2021 Calgary Flames NHL Draft

[jjgallow]

1 hour ago, travel_dude said:

 

If any of those 4 you talk about are available, then fine.

Even if they go later, they are still off the board when time comes for us.

Even if teams are dumb, they can still evaluate talent.

At least one team will draft on position.

Another will use moneyball.

 

Well this is interesting.   So if I had any say (lol) I'd be working to upgrade our pick a few spots.

 

But....all said, yeah.   I think one of those 4, or Wallstedt, will become available if we get the 10th pick.  Because teams really are that dumb and some of them will choose forwards.   Happy to do a fun friendly pretend wager on it.
https://www.eliteprospects.com/draft-center/2021/dobberprospects

 

Looks like about half of the "ranking authorities" agree with me and half of them agree with you.   Move our position to 8th and they literally all agree with me.  But I know we won't upgrade even though we should.

 

My bet is teams are dumb and they will pick forwards over goalies and defencemen because teams are dumb.

 

Carson Lambos and Ceulemans are no slouches as consolation prizes btw.  Don't see talent like that often.

 

 

Quote

Trading Gaudreau and Bennett for FLA's 1st?  That's sad.

 

Which is why nobody suggested it lol.

[jjgallow]

9 minutes ago, cross16 said:

And I would say it’s how the flames operate at least based on comments and their drafting history. 

 

 

Both of you disagree with what the Flames are doing and both of you are right imho.

 

There is more than one way to run a successful organisation.

 

Flames just aren't doing any of those ways.

[travel_dude]

19 hours ago, jjgallow said:

Would trade Gaudreau in heart.  Beat. lol.   This is also the one thing I didn't like about the Bennett trade, we should have done package deal for a firsty.

 

Isn't that suggesting Bennett and Gaudreau for a first?

[travel_dude]

43 minutes ago, jjgallow said:

But....all said, yeah.   I think one of those 4, or Wallstedt, will become available if we get the 10th pick.  Because teams really are that dumb and some of them will choose forwards.   Happy to do a fun friendly pretend wager on it.
https://www.eliteprospects.com/draft-center/2021/dobberprospects

 

Looks like about half of the "ranking authorities" agree with me and half of them agree with you.   Move our position to 8th and they literally all agree with me.  But I know we won't upgrade even though we should.

 

My bet is teams are dumb and they will pick forwards over goalies and defencemen because teams are dumb.

 

Carson Lambos and Ceulemans are no slouches as consolation prizes btw.  Don't see talent like that often.

 

Every draft year is different.  Teams with multiple picks will change the complexion of the draft.

The lotto will change some things.

The fact that Seattle gets a protected 3rd overall changes it.

What the perennial rebuilding teams do depends on what they did in other years.

 

Even in this draft, the cost to move up will be prohibitive.

 

Just assuming for a moment you had traded Gaudreau for a 1st, what do you expect to get for a late pick?

It would have had to be last summer and lucky to get a lotto team.

Philly might have made the playoffs with Gaudreau.

Trade him this summer?

Ok, that doesn't much help our team in the next 3-5 years.

Drafting good to great players helps, but not the only way to turn into a contender.

 

Maybe one of those top 4 D will be franchise players, but the chances drop in finding one unless we move up.

Same is true for picking a goalie.

In fact, probably worse, since our goalie development sucks.

Better to clean house and pick up additional picks next year,

We should probably clean house anyway, since scouting could be an issue as well.

 

[The_People1]

3 hours ago, cross16 said:

And I would say it’s how the flames operate at least based on comments and their drafting history. 

 

Except based on the draft results that you posted, we are statistically average on picking RHS... we don't place any additional focus on RHS based on this fact.  Flames only comment but don't actually do it.

[jjgallow]

4 hours ago, travel_dude said:

 

Isn't that suggesting Bennett and Gaudreau for a first?

 

Nah, just me thinking many things at once.   they would be two separate trades.     I don't see packing them both together unless it's a first overall or multiple firsts.    proposing package deals isn't my thing but it would be some other player you package them with (or pick)

[jjgallow]

4 hours ago, travel_dude said:

 

Every draft year is different.  Teams with multiple picks will change the complexion of the draft.

The lotto will change some things.

