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

11th Pick Scenario (Ristolainen vs. Zadorov vs. Pulock)

View Poll Results: Who do you choose at #11?
Pulock 11 11.58%
Ristolainen 66 69.47%
Zadarov 18 18.95%
Voters: 95. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
05-25-2013, 05:04 PM
  #26
phlocky
Registered User
 
phlocky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 6,150
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Prongo View Post
Dallas is sitting at 10 currently so you want to trade back around 15 spots to the Bruins 1st? I don't like the sounds of that. A team to watch is Columbus. They have the 14th and 44th picks(their own) and might look to move up. We are in perfect position for them to make that move to 11 if we see the same level of talent at 11 that will be at 14.

Oh trust me, I don't want us to trade the pick but I also don't want us to reach and take aguy way too early if we could trade down and get him around 20 or so. IF we do look to trade down I hope we'd make adeal something like our 1st and 2nd this year to the Sens for their 1st this year (I think #19) and their 1st next year.

We seem to be able to find real gems with picks in the 20's so picking up two of those picks (assuming the Sens pick around 20 again next year) for our 1st and 2nd this year might yield us a better overall team in the future.

Again I personally just want us to use the #11 pick and take a high quality player but I wouldn't be overly pissed off if we made a trade like this. I WOULD be pissed if drafted aguy slated to go around 20th with our pick at #11.

phlocky is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-26-2013, 08:13 AM
  #27
Bill_Meltzer
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 459
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by phlocky View Post
I WOULD be pissed if drafted aguy slated to go around 20th with our pick at #11.
As long as the player pans out, no one will care in a few years if they "reached" for the pick or didn't risk trading down. An example from Flyers history:

Some people were in apoplexy back in 1991 when they learned the Flyers had used the 6th overall pick to take someone whom The Hockey News and Central Scouting had pegged as a late first-round to early-second pick. On the strong recommendation of scouts Inge Hammarström and Bill Dineen, the Flyers went off the board and selected Peter Forsberg.

The next year, the Flyers used the 7th overall pick and chose the player THN called "the safest pick in the draft". That player was Ryan Sittler.

Bill_Meltzer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-26-2013, 08:35 AM
  #28
CanuckistanFlyerfan
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 1,371
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bill_Meltzer View Post
As long as the player pans out, no one will care in a few years if they "reached" for the pick or didn't risk trading down. An example from Flyers history:

Some people were in apoplexy back in 1991 when they learned the Flyers had used the 6th overall pick to take someone whom The Hockey News and Central Scouting had pegged as a late first-round to early-second pick. On the strong recommendation of scouts Inge Hammarström and Bill Dineen, the Flyers went off the board and selected Peter Forsberg.

The next year, the Flyers used the 7th overall pick and chose the player THN called "the safest pick in the draft". That player was Ryan Sittler.


The voice of reason.

I wonder who on here has seen what of the 3 prospects in question. I can't comment on Ristolainen cause I haven't seen much of him. Pulock I've seen a bit of and seems to have what we need but its too small a sample size to be sure. Zadorov I watched live 6 or 7 times this year and thought he's big but wasn't overly wowed. I really thought he'd stand out physically and he didn't, at least when I saw him.

That's what you get with teenagers, especially picking out of the top 5 or 6 this year. I don't care who they take, as long as he pans out. We need D, but I'd rather have another good forward than a bust on defence.

CanuckistanFlyerfan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-26-2013, 09:01 AM
  #29
SeanCWombBroom
DownieFaceSoftener
 
SeanCWombBroom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 4,787
vCash: 500
Panning out is certainly more important than final draft selection.

Another lesson from history:

1) Daigle.
2) Pronger.
3) Chris Gratton.
4) Paul Kariya.

I imagine people would have been steamed in Kariya was taken 1st overall given Daigle's hype. The hype surrounding Daigle basically caused a pretty dramatic reaction: The draft lottery due to the Sens skating like children to finish out the season.


Last edited by SeanCWombBroom: 05-26-2013 at 09:01 AM. Reason: Spelling
SeanCWombBroom is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-26-2013, 09:29 AM
  #30
LegionOfDoom91
Registered User
 
LegionOfDoom91's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Country: United States
Posts: 13,507
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DownieFaceSoftener View Post
Panning out is certainly more important than final draft selection.

