HFBoards

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

Derrick Pouliot | Defenseman | Portland (WHL) | 1st Round, 8th overall

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
06-26-2012, 11:53 PM
  #301
IHWR
The Chiropractor
 
IHWR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Ottawa, ON
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,396
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jules Winnfield View Post
Christ. Slava Fetisov must've been 90 when he retired then.

I just did a little googling and I guess a Western Conference GM said the same thing about Grigorenko at the Draft. I guess my "inside info" would have been more relevant a few days ago...and that's why I usually keep these things to myself.

Either that or my Western Conference GM friend needs to shut his trap around Damien Cox.

IHWR is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-26-2012, 11:54 PM
  #302
Jules Winnfield
Top 6 wing please...
 
Jules Winnfield's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 6,110
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by IHWR View Post
Then they'd be incredibly wrong. Yakupov was the best player in this draft by a nautical mile. If he had gone any lower than first overall then the Oilers should be relegated.

When people look back at the 2012 Draft it'll be Nail...then everyone else.
I don't think anyone is saying Yakupov isn't the best prospect for the 2012 draft. He's not "perfect," that's all I'm saying. The odds of finding a perfect 17 year old hockey player are incredibly small. As much hype as there was about Crosby, people wondered if his lack of size would affect him in the NHL.

I'm just saying in all the years I've been watching hockey, the only prospect I've never seen knocked for anything was Lindros. The knock on drafting Lindros didn't have to do with his play or anything like that. It was his father's involvement with managing him.

Jules Winnfield is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-27-2012, 12:21 AM
  #303
Tender Rip
Learning from Scuds?
 
Tender Rip's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Shanghai, China
Posts: 12,697
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Jiggyfly View Post
How do you know that, exactly?

We have no clue what the depth of this team will look like in three years.
Interesting, considering that the comment of yours to which I replied was you agreeing that defense is where we are going to have the most changes - stating that this is what everybody overlooks.
So you know where changes are coming, and can make a point of that, but others can have no clue ?

Beyond that I obviously agree that we can't really know how the team will look like, what with trades and different development paths of prospects. What we can know is that we have (and already had) many more high end D-men prospects than forwards. This of course has consequences for those later picks chances of getting into the pro team, and if they don't get into the pro team, it has significant consequences for their trade/asset value for us. Just see Strait and Bortuzzo if we don't make space for them this off-season. Then we're looking at Letestu returns for guys who could easily be 3rd pairing D-men in the NHL, at sweet heart contracts.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Jiggyfly View Post
The difference is people want to draft for a current weakness, that I am 100% sure will be fixed because Staal has been moved.
No one here expected any forward picked this season to be a current/immediate solution, I think. No one would have predicted that Tarasenko would have been an immediate solution either, but I would have sure liked for him to be picked if he had been in this draft. Forsberg in many ways is the Tarasenko of this years draft. One who was seen as the top European forward available and slid perhaps because it was unsure when he'd be coming over.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Jiggyfly View Post
When have I ever said I trust what this org does unconditionally? That is classic...
I was being quite specific. 'Trust this org' is obviously what you are saying as regards drafting D-men in the first round and building this stock pile. You said it before the draft and after. Never mind that few if any are against the player(s) picked, not too much at least, it doesn't mean that everyone has to think your big picture ideas are in fact the only big picture worth considering.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Jiggyfly View Post
I am simply pointing out that Shero now as an unreal blueline pool to build his big club. If people can't see the rare value in that, they need to open up their minds and put down the draft guides for a minute.
Everyone sees the value of having it, but we already had a great pool, and in adding Dumoulin even more so. With this many high profile D-prospects and a constant need to also have veterans on D to actually have a chance at winning anything, we are not going to develop all these prospects to the point where they contribute on the the team nor merit big returns a'la Goligoski. Some will inevitably be caught in the numbers game. It is naive to think otherwise. That's part of the reason why some of us would like to have a little more balance, because a guy like Beau Bennett for instance, while IMO not quite the talent many of our D-men are, he will be on this team if he doesn't tank development wise. If nothing else because we have precious few others. When you have access to forwards with significantly more pedigree than Bennett and instead go a bit off the board to draft a D-man whose way to the NHL will be longer and has a stronger pipeline in front of him, then it isn't weird that some of us are... hesitant to thinking this the smartest choice.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Jiggyfly View Post
The irony is, I also watched them pass up a few fwds I really wanted, but that doesn't mean I am going to whine about it, especially when Shero ends up doing exactly as I predicted he would. Me whining would be kind of hypocritical, given that I flat out stated I felt his best course of action was to continue adding to his deep blueline farm.
Disagreement isn't whining. I'd be more interested in reading who you did think should be picked than hearing you won't talk about that for fear of being branded a hypocritical whiner .

