HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Metropolitan Division > Columbus Blue Jackets
Notices

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

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
06-19-2012, 10:33 AM
  #901
ernmorris
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 205
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ernmorris View Post
MOD EDIT: please don't quote entire articles, just quote a relevant portion and link to the entire article.
Sorry - I was unaware. I assumed that since it was a free article and that I provided a link that it was ok. That's what I get for assuming!

Just another thing that you guys can make fun of me!

ernmorris is offline  
Old
06-19-2012, 10:34 AM
  #902
CBJBrassard16
Sergei BobTrollsky
 
CBJBrassard16's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 11,809
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nordique View Post
Galchenyk, Frk, and Dansk I could see happening, coupled with a SJ trade that brings Niemi and other minor pieces here for Nash.
Please god no.

My list is

1. Yakupov
2. Galchenyuk
3. Murray
4. Forsberg
5. Reinhart

CBJBrassard16 is offline  
Old
06-19-2012, 10:41 AM
  #903
eclipse2411
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 92
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CBJBrassard16 View Post
Please god no.

My list is

1. Yakupov
2. Galchenyuk
3. Murray
4. Forsberg
5. Reinhart
I have that very same top 5. Would love to somehow land both Yakupov and Galchenyuk but that isn't going to happen. They already have chemistry together not to mention the skill they both have..Might not get either one..

eclipse2411 is offline  
Old
06-19-2012, 10:46 AM
  #904
ernmorris
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 205
vCash: 500
I have a general draft philosophy question for the group - not necessarily related to the CBJ.

I've seen some people mention "drafting for team needs" and I've also seen some 'experts' say to "take the best available player" in the draft.

With that said, if you were in charge of a teams draft which would be your philosophy?

Tying this back to the CBJ, if we were drafting for team needs we would have to go with a foward, right? (Yak or Galchenyuk - whichever one is available)
If we're taking the best available, then Murray may enter back into the equation (my opinion).

Random thought: if Yak & Galchenyuk go 1 & 2 could this end up being the "yak & yuk" draft? A few years ago we had the "Taylor/Tyler" draft. Ok, bad joke. 2 minute banning for that one.

ernmorris is offline  
Old
06-19-2012, 10:54 AM
  #905
KeithBWhittington
Going North
 
KeithBWhittington's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Brick by Brick
Country: Hungary
Posts: 10,208
vCash: 500
When you are drafting this high, you should always take BPA. "Needs" can be filled throughout the rest of the draft. And "needs" are changing constantly.

KeithBWhittington is offline  
Old
06-19-2012, 11:00 AM
  #906
alphafox
Registered User
 
alphafox's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 815
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ernmorris View Post
I have a general draft philosophy question for the group - not necessarily related to the CBJ.

I've seen some people mention "drafting for team needs" and I've also seen some 'experts' say to "take the best available player" in the draft.

With that said, if you were in charge of a teams draft which would be your philosophy?

Tying this back to the CBJ, if we were drafting for team needs we would have to go with a foward, right? (Yak or Galchenyuk - whichever one is available)
If we're taking the best available, then Murray may enter back into the equation (my opinion).
I hate to sound like an exec, but it has got to be a bit of both. I think you look at talent first (BPA) and make a decision of what level the talent is available and if someone clearly is head and shoulder's better you take them (You could be in desperate need of Defense but you don't pass up Crosby, Malkin, or Stamkos, otherwise all the talent available being about the same level you draft for need. (i.e. in my opinion you go with BPA and use positional need as a tie breaker)

The issue is really prevalent in drafts like this one where no one has really separated themselves from the field. Just look at this draft thread I've seen Yakupov, Galchenyuk, Forsberg, Murray, and Grigorenko all stated as potentially the best player to come out of this years draft. I've seen other places pushing Reinhart, Trouba, and Teuvo as elite guys as well. This year I think is a situation where drafting for need is going to be a major factor because there isn't a really significant talent difference between the top 5-10 guys.

alphafox is offline  
Old
06-19-2012, 11:06 AM
  #907
Ludicrous Speed
Registered User
 
Ludicrous Speed's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Killumbus
Country: Micronesia
Posts: 10,927
vCash: 500
I must say, KBW, that your new avatar is way more appealing than having to see that POS Priest every time you post

A Sens fan on the main board proposed this:

Zibanejad
Foligno
15th ovr
Lehner
Ottawa 3rd
Nashville 3rd


for

Nash
31st
Savard

Good value IMO. I would try to change Savard to Moore, given our lack of righties. Then I would take Murray at 2, because now we would have a guy to fill in the top six with Foligno, and would net a nice prospect in Zbad. The pressure to take a forward would be gone, and Murray is a guy with very little question marks, something that should appeal to all given how bad our luck is with swinging for the fences. Then take Collberg if he's there at 15 to get the Swedish connection with Zibanejad (and hey, keep LA's pick and hope Dansk is there to go for the double Swedish connection at 2 positions!).

