2024 NHL draft - A New Hope

[The_People1]

3 hours ago, cross16 said:

Lindstrom gives me big=good vibes. I'm not going to deny he is talented, he for sure is. Does his talent match a top 10 pick? I'm not so sure myself. Reminds me a lot of Micheal Rasmussen. 

 

Not a bad player to have and size down the middle is something all teams are looking for so I get it but it's not the direction i'd go, especially when you consider injuries. 

 

Big=good vibes is Silayev, not Lindstrom.

 

Lindstrom uses his body to shield the puck so he's not just big and doesn't use it.  He uses it to his advantage.  Watch how he places the put away while taking contact and leaning in.  That's tremendous confidence, balance, strength, etc and he's still got the edge work to spin 360 and make quick moves usually reserved for someone smaller.  There were a few seconds in the highlight package where he came out of the corner with the puck and did some McDavid-quick cross overs and lightning stick handling to attack the front of the net.

 

The talent and numbers he put up justifies a top 10 pick, if not top 5.  I guess it comes down to injuries and not being able to stay healthy.

[cross16]

43 minutes ago, The_People1 said:

 

Big=good vibes is Silayev, not Lindstrom.

 

Lindstrom uses his body to shield the puck so he's not just big and doesn't use it.  He uses it to his advantage.  Watch how he places the put away while taking contact and leaning in.  That's tremendous confidence, balance, strength, etc and he's still got the edge work to spin 360 and make quick moves usually reserved for someone smaller.  There were a few seconds in the highlight package where he came out of the corner with the puck and did some McDavid-quick cross overs and lightning stick handling to attack the front of the net.

 

The talent and numbers he put up justifies a top 10 pick, if not top 5.  I guess it comes down to injuries and not being able to stay healthy.

 

I'd personally be more cautious scouting off highlight videos but that's just me. 

 

From what i've seen I don't think his talent and numbers warrant a top 5 pick. Maybe 10 yes but that's where the injuries come into play. IMO he's a pick more based on projection that what he has done/is now because I dont' see the level of offence in relation to other players available in the top 10. 

 

I think he's in the top 10 more based on what teams think he can. Teams are alwas looking for size down the middle so if you can get size plus any amount of skill I think it creates a situation where you are reaching. It's just not the direction I would prefer to go. 

[JTech780]

1 hour ago, cross16 said:

 

I'd personally be more cautious scouting off highlight videos but that's just me. 

 

From what i've seen I don't think his talent and numbers warrant a top 5 pick. Maybe 10 yes but that's where the injuries come into play. IMO he's a pick more based on projection that what he has done/is now because I dont' see the level of offence in relation to other players available in the top 10. 

 

I think he's in the top 10 more based on what teams think he can. Teams are alwas looking for size down the middle so if you can get size plus any amount of skill I think it creates a situation where you are reaching. It's just not the direction I would prefer to go. 

Again I don’t disagree, more playing devils advocate, but I think we starting to see a trend with an emphasis back on size. I think size has always been important, but I think teams are starting to put more value back on size.

 

Now I think this applies mostly to defense, but I do think you will see more emphasis put on size across the board.

 

For me I think Calgary really needs to start emphasizing speed. It’s a dimension that is sorely lacking top to bottom in the organization. Calgary was a below average team when it comes to speed last season. 
 

If you can get that top end speed and combine it with size and talent you have a deadly combination.

[cross16]

49 minutes ago, JTech780 said:

Again I don’t disagree, more playing devils advocate, but I think we starting to see a trend with an emphasis back on size. I think size has always been important, but I think teams are starting to put more value back on size.

 

Now I think this applies mostly to defense, but I do think you will see more emphasis put on size across the board.

 

For me I think Calgary really needs to start emphasizing speed. It’s a dimension that is sorely lacking top to bottom in the organization. Calgary was a below average team when it comes to speed last season. 
 

If you can get that top end speed and combine it with size and talent you have a deadly combination.

 

Yup I hear you, its all a good and fun debate. 

