HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Western Conference > Pacific Division > Edmonton Oilers
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

2013 NHL Entry Draft Thread | "Don't Be A Moran, Draft Monahan"

View Poll Results: Who Would You Draft Of These Options?
Sean Monahan 141 52.61%
Elias Lindholm 26 9.70%
Valeri Nischushkin 34 12.69%
Darnell Nurse 45 16.79%
Rasmus Ristolainen 8 2.99%
Curtis Lazar 14 5.22%
Voters: 268. You may not vote on this poll

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
04-18-2013, 02:25 AM
  #201
Qrispy
Registered User
 
Qrispy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 3,365
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by 40oz View Post
Am I the only one who's really sick of seeing every player who isn't 6'2 being written off?
It's incredibly enraging.

You don't draft Monahan's or Barkov's ahead of players like MacKinnon because of a couple inches.
I'm with you there.

If you don't take MacKinnon over Monahan or Barkov, you're effin crazy. MacKinnon plays very much like Hall from what I've seen and I'd kill to have another player like that on this team.

Qrispy is offline  
Old
04-18-2013, 02:51 AM
  #202
Joey Moss
Registered User
 
Joey Moss's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 23,361
vCash: 500
Would be cool if Calgary got Drouin and we got MacKinnon. I agree though, I'd take Mack over Barkov or Monahan. If he can bring all the other assets like defensive play and faceoffs that the other two do then I'm fine with it..

Joey Moss is offline  
Old
04-18-2013, 03:53 AM
  #203
Bryanbryoil
Moderator
Bozo Buddies
 
Bryanbryoil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 51,798
vCash: 500
Mackinnon from what I recall at the WJC's was fast as hell and strong for his size. I would not discount a player like that just because another prospect has a few inches of height over him.

__________________
Treat Others As You Would Like To Be Treated
Bryanbryoil is online now  
Old
04-18-2013, 03:58 AM
  #204
Soundwave
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 26,175
vCash: 500
If MacKinnon is on the board you take him, I don't even think it's much of a debate. Bye bye Gagner. I doubt the Oilers can drop that low though, he'll be gone by no.3 for sure.

Soundwave is offline  
Old
04-18-2013, 04:03 AM
  #205
Joey Moss
Registered User
 
Joey Moss's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 23,361
vCash: 500
The Oilers are 3 points away from 3, so you never know.. especially with our schedule.

He's a lot like Taylor Hall but with better balance and hands. Hall is clearly faster and bigger. Mac will probably play at 6'1 200 though. He's a tank for his size already. His body style is a lot like Crosby's at an early age. I would love to get Mackinnon and trade Gagner for a defenseman. I've also done some reading on his defensive play, he's responsible defensively and his faceoffs are improving. I read somewhere he was at 55% this year.

Joey Moss is offline  
Old
04-18-2013, 04:15 AM
  #206
Everlasting
Registered User
 
Everlasting's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Somwhere in time
Country: Sweden
Posts: 4,529
vCash: 500
More kids = Longer rebuild.

Everlasting is offline  
Old
04-18-2013, 04:17 AM
  #207
Lay Z Boy GM
Registered User
 
Lay Z Boy GM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: West coast
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,353
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BarDownBobo View Post
I agree with this for the most part, however I think Barkov and MacKinnon are so close that they're interchangeable. But yes, it's ridiculous to suggest picking Monahan over MacKinnon, and personally I'd say over Lindholm too.
I didn't actually see anyone say they would take Monahan over Mackinnon. I know Mackinnon is going to be great, but I'd at least consider trading down to pick Barkov. Of course Lindholm looks great too, there's so many options for us to secure a 2nd line center. Barkov is the guy I want in the top 5, Monahan is the guy I'd hope to get 5-7.

Lay Z Boy GM is offline  
Old
04-18-2013, 05:02 AM
  #208
Heavy Dee
Registered User
 
Heavy Dee's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,518
vCash: 500
As long as we get one of the five studs

For me:

Jones
Drouin
MacKinnon
Barkov
Lindholm

Is the pretty clear top 5 right now.

