Final Call -Who Do We Get?

[phoenix66]

Ok, so we have debated it to death, but with the draft less than 72 hrs away, lets just throw it on the table who we think we are going to get.

No debating, no explaining, just who you think we pick in the first round. We can come back and see how we did after.

Do you think we trade up/ down? Fine then just put the pick number down.

Eg: think we trade all our picks to Colorado for #1? Fine just put "1. Mackinnon" and youre done

Here is mine:

6. Lindholm

22. Kerby Rychel

28 Sam Morin

[redfire11]

6. Sean Monahan  C

22. Nikita Zadorov  D

28. Joshua Morrissey D

[The_People1]

I don't want this but i think we get this,

 

6 Sean Monahan

22 Ryan Hartman

28 Steve Santini

[Bastardsonofmacinnis]

I don't want this but i think we get this,

 

6 Sean Monahan

22 Ryan Hartman

28 Steve Santini

I think we get this too. But I want this.

[Zatch]

6 - Sean Monahan - Center

22 - Zach Nastasiuk - Right Wing

28 - John Morrissey - Defense

[JTech780]

6. Monahan

22. Morrissey

28. Compher

 

I think we trade the 28th pick and pick up a couple 2nds.

[travel_dude]

Scenario 1 (Barkov and Nish gone by 6)

#6 Lindholm

#22 Zykov 

#28 Petan

 

Scenario 2 (Barkov available)

#6 Barkov

#22 Mantha 

#28 Klimchuk

 

Scenario 3 (Nish available)

#6 Nichushkin

#22 Hunter Shrink-wrap(think he falls a bit) 

#28 De La Rose

[geo35]

#6   Monahan

#22 Gauthier

#28 Hagg

[joeyabs]

6. Lindholm

22. Rychel

28. Fucale / Petan

 

 

Changed my 28 pick:

 

Craig button has some severe wood for Fucale, usually Todd follows suit (at least to some degree). 

 

Follow up team combine with Petan & their in house analytics leads me to believe Petan is a strong candidate to get picked.  

[s4xon]

Going out on a limb and saying Feaster trades the 6th and 22nd picks and gets

 

4.Barkov C

28.Hagg D

[PokernHockey]

6. Monahan

22.Morrissey

28.hartman

 

(if Monahan, Lindholm, and Nish are available at 6 - I think ed takes a D at 7)

8. Monahan (lindholm)

16.Shinkarak

22. Morrissey

 

The second one is more of a hope then an honest belief even if the three are available.

 

I am also going to say that Cammy gets traded in a move that involves a first round pick, (calgary retains cap) although I am not willing to call if it is part of a package to move up one of our existing picks or a 4th first round pick.

[mamccarthy]

Monahan, Lindholm or Nish? In what order would you take each? If they're available at 6 

[FlamesLogic]

#6   Monahan

#22 Gauthier

#28 Hagg

This is what I would like to see but I dont think it will fall that way.

 

6 will be Monahan or Lindholm (in that order) provided top 5 break down as expected

22 Morin or Gauthier (if available) or Rychel

28 Hagg (if Gauthier or Rychel taken at 22) or Hartman (if Morin taken) or McCarron/McCoshen/Santini if all of these are gone

 

Why McCarron/McCoshen/Santini?

a) USHL players tend to go to NCAA

Weisbrod has shown a preference to NCAA for development

c) NCAA routes allows 4 years before ELC instead of normal 2 years

d) dmen take longer to develop so in the case of Santini/McCoshen having those 4 years before ELC gives them extra time to develop

 

The 28 depends alot on what has happened earlier and unless you get a guy with some real upside like a Hagg or Hartman I think the flames will maybe try and move back and get one of those 3 guys in the early second and pickup and extra pick in say the 3rd or a 2nd next year.

 

Theres kind of a new tier of talent that starts in the high 20's and runs deep through the second round so not much advantage to grabbing a guy at the start of that tier when you get maybe move back and get one later. Just need to find a team that covets one of the guys left on the board.

