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

Options at #1

View Poll Results: Pick 1
Seth Jones 11 17.19%
Nathan Mackinnon 45 70.31%
Johnathan Drouin 8 12.50%
Voters: 64. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
03-03-2013, 10:43 AM
  #26
Xoggz22
Registered User
 
Xoggz22's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Columbus, Ohio
Country: United States
Posts: 4,286
vCash: 500
McKinnon for me. I realize players improve over time but McKinnon has been in the limelight for 2+ years and continues to be highly thought of. Sounds like a pretty complete player, willing to compete and high skill and IQ. We need that up front and while Jones would be a great addition (I wouldn't lose sleep if we did pick him) I just think they are close enough to choose the need in this case.

Granted, I'm convinced the Rangers are going to miss the playoffs and win the lottery giving us Jones and McKinnon (or in that case trade down a spot or 2 and take Drouin or Barkov if necessary)

Xoggz22 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-03-2013, 11:14 AM
  #27
CBJ All The Way
HFBoards Sponsor
 
CBJ All The Way's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Columbus, OH
Country: United States
Posts: 3,086
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Xoggz22 View Post
McKinnon for me. I realize players improve over time but McKinnon has been in the limelight for 2+ years and continues to be highly thought of. Sounds like a pretty complete player, willing to compete and high skill and IQ. We need that up front and while Jones would be a great addition (I wouldn't lose sleep if we did pick him) I just think they are close enough to choose the need in this case.

Granted, I'm convinced the Rangers are going to miss the playoffs and win the lottery giving us Jones and McKinnon (or in that case trade down a spot or 2 and take Drouin or Barkov if necessary)
You also gotta remember that LA is struggling too, We may have 3 top 15 Picks! Reading some of these comments has really made me think how sick it would be to have a Toews, Tavares, Stammy which Mackinnon should be! Although jones is gonna be a workhorse in the league! Ahh its such a tough choice! I have trust in the new front office and belive they will make all the right picks!

CBJ All The Way is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-03-2013, 11:19 AM
  #28
RDriesenUD
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 8,225
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by kemisti View Post
BPA.. Which to me is Jones. This team may need Mac more now but I still wouldn't pass on Jones.
I agree. I may change my mind by the draft, but that is what I am thinking right now.

RDriesenUD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-03-2013, 11:20 AM
  #29
EspenK
Registered User
 
EspenK's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 5,181
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CBJ All The Way View Post
You also gotta remember that LA is struggling too, We may have 3 top 15 Picks! Reading some of these comments has really made me think how sick it would be to have a Toews, Tavares, Stammy which Mackinnon should be! Although jones is gonna be a workhorse in the league! Ahh its such a tough choice! I have trust in the new front office and belive they will make all the right picks!
They may have started slowly but the Kings are playing well now. Our best hope is for Rangers to quit on Torts and continue to struggle offensively.

My guess is Rangers win on last day to make the playoffs. Team they knock out wins lottery.

EspenK is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-03-2013, 11:20 AM
  #30
RDriesenUD
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 8,225
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by EspenK View Post
Mackinnon. Next 3 picks- forward, forward, forward. This team needs forwards.
First pick - BPA. Next 3 picks - BPA, BPA, and BPA.

RDriesenUD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-03-2013, 11:27 AM
  #31
Sore Loser
HF Partner
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Spokane, WA.
Country: United States
Posts: 6,159
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Matthew View Post
(Not comparing the players at all in terms of skill here)

Do you find a similarity between this year and the Stamkos/Hedman year with this draft? Hedmen momentarily took the lead from Stamkos for a couple of the rankings as I recall.
You must be thinking of Tavares/Hedman...

Yes, I think it's similar, but I think Seth Jones is a better player than Victor Hedman, and I don't think Nathan MacKinnon is as good as John Tavares ... so, I think there's actually merit to this one.