Heavy Dee is offline  
Old
04-18-2013, 06:41 AM
  #209
Up the Irons
Registered User
 
Up the Irons's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,494
vCash: 508
Quote:
Originally Posted by 40oz View Post
Am I the only one who's really sick of seeing every player who isn't 6'2 being written off?
It's incredibly enraging.

You don't draft Monahan's or Barkov's ahead of players like MacKinnon because of a couple inches.
as long as the Oil don't take Drouin. i don't know enough about any of the Centres to say, but, we better be taking the one that is strong on the puck and difficult to play against. we absolutely must pick for need. this 'best player available' isn't all its cracked up to be. just ask the now unemployed Tambellini. MacT will likely be trading one of our 'best players available' to fill a gaping need. We shall see what all you 'BPA, everytime, no matter what' disciples think then. I suspect many of you are the same people as the 'you just don't trade a player like that, ever' crowd. Tambellini has one of them.

Up the Irons is offline  
Old
04-18-2013, 09:19 AM
  #210
Jimmi Jenkins
Turtle Renji
 
Jimmi Jenkins's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Alberta
Country: Canada
Posts: 39,266
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by RustE View Post
as long as the Oil don't take Drouin. i don't know enough about any of the Centres to say, but, we better be taking the one that is strong on the puck and difficult to play against. we absolutely must pick for need. this 'best player available' isn't all its cracked up to be. just ask the now unemployed Tambellini. MacT will likely be trading one of our 'best players available' to fill a gaping need. We shall see what all you 'BPA, everytime, no matter what' disciples think then. I suspect many of you are the same people as the 'you just don't trade a player like that, ever' crowd. Tambellini has one of them.
From what I can tell, you'd be hard pressed to take Barkov, or Monahan especially, over Drouin because of "size"

That would be like taking JVR over Pat Kane because you want a "big forward"

Jimmi Jenkins is offline  
Old
04-18-2013, 09:28 AM
  #211
CornKicker
Still burning Lowood
 
CornKicker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,072
vCash: 694
the debate for the oilers shouldnt be hard if they have a top 3 pick imo. Jones is #1, Mackinnon #2 and drouin is clearly better than the rest so he is #3. then the debate can start Barkov is probably next on my list then Lindholm. that is the top 5 it has to be. if we pick out of that range then you are in Monahan, Nurse etc.

if anyone passes on Mackinnon or Drouin we have to take them, not taking drouin would be like not taking parise and picking poo-leeot. Mackinnon has the compete level of hall and yak. if there is any chance we get him we have to take him.

CornKicker is offline  
Old
04-18-2013, 09:47 AM
  #212
DousedInOil
Registered User
 
DousedInOil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Katy <3
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,824
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Everlasting View Post
More kids = Longer rebuild.
If the cost of a longer rebuild is the addition of MacKinnon, I'm okay with the wait. Besides, a GM should be able to build around his guys without giving up his first round pick.

We better not trade a top 5 pick for a couple years at an aging veteran.

DousedInOil is offline  
Old
04-18-2013, 10:18 AM
  #213
CupofOil
Visually, we suck.
 
CupofOil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Rock Bottom
Country: United States
Posts: 14,347
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Heavy Dee View Post
As long as we get one of the five studs

For me:

Jones
Drouin
MacKinnon
Barkov
Lindholm

Is the pretty clear top 5 right now.
I would put Monahan in that group, he arguably fits the Oilers needs better than any of those guys outside of Jones of course. I'm not sure what makes Lindholm better than him although i gotta admit that Lindholm was extremely impressive at the WJC, much more physical than i imagined he would be.

CupofOil is offline  
Old
04-18-2013, 10:22 AM
  #214
nafrelio
Registered User
 
nafrelio's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: brite feuchure
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,575
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joey Moss View Post
Would be cool if Calgary got Drouin and we got MacKinnon. I agree though, I'd take Mack over Barkov or Monahan. If he can bring all the other assets like defensive play and faceoffs that the other two do then I'm fine with it..
It would be even cooler if we got MacKinnon and the Flames won enough games to get out of the top 8 - I'd be okay if they got Zadorov or Shinkaruk.