The fact that Seattle gets a protected 3rd overall changes it.

What the perennial rebuilding teams do depends on what they did in other years.

 

Even in this draft, the cost to move up will be prohibitive.

 

Just assuming for a moment you had traded Gaudreau for a 1st, what do you expect to get for a late pick?

It would have had to be last summer and lucky to get a lotto team.

Philly might have made the playoffs with Gaudreau.

Trade him this summer?

Ok, that doesn't much help our team in the next 3-5 years.

Drafting good to great players helps, but not the only way to turn into a contender.

 

Maybe one of those top 4 D will be franchise players, but the chances drop in finding one unless we move up.

Same is true for picking a goalie.

In fact, probably worse, since our goalie development sucks.

Better to clean house and pick up additional picks next year,

We should probably clean house anyway, since scouting could be an issue as well.

 

 

I agree with a lot of this or maybe all of it.

 

We trade Gaudreau for a late pick we can get someone like Ceulemans who could be a first line D for 10-15 years.   Gaudreau for Cossa?  Yeah I would.

 

Maybe we package that pick with something else to upgrade it more.

 

But more importantly, and you know this, it means we get better picks in 2022-2023, because we traded Gaudreau.   Sucks but true.   And, like you just argued, that matters a lot.   It's a difference maker.     Also, then we don't ruin Tkachuk's career.  which we currently are out of our stupidity.   So there's another high first rounder there for you that we would otherwise destroy as we have countless times before.         And none of this affects our chances of winning a cup because Gaudreau is not effective in the post-season.

 

We have players to upgrade this year.   I'd be ready to trade them at the draft.    Upgrade our pick, do what it takes.   It's just like you said, it matters.   So pay up.

[travel_dude]

1 hour ago, jjgallow said:

But more importantly, and you know this, it means we get better picks in 2022-2023, because we traded Gaudreau.   Sucks but true.   And, like you just argued, that matters a lot.   It's a difference maker.     Also, then we don't ruin Tkachuk's career.  which we currently are out of our stupidity.   So there's another high first rounder there for you that we would otherwise destroy as we have countless times before.         And none of this affects our chances of winning a cup because Gaudreau is not effective in the post-season.

 

Who is effective in the post season?

If you play Gaudreau against a top line that limits his options or forces him to defend, he's not going to do much.

 

[jjgallow]

1 hour ago, travel_dude said:

 

Who is effective in the post season?

If you play Gaudreau against a top line that limits his options or forces him to defend, he's not going to do much.

 

 

I could list off all the effective players in the history of post season, and every one of them had to play against the top line.    That's the burden of all effective post-season players, and even Potentially effective (in Gaudreau's case).  

 

Maybe he could be effective on a larger team where he was the second-string LW.   But that's a big ask when he's top 10 in the NHL as he was that season.

 

And by the way I'm not saying I don't like Gaudreau.   I do think, pound for pound he's probably the most talented player in the NHL.    But smart organizations don't just trade players they hate.   They trade players they like, too.  When it makes sense.

[travel_dude]

2 hours ago, jjgallow said:

 

I could list off all the effective players in the history of post season, and every one of them had to play against the top line.    That's the burden of all effective post-season players, and even Potentially effective (in Gaudreau's case).  

 

Maybe he could be effective on a larger team where he was the second-string LW.   But that's a big ask when he's top 10 in the NHL as he was that season.

 

And by the way I'm not saying I don't like Gaudreau.   I do think, pound for pound he's probably the most talented player in the NHL.    But smart organizations don't just trade players they hate.   They trade players they like, too.  When it makes sense.

 

You missed my point.

Who on the Flames was effective in the playoffs?

So, you expect him to rise above every other player on his line, where he is by trade a passer?

 

Maybe if there were options to use him in the playoffs, it might be another story.

 

I'm not saying don't trade the player.  What I am saying is that a chance at a good player in a draft is not a good enough return.

 

 

 

[Thebrewcrew]

Vancouver can't catch the Flames now. 

