HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Metropolitan Division > New York Islanders
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

Who is on your top 5 wish list for pick #5 ?

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
06-03-2010, 12:43 PM
  #26
OlTimeHockey
Registered User
 
OlTimeHockey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: home
Country: China
Posts: 15,940
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thisisacodee View Post
1. Fowler
2. Gudbranson
3. Gormley

----

4. Connolly
5. Niederreiter

One of the top 3 defenseman should be available. Grab whichever one's left. I don't care that MacDonald, Hillen, Hamonic, and DeHaan are all in the system - I'm sure 2005-2006 Islanders fans thought Gervais and Campoli would be our top pair.

Watching the Stanley Cup Finals and seeing Keith/Seabrook/Campbell/Hjalmarsson vs. Pronger/Carle/Timonen/Coburn just reinforces the fact that defense wins.
Yeah.....but the coach wants them playing up ice and skating really fast.

OlTimeHockey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-03-2010, 01:17 PM
  #27
doublechili
Registered User
 
doublechili's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 5,505
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thisisacodee View Post
1. Fowler
2. Gudbranson
3. Gormley

----

4. Connolly
5. Niederreiter

One of the top 3 defenseman should be available. Grab whichever one's left. I don't care that MacDonald, Hillen, Hamonic, and DeHaan are all in the system - I'm sure 2005-2006 Islanders fans thought Gervais and Campoli would be our top pair.

Watching the Stanley Cup Finals and seeing Keith/Seabrook/Campbell/Hjalmarsson vs. Pronger/Carle/Timonen/Coburn just reinforces the fact that defense wins.
I agree, however forwards forechecking those defensemen can have an effect. Note the 15-4 3rd period Phila shot advantages the last 2 games and let's see if that pattern continues. In other words, as much as I value defense, you need guys on O too. To me, commitment is ultimately really what wins, on both sides of the puck.

doublechili is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-03-2010, 01:20 PM
  #28
Seph
Registered User
 
Seph's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Oregon
Country: South Korea
Posts: 15,772
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Seph
I was bored at work, so here's my draft board for our first two picks, though keep in mind, I am not anything remotely resembling a draft expert/scout.


1. Hall - Most dynamic player in the draft, and shows up in playoffs, not to mention comes with built in chemistry with Bailey.
2. Seguin - No brainer after Hall.
3. Gormley - Good skills, good size, but mostly I like his poise and mistake free hockey, which is my favorite quality in a defenseman. He reminds me a lot of someone like Duncan Keith - no flash, easy to miss how much he's accomplishing out there, but highly effective. Seems both the safest Dman and has as good of a chance as anyone to be the best Dman from this draft.
4-5. Fowler and Gudbranson - Both of them have high upsides and highly attractive skillsets, but I don't see either being quite the rock defensively or as safe as Gormley. I don't really have a strong preference between the two.
6. Johansen - Big fan of his. Great size, great skating, great skills. The only thing that drops him this low is that we've only seen those things for one season. His upside is as good as anyone past the top 2 I think, but I see him as being a bit riskier than the three above due to the smaller sample size.
7. Forbort - I just love this kid's upside, but again, I see him as somewhat risky since he's still so raw.
8. Niederreiter - Seems about as safe a pick as exists, and could probably play a third line role right away. His downside seems to still be an NHLer, but he may have the lowest upside of the top ten. Could be a tremendous support player, and seems like he'd complement JT perfectly.
9. Granlund - If only he were bigger or faster, he'd probably be #3 on the list. As it stands, his size drops him, but his incredible play in a top men's league as well as in the tournies makes it hard to put him any lower.
10-13 Connolly, Tarasenko, Skinner. Merrill (in that order). Great upsides for all of them, but I just view them as too risky (respectively due to injury concerns, Russian-factor, size/speed, and rawness) to warrant moving them up higher than this.
14. Campbell - Big game goalie, and even with the recently drafted giant Scandinavians and development from Poulin, we could still stand to improve in prospect depth between the pipes.
15. Pysyk - Doesn't have quite the physical gifts of Gormley (or any dman I have higher), but has excellent poise and makes few mistakes.
16. Howden
17. Etem
18. Watson
19. McIlrath
20. Bjugstad
21. Schwartz
22. Tyler Toffoli
23. Martindale
24. Weal
25. Burmistrov
26. Pulkkinen
27. Hishon
28. Tinordi
29. McFarland
30. Pitlick
31. Petrovic
32. Pickard
33. Kabanov
34. Galiev
35. Sheahan
36. Kuznetsov