Ludicrous Speed is offline  
Old
06-19-2012, 11:23 AM
  #908
RDriesenUD
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 7,517
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ernmorris View Post
I have a general draft philosophy question for the group - not necessarily related to the CBJ.

I've seen some people mention "drafting for team needs" and I've also seen some 'experts' say to "take the best available player" in the draft.

With that said, if you were in charge of a teams draft which would be your philosophy?

Tying this back to the CBJ, if we were drafting for team needs we would have to go with a foward, right? (Yak or Galchenyuk - whichever one is available)
If we're taking the best available, then Murray may enter back into the equation (my opinion).

Random thought: if Yak & Galchenyuk go 1 & 2 could this end up being the "yak & yuk" draft? A few years ago we had the "Taylor/Tyler" draft. Ok, bad joke. 2 minute banning for that one.
I would put the prospects in tiers. Tier 1, Tier 2, etc.... I would then take the best player availlable who fits my teams philosophy from the highest tier. I.E. I wouldn't take anyone from Tier 2 until no one is left in Tier 1.

RDriesenUD is offline  
Old
06-19-2012, 11:24 AM
  #909
Fro
Yes Cbus has hockey
 
Fro's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Drinking With Carts
Country: United States
Posts: 12,778
vCash: 500
i have always looked at it that you take BPA with a caveat...and that is if you can and it isn't a reach, you take the BPA at the position you need most...which continues to lead me back to Galch

Fro is offline  
Old
06-19-2012, 11:24 AM
  #910
CBJBrassard16
Sergei BobTrollsky
 
CBJBrassard16's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 11,809
vCash: 500
When you pick top 5, you always go BPA. If you have a need for an amazing two way defenseman defenseman, but a potential 40 goal scoring superstar is there, you go with the superstar.

CBJBrassard16 is offline  
Old
06-19-2012, 11:26 AM
  #911
RDriesenUD
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 7,517
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ludicrous Speed View Post
I must say, KBW, that your new avatar is way more appealing than having to see that POS Priest every time you post

A Sens fan on the main board proposed this:

Zibanejad
Foligno
15th ovr
Lehner
Ottawa 3rd
Nashville 3rd


for

Nash
31st
Savard

Good value IMO. I would try to change Savard to Moore, given our lack of righties. Then I would take Murray at 2, because now we would have a guy to fill in the top six with Foligno, and would net a nice prospect in Zbad. The pressure to take a forward would be gone, and Murray is a guy with very little question marks, something that should appeal to all given how bad our luck is with swinging for the fences. Then take Collberg if he's there at 15 to get the Swedish connection with Zibanejad (and hey, keep LA's pick and hope Dansk is there to go for the double Swedish connection at 2 positions!).
This is probably good, but I would rather trade something else than the 31st. I would like to keep that to pick a goaltender while getting to keep the LA pick for 2013.

RDriesenUD is offline  
Old
06-19-2012, 11:38 AM
  #912
JacketsFanWest
Registered User
 
JacketsFanWest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Country: Sweden
Posts: 2,686
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sore Loser View Post
3.Ryan Murray. JFW, usually I agree with you, but here I think you're wrong. Murray is a "safe pick" for exactly the reasons you mentioned; but I think he does have #1 defenseman upside. That being said, he isn't our biggest need.
IMO, his offensive numbers depend on the team that surrounds him and with the Jackets, that's not exactly going to help him.

Both Murray and Forsberg do the little things right, which is less obvious when watching clips on YouTube, but it's what's the difference between being NHL ready and looking great in pre-season but faltering in the regular season like so many other Jackets first round picks. I do like that Murray is CBJ development proof but I do worry that his ceiling isn't quite as high as other players and that some defenseman available later have just as high of ceilings.

