HFBoards

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

2013 Draft Discussion (Mar. 29 article, post #976)

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
03-22-2013, 08:39 AM
  #701
Flyotes
DownieFaceSoftener
 
Flyotes's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 5,189
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Protest View Post
If we finish last is there anyone here that doesn't think we'll be picking 2nd again lol?
Not really, no. Nothing to think the hockey gods are not through smiting this fanbase.

Flyotes is offline  
Old
03-22-2013, 08:39 AM
  #702
Jack de la Hoya
Registered User
 
Jack de la Hoya's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Texas
Country: United States
Posts: 14,053
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by orange is better View Post
I think if we're at like 4th-6th and jones is off the board (obviously) wed likely take Barkov, Monohan or Shinkaruk and then flip Couturier or Laughton + for an upgrade at D. But if we're picking around 7thish, I wouldn't be surprised to see them go for Nurse, Zadorov or Pulock.
Well, Nurse seems to be on the rise. It is possible he passes Shinkaruk (at minimum) by the time of the draft.

But other than Barkov, those guys aren't necessarily better (or project better) than Couturier--and even Barkov isn't a clearly better choice (he has a higher ceiling, right, but for the role Couturier is projected to play at the moment, I'm not sure he isn't the better choice).

If I'm right, I'm not sure drafting Barkov would make Couturier expendable in a trade. Couturier's trade value hasn't peaked yet, so I'm not sure why selling "low" on him in a trade is a better idea than "reaching" by a pick or two to take the best defensive prospect over Barkov or Shinkaruk.

Picking Best Available Player is a fine strategy, but it loses some of its luster if it comes with the caveat that you're trading an existing prospect / young piece for less than full value.

Jack de la Hoya is offline  
Old
03-22-2013, 09:13 AM
  #703
Psuhockey
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 2,065
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Protest View Post
If we finish last is there anyone here that doesn't think we'll be picking 2nd again lol?
But this year isn't a 1 person draft like last time.

Psuhockey is offline  
Old
03-22-2013, 09:26 AM
  #704
BernieParent
Registered User
 
BernieParent's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Montreal, QC
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,480
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Psuhockey View Post
But this year isn't a 1 person draft like last time.
Exactly. The Flyers last time around picked the wrong year to have a disaster season. Even Kane had question marks, and the talent level overall – at the time of the draft – was meh. This year's draft should provide star-quality players to at least the top 3.

Then again, any (or all) of these players could become another Patrik Stefan. Unlikely, but busts happen.

On another note, it will be interesting to see what Columbus does with their 3 1sts: they are currently at positions 12, 14 (Rangers' pick) and 23 (LA).

BernieParent is online now  
Old
03-22-2013, 09:27 AM
  #705
Psuhockey
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 2,065
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jack de la Hoya View Post
Well, Nurse seems to be on the rise. It is possible he passes Shinkaruk (at minimum) by the time of the draft.

But other than Barkov, those guys aren't necessarily better (or project better) than Couturier--and even Barkov isn't a clearly better choice (he has a higher ceiling, right, but for the role Couturier is projected to play at the moment, I'm not sure he isn't the better choice).

If I'm right, I'm not sure drafting Barkov would make Couturier expendable in a trade. Couturier's trade value hasn't peaked yet, so I'm not sure why selling "low" on him in a trade is a better idea than "reaching" by a pick or two to take the best defensive prospect over Barkov or Shinkaruk.

Picking Best Available Player is a fine strategy, but it loses some of its luster if it comes with the caveat that you're trading an existing prospect / young piece for less than full value.
I think you underrating Barkov. Barkov is projected to be an elite 1st line center. That being said, you are right that he doesn't allow for a trade of Couturier because they are projected for two different roles. If anything Barkov makes Schenn expendable but I still wouldn't trade him either.

