HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Metropolitan Division > Philadelphia Flyers
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

Eklund: "Flyers working a deal with Kings"

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
06-16-2009, 03:17 PM
  #101
FlyHigh
Registered User
 
FlyHigh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 28,156
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to FlyHigh Send a message via MSN to FlyHigh
Quote:
Originally Posted by FireStevensDotCom View Post
That UNH team was not very good. JVR was usually the best player on the ice for UNH on a team that well had very little talent. Of course he didnt put up the "stats" that most people wanted to see because he had no one most nights to help him.
Take JVR and the few good seniors they had off last years team and I am afraid to see how bad that UNH team is going to be this coming season.
Yeah no kidding, I just looked at the stats again and forgot they had actually finished 3rd in Hockey East with that roster.

You can give as much or as little credit to JVR as you want I guess, but the fact that UNH finished 3rd is simply amazing when you look at their forward corps past JVR and Leblanc and their defense past Kessel.

FlyHigh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-16-2009, 03:18 PM
  #102
mercury
Registered User
 
mercury's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: South Philly/SoCal
Country: United States
Posts: 11,105
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CanadianFlyer88 View Post
If the Flyers do end up moving Lupul or Briere, I want to see a Hartnell-Carter-Giroux line as well.
I want to get rid of Jones and do the Lupul and 3rd for Harding (or Lupul, Cote, and 3rd for Harding and Boogaard) deal. If Knuble would re-sign at a small discount, I'd like to keep him around, too. Maybe sign Beauchemin.

mercury is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-16-2009, 03:29 PM
  #103
GKJ
Global Moderator
Entertainment
 
GKJ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Do not trade plz
Country: United States
Posts: 111,739
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jester View Post
Well, he does WORK for the organization...

I would be shocked if they weren't shopping Briere...doesn't mean there will be takers, or Briere will be willing to waive his NMC.
I said somewhere else, if they're really shopping Briere, I'm sure he knows about it, and told them what teams he would accept a trade to. If the Flyers were to have a deal done and then say "listen, we have a deal to trade you, will you go to ______" and he says no, the GM looks like an idiot.

GKJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-16-2009, 03:32 PM
  #104
UseYourAllusion
Registered User
 
UseYourAllusion's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Philly
Country: United States
Posts: 6,873
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CanadianFlyer88 View Post
If the Flyers do end up moving Lupul or Briere, I want to see a Hartnell-Carter-Giroux line as well.
Carter dominates the puck though, and Giroux is a player I see as a creator. I'm thinking a Gagne-Richards-Giroux would be a better fit.

UseYourAllusion is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-16-2009, 03:35 PM
  #105
LEIFey
Context Matters!
 
LEIFey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Ann Arbor, MI
Country: United States
Posts: 7,318
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to LEIFey
meh, i'd rather see giroux bring out the hidden offensive potential in cote and carcillo. the potential to offend

i agree though that i don't think giroux is suited to playing with carter. giroux needs the puck to work his magic and there isn't enough of it to go around with a puckhog like carter on his line.

LEIFey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-16-2009, 03:38 PM
  #106
Jester
Registered User
 
Jester's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: St. Andrews
Country: Scotland
Posts: 34,075
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by go kim johnsson 514 View Post
I said somewhere else, if they're really shopping Briere, I'm sure he knows about it, and told them what teams he would accept a trade to. If the Flyers were to have a deal done and then say "listen, we have a deal to trade you, will you go to ______" and he says no, the GM looks like an idiot.
Why does he look like an idiot...both teams are operating with the knowledge that Briere has the ability to nix a trade. Would it make sense to know what Briere's possible destinations might be? Sure...does it not make sense to see what's possible out there and then go to Briere with it? I don't see it that way.

Holmgren to GM X: would you be interested in trading for Briere?
GM X: Sure.

Holmgren to Briere: would you be interested in going to Team X?
Briere: Nope.
Holmgren: OK.

