HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Western Conference > Central Division > St. Louis Blues
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

THNca Mock draft

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
06-09-2004, 09:44 PM
  #26
degroat*
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: http://nhl.degroat.n
Posts: 8,108
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by c-carp
What would the high end be on most of the kids in the second group mentioned and what would you be willling to part with to move up? Do we have what it would take to move up and get them. If we had to use Tkachuk or Weight to move up to get the pick to get them, there would have to be more coming back our way. Correct?
They've all got top line/top pairing potential... but whether or not they'll become stars remains to be seen.

As for the 2nd part of your question... with their salaries, neither one would probably be able to fetch a top 9 pick right now unless we take some salary... maybe Weight since he's due a lot less than Tkachuk... but neither is going to bring more than the pick.

degroat* is offline  
Old
06-09-2004, 10:29 PM
  #27
c-carp
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Illinois
Posts: 9,470
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stich
They've all got top line/top pairing potential... but whether or not they'll become stars remains to be seen.

As for the 2nd part of your question... with their salaries, neither one would probably be able to fetch a top 9 pick right now unless we take some salary... maybe Weight since he's due a lot less than Tkachuk... but neither is going to bring more than the pick.
Then trade them for other NHL players if they have to be traded. If they couldnt bring more than a top 9 pick it isnt worth it unless you could get Oveechkin which isnt going to happen.

c-carp is offline  
Old
06-10-2004, 08:01 AM
  #28
markus1
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Alton, Illinois
Posts: 88
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to markus1
I wish this organization had somebody who would stand up to some of these overpaid jokers. If Pronger & Weight (and/or Tkachuk) have a problem then somebody needs to straighten them out. And if one of them didn't like it, let them be benched until they 'get it'...

markus1 is offline  
Old
06-10-2004, 08:12 AM
  #29
markus1
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Alton, Illinois
Posts: 88
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to markus1
Quote:
Originally Posted by c-carp
Since this isnt suppost to be a real deep draft after the top 3 why would we want to trade up?
Says who? The 'experts'...? Just my opinion, but I don't buy much into the projections of some of the experts within the hockey media. All I know is that two first round draft picks is better than one. And if we are indeed 'rebuilding' then it makes sense to me to get money off the books. Would it be nicer to get two or three picks in return for a Tkachuk or Demitra? Yes, but as long as we are getting picks back in return then I'm at least content as a fan...

markus1 is offline  
Old
06-10-2004, 03:41 PM
  #30
Frenzy1
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 3,823
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CuSa_1
Actually projecting a person's character is a huge part of the draft process. I think you're totally off base here.

His situation doesn't MEAN he's a cancer, however his type of situation does imply that there could be some character issues. It's a risk. It doesn't mean that no one else in the draft is, or that he for sure is. However the risk is slightly higher, in the teams' eyes when something happens to the effect of what Schremp did.

But without a doubt, I'd take him.

Guys keep in mind that Shockov(sp)left Moncton at the beginning of the year in quite a huff, but noone has labeled him a cancer. The move was actaully very good as he started to come into his own in Quebec and who knows what would have happened if he stayed in Moncton.

Part of the Canadian media will blast a young player for wanting to move on to a better situation or for money. Robbie may have left Missu, but the move may have been good for both parties. (Growth can be stiffled in a bad atmosphere)

I would take Robbie in a hart beat if he fell to 17, which we wont.

So my question to those who would like to trade w/ Florida.

Who would you take w/ the 7th overall?

Frenzy1 is offline  
Old
06-10-2004, 03:52 PM
  #31
CuSa_1
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Country: United States
Posts: 1,557
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frenzy1
Guys keep in mind that Shockov(sp)left Moncton at the beginning of the year in quite a huff, but noone has labeled him a cancer. The move was actaully very good as he started to come into his own in Quebec and who knows what would have happened if he stayed in Moncton.

Part of the Canadian media will blast a young player for wanting to move on to a better situation or for money. Robbie may have left Missu, but the move may have been good for both parties. (Growth can be stiffled in a bad atmosphere)

I would take Robbie in a hart beat if he fell to 17, which we wont.

So my question to those who would like to trade w/ Florida.

Who would you take w/ the 7th overall?
Once again I'm not labeling him a cancer.

CuSa_1 is offline  
Old
06-10-2004, 03:58 PM
  #32
Frenzy1
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 3,823
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CuSa_1
Once again I'm not labeling him a cancer.
Never said that you did. But, King pointed it out that he may become one, evidenced from this past year. While I respect Kubina's opinion, I just wanted to point out another situation that was simular, where a played didn't like the system and wanted to move on.

