HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Metropolitan Division > Columbus Blue Jackets
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

2012 NHL Draft Thread III (June 22nd-23rd)

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
06-16-2012, 06:39 AM
  #776
Roadman
Moving On
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: London OH
Country: United States
Posts: 2,592
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jacks Johnson View Post
Well I guess Savard, Gobo, Weber, or Prout could play in our top 6 forward role since we will have guys like Letestu, Umberger that will have to play that role
Who are you drafting that's magically going to fix the front end this year?

Roadman is offline  
Old
06-16-2012, 07:24 AM
  #777
EspenK
Registered User
 
EspenK's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 4,968
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roadman View Post
Who are you drafting that's magically going to fix the front end this year?
Unless Yak falls to #2 probably no one (and even one guy is not going to make this team an offensive juggernaut)-but that's the point if you don't start to rebuild the offense the future will remain bleak. Who you going to pick next year-Seth Jones?

I think it has to be a forward.

EspenK is offline  
Old
06-16-2012, 07:35 AM
  #778
Roadman
Moving On
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: London OH
Country: United States
Posts: 2,592
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by EspenK View Post
Unless Yak falls to #2 probably no one (and even one guy is not going to make this team an offensive juggernaut)-but that's the point if you don't start to rebuild the offense the future will remain bleak. Who you going to pick next year-Seth Jones?

I think it has to be a forward.
And my point is that by developing skilled depth on the defensive side you can up grade the front end via trade. And since young developed D have a greater value you can get a better return down the road. Build from the back end out. My preference would be to get to the point where we are really solid, and by that I would mean top third in the league, on the blue line.

Fix one problem, and fix it right, then fix the next problem.

Roadman is offline  
Old
06-16-2012, 07:53 AM
  #779
Xoggz22
Registered User
 
Xoggz22's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Columbus, Ohio
Country: United States
Posts: 4,280
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sore Loser View Post
I assure you, that was not my goal!

I really think Columbus drafts Galchenyuk; I think his showing at the combine was strong enough to warrant them taking the risk, and I think that they need to get the best potential player available. This is why I think Montreal takes Grigorenko - they need depth down the middle as well; the Islanders get the guy that they would probably take at #2, and Toronto lands Filip Forsberg.
Here's my rationale with taking Galchenyuk.... Brassard has two years remaining on his current deal. I would imagine that Galy returns to Juniors next year which likely means he ends up with the CBJ in Brass's contract year. Johansen plays center next year (3rd line? 2nd line? wherever) and we have a better idea how Brass and Johan perform while have a third potential top 6 center developing. When Brass and Johan's contracts need renewed in 2 years you can hopefully make an educated decision on where you sit with your top 2 centers.

Also, Chaput and Jenner will both be pushing for jobs but neither has the offensive gifts that Galchenyuk have and I think Jenner could play wing. I just think we have a good situation to review (yet still have potential to achieve) and adding to one of the toughest positions to stock would be a great idea. With the Nash trade you can get another 1st and likely draft a wing or d-man. We're fairly well stocked on defense which could also be used to trade for wings.

Now goaltending.....

Xoggz22 is offline  
Old
06-16-2012, 07:57 AM
  #780
Jaxs
HFBoards Sponsor
 
Jaxs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Country: United States
Posts: 7,099
vCash: 500
Cmon Friday. Take Galchenyuk at the 2 spot. Nash gets us some magical combination that gives hope for this coming season. Harding or Schneider or Luongo becomes the #1, and a competent #2 is signed. Mason gets claimed on waivers by some lucky team thinking he'll turn it around.

Davidson is brought in as President of hockey operations. There are no early season suspensions or injuries, allowing the team to gel out of the gate.

Isn't fiction wonderful?

Jaxs is offline  
Old
06-16-2012, 07:59 AM
  #781
Xoggz22
Registered User
 
Xoggz22's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Columbus, Ohio
Country: United States
Posts: 4,280
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by EspenK View Post
Unless Yak falls to #2 probably no one (and even one guy is not going to make this team an offensive juggernaut)-but that's the point if you don't start to rebuild the offense the future will remain bleak. Who you going to pick next year-Seth Jones?