Another lesson from history:

1) Daigle.
2) Pronger.
3) Chris Gratton.
4) Paul Kariya.

I imagine people would have been steamed in Kariya was taken 1st overall given Daigle's hype. The hype surrounding Daigle basically caused a pretty dramatic reaction: The draft lottery due to the Sens skating like children to finish out the season.
That sucks for Ottawa, that they passed up two possible HOF's for Daigle. Of course if Daigle had the right attitude it probably wouldn't have been too bad.


Last edited by LegionOfDoom91: 05-26-2013 at 10:08 AM.
LegionOfDoom91 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
05-26-2013, 10:12 AM
  #31
FlyersFan61290
Registered User
 
FlyersFan61290's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Philadelphia
Country: United States
Posts: 8,495
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by LegionOfDoom91 View Post
That sucks for Ottawa, that they passed up two possible HOF's for Daigle. Of course if Daigle had the right attitude it probably wouldn't have been too bad.
I was actually surprise at his career numbers when I looked them up, I expected them to be worse. Obviously as hyped as he was he should've been much much better I'm just saying if you forget about the hype he had a decent career.

FlyersFan61290 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-26-2013, 10:44 AM
  #32
Larry44
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 5,116
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by daynus View Post
didnt see a whole lot of him, but really noticed him at the wjc. but what is really impressing me at the memorial cup with zad is, the guy is a surprising athlete for his size. in games he will make a few big hits, then his team needs some offense. they get him to pinch, he gets the puck in the middle swings to the right goes in and scores. then his second goal at the tourney, he pinches, sits around the net like a dump truck. puck comes along bounces off his skate, in the net. then another moment i thought, man how would this guy look on the flyers. my question got answered. pouillot was coming into the london zone. and he didnt see this 6-5,230 lb wall. runs right into Z, and tumbles to the ice. i was like a penguin prospect runs into this guy,loses the battle and falls down with no effort from Z, that is beautiful. would love to see that, at the next level. my other choices are morin and morrisey, wants nothing to do with pulock. he scares me. with him the risk of getting a number 4 dman, at pick 11, is a big waste of a pick.
I loved Zadorov in that game. Crushed two guys, one on the wall, one in open ice. Played on the PP and the PK. He makes beautiful stretch passes and is really just a player. Huge reach and knows how to use it.

I think I would pick him over Nurse at this point, let alone the others, but if Nurse is available, it'll be because New Jersey took Zadorov and let him slide.


Last edited by Larry44: 05-27-2013 at 08:52 AM.
Larry44 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
05-26-2013, 02:05 PM
  #33
The Couturier Effect
Registered User
 
The Couturier Effect's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Country: United States
Posts: 3,820
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by flyersfromquebec View Post
What about Nurse if he is available???
Nurse is the 2nd best defenseman in the draft (I believe), so if he's available, it's a sign of a miracle and you take him. But I doubt he's on the board at #11. The only way the Flyers draft him is if they trade up, which I think is a good idea.

The Couturier Effect is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-26-2013, 07:02 PM
  #34
Curufinwe
Registered User
 
Curufinwe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Country: New Zealand
Posts: 7,677
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheCerebral1 View Post
Zadarov, I like what I've read about him more and more. I don't mind Risto. Honestly, I prefer a winger Valeri Nichushkin over them to be honest. Take the best player available.
I think he will go third now he has committed to play in the NHL.

Curufinwe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-27-2013, 01:25 AM
  #35
seanerixon
Registered User
 
seanerixon's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Collingswood, NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 641
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to seanerixon Send a message via MSN to seanerixon Send a message via Yahoo to seanerixon Send a message via Skype™ to seanerixon
As much as I like Pulock, something tells me he will develop into a Matt Carle and nothing more than that. We need someone that offers a mean-streak like Risto, in my opinion.

seanerixon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-27-2013, 02:29 AM
  #36
Jtown
Registered User
 
Jtown's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Fairfax, Virginia
Posts: 10,409
vCash: 539
Quote:
Originally Posted by Larry44 View Post
I loved Zadorov in that game. Crushed two guys, one on the way, one in open ice. Played on the PP and the PK. He makes beautiful stretch passes and is really just a player. Huge reach and knows how to use it.

