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

2012 NHL Entry Draft

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
02-01-2012, 11:10 PM
  #126
DesertDawg
Registered User
 
DesertDawg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Superstition Mts
Posts: 5,128
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by hbk View Post
Honestly I don't know if it's worth the hassle of moving Whitney for anything less than a 1st. If it's just a late second coming our way I'd rather we just give him a 2 year extension now.
I probably should have clarified that the upgrade would be a 1st. I don't think a team would offer a 1st for just a Whitney rental and the Coyotes don't need multiple 2nds, but if they can get a 1st for Doan and still move up with another 1st

Quote:
Rozsival gets at least a 2nd. He's a steady presence on the blueline if nothing else. If he didn't have the cap hit he'd have a lot of interest.
It would give Maloney a lot of options at the draft with another 2nd
Quote:
Doan would command an A Prospect + 1st type package. Maybe more. If Phoenix is staying at least another year he'll get an extension.
this may not play out before the trade deadline, Maloney wouldn't want the 1st to be an optional pick

ideally, 3 1sts & 3 2nds in a deep draft, maybe wishful thinking

DesertDawg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-01-2012, 11:48 PM
  #127
hbk
HFBoards Sponsor
 
hbk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,460
vCash: 500
Just finished watching the Top Prospects game. BPA may very well be a D. Some very good options may be available.

Pouliot was the top guy on the night. Puck skill was evident. He would be a redundant asset on our squad though.

Reinheart had a goal but he is a physically imposing presence. He's the epitome of a huge shutdown presence. When he takes you to the boards you stay there. Just a huge huge man. I know he had a goal but don't expect offense from this guy.

Was not overwhelmed by Murray. I've seen him play much much better. Far cry from the U-18's last year where he was absolutely dominant. This was a very poor performance in comparison. If you are a puck rushing d man than be a puck rushing d man. Don't pretend you are the second coming of Larry Robinson. That's not your game.

Dumba had a great open ice hit. That being said if you think he's the next Scott Stevens he's in your top 5. If you think he's Bryan Marchment then you have him later. He's only 6 feet so I don't see him being able to do that consistently at the NHL level without having injury issues.

I liked some of what I saw out of Grigorenko. Great poise with the puck in the offensive zone. Still coming back from injury though. He showed promise but any time you are talking about a top 3 pick you expect much much more.

Sissons reminded me somewhat of Langkow. Good two way game. I actually liked him beter than Gaunce last night.

Sutter looked like a typical gritty Sutter. Someone will grab him in the 2nd round.


Last edited by hbk: 02-02-2012 at 10:31 AM.
hbk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-02-2012, 10:23 AM
  #128
hbk
HFBoards Sponsor
 
hbk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,460
vCash: 500
Just a thought on Whitney.

One of the rumored teams (thus far) is Nashville.

Nashville isn't overwhelming with offensive prospects but I wouldn't be opposed to packaging up Labarbara and Whitney for something built around their backup Lindback. Lindback is highly regarded and would solidify our current goaltending situation and provide some insurance if Visentin or Dominingue or Lee run into some hurdles along the way.


Last edited by hbk: 02-02-2012 at 09:09 PM.
hbk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-02-2012, 11:03 AM
  #129
PhoPhan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 13,252
vCash: 500
Interesting thought. If any of Lee, Domingue or Visentin turns out well, it's still some years off. Lindback is probably ready to take the reins in the next year or two, and Smith has only a year left on his deal. And we all know Maloney likes to throw as much as he can at the wall and see what sticks.

PhoPhan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-02-2012, 11:26 AM
  #130
rt
Usually Incorrect
 
rt's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Rarely Sober
Country: United States
Posts: 45,170
vCash: 500
I can't really figure a proper over/under. Not sure what we are betting on. My end of season point total would be dependant on our total over the next eleven. If we only gather 50ish percent in the next eleven, I would guess we will sell. If we sell Whitney, Doan, and Aucoin, I would guess we will close out with 35ish in the following 20

__________________
This poster should not be taken seriously under any circumstances.
rt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-02-2012, 11:46 AM
  #131
PhoPhan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 13,252
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by rt View Post
I can't really figure a proper over/under. Not sure what we are betting on. My end of season point total would be dependant on our total over the next eleven. If we only gather 50ish percent in the next eleven, I would guess we will sell. If we sell Whitney, Doan, and Aucoin, I would guess we will close out with 35ish in the following 20
Let's revisit in a couple weeks, then.

PhoPhan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-02-2012, 03:39 PM
  #132
Gwyddbwyll
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Country: United Kingdom
Posts: 10,630
vCash: 500
The crop of forwards doesnt seem that impressive to me, top heavy with the 2 at the top. 2012 seems to be like 2008 when Stamkos and Filatov were ranked with 4 defensemen (Doughty, Pietrangelo, Bogosian, Schenn) and Myers, Karlsson, Carlson, Del Zotto, Sbisa were in that 1st round. Boedker was the 4th highest forward taken and has been fairly mediocre (and he's a favorite of mine).