Last edited by Seph: 06-03-2010 at 01:32 PM.
Seph is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-03-2010, 02:08 PM
  #29
JPIsles21
Registered User
 
JPIsles21's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 1,431
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thisisacodee View Post
1. Fowler
2. Gudbranson
3. Gormley

----

4. Connolly
5. Niederreiter

One of the top 3 defenseman should be available. Grab whichever one's left. I don't care that MacDonald, Hillen, Hamonic, and DeHaan are all in the system - I'm sure 2005-2006 Islanders fans thought Gervais and Campoli would be our top pair.

Watching the Stanley Cup Finals and seeing Keith/Seabrook/Campbell/Hjalmarsson vs. Pronger/Carle/Timonen/Coburn just reinforces the fact that defense wins.
On the flip side to this, you need forward depth as well. Nashville arguably has the deepest and best defense corps in hockey. But having no forward depth has not netted them a chance to progress deep in the playoffs. People tend to forget that these teams are pretty strong up front as well. You need depth at both to win cups.

The most important position can be argued to be Center. If you take a look at all the cup finalists in the last decade, and maybe even beyond, they all have 1 thing in common: quality depth at center. Carolina won a cup not too long ago with solid, but unspectacular dmen. However, they were deep at center. The center position seems to be the common denominator of all largely successful teams.

JPIsles21 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-03-2010, 04:54 PM
  #30
Chapin Landvogt
Hockey's Future Staff
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Germany
Posts: 12,295
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thisisacodee View Post
Watching the Stanley Cup Finals and seeing Keith/Seabrook/Campbell/Hjalmarsson vs. Pronger/Carle/Timonen/Coburn just reinforces the fact that defense wins.
Interestingly, after that it's Sopel-Hendry and Bartulis-Krajicek. I'd almost take Gervais-Meyer over both of those pairs.

Chapin Landvogt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-03-2010, 04:57 PM
  #31
Chapin Landvogt
Hockey's Future Staff
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Germany
Posts: 12,295
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JPIsles21 View Post
The most important position can be argued to be Center. If you take a look at all the cup finalists in the last decade, and maybe even beyond, they all have 1 thing in common: quality depth at center. Carolina won a cup not too long ago with solid, but unspectacular dmen. However, they were deep at center. The center position seems to be the common denominator of all largely successful teams.
Pretty good point...

Chapin Landvogt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-03-2010, 05:34 PM
  #32
xIsle
Registered User
 
xIsle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Montreal
Posts: 836
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Seph View Post
I was bored at work, so here's my draft board for our first two picks, though keep in mind, I am not anything remotely resembling a draft expert/scout.


3. Gormley - Good skills, good size, but mostly I like his poise and mistake free hockey, which is my favorite quality in a defenseman. He reminds me a lot of someone like Duncan Keith - no flash, easy to miss how much he's accomplishing out there, but highly effective. Seems the safest Dman and has as good of a chance as anyone to be the best Dman from this draft.
I agree 100 % with you about Gormley. I hope the Isles select him.
My second favorite is Niederreiter. My third is probably Johansen but it's pretty close with the others wich I have no real preference : Gudbranson, Fowler and Connolly.


