420since1974 Posted February 10, 2016 Report Share Posted February 10, 2016 I doubt that the Flames will be picking first overall, we'd never have that kind of luck. But, anywhere in the 2nd to 7th spots are certainly not out of the realm of possibility. My choices would be: 2. Laine 3. Puljujarvi 4. Tkachuk 5. Chychrun 6. Sergachev 7. Nylander I might be convinced that the Flames need a D like Sergachev more than they do Chychrun. Sergachev: "Big tough mobile import defenseman playing in the OHL with a strong heavy point shot. A difficult player to beat one on one because he possesses a strong stride and excellent East-West lateral mobility. Relishes been able to get a big check in on opponents both along the boards and in open-ice. Has good vision and in transition makes good home run outlet passes. And although he on occasion will hold on to pucks a bit long, or get careless in his carries, he displays good passing skills. When you see a junior defender with this size ,mobility mixed with a dose of nasty, you have to think he goes off the board early no matter how much the pro game is evolving."—Bill Placzek— Chychrun: "Each player that was granted early entrance exceptional status into Canadian junior leagues is heaped with platitudes and criticized through strong microscopes. Continue up the ladder to the NHL takes a larger developmental commitment for a defensive prospect than a forward. The son of former NHL player, Jeff, plays with a calm demeanor, good feet, lateral agility and physicality. An elite defensive prospect with a tremendous package of talent. Already physically developed, he is a terrific skater with a separation gear, and a hard cutting stride and a skating base that lets him protect the puck. Possesses a strong wrist shot and is able to stickhandle with precision and accuracy through traffic. He is polished two way player with good feet, strong skills but needs to continue to hone the defensive side of his game. Already plays with an edge. With physicality in place he needs to continue maturing in his positional play. It will determine if he evolves to a impact pro or simply a good one. His puck smarts and passing ability see him as a future NHL PP guy too." --Bill Placzek Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jjgallow Posted February 11, 2016 Author Report Share Posted February 11, 2016 I might be convinced that the Flames need a D like Sergachev more than they do Chychrun. I would argue that the Flames need a D like Ekblad more than they do either of these. In other words, they need a D that is somewhat established and proven capable of playing top-line minutes, now. Drafting a D, they may not turn out at all, or they may take 6 years to develop to that point (or more). In otherwords, the draft is really BPA. Yes, the Flames need a defenceman. But the best way to address that at this stage, is through signing or a trade. So I know this will get shot down, but as an example only..... If we got Matthews, we could conceivably trade Bennett or Monahan for an Ekblad-like player. Or....just...Ekblad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kehatch Posted February 11, 2016 Report Share Posted February 11, 2016 I would argue that the Flames need a D like Ekblad more than they do either of these. In other words, they need a D that is somewhat established and proven capable of playing top-line minutes, now. Drafting a D, they may not turn out at all, or they may take 6 years to develop to that point (or more). In otherwords, the draft is really BPA. Yes, the Flames need a defenceman. But the best way to address that at this stage, is through signing or a trade. So I know this will get shot down, but as an example only..... If we got Matthews, we could conceivably trade Bennett or Monahan for an Ekblad-like player. Or....just...Ekblad. I don't think anyone shoots that down. It could happen. Eventually. In fact that's why you pick Mathews regardless of our young depth at centre. I just don't think you see it right away. There will be zero reason to rush. Might as well see what you have for a season or two. Especially with Giordano, Brodie, and Hamilton signed long term. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cross16 Posted February 11, 2016 Report Share Posted February 11, 2016 Problem with that theory JJ is Dman like Ekblad don't come around very often and if they do they don't get traded and the only reason to trade a dman like that with the cap is because you can't afford him. with all the contract the Flames have coming up they arn't gonig to be able to afford him either. The Flames already ahve 2 Norris Trophy calibre Dmen and 1 more potential one signed long term. I don't think they need another top pairing dman in the foreseable future. There is no questions in my mind the Flames biggest needs are up front and in the net. They need at least 1 more top end point producer which is why I don't agree with the logic of taking anyone but Matthews and having him in your lineup. Flames have the high end talent on the blueline they just need some depth, they need more high end talent up front. If the Flames wind up in the 6-10 range, which as much as I hate to admit it is probably the most likely, there is a good chance that between Chychrun, Sergachev and Juolevi a dman is going to be BPA in that spot. I don't know as much about Chychrun or Sergachev but i was extremely impressed by Juolevi at the WJC. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JTech780 Posted February 11, 2016 Report Share Posted February 11, 2016 My thought process on prospects is usually if everything else is equal (talent, size, etc.), take the center, then you look at defensemen. Regardless of what holes Calgary has to address, you look to add premium talent at premium positions first. If we were lucky enough to get Matthews I am more than ok with the idea of shifting Bennett to wing. I am slightly worried about him playing center at his size in the Pacific division anyways. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
