HFBoards

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

Draft Thread Part 2: Bark to the Future

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
05-31-2013, 07:59 AM
  #351
glenngineer
Registered User
 
glenngineer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Spring Hill, TN
Country: United States
Posts: 3,964
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by AtlantaWhaler View Post
I see where you're coming from, and I agree to an extent, but our garbage IS what you're offering. From Colorado or Florida's position, why on earth move out of the big 3 (or really 2 in this case) for players not panning out (though with potential). Blum and/or SK to lose out on Mac? They would want a real good reason to not draft where they are and those guys are not it.
Is Smith really garbage if paired with Stastny? If they have the same chemistry they may have something special. Having the best players isn't always the right way to go, it's having the guys that get the most out of each other. While many around here think SK is garbage, I still don't buy it. Blum, ok, he's garbage...lol.

It depends on needs as well for both teams. Really, what is it worth to move up three spots in the draft? Years ago we moved a second to move from 3 to 2 to pick Legwand. I could see moving Ellis and swapping picks might get it done. Might have to throw in another prospect of lower value but I don't see moving one of our better prospects who are ready to play now to move up.

For what it's worth, I'm not sold on MacKinnon. I just get a bad feeling that he is going to be a bust. Felt that way for a long time. Watched him in some games and I just don't see it. That's just me though. He's good but is he going to be THAT guy.

glenngineer is offline  
Old
05-31-2013, 08:22 AM
  #352
braindead
Registered User
 
braindead's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: The cookie spoke
Country: Tibet
Posts: 2,764
vCash: 500
I would pay that price to move up to #1. You get the best forward in the draft and the forward that for several years has been projected to go first overall. Not that you can base the decision on it but you also get the marketing and pr benefits of picking first.

Edit: Of course, I am sold on him. I fully expect him to be better than Barkov and every other center in the draft (although I do think Barkov will excel as well so won't be complaining if he is our pick).


Last edited by braindead: 05-31-2013 at 08:28 AM.
braindead is offline  
Old
05-31-2013, 08:50 AM
  #353
AtlantaWhaler
Moderator
Thrash/Preds/Sabres
 
AtlantaWhaler's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Country: United States
Posts: 11,448
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by braindead View Post
I would pay that price to move up to #1.
What price?

AtlantaWhaler is offline  
Old
05-31-2013, 09:10 AM
  #354
braindead
Registered User
 
braindead's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: The cookie spoke
Country: Tibet
Posts: 2,764
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by AtlantaWhaler View Post
What price?
Any suggested by v82 above. 4th plus SK/Blum plus a player referenced, including, reluctantly, beck or borkie.

braindead is offline  
Old
05-31-2013, 09:15 AM
  #355
PFL615
Registered User
 
PFL615's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Smashville, TN
Country: United States
Posts: 1,578
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ThirdManIn View Post
Let's be fair. A 25-27 year old consistent 30 goal scorer is not an average forward. It's a rarity in this league.

Of course, goal scoring is but one of many attributes that is essential in a forward this team needs. Yes, we need someone who can provide that, but we do not need a one-dimensional player. For instance, having a one-dimensional 30 goal scoring winger is not what we need, and it would do us little good to simply scoff at the ability to draft a potential top line center in an effort to gain that. While it is certainly enticing to put together a package centered around our #4 pick to bring a young, 30 goal scoring forward aboard, it obviously brings up the question, "why does a team give that up for our pick plus whatever it is we package along with it?" After all, what do we offer another team to sweeten the deal that does not create another hole in our roster? SK? Blum? Ellis? I don't think so.

Our needs are simple, in my opinion. We need a top line center, which is nothing new, and we need a second pairing defenseman. One of those things is attainable, while not necessarily easily attainable, through free agency or trade. The other is not.
I agree with what you are saying but if we are going to have a chance of getting an offensive superstar it's going to be in the draft. I would rather take my chances on filling the center position void in the draft since we have a shot at Barkov. I think trading away the pick to possibly fill the void with someone another team is willing to trade could be a disaster.

PFL615 is offline  
Old
05-31-2013, 09:22 AM
  #356
PFL615
Registered User
 
PFL615's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Smashville, TN
Country: United States
Posts: 1,578
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by AtlantaWhaler View Post
What price?
4th, SK, Ellis, 2014 1st to Colorado for 2013 1st overall and Stastny?

