HFBoards

HFBoards (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/index.php)
-   Trade Rumors and Free Agent Talk (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/forumdisplay.php?f=3)
-   -   Proposal: Calgary's 3 Firsts for First Overall (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/showthread.php?t=1413005)

Walkingthroughforest 04-26-2013 12:27 AM

Calgary's 3 Firsts for First Overall
 
If the season ends today, Calgary is sitting with the 6th overall pick, a low midround pick, and a late round pick. Would these three +say a Giordano or Glencross be enough for 1st overall?

JeffMangum 04-26-2013 12:31 AM

Personally, I think that the Flames would be better off stocking up on prospect depth than going all in for the #1. Especially if they're adding an already good NHL player to the deal.

In reality, the first overall pick is not worth nearly as much as the people here would like to believe.

FLAMES666 04-26-2013 12:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zenith (Post 64692983)
Personally, I think that the Flames would be better off stocking up on prospect depth than going all in for the #1. Especially if they're adding an already good NHL player to the deal.

In reality, the first overall pick is not worth nearly as much as the people here would like to believe.

Agreed.

SLAPSHOT723 04-26-2013 12:32 AM

Yup, Flames don't have the prospect depth. They should take the quality where they can get it.

Avs44 04-26-2013 12:35 AM

I think Calgary would be far better off taking whoever falls to them at #6(assuming this is where they stay) and drafting two other quality prospects.

5RingsAndABeer 04-26-2013 12:39 AM

I don't think it would be enough. The dropoff from 1st overall to 6th + mid + late in most drafts is absolutely massive. I don't know if Seth Jones will be on the same level as previous 1st overalls, but generally I doubt it would be enough.

jigglysquishy 04-26-2013 12:39 AM

This year there are effectively 4 first overall picks. Jumping from 6th to 4th to pick up Barkov is pretty much done with Giordano and that 6th spot or the two later firsts for the 4th.

Flames with Barkov plus two mid-first rounders are a much stronger team prospect wise.

JeffMangum 04-26-2013 12:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Avs44 (Post 64693159)
I think Calgary would be far better off taking whoever falls to them at #6(assuming this is where they stay) and drafting two other quality prospects.

If anything, they could move up a spot or two, or even move back and add more depth.

Frankly, I know nothing about this year's draft class, mainly because of the fact that the Rangers don't have a first. :laugh: Seems like the first round is loaded, though, and that 5-10 are pretty equal in talent. Just from the little I've read. Could anyone give me some insight?

veedubn1 04-26-2013 12:42 AM

Pretty much what everyone else said... keep the picks and make them count.

Petes2424 04-26-2013 12:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Walkingthroughforest (Post 64692795)
If the season ends today, Calgary is sitting with the 6th overall pick, a low midround pick, and a late round pick. Would these three +say a Giordano or Glencross be enough for 1st overall?

If Calgary had more organizational depth, then there would be some form of reasoning to do the above. First of all, they have a good chance at #1 anyway. There's absolutely no reason to give much if anything away to land that pick.

#66 04-26-2013 12:47 AM

Like the guys up there said, go with depth. This is a good draft and the Flames can really walk away with a nice stockpile of players. Heck they could get a high end line like Domi-Lindholm-Mantha or Hartman... if everything plays out right.

Petes2424 04-26-2013 12:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by #66 (Post 64693615)
Like the guys up there said, go with depth. This is a good draft and the Flames can really walk away with a nice stockpile of players. Heck they could get a high end line like Domi-Lindholm-Mantha or Hartman... if everything plays out right.

And it could play out very similar, which is far more appealing than only Seth Jones or Drouin.

Avs44 04-26-2013 12:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zenith (Post 64693417)
If anything, they could move up a spot or two, or even move back and add more depth.

Frankly, I know nothing about this year's draft class, mainly because of the fact that the Rangers don't have a first. :laugh: Seems like the first round is loaded, though, and that 5-10 are pretty equal in talent. Just from the little I've read. Could anyone give me some insight?

I think there is a drop in talent after #3 or 4. Jones, MacKinnon, and Drouin I think are the consensus top 3 picks, and then Barkov.



I personally think Calgary should stay where they are and nab one of Lindholm/Monahan.

BK201 04-26-2013 12:55 AM

Top 6 prospects

Jones
Lindholm
MacKinnon
Barkov
Drouin
Monahan

Why trade the only way Flames get screwed is if some one behind the wins the lottery.

domaug* 04-26-2013 12:56 AM

three quality prospects together are better than one higher quality prospect for the Flames right now. retooling your prospect pool will be slightly easier with those 3 picks.