I think I would pick him over Nurse at this point, let alone the others, but if Nurse is available, it'll be because New Jersey took Zadorov and let him slide.
I think NJ is targeting a forward.

Jtown is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
05-27-2013, 10:53 AM
  #37
Rolex
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Country: United States
Posts: 199
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jtown View Post
I think NJ is targeting a forward.
Also I think that they lose their #1 selection in next year's draft which makes it even more likely that they will take a forward.

Rolex is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-28-2013, 08:01 AM
  #38
Hockeypete49
How you like me now!
 
Hockeypete49's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: South Jersey
Country: Isle of Man
Posts: 4,527
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bill_Meltzer;66613873[B
]As long as the player pans out, no one will care in a few years if they "reached" for the pick[/B] or didn't risk trading down. An example from Flyers history:

Some people were in apoplexy back in 1991 when they learned the Flyers had used the 6th overall pick to take someone whom The Hockey News and Central Scouting had pegged as a late first-round to early-second pick. On the strong recommendation of scouts Inge Hammarström and Bill Dineen, the Flyers went off the board and selected Peter Forsberg.

The next year, the Flyers used the 7th overall pick and chose the player THN called "the safest pick in the draft". That player was Ryan Sittler.
Sit's boy was one of the locks in the draft to play in the NHL back then! So you never know. Heck look at last year, they reached for Scott and that move looks like it will pan out.

Hockeypete49 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-28-2013, 08:42 AM
  #39
SolidSnakeUS
Registered User
 
SolidSnakeUS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Pipersville, PA
Country: United States
Posts: 29,646
vCash: 500
Out of those 3, I would say Rist. He's still pretty big, but he's not much of a slapper, but has a very good wrister. He also apparently has a good mean streak to him.

However, if someone like Lindholm drops to us, take him. He started this past season as a 17 year old in a man's league and did VERY well.

SolidSnakeUS is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
05-28-2013, 08:55 AM
  #40
Broad Street Elite
Registered User
 
Broad Street Elite's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 3,363
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hockeypete49 View Post
Sit's boy was one of the locks in the draft to play in the NHL back then! So you never know. Heck look at last year, they reached for Scott and that move looks like it will pan out.
There's a difference between going off the board and drafting for need though. Scott clearly was "going off the board", but certainly not drafting for need (defensemen).

Ironically, the Flyers could have gone for need and board by drafting Maatta, which tells you how much they liked Scott and/or disliked Olli.

Broad Street Elite is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-28-2013, 10:16 AM
  #41
SeanCWombBroom
DownieFaceSoftener
 
SeanCWombBroom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 4,787
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolidSnakeUS View Post
However, if someone like Lindholm drops to us, take him. He started this past season as a 17 year old in a man's league and did VERY well.
Someone usually drops. The Flyers would be all over that--maybe trade up a spot if they're worried. It looked like last year they were trying to move up for Teuvo and were mad when it didn't work out (based purely on speculation from their desk during the draft).

SeanCWombBroom is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-28-2013, 10:21 AM
  #42
Larry44
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 5,116
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Broad Street Elite View Post
There's a difference between going off the board and drafting for need though. Scott clearly was "going off the board", but certainly not drafting for need (defensemen).

Ironically, the Flyers could have gone for need and board by drafting Maatta, which tells you how much they liked Scott and/or disliked Olli.
I wouldn't say Laughton was 'going off the board.' THN had him ranked 24th or something, IIRC, so 20 wasn't a Charaesque reach.

Larry44 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
05-28-2013, 11:43 AM
  #43
DecadesofFutility
Registered User
 
DecadesofFutility's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Wilmington, Delaware
Country: United States
Posts: 439
vCash: 500
If we are keeping Couturier and Laughton, then we should take either Pulock or Morrisey if we keep our #11 pick.
They are rated #11 and #12, I think. They should be BPA on their lists.
If another player is rated higher, then FO fails in ability to determine BPA.

No excuses can be accepted for drafting more forwards.
That is the definition of insanity.
Doing the same thing repeatedly and expecting different results.

