93 at a world under-18 tournament last summer.
The rep: Scouts love his athleticism and the way he sees the ice and makes quick decisions.
Barnett says: "If you saw him in street clothes you would think he could be an athlete in six or seven different sports. He uses his strength well. He recovers tremendously. He gets down and back up like a pro."

Andrew Ladd, LW
Vitals: 6-2, 200, born Dec. 12, 1985, shoots left.
Hometown: Maple Ridge, British Columbia.
2003-04 team/league: Calgary/Western Hockey League.
2003-04 stats: 30 goals, 45 assists, 119 penalty minutes in 71 games.
The rep: Ladd exceeded expectations by leading WHL rookies in scoring. He also turned heads with solid play along the boards and in the corners.
Barnett says: "He has great hockey sense and passes the puck extremely well from his forehand and his backhand, and has terrific accuracy on his shot."
Karpan says: "He's an intelligent two-way player who rarely makes a poor play."

Rotislav Olesz, C
Vitals: 6-1, 202, born Oct. 10, 1985, shoots left.
Hometown: Ostrava, Czech Republic.
2003-04 team/league: HC Vitkovice/Czech League.
2003-04 stats: One goal, 11 assists, 10 penalty minutes in 35 games.
The rep: A big player with a knack for doing the little things.
Barnett says: "I'm not sure if he'll be a big goal scorer, but he's certainly a player who is mature beyond his years and very focused and intelligent."
Karpan says: "He could step in and play (in the NHL) next season."

Dan
06-25-2004, 09:08 AM
Vaughn Karpan and Dave Draper do a tremendous job leading the draft and they have shown in the past they are not afraid to take a gamble and have it pay off in the long run. Don’t be surprised if we have a couple of picks that seem to come out of nowhere, but remember we are well prepared and we have a plan. We are not pulling names out of a hat, we will pick guys because we fell we know something about them that makes them a solid draft pick.
Interview with Michael Barnett (http://www.phoenixcoyotes.com/news/story_details.php?op=details&ID=3520&SectionID=11)

PhoPhan
06-25-2004, 12:48 PM
Vaughn Karpan and Dave Draper do a tremendous job leading the draft and they have shown in the past they are not afraid to take a gamble and have it pay off in the long run. Don’t be surprised if we have a couple of picks that seem to come out of nowhere, but remember we are well prepared and we have a plan. We are not pulling names out of a hat, we will pick guys because we fell we know something about them that makes them a solid draft pick.
Interview with Michael Barnett (http://www.phoenixcoyotes.com/news/story_details.php?op=details&ID=3520&SectionID=11)
*crosses fingers for Radulov*

ParisSaintGermain
06-25-2004, 02:07 PM
*crosses fingers for Radulov*

Radulov hasn't been mentioned publicly during any of the management or scout interviews. Is this a plan? I doubt it but....

Hoot
06-25-2004, 03:21 PM
I'm a bit surprised at the Tukonen/Doan comparison. Tukonen is a far better skater and has much better hands than Doan but Doan has the edge in physical play.

XX
06-25-2004, 04:01 PM
Drapers last gamble was LeNeveu and I think we can all agree that we won that one. Tukonen - Westrum - Sjostrom would be an awesome energy line. There will definately be some trades, and I wouldnt be suprised if the Coyotes made every effort to draft a top 5 forward and one of Montoya or Schwarz. Their stock seems to have risen to where the teams 6-12 will take them, and I dont think Kolanos + the 35th would get us that high. Perhaps they will trade for a mid first and grab a Dman like Thelen?

I dont like the "out of nowhere thing," like if they took Wolski with the 5th pick.

Matzel
06-26-2004, 12:54 PM
Wheeler at 5th? WTF?

Why didn't Barnett trade down? That's poor asset management in my opinion.

I can't believe they didn't take Lauri Tukonen... :shakehead

Dancin' Gabe rules!

CoyoteBaloney
06-26-2004, 01:14 PM
Coyotes want bigger, solid skating player. Tukonen's skating ability has been questioned.

Still it was a very crappy pick. The Coyotes could have traded a package using Kolanos and their best 2nd rounder for the 20th-25th pick overall and they would have taken Wheeler with that pick.

kosir
06-26-2004, 01:24 PM
WOW... Huge Surprise... Who one expected this choice :help: ???

It looks, that Coyotes must be always something (draft) extra :eek: I know nothing about this high-school sniper. Maybe Mike Barnett was watching him during his Keith Ballard´s visit in Minesotta :teach: Golden Gophers can help him next year, but i still dont understand this choice, perhaps Coyotes´scouts knows what they do :yo:

glenjackson
06-26-2004, 01:47 PM
Coyotes want bigger, solid skating player. Tukonen's skating ability has been questioned.

Still it was a very crappy pick. The Coyotes could have traded a package using Kolanos and their best 2nd rounder for the 20th-25th pick overall and they would have taken Wheeler with that pick.

Good point. I wonder if they did try to trade down but couldn't work a deal out in time. Very surprising pick. Thought he'd go late first round at best.

Sinurgy
06-26-2004, 03:15 PM
ESPN Announcer: "Every year there is that one pick in the first round that comes out of nowhere, with me now is Coyotes GM Mike Barnett." :shakehead

So what does everyone think about the Coyotes 1st round pick?

XX
06-26-2004, 03:36 PM
I dont have a problem with Wheeler, I have a problem with the fact they used the 5th on him.