Last edited by xIsle: 06-03-2010 at 05:40 PM.
xIsle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-03-2010, 05:38 PM
  #33
doublechili
Registered User
 
doublechili's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 5,505
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Seph View Post
I was bored at work, so here's my draft board for our first two picks
Seph, good work on that list. I really like that you talk about risk. To me the top part of the draft is all about getting the best player possible while minimizing risk. To use an extreme example, the great thing about Crosby his draft year was that there was very little risk that he would not turn out to be an outstanding player. Teams are always balancing upside and risk, and it seems to me that SnowJanks are somewhat risk-averse at the top of the draft (taking their chances later on).

So, for example, Connolly has two risks: (1) his injury; and (2) evaluating him on last year only. Considering the quality of the other options, will a team spend a top 5 pick on him? That's a huge question to me.

doublechili is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-03-2010, 05:42 PM
  #34
Chapin Landvogt
Hockey's Future Staff
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Germany
Posts: 12,295
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by doublechili View Post
So, for example, Connolly has two risks: (1) his injury; and (2) evaluating him on last year only. Considering the quality of the other options, will a team spend a top 5 pick on him? That's a huge question to me.
One I'm heavily assuming the Islanders are not gonna give their "yay" word to in the form of drafting Connolly at 5.

Chapin Landvogt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-03-2010, 06:09 PM
  #35
CodeE
Registered User
 
CodeE's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Country: United States
Posts: 3,185
vCash: 500
All fair points, and I will agree that the Islanders need offense, but it really makes me jealous to look around the Eastern Conference and see so many teams have young, talented defensemen who look to anchor their bluelines for years to come. Subban, Hedman, Myers, Bogosian, Phaneuf, Green, each of these players shows signs of being dominant for the next decade or so.

The Islanders, on the other hand? Our defensive future rests in the hands of Andy MacDonald (young, late-round pick, seems a bit like how Mr. Gervais started his career) and DeHaan & Hamonic, who've never stepped foot on NHL ice.

2006 we took Okposo, 2008 we took Bailey, 2009 we took Tavares. Go backwards from there and it's almost a tradition of taking a forward in the first round: O'Marra, Nokelainen, Nilsson, Bergenheim. Last time the Islanders drafted a defenseman first was Wade Redden in 1995.

By nearly all accounts, there are three top-tier defenseman in this class. Assuming Hall & Seguin go 1st and 2nd, one of them will be available by the time the Islanders are on the clock. It's time we nourished a true #1 defenseman through the system, not via free agency or trade.

CodeE is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
06-03-2010, 07:25 PM
  #36
JPIsles21
Registered User
 
JPIsles21's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 1,431
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thisisacodee View Post
All fair points, and I will agree that the Islanders need offense, but it really makes me jealous to look around the Eastern Conference and see so many teams have young, talented defensemen who look to anchor their bluelines for years to come. Subban, Hedman, Myers, Bogosian, Phaneuf, Green, each of these players shows signs of being dominant for the next decade or so.

The Islanders, on the other hand? Our defensive future rests in the hands of Andy MacDonald (young, late-round pick, seems a bit like how Mr. Gervais started his career) and DeHaan & Hamonic, who've never stepped foot on NHL ice.

2006 we took Okposo, 2008 we took Bailey, 2009 we took Tavares. Go backwards from there and it's almost a tradition of taking a forward in the first round: O'Marra, Nokelainen, Nilsson, Bergenheim. Last time the Islanders drafted a defenseman first was Wade Redden in 1995.

By nearly all accounts, there are three top-tier defenseman in this class. Assuming Hall & Seguin go 1st and 2nd, one of them will be available by the time the Islanders are on the clock. It's time we nourished a true #1 defenseman through the system, not via free agency or trade.
Of the guys you name only Myers, Bogosian, and Green are true studs at this point. Phaneuf is a giant enigma and liability at times. And Subban hasn't shown enough at the NHL. Hedman will likely be great, but he's not there yet.