PFL615 is offline  
Old
05-31-2013, 09:31 AM
  #357
Joe T Choker
Roll Wide Roll
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Country: Italy
Posts: 23,341
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Smashville615 View Post
4th, SK, Ellis, 2014 1st to Colorado for 2013 1st overall and Stastny?
is not happening ... trading an established player within your conference (no longer divisions) isn't happening

Joe T Choker is offline  
Old
05-31-2013, 09:33 AM
  #358
SavageSteve
Registered User
 
SavageSteve's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Nashville, TN
Country: United States
Posts: 433
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Smashville615 View Post
I agree with what you are saying but if we are going to have a chance of getting an offensive superstar it's going to be in the draft. I would rather take my chances on filling the center position void in the draft since we have a shot at Barkov. I think trading away the pick to possibly fill the void with someone another team is willing to trade could be a disaster.
Totally agree here.

As a kid in the '80s in St. Louis, other than Joey Mullen and Doug Gilmour I watched the Blues treat the draft/prospects as a tool to get gritty re-treads for playoff runs over and over in the old Norris Division. Only once did trading off assets really pan out in Brett Hull (which was amazing when he was netting 70+ goals); but maddening when you see the players you dealt hoist the Cup for Crispy in Calgary or elsewhere for what turned out to be a rental. I think it is wise for the organization to do their homework and posture to see if someone will overpay like GMDP did with Erat or get good value on trading up. I'd really prefer for them to stand pat taking Barkov at this point and also qualify Blum/keep Ellis to see what Housley can do with the defense and build their value for other assets we will invariably need through attrition. You never know when some team will channel Mike Ditka in NOLA and give up a ton of draft picks/prospects for your pick.

Of course other teams will posture to take a player that Poile obviously covets and see if he will give up an asset or move to Plan B and vice versa.

SavageSteve is offline  
Old
05-31-2013, 09:34 AM
  #359
Top 6 Spaling
Registered User
 
Top 6 Spaling's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Smashville
Country: United States
Posts: 10,247
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Smashville615 View Post
4th, SK, Ellis, 2014 1st to Colorado for 2013 1st overall and Stastny?
Yeah right...they don't take that IMO. To fall to 4, I think they'd ask for #4+Ellis+SK or something, which leaves 2014 1st for Stastny. Doubt it.

Top 6 Spaling is offline  
Old
05-31-2013, 09:37 AM
  #360
ffwrx
Don't Blink!
 
ffwrx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Greenbrier, TN
Country: United States
Posts: 381
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Smashville615 View Post
I agree with what you are saying but if we are going to have a chance of getting an offensive superstar it's going to be in the draft. I would rather take my chances on filling the center position void in the draft since we have a shot at Barkov. I think trading away the pick to possibly fill the void with someone another team is willing to trade could be a disaster.
What happens if for some weird reason it goes Mac Barkov Druin? Do we take Jones or trade down?

ffwrx is offline  
Old
05-31-2013, 09:50 AM
  #361
henchman24
#ImagineAvs
 
henchman24's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 10,953
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by oreilly22 View Post
I'll be honest, the Preds probably want to keep Weber, Rinne, Wilson, Josi, Klein, Forsberg, and Hornqvist. Probably Fisher and possibly Legwand too. If you are interested in anyone other than those guys, then I would jump at it without hesitation.

Players probably available that could interest you: Ellis, Blum, SK, Bourque (one of my faves, but worth it if we could move to #1), Craig Smith (lit it up on a line with Stastny in the WC) Austin Watson (big young center with defensive upside), Magnus Hellberg (very talented young goalie prospect)
I don't think the Avs would have much interest in Ellis, Blum (too many RD as it is with EJ, Barrie, and Elliott), SK, or Hellberg (have 2 good G prospects).

IMO Borque, Smith, and Watson are the more interesting, but I don't believe there is enough incentive to move from 1 to 4 with those. Roy has said the Avs don't want to move out of the top 3, but would consider 4 if a big enough offer. I take that as an overpayment.

