Thread: Speculation: Wild/Bos
View Single Post
Old
06-15-2010, 11:35 AM
  #14
State of Hockey
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Minny
Country: United States
Posts: 11,189
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CircularTheory View Post
Instead of a guy like Johansen, Skinner or Etem, we'll be getting Bjugstad and/or the Coyle, Nelson, Schawrtz, Galiev etc etc.

This draft is very deep and if we can get two prospects that are almost even in talent as the one, then why not?
Johansen, Skinner, or Etem are like the three worst prospects we could get at #9. Instead think of Connolly, Nino, Tarasenko, Granlund, or Johansen. Bjugstad doesn't look so good anymore.

I'm all into stats and history, and even the deepest draft (2003) was falling off at #15. 2010 is not deep in comparison. And every draft at #32 is a crapshoot. It's quantity versus quality. Quantity isn't worth it in this case.

Quote:
Originally Posted by mnwildgophers View Post
On the other hand, where does the drop-off begin? Scouts speculate from anywhere 3-17 is where the next drop off begins. I'd be okay if we traded back and took a Watson while picking up another pick.
There's a clear drop-off around #7-#10. It was that way months ago, and it's stayed that way. About 7 prospects have never been projected below the top-10. Then there's Johansen, Tarasenko, and Granlund - three which are almost always within the top-12. After those 10 prospects, it's anybody's game. That signifies a drop-off. Dropping to #15 could mean we miss any chance at just one. Staying at #9 guarantees us a chance.

State of Hockey is offline   Reply With Quote