HFBoards

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

2013 NHL Draft Thread

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
10-28-2012, 11:10 PM
  #101
GoJackets1
Someday.
 
GoJackets1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Columbus
Country: United States
Posts: 3,502
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sore Loser View Post
Why would we sell off our future for Bobby Ryan? We finally have a good thing going with some youth movement and some stockpiled draft picks ... why do we want to blow it up for one player?

I'll ask: What last place team in the last 10 years made a single trade that immediately made them a Cup contender? Teams are built by the draft now, you draft talent, bring in youth, let them develop, and build from the ground up. This player isn't an overnight fix.
Honestly, just wanted to include a big trade, and we have a surplus on D so I figured what the hell. And I thought someone would complain about it looking too similar to what it is now.

GoJackets1 is offline  
Old
10-29-2012, 12:13 AM
  #102
alphafox
Registered User
 
alphafox's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 946
vCash: 500
What do you guys think of Adam Erne? I've seen a few highlights that remind of Rick Nash and it seems like he may be available in the middle of the first round, which could be of good use of one of our first round picks.

Also anyone have thoughts on Max Domi?

alphafox is offline  
Old
10-29-2012, 07:14 AM
  #103
EspenK
Registered User
 
EspenK's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 5,624
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by gojackets1 View Post
My question would be, if we get the #2 pick, do we take Jones or a forward?
In my opinion we have to take a forward. Preferably a big center, the one who projects out the best. IF Johansen and this pick pan out we'd be set at C for a long while.

EspenK is online now  
Old
10-29-2012, 09:10 AM
  #104
RDriesenUD
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 8,250
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by gojackets1 View Post
Honestly, just wanted to include a big trade, and we have a surplus on D so I figured what the hell. And I thought someone would complain about it looking too similar to what it is now.
Why would we want to trade that depth away though? It has taken us this long to get it and I want to keep it.

RDriesenUD is offline  
Old
10-29-2012, 10:32 AM
  #105
alphafox
Registered User
 
alphafox's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 946
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by RDriesenUD View Post
Why would we want to trade that depth away though? It has taken us this long to get it and I want to keep it.
Not directed at me, but I'll throw in my 2 cents. Right now we have a bunch of young guys in the D pipeline and a young blue line (Tyutin is the oldest @ 30 if you disregard Aucoin who was brought in to help teach the young guys.) Most of our prospects have roughly the same potential as top 4 blue liners. Murray seems like a legit top pairing guy with a floor of being a top 4 guy. Moore and Erixon look good from most accounts in springfield and look primed to play in the NHL. Add into that Savard, Goboulef, and Weber and our D is deep enough to absorb some subtraction to make the rest of our team better. By next season we are looking at a blue line with no space for our young guys with potential to play. I like most of our blueline guys, but the only one untouchable for me is Johnson. The rest of them could potentially net us major assets (1st round pick, blue chip prospects) for the to build the forward corps with. Imagine swinging a deal where we get a first and prospect for Wiz. That opens up our Blue line to include say Murray, Moore, and Erixon, while at the same time netting us more assets to build the other parts of our team.

When you look at the cupboard on the offensive side of the puck it is sadly lacking. Johansen and Atkinson seem to be our only guys with top six playmakng/goal scoring potential, and we can have hard working lunch pail guys till the cows come home, but you still need to put the puck in the net. We currently lack talent in the offensive zone, the 2013 draft should help to fix that as we should be able to grab at least one of the elite players in the draft. If using some of our blueline depth lands us another major offensive talent I'm all for it.


Last edited by alphafox: 10-29-2012 at 10:49 AM.
alphafox is offline  
Old
10-29-2012, 12:53 PM
  #106
Viqsi
carrying the flag
 
Viqsi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: The Scary Internet
Country: United States
Posts: 21,061
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Viqsi
Quote:
Originally Posted by alphafox View Post
There are a number of elite offensive prospects at the top of draft, and we have the opportunity to grab a pair of top 10 maybe even top 5 picks. Would you rather have the 4th and 7th overall picks or have Moore the 4th, 15th and 23rd overall picks?
Moore and the picks AINEC. Trading two firsts and a top defense prospect to move up 8 spots on one of those firsts is Milburyesque, and I don't care how much you think it'll land on black this go-around or how hot you think the dice are.

If you want to trade blueliners, trade them after they're developed and thus of high value. Having a Blueline Of The Stars can make up for a whole hell of a lot of other issues; just ask Nashville, or the '07 Ducks.

__________________
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  
Old
10-29-2012, 01:01 PM
  #107
Samkow
Global Moderator
Young Guns
 
Samkow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Detroit
Country: United States
Posts: 14,016
vCash: 500
Send a message via Skype™ to Samkow
Quote:
Originally Posted by alphafox View Post
I just don't understand why we can't spend some assets to get a top 5 pick. This isn't like the Crosby draft where there is a clear far and away #1. Mackinnon, Jones, and Barkov are all arguably in competition for first overall honors, and guys like Monahan, Shinkaruk, and Drouin are all trying to push themselves into the top 5. We have 3 first round picks and enough defensive depth to package an asset (one of moore, savard, Erixon) if we need to. Maybe its just me but I'd rather have a top 5 and a mid level first rounder than 3 mid level first rounders.

There are a number of elite offensive prospects at the top of draft, and we have the opportunity to grab a pair of top 10 maybe even top 5 picks. Would you rather have the 4th and 7th overall picks or have Moore the 4th, 15th and 23rd overall picks?
Seeing as...

1. This draft is considered the deepest in a decade, especially offensively.
2. The forward corps is really lacking in young, offensive guys (not much beyond Johansen and Atkinson)
3. Moore is really playing well down in Springfield.

...I'd rather not trade up.

__________________
Truth should never get in the way of a good persecution complex.
Samkow is offline  
Old
10-29-2012, 01:19 PM
  #108
Mayor Bee
\/me_____you\/
 
Mayor Bee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 15,061
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sore Loser View Post
Why would we sell off our future for Bobby Ryan? We finally have a good thing going with some youth movement and some stockpiled draft picks ... why do we want to blow it up for one player?

I'll ask: What last place team in the last 10 years made a single trade that immediately made them a Cup contender? Teams are built by the draft now, you draft talent, bring in youth, let them develop, and build from the ground up. This player isn't an overnight fix.
I think it's common to overstate the actual impact of a star player. If Columbus added Steven Stamkos tomorrow, it wouldn't be simply grafting 50 or 60 goals into the lineup because it doesn't take team depth into consideration. Going from "average" to "All-Star" at a given position doesn't equate to an additional 10 wins.

Mayor Bee is offline  
Old
10-29-2012, 01:38 PM
  #109
Mayor Bee
\/me_____you\/
 
Mayor Bee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 15,061
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by alphafox View Post
I just don't understand why we can't spend some assets to get a top 5 pick. This isn't like the Crosby draft where there is a clear far and away #1. Mackinnon, Jones, and Barkov are all arguably in competition for first overall honors, and guys like Monahan, Shinkaruk, and Drouin are all trying to push themselves into the top 5. We have 3 first round picks and enough defensive depth to package an asset (one of moore, savard, Erixon) if we need to. Maybe its just me but I'd rather have a top 5 and a mid level first rounder than 3 mid level first rounders.

There are a number of elite offensive prospects at the top of draft, and we have the opportunity to grab a pair of top 10 maybe even top 5 picks. Would you rather have the 4th and 7th overall picks or have Moore the 4th, 15th and 23rd overall picks?
Moore and the picks. Players rise and fall for a number of reasons, and a quick look at the draft this very year bears out that the biggest names don't always end up at the top and the lesser names could well end up as the best players.

Mayor Bee is offline  
Old
10-29-2012, 01:43 PM
  #110
alphafox
Registered User
 
alphafox's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 946
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Samkow View Post
Seeing as...

1. This draft is considered the deepest in a decade, especially offensively.
2. The forward corps is really lacking in young, offensive guys (not much beyond Johansen and Atkinson)
3. Moore is really playing well down in Springfield.

...I'd rather not trade up.
I did some research after the suggesting Moore, so I'll go ahead and give a Mea culpa on that one. I do however still think trading up (depending on where our picks are) still makes sense. The top of this draft is really impressive, and guys like Mackinnon, Jones, Barkov, Monahan, and Shinkaruk are all the type of players that would have been number one overall picks in drafts like last year.

