Then you draft someone like Filatov, a guy who has high offensive upside but also high boom/bust chance.
If we were drafting 2nd and Mackinnon went first, I would have no problem taking Jones if they think he's superior to Barkov and Drouin. Think, a Murray - Jones pairing.
Do I hope to see Mackinnon in a CBJ sweater if this season goes like I think it's going? Absolutely. Would I be upset if they drafted Barkov, Drouin, Lindholm, Monahan, or Shinkaruk with picks 2-5? No, not if they truly believe that player is the best of who is available.
i would rather see a Johnson-Murray paiing
i dont think Jones is that good and have him 4th behind MacKinnon, Drouin and Barkov.
yeah lets just keep losing games 3-0, 3-1 etc because we kept taking BPA and didnt get scoring
We took scoring with Nash, Zherdev, Brule, Brassard, Voracek, Filatov, and Johansen. See how well that's turned out?
If the BPA is a forward, great take a forward. If the BPA isn't a forward, don't try to be smarter than everybody else by reaching or trading down. Good teams don't use high picks on needs. They use high picks on the best player available and then try to overcome needs later in the draft or by acquiring other players.
I think we need offense. Now if the scouts say Seth Jones is the second coming of Niklas Lindstrom and MacKinnon and company are average top picks and in any other year would be mid first rounders then fine take Jones. But from what I've read this isn't the case and MacKinnon in particular is an above average talent. I say take MacKinnon.
And as a side note, good teams are usually not drafting high enough where they can cherry pick for a position so that argument is a bit weak. And for teams drafting 23 or 28 or wherever I can't believe that the BPA is readily determinable. Plus throw in the vagaries of the draft and who knows?
I think we need offense. Now if the scouts say Seth Jones is the second coming of Niklas Lindstrom and MacKinnon and company are average top picks and in any other year would be mid first rounders then fine take Jones. But from what I've read this isn't the case and MacKinnon in particular is an above average talent. I say take MacKinnon even if jones is the consensus BPA
And as a side note, good teams are usually not drafting high enough where they can cherry pick for a position so that argument is a bit weak. And for teams drafting 23 or 28 or wherever I can't believe that the BPA is readily determinable. Plus throw in the vagaries of the draft and who knows?
We took scoring with Nash, Zherdev, Brule, Brassard, Voracek, Filatov, and Johansen. See how well that's turned out?
If the BPA is a forward, great take a forward. If the BPA isn't a forward, don't try to be smarter than everybody else by reaching or trading down. Good teams don't use high picks on needs. They use high picks on the best player available and then try to overcome needs later in the draft or by acquiring other players.
well i guess if we're using that logic just fold the franchise and or dont draft anybody since we've been losing since we joined the the league
1- guy who can score
2- guy who can score
3- guy who can score
4- guy who can score
This. The Jackets need to put the puck into the net. No more drafting Dalton Smith types. There are enough in the system. They need goal scorers. If it takes 3 picks to have one that turns out, fine.
I was watching a DIF game and Alexander Wennberg has this uncanny ability to just go to the net and goals some how happen out of nowhere. You think nothing is happening on an offensive cycle and all of the sudden, Wennberg has deflected a puck into the net.
How many times in the last 2 games have the Jackets had the puck near the crease and a forward fanned on it, didn't even get a shot, or completely missed an open net.
They need creative forwards who can get the puck out of their own zone and through the neutral zone and players with sick hands that can make something out of nothing and put the puck into the net.
I don't understand how this is even debatable. We have no more than three forwards with NHL level offensive talent-Atkinson, Johansen and Prospal. Good teams usually 8-9 of the. To me every one of the three first round pickd should be used on offense.
well i guess if we're using that logic just fold the franchise and or dont draft anybody since we've been losing since we joined the the league
The logic is that just because you draft scoring doesn't mean you'll get scoring. With a high pick, you cannot afford to take a risk and fail. You need to simplify it. Focus on getting a player who you KNOW will be able to significantly contribute to your team in the near future in whatever important capacity.