What the heck draft a Defenseman for once.
It's not like Downie was a great first round pick.
And it's not evident that Couturier is the next Ryan Kesler either.


Last edited by DecadesofFutility: 05-28-2013 at 11:48 AM.
DecadesofFutility is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-28-2013, 11:47 AM
  #44
Prongo
Beer
 
Prongo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: philadelphia
Country: United States
Posts: 13,878
vCash: 500
I am not sure you realize that our prospect system needs every single position player we can get. Not just defense, offense or goalie, but all of them! Can't you understand this? It has been said many ties before. Also if we trade Couts(which presumably for a defender) why are you still adamant about taking a defenseman? We would need another forward who could make the jump this year or next to help out of forward depth then.

Say a player like Barkov falls to 11, would you take Pulock or any other defenseman over him, if the answer is yes, you would be the worst GM out there. He would easily be the best player at that spot, you need to take the BPA always to ensure they have the best chance of working out. If you don't, you increase the risk of that player being a bust.

How many times does this have to be told to you?

Prongo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-28-2013, 12:08 PM
  #45
Broad Street Elite
Registered User
 
Broad Street Elite's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 3,363
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Larry44 View Post
I wouldn't say Laughton was 'going off the board.' THN had him ranked 24th or something, IIRC, so 20 wasn't a Charaesque reach.
There were definitely some much lower than 24 when you factored in the goalies and international skaters. In the combined rankings, I know at least a couple of places had him as an early second. No, it wasn't going "off the board", but iirc he wasn't among the "best available" lists that were showing as the Flyers pick approached.

Regardless, my larger point was that the Flyers passed on the defenseman that was ranked in the 12-15 range to take the center that most places had in the 25+ range. You're right that it wasn't completely "off the board", but it was absolutely a surprise to most people when it happened both here and in the TSN coverage.

I trust the Flyers ability to get a good player when they draft as they've shown pretty solid prowess in recent years. I was disappointed when we passed on Maatta for Laughton, but am more than happy to eat some crow if that turns out to be the right call at a later date (as Bill indicated above).


Last edited by Broad Street Elite: 05-28-2013 at 12:21 PM.
Broad Street Elite is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-28-2013, 03:47 PM
  #46
DecadesofFutility
Registered User
 
DecadesofFutility's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Wilmington, Delaware
Country: United States
Posts: 439
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Prongo View Post
I am not sure you realize that our prospect system needs every single position player we can get. Not just defense, offense or goalie, but all of them! Can't you understand this? It has been said many ties before. Also if we trade Couts(which presumably for a defender) why are you still adamant about taking a defenseman? We would need another forward who could make the jump this year or next to help out of forward depth then.

Say a player like Barkov falls to 11, would you take Pulock or any other defenseman over him, if the answer is yes, you would be the worst GM out there. He would easily be the best player at that spot, you need to take the BPA always to ensure they have the best chance of working out. If you don't, you increase the risk of that player being a bust.

How many times does this have to be told to you?
Keep saying it, my head is bit hard.
It might sink in some day.

Yes, our talent pool is shallow.
I would love them to draft the next Lundquist.
Or the next Crosby, or Weber.

I just take issue with how the Front Office goes about refilling it.
I understand that a player ranked at 11 is better than a player ranked 15-17.
And that supposedly you pick the BPA, but, I feel the Flyers,
pick BFA (BEST FORWARD AVAILABLE).

There were better players than Laughton available at the time,
and Hamilton could have been the BPA, not Couturier.
Another team had Hamilton rated highly, why not us.
Other teams think a #1 Defenseman are the BPA, why not the Flyers.

If I am keeping Coots and Laughton, then I trade down if BPA is another center or forward.
Then I get another useful pick and can pick maybe a defenseman is BPA.
Then, I have an extra chance of drafting a useful player in the draft.
More picks = Less chance of draft busts.

DecadesofFutility is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-28-2013, 03:50 PM
  #47
Beef Invictus
Global Moderator
Beefitor
 
Beef Invictus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Centreville
Country: Lord Howe Island
Posts: 37,808
vCash: 156
Quote:
Originally Posted by DecadesofFutility View Post
Keep saying it, my head is bit hard.
It might sink in some day.