There were perhaps 10 teams who would have loved to have the #5 spot, and we could have picked up a late first and another 2nd rounder or something and still gotten our guy. Its utter BS and management knows it, they deserve all the smacktalk they are going to recieve. I have a funny feeling that NJ would have drafted him as well, management obviously knows something we dont and has seen something in Blake to warrant their decision. Either that or their ****ing nuts, but with Draper im going to hold my tounge and wait. Hopefulyl in 5 years we can look back and say what fools we were for doubting the pick.

andimgone
06-27-2004, 10:04 AM
So far the Coyotes are trying to hit home-runs with almost every pick.... not the best strategy, but in a weak draft, it's not that bad of an idea.

Wheeler - off the board. Is the youngest player drafted, and was only 16 days from being in the 2005 draft. Still needs to finish high school, and at least a couple of college years. Seems to have a big upside - good skater, good size, and plays aggressive. Was a stretch for the 5th overall pick, but can still become a solid player.

Stephenson - another pick gone higher than he's suppose to. Can log good minutes, and plays a very physical game. His hockey sense is questionable, and has no offensive upside. Looks like another Matthew Spiller, who has yet to make an impact.

Lisin - good pick. Has great speed and finishing skills.... but doesn't like to pass the puck, and his work ethic is reported to be that of a sloth. Boom or bust it seems.

Tomanek - good pick, but is similar to that of Lisin. Very good offensive skills, but lacks desire to improve himself.

Interesting draft.......O_o

andimgone
06-27-2004, 10:19 AM
Since I'm searching for anything about players taken with the later picks.... I found the roster for Kevin Cormier's team in Moncton. Look at Cormier's height/weight.

http://radicalsurgery.ca/hockeyscene/MJAHL/mjahl_beavers_0304.html

:eek:

Not bad for an 18 year old.

Gwyddbwyll
06-27-2004, 11:44 AM
Looks like a goon pick? Bit of a throwaway I feel.

Full draft: nine forwards and one defenseman.

Blake Wheeler
Logan Stephenson
Enver Lisin
Roman Tomanek
Kevin Porter
Kevin Cormier
Chad Kolarik
Aaron Gagnon
Will Engasser
Daniel Winnik

Tomanek really blew out of nowhere in the tourney. Intriguing pick. I like the program that Kolarik and Porter come from. I kinda think the Gagnon and Cormier picks were wasted ones...

andimgone
06-27-2004, 12:11 PM
Blake Wheeler (RW) Breck High school, MIN
Logan Stephenson (D) Tri-City, WHL
Enver Lisin (RW) Saratov, Russia
Roman Tomanek (RW) Povaska Bystrica Slovakia
Kevin Porter (C/LW) US National U-18, USA
Kevin Cormier (F) Moncton Jr. A, MJAHL
Chad Kolarik (C) US National U-18, USA
Aaron Gagnon (C) Seattle, WHL
Will Engasser (LW) Blake High School, MIN
Daniel Winnik (C/LW) University of New Hampshire, NCAA

O_o

Somebody likes the American hockey program.

ttnorm
06-27-2004, 12:55 PM
Wheeler's high school (Breck) played Engasser's high school (Blake) 3 times this year so they are familiar with each other. Breck was 2-0-1 v. Blake (Blake had only 3 losses). In those games Wheeler had a line of 3g 2a and Engasser had a line of 3 g 0a.

Blake's schedule (http://www.mshsl.org/mshsl/schoolactpage.asp?actnum=410&school=53)

BTW, Engasser like Wheeler, was also a terrific HS football player and was recruited by D1 colleges (I heard Stanford among others).

Matzel
06-27-2004, 09:08 PM
...Don’t be surprised if we have a couple of picks that seem to come out of nowhere, but remember we are well prepared and we have a plan. We are not pulling names out of a hat, we will pick guys because we fell we know something about them that makes them a solid draft pick.
Interview with Michael Barnett

*crosses fingers for Radulov*

Can you say:"Wheeler"?! ;)

Dancin' Gabe rules! :gman:

chuckie
07-01-2004, 07:36 PM
from the forecaster.ca.......................the worst grade in the entire draft

PHOENIX COYOTES
The Good: The Coyotes addressed long-term scoring potential needs with the additions of forwards Blake Wheeler (No. 5 overall), Enver Lisin (50th overall), Roman Tomanek (103rd overall), Kevin Porter (119th overall) and Chad Kolarik (199th overall).
The Bad: Wheeler was a reach of mega proportions, considering most observers had the U.S. high-school right wing going late in Round 1--or possibly even early in the second round. Also, rugged rearguard (35th overall) Logan Stephenson was taken ahead of several other defenders with better all-around ability.
The Unique: Size continues to be a huge part of the Coyotes drafting philosophy. In 2004, seven of 10 draftees were 6-1 or taller--including hulking left wing Kevin Cormier (168th overall), who's a 6-3, 236-pound enforcer with minimal hockey ability.
The Grade: Despite Wheeler's long-term potential (place the stress on the word LONG), he wasn't worth the outlandish gamble as the No. 5 pick in the draft. The Coyotes could have done a lot more with their draft assets but chose to stick to their draft list. If Wheeler bombs, it will probably be GM Mike Barnett's head--among others... F

GKJ
07-01-2004, 07:40 PM
Classic example of why Wayne Gretzky isn't quite ready to be running a hockey team, because he has people who are clueless working under him....

XX
07-01-2004, 07:47 PM
Classic example of why Wayne Gretzky isn't quite ready to be running a hockey team, because he has people who are clueless working under him....

didnt philly fans want managements head after they took some stupid 2nd rounder 6th overall named Forsberg?

Good for whomever wrote that article, they can look at rankings. Someone needs to learn to read between the lines and actually research things a bit, he may have been rated a 2nd rounder coming into the draft but there were many teams who would have taken him.