Murray has had so much exposure from three years in the WHL as a highly rated prospects. In comparison, Hampus Lindholm was almost unknown last year and is now possibly a top 15 pick.

The problem I have with taking Murray is when will the Jackets get a shot at another top forward like a Galchenyuk or Forsberg? Maybe they solidify defensively and the goaltending this season through the draft, trades and free agent signings and next draft, getting a lottery pick and taking Mackinnon or Shinkaruk would be the best scenario, but I know season ticket holders paying to see aren't going be happy with another crappy season.

Waiting for a forward isn't going to be any easier. Looking back to the Nordiques, Peter Forsberg was drafted in 1991 and his debut was delayed by the lockout until 1995 and the Nords moved to Denver the following year. I was bugging Nords coach Pierre Page outside arenas about when Forsberg was going to come over (oh the days before the internet) and it was frustrating waiting.

The Jackets need skilled forwards. They could take Murray as a no-brainer, can't miss but less upside defenseman and then take undersized Euro skilled forwards like Collberg or Åberg (who have Huselius type potential) or very raw high schoolers like Jankowski or Nieves with the 2nd round picks and hope they develop but any forward taken in the 2nd round is going to be a longer term project.

I'd rather go with a higher can't miss forward than take the chance on forwards available in the 2nd round (or with the Kings pick). Statistically, top forwards are drafted in the top 3 picks and defensemen are found throughout the draft. Murray's been quick to mature and held up well to being in the spotlight. But is the question is if he will be the best player available in 5 years.

JacketsFanWest is offline  
Old
06-19-2012, 11:55 AM
  #913
JacketsFanWest
Registered User
 
JacketsFanWest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Country: Sweden
Posts: 2,686
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nanabijou View Post
By the way, in terms of the goaltender watch from the Final TSN Draft Rankings, here are the goalies in the top 60...

24. Andrei Vasilevski
25. Malcolm Subban
35. Oscar Dansk
54. Matthew Murray

I'd like to see one of these 4 nabbed with one of our 2nd round picks.
Dansk is continuing to jump back and forth across the pond and has said he's going to the CHL. Likely will he be taken by the London Knights in the import draft and that will probably increase his draft stock.

Dansk previously was at Shattuck St Mary's boarding school in MN, then left his junior year to work with a better coach in Sweden in Gävle Sweden (he's from Stockholm) and now bailed on his Swedish team to head to Ontario. Lots of good coaching, not a lot of team loyalty.

Still, he's almost like a NA prospect, and he'll be drafted out of Europe, so he technically could play in the AHL next season and won't be subject to the CHL age restrictions. So, I could see Dansk going 1st round now.

I'd love the Jackets to get one of Subban, Dansk or Vasilevski, but it might require moving up. That's not worth it. If they don't fall to the 2nd, then I'd say take at least one if not two longer-term goalie prospects. Redline is very high on Yakupov's buddy Andrei Makarov. Finn Joonas Korpisalo may be highly underrated and the Jackets need to draft him before Nashville does. Drafting future Buckeye Collin Olson would give the Jackets goalie coach an opportunity to work more closely with him locally.

JacketsFanWest is offline  
Old
06-19-2012, 11:55 AM
  #914
Mayor Bee
\/me_____you\/
 
Mayor Bee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 13,592
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sore Loser View Post
I prefer Mike Winther, but it's really more a matter of preference than anything. With the lack of talented wings in this draft, I think it's entirely possible that Kosmachuk goes 5-10 spots ahead of Winther, but I don't think that has anything to do with skill level. What I love about Winther is that he has all of the tangibles, including an unparalleled work ethic. He plays center, but can play on the wing if he has to. With Kosmachuk, you're getting more of an up and down type player, a guy who drives the net and plays a more physical game than Winther.

Style comparison for Winther would have to be Brandon Dubinsky. For me, I see some obvious similarities in their games ... whether or not Winther ever gets to that level is debatable, though. For Kosmachuk, think more along the lines of Scottie Upshall ... a mid-sized winger with grit. Again, skillset comparison, not upside comparison.
Let's say that it gets to pick #28 and both Winther and Colton Sissons are on the board. Does the Kings' pick get used, with those two going #30 and #31, banking on using #45 in some way to get a goalie? Maybe draft Korpisalo or Makarov?

