I don't want Drouin because he plays with MacKinnon, I want him because he's an awesome player. To get both would be unbeleivable. I would just about trade LA and NY's picks for #3 and take Drouin after taking MacKinnon or Jones at the top.
I don't want Drouin because he plays with MacKinnon, I want him because he's an awesome player. To get both would be unbeleivable. I would just about trade LA and NY's picks for #3 and take Drouin after taking MacKinnon or Jones at the top.
If all it took was those two picks, I'd do it without hesitation.
FYI apparently the new draft system WON'T be in place for this year, the odds won't change, the lottery winner will still however get the first overall.
Artturi Lehkonen is also that type of player. Maybe doesn't have the leadership and is rather smallish. Also just suffered his 2nd concussion this year. Probably drops to 2nd round. If we get another 2nd rounder, wouldn't mind to pick him up. JK has seen a lot of him, I'm sure.
From my limited viewings, Curtis Lazar seems to fit the bill. But I think we already have similar players.
FYI apparently the new draft system WON'T be in place for this year, the odds won't change, the lottery winner will still however get the first overall.
So 30th overall still has a 48.something percent chance at landing the #1 overall pick? Fine with me.
I believe it means that the odds for the non-playoff teams will not change. So that any non-playoff team can win the lottery, but not any other team. While that can happen the odds of that happening right now are extremely small, and I believe the discussion was to increase the chances, which will not be happening this year.
So I don't think any playoff team can win the lottery. I may be mistaken however.
So 30th overall still has a 48.something percent chance at landing the #1 overall pick? Fine with me.
No, it is 25% like it was before. The only difference is now all lottery teams can move up to first, so the team that finishes last no longer has the extra % from the teams who couldn't move up to first before. That is why it used to be 48.2%
Before, the last place team got the 1st pick if any of the teams bolded won the lottery. Now, they can only get the first pick if they win the lottery.
If the Kings decide to continue to suck and Rick Nash has a concussion, there's a chance at having a stupidly high shot at it (and still losing to EDM).
Could you imagine the Rags fans if they had the 14the pick and won the lottery.. I think the boards might implode..
Quote:
Originally Posted by Matthew
Oh well.
If the Kings decide to continue to suck and Rick Nash has a concussion, there's a chance at having a stupidly high shot at it (and still losing to EDM).
I sincerely hope that both teams crash and burn, but it is looking less and less likely. The kings goalies are getting hot and the Rags are finally getting into Torts system.
I'm betting they are both first round playoff exits, which would still give us a decent first round. (though not the dream one that many of us are hoping for)
No, it is 25% like it was before. The only difference is now all lottery teams can move up to first, so the team that finishes last no longer has the extra % from the teams who couldn't move up to first before. That is why it used to be 48.2%
Before, the last place team got the 1st pick if any of the teams bolded won the lottery. Now, they can only get the first pick if they win the lottery.
Thanks for all the background SL. I've enjoyed reading your insights.
I realize this may be hard to judge, but is there a Toews or (better yet) Yzerman type of "win at all costs" leader in this draft?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mayor Bee
Take it for what it's worth, but those are the two names most commonly used when describing Sean Monahan.
This is correct, Monahan is probably the closest to this "type" that you'll see. That being said, I don't think there's anyone near the level of a Toews or Yzerman ... I think of Monahan as a good #1b or #2a type of center. Maybe more of a Jordan Staal than anything.
I still think it's really dumb that the worst team in the league only gets a 25% chance at retaining the first overall.
I tend to agree, although as the Jackets begin their climb up the ladder at least they will have a chance to pick number 1 for at least a couple of seasons.
I tend to agree, although as the Jackets begin their climb up the ladder at least they will have a chance to pick number 1 for at least a couple of seasons.
Great point! Also, the last place team who may get beat out for 1st overall will get a solid conciliation price with the 2nd overall pick.
Personally, I'll call this draft a win if we get one of (Mackinnon, Jones, Barkov Drouin) & one of (Domi, Mantha Erne).
