HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Western Conference > Pacific Division > Anaheim Ducks
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

Ducks Pick 9th

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
04-09-2004, 07:53 PM
  #26
Professor John Frink
Registered User
 
Professor John Frink's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Country: United States
Posts: 2,806
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to Professor John Frink
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fighter
Exactly mi thoughts. Olesz could be ours only with a trade, and I don't think that BM would trade someone for him cause we all know he prefer NA guys.

Why do you think Thelen is a risk pick? It seems he is a solid d-man, maybe because he plays in the NCAA and not in the CHL?
He is a risky pick in that he has really come out of nowhere this season to shoot up the rankings. Which should always bring up a bit of a red flag. In that he could just be having a great year at the perfect time. Don't get me wrong I like him alot and wouldn;t be upset at all if we drafted him at 9. I also wouldn;t be surprised if he never reached the potential they hoped for him by drafting him at 9.

I actually prefer a lot of college players to junior guys. They are more mature IMO and are willing to work harder. They pan out less, but to me they are better team guys.

Professor John Frink is online now  
Old
04-09-2004, 07:57 PM
  #27
Jerky Leclerc
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Anaheim
Country: United States
Posts: 7,637
vCash: 500
Bryan Murray's draft record. Lupul and Brent in 2003. Getzlaf and Perry in 2003. Does anyone have the feeling Murray is staying away from the Euros? Size and character seems to be the premium with Murray so I fully expect the same in 2004. I would be very surprise if we drafted a Euro forward at #9.

Jerky Leclerc is offline  
Old
04-09-2004, 09:51 PM
  #28
Professor John Frink
Registered User
 
Professor John Frink's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Country: United States
Posts: 2,806
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to Professor John Frink
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jerky Leclerc
Bryan Murray's draft record. Lupul and Brent in 2003. Getzlaf and Perry in 2003. Does anyone have the feeling Murray is staying away from the Euros? Size and character seems to be the premium with Murray so I fully expect the same in 2004. I would be very surprise if we drafted a Euro forward at #9.
Agreed, he is looking for size, heart and charachter mostly for the future of this team. However I think in the past two drafts with both our first two picks, the consensus was Lupul and Getzlaf all around the league. This year at number 9 there is not just one guy who can or should go there are a few that could go.

Perry was different in that the scouts obviously really wanted him to trade up to get him.

I still want best available in this spot. No matter who it is

Professor John Frink is online now  
Old
04-09-2004, 11:46 PM
  #29
Hank
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 2,010
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Professor John Frink
Agreed, he is looking for size, heart and charachter mostly for the future of this team. However I think in the past two drafts with both our first two picks, the consensus was Lupul and Getzlaf all around the league.
Also factor in the weak Euro talent in both of those drafts... there wasn't a single one taken last year from 16 to 32 and only 4 total in the 1st round. It wasn't as lopsided 2 years ago but close.

Bottom line is Murray won't pass up a European if he thinks it is the right pick to make.

Hank is offline  
Old
04-10-2004, 06:55 AM
  #30
Fighter
Soviet Duck
 
Fighter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Trieste, Italy
Country: Italy
Posts: 8,679
vCash: 692
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hank
Also factor in the weak Euro talent in both of those drafts... there wasn't a single one taken last year from 16 to 32 and only 4 total in the 1st round. It wasn't as lopsided 2 years ago but close.

Bottom line is Murray won't pass up a European if he thinks it is the right pick to make.
Amen! What I think is that, even if it would be wonderful, I don't see Murray trading to move up in the draft to pick a Olesz or a Barker. At this point if Tukonen is available at #9 BM could draft him since he has top 5 talent, but more probably we'll end up picking one between Ladd, Thelen or Stafford.

I'm also curious about what we'll pick with the second rounder. I'm not sold on Schultz, I would rather prefer Meszaros if he's available (difficult).
Or, if he's available, what about drafting Dubnyk? I think we need a goalie once Gerber will go and Bryz will join Anaheim.