 

I think the last sentence here is what i'm getting at in a nutshell with Lindstrom. Is that combo there or do you want it to be there? I think with Lindstrom people want it to be there but i'm not sure it is which is why I think you see him all over different draft boards rights now. 

 

I'm in agree on speed. Speed and skill for me are the priorities. Of course if you can get that with a player who brings size and physicality then score, but I'm not wiling to put size ahead of those 2 things. I do agree that I think Conroy values size more than Treliving did so see if that continues. 

[conundrumed]

If I recall correctly, I believe that this isn't his first back problem. I think a lot of big players have shoulder issues, Edvinsson had preventative surgery and I believe that's fairly common. I believe Musty had the same growing pains. Perhaps I'm incorrect that this isn't his first, but back issues are pretty darn heady.

We'll see if it holds teams back and where he lands. I'd much prefer a player without back-pain history. I'm not positive if that's him or not.

Honestly haven't seen him much due to injury.

I'm with @cross16 that I can't watch highlight packages to assess.

If Dickinson could do something to annoy everyone into dropping to 9th, I'd be appreciative.

I'll be watching Game 1 of Oshawa @ London finals tonight alongside CAR @ NYR.

Dickinson and O'Reilly vs Sennecke. Some real talent going on there! I want the 1st 2 but resign myself to it being neither. Dickinson is so refined at playing D, there just aren't enough adjectives. O'Reilly is going to have a growth explosion imho. He's only 3 yrs removed from being a Dman.

I'm not shy about drafting US players, but Eiserman's giving me those vibes. Anyone who talks about themselves in the 3rd person is sketch af arrogant.

That's what conundrumed thinks. lol

[The_People1]

4 hours ago, cross16 said:

 

I'd personally be more cautious scouting off highlight videos but that's just me. 

 

From what i've seen I don't think his talent and numbers warrant a top 5 pick. Maybe 10 yes but that's where the injuries come into play. IMO he's a pick more based on projection that what he has done/is now because I dont' see the level of offence in relation to other players available in the top 10. 

 

I think he's in the top 10 more based on what teams think he can. Teams are alwas looking for size down the middle so if you can get size plus any amount of skill I think it creates a situation where you are reaching. It's just not the direction I would prefer to go. 

 

Ya absolutely I'm just commenting off highlights.  Perhaps he's a floater and is average in all other aspects of the game and I can't see it from a highlight package.

 

Also, big players usually dominate Juniors and look unstoppable but once in the NHL against men, they can't do even half the stuff they were allowed to do in Juniors.  Lafreniere is the best example in recent years.

 

Byfield also looking like a 2nd liner max.  Kirby Dach can't stay healthy.  Slafkovsky also slowly coming around but doesn't look like a super star yet.  There are legit reasons to be concerned about a bigger Junior player being pumped up due to size, for sures.

[The_People1]

1 hour ago, conundrumed said:

If I recall correctly, I believe that this isn't his first back problem. 

 

Ya that's scary to hear then.  I could see him available at 9 if he isn't passing his medicals by the time the combines come around.

[The_People1]

9 hours ago, conundrumed said:

But we're likely to be having decent drafts through '26 and some things may fall into your lap on the way. This is only 1 draft. We won't be fixing everything this year alone. Next year's draft will pull in more good prospects.

 

1000%.  The Flames need to look at this as a 3 to 4 year rebuild in the basement.  Look ahead and see what the next 3 to 4 drafts have, if that's even possible.  

 

For example, this draft has lots of D... Maybe take one now.

 

Next year, maybe it's Centers.

 

Year after that, McKenna... And who else?  Try to prepare.

 

Worst thing that can happen is we come out of this rebuild with 4 LHS LW.  Honzek... Then Iginla... Then next year another LHS LW... Year after that LHS LW... Etc, etc.

[sak22]

1 hour ago, conundrumed said:

 

I'm not shy about drafting US players, but Eiserman's giving me those vibes. Anyone who talks about themselves in the 3rd person is sketch af arrogant.

