I had a dream that Edmonton drafted RNH, Colorado and Florida both went WAY off the board and picked two random players I had never heard of, and then we drafted Murphy even though Larsson and Landeskog were both on the board. I guess you could call it nightmare actually.
I had a dream that Edmonton drafted, RNH, Colorado and Florids both went WAY off the board and picked two random players I had never hear of, and then we frafted Murphy even though Larsson and Landeskog were both on the board. I guess you could call it nightmare actually.
Ladd was moved twice, we can get a player like Ladd on the market but we won't be able to land a #1 center or top pairing d-men with the same return... garanteed.
Ladd was moved because of cap reasons. They didn't want to move him in Chicago, but they had to.
There's no guarantee that your beloved Murphy or Couturier, Huberdeau or Larsson become top pairing or #1 C just like Landeskog is no guarantee to be a great player.
Ladd was moved because of cap reasons. They didn't want to move him in Chicago, but they had to.
There's no guarantee that your beloved Murphy or Couturier, Huberdeau or Larsson become top pairing or #1 C just like Landeskog is no guarantee to be a great player.
All these kids have + and - attributes.
It's all good.
Carolina didn't have any cap problems and if you are moving a key player for cap relief and picks, you are doing a terrible job. We would say the same if Lou would've moved Parise last offseason to fix our cap problems.
Bottom line is that Ladd was not a key player for the Hawks even if he played very well in the SCP's so they moved him and decided to keep Toews, Kane, Hossa, Keith, Seabrook and of all players Campbell.
We'll get a bluechip prospect and that's all that matters I guess.
This will be the second time I ever watch the NHL draft, and hopefully the last. The first and only time so far was when my boy vanRiemsdyk was getting drafted.
Also, I think the Ladd/Skog comparison is pretty weird. They both are good at everything, do the little things, and have great leadership, but it's weird because I don't consider them to be similar players.
I still see the Zubrus in Skog, and even Zubs was a 1st rounder. Every team needs a Zubrus, but I don't want him at 4.
If Edmonton passes on Larsson I can see Colorado passing on him too since they are well stocked in defensive prospects, it would be up to Florida to make the unbelievable believable.
If Edmonton passes on Larsson I can see Colorado passing on him too since they are well stocked in defensive prospects, it would be up to Florida to make the unbelievable believable.
That's what I'm thinking. And apparently Tallon isn't looking to take a defenseman.
It's all smoke and mirrors at this point, but I could certainly see it happening.
I just don't see Larsson falling at #4. When you are a bottom feader like the Panthers, Oilers and to a lesser extent the Avs, you have to take the best player for the future of your franchise.
Who's to say that EJ won't suffer from another golf cart incident or Gudbranson will pan out as a top pairing d-men? When you are selecting in the top #5, you take the BPA and if you need to address some needs cause you picked a prospect at a position you didn't really need or got improved via trades/UFA, you can flip that prospect ala Runblad for Tarashenko and get another solid player in return.