Also, random speculation time. Where do you guys think Johansen would rank in this draft? And would you trade him if it meant getting another player in the top 10 of the draft?
I ask this because there are a considerable number of centers in this draft that I think are first line talents (Mack, Barkov, maybe Drouin, Monahan, Lindholm, and Domi). We could, in this scenario, pick two of them and use the other picks on Wings and maybe D.
Quick mock of this theoretical first round for us if we decide to go full court press for offense.
Also, the more and more I look at this draft I feel we will either trade up or down with our second first rounder. I would bet that near the end of the top 10 there is going to be a run on D-men (like the run on forwards that saw folwer drop his draft year). I would bet in picks 8-11 or so will see Risto, Pulock, Nurse, Zadorov, Morrissey, and maybe even a reach like Hagg come off the board leaving some premier offensive talent in the 12-20 range like Shinkaruk, Domi, Erne, Mantha, Wennberg.
Also, random speculation time. Where do you guys think Johansen would rank in this draft? And would you trade him if it meant getting another player in the top 10 of the draft?
How long of a rebuild are you planning? Not only are you giving up on one prospect in exchange for an unknown, you're pushing back when you will get a serviceable player by 2 years.
Had Johan spent all of last year in the WHL, all of this season in the AHL, we'd be excited to see him next year in the NHL. But because he was in the NHL last year, not getting much playing time, then sent to the AHL this year to properly develop where he should, people see it as a regression, and are ready to give up on him.
How long of a rebuild are you planning? Not only are you giving up on one prospect in exchange for an unknown, you're pushing back when you will get a serviceable player by 2 years.
Had Johan spent all of last year in the WHL, all of this season in the AHL, we'd be excited to see him next year in the NHL. But because he was in the NHL last year, not getting much playing time, then sent to the AHL this year to properly develop where he should, people see it as a regression, and are ready to give up on him.
I'm not necessarily advocating it, I was just wondering aloud as it were. (For the record I also am a big Johansen fan and think he shouldn't have been sent down). However, I do think that there are a number of players this year who have at least as high a ceiling as Johansen (though Johansen's floor is now significantly higher than all but a few, with how well his defensive game has progressed)
As for the rebuild time, I imagine that it will be three years+ regardless of if we have Johansen or not. As for regression, I don't see it. He was being asked to concentrate on everything but scoring in the AHL and it showed when he was called up. Johan is rounding out his game not regressing.
My biggest fear though is that when he is called up and he will end up not achieving his full potential, because as a playmaker he has no finishers around him. Johansen is not like Nash who could single handedly manufacture goals regardless of the team around him. Johansen is excellent at opening up the ice and breaking defenses down creating opportunities for others. His passing, vision and Hockey IQ are IMO already among the highest on the team, but his game requires adequate linemates. I couldn't count the number of times this year that Johan made a great pass or a smart play that went unheralded because his line mates were incapable of playing at that level.
Edit:
BTW midway through the post I realized that I knew my own answer to trading Johan was no, unless he we can get one of Mackinnon, Jones, Drouin, Barkov for him.
I'm not necessarily advocating it, I was just wondering aloud as it were. (For the record I also am a big Johansen fan and think he shouldn't have been sent down). However, I do think that there are a number of players this year who have at least as high a ceiling as Johansen (though Johansen's floor is now the significantly higher than all but a few, with how well his defensive game has progressed)
As for the rebuild time, I imagine that it will be three years+ regardless of if we have Johansen or not. As for regression, I don't see it. He was being asked to concentrate on everything but scoring in the AHL and it showed when he was called up. Johan is rounding out his game not regressing.
My biggest fear though is that when he is called up and he will end up not achieving his full potential, because as a playmaker he has no finishers around him. Johansen is not like Nash who could single handedly manufacture goals regardless of the team around him. Johansen is excellent at opening up the ice and breaking defenses down creating opportunities for others. His passing, vision and Hockey IQ are IMO already among the highest on the team, but his game requires adequate linemates. I couldn't count the number of times this year that Johan made a great pass or a smart play that went unheralded because his line mates were incapable of playing at that level.
