Thread: Prospect Info: 2013 NHL Draft Thread
View Single Post
Old
01-20-2013, 11:04 PM
  #286
Viqsi
carrying the flag
 
Viqsi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: The Scary Internet
Country: United States
Posts: 21,739
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Viqsi
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gagnefan924 View Post
Missed this.


And this.


My point being if we trade up and land a top 5 talent so be it. I think it'd be a smart idea because this actually makes our depth more talented. Thats why teams that have all depth and little talent dont win cups. You need talent AND depth. Now that we actually have some depth, time to get some talent. However I find that Davidson actually making a trade that involves all of our picks, somewhat unlikely. Thus my opinions on late round guys such as Hartman, Domi, and Furcale even though I'd much prefer a more elite talent like Barkov, Drouin, Lindholm.
The only problem I see is that trading up to one of the major guys is pretty much not going to be feasible - about the only way we get one is if we end up in the top-5 or 6, or if some folks take a reach or two and we get a fortunate drop. It's like saying "I'd like to trade for another depth top-6 scorer, but I'd really prefer being able to trade for Claude Giroux." Of course one would prefer Claude Giroux. But some concept of realism and common sense has to come into play, and for some reason around here it is not yet common sense that trading up from the middle of the 1st round to the top of the 1st round is not a thing that happens.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gagnefan924 View Post
Tell me how adding A player "kills our depth and makes us a Savior Player Model." If we traded all 3 picks and Savard for example for Nathan Mackinnon, how does that not make us a better team? Oh wait that kills our depth. But not really...
Assuming that someone in the top-3 would even accept that (highly debatable), prospect depth isn't exactly something that you achieve once and then lean on for the rest of your days. It's a continually built thing. Taking shortcuts with it generally only makes sense when your roster is set and you're about to charge after a championship - not because you want to disclaim all faith in your ability to scout the middle of the first round in a deep draft and instead go after the new hotness everybody's talking about. That excites fans, but it doesn't necessarily make your team any better - or any more likely to be better.

I would much rather trust our newly revamped scouts to get a hit with three quality chances, rather than toss all those chances for an attempt at The Popular One (and thus an opportunity for the scouts to be lazy). Higher profile is not a guarantee, but trying to get it it when you're not already in position to have it fall into your lap is a pretty good way to end up on a wild goose chase. I would also vastly prefer that we have more quality prospects that can come together and develop side-by-side in Springfield - which can help everybody in the system rather than just our One Single Superstar and thus lead to better team cohesion. (And maybe a Calder Cup chance for the farm team... )

__________________
Remember - when you're a hockey fan, it's not "reckless driving", it's "good forechecking".
"Viqsi, you are our sweet humanist..." --mt-svk on the CBJ boards

Thanks, Howson, for cleaning up MacLean's toxic waste. Welcome, Kekalainen; let's get good things built!
Viqsi is offline