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
06-18-2012, 12:14 AM
  #826
Seanconn*
mission accomplished
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Manhattan
Country: United States
Posts: 4,267
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CBJBrassard16 View Post
Move down 4 spots for a 3rd liner? No thanks. Add alot more
Third liner? Maybe on the ducks. Cogliano would easily be a second liner on the jackets...

I guess you guys are just going to keep #2 overall. Don't blame you one bit

Cuz I don't see any other teams offering as much as that to move up 2-3 spots.

Seanconn* is offline  
Old
06-18-2012, 12:15 AM
  #827
Gagnefan924
Need Moar AmericanZ
 
Gagnefan924's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: PA
Country: United States
Posts: 8,065
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChairmanCat View Post
Third liner? Maybe on the ducks. Cogliano would easily be a second liner on the jackets...

I guess you guys are just going to keep #2 overall. Don't blame you one bit

Cuz I don't see any other teams offering as much as that to move up 2-3 spots.
hahahahah really?

Gagnefan924 is offline  
Old
06-18-2012, 12:16 AM
  #828
CBJWennberg41
Formerly CBJBrassard
 
CBJWennberg41's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Country: United States
Posts: 13,900
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChairmanCat View Post
Third liner? Maybe on the ducks. Cogliano would easily be a second liner on the jackets...

I guess you guys are just going to keep #2 overall. Don't blame you one bit

Cuz I don't see any other teams offering as much as that to move up 2-3 spots.
I'd take Nash, Prospal, Umberger, Johansen, Brassard, and Atkinson over Cogliano, which is our top 6 right now.

CBJWennberg41 is online now  
Old
06-18-2012, 12:47 AM
  #829
Crede777
Deputized
 
Crede777's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Country: United States
Posts: 7,802
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChairmanCat View Post
Third liner? Maybe on the ducks. Cogliano would easily be a second liner on the jackets...
That doesn't make him a 2nd liner. Malkin is a 1st line center but he's playing the 2nd line because of Crosby. Likewise Brassard probably isn't a 1st line center but that's where he played for a good amount of the season in Columbus.

Crede777 is offline  
Old
06-18-2012, 12:56 AM
  #830
Ludicrous Speed
Registered User
 
Ludicrous Speed's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Killumbus
Country: Micronesia
Posts: 11,059
vCash: 500
Just would rather have the most valuable asset. That's mostly why it's a no-go. Pretty much goes the same for most "pick + (single asset)" proposals within the top 5-10. It's why I would be hesitant to take a deal like #5 + Schenn. Not exactly bad value, but I'd rather have a dime than two nickels in this case.

Ludicrous Speed is offline  
Old
06-18-2012, 09:53 AM
  #831
Xoggz22
Registered User
 
Xoggz22's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Columbus, Ohio
Country: United States
Posts: 4,309
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChairmanCat View Post
Third liner? Maybe on the ducks. Cogliano would easily be a second liner on the jackets...
I guess you guys are just going to keep #2 overall. Don't blame you one bit

Cuz I don't see any other teams offering as much as that to move up 2-3 spots.
This is where the problem lies. Not to pick on you but when teams want to move up to draft a TOP line player and ultimately move the team drafting to a draft position that likely nets a useful player but lower odds of a top line player why would said team want to trade for a THIRD LINE PLAYER as the asset.

Think about it. Columbus would trade to get better. If you think your player is a third liner on your team but a 2nd liner on our team it simply means our team isn't very good. trade us a 2nd line player or a future top 6 player and that's you you work a deal. You can't think of the trade on how the player would be going to the new team. Columbus wants to improve. adding Cogs may appear to do that based on our current state but it severely hampers significant long term improvement potential with the #2. Go Big or Go Home!

I'm sure others have different opinions on this subject but you don't trade out of the #2 without a significant asset coming back.

Xoggz22 is offline  
Old
06-18-2012, 11:08 AM
  #832
CapnCornelius
Registered User
 
CapnCornelius's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 10,938
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChairmanCat View Post
Third liner? Maybe on the ducks. Cogliano would easily be a second liner on the jackets...

