ya i suggest letting them have the 2nd this year. It is not guaranteed that we win the division next season.
I agree, I think it will be a dogfight to win the division next season, but even if we finish 6th in the conference or something(we were 6th points-wise this season) our pick could be something like #18-19, which wouldn't be a big difference. It's not that important to me either way, it just might not matter that much and that prospect would be a year closer.
Quote:
Depending on where we finish do you think tallon will trade the first for 2 seconds? It might be a wise strategy.
In a stronger draft that wouldn't be a bad idea, although I don't think we could even get two 2nds, unless they are very low 2nds. Typically that kind of trade is a 1st for a 2nd+3rd. But I think we should draft where we end up and not move back, we are going to get a solid prospect, but if we move back several spots the certainty really drops, IMO.
Quote:
Originally Posted by J17 Vs Proclamation
Koekkoek, Maatta, Finn, Lindholm, Bystrom, or Thrower are certainly intriguing prospects. Koekkoek would likely be higher if it wasn't for injury, and i'd be all aboard selecting him. Maatta im ok with there, i think he'll be a solid #3 one day so it's good value, even if it isn't sexy. I know Finn has been ranked high, but im somewhat clueless about him. Lindholm apparently had a very very good Kvalserien for Rogle. His U-18 tournament may hold the key to where he is drafted. Potentially he goes higher than we draft, potentially he goes lower. Interesting option i think. Thrower would be a good 2nd round selection, but his size would be somewhat of a concern considering the game he plays.
Finn has good size, is a good skater, plays gritty and physical, solid in his own end, has pretty good offensive upside. He performed well as the PPQB for Guelph this season. He's good at carrying the puck up ice. He's not Brian Campbell or anything, but he's a decent puckcarrier. Good vision, good passer. Just an overall solid d-man with little bust risk.
I like what I've been hearing about Lindholm. Yeah, seems like a guy who might go before we pick depending on the U-18's, but you could say that for a few of these guys. But one or two of them will be available. Bystrom is a real solid D.
I don't think size is a concern with Thrower with the game he plays, and based on recent rankings, I think he'll go late 1st. He won't punish guys all over the ice in the NHL, but he could be a pesky thorn in a lot of forwards' sides. Thrower is tough as nails, and seems like the kind of guy who will establish his reputation quickly in the NHL, rather than a guy who will fade away and become a softer player. He has that 'no way I'm backing down from anyone' attitude that Parise, Richards, Tootoo, and other smaller players have. And he's not small. He seems like the kind of guy who will make it to the NHL more likely than not, based on his attitude and good all-around play. The guy is more than just a little ball of hate, he's got nice offensive upside too. There aren't going to be many d-men eligible for the draft this year with better offensive numbers than him. When I see him play, I think Stephane Robidas. Smaller than average d-man, plays a sandpaper style, good offensively.
Quote:
Pokka i wouldn't touch in the 1st. Nice prospect with some interesting tools, but needs to improve his mobility and decision making. 2nd round i'd have some interest.
I saw him briefly during the WJC, he looked very solid, but admittedly I didn't get a long look at him.
Quote:
Next year does look much superior in regards to Forwards. The WHL looks loaded, there is a good OHL crop and a very interesting QMJHL crop (Players like Sorensen ranked in the 15's) whilst Sweden and Finland have very very good Forwards for next year. Not that Russia is NHL draft orientated, but i've heard several times the 95's are their best age group in a long long time. Overall, a sexy looking draft. Of course 2012 looked so, and here we are, a little underwhelmed.
True, but there were already some concerns with the North American forwards going into this year, whereas those concerns don't exist with 2013. It's hard to see this forward crop not being a good one. If it turns into anything like 2012, I'll eat my hat.
Finn has good size, is a good skater, plays gritty and physical, solid in his own end, has pretty good offensive upside. He performed well as the PPQB for Guelph this season. He's good at carrying the puck up ice. He's not Brian Campbell or anything, but he's a decent puckcarrier. Good vision, good passer. Just an overall solid d-man with little bust risk.
