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 NHL Draft Talk Part 4: Flyers own the 11th overall pick

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
05-08-2013, 08:05 AM
  #326
Protest
C`est La Vie
 
Protest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Deptford, NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 4,567
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by fauxflex View Post
In case anyone is interested, there are some new consolidated profiles for some of the possible Flyer 1st rd prospects over on hbuzz. Aggregates many of the pro/amateur scouting commentary pro/con and vids and more...note, these are done by exlund not eklund

Darnell Nurse
http://www.hockeybuzz.com/boards/thr...read_id=106806

Ryan Pulock
http://www.hockeybuzz.com/boards/thr...read_id=106801

Nikita Zadorov
http://www.hockeybuzz.com/boards/thr...read_id=106797

Rasmus Ristolainen
http://www.hockeybuzz.com/boards/thr...read_id=106838

Valeri Nichushkin
http://www.hockeybuzz.com/boards/thr...read_id=106836
I'd really liked to get Nichuskin, but that won't happen at 11. Honestly he sounds like Malkin. Realistically, I think Pulock or Ristolainen sound like good picks at that spot. The fact that people point to Pulock's hockey IQ is something I find really encouraging. That reduces the bust potential of a pick in my opinion.

Protest is offline  
Old
05-08-2013, 08:13 AM
  #327
DrinkFightFlyers
Grave Before Shave
 
DrinkFightFlyers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 12,977
vCash: 50
Send a message via AIM to DrinkFightFlyers
Quote:
Originally Posted by RoDu View Post
if he doesn't show up, it lessens his trade value, and what he can fetch us
I was just about to post this.

On a similar note, I think most of the time, you go BPA regardless of the circumstances. I've said this so many times this offseason but I'm going to say it again. This team, with this pick, in this draft, should NOT draft a center in the first round even if a center is the BPA. It simply doesn't make sense unless there is a trade in the works to move one of the other centers (or the team doesn't think any of the defenders available in the first round have as high a ceiling as the rest of the world does). This is a draft with a deep crop of defensemen to be had in the first round. This is an organization that is without any serious defensive prospects and is overflowing with prospects at the center position. Homer is constantly killed for his "poor asset management" around here. To me, poor asset management at its finest would be going into this draft, have pick #11, seeing a number of prospects that have top 4 (or higher) potential on the blueline, and taking a center to add to the glut of centers this team already has. Diversify your investments, people!

DrinkFightFlyers is offline  
Old
05-08-2013, 08:51 AM
  #328
Rolex
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Country: United States
Posts: 199
vCash: 500
A hunch here. The Flyers do well drafting from the Q. Frederik Gauthier could be the player that they take at 11 if they pass on a defenseman. He's a big winger that skates well and has good hands around the net. Holmgren likes size.

Rolex is offline  
Old
05-08-2013, 08:59 AM
  #329
BernieParent
Registered User
 
BernieParent's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Montreal, QC
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,493
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrinkFightFlyers View Post
I was just about to post this.

On a similar note, I think most of the time, you go BPA regardless of the circumstances. I've said this so many times this offseason but I'm going to say it again. This team, with this pick, in this draft, should NOT draft a center in the first round even if a center is the BPA. It simply doesn't make sense unless there is a trade in the works to move one of the other centers (or the team doesn't think any of the defenders available in the first round have as high a ceiling as the rest of the world does). This is a draft with a deep crop of defensemen to be had in the first round. This is an organization that is without any serious defensive prospects and is overflowing with prospects at the center position. Homer is constantly killed for his "poor asset management" around here. To me, poor asset management at its finest would be going into this draft, have pick #11, seeing a number of prospects that have top 4 (or higher) potential on the blueline, and taking a center to add to the glut of centers this team already has. Diversify your investments, people!
I agree. BPA should be a head-and-shoulders designation, not "most experts have Player A 1-2 spots above everyone else". There should still be a lot of skill and potential among both defensemen and forwards at 11, so I don't see the Flyers breaking the BPA rule if they went Dman first.

BernieParent is offline  
Old
05-08-2013, 09:30 AM
  #330
Haute Couturier
Registered User
 
Haute Couturier's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Philadelphia
Country: United States
Posts: 5,972
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Krishna View Post
I understand why you put him at the bottom, but you always go BPA. If Monahan is available at 11, you take him. Monahan and Laughton will be putting pressure on Couturier to finally show up offensively. If he doesn't show up, you move him for a D man.
I don't think Laughton will be pressuring him to do anything. Laughton is good, but he is inferior on both ends of the ice. He is not going to replace Couturier's tough defensive minutes.

