Originally Posted by Timothy Freitag (Post 46572947)

Count me in the Trouba camp. I got to see him play against Dubuque last week, and the kid is a stud. There were a ton of scouts at that game, which is no surprise since there were 5 potential 1st rounders on the ice.

Things I noticed while watching Trouba.
He's poised... the game is slower for him than for other players at the USHL level.
He plays with his head up and makes good passes out of the zone.
He's physical. He's not running around hitting people, but he wins the puck in the corners. Also, I got to see him answer the bell with Z Girgensons, and Trouba rocked him.
He's got an NHL body already. He was the most mature looking player on the Developmental team.

BTW... I saw scouts from Toronto, Buffalo, Anaheim that were wearing logo gear. Outside of that, there were another 7-8 guys sitting in the scouts section.

Originally Posted by squidz (Post 46575289)

So now we define #1 defensemen by "who won the Norris trophy?" It's all well and good that "since 1993..." and that "Lidstrom was beatable" but the fact of the matter is, the league handed Lidstrom the trophy 7 times. He might have actually deserved to win 3 of those, but when one guy wins it over and over again, and you try to use that stat as some sort of proof that high draft picks are bad, you've gone completely off your rocker.

It's hardly worth arguing though. You've already had to switch your argument twice. A couple months ago you didn't want to select a defenseman in the first round because they bust so frequently. But we pointed out that was a completely fabricated fact with no basis in reality. Then you changed your story and you didn't want a defenseman in the first round because you can find all star defensemen later in the draft. But we pointed out that after the first round, each draft has an average of 1 defenseman who will make the all-star game ever in his career. Now you've got some bizarre analogy about how many win a trophy which is more a popularity contest than a real competition, and is only awarded to a single player every year.

You need to get over the fact that you can't magically conjure up a star forward or goal scoring winger. If Yakupov, Galchenyuk, or Grigorenko is available, draft them. If they're not, picking Faksa or Gaunce even 1st overall wouldn't magically convert them into a goal scoring winger any more than drafting Murray 4th would turn him into Nik Lidstrom. What you so clearly can't even begin to grasp the concept of is that you can only draft players who exist. You can't draft Phil Kessel 5th overall in this draft because Phil Kessel isn't eligible for this draft. LA could have taken Sam Gagne 4th overall in 2007, but he would still be Sam Gagne. Drafting him higher wouldn't have magically turned him into some sort of star. This team will make a selection based upon who is remaining on the draft board, and all your crying won't change a single iota of the potential and ability that those players possess. If the star forwards and goal scoring wingers are all gone (and they almost certainly will be if we're picking later than 5) then you can't pick them.

Originally Posted by nickschultzfan (Post 46576807)

I would pick Trouba over Reilly. But that opinion should be given no weight.

As for Dumba, he's listed at 6'0" on the Red Deer website and he doesn't look small on the ice.

Originally Posted by vitogor (Post 46576751)

This draft class scares me more than any other in recent memory. I don't know, maybe it's just my paranoia, but I can't help but think '1996 draft' for some reason...

Originally Posted by mnwildgophers (Post 46577321)

I'm starting to like the idea of picking Dumba, but I don't know if we're going to finish low enough to pick him up. I wouldn't mind picking a Trouba at #6-#8. That's where we might be picking because of the better play lately. Here's our last games:

@ BUF
@ WAS
vs. NYR
vs. FLA
vs. LAK
@ CHI
@ NAS
vs. CHI
vs. PHX

We do have a decently good chance of only winning 2 of those games. If that's the case, we'd end up with 76 points. We'd be in all likelihood drafting in top 5 if that's the case, but we are getting healthy and having Koivu back will help the team win more games, so it's tough to say. I don't think we drop below #7.

Originally Posted by mnwildgophers (Post 46577321)

I'm starting to like the idea of picking Dumba, but I don't know if we're going to finish low enough to pick him up. I wouldn't mind picking a Trouba at #6-#8. That's where we might be picking because of the better play lately. Here's our last games:

@ BUF
@ WAS
vs. NYR
vs. FLA
vs. LAK
@ CHI
@ NAS
vs. CHI
vs. PHX

We do have a decently good chance of only winning 2 of those games. If that's the case, we'd end up with 76 points. We'd be in all likelihood drafting in top 5 if that's the case, but we are getting healthy and having Koivu back will help the team win more games, so it's tough to say. I don't think we drop below #7.

Originally Posted by Casper (Post 46577539)

we got koivu back but lost 2 d-men. We most likely will be playing curtis Foster and possiblty a rookie dman next game. The flames should have buried the wild but failed to do so and we caught a sleepy vancouver team. I wouldn't underestimate this teams ability to lose.

Can't say it isn't refreshing to see a win for a change though...

Originally Posted by Jarick (Post 46577795)

Minnesota down to 6th actual, 5th projected. The reverse-tank is on.

Originally Posted by Puhis (Post 46578419)

Squidz: It's Olli Määttä. Not Maata. ;)


Aside from that, I'm starting to warm at Trouba, if he's really as good as they say.

Originally Posted by squidz (Post 46578869)

I had forgotten I even had those links in it. I've corrected it. I should probably flesh some more of that out, but I'm feeling lazy.

Originally Posted by Jarick (Post 46580397)

Okay, think I got it. Mat-a?

Originally Posted by Puhis (Post 46582879)

You're supposed to emphasize the first vowel, it's more like Ma~tt-a. And the [t] is quite hard, it's not soft.

You'll get the hang of it eventually. Then you can spell words like "kitkalukkovetopyörästö-öljy" effortlessly. :naughty: