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
11-24-2012, 04:58 AM
  #126
Ebbisen
Registered User
 
Ebbisen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Lurking the HF board
Country: Sweden
Posts: 105
vCash: 374
Just did a simulation and Columbus ended up with the 4th,9th and 26th pick. Would it be wise to trade a late pick for 2 2nd round picks? Since it is considered a very deep draft. And wich players would you like to be picked in the 2nd round if this would happen?

Ebbisen is offline  
Old
11-24-2012, 09:58 AM
  #127
RDriesenUD
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 7,946
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ebbisen View Post
Just did a simulation and Columbus ended up with the 4th,9th and 26th pick. Would it be wise to trade a late pick for 2 2nd round picks? Since it is considered a very deep draft. And wich players would you like to be picked in the 2nd round if this would happen?
Normally, I like doing that, but not this year. We have enough depth, IMO. We need to get talent. We need to either stay where we are or trade up this year.

RDriesenUD is offline  
Old
11-24-2012, 10:54 AM
  #128
candyman82
Registered User
 
candyman82's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Fredericksburg, VA
Posts: 2,415
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by RDriesenUD View Post
Normally, I like doing that, but not this year. We have enough depth, IMO. We need to get talent. We need to either stay where we are or trade up this year.
If the two picks are between 30 and 39 I would do that deal.

candyman82 is offline  
Old
11-24-2012, 11:51 PM
  #129
alphafox
Registered User
 
alphafox's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 854
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by RDriesenUD View Post
We need to get talent. We need to either stay where we are or trade up this year.
This, personally, I package something together to move up either the with the 9 to get another pick in the top 7 (Basically, be in a position to grab say Drouin or Shinkaruk). I personally would like to see brassard shipped out, maybe brassard, the 9th and a prospect like Savard for the 5th overall.

We have tons of depth (i.e second line/third line players) but no elite talent, hopefully this draft will go a long way toward fixing that.

alphafox is offline  
Old
11-25-2012, 12:09 PM
  #130
pete goegan
HFBoards Sponsor
 
pete goegan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 11,545
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by alphafox View Post
This, personally, I package something together to move up either the with the 9 to get another pick in the top 7 (Basically, be in a position to grab say Drouin or Shinkaruk). I personally would like to see brassard shipped out, maybe brassard, the 9th and a prospect like Savard for the 5th overall.

We have tons of depth (i.e second line/third line players) but no elite talent, hopefully this draft will go a long way toward fixing that.
I agree with your comment about depth and the lack of elite talent (and I am far from his biggest fan), but I'm not ready to write Brassard off quite yet. Especially not for a prospect who may not produce in the NHL for some time, if ever. I know, "give to get," but our excess appears to be on defense, so I'm not sure we can afford to "give" offensive talent, no matter how disappointing he's been, up to now.

pete goegan is online now  
Old
11-25-2012, 12:43 PM
  #131
Sore Loser
Since 2009
 
Sore Loser's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Spokane, WA.
Country: United States
Posts: 5,993
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by alphafox View Post
This, personally, I package something together to move up either the with the 9 to get another pick in the top 7 (Basically, be in a position to grab say Drouin or Shinkaruk). I personally would like to see brassard shipped out, maybe brassard, the 9th and a prospect like Savard for the 5th overall.

We have tons of depth (i.e second line/third line players) but no elite talent, hopefully this draft will go a long way toward fixing that.
No way we give up that much to move up four spots. The difference in those spots is a prospect like Drouin/Shinkaruk or Lazar/Pulock ... really, not that big of a drop in talent, if at all. If anything, we give up the #9 pick, plus a 2nd/3rd rounder or one of the defense prospects, including possibly Savard, to get into the top-5 again. Of course, that all hinges on finding a team that's willing to deal down, which is a longshot to begin with.

If we deal Brassard away, I think it's a straight up deal, and it won't be for a top-5 pick; it would be for another late first rounder, or possible a second.

Sore Loser is offline  
Old
11-25-2012, 08:00 PM
  #132
alphafox
Registered User
 
alphafox's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 854
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by pete goegan View Post
I agree with your comment about depth and the lack of elite talent (and I am far from his biggest fan), but I'm not ready to write Brassard off quite yet. Especially not for a prospect who may not produce in the NHL for some time, if ever. I know, "give to get," but our excess appears to be on defense, so I'm not sure we can afford to "give" offensive talent, no matter how disappointing he's been, up to now.
Its not that I hate brassard (though i'm not really a fan either) I just don't see what he brings to the table. To my eye Anisimov and Johansen already are capable of outplaying Brassard. If, as expected, we draft a center like Mackinnon, Barkov, or even Lindholm (i.e. an NHL top 6 center) where does Brassard fit. He's already proven he struggles playing on the wing, I just don't see how he helps the team now or in the future other than as a trade asset.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sore Loser View Post
No way we give up that much to move up four spots. The difference in those spots is a prospect like Drouin/Shinkaruk or Lazar/Pulock ... really, not that big of a drop in talent, if at all. If anything, we give up the #9 pick, plus a 2nd/3rd rounder or one of the defense prospects, including possibly Savard, to get into the top-5 again. Of course, that all hinges on finding a team that's willing to deal down, which is a longshot to begin with.