I guess you guys are just going to keep #2 overall. Don't blame you one bit

Cuz I don't see any other teams offering as much as that to move up 2-3 spots.
As a Ducks season ticket holder and Jackets fan, you must really think we were born yesterday.

Cogliano is a non-factor. A younger Jason Blake, essentially. He isn't a 2nd line player on any NHL team at this point in his career.

CapnCornelius is offline  
Old
06-18-2012, 01:45 PM
  #833
Sore Loser
HF Partner
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Spokane, WA.
Country: United States
Posts: 6,165
vCash: 500
I can't believe there's been this much debate on a trade offer involving Andrew Cogliano ... a player we have no use for, truly, as we do not have any other capable scoring players for our third line. It would be like signing Sami Pahlsson to play on our fourth line for the playoff run. Oh, wait...

Sore Loser is offline  
Old
06-18-2012, 02:00 PM
  #834
ernmorris
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 218
vCash: 500
Listening to Howson's interview on TV the other night, the reporter asked him about trading up, but the way Howson answered the question it seemed like he may be more interested in trading down.

If that's the case then I assume that rumors are accurate that Forberg is the most likely pick.

Am I the only one concerned with Forsberg? I just don't see him being an impact player at the NHL level. Don't get me wrong, I could see him having a nice career, but when you have the #2 overall pick you want someone who could develop into a prime-time player.

Why trade back and get him when you can get that solid NHL'er with one of the Russians or Murray (my pick)? I don't care if we pick up a player or a later round draft pick by moving back a few spots.

I don't know...this just scares me. Anyone else share that same concern?

To me, the choice is clear. Keep the pick and choose Yak, Murray or Galch. 2 of those 3 will be available with that #2 pick. Just choose one of them and you can't screw this draft up. This is so fool proof that even a caveman could do it.

ernmorris is offline  
Old
06-18-2012, 03:42 PM
  #835
Feicht
Registered User
 
Feicht's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Twin Cities
Country: Austria
Posts: 7,287
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Feicht
Quote:
Originally Posted by ernmorris View Post
Listening to Howson's interview on TV the other night, the reporter asked him about trading up, but the way Howson answered the question it seemed like he may be more interested in trading down.

If that's the case then I assume that rumors are accurate that Forberg is the most likely pick.

Am I the only one concerned with Forsberg? I just don't see him being an impact player at the NHL level. Don't get me wrong, I could see him having a nice career, but when you have the #2 overall pick you want someone who could develop into a prime-time player.

Why trade back and get him when you can get that solid NHL'er with one of the Russians or Murray (my pick)? I don't care if we pick up a player or a later round draft pick by moving back a few spots.

I don't know...this just scares me. Anyone else share that same concern?

To me, the choice is clear. Keep the pick and choose Yak, Murray or Galch. 2 of those 3 will be available with that #2 pick. Just choose one of them and you can't screw this draft up. This is so fool proof that even a caveman could do it.
I have stopped being shocked at the questionable things this franchise does, honestly. No it would not surprise me at all if Howson traded down to get a lesser pick + some third line NHLer. And it makes me sad

Feicht is offline  
Old
06-18-2012, 03:55 PM
  #836
Roadman
Moving On
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: London OH
Country: United States
Posts: 2,592
vCash: 500
Why don't we wait and see what happens before we start moaning.

Roadman is offline  
Old
06-18-2012, 04:03 PM
  #837
ernmorris
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 218
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roadman View Post
Why don't we wait and see what happens before we start moaning.
The intent of my post wasn't to moan about what we will do although in reading it again I can see how it could be construed that way.

It was more so to ask about Forsberg and if anyone else shared my concern that he's not the impact player that some think he is. He concerns me and reading between the lines, I believe that he is the guy that our staff likes the most (or, at minimum, likes a lot). But I could be completely wrong about that.

I would just like to state for the record again that Murray is my pick!

ernmorris is offline  
Old
06-18-2012, 04:05 PM
  #838
FANonymous
Registered User
 
FANonymous's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 4,911
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roadman View Post
Why don't we wait and see what happens before we start moaning.
Because that's not how we do things around here?