Sore Loser is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-03-2013, 12:15 PM
  #32
Crede777
Deputized
 
Crede777's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Country: United States
Posts: 7,557
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by RDriesenUD View Post
First pick - BPA. Next 3 picks - BPA, BPA, and BPA.
While I agree, one could make the argument Jones isn't the BPA.

Crede777 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-03-2013, 12:35 PM
  #33
davidbklyn
Registered User
 
davidbklyn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 1,935
vCash: 500
The team needs scoring, but I'm a bigger fan of defense in general, and Jones seems to have a very, very high ceiling. I wouldn't be disappointed with Mack, though, by any means.

I'm interested to see if we actually end up using all 3 first rounders, or if one of them gets traded.

davidbklyn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-03-2013, 12:47 PM
  #34
CapnCornelius
Registered User
 
CapnCornelius's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 10,938
vCash: 500
This is not a 1 year rebuild, so you take the best player available. I'm not convinced our defense is as great as some had thought when you consider it has been as good without its "top pair" as it was with them.

That said, while I like Jones and I like his size, I have some concerns. Specifically, guy doesn't use his body enough for a player his size. You are not going to confuse him for Chris Pronger. He's also sometimes reluctant to take a shot. In a game earlier this week, he has a chance to tie the game with the puck on his stick and makes an ill-advised pass. Now, he's young and there is plenty of time to fix these issues, but it is a concern for me. I'd like to see how Jones plays in the playoffs and gauge whether he's going to raise his game to the next level and play with the edge he'll need to in the NHL.

I haven't yet seen enough of MacKinnon. But to take Jones I'd have to feel he was clearly the better overall player.

So, I'm still on the fence, but I don't think we should take MacKinnon simply because we need offense. We're going to be drafting high again next year and we are going to have to make some smart trades and acquisitions to rebuild our mess of a forward core. Rome wasn't built in a day. Hopefully we get a least one forward that can contribute going forward out of this draft, whether at #1/2 or later in the draft.

CapnCornelius is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-03-2013, 12:52 PM
  #35
EspenK
Registered User
 
EspenK's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 5,181
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by RDriesenUD View Post
First pick - BPA. Next 3 picks - BPA, BPA, and BPA.
theory is great but what if the 4 are all D. No way.

EspenK is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-03-2013, 12:58 PM
  #36
JacketsFanWest
Registered User
 
JacketsFanWest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Country: Sweden
Posts: 2,749
vCash: 500
MacKinnon.

There's too high of a risk taking a defenseman first overall. Too often they don't pan out, and the Jackets desperately need a big win at the draft.

JacketsFanWest is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-03-2013, 01:06 PM
  #37
Matthew
F.A.R.T on Mike Todd
 
Matthew's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Columbus, Ohio
Country: United States
Posts: 7,318
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Matthew
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sore Loser View Post
You must be thinking of Tavares/Hedman...

Yes, I think it's similar, but I think Seth Jones is a better player than Victor Hedman, and I don't think Nathan MacKinnon is as good as John Tavares ... so, I think there's actually merit to this one.
Yeah, not sure how I mixed that up.

Matthew is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-03-2013, 02:12 PM
  #38
slightlystewpid420
Registered User
 
slightlystewpid420's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 2,835
vCash: 500
I'd love to see one of those behind the scenes jackets video of JD and JK's scouting sessions or meetings like they did when JD first got in. I'm really curious to hear what he has to say about the top 4 players or at least his ranking

slightlystewpid420 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-03-2013, 04:42 PM
  #39
RDriesenUD
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 8,225
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crede777 View Post
While I agree, one could make the argument Jones isn't the BPA.
I never said he was. Just saying I am not picking one specific guy just because of his position. We have to take BPA.

RDriesenUD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-03-2013, 04:45 PM
  #40
RDriesenUD
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 8,225
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by EspenK View Post
theory is great but what if the 4 are all D. No way.
Then you make trades. Either to move up/back or for prospects/players.