It's also irrelevant to look at guys drafted before 06, that scouting staff is done. Your point is correct about drafting forwards in the first round. But a team can't force drafting a dman, when that dman is not BPA. In 06, only Okposo and Mueller were options. In 08, the Isles truly thought the BPA was Josh Bailey at their pick and they got him while picking up more picks (one of which help land our best dman prospect in Hamonic). In 09, Tavares was a no-brainer pick. Teams that are successful at drafting always take the BPA. All the time. Every time.

Also, the success rate for drafting a stud forward in the first round is a lot higher than drafting a stud dman in the first round. A team like the Isles need talent on both offense and defense.

There is a very good chance we take a dman this year. Not because we need one, but because whoever we take will, in the eyes of the Isles scouting staff, be the best player available. You can't play the 'needs' game when dealing with players that can't be properly judged until 3-5 years down the road. It wasn't too long ago that we had Hamrlik/Aucoin/Jonsson/Niinimaa as our top 4. Who knew then that 6 years later, we'd be so barren on defense?

JPIsles21 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-03-2010, 07:33 PM
  #37
Seph
Registered User
 
Seph's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Oregon
Country: South Korea
Posts: 15,772
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Seph
Quote:
Originally Posted by doublechili View Post
Seph, good work on that list. I really like that you talk about risk. To me the top part of the draft is all about getting the best player possible while minimizing risk. To use an extreme example, the great thing about Crosby his draft year was that there was very little risk that he would not turn out to be an outstanding player. Teams are always balancing upside and risk, and it seems to me that SnowJanks are somewhat risk-averse at the top of the draft (taking their chances later on).

So, for example, Connolly has two risks: (1) his injury; and (2) evaluating him on last year only. Considering the quality of the other options, will a team spend a top 5 pick on him? That's a huge question to me.
Thanks, to me risk isn't something people seem to spend a lot of time evaluating in the draft around here; it seems that many tend to either view the high-end projection or that they think a guy will bust, without taking much time to consider that both are possible as well as a myriad of possibilities in the middle. And really, I've often observed guys who were considered super safe picks turning out to have a much higher upside than originally projected, about as often as I've seen riskier picks with high projected upsides actually reach those upsides. Parise for example fell in the draft largely on the perception that his upside was limited to a 2nd liner/support winger due to his lack of size/high end skills, and he's turned out to be one of the best players from that draft. From the same draft, Mike Richards was thought to be a very safe bet for a 3rd liner, but he wouldn't be much more than that.

I agree with you about Snowjanks, they don't seem to like much risk in the first round, but they do seem to swing for the fences after that. They also seem to do their due diligence into evaluating risk even with those picks, like the story about how they wanted to take Anders Lee in 08, but had spoken with him and he wasn't ready to commit to hockey fulltime, and then in 09 they spoke with him again and he was so they drafted him.

Quote:
Originally Posted by xIsle View Post
I agree 100 % with you about Gormley. I hope the Isles select him.
My second favorite is Niederreiter. My third is probably Johansen but it's pretty close with the others wich I have no real preference : Gudbranson, Fowler and Connolly.
I hope he's available, at any rate. I think he goes before Gudbranson and Connolly, but that's just my uneducated guess.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Thisisacodee View Post
All fair points, and I will agree that the Islanders need offense, but it really makes me jealous to look around the Eastern Conference and see so many teams have young, talented defensemen who look to anchor their bluelines for years to come. Subban, Hedman, Myers, Bogosian, Phaneuf, Green, each of these players shows signs of being dominant for the next decade or so.

The Islanders, on the other hand? Our defensive future rests in the hands of Andy MacDonald (young, late-round pick, seems a bit like how Mr. Gervais started his career) and DeHaan & Hamonic, who've never stepped foot on NHL ice.
Neither has anyone we'll draft with the #5, and even if we do draft a D-man, there's a good chance Hamonic will still play in the NHL before him.