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Jiggyfly View Post
If someone like IHWR criticizes the pick, I respect him being disappointed. However, when people flat out say they never saw any of these players and all they did was read a draft guide... Then they ***** about the pick, that is foolish. Sorry.

I've already read a few people who said in no uncertain terms PF will be better than DP. Based on what? A draft guide? Please...
Clearly one would like to have better first hand knowledge on these players when opining, but just because one doesn't have regular access to junior hockey, one can do more than 'read a draft guide' (singular) to educate oneself on how credible hockey people evaluate these prospects. Of course some of us also do have access to feeds of international tourney games, so there is some basis for looking at a couple of the forwards discussed also.
You or IHWR or others here regularly bring input on prospects which everybody likes to read, and that is awesome, but it doesn't mean that there is no value to getting a consensus view from people working in the scouting community. Indeed, it doesn't mean that your predictions on talent is more credible than a consensus estimate from ISS for instance.

What it does do is make absolute statements about the level of players I/others here have never seen, meaningless. I haven't made any such statements. I don't know if Pouliot will become a better NHL'er than Forsberg. I am quite convinced that would have more need of Forsberg should he pan out than we'd have of Pouliot doing so though. With the majority of scouts thinking Forsberg a higher level talent than Pouliot, and one who is closer to contributing in the NHL, I can't see how it is whining to state a preference for thinking that the big picture. Indeed, lots of people believe we got the better D-man at 22. Going off the board invites scrutiny, that's nothing new.

Anyway, forza Pouliot. Hope he rocks .

Tender Rip is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-27-2012, 12:53 AM
  #304
Malkin4Top6Wingerz
Can you like, shutup
 
Malkin4Top6Wingerz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Country: United States
Posts: 4,953
vCash: 500
Awesome points TR. Agree with all of them.

Malkin4Top6Wingerz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-27-2012, 01:16 AM
  #305
Big McLargehuge
Global Moderator
HFBoards: Night's Watch
 
Big McLargehuge's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Los Angeles
Country: Iceland
Posts: 55,663
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jacob View Post
Forsberg struggled to produce against teenagers at the WJCs, too.

I really have nothing against Forsberg, other than that people seem to be blindly trumping him up, so I almost feel obligated to be the counter-point to that. I'd have been satisfied if we drafted him. He's just not perfect, and there's a reason 2 more teams passed on him after we did.

Grigorenko is money though. He has Malkin-like upside, in my opinion.
The World Juniors hold way too much weight on a prospect's stock, considering a bad week can result in a complete destruction of a prospect and a great week can raise the stock of a lousy prospect...it's just too small a sample size for players way too young to have the consistency thing under wraps yet. It's the sort of tournament where I'm more interested in the players that do well than in writing off the players that do so-so...especially in the case of Forsberg, who was younger than just about everyone in that tournament.

Forsberg is far from a sure thing, but he looks like he'll probably be a very good 2nd liner. That may not jump up and down as an amazing prospect, even if you take the low-line on his potential, but at 8th overall...I take that.

Forsberg I can see passing more than Grigorenko...but I have no doubt that the Russian factor played into things there...which is silly because we're one of two teams that can probably get Russians to actually come over pretty safely.

In the end I just think it has everything to do with Shero being far more comfortable drafting North American players, period. Grigorenko plays for the Quebec Ramparts, but so did Radulov. Määttä is an exception...but the fact that he's a Finn and the fact that he's a teammate of a top Penguins prospect definitely had to play into things there. Finns aren't nearly as big of flight risks and I have no doubt that the scouting staff was as familiar with Määttä as anyone in the draft. As much as I love the Määttä pick I really do with that our two first rounders weren't teammates of our first two picks last year...I love the potential chemistry that could breed, but it seems a little too weird to be a coincidence.

Quote:
Originally Posted by IHWR View Post
I have it on good authority from someone I trust that Grigorenko is probably 20 years old. I guess that's something that happens in smaller towns in Europe (like South American teams at the little league world series). The same guy said he also believes Malkin was closer to 20 when the Pens drafted him.
I've heard the rumors as well...and it definitely is common in the small towns in parts of Europe (some places it's easy to fake something like that...it's getting to the point where it's almost assumed that any baseball player from the Dominican Republic is 2 years older than what is listed)...but even if it is true, his skill is very real. Scoring well in the QMJHL wouldn't be that hard for an overage Russian skill player (our 6th rounder Zlobin had as many goals and 9 fewer points in 7 more games as a 19 year-old), but I prefer not to look at stat sheets too much when it comes to prospects. The video I've seen of Grigorenko says all I need to see...and even if he's 20 he's a damn good prospect.

