2024 NHL draft - A New Hope

[The_People1]

4 hours ago, phoenix66 said:

All later picks ..that's my point ..

In top 10, IMO unless you're nabbing a Cake Makar.. go with the best shots at game breakers / centers preferably 

 

It's just as difficult to add top line F than it is to add top pair D.  You need star players to trade for star players at the end of the day.  Again, the Flames will probably have several cracks at the top 10 in this retool.  At some point, we should take a D with high end potential.  I'm okay with Catton over Dickinson but eventually, we need to take the D over the C either next year or the year after.

[MP5029]

5 hours ago, The_People1 said:

 

It's just as difficult to add top line F than it is to add top pair D.  You need star players to trade for star players at the end of the day.  Again, the Flames will probably have several cracks at the top 10 in this retool.  At some point, we should take a D with high end potential.  I'm okay with Catton over Dickinson but eventually, we need to take the D over the C either next year or the year after.

Meh…you draft RS Ctrs, you can trade them for RS D.

 

however, RS Ctrs have been a huge problem for this team for many decades.

[conundrumed]

Damn, this draft needs to get over with, so we can move on to the pissing and moaning phase for a day prior to FA firing up.

[cross16]

15 hours ago, Thebrewcrew said:

 

 

"The list is long"

 

Proceeds to list 5 players in a 20 years period where over almost 4500 people were drafted. 

Typically looks like around 50 US born kids get drafted every year, so around 1000 of those were US kids (which matches about what he NHL is too). so 5 US players out of 1000. 

There is a definite risk especially in a "non elite Canadian market", but then list only 1 player who actually left a Canadian market.  The rest of those players were Americans who left US markets. Lot of small sample size bias here. 

 

Just an overall bad argument really. I get what he is trying to say about "Russian fear" and I do agree that is overblown but you should look (at more rounds than just the first) the amount of times a Russian player never came over vs how many US kids trying to use leverage.  

 

[conundrumed]

8 minutes ago, cross16 said:

 

"This list is long"

 

Proceeds to list 5 players in a 20 years period where over almost 4500 people were drafted. 

Typically looks like around 50 US born kids get drafted every year. so 5 US players in 1000.

There is a "definite " risk especially in a non elite Canadian market, but then list only 1 player who actually left a Canadian market. 

 

His point about the Russian "fear" is somewhat accurate, but supported by a pretty flimsy argument. 

 

He's gotten pretty darn opinionated lately. I agree, that "warning" is farcical.

We seriously need to avoid Cole Hutson due to his brother joining Montreal. God knows it can't happen twice in one family. /s

[cross16]

13 hours ago, Thebrewcrew said:

The Flames had really good drafts in 20215 and 2016. It's been a mixed bag since then. They say two players in a draft is a success.

2017- Valimaki and Ruzicka made it. Not impactful for Calgary.

2018- They didn't pick until #105. They got Pospisil. 1 NHLer in this case is pretty good.

2019- Has a chance to be good. Pelletier and Wolf.

2020- Also a chance for a good draft. Zary is a regular. Poirier/Solovyov/Kerins/Kuznetsov have a chance. This was the first draft in a while the Flames had picks

2021- This draft comes down to Coronato, Stromgren and potentially Sergeev. Lots of misses, that didn't get contracts. Covid was a real factor here.

2022- They used one of their three picks on a criminal.

2023- too early to tell. Honzek and Morin were the top two picks, they didn't take as big as step as you'd hope. Still time with this class though.

 

I think Flames are probably a middle of the pack team, in terms of drafting. They've traded away a lot of picks in the past five years though.

 

I'll say this though, the 2024 draft is critical. With 8 selections in the top 110, the Flames have to find players. Most teams shoot for two in a draft. With eight picks in the first four rounds, I think the Flames need to find three players. If they want to shorten the rebuild.

 

I think if you want to look at it just in terms of the raw results (ie players produced) yeah middle of the pack is probably fair. 

 

I think if you look the ratio of NHLers to pick, the Flames will come out as one of the better drafting teams in the NHL.  I think they are top 5.

