2023 Calgary Flames NHL Draft

[cross16]

6 hours ago, jjgallow said:

 

I agree with you on Janx.   However, since we're bringing up hindsight, when I was critical of the Jankowsky pick./trade I was routed on here and accused of being a troll, etc etc etc...

 

We all know I have a charming personality so this was very hard to understand.

 

My point is, lol:   Everyone on here was 100% supportive of the Jankowsky move, and any criticism of it was met with "you can't predict the future".     Any mention of the Flame's track record of going off-board in the first round (cause Jankowsky wasn't the first) was met with   "hindsight is 20/20"

 

There is a very, very, very fine line between "hindsight is 2020" and simply refusing to learn from anything, which is pretty common in this space.

 

So when the Jankowski situation presented itself, did you disagree on here?  What did crash have to say?

 

On Zary/Poirier:     Still to early to say for Sure, but generally speaking downgrading picks is caused by over-confidence and it rarely goes well.  I like to think we agree on that, you just don't want me too overconfident when I say it.

                          "middle C" what does that mean.
                           A 3rd line center is not a good pick.  Why?  cause you can pick them up for free in the offseason.
                          A 2nd line center is a good pick.

                           You don't downgrade unless you think you can pick just as good of a pick in the downgrade.
                                         it's looking 80% chance they were wrong on this.
                            You don't downgrade like that unless you're very confident of your 2nd round scouting.
                                      This, I will give them.   BUT.
                                        Why not just acquire more picks then?   Why downgrade your first to do it?
                                       Still dumb.   Dumb then, dumb now, dumb in the future. You know it. I know it.

 

 

 

So again when Feaster was GM everyone on here loved him lol.  Just saying.  

 

Wyatt:  Yeah.   Great scouts will find him, especially without covid.  Stats will also find him.

                      Great organisations will use a combination of the two to find him.

 

What does Dallas have that we didn't?   10 picks, is what they had.

                   They had 10 picks and could afford to take calculated chances.

                        Wyatt was flying up the rankings, and they blinked, cause they could.

 

                        It was killing me to watch the Flames lose pick after pick to a lost cause.

 

                        I look forward to that "era" hopefully ending.

 

 

 

BT makes it seem like downgrading picks and losing picks for literally nothing (Monahan etc) is a cakewalk.  Which makes the reverse true.

         If you're doing deals with BT, sorry but it is a cakewalk.

 

Can't have cake and eat it too, can't be like losing first rounders is no big deal but upgrading one spot is super hard.

 

No I didn't know Dawson Mercer because I felt we needed D/goaltending.   And still do, as demonstrated by...this whole season.

           

            I think you're slightly off the mark rebutting me.

 

             I'll throw you a bone on something I may regret:

 

            Here's what I wanted that round:

            

                     I wanted us to upgrade   (don't regret this since we gave all our assets away for free anyway)

 

                  My list was  (it's documented in here, I can't run from it):

                          Drysdale

                          Askarov

                          Sanderson

                          Schneider  (if not upgrading)

 

         All probably would have turned out a hella lot better than downgrading.  Unless Poirier jumps another big level  ( but we never needed to downgrade to get him).

      But Askarov could come back to haunt lol.   I expected him to transition a bit better.  Hardly giving up on him yet.   But there.  I've thrown you a bone.

lol….

 

if you want to be taken seriously then i would suggest stop making up narratives that try to make it sound like you know better than anyone else. 
 

Hard to participate in threads when they are just layered with nonsense. Jankowski is without question the most controversial first round pick for the Flames I’ve ever seen. 

 

[cross16]

1 hour ago, robrob74 said:

When I look at Schneider, people always say that it takes longer for D to develop. He's the same age as Zary and playing in the NHL already. 
 

Likewise, it would be good to wait on determining what he is, as those say to wait on Zary as well. 
 

we've depleted our C depth, so now it is good to have one in the system. We have low Depth on D as well, so I remember I wanted a Defense back then.
 

i just don't like trading down to get an extra pick.
 