 

If no one wants to move up the Flames will just have to grab the guy they like most at that spot.

[geos]

Lindholm, Pulock, Hagg.

[kehatch]

Monahan, Hartman, Petan

[Faron]

6. Lindholm

 

22. Hartman

 

28. Morrissey

[lordxan]

#6   Monahan

#22 Gauthier

#28 Hagg

This

[Prids]

Lindholm, Pulock, Hagg.

I would like to see this, but I think Pulock will be gone.

 

My prediction:

 

6. Lindholm

22. Morrissey

28. Hartman/ Zykov

[joeyabs]

I think they'll pick Fucale at 28 if he's there.  In the latest interview with Todd Button, he seemed gitty when Kerr asked him about the goalies in the draft - Button said one was going in the first round for sure (Fucale obv), but not sure where.

[Prids]

I think they'll pick Fucale at 28 if he's there.  In the latest interview with Todd Button, he seemed gitty when Kerr asked him about the goalies in the draft - Button said one was going in the first round for sure (Fucale obv), but not sure where.

 

Please NO! haha. Because using our 1st on goalies have worked out for us soooooo well in the past....oh wait

[geos]

I think they'll pick Fucale at 28 if he's there.  In the latest interview with Todd Button, he seemed gitty when Kerr asked him about the goalies in the draft - Button said one was going in the first round for sure (Fucale obv), but not sure where.

 

I think Fucale would be ok at 28th, but I doubt he gets there.

[PokernHockey]

Please NO! haha. Because using our 1st on goalies have worked out for us soooooo well in the past....oh wait

 

I think you may be mixing up the visible symptom and the underlying problem. By your logic: The Flames have picked 4 goalies in the first round to my knowledge, Kidd, Krahn, Muzzatti and Irving. The flames have picked 6th twice, Fata and Tkaczuk. I think it is safe to say Kidd had the best career, Muzzatti/Tkaczuk had arguably equal careers and Irving/Krahn/Fata are arguably a wash. (Had Tkaczuk not gotten a concussion his first year things may have turned out differently, he was on pace for a pretty good rookie season through 19 games. Krahn is another one that injuries likely changed everything.) With previous 6th overall picks the flames have always picked a skater (forward), and they have turned out to be busts.

 

Therefore the flames should either trade down their 6th overall pick, (where they have had more success), trade all of their picks for previously drafted players, (where they have in the past 20 years had the most proven success) or pick Fucale or a D 6th (since they have not tried before) since:

 

using our 1st 6th overall on goalies skaters (forwards) have worked out for us soooooo well in the past....oh wait

 

If the flames took Fucale with 28th overall I would be ecstatic, but I seriously doubt he is still there. He is even on my list at 22, I just think there are other guys I want there more who will still likely be around.

[Prids]

I think you may be mixing up the visible symptom and the underlying problem. By your logic: The Flames have picked 2 goalies in the first round to my knowledge, Kidd and Irving. The flames have picked 6th twice, Fata and Tkaczuk. I think it is safe to say Kidd had the best career and Irving/Fata are arguably a wash. (Had Tkaczuk not gotten a concussion his first year things may have turned out differently, he was on pace for ~48 points, not bad for a rookie.) With previous 6th overall picks the flames have always picked a skater (forward), and they have turned out to be busts.

 

Therefore the flames should either trade down their 6th overall pick, (where they have had more success), trade all of their picks for previously drafted players, (where they have in the past 20 years had the most proven success) or pick Fucale or a D 6th (since they have not tried before) since:

 

 

If the flames took Fucale with 28th overall I would be ecstatic, but I seriously doubt he is still there. He is even on my list at 22, I just think there are other guys I want there more who will still likely be around.

 

 

Flames also drafted Brent Krahn 9th overall in 2000.  

