View Single Post
04-27-2004, 06:36 AM
RangerBoy's Avatar
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: New York
Country: United States
Posts: 32,280
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by rnyquist
but we're not really in position to gamble, its not like we're montreal or washington and we're stacked, we have next to ZERO prospect depth, we can't afford a gamble like Brendl and Lundmark its crippled our depth by putting so much faith in 2 guys. Yes i know, different situation but on the same hand we're in the same place. By being agressive we may not acctually improve. Its easy to argue that getting 2 top 10's is the best way but what if both bust and the guy we wanted to take with the 26th pick becomes the next Havlat?. IMO we're not in a depth to gamble, we need the most we can get and thats all the picks, i think we'd be better off dealing the spare parts like poti and what not to move up, even if its a minimal move. IMO we'd do really well drafting a top line forward with the #6, maybe move up and get Olesz (sather loves to gamble) and then take another forward with the toronto pick and then get Tesliuk in the 2nd round and who knows from there, lets find a sleeper, get Rockwell on the phone, who knows, but being aggressive may not be the best thing.
I'm not talking about trading two NHLers in Dan Cloutier and Niklas Sundstrom,a 1st round pick and 3rd round pick to move up.

It's not a great draft.Probably one of the weakest since 1996.Do you know how many second round picks do not make it?

Montreal and Washington are stacked in high end talent.You just made my point.

I'm talking about trading second round picks

RangerBoy is offline