LCP_STEVIEG Posted June 14, 2012 Report Share Posted June 14, 2012 I read the mock drafts on the home page and thought that two out of the 4 were not what we'd be looking for in the 1st round because I think we should be looking for a RW or C and those two had D on their list. As much as we can use some more high end depth on D, we need a #1 C and top6 RW to come from that 1st pick. I know that it's impossible to predict what a player's going to turn out like but I think they had Collberg and Gaunce as my choices. From what I've heard about the players I think they're good for what we're looking for. We need a C who can pass and score, and not just score, because I feel like C who just score, don't necessarily have the all around intelligence. It's basically what we had in Joker. RW, I think that Collberg brings what we need there too from what I've read. We shall see. I understand that this years 1st round pick isn't the fix for our problems, but we need that high end talent in our system to at least get us there in a few years, or to roll in when guys like Cammy and Iggy are gone... Drafting by position isn't wise. Take last year for example. A lot of people wanted us to draft Mark McNeill because he's a large center and they saw the center void in our line-up and they made the connection. Instead, we drafted Baertschi, who at the moment, looks like a superstar in the making. My point being is that drafting the best player available is key. So by the time the 14th pick rolls around, if the best player on the board is a defenseman, you make that pick. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robindr Posted June 14, 2012 Report Share Posted June 14, 2012 Drafting by position isn't wise. Take last year for example. A lot of people wanted us to draft Mark McNeill because he's a large center and they saw the center void in our line-up and they made the connection. Instead, we drafted Baertschi, who at the moment, looks like a superstar in the making. My point being is that drafting the best player available is key. So by the time the 14th pick rolls around, if the best player on the board is a defenseman, you make that pick. I guess so, But when have we ever drafted the best center available? or the best rw available? We've never had a C and we look back at all of those drafts and see all of those Centers that have been overlooked because they weren't considered the BPA at that time? It's frustrating, but you can never tell who's going to turn out... I look back at the drafts over the last 10 years and think wow, we coulda had this guy, or we coulda had that guy, etc... but you get my point. Even with a Dman at that point, you're not going to know if he's going to be a sure-fire prospect. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crzydrvr Posted June 14, 2012 Report Share Posted June 14, 2012 But when have we ever drafted the best center available? or the best rw available? We've never had a C and we look back at all of those drafts and see all of those Centers that have been overlooked because they weren't considered the BPA at that time? It's frustrating, but you can never tell who's going to turn out... I look back at the drafts over the last 10 years and think wow, we coulda had this guy, or we coulda had that guy, etc... Hindsight is 20/20. You can kill yourself saying "Why did we get Phaneuf when we coulda had a Carter or a Getzlaf or a Perry or a Parise...." but it isn't going to change anything. Is it better to go off the board for a guy who fills our needs, or is it better to ignore those needs and go for BPA? There is no right answer. However, most NHL teams do go by their BPAs so obviously our scouts felt that Player A was better than Player B. And therein lies the fun of scouting. It's interesting to see how players develop after their draft and who really becomes that standout player. For a while we thought Phaneuf was going to be that player, but look at him now. It really is true what they say about drafts: it doesn't matter where they are drafted, it only matters what they do with it afterwards. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cmpdave Posted June 15, 2012 Report Share Posted June 15, 2012 Forsberg has committed to playing in Sweden next year. Does that possibly hurt his draft stock a little? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crzydrvr Posted June 15, 2012 Report Share Posted June 15, 2012 Forsberg has committed to playing in Sweden next year. Does that possibly hurt his draft stock a little? If a team likes him enough, they'll take him. Simple as that. They won't drop him just because they don't think he'll be at camp next year. In any case, Forsberg does need more development so why not let him stay a year or two and really get going and build some confidence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Meatpuppet42 Posted June 16, 2012 Report Share Posted June 16, 2012 How about flames trade Markus Granlund and there 1st round to Minnesoda for there 1st round then they pick Griffin Reinhart. Both teams would have brothers in the line up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flyerfan52 Posted June 16, 2012 Report Share Posted June 16, 2012 Hindsight is 20/20. You can kill yourself saying "Why did we get Phaneuf when we coulda had a Carter or a Getzlaf or a Perry or a Parise...." but it isn't going to change anything. Is it better to go off the board for a guy who fills our needs, or is it better to ignore those needs and go for BPA? There is no right answer. However, most NHL teams do go by their BPAs so obviously our scouts felt that Player A was better than Player B. And therein lies the fun of scouting. It's interesting to see how players develop after their draft and who really becomes that standout player. For a while we thought Phaneuf was going to be that player, but look at him now. It really is true what they say about drafts: it doesn't matter where they are drafted, it only matters what they do with it afterwards. Heck yeah! All teams were hot for Phaneuf in 2003. Many viewed their top picks as a kind of consolation prize. & let's not forget that all the teams bypassed Shea Weber (most of them did it twice) before he was taken @ # 49. Even in the deepest draft you go by what you project that 18 year old will become. With the benefit of hindsight the BJs wouldn't have taken Zherdev. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrippinVdUb Posted June 16, 2012 Report Share Posted June 16, 2012 How about flames trade Markus Granlund and there 1st round to Minnesoda for there 1st round then they pick Griffin Reinhart. Both teams would have brothers in the line up. No thanks, I dont want to give up two prospects for the price of one. The draft is deep with defense men and we can probably find some one pretty close to Reinhart at 14 with out giving up Granlund. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ConnorFutureGM Posted June 16, 2012 Report Share Posted June 16, 2012 From what it sounded like in Feaster's interview on the fan 960, the Flames will be targeting a forward. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Numbear Posted June 16, 2012 Report Share Posted June 16, 2012 I hope its gringenko - big centre to play between baert, gaudreau in the future. We need size in our prospects or collberg - leaves us with a gap in the centre. But baert/collberg could be a nice set of wings. I might be wrong but isn't collberg similar to Rattie in how he plays? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kehatch Posted June 16, 2012 Report Share Posted June 16, 2012 From what it sounded like in Feaster's interview on the fan 960, the Flames will be targeting a forward. Huh? He was pretty clear. Best player available. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ConnorFutureGM Posted June 16, 2012 Report Share Posted June 16, 2012 Huh? He was pretty clear. Best player available. I might be mixing up his interview and Conroy's interview but one of them said that defencemen take too long to develop. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kehatch Posted June 16, 2012 Report Share Posted June 16, 2012 I might be mixing up his interview and Conroy's interview but one of them said that defencemen take too long to develop. If you are talking about the 60 minutes he joined the fan a day or two ago Conroy was clear on BPA. He did say he didn't think they would draft a goalie in the first round. Feaster has also been adamant on BPA. Giving multiple examples etc. Going so far as saying drafting based on need was his biggest mistake in Tampa. Personally I think Murphy, Reinhart, Troubadour, Ceci etc are gone and we pick a forward. But if the player highest on the list is a D come 14 the Flames pick him. That said I don't know how high Feaster is on the position in general. He seems. To prefer 20-minute guys. So in his mind the BPA may not be a D. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wally31 Posted June 16, 2012 Report Share Posted June 16, 2012 How about flames trade Markus Granlund and there 1st round to Minnesoda for there 1st round then they pick Griffin Reinhart. Both teams would have brothers in the line up. I'd do it in a second, but I doubt Minni would. Moving 7 spots down would allow us to pick anyone from Reinhart, Reilly, Trouba, TT, etc.. If Feaster could do this, he should. I think Reinhart & Reilly are going to be impact NHLers.. CGY: 7th overall Minni: 14th Backlund 7th would such a great position to be in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zirakzigil Posted June 17, 2012 Report Share Posted June 17, 2012 I'd do it in a second, but I doubt Minni would. Moving 7 spots down would allow us to pick anyone from Reinhart, Reilly, Trouba, TT, etc.. If Feaster could do this, he should. I think Reinhart & Reilly are going to be impact NHLers.. CGY: 7th overall Minni: 14th Backlund 7th would such a great position to be in. Not worth it. I fully expect Backlund to thrive under Hartley. He got offensively smothered with Sutter. I want the Flames to put Backlund and Sven together and see what the kids can do with some decent offensive minutes. Hartley has a history of doing that and those 2 have the talent and creativity to do some damage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carty Posted June 18, 2012 Report Share Posted June 18, 2012 Not worth it. I fully expect Backlund to thrive under Hartley. He got offensively smothered with Sutter. I want the Flames to put Backlund and Sven together and see what the kids can do with some decent offensive minutes. Hartley has a history of doing that and those 2 have the talent and creativity to do some damage. I think what I bolded in your your post is true of a number of players... Sutter mismanaged much of the talent on the Flames during his tenure here, and from what I saw, I considered it to be more of the same during the recent WC's... Hartley will not be an easy coach to play for, as I believe he will push every member on the roster to deliver towards playing to the best of their potential, both offensively and defensively... The more thought I have given it, perhaps a dose of Hartley is just what the doctor ordered... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flyerfan52 Posted June 18, 2012 Report Share Posted June 18, 2012 How about flames trade Markus Granlund and there 1st round to Minnesoda for there 1st round then they pick Griffin Reinhart. Both teams would have brothers in the line up. & being brothers that haven't played together since the 1st left home for the CHL, university or what ever @ 15 means what? It means there are 2 different #s with the same nameplate on the back if both make the team. It's a romantic ideal but seldom works. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carty Posted June 18, 2012 Report Share Posted June 18, 2012 & being brothers that haven't played together since the 1st left home for the CHL, university or what ever @ 15 means what? It means there are 2 different #s with the same nameplate on the back if both make the team. It's a romantic ideal but seldom works. Unless you are the androgynous sisters from the left coast... Then you get your relatively short term worth of quality fame before it is all over... *edit: ya'll know I hate the nucks... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kehatch Posted June 18, 2012 Report Share Posted June 18, 2012 & being brothers that haven't played together since the 1st left home for the CHL, university or what ever @ 15 means what? It means there are 2 different #s with the same nameplate on the back if both make the team. It's a romantic ideal but seldom works. Sam and Max play together. So did the Granlunds. Lots of rumblings that if Staal is moved it will be to Carolina to play with his two brothers. The Sutter brothers played together. Well sorta! I agree it's more romantic then practical. But these players share similar pedigrees and coaches and played together growing upand they assumably want to play with each other. So I wouldn't discount it entirely. That said, it will cost more then Granlund for us to move up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zirakzigil Posted June 18, 2012 Report Share Posted June 18, 2012 Lots of rumblings that if Staal is moved it will be to Carolina to play with his two brothers. The Sutter brothers played together. Doubt it. The asking price for Jordan will be Skinner. And I highly doubt that the Canes do that. Sutter and the 8th (most common thing being thrown around) does not help the Penguins win now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ConnorFutureGM Posted June 18, 2012 Report Share Posted June 18, 2012 Doubt it. The asking price for Jordan will be Skinner. And I highly doubt that the Canes do that. Sutter and the 8th (most common thing being thrown around) does not help the Penguins win now. Sutter would replace Staal and they would get an 8th overall pick. They would more or less maintain well adding a very good prospect. If they are looking to improve right now, they could package that pick or another prospect and one of their defencemen for another defenceman. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zirakzigil Posted June 18, 2012 Report Share Posted June 18, 2012 Sutter would replace Staal and they would get an 8th overall pick. They would more or less maintain well adding a very good prospect. If they are looking to improve right now, they could package that pick or another prospect and one of their defencemen for another defenceman. Sutter doesnt even come close to replacing what Staal brings and the 8th overall is next to useless to a contending team. This isnt the Oilers who are happy collecting top draft picks and going nowhere every year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kehatch Posted June 18, 2012 Report Share Posted June 18, 2012 Sutter doesnt even come close to replacing what Staal brings and the 8th overall is next to useless to a contending team. This isnt the Oilers who are happy collecting top draft picks and going nowhere every year. I don't disagree. But the 8 overall is still an asset and could be turned into a solid winger or D. Plus the cap space would be beneficial and Sutter does effectively fill the roll of a 3-line C. Carolina is one of the few teams that will pay full value for Staal as they have to be confident they can re-sign him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calgaryboy12 Posted June 18, 2012 Report Share Posted June 18, 2012 Sutter doesnt even come close to replacing what Staal brings and the 8th overall is next to useless to a contending team. This isnt the Oilers who are happy collecting top draft picks and going nowhere every year. Many thought that 13th wouldn't go anywhere last year. What's that guy's name again...? Does it start with an Sv...? That being said, first rounders always have huge potential. Giroux was a late first rounder and he's only one example. I also think that Sutter (if we're talking about Brandon) brings a lot to the table. Leadership being one of his desirable traits. As much as I hate the Oilers, I think that plenty of their picks have the potential of being star quality players. Sorry for the contradictions... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrippinVdUb Posted June 19, 2012 Report Share Posted June 19, 2012 Many thought that 13th wouldn't go anywhere last year. What's that guy's name again...? Does it start with an Sv...? That being said, first rounders always have huge potential. Giroux was a late first rounder and he's only one example. I also think that Sutter (if we're talking about Brandon) brings a lot to the table. Leadership being one of his desirable traits. Agreed, Brandon is a hell of a hockey player and would fit in nicely with Pittsburgh and this deal makes sense for allot of reasons. The Pens get back a very good 3rd line C that will fit there mold and cost considerably less. It gives them a early first round pick in a draft that happens to be in there home building. I could easily see that going down! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.