Jester is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-16-2009, 03:39 PM
  #107
CanadianFlyer88
Moderator
Knublin' PPs
 
CanadianFlyer88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Van City
Posts: 14,702
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by UseYourAllusion View Post
Carter dominates the puck though, and Giroux is a player I see as a creator. I'm thinking a Gagne-Richards-Giroux would be a better fit.
I like the way Giroux handles the puck more than I do Carter. Carter's line is the worst on the team for keeping pressure in the offensive zone this year; with a creative player like Giroux keeping the puck out of Carter's hands in the offensive zone it will create more chances. It would even allow Hartnell to set up in front of the net, which he didn't do very much this past season at even strength.

I also think a line of Gagne-Richards-Lupul (if Briere is moved) or Gagne-Richards-Briere (if Lupul is moved) makes a great compliment to the above Carter line, should the Flyers revert to a more traditional third line checking group.

There's a lot of time before we'll know the make up of next year's Flyers; I was just happy to see someone else entertain the idea of Giroux with Carter.

CanadianFlyer88 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-16-2009, 03:53 PM
  #108
Jester
Registered User
 
Jester's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: St. Andrews
Country: Scotland
Posts: 34,075
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CanadianFlyer88 View Post
I like the way Giroux handles the puck more than I do Carter. Carter's line is the worst on the team for keeping pressure in the offensive zone this year; with a creative player like Giroux keeping the puck out of Carter's hands in the offensive zone it will create more chances. It would even allow Hartnell to set up in front of the net, which he didn't do very much this past season at even strength.
I think you need to go back and look at some of Carter's goals again...I think Hartnell's ass deserves significant credit for Carter's breakout season. Hartnell, with ease, lays down the best screens on the roster and they take advantage of them just as much at even strength as they do on the PP.

That being said, I do like the idea in theory of Giroux helping to slow down the pace of Carter's play...the issue would be whether Carter actually would defer puck possession some to another player. Is Carter capable of playing at that slower pace...same reason I wouldn't have a problem with Briere being on his line.

Quote:
I also think a line of Gagne-Richards-Lupul (if Briere is moved) or Gagne-Richards-Briere (if Lupul is moved) makes a great compliment to the above Carter line, should the Flyers revert to a more traditional third line checking group.
You can stick anyone with Gagen and Richards and it will be good. That being said, remember that any significant cap move likely means Knuble is back.

Quote:
There's a lot of time before we'll know the make up of next year's Flyers; I was just happy to see someone else entertain the idea of Giroux with Carter.
Additionally...the lines you go into camp with will not be the only lines you use during the course of the year.

Jester is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-16-2009, 04:12 PM
  #109
dawkins121
Registered User
 
dawkins121's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Philadelphia
Country: United States
Posts: 2,415
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by go kim johnsson 514 View Post
I said somewhere else, if they're really shopping Briere, I'm sure he knows about it, and told them what teams he would accept a trade to. If the Flyers were to have a deal done and then say "listen, we have a deal to trade you, will you go to ______" and he says no, the GM looks like an idiot.
Actually I think that's the way it usually works. There have been plenty of deals that have been nixed when the player refuses to waive his NTC, not just in hockey. Take Jake Peavy for example. A few weeks ago the Padres had a deal in place to send him to the White Sox and THEN he said no go.

dawkins121 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-16-2009, 04:18 PM
  #110
CanadianFlyer88
Moderator
Knublin' PPs
 
CanadianFlyer88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Van City
Posts: 14,702
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jester View Post
I think you need to go back and look at some of Carter's goals again...I think Hartnell's ass deserves significant credit for Carter's breakout season. Hartnell, with ease, lays down the best screens on the roster and they take advantage of them just as much at even strength as they do on the PP.
Hartnell has a nose for the net and, yes, he was instrumental in helping Carter nearly hit 50 goals. I want to see shifts where Hartnell has his ass planted in front of opposition goaltenders for more than just a few seconds, though. This line didn't take advantage of Hartnell's net presence like it could have.

This wouldn't just help Carter, though; something the Flyers lacked this season was goals from the defense. Slow Carter's line down, take advantage of the time in the offensive zone and open up lanes for the defense, as well as Carter. That's what I was referring to at even strength from Carter's line.