420since1974 Posted February 12, 2016 Report Share Posted February 12, 2016 If the BPA is a defense man, I'd take one of them. It's easier to trade for a winger than a D. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DirtyDeeds Posted February 15, 2016 Report Share Posted February 15, 2016 Don't recall seeing this posted: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jjgallow Posted February 16, 2016 Author Report Share Posted February 16, 2016 Don't recall seeing this posted: He makes it look so easy... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xstrike Posted February 17, 2016 Report Share Posted February 17, 2016 I don't know if this has already been posted, but this writer suggests that, given the choice of any player, the Flame would go for Puljujarvi. http://thehockeywriters.com/2016-nhl-mock-draft-the-next-ones-midterm-edition/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cross16 Posted February 17, 2016 Report Share Posted February 17, 2016 I don't know if this has already been posted, but this writer suggests that, given the choice of any player, the Flame would go for Puljujarvi. http://thehockeywriters.com/2016-nhl-mock-draft-the-next-ones-midterm-edition/ Classic draft mistake, picking a need over the best player. Don't get me wrong I really like Puljujarvi but you don't take anyone over Mathews in this draft. The gap has closed, but there is still a gap there and Mathews is the unquestionted number 1 IMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JTech780 Posted February 17, 2016 Report Share Posted February 17, 2016 Classic draft mistake, picking a need over the best player. Don't get me wrong I really like Puljujarvi but you don't take anyone over Mathews in this draft. The gap has closed, but there is still a gap there and Mathews is the unquestionted number 1 IMO. I agree. It would take a lot to give up a franchise center. Puljujarvi and Laine are both elite level wingers, but they are still only wingers. I would need a pretty big add to go from 1st to 2nd or 3rd. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DirtyDeeds Posted February 17, 2016 Report Share Posted February 17, 2016 Classic draft mistake, picking a need over the best player. Don't get me wrong I really like Puljujarvi but you don't take anyone over Mathews in this draft. The gap has closed, but there is still a gap there and Mathews is the unquestionted number 1 IMO. After reading the article I think that the writer intended to move down and switch picks with the Leafs. He said this in the Flames pick section but did not actually switch the picks around: Since they stray from the consensus number one pick, Auston Matthews, they would likely be able to pry an asset from the Maple Leafs for a swap of the top two picks. At least that is what it looks like to me. It also appears he did not review his article or he would have caught this error. I am disappointed and I expect better content from this website. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cross16 Posted February 17, 2016 Report Share Posted February 17, 2016 After reading the article I think that the writer intended to move down and switch picks with the Leafs. He said this in the Flames pick section but did not actually switch the picks around: At least that is what it looks like to me. It also appears he did not review his article or he would have caught this error. I am disappointed and I expect better content from this website. I actually read it and still didn't catch that. Agreed they should have made it more clear. Having said that, it still doesn't change my answer. The draft pick better be pretty darn high to move from Mathews to the 2 fins. I don't make that move unless the Leafs give me something off their roster. It still seems to me the article/webiste, is advocating drafting based on need over best player and I strongly disagree with that unless its worth your while and I don't think a draft pick is worth you while to move off of drafting Mathews. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlbertaBoy12 Posted February 17, 2016 Report Share Posted February 17, 2016 After reading the article I think that the writer intended to move down and switch picks with the Leafs. He said this in the Flames pick section but did not actually switch the picks around: That brings up an interesting idea, what kind of trade would be looking at to swap lets say 1st overall for 2nd overall with the leafs if that was the case. Does BT ask for one of the young players they have like kapanen or nylander? I would be interested to see what kind of deal would be done for something like that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DirtyDeeds Posted February 17, 2016 Report Share Posted February 17, 2016 I actually read it and still didn't catch that. Agreed they should have made it more clear. Having said that, it still doesn't change my answer. The draft pick better be pretty darn high to move from Mathews to the 2 fins. I don't make that move unless the Leafs give me something off their roster. It still seems to me the article/webiste, is advocating drafting based on need over best player and I strongly disagree with that unless its worth your while and I don't think a draft pick is worth you while to move off of drafting Mathews. While the best policy has always been to draft the "Best Player Available" I think maybe that thinking is shrinking a bit in popularity. If a couple of picks are close(in rating/quality) and either can play at an NHL level without a lot of development in the minors(think Monahan/Bennett) then maybe a pick for position is not so bad. As for this draft, our needs are RW, Matthews is listed as a RW, so it is a no brainer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cross16 Posted February 17, 2016 Report Share Posted February 17, 2016 While the best policy has always been to draft the "Best Player Available" I think maybe that thinking