2023 Calgary Flames NHL Draft

[Thebrewcrew]

23 minutes ago, robrob74 said:

 

I actually think we can use a D or a C. Or RHS RW.

 

hopefully Pelletier is an NHLer by then. Any other LWer prospects? 
 

wouldn't we want Ruzicka to be a mainstay? 
 

 

Perfect world you take the D or RH forward.

 

Not sure if there will be a D worth taking at 16th. But should be RHS forward options.

 

I really like Barlow. Enough that I wouldn’t be bothered that he’s a LHS

[420since1974]

15 hours ago, jjgallow said:

An extreme example:  Should the Flames have drafted the highly flawed Brett Hull?   I think yes.  And I don't think they would win the cup without Ramage.   Which means they may not have won the cup had they not drafted Hull.  And I do NOT like Hull.

I totally agree with you on this one.

When Gary Suter got his jaw broken in game 5 against Vancouver, the Flames were done without Rob Ramage.

I look at it as trading Brett Hull for a Stanley Cup, a trade that I'd make again any day.

[robrob74]

1 hour ago, 420since1974 said:

I totally agree with you on this one.

When Gary Suter got his jaw broken in game 5 against Vancouver, the Flames were done without Rob Ramage.

I look at it as trading Brett Hull for a Stanley Cup, a trade that I'd make again any day.

i remember an article I read where they said Fletcher traded Reinhart to Vancouver, not because we didn't need him, but that Vancouver needed good players to compete with the oilers. Essentially, getting Vancouver to win a few more against the oilers would help the flames secure the division and pres.... 

 

chess. 

 

how many of our GM's have played chess in this way since Fletcher? Genius!!!

 

 Almost backfired on us though. although I was a new flames fan come round 1 off the playoffs. I only started really following hockey that year, those playoffs. Went against Vancouver...

[sagacity7]

33 minutes ago, robrob74 said:

i remember an article I read where they said Fletcher traded Reinhart to Vancouver, not because we didn't need him, but that Vancouver needed good players to compete with the oilers. Essentially, getting Vancouver to win a few more against the oilers would help the flames secure the division and pres.... 

 

chess. 

 

how many of our GM's have played chess in this way since Fletcher? Genius!!!

 

 Almost backfired on us though. although I was a new flames fan come round 1 off the playoffs. I only started really following hockey that year, those playoffs. Went against Vancouver...

Would you say Lucic for Neal was kinda like that? Hurt the Oilers defensive chances greatly because Neal didn’t play much defense? 

[robrob74]

14 hours ago, sagacity7 said:

Would you say Lucic for Neal was kinda like that? Hurt the Oilers defensive chances greatly because Neal didn’t play much defense? 

no, not really, just trying to get out of a contract. Both sides needed to shake up their culture that the negativity they were facing.

[jjgallow]

17 hours ago, 420since1974 said:

I totally agree with you on this one.

When Gary Suter got his jaw broken in game 5 against Vancouver, the Flames were done without Rob Ramage.

I look at it as trading Brett Hull for a Stanley Cup, a trade that I'd make again any day.

 

Yeah.   You need that 1 extra impact D in the playoffs unless you know they're all going to stay healthy....back then zero chance of that lol 

[Thebrewcrew]

Draft Simulator (draftprospectshockey.com)

 

Hard to find a good mock draft simulator, but this one is decent. There are tons of good sites for NFL mock drafts, ut not for the NHL. Although the NFL draft is such a massive event.

 

Here's what I got

 

16th

Matthew Wood C/W RHS 

Went with Wood over Perrault and Tom Willander

48th

Theo Lindstein LD

14th ranked European skater

112th

Arttu Karki LD

37th ranked European skater

Over pt/g in junior in Finland

176th

Ty Higgins RD

04 birthday is a little older in this class

41pts in 68 games in the Q

208th

Jake Livanavage LD

Committed to North Dakota

36pts in 48 games with the Chicago Steel

 

Put an emphasis on building the defensive prospect pool back up in this draft.

[The_People1]

On 6/12/2023 at 6:36 PM, Thebrewcrew said:

Draft Simulator (draftprospectshockey.com)

 

Hard to find a good mock draft simulator, but this one is decent. There are tons of good sites for NFL mock drafts, ut not for the NHL. Although the NFL draft is such a massive event.

 

Here's what I got

 

16th

Matthew Wood C/W RHS 

Went with Wood over Perrault and Tom Willander

48th

Theo Lindstein LD

14th ranked European skater

112th

Arttu Karki LD

37th ranked European skater

Over pt/g in junior in Finland

176th

Ty Higgins RD

04 birthday is a little older in this class

41pts in 68 games in the Q

208th

Jake Livanavage LD

Committed to North Dakota

36pts in 48 games with the Chicago Steel

 

Put an emphasis on building the defensive prospect pool back up in this draft.

 

Haven't seen Wood fall to us in many mock drafts.  Would be a steal if that happened.  6'-3" C/LW.  We need that size in the top 6.