BigTuna49 04-26-2013 12:59 AM

The depth would do more for them, short term at least, then Seth Jones ever could. Three 1sts can give them a very quick rebuild if done right.

herashak 04-26-2013 12:59 AM

doesn't make sense for the flame to do this.

Hockey Ninja 04-26-2013 01:01 AM

Absoleutly no way are we in a position to trade those three 1st. Keep them and build our team through the draft for once. Hopefully this draft goes as well as our 2011 draft did.

Djp 04-26-2013 01:02 AM

Calgary needs to keep the picks and stock up in talent.

Calgary right now is 7th but they can easily move up to around 4th or 5th if things go their way.

JeffMangum 04-26-2013 01:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Avs44 (Post 64693729)
I think there is a drop in talent after #3 or 4. Jones, MacKinnon, and Drouin I think are the consensus top 3 picks, and then Barkov.



I personally think Calgary should stay where they are and nab one of Lindholm/Monahan.

Yeah, Monahan would be a nice pick up for the Flames. They need a talented, young center, and from what I've read, he is very mature and seems like a leader. The Flames need a guy like that, to try and replace the leadership void that is left there without Iginla.

Noori 04-26-2013 01:26 AM

I don't think the dropoff from MacKinnon/Drouin to Lindholm/Monahan is significant enough to warrant giving up two (later) firsts in what's thought of as a deep first round. There's a lot of value in those picks.

HighLifeMan 04-26-2013 02:29 AM

Not a chance.
Keep the picks and the established player(s) and build from there.

Rorschach 04-26-2013 03:08 AM

I would keep the bottom two picks but trade the 6th overall plus something else to move in to the top 5...like 3-5. If you can either get one of the top guys who falls if they do, or get a 1st line center, then everything else is gravy.

Sam Pollock 04-26-2013 03:10 AM

Actually I am going to take a different view on this. Flame away if you want but I am looking more at history of drafting overall more than anything else.

I realize that the Flames need to stock the cupboards in the worst way but there are other ways of doing that (junior and college free agents is one way).

If the draft was held right now, the Flames would have the 7th, 23rd and 29th picks in a deep draft.

If they had those picks in 2003 (a deep draft), they would have had Ryan Suter, Ryan Kesler and Patrick Eaves. The first two impress me alot. The third one not so much.

If they had the 1st pick they would have had Marc-Andre Fleury. If they were going for a franchise center (which they need the most), they would have gone for Eric Staal (2nd overall).

I realize this reasoning is faulty just on the basis of what a team needs differs greatly from one another but my question is this: would you rather have Eric Staal or Ryan Suter and Ryan Kesler?

For me that's tough because Staal is a franchise player where as Kesler and Suter are great players.

Saying that, I think a first pick overall trumps a 7th, 23rd and 29th picks overall in a deep draft because the goal should always to try and draft the best player available. According to Scott Cullen's article , you can see the importance of a first pick compared to rest of the 29 picks in the first round.

Maybe I'm wrong but I would go for the first pick overall. Just my thoughts.

Rorschach 04-26-2013 03:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sam Pollock (Post 64696815)
Actually I am going to take a different view on this. Flame away if you want but I am looking more at history of drafting overall more than anything else.

I realize that the Flames need to stock the cupboards in the worst way but there are other ways of doing that (junior and college free agents is one way).

If the draft was held right now, the Flames would have the 7th, 23rd and 29th picks in a deep draft.

If they had those picks in 2003 (a deep draft), they would have had Ryan Suter, Ryan Kesler and Patrick Eaves. The first two impress me alot. The third one not so much.

If they had the 1st pick they would have had Marc-Andre Fleury. If they were going for a franchise center (which they need the most), they would have gone for Eric Staal (2nd overall).

I realize this reasoning is faulty just on the basis of what a team needs differs greatly from one another but my question is this: would you rather have Eric Staal or Ryan Suter and Ryan Kesler?

For me that's tough because Staal is a franchise player where as Kesler and Suter are great players.

Saying that, I think a first pick overall trumps a 7th, 23rd and 29th picks overall in a deep draft because the goal should always to try and draft the best player available. According to Scott Cullen's article , you can see the importance of a first pick compared to rest of the 29 picks in the first round.

Maybe I'm wrong but I would go for the first pick overall. Just my thoughts.

You're wrong. :naughty:

In this draft there are multiple Eric Staal's at the top of the draft. So if they can just get up there high enough with their 6th, that might be worth it. I wouldn't do a three for one thing or even a two for one thing, on that I agree. But #1 may cost too much. People there want Jones.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:41 AM.

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com, A property of CraveOnline, a division of AtomicOnline LLC ©2009 CraveOnline Media, LLC. All Rights Reserved.