Quote:
That being said, I do like the idea in theory of Giroux helping to slow down the pace of Carter's play...the issue would be whether Carter actually would defer puck possession some to another player. Is Carter capable of playing at that slower pace...same reason I wouldn't have a problem with Briere being on his line.
I would have liked to see Briere with Carter at one point and, if it happened this season, I wouldn't be opposed.

I don't think puck possession would be a huge issue for Carter if Giroux was on his line. We won't know unless we see it; I'd like to see them get the chance to play together.

Quote:
You can stick anyone with Gagne and Richards and it will be good. That being said, remember that any significant cap move likely means Knuble is back.
True enough.

Regarding Knuble, I would have liked him to have fewer even strength minutes this past season. If the Flyers go the checking line route, Knuble would be a good fit for this season.

Quote:
Additionally...the lines you go into camp with will not be the only lines you use during the course of the year.
Again, true enough. There are far too many factors to consider at this point; it's fun to speculate, though.

CanadianFlyer88 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-16-2009, 04:22 PM
  #111
Haute Couturier
Registered User
 
Haute Couturier's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Philadelphia
Country: United States
Posts: 5,972
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by FlyerX View Post
I don't know what's going to happen with the cap, it should be getting set soon with UFA time coming up in 2 weeks. I was spot on in calling $58M last year. I don't know what revenue time frame they look at. If it's the 2008 calender year, it may go up $1M or so. If Briere can stay healthy, help keep the PP near the top of the league and score around a point per game, they can use him.

Biron out for Emery has bought them some breathing room.
I didn't mean this upcoming season's cap. I mean next season's cap where the early estimates that it could drop down to $50M or so. That would be tough, especially considering Coburn, Parent, and Emery will need new contracts. At that point no one would want Briere's awful contract. This year's cap is supposed to stay the same or drop depending whether or not they use the 5% inflator.

Quote:
Originally Posted by FlyHigh View Post
Couple things.

A) Trading JVR makes no sense right now. Given the fact that their have been persistent rumors about him, I don't think he has a huge amount of value plus outside of MSP, the top forward prospects in the draft are centers and why would we need Cowen when we already have 2 stay at home prospects in Marshall and Parent?

B) If they want to win now (which seems to be the direction they're trending in), why does trading Briere make sense? Sign a 3rd line C, trade Lupul, put Briere in the top-6.

I can always see some rationale for trading Briere, but considering that they seem to be trying to win in the next couple years, trading him for a pick that won't be ready to contribute doesn't make very much sense.

Stoll wouldn't be bad although his -23 year a couple years ago is a little odd.
A) Who cares what position they play? You can never have too much depth at any position. We have no idea what our roster could look like in 2-3 years so it's a bit stupid to pass up on a good prospect just because we may have depth at a certain position today. A lot can change in that time, plus it doesn't hurt to add another asset which could give us the opportunity to trade from a position of strength for a position of need.

B) Cap space is at a premium and Briere is the most redundant contract on the roster. If you want to be able to upgrade our defense or keep most of our core together for the long haul then it makes sense to dump his salary.

Stoll was playing on a poor team and was coming off a major concussion that year.

Quote:
Originally Posted by FlyHigh View Post
The fact that this statement is out there just continues to amaze me. JVR was the best player on a UNH team that significantly overachieved this past year and was very damn close to knocking BU out of the NCAAs.
Well he was supposed to be their best player considering he was the most talented player UNH has ever recruited. That still doesn't mean his season wasn't a disappointment. The organization was unhappy with his development, he was a disappointment at the WJC, and didn't show that much in the AHL. That's not to say he's a bust, but I don't know how you can say his season wasn't a disappointment.

Haute Couturier is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-16-2009, 04:28 PM
  #112
FlyHigh
Registered User
 
FlyHigh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 28,156
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to FlyHigh Send a message via MSN to FlyHigh
Quote:
Originally Posted by Libertine View Post
A) Who cares what position they play? You can never have too much depth at any position. We have no idea what our roster could look like in 2-3 years so it's a bit stupid to pass up on a good prospect just because we may have depth at a certain position today. A lot can change in that time, plus it doesn't hurt to add another asset which could give us the opportunity to trade from a position of strength for a position of need.