With that I could see the Avs targeting Josi to improve their top 4 (need LD for that as EJ and Barrie occupy the right spots). What about a #1 + for #4 + Josi? The + would have to be significant.

henchman24 is offline  
Old
05-31-2013, 09:53 AM
  #362
henchman24
#ImagineAvs
 
henchman24's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 10,953
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Smashville615 View Post
4th, SK, Ellis, 2014 1st to Colorado for 2013 1st overall and Stastny?
Avs don't do that deal because SK and Ellis are not pieces that would fit in Colorado's long-term plans. The deal would end up #4 + 2014 1st for #1 + Stastny. The Avs can get more than just a 1st round pick for Stastny at next year's deadline.

henchman24 is offline  
Old
05-31-2013, 09:54 AM
  #363
glenngineer
Registered User
 
glenngineer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Spring Hill, TN
Country: United States
Posts: 3,964
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ffwrx View Post
What happens if for some weird reason it goes Mac Barkov Druin? Do we take Jones or trade down?
Take Jones and you have one of your needs met in getting a second pairing guy to play with Klein AND Jones gets to learn from one of the best in Weber. We still may not score but we won't be giving up much either. We'd basically have two pairs of defense that we could roll close to 25 minutes a night apiece and talk about protected minutes for your third pairing. The other thing is, you'd always have the right to move Jones at a later time if you want and maybe even land more in a package for him then on draft day.

glenngineer is offline  
Old
05-31-2013, 09:57 AM
  #364
glenngineer
Registered User
 
glenngineer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Spring Hill, TN
Country: United States
Posts: 3,964
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by henchman24 View Post
I don't think the Avs would have much interest in Ellis, Blum (too many RD as it is with EJ, Barrie, and Elliott), SK, or Hellberg (have 2 good G prospects).

IMO Borque, Smith, and Watson are the more interesting, but I don't believe there is enough incentive to move from 1 to 4 with those. Roy has said the Avs don't want to move out of the top 3, but would consider 4 if a big enough offer. I take that as an overpayment.

With that I could see the Avs targeting Josi to improve their top 4 (need LD for that as EJ and Barrie occupy the right spots). What about a #1 + for #4 + Josi? The + would have to be significant.
When you say the + would need to be significant is that from your end or ours? No offense but Josi is a top pairing defenseman already and dealing him to move up to number 1 creates more holes for us than it fills. Josi isn't going anywhere any time soon. He's actually a better player at this point than Suter was.

glenngineer is offline  
Old
05-31-2013, 09:58 AM
  #365
ffwrx
Don't Blink!
 
ffwrx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Greenbrier, TN
Country: United States
Posts: 381
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by glenngineer View Post
Take Jones and you have one of your needs met in getting a second pairing guy to play with Klein AND Jones gets to learn from one of the best in Weber. We still may not score but we won't be giving up much either. We'd basically have two pairs of defense that we could roll close to 25 minutes a night apiece and talk about protected minutes for your third pairing. The other thing is, you'd always have the right to move Jones at a later time if you want and maybe even land more in a package for him then on draft day.
Doesn't he shoot right? We would have 3 right handers in the top 4. I guess it doesn't matter. I just thought that we usually tried to pair a lefty and righty together.

ffwrx is offline  
Old
05-31-2013, 10:04 AM
  #366
glenngineer
Registered User
 
glenngineer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Spring Hill, TN
Country: United States
Posts: 3,964
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ffwrx View Post
Doesn't he shoot right? We would have 3 right handers in the top 4. I guess it doesn't matter. I just thought that we usually tried to pair a lefty and righty together.
He is and we try to but if he's an elite talent it shouldn't matter which side he's on. Most defensemen can play either side but it is better to have left/right pairings.

glenngineer is offline  
Old
05-31-2013, 10:05 AM
  #367
henchman24
#ImagineAvs
 
henchman24's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 10,953
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by glenngineer View Post
When you say the + would need to be significant is that from your end or ours? No offense but Josi is a top pairing defenseman already and dealing him to move up to number 1 creates more holes for us than it fills. Josi isn't going anywhere any time soon. He's actually a better player at this point than Suter was.
From the Avs end. The only real untouchables would be Landeskog, Duchene, ROR (because he can't be traded until Feb 28, 2014), EJ, PAP, and Barrie. That leaves Stastny, McGinn, Downie, Elliott, Siemens, Sgarbossa, Hishon, Hejda, and Wilson as significant assets that could be included in a deal.

henchman24 is offline  
Old
05-31-2013, 10:11 AM
  #368
Top 6 Spaling
Registered User
 
Top 6 Spaling's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Smashville
Country: United States
Posts: 10,247
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by henchman24 View Post
From the Avs end. The only real untouchables would be Landeskog, Duchene, ROR (because he can't be traded until Feb 28, 2014), EJ, PAP, and Barrie. That leaves Stastny, McGinn, Downie, Elliott, Siemens, Sgarbossa, Hishon, Hejda, and Wilson as significant assets that could be included in a deal.
#1+Stastny for #4+Josi is probably ok value wise, but there's no chance I'd do it. Kevin Klein would be our #2D next year. Trading Josi creates such a whole that we would have to draft Jones over Mac, so we still don't get our dynamic scorer. No thanks.