The upgrade the Flyers need on defense is probably not available without a huge overpayment. If that is the case, they would be selling pennies on the dollar so to speak and it wouldn't be worth moving Schenn or Couturier for a marginal upgrade so I agree with you. That being said, if the Flyers are in the top 10 they should pick BPA and take a bunch of defensemen later. The defenseman they get in the 2nd rd might end p being better then the one they reached for in the 1st while they would not likely being getting a better forward later in the draft.

Psuhockey is offline  
Old
03-22-2013, 09:29 AM
  #706
Protest
C`est La Vie
 
Protest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Deptford, NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 4,556
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Psuhockey View Post
But this year isn't a 1 person draft like last time.
Yes that is the good part.

Protest is offline  
Old
03-22-2013, 09:33 AM
  #707
BernieParent
Registered User
 
BernieParent's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Montreal, QC
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,480
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jack de la Hoya View Post
Well, Nurse seems to be on the rise. It is possible he passes Shinkaruk (at minimum) by the time of the draft.

But other than Barkov, those guys aren't necessarily better (or project better) than Couturier--and even Barkov isn't a clearly better choice (he has a higher ceiling, right, but for the role Couturier is projected to play at the moment, I'm not sure he isn't the better choice).

If I'm right, I'm not sure drafting Barkov would make Couturier expendable in a trade. Couturier's trade value hasn't peaked yet, so I'm not sure why selling "low" on him in a trade is a better idea than "reaching" by a pick or two to take the best defensive prospect over Barkov or Shinkaruk.

Picking Best Available Player is a fine strategy, but it loses some of its luster if it comes with the caveat that you're trading an existing prospect / young piece for less than full value.
I definitely agree that trading Couturier at this point would significantly undersell on his value. I disagree, though, on BPA; there's nothing wrong with being overloaded on forward talent, especially given this squad's propensity to suffer injuries. It would be nice to take a Detroit-like approach that players earn their roster spots after putting in their time in the AHL and then slowly working their way up the lines.

BernieParent is online now  
Old
03-22-2013, 09:37 AM
  #708
Jack de la Hoya
Registered User
 
Jack de la Hoya's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Texas
Country: United States
Posts: 14,053
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Psuhockey View Post
I think you underrating Barkov. Barkov is projected to be an elite 1st line center. That being said, you are right that he doesn't allow for a trade of Couturier because they are projected for two different roles. If anything Barkov makes Schenn expendable but I still wouldn't trade him either.
Sounds like I am. I was under the impression that he projected to a 1B-type as well (which was / remains Schenn and Couturier's ceiling)

I do think that they should (and will) take the best player available. I wasn't suggesting that the pass on Barkov if he's there. That's a no brainer to me, even with my slightly-uninformed assumption about his ceiling.

It more comes down to someone like Nurse vs. Monahan or Shinkaruk (EDIT: an Lindholm). In that situation, I could see a reasonable case to be made for selecting Nurse if the grade on the players is close.


Last edited by Jack de la Hoya: 03-22-2013 at 09:52 AM.
Jack de la Hoya is offline  
Old
03-22-2013, 09:46 AM
  #709
Psuhockey
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 2,065
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jack de la Hoya View Post
Sounds like I am. I was under the impression that he projected to a 1B-type as well (which was / remains Schenn and Couturier's ceiling)

I do think that they should (and will) take the best player available. I wasn't suggesting that the pass on Barkov if he's there. That's a no brainer to me, even with my slightly-uninformed assumption about his ceiling.

It more comes down to someone like Nurse vs. Monahan or Shinkaruk.
Agree 100% on Nurse over those two. I would put him 5th behind Jones, Drouin, Mackinnon, and Barkov. Nichushkin would be ahead of him but I am a realist and doubt the Flyers would pick him due to his KHL contract at 5. Lindholm is intersting too at 5 but would probably still go with Nurse.

Psuhockey is offline  
Old
03-22-2013, 09:51 AM
  #710
JDinkalage Morgoone
U of South Flurrida
 
JDinkalage Morgoone's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: 308 Negra Arroyo Ln.
Country: Uzbekistan
Posts: 12,579
vCash: 500
The more I hear about Darnell Nurse, the more I'd like to see the Flyers get him if Seth Jones is not able to be had.

