If Grigs or Gally are available at 4 when we pick, any chance that Burke is willing to overpay? He has been very aggressive targeting the players he wants and with their need for a #1 C, it could be a deal worth making for them.
get #4 overall (maybe throw in our 3rd rounder?)
get #5 overall and #35 overall.
Worth it?
That would give the Islanders back to back picks in the early second round, allowing them to move back into the late first round.
I see where you are going with this and I think you are on the money with value, but I'd rather have Galchenyuk or Grigorenko. Give me fewer, better players, than more, but lesser players.
Are there any defenseman that could be NHL ready?
My take is we as fans are done with this "rebuild". By taking a D that needs a year or 2 to develop in the minors is great, but they need help NOW!!! I think they need to take someone that can step into the lineup next season and make a difference.
Of the top tier of defensemen, Murray and Ceci are thought to be close to NHL-ready, maybe Reinhart too.
It kind of makes me chuckle when people nitpick over this. But the truth is, Russians are a different breed. Generally, they're very talented hockey players. Their training is different, and a this stage of the game, they're brought up by parents who grow up under the iron fist of communism. If anyone thinks that doesn't mean anything, that's just plain ignorant.
There is a severe culture change when a Russian comes to North America. First of all, they have to learn the North American game. That is quite widely known. The Russians are trained to be great skaters and have great puck skills, which very seldom results in proper use of their teammates. Alexei Kovalev just might be the most skilled hockey player that I've ever seen, but it doesn't mean he was the best, and I think a lot of people confuse best skill for being the best player quite often.
It's very important that, to understand what makes a hockey player in reality is not the same as what makes a good hockey player in a video game. I see "BPA" alot, which makes me cringe for two reasons: 1) I hate acronyms that aren't natural acronyms 2) "Best player available" can be, and usually is, quite subjective. Teams build a culture and will select their player based on the player's ability to fit into that culture and be a good hockey player. The Islanders once had a great affinity for the WHL, which is part of the reason why I think that they would have selected Scott Scissons over Jaromir Jagr anyway. There was also thought that Jagr was going to be difficult to bring to North America. In the 2010-11 season when the wheels fell off towards the end of October, a lot of fans were talking about #1 over all by Christmas, and I was intrigued by Gabriel Landeskog, while one of the narcissistic sons of *****es on IslanderMania was saying in his typical condescending fashion, "No, you go with the BPA." - I retorted, "According to what some are saying, Landeskog might be the best in the draft." - Then he replies, "No, it's Sean Coutorier and it isn't even close." - Now that is arrogant, because he's arguing from a false pretense, and after seeing both of them play, at this point, it's clear to me that Landeskog is better.
But getting back to Russians, they're skilled, but they struggle when in a position to lead a team. Pavel Datsyuk, for as great as he is, when Niklas Lidstrom goes down, as he did his year, the team struggled. To Evgeni Malkin's credit, he stepped up this year while Crosby was out, but last year was different.
In this day of media saturation, where information is available anywhere you go, it's important to remember one simple rule, "Don't believe anything you hear, and only half of what you see."
Also, consider syllogisms: A lot of the responses I get from people are inductive. More often than not, what I offer is deductive, and the only time that I won't be deductive is when I'm in my car and doing this on my phone, or when I'm pressed for time. For instance, when I point to Russians who have not led a team to a Stanley Cup, I'll rattle off the names like Ovechkin, Kovalchuk, and Bure (who was one of my favorite players ever to watch), but for all of their skill, speed, and scoring ability, were never able to lead their team to a Stanley Cup. They're greatly skilled, but in all cases, it was "get the puck and go" - None of them ever made great use of their linemates, which is part of being a great hockey player and part of what it takes to win a Stanley Cup. One wisenheimer said to me, "I don't care if John Tavares gets 0 goals and 0 assists, if Yakupov scores 100 goals and leads us to a Stanley Cup, that's all that's important." - Well, the problem is that none of that has ever happened. There has never been a single player who has led his team to a Stanley Cup based on his skills, and no one has ever scored more than 92 goals in a season. Steven Stamkos scored 60 this past season, and he was still 32 short. Hockey is the consummate team game. And when you have a guy like John Tavares who makes terrific use of his teammates, and you take that away from him because Nail Yakupov has the puck all the time now, you've just done your team and fans a disservice.
Nail Yakupov, in my opinion, is not the right player for this team. Anyone who's capable of being a "one man show" is more of a detriment than an asset.
Okay, time to go back to sleep. Enjoy your Thursday, folks.
i agree with what you say. i also think that motivation is a key factor. NA kids dream of winning the Stanley Cup, and alot will 'go through a wall' to try to win a cup. alot of Europeans are more motivated to win for their country. although i see this changing, as technonlogy has allowed Europeans to follow the NHL closer.
i use the term 'alot' for both NA and Europeans, because their are exceptions. anyone else think this is true?