Last edited by Fighter: 04-10-2004 at 06:59 AM.
Fighter is offline  
Old
04-10-2004, 09:17 AM
  #31
Professor John Frink
Registered User
 
Professor John Frink's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Country: United States
Posts: 2,806
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to Professor John Frink
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fighter

I'm also curious about what we'll pick with the second rounder. I'm not sold on Schultz, I would rather prefer Meszaros if he's available (difficult).
Or, if he's available, what about drafting Dubnyk? I think we need a goalie once Gerber will go and Bryz will join Anaheim.
I would go against drafting a goalie in the 2nd round. With the youth of Giguere and Bryzgalov whats the point in wasting such an early pick on a guy who may never honestly get a chance to shine in Anaheim but will be an injury call-up or depth guy mostly. I would look for the Ducks to draft a goalie in round 5 or 6.

Professor John Frink is online now  
Old
04-10-2004, 12:16 PM
  #32
Jerky Leclerc
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Anaheim
Country: United States
Posts: 7,637
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Professor John Frink
I would go against drafting a goalie in the 2nd round. With the youth of Giguere and Bryzgalov whats the point in wasting such an early pick on a guy who may never honestly get a chance to shine in Anaheim but will be an injury call-up or depth guy mostly. I would look for the Ducks to draft a goalie in round 5 or 6.
I respectfully disagree. It usually takes 5 years to develop a goaltender. Well with the new CBA coming out, the age for UFA might be as low as 28 years of age. In 5 years, the Ducks may not have either Giguere or Bryzgalov on the team anymore. It would be wise to develop a top talent who can take over. Anyone remember the old days when our top goaltender prospect was Tom Askey. Well I do and I don't want to relive those days.

Jerky Leclerc is offline  
Old
04-10-2004, 12:34 PM
  #33
Fighter
Soviet Duck
 
Fighter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Trieste, Italy
Country: Italy
Posts: 8,679
vCash: 692
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jerky Leclerc
Anyone remember the old days when our top goaltender prospect was Tom Askey.
THOSE were days! :lol

I would use our second rounder only if Dubnyk is still available, if not I would like to pick a d-man.

Fighter is offline  
Old
04-10-2004, 02:01 PM
  #34
Professor John Frink
Registered User
 
Professor John Frink's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Country: United States
Posts: 2,806
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to Professor John Frink
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jerky Leclerc
I respectfully disagree. It usually takes 5 years to develop a goaltender. Well with the new CBA coming out, the age for UFA might be as low as 28 years of age. In 5 years, the Ducks may not have either Giguere or Bryzgalov on the team anymore. It would be wise to develop a top talent who can take over. Anyone remember the old days when our top goaltender prospect was Tom Askey. Well I do and I don't want to relive those days.
I respectfully disagree with your disagreement. The league is overwhelmed with goaltending and goaltending prospects. And I won't base my opinion on specualtion that the CBA will drop the UFA age. If we didn't draft a goaltender in any round this draft, we would still be fine without a goaltending prospect. Because a deal can still be made to acquire one down the road.

You could also make the argument that BM might let one of Giguere or Bryz walk at the new UFA age, but not both. I just don't think it is worth wasting a top pick on at this point. I'd much rather have a d-man in the 2nd round than a goaltender.

Professor John Frink is online now  
Old
04-10-2004, 06:32 PM
  #35
McDonald19
Hampus
 
McDonald19's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: California
Country: United States
Posts: 17,703
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Professor John Frink
I'd much rather have a d-man in the 2nd round than a goaltender.
I agree!!!

McDonald19 is online now  
Old
04-11-2004, 12:16 AM
  #36
Hockey Duckie
Registered User
 
Hockey Duckie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: southern cal
Posts: 3,057
vCash: 500
Gerber was drafted in the 8th round in 2001. ::: raising shoulders ::: No real need to draft a netminder in the 2nd round, but it's nice to have scouts who know what they're doing. Great find with Gerber! And hopefully we can say the same with Corey Perry.

Hockey Duckie is offline  
Old
04-11-2004, 04:19 PM
  #37
Jerky Leclerc
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Anaheim
Country: United States
Posts: 7,637
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Professor John Frink
The league is overwhelmed with goaltending and goaltending prospects. And I won't base my opinion on specualtion that the CBA will drop the UFA age. If we didn't draft a goaltender in any round this draft, we would still be fine without a goaltending prospect. Because a deal can still be made to acquire one down the road.
1) We don't know the market next year on goaltender, let alone three years from now. There's going to be alot of retirements and changes resulting from the CBA.