nafrelio is offline  
Old
04-18-2013, 10:47 AM
  #215
jukon
#Nailedit
 
jukon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 1,508
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Heavy Dee View Post
As long as we get one of the five studs

For me:

Jones
Drouin
MacKinnon
Barkov
Lindholm

Is the pretty clear top 5 right now.
Most Edmonton fans don't want Lindholm because he isn't tall enough.

jukon is offline  
Old
04-18-2013, 11:20 AM
  #216
Neilio
Navi-X, Google it
 
Neilio's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Calgary
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,173
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jimmi Jenkins View Post
From what I can tell, you'd be hard pressed to take Barkov, or Monahan especially, over Drouin because of "size"

That would be like taking JVR over Pat Kane because you want a "big forward"
In general, yes. BPA. But the Best Possible Centre generally has more value than the Best Possible Winger.

In Chicago's perspective, they already had Toews and two stud defencemen in Keith and Seabrook. A skill winger was exactly what they needed. Not to say they wouldn't have taken him anyway, because he was the consensus #1 overall. Like us taking Yak. We weren't dying for skill on the wings, but if you have #1 you take the BPA. But we just got three BPAs in a row, so if you have two players close in rank, I think we can take the one that suits us better. I think its been proven that its too difficult to trade for those types of players.

In our case, if we were to take Drouin, we have another smallish skilled winger in our top six. We would likely then need to consider moving one of them for a #2C that we desperately need, and it would cost dearly if we could even manage it. Barkov fits what this team needs, and is the skill drop off so much that he's not close to Drouin? I don't think so. He's scoring more against grown men in the Finnish league than anyone since Selanne. If we're in the range of Monahan, Drouin is gone already, so don't be scurred homie.

Neilio is offline  
Old
04-18-2013, 11:26 AM
  #217
Koto
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2011
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,263
vCash: 500
how


low


can we go

Koto is offline  
Old
04-18-2013, 11:28 AM
  #218
jadeddog
Registered User
 
jadeddog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Regina, Saskatchewan
Posts: 12,029
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Everlasting View Post
More kids = Longer rebuild.
exactly... look, i'll be thrilled to get mackinnon (although i really doubt that happens)... but if we did draft him, i don't think we should trade gagner and insert mackinnon next year... that is, unless we want to lose more games next year... gagner next year >> mackinnon next year... long term this changes (obviously), but there is essentially no chance of mackinnon being the better NHL player next season

if we fluke out and end up with mackinnon, we keep gagner (or some other real NHL-centre that gagner is traded for) and only put mackinnon into the 2nd line C role when he is ready... likely in 2 or maybe 3 years

jadeddog is offline  
Old
04-18-2013, 11:36 AM
  #219
jadeddog
Registered User
 
jadeddog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Regina, Saskatchewan
Posts: 12,029
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by RustE View Post
as long as the Oil don't take Drouin. i don't know enough about any of the Centres to say, but, we better be taking the one that is strong on the puck and difficult to play against. we absolutely must pick for need. this 'best player available' isn't all its cracked up to be. just ask the now unemployed Tambellini. MacT will likely be trading one of our 'best players available' to fill a gaping need. We shall see what all you 'BPA, everytime, no matter what' disciples think then. I suspect many of you are the same people as the 'you just don't trade a player like that, ever' crowd. Tambellini has one of them.
ugg, i can't even believe i'm responding to this, but here goes

yes, you still ALWAYS pick the BPA... because even if you don't end up with a player that fits your team need (such is arguably the case with yakupov) you still end up with the best player... by having the best player, you have the most valuable trading chip from that draft, which can be cashed in for a player that fits your team need

i can't believe this still needs to be pointed out (over and over and over and over and over)

jadeddog is offline  
Old
04-18-2013, 11:53 AM
  #220
Jimmi Jenkins
Turtle Renji
 
Jimmi Jenkins's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Alberta
Country: Canada
Posts: 39,266
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Neilio View Post
In general, yes. BPA. But the Best Possible Centre generally has more value than the Best Possible Winger.