I don't see anything near Malkin potential in the guy, but I do see him as having PPG potential...he's not the most likely to reach that potential around, but he's one of only two players in this class that I would say has that potential (Yakupov being the other).

As for Malkin being closer to 20 at his draft time...come on, man...look at his pre-draft photos. He looks like he's closer to 12 than 20.




At the end of the day we got a very good prospect, and someone our scouts are very high on...I have limited doubts that Pouliot won't either become a top four PMD for the Penguins or get us extremely good value on the trade market in the future. Pouliot wasn't the BPA by general consensus, and that makes it a hard pick to love, but he's still a very good prospect and one that would fit our system like a glove. None of us are professional scouts...I hate that write-off since some teams/scouts just keep missing way too clearly (looking at you, Columbus) for the paycheck to mean absolute credibility...but still...our guys have seen every one of these players more than we have. They may not have seen much of the European players...but neither have we.

__________________
“The most terrifying fact about the universe is not that it is hostile, but that it is indifferent. If we can come to terms with this indifference and accept the challenges of life within the boundaries of death, our existence as a species can have genuine meaning and fulfillment. However vast the darkness, we must supply our own light.” - Stanley Kubrick
http://sprites.pokecheck.org/i/054.gif

Last edited by Big McLargehuge: 06-27-2012 at 01:27 AM.
Big McLargehuge is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-27-2012, 01:43 AM
  #306
Ragamuffin Gunner
Lost in The Flood
 
Ragamuffin Gunner's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Boston
Country: United States
Posts: 16,619
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Milliardo View Post
I believe that Mr. Burgundy will come out and eat crow (if Pouliot turns out great), Muffin, not so much, sorry
What the **** is that supposed to mean?

Ragamuffin Gunner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-27-2012, 01:56 AM
  #307
Ragamuffin Gunner
Lost in The Flood
 
Ragamuffin Gunner's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Boston
Country: United States
Posts: 16,619
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Jiggyfly View Post
How do you know that, exactly?

We have no clue what the depth of this team will look like in three years.



The difference is people want to draft for a current weakness, that I am 100% sure will be fixed because Staal has been moved.

Again, big picture here.



When have I ever said I trust what this org does unconditionally? That is classic...

How many times have I criticized this org inability to draft and develop top six fwds? I am simply pointing out that Shero now as an unreal blueline pool to build his big club. If people can't see the rare value in that, they need to open up their minds and put down the draft guides for a minute.

The irony is, I also watched them pass up a few fwds I really wanted, but that doesn't mean I am going to whine about it, especially when Shero ends up doing exactly as I predicted he would. Me whining would be kind of hypocritical, given that I flat out stated I felt his best course of action was to continue adding to his deep blueline farm.

If someone like IHWR criticizes the pick, I respect him being disappointed. However, when people flat out say they never saw any of these players and all they did was read a draft guide... Then they ***** about the pick, that is foolish. Sorry.

I've already read a few people who said in no uncertain terms PF will be better than DP. Based on what? A draft guide? Please...

If people can't understand the value of what Shero just did here, cool. But I'm not going to agree with people who can't see the big picture.
I know you're talking about me, and TBH even had I seen both live I'd still defer to the likes of Bob Mac and other hockey analysts. I'm not some egomaniac that thinks that after seeing a player play that my opinion is gospel and anyone who doesn't agree with e is wrong.

The fact of the matter is that even if you've seen every shift that Pouliot and Fors have played up till now your opinion of who will be better in 3 years could very well be wrong.

You've seen DP, and that's great, but TBH if you were that good of a scout you wouldn't be posting on HF, you'd be an actual scout.

Ragamuffin Gunner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-27-2012, 02:39 AM
  #308
Milliardo
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Zürich
Country: Switzerland
Posts: 1,596
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ragamuffin Gunner View Post
Just because I haven't scouted these players doesn't mean I can't form an opinion about them.
Actually, it does. Especially when you state you opionion as fact, because that's what makes you look silly. And I love when arguments like "Shero-koolaid" come up, great. If something like that exists, you seem like a MAF koolaid adict.

Milliardo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-27-2012, 08:47 AM
  #309
Mr Jiggyfly
Registered User
 
Mr Jiggyfly's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 15,650
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tender Rip View Post
Interesting, considering that the comment of yours to which I replied was you agreeing that defense is where we are going to have the most changes - stating that this is what everybody overlooks.
So you know where changes are coming, and can make a point of that, but others can have no clue ?
No, that was JTs point. My point was that we have no clue what this roster will look like in three years.