Mayor Bee is offline  
Old
06-19-2012, 12:07 PM
  #915
Ludicrous Speed
Registered User
 
Ludicrous Speed's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Killumbus
Country: Micronesia
Posts: 10,927
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by RDriesenUD View Post
This is probably good, but I would rather trade something else than the 31st. I would like to keep that to pick a goaltender while getting to keep the LA pick for 2013.
The Sens fan noted that if they were to deal Lehner, they'd want 31 coming back so they could replace him. Makes sense to me, I'd take Lehner over Dansk or Subban merely because he's ahead in development. We still could get Matt Murray at 45, and Collin Olson will go in the later rounds, and he'll be at OSU. There's still options aside from the guys available at 31, especially if Lehner would be coming back.

Ludicrous Speed is offline  
Old
06-19-2012, 12:22 PM
  #916
Double-Shift Lassé
Moderator
Just post better
 
Double-Shift Lassé's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Superurban Cbus
Country: United States
Posts: 17,022
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by RDriesenUD View Post
This is probably good, but I would rather trade something else than the 31st. I would like to keep that to pick a goaltender while getting to keep the LA pick for 2013.
Yep but I'd figure out how not to include Savard rather than the pick, if adding to Nash is necessary. Take out those draft picks coming in from OTT's side or something.

Then, you can either consider Lehner in place of the goalie you might have taken at 31, or, if you want, use the LA pick and take another goalie.

__________________
"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 Lassé is offline  
Old
06-19-2012, 12:25 PM
  #917
Xoggz22
Registered User
 
Xoggz22's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Columbus, Ohio
Country: United States
Posts: 3,905
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ernmorris View Post
I have a general draft philosophy question for the group - not necessarily related to the CBJ.

I've seen some people mention "drafting for team needs" and I've also seen some 'experts' say to "take the best available player" in the draft.

With that said, if you were in charge of a teams draft which would be your philosophy?

Tying this back to the CBJ, if we were drafting for team needs we would have to go with a foward, right? (Yak or Galchenyuk - whichever one is available)
If we're taking the best available, then Murray may enter back into the equation (my opinion).

Random thought: if Yak & Galchenyuk go 1 & 2 could this end up being the "yak & yuk" draft? A few years ago we had the "Taylor/Tyler" draft. Ok, bad joke. 2 minute banning for that one.
If you think about the draft and what it means for the short term...typically there aren't many players that will have an immediate impact. If you are at the top of the draft you most likely are lucky to have made a trade with a team that ended up sucking or your team had a tough year.

That being said I don't see any other way around BPA at the top end of the draft. Personally I would follow this philosophy throughout the entire draft with two exceptions: 1) I would draft a goaltender every year (I would target rd 3-7 unless there were high quality goalies worth drafting sooner) and 2) I don't live in a bubble and realize the organization has needs and requires depth at all positions.

Let's be honest, the #2 pick this year is not the difference between a playoff team and a loser next year. I would take the player that I project to have the best impact to my team. In my case, I choose Galchenyuk (again, I'm not expert, just my opinion). Murray works and so does Yakupov and Forsberg but the only players I see playing next year are Murray and Yakupov. However, I don't take them because they will play next year, I would take them if I felt it was best for the development of a winner.

As you get later in the draft it likely becomes more challenging to discuss BPA because clearly later rounds have players with bigger "holes" in their game. Which hole can you fix? What does the organization depth dictate? If it was a clear choice on better player, I'd still take that player.

You can always sign players or make trades to fill needs.

Xoggz22 is offline  
Old
06-19-2012, 12:30 PM
  #918
Xoggz22
Registered User
 
Xoggz22's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Columbus, Ohio
Country: United States
Posts: 3,905
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ludicrous Speed View Post
A Sens fan on the main board proposed this:

Zibanejad
Foligno
15th ovr
Lehner
Ottawa 3rd
Nashville 3rd


for

Nash
31st
Savard
I think Ottawa gets the better of this deal. I would remove the picks on both sides and take out Savard. Put the CBJ 3rd in there or possibly the Ottawa 2nd (we own it) and that seems more realistic to me.

Nash for #15, Z and Foligno (seems light to me and too much "hope")
Ottawa 2nd for Lehner

As I finished typing this reply, I think the Nash portion would need to change (unless the argument is Lehner is worth more than a mid 2nd).