In Chicago's perspective, they already had Toews and two stud defencemen in Keith and Seabrook. A skill winger was exactly what they needed. Not to say they wouldn't have taken him anyway, because he was the consensus #1 overall. Like us taking Yak. We weren't dying for skill on the wings, but if you have #1 you take the BPA. But we just got three BPAs in a row, so if you have two players close in rank, I think we can take the one that suits us better. I think its been proven that its too difficult to trade for those types of players.

In our case, if we were to take Drouin, we have another smallish skilled winger in our top six. We would likely then need to consider moving one of them for a #2C that we desperately need, and it would cost dearly if we could even manage it. Barkov fits what this team needs, and is the skill drop off so much that he's not close to Drouin? I don't think so. He's scoring more against grown men in the Finnish league than anyone since Selanne. If we're in the range of Monahan, Drouin is gone already, so don't be scurred homie.
Yeah those ridiculously high end skill guys are just a dime a dozen. Again, Drouin isn't the ideal pick, but if he falls to the Oilers outside of the top-3 to 5, then they would be stupid not to take him. Besides, if they do pick him, convert him to a center, like the Hawks have done with Kane a bit.

Jimmi Jenkins is offline  
Old
04-18-2013, 12:13 PM
  #221
NeutralZone
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 279
vCash: 500
Drouin presents an interesting situation for the Oilers. Most likely he'll either be gone or we're picking first and taking Jones, but what if we pick third and he's still on the board?

With Hall, Drouin, Eberle and Yakupov and we'd be stacked down both wings, but with no size. It seems crazy to pick another winger, especialy one under 6 feet, given our lack of depth at center and d.

Would we trade down and take Barkov? Would anyone give us a decent return on one draft spot? Would we trade the pick outright for an established player?

Also, how do people feel about Nurse? If Jones, Drouin, MacKinnon, Barkov and Lindholm are gone, does it make sense to draft Nurse, or trade the pick? You've got to draft dmen at some point, but they take a long time to develop.

NeutralZone is offline  
Old
04-18-2013, 12:19 PM
  #222
Neilio
Navi-X, Google it
 
Neilio's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Calgary
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,173
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jimmi Jenkins View Post
Yeah those ridiculously high end skill guys are just a dime a dozen. Again, Drouin isn't the ideal pick, but if he falls to the Oilers outside of the top-3 to 5, then they would be stupid not to take him. Besides, if they do pick him, convert him to a center, like the Hawks have done with Kane a bit.
Who's to say how much higher skill Drouin is than Barkov? Different leagues. If Barkov is a half-step below in offensive skill, he's got a better all-around game and a better frame to build on. That's more rare than a smallish skill guy, IMO. And harder to acquire outside of the draft. People make it sound like you're going to be getting Kane vs Pouliot skill wise. But its more like Jeff Skinner vs Anze Kopitar. Both great players, but who would you rather have on your team?

Neilio is offline  
Old
04-18-2013, 12:28 PM
  #223
oilersfan11
Registered User
 
oilersfan11's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 11,538
vCash: 50
I would trade the pick UNLESS we end up getting Seth Jones.

oilersfan11 is offline  
Old
04-18-2013, 12:35 PM
  #224
DousedInOil
Registered User
 
DousedInOil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Katy <3
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,824
vCash: 500
I voted Monahan but man Elias Lindholm is really underrated here with ony 14 votes. He's arguably a better player and would bring some grit to that second line center position. He could really be a special player and would look awesome alongside Paajarvi.

Hall-RNH-Eberle
PRV-Lindholm-Yakupov

Fill the rest of the forwards with big gritty plugs.

DousedInOil is offline  
Old
04-18-2013, 12:53 PM
  #225
Mr Sakich
Registered User
 
Mr Sakich's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Motel 35
Posts: 8,100
vCash: 500
I think we are going to end up 4th or 5th. ISS has Druin at 4 so it is quite possible that he will be the BPA when we pick.

IMO, at least one GM is going to want Druin so bad that he will trade a big body top 6 or a PMD for Druin. This could be MacT's bold move - a potential franchise forward traded to fill a need.

In the last 10 years, only 1 top 4 pick has been traded (Seguin) and that was a mistake. If Toronto knew it was a top 4, the trade would have never happened. The price for a top 4 pick is very high.

Mr Sakich 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 10:46 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.