Starsdude
07-01-2004, 07:59 PM
Lisin at 50 was okay. No worse than the stars

Devils Advocate
07-01-2004, 07:59 PM
Classic example of why Wayne Gretzky isn't quite ready to be running a hockey team, because he has people who are clueless working under him....

Like Cliff Fletcher & Dave Draper, not to mention a GM who has had 0 holdouts or nasty contract negotiations, and recently extended Doan thru 2007 at about 3.5MM per season.

c9orf
07-01-2004, 08:36 PM
didnt philly fans want managements head after they took some stupid 2nd rounder 6th overall named Forsberg?
Um... wha..? That comment is astonishing.

Occasionally, a second round pick ends up being spectacularly successful. This should not be interpreted to mean that the 35th ranked player is more likely to succeed than the 5th ranked player.

hbk
07-01-2004, 08:47 PM
there were a number of picks in the first round that made you stop to wonder why the team was selecting that player in that spot. it was a weak draft with a lot of uncertainty. Was it worthwhile to move back a couple of spots for a fifth round pick or so? Was it worth it to risk the player you wanted in order to get another longshot to make the NHL? Teams were very vocal about their willingness to go off the board. In 2002, the Sabres took a gamble on a player by the name of Keith Ballard who wasn't pegged as a legitimate first rounder. In 1996, the guys covering the draft laughed at the selection by Calgary by the name of Derek Morris. Who's laughing now? Ballard is pegged as a future star in the league. Morris was probably one of the three best players taken in the entire 96 draft. Yes, we gambed, but we are certainly not alone. Talk to me in five years and then we can truly determine if Phoenix management was wrong to listen to their scouts and make the selections they made.

CoyoteBaloney
07-01-2004, 09:05 PM
Here's another unflattering perspective about the Coyotes draft:

http://www.thefourthperiod.com/phx50.html

I tend to agree with them. I was expecting something closer to NHL ready then Wheeler.

GKJ
07-01-2004, 10:00 PM
didnt philly fans want managements head after they took some stupid 2nd rounder 6th overall named Forsberg?


And that management is out....


A guy who was such a reach was traded for Lindros, and Forsberg didn't want to play here. Couldn't blame him, the Flyers were in the midst of poor management, easily the low point in Flyers history.

And so what, no one holds out. Look at the trade history, look at the new arena that was built and not selling out...this isn't the first blunder.

If the Flyers truly beleived he was worth the 6th overall pick in the draft, Forsberg would still be here, regardless.

I mean, Blake Wheeler was a junior in high school. That's less then where Forsberg was at when the Flyers drafted him...

hbk
07-01-2004, 10:02 PM
The 2002 Entry Draft was by all accounts one of the worst drafts on record. How many assets have we signed from that draft? Ballard, Koreis, Kouba, Callahan, LeNeveu. Toss in Eager who received a contract and Jones who is surely expected to receive an offer. Consider that there are teams who signed maybe two players total from that draft. Our scouts did their homework and we have usable assets. Yes, we could have dealt down and selected Wheeler but the bottom line is we got the guy we wanted period. Why take the chance at losing him because we wanted a third round pick. If another team like the Isles stepped up and went off the board to take Ballard early our scouts would have been p/o'd and we would have other management issues to sort out. We got the guy our scouts wanted. like it or not, we have to trust their judgement.

XX
07-01-2004, 10:35 PM
Occasionally, a second round pick ends up being spectacularly successful. This should not be interpreted to mean that the 35th ranked player is more likely to succeed than the 5th ranked player.

The lesson is, percieved rankings arent everything. The reporter lacked to realize that the coyotes dont need "an all around defenseman" because they plenty in the system. Its just a crappy article written by someone who only saw who the coyotes drafted, and what their rankings were.

Matzel
07-01-2004, 11:31 PM
If the Flyers truly beleived he was worth the 6th overall pick in the draft, Forsberg would still be here, regardless.

Today, we know that Forsberg became a franchise player. Argueably the best allround player in the world (when healthy). However, at the time when he was drafted, management was critisized for picking him so high.

Now everybody and their dog critisizes the 'Yotes management. Draper has a proven track record for identifying talent and projecting career potential. I was really bummed watching the draft on TV and hearing Gretz announce that the dogs pick a kid I knew nothing about. After weeks of talking about the Tukonens, Ladds and Schremps I was disgusted. After a few days of research and reading the comments the scouting staff have made about Wheeler, I am feeling a lot better about the pick.

Only time will tell, I guess, whether this was a good move, or not...

Dancin' Gabe rules! :gman:

CoyoteBaloney
07-02-2004, 12:36 AM
You can still find gems in a weak draft, but the bottom line is that the Coyotes picks of Wheeler and Stephenson were done way too early for what they were projected to be. I am still trying to figure out why Wheeler was picked, but it is very clear why Stephenson was picked -- his physical attributes and not his hockey playing talent.

c9orf
07-02-2004, 01:26 AM
I am as hopeful as the next person that Wheeler turns out to be a great player. I'm happy to have him in our system. But I'm not prepared to become a management apologist - success in the draft isn't about the quality of players you get, it is about asset management.

I cannot see how ANYONE could be truly confident at this point that Wheeler will be an elite player. He is a project. So even though I think we had a 90+% chance of drafting him in the 15-20 range, failing to do so would not have been the end of the world. Getting a second round pick from someone in exchange for a drop of that magnitude should not have been difficult; in effect, we'd have gotten Lisin for free.

High draft picks are bought at a horrible price. Does anyone remember the pathetic, disasterous period from January 11th to now? During which we won SIX of FORTY-ONE games?

By squandering their opportunities, the Coyotes management drafted personnel with (apparent) potential comparable to those obtained by a team like Ottawa, despite picking much earlier. Wheeler, Stephenson, and Lisin are (by consensus) not much different from Meszaros, Lyamin, and Weller - but somehow I *suspect* that Senators' fans had a more enjoyable season than we did.