Yes, our talent pool is shallow.
I would love them to draft the next Lundquist.
Or the next Crosby, or Weber.

I just take issue with how the Front Office goes about refilling it.
I understand that a player ranked at 11 is better than a player ranked 15-17.
And that supposedly you pick the BPA, but, I feel the Flyers,
pick BFA (BEST FORWARD AVAILABLE).

There were better players than Laughton available at the time,
and Hamilton could have been the BPA, not Couturier.
Another team had Hamilton rated highly, why not us.
Other teams think a #1 Defenseman are the BPA, why not the Flyers.

If I am keeping Coots and Laughton, then I trade down if BPA is another center or forward.
Then I get another useful pick and can pick maybe a defenseman is BPA.
Then, I have an extra chance of drafting a useful player in the draft.
More picks = Less chance of draft busts.
Hamilton was taken after Couturier. Nobody else had taken him. After Couturier was taken, perhaps Hamilton became BPA for the Bruins.

__________________
Down in the basement, I've got a Craftsman lathe. Show it to the children when they misbehave.
Beef Invictus is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
05-28-2013, 08:26 PM
  #48
phlocky
Registered User
 
phlocky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 6,150
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Prongo View Post
I am not sure you realize that our prospect system needs every single position player we can get. Not just defense, offense or goalie, but all of them! Can't you understand this? It has been said many ties before. Also if we trade Couts(which presumably for a defender) why are you still adamant about taking a defenseman? We would need another forward who could make the jump this year or next to help out of forward depth then.

Say a player like Barkov falls to 11, would you take Pulock or any other defenseman over him, if the answer is yes, you would be the worst GM out there. He would easily be the best player at that spot, you need to take the BPA always to ensure they have the best chance of working out. If you don't, you increase the risk of that player being a bust.

How many times does this have to be told to you?

You do NOT alwaysdraft BPA, that's a common misconception You rate each and every player on many catagories and from that you RANK the players (usually you do it by a point system rating players on ascale of 1-10 in however many catagories). Usually you end up with "tiers" of players where we will most likely be outside to first two tiers. You can easily end up with 3 players within a point or two of each other and then you look to your team "needs" and one player may be more "valuable" than another. When a player drops from a tier above where you had him rated THAT'S when you clearly do NOT draft by need. It may very well end up that the players in the tier where we are draft are all forwards and to take a dman would drafting a tier down and NOT building the STRONGEST team possible.

The point is that you CAN'T just draft by need and you CAN'T draft just BPA. Drafting purely by need would make you a weaker team in the long run. Drafting purely by BPA when there may be a few players very close to each other could very easily leave you with gaping holes and preventing you from building the best team possible.

phlocky is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-28-2013, 08:40 PM
  #49
feedingschennzy
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 346
vCash: 500
The more I read the more I want Pulock. Ristolainen is the most likely to make an early impact but I don't see his ceiling being as high as Pulock or Nurse. Maybe having a fellow Finn in Timonen could help motivate and groom him. He has the least potential I would guess to bust. At the same time Nurse seems unlikely to fall to us and while I would take him at 11, he isn't a garuntee to be there. Pulock has a great shot and is right handed, two things we have been criminally short on in recent years.

feedingschennzy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-28-2013, 10:48 PM
  #50
Larry44
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 5,116
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Broad Street Elite View Post
There were definitely some much lower than 24 when you factored in the goalies and international skaters. In the combined rankings, I know at least a couple of places had him as an early second. No, it wasn't going "off the board", but iirc he wasn't among the "best available" lists that were showing as the Flyers pick approached.

Regardless, my larger point was that the Flyers passed on the defenseman that was ranked in the 12-15 range to take the center that most places had in the 25+ range. You're right that it wasn't completely "off the board", but it was absolutely a surprise to most people when it happened both here and in the TSN coverage.I trust the Flyers ability to get a good player when they draft as they've shown pretty solid prowess in recent years. I was disappointed when we passed on Maatta for Laughton, but am more than happy to eat some crow if that turns out to be the right call at a later date (as Bill indicated above).
Except, of course, when Bob Mackenzie said he thought the Flyers were looking at Laughton.

Larry44 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 07:17 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.