I was mortified when we drafted Jankowski, in a year they said we were still going for it and needing a C for Iginla, we draft a project.
 

Hopefully Zary turns out very good for us. I'm like JJ, wish we would use extra players as draft capital, the way other teams seem to get for their players... like the Preds did this year. Build the farm so there is a constant carousel of players coming through that gives us the ability to do that kind of thing, instead of using draft picks to fill holes trading for other teams' expensive players.

Weird complaint. They lacked depth on D so they trade down to pick one up and it’s a bad move? 
 

Weird how this is being framed. The analysis here isn’t hard. would you rather have:

Connor Zary or

Connor Zary, Porier, Jake Boltman. That’s what you were getting in that draft. They had Zary ranked higher than Schneider so trading down didn’t cost them anything they only gained. 
 

if you want to debate that they should have had Schneider ranked right then fine but the trade down had nothing to do with that. 

 

[jjgallow]

18 minutes ago, cross16 said:

lol….

 

if you want to be taken seriously then i would suggest stop making up narratives that try to make it sound like you know better than anyone else. 
 

Hard to participate in threads when they are just layered with nonsense. Jankowski is without question the most controversial first round pick for the Flames I’ve ever seen. 

 

 

It's good advice lol.   I think I already gave up on that years ago though, this is kind of like my stress ball now.

 

I just looked for a first rounder to argue with you on the most controversial but came up empty-handed.  Unless I'm allowed to just combine the whole era where Sutter was GM.  As a whole, that would do it.

[travel_dude]

1 hour ago, robrob74 said:

When I look at Schneider, people always say that it takes longer for D to develop. He's the same age as Zary and playing in the NHL already. 
 

Likewise, it would be good to wait on determining what he is, as those say to wait on Zary as well. 
 

we've depleted our C depth, so now it is good to have one in the system. We have low Depth on D as well, so I remember I wanted a Defense back then.
 

i just don't like trading down to get an extra pick.
 

I was mortified when we drafted Jankowski, in a year they said we were still going for it and needing a C for Iginla, we draft a project.
 

Hopefully Zary turns out very good for us. I'm like JJ, wish we would use extra players as draft capital, the way other teams seem to get for their players... like the Preds did this year. Build the farm so there is a constant carousel of players coming through that gives us the ability to do that kind of thing, instead of using draft picks to fill holes trading for other teams' expensive players.

 

There are problems that you can't always fix.  Was there a market for our pending UFA's at all?  Considering we were struggling at the time, they had little value.  Vrana went for a 4th with half retained.  Nobody is giving us a 6th for Lucic at half retained.  Lewis wasn't on anyone's radar.  Ritchie?  Used to get a more expensive Ritchie (UFA) and Stecher (another UFA).  This is this year.

 

Look at other years.  Gio was going into the last year of his deal in the expansion draft.  Trading anyone in that TDL was difficult because of potential losing players for nothing.  Last year we were adding.  We were near tops in the West and were not about to trade at TDL.  We added pending UFA's.  

 

BT is smart at managing the contracts, but he doesn't take into account trading them in their UFA years.  So, with the up and down cycle of the Flames, we don't have the pending UFA's with valiue in the down years.  In those down years, you may have a market for your top guys with a few years left; Lindholm, Toffoli, Hanifin.  But the teams wanting those players know you are struggling and won't give you a great offer.  

 

We have 2 years in a row of success in the AHL and we have used how many of those players?  Yeah, I know we needed to have more in there years ago, but we just move on from a lot of them.  Valimaki and Mackey say hi.  But your point about trading picks is true.  You have to be careful.  I'm okay with the Toffoli trade, not with the Monahan one.  I would rather have taken a chance on him and traded Backlund, who actually had value.  I am okay with the Dougie trade, not with the Elliott one.  That is hindsight.  We would have been better off trading for a real goalie instead of Elliott and Smith.  Our timing sucked.