Frenzy1 is offline  
Old
06-10-2004, 04:02 PM
  #33
CuSa_1
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Country: United States
Posts: 1,557
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frenzy1
Never said that you did. But, King pointed it out that he may become one, evidenced from this past year. While I respect Kubina's opinion, I just wanted to point out another situation that was simular, where a played didn't like the system and wanted to move on.
Ok so me and you are in the same boat. We both agree that certain situations scream "cancer" more than others, however there are just as many exceptions to it.

Just because one person in a similar situation isn't a cancer doesn't tell us anything about the other.

and vice versa

CuSa_1 is offline  
Old
06-10-2004, 08:40 PM
  #34
kimzey59
Registered User
 
kimzey59's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 3,625
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frenzy1
Never said that you did. But, King pointed it out that he may become one, evidenced from this past year. While I respect Kubina's opinion, I just wanted to point out another situation that was simular, where a played didn't like the system and wanted to move on.
That isn't what happened in the Shkotov case. The QMJHL has a rule in place where you can only have so many European born players on the ice per night(I believe the limit is at 2 Euro's per team but I could be wrong on that). Moncton had 1 too many. Zakharov, Shkotov and a winger named Martin Karsums were cycling in and out of the lineup and that was hurting their production and the effectiveness of the team. Karsums was one of their better PK forwards so he played more regularly than Zak or Shkotov did. The Blues(should read Jarmo Kekaleinen) orchestrated the trade so that both Shkotov and Zakharov could get regular playing time and not stunt their developement. Moncton got to keep their best PK man and a good offensive forward and Shkotov went to a team that didn't have him cycling in and out of the lineup. It was a win-win scenario for both players and both teams. It had nothing to do with Shkotov's like or dislike of the system or team.

That said, I am inclined to believe that the Canadian media blew Schremps leaving out of proportion. By their standards you should be paying the team to play for them, and that is at the NHL level. If anyone thinks they "deserve" anything(even if it's only more playing time) they are selfish, a cancer in the room and a black mark on the game.

kimzey59 is offline  
Old
06-10-2004, 08:48 PM
  #35
Prussian_Blue
Registered User
 
Prussian_Blue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Country: Germany
Posts: 7,753
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by kimzey59
That isn't what happened in the Shkotov case. The QMJHL has a rule in place where you can only have so many European born players on the ice per night(I believe the limit is at 2 Euro's per team but I could be wrong on that). Moncton had 1 too many. Zakharov, Shkotov and a winger named Martin Karsums were cycling in and out of the lineup and that was hurting their production and the effectiveness of the team. Karsums was one of their better PK forwards so he played more regularly than Zak or Shkotov did. The Blues(should read Jarmo Kekaleinen) orchestrated the trade so that both Shkotov and Zakharov could get regular playing time and not stunt their developement. Moncton got to keep their best PK man and a good offensive forward and Shkotov went to a team that didn't have him cycling in and out of the lineup. It was a win-win scenario for both players and both teams. It had nothing to do with Shkotov's like or dislike of the system or team.
You're correct about the "two Euros" rule, and about Karsums eating up a lot of the ice time that could/should have gone to Shkotov (just as a side note... Karsums is a guy I like, and wouldn't mind picking up if he's there in the third or fourth rounds). I don't doubt your story for a minute, but I do recall reading somewhere that Shkotov had something of a falling-out with Moncton's coach/GM, and harsh words were exchanged. If I remember correctly, it had something to do with ice time, which does lend more credence to your interpretation of the events...


Quote:
Originally Posted by kimzey59
That said, I am inclined to believe that the Canadian media blew Schremps leaving out of proportion. By their standards you should be paying the team to play for them, and that is at the NHL level. If anyone thinks they "deserve" anything (even if it's only more playing time) they are selfish, a cancer in the room and a black mark on the game.
Can't argue with that, either. That's actually a pretty spot-on assessment of the Canadian media when it comes to junior hockey players, based on what I've read in it...

B.

Prussian_Blue is offline  
Old
06-10-2004, 09:51 PM
  #36
degroat*
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: http://nhl.degroat.n
Posts: 8,108
vCash: 500
Also, let's not forget that Schremp is American.

degroat* is offline  
Old
06-10-2004, 10:52 PM
  #37
kimzey59
Registered User
 
kimzey59's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 3,625
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stich
Also, let's not forget that Schremp is American.
In that case(in my best French accent) Schremp should know that American's are second rate hockey players to begin with, and should be thanking their team just for letting them wear the jersey. Asking for anything is a Federal crime and should be punished with exile. Schremp should consider himself honored by playing on a Canadian team and should be happy to even sit on the bench with a Canadian player.