I think it has to be a forward.
Nashville has done pretty well with a group of no name forwards that are pluggers, grinders, some skill but very little high end offensive talent. Sure, they haven't won a cup but with their defense and goaltending, I think it's a great way to start. We fix the goaltending and we're in much better competitive shape. we'll get the forwards too but strong defensive depth and provide a world of winning hockey

Xoggz22 is offline  
Old
06-16-2012, 08:03 AM
  #782
Roadman
Moving On
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: London OH
Country: United States
Posts: 2,592
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Xoggz22 View Post
Here's my rationale with taking Galchenyuk.... Brassard has two years remaining on his current deal. I would imagine that Galy returns to Juniors next year which likely means he ends up with the CBJ in Brass's contract year. Johansen plays center next year (3rd line? 2nd line? wherever) and we have a better idea how Brass and Johan perform while have a third potential top 6 center developing. When Brass and Johan's contracts need renewed in 2 years you can hopefully make an educated decision on where you sit with your top 2 centers.

Also, Chaput and Jenner will both be pushing for jobs but neither has the offensive gifts that Galchenyuk have and I think Jenner could play wing. I just think we have a good situation to review (yet still have potential to achieve) and adding to one of the toughest positions to stock would be a great idea. With the Nash trade you can get another 1st and likely draft a wing or d-man. We're fairly well stocked on defense which could also be used to trade for wings.

Now goaltending.....
I still prefer Murray and the build from the back end. This is a very acceptable and a quite probable alternative. Well done.

Now goaltending......

Roadman is offline  
Old
06-16-2012, 09:06 AM
  #783
JACKETfan
Real Blue Jacketfan
 
JACKETfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Venice
Country: United States
Posts: 9,232
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gagnefan924 View Post
We get it. You hate management. If you want to complain, go to the Fire Howson thread.
You're mistaken sir. I have no faith in their drafting ability based on years of accumulated evidence.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mayor Bee View Post
Best looking girlfriend I've ever seen at a draft was Brian Finley in 1999.

For those who have never heard of Brian Finley, he's the lone exception to the idea that "Nashville is magic with goalies".
Thanks for bringing us back on topic.
So you're saying we need to scout their girlfriends in the stands before announcing the pick? Given past results, we might as well try it.

Or we could post a poll and use that. Or just let Cap'n pick because he says the most.

...and fire Howson.

JACKETfan is offline  
Old
06-16-2012, 10:03 AM
  #784
KeithBWhittington
Going North
 
KeithBWhittington's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Brick by Brick
Country: Hungary
Posts: 10,239
vCash: 500
So We are looking for the "Ryan Tannehill" of the NHL draft....

KeithBWhittington is offline  
Old
06-16-2012, 10:27 AM
  #785
big eyeball
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Country: United States
Posts: 19
vCash: 500
Draft Tickets

I have four tickets for Saturday rounds 2-7. I can't go but I would really like to have as many Bluejackets jerseys in that arena as we can get. I'll let them go for cheap, PM me if interested. Thanks

big eyeball is offline  
Old
06-16-2012, 10:44 AM
  #786
EspenK
Registered User
 
EspenK's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 4,968
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by KeithBWhittington View Post
So We are looking for the "Ryan Tannehill" of the NHL draft....
No, the Mrs.Tannehill

EspenK is offline  
Old
06-16-2012, 10:49 AM
  #787
jacks johnson
Registered User
 
jacks johnson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,324
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roadman View Post
And my point is that by developing skilled depth on the defensive side you can up grade the front end via trade. And since young developed D have a greater value you can get a better return down the road. Build from the back end out. My preference would be to get to the point where we are really solid, and by that I would mean top third in the league, on the blue line.