B) Cap space is at a premium and Briere is the most redundant contract on the roster. If you want to be able to upgrade our defense or keep most of our core together for the long haul then it makes sense to dump his salary.
A) What the hell are we going to do with Braydon Schenn? He's an awesome 2-way prospect at C, too bad we already have 2 of those. Both Duchene and Kane are Cs too and those are the 2-4 forwards in the draft.

You need to think somewhat about positions in the draft.

B) Dump Lupul and Carle first, there's nearly 8 million right there and both Lupul and Carle are more easily replaceable.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Libertine
Well he was supposed to be their best player considering he was the most talented player UNH has ever recruited. That still doesn't mean his season wasn't a disappointment. The organization was unhappy with his development, he was a disappointment at the WJC, and didn't show that much in the AHL. That's not to say he's a bust, but I don't know how you can say his season wasn't a disappointment.
Fail train pulling into the station. Once again, it's amazing how the people who have actually watched JVR play are impressed with him and the ones that haven't think he is a bust.

As for the organization's view, seeing that in the past year, they've extended Lupul for little to no reason, signed Jones to a contract for twice what he's worth, waived Vaananen and Metro in order to make room for Jones who still needed surgery, kept Stevens despite our horrid March and playoff embarrassment, traded Upshall and a pick for an inferior player, and decided to go after the immortal Ray Emery and let our best starter of the past 20 years test the FA market, I'm not really going to put any stock in their opinions.

FlyHigh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-16-2009, 04:31 PM
  #113
Jester
Registered User
 
Jester's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: St. Andrews
Country: Scotland
Posts: 34,075
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CanadianFlyer88 View Post
Hartnell has a nose for the net and, yes, he was instrumental in helping Carter nearly hit 50 goals. I want to see shifts where Hartnell has his ass planted in front of opposition goaltenders for more than just a few seconds, though. This line didn't take advantage of Hartnell's net presence like it could have.
It's hard to just plant a guy in front of the net at even strength...cuz then he can't really help in cycling the puck, and chasing the puck, and everything else that you need your forwards doing. I think you'd be hard pressed to find teams that are just planting a guy in the net as a matter of philosophy.

What Hartnell is very good at is timing himself to skate through the crease right as the shot is coming, which is really what you want to be doing, as this doesn't really let the defenders move you out either. What he needs to cut down on is skating into the goalie while he's doing this, but I often think he's doing that purposefully...which is just annoying.

Quote:
This wouldn't just help Carter, though; something the Flyers lacked this season was goals from the defense. Slow Carter's line down, take advantage of the time in the offensive zone and open up lanes for the defense, as well as Carter. That's what I was referring to at even strength from Carter's line.
I think that has more to do with our defense and the type of offensive possessions we had than anything the forwards are specifically doing in front of the net. Timonen is our only real "offensive" D, and he doesn't really have a stellar shot, just a good one.

Jester is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-16-2009, 04:33 PM
  #114
Jester
Registered User
 
Jester's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: St. Andrews
Country: Scotland
Posts: 34,075
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by FlyHigh View Post
A) What the hell are we going to do with Braydon Schenn? He's an awesome 2-way prospect at C, too bad we already have 2 of those. Both Duchene and Kane are Cs too and those are the 2-4 forwards in the draft.

You need to think somewhat about positions in the draft.
No...BPA. Every time. Always take the best player at that spot, regardless of position. Then, if necessary, you can trade from a position of strength.

Position, especially at forward, is a waste of time when discusing 18 year old prospects. Simon Gagne was a center upon a time.

Jester is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-16-2009, 04:42 PM
  #115
TheKingPin
Registered User
 
TheKingPin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Country: United States
Posts: 7,966
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jester View Post
No...BPA. Every time. Always take the best player at that spot, regardless of position. Then, if necessary, you can trade from a position of strength.

Position, especially at forward, is a waste of time when discusing 18 year old prospects. Simon Gagne was a center upon a time.
yea but in this situation this is incorrect. for the flyers and for the rest of the NHL top flight dmen are worth more than top forwards. so if you are planning to trade for a dman it makes more sense to just draft them in the first place.

