HFBoards

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

2013 NHL Draft (draft day chat link in Post 887)

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
04-25-2013, 06:10 PM
  #201
DesertDawg
Registered User
 
DesertDawg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Superstition Mts
Posts: 4,828
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Foppa2118 View Post
This isn't very likely, but just out of curiosity say Florida takes Seth Jones with the 1st overall pick, and Colorado holds the #2. Would you guys trade OEL straight up for #2 and take MacKinnon? Or is he too untouchable?
hypothetical and total unrealistic. Florida has Gudbranson and a decent defensive core, but need help down the middle with Weiss hitting free agency.

DesertDawg is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
04-25-2013, 06:19 PM
  #202
OOEEL
Registered User
 
OOEEL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Arizona
Country: United States
Posts: 413
vCash: 500
Slightly(okay VERY) bias but there's only about 5 players I'd trade OEL for straight up.

Ovechkin
Stamkos
Crosby
Malkin
Tavares

And then MAYBE Giroux, Parise, Kovalchuk, Couture, Backstrom, and either of the Kanes.

Am I being realistic? Absolutely not, but Oliver is my favorite player and it'd take a legitimate superstar for me to be even close to okay with letting him go.

OOEEL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-25-2013, 06:34 PM
  #203
XX
Lots of Try
 
XX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Executionville
Country: United States
Posts: 29,019
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Foppa2118 View Post
This isn't very likely, but just out of curiosity say Florida takes Seth Jones with the 1st overall pick, and Colorado holds the #2. Would you guys trade OEL straight up for #2 and take MacKinnon? Or is he too untouchable?
You're asking if an NHL team would trade a known quantity, one that appears to be among the best at his position, for an unknown? Think that one out. I wouldn't trade Yandle straight up for that pick. I'd be perfectly content to sit on my all-star puck mover, versus rolling the dice on a kid coming out of junior. Being HFBoards, we need to remember that one in the hand is worth two in the bush.

You'd have better luck trading for Gormley or other ready D that are in organizations that can afford to lose them.

XX is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-25-2013, 06:42 PM
  #204
OOEEL
Registered User
 
OOEEL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Arizona
Country: United States
Posts: 413
vCash: 500
Hate to double post but I was thinking.

Say we finish with the 12th pick. We all know Philly needs defensemen. Assuming they finish with the 8th pick, what would we need to throw together to close the gap and get them to trade down? Klesla? Schlemko? Summers? Then they'd still be able to get a defenseman at 12(Maybe Risto instead of Nurse), and NHL coverage while they groom the pick.

OOEEL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-25-2013, 06:52 PM
  #205
XX
Lots of Try
 
XX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Executionville
Country: United States
Posts: 29,019
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by OOEEL View Post

Say we finish with the 12th pick. We all know Philly needs defensemen. Assuming they finish with the 8th pick, what would we need to throw together to close the gap and get them to trade down? Klesla? Schlemko? Summers? Then they'd still be able to get a defenseman at 12(Maybe Risto instead of Nurse), and NHL coverage while they groom the pick.
Not worth it unless that player is Monahan or Lindholm, which is unlikely. Shedding depth is for teams that can afford to sign players to replace them. Summers is an UFA, anyways.

XX is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-25-2013, 07:08 PM
  #206
Foppa2118
Registered User
 
Foppa2118's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: 22 Acacia Avenue
Country: United States
Posts: 20,823
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by OEL View Post
That's a really tough call. We so desperately need a franchise-defining #1 center. It's just tough to make such a gamble when not only do we get world-class skill in OEL, but his personality seems to be a perfect fit for this team. I would kick myself forever if we made such a move for McKinnon and the guy ended up bailing on us as Mueller and Turris have done.

So I think I'd pass. Way too risky for the Coyotes.
Quote:
Originally Posted by IPreferPi View Post
OEL is only 21 as is arguably a Top 10 d-man in the league at least. As appealing as MacKinnon is and as much as we're desperate for a 1C, it's way too much of a risk to trade a proven commodity (who hasn't even reached his peak yet) that wants to be here long-term for an unproven one. Gotta pass.
Understandable. Thanks for the info.

Quote:
Originally Posted by XX View Post
You're asking if an NHL team would trade a known quantity, one that appears to be among the best at his position, for an unknown? Think that one out. I wouldn't trade Yandle straight up for that pick. I'd be perfectly content to sit on my all-star puck mover, versus rolling the dice on a kid coming out of junior. Being HFBoards, we need to remember that one in the hand is worth two in the bush.