Don't get me wrong, if we have the chance to get say Monahan, Erne, and Domi then yeah I agree we stand pat, but if we have the chance to turn two bottom 15 picks and a Defensive prospect into a top 10 pick I go for it. I think 2 elite talents are better than one elite talent and 2 good talents, but that is my opinion.

alphafox is offline  
Old
10-29-2012, 02:16 PM
  #111
RDriesenUD
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 8,250
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by alphafox View Post
Not directed at me, but I'll throw in my 2 cents. Right now we have a bunch of young guys in the D pipeline and a young blue line (Tyutin is the oldest @ 30 if you disregard Aucoin who was brought in to help teach the young guys.) Most of our prospects have roughly the same potential as top 4 blue liners. Murray seems like a legit top pairing guy with a floor of being a top 4 guy. Moore and Erixon look good from most accounts in springfield and look primed to play in the NHL. Add into that Savard, Goboulef, and Weber and our D is deep enough to absorb some subtraction to make the rest of our team better. By next season we are looking at a blue line with no space for our young guys with potential to play. I like most of our blueline guys, but the only one untouchable for me is Johnson. The rest of them could potentially net us major assets (1st round pick, blue chip prospects) for the to build the forward corps with. Imagine swinging a deal where we get a first and prospect for Wiz. That opens up our Blue line to include say Murray, Moore, and Erixon, while at the same time netting us more assets to build the other parts of our team.

When you look at the cupboard on the offensive side of the puck it is sadly lacking. Johansen and Atkinson seem to be our only guys with top six playmakng/goal scoring potential, and we can have hard working lunch pail guys till the cows come home, but you still need to put the puck in the net. We currently lack talent in the offensive zone, the 2013 draft should help to fix that as we should be able to grab at least one of the elite players in the draft. If using some of our blueline depth lands us another major offensive talent I'm all for it.
I agree, but he was wanting to trade the young guys. One reason you build depth, imo, is so you can trade the higher priced guys when the prospects are ready. Not so you can trade those younger, cheaper players.


Last edited by RDriesenUD: 10-30-2012 at 10:45 PM.
RDriesenUD is offline  
Old
10-29-2012, 04:33 PM
  #112
Sore Loser
HF Partner
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Spokane, WA.
Country: United States
Posts: 6,165
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by alphafox View Post
What do you guys think of Adam Erne? I've seen a few highlights that remind of Rick Nash and it seems like he may be available in the middle of the first round, which could be of good use of one of our first round picks.

Also anyone have thoughts on Max Domi?
I like Max Domi, but I think he'll be a middle-6 forward in the NHL at best. I don't see top line potential there.

Sore Loser is offline  
Old
10-30-2012, 09:02 PM
  #113
LetsGOJackets!!
Registered User
 
LetsGOJackets!!'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Columbus Ohio
Posts: 2,583
vCash: 500
I'll bite GoJackets61

I'm not against Bobby Ryan at all. Young, big right wing.. I wouldn't trade one of the three first round picks this year though. If he did a sign and trade I'd give a roster player or two and next years first and 2nd.

I am very intrigued by what the careers end up looking like for Ryan Murray, John Moore, Tim Erixon, David Savard, Goulebef, Ruth & Will Weber. Hoping very much with Johnson and Nikitin we have an awesome group of seven.

Still looking for a franchise goalie, and we obviously need some top six skill. Pray to God we get a combo that turns out like Richards and Carter as young guns, or a top sniper.

We don't just need top 10 picks anymore to hit on some great talent. JD brings a lot of connections with him.. we need that Bald headed european scout that the Blues have ha ha. Can't remember the guys name.

LetsGOJackets!! is offline  
Old
10-31-2012, 06:22 PM
  #114
NHL Dude 120
Registered User
 
NHL Dude 120's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Ottawa
Country: Ethiopia
Posts: 683
vCash: 188
Chemestry

If i were the GM of Columbus i would focus on Chemestry when drafting this year . it is realistic to assume you guys can draft Mackinnon( no offense) but what about trying to get his teammates as well. (im an Ottawa fan but this is something that could be intriguing.)