Quote:
Beyond that I obviously agree that we can't really know how the team will look like, what with trades and different development paths of prospects. What we can know is that we have (and already had) many more high end D-men prospects than forwards. This of course has consequences for those later picks chances of getting into the pro team, and if they don't get into the pro team, it has significant consequences for their trade/asset value for us. Just see Strait and Bortuzzo if we don't make space for them this off-season. Then we're looking at Letestu returns for guys who could easily be 3rd pairing D-men in the NHL, at sweet heart contracts.
You are still making assumptions based on a roster three years from now. If the Pens scouts had DP rated above FP, they would of been foolish to take the winger prospect because it is a current weakness.

Furthermore, I believe I am one of the first people to caution about Bortuzo and Strait's waiver eligibility. However, Shero just turned Letestu into Marcantuoni, so I'm not going to complain. I hate the idea of losing either, but if one of them is traded, it more than likely means a young gun like Morrow or Despres forced the move. I can't say that would be such a bad scenario.

Quote:
No one here expected any forward picked this season to be a current/immediate solution, I think. No one would have predicted that Tarasenko would have been an immediate solution either, but I would have sure liked for him to be picked if he had been in this draft. Forsberg in many ways is the Tarasenko of this years draft. One who was seen as the top European forward available and slid perhaps because it was unsure when he'd be coming over.
Actually, Tarasenko only fell because of the Russian factor. He had an NHL ready body at the combine and blew scouts away. Comparing him to PF.... I'll just let that go.

There were a lot of concerns about PF ability at the next level, which is why he fell. Those questions were not present with Tarasenko; his drop was all politics. So trying to cherry pick him as a reason to support your argument is a big reach.

PF is not the prospect VT was.

Quote:
I was being quite specific. 'Trust this org' is obviously what you are saying as regards drafting D-men in the first round and building this stock pile. You said it before the draft and after. Never mind that few if any are against the player(s) picked, not too much at least, it doesn't mean that everyone has to think your big picture ideas are in fact the only big picture worth considering.
Again, context. I've questioned many things about what this org does. However, my point is and has remained about where the strength of this draft was, how Shero had a huge opportunity to build the deepest blueline farm in the league and the leverage and flexibility that would give him.

This is based on how difficult it is to find top four blueliners and the luxury of having an in house solution. We also know from experience the premium placed on blueliners around the league and the type of assets they can bring back.

So you call it trusting the org; I call it trusting history. Significant difference.

Quote:
Everyone sees the value of having it, but we already had a great pool, and in adding Dumoulin even more so. With this many high profile D-prospects and a constant need to also have veterans on D to actually have a chance at winning anything, we are not going to develop all these prospects to the point where they contribute on the the team nor merit big returns a'la Goligoski. Some will inevitably be caught in the numbers game. It is naive to think otherwise. That's part of the reason why some of us would like to have a little more balance, because a guy like Beau Bennett for instance, while IMO not quite the talent many of our D-men are, he will be on this team if he doesn't tank development wise. If nothing else because we have precious few others. When you have access to forwards with significantly more pedigree than Bennett and instead go a bit off the board to draft a D-man whose way to the NHL will be longer and has a stronger pipeline in front of him, then it isn't weird that some of us are... hesitant to thinking this the smartest choice.
You live under the assumption that each blueliner has to be fully developed to garner any value. The Pens stable of prospects include four #1s and two #2s. If they continue to develop, they don't have to spend time in the NHL to have significant value. Bortuzzo and Strait are a different story because of where they were taken and the style of game that they play.

I'm pretty sure if Shero went to move Morrow, Despres or Harrington this Summer, they would fetch a nice return.

Quote:
Disagreement isn't whining. I'd be more interested in reading who you did think should be picked than hearing you won't talk about that for fear of being branded a hypocritical whiner .
Saying one prospect for sure will be better than another one because Shero didn't take your "guy" is whining. If you disagree, that is your prerogative.

There is a way to disagree that I can respect (see IHWR) and a way to disagree that is purely whining.

Quote:
Clearly one would like to have better first hand knowledge on these players when opining, but just because one doesn't have regular access to junior hockey, one can do more than 'read a draft guide' (singular) to educate oneself on how credible hockey people evaluate these prospects. Of course some of us also do have access to feeds of international tourney games, so there is some basis for looking at a couple of the forwards discussed also.
You or IHWR or others here regularly bring input on prospects which everybody likes to read, and that is awesome, but it doesn't mean that there is no value to getting a consensus view from people working in the scouting community. Indeed, it doesn't mean that your predictions on talent is more credible than a consensus estimate from ISS for instance.
Nor does it mean ISS is more credible than Shero, Heinbuck and Sexton.