Just seems that the Coyotes have been somewhat unlucky that they've had to take defensemen in drafts that were full of forward talents (Ekman-Larsson, Gormley, C.Murphy). Circumstances have always worked against them.. every time they have 2 first rounders, its the worst draft class in years and when they dont have a first rounder, its the best draft class for a generation.

Gwyddbwyll is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-02-2012, 09:01 PM
  #133
crazyhockeylover96
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Country: United States
Posts: 281
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by hbk View Post
Just a thought on Whitney.

One of the umored teams (thus far) is Nashville.

Nashville isn't overwhelming with offensive prospects but I wouldn't be opposed to packaging up Labarbara and Whitney for something built around their backup Lindback. Lindback is highly regarded and would solidify our current goaltending situation and provide some insurance if Visentin or Dominingue or Lee run into some hurdles along the way.
I would jump at this. I love Lindback's size and mobility. I would think Burke would be drooling too.

crazyhockeylover96 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-04-2012, 03:46 PM
  #134
lanky
Registered User
 
lanky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Winnipeg
Posts: 1,128
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by rt View Post
If you look at the eight teams currently ahead of us, and project their current pace, they will end up...

1. CBJ - 53pts
2. EDM - 70pts
3. CAR - 71pts
4. ANA - 75pts
5. MTL - 77pts
6. BUF - 77pts
7. NYI - 78pts
8. TBL - 80pts

Our 77pts would put us right in the mix for lotto.
Since we're probably looking to draft our future #1 Center we should be willing to pay the price to get the right guy. I like the assortment of Centers that would be available to us in the 6 to 10 range. Faksa/Gaunce/Girgensons/Hertl are all hard working two way players but they aren't good bets to be #1 Centers. Galchenyuk is a good bet. He's more skilled and dynamic. He's also not going to fall past the 4 or 5 spot. I'm hoping Maloney is ready and willing to trade up a few spots to get ahead of teams like Montreal, Buffalo and Anaheim that would have interest in him. I'm not so worried about TB, NYI or Edm as they each have a couple excellent young Centers already.

lanky is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-04-2012, 04:10 PM
  #135
zz
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 5,715
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by lanky View Post
Since we're probably looking to draft our future #1 Center we should be willing to pay the price to get the right guy.


2007 all over again.

zz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-04-2012, 07:18 PM
  #136
RemoAZ
Stugots
 
RemoAZ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Glendale, AZ
Country: United States
Posts: 2,585
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by zz View Post


2007 all over again.

How do the guys slotted for the first few spots compare to Tavares when he was drafted?

RemoAZ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-04-2012, 11:44 PM
  #137
rt
Usually Incorrect
 
rt's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Rarely Sober
Country: United States
Posts: 45,170
vCash: 500
I swear, I'd pick Galchenyuk with the third pick. Hell, I'd be tempted to take him at 2nd, over Yakupov. We need a first line center. I think both Grigorenko and Galchenyuk will be number one centers. Yakupov will be a high flying, balls to the wall, hard nosed, dynamic, goal scoring winger. A small one. There aren't many of those. He could be one of the few, no doubt. He's an amazing talent. I'd really lean toward picking a center, though.

rt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-04-2012, 11:53 PM
  #138
rt
Usually Incorrect
 
rt's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Rarely Sober
Country: United States
Posts: 45,170
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by RemoAZ View Post
How do the guys slotted for the first few spots compare to Tavares when he was drafted?
Yakupov is like a much, much smaller version of Ovechkin. Or maybe like a cross between Brad Marchand and Phil Kessel.

rt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-04-2012, 11:58 PM
  #139
hbk
HFBoards Sponsor
 
hbk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,460
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by rt View Post
I swear, I'd pick Galchenyuk with the third pick. Hell, I'd be tempted to take him at 2nd, over Yakupov. We need a first line center. I think both Grigorenko and Galchenyuk will be number one centers. Yakupov will be a high flying, balls to the wall, hard nosed, dynamic, goal scoring winger. A small one. There aren't many of those. He could be one of the few, no doubt. He's an amazing talent. I'd really lean toward picking a center, though.
Bill Torrey school of building a team is to build the forward group around a strong center. Good centers can be successful with mediocre wingers. Mediocre centers can make your star winger look very mediocre. It's the Ovechkin/Malkin debate and Torrey is the one who trained Maloney.

hbk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-08-2012, 10:24 AM
  #140
hbk
HFBoards Sponsor
 
hbk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,460
vCash: 500
After watching Bob McKenzie's mid-term draft special last night I'm less and less enthralled with finishing in a lottery position.

hbk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-08-2012, 02:56 PM
  #141
Sindiggy
Go Desert Dogs
 
Sindiggy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Chandler, AZ
Country: United States
Posts: 3,551
vCash: 500
After watching the jr all-star game, I'm tending to believe the non-hype about this draft and put it just a shade above the 2007 draft.