TheKingPin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-16-2009, 04:49 PM
  #116
Jester
Registered User
 
Jester's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: St. Andrews
Country: Scotland
Posts: 34,075
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheKingPin View Post
yea but in this situation this is incorrect. for the flyers and for the rest of the NHL top flight dmen are worth more than top forwards. so if you are planning to trade for a dman it makes more sense to just draft them in the first place.
so, if we equate the BPA to a value designation for the players...why wouldn't this claim be subsumed into the BPA strategy?

you should never draft a player above where you think he should go in the draft (within reason). if you want a player and they're a few spots lower in the draft...trade down.

drafting by position leads to not getting the full value of your draft pick.

Jester is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-16-2009, 04:53 PM
  #117
FlyHigh
Registered User
 
FlyHigh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 28,156
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to FlyHigh Send a message via MSN to FlyHigh
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jester View Post
No...BPA. Every time. Always take the best player at that spot, regardless of position. Then, if necessary, you can trade from a position of strength.

Position, especially at forward, is a waste of time when discusing 18 year old prospects. Simon Gagne was a center upon a time.
I don't think so in this case.

I think in Rounds 2-7, that's a good philosophy, but in Round 1, organizational need has to come into play.

For instance, when we traded up to get Pickard and got Sbisa, a lot of people would have said that maybe Tedenby was the BPA, certainly a dynamic prospect that tore it up in Sweden this past year in the playoffs I believe.

But would you be happier with Tedenby in the organization or with Sbisa? I know which one I would choose for us.

I mean, the Lions did BPA 3 years in a row and ask them how that worked out.

You have to at least consider organizational need in the 1st round. It shouldn't be a deciding factor, but it needs to be a consideration and right now, it really makes no sense for the Flyers to trade into the top-5 unless they get Hedman/Tavares.

FlyHigh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-16-2009, 05:04 PM
  #118
BobbyClarkeFan16
Registered User
 
BobbyClarkeFan16's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: London Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,991
vCash: 500
God only knows what Holmgren has in mind. However, if Holmgren can swing a deal like Briere, JVR and the Flyers first round pick for Stoll, Bernier and LA's first round pick, then he's done a fabulous job in my mind. We've got the third line center everyone claims we need, we got a top notch goaltending prospect, and we get a high first round pick that maybe they use to deal down with to get more picks.

As for Jared Cowen, not sold on him at all. A 6'5 defender who just had major knee surgery. Speed and mobility was a big part of his game. It's just such a big unknown as to how he's going to respond. I'd have to think they're looking at one of the top rated forwards at that spot. I know the name Schenn is coming up a lot and you've got to believe that they're also looking at guys like Kadri and Kane as well. However, keep an eye on the name Oliver Ekman-Larsson. He seems to be rocketing up the list.

BobbyClarkeFan16 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-16-2009, 05:06 PM
  #119
Jester
Registered User
 
Jester's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: St. Andrews
Country: Scotland
Posts: 34,075
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by FlyHigh View Post
I don't think so in this case.

I think in Rounds 2-7, that's a good philosophy, but in Round 1, organizational need has to come into play.

...

I mean, the Lions did BPA 3 years in a row and ask them how that worked out.

You have to at least consider organizational need in the 1st round. It shouldn't be a deciding factor, but it needs to be a consideration and right now, it really makes no sense for the Flyers to trade into the top-5 unless they get Hedman/Tavares.
Actually, I could not disagree more. Rd. 1 is the round where it is most important that you draft BPA, as those are the players that are most reliable in their "panning out." Further you go in the draft the more of a complete guess it is, so, sure, load up at positions after there and hope you find a gem at whatever position you need, but Rd. 1 ABSOLUTELY needs to be all about an evaluation of pure talent and getting the best possible talent, regardless of position.

If you are vehement about drafting a position, then trade down...but drafting someone over their slot just because you want position X is flat stupid, and poor asset management.

As for the Lions...you could question a couple of things: 1) did they draft the best players...since they appear to have drafted a lot of BUSTS, which leads me to believe they weren't doing a good job of figuring out BPA; and 2) they should have traded down.