 

One more win in the final 2 games and the Flames leapfrog Chicago and will pick 13th. This is significant as it will put the Flames out of the lottery range. Under these new rules, the 12th place team is only eligible to pick 2nd if they win the lotto, 11th can win either of the two spots. What I wonder is, how does the ARI pick factor in? If the Flames were to win a game in the final two, they would be picking 13th, but it's really the 12th pick as the ARI pick is forfeited. I wonder if the league would consider CGY eligible in that case. I doubt it though.

 

Realistically, the Flames are picking 11th or 13th, but it may as well be 12th as Arizona doesn't pick. 

[The_People1]

3 minutes ago, Thebrewcrew said:

Vancouver can't catch the Flames now. 

 

One more win in the final 2 games and the Flames leapfrog Chicago and will pick 13th. This is significant as it will put the Flames out of the lottery range. Under these new rules, the 12th place team is only eligible to pick 2nd if they win the lotto, 11th can win either of the two spots. What I wonder is, how does the ARI pick factor in? If the Flames were to win a game in the final two, they would be picking 13th, but it's really the 12th pick as the ARI pick is forfeited. I wonder if the league would consider CGY eligible in that case. I doubt it though.

 

Realistically, the Flames are picking 11th or 13th, but it may as well be 12th as Arizona doesn't pick. 

 

I might actually rather pick #2 and take Brandt Clarke than #1 and take Owen Power.

[travel_dude]

1 hour ago, Thebrewcrew said:

Vancouver can't catch the Flames now. 

 

One more win in the final 2 games and the Flames leapfrog Chicago and will pick 13th. This is significant as it will put the Flames out of the lottery range. Under these new rules, the 12th place team is only eligible to pick 2nd if they win the lotto, 11th can win either of the two spots. What I wonder is, how does the ARI pick factor in? If the Flames were to win a game in the final two, they would be picking 13th, but it's really the 12th pick as the ARI pick is forfeited. I wonder if the league would consider CGY eligible in that case. I doubt it though.

 

Realistically, the Flames are picking 11th or 13th, but it may as well be 12th as Arizona doesn't pick. 

 

The ARI pick is not being done.

If ARI wins either lotto, it goes back and is drawn again.

If we are tied with ARI we finish with a better record and have worse odds than ARI (then a re-pick).

If we are tied with CHI, we finish with a better record and have worse odds than CHI and ARI.

 

A single point for VAN drops them past SJS and LA.

Two wins of any variety puts them past Ottawa.

 

If we gain one or fewer points, we don't change spots we pick unless a later team wins the lotto.

We are 10th picking 11th right now.

Or 11th picking 11th.

Or 13th picking 13.

 

Think I got it right this time.

[Thebrewcrew]

31 minutes ago, travel_dude said:

 

The ARI pick is not being done.

If ARI wins either lotto, it goes back and is drawn again.

If we are tied with ARI we finish with a better record and have worse odds than ARI (then a re-pick).

If we are tied with CHI, we finish with a better record and have worse odds than CHI and ARI.

 

A single point for VAN drops them past SJS and LA.

Two wins of any variety puts them past Ottawa.

 

If we gain one or fewer points, we don't change spots we pick unless a later team wins the lotto.

We are 10th picking 11th right now.

Or 11th picking 11th.

Or 13th picking 13.

 

Think I got it right this time.

If the Flames end up passing the Hawks and Yotes, I just wonder if the league will consider them eligible for the lotto, being they are technically the 12th team. I doubt it though as the league goes by the letter of the law with draft orders and as a result the Flames would be out of the lotto.

[travel_dude]

54 minutes ago, Thebrewcrew said:

If the Flames end up passing the Hawks and Yotes, I just wonder if the league will consider them eligible for the lotto, being they are technically the 12th team. I doubt it though as the league goes by the letter of the law with draft orders and as a result the Flames would be out of the lotto.

 

Nobody is out of the lotto that are not in the playoffs.

The odds suck for hgiher teams.

There is no 10 spots only rule or 2 max wins yet.

That starts next year.

 

Even next year, a 16th place team gets a lotto chance.

Just can't get to #1.

[Thebrewcrew]

7 minutes ago, travel_dude said:

 

Nobody is out of the lotto that are not in the playoffs.

The odds suck for hgiher teams.

There is no 10 spots only rule or 2 max wins yet.

That starts next year.

 

Even next year, a 16th place team gets a lotto chance.

Just can't get to #1.