Xoggz22 is offline  
Old
06-19-2012, 12:52 PM
  #919
RDriesenUD
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 7,517
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ludicrous Speed View Post
The Sens fan noted that if they were to deal Lehner, they'd want 31 coming back so they could replace him. Makes sense to me, I'd take Lehner over Dansk or Subban merely because he's ahead in development. We still could get Matt Murray at 45, and Collin Olson will go in the later rounds, and he'll be at OSU. There's still options aside from the guys available at 31, especially if Lehner would be coming back.
Yeah, like I said, it is just what I would prefer .

RDriesenUD is offline  
Old
06-19-2012, 01:06 PM
  #920
Viqsi
"They're back."
 
Viqsi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: The Scary Internet
Country: United States
Posts: 20,095
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Viqsi
Quote:
Originally Posted by Double-Shift Lassé View Post
You're funny.
Sometimes even intentionally!

Quote:
Originally Posted by SuperGenius View Post
The problem is that it seems only reason some agree that this will happen is because they think it's a bad idea.

We've apparently gone from complaining about what actually happens to what might happen to assuming that no matter what, whatever we think is a good idea, won't happen.

It sucks the life out of the room, frankly.
This. It's why I keep kvetching and smacking people around, because I'm tired of this apathetic malaise. I'm here to be entertained, not to cultivate depression, so I don't care how frustrated you are you're going to stand up and ****ing CHEER or else I'm going to set you on fire.


DISCLAIMER: Some mild overstatement and/or hyperbole may have been used in the preceding paragraph.

Quote:
Originally Posted by CapnCornelius View Post
I don't know about Robert, but I feel Savard and Moore are question marks at this point. It isn't clear to me that Savard will ever be good enough in his zone to become anything more than a bottom pairing player. Moore clearly struggled as the season progressed last year. So to just assume the cupboard is full and we can close up shop is misguided.

The only guy in our entire system that I personally think of as a true top pairing defenseman is Johnson. That said, he and Wiz had good chemistry last season and I'm hoping that they continue to work as a pair. However, that wouldn't keep me from drafting a Murray or a Reinhart (depending on trades within the draft). Nashville has done a pretty good job by always having defensive prospects knowing that they can always trade them for forwards if they need to. Finding later that you have to trade for defense is not a good position to be in.
How many high-end forwards does Nashville have, again? I count one - Martin Erat. A case could eventually be made for Sergei Kostitsyn. But everyone else on there is second-line at best.

I certainly appreciate their ability to get to the playoffs year after year. But you can't just say "just always draft X and it'll turn out okay."


As for who to pick... I see good reasons for and against all three of the usual suspects. I'm willing to go with any of 'em. It's not like I'm the one who has to make the decision.

__________________
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
06-19-2012, 01:17 PM
  #921
ernmorris
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 205
vCash: 500
Article on Galchenyuk:
Quote:
The old saying is that a player can't lose his position due to injury.

It's a tired cliché, but the reality is much less genuine than the good natured undertones would suggest in a world where results are the bottom line.

...
http://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/draft...yuk_long_road/

ernmorris is offline  
Old
06-19-2012, 01:24 PM
  #922
Sore Loser
Since 2009
 
Sore Loser's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Spokane, WA.
Country: United States
Posts: 5,553
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JacketsFanWest View Post
IMO, his offensive numbers depend on the team that surrounds him and with the Jackets, that's not exactly going to help him.

Both Murray and Forsberg do the little things right, which is less obvious when watching clips on YouTube, but it's what's the difference between being NHL ready and looking great in pre-season but faltering in the regular season like so many other Jackets first round picks. I do like that Murray is CBJ development proof but I do worry that his ceiling isn't quite as high as other players and that some defenseman available later have just as high of ceilings.

Murray has had so much exposure from three years in the WHL as a highly rated prospects. In comparison, Hampus Lindholm was almost unknown last year and is now possibly a top 15 pick.

The problem I have with taking Murray is when will the Jackets get a shot at another top forward like a Galchenyuk or Forsberg? Maybe they solidify defensively and the goaltending this season through the draft, trades and free agent signings and next draft, getting a lottery pick and taking Mackinnon or Shinkaruk would be the best scenario, but I know season ticket holders paying to see aren't going be happy with another crappy season.