RDriesenUD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-03-2013, 05:23 PM
  #41
EspenK
Registered User
 
EspenK's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 5,181
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by RDriesenUD View Post
Then you make trades. Either to move up/back or for prospects/players.
I don't get the logic- If I'm supposed to pick the BPA (say Jones at 1) why would I trade him to get the BPA (say Lindholm at 6) at a lower level but not chose a guy who is the next BPA (say Mackinnon at 2) but happens to be a forward. I think you buy into that theory way too much. The throw in for that kind of a deal (2nd rounder) is probably a pick where the odds of them being successful are much less.

PS I used the top guys to illustrate a point because I know their names and relative positions not to advocate giving up Jones to get Lindholm.

Probably an agree to disagree situation.

EspenK is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-03-2013, 05:52 PM
  #42
RDriesenUD
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 8,225
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by EspenK View Post
I don't get the logic- If I'm supposed to pick the BPA (say Jones at 1) why would I trade him to get the BPA (say Lindholm at 6) at a lower level but not chose a guy who is the next BPA (say Mackinnon at 2) but happens to be a forward. I think you buy into that theory way too much. The throw in for that kind of a deal (2nd rounder) is probably a pick where the odds of them being successful are much less.

PS I used the top guys to illustrate a point because I know their names and relative positions not to advocate giving up Jones to get Lindholm.

Probably an agree to disagree situation.
Where did I ever say to trade the first pick? You said what happens if all 4 BPA are D. Well, if you already took a D with your first pick, and want a C (for example), then you can trade up or down. We aren't drafting to be good next year. We are drafting to be good in 3 or 4 years. Who knows who will be on the team then. You have to go BPA in the first round. You can't turn down the best player when you are picking.

If you have two guys very closely rated then you can draft by position. Otherwise you need to draft the best player available.


Last edited by RDriesenUD: 03-03-2013 at 07:21 PM.
RDriesenUD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-03-2013, 05:52 PM
  #43
major major
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 3,851
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by EspenK View Post
I don't get the logic- If I'm supposed to pick the BPA (say Jones at 1) why would I trade him to get the BPA (say Lindholm at 6) at a lower level but not chose a guy who is the next BPA (say Mackinnon at 2) but happens to be a forward. I think you buy into that theory way too much. The throw in for that kind of a deal (2nd rounder) is probably a pick where the odds of them being successful are much less.

PS I used the top guys to illustrate a point because I know their names and relative positions not to advocate giving up Jones to get Lindholm.

Probably an agree to disagree situation.
You get way more than a second rounder for dropping from 1 to 6. Remember when the Isles offered us their entire draft for the #2, and it wasn't nearly enough? I think you could get next year's first rounder just for dropping from 1 to 3 or 4.

major major is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-03-2013, 06:46 PM
  #44
DesertDawg
Registered User
 
DesertDawg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Superstition Mts
Posts: 4,660
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CBJBrassard16 View Post
You build offense with Centers. Take the center
...and you build a team from the blue zone out, go with Jones ...
but then again a team may be willing to over pay to get that franchise center (and not for more draft picks it would be for a top prospect/player + a top 1st rnd pick).

DesertDawg is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
03-03-2013, 07:57 PM
  #45
Fred Glover
Chief of Sinners
 
Fred Glover's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Ohio
Country: Scotland
Posts: 4,105
vCash: 6400
You take the BPA. This team needs talent all over the ice. If Jones is the BPA, then you draft him and trade your vet defensemen if he happens to beat them out. Remember, our #1 last year is a defenseman who is injured, all the reports were that he was and will be a stud. We need to upgrade in the worse way all over the ice. So, BPA for me. That being said, I would be happy with anyone of the three that are listed in the poll

Fred Glover is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-03-2013, 08:56 PM
  #46
EspenK
Registered User
 
EspenK's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 5,181
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by RDriesenUD View Post
Where did I ever say to trade the first pick? You said what happens if all 4 BPA are D. Well, if you already took a D with your first pick, and want a C (for example), then you can trade up or down. We aren't drafting to be good next year. We are drafting to be good in 3 or 4 years. Who knows who will be on the team then. You have to go BPA in the first round. You can't turn down the best player when you are picking.