Haute Couturier is offline  
Old
05-08-2013, 09:33 AM
  #331
Dasachtach
Bluenoser
 
Dasachtach's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Birthplace of Hockey
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,834
vCash: 500
What are the chances the Flyers take Fucale?

Dasachtach is offline  
Old
05-08-2013, 09:34 AM
  #332
Haute Couturier
Registered User
 
Haute Couturier's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Philadelphia
Country: United States
Posts: 5,972
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Domhnall Dubh View Post
What are the chances the Flyers take Fucale?
Unlikely they take a goalie in the first.

Haute Couturier is offline  
Old
05-08-2013, 09:35 AM
  #333
Broad Street Elite
Registered User
 
Broad Street Elite's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 3,419
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Haute Couturier View Post
I don't think Laughton will be pressuring him to do anything. Laughton is good, but he is inferior on both ends of the ice. He is not going to replace Couturier's tough defensive minutes.
I don't see Laughton being inferior offensively to Couturier in the medium or long term. Perhaps it will be because of the tough minutes Couturier shoulders, but also because skating matters for scoring and Laughton is easily the superior skate both in terms of speed, balance and getting to spots.

Broad Street Elite is offline  
Old
05-08-2013, 09:37 AM
  #334
Haute Couturier
Registered User
 
Haute Couturier's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Philadelphia
Country: United States
Posts: 5,972
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Broad Street Elite View Post
I don't see Laughton being inferior to Couturier in the medium or long term. Perhaps it will be because of the tough minutes Couturier shoulders, but also because skating matters for scoring and Laughton is easily the superior skate both in terms of speed, balance and getting to spots.
Laughton has never showed Couturier's scoring ability in juniors.

Haute Couturier is offline  
Old
05-08-2013, 09:52 AM
  #335
Broad Street Elite
Registered User
 
Broad Street Elite's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 3,419
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Haute Couturier View Post
Laughton has never showed Couturier's scoring ability in juniors.
Based on what I saw last season in limited action at the NHL/AHL level, then back in the OHL upon his return, I suspect that Laughton's offensive game translates better than Couturier's. It won't be by a huge amount, but maybe 10-15 points more per season imo.

Broad Street Elite is offline  
Old
05-08-2013, 09:55 AM
  #336
ORYX
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,477
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Haute Couturier View Post
I don't think Laughton will be pressuring him to do anything. Laughton is good, but he is inferior on both ends of the ice. He is not going to replace Couturier's tough defensive minutes.
Couturier is very good defensively, and you can expect the same from Laughton. He is by no means inferior. He may not be as good defensively now, at the same age as Couturier, but his IQ is just as good, and his skating is much much better.

Couturier has the better offensive insticts, but IMO, his skating is really going to limit his ability to pounce on opportunties to score.

I still believe Couturier will be a better player then Laughton, but don't just brush Laughton to the side, he is a very capable offensive and defensive player.

ORYX is offline  
Old
05-08-2013, 11:44 AM
  #337
DrinkFightFlyers
Grave Before Shave
 
DrinkFightFlyers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 12,977
vCash: 50
Send a message via AIM to DrinkFightFlyers
Quote:
Originally Posted by Domhnall Dubh View Post
What are the chances the Flyers take Fucale?
I would seriously cry.

DrinkFightFlyers is offline  
Old
05-08-2013, 11:59 AM
  #338
Curufinwe
Registered User
 
Curufinwe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Country: New Zealand
Posts: 9,522
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Domhnall Dubh View Post
What are the chances the Flyers take Fucale?
Very low.

Curufinwe is offline  
Old
05-08-2013, 12:01 PM
  #339
Flyers2point0
Registered User
 
Flyers2point0's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Chicago, IL
Country: United States
Posts: 91
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrinkFightFlyers View Post
I would seriously cry.
Same. I don't think there's any chance we take a goalie in the first, and I can't see them taking one in the second for that matter either. Fucale will likely go somewhere after 20. I can see Calgary taking him with either STL or PITT's pick.

I haven't read/seen this interview myself but someone else on here quoted Holmgren basically saying that in order to get a #1 d-man you have to draft and develop one. (anyone have a link to that interview?)
But yeah I have a hard time seeing us not go with a defenseman.

Personally I hope it's Zadorov. While he's a very raw talent, I think given how well Gustafsson has been coming long as of late it would make them a lot less likely to rush the kid and develop him properly.