Seph is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-04-2010, 09:08 AM
  #38
Antidote
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Victoria, BC
Country: Scotland
Posts: 2,613
vCash: 500
Article this morning by Mark Seidel of North American Central Scouting: NHL Draft: Risers and tumblers. He moves Jeff Skinner to 5, up 20 places since December, noting "all this kid does is score goals". 70 in 84 games this year for Kitchener actually. Would Isles actually take that shot in the dark? Hope they go for big D before a small forward.

http://www.cbc.ca/sports/hockey/stor...g-falling.html

Antidote is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-04-2010, 11:00 AM
  #39
doublechili
Registered User
 
doublechili's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 5,505
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Seph View Post
Thanks, to me risk isn't something people seem to spend a lot of time evaluating in the draft around here; it seems that many tend to either view the high-end projection or that they think a guy will bust, without taking much time to consider that both are possible as well as a myriad of possibilities in the middle. And really, I've often observed guys who were considered super safe picks turning out to have a much higher upside than originally projected, about as often as I've seen riskier picks with high projected upsides actually reach those upsides. Parise for example fell in the draft largely on the perception that his upside was limited to a 2nd liner/support winger due to his lack of size/high end skills, and he's turned out to be one of the best players from that draft. From the same draft, Mike Richards was thought to be a very safe bet for a 3rd liner, but he wouldn't be much more than that.

I agree with you about Snowjanks, they don't seem to like much risk in the first round, but they do seem to swing for the fences after that. They also seem to do their due diligence into evaluating risk even with those picks, like the story about how they wanted to take Anders Lee in 08, but had spoken with him and he wasn't ready to commit to hockey fulltime, and then in 09 they spoke with him again and he was so they drafted him.


I hope he's available, at any rate. I think he goes before Gudbranson and Connolly, but that's just my uneducated guess.
Great stuff! I totally agree with that bolded part. I've since thrown them away, but I used to have 10+ years of THN Draft Previews laying around, and I found you can learn a lot going back and reading them years later when you know how prospects turned out. And I definitely observed that if you read the profiles objectively and realistically, leaving the OPINION parts out, they tend to be pretty accurate.

In other words, the write-up might say Player A can do everything well, works hard and has put up points, but then they throw in the opinion that he doesn't have as much upside as some other kids. Player B can be lazy at times and hasn't really shown any proven production, but man the kid is big and can skate and shoot and if he ever puts it together he'll be a star. Well, guess who turns out to be a player more often than not? If a team leaves the hope aspect aside and objectively assesses a player's skill, smarts, attitude and production, I think they'll get it right more often than not. And from my observations that's exactly how SnowJanks operate.

Of course, getting back to risk/reward, as you get later in the draft it's fine to take a measured risk in the hopes that you get a steal on a real talent.

doublechili is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-08-2010, 12:53 AM
  #40
Stercrazy
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 948
vCash: 500
B P A!!!! Parking lot attendant.....draft him! Hot Dog vendor....draft him! Who ever is the BPA....draft him!

Stercrazy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-08-2010, 03:53 AM
  #41
Isles Junkie
Registered User
 
Isles Junkie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Brooklyn, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 8,138
vCash: 500
I've been tossing Gudbranson & Fowler back and forth for a while now. I feel like the Isles can use both of them. Fowlers skating ability & size (even though he doesn't use it) is impressive. But the Isles have plenty of offensive minded Dmen in their system. Gudbranson is a 2 way Dman also, but the guy is a big mean nasty son of a *****. I want the SOB.

Gudbranson
Fowler
Connolly
Niederreiter
Gormley

Isles Junkie is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
06-08-2010, 06:33 AM
  #42
Chapin Landvogt
Hockey's Future Staff
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Germany
Posts: 12,295
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Isle Junkie View Post
I've been tossing Gudbranson & Fowler back and forth for a while now. I feel like the Isles can use both of them. Fowlers skating ability & size (even though he doesn't use it) is impressive. But the Isles have plenty of offensive minded Dmen in their system. Gudbranson is a 2 way Dman also, but the guy is a big mean nasty son of a *****. I want the SOB.