 

I think drafting goalies is kind of a crap shoot. Goalies need a lot of time to develop and they need a actual roster spot where they can play. I think Calgary has some very decent goalies in the system, but will need time to let them develop. Brossoit, Ortio, Gillies. Then we also have Berra and Ramo. In my option we need to give these guys playing time and allow them to develop before determining what we really have.

 

Reimer - 99th overall

Rinne - 258th overall

Crawford - 52nd overall

Smith - 161 overall

Howard -64th overall

Quick -72nd overall

 

The list goes on....what I am saying is....teams don't need to draft a goalie early...teams NEED to let the goalie develop and that takes time/ a number 1 spot where they get lots of playing time.

 

Now of course there are others: Price, Flurey, ect where they went right into the NHL. But even then both those guys went through some rocky seasons where people doubted they were a number 1 goalie.

[Heartbreaker]

Now of course there are others: Price, Flurey, ect where they went right into the NHL. But even then both those guys went through some rocky seasons where people doubted they were a number 1 goalie.

Like the recently concluded playoffs. 

 

Love. 

[PokernHockey]

Flames also drafted Brent Krahn 9th overall in 2000.  

 

I think drafting goalies is kind of a crap shoot. Goalies need a lot of time to develop and they need a actual roster spot where they can play. I think Calgary has some very decent goalies in the system, but will need time to let them develop. Brossoit, Ortio, Gillies. Then we also have Berra and Ramo. In my option we need to give these guys playing time and allow them to develop before determining what we really have.

 

Reimer - 99th overall

Rinne - 258th overall

Crawford - 52nd overall

Smith - 161 overall

Howard -64th overall

Quick -72nd overall

 

The list goes on....what I am saying is....teams don't need to draft a goalie early...teams NEED to let the goalie develop and that takes time/ a number 1 spot where they get lots of playing time.

 

Now of course there are others: Price, Flurey, ect where they went right into the NHL. But even then both those guys went through some rocky seasons where people doubted they were a number 1 goalie.

 

I corrected myself on the goalies, but you must have started replying before I edited it, sorry about that. To be fair on Krahn, it was knee injuries which derailed him: he may have become as good as he was projected to be if not for them.

 

I agree that goalies are more of a crap shoot/need a different development path, but I can also pull out players names who were taken later and turned out just as good as the goalies you mentioned:

 

webber, datsyuk, Theo Fleury, etc. and then you have top picks that fizzle such as Daigle.

 

I think the main different between goalies and skaters is that scouts have not figured out how to project goalies as well as they do skaters. 20 years ago  skaters were much less projectable then they are now, so perhaps in 10 years goalies and skaters will have similar probabilities dependent on their rounds. Neither are a perfect science.

 

That said, I think you take BPA, and part of that "formula" should include the probability of success. I think that Fucale is a top tier talent who, when I include the higher risk of failure IS at the top of my list at 28th and should be mentioned in the discussion at 22 based on who I anticipate being available. Is he more likely to be a bust then Gauthier for example? For sure, but at the same time, Fucale projects to be a #1 goalie, potentially a franchise guy, Gauthier projects to be a 3rd line guy, maybe 2nd if the stars line up.  And a big part of what people like about Gauthier is his size, yet he doesn't play overly physically. think about how many people lambasted JayBo for that. Which pick is better? its a judgement call and there is not a right or wrong answer.

 

To distill my argument using hockey's future's ratings; All else equal, if you are comparing two players, and A has a 10% chance of becoming a "9", and a 40% chance of becoming a "7", and a 50% chance of never making the show, or B who has a 50% chance of becoming a "6", and a 20% chance of becoming a "5" with a 30% chance of never making it, which should you take? the simple multiplication suggests you should take B. (expected value of 3.7 and 4 respectively), yet myself I would probably take A since the risk is worth the reward in my mind.

 

Its the same argument as last year with Janko (boom-bust potential all star) or Maatta ("safe" 3-4 defender). Neither side is necessarily wrong or right.