I like many of your posts B-W, but, on Russians, you don't know s***. I am married to a Russian who has been in the US since 1993, but who grew up in Russia. She probably appreciates what the US has to offer more than many of us (those who are Americans or live here) because we take this stuff for granted. Sure we wave our flags on the 4th and feel patriotic when Bin Laden was taken down...but that is not real patriotism. She goes back to Russia and has told me more than once how happy she was to come back "home" to the US. She said she literally wanted to kiss the ground. She works very hard here. When we were dating, she literally had three jobs at once and not because the first would not pay the bills...it is a little thing called motivation (I actually still joke with her saying that, if she gets another job, I should be able to retire early!). She is now an American citizen, but she is also RUSSIAN. Categorizing all of one nation as being a certain way is as ignorant as Frenchies talking badly about Americans. There is nothing keeping a Russian player from succeeding at the NHL level that would be based upon his upbringing, training, skill...nothing. I would love for the Islanders to get Galchenyuk (Russian descent) or Grigorenko (Russian) if he somehow fell to us. Don't worry...I think we'll end up with Murray and he fills a need. That is where my excitement for him
First of all, and this is a generalization, Russian women are beautiful. In terms of hockey, I don't mean to be condescending towards them, they were just trained differently. They very much play a puck possession/skating game. Typically, North Americans handle, move the puck, and shoot a little more equitably. As a whole, I think ALL hockey players look to pass too much. There is no perfect hockey player. Perhaps Gordie Howe was the closest there ever was, but I never saw him play.
I'm not trying to preach or be soap boxy, I just don't love the way the Russians play the game. No doubt, they're fun to watch. Would I kick someone of Evgeni Malkin's ilk off this team? No way. But still, I do have a bias against the way most Russians play hockey. Is there an argument for how they play? Definitely. Am I always right? Let's put it this way, in 2003, I actually WANTED Robert Nilsson. How's that grab ya? Clearly, if there was an assassin emoticon, surley, you and most others would use it here.
Last edited by PWJunior: 04-12-2012 at 10:12 AM.
Reason: Not necessary
I watched some Forsberg videos, trying to like him in case we do draft him. I could probably live with the pick, but I just don't see the high end potential in him. Just because you could be good with Tavares doesn't necessarily mean you're a great hockey player.
Looking into the prospects more, Galchenyuk is really catching my eye. I think depth down the middle would be huge for this team. You hear it over and over again, but look at Pittsburgh. I think Galchenyuk has #1 C stuff, and he'd be our #2. That's something hard to pass up for me.
Check out this video, and listen to the song! It's meant to be!
I watched some Forsberg videos, trying to like him in case we do draft him. I could probably live with the pick, but I just don't see the high end potential in him. Just because you could be good with Tavares doesn't necessarily mean you're a great hockey player.
Looking into the prospects more, Galchenyuk is really catching my eye. I think depth down the middle would be huge for this team. You hear it over and over again, but look at Pittsburgh. I think Galchenyuk has #1 C stuff, and he'd be our #2. That's something hard to pass up for me.
Check out this video, and listen to the song! It's meant to be!
I watched some Forsberg videos, trying to like him in case we do draft him. I could probably live with the pick, but I just don't see the high end potential in him. Just because you could be good with Tavares doesn't necessarily mean you're a great hockey player.
Looking into the prospects more, Galchenyuk is really catching my eye. I think depth down the middle would be huge for this team. You hear it over and over again, but look at Pittsburgh. I think Galchenyuk has #1 C stuff, and he'd be our #2. That's something hard to pass up for me.
Check out this video, and listen to the song! It's meant to be!
Drafting for a "spot" more often busts than not. As a Cowboy fan I watched Jerrah (Yes I am a fan of two teams with the worst owners in sports.) draft Felix Jones over Chris Johnson and Mendehall and a plethora of other good backs b/c Jones was a "change of pace back" to compliment Marion Barber. Well did not work out at all.
I rather swing for the fence with Galchenyuk and have to worry about two #1Cs than Forsberg who has not shown anything to warrant the 4th pick in my opinion. I'll be fine with Murray but will be pissed if we pass on Yuk for Forsberg.
I am still on the fence about Galchenyuk, but it seems like I'm becoming one of the bigger pro-Forsberg people around here. I personally see oodles of offensive ability with a high motor. Mika Zibanejad looked awesome in the WJC and Forsberg is considered a better prospect at the same age. I really do like this kid.
I am still on the fence about Galchenyuk, but it seems like I'm becoming one of the bigger pro-Forsberg people around here. I personally see oodles of offensive ability with a high motor. Mika Zibanejad looked awesome in the WJC and Forsberg is considered a better prospect at the same age. I really do like this kid.