FANonymous is offline  
Old
06-18-2012, 04:16 PM
  #839
Sore Loser
HF Partner
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Spokane, WA.
Country: United States
Posts: 6,165
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ernmorris View Post
The intent of my post wasn't to moan about what we will do although in reading it again I can see how it could be construed that way.

It was more so to ask about Forsberg and if anyone else shared my concern that he's not the impact player that some think he is. He concerns me and reading between the lines, I believe that he is the guy that our staff likes the most (or, at minimum, likes a lot). But I could be completely wrong about that.

I would just like to state for the record again that Murray is my pick!
I don't really share that concern, as Forsberg is a great player, he just isn't as "ready" as Murray or Yakupov, and doesn't have the same ceiling as, say, Galchenyuk. Five years from now we could all be wishing we had taken Forsberg.

Sore Loser is offline  
Old
06-18-2012, 04:18 PM
  #840
CBJ Bob
It Smells Bad!
 
CBJ Bob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: In Hiding
Country: United States
Posts: 876
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roadman View Post
Why don't we wait and see what happens before we start moaning.
I can't help myself - I have a really bad feeling. I'll put money on it right now that it will be Forsberg. There are more questions than answers with Forsberg vs other prospects. I don't feel the need to swing for the fence; I'd be happy with a solid single as a place to start.

CBJ Bob is offline  
Old
06-18-2012, 04:21 PM
  #841
Viqsi
carrying the flag
 
Viqsi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: The Scary Internet
Country: United States
Posts: 21,061
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Viqsi
Quote:
Originally Posted by FANonymous View Post
Because that's not how we do things around here?
And look how successful we are as a result!

Maybe a culture change is necessary?

__________________
Remember - when you're a hockey fan, it's not "reckless driving", it's "good forechecking".
"Viqsi, you are our sweet humanist..." --mt-svk on the CBJ boards

Thanks, Howson, for cleaning up MacLean's toxic waste. Welcome, Kekalainen; let's get good things built!
Viqsi is offline  
Old
06-18-2012, 04:28 PM
  #842
Crede777
Deputized
 
Crede777's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Country: United States
Posts: 7,802
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sore Loser View Post
I don't really share that concern, as Forsberg is a great player, he just isn't as "ready" as Murray or Yakupov, and doesn't have the same ceiling as, say, Galchenyuk. Five years from now we could all be wishing we had taken Forsberg.
I just have a problem with the team trading away Nash and the 2nd overall while finishing last in the league.

The fans here need a big name talent be it Nash or someone else and they need him next year. Umberger and Johnson aren't going to cut it. Either keep Nash, get a big name player back for Nash (unlikely), or draft a franchise player capable of playing next year.

Nobody will be in the stands if they trade Nash for a bunch of players without name recognition and draft a kid who isn't even going to be here next year. Besides, the 2nd best player in the draft WON'T drop to #5. It never happens. Keep #2 and draft Murray/Galchenyuk or Forsberg if you are absolutely sure he's the best behind Yakupov. If Burke offers you Schenn + #5 overall and claims Forsberg will still be there, don't do the deal and instead draft whomever Burke really wants.

Crede777 is offline  
Old
06-18-2012, 04:56 PM
  #843
Roadman
Moving On
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: London OH
Country: United States
Posts: 2,592
vCash: 500
For the record, in case you had missed it in the previous (numerous) posting is Murray. After, in order of preference is Galchenyuk and Forsberg. I do not want us to trade down. Keep the pick and draft one. If EDM diverts and takes Murray then draft Yakupov.

All draft picks have their pluses and their minuses. Probably the biggest difference between the three probable choices is their development curve. Murray is projected to be ready now with a top projection of a #1/#2. Galchenyuk by most indications, will spend a year back at Sarnia, rehabing and honing his skills for one more year. Again projection top six, probable #1 center, possible league top third. Forsberg is said to have the highest ceiling, what ever that may turn out to be, he is also the rawest at this point and at least three years away. Biggest risk, highest reward.