You'd have better luck trading for Gormley or other ready D that are in organizations that can afford to lose them.
No to Yandle for Nathan MacKinnon huh? Ok.

Foppa2118 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
04-25-2013, 07:09 PM
  #207
XX
Lots of Try
 
XX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Executionville
Country: United States
Posts: 29,019
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Foppa2118 View Post
No to Yandle for Nathan MacKinnon huh? Ok.
Would you trade Landeskog or Duchene straight up for MacKinnon? I sure as **** hope not.

XX is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-25-2013, 07:19 PM
  #208
rt
Usually Incorrect
 
rt's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Rarely Sober
Country: United States
Posts: 43,869
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by OOEEL View Post
Hate to double post but I was thinking.

Say we finish with the 12th pick. We all know Philly needs defensemen. Assuming they finish with the 8th pick, what would we need to throw together to close the gap and get them to trade down? Klesla? Schlemko? Summers? Then they'd still be able to get a defenseman at 12(Maybe Risto instead of Nurse), and NHL coverage while they groom the pick.
I was thinking of a scenario where Philly picks eighth and by some miracle Monahan/Lindholm is still on the board but both Jones and Nurse are gone. Say Philly likes Gormley a whole lot more than Ristolainen, Zadorov, Pulock, would Gormley for Monahan/Lindholm make sense for either side? (I don't acually see Monahan/Lindholm on the board at 8, btw).

1. Flo - Mac
2. Col - Jones
3. Tbl - Drouin
4. Nsh - Barkov
5. Car - Nichushkin
6. Edm - Nurse
7. Cgy - Monahan/Lindholm
8. Phi - ????

^^^I don' think it's too far fetched that CAR (with both Staals down the middle already) take a homerun swing at Nichushkin rather than taking Monahan or Lindholm. Nurse has been shooting up the charts and is just what EDM needs. I could see them taking him over another forward. Calgary takes one or the other and Philly is left with taking yet ANOTHER F or reaching for Risto or Zadorov or Pulock. If they actually like Gormley better than any of those three (I sure do) than maybe there could be a deal to be made.

Gormley for one of Lindholm or Monahan at 8th overall and then at 11th or 12th or wherever we pick, we no longer have to worry about positional needs and can go for BPA (maybe it's Pulock at the spot or maybe it's Wennberg, but it should no longer matter).

__________________
This poster should not be taken seriously under any circumstances.
rt is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
04-25-2013, 07:22 PM
  #209
Foppa2118
Registered User
 
Foppa2118's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: 22 Acacia Avenue
Country: United States
Posts: 20,823
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by XX View Post
Would you trade Landeskog or Duchene straight up for MacKinnon? I sure as **** hope not.
Landeskog and Duchene are not in the same position with the Avs, that Yandle is with Phoenix. He's a few years away from UFA, and appears to have been considered to be traded for a top center anyway. Phoenix could absorb his loss much easier than the Avs could Duchene or Landeskog.

It's none of my business since Yandle wasn't what I was asking about, and it's fine that you have that opinion, but there's such a thing as being too safe. I think Maloney jumps out of his chair if he gets offered that deal, but that's just me.

Obviously the OEL idea was hypothetical and unrealistic, but I was just curious. Thanks for the feedback.


Last edited by Foppa2118: 04-25-2013 at 07:27 PM.
Foppa2118 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
04-25-2013, 07:24 PM
  #210
rt
Usually Incorrect
 
rt's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Rarely Sober
Country: United States
Posts: 43,869
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by XX View Post
Would you trade Landeskog or Duchene straight up for MacKinnon? I sure as **** hope not.
I'd trade Yandle for MacKinnon. OEL? No way in heck.

rt is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
04-25-2013, 07:34 PM
  #211
XX
Lots of Try
 
XX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Executionville
Country: United States
Posts: 29,019
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by rt View Post
I'd trade Yandle for MacKinnon. OEL? No way in heck.
Because you're job isn't on the line, nor is your money. MacKinnon busts, you get fired. Your team, one that can't acquire more assets via UFA, blows a major homegrown chip. You are set back years. MacKinnon is no Crosby. Is he likely to bust? Hardly, as far as I can tell, or scouts. But is he going to be top 5 at his position? Much harder to say. No one will say that Jordan Staal is a bad player, or was a bad pick at #2, but you certainly hope for more. That's how I see it.