Sinurgy
07-02-2004, 02:26 AM
I have to agree with umm...Salad. I do like the guys we took and believe (for now) in the scouts ability to judge talent. However, I still think their asset management was horrible. They should've traded down and then selected Wheeler and they shouldn't have taken Stephenson so high either. Sure there is a chance, they could've had one or both picks taken out from underneith them but I don't think it was likely. They could've traded down to the 27th pick and most likely Wheeler still would've been available but I do see that as a slight gamble. So instead trade down to #15 and you've pretty much removed that gamble. True Wheeler still could get taken before then but that was highly doubtful!! So you still end up with Wheeler and most likely atleast another 2nd round pick to boot. Now like I said above, I'm not going to criticize the players we selected because I like what I've read about them thus far and I'm going to have faith they will turn into good maybe even great players but that doesn't change the likelihood we could've had them along with a few other picks to boot. It simply was not good asset management.

Example:
In my fantasy baseball league a guy took Kerry Wood with the #1 pick. Is Kerry Wood a good pitcher? Of course he is and you can't fault a guy for wanting him on his team. You'll get a great ERA, Whip, Wins and of course strikeouts. So was it stupid of him to take Kerry Wood with the #1 pick? The answer is yes (granted the answer is yes because Wood is not the best pitcher in MLB but that is irrelevant to this discussion)! Here is why...he could've drafted Arod with the #1 pick and there was about a %95 chance Wood is available when his #20 pick comes around. The rest of the players in the league do not value Kerry like he obviously did and he should've known that! He could've ended up with Arod and Kerry Wood but instead he blew his #1 pick on a guy no one would've looked at till much later in the draft. It's basic asset management. Remember it's not just who you draft, it's when you draft them! :teach:

c9orf
07-02-2004, 03:03 AM
I just realized that I made a mistake earlier. When I said "Success in the draft isn't about the quality of players you get, it is about asset management', I meant to say:

"[It] isn't about the quality of players you get, it is about asset ****ING management!"

Sorry for the (previous) lack of emphasis.

Gwyddbwyll
07-02-2004, 06:14 AM
Classic example of why Wayne Gretzky isn't quite ready to be running a hockey team, because he has people who are clueless working under him....

Do you know who Dave Draper is? I suggest you find out. By all means criticize Wayne Gretzky if you want but at least try and find out something about those "clueless" people working under him which include directors of Canadian junior hockey and former winners of the Stanley.


I cannot see how ANYONE could be truly confident at this point that Wheeler will be an elite player. He is a project. So even though I think we had a 90+% chance of drafting him in the 15-20 range, failing to do so would not have been the end of the world. Getting a second round pick from someone in exchange for a drop of that magnitude should not have been difficult; in effect, we'd have gotten Lisin for free.


By the same token I cannot see HOW you can be so confident Wheeler would have been there in 15-20. Dallas already said they wanted him at no.20. Because he was not there, they traded down twice and took a scrapper with limited but strong upside instead. That tells you a lot about the quality of the draft. What's to say they wouldnt have traded up a few picks if Wheeler was there at 15? I am pretty sure the Islanders at no.16 and Minnesota themselves at no.12 were VERY interested. Wheeler fits both of their drafting profiles absolutely perfectly.

Phoenix did actually try to move down.. they had a deal in place with New York to move down one spot. Its a shame it didnt work out. But I dont believe you can feel safe moving outside of the top 10 let alone the top 15. The "second round" comment by forecaster is out of date and has already been shown to be wrong.

Hoot
07-02-2004, 09:34 AM
The draft is the time to add quality to your organization, not a game to see who has the most or the best picks. If your team can add three outstanding impact players a year you win no matter what. Without statistical evidence I believe one (maybe two) every now and then is the norm in the NHL. Some years teams draw a blank. Getting the outstanding players into the organization is paramount. This is a different issue, but related of course, to asset managment. The ultimate purpose of asset management is to strengthen your organization but you cannot do that unless you draft well. If Karpan and Draper have read the situation correctly and Wheeler indeed will become a star player then I have no problems with this pick. But that is a huge if. I haven't seen Wheeler, of course, so this is an academic discussion for me. Who cares if some bozo has Wheeler rated somewhere around 250 or so if your assesment is the correct one. But odds are that we drafted another Ward/Berg with this pick. It is so easy to project hopes and wishful thinking onto Giant Baby picks, and so difficult to ***** their true talent level. Have they simply reached their peak long before their peers? It won't matter how long the Coyotes give Wheeler to develop unless his natural talent matches the projections.

I found Karpan's comments interesting about the Wheeler pick. He said that it was him and Draper who had to fight hard and really sell Wheeler as the # 5 pick. Management was sceptical and some scouts had the following guy rated higher and wanted to go with him. I really wonder who that guy was (my guess is Tukonen but I think we will have to wait a long time before we get to know that).

eye
07-02-2004, 10:29 AM
It's not like me to defend mgt. these days but hbk, hoot and others bring up some excellent points. I've never been a fan of lists or projections by so called experts that either never saw a player play or only saw him play once or twice. I'm sure Draper Karpan and other Yotes scouts saw Wheeler and the other high picks play at least 5 - 15 times each, hence I trust their opinion over that of Forcaster, THN, Redline or any other magazine where their writers likely never saw all the eligible players or never saw them enough to compare accurately. I have no problem with the Yotes stepping up and saying this is our man and we believe in him. If Wheeler fails to shine over the next 3-5 years then Draper Karpan and Barnett will be gone. That's the way the business goes. If he shines then kudos will be heard by all of the red faced embarrassed scouts around the league that laughed at the Yotes when they took Wheeler earlier than projected. I know for a fact that NHL central scouts do not see all draft eligible players so they go to a room and compare the players they have seen and quite often the scouts that are more vocal or louder and seem more confident get their players rated higher or lower depending on their own perspective.

hbk, let me go on record that Ballard will be marginally better than Knyazev. Of course I hope I'm wrong but that's my opinion right now and I'm sticking to it. Morris is good but not as good as his hype, and Comrie still doesn't cut it in my books as a top line C. We still have a long ways to go but you are right there are more assets today than we had 24 months ago.