Edit:
BTW midway through the post I realized that I knew my own answer to trading Johan was no, unless he we can get one of Mackinnon, Jones, Drouin, Barkov for him.
If we get Jones we need to keep johansen. I don't see us trading for Jones.
Seems to me, most good teams in the salary cap era are building around a corps of 7 key "skill" players. 4 on offense, 2 on defense, and 1 goalie. Then 13-15 complementary players to round out the roster. Chicago is a good example of this, though some question remains about the goalie. Anaheim, Pittsburgh, Vancouver, and Boston are also good examples.
Offensively none of those teams load up a single line with three great offensive players, they put two studs and a complementary player together on the top two lines. Defensively they typically play their big minute eaters together. This usually consists of an offensive minded d-man and a traditional stay at home type who can cover his partner's back.
Clearly we have the 13-15 complementary players, the question is who are our 7 key "skill" guys and who is available via draft, trade, or free agency to make out the roster?
Elite Top Line Winger (80+ points)- We need this guy
Elite Top Line Center (80+ points)- We need this guy
Very Good 2nd line winger (50-80 points)- We need this guy
Very Good 2nd line center (50-80 points)- We need this guy
Complementary Top line winger (60ish points)-Atkinson or Johan (I think he'll end up a power forward, not a center)
Complementary 2nd line winger (40ish points)-Anisimov,
Third line (defensively capable) Dubi, Jenner, Foligno, Calvert, Letestu
4th line (energy creators)-Boll, Mac, Dorsett, Gillies
Top Pairing Offensive Defenseman (40-50 points) Perhaps JJ
Top Pairing (SAH) Stay at home D-man (+20) Need this guy
2nd Pairing Offensive Defenseman (30-40 points) Wiz
2nd Pairing SAH (+15) Moore
3rd Pairing Offensive Defenseman (20-30 points) Erixon
3rd Pairing SAH (+10) Murray
#1 Goalie (2.0 GA/.920%) we need this guy
#2 Goalie (someone who can be reliable in a pinch) Mason or Bob is fine with me.
Of the 7 key "skill" positions we currently have 1 filled (JJ).
I don't see a place on this roster for Brassard, Umberger, or Nikitin. I also think we should trade some players who are fighting for the same spot, like Wiz or Tyutin. We don't need two 2nd pairing offensive defensemen when we have so many other holes. Same could be said for trading one of Anisimov, Atkinson, or Johan (unless we think he is a top 4 offensive player).
Seems to me, most good teams in the salary cap era are building around a corps of 7 key "skill" players. 4 on offense, 2 on defense, and 1 goalie. Then 13-15 complementary players to round out the roster. Chicago is a good example of this, though some question remains about the goalie. Anaheim, Pittsburgh, Vancouver, and Boston are also good examples.
Offensively none of those teams load up a single line with three great offensive players, they put two studs and a complementary player together on the top two lines. Defensively they typically play their big minute eaters together. This usually consists of an offensive minded d-man and a traditional stay at home type who can cover his partner's back.
Clearly we have the 13-15 complementary players, the question is who are our 7 key "skill" guys and who is available via draft, trade, or free agency to make out the roster?
Elite Top Line Winger (80+ points)- We need this guy
Elite Top Line Center (80+ points)- We need this guy
Very Good 2nd line winger (50-80 points)- We need this guy
Very Good 2nd line center (50-80 points)- We need this guy
Complementary Top line winger (60ish points)-Atkinson or Johan (I think he'll end up a power forward, not a center)
Complementary 2nd line winger (40ish points)-Anisimov,
Third line (defensively capable) Dubi, Jenner, Foligno, Calvert, Letestu
4th line (energy creators)-Boll, Mac, Dorsett, Gillies
Top Pairing Offensive Defenseman (40-50 points) Perhaps JJ
Top Pairing (SAH) Stay at home D-man (+20) Need this guy
2nd Pairing Offensive Defenseman (30-40 points) Wiz
2nd Pairing SAH (+15) Moore
3rd Pairing Offensive Defenseman (20-30 points) Erixon
3rd Pairing SAH (+10) Murray
#1 Goalie (2.0 GA/.920%) we need this guy
#2 Goalie (someone who can be reliable in a pinch) Mason or Bob is fine with me.