It's absolutely not worth it to take the risk. Trading Yandle brings down the whole roster. It's a cumulative effect. Look at how important a good puck mover is. I guess it depends on whether or not you buy the hype, and put MacKinnon in the Stamkos/Tavares stratosphere. I don't. We're not betting that MacKinnon has an impact in the NHL here. We're betting that he has an impact above and beyond what Yandle contributes, or could bring in another trade. It has to be enough to justify the risk. I don't see it.

It's always impossible to explain hedging and risk management to a crowd that adores prospects. But you guys have been spoiled in recent years, as nobody has majorly flamed out. Would you trade Yandle for Zherdev, Barker, Olesz, Pouliot, Brule, Brassard, Hickey, Filatov or Glennie? No, because those are names we recognize as busts or players that haven't lived up to their draft position. Hindsight is 20/20, but risk can be a total ***** sometimes.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Foppa2118 View Post
I think Maloney jumps out of his chair if he gets offered that deal, but that's just me.
You aren't familiar with Maloney then.

XX is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-25-2013, 07:50 PM
  #212
Foppa2118
Registered User
 
Foppa2118's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: 22 Acacia Avenue
Country: United States
Posts: 20,823
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by XX View Post
Because you're job isn't on the line, nor is your money. MacKinnon busts, you get fired. Your team, one that can't acquire more assets via UFA, blows a major homegrown chip. You are set back years. MacKinnon is no Crosby. Is he likely to bust? Hardly, as far as I can tell, or scouts. But is he going to be top 5 at his position? Much harder to say. No one will say that Jordan Staal is a bad player, or was a bad pick at #2, but you certainly hope for more. That's how I see it.

It's absolutely not worth it to take the risk. Trading Yandle brings down the whole roster. It's a cumulative effect. Look at how important a good puck mover is. I guess it depends on whether or not you buy the hype, and put MacKinnon in the Stamkos/Tavares stratosphere. I don't. We're not betting that MacKinnon has an impact in the NHL here. We're betting that he has an impact above and beyond what Yandle contributes, or could bring in another trade. It has to be enough to justify the risk. I don't see it.

It's always impossible to explain hedging and risk management to a crowd that adores prospects. But you guys have been spoiled in recent years, as nobody has majorly flamed out. Would you trade Yandle for Zherdev, Barker, Olesz, Pouliot, Brule, Brassard, Hickey, Filatov or Glennie? No, because those are names we recognize as busts or players that haven't lived up to their draft position. Hindsight is 20/20, but risk can be a total ***** sometimes.



You aren't familiar with Maloney then.
I think you'd be making a valid point in terms of risk if this were about the number 5 or 6 pick like most of the past guys you mentioned. They were all taken behind other forwards, in most cases behind a couple.

It's not like MacKinnon is gonna turn into Alexander Daigle. Even at his low end potential, he'll still be a good NHLer. That's why he's ranked #2 and likely will be the first forward taken with one of the first two picks.

Something that can't be said for Zherdev, Barker, Olesz, Pouliot, Brule, Brassard, Hickey, Filatov or Glennie.


Last edited by Foppa2118: 04-25-2013 at 07:59 PM.
Foppa2118 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
04-25-2013, 07:55 PM
  #213
XX
Lots of Try
 
XX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Executionville
Country: United States
Posts: 29,019
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Foppa2118 View Post
It's not like MacKinnon is gonna turn into Alexander Daigle. Even at his low end potential, he'll still be a good NHLer. That's why he's ranked #2 and likely will be the first forward taken with one of the first two picks.
You are aware of the hype that surrounded Daigle, right? And that people said the exact same things about him, and about many of the names below. You don't have a crystal ball. History has taught us that you should know better than to say such things. MacKinnon could go on to be the next Tavares and it doesn't matter. You don't make that trade, given the risk. Let some other team take that risk and potentially reap the rewards. The Coyotes have zero business doing something so risky.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Foppa2118 View Post
Something that can't be said for Zherdev, Barker, Olesz, Pouliot, Brule, Brassard, Hickey, Filatov or Glennie.

XX is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-25-2013, 07:55 PM
  #214
OOEEL
Registered User
 
OOEEL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Arizona
Country: United States
Posts: 413
vCash: 500
I'd trade Yandle for MacKinnon OR Drouin. I would've traded him for Galchenyuk last year, but not Yakupov.