That's what conundrumed thinks. lol

I'm more concerned with how he continues to fall in everyone's list, it seems like guys who drop like that during their draft year often continue to show why they dropped after.  I don't know much about the attitude, but I dream of the day when not all hockey players sound alike, as long as he isn't completely toxic in the room I don't care if he showcases the arrogance, there is plenty of arrogance in the league currently hidden behind humble interviews because they are trained in giving the same speeches full of the same clichés. 

[Thebrewcrew]

Mock Draft Builder - FCHockey (nhlentrydraft.com)

 

I gave this a spin through three rounds. It's a lot of fun having three picks...

 

Here's what I got

 

9th- Zeev Buium LD Denver

He's been talked about a lot here. Might become the best LD in the Flames organization if they selected him.

 

29th- Henry Mews RD Ottawa

I attacked the blueline early. A converted forward, good skater, offensive instincts. I considered Jett Luchanko here.

 

41st- Maxim Masse RW Chicoutimi

Anytime this organization can add a RHS forward, I'm for it. Led Chicoutimi in scoring by 15 points as a draft eleigible.

 

64th- Simon Zether C Rogle

Big Swedish centre. Needs to fill out. RHS. With so many picks, the Flames have to strategically use them, you can't take all CHL players for example, the timeline is too tight. With a European kid, you have some developmental runway.

 

74th- Tarin Smith LD Everett

Went back to address the blueline in the third round. I trust Everett's program, they haven't developed many stars, but they develop good players. Smith may be partnered with Landon Dupont next year.

 

84th- Clarke Caswell LW Swift Current

Was really happy to see Caswell was still available here. Like Masse, Caswell led his team in scoring as a draft eligible. Swift was a really good team too. 

[The_People1]

2 hours ago, Thebrewcrew said:

Mock Draft Builder - FCHockey (nhlentrydraft.com)

 

I gave this a spin through three rounds. It's a lot of fun having three picks...

 

Here's what I got

 

9th- Zeev Buium LD Denver

He's been talked about a lot here. Might become the best LD in the Flames organization if they selected him.

 

29th- Henry Mews RD Ottawa

I attacked the blueline early. A converted forward, good skater, offensive instincts. I considered Jett Luchanko here.

 

41st- Maxim Masse RW Chicoutimi

Anytime this organization can add a RHS forward, I'm for it. Led Chicoutimi in scoring by 15 points as a draft eleigible.

 

64th- Simon Zether C Rogle

Big Swedish centre. Needs to fill out. RHS. With so many picks, the Flames have to strategically use them, you can't take all CHL players for example, the timeline is too tight. With a European kid, you have some developmental runway.

 

74th- Tarin Smith LD Everett

Went back to address the blueline in the third round. I trust Everett's program, they haven't developed many stars, but they develop good players. Smith may be partnered with Landon Dupont next year.

 

84th- Clarke Caswell LW Swift Current

Was really happy to see Caswell was still available here. Like Masse, Caswell led his team in scoring as a draft eligible. Swift was a really good team too. 

 

I got Levshunov at 9 and Elick at 29.

 

It's fun... but a bit too wild and random to be real.

[JTech780]

Decided to follow suit.

 

9. Artyom Levshunov: He won’t be available here.

29. Jett Luchanko: He is most likely gone at this point.

41. Dean Letourneau: Took a swing on upside.

64. Julius Miettinen: A safer pick, good size at center, limited offensive upside.

74. Justin Poirier: Another swing at upside.

84. George Carter: Highest ranked goalie left on the board.

[sak22]

Mine was 

9. Sam Dickenson

29. Michael Hage

41. Matvei Shuravin 

64. Tomas Lavoie

74. Carter George

85. Justin Poirier

 

[420since1974]

To be fair, I have not watched anything except for the highlights of the players slated to be drafted in the Top 64.

 

With the Flames drafting at 9, my dream is that Artyom Levshunov (RH RD), Sam Dickinson (LH LD) or Kosta Helenius (RH C/RW) are available.

The only way that I'd consider Tij Iginla (LH LW/C) is if he expresses a very strong desire to play for Calgary. If he expresses any hesitation at all regarding the pressure of following his father with the Flames, I want nothing to do with him.