Flyers2point0 is offline  
Old
05-08-2013, 12:05 PM
  #340
orange is better
than other colors...
 
orange is better's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Country: United States
Posts: 8,192
vCash: 500
I think Laughtons offensive game, while not as prolific at Couturiers was in juniors, has the potential to translate better to the nhl level. I could honestly see Laughton as being one of those guys who produces essentially the same numbers at ever level, and I could really see him being a 65-70 point, 2-way 2nd line C at the nhl level. He's a very hard worker, never quits on a play, is very physical and tenacious on the forecheck and backcheck. Couturier has the ability to force turnovers with his stick and positioning without the puck, Laughton has the ability to force turnovers with his speed and tenacity.

I think both will be great players in this league actually. While I don't think Laughton has the potential to be a selke candidate like couturier may, I think he will be a bit lesser defensively and a bit greater offensively.

Couturier has the higher hockey IQ by far, but he's essentially typecast already at an early age. With the minutes he's tasked with playing against the players he does, on top of his lack of mobility, I don't see him fully reaching his offensive potential.

I could see Laughton turning into a player of the mold of a guy like Andrew Ladd.

orange is better is offline  
Old
05-08-2013, 12:26 PM
  #341
LegionOfDoom91
Registered User
 
LegionOfDoom91's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Country: United States
Posts: 15,958
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rolex View Post
A hunch here. The Flyers do well drafting from the Q. Frederik Gauthier could be the player that they take at 11 if they pass on a defenseman. He's a big winger that skates well and has good hands around the net. Holmgren likes size.
Gauthier plays center.

LegionOfDoom91 is offline  
Old
05-08-2013, 01:56 PM
  #342
Psuhockey
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 2,081
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by LegionOfDoom91 View Post
Gauthier plays center.
Forward position in juniors is fairly irrelevant. The most gifted forwards usually play center in juniors even though they will play something else as a pro. Gagne was a center while Giroux is a good example of the opposite as he was drafted as a right wing. I think Meltzer said Gauthier has played wing before.

Psuhockey is offline  
Old
05-08-2013, 02:19 PM
  #343
sa cyred
Yea....the Flyers...
 
sa cyred's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Traveling...
Country: Cuba
Posts: 15,778
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Psuhockey View Post
Forward position in juniors is fairly irrelevant. The most gifted forwards usually play center in juniors even though they will play something else as a pro. Gagne was a center while Giroux is a good example of the opposite as he was drafted as a right wing. I think Meltzer said Gauthier has played wing before.
Gautheir is known as a defensive center with some faceoff ability. Would be weird to play him on the wing.

sa cyred is offline  
Old
05-08-2013, 02:20 PM
  #344
Flyers2point0
Registered User
 
Flyers2point0's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Chicago, IL
Country: United States
Posts: 91
vCash: 500
If forward position matters so little in junior why don't we just convert Laughton to wing? Why draft another center when we already have too many top-6 centermen to begin with? And in my opinion Gauthier is a bit of a reach at 11. Someone that deserves to be in the top 10 will likely be available there, and even if not and Z and Risto are gone, Pulock should still be there. I really don't see Gauthier going that early in the first at all. Not before Pulock or Mantha.

Flyers2point0 is offline  
Old
05-08-2013, 02:31 PM
  #345
Krishna
Registered User
 
Krishna's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Philadelphia
Country: Canada
Posts: 82,156
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Haute Couturier View Post
I don't think Laughton will be pressuring him to do anything. Laughton is good, but he is inferior on both ends of the ice. He is not going to replace Couturier's tough defensive minutes.
Laughton isn't too far behind Couturier as a defensive forward imo. Couturier is never going to get a chance at developing his offensive skills with Laviolette using Couturier as a 3rd/4th line grinder. Meltzer touched on this on twitter around the time the season ended.

Laughton's offensive skill would make him much more suited towards the 3rd line C spot imo. I'm not saying I wouldn't mind a Malkin-Crosby-Staal situation with Giroux-Schenn-Couturier, but if moving him helps gets a D man that helps this team in the long run, I'm okay with it and actually kind of expect it to happen this summer

Krishna is offline  
Old
05-08-2013, 03:54 PM
  #346
Larry44
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 5,340
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Krishna View Post
Laughton isn't too far behind Couturier as a defensive forward imo. Couturier is never going to get a chance at developing his offensive skills with Laviolette using Couturier as a 3rd/4th line grinder. Meltzer touched on this on twitter around the time the season ended.

Laughton's offensive skill would make him much more suited towards the 3rd line C spot imo. I'm not saying I wouldn't mind a Malkin-Crosby-Staal situation with Giroux-Schenn-Couturier, but if moving him helps gets a D man that helps this team in the long run, I'm okay with it and actually kind of expect it to happen this summer
I really don't think they are going to trade Couturier. Have some patience. In retrospect, Couts would've been better off spending last year in Jr and coming to the NHL this year, like Huberdeau did.