If we deal Brassard away, I think it's a straight up deal, and it won't be for a top-5 pick; it would be for another late first rounder, or possible a second.
Well, I guess the major issue is what the difference between guys like Drouin/Shinkaruk and Lazar/Pulock and the value of brassard .

First IMO (though generally I do bow to the wisdom of those with more experience) there is a large difference between guys like Drouin, Lindholm, Shinkaruk and guys like Lazar and Pulock. The guys in my top 7 (1.Barkov 2. Mackinnon 3. Jones 4. Lindholm 5. Drouin 6. Shinkaruk 7. Monahan) all have franchise changing potential, after that the talent level "falls" to being first line players. Right now we need a player or two with superstar potential there is a huge difference to the fans and the team between a guy like Crosby/Stamkos and a Jamie Benn/Phil Kessel.

As to the value of Brassard, I just don't see it being that high. I would love to be wrong, but I just can't see a team paying much more than a late second rounder for him. He just doesn't do enough to demand that large a return.

alphafox is offline  
Old
11-25-2012, 10:31 PM
  #133
Sore Loser
Since 2009
 
Sore Loser's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Spokane, WA.
Country: United States
Posts: 5,993
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by alphafox View Post
Its not that I hate brassard (though i'm not really a fan either) I just don't see what he brings to the table. To my eye Anisimov and Johansen already are capable of outplaying Brassard. If, as expected, we draft a center like Mackinnon, Barkov, or even Lindholm (i.e. an NHL top 6 center) where does Brassard fit. He's already proven he struggles playing on the wing, I just don't see how he helps the team now or in the future other than as a trade asset.



Well, I guess the major issue is what the difference between guys like Drouin/Shinkaruk and Lazar/Pulock and the value of brassard .

First IMO (though generally I do bow to the wisdom of those with more experience) there is a large difference between guys like Drouin, Lindholm, Shinkaruk and guys like Lazar and Pulock. The guys in my top 7 (1.Barkov 2. Mackinnon 3. Jones 4. Lindholm 5. Drouin 6. Shinkaruk 7. Monahan) all have franchise changing potential, after that the talent level "falls" to being first line players. Right now we need a player or two with superstar potential there is a huge difference to the fans and the team between a guy like Crosby/Stamkos and a Jamie Benn/Phil Kessel.

As to the value of Brassard, I just don't see it being that high. I would love to be wrong, but I just can't see a team paying much more than a late second rounder for him. He just doesn't do enough to demand that large a return.
I think the bigger question would be, would you give up three major assets (a top-15ish pick, Brassard, Savard) to move up four spots to pick a player that would mean the difference between a Ryan Kesler type (Lazer) or Al MacInnis type (Pulock) to a Paul Kariya type (Shinkaruk/Drouin)?

For me, I think the tangibles in guys like Lazar and Pulock are worth holding pat for - in this scenario, we'd already be getting our hands on one of those big name prospects with our first pick, and with us being short on solid assets as it is, I think the best bet would be to add as many viable future players as we can. Again, I think this is moot, because particularly after coming off of a lockout and losing a year of everyone's contract, teams will be looking to build at the draft. This is a good one, and you have to find someone willing to give up the chance to draft one of those players.

Personally, I think Ryan Pulock has one of the highest ceilings in the draft. If someone can help his foot speed, this guy could be one of the top defensemen in the NHL in a very short period of time.

Sore Loser is offline  
Old
11-25-2012, 11:04 PM
  #134
alphafox
Registered User
 
alphafox's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 854
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sore Loser View Post
I think the bigger question would be, would you give up three major assets (a top-15ish pick, Brassard, Savard) to move up four spots to pick a player that would mean the difference between a Ryan Kesler type (Lazer) or Al MacInnis type (Pulock) to a Paul Kariya type (Shinkaruk/Drouin)?
Ironically, I posed the same question a while back and came down as willing to give up the assets. I think the reason I'm so willing to make the trade is I just don't see a place for Brass or Savard in the NHL. Brass while technically our top line center really could be replace by Anisimov or Johansen, we also have Jenner who has taken a huge leap forward and will make a huge push for the big club, not to mention we will likely be able to draft one of the elite centers in this draft. Likewise Savard is behind Moore, Erixon, Murray, and even Gouboulef to take 1-2 spots on the blueline (and that is assuming we don't use one of the first rounders to draft a guy like Pulock.