Gwyddbwyll
07-02-2004, 10:29 AM
Wheeler was #4 on their board correct? My guess is Ladd was their next guy.

eye
07-02-2004, 10:34 AM
My personal choice would have been A.J. Thelen the player the Wild took. 2-3 years closer to the NHL than Wheeler and more of a sure thing. Just my thoughts.

CoyoteBaloney
07-02-2004, 01:28 PM
Do you know who Dave Draper is? I suggest you find out. By all means criticize Wayne Gretzky if you want but at least try and find out something about those "clueless" people working under him which include directors of Canadian junior hockey and former winners of the Stanley.



By the same token I cannot see HOW you can be so confident Wheeler would have been there in 15-20. Dallas already said they wanted him at no.20. Because he was not there, they traded down twice and took a scrapper with limited but strong upside instead. That tells you a lot about the quality of the draft. What's to say they wouldnt have traded up a few picks if Wheeler was there at 15? I am pretty sure the Islanders at no.16 and Minnesota themselves at no.12 were VERY interested. Wheeler fits both of their drafting profiles absolutely perfectly.

Phoenix did actually try to move down.. they had a deal in place with New York to move down one spot. Its a shame it didnt work out. But I dont believe you can feel safe moving outside of the top 10 let alone the top 15. The "second round" comment by forecaster is out of date and has already been shown to be wrong.
This post was on another message board and as far as I am concerned says it best regarding the drafting of Wheeler at #5:
Let's put the Coyotes drafting of Wheeler in legal terms. OJ Simpson was tried on the murder of Nicole Brown on a purponderance of evidence -- not physical evidence. That means that there was enough circumstantial evidence to conclude that OJ Simpson committed the murders.

The same can be said for Blake Wheeler and the position where he most likely would have been drafted. According to a purponderance of opinion based on the labeled experts of such talent, Wheeler was not projected to be picked before the 20th pick. Therefore, the Coyotes selecting Wheeler 5th overall and failing to trade down and acquire other pieces to their puzzle before selecting Wheeler 10-15 picks later showed that the Coyotes were either asking too much for other teams to move up or misjudged the market value of Wheeler.

Either reason suggests that the Coyotes entered this draft poorly prepared regardless of what kind of a player Wheeler turns out to be.

CoyoteBaloney
07-02-2004, 01:40 PM
It's not like me to defend mgt. these days but hbk, hoot and others bring up some excellent points. I've never been a fan of lists or projections by so called experts that either never saw a player play or only saw him play once or twice. I'm sure Draper Karpan and other Yotes scouts saw Wheeler and the other high picks play at least 5 - 15 times each, hence I trust their opinion over that of Forcaster, THN, Redline or any other magazine where their writers likely never saw all the eligible players or never saw them enough to compare accurately. I have no problem with the Yotes stepping up and saying this is our man and we believe in him. If Wheeler fails to shine over the next 3-5 years then Draper Karpan and Barnett will be gone. That's the way the business goes. If he shines then kudos will be heard by all of the red faced embarrassed scouts around the league that laughed at the Yotes when they took Wheeler earlier than projected. I know for a fact that NHL central scouts do not see all draft eligible players so they go to a room and compare the players they have seen and quite often the scouts that are more vocal or louder and seem more confident get their players rated higher or lower depending on their own perspective.

hbk, let me go on record that Ballard will be marginally better than Knyazev. Of course I hope I'm wrong but that's my opinion right now and I'm sticking to it. Morris is good but not as good as his hype, and Comrie still doesn't cut it in my books as a top line C. We still have a long ways to go but you are right there are more assets today than we had 24 months ago.
Yet, the problem is that the Coyotes do not have the luxery of waiting 6 years for one of their draft picks to sign his first contract. Unlike teams like Tampa Bay and half the rest of the NHL teams, the Coyotes need quality players ASAP. If the Coyotes were set on picking Wheeler they needed to trade down and acquire another asset for their team.

What really irrates me is that just 24 hours before the draft Vaughn Karpen, the Coyotes director of amatuer scouting said over a radio show that the fans can expect the Coyotes to draft a player who will make the NHL roster in 2 years just like Freddie Sjostrom. With Wheeler as their pick at #5 overall this is very unlikely.

Gwyddbwyll
07-02-2004, 06:21 PM
It is all smoke and mirrors before the actual draft. If you believe everything then the Coyotes were all set to draft Montoya. This misdirection obviously scared the Rangers, however the Coyotes tried to get even more out of the deal and lost.

Also.. the best scouts are working for the 30 teams. "Expert observers" are always behind the times. Wheeler was one of the fastest risers through the draft in the final weeks, we certainly know that much.

Hoot
07-02-2004, 06:40 PM
That Wheeler was rising after the season ended indicates that it was 'intangibles' that made him rise, not his pure hockey talent. It could be more a case of other prospects sinking if they were judged to have a not so hot personality or if they screwed up their interviews for example. In Blake's case the Coyotes seemed to have been impressed with his physical potential. We know that the Coyotes are putting a premium on physical strength, the athletic part, in their prospects. I would prefer the emphasis was on hockey sense but there you go.