First Round
Nathan Mackinnon
Jonathan Drouin
Zachary Fucale

pretty sweet huh. get the rebuild going and if you draft in the top five for 2014 you could hopefully get Sam Reinheart.

A Foundation of
Mackinnon
Johannson
Drouin
Reinheart* ( 2014)
Murray
Dansk
Jenner
Johannson
Fucale

would be pretty sweet. keep them developing together, like Edmonton . if it were up to me i would have them play out their entire junior eligibility and a year in Springfield to get them ready for the prime time. Also by drafting with chemistry in mind by the time they're NHL ready they'll have chemistry making the adjustment alot easier.

NHL Dude 120 is offline  
Old
11-01-2012, 12:45 AM
  #115
Sore Loser
HF Partner
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Spokane, WA.
Country: United States
Posts: 6,165
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NHL Dude 120 View Post
If i were the GM of Columbus i would focus on Chemestry when drafting this year . it is realistic to assume you guys can draft Mackinnon( no offense) but what about trying to get his teammates as well. (im an Ottawa fan but this is something that could be intriguing.)

First Round
Nathan Mackinnon
Jonathan Drouin
Zachary Fucale

pretty sweet huh. get the rebuild going and if you draft in the top five for 2014 you could hopefully get Sam Reinheart.

A Foundation of
Mackinnon
Johannson
Drouin
Reinheart* ( 2014)
Murray
Dansk
Jenner
Johannson
Fucale

would be pretty sweet. keep them developing together, like Edmonton . if it were up to me i would have them play out their entire junior eligibility and a year in Springfield to get them ready for the prime time. Also by drafting with chemistry in mind by the time they're NHL ready they'll have chemistry making the adjustment alot easier.
I'm personally not a fan of drafting three guys from the same team just for the sake of keeping them together. Some of those experiments have failed horribly in the past for teams. Sometimes, players at the junior level are more dominant because of the other talent around them, and it doesn't quite transfer over to the next level. It's for that reason that I'm a big fan of drafting more talented players instead of guys who have played together. I'm not fully sold on Jonathan Drouin, and I don't think we'll be in a spot to draft both MacKinnon and Fucale, because MacKinnon will go top-2, and Fucale likely top-10. Add to that the fact that we actually have some decent goalie prospects in the pipeline, there's no reason to spend a high pick on a goalie in such a solid draft.

Give me MacKinnon and a guy like Curtis Lazar or Sean Monahan in the top-15 of the draft and I'll be thrilled.

Sore Loser is offline  
Old
11-01-2012, 05:20 PM
  #116
NHL Dude 120
Registered User
 
NHL Dude 120's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Ottawa
Country: Ethiopia
Posts: 683
vCash: 188
input

thanks for the input , i figured get the chemistry early to help rebuild faster. This is gonna be a tough year for you guys ( if there is one) and that's why i thought Mackinnion would be realistic. Yeah a combination of Mackinnion and Lazar would cement Center depth. For some reason i believe that Lazar would be a third line center although i don't know why.

NHL Dude 120 is offline  
Old
11-01-2012, 08:13 PM
  #117
slightlystewpid420
Registered User
 
slightlystewpid420's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 3,431
vCash: 500
If we end up with 2 top 10 picks i'd be thrilled with 2 of Barkov, shinkaruk, mackinnon, jones, lazaar, monahan. Im leaning more torwards these guys who are putting up big numbers with no help on their team, shinkaruk and monahan. Jones really just solidified the winterhawks and made them into a true powerhouse.

slightlystewpid420 is online now  
Old
11-02-2012, 01:35 AM
  #118
Sore Loser
HF Partner
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Spokane, WA.
Country: United States
Posts: 6,165
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NHL Dude 120 View Post
thanks for the input , i figured get the chemistry early to help rebuild faster. This is gonna be a tough year for you guys ( if there is one) and that's why i thought Mackinnion would be realistic. Yeah a combination of Mackinnion and Lazar would cement Center depth. For some reason i believe that Lazar would be a third line center although i don't know why.
Personally, I think we're being sold short by a lot of people. I don't think we're a contender for the #1 pick if there is a season. That's a big if. Without a season, if the same rules are put in place as after the last lockout, then we definitely have a great shot at it, not having made the playoffs, nor drafted #1 overall, for the last three years. Looking at our lineup depth, I think we're competitive enough to beat out at least 4-5 teams in the league (hard to say who). Our forwards are going to be chippy and hard working, and our defense is actually very good. Goaltending will be the biggest question mark, but I will argue that with our improved defense, we should even see massive improvement there.