Since in my opinion these guys don't have a place in the organization in the near future if we could turn those assets into another top-5 picks I would pull the trigger.

alphafox is offline  
Old
11-26-2012, 01:10 AM
  #135
Mayor Bee
\/me_____you\/
 
Mayor Bee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 14,313
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sore Loser View Post
I think the bigger question would be, would you give up three major assets (a top-15ish pick, Brassard, Savard) to move up four spots to pick a player that would mean the difference between a Ryan Kesler type (Lazer) or Al MacInnis type (Pulock) to a Paul Kariya type (Shinkaruk/Drouin)?

For me, I think the tangibles in guys like Lazar and Pulock are worth holding pat for - in this scenario, we'd already be getting our hands on one of those big name prospects with our first pick, and with us being short on solid assets as it is, I think the best bet would be to add as many viable future players as we can. Again, I think this is moot, because particularly after coming off of a lockout and losing a year of everyone's contract, teams will be looking to build at the draft. This is a good one, and you have to find someone willing to give up the chance to draft one of those players.

Personally, I think Ryan Pulock has one of the highest ceilings in the draft. If someone can help his foot speed, this guy could be one of the top defensemen in the NHL in a very short period of time.
How would Pulock compare, both in terms of skill set and in ceiling, to Shea Weber? And what does it say about the 2013 draft that someone like Pulock is ranked anywhere from 9th to 14th?

Mayor Bee is offline  
Old
11-26-2012, 07:34 PM
  #136
Sore Loser
Since 2009
 
Sore Loser's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Spokane, WA.
Country: United States
Posts: 5,993
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mayor Bee View Post
How would Pulock compare, both in terms of skill set and in ceiling, to Shea Weber? And what does it say about the 2013 draft that someone like Pulock is ranked anywhere from 9th to 14th?
It's quite possible that he develops into that type of player, but he isn't as physical. He has as hard a shot as I've ever seen at the junior level; when I saw him live last year I boasted that he ripped a shot that had to be 100 mph (and was blasted for it then - now everyone is agreeing!). His skating is the biggest issue, but he's already got a pro frame, makes smart plays, and in my opinion would be the perfect fit alongside Ryan Murray. This would be our answer to Keith/Seabrook or Suter/Weber, in only a few years.

Sore Loser is offline  
Old
11-26-2012, 07:35 PM
  #137
Sore Loser
Since 2009
 
Sore Loser's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Spokane, WA.
Country: United States
Posts: 5,993
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by alphafox View Post
Ironically, I posed the same question a while back and came down as willing to give up the assets. I think the reason I'm so willing to make the trade is I just don't see a place for Brass or Savard in the NHL. Brass while technically our top line center really could be replace by Anisimov or Johansen, we also have Jenner who has taken a huge leap forward and will make a huge push for the big club, not to mention we will likely be able to draft one of the elite centers in this draft. Likewise Savard is behind Moore, Erixon, Murray, and even Gouboulef to take 1-2 spots on the blueline (and that is assuming we don't use one of the first rounders to draft a guy like Pulock.

Since in my opinion these guys don't have a place in the organization in the near future if we could turn those assets into another top-5 picks I would pull the trigger.
Fair enough. The only concern I would have is if Brassard regained his form from before the fight with James Neal. I think we had a special player in the works there, and it's quite unfortunate that he suffered such an injury.

Sore Loser is offline  
Old
11-27-2012, 10:19 AM
  #138
BluejacketNut
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 4,847
vCash: 500
Murray to have surgery, out 6 months

http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/story/?id=410370

BluejacketNut is offline  
Old
11-27-2012, 11:33 AM
  #139
alphafox
Registered User
 
alphafox's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 854
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BluejacketNut View Post
Murray to have surgery, out 6 months

http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/story/?id=410370
The best solution for a tough situation. The vast majority of the time surgery solves any instability issues that can result from injuries like this. Fortunately it seems that the tear really is only a small tear, and no ligaments or muscles separated from the bone.

alphafox is offline  
Old
11-27-2012, 11:39 AM
  #140
BluejacketNut
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 4,847
vCash: 500
Oops, meant that to go into prospects thread.