[jjgallow]

27 minutes ago, cross16 said:

Weird complaint. They lacked depth on D so they trade down to pick one up and it’s a bad move? 
 

Weird how this is being framed. The analysis here isn’t hard. would you rather have:

Connor Zary or

Connor Zary, Porier, Jake Boltman. That’s what you were getting in that draft. They had Zary ranked higher than Schneider so trading down didn’t cost them anything they only gained. 
 

if you want to debate that they should have had Schneider ranked right then fine but the trade down had nothing to do with that. 

 

 

The analysis is simpler than that.

 

Would rather have Schneider than all of the above, and so would any other NHL team right now.   Or any of the other available D through trading up.

 

We all knew the greatest need was D.   You're trying to argue that a bunch of D in the 2nd round is way better than the best available D.

 

It isn't.

 

I know you're trying to say  there's nothing we can do when Button goes completely off the board in the first round.   That we should just accept that as reality.

 

But we don't have to, it's never paid off in the first round.   I don't expect it ever will, I give him full credit in later rounds.   I'm starting to get the sense that Button tends to go off-board in weak drafts in the first round.  Not exactly sure why but there seems to be something to it.

 

IMHO, when he does that, it should be a signal to trade up above to where he's in agreement with the field.   

 

https://www.tsn.ca/craig-s-list-alexis-lafreniere-solidifies-status-as-hockey-s-top-prospect-1.1461675

 

In that particular year that strategy, a Safer strategy really, would have landed us with Drysdale.   And less one vet that we ended up giving away for free anyway.

[travel_dude]

20 minutes ago, jjgallow said:

 

The analysis is simpler than that.

 

Would rather have Schneider than all of the above, and so would any other NHL team right now.   Or any of the other available D through trading up.

 

We all knew the greatest need was D.   You're trying to argue that a bunch of D in the 2nd round is way better than the best available D.

 

It isn't.

 

I know you're trying to say  there's nothing we can do when Button goes completely off the board in the first round.   That we should just accept that as reality.

 

But we don't have to, it's never paid off in the first round.   I don't expect it ever will, I give him full credit in later rounds.   I'm starting to get the sense that Button tends to go off-board in weak drafts in the first round.  Not exactly sure why but there seems to be something to it.

 

IMHO, when he does that, it should be a signal to trade up above to where he's in agreement with the field.   

 

https://www.tsn.ca/craig-s-list-alexis-lafreniere-solidifies-status-as-hockey-s-top-prospect-1.1461675

 

In that particular year that strategy, a Safer strategy really, would have landed us with Drysdale.   And less one vet that we ended up giving away for free anyway.

 

Really, you are going all over the map now.  Zary was off the board now?  By who's standard?

And you talk like trading up is easy.  A couple of spots cost a 2nd or 3rd.  Moving to 10th would have involved next year's draft or a good young roster player.  An equivalent in 2021 with DET, saw them move from 23rd to 15th (not the same type of movement as to top 10) for 1st a 2nd and a 5th.  

[cross16]

46 minutes ago, jjgallow said:

 

The analysis is simpler than that.

 

Would rather have Schneider than all of the above, and so would any other NHL team right now.   Or any of the other available D through trading up.

 

We all knew the greatest need was D.   You're trying to argue that a bunch of D in the 2nd round is way better than the best available D.

 

It isn't.

 

I know you're trying to say  there's nothing we can do when Button goes completely off the board in the first round.   That we should just accept that as reality.

 

But we don't have to, it's never paid off in the first round.   I don't expect it ever will, I give him full credit in later rounds.   I'm starting to get the sense that Button tends to go off-board in weak drafts in the first round.  Not exactly sure why but there seems to be something to it.

 

IMHO, when he does that, it should be a signal to trade up above to where he's in agreement with the field.   