If you have two guys very closely rated then you can draft by position. Otherwise you need to draft the best player available.
You didn't. Nor did I. I was merely using the names of the top guys (see the PS) to illustrate a point.

And I don't disagree that trading up to get a player you really want isn't smart. Nor am I saying that trading down if the guy you like is probably going to be available later, What I am saying is that by trading down you are violating the principle of taking the best player available because the best guy is probably not who you want but is 5 or 10 spots down the list of "best" players. He is probably a guy who best fits the situation. Our situation is we are offensively challenged and I believe we should spend out top picks on the best offensive players we can get. And further more if the BPA was readily ascertainable why do guys down the list become stars and top picks sometimes bust? I think the BPA is a mythical character who people use as a crutch for missing better players.

Capn had a post where he suggested that the guy who revolutionizes hockey scouting will probably reap great benefits. I tend to agree. Otherwise everyone should just buy Central Scoutings list and there can be an autodraft.

You can't have it both ways. Either you think we should always draft the best guy available or you don't.

EspenK is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-03-2013, 09:00 PM
  #47
EspenK
Registered User
 
EspenK's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 5,181
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by major major View Post
You get way more than a second rounder for dropping from 1 to 6. Remember when the Isles offered us their entire draft for the #2, and it wasn't nearly enough? I think you could get next year's first rounder just for dropping from 1 to 3 or 4.


That isn't what I said either. See above for what I was trying to say.

EspenK is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-03-2013, 09:06 PM
  #48
CBJWennberg41
Formerly CBJBrassard
 
CBJWennberg41's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 13,314
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DesertDawg View Post
...and you build a team from the blue zone out, go with Jones ...
but then again a team may be willing to over pay to get that franchise center (and not for more draft picks it would be for a top prospect/player + a top 1st rnd pick).
We already have a crop of defenseman. Unless Jones is far and away no questionably the best player in the draft, take MacKinnon.

CBJWennberg41 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-03-2013, 09:34 PM
  #49
Mayor Bee
\/me_____you\/
 
Mayor Bee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 14,694
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CBJBrassard16 View Post
We already have a crop of defenseman. Unless Jones is far and away no questionably the best player in the draft, take MacKinnon.
Once had a crop of forwards too, only their names were Picard, Platt, Brule, and Fritsche.

Imagine if the 2006 draft had involved falling back to take the best defenseman available, what with D being a major organizational weakness at the time. The next 10 defensemen taken (all in the 1st or early 2nd round) were Ty Wishart, Mark Mitera, David Fischer, Bobby Sanguinetti, Denis Persson, Ivan Vishnevskiy, Chris Summers, Matt Corrente (the preceding were all in the 1st round), Carl Sneep, and Yuri Alexandrov. Every one of those guys was taken in the top-37.

Mayor Bee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-03-2013, 09:52 PM
  #50
CBJ All The Way
HFBoards Sponsor
 
CBJ All The Way's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Columbus, OH
Country: United States
Posts: 3,086
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mayor Bee View Post
Once had a crop of forwards too, only their names were Picard, Platt, Brule, and Fritsche.

Imagine if the 2006 draft had involved falling back to take the best defenseman available, what with D being a major organizational weakness at the time. The next 10 defensemen taken (all in the 1st or early 2nd round) were Ty Wishart, Mark Mitera, David Fischer, Bobby Sanguinetti, Denis Persson, Ivan Vishnevskiy, Chris Summers, Matt Corrente (the preceding were all in the 1st round), Carl Sneep, and Yuri Alexandrov. Every one of those guys was taken in the top-37.
That's very interesting

CBJ All The Way 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 03:11 AM.

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.