Quote:
What it does do is make absolute statements about the level of players I/others here have never seen, meaningless. I haven't made any such statements. I don't know if Pouliot will become a better NHL'er than Forsberg. I am quite convinced that would have more need of Forsberg should he pan out than we'd have of Pouliot doing so though. With the majority of scouts thinking Forsberg a higher level talent than Pouliot, and one who is closer to contributing in the NHL, I can't see how it is whining to state a preference for thinking that the big picture. Indeed, lots of people believe we got the better D-man at 22. Going off the board invites scrutiny, that's nothing new.
Just because you didn't make those statements, doesn't mean others didn't. Understand?

I have read tons of draft "grades" and not one expert called this pick a reach. In fact, every article I have read likes the pick.

The only people calling this a reach seems to be the wannabe experts on here who read a few draft guides.

This draft had so many players close together from 6-25, that calling DP a reach at 8 is absurd.

I had players I wanted more at 22 than Maatta, but I'm willing to be patient and I know there wasn't just one perfect pick in that slot. So I haven't preached about seeing the bigger picture anymore to others, than I have to myself.

Mr Jiggyfly is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-27-2012, 08:49 AM
  #310
Mr Jiggyfly
Registered User
 
Mr Jiggyfly's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 15,650
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ragamuffin Gunner View Post
I know you're talking about me, and TBH even had I seen both live I'd still defer to the likes of Bob Mac and other hockey analysts. I'm not some egomaniac that thinks that after seeing a player play that my opinion is gospel and anyone who doesn't agree with e is wrong.

The fact of the matter is that even if you've seen every shift that Pouliot and Fors have played up till now your opinion of who will be better in 3 years could very well be wrong.

You've seen DP, and that's great, but TBH if you were that good of a scout you wouldn't be posting on HF, you'd be an actual scout.
First of all, I have five or six posters in mind who whined to ridiculous levels, but yep you are one of them for sure.

Ironically, I actually know several scouts who post on here, but I'll let you get back to reading your draft guides.

Mr Jiggyfly is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-27-2012, 09:33 AM
  #311
Tender Rip
Learning from Scuds?
 
Tender Rip's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Shanghai, China
Posts: 12,697
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Jiggyfly View Post
No, that was JTs point. My point was that we have no clue what this roster will look like in three years.
Well, your "That is the key thing people are overlooking" reply to exactly that statement lend itself to misinterpretation then, bygones.

I'll leave most the rest because it would just be mincing words.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Jiggyfly View Post
Furthermore, I believe I am one of the first people to caution about Bortuzo and Strait's waiver eligibility.
Yes, it is one of the many things we are and have been agreeing on.
But seeing that you are also cognizant of this risk, I don't understand how you can dismiss the obvious risk of it happening with more recent picks also, what with building a pipeline long enough to insure that obviously not all of these guys will be Penguins.

Except it is tied to this:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Jiggyfly View Post
You live under the assumption that each blueliner has to be fully developed to garner any value. The Pens stable of prospects include four #1s and two #2s. If they continue to develop, they don't have to spend time in the NHL to have significant value. Bortuzzo and Strait are a different story because of where they were taken and the style of game that they play.

I'm pretty sure if Shero went to move Morrow, Despres or Harrington this Summer, they would fetch a nice return.
Dumoulin is now considered a prospect in this range also. He was the third and lesser part of the Staal deal, and Shero made it clear that Sutter was the key, citing that it was big to get a young quality player who has proven himself in the NHL.
We are very happy with Morrow and Despres' development, and rightly so, but that doesn't mean they have great trade value yet.

Again, Gardiner was a throw in with Lupul for Anaheim to get Beauchemin back. Gardiner is comparable to many of our prospects - or more correctly was at the time. We know what proven players like Whitney and Gogo returned - why don't you cite me an example of a young gun getting moved for a sizable return if you want to make a better case that my fear of it being unlikely is so misplaced?

The closest I can get in latter years is David Rundblad, who had already made the NHL roster out of camp after taking major strides in the SEL and having had huge performances with team Sweden (after which St.Louis traded him to Ottawa for a 1st). When leaving Ottawa (along with a 2nd round pick) he fetched an underperforming (big) talent, Turris, locked in a contract dispute.

That trade now looks great for Ottawa, after the St.Louis one looked bad when they picked Tarasenko. But examples are really scarce. Much more often, unproven prospects are sweeteners, not main pieces, in deals for big players.


Last edited by Tender Rip: 06-27-2012 at 09:52 AM.
Tender Rip is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-27-2012, 09:47 AM
  #312
mpp9
Registered User
 
mpp9's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Country: United States
Posts: 18,741
vCash: 500
I'm not of the opinion Despres can be a centerpiece in a package for Ryan, but Id bet we could move him for a sizable return. He showed he's NHL ready in postseason hockey. Ridiculous combination of size, skating and puck skills.