Yeah, that's my bad I misread the new rules.

 

It's next year where the 13th place team isn't in the lottery

[travel_dude]

11 hours ago, Thebrewcrew said:

Yeah, that's my bad I misread the new rules.

 

It's next year where the 13th place team isn't in the lottery

 

Actually, all teams get in the lottery, just that they can only move up 10 spots.

[Thebrewcrew]

Sliding down to 13th.

 

I think it takes Wallstedt out of play, but the Flames should still get a good player. 1% lower chance at a lotto win

[cross16]

It is going to be very on brand for the Flames if the 11th seed wins the lottery. 

[travel_dude]

18 minutes ago, cross16 said:

It is going to be right out of the Flames play book if the 11th seed wins the lottery.

 

Maybe karma will work this time.

These meaningless games have killed us a lot.

 

we lose to Ottawa and all 4 games to VAN and we end up 4th, picking 5th with really good lotto odds.

 

[The_People1]

1 hour ago, Thebrewcrew said:

Sliding down to 13th.

 

I think it takes Wallstedt out of play, but the Flames should still get a good player. 1% lower chance at a lotto win

 

Wallstedt probably gone by 9th or so.  Let's trade down for Cossa.

[tmac70]

We better not draft a goalie in the 1st round. Trevling should be let go already but a goalie in the 1st round is crazy

[The_People1]

1 hour ago, tmac70 said:

We better not draft a goalie in the 1st round. Trevling should be let go already but a goalie in the 1st round is crazy

 

It's a weak draft year and we certainly picking #12 or #13 so,... take a goalie.  We need one in the system.

[Thebrewcrew]

Mason McTavish or Cole Sillinger? Two players that I think the Flames will strongly consider and there are similarities between the two. 

 

Both players have NHL bloodlines. Everyone knows Mike Sillinger, Mason Mctavish's dad, Dale is a former Flame. Kinda neat.

 

Both players are very physically mature. McTavish has an NHL body at this point, 6'2" 207, he's pretty close to a finished product from a physical development standpoint. Sillinger is slightly smaller, but still a solid 6'0" 200. 

 

The best skill these players have is their ability to fire the puck. Maybe it's that he wears 23, but I see a little bit of Monahan in McTavish's game. For a 13th overall pick, that wouldn't be bad at all. Sillinger has a deceptive release, he's able to curl and drag it a little bit like a Matthews or Pettersson. 

 

Hard to compare the two this year, McTavish played in Switzerland and Sillinger was in the USHL. Quick look at their 19/20n stats

McTavish 57 gp 29-13=42 on a Petes team that went 37-21-4

Sillinger 48gp 22-31=53 on a Tigers team that went 41-19-3. Important to remember this was both players first season of major junior. 

 

 

[The_People1]

43 minutes ago, Thebrewcrew said:

Mason McTavish or Cole Sillinger? Two players that I think the Flames will strongly consider and there are similarities between the two. 

 

Both players have NHL bloodlines. Everyone knows Mike Sillinger, Mason Mctavish's dad, Dale is a former Flame. Kinda neat.

 

Both players are very physically mature. McTavish has an NHL body at this point, 6'2" 207, he's pretty close to a finished product from a physical development standpoint. Sillinger is slightly smaller, but still a solid 6'0" 200. 

 

The best skill these players have is their ability to fire the puck. Maybe it's that he wears 23, but I see a little bit of Monahan in McTavish's game. For a 13th overall pick, that wouldn't be bad at all. Sillinger has a deceptive release, he's able to curl and drag it a little bit like a Matthews or Pettersson. 

 

Hard to compare the two this year, McTavish played in Switzerland and Sillinger was in the USHL. Quick look at their 19/20n stats

McTavish 57 gp 29-13=42 on a Petes team that went 37-21-4

Sillinger 48gp 22-31=53 on a Tigers team that went 41-19-3. Important to remember this was both players first season of major junior. 

 

 

 

Boy these highlight packages are brutal.  It's quite literally "he shoots he scores" for minutes on end.  Can these guys even hockey in between that? 

 

Based on what I can tell,

McTavish has a great shot but looks kinda slow.

Sillinger seems to move around quicker.

I would favour Sillinger here.