Fix one problem, and fix it right, then fix the next problem.
I understand build from the back end, but you get elite forwards when you have a chance. We have pretty good depth at D, and little to none at the forward position. Say we draft Murray, yeah we have a better defense, maybe win a few more games in the short term, probably miss the playoffs, and draft around 12-14 next year, you don't pick up a forsberg or galchenyuk in that range usually. Look at some of the past #2 picks the past 10 years, like a Malkin. Murray could be great, but a lot of scouts feel like a Reily or Reinhart have a higher ceiling, if we went D, I would trade down and grab one of these guys. But we don't need D. Get a goalie like Schneider, Rask, Bernier, and with our current D, we already have a pretty decent team. Trading Nash should help get a few more pieces to really build on. I don't expect a Galchenyuk to be our savior next year, let him develop, but we need forwards in a bad way, especially when you look at our current top 6.

Also, Nashville has one of the best goalies in the game, a great defense, but they are pretty lacking at the forward position. Now they are going to try to address bringing in scoring, but teams usually don't trade elite forwards, unless they are getting a big return, maybe they are able to attract a Paraise ?

jacks johnson is offline  
Old
06-16-2012, 10:54 AM
  #788
EspenK
Registered User
 
EspenK's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 4,968
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roadman View Post
And my point is that by developing skilled depth on the defensive side you can up grade the front end via trade. And since young developed D have a greater value you can get a better return down the road. Build from the back end out. My preference would be to get to the point where we are really solid, and by that I would mean top third in the league, on the blue line.

Fix one problem, and fix it right, then fix the next problem.
I'm not sure you can achieve what you want by how you propose to do it. Sooner or later, somebody has to be your #5,6,& 7 d-men. They get less time, their stats suffer, their trade value diminishes and everyone is looking for one of your top 4. So you trade your top 4. Bad things happen when you trade one of your top 4 d-men. (Sorry, I just couldn't resist parodying the Direct TV ad). Then you have to have a GM who is willing to trade a top 4 guy. And someone who is willing to give up front line talent for a D-man. I am skeptical it can happen the way you envision. Obviously I prefer to draft offense and try to get it right for a change. We'll know Friday.

Look what Dion Phaneuf garnered. Of course Scotty Gomez yielded Ryan McDonagh so maybe it can work in reverse.

EspenK is offline  
Old
06-16-2012, 10:58 AM
  #789
pete goegan
HFBoards Sponsor
 
pete goegan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 11,651
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jacks Johnson View Post
I understand build from the back end, but you get elite forwards when you have a chance. We have pretty good depth at D, and little to none at the forward position. Say we draft Murray, yeah we have a better defense, maybe win a few more games in the short term, probably miss the playoffs, and draft around 12-14 next year, you don't pick up a forsberg or galchenyuk in that range usually. Look at some of the past #2 picks the past 10 years, like a Malkin. Murray could be great, but a lot of scouts feel like a Reily or Reinhart have a higher ceiling, if we went D, I would trade down and grab one of these guys. But we don't need D. Get a goalie like Schneider, Rask, Bernier, and with our current D, we already have a pretty decent team. Trading Nash should help get a few more pieces to really build on. I don't expect a Galchenyuk to be our savior next year, let him develop, but we need forwards in a bad way, especially when you look at our current top 6.
I agree, especially the bolded portion.

pete goegan is online now  
Old
06-16-2012, 11:11 AM
  #790
CapnCornelius
Registered User
 
CapnCornelius's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 10,936
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jacks Johnson View Post
I understand build from the back end, but you get elite forwards when you have a chance. We have pretty good depth at D, and little to none at the forward position. Say we draft Murray, yeah we have a better defense, maybe win a few more games in the short term, probably miss the playoffs, and draft around 12-14 next year, you don't pick up a forsberg or galchenyuk in that range usually. Look at some of the past #2 picks the past 10 years, like a Malkin. Murray could be great, but a lot of scouts feel like a Reily or Reinhart have a higher ceiling, if we went D, I would trade down and grab one of these guys. But we don't need D. Get a goalie like Schneider, Rask, Bernier, and with our current D, we already have a pretty decent team. Trading Nash should help get a few more pieces to really build on. I don't expect a Galchenyuk to be our savior next year, let him develop, but we need forwards in a bad way, especially when you look at our current top 6.