I have a feeling after Suter and Garrison are signed. The market for defensemen is gonna go crazy. Like take on Martin's contract and giving up quite a bit to do so. And look to trade for high potential NHL ready guys when the vets are off the market.

mpp9 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-27-2012, 10:32 AM
  #313
Mr Jiggyfly
Registered User
 
Mr Jiggyfly's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 15,650
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tender Rip View Post
Well, your "That is the key thing people are overlooking" reply to exactly that statement lend itself to misinterpretation then, bygones.

I'll leave most the rest because it would just be mincing words.
No biggie.

Quote:
Yes, it is one of the many things we are and have been agreeing on.
But seeing that you are also cognizant of this risk, I don't understand how you can dismiss the obvious risk of it happening with more recent picks also, what with building a pipeline long enough to insure that obviously not all of these guys will be Penguins.

Except it is tied to this:

Dumoulin is now considered a prospect in this range also. He was the third and lesser part of the Staal deal, and Shero made it clear that Sutter was the key, citing that it was big to get a young quality player who has proven himself in the NHL.
We are very happy with Morrow and Despres' development, and rightly so, but that doesn't mean they have great trade value yet.

Again, Gardiner was a throw in with Lupul for Anaheim to get Beauchemin back. Gardiner is comparable to many of our prospects - or more correctly was at the time. We know what proven players like Whitney and Gogo returned - why don't you cite me an example of a young gun getting moved for a sizable return if you want to make a better case that my fear of it being unlikely is so misplaced?

The closest I can get in latter years is David Rundblad, who had already made the NHL roster out of camp after taking major strides in the SEL and having had huge performances with team Sweden (after which St.Louis traded him to Ottawa for a 1st). When leaving Ottawa (along with a 2nd round pick) he fetched an underperforming (big) talent, Turris, locked in a contract dispute.

That trade now looks great for Ottawa, after the St.Louis one looked bad when they picked Tarasenko. But examples are really scarce. Much more often, unproven prospects are sweeteners, not main pieces, in deals for big players.
I can easily point out how Voynov stepped in, made Johnson expendable, and nabbed the Kings Carter.

That is one example from a team that just won the cup. You also will have injuries that allow these kids to show off their potential and further increase their trade value. Maybe a guy like Morrow makes Letang expendable? It sounds crazy now, but you simply don't know. Letang could then be moved for a huge bounty. Despres could make Orpik expendable... Etc etc.

We have no idea what will happen.. But having a boatload of talent on the blueline is far from a bad thing. It opens up so many possibilities.

People also assume that all of these guys will fulfill their potential, but they won't. The more you have in your system, the more your odds increase of getting a few impact players.

Let's just say Shero will have a nice problem on his hands if each and every one of them works out. The more depth you have at a position, the more options you have as a GM.

People are worrying about a problem that may or may not transpire three years from now. Relax.

Mr Jiggyfly is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-27-2012, 10:47 AM
  #314
Tender Rip
Learning from Scuds?
 
Tender Rip's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Shanghai, China
Posts: 12,697
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Jiggyfly View Post
I can easily point out how Voynov stepped in, made Johnson expendable, and nabbed the Kings Carter.
I rest my case if that is the example you come up with to show how unproven D-prospects have strong trade value.....



While I appreciate the potential for a similar domino effect as what you cite here, you must understand that it is a terrible way to back up your previous argument, right? Gimme that much!

Tender Rip is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-27-2012, 11:14 AM
  #315
Mr Jiggyfly
Registered User
 
Mr Jiggyfly's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 15,650
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tender Rip View Post
I rest my case if that is the example you come up with to show how unproven D-prospects have strong trade value.....



While I appreciate the potential for a similar domino effect as what you cite here, you must understand that it is a terrible way to back up your previous argument, right? Gimme that much!
You are the one who seems to insist they will have to be traded before spending any time in the NHL and can only be used as "sweetners", not me.

You essentially want me to back an argument you are making? Nice spin...

However, if you want an example of a blueliner who spent no time in the NHL, that netted a big return, I'll call your bluff and connect the dots with two players you already mentioned:

Rundblad was taken 17th overall by the Blues in 2009. In 2010, he was traded to the Sens for the 16th pick. The Blues used that pick to take a player who is now widely considered the best fwd prospect in the NHL.

I'll let you figure out who the Blues took.

Mr Jiggyfly is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-27-2012, 11:29 AM
  #316
Tender Rip
Learning from Scuds?
 