 

https://www.tsn.ca/craig-s-list-alexis-lafreniere-solidifies-status-as-hockey-s-top-prospect-1.1461675

 

In that particular year that strategy, a Safer strategy really, would have landed us with Drysdale.   And less one vet that we ended up giving away for free anyway.

as I said if you would have preferred Schneider fine but the point here is that had nothing to do with the trade down. They preferred Zary and as such did the wise thing and pick him AND additional assets. Can debate Schneider vs Zary as much as you’d like as it’s a fair and reasonable one. Time will tell, it’s the focus on the trade down that makes no sense. It was absolutely the right decision and really not debatable. 
but as long as you keep dealing with hyperbole it’s tough to have a discussion 

-it is not certain that every team in the nhl would want Schneider over Zary/Porier.
-Zary was not “off the board”

-can’t act like there is a consensus scouting board. Every team is different. 
-trading up is significantly more difficult then you suggest. You should look up what that it costs teams to do.

 

 

[jjgallow]

12 minutes ago, travel_dude said:

 

Really, you are going all over the map now.  Zary was off the board now?  By who's standard?

And you talk like trading up is easy.  A couple of spots cost a 2nd or 3rd.  Moving to 10th would have involved next year's draft or a good young roster player.  An equivalent in 2021 with DET, saw them move from 23rd to 15th (not the same type of movement as to top 10) for 1st a 2nd and a 5th.  

 

Woah woah,

 

I will clarify.   It is  not so much that Zary was completely off the board, but more the combination of ranking Zary very high and some of the top defenseman very low.  Between  the 2, and how they used the information,  they were off the board by something like 30 spots.  Not that different thsnk a Janko actually.    Admittedly this is not the Janko situation.   Not trying to say that.

 

We have enough info already to know he was wrong about the defenseman.   It's too early to say if he was wrong on the C side , for sure.  But not looking great.

[jjgallow]

6 minutes ago, cross16 said:

as I said if you would have preferred Schneider fine but the point here is that had nothing to do with the trade down. They preferred Zary and as such did the wise thing and pick him AND additional assets. Can debate Schneider vs Zary as much as you’d like as it’s a fair and reasonable one. Time will tell, it’s the focus on the trade down that makes no sense. It was absolutely the right decision and really not debatable. 
but as long as you keep dealing with hyperbole it’s tough to have a discussion 

-it is not certain that every team in the nhl would want Schneider over Zary/Porier.
-Zary was not “off the board”

-can’t act like there is a consensus scouting board. Every team is different. 
-trading up is significantly more difficult then you suggest. You should look up what that it costs teams to do.

 

 

 

Ok well, in any case, 

 

I am actually not worried about it this year.   I think this draft is deep enough that we won't have this kind of situation.    

 

And going back to when I maybe took things off the rails, I agree with @conundrumed that the 2nd round is really interesting this year.

 

In fact,  I hope they do go a little nuts in the 2nd and pick "their guy".

 

As long as they don't in the 1st round lol

[conundrumed]

There are so many F around our pick that there is no saying which one(s) will be the one that really takes off imo.

[travel_dude]

28 minutes ago, jjgallow said:

 

Woah woah,

 

I will clarify.   It is  not so much that Zary was completely off the board, but more the combination of ranking Zary very high and some of the top defenseman very low.  Between  the 2, and how they used the information,  they were off the board by something like 30 spots.  Not that different thsnk a Janko actually.    Admittedly this is not the Janko situation.   Not trying to say that.

 

We have enough info already to know he was wrong about the defenseman.   It's too early to say if he was wrong on the C side , for sure.  But not looking great.

 

You rank him very low I guess.  Craig Button had him at 10th in his draft year, though I don't remember his final rank.  30 spots in the combine, LOL.  You really stretch to throw shade.  Your proof they were wrong is a young D playing on a stacked team.  Compared to a C that has yet to play in the NHL   

 

Who are all these better C's they passed on?  Ones available without having to give up multiple picks to get.  I think NJ was positioned to take Mercer and not consider a trade.  CAR?  Good luck with that.