Sounds like a solid selection for our range, though im aware Finn has been ranked higher than we select too.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Markstrom Rules
I like what I've been hearing about Lindholm. Yeah, seems like a guy who might go before we pick depending on the U-18's, but you could say that for a few of these guys. But one or two of them will be available. Bystrom is a real solid D.
Cetainly Lindholm and Bystrom will be two of the most interesting prospects to watch at the U-18's. Brodin/Klefbom were perhaps consistently ranked a little higher throughout the season, but they saw late rises and the same it certainly possible with these two.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Markstrom Rules
I don't think size is a concern with Thrower with the game he plays, and based on recent rankings, I think he'll go late 1st. He won't punish guys all over the ice in the NHL, but he could be a pesky thorn in a lot of forwards' sides. Thrower is tough as nails, and seems like the kind of guy who will establish his reputation quickly in the NHL, rather than a guy who will fade away and become a softer player. He has that 'no way I'm backing down from anyone' attitude that Parise, Richards, Tootoo, and other smaller players have. And he's not small. He seems like the kind of guy who will make it to the NHL more likely than not, based on his attitude and good all-around play. The guy is more than just a little ball of hate, he's got nice offensive upside too. There aren't going to be many d-men eligible for the draft this year with better offensive numbers than him. When I see him play, I think Stephane Robidas. Smaller than average d-man, plays a sandpaper style, good offensively.
I haven't really seen anything of Thrower so i'll take your word on it. Simply citing all the data/information i have read from various reliable sources.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Markstrom Rules
I saw him briefly during the WJC, he looked very solid, but admittedly I didn't get a long look at him.
He's an interesting project, but i wouldn't gamble on him that high. He certainly does have some tools that equate to being an NHL player.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Markstrom Rules
True, but there were already some concerns with the North American forwards going into this year, whereas those concerns don't exist with 2013. It's hard to see this forward crop not being a good one. If it turns into anything like 2012, I'll eat my hat.
It was never percieved to be a high end North American forward crop, but there have been notable forwards who have bombed.
Next year does look sick. In the WHL you have Lazar, Shinkaurak amongst others, the OHL we have Monaham, Domi and many others, the QMJHL you obviously have Mackinnon, Duclair, Erne, Sorensen amongst others. Sweden has Wallmark, Lindholm (Might be better than Forsberg this year), Finland has Barkov, Ikonen and Russia has Tolchinsky, Nichuskin amongst others. Some will fall, but it's an astonishing age group for Forwards IMO.
do we really need more defensemen? We already have a log jam even without robak and petrovic.
We have a logjam of forwards too, with four top prospects waiting in the wings. It's not about today though, it's about a few years down the line. We could lose Garrison this summer, so I do think unless Garrison is re-signed by the draft that we could use another quality defense prospect. After Petrovic and Robak, we only have Bengtsson, Racine, and Wittchow as D prospects with any realistic shot of making it, and Racine and Wittchow are longshots themselves. Our D prospects aren't that great. And we don't know how Petrovic and Robak will turn out, either.
I think we should take the best skater available. That may very well be a d-man because that's just the nature of this draft. You can't draft for need at #23-25. I think we also have a need for D too like I said.
If we don't make the conference finals, then the lowest we will pick is #25. Division winners come next at the bottom of the draft order after the conference finalists. I'm thinking that we will draft #24 if not higher, I gotta think that at least one non-division winner will reach the conference finals. Actually, I think Pittsburgh will win the Cup.
All the mock drafts (including the ones on NHL.com) have us picking 17th...is this just because they haven't reseeded yet and won't until after the playoffs?