Picks your poison. There is no right/wrong, only in hindsight which is always 20/20 will we know which was/would have been the wisest choice.

Roadman is offline  
Old
06-18-2012, 04:58 PM
  #844
EspenK
Registered User
 
EspenK's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 5,627
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roadman View Post
Why don't we wait and see what happens before we start moaning.
I don't think he was moaning; he was expressing himself and his opinions and was asking how others felt. Of course the PMA'ers, the .034%(i think I got that right) and all Don Quixote fans think he was moaning. Heck if we waited until things happened (and then according to some we should only comment on the good stuff) it would be a very lonely place here.

Now on to the "moaning". I agree with Cree. When you finish 30th you are kidding yourself if you think a tweak here, a trade of your superstar and drafting a guy who is at least two and probably 3 years away form the NHL will make you a better team. Maybe three years from now but not next year. Take Murray or Galchenyuk - whoever you have ranked higher and who can make an impact sooner rather than later.

EspenK is offline  
Old
06-18-2012, 05:01 PM
  #845
Double-Shift Lassť
Moderator
Just post better
 
Double-Shift Lassť's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Superurban Cbus
Country: United States
Posts: 18,186
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Viqsi View Post
And look how successful we are as a result!

Maybe a culture change is necessary?
You're funny.

__________________
"Every game, every point is a necessity." -- Ty Conklin, January 2007
"I'll have a chance to compete for the post of first issue. This is the most important thing." -- Sergei Bobrovsky, June 2012
Double-Shift Lassť is offline  
Old
06-18-2012, 05:05 PM
  #846
CapnCornelius
Registered User
 
CapnCornelius's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 10,938
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by EspenK View Post
INow on to the "moaning". I agree with Cree. When you finish 30th you are kidding yourself if you think a tweak here, a trade of your superstar and drafting a guy who is at least two and probably 3 years away form the NHL will make you a better team. Maybe three years from now but not next year. Take Murray or Galchenyuk - whoever you have ranked higher and who can make an impact sooner rather than later.
I'd take Forsberg if I thought he was the best option. I just don't think he will be at #2. I don't care when he's ready because I don't think this is a simple tweak job, so having a player in the lineup or not is not of a concern to me. What is a concern is taking a wing with question marks over a center and defenseman who, to me, have fewer question marks.

Maybe if we are trading back to get a guy like Reinhart and the additional asset we get is decent I'll change my mind, but if we are trading back just to get Forsberg, not sure I'm thrilled with the idea.

CapnCornelius is offline  
Old
06-18-2012, 05:07 PM
  #847
Mayor Bee
\/me_____you\/
 
Mayor Bee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 15,061
vCash: 500
Remember when Winnipeg drafted that kid out of Finland, then only brought him over to North America four years later after another team signed him to an offer sheet? In the meantime, the five players drafted right after him all made the NHL sooner. And then when Teemu Selanne finally came over, he made an immediate impact.

There are plenty of players who use and have used their native European league as a sort of finishing school before coming over. I remember Vancouver having one in Mattias Ohlund; he was picked in 1994 and didn't come over at all until 1997, then stepped right in and didn't look out of place. In fact, I think his arrival was the same way as Selanne...someone signed him to an offer sheet, which his drafting team matched.

Mayor Bee is online now  
Old
06-18-2012, 05:18 PM
  #848
Roadman
Moving On
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: London OH
Country: United States
Posts: 2,592
vCash: 500
The moaning comment was a general directive not poster specific.

EspenK that's .34%, what's left after the 99.66.

And in spite of my position in the PMA, .34% and sunshine patrol, I do understand the frustration and angst of those that don't share my perspective. My biggest objection is the vitriol that often occompanies it.

Roadman is offline  
Old
06-18-2012, 05:25 PM
  #849
JacketsFanWest
Registered User
 
JacketsFanWest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Country: Sweden
Posts: 2,761
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roadman View Post
For the record, in case you had missed it in the previous (numerous) posting is Murray. After, in order of preference is Galchenyuk and Forsberg. I do not want us to trade down. Keep the pick and draft one. If EDM diverts and takes Murray then draft Yakupov.