[jjgallow]

25 minutes ago, travel_dude said:

 

You rank him very low I guess.  Craig Button had him at 10th in his draft year, though I don't remember his final rank.  30 spots in the combine, LOL.  You really stretch to throw shade.  Your proof they were wrong is a young D playing on a stacked team.  Compared to a C that has yet to play in the NHL   

 

Who are all these better C's they passed on?  Ones available without having to give up multiple picks to get.  I think NJ was positioned to take Mercer and not consider a trade.  CAR?  Good luck with that.

 

We're getting pretty nitty gritty about which C was better in a Clear D draft.   That in itself was weird, and looks weird now too with most/all of those D having advanced well ahead of schedule.

 

That's the elephant in the room, not which C was better in a draft with garbage C

[robrob74]

1 hour ago, cross16 said:

Weird complaint. They lacked depth on D so they trade down to pick one up and it’s a bad move? 
 

Weird how this is being framed. The analysis here isn’t hard. would you rather have:

Connor Zary or

Connor Zary, Porier, Jake Boltman. That’s what you were getting in that draft. They had Zary ranked higher than Schneider so trading down didn’t cost them anything they only gained. 
 

if you want to debate that they should have had Schneider ranked right then fine but the trade down had nothing to do with that. 

 

well, Poirier is not a sure-fire NHLer. He may play, but at what level of play? 3rd pair? 2nd pair? Not a 1st pair D. Maybe Boltman is a 2nd pair? Maybe 3rd as well. I'd rather have a guy that can play in the NHL. Zary will get there, but yet to be seen how they will translate 
 

it's great to change the narrative that these guys were D and that they have this immense ability to be a top pair in the NHL. 
 

who says they had Zary higher than Schneider? Were you at the table? It just means they were willing to take whatever they had at the time. They said that draft had decent players there and they were willing to add more to drop And be ok with it. 
 

yes they should have ranked Schneider higher. And yes the trade down has plenty to do with what is wrong with the team and their prospects. Which is only ok and because it's way better than it used to be, we justify it because it's not terrible anymore. 

[robrob74]

1 hour ago, travel_dude said:

 

Really, you are going all over the map now.  Zary was off the board now?  By who's standard?

And you talk like trading up is easy.  A couple of spots cost a 2nd or 3rd.  Moving to 10th would have involved next year's draft or a good young roster player.  An equivalent in 2021 with DET, saw them move from 23rd to 15th (not the same type of movement as to top 10) for 1st a 2nd and a 5th.  

trading up is easy for other teams because we seem to trade down every other year. But the Flames knows best! 

[conundrumed]

51 minutes ago, travel_dude said:

 

You rank him very low I guess.  Craig Button had him at 10th in his draft year, though I don't remember his final rank.  30 spots in the combine, LOL.  You really stretch to throw shade.  Your proof they were wrong is a young D playing on a stacked team.  Compared to a C that has yet to play in the NHL   

 

Who are all these better C's they passed on?  Ones available without having to give up multiple picks to get.  I think NJ was positioned to take Mercer and not consider a trade.  CAR?  Good luck with that.

Zary's consensus ranking averaged 17.5.

Here is the source, but read how there consensus ranking works to eliminate misreading:

https://www.habseyesontheprize.com/2020-nhl-draft-rankings-consensus-lafreniere-byfield-stutzle-bob-mckenzie-athletic-hockey-prospects/

 

[travel_dude]

19 minutes ago, robrob74 said:

trading up is easy for other teams because we seem to trade down every other year. But the Flames knows best! 

 

Who are these other teams you speak of?  There is little movement in the top 10, if ever.  The 10-20 range is some movement and depending on the number they jump, it's very costly.  Dallas obviously was not worried about moving to 23rd.  Are they stupid?  They might have ended up with Zary.  They didn't see Schneider as a keeper.  

 

We decided on Coronato and people already writing him off as meh.  Just because we have the smartest coach in the NHL that doesn't believe in playing kids means we don't have good prospects.  

 

The point of drafting is to have as many picks as you can manage while having a good NHL team to bring them along.  I don't believe in trading away picks when you are not really close to contender or if that player is not going to move the needle much.  Hammy and Toffoli were good usage.  Jarnkrok and Carpenter etc. not.