That's why I hope they just sign Adam Hall as a big 4C and let Laughton stay in Oshawa for one more year: dominate offensively, play for Canada at WJC, etc. The things Giroux did and what helped make him great.

Laughton will never have one thing Couts has: size. Trading Couts for a D would leave us in need of a big C, for the top three lines, something that is not a problem now. Giroux-Schenn-Laughton is too small a group for top three lines.

At 11, there are going to be 5 or 6 really good Dmen to choose from, depending on who goes and who drops.

Realistically, it's possible that we'll have a choice of Zadorov, Hennessey, Pulock, Ristolainen or Morin. It's up to the scouts to determine who we like, or to gamble on trading 11 to Columbus for two later picks (eg. our 11 and 41 for their pick at 14 and either the NYR or LA picks TBD in the 19 through30 range).

This could work if Kekalainen really likes Ristolainen, for example and he's still on the board at 11 but might not be at 14. If we are torn between Risto, Hennessey, Pulock and Morin, then trade down and get two of them?

Larry44 is online now  
Old
05-08-2013, 03:57 PM
  #347
Jack de la Hoya
Registered User
 
Jack de la Hoya's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Texas
Country: United States
Posts: 14,075
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Larry44 View Post
I really don't think they are going to trade Couturier. Have some patience. In retrospect, Couts would've been better off spending last year in Jr and coming to the NHL this year, like Huberdeau did.

That's why I hope they just sign Adam Hall as a big 4C and let Laughton stay in Oshawa for one more year: dominate offensively, play for Canada at WJC, etc. The things Giroux did and what helped make him great.

Laughton will never have one thing Couts has: size. Trading Couts for a D would leave us in need of a big C, for the top three lines, something that is not a problem now. Giroux-Schenn-Laughton is too small a group for top three lines.

At 11, there are going to be 5 or 6 really good Dmen to choose from, depending on who goes and who drops.

Realistically, it's possible that we'll have a choice of Zadorov, Hennessey, Pulock, Ristolainen or Morin. It's up to the scouts to determine who we like, or to gamble on trading 11 to Columbus for two later picks (eg. our 11 and 41 for their pick at 14 and either the NYR or LA picks TBD in the 19 through30 range).

This could work if Kekalainen really likes Ristolainen, for example and he's still on the board at 11 but might not be at 14. If we are torn between Risto, Hennessey, Pulock and Morin, then trade down and get two of them?
I don't know that you'd get more than a 3rd to drop 3 spots. Maybe a 2nd (if we sent our 4th back or something).

Jack de la Hoya is offline  
Old
05-08-2013, 04:11 PM
  #348
Larry44
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 5,340
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jack de la Hoya View Post
I don't know that you'd get more than a 3rd to drop 3 spots. Maybe a 2nd (if we sent our 4th back or something).
How about our 11 and 41 plus a prospect or a 5th (or other future pick), for their 14 plus the higher pick of NYR or LA (likely in the 24 range at least)? They'd keep 11 and another first, and get our 2nd and another pick/player.

I'm trying to get us a 2nd late-first rounder somehow....

Larry44 is online now  
Old
05-08-2013, 04:16 PM
  #349
Jack de la Hoya
Registered User
 
Jack de la Hoya's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Texas
Country: United States
Posts: 14,075
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Larry44 View Post
How about our 11 and 41 plus a prospect or a 5th (or other future pick), for their 14 plus the higher pick of NYR or LA (likely in the 24 range at least)? They'd keep 11 and another first, and get our 2nd and another pick/player.

I'm trying to get us a 2nd late-first rounder somehow....
Well setting aside the 5th or its prospect equivalent (which holds little value), you're basically asking whether Columbus would be willing to trade back ~20 spots in one swap in order to move up 3 spots in the other.

Jack de la Hoya is offline  
Old
05-08-2013, 04:26 PM
  #350
DrinkFightFlyers
Grave Before Shave
 
DrinkFightFlyers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 12,977
vCash: 50
Send a message via AIM to DrinkFightFlyers
Quote:
Originally Posted by Larry44 View Post
How about our 11 and 41 plus a prospect or a 5th (or other future pick), for their 14 plus the higher pick of NYR or LA (likely in the 24 range at least)? They'd keep 11 and another first, and get our 2nd and another pick/player.

I'm trying to get us a 2nd late-first rounder somehow....
I think a better way to get a late first would be trade with a team who is either so far off that they would want more picks to re-stock, or a team that is so close that picks in this draft aren't going to be that important to them. Otherwise you are probably going to have to trade an actual roster player to get one (Read, Couturier, etc).

DrinkFightFlyers 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 12:37 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.