We have a logjam of forwards too, with four top prospects waiting in the wings. It's not about today though, it's about a few years down the line. We could lose Garrison this summer, so I do think unless Garrison is re-signed by the draft that we could use another quality defense prospect. After Petrovic and Robak, we only have Bengtsson, Racine, and Wittchow as D prospects with any realistic shot of making it, and Racine and Wittchow are longshots themselves. Our D prospects aren't that great. And we don't know how Petrovic and Robak will turn out, either.
I think we should take the best skater available. That may very well be a d-man because that's just the nature of this draft. You can't draft for need at #23-25. I think we also have a need for D too like I said.
Out of curiosity is the fact that we have more depth at center (was just looking at the depth charts on THN) of any relevance? Or is it more along the lines of drafting a forward regardless of position at the draft and put him where the need is greatest?
Quote:
Originally Posted by CaptainScrewy
All the mock drafts (including the ones on NHL.com) have us picking 17th...is this just because they haven't reseeded yet and won't until after the playoffs?
As I understand it the draft positions don't change until the conference finals. Though if I'm wrong someone please do correct me.
Out of curiosity is the fact that we have more depth at center (was just looking at the depth charts on THN) of any relevance? Or is it more along the lines of drafting a forward regardless of position at the draft and put him where the need is greatest?
I dont put much stock into positions listed. I mean on HF both Connor Brickley & Kyle Rau are listed as centers and neither of them play that position currently (Brickley hasnt played it in 2 seasons at Vermont). Many times players are moved to the wing because they just dont have what it takes to play center in the pros. So yes I'd say take a forward regardless of position and then move him if he isnt going to be best utilized at center. It never hurts to have someone play wing who can also take faceoffs.
But I agree with others and have been saying it for a while, this is a draft that you dont reach for a forward with where we're going to pick. The best value is most likely going to be in selecting a d-man. And I am expecting Ellerby to get traded this summer so we'll need to keep restocking the pantry on defense.
All the mock drafts (including the ones on NHL.com) have us picking 17th...is this just because they haven't reseeded yet and won't until after the playoffs?
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheMightyPanther85
As I understand it the draft positions don't change until the conference finals. Though if I'm wrong someone please do correct me.
Yeah, they don't know who the conference finalists will be yet so they can't make a draft order.
I dont put much stock into positions listed. I mean on HF both Connor Brickley & Kyle Rau are listed as centers and neither of them play that position currently (Brickley hasnt played it in 2 seasons at Vermont). Many times players are moved to the wing because they just dont have what it takes to play center in the pros. So yes I'd say take a forward regardless of position and then move him if he isnt going to be best utilized at center. It never hurts to have someone play wing who can also take faceoffs.
But I agree with others and have been saying it for a while, this is a draft that you dont reach for a forward with where we're going to pick. The best value is most likely going to be in selecting a d-man. And I am expecting Ellerby to get traded this summer so we'll need to keep restocking the pantry on defense.
Yeah, I agree. You take the BPA, that's how great organizations do it. When you have two players of equal strength, then you can pick for need. Some centers switch to wing in the NHL and some wingers end up as centers. Sometimes it's just as simple as there's no room at a particular position on the NHL roster. Take the BPA, the rest tends to sort itself out.
Not sure yet, since we won the Division. Some are saying we will draft later because of it. We'll see.
Draft Order
The 14 teams that missed the playoffs during the previous NHL season hold the first 14 picks. They draft in order of fewest points to most points, subject to the results of the draft lottery.
The current Stanley Cup champion picks last (30th).
The Stanley Cup runner-up picks 29th.
The other two Conference Finalists pick 28th and 27th.
Regular-season division winners hold the other lowest positions.
Remaining teams draft in order of fewest points to most points from the previous regular season.
So our hope is in that as many as possible non Division winners make the Conference Finals.
The highest we could pick would be 21st. That would happen if:
- Rangers lose
- Blues lose
- Yotes lose
- Winner of Devils/Flyers doesn't matter, they didn't win their division and the one that doesn't make the Conference Finals will pick before us
And the lowest we could pick would be 24th.