Guest
07-02-2004, 10:13 PM
Much of this discussion is why I generally am not a big fan of the draft as it is now. If the Coyotes could have afforded it, I would have rather seen the pick go for a player that can contribute now just because it was a high pick in a shallow draft, and in the case of Wheeler, we won't be seeing him anytime soon.

At some point you have to develop your own players, but considering how many top notch players go late in the draft, it's far from a science.

I'd like to see the draft age raised, so that the players have shown more of their calibre. Maybe something like raising the draft age to 19 or 20, it would make a little bit of a difference, because in just one year players can go sky high or hit rock bottom, and by the time they are 19 or 20, they have played against better competition than prior to that. When you consider how many 18 or 19 year olds make it to the NHL, it would have a minimal impact on losing that talent, and maybe you could still put it so you can draft "underage" players in the 1st round only or something.

TomHBlain
07-02-2004, 11:59 PM
didnt philly fans want managements head after they took some stupid 2nd rounder 6th overall named Forsberg?

Good for whomever wrote that article, they can look at rankings. Someone needs to learn to read between the lines and actually research things a bit, he may have been rated a 2nd rounder coming into the draft but there were many teams who would have taken him.

I think everyone's point here is not whether Wheeler will pan out better then expect, I think their point is the Coyotes could have managed the draft better. If they wanted Blake Wheeler, they should have traded down in the draft. Someone mentioned a failed traded to NYR, but if they really wanted Wheeler they could have safely traded down into the 10s or 20s and picked up some extra picks.

Draft these days is more about pick managment. If you guy is a reach, you adjust your draft to get him... you don't reach yourself. I tend to agree with this philosophy. It gives you more assets long term.

XX
07-03-2004, 12:28 AM
. If they wanted Blake Wheeler, they should have traded down in the draft. Someone mentioned a failed traded to NYR, but if they really wanted Wheeler they could have safely traded down into the 10s or 20s and picked up some extra picks.


We dont know that he would have been available, and Coyotes management obviously had a better view of the grand scheme than anyone of us. They took their man, and im glad they werent forced into an awkward situation where Wheeler was gone and they had traded down.

YotesFan
07-03-2004, 12:56 AM
I just realized that I made a mistake earlier. When I said "Success in the draft isn't about the quality of players you get, it is about asset management', I meant to say:

"[It] isn't about the quality of players you get, it is about asset ****ING management!"

Sorry for the (previous) lack of emphasis.

I'll take quality ****ING players over asset ****ING managment anyday.

ParisSaintGermain
07-03-2004, 08:18 AM
Much of this discussion is why I generally am not a big fan of the draft as it is now. If the Coyotes could have afforded it, I would have rather seen the pick go for a player that can contribute now just because it was a high pick in a shallow draft, and in the case of Wheeler, we won't be seeing him anytime soon.

I feel the same. I am still upset because if they were really up for Wheeler, why not let another team pick him, follow closely how he evolves in the next two years and then if still interested, try to include him in a trade as he will probably still be far away from the NHL and tradable.
I would rather have one of the Tukonen-Olesz-Ladd.

BAuldie
07-03-2004, 10:36 AM
didnt philly fans want managements head after they took some stupid 2nd rounder 6th overall named Forsberg?

Good for whomever wrote that article, they can look at rankings. Someone needs to learn to read between the lines and actually research things a bit, he may have been rated a 2nd rounder coming into the draft but there were many teams who would have taken him.

You are right about Forsberg.. he was a bit of a reach as well but there is a difference. Back then the scouting of the European leagues was not nearly as extensive as it is now. Back then all sorts of players were unheard of. With the scouting as it is today very few players slip through the cracks

Lowetide
07-03-2004, 10:46 AM
I'm certainly not going to defend the pick, and I do think that Wayne Gretzky is probably not a front office genius. However, there are two things to consider:

1. We may never know, but another team up high may well have taken Wheeler. When we discuss Wheeler being chosen, its in the context of his being slotted anywhere from the back end of the first round to mid second round.

But, what if NYR had decided to take him? It's certainly possible. Wheeler does offer a unique combination of skills.

2. No matter how anyway feels, he is still an asset. Even if he only delivers some of the promise he currently has, his size and potential are still attractive to other teams. He IS a valuable asset.

Waldo
07-03-2004, 11:20 AM
You are right about Forsberg.. he was a bit of a reach as well but there is a difference. Back then the scouting of the European leagues was not nearly as extensive as it is now. Back then all sorts of players were unheard of. With the scouting as it is today very few players slip through the cracks
The point may very well be that most teams didn't scout US highschools very seriously. If the Yotes scouted it out more thoroughly and found a hidden underrated talent then we should be praising them for their thoroughness and the courage to following their conviction. They were fully aware that it would not be a popular pick but felt strongly enough about it to take the abuse instead of taking the popular and more conventional choices. I can respect the opinions of those posters who I recognize as being regular and knowledgeable contributors. Many of these posters though have never posted here before and know nothing about the Coyotes or the organization. These people live to complain and I don't take them very seriously. I do wish that there was a rookie tournament this year so we could get a glimpse of these players. It'll be interesting to follow Wheeler's development.

BAuldie
07-03-2004, 11:33 AM
The point may very well be that most teams didn't scout US highschools very seriously. If the Yotes scouted it out more thoroughly and found a hidden underrated talent then we should be praising them for their thoroughness and the courage to following their conviction. They were fully aware that it would not be a popular pick but felt strongly enough about it to take the abuse instead of taking the popular and more conventional choices. I can respect the opinions of those posters who I recognize as being regular and knowledgeable contributors. Many of these posters though have never posted here before and know nothing about the Coyotes or the organization. These people live to complain and I don't take them very seriously. I do wish that there was a rookie tournament this year so we could get a glimpse of these players. It'll be interesting to follow Wheeler's development.