Yeah there's obviously a gamble but it's not like you're trading for a middle of the round pick, it's a top three pick to get one of the consensus best players in the draft. Of course you can come back and argue "But DAIGLE!!!" and yeah, there's always that, but if you're dealing from a position of excess to acquire someone you've done your due diligence on and are confident will address your team's need for the next 5-10 years, then you do that.

And if he busts that's more on your scouting team for doing bad work than you for making the deal.

OOEEL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-25-2013, 08:01 PM
  #215
XX
Lots of Try
 
XX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Executionville
Country: United States
Posts: 29,019
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by OOEEL View Post
if you're dealing from a position of excess
The Coyotes do not have an excess of talent. Not on the ice, not in organizational depth. Asset management is a game that moves from left to right, with the goal to be gathering more value every transaction you make. Going all in on one draft pick is for amateurs, panicky GMs and teams that can afford to do so. The Coyotes are none of the above. Take your selection at 11 or wherever, and be happy. Or explore a minor move up to 7/8 if it's Klesla cheap.

It's not sexy, but it's effective. I get a laugh about everyone here so eager to jump into this trade when the Coyotes whiffed miserably on the consensus third best player in the draft in Turris. Short term memory.

XX is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-25-2013, 08:10 PM
  #216
rt
Usually Incorrect
 
rt's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Rarely Sober
Country: United States
Posts: 43,869
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by XX View Post
Because you're job isn't on the line, nor is your money. MacKinnon busts, you get fired. Your team, one that can't acquire more assets via UFA, blows a major homegrown chip. You are set back years. MacKinnon is no Crosby. Is he likely to bust? Hardly, as far as I can tell, or scouts. But is he going to be top 5 at his position? Much harder to say. No one will say that Jordan Staal is a bad player, or was a bad pick at #2, but you certainly hope for more. That's how I see it.

It's absolutely not worth it to take the risk. Trading Yandle brings down the whole roster. It's a cumulative effect. Look at how important a good puck mover is. I guess it depends on whether or not you buy the hype, and put MacKinnon in the Stamkos/Tavares stratosphere. I don't. We're not betting that MacKinnon has an impact in the NHL here. We're betting that he has an impact above and beyond what Yandle contributes, or could bring in another trade. It has to be enough to justify the risk. I don't see it.

It's always impossible to explain hedging and risk management to a crowd that adores prospects. But you guys have been spoiled in recent years, as nobody has majorly flamed out. Would you trade Yandle for Zherdev, Barker, Olesz, Pouliot, Brule, Brassard, Hickey, Filatov or Glennie? No, because those are names we recognize as busts or players that haven't lived up to their draft position. Hindsight is 20/20, but risk can be a total ***** sometimes.



You aren't familiar with Maloney then.
I probably would not have traded Yandle for Yakupov last year. I would definitely trade Yandle for MacKinnon this year, though. I like MacKinnon a lot. I love his pro-style game, the way he projects, and the fact that he's very ready, right now. He's just the type we need. He can get on his horse and take care of business all by himself. He's a poor man's Jeremy Roenick. He's got all of that moxy and swagger to go along with all of that talent. He's a difference maker on the ice like we've haven't seen in over a decade. Turris was a toolsy project. Pat Kane was a guy who had questions about how his game would translate, JvR was a big beast of a physical project. MacKinnon is already all put together. He's different from the guys on your list, and I'm not talking about hindsight.

rt is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
04-25-2013, 08:19 PM
  #217
Foppa2118
Registered User
 
Foppa2118's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: 22 Acacia Avenue
Country: United States
Posts: 20,823
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by XX View Post
You are aware of the hype that surrounded Daigle, right? And that people said the exact same things about him, and about many of the names below. You don't have a crystal ball. History has taught us that you should know better than to say such things. MacKinnon could go on to be the next Tavares and it doesn't matter. You don't make that trade, given the risk. Let some other team take that risk and potentially reap the rewards. The Coyotes have zero business doing something so risky.
Daigle was drafted in 1993 when scouting and exposure wasn't what it is now, and is a huge rarity.

It's not really my place to argue much in terms of what you will and won't trade Yandle for. That's your opinion, and I'm not a Coyotes fan. I disagree with the risk of busting though in terms of MacKinnon, and what value that gives him in terms of trading a guy like Yandle.

