I feel like I'm being teased again. If Ryder and Robidas go I won't even care about Morrow. Based on this speculation what would we want from any of those teams if they inquired about him? I'm not really familiar with their prospect systems.
First of all, that source really shouldn't even be allowed here but that's neither here nor there. The link said "if the team is out of contention for playoffs" or something to that effect...Nieuwendyk has always been able to talk himself out of being a seller, in a shortened season like this there's no reason to think that has changed.
So does Dallas move their pick with Robidas in this years draft since it is not supposed to be deep with talent? Or do you think they keep it since we look to be destined for the basement of the Western Conf?
So does Dallas move their pick with Robidas in this years draft since it is not supposed to be deep with talent?
That's the exact opposite of what is being said around the league.
The draft is deep ... and you package picks with players for playoff rentals. Trading Robidas would be a selling move ... you don't just dump 1st round picks for the hell of it.
I keep joking about picking up Ryan Whitney, but that really seems like a low-risk, high-reward move.
Does anyone know of any other defensemen who have lost a step & need a change of scenery?
I keep joking about picking up Ryan Whitney, but that really seems like a low-risk, high-reward move.
Does anyone know of any other defensemen who have lost a step & need a change of scenery?
At that point, it's crazy to think about draft depths.
With most regular seasons in the NCAA, CHL, and Europe ending in less than a month .... it's too late to talk about draft depth?
Unless draft prospects are lucky to get into the U-18 or go on a long playoff run, they are not going to have enough games to change many scouts opinions. The meat of the scouting season is essentially over.
At this point last year, Dallas scouts were already telling GM Joe that the draft was 50 players deep and he should try and add a 2nd. In every conversation after the Grossmann trade on 2/16 last year he mentioned the scouts opinion of the 2012 draft. Those same things have already probably been discussed this year.
found a picture of Larsen after crashing into the boards.
What about Ryan Whitney from Edmonton? On the outs here and a regular scratch. Injured his foot a couple seasons back and just hasn't regained form. Negative situation here like Souray, the difference is Whitney just turned 30. Could be had for cheap, and you know someone will tale a chance on him. I'd hate to see him regain form somewhere else, knowing we coulda had him for peanuts.
Mods: I made a thread on this so if you want to delete it and just discuss in this thread that's cool too.
Edit: Didn't even see Whitney being mentioned above. Guess that means I'm not alone on that path.
That's the exact opposite of what is being said around the league.
The draft is deep ... and you package picks with players for playoff rentals. Trading Robidas would be a selling move ... you don't just dump 1st round picks for the hell of it.
The draft is a pretty regular hype cycle. At the beginning of the year everybody thinks the draft is going to be so deep and all the players are great. Then the season actually happens and some players are disappointing and others get injured and all of the "deepest draft in years" articles get followed by "draft not so deep" articles.
How deep exactly? I think the article specifically points to the 2013 draft not matching the 2003 draft, and I'd have to agree.
That's not really a fair comparison though. That 2003 draft might be the best ever. Not being as good as that isn't exactly a failure. The top ten looks amazing and even into the early 2nd there appears to be some decent talent. This one won't net the sheer number of players that '03 draft did but it's not 1999 awful.
The nice thing about the Stars is that they seem to take chances on guys who get injured and would have been higher had they played their draft year. Guys like Larsen, Vincour, Ritchie, Klingberg and the like. It sometimes fails, Troock but good players are found later sometimes and this draft has some potential for guys like that, ie Shore.
This is a draft that getting a top ten, if not top five pick would be huge. There is a talent drop off but there are several good players who will be available later on.
That's not really a fair comparison though. That 2003 draft might be the best ever.
I agree, but I am merely playing Devil's advocate for that article.
Quote:
Not being as good as that isn't exactly a failure. The top ten looks amazing and even into the early 2nd there appears to be some decent talent. This one won't net the sheer number of players that '03 draft did but it's not 1999 awful.
Nowhere did I say not being as good as 2003 is in any way a failure. I honestly didn't know how deep that draft was, but thanks for the clarification.
I feel like there's a huge dropoff after the top 6. Honestly have never understood why this draft is considered so deep, not really impressed by the talent pool. A lot of guys with low ceilings, but not much in terms of potential.
By the way, the '09 draft is shaping up to be crazy deep in the 1st. I think like, 26 or 27 players have played at least one NHL game already (Glennie included, of course), and a quick glance through the names shows that there are quite a few impact players from '09.