You are probably right.. They probably see something in him that most people don't. The question is though why didn't they trade down. They more than likely could've gained another 3rd round pick or something and still gotten Wheeler.

CoyoteBaloney
07-03-2004, 12:52 PM
The point may very well be that most teams didn't scout US highschools very seriously.
And that is all the more reason to trade down and draft Wheeler later in the first round -- not with the 5th overall pick.

Waldo
07-03-2004, 01:28 PM
You are probably right.. They probably see something in him that most people don't. The question is though why didn't they trade down. They more than likely could've gained another 3rd round pick or something and still gotten Wheeler.
I'm sure they had discussions with other teams but no one knows what was offerred and no one knows which other teams were involved. I would not trade down to 15th or 20th for a 3rd round pick. Whose to say anyone was offering a 2nd rounder or how far down the 1st round they had to go to make a deal. It would be stupid to trade down and then NOT be able to get the player they really wanted. If there was some doubt then I would rather they took Wheeler 5th overall. But no one knows what was discussed or with which team. They got their man and I'm happy with that. The deed is done. The pissing and moaning about it is getting tiresome.

Devils Advocate
07-03-2004, 01:42 PM
I'm certainly not going to defend the pick, and I do think that Wayne Gretzky is probably not a front office genius. However, there are two things to consider:

1. We may never know, but another team up high may well have taken Wheeler. When we discuss Wheeler being chosen, its in the context of his being slotted anywhere from the back end of the first round to mid second round.

But, what if NYR had decided to take him? It's certainly possible. Wheeler does offer a unique combination of skills.

2. No matter how anyway feels, he is still an asset. Even if he only delivers some of the promise he currently has, his size and potential are still attractive to other teams. He IS a valuable asset.

Thanks for the unbiased opinion. Now that the initial shock of this pick has worn off & having seen other players that were supposed to be ranked 5th drop to 11, 20, & later. I don't mind this pick at all. I doubt any of us here have a better understanding of the available players other than Draper & Co. It doesn't sound like an extra pick was worth the risk of not getting the player they wanted.

I don't quite understand why everyone keeps bashing Gretzky though. Although not officially the GM anymore, it's my opinion that Cliff Fletcher is still the primary person pulling the strings in player trades. Although Barnett IS the official GM, I think his primary role is negotiating contracts (while he learns his trading skills from the Silver Fox), which he has done an outstanding job of since Gretzky hired him. Getting Draper was another outstanding move by Gretzky. While Gretzky may not be a front-office genius, he has hired 2 if not 3 geniuses, which in my mind makes Gretzky a genius??

Lowetide
07-03-2004, 01:56 PM
I don't quite understand why everyone keeps bashing Gretzky though. Although not officially the GM anymore, it's my opinion that Cliff Fletcher is still the primary person pulling the strings in player trades. Although Barnett IS the official GM, I think his primary role is negotiating contracts (while he learns his trading skills from the Silver Fox), which he has done an outstanding job of since Gretzky hired him. Getting Draper was another outstanding move by Gretzky. While Gretzky may not be a front-office genius, he has hired 2 if not 3 geniuses, which in my mind makes Gretzky a genius??

Not really bashing him, but saying that one of the reasons people question this pick is that the Coyotes haven't had a lot of success, and 99 hasn't changed that (yet).

If Lou in NJ had taken Wheeler 5th overall, these boards would be saying "what did we miss?" When the Coyotes took him, it became more of a risk to fans than if NJ had taken him.

btw, don't feel bad, people would have questioned it just as much if Edmonton took Wheeler at 5. Just me feeling, anyway.

Gwyddbwyll
07-03-2004, 02:10 PM
Not really bashing him, but saying that one of the reasons people question this pick is that the Coyotes haven't had a lot of success, and 99 hasn't changed that (yet).

If Lou in NJ had taken Wheeler 5th overall, these boards would be saying "what did we miss?" When the Coyotes took him, it became more of a risk to fans than if NJ had taken him.

btw, don't feel bad, people would have questioned it just as much if Edmonton took Wheeler at 5. Just me feeling, anyway.

I guess you mean a lot of NHL success rather than drafting success?

Their drafting has been better under the new management. Its just that few at HF realize that. It wasnt long ago that Sjostrom was ridiculed here as a bust yet now he is in the NHL. Picks like LeNeveu, Redenbach, Callahan, Gelech look set to continue the improving trend.

Devils Advocate
07-03-2004, 03:08 PM
Not really bashing him, but saying that one of the reasons people question this pick is that the Coyotes haven't had a lot of success, and 99 hasn't changed that (yet).

If Lou in NJ had taken Wheeler 5th overall, these boards would be saying "what did we miss?" When the Coyotes took him, it became more of a risk to fans than if NJ had taken him.

btw, don't feel bad, people would have questioned it just as much if Edmonton took Wheeler at 5. Just me feeling, anyway.

Yep, more good points. I had mentioned on some other posts that the Devils seem to have picks questioned frequently & have had great sucess with their picks.

Thanks for the input.

CoyoteBaloney
07-03-2004, 04:30 PM
Not really bashing him, but saying that one of the reasons people question this pick is that the Coyotes haven't had a lot of success, and 99 hasn't changed that (yet).