If you're expecting a top five forward in the NHL like you are worried Mac won't become, for Yandle, that is gonna be a tough sell. If the low end for MacKinnon is Jordan Staal like you mentioned, that seems like it should be a good deal for Yandle. Especially since Phoenix will still have a sold D, and MacKinnon still has upside to be better than Staal.

Here's the top two forwards taken in the draft going back to 2000. The only ones that are disappointments are Upshall and Filatov, and they were the second forward taken with the 6th pick in weak drafts for forwards. Neither of which is very likely to be said about MacKinnon or this draft.

2000

Heatley (2)
Gaborik (3)

2001

Kovalchuk (1)
Spezza (2)

2002

Nash (1)
Upshall (6)

2003

E. Staal (2)
Horton (3)

2004

Ovechkin (1)
Malkin (2)

2005

Crosby (1)
Ryan (2)

2006

J. Staal (2)
Toews (3)

2007

P. Kane (1)
JVR (2)

2008

Stamkos (1)
Filatov (6)

2009

Tavares (1)
Duchene (3)

2010

Hall (1)
Seguin (2)

2011

RNH (1)
Landeskog (2)

2012

Yakupov (1)
Galchenyuk (3)

Foppa2118 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
04-25-2013, 08:43 PM
  #218
hbk
Registered User
 
hbk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,035
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Foppa2118 View Post
Daigle was drafted in 1993 when scouting and exposure wasn't what it is now, and is a huge rarity.

It's not really my place to argue much in terms of what you will and won't trade Yandle for. That's your opinion, and I'm not a Coyotes fan. I disagree with the risk of busting though in terms of MacKinnon, and what value that gives him in terms of trading a guy like Yandle.

If you're expecting a top five forward in the NHL like you are worried Mac won't become, for Yandle, that is gonna be a tough sell. If the low end for MacKinnon is Jordan Staal like you mentioned, that seems like it should be a good deal for Yandle. Especially since Phoenix will still have a sold D, and MacKinnon still has upside to be better than Staal.

Here's the top two forwards taken in the draft going back to 2000. The only ones that are disappointments are Upshall and Filatov, and they were the second forward taken with the 6th pick in weak drafts for forwards. Neither of which is very likely to be said about MacKinnon or this draft.

2000

Heatley (2)
Gaborik (3)

2001

Kovalchuk (1)
Spezza (2)

2002

Nash (1)
Upshall (6)

2003

E. Staal (2)
Horton (3)

2004

Ovechkin (1)
Malkin (2)

2005

Crosby (1)
Ryan (2)

2006

J. Staal (2)
Toews (3)

2007

P. Kane (1)
JVR (2)

2008

Stamkos (1)
Filatov (6)

2009

Tavares (1)
Duchene (3)

2010

Hall (1)
Seguin (2)

2011

RNH (1)
Landeskog (2)

2012

Yakupov (1)
Galchenyuk (3)
In 1993 the NHL had scouts and everyone saw Daigle play multiple times. Some of then best scouts of all time missed on him. It happens. You don't measure heart at the combine.

I would deal Yandle to get a Top forward the franchise could build around.

hbk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-25-2013, 09:01 PM
  #219
rt
Usually Incorrect
 
rt's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Rarely Sober
Country: United States
Posts: 43,869
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Foppa2118 View Post
Daigle was drafted in 1993 when scouting and exposure wasn't what it is now, and is a huge rarity.

It's not really my place to argue much in terms of what you will and won't trade Yandle for. That's your opinion, and I'm not a Coyotes fan. I disagree with the risk of busting though in terms of MacKinnon, and what value that gives him in terms of trading a guy like Yandle.

If you're expecting a top five forward in the NHL like you are worried Mac won't become, for Yandle, that is gonna be a tough sell. If the low end for MacKinnon is Jordan Staal like you mentioned, that seems like it should be a good deal for Yandle. Especially since Phoenix will still have a sold D, and MacKinnon still has upside to be better than Staal.

Here's the top two forwards taken in the draft going back to 2000. The only ones that are disappointments are Upshall and Filatov, and they were the second forward taken with the 6th pick in weak drafts for forwards. Neither of which is very likely to be said about MacKinnon or this draft.