Tender Rip's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Shanghai, China
Posts: 12,697
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Jiggyfly View Post
You are the one who seems to insist they will have to be traded before spending any time in the NHL and can only be used as "sweetners", not me.
Come on. Last we had your quote explicitly agreeing to something you then say you never agreed on, and now we have you dismissing that you have time and time again said these prospects have strong trade value. When asked for examples, you skip to say that you can trade other proven players and promote the youngsters (which I never disputed, indeed it is my point). Moving the goal posts much?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Jiggyfly View Post
However, if you want an example of a blueliner who spent no time in the NHL, that netted a big return, I'll call your bluff and connect the dots with two players you already mentioned:

Rundblad was taken 17th overall by the Blues in 2009. In 2010, he was traded to the Sens for the 16th pick. The Blues used that pick to take a player who is now widely considered the best fwd prospect in the NHL.

I'll let you figure out who the Blues took.
St.Louis gave him up for a pick in pretty much the same position they'd drafted. That is no ones idea of increased value after Rundblad had done well. That it turned into Tarasenko does not reflect on Rundblad's tradevalue. It means St.Louis got a steal.


Last edited by Tender Rip: 06-27-2012 at 11:36 AM. Reason: Eh.... lazy reading :)
Tender Rip is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-27-2012, 11:40 AM
  #317
Mr Jiggyfly
Registered User
 
Mr Jiggyfly's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 15,650
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tender Rip View Post
Come on. Last we had your quote explicitly agreeing to something you then say you never agreed on, and now we have you dismissing that you have time and time again said these prospects have strong trade value. When asked for examples, you skip to say that you can trade other proven players and promote the youngsters (which I never disputed, indeed it is my point). Moving the goal posts much?
I haven't deviated from my original argument which started way back in this thread; this type of blueline pipe gives Shero a ridiculous amount of options.

Don't ever assume I agree with your narrow minded view here.

Quote:
Now you are just lazy. Re-read my second to last post above. This is the exact example I gave myself as the only one I could think of.
I know exactly what you wrote. I filled in the blanks that you convieniently left out. Hence me connecting the dots you failed to do yourself.

I mean, besides a blueliner taken a year before with a mid first round pick netting the best fwd prospect in the world, I suppose I got nothing... >>> insert your silly emoticon here <<<

Mr Jiggyfly is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-27-2012, 11:58 AM
  #318
Tender Rip
Learning from Scuds?
 
Tender Rip's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Shanghai, China
Posts: 12,697
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Jiggyfly View Post
I haven't deviated from my original argument which started way back in this thread; this type of blueline pipe gives Shero a ridiculous amount of options.
Should I quote you again on the great trade value high caliber unproven D-men have?
If you want to say that what you really mean is something else - fair enough - there's no shame in being unclear. But don't be a tit and just refuse to relate to what you've written lots of times. Its just an annoying dishonest way to argue.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Jiggyfly View Post
Don't ever assume I agree with your narrow minded view here.
Goodness no! And if you were to infer such terrible agreement in a weak moment you are certainly very free to later claim you didn't. Much like how you now claim you were always against the Martin pick-up while hailing our D as top-3 in the league when Shero made the deal.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Jiggyfly View Post
I know exactly what you wrote. I filled in the blanks that you convieniently left out. Hence me connecting the dots you failed to do yourself.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tender Rip View Post
That trade now looks great for Ottawa, after the St.Louis one looked bad when they picked Tarasenko. But examples are really scarce. Much more often, unproven prospects are sweeteners, not main pieces, in deals for big players.
Blanks?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Jiggyfly View Post
I mean, besides a blueliner taken a year before with a mid first round pick netting the best fwd prospect in the world, I suppose I got nothing... >>> insert your silly emoticon here <<<
Again - a pick weeks before the draft is just a pick. Had they traded Rundblad on draft day or even better when the opportunity to actually get Tarasenko was present, then you can claim that Rundblad's value was Tarasenko. Ie. when Buffalo traded up this season, one knew what they wanted.

This is like you claiming that Letestu's 4th somehow has a value connection with our interesting boom-bust Macaroni pick, but at the time we were all decrying that we only got a 4th for someone who had looked like a potentially solid, cheap NHL player the season before.

Tender Rip is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-27-2012, 12:01 PM
  #319
Milliardo
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Zürich
Country: Switzerland
Posts: 1,596
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ragamuffin Gunner View Post
What the **** is that supposed to mean?
I just don't see you ever admitting you were wrong, that's all.

Milliardo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-27-2012, 12:03 PM
  #320
Shady Machine
Registered User
 
Shady Machine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 13,458
vCash: 500
Good discussion guys. It's an interesting read on my lunch break.