Gudbranson
Fowler
Connolly
Niederreiter
Gormley
Difference is, Fowler is still the better overall prospect. So you take him and if you decide that your blueline is too homogenous (which would be a real possibility in light of Streit, de Haan, Hillen and MacDonald back there with guys like Ness, Donovan and Kessel possibly on the way), then you either trade away the players who aren't the best for that toughness element you're looking for or you trade away a Fowler/de Haan for a real nice return to help out on other fronts.

Chapin Landvogt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-08-2010, 10:07 AM
  #43
Isles Junkie
Registered User
 
Isles Junkie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Brooklyn, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 8,138
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CIsle View Post
Difference is, Fowler is still the better overall prospect. So you take him and if you decide that your blueline is too homogenous (which would be a real possibility in light of Streit, de Haan, Hillen and MacDonald back there with guys like Ness, Donovan and Kessel possibly on the way), then you either trade away the players who aren't the best for that toughness element you're looking for or you trade away a Fowler/de Haan for a real nice return to help out on other fronts.
Perhaps, but there's no guarantee that a big mean nasty SOB will be available in a couple of years when the NYI are ready to make such a trade.

Gudbranson is the type of player this team has been lacking for a long time. Sure Sutton was great last year, but he doesn't have the offensive ability of Gudbranson. He would round out the defensive prospect pool very nicely.

Only 1 of them and very possibly neither of them will be available at 5 anyway. But even if they had their choice, I wouldn't complain either way. I wouldn't complain with Connolly either. Isles are getting a great prospect at #5. Unless they go totally off the board they can't lose.

Isles Junkie is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
06-08-2010, 11:15 AM
  #44
redbull
game on
 
redbull's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,950
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CIsle View Post
Difference is, Fowler is still the better overall prospect. So you take him and if you decide that your blueline is too homogenous (which would be a real possibility in light of Streit, de Haan, Hillen and MacDonald back there with guys like Ness, Donovan and Kessel possibly on the way), then you either trade away the players who aren't the best for that toughness element you're looking for or you trade away a Fowler/de Haan for a real nice return to help out on other fronts.
very good point. If you have Malkin from 2004 and Crosby's the best prospect in 2005, you still take him, even though you already have a #1 centre. In 2006, do you take Jordan Staal at 2, another centre? Maybe you win a cup in a year or two

I'm just not sure Fowler's the better prospect, not with any confidence. Personally, I haven't seen enough of both players to make a confident decision. In ratings and rankings, Fowler is generally above Gudbranson and maybe that's the case. Jankowski and Snow have their "process" of evaluating players and who knows where they rank in terms of who THEY FEEL IS BPA!

in 2006, the best NON-center available at #2 (in the first round) was Kyle Okposo at #7, maybe Chris Stewart at #18 with no defensemen in that round playing any significant minutes in the NHL as yet (outside Erik Johnson at #1 overall)

I wonder if Pitts considered taking a winger at #2 or trading down?

Personally, I'd always take the best player, especially among forwards since it's not too difficult for center to play wing, in most cases.

redbull is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-08-2010, 12:26 PM
  #45
Chapin Landvogt
Hockey's Future Staff
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Germany
Posts: 12,295
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by redbull View Post
I'm just not sure Fowler's the better prospect, not with any confidence. Personally, I haven't seen enough of both players to make a confident decision. In ratings and rankings, Fowler is generally above Gudbranson and maybe that's the case. Jankowski and Snow have their "process" of evaluating players and who knows where they rank in terms of who THEY FEEL IS BPA!
I don't know this either. I'm just assuming that between his being the #3 for the greater part of this draft year AND being the more accomplished player (uhhh, WJC gold and Memorial Cup as a top 2/3 Dman in the same year - not too shabby!), that Fowler is most scout's eyes the better prospect.