2000
Heatley (2)
Gaborik (3)

2001
Kovalchuk (1)
Spezza (2)

2002
Nash (1)
Upshall (6)

2003
E. Staal (2)
Horton (3)

2004
Ovechkin (1)
Malkin (2)

2005
Crosby (1)
Ryan (2)

2006
J. Staal (2)
Toews (3)

2007
P. Kane (1)
JVR (2)

2008
Stamkos (1)
Filatov (6)

2009
Tavares (1)
Duchene (3)

2010
Hall (1)
Seguin (2)

2011
RNH (1)
Landeskog (2)

2012
Yakupov (1)
Galchenyuk (3
)
Good post.

rt is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
04-26-2013, 12:28 PM
  #220
IPreferPi
A Nonny Mouse
 
IPreferPi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Posts: 7,475
vCash: 500
FWIW, latest NHL.com mock drafts have both Lindholm and Monahan dropping to the 10-ish range, so you never know. #fingerscrossed

http://www.nhl.com/ice/news.htm?id=667662

IPreferPi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-26-2013, 02:08 PM
  #221
hbk
Registered User
 
hbk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,035
vCash: 500
I would/could be tempted to package our first (12ish) and D Rundblad (which would be a commitment of this franchise to Keith Yandle) to move up into.the mid late top 10 to select either Barkov (who may end up as high as #2 on my list), Monahan, or Lindholm. We would of course want a roster player and/or draft pick(s) to balance out the deal.

hbk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-26-2013, 02:17 PM
  #222
IPreferPi
A Nonny Mouse
 
IPreferPi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Posts: 7,475
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by hbk View Post
I would/could be tempted to package our first (12ish) and D Rundblad (which would be a commitment of this franchise to Keith Yandle) to move up into.the mid late top 10 to select either Barkov (who may end up as high as #2 on my list), Monahan, or Lindholm. We would of course want a roster player and/or draft pick(s) to balance out the deal.
Cosigned, but it remains to be seen if there would be any takers. I don't think Edmonton will bite as they seem pretty fixated on Monahan or Nurse. Philly could very well finish behind us.

We'd probably have to jump up to at least 6-7 as well.

IPreferPi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-26-2013, 02:21 PM
  #223
hbk
Registered User
 
hbk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,035
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by IPreferPi View Post
Cosigned, but it remains to be seen if there would be any takers. I don't think Edmonton will bite as they seem pretty fixated on Monahan or Nurse. Philly could very well finish behind us.

We'd probably have to jump up to at least 6-7 as well.
Under 18's have yet to factor and playoffs / memorial cup (I'm attending) to be factored into final rankings. There will be some late risers that change the current thought process on who will be available where. We need a run on D in the top 10.

That is a fairly enticing package though in our first and Rundblad. It's either that or the bigger Yandle deal with either the Flyers or Oilers that includes a Top 10 pick. Both of those clubs are dealing from a position of weakness.

A 3rd scenarios would be the typical 1st and second to move up a couple of slots to get someone we are targeting. Likely downgrading our 2nd to a 3rd in the process. Least likely scenario.


Last edited by hbk: 04-26-2013 at 02:26 PM.
hbk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-26-2013, 03:09 PM
  #224
rt
Usually Incorrect
 
rt's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Rarely Sober
Country: United States
Posts: 43,869
vCash: 500
Plus, it's just HFOil that's obsessed with Nurse and Monahan. That means nothing. The actual Oil brass may have Nurse 10th and Monahan 11th. Could be they've got Shinkaruk 4th and Pulock 5th. Who knows?

rt is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
04-26-2013, 05:00 PM
  #225
rt
Usually Incorrect
 
rt's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Rarely Sober
Country: United States
Posts: 43,869
vCash: 500
I'm assuming we'll pick up at least one more point and end up stuck at 12th overall. With the way things are shaking out, our best trade partners are going to be Carolina or Edmonton who could end up with the fifth and sixth picks, possibly. Carolina has already got the Staals in the one and two center spots. I could see them going Nichushkin, though. However, if I'm not mistaken their GM has said he doesn't like taking D too high in the draft because they take too long to develop. If they aren't interested in a D and aren't interested in the Russian (who knows?) maybe they'd be interested in Gormley, since they are set at Center already.

Gormley to Carolina for Lindholm or Monahan? Then we hang onto 12th and we can take one of Wennberg, Domi, Lazar, Erne, Mantha, or whichever forward we're into. Heck, if we deal Gormley for a C than it doesn't even have to be a forward. We can take Pulock, or somebody, if we'd like.

rt is online now   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 09:41 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.