[travel_dude]

7 minutes ago, conundrumed said:

Zary's consensus ranking averaged 17.5.

Here is the source, but read how there consensus ranking works to eliminate misreading:

https://www.habseyesontheprize.com/2020-nhl-draft-rankings-consensus-lafreniere-byfield-stutzle-bob-mckenzie-athletic-hockey-prospects/

 

 

When we were in the draft year there were some sources that ranked by continent.  NA vs Euro.  Like 10 best skater in NA or 5th best in Euro.  With that consensus ranking, we picked him later than where we could have picked him by rank.  We get him 18th or 24th.

 

I will wait for his NHL debut.  With Pelletier, I think they used his good showing early to move him to play with Huberdeau, who I felt was on the wrong wing to play with Pelletier.  I don't have much faith they will choose any wiser with Coronato and then Zary.  Sutter talked about him at camp like he was NHL capable then, but needed the reps in the AHL first.  That sure sounded like a bunch of crap.  DIdn't see him at all, even though we could have used a RW.  Bring up Pelletier, which wasn't a bad move, but we were not lacking LW'ers.

[conundrumed]

11 minutes ago, travel_dude said:

 

When we were in the draft year there were some sources that ranked by continent.  NA vs Euro.  Like 10 best skater in NA or 5th best in Euro.  With that consensus ranking, we picked him later than where we could have picked him by rank.  We get him 18th or 24th.

 

Look at #32 we took 72nd. #72 we took 50th.

[cross16]

57 minutes ago, robrob74 said:

well, Poirier is not a sure-fire NHLer. He may play, but at what level of play? 3rd pair? 2nd pair? Not a 1st pair D. Maybe Boltman is a 2nd pair? Maybe 3rd as well. I'd rather have a guy that can play in the NHL. Zary will get there, but yet to be seen how they will translate 
 

it's great to change the narrative that these guys were D and that they have this immense ability to be a top pair in the NHL. 
 

who says they had Zary higher than Schneider? Were you at the table? It just means they were willing to take whatever they had at the time. They said that draft had decent players there and they were willing to add more to drop And be ok with it. 
 

yes they should have ranked Schneider higher. And yes the trade down has plenty to do with what is wrong with the team and their prospects. Which is only ok and because it's way better than it used to be, we justify it because it's not terrible anymore. 

what narrative is being changed and who is saying they have massive potential? What’s funny though is I’d argue Porier has as much a ceiling as Schneider (Schneider has the much higher floor) and that Porier was thought of as a potential first round pick by some. 
 

How do I know? It’s pretty standard operating procedure. You wouldn’t trade a pick to a team who was going to take your guy and you don’t trade down unless you’re going to get your guy or someone of the same caliber. Teams do their homework, this isn’t a guessing game like it seems to us. 
If the flames wanted Schneider over Zary they would have stayed and taken him and they damn sure wouldn’t have traded the pick to the Rangers for them to take him. They liked Zary more or at worse they had them tied and thought a 3rd round pick was better value. 
It’s 2 separate decisions.  1- rank Zary higher and then 2 trade back to get player we like or the same caliber. Debate 1 all you like but number 2 is a no brainer. 

same as Jankowski. Ranking him that high was bad but trading down to take him and gettin value was also a no brainer. If you are trading down and still getting your guy you do it every single time. That year they just had the wrong guy. Always fair to debate whether or not you have the right guy. 

 

55 minutes ago, robrob74 said:

trading up is easy for other teams because we seem to trade down every other year. But the Flames knows best! 

In 20 years the Flames have traded down in the first round 4 times and one of which was for Backlund. 
probably traded up as many times as they’ve traded down. 
 

[travel_dude]

36 minutes ago, conundrumed said:

Look at #32 we took 72nd. #72 we took 50th.

 

As you say, who knows.  Kuz reminds me of Zadorov without the skating part.