For instance, with Ryan Murray, we can be reasonably sure that he will be a very good defenseman and can be with the team for a long time. Take him over a guy like Forsberg who could be a very productive forward in the NHL, may not be a productive forward but still be in the NHL, or not make the NHL at all.
Then there's always the refrain of "if we are extremely deep at a position, we can trade that depth for proven talent at another position." For instance, let's say Tyutin continues at his current clip of .75 points per game. That's a really good clip for a defenseman. If we draft Jones, maybe we can trade Tyutin for a good top-6 winger.
Quote:
Originally Posted by EspenK
And as a side note, good teams are usually not drafting high enough where they can cherry pick for a position so that argument is a bit weak.
Not true. You can have teams like Boston who drafted 2nd and 8th overall with Toronto's picks. But more commonly you have teams that are good now but were bad back then like the Blackhawks, Penguins, and Kings. They're the teams that suck for a while but turn it around like a team should. Not like Columbus or the Islanders who just suck and don't seem to turn it around despite constantly drafting high and having a revolving door of players and coaches.
For Howson and company, I will say this. I was saying this prior to the 2012 draft. Keep it simple, stupid. You aren't smarter than any of the other GM's. Don't try to be. Don't get fancy. Take a player who you know will be a major contributor at the NHL level and say thank you and go home. Because, as I've pointed out with our past draft history, we really struggle with that very basic concept. Master that first and THEN we can talk about jumping down a few spots to pick a European center over a "safe bet" defenseman. But first, show me you can draft and develop someone. Anyone.
The logic is that just because you draft scoring doesn't mean you'll get scoring. With a high pick, you cannot afford to take a risk and fail. You need to simplify it. Focus on getting a player who you KNOW will be able to significantly contribute to your team in the near future in whatever important capacity.
For instance, with Ryan Murray, we can be reasonably sure that he will be a very good defenseman and can be with the team for a long time. Take him over a guy like Forsberg who could be a very productive forward in the NHL, may not be a productive forward but still be in the NHL, or not make the NHL at all.
Then there's always the refrain of "if we are extremely deep at a position, we can trade that depth for proven talent at another position." For instance, let's say Tyutin continues at his current clip of .75 points per game. That's a really good clip for a defenseman. If we draft Jones, maybe we can trade Tyutin for a good top-6 winger.
Not true. You can have teams like Boston who drafted 2nd and 8th overall with Toronto's picks. But more commonly you have teams that are good now but were bad back then like the Blackhawks, Penguins, and Kings. They're the teams that suck for a while but turn it around like a team should. Not like Columbus or the Islanders who just suck and don't seem to turn it around despite constantly drafting high and having a revolving door of players and coaches.
For Howson and company, I will say this. I was saying this prior to the 2012 draft. Keep it simple, stupid. You aren't smarter than any of the other GM's. Don't try to be. Don't get fancy. Take a player who you know will be a major contributor at the NHL level and say thank you and go home. Because, as I've pointed out with our past draft history, we really struggle with that very basic concept. Master that first and THEN we can talk about jumping down a few spots to pick a European center over a "safe bet" defenseman. But first, show me you can draft and develop someone! Anyone!
but that logic also means just because you draft anything doesn't mean you're going to get it, its absolutley the worst possible logic there is, nobody ever knows how good draft prospects will turnout thats why drafts in all sports are called crap shoots
but that logic also means just because you draft anything doesn't mean you're going to get it, its absolutley the worst possible logic there is, nobody ever knows how good draft prospects will turnout thats why drafts in all sports are called crap shoots
Once again this is untrue. Some prospects are longer shots than others. Ryan Murray doesn't have the same odds of success that Mark Jankowski does. I'm not saying avoid drafting Mackinnon. I'm saying if we're sitting at #2 and it's a choice between Jones and Barkov and you think Jones is more likely to become an impact NHL'er, draft Jones regardless of what your team needs. If you think Barkov is the safer pick, draft Barkov.
if the draft ended today we would pick 2nd, 6th and 10th
Barkov, Mohanan and Zadorov anybody?
or
Jones,Mohanan and Erne/Domi/Mantha?