Of the 7 key "skill" positions we currently have 1 filled (JJ).
I don't see a place on this roster for Brassard, Umberger, or Nikitin. I also think we should trade some players who are fighting for the same spot, like Wiz or Tyutin. We don't need two 2nd pairing offensive defensemen when we have so many other holes. Same could be said for trading one of Anisimov, Atkinson, or Johan (unless we think he is a top 4 offensive player).
The major flaw I see in the analysis here is the theory that certain players presently on the roster won't be part of a final, competitive roster, so therefore "they should be traded immediately for draft picks."
The problem with that is that we still need to ice an NHL team in the interim, and throwing kids to the wolves is rarely good for their development. They still need to EARN places rather than have 'em handed over.
Also, historically, Umberger fits into that "very good 2nd line winger" category so long as he's not being asked to carry the load by himself. Whether or not he'll still be there by the time we're competitive is debatable, but frankly I don't know what you're projecting this roster concept for - next year or several years from now.
__________________
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!
Seems to me, most good teams in the salary cap era are building around a corps of 7 key "skill" players. 4 on offense, 2 on defense, and 1 goalie. Then 13-15 complementary players to round out the roster. Chicago is a good example of this, though some question remains about the goalie. Anaheim, Pittsburgh, Vancouver, and Boston are also good examples.
Offensively none of those teams load up a single line with three great offensive players, they put two studs and a complementary player together on the top two lines. Defensively they typically play their big minute eaters together. This usually consists of an offensive minded d-man and a traditional stay at home type who can cover his partner's back.
Clearly we have the 13-15 complementary players, the question is who are our 7 key "skill" guys and who is available via draft, trade, or free agency to make out the roster?
Elite Top Line Winger (80+ points)- We need this guy
Elite Top Line Center (80+ points)- We need this guy
Very Good 2nd line winger (50-80 points)- We need this guy
Very Good 2nd line center (50-80 points)- We need this guy
Complementary Top line winger (60ish points)-Atkinson or Johan (I think he'll end up a power forward, not a center)
Complementary 2nd line winger (40ish points)-Anisimov,
Third line (defensively capable) Dubi, Jenner, Foligno, Calvert, Letestu
4th line (energy creators)-Boll, Mac, Dorsett, Gillies
Top Pairing Offensive Defenseman (40-50 points) Perhaps JJ
Top Pairing (SAH) Stay at home D-man (+20) Need this guy
2nd Pairing Offensive Defenseman (30-40 points) Wiz
2nd Pairing SAH (+15) Moore
3rd Pairing Offensive Defenseman (20-30 points) Erixon
3rd Pairing SAH (+10) Murray
#1 Goalie (2.0 GA/.920%) we need this guy
#2 Goalie (someone who can be reliable in a pinch) Mason or Bob is fine with me.
Of the 7 key "skill" positions we currently have 1 filled (JJ).
I don't see a place on this roster for Brassard, Umberger, or Nikitin. I also think we should trade some players who are fighting for the same spot, like Wiz or Tyutin. We don't need two 2nd pairing offensive defensemen when we have so many other holes. Same could be said for trading one of Anisimov, Atkinson, or Johan (unless we think he is a top 4 offensive player).
Not sure what time frame you project this to be. Next year, beginning, middle, end? Year after? Transitional period between now and when?
I don't think you can just throw everyone out with the bath water until such time as your projected replacements have demonstrated at least some ability to fill their roles. I don't see slash and burn as a viable rebuild strategy.
Seriously doubt Murray projects as 3rd pair SAH. And while I may agree with many of your other assessments, they are what we have until we have developed/acquired demonstrably better. Some will be moved sooner others later.