Also, Nashville has one of the best goalies in the game, a great defense, but they are pretty lacking at the forward position. Now they are going to try to address bringing in scoring, but teams usually don't trade elite forwards, unless they are getting a big return, maybe they are able to attract a Paraise ?
Yes, poor Nashville. All they've done is made the playoffs the last two years.

Seriously, people talk about building from the goal out and then the draft comes and this focus goes out the window. If you are using a pick on a forward, it better be a center. Look at the teams that win the Cup--goal, defense, center. Those are the priorities. You can get good enough wings in free agency. As we've seen time and again, the others are not so easily acquired.

CapnCornelius is offline  
Old
06-16-2012, 11:31 AM
  #791
EspenK
Registered User
 
EspenK's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 4,968
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CapnCornelius View Post
Yes, poor Nashville. All they've done is made the playoffs the last two years.

Seriously, people talk about building from the goal out and then the draft comes and this focus goes out the window. If you are using a pick on a forward, it better be a center. Look at the teams that win the Cup--goal, defense, center. Those are the priorities. You can get good enough wings in free agency. As we've seen time and again, the others are not so easily acquired.
I think the UFA pool is shrinking over the last few years and I expect it to continue to shrink as GM's lock up their you talent for longer periods of time. of course if the Jackets sign Parise, I'll change my mind.

I agree that the Cup goes to the team that is strong at the positions you mentioned. However after being "brainwashed" by the Mayor and others about not drafting a goalie sooner than 165th nor trading for a potentially outstanding one, looks like goalie is off the table for immediate help as far as the draft goes.

I favor Galchenyuk for the reasons you state. You have to have a good to great center depth. Potentially, Galy/RyJo could be a solid 1/2 for years to come. Throw in Jenner/Chaput on the third-could be very solid.

Adding Murray ranks for me above adding Forsberg. IMO he is too young and forwards are easier (although not necessarily for the Jackets) to come by.

EspenK is offline  
Old
06-16-2012, 11:56 AM
  #792
CapnCornelius
Registered User
 
CapnCornelius's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 10,936
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by EspenK View Post
I agree that the Cup goes to the team that is strong at the positions you mentioned. However after being "brainwashed" by the Mayor and others about not drafting a goalie sooner than 165th nor trading for a potentially outstanding one, looks like goalie is off the table for immediate help as far as the draft goes.

I favor Galchenyuk for the reasons you state. You have to have a good to great center depth. Potentially, Galy/RyJo could be a solid 1/2 for years to come. Throw in Jenner/Chaput on the third-could be very solid.

Adding Murray ranks for me above adding Forsberg. IMO he is too young and forwards are easier (although not necessarily for the Jackets) to come by.
Let me count the ways MB is wrong...
Marty Brodeur--#20 overall
Patrick Roy--#51 overall
Jonanathan Quick--#72 overall
Marc Andre Fleury--#1 overall
Chris Osgood--#54 overall
J.S. Giguere--#13 overall
Cam Ward--#25 overall
Mike Richter--#28 overall
Tom Barrasso--#5 overall
Grant Fuhr--#8 overall
Mike Vernon--#56 overall
Bill Ranford--#52 overall
Ken Dryden--#14 overall
Billy Smith--#59 overall

I think those guys won some Cups, no?

Notable exceptions--
Antti Niemi--undrafted
Nikolai Khabibulin--#204 overall
Tim Thomas--#217 overall
Dominick Hasek--#199
Ed Belfour--undrafted
Bernie Parent

Another point--the exceptions didn't tend to win multiple Cups.