Shady Machine is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
06-27-2012, 12:18 PM
  #321
Mr Jiggyfly
Registered User
 
Mr Jiggyfly's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 15,650
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tender Rip View Post
Should I quote you again on the great trade value high caliber unproven D-men have?
If you want to say that what you really mean is something else - fair enough - there's no shame in being unclear. But don't be a tit and just refuse to relate to what you've written lots of times. Its just an annoying dishonest way to argue.
Where did I refute that?

You simply keep reading things the way you want, which is a lack of reading comprehension I suppose.

I've talked about the plethora of options Shero has. I've mentioned blueliners like they have can fetch a nice return without ever playing in the NHL, then listed a litany of other ways they have value.

Not once did I say I believe any of them will be moved because of roster problems. You brought that into the equation. That is why I continue to mention that no one knows what this roster will look like in three years.

Try to keep your own argument straight, playboy.

Quote:
Goodness no! And if you were to infer such terrible agreement in a weak moment you are certainly very free to later claim you didn't. Much like how you now claim you were always against the Martin pick-up while hailing our D as top-3 in the league when Shero made the deal.
Well I guess this is the part where I have to call you a liar.

Jags can easily back me up about how I felt about Whitney vs Martin as we both agreed two Summers ago Whitney is the guy we both wanted badly.

If you can find a quote where I said their D was top three back then, good luck. If you can't (and you won't) well we both know what that makes you.

Quote:
Blanks?
Context.

Quote:
Again - a pick weeks before the draft is just a pick. Had they traded Rundblad on draft day or even better when the opportunity to actually get Tarasenko was present, then you can claim that Rundblad's value was Tarasenko. Ie. when Buffalo traded up this season, one knew what they wanted.
You just made a fool of yourself... Do research if you are clueless.

Quote:
This is like you claiming that Letestu's 4th somehow has a value connection with our interesting boom-bust Macaroni pick, but at the time we were all decrying that we only got a 4th for someone who had looked like a potentially solid, cheap NHL player the season before.
Again, you are pulling things out of your ass. Just stop.

Go back and read the thread. People wanted Letestu traded or given away. Ppl were hailing Shero as a hero for getting a 4th.

Mr Jiggyfly is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-27-2012, 12:53 PM
  #322
Circulartheory
@danccchan
 
Circulartheory's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Hong Kong
Country: Hong Kong
Posts: 5,004
vCash: 500
Wild fan here.

So what is the consensus opinion on the pick by the team's fans? I think Pouliot is a very good player, but the Pens are already stacked on defense with Morrow, Despres, Harrington, now Dumoulin.

Are you surprised they take a forward?

Circulartheory is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-27-2012, 01:19 PM
  #323
Darth Vitale
Moderator
Transitional Period
 
Darth Vitale's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Victoryville
Country: United States
Posts: 25,628
vCash: 500
Dan: read through the thread and you'll find your answer.

Basically, no consensus. About half say they're OK with not drafting for need (F), and that our offensive blueliners are often made into good roster players, or converted into solid trade assets... the other half wanted a stud F prospect.

For my part I'm fine with it. Shero's tendency is obvious: draft stud D and develop them into roster players, or trade them to fill F gaps with experienced guys (Kunitz and Neal being the most obvious examples). IOW our organizational strength is like Nashville: developing very good D, so you run with that and acquire your F needs. Better to trade for a F who is ready to produce immediately, then to draft a bunch of them hoping 1 or 2 become all-star quality players like Hossa or Neal (big long shot).

Essentially, we let other teams take the 1st round risks on F, while we develop near-sure-thing D in our system and turn those into experienced F when we need to. I am so sure that this is their gameplan now that I'd be willing to bet, barring injury-ravaged seasons leading to lottery picks, we'll draft the best D available in the first round, almost every single year.


Last edited by Darth Vitale: 06-27-2012 at 01:25 PM.
Darth Vitale is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-27-2012, 01:54 PM
  #324
JTG
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Country: Sierra Leone
Posts: 38,891
vCash: 500
There is no more valuable commodity in the NHL than a defenseman who can put up points.

JTG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-27-2012, 02:48 PM
  #325
Kunitziwa
Registered User
 
Kunitziwa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Rochester, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 2,138
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Kunitziwa
I'm sorry if this was already mentioned but here it goes anyway.

Do you guys think part of the D heavy drafting philosophy is that it seems to be an organazational strength? The success rate for defensmen drafted by us the past, idk 10 or so years has seemingly been pretty good. Especially when compared to the forwards we drafted (outside of Crosby, Malkin, Staal). In other words do they just feel flat out more confident in their ability to draft defenseman versus forwards, and therfor tend to shy away from drafting forwards? Is it just luck of the draw that D are topping their BPA lists at the time of our picks versus where they have forwards ranked? Or does the organization just truly believe that D bring the best value?

Kunitziwa 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 05:33 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.