 

I hope that Henry Mews (RH RD) will be available when the Flames use Vancouver's first round pick (26 - 32?) and I'd take a gamble on Dean Letourneau (RH C) with the Flames 41st pick. I'm not sure at all who I'd take with the Dallas 2nd round pick (26 - 32?).

Who would you guys target with the Dallas pick?

 

[conundrumed]

The Dean Letourneau love is hilarious. Thank god Wiesbrod isn't here to override our actual scouts.

Is there nobody on the Calgary Buffaloes that is 6'7"?

"5 years folks, people will be like, wow, they won that draft". lol

 

[conundrumed]

Swinging big time after crushing Dmen. Not really shocking me much that I think bpa are dmen prospects.

Swap Catton for Levshunov, because there is no way. I'm happy with the 4 Dmen in the middle. I can get Repcik, Allard and Fisher that late? Sure, I'll take it.

 

9.   Artyom Levshunov D

29. Luke Misa C

41. Cole Hutson D

64. Luca Marrelli D

74. Tomas Lavoie D

84. Harrison Brunicke D

106. Peter Repcik C

107. Owen Allard C

170. Jake Fisher C

[cberg]

2 hours ago, conundrumed said:

The Dean Letourneau love is hilarious. Thank god Wiesbrod isn't here to override our actual scouts.

Is there nobody on the Calgary Buffaloes that is 6'7"?

"5 years folks, people will be like, wow, they won that draft". lol

 

Looking for upside, with recent similar examples of success.  How do you manage success, unicorns....?

[conundrumed]

Dickinson's assists on goals 3 & 6 are kind of fun:

 

[The_People1]

Not going to lie but last year's Honzek pick was a disappointment and shock because Honzek was ranked late teens or early 20s.  We were discussing how we hoped certain kids in the top 12 would drop to us.

 

And so here we are again, hoping someone would drop to us.  Buium, Dickinson, etc.  but the Flames draft Brandsegg-Nygard?  Maybe Chernyshov?  Talk about a vote of non confidence with Honzek.  Would the Flames go off the board again?  Connelly?  

[cross16]

Can we please stop with this off the board nonsense?

 

I completely understand if you didn't like the Honzek pick, really do. It was an underwhelming pick for me too and it's fair to want other players. Scouting is based on subjective opinions after all. 

 

But to complain that the Flames went off the board is just such a wrong and tired debate.  For reference, Mckenzie had him 19, Corey Pronman had him 12th, Elite prospects 15th. Yes some had him in the 20s too but that's scouting and the draft for you there is no such thing as consensus scouting and ranking. I don't find it valuable at all to try and put down draft picks by comparing them to a non existent board, it's not fair IMO. 

 

I think it's far more productive to question whether or not the Flames have the right scouting criteria or values when it comes to the draft, instead of suggesting they should stick to some non existent board.  

[jjgallow]

1 hour ago, cross16 said:

Can we please stop with this off the board nonsense?

 

I completely understand if you didn't like the Honzek pick, really do. It was an underwhelming pick for me too and it's fair to want other players. Scouting is based on subjective opinions after all. 

 

But to complain that the Flames went off the board is just such a wrong and tired debate.  For reference, Mckenzie had him 19, Corey Pronman had him 12th, Elite prospects 15th. Yes some had him in the 20s too but that's scouting and the draft for you there is no such thing as consensus scouting and ranking. I don't find it valuable at all to try and put down draft picks by comparing them to a non existent board, it's not fair IMO. 

 

I think it's far more productive to question whether or not the Flames have the right scouting criteria or values when it comes to the draft, instead of suggesting they should stick to some non existent board.  

 

You know how much I support Conroy, I would love to say back off, give Conroy a chance.

 

But facts are, there is a list, there are lists, and there isn't a single known list with professional scouts that would have picked Honzek next.   Not Pronman, not Mckenzie, not Button, not eliteprospects, not any combination of any of them.  

 

Conroy said himself that there is a list, and their priority is going by that list in 2024.

 

But in last year's draft, he didn't.  He went with the guy he personally saw and scouted.  And I think he regrets that, which is why he has been adamant about a "list" this year.     He's boosted up scouting a ton.   I think/hope he's learned.