Oh, by the way, Josh Harding was drafted #38 overall. So, if it isn't wise to draft a goalie that high, is it wise to sign him as a free agent after he was drafted that high?

CapnCornelius is offline  
Old
06-16-2012, 12:17 PM
  #793
Mayor Bee
\/me_____you\/
 
Mayor Bee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 14,427
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CapnCornelius View Post
Let me count the ways MB is wrong...
Marty Brodeur--#20 overall
Patrick Roy--#51 overall
Jonanathan Quick--#72 overall
Marc Andre Fleury--#1 overall
Chris Osgood--#54 overall
J.S. Giguere--#13 overall
Cam Ward--#25 overall
Mike Richter--#28 overall
Tom Barrasso--#5 overall
Grant Fuhr--#8 overall
Mike Vernon--#56 overall
Bill Ranford--#52 overall
Ken Dryden--#14 overall
Billy Smith--#59 overall

I think those guys won some Cups, no?
So?

Narrow it down to the last 20 years, then take a look at how those players were acquired and for what. That leaves us:

1992-93 - 3rd-round pick nine years earlier (Patrick Roy)
1993-94 - 2nd-round pick nine years earlier (Mike Richter)
1994-95 - 1st-round pick five years earlier (Martin Brodeur)
1995-96 - Acquired six months earlier with Mike Keane for Kovalenko, Thibault, and Rucinsky (Patrick Roy)
1996-97 - Acquired three years earlier for Steve Chiasson (Mike Vernon)
1997-98 - 3rd-round pick seven years earlier (Chris Osgood)
1998-99 - Signed as a free agent two years earlier (Ed Belfour)
1999-00 - 1st-round pick ten years earlier (Brodeur)
2000-01 - Acquired five years earlier in the same deal referenced for 1995-96 (Patrick Roy)
2001-02 - Acquired one year earlier for Slava Kozlov and a 1st-rounder (Dominik Hasek)
2002-03 - 1st-round pick thirteen years earlier (Brodeur)
2003-04 - Acquired three years earlier with Stanislav Neckar for Mike Johnson, Paul Mara, Ruslan Zainullin, and a 2nd-rounder (Nikolai Khabibulin)
2005-06 - 1st-round pick four years earlier (Cam Ward)
2006-07 - Acquired seven years earlier for 2nd-round pick (J-S Giguere)
2007-08 - Signed as free agent three years prior (Chris Osgood)
2008-09 - 1st-round pick six years earlier (Marc-Andre Fleury)
2009-10 - Signed as undrafted European free agent two years earlier (Antti Niemi)
2010-11 - Signed as undrafted European free agent nine years earlier (Tim Thomas)
2011-12 - 3rd-round pick seven years earlier (Jonathan Quick)

My point is, and has been, that a significant outlay of assets to get a goalie isn't exactly a great idea. Essentially, it's the one position that mirrors the NFL development model...a good one can come from anywhere in the draft (or outside the draft), and the return on any goalie that ranks below "elite" in the market is less than would be expected for a forward or defenseman of similar caliber.

Don't forget that Jaroslav Halak had the huge playoff year, then was traded for a good-but-not-great prospect in Lars Eller. People were up in arms last year because Varlamov netted a 1st- and 2nd-round pick that was universally regarded as significant overpayment.

Harding was 38th overall...what's your point? Even if he were signed, I doubt that he'd net anything more than a 3rd-rounder in the trade market.

Mayor Bee is offline  
Old
06-16-2012, 01:10 PM
  #794
CalBuckeyeRob
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 93
vCash: 500
I think the problem in evaluating goalies is that performance is often deceptive. Curtis Sanford had a 2.60 GAA and a .911 Save percentage and went 10-18. Craig Anderson for Ottawa and Cam Ward for Carolina had worse GAAs and only marginally better save percentages while putting up winning records. Offense can make a goalie seem more effective than he really was.