Don't get me started on European's. Some of those comments might get me banned(or at least censored).

kimzey59 is offline  
Old
06-10-2004, 11:33 PM
  #38
kimzey59
Registered User
 
kimzey59's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 3,625
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brian Weidler
You're correct about the "two Euros" rule, and about Karsums eating up a lot of the ice time that could/should have gone to Shkotov (just as a side note... Karsums is a guy I like, and wouldn't mind picking up if he's there in the third or fourth rounds). I don't doubt your story for a minute, but I do recall reading somewhere that Shkotov had something of a falling-out with Moncton's coach/GM, and harsh words were exchanged. If I remember correctly, it had something to do with ice time, which does lend more credence to your interpretation of the events...
There was a thread on here about it at the time the trade was made. It got purged the last time they cleaned out our unused threads. I've been trying to find a thread on the nuthouses but they both seem to have been purged since then as well. If I can find a solid link anywhere I'll post it but right now it doesn't look to good on that front.

kimzey59 is offline  
Old
06-11-2004, 12:41 PM
  #39
Frenzy1
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 3,823
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by kimzey59
There was a thread on here about it at the time the trade was made. It got purged the last time they cleaned out our unused threads. I've been trying to find a thread on the nuthouses but they both seem to have been purged since then as well. If I can find a solid link anywhere I'll post it but right now it doesn't look to good on that front.
Kimzey, I also remember the falling out. If memory serves me it had to do more w/ the defensive system Moncton played vs. playing time. I do believe the Axeli and the Moncton got caught in a yelling match and that was what prompted the trade.

This is one of those moves that benefitted both team and player.

Frenzy1 is offline  
Old
06-11-2004, 03:01 PM
  #40
c-carp
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Illinois
Posts: 9,470
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by markus
Says who? The 'experts'...? Just my opinion, but I don't buy much into the projections of some of the experts within the hockey media. All I know is that two first round draft picks is better than one. And if we are indeed 'rebuilding' then it makes sense to me to get money off the books. Would it be nicer to get two or three picks in return for a Tkachuk or Demitra? Yes, but as long as we are getting picks back in return then I'm at least content as a fan...
The problem is that a total rebuilding process requires that you get as bad as the Hawks or Caps were last year and I dont know if that is the way to go for a coup;e of reasons.

1. The Blues who are already loosing money would take an even bigger hit in the walllet even dumping salaries as you would do in this plan because the only peop;e over there would be diehards like us. The Casual sports fans would stay away in droves I think. Also the NHL has a draft lottery now like the NBA so even if you finish last and get the no 1 pick next year (Sydney Crosby) who is suppost to be a Phenom even better than oveechkin. There is no guarantee that you get him. With the Blues luck we would loose the lottery and be back to the crapshoot thing. The only way that I feel a total rebuilding process IE dump everybody would be good would be if it guaranteed that I got a franchise player like Crosby and there is no guarantee there.

2. I think they are going to cut salaries by a significant amount.

Demitra is most likely gone
MacInnis is likely going to retire do to his eye injury.
Mellanby is likely to retire
I think one of Weight or Tkachuk will also be moved

Even if only the first three happen that is a lot of money off the books also some of the lesser players will also be gone. So I think they are rebuilding just not blowingf the whole thing up. I think this will all start to take shape around the draft.

c-carp is offline  
Old
06-11-2004, 03:03 PM
  #41
c-carp
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Illinois
Posts: 9,470
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frenzy1
Guys keep in mind that Shockov(sp)left Moncton at the beginning of the year in quite a huff, but noone has labeled him a cancer. The move was actaully very good as he started to come into his own in Quebec and who knows what would have happened if he stayed in Moncton.

Part of the Canadian media will blast a young player for wanting to move on to a better situation or for money. Robbie may have left Missu, but the move may have been good for both parties. (Growth can be stiffled in a bad atmosphere)

I would take Robbie in a hart beat if he fell to 17, which we wont.

So my question to those who would like to trade w/ Florida.

Who would you take w/ the 7th overall?
I wouldnt trade a Tkachuk or Weight to get Scremph or anyone else who would likely be there at 7 unless we had other players who could help us coming back from the Panthers. That is too much to give up.

c-carp is offline  
Old
06-11-2004, 03:31 PM
  #42
Frenzy1
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 3,823
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by c-carp
I wouldnt trade a Tkachuk or Weight to get Scremph or anyone else who would likely be there at 7 unless we had other players who could help us coming back from the Panthers. That is too much to give up.
I would move us for a shot a Schremp.

Maybe something like this: Weight, 2.5 mill, 17th overall for 7th, Husielius.

Frenzy1 is offline  
Old
06-11-2004, 03:37 PM
  #43
c-carp
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Illinois
Posts: 9,470
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frenzy1
I would move us for a shot a Schremp.

Maybe something like this: Weight, 2.5 mill, 17th overall for 7th, Husielius.
Not totally sold yet, but thinking about it. If the Panthers would let us keep our pick at 17 I do it.