So we'll pick 21st, 22nd, 23rd or 24th. One of the four will happen.
edit: Forgot Vancouver from the original count, one place up.
That's semi-ridiculous. I guess that's the price we pay for getting a free high seed in the playoffs. Still seems like it should go reverse record of teams getting eliminated in each round.
I don't get why that matters. Shouldn't them advancing further than us be enough?
Quote:
Originally Posted by AwesomePanthers
Not sure yet, since we won the Division. Some are saying we will draft later because of it. We'll see.
haha oops I forgot to factor in the clinched division and the fact that Washington has made it further than us in the playoffs and therefore gets the lower pick....guess it was wishful thinking on my part.
But even then, as I understand it, it's all done in groupings using the point system from the league standings. You have the top 14 which are your non-playoff teams then you have picks 15-22 which are your teams that were eliminated in the first round and teams eliminated in the second round would have 23-26 and so on and so forth.
Now there were 3 division champions that didn't make past the first round, Florida, Boston, and Vancouver (though with the Nucks clinching the Presidents trophy I'm not sure how that affects their position). Because of that they'll get the lower picks so the rankings should go as follows:
Otherwise this is the correct order, but we can't pick 20th. Devils or Flyers are doomed to lose, and since they didn't win their division- whichever loses will pick before us. 21st is the highest we can pick if all the division winners that are currently left lose at round 2.
how would u guys feel on taking a flyer with maybe a 4th-6th round pick on gudbransons little brother alex? hes ranked 161 of NA skaters. I personally think that would be amazing! he might not be as good as eric, but I think it would be a great thing to do by tallon! making eric feel that he really is our number one guy moving forward, and that the organization really wants him here for his career!
Funny you mention that because i wanted tallon to take nicolas shore in 4th round in the 2012 draft.. would've been pretty cool but he took logan shaw instead... i think this year there is another shore coming up but they are not related.. (devin shore)
Thing is there are a variety of factors in a decision like that.. I'll leave it to the scouts/tallon & co. to see whats the better choice when the rounds come but It would be pretty sweet to have the brothers banging around the boards for us for sure.. but again that might be a distraction.. look at the staal brothers for example..
the concussion issue that marc stall received from his brother was kind of a "stalling" point for eric staal and his season with the hurricanes.. and carolina acquired jared staal from the coyotes and he still has not shown the ability to step onto NHL ice with his brother.. no less with any team..
It would be nice but hard to say without heavy scouting and understanding of the team's prospect pool's needs and development..
I rather focus on getting something of value.. like maybe shooting for a offensive project player so we can finally generate some offense and creativity in our prospect pool (even tho its looking freaking great!)
I honestly think we should take a long term project - PMD - Offensive minded D-man in the draft.. schmaltz, pouliot or skjei... i would love to have collberg, girgensons or aberg if it drops.. but our pools looks pretty good.. would love to take frk, tanner richard, maybe maidens or another offensive minded forward in the 2nd round. Anton Slepyshev looks like the true sniper in he 2nd round but with his russian background it might be hard to take him seriously unfortunately...
the more i look at this draft the more i see there are some sleepers but it's really a more defensive minded draft for both forwards and d-men.. after the first round the offensive potential looks a bit lacking..
While it's kinda cool, drafting a sibling to the same team, it isn't necessary the best move for the team. I remain to the fact that you draft the best player available at that point, brother or not.
The highest we could pick would be 21st. That would happen if:
- Rangers lose
- Blues lose
- Yotes lose
- Winner of Devils/Flyers doesn't matter, they didn't win their division and the one that doesn't make the Conference Finals will pick before us
And the lowest we could pick would be 24th.
So we'll pick 21st, 22nd, 23rd or 24th. One of the four will happen.
edit: Forgot Vancouver from the original count, one place up.
Actually it could be has high as 20th, if Devils lose this round and decide to forfeit their pick this year (because of Kovy contact).