Until a goalie puts up significantly better than league average stats for several years you cannot be sure if the stats are simply a fluke or due to the surrounding talent making them appear better. For that reason, you trade for a guy that looked great on Vancouver, he might be average or worse on Columbus. Because of that, you pay less for goalies in trade because there are so few Roys and Brodeurs in the talent pool.

CalBuckeyeRob is online now  
Old
06-16-2012, 03:03 PM
  #795
JACKETfan
Real Blue Jacketfan
 
JACKETfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Venice
Country: United States
Posts: 9,232
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by KeithBWhittington View Post
So We are looking for the "Ryan Tannehill" of the NHL draft....
Quote:
Originally Posted by EspenK View Post
No, the Mrs.Tannehill
Yes, according to "Leesmith's Rule" this is how we should draft. And barring a real looker beinga available, we go with whoever the person with the most posts in this thread picks (Cap'n's Rule).

...and then we fire Howson.

JACKETfan is offline  
Old
06-16-2012, 03:27 PM
  #796
FANonymous
Registered User
 
FANonymous's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 4,911
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JACKETfan View Post
...and then we fire Howson.
Out of our cannon?

FANonymous is offline  
Old
06-16-2012, 08:44 PM
  #797
KeithBWhittington
Going North
 
KeithBWhittington's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Brick by Brick
Country: Hungary
Posts: 10,239
vCash: 500
One name continues to prevade my thinking now that its become official that the CBJ are at least fielding offers for the 2nd overall. Howson seemed general pleased, despite the +/- rating, with John Moore's inagural season in Columbus. Moore was billed as the best-skating defenseman in his draft. This year, Brad Skjei with the USNDTP is rated very similar, skating-wise, to John Moore, and many mocks I've seen have him going with in the 19-26 range (Moore went 18th).

I don't forsee a drastic tradedown until the early twenties, but if Howson wants him, he could potentially get extra pick(s) back to move down into the teens or 20.

KeithBWhittington is offline  
Old
06-16-2012, 09:33 PM
  #798
leesmith
"We're NEVER Done!"
 
leesmith's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 15,340
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JACKETfan View Post
Yes, according to "Leesmith's Rule" this is how we should draft. And barring a real looker beinga available, we go with whoever the person with the most posts in this thread picks (Cap'n's Rule).

...and then we fire Howson.
Hey, my approach will boost TV ratings. They've gone to hell since CBJCougar stopped sitting behind the Jackets bench.

leesmith is offline  
Old
06-16-2012, 09:48 PM
  #799
Sore Loser
HF Partner
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Spokane, WA.
Country: United States
Posts: 6,072
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by KeithBWhittington View Post
One name continues to prevade my thinking now that its become official that the CBJ are at least fielding offers for the 2nd overall. Howson seemed general pleased, despite the +/- rating, with John Moore's inagural season in Columbus. Moore was billed as the best-skating defenseman in his draft. This year, Brad Skjei with the USNDTP is rated very similar, skating-wise, to John Moore, and many mocks I've seen have him going with in the 19-26 range (Moore went 18th).

I don't forsee a drastic tradedown until the early twenties, but if Howson wants him, he could potentially get extra pick(s) back to move down into the teens or 20.
Remind me why we would want another John Moore? Do we really need two of those guys?

Sore Loser is offline  
Old
06-16-2012, 11:44 PM
  #800
Robert
Foligno family
 
Robert's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: KY & Lime Lake NY
Country: United States
Posts: 30,165
vCash: 500
Send a message via MSN to Robert
Summer issues are killing me with staying current here but if I may say this;

1. Buffalo does not want to deal with the CBJ in any format.... not for Nash, draft picks or anything else. A gut statement not fact but I just don't see that organization being bold when they have a history of building via their system.

2. If Nail is gone at #2 the pick for the CBJ is Murray; this CBJ HF board talk of Forsberg at #2 is folly.. That said, book it, Howson will take the 17 year old Forsberg who will be lucky to have an NHL impact by 2015 if then.

Robert 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 02:25 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.