IMO, Jones will go #1, I love Mackinnon but Jones is the type of D-man that every team craves a potential Chara/Weber. If he is there and Mackinnon is gone we take him. Murray and Jones could become the next Suter-Weber.
So in your scenario I take option 2,
My personal scenario
2-Mackinnon 6-Lindholm/Monahan 10- Shinkaruk (if not there I'd trade back to take Erne)
Once again this is untrue. Some prospects are longer shots than others. Ryan Murray doesn't have the same odds of success that Mark Jankowski does. I'm not saying avoid drafting Mackinnon. I'm saying if we're sitting at #2 and it's a choice between Jones and Barkov and you think Jones is more likely to become an impact NHL'er, draft Jones regardless of what your team needs. If you think Barkov is the safer pick, draft Barkov.
no it isnt untrue you just want to cherry pick arguments
IMO, Jones will go #1, I love Mackinnon but Jones is the type of D-man that every team craves a potential Chara/Weber. If he is there and Mackinnon is gone we take him. Murray and Jones could become the next Suter-Weber.
So in your scenario I take option 2,
My personal scenario
2-Mackinnon 6-Lindholm/Monahan 10- Shinkaruk (if not there I'd trade back to take Erne)
and every team also craves a player like MacKinnon who could be a Malkin/earlier career Ovechkin
and every team also craves a player like MacKinnon who could be a Malkin/earlier career Ovechkin
Really? Did not know he was being projected as a generational talent with that kind of upside. I thought his upside was a step below the Malkin/Crosby/Stamkos level. I thought McDavid was the next once in a generation talent.
don't know that our scouts are that good, but I do look at the Blues and Davidson was part of that group. Draft Seth Jones and don't think twice about it. The rest of the draft can be traded to upgrade the 2nd two first rounders.
Really? Did not know he was being projected as a generational talent with that kind of upside. I thought his upside was a step below the Malkin/Crosby/Stamkos level. I thought McDavid was the next once in a generation talent.
He is sitting with 60 pts in 35 games so far this season.
Here how I look at it. Mackinnon and Jones are both franchise caliber players, and as a jackets fan of course everyone wants to see offense. But I think if the jackets are in the position to take Jones they should do it. They have an opportunity to acquire 2 franchise dmen, and still acquire two other highly talented players later in the 1st. Completely solidify that blueline, let the talent in the system up front get its opportunities and hopefully we can find a steal in the 1st Rd with nyr or LA's pick. Or he'll maybe we trade them both for another top 10 pick.
Here how I look at it. Mackinnon and Jones are both franchise caliber players, and as a jackets fan of course everyone wants to see offense. But I think if the jackets are in the position to take Jones they should do it. They have an opportunity to acquire 2 franchise dmen, and still acquire two other highly talented players later in the 1st. Completely solidify that blueline, let the talent in the system up front get its opportunities and hopefully we can find a steal in the 1st Rd with nyr or LA's pick. Or he'll maybe we trade them both for another top 10 pick.
but do you want to see just ok/average/good enough offense or an offense you can go into any game knowing you're getting at least 2 goals
Here how I look at it. Mackinnon and Jones are both franchise caliber players, and as a jackets fan of course everyone wants to see offense. But I think if the jackets are in the position to take Jones they should do it. They have an opportunity to acquire 2 franchise dmen, and still acquire two other highly talented players later in the 1st. Completely solidify that blueline, let the talent in the system up front get its opportunities and hopefully we can find a steal in the 1st Rd with nyr or LA's pick. Or he'll maybe we trade them both for another top 10 pick.
Maybe he was reffering to Ryan Murray? So draft Jones with our pick(Jones/Murray are the two franchise defensemen). Then he went onto say, "and still acquire two other highly talented players later in the 1st" So the two would be from the LA and NYR picks.
