View Single Post
05-28-2013, 03:47 PM
Registered User
DecadesofFutility's Avatar
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Wilmington, Delaware
Country: United States
Posts: 479
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by Prongo View Post
I am not sure you realize that our prospect system needs every single position player we can get. Not just defense, offense or goalie, but all of them! Can't you understand this? It has been said many ties before. Also if we trade Couts(which presumably for a defender) why are you still adamant about taking a defenseman? We would need another forward who could make the jump this year or next to help out of forward depth then.

Say a player like Barkov falls to 11, would you take Pulock or any other defenseman over him, if the answer is yes, you would be the worst GM out there. He would easily be the best player at that spot, you need to take the BPA always to ensure they have the best chance of working out. If you don't, you increase the risk of that player being a bust.

How many times does this have to be told to you?
Keep saying it, my head is bit hard.
It might sink in some day.

Yes, our talent pool is shallow.
I would love them to draft the next Lundquist.
Or the next Crosby, or Weber.

I just take issue with how the Front Office goes about refilling it.
I understand that a player ranked at 11 is better than a player ranked 15-17.
And that supposedly you pick the BPA, but, I feel the Flyers,

There were better players than Laughton available at the time,
and Hamilton could have been the BPA, not Couturier.
Another team had Hamilton rated highly, why not us.
Other teams think a #1 Defenseman are the BPA, why not the Flyers.

If I am keeping Coots and Laughton, then I trade down if BPA is another center or forward.
Then I get another useful pick and can pick maybe a defenseman is BPA.
Then, I have an extra chance of drafting a useful player in the draft.
More picks = Less chance of draft busts.

DecadesofFutility is offline   Reply With Quote