If Lou in NJ had taken Wheeler 5th overall, these boards would be saying "what did we miss?" When the Coyotes took him, it became more of a risk to fans than if NJ had taken him.

btw, don't feel bad, people would have questioned it just as much if Edmonton took Wheeler at 5. Just me feeling, anyway.
But Lou Lam didn't draft Wheeler and Karpen and even Gretzky do not have the history of finding sleepers in the first round as Lou does. So, it really means very little that IF lout drafted Wheeler there would be fewer questions because Lou has earned the right not to be question -- Karpen and Gretzky and Barnett have not earned that right.

If Wheeler pans out as they hope he will, then they too will have earned the right not to be questioned the way they have been from this R E A C H of a pick.

yakko
07-03-2004, 04:35 PM
Pure Speculation:

I get the feeling the Coyotes saw the top 2 picks as head and shoulders above everyone else in the draft and targeted Ladd. When Ladd was taken ahead of their pick, the rest of the players available didn't look very attractive. Instead of drafting a player that was or soon would be an NHL ready third or fourth line player, they took a player their scouts said had real first line potential. I also think they were under the impression that they weren't the only team picking in the first half of the first round with the same logic and didn't want to trade down and lose the only player after Ladd they had any faith at all could be a top end player. The Coyotes already have plenty of servicable third or fourth line players in their system. They wanted to finally get some top end talent.

In most other drafts I'd agree with most of you. If there were talent to be had in this draft, drafting a long term project this high would be insane. The fact of the matter is that most people -- and likely the Coyotes scouting staff -- didn't think there was any near NHL ready talent left to be had and took what they could.

CoyoteBaloney
07-03-2004, 04:42 PM
http://tsf.waymoresports.thestar.com/thestar/hockey/extras.cgi?2004NHLDraft-Review

ANYTHING GOES IN CAROLINA
It was a wild and wacky first round of the 2004 NHL Entry Draft, as surprises and trade movement up and down the draft order ruled the proceedings. As soon as Phoenix part owner Wayne Gretzky shocked the arena by naming Blake Wheeler his club's first pick (5th overall), teams started reworking their draft lists to include those players the Coyotes left behind. It resulted in a scrambled first round order and plenty of high drama. Here are a few other facts and figures about the 2004 NHL Entry Draft...

- Wheeler became the highest selected player coming out of a U.S. high school since the Minnesota North Stars took Brian Lawton first overall out of Mount St. Charles High School in 1983.

FROM LEFT FIELD TO THE DRAFT TABLE
There are always drafted players that are considered a 'reach'--someone taken before they're expected to go. Here are a few of the 2004 selections that came surprisingly early:

5th overall - Blake Wheeler (Phoenix)
Before the draft, there were whispers about Wheeler possibly going near the bottom of Round 1. Instead, the Coyotes made one of the most surprising top-five selections in recent draft history.

35th overall - Logan Stephenson (Phoenix)
Like Mark Fistric, Stephenson went before several other defensemen with better all-around ability. The Coyotes continue to lust after players with imposing physical toughness.

THE LOSERS
Phoenix Coyotes
Unless Blake Wheeler turns into the second coming of Jarome Iginla, or Brett Hull, or Jaromir Jagr or Gordie Howe, the Coyotes wasted a glorious opportunity to add a few more assets by trading down in Round 1. Nobody saw the selection of Wheeler at No. 5 coming, so the Coyotes will be closely scrutinized for several years to come. Adding Enver Lisin at No. 50 and Roman Tomanek at No. 103 won't make up for the Coyotes' needless top-five gamble.

Dancing Chicken
07-03-2004, 05:00 PM
Not really bashing him, but saying that one of the reasons people question this pick is that the Coyotes haven't had a lot of success, and 99 hasn't changed that (yet).


The yet part is KEY.. I dont ever remeber a more balance team the Yotes / Jets have ever had. A lot of you think the Yotes are full of third and fourth liners but remeber they are young. Nagy was brought in as a third liner and first was also thought as a selfish bust but he turned it around, Johnson I heard offers of tradeing him for a third but look what he turned into.. Doan I slamed him a lead footed third line grinder, look at him now.. Westy and Gleach can be huge surprises out of no where.. in three years we can be fighting for tops in a tough pacfic on a yearly base..

we just need a coach and a plan to keep our youth growing..

CoyoteBaloney
07-03-2004, 05:55 PM
Not really bashing him, but saying that one of the reasons people question this pick is that the Coyotes haven't had a lot of success, and 99 hasn't changed that (yet).


The yet part is KEY.. I dont ever remeber a more balance team the Yotes / Jets have ever had. A lot of you think the Yotes are full of third and fourth liners but remeber they are young. Nagy was brought in as a third liner and first was also thought as a selfish bust but he turned it around, Johnson I heard offers of tradeing him for a third but look what he turned into.. Doan I slamed him a lead footed third line grinder, look at him now.. Westy and Gleach can be huge surprises out of no where.. in three years we can be fighting for tops in a tough pacfic on a yearly base..

we just need a coach and a plan to keep our youth growing..
The Coyotes management has a game plan and now they are trying to find a coach who understands and can implement that game plan with the players supplied him.

The Coyotes have already come out and said they want to develop their game after Tampa Bay's "pressure the puck" style.

Hence a major reason for acquiring Chimera.

ulf
07-03-2004, 11:19 PM
in my opinion last years draft day debacle between mgmt and the scouting staff may be responsible for the selection of wheeler at #5.

mgmt may have done it's smartest move to date by allowing the scouting staff to select their man instead of the consensus tukonen or montoya choices.

this team isn't going anywhere soon,with questionable goaltending and limited nhl quality players our future is a couple[at least] years away...so why not go for down the road potential.

i'd give the draft day performance a "c" at least with the possibility of an "a" closer than the "f" the pundits are giving it now.

RangerBlues
07-03-2004, 11:33 PM
Keenan and Millbury were also looking at Wheeler,Wane could have lost his player trading down.