Quote:
Originally Posted by slightlystewpid420 View Post
If we end up with 2 top 10 picks i'd be thrilled with 2 of Barkov, shinkaruk, mackinnon, jones, lazaar, monahan. Im leaning more torwards these guys who are putting up big numbers with no help on their team, shinkaruk and monahan. Jones really just solidified the winterhawks and made them into a true powerhouse.
Curtis Lazar reminds me a little bit of Patrice Bergeron, in that he does all of the little things very well, but can also chip in offense. If that's in a third line center role, it will be for the same reason as the Bruins using Bergeron in a third line role - the depth ahead of him. I'd be happy with that.

And as for Seth Jones, don't give him too much hype - the Winterhawks were WHL runners up the last two seasons. They are a very good team with some very good pieces, including four other very talented defensemen for him to play with (Rutkowski, Wotherspoon, Hanson, Pouliot).

Sore Loser is offline  
Old
11-23-2012, 01:19 PM
  #119
indigobuffalo
Portage and Main
 
indigobuffalo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Winnipeg MB
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,349
vCash: 1045
Has anyone on the Columbus board figured out the statistical probability that Columbus gets the 1st, 2nd and 3rd Overall picks in the NHL's 2013 Entry Draft?

Assuming there is no season and the league adopts a draft lottery (with the same rules as the 2005 draft).

They have three 1sts, afterall.

Quote:
Originally Posted by My Sweet Shadow
Even that description's a little misleading. You don't lose a ball "for every" playoff appearance or first overall. Essentially there's two criteria:

1) Missed the playoffs in each of the previous 3 seasons.
2) Didn't have the 1st overall selection over the last 4 drafts.

If you met both criteria, you got 3 balls.
If you made the playoffs only once OR had the 1st overall only once, you got 2 balls.
If you had two or more of any combination of those two (playoff appearances or 1st overalls), then you only got 1 ball.

http://www.nhl.com/ice/page.htm?id=26401

Thanks for starting the thread though; it'll definitely be useful with all this lock-out talk flying around.
So teams with a 3/50 chance would be:
Calgary, Carolina, Columbus, Dallas, Minnesota, Toronto and Winnipeg/Atlanta (3/50 = 6%, 7*6% = 42%)
Teams with a 2/50 chance would be:
Anaheim, Colorado, Florida, New York Islanders, St Louis and Tampa Bay (2/50 = 4%, 6*4% = 24%)
Teams with a 1/50 chance would be:
Boston, Buffalo, Chicago, Detroit, Edmonton, Los Angeles, Montreal, Nashville, New Jersey, New York Rangers, Ottawa, Philadelphia, Phoenix, Pittsburgh, San Jose, Vancouver and Washington (1/50 = 2%, 18*2% = 36%)

So Columbus has a 10% chance of getting the 1st overall. Assuming best possible odds (where LA is selected 1st, NYR selected 2nd and CLB selected 3rd):
0.1 * 0.08 * 0.06 = 0.00048, or 0.048% chance, or 3/6,250 for those preferring fractions.


Last edited by indigobuffalo: 11-23-2012 at 02:25 PM.
indigobuffalo is online now  
Old
11-23-2012, 04:01 PM
  #120
TheFatOne
Mr.Negativo
 
TheFatOne's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Malmö, Sweden
Country: Sweden
Posts: 4,622
vCash: 500
http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/sh....php?t=1296871

TheFatOne is offline  
Old
11-23-2012, 06:49 PM
  #121
EspenK
Registered User
 
EspenK's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 5,624
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by indigobuffalo View Post
Has anyone on the Columbus board figured out the statistical probability that Columbus gets the 1st, 2nd and 3rd Overall picks in the NHL's 2013 Entry Draft?