Jester is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-16-2009, 05:11 PM
  #120
BobbyClarkeFan16
Registered User
 
BobbyClarkeFan16's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: London Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,991
vCash: 500
In regards to the Detroit Lions, Matt Millen was a moron. It was just drafting he sucked at, he also sucked at signing free agents, coaches, etc.....He was just in completely over his head and had zero idea on how a franchise was to be run. There were numerous occasions where his scouts said who the best player available was, and he vetoed his own scouts because he fell in love with the 'hotshot' of the day so to speak. Detroit never used best player available because the scouts would identify who the best player was and Millen would do his own thing anyways.

There was an article on this from cnnsi.com a few weeks before the NFL draft where various scouts within the Detroit organization talked about how out of sorts Millen was with the scouts. So, I wouldn't use Detroit as an example of drafting BPA. If you really want to talk about a team that drafts BPA, talk about New England. They're probably the model franchise in terms of how to run a draft.

BobbyClarkeFan16 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-16-2009, 05:17 PM
  #121
captainpaxil
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Country: United States
Posts: 2,179
vCash: 500
id love to work something out for johnson. handzus is a cap dump but id willingly eat it if the rest of the package is nice. i have no interest in stoll.

captainpaxil is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-16-2009, 05:21 PM
  #122
HoverCarle*
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,859
vCash: 500
Send a message via MSN to HoverCarle*
at least Stoll can win a faceoff unlike our centres

HoverCarle* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-16-2009, 05:28 PM
  #123
FlyHigh
Registered User
 
FlyHigh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 28,156
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to FlyHigh Send a message via MSN to FlyHigh
Quote:
Originally Posted by BobbyClarkeFan16
If you really want to talk about a team that drafts BPA, talk about New England. They're probably the model franchise in terms of how to run a draft.
Exactly. And what have the Pats done the past couple years? They've traded down. 2008 Draft, they came in with the 7th overall and a desperate need for an LB. So they traded down to 10 and took Jerod Mayo. Smart draft. The Pats have always drafted on need, remember when they were thin on the O-line and drafted Logan Mankins out of left field, who's laughing at that now?

The Pats draft on need and trade picks around to try to make sure that their need pick and the BPA are the same as much as they can.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jester View Post
Actually, I could not disagree more. Rd. 1 is the round where it is most important that you draft BPA, as those are the players that are most reliable in their "panning out." Further you go in the draft the more of a complete guess it is, so, sure, load up at positions after there and hope you find a gem at whatever position you need, but Rd. 1 ABSOLUTELY needs to be all about an evaluation of pure talent and getting the best possible talent, regardless of position.

If you are vehement about drafting a position, then trade down...but drafting someone over their slot just because you want position X is flat stupid, and poor asset management.

As for the Lions...you could question a couple of things: 1) did they draft the best players...since they appear to have drafted a lot of BUSTS, which leads me to believe they weren't doing a good job of figuring out BPA; and 2) they should have traded down.
You seem to be missing my point.

I argue that moving into the top-5 would make no sense because we are already absolutely set at C and pretty set at defensive D. So if there was one player it would make sense for us to trade up and get, it'd probably be MSP.

But MSP won't go in the top-5, so why would you trade into the top-5?

The only reason to trade into the top-5 would be to immediately start trying to trade down and stockpile more picks and seeing as JVR is more of a sure thing than MSP right now, I really don't see how that makes any sense.

EDIT: I should clarify that you shouldn't take Player A who's worse than Player B because he fits an organizational need in the 1st round, but unless you absolutely love Player B, you trade down in the 1st round and try to nab Player A a few picks later.

FlyHigh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-16-2009, 05:33 PM
  #124
HoverCarle*
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,859
vCash: 500
Send a message via MSN to HoverCarle*
well we could trade for the 5th and then deal it for the 7th or 8th, not a big deal

HoverCarle* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-16-2009, 05:34 PM
  #125
blah
Registered User
 
blah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 4,269
vCash: 500
The Flyers are not set at center. They still need a third line center. They don't need the 5th overall pick or Jack Johnson. They need Zues or Stoll.

blah is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:24 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. ©2014 All Rights Reserved.