Maybe I am putting more value on Weight than I should, but in that deal as it stands, If I have to throw my pick in I want something else back.

c-carp is offline  
Old
06-11-2004, 03:53 PM
  #44
Frenzy1
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 3,823
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by c-carp
Not totally sold yet, but thinking about it. If the Panthers would let us keep our pick at 17 I do it.

Maybe I am putting more value on Weight than I should, but in that deal as it stands, If I have to throw my pick in I want something else back.
Would it help if they tossed in a mid-level prospect.

Or what about Walker or Stuart our 17th for their 7th.


Most fans are asking for more, saying that the draft is shallow and thus upping the ante. However, I don't buy this. Though some will say you can never have enough prospects, the fact is at some point you need to turn the prospects into solid players. What the actual value is, is hard to determine. Are two good prospects that MAY have 1st line ability worth a solid 2nd liner?

Frenzy1 is offline  
Old
06-11-2004, 04:03 PM
  #45
c-carp
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Illinois
Posts: 9,470
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frenzy1
Would it help if they tossed in a mid-level prospect.

Or what about Walker or Stuart our 17th for their 7th.


Most fans are asking for more, saying that the draft is shallow and thus upping the ante. However, I don't buy this. Though some will say you can never have enough prospects, the fact is at some point you need to turn the prospects into solid players. What the actual value is, is hard to determine. Are two good prospects that MAY have 1st line ability worth a solid 2nd liner?
Walker or Stuart plus our pick I would do. As far as the mid level prospect they would toss in I dont know if that would be enough for me personally to do it.

c-carp is offline  
Old
06-11-2004, 04:22 PM
  #46
degroat*
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: http://nhl.degroat.n
Posts: 8,108
vCash: 500
There's no way they'd trade down 10 spots and only acquire Walker or Stuart.

Weight, 2.5 mill, 17th overall for 7th, Husielius probably wouldn't even get it done.

degroat* is offline  
Old
06-12-2004, 11:49 AM
  #47
Irish Blues
____________________
 
Irish Blues's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Country: St Helena
Posts: 21,804
vCash: 91
1. Why trade up in this draft - why not trade for draft picks in the (deeper) '05 draft? I'd take '05 picks whenever offered (as long as it made sense), angling hard for a prospect + '05 pick in lieu of an '04 pick.

2. I think the Shkotov trade occurred before the boards crashed...so that's why it's not there. AFAIK old threads have not been purged....but I'll dig in the archives to see if I can find anything. (But for the record...Shkotov and his coach did exchange words over playing time, and the trade occured shortly after that.)

3. I would deal a Weight or Tkachuk and pay up to 1/3rd of their remaining salary in a trade - how the other team wants to allocate it is not my concern.

4. Speaking of Weight not seeing eye-to-eye with Pronger and/or Tkachuk...anyone else hear of Weight and Quenneville getting into it around the time the team crashed and burned? I've heard there was a blow-up within the locker room and Weight and Quenneville were mentioned as part of it but I haven't heard anything else and don't know many more details - but the net effect was that the team was split and all chemistry was destroyed.

Irish Blues is offline  
Old
06-12-2004, 10:14 PM
  #48
CuSa_1
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Country: United States
Posts: 1,557
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Irish Blues
1. Why trade up in this draft - why not trade for draft picks in the (deeper) '05 draft? I'd take '05 picks whenever offered (as long as it made sense), angling hard for a prospect + '05 pick in lieu of an '04 pick.

2. I think the Shkotov trade occurred before the boards crashed...so that's why it's not there. AFAIK old threads have not been purged....but I'll dig in the archives to see if I can find anything. (But for the record...Shkotov and his coach did exchange words over playing time, and the trade occured shortly after that.)

3. I would deal a Weight or Tkachuk and pay up to 1/3rd of their remaining salary in a trade - how the other team wants to allocate it is not my concern.

4. Speaking of Weight not seeing eye-to-eye with Pronger and/or Tkachuk...anyone else hear of Weight and Quenneville getting into it around the time the team crashed and burned? I've heard there was a blow-up within the locker room and Weight and Quenneville were mentioned as part of it but I haven't heard anything else and don't know many more details - but the net effect was that the team was split and all chemistry was destroyed.

What I heard was it was Weight and Tkachuk against Pronger and Ozzy. This is by no means a reliable report, however that's what I was hearing. So I have no idea.

CuSa_1 is offline  
Old
06-14-2004, 05:11 PM
  #49
degroat*
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: http://nhl.degroat.n
Posts: 8,108
vCash: 500
I don't know if Weight actually got into an argument with Q, but he was the only one of the key players on the team that didn't come out and speak up for Q.

degroat* 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 11:28 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.