Assuming there is no season and the league adopts a draft lottery (with the same rules as the 2005 draft).

They have three 1sts, afterall.



So teams with a 3/50 chance would be:
Calgary, Carolina, Columbus, Dallas, Minnesota, Toronto and Winnipeg/Atlanta (3/50 = 6%, 7*6% = 42%)
Teams with a 2/50 chance would be:
Anaheim, Colorado, Florida, New York Islanders, St Louis and Tampa Bay (2/50 = 4%, 6*4% = 24%)
Teams with a 1/50 chance would be:
Boston, Buffalo, Chicago, Detroit, Edmonton, Los Angeles, Montreal, Nashville, New Jersey, New York Rangers, Ottawa, Philadelphia, Phoenix, Pittsburgh, San Jose, Vancouver and Washington (1/50 = 2%, 18*2% = 36%)

So Columbus has a 10% chance of getting the 1st overall. Assuming best possible odds (where LA is selected 1st, NYR selected 2nd and CLB selected 3rd):
0.1 * 0.08 * 0.06 = 0.00048, or 0.048% chance, or 3/6,250 for those preferring fractions.




Not a stat whiz,but I don't think your probabilities are right. In your scenario either the Kings or Rangers have a 2% chance of winning #1; the loser then has a slightly better than 2% chance of 2nd leaving the Jackets with a 3/48 or 6.25% chance of picking third. Multiply them together and the probability that this scenario happens is .0051 per cent.

The highest chance of the Jackets getting all three is .051%. 10% (5/50) x 8% (4/49) x 6% (3/48) (rounding ignored here). That is assuming the Rangers and Kings happen to win the first two. If you say for sure that is going to happen then I think its the scenario above that dictates the probability of that happening.

Corrections welcomed.

EspenK is online now  
Old
11-23-2012, 07:43 PM
  #122
CalBuckeyeRob
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 97
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by EspenK View Post
[/B]


Not a stat whiz,but I don't think your probabilities are right. In your scenario either the Kings or Rangers have a 2% chance of winning #1; the loser then has a slightly better than 2% chance of 2nd leaving the Jackets with a 3/48 or 6.25% chance of picking third. Multiply them together and the probability that this scenario happens is .0051 per cent.

The highest chance of the Jackets getting all three is .051%. 10% (5/50) x 8% (4/49) x 6% (3/48) (rounding ignored here). That is assuming the Rangers and Kings happen to win the first two. If you say for sure that is going to happen then I think its the scenario above that dictates the probability of that happening.

Corrections welcomed.
More worried about getting picks 28, 29 and 30 which would be the luck of Columbus

CalBuckeyeRob is offline  
Old
11-23-2012, 11:19 PM
  #123
Sore Loser
HF Partner
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Spokane, WA.
Country: United States
Posts: 6,165
vCash: 500
IMO, the likelihood is that the NHL will "fix" this draft, as they did the last post-lockout draft, only this time it will be the Phoenix Coyotes getting the #1 overall pick. I think the Jackets will end up with a pick in the top-7 or 8, and then a pick in the late teens, and a pick in the last few picks of the first round.

Just a guess.

Sore Loser is offline  
Old
11-24-2012, 12:48 AM
  #124
candyman82
Registered User
 
candyman82's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Fredericksburg, VA
Posts: 2,476
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sore Loser View Post
IMO, the likelihood is that the NHL will "fix" this draft, as they did the last post-lockout draft, only this time it will be the Phoenix Coyotes getting the #1 overall pick. I think the Jackets will end up with a pick in the top-7 or 8, and then a pick in the late teens, and a pick in the last few picks of the first round.

Just a guess.
No way they fix it for Phoenix. That would be far too obvious.

candyman82 is offline  
Old
11-24-2012, 12:52 AM
  #125
GoJackets1
Someday.
 
GoJackets1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Columbus
Country: United States
Posts: 3,502
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by candyman82 View Post
No way they fix it for Phoenix. That would be far too obvious.
Just like the NBA and New Orleans? Damn shame.. :

GoJackets1 is offline  
Closed Thread

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 07:54 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.