I like Drouin, I really do. His teammates say that his motor never stops, on or off the ice, and he's got sublime skill. But if I'm choosing between him and MacKinnon, it's Mac every time. There's a pattern every year where the guy in MacKinnon's position (i.e. Yakupov, Tavares, Hall, Stamkos to an extent) starts being dissected through and through, but there is a reason he and the others before him have been at the top of the class for so long. Drouin's stats may in fact be better, but it's all about how well their game translates to the pro level. I'm not saying Drouin is nothing special, or that his game won't translate. I'd love to take him if he's on the board at 4, MAYBE 3 (but Barkov is too impressive for me). All I'm saying is that there's always a reason why the MacKinnons, Joneses, Halls, etc. are at the top of the board from age 15-16. There's just simply no way you pass on MacKinnon at this stage of everyone's careers. He's a safe bet to be at worst a top six player, or even a role player, and a safe bet to be a special player. I don't think Drouin has the same certainties, and that's why he's rated lower.
This post is spot on. I remember people breaking down John Tavares to the point where many were saying ridiculous stuff like "I wouldn't take him top-5" ... well, not many people out there that wouldn't love to have this guy on their team. I think MacKinnon is something truly special; and while Drouin may have huge offensive upside, with MacKinnon you're getting a more sure thing and a better all-around player.
Quote:
Originally Posted by CBJBrassard16
Who's the other franchise defenseman?
Ryan Murray. And yes, he's that good.
Saw Seth Jones and the Portland Winterhawks live tonight in a 3-0 shutout over the Spokane Chiefs. Seth had three assists and was an absolute force on the ice, both physically and with the puck. If this guy isn't in the NHL next year it will be a big surprise to me - he's physically ready, and has excellent poise with the puck. Listed at 6'4", but I would say he's at least 6'5" and maybe even bigger. What's amazing is that he skates up the ice like a 5'10" forward, dodging hits and stickhandling smoothly. There is no awkwardness about him, just pure confidence and skill ... I've only seen this with a few other prospects in this league (Ryan Murray being one of them). I will be very surprised if this player lasts past the #2 pick at the draft in June; he's a very special athlete.
Really, after tonight, I don't care what our supposed "needs" are - if we're in a spot to land one of MacKinnon or Jones, it's a no brainer. For me, the two are ahead of the pack, and the only person that's even challenging would be Drouin - but I don't see him leapfrogging either one. Also a big fan of Barkov, but nowhere ahead of third overall.
This post is spot on. I remember people breaking down John Tavares to the point where many were saying ridiculous stuff like "I wouldn't take him top-5" ... well, not many people out there that wouldn't love to have this guy on their team. I think MacKinnon is something truly special; and while Drouin may have huge offensive upside, with MacKinnon you're getting a more sure thing and a better all-around player.
Ryan Murray. And yes, he's that good.
Saw Seth Jones and the Portland Winterhawks live tonight in a 3-0 shutout over the Spokane Chiefs. Seth had three assists and was an absolute force on the ice, both physically and with the puck. If this guy isn't in the NHL next year it will be a big surprise to me - he's physically ready, and has excellent poise with the puck. Listed at 6'4", but I would say he's at least 6'5" and maybe even bigger. What's amazing is that he skates up the ice like a 5'10" forward, dodging hits and stickhandling smoothly. There is no awkwardness about him, just pure confidence and skill ... I've only seen this with a few other prospects in this league (Ryan Murray being one of them). I will be very surprised if this player lasts past the #2 pick at the draft in June; he's a very special athlete.
Really, after tonight, I don't care what our supposed "needs" are - if we're in a spot to land one of MacKinnon or Jones, it's a no brainer. For me, the two are ahead of the pack, and the only person that's even challenging would be Drouin - but I don't see him leapfrogging either one. Also a big fan of Barkov, but nowhere ahead of third overall.