is shrinking a bit in popularity. If a couple of picks are close(in rating/quality) and either can play at an NHL level without a lot of development in the minors(think Monahan/Bennett) then maybe a pick for position is not so bad. As for this draft, our needs are RW, Matthews is listed as a RW, so it is a no brainer. If players are even on your board i have no problem picking based on position. But when a player is clearly ahead, which IMO Mathews is ahead of both Laine/Pulljarvi then you should always stick with the best player available. The gap determines how much you would need via trade to make that move and IMO the gap is large enough that i'm not willing to take back just a draft pick to make the swap. If they want to up the anty I would be all ears but I think it would take alot. As good as Laine and Pulljarvi are I think passing on a guy like Matthews i the type of move that gets you fired unless its really worth it. Franchise centers just do not grow on trees. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
420since1974 Posted February 18, 2016 Report Share Posted February 18, 2016 For sure Matthews at #1, but I think that any of the Top 3 could help the Flames right away. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
conundrumed Posted February 18, 2016 Report Share Posted February 18, 2016 Ugh, here comes hyping the draft again. Let the scouts agree on the draft. Let them pick. Matthews is solid, but is he a Toews or a Versteeg, it's a fine line. For the OP, I don't think he's close to McDavid, imho. The NHL is a big wake up call for most., and I don't see Matthews as a Stamkos or Tavares even. McDavid, not even maybe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jjgallow Posted February 19, 2016 Author Report Share Posted February 19, 2016 Ugh, here comes hyping the draft again. Let the scouts agree on the draft. Let them pick. Matthews is solid, but is he a Toews or a Versteeg, it's a fine line. For the OP, I don't think he's close to McDavid, imho. The NHL is a big wake up call for most., and I don't see Matthews as a Stamkos or Tavares even. McDavid, not even maybe. Ok, fair enough, I totally get it. Just ...keep in mind, that I was also the OP for the Connor McDavid thread, and it was met with a Overwhelming skepticism with "Next One" comparisons: http://fans.flames.nhl.com/community/topic/19848-connor-mcdavid-watch/ That is, until he started playing in the NHL. http://edmontonjournal.com/sports/hockey/nhl/cult-of-hockey/cult-of-hockey-oilers-rookie-mcdavid-compares-well-to-gretzky-lemiuex-in-their-rookie-years So to give you my take, for what it's worth...I agree with you that, currently, I wouldn't put Matthews up with McDavid. I would, however, put him up with, or above, Stamkos, or Tavares. And well above Toews, Versteeg, etc. Matthews didn't have the best World Juniors showing. (neither did McDavid, actually). I do take that into account, and I think it has to lower our expectations of him, somewhat. However, it was also an unfamiliar league to him. Now look at the Swiss League: http://www.eliteprospects.com/league.php?season=2015&leagueid=NLA&sort=&leagueteam=&nation=&name=&order=PPG Matthews has the highest Goals-per-Game in the entire league. Is already, by most measurements, the best player in the entire league. Against many ex-NHLers. How do we compare that, and to what? Well, Jesse Puljujarvi is playing in a comparable mens league (SM Liiga). He's barely in the top 100. http://www.eliteprospects.com/league.php?season=2015&leagueid=Liiga&sort=&leagueteam=&nation=&name=&order=PPG Laine is a bit better in the same league, just barely cracking the top 20. How does Laine's and Puljujarvi's performance compare with other top Finnish prospects? I would say Mikael Granlund, taken 9th overall in 2010, was probably slightly better or on par with Laine: http://www.eliteprospects.com/player.php?player=16037 What Matthews is doing in the Swiss League is just, frankly, way more impressive. Sure, he's a bit older. But I wouldn't underestimate him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JTech780 Posted February 22, 2016 Report Share Posted February 22, 2016 http://futureconsiderations.ca/nhl-draft-lottery-simulator/ Here is fun Draft Lottery Simulator that also runs a mock draft as well. Just in case you guys wanted to check it out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jjgallow Posted March 1, 2016 Author Report Share Posted March 1, 2016 Matthews is tearing it up. And the Flames....aren't. This thing is getting real..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rickross Posted March 1, 2016 Report Share Posted March 1, 2016 If we got that kid..our rebuild would get very real very quick. I don't even want to jinx the odds but it would be great for this franchise. Too bad the Oilers will get him Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
travel_dude Posted March 1, 2016 Report Share Posted March 1, 2016 Matthews is tearing it up. And the Flames....aren't. This thing is getting real..... But.....we are competing with the Draft Masters. The Lotto Gurus. Tank Commanders. Teams getting chances to move up to 1st, 2nd and 3rd. Even a 28-30th place finish guarantees us nothing more than a 4th OA. That's not great. I would be fine with a top 3, but a lot of losing to get there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
420since1974 Posted March 1, 2016 Report Share Posted March 1, 2016 I think that the Top 3 are pretty set; Matthews then Laine/Puljujarvi. What if you were picking 4th? Is it Tkachuk? Or Chychrun? Or someone else? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cross16 Posted March 1, 2016 Report Share Posted March 1, 2016 I think that the Top 3 are pretty set; Matthews then Laine/Puljujarvi. What if you were picking 4th? Is it Tkachuk? Or Chychrun? Or someone else? Tkachuk for me. I think the top 4 are locked and the 5th spot you can start having some debate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.