Craig Smith is someone I think Colorado would like due to the way he and Stastny played at the WCs, but he isn't enough for them to move down from #1 to #4.

Top 6 Spaling is offline  
Old
05-31-2013, 10:18 AM
  #369
henchman24
#ImagineAvs
 
henchman24's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 10,953
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Top 6 Spaling View Post
#1+Stastny for #4+Josi is probably ok value wise, but there's no chance I'd do it. Kevin Klein would be our #2D next year. Trading Josi creates such a whole that we would have to draft Jones over Mac, so we still don't get our dynamic scorer. No thanks.

Craig Smith is someone I think Colorado would like due to the way he and Stastny played at the WCs, but he isn't enough for them to move down from #1 to #4.
The deal around Stastny and Josi is probably where it would have to go, but I could see the reason for not doing the deal. There would probably have to be other moving parts to get something done there.

Smith would be interesting, but he isn't nearly enough to risk losing out on one of Drouin, Jones, or MacKinnon.

henchman24 is offline  
Old
05-31-2013, 10:30 AM
  #370
triggrman
HFBoards Sponsor
 
triggrman's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Nashville
Country: United States
Posts: 17,274
vCash: 500
I'd almost rather just role the dice with Barkov or Nichushkin. I don't know if there's that much difference. No way is the difference Josi for sure.

triggrman is offline  
Old
05-31-2013, 10:36 AM
  #371
Top 6 Spaling
Registered User
 
Top 6 Spaling's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Smashville
Country: United States
Posts: 10,247
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by triggrman View Post
I'd almost rather just role the dice with Barkov or Nichushkin. I don't know if there's that much difference. No way is the difference Josi for sure.
Agreed, which is why they are adding a very good #2C on top of Mackinnon. Still, I think both teams are most likely better off staying where they are. Colorado gets their franchise D, we get our #1C. Everyone is happy.

Top 6 Spaling is offline  
Old
05-31-2013, 11:05 AM
  #372
maplepred
Registered User
 
maplepred's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 1,635
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by glenngineer View Post
Take Jones and you have one of your needs met in getting a second pairing guy to play with Klein AND Jones gets to learn from one of the best in Weber. We still may not score but we won't be giving up much either. We'd basically have two pairs of defense that we could roll close to 25 minutes a night apiece and talk about protected minutes for your third pairing. The other thing is, you'd always have the right to move Jones at a later time if you want and maybe even land more in a package for him then on draft day.
If drouin, barkov and Mack are all gone at four, we deal the pick and move down and take nichushkin. Some team will overpay to get jones at four. No way do we draft jones, we won't win a cup with him. We had suter, and never made it past second round due to scoring, we need barkov, drouin, Mack c or nichushkin, plain and simple.

Also,
Anyone suggesting josi is dealt must be high, preds won't deal him at all, would MUCH rather take barkov or Nichushkin then lose josi and get mackinnon. Thanks but no thanks. Josi is young and already elite.

maplepred is offline  
Old
05-31-2013, 11:22 AM
  #373
AtlantaWhaler
Moderator
Thrash/Preds/Sabres
 
AtlantaWhaler's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Country: United States
Posts: 11,448
vCash: 500
I'll gladly take Jones and (possibly) have one of the best top-4's in the league for a very long time.

AtlantaWhaler is offline  
Old
05-31-2013, 11:54 AM
  #374
Soundgarden
Registered User
 
Soundgarden's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Spring Hill, TN
Country: United States
Posts: 6,249
vCash: 562
I'm perfectly fine with taking Jones, or trading for Nich + 2nd/roster defenseman.

To me this season has been an anomaly. Tons of injuries, late start, etc. not that I'm making up excuses, but I think we totally lucked out with a top 4 pick. As long as we use it wisely I'm fine with it. We are already being very proactive this off-season, so if next year is anything like this one, then we're in a small rebuild.

Sorry, I'm rambling. Use the free top 5 pick, be proactive this off-season, good camp, start fresh next season.

Soundgarden is offline  
Old
05-31-2013, 12:16 PM
  #375
Byrddog
Registered User
 
Byrddog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 1,750
vCash: 500
http://www.hockeywilderness.com/2013...ksander-barkov

http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/story/?id=421577


Last edited by Byrddog: 05-31-2013 at 12:29 PM.
Byrddog is offline  
Closed Thread

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:21 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.