He struggled to score but seems better now.

I really like Poirier.

I think it was a good draft overall for us.

 

Ryan Francis was not the best, but accoring to some he was our top prospect.  LOL

[jjgallow]

3 hours ago, cross16 said:

as I said if you would have preferred Schneider fine but the point here is that had nothing to do with the trade down. They preferred Zary and as such did the wise thing and pick him AND additional assets. Can debate Schneider vs Zary as much as you’d like as it’s a fair and reasonable one. Time will tell, it’s the focus on the trade down that makes no sense. It was absolutely the right decision and really not debatable. 
but as long as you keep dealing with hyperbole it’s tough to have a discussion 

-it is not certain that every team in the nhl would want Schneider over Zary/Porier.
-Zary was not “off the board”

-can’t act like there is a consensus scouting board. Every team is different. 
-trading up is significantly more difficult then you suggest. You should look up what that it costs teams to do.

 

 

 

Yeah I'm cool with taking a weekend break from hyperbole and resuming on Tuesday.  

 

I am actually more interested in this upcoming draft and I am actually not worried about a repeat of this situation for this draft anyway.

 

I still maintain some small amount of unreasonable hope for Michkov.   Really unfortunate what has been happening to him lately.   I realize it would take a miracle, but they do happen.

 

And moving more into more reasonable possibilities this draft is just rich.  

[conundrumed]

2 hours ago, jjgallow said:

 

We're getting pretty nitty gritty about which C was better in a Clear D draft.   That in itself was weird, and looks weird now too with most/all of those D having advanced well ahead of schedule.

 

That's the elephant in the room, not which C was better in a draft with garbage C

Not. Even. Close.

[jjgallow]

15 minutes ago, conundrumed said:

Not. Even. Close.

 

I just didn't think it was constructive to bring up the goaltending, sorry

[jjgallow]

 

 

https://www.tsn.ca/nhl/craig-s-list-adamfantilli-leo-carlsson-jostle-for-second-behind-connor-bedard-in-nhl-draft-ranking-1.1937531

 

Ok.  Gonna try to transition this to on topic.

 

Looking at Button's list, it's mostly ho-hum.  But with a few exceptions.   There are 5 players who May, or may not be a bit off the radar/board and possibly relevant to where the Flames will be picking.  In all cases, players that appear to be favorites of Button.   History tells us that if there are Shinanigans with Flames 1st round drafting, they will likely involve these players.   

 

I've not had time to look closely at them yet.  Here they are

 

Gabe Perraeult LW

Axel Sandin  D

Tom Willander D

Andrew Cristall LW

Eduard Sale LW

[Thebrewcrew]

12 minutes ago, jjgallow said:

 

 

https://www.tsn.ca/nhl/craig-s-list-adamfantilli-leo-carlsson-jostle-for-second-behind-connor-bedard-in-nhl-draft-ranking-1.1937531

 

Ok.  Gonna try to transition this to on topic.

 

Looking at Button's list, it's mostly ho-hum.  But with a few exceptions.   There are 5 players who May, or may not be a bit off the radar/board and possibly relevant to where the Flames will be picking.  In all cases, players that appear to be favorites of Button.   History tells us that if there are Shinanigans with Flames 1st round drafting, they will likely involve these players.   

 

I've not had time to look closely at them yet.  Here they are

 

Gabe Perraeult LW

Axel Sandin  D

Tom Willander D

Andrew Cristall LW

Eduard Sale LW

The Flames are likely picking 15-17th.

 

Out of those 5 names, I think they’d have a chance at Perreault and Willander.

 

Cristall is likely a top 10 pick. Probably one of the best playmakers in the draft on a Kelowna team that wasn’t all that good.

 

Sale, is a tougher one to evaluate, it’s always hard to compare the European kids vs NA kids.  But he seems like a player to go anywhere from 7-14.

 

It’s not a great D class at the top,  but I still think three D will be gone by the time the Flames pick, Sandin Pellikka likely being one of them.