Waiting for a forward isn't going to be any easier. Looking back to the Nordiques, Peter Forsberg was drafted in 1991 and his debut was delayed by the lockout until 1995 and the Nords moved to Denver the following year. I was bugging Nords coach Pierre Page outside arenas about when Forsberg was going to come over (oh the days before the internet) and it was frustrating waiting.

The Jackets need skilled forwards. They could take Murray as a no-brainer, can't miss but less upside defenseman and then take undersized Euro skilled forwards like Collberg or Åberg (who have Huselius type potential) or very raw high schoolers like Jankowski or Nieves with the 2nd round picks and hope they develop but any forward taken in the 2nd round is going to be a longer term project.

I'd rather go with a higher can't miss forward than take the chance on forwards available in the 2nd round (or with the Kings pick). Statistically, top forwards are drafted in the top 3 picks and defensemen are found throughout the draft. Murray's been quick to mature and held up well to being in the spotlight. But is the question is if he will be the best player available in 5 years.
I agree, mostly. I had Galchenyuk and Yakupov ahead of Murray on my list of "wants".

The bolded part, however, raised a question mark with me. Everett was not a high scoring team by anyone's standards - 185 goals for was third worst in the Western Hockey League, and yet Murray still managed to lead his team's defense corps in scoring, despite playing in 13 fewer games than the next closest scorer. Last season, he finished third on his entire team in scoring with 46 points (while only missing two regular season games), on a team that scored the second fewest goals in the WHL (172). Average points per game were 0.66 last year, and 0.67 this year.

Everett is by no means an offensive powerhouse in the WHL. The fact that Ryan Murray was an even player this year speaks volumes about him, as his team only won 22 of their 72 games, and finished with a -83 goal differential.

I won't go as far as saying his offensive game is at an elite level, but I think he's being discounted here. I see him being a 40-50 point defenseman in the NHL, while also being a very reliable shutdown player. He says he likes to model his game after Duncan Keith ... whether or not he ever gets there is certainly debatable, but I really see some quality features in Ryan Murray.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mayor Bee View Post
Let's say that it gets to pick #28 and both Winther and Colton Sissons are on the board. Does the Kings' pick get used, with those two going #30 and #31, banking on using #45 in some way to get a goalie? Maybe draft Korpisalo or Makarov?
I don't think so. I think the only reason we keep that LA Kings pick this year is if someone who is high on our list falls to that spot. I don't think Colton Sissons would be that high on our list of needs, as he projects - high end - as a middle 6 wing. Winther should be available with pick #45; and if he's not, I don't that makes or breaks our entire draft, as there should still be some quality players on the board. Makarov will probably be available in the third round - we might be able to either trade down and get assets, or trade our fourth rounders up and select him, again depending on how bad we think we need him. Remember, he's a second year eligible (late bloomer).

I honestly don't think that keeping the LA Kings pick this year is going to bring us a game changer. If someone like Derrick Pouliot or Matt Finn falls down and we want to land one of them, and one of the three goaltenders (Subban, Dansk, Vasilevski - in that order) are still there, then we keep the pick. Otherwise, we're just going to wind up with a prospect who will be a bottom of the lineup player at best.

Sore Loser is offline  
Old
06-19-2012, 01:31 PM
  #923
Double-Shift Lassé
Moderator
Just post better
 
Double-Shift Lassé's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Superurban Cbus
Country: United States
Posts: 17,022
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Viqsi View Post

But you can't just say "just always draft X and it'll turn out okay."


Double-Shift Lassé is offline  
Old
06-19-2012, 02:04 PM
  #924
Viqsi
"They're back."
 
Viqsi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: The Scary Internet
Country: United States
Posts: 20,095
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Viqsi
Quote:
Originally Posted by Double-Shift Lassé View Post
That was performed before I was born.

Thank you for making me feel young again.

Viqsi is offline  
Old
06-19-2012, 02:31 PM
  #925
leesmith
"We're NEVER Done!"
 
leesmith's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 15,009
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by eclipse2411 View Post
I have that very same top 5. Would love to somehow land both Yakupov and Galchenyuk but that isn't going to happen. They already have chemistry together not to mention the skill they both have..Might not get either one..
How can we get BOTH?

leesmith 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 05:02 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.