__________________
"Help was not promised, lovely girl. Only death."
JDinkalage Morgoone is online now  
Old
03-22-2013, 09:51 AM
  #711
Jack de la Hoya
Registered User
 
Jack de la Hoya's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Texas
Country: United States
Posts: 14,053
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Psuhockey View Post
Agree 100% on Nurse over those two. I would put him 5th behind Jones, Drouin, Mackinnon, and Barkov. Nichushkin would be ahead of him but I am a realist and doubt the Flyers would pick him due to his KHL contract at 5. Lindholm is intersting too at 5 but would probably still go with Nurse.
Yeah, Lindholm was the guy I forgot.

I was curious what others thought about Nichushkin. That would just seem to require a level of patience that the organization hasn't demonstrated recently.

He'd be an interesting pick for Washington though. Ovechkin-Kuznetsov-Nichushkin in a few years? EDIT, Tampa has also shown a bias towards Russians of late.

EDIT: If the season ended today, and FLA won the lottery, we'd be looking at:

1. Florida
2. Colorado
3. Calgary
4. Flyers
5. Washington
6. Tampa Bay

If, however, we could get "ahead" of Calgary, there might be a deal to be made with FLA, who, according to their fans at least, covet a forward rather than Jones. FLA traded down from 1 to 3 in 2003 to take Horton (PITT took Fleury). The consensus among Avs fans seems to be that they would definitely take Jones (for a few different reasons) if he's there. Assuming that we were slotted 3rd, that would still guarantee one of Drouin or MacKinnon for FLA.


Last edited by Jack de la Hoya: 03-22-2013 at 09:59 AM.
Jack de la Hoya is offline  
Old
03-22-2013, 10:04 AM
  #712
Jtown
Registered User
 
Jtown's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Fairfax, Virginia
Posts: 12,237
vCash: 500
Giroux Mackinnon Simmonds
Hartnell Schenn Voracek
read Couturier Briere
Rinaldo Talbot Mcginn

Jtown is offline  
Old
03-22-2013, 10:07 AM
  #713
sa cyred
Yea....the Flyers...
 
sa cyred's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Traveling...
Country: Cuba
Posts: 15,766
vCash: 500
I would probably just stay at 3. Obviously if it doesnt cost alot i would jump but i cant see it if florida knows colorado wants a defender. At that point in time you take Mackinnon or Drouin without losing assets. I personally think Drouin is the best player in this class, but you are not downgrading ij talent if your not getting Jones.

sa cyred is online now  
Old
03-22-2013, 10:07 AM
  #714
Jack de la Hoya
Registered User
 
Jack de la Hoya's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Texas
Country: United States
Posts: 14,053
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jtown View Post
Giroux Mackinnon Simmonds
Hartnell Schenn Voracek
read Couturier Briere
Rinaldo Talbot Mcginn
MacKinnon would seem like a better fit on the wing than Giroux, right, and I'd be a bit reluctant to break up Giroux/Voracek and Schenn/Simmonds?

MacKinnon-Giroux-Voracek
Hartnell-Schenn-Simmonds
Talbot-Couturier-Read
McGinn-Laughton-Rinaldo

(That's probably a 2014-2015 lineup. I can't imagine MacKinnon getting top-line minutes in year one.)

Maybe several years down the road, MacKinnon moves to C, but it would seem easier to get him early minutes at wing.

Jack de la Hoya is offline  
Old
03-22-2013, 10:11 AM
  #715
Jack de la Hoya
Registered User
 
Jack de la Hoya's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Texas
Country: United States
Posts: 14,053
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by sa cyred View Post
I would probably just stay at 3. Obviously if it doesnt cost alot i would jump but i cant see it if florida knows colorado wants a defender. At that point in time you take Mackinnon or Drouin without losing assets. I personally think Drouin is the best player in this class, but you are not downgrading ij talent if your not getting Jones.
In 2003, the price was 3rd overall + 55th overall + M. Samuelsson for 1st overall + a mid-3rd.