However, I'd still like to roll the dice and see if we can't move up to select Galchenyuk if he doesn't go in the top 5.

If not, then give me Girgensons, Collberg, Hertl, Gaunce, Aberg, Faksa in that order...not a big believer in Faksa.

Sindiggy is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
02-08-2012, 03:00 PM
  #142
rt
Usually Incorrect
 
rt's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Rarely Sober
Country: United States
Posts: 45,170
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by hbk View Post
After watching Bob McKenzie's mid-term draft special last night I'm less and less enthralled with finishing in a lottery position.
I actually find it refreshing that the media and arm chair scouts are learning to be more realistic in their projections and are using less and less hyperbole. I'm sick of every skinny center with a good wrist shot being the next Joe Sakic.

Anyway, there are some pretty interesting D on the list. Especially Trouba. Still, we had better not pick a D. We just can't. I don't care if Dumba shoots right. We CAN'T go there.

Forwards in McKenzie's top 30:

1. Yakupov(1)
2. Grigorenko(2)
3. Forsberg(4)
4. Galchenyuk(7)
5. Faksa(10)
6. Girgensons(11)
7. Gaunce(13)
8. Collberg(16)
9. Aberg(19)
10.Wilson(20)
11.Hertl(23)
12.Frk(24)
13.Matteau(25)
14.Pearson(26)
15.DiGuiseppe(27)
16.Teravainen(28)
17.Sissons(30)

rt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-08-2012, 03:05 PM
  #143
PhoPhan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 13,252
vCash: 500
Depending on where the Coyotes end up picking, the defensive heaviness of this draft could be a good thing. Better for everyone else to take a run on defense if the Coyotes want a forward.

That said, while this isn't the 2003 draft, I like most of the forwards available, which is a rare thing indeed. Of those top 17 guys, I'd be satisfied taking any but three or four of them in the first round. Hockey Prospectus has been talking up Teravainen a lot lately, and I'm starting to buy it.

PhoPhan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-08-2012, 03:11 PM
  #144
hbk
HFBoards Sponsor
 
hbk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,460
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by rt View Post
I actually find it refreshing that the media and arm chair scouts are learning to be more realistic in their projections and are using less and less hyperbole. I'm sick of every skinny center with a good wrist shot being the next Joe Sakic.

Anyway, there are some pretty interesting D on the list. Especially Trouba. Still, we had better not pick a D. We just can't. I don't care if Dumba shoots right. We CAN'T go there.

Forwards in McKenzie's top 30:

1. Yakupov(1)
2. Grigorenko(2)
3. Forsberg(4)
4. Galchenyuk(7)
5. Faksa(10)
6. Girgensons(11)
7. Gaunce(13)
8. Collberg(16)
9. Aberg(19)
10.Wilson(20)
11.Hertl(23)
12.Frk(24)
13.Matteau(25)
14.Pearson(26)
15.DiGuiseppe(27)
16.Teravainen(28)
17.Sissons(30)
I love the draft. Love it. It is my Xmas. I book the day off of work a year in advance. That's how strongly I love the draft.

We can't take a D. I'm in complete agreement. I always say to never take a G in the first round either... and then I start buying into the hype on the guys rated in the first round (Valivski and Subban) with the thought that if the draft is truly that questionable then maybe further solidifying that position isn't a bad way to go (it's already starting to happen) compared to the thought of adding a potential 5th or 6th D man.

That leaves a fairly small and uncertain forward group. A limited number of options with injury issues and questionable upside after you get past the fourth or fifth forward. I think it's great to be honest. There is value in this draft just like there is value in every draft. This is where I hope Maloney hired the right guy to head up his scouting department. Win at the draft and it translates to long-term success.

If we end up in that 10-15 range there are a number of ways we can go. Use some of our other draft picks to move up to take Galchenyuk (need to get into that 4th - 6th spot IMO to ensure this happens). After that I'm looking optimistically (suspiciously at Forsberg and Faksa) and whether or not we should move up to snag one of these guys. After those names though and assuming we can't move up I'm not sure if we shouldn't look at dropping back a spot or two ourselves and adding yet another 2nd round pick. Lots of hockey to be played and the names on the list are going to move significantly IMO as scouts get better reads on some of these players. I'm excited at the possibilities. Let the debate begin.

hbk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-08-2012, 03:17 PM
  #145
PhoPhan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 13,252
vCash: 500
Talking about the draft now is such a tease. We have no idea where the Coyotes will be picking, and we have no idea how these rankings will change. And they will change.