[robrob74]

1 hour ago, The_People1 said:

 

Haven't seen Wood fall to us in many mock drafts.  Would be a steal if that happened.  6'-3" C/LW.  We need that size in the top 6.

 

 

Has Conroy talked at all about the team getting bigger? I feel like he might have, but don't necessarily remember anything about it. I've been in Masters Degree mode lately, so I've not been paying great attention to what Conroy has been saying since his hiring. 

 

I know he said build through the draft. 

 

Beginning to not mind the Huska hire. I like that he is firm (the Andersson in the AHL story) and a players' coach too. Sounded like he laid into Andersson but explained why he needed him to follow what he was saying. I think people want some discipline, but not the kind that is insulting. He also talked about how the PK took it to heart and was a pride thing. It is like the team tried hard on that part of the game, on D. I don't want to call Sutter out, but to me it seemed like they didn't quit on Huska, but might have on Sutter. Maybe not even, because like others have said, it looked like they were trying... and numbers were good, just not the scoresheets. 

 

 

[The_People1]

7 minutes ago, robrob74 said:

 

 

Has Conroy talked at all about the team getting bigger? I feel like he might have, but don't necessarily remember anything about it. I've been in Masters Degree mode lately, so I've not been paying great attention to what Conroy has been saying since his hiring. 

 

I know he said build through the draft. 

 

Beginning to not mind the Huska hire. I like that he is firm (the Andersson in the AHL story) and a players' coach too. Sounded like he laid into Andersson but explained why he needed him to follow what he was saying. I think people want some discipline, but not the kind that is insulting. He also talked about how the PK took it to heart and was a pride thing. It is like the team tried hard on that part of the game, on D. I don't want to call Sutter out, but to me it seemed like they didn't quit on Huska, but might have on Sutter. Maybe not even, because like others have said, it looked like they were trying... and numbers were good, just not the scoresheets. 

 

No I don't recall Conroy saying we need to get bigger.  Only that we want to inject youth into the core... But are Pelletier-types ever going to be "core"?  Those seem like peripheral pieces to me.  "Core" would be like getting Leo Carlsson from CBJ's 3oa.

[travel_dude]

1 hour ago, The_People1 said:

 

No I don't recall Conroy saying we need to get bigger.  Only that we want to inject youth into the core... But are Pelletier-types ever going to be "core"?  Those seem like peripheral pieces to me.  "Core" would be like getting Leo Carlsson from CBJ's 3oa.

 

So, you need to use players deemed too small then to make trades, right?

But I will point out that small height is not a reason to exclude them

Jonathon Marshmallow.  5'9"

Discarded by FLA in the expansion draft.

Playoff MVP.

[The_People1]

1 hour ago, travel_dude said:

 

So, you need to use players deemed too small then to make trades, right?

But I will point out that small height is not a reason to exclude them

Jonathon Marshmallow.  5'9"

Discarded by FLA in the expansion draft.

Playoff MVP.

 

Not the size.  Pelletier's talents are middle six level.  We need top line core guys.  

[Thebrewcrew]

2023 NHL Mock Draft: Post-Stanley Cup edition - Daily Faceoff

Daily Faceoff mock has the Flames taking RD Axel Sandin Pellikka. Would absolutely fill a major organizational need.

 

Mock 2023 NHL Draft: Bedard, Fantilli, Carlsson, Smith consensus top 4

NHL.com has them taking C Otto Stenberg, another mock has them taking LW Samuel Honzek.

 

I'm pretty high on Colby Barlow, all three mocks have the Flames passing on him. I could understand them doing it for Sandin Pellikka. I'd be less enthused for Stenberg or Honzek.

[The_People1]

11 hours ago, Thebrewcrew said:

2023 NHL Mock Draft: Post-Stanley Cup edition - Daily Faceoff

Daily Faceoff mock has the Flames taking RD Axel Sandin Pellikka. Would absolutely fill a major organizational need.

 

Mock 2023 NHL Draft: Bedard, Fantilli, Carlsson, Smith consensus top 4

NHL.com has them taking C Otto Stenberg, another mock has them taking LW Samuel Honzek.

 

I'm pretty high on Colby Barlow, all three mocks have the Flames passing on him. I could understand them doing it for Sandin Pellikka. I'd be less enthused for Stenberg or Honzek.

 

I don't mind Sandin-pellikka at 16.  Good value pick.  Flames have zero RHS RD prospects.  LD looking better but still, I don't mind Simashev either.

 

I don't mind passing on Barlow because LHS LW... Again, Huberdeau and Pelletier are going to be here for the next 8-years.  Ruzicka can play LW in a heartbeat.  Parker Bell is coming along very well.  Looks like a mid-6 LW in the making.  Assuming we trade away Dube and Mangiapane, we still have LWs up the Ying Yang.

 

We should take anyone but a LW here.

[Thebrewcrew]

7 hours ago, The_People1 said:

 

I don't mind Sandin-pellikka at 16.  Good value pick.  Flames have zero RHS RD prospects.  LD looking better but still, I don't mind Simashev either.