I'm not sure what the comparable to Samuelsson is for us, but if we can flip Mezsaros for a late 2nd / early 3rd, I'd easily give that pick up + an addition 3rd-level asset.

Jack de la Hoya is offline  
Old
03-22-2013, 10:19 AM
  #716
sa cyred
Yea....the Flyers...
 
sa cyred's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Traveling...
Country: Cuba
Posts: 15,766
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jack de la Hoya View Post
In 2003, the price was 3rd overall + 55th overall + M. Samuelsson for 1st overall + a mid-3rd.

I'm not sure what the comparable to Samuelsson is for us, but if we can flip Mezsaros for a late 2nd / early 3rd, I'd easily give that pick up + an addition 3rd-level asset.
I think the situation is different though. If there are rumblings that colordo really wants to choose a defender, florida can use that to their advantage in getting more from us.

sa cyred is online now  
Old
03-22-2013, 10:21 AM
  #717
Jack de la Hoya
Registered User
 
Jack de la Hoya's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Texas
Country: United States
Posts: 14,053
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by sa cyred View Post
I think the situation is different though. If there are rumblings that colordo really wants to choose a defender, florida can use that to their advantage in getting more from us.
Is that different?

There must have been some reason that Pittsburgh decided it needed to move from 3 to 1 to get Fluery? I don't see why Carolina would have picked him, but the trade doesn't seem to make sense otherwise.

(I'll confess, I was an undergraduate at the time, and while I followed the Flyers closely, I didn't pay quite as much attention to other teams).

Jack de la Hoya is offline  
Old
03-22-2013, 10:23 AM
  #718
Jtown
Registered User
 
Jtown's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Fairfax, Virginia
Posts: 12,237
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by sa cyred View Post
I think the situation is different though. If there are rumblings that colordo really wants to choose a defender, florida can use that to their advantage in getting more from us.
And what is different now is that in 2013 there is a legit number 1 top prospect.

Jtown is offline  
Old
03-22-2013, 10:47 AM
  #719
sa cyred
Yea....the Flyers...
 
sa cyred's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Traveling...
Country: Cuba
Posts: 15,766
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jack de la Hoya View Post
Is that different?

There must have been some reason that Pittsburgh decided it needed to move from 3 to 1 to get Fluery? I don't see why Carolina would have picked him, but the trade doesn't seem to make sense otherwise.

(I'll confess, I was an undergraduate at the time, and while I followed the Flyers closely, I didn't pay quite as much attention to other teams).
Well I don't know for sure. I just can't see us giving up a 3rd and Meszaros to move up infront of a team that wants him ALOT in Colorado. I honestly see Colorado paying more than us to move up to get him. Florida could bet the two of us against one another and get the best deal.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jtown View Post
And what is different now is that in 2013 there is a legit number 1 top prospect.
I'm guessing your talking about Jones? I don't know if I agree with this if so. If I am any team in the league, I'd take Drouin #1. Kid is a dynamic forward who looks to be one of those 100 point players in the nhl. Kid has UNREAL skill and drive. Doesnt slack in any areas either. Don't get me wrong, I like Jones, I just like Drouin more. And I dont know if Jones is the consensus #1.

sa cyred is online now  
Old
03-22-2013, 10:55 AM
  #720
WeekendAtBernies
Registered User
 
WeekendAtBernies's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Posts: 2,716
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Protest View Post
If we finish last is there anyone here that doesn't think we'll be picking 2nd again lol?
Quote:
Originally Posted by DownieFaceSoftener View Post
Not really, no. Nothing to think the hockey gods are not through smiting this fanbase.
The process this year is significantly different than in 2007.

In 2007, we had a 48.2% chance of picking first, since you could only move up a max of 4 spots if you won the lottery. Did we get "screwed", nah not really, we lost a coin-flip. Actually the odds were slightly against us... But we were somewhat unlucky.