PhoPhan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-08-2012, 03:25 PM
  #146
hbk
HFBoards Sponsor
 
hbk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,460
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by PhoPhan View Post
Depending on where the Coyotes end up picking, the defensive heaviness of this draft could be a good thing. Better for everyone else to take a run on defense if the Coyotes want a forward.

That said, while this isn't the 2003 draft, I like most of the forwards available, which is a rare thing indeed. Of those top 17 guys, I'd be satisfied taking any but three or four of them in the first round. Hockey Prospectus has been talking up Teravainen a lot lately, and I'm starting to buy it.
If we use the 2010 draft as a sign for things to come we may see a scenario where teams jump on forwards early rather than go for the more highly regarded D prospect (ie how we ended up with Gormely). Approximately 20 of the 45 names mentioned by McKenzie are D so the forward concerns extend well beyond the first round and the thought process by GM's may be to forego a D in the first round because there will likely be one you like who's there in the 2nd round. Couple that with the legitimate concerns regarding the length of time it takes D and G to develop into NHL'ers and the corresponding limited time in which those players will be legitimate NHL assets before you risk losing them to UFA status.

Of course what's the one common thread amongst playoff team wish lists right now? Depth on Defense.....

hbk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-08-2012, 03:27 PM
  #147
hbk
HFBoards Sponsor
 
hbk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,460
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by PhoPhan View Post
Talking about the draft now is such a tease. We have no idea where the Coyotes will be picking, and we have no idea how these rankings will change. And they will change.
There's a reason strip clubs are popular lol.

hbk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-08-2012, 06:00 PM
  #148
rt
Usually Incorrect
 
rt's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Rarely Sober
Country: United States
Posts: 45,170
vCash: 500
I don't get the Forsberg hype. He was invisible at the WJCs. Collberg looked great. Why didnt the bigger, more physically mature player? OEL was criticized for playing for Leksand in the Allsvenskan. Forsberg is not. OEL had 17pts in 39gms in his draft yr. He had 8pts in 6gms in his draft yr u18s. Forsberg has 14pts in 36gms for Leksand and had 5pts in 5gms in the u18s. OEL is a D and Forsberg is a W. Why was OEL so much more productive?

Faksa looked like **** compared to Hertl at the u20s. Faksa is having a good yr in the o. Hertl is having a great yr in the top Czech men's league.

I know you shouldn't base an opinion on one tournament and I know you shouldn't go exclusively on stats. But when you can take both into consideration, I feel like its enough to at least give you a little bit to be skeptical about.

rt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-08-2012, 06:04 PM
  #149
hbk
HFBoards Sponsor
 
hbk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,460
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by rt View Post
I don't get the Forsberg hype. He was invisible at the WJCs. Collberg looked great. Why didnt the bigger, more physically mature player? OEL was criticized for playing for Leksand in the Allsvenskan. Forsberg is not. OEL had 17pts in 39gms in his draft yr. He had 8pts in 6gms in his draft yr u18s. Forsberg has 14pts in 36gms for Leksand and had 5pts in 5gms in the u18s. OEL is a D and Forsberg is a W. Why was OEL so much more productive?

Faksa looked like **** compared to Hertl at the u20s. Faksa is having a good yr in the o. Hertl is having a great yr in the top Czech men's league.

I know you shouldn't base an opinion on one tournament and I know you shouldn't go exclusively on stats. But when you can take both into consideration, I feel like its enough to at least give you a little bit to be skeptical about.
I believe OEL had a breakout performance at a year-end tournament on the world stage (can't remember if it was the U-18's or not). I think that's where you started to see the comments appearing from Sens GM Bryan Murray about another (other than Hedman) Swedish d man who could be the best d-man available. That tournament is going to drive a lot of the movement in the final set of rankings.

hbk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-08-2012, 06:20 PM
  #150
Sindiggy
Go Desert Dogs
 
Sindiggy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Chandler, AZ
Country: United States
Posts: 3,551
vCash: 500
I'm just hoping that our new director of scouting can find some gems in the later rounds.

I give credit to Keith for selecting OEL where he did, but Gormley fell into his lap and our other crop of 1st rounders haven't been especially great i.e. MacLean/Tikhonov/Ross, etc...

For the model to work in Phoenix, the team has to draft well so the kids are outperforming their ELC's, so we can stay near the floor. I am excited (if the team stays) to see Yandle/OEL/Gormley/Rundblad/Summers/Murphy all on the back end.

The only thing missing on the back-end is the big nasty dman...btw, does anyone know if Stone is having a good year in Portland. I haven't been able to catch any of their games this year, but his stats don't look half bad for a 2nd year pro.

Sindiggy 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 06:57 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2015 All Rights Reserved.