 

I don't mind passing on Barlow because LHS LW... Again, Huberdeau and Pelletier are going to be here for the next 8-years.  Ruzicka can play LW in a heartbeat.  Parker Bell is coming along very well.  Looks like a mid-6 LW in the making.  Assuming we trade away Dube and Mangiapane, we still have LWs up the Ying Yang.

 

We should take anyone but a LW here.

If they take a RHS. I'll understand for sure.

 

In the case of the two NHL.com mocks, that's where I would be a little bit annoyed. Honzek is also a LHS LW. I'd rather Barlow. Stenberg is a C right now, but at his size is likely a LW in the NHL. 

 

Just my opinion, but the way I think the top 15 picks go, I don't see Calgary taking a D. I think Reinbacher/ASP/Willander all go before 16. Simashev is a good player but the Flames aren't an organization that has typically taken Russians early. I could see the pick coming down to Barlow or Yager. Again, just the way I think the board shapes up, which of course will be wrong lol.

[The_People1]

It seems the Canucks have their sights set on three players who should be available in their range of #11.  Willander, Barlow, and Danielson.  I hope they take Barlow.  We need either Wallinder or Danielson.

 

 

[conundrumed]

5 hours ago, The_People1 said:

It seems the Canucks have their sights set on three players who should be available in their range of #11.  Willander, Barlow, and Danielson.  I hope they take Barlow.  We need either Wallinder or Danielson.

 

 

See how much fun it would be to get St. Loo's 10th oa?lol

[The_People1]

9 hours ago, conundrumed said:

See how much fun it would be to get St. Loo's 10th oa?lol

 

What would it take to get 10oa?  Hanifin straight up?

[jjgallow]

9 hours ago, conundrumed said:

See how much fun it would be to get St. Loo's 10th oa?lol

 

Potential to reduce the rebuild by one year sounds like fun to me.   Although I'd still be going for Reinbacker or Michkov I think.

[jjgallow]

21 minutes ago, The_People1 said:

 

What would it take to get 10oa?  Hanifin straight up?

 

Like, not an upgrade but a fresh new pick?   That sounds about right.  I'd do it.

 

Or Lindholm or Toffoli.   Two first rounders in the top 16 would be a lot of "fun"....a lot more "fun" than desperately trying to make the playoffs so we can get blown out in the first round and stuck with dead weight contracts.

[The_People1]

14 minutes ago, jjgallow said:

Like, not an upgrade but a fresh new pick?   That sounds about right.  I'd do it.

 

Or Lindholm or Toffoli.   Two first rounders in the top 16 would be a lot of "fun"....a lot more "fun" than desperately trying to make the playoffs so we can get blown out in the first round and stuck with dead weight contracts.

 

IMO, Reinbacher, Wallinder, and Sandin-pellikka have Hanifin-level potential.  That is, they top out as a complementary first pair D.  They alone are not elite.  They are not Makar/Heiskanen level.

 

So, we buy time by swapping Hanifin for a pick and drafting one of those 3 D.  STL gets Hanifin and basically skips having to develop those kids into the next Hanifin.

 

Really depends if said teams want to win immediately or in 3 to 5 years.

[cross16]

Just me.. but I highly doubt you are getting a top 10 pick ( in a really strong draft) for a player 1 year away from UFA. 

 

Too strong of a draft. 

[The_People1]

43 minutes ago, cross16 said:

Just me.. but I highly doubt you are getting a top 10 pick ( in a really strong draft) for a player 1 year away from UFA. 

 

Too strong of a draft. 

 

Oof then how about Weegar to the Canucks for the 11oa?  Weegar NTC doesn't kick in until July 1st.  Canucks need a RHS RD so badly.

 

We can extend Hanifin to keep some balance on D (I would trade him too but we still want to win apparently).

[cross16]

29 minutes ago, The_People1 said:

 

Oof then how about Weegar to the Canucks for the 11oa?  Weegar NTC doesn't kick in until July 1st.  Canucks need a RHS RD so badly.

 

We can extend Hanifin to keep some balance on D (I would trade him too but we still want to win apparently).

 

I personally don't think your getting a top 10 pick in this draft via trade and i'm not sure there is a player the Flames have that can change that. It's just too strong of a draft and I don't think GMs are going to be anxious to trade picks. 

 

could be wrong, just my opinion. I don't see why the Canucks are going to send a top 10 pick for a 30 year old man. Yes they did it recently but it's also blown up in their face. 

[sak22]

38 minutes ago, The_People1 said:

 

Oof then how about Weegar to the Canucks for the 11oa?  Weegar NTC doesn't kick in until July 1st.  Canucks need a RHS RD so badly.

 

We can extend Hanifin to keep some balance on D (I would trade him too but we still want to win apparently).

I can't believe the playoffs just ended and we haven't traded everyone yet.  You have no patience for the offseason, how can you handle a rebuild.