All draft picks have their pluses and their minuses. Probably the biggest difference between the three probable choices is their development curve. Murray is projected to be ready now with a top projection of a #1/#2. Galchenyuk by most indications, will spend a year back at Sarnia, rehabing and honing his skills for one more year. Again projection top six, probable #1 center, possible league top third. Forsberg is said to have the highest ceiling, what ever that may turn out to be, he is also the rawest at this point and at least three years away. Biggest risk, highest reward.].
I agree with taking a forward. Ryan Murray will be a good NHLer, but this is the chance for the Jackets to get an elite forward. Murray doesn't project as a guaranteed #1 defenseman. He's the type of #3 that will help a team win a Stanley Cup. The Jackets need a forward that will sell tickets and those types of players are at the top of the draft.

Teuvo Teršvšinen is probably the biggest risk and the least NHL ready and could have the highest ceiling, especially since he projects as a very dynamic playmaking center in the NHL. Only he was born only a few days before the cut-off and he's 169 lbs. There's absolutely no way the Jackets could even consider him, since he truly is 3+ years away. But he likely falls, spends 4 years in Finland and comes over to the NHL and blows everyone away.

Forsberg has the problem of being a 17 year old "power" forward at 188 lbs. He could play in the NHL next season, but there's going to be huge expectations and the likelihood he spends time on the 4th line learning. He might as well stay in Sweden until he's ready. I don't think he's 3+ years away. Yakupov and Galchenyuk are stocky guys who are pretty much done growing. Forsberg is going to need to fill out before reaching his maximum potential in the NHL. But he is his ahead of the development curve for most players in Sweden. He dominated the Under-20 league as a 16 year old, playing on the men's team as 17. He's not exactly "raw", he's just young and the type of player that takes longer to develop. But he's so much farther ahead of other Swedish players at his age.


Last edited by JacketsFanWest: 06-18-2012 at 05:30 PM.
JacketsFanWest is offline  
Old
06-18-2012, 05:38 PM
  #850
Roadman
Moving On
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: London OH
Country: United States
Posts: 2,592
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JacketsFanWest View Post
I agree with taking a forward. Ryan Murray will be a good NHLer, but this is the chance for the Jackets to get an elite forward. Murray doesn't project as a guaranteed #1 defenseman. He's the type of #3 that will help a team win a Stanley Cup. The Jackets need a forward that will sell tickets and those types of players are at the top of the draft.

Teuvo Teršvšinen is probably the biggest risk and the least NHL ready and could have the highest ceiling, especially since he projects as a very dynamic playmaking center in the NHL. Only he was born only a few days before the cut-off and he's 169 lbs. There's absolutely no way the Jackets could even consider him, since he truly is 3+ years away. But he likely falls, spends 4 years in Finland and comes over to the NHL and blows everyone away.

Forsberg has the problem of being a 17 year old "power" forward at 188 lbs. He could play in the NHL next season, but there's going to be huge expectations and the likelihood he spends time on the 4th line learning. He might as well stay in Sweden until he's ready. I don't think he's 3+ years away. Yakupov and Galchenyuk are stocky guys who are pretty much done growing. Forsberg is going to need to fill out before reaching his maximum potential in the NHL. But he is his ahead of the development curve for most players in Sweden. He was dominated the Under-20 league as a 16 year old, playing on the men's team as 17. He's not exactly "raw", he's just young and the type of player that takes longer to develop.
I am not a scout nor the kind of hockey junkie that has personal knowledge of the prospects. So all I can do is try and assimilate what I read. With that as my disclaimer...

What I have read about Murry does not have him as a 3, his talent is such that he just makes it look easy not flashy and so he just gets under appreciated. Particularly as we enter the microscope stage. Forsberg will stay home this year at least, at some point in time he will have to spend some time on the smaller NA ice, won't he? It is entirely possible I could be wrong, but I still think 3 years either here ther or some combination.

Roadman 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 10:41 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.