2) Even today, who's on the market who the Ducks can develop into a #1? Just because there are alot of journeyman on the market doesn't necessarily mean I want any of them. I would much rather use a top pick and secure the future rather than wait and trade a top young asset on the team to get someone later on. The Ducks were fortunate with Giguere because of the expansion draft. I don't see the same thing happen post-CBA 04.

Jerky Leclerc is offline  
Old
04-11-2004, 04:32 PM
  #38
Professor John Frink
Registered User
 
Professor John Frink's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Country: United States
Posts: 2,806
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to Professor John Frink
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jerky Leclerc
1) We don't know the market next year on goaltender, let alone three years from now. There's going to be alot of retirements and changes resulting from the CBA.

2) Even today, who's on the market who the Ducks can develop into a #1? Just because there are alot of journeyman on the market doesn't necessarily mean I want any of them. I would much rather use a top pick and secure the future rather than wait and trade a top young asset on the team to get someone later on. The Ducks were fortunate with Giguere because of the expansion draft. I don't see the same thing happen post-CBA 04.
Well we will just again agree to disagree. Drafting a goalie in the 2nd round is not needed at this point. If Bm and crew feels a goalie is the best available then they will draft one, but as far as need I think goaltending is at the bottom of the list for this team as far as need goes.

Professor John Frink is online now  
Old
04-11-2004, 07:57 PM
  #39
Jerky Leclerc
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Anaheim
Country: United States
Posts: 7,637
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Professor John Frink
Well we will just again agree to disagree.
Agreed....but I'm right of course.

Jerky Leclerc is offline  
Old
04-11-2004, 11:06 PM
  #40
Gibsons Finest
R-E-L-A-X
 
Gibsons Finest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Saskatoon
Country: Canada
Posts: 20,438
vCash: 500
Save the goalies for the later rounds. Look at Euro goalies drafted late: Nabokov, Checkmanek, Gerber, Nurminen, the list goes on. Add in the fact that WE DON'T NEED A GOALIE, and that's why we don't take Dubnyk.

Gibsons Finest is offline  
Old
04-12-2004, 07:11 PM
  #41
Kick Save
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 1,161
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ducksflytogether
Save the goalies for the later rounds. Look at Euro goalies drafted late: Nabokov, Checkmanek, Gerber, Nurminen, the list goes on. Add in the fact that WE DON'T NEED A GOALIE, and that's why we don't take Dubnyk.
I agree with your basic point that we don't have to draft a goalie in the early rounds. However, I'm not as sure that "WE DON'T NEED A GOALIE". Gerber is as good as gone. If the reports I've read about Bryzgalov "imploding" in a recent game against Houston are true---supposedly, he stormed out of the net, skated over to the bench and, in essence tried to take himself out of the game after giving up a few "soft" goals---he may not have the mental makeup to cut it in the NHL.

Kick Save is offline  
Old
04-12-2004, 11:07 PM
  #42
Gibsons Finest
R-E-L-A-X
 
Gibsons Finest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Saskatoon
Country: Canada
Posts: 20,438
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kick Save
I agree with your basic point that we don't have to draft a goalie in the early rounds. However, I'm not as sure that "WE DON'T NEED A GOALIE". Gerber is as good as gone. If the reports I've read about Bryzgalov "imploding" in a recent game against Houston are true---supposedly, he stormed out of the net, skated over to the bench and, in essence tried to take himself out of the game after giving up a few "soft" goals---he may not have the mental makeup to cut it in the NHL.
One blow-up doesn't make a career. He did awesome against the Yotes this year, and should be a good back-up. The "we don't need a goalie" remark was incorrect, though. I should've said we don't need a franchise goalie, or even a starting goalie at the moment.

Gibsons Finest is offline  
Old
04-13-2004, 01:15 AM
  #43
Randall Graves*
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Country: United States
Posts: 18,621
vCash: 500
And if he does that in a game in the NHL he will lose the team. He has the physical tools but apparantly not the mental ones needed to succeed.

Sounds like Roman Cechmanek does it not?

Randall Graves* is offline  
Old
04-13-2004, 02:39 AM
  #44
Spankatola Jamnuts*
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: ...sucka?
Country: United States
Posts: 10,982
vCash: 500
Yeah. It's identical. Let's dump him right now.

Spankatola Jamnuts* 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 09:17 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2015 All Rights Reserved.