BluejacketNut is offline  
Old
11-27-2012, 07:14 PM
  #141
Sore Loser
Since 2009
 
Sore Loser's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Spokane, WA.
Country: United States
Posts: 5,993
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by alphafox View Post
The best solution for a tough situation. The vast majority of the time surgery solves any instability issues that can result from injuries like this. Fortunately it seems that the tear really is only a small tear, and no ligaments or muscles separated from the bone.
Very true.

Sore Loser is offline  
Old
11-27-2012, 08:47 PM
  #142
Cool Beans Man
Registered User
 
Cool Beans Man's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Ontario
Posts: 3,628
vCash: 500
What a tough year all together with Columbus fans. With the Nash fiasco, losing the lottery, the All-Star game and now Murray out for half a year, I truly feel for the fan base.

Helluva a young nucleus coming up, and looking like a franchise centre in the next year, things are looking up, and I wish for the best for the franchise.

Cool Beans Man is offline  
Old
11-27-2012, 09:53 PM
  #143
alphafox
Registered User
 
alphafox's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 854
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cool Beans Man View Post
What a tough year all together with Columbus fans. With the Nash fiasco, losing the lottery, the All-Star game and now Murray out for half a year, I truly feel for the fan base.

Helluva a young nucleus coming up, and looking like a franchise centre in the next year, things are looking up, and I wish for the best for the franchise.
Thank you for your sympathy. Hopefully this draft really will be the turning point for the franchise. We've had a lot of bad luck that has been compounded on various occasions by bad management. With John Davidson and Craig Patrick at the top of the organization the management now has proven hockey minds steering the ship, and eventually we will find a way to turn our luck around.

I remember when I first got into hockey my favorite team was the Penguins with Super Mario at the helm, I watched them spiral down from those heights and have seen the massive turn around that a few players and the right guys at the top can make. The Jackets can do the same thing, and I think this is the moment where the Jackets will begin their rise from cellar dwellers to a competitive force in the League. I look forward to someday watching my two favorite teams battle for they cup.

alphafox is offline  
Old
11-28-2012, 06:00 AM
  #144
Jovavic
Lose to CBJ?
 
Jovavic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: ClosedDoorMeeting
Country: Qatar
Posts: 10,746
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Jovavic
When Leafs fans come by to pity you, you know you've reached bottom

No offense, Leaf fan

Jovavic is offline  
Old
11-28-2012, 06:28 AM
  #145
BluejacketNut
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 4,847
vCash: 500
Tough year? Try tough existence

BluejacketNut is offline  
Old
11-28-2012, 09:00 AM
  #146
SarcazemKadri
Registered User
 
SarcazemKadri's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 798
vCash: 500
Leaf fan here,

Although the past few seasons have been bad for Columbus, things could swing in a big way this off season. The three first rounders will be huge if there's a full season lockout. Would walk away with 3 franchise/first line/top pairing studs.

Mackinnon?
Pulock?
Domi?

(just spitballing)

As a leaf fan, very jealous.

SarcazemKadri is online now  
Old
11-28-2012, 09:42 AM
  #147
gojackets1
Someday.
 
gojackets1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Columbus
Country: United States
Posts: 3,388
vCash: 500
My players I've been paying attention to so far are Drouin, Mac, Lindholm, Barkov, and Pulock. Pulock I think we have an extremely good shot at if we draft 5-10. He seems studly from what I've heard.

gojackets1 is offline  
Old
11-28-2012, 11:18 AM
  #148
stevo61
Registered User
 
stevo61's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 932
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by gojackets1 View Post
My players I've been paying attention to so far are Drouin, Mac, Lindholm, Barkov, and Pulock. Pulock I think we have an extremely good shot at if we draft 5-10. He seems studly from what I've heard.
He's a very talented defense men who also has the character to fit the way the team is going but depending on where we pick and who's available goal scoring is a pretty big need. That being said i wouldn't be disappointed to see him picked.

stevo61 is offline  
Old
11-28-2012, 01:48 PM
  #149
EspenK
Registered User
 
EspenK's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 4,874
vCash: 500
Pulock or Shinkaruk? All things being equal I'll take offense over more D. Sore Loser? Anyone?

EspenK is offline  
Old
11-28-2012, 02:31 PM
  #150
alphafox
Registered User
 
alphafox's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 854
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by EspenK View Post
Pulock or Shinkaruk? All things being equal I'll take offense over more D. Sore Loser? Anyone?
I say Shinkaruk. Personally I think shinkaruk is one of the elite offensive talents in the draft (reminds me alot of Ray whitney) and give our depth on defense and lack of any elite scoring talent Shinkaruk appears to be a no-brainer. Pulock's skills are impressive, and his offensive tools as a converted forward are amazing, but given the current state of our team if both are available I take Hunter.

alphafox 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 02:20 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.