They don't necessarily "fail". They just end being disappointments. Remember when there was a legitimate debate between Doughty and Stamkos? No debate now. Bogosian, Schenn, and Alzner are replaceable defensive-minded defensemen. Erik Johnson has been a big disappointment. Jack Johnson has never put it all together defensively. There just isn't much success in the top-5. You don't get the Norris candidates you expected.
If you trust your scouts and development, then you let them do what they do. If the best player available is a defenseman, you take him, and hope he's more Pietrangelo than Bogosian.
They don't necessarily "fail". They just end being disappointments. Remember when there was a legitimate debate between Doughty and Stamkos? No debate now. Bogosian, Schenn, and Alzner are replaceable defensive-minded defensemen. Erik Johnson has been a big disappointment. Jack Johnson has never put it all together defensively. There just isn't much success in the top-5. You don't get the Norris candidates you expected.
That's because Norris candidates don't come along every season. The same 5 guys win it for like a 10-15 year period.
All you are looking for is a #1 Dman at Burn's level. Which Murray, or Dumba, or somebody else could be.
I'm going to trust with who'm they pick. Also i can't fault the team for wanting to win, you have to keep in my that these guys have to live with this season, they all want to end on a positive note and i can't blame them for that. Sure it be great to tank but we just have to hope we lost more then we win but get good effort.
as for this draft.
Murray
Rielly
Ceci
Trouba
Reinhart
Bystrom
are some of the elite dman i see, or "best picks" i will not be shocked one ****ing bit if we trade down a bit and pick Bystrom with our pick, he is a Brodinlike player who is having a quiet season. to me he represents what Flahr looks for in a dman, we don't know much about him but name me one guy on here who had Brodin on our radar last year.
very young like Brodin saw some time in SEL but don't throw you panties in a bunch because he didn't blaze the league up with points saw limited ice time shutting down, has some offensive tools tho given his point production in like level leagues.
That's more a scouting issue than a "let's not pick a Dman in the top-10" issue.
It goes beyond just a scouting a issue. It points to how difficult it is to project the future of a defensemen versus a forward.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr Jan Itor
If you trust your scouts and development, then you let them do what they do. If the best player available is a defenseman, you take him, and hope he's more Pietrangelo than Bogosian.
Probably one of the biggest mistakes a manager can do is trust scouts too much. Above all, the draft is a crapshoot. It's funny looking back at old drafts and watching teams being so sure of their future bust. Lately drafting a defensemen high is taking risk to the highest level without a high reward to match.
Quote:
Originally Posted by nickschultzfan
That's because Norris candidates don't come along every season. The same 5 guys win it for like a 10-15 year period.
All you are looking for is a #1 Dman at Burn's level. Which Murray, or Dumba, or somebody else could be.
Still, don't you find it troubling that the last top-drafted Norris winner was selected in 1993? Almost 20 years of drafting has gone by, and the only Norris winners selected after 1993 are two 2nd rounders. Lidstrom has been outstanding but there's been seasons where he was beatable. And if you look at recent younger candidates, few are coming from high in the draft. On the other hand, look at the best forwards in the game. By and large they were drafted top-5.
My order of needs for the Wild would be this:
1. star forward
2. top goal scoring winger
3. true #1 defensemen
Work the first two through the high draft. Find #3 already in the NHL if you don't get lucky in the draft.
when has anyone dealt a true #1 defenseman without giving up #1 on your list? They don't come up in FA very often. This year looks to have one, but who else has made to FA (i mean as an established defenseman, not a guy who later became one).
when has anyone dealt a true #1 defenseman without giving up #1 on your list? They don't come up in FA very often. This year looks to have one, but who else has made to FA (i mean as an established defenseman, not a guy who later became one).
Chris Pronger, one of the best #1s, has been traded three times since 2005. The players involved going the other way have been Lupul (twice), Brewer, Smid, Sbisa, Woywitka, and someone named Lynch. The rest were picks. None of them are even close to #1 or #2 on my list.
Chris Pronger, one of the best #1s, has been traded three times since 2005. The players involved going the other way have been Lupul (twice), Brewer, Smid, Sbisa, Woywitka, and someone named Lynch. The rest were picks. None of them are even close to #1 or #2 on my list.
i was more asking out of curiosity. pronger out of eddy...they were kind of forced, right?
Count me in the Trouba camp. I got to see him play against Dubuque last week, and the kid is a stud. There were a ton of scouts at that game, which is no surprise since there were 5 potential 1st rounders on the ice.
Things I noticed while watching Trouba.
He's poised... the game is slower for him than for other players at the USHL level.
He plays with his head up and makes good passes out of the zone.
He's physical. He's not running around hitting people, but he wins the puck in the corners. Also, I got to see him answer the bell with Z Girgensons, and Trouba rocked him.
He's got an NHL body already. He was the most mature looking player on the Developmental team.
BTW... I saw scouts from Toronto, Buffalo, Anaheim that were wearing logo gear. Outside of that, there were another 7-8 guys sitting in the scouts section.
Still, don't you find it troubling that the last top-drafted Norris winner was selected in 1993? Almost 20 years of drafting has gone by, and the only Norris winners selected after 1993 are two 2nd rounders. Lidstrom has been outstanding but there's been seasons where he was beatable. And if you look at recent younger candidates, few are coming from high in the draft. On the other hand, look at the best forwards in the game. By and large they were drafted top-5.
My order of needs for the Wild would be this:
1. star forward
2. top goal scoring winger
3. true #1 defensemen
Work the first two through the high draft. Find #3 already in the NHL if you don't get lucky in the draft.
So now we define #1 defensemen by "who won the Norris trophy?" It's all well and good that "since 1993..." and that "Lidstrom was beatable" but the fact of the matter is, the league handed Lidstrom the trophy 7 times. He might have actually deserved to win 3 of those, but when one guy wins it over and over again, and you try to use that stat as some sort of proof that high draft picks are bad, you've gone completely off your rocker.
It's hardly worth arguing though. You've already had to switch your argument twice. A couple months ago you didn't want to select a defenseman in the first round because they bust so frequently. But we pointed out that was a completely fabricated fact with no basis in reality. Then you changed your story and you didn't want a defenseman in the first round because you can find all star defensemen later in the draft. But we pointed out that after the first round, each draft has an average of 1 defenseman who will make the all-star game ever in his career. Now you've got some bizarre analogy about how many win a trophy which is more a popularity contest than a real competition, and is only awarded to a single player every year.
You need to get over the fact that you can't magically conjure up a star forward or goal scoring winger. If Yakupov, Galchenyuk, or Grigorenko is available, draft them. If they're not, picking Faksa or Gaunce even 1st overall wouldn't magically convert them into a goal scoring winger any more than drafting Murray 4th would turn him into Nik Lidstrom. What you so clearly can't even begin to grasp the concept of is that you can only draft players who exist. You can't draft Phil Kessel 5th overall in this draft because Phil Kessel isn't eligible for this draft. LA could have taken Sam Gagne 4th overall in 2007, but he would still be Sam Gagne. Drafting him higher wouldn't have magically turned him into some sort of star. This team will make a selection based upon who is remaining on the draft board, and all your crying won't change a single iota of the potential and ability that those players possess. If the star forwards and goal scoring wingers are all gone (and they almost certainly will be if we're picking later than 5) then you can't pick them.