MEH. I dont see as much from that as the Galley video. He reminds me a lot of Nino. A lot of those goals were long range or from in tight....no game breaking speed or excellent hands.
Gally showed much more speed and much better hands imo in the previous video.
I watched some Forsberg videos, trying to like him in case we do draft him. I could probably live with the pick, but I just don't see the high end potential in him. Just because you could be good with Tavares doesn't necessarily mean you're a great hockey player.
Looking into the prospects more, Galchenyuk is really catching my eye. I think depth down the middle would be huge for this team. You hear it over and over again, but look at Pittsburgh. I think Galchenyuk has #1 C stuff, and he'd be our #2. That's something hard to pass up for me.
Check out this video, and listen to the song! It's meant to be!
MEH. I dont see as much from that as the Galley video. He reminds me a lot of Nino. A lot of those goals were long range or from in tight....no game breaking speed or excellent hands.
Gally showed much more speed and much better hands imo in the previous video.
and yes. im basing my opinion on a youtube video.
There isn't too much footage of Forsberg around and I know I've posted this one before. As a refresher though, this kid has some skills. As far as his hands, I think he's got quite a pair of mitts.
On the other hand, Grigorenko is being compared to Yashin over at the prospects board. Not much enthusiasm for him.
I would take an Alexei Yashin in his prime any day. Consistently very good, occasionally great. If we had that kind of production behind Tavares we would be golden upfront.
Dumba may not have the defensive game so he might not be worth taking but man does his offensive game and physical game get me pumped.
A huge mess of talent with Tavares, Strome, Nino, Galchenyuk, Nelson and then there is still Moulson, Okposo and Grabner. Damn. Galchenyuk I saw is a center, so maybe Strome can go on JT's wing then and then Galchenyuk can be the number two center with Nelson being three.
Murray is probably the one I want the most but I don't think he'd fall to us unless we trade up. Having him, Hamonic, Donovan and MacDonald is pretty friggin sweet. Streit still has a bunch of years IMO as well.
I would take an Alexei Yashin in his prime any day. Consistently very good, occasionally great. If we had that kind of production behind Tavares we would be golden upfront.
Alexei Yashin in his prime, in my opinion, was right there with Jaromir Jagr.
Dumba may not have the defensive game so he might not be worth taking but man does his offensive game and physical game get me pumped.
A huge mess of talent with Tavares, Strome, Nino, Galchenyuk, Nelson and then there is still Moulson, Okposo and Grabner. Damn. Galchenyuk I saw is a center, so maybe Strome can go on JT's wing then and then Galchenyuk can be the number two center with Nelson being three.
Murray is probably the one I want the most but I don't think he'd fall to us unless we trade up. Having him, Hamonic, Donovan and MacDonald is pretty friggin sweet. Streit still has a bunch of years IMO as well.
I want Murray the most as well...I think theres a good chance the first 3 picks are fowards leaving Murray in our lap at 4.....But anything can happen from the combine and team interviews so who knows...
I am still on the fence about Galchenyuk, but it seems like I'm becoming one of the bigger pro-Forsberg people around here. I personally see oodles of offensive ability with a high motor. Mika Zibanejad looked awesome in the WJC and Forsberg is considered a better prospect at the same age. I really do like this kid.
I was very confused when I clicked on the video... it took a minute to load so I switched tabs and all the sudden I heard "The Freshmen" come on so I checked everywhere to find out where the heck it was coming from... Love the song, but the last place I thought I'd hear it was a prospects highlights video
I would take an Alexei Yashin in his prime any day. Consistently very good, occasionally great. If we had that kind of production behind Tavares we would be golden upfront.
The comparison was more about his drive to succeed (or lack of) than talent. I haven't seen any video of Grigs yet.
There isn't too much footage of Forsberg around and I know I've posted this one before. As a refresher though, this kid has some skills. As far as his hands, I think he's got quite a pair of mitts.
Quick release and good slapshot, me likey. Still favor Galyenchuk though. But wouldn't be pissed if we take Forsberg, he's been highly rated for a couple of years. Like I said, I'd be happy with any of Grigorenko, Galchenyuk, Murray, Forsberg and Dumba (in that order).
Knowing the Isles history of draft picks, I'd be surprised if Forsberg was not their first option. He is almost a full year younger than some of the other highly touted guys, and the isles seem to like that.
i have not heard that about ceci and reinhart. just murray. where was this mentioned?
It has been mentioned with Murray and Ceci because they are in their 3rd full years in the CHL. I've never seen any mention of Reinhart being NHL-ready though, I would think he's more of a project. He's only in his 2nd season in the CHL and his skills could use a bit more polish.
get #4 overall (maybe throw in our 3rd rounder?)
get #5 overall and #35 overall.