In 2013, the last place team has precisely a 25% chance of picking first. AKA roughly 3 years out of every 4, the team w/ the worst record won't be picking first. So even if the Flyers finish dead last, I'll be expecting to pick 2nd overall.

You can chalk it up to terrible luck, hockey gods smiting the fans, etc. but in reality we weren't "screwed". We lost a 50-50 bet. Maybe this year, we'll get "payback" and win the lottery when we only have a 18.8% (if we finish 2nd worst) or 14.2% (if we finish 3rd worst) chance.

Or maybe Seth Jones goes #1 overall to some other team and is the next in a long line of American defensemen who have disappointed in the NHL, while we end up w/ Drouin or MacK, who go on to become legitimate NHL Superstars. Who knows what's in the cards?

WeekendAtBernies is offline  
Old
03-22-2013, 10:55 AM
  #721
Jack de la Hoya
Registered User
 
Jack de la Hoya's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Texas
Country: United States
Posts: 14,053
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jtown View Post
And what is different now is that in 2013 there is a legit number 1 top prospect.
I can't tell whether you mean that there is a clear-cut #1, or whether there are guys who are worth taking #1.

I'm not sure Jones is the consensus #1 [EDIT: in the sense of, consensus to be selected 1st overall]. It seems to me that Mackinnon and Drouin could also go that high. The fact that there are three guys who could arguably hold first overall-type value might make it easier to move from 3rd to 1st than it would be in a year when one player was a clear cut above the others.


Last edited by Jack de la Hoya: 03-22-2013 at 11:16 AM.
Jack de la Hoya is offline  
Old
03-22-2013, 11:06 AM
  #722
Roo Mad Bro
U havin a giggle m8?
 
Roo Mad Bro's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: PA
Country: United States
Posts: 6,083
vCash: 500
At this point, I still think MacKinnon is a better pro prospect than Drouin.

His game is just built to succeed at the NHL level. His skating is the definition of "elite", and reports have said that he has the best acceleration of any prospect in years. He backchecks, and plays a Taylor Hall type offense where he drives the net using his speed and power.



To give you a good look at his skating prowess. Unreal.

Roo Mad Bro is offline  
Old
03-22-2013, 11:10 AM
  #723
JackStraw
Moving much too slow
 
JackStraw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Maine
Country: United States
Posts: 1,920
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jack de la Hoya View Post
I can't tell whether you mean that there is a clear-cut #1, or whether there are guys who are worth taking #1.

I'm not sure Jones is the consensus #1. It seems to me that Mackinnon and Drouin could also go that high. The fact that there are three guys who could arguably hold first overall-type value might make it easier to move from 3rd to 1st than it would be in a year when one player was a clear cut above the others.
Every prospect ranking I've seen recently has Jones at #1. Seems like a consensus to me. Doesn't necessarily mean he'll go first overall, the top three are close and it could come down to need. But Jones seems to be "BPA" pretty much everywhere.

JackStraw is offline  
Old
03-22-2013, 11:14 AM
  #724
dingbathero
No Jam? How about PB
 
dingbathero's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: St. John's, NL
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,905
vCash: 500
We NEED a D man in the worst kind of way. Having said that, I think you have to go with BPA wherever we land in the draft order. Top 3 would be amazing, hell top 5 even.

I am not sure how you can go wrong with either of:
Jones
McKinnon
Drouin

dingbathero is offline  
Old
03-22-2013, 11:19 AM
  #725
dingbathero
No Jam? How about PB
 
dingbathero's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: St. John's, NL
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,905
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roo Mad Bro View Post
At this point, I still think MacKinnon is a better pro prospect than Drouin.

His game is just built to succeed at the NHL level. His skating is the definition of "elite", and reports have said that he has the best acceleration of any prospect in years. He backchecks, and plays a Taylor Hall type offense where he drives the net using his speed and power.



To give you a good look at his skating prowess. Unreal.
I started watching them now... ha. good vids.

dingbathero 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 04:11 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.