Honestly, I've seen only highlights of Gudbranson and they really, really reminded me of the junior highlights of Schenn I saw a few years back... but that's just me.

Chapin Landvogt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-08-2010, 12:39 PM
  #46
OlTimeHockey
Registered User
 
OlTimeHockey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: home
Country: China
Posts: 15,940
vCash: 500
If you have a Corvette already and have the chance to get a ZR1 but decide to get a Malibu because you lack a family car.....you get the car you needed. You spent the same money on a Malibu as you would have for the vastly superior/pricer/unobtainable ZR1.......but you got the family sedan to go to Wally World or whatever.

Same logic.

I'd like to swing for the fences and see if a home run can get me some solid help in a trade/blockbuster down the line.

Or if we'd even need it, having some serious talent propelling us and making us a better destination for UFA's. Redbull's Pitt analogy is spot on....draft the best players possible and you may lack key pieces but you'll have a list of amazing players. The trade market and FA signings should fill holes.....rather than the draft table. That would show just an explicit lack of ability/talent for a GM to use only one platform available to build a team, and that one platform would be totally misused.

OlTimeHockey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-09-2010, 05:42 AM
  #47
ettlinger
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Country: Germany
Posts: 75
vCash: 500
BPA seems to be one of the very few things that almost all posters here seem to agree on. But a team also might find itself in a situation where there are several players available that are all about equal in every important aspect of their game. In this case the team might pick the player that they think might be best to fill a certain need. Who would that be for the Islanders? Hard to tell, but my guess would be a big winger as they have drafted a lot of centers, defensemen and goalies over the last couple of years...

ettlinger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-09-2010, 09:44 AM
  #48
doublechili
Registered User
 
doublechili's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 5,505
vCash: 500
Everyone always says "BPA", but the BPA at #5 might just be Jack Campbell. So, do we still want BPA?

doublechili is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-09-2010, 10:17 AM
  #49
OlTimeHockey
Registered User
 
OlTimeHockey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: home
Country: China
Posts: 15,940
vCash: 500
Interesting.....Yeah.

If Campbell were far better than whoever is left, we have two Euro goalies refusing to sign with us and no certainty in the position, so why not?

If we end up with three young goalies who are that good, Snow has a tradeable asset to get us a certainty player to fill a void. Look at Boston with Cheevers & Co.

OlTimeHockey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-09-2010, 10:47 AM
  #50
redbull
game on
 
redbull's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,950
vCash: 500
BPA is a bit of a myth though. The reality is, these players, after the first few, become very very close in terms of ranking. Not just close to one another, but also close among the other teams and scouting departments.

If we "score" the prospects on the category "Best Player" on a scale of 1-100, I'd imagine you'll see something like this:

Hall - 98.2
Seguin - 98.1
Fowler - 94.1
Gudbranson - 93.5
Connolly - 93.4
Gormley - 92.1
Johansen - 92.0
Niederreiter - 91.9
Campbell - 91.8

How confident can you be that Gudbranson is truly the BPA over Connolly and the others?

Add the complexity of different positions, different relative strengths and weaknesses, different projections in their eventual NHL play/role - and the BPA is very cloudy.

And all teams will have significantly different orders (likely past the first two).

I believe, in general, BPA is too close to call (after the first few) - and it gets significantly harder to discern the BPA after each pick.

Burke said in a radio interview the other day, his philosophy in picks after the first two rounds is to pick a player with at least ONE TRAIT that is NHL-caliber and then hope to develop the weaknesses.

Draft a guy with NHL wheels and work on his skills, intensity, attitude, etc.
Draft a guy with NHL size and work on his skating, shot, work ethic, etc.

I think the NHL should move to a 19 year old draft! But that's another thread.

redbull is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

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 05:50 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.