 

But....like Bertuzzi would say, it is what it is.   It was off every single board.    And at least 10 spots off of popular opinion when looking at the guys available (Pellika, Barlow) and where they were rated.

 

Conroy's strength lies in his ability to surround himself with the right people, imho.   In this case, it was his weakness, because he knew Honzek.   But since then he has surrounded himself with scouting staff that he trusts, and I think we will see good results from that this year.

[cross16]

38 minutes ago, jjgallow said:

 

You know how much I support Conroy, I would love to say back off, give Conroy a chance.

 

But facts are, there is a list, there are lists, and there isn't a single known list with professional scouts that would have picked Honzek next.   Not Pronman, not Mckenzie, not Button, not eliteprospects, not any combination of any of them.  

 

Conroy said himself that there is a list, and their priority is going by that list in 2024.

 

But in last year's draft, he didn't.  He went with the guy he personally saw and scouted.  And I think he regrets that, which is why he has been adamant about a "list" this year.     He's boosted up scouting a ton.   I think/hope he's learned.

 

But....like Bertuzzi would say, it is what it is.   It was off every single board.    And at least 10 spots off of popular opinion when looking at the guys available (Pellika, Barlow) and where they were rated.

 

Conroy's strength lies in his ability to surround himself with the right people, imho.   In this case, it was his weakness, because he knew Honzek.   But since then he has surrounded himself with scouting staff that he trusts, and I think we will see good results from that this year.

 

Yes there is a list and 1 list that matters and it's the team's, which clearly had Honzek at the top of it when it was their turn to pick. As I said it's fair to debate that and why but to compare it to a non existent consensus list is pretty pointless IMO. 

 

Conroy did increase pro scouting but amateur scouting is mostly unchanged in terms of quantity but they did replace some outgoing scouts with new ones. The rest of this is pretty baseless speculation on your part.

[jjgallow]

1 minute ago, cross16 said:

 

Yes there is a list and 1 list that matters and it's the team's, which clearly had Honzek at the top of it. As I said it's fair to debate that and why but to compare it to a non existent consensus list is pretty pointless IMO. 

 

Conroy did increase pro scouting but amateur scouting is mostly unchanged in terms of quantity but they did replace some outgoing scouts with new ones. The rest of this is pretty baseless speculation on your part.

 

i just listened to a direct interview with Conroy on why they picked Honzek man, and that's pretty much what he said.   Just like this year, he's being pretty clear about a list.

 

Anyway, I think we all have some level of understanding on Honzek, which we are expressing differently.   

I personally empathise with the "off the board" phrase, but, I understand why others don't....it's definitely not meant to offend people, especially on something that I don't think anyone is that far off on.  

[The_People1]

1 hour ago, cross16 said:

Can we please stop with this off the board nonsense?

 

I completely understand if you didn't like the Honzek pick, really do. It was an underwhelming pick for me too and it's fair to want other players. Scouting is based on subjective opinions after all. 

 

But to complain that the Flames went off the board is just such a wrong and tired debate.  For reference, Mckenzie had him 19, Corey Pronman had him 12th, Elite prospects 15th. Yes some had him in the 20s too but that's scouting and the draft for you there is no such thing as consensus scouting and ranking. I don't find it valuable at all to try and put down draft picks by comparing them to a non existent board, it's not fair IMO. 

 

I think it's far more productive to question whether or not the Flames have the right scouting criteria or values when it comes to the draft, instead of suggesting they should stick to some non existent board.  

 

I'm other words, yes.  Connelly it is.  Ranked 6 by Central Scouting.

[cross16]

21 minutes ago, jjgallow said:

 

i just listened to a direct interview with Conroy on why they picked Honzek man, and that's pretty much what he said.   Just like this year, he's being pretty clear about a list.

 

Anyway, I think we all have some level of understanding on Honzek, which we are expressing differently.   

I personally empathise with the "off the board" phrase, but, I understand why others don't....it's definitely not meant to offend people, especially on something that I don't think anyone is that far off on.  

 

cool, you should post it then. Because it runs counter to everything they said post draft and runs counter to how this organization has operated for some time.