[cross16]

On 6/23/2024 at 8:10 AM, phoenix66 said:

Could just be my interpretation ,but I read that as a knock on his hockey IQ.. 

That being said if we were in the teens he looks like a steal , but at 9 we need a game breaker. Just surprised me he would describe the other 2 as being that , but figure we'd go for the dman 

 

If you read anyone who discounts Dickinson hockey IQ then I would recommend not reading that person again. 

 

I think Dickinson has the skill set to be what people always wanted Hanifin to be, an actual number one dman. I think they both carry the same tantalizing size/speed/skating combo, but IMO Dickinson sees the game better. I was never a big fan of Hanifin because IMO (and this goes back to me watching him as the World Juniors) you always saw weaker hockey IQ. I think Hanifin used his skating to get himself out of trouble, whereas Dickinson uses his skating to minimize trouble. Dickinson is, by a decent margin for me, the better prospect than Hanifin. 

 

I see more Heiskanen when he plays than Hanifin. I'm not sure what the caliber is for game breaker but if that isn't then the standard are unrealistic IMO. 

[phoenix66]

34 minutes ago, cross16 said:

 

If you read anyone who discounts Dickinson hockey IQ then I would recommend not reading that person again. 

 

I think Dickinson has the skill set to be what people always wanted Hanifin to be, an actual number one dman. I think they both carry the same tantalizing size/speed/skating combo, but IMO Dickinson sees the game better. I was never a big fan of Hanifin because IMO (and this goes back to me watching him as the World Juniors) you always saw weaker hockey IQ. I think Hanifin used his skating to get himself out of trouble, whereas Dickinson uses his skating to minimize trouble. Dickinson is, by a decent margin for me, the better prospect than Hanifin. 

 

I see more Heiskanen when he plays than Hanifin. I'm not sure what the caliber is for game breaker but if that isn't then the standard are unrealistic IMO. 

To be fair , I wasnt knocking him ..he sounds like a good prospect .. just wouldn't take him at 9 over the other 2 ..

The writer that mocked him to us and left Tij and Catton on the board , while knocking his "vision" ..gave much richer reviews on the other 2 .. just seemed odd ..thinking he's of the opinion were targeting dmen..and to be fair in his mock he would be the best D available 

 

I personally think and also from Conroy's comments d is not what they will focus on unless BPA is glaring 

[phoenix66]

11 hours ago, The_People1 said:

 

It's just as difficult to add top line F than it is to add top pair D.  You need star players to trade for star players at the end of the day.  Again, the Flames will probably have several cracks at the top 10 in this retool.  At some point, we should take a D with high end potential.  I'm okay with Catton over Dickinson but eventually, we need to take the D over the C either next year or the year after.

From what I've been reading..next year is loaded with a bunch of RSD.. so definitely could happen 

 

I think in the meantime we just need to get the later Rounds right...many a D stud have come from later rounds

[The_People1]

17 minutes ago, phoenix66 said:

From what I've been reading..next year is loaded with a bunch of RSD.. so definitely could happen 

 

I think in the meantime we just need to get the later Rounds right...many a D stud have come from later rounds

 

The way too early 2025 rankings.  Some good RHS RD.  But even better LHC... Maybe we take Dickinson this year instead of Catton.  Next year we take the C.

 

[MP5029]

I’m still of the opinion we need to draft Tig…

 

we need a new leader, we blew that chance with Chucky and the core of Monahan, Gaudreau, Lindhom, Hanifin and Markstrom.

 

time to start fresh, move on and move out everyone less they younger guys like Shar (age is a bit on the higher side but need some vets in 2-3 years), Kuzy (same as Shar, bit older but need some vets in 2-3 years) Wolf, Zary, Pos, Andreson (same as Shar and Kuzy, but if you move Weegar, need. Solid vet D in 2-3 years) etc…

 

the old dogs move them, Huby (this will

cost us but long term gain), Backlund (he’s not a good leader, too passive) Manji (love the guy but he’s not within the age category or cap hit value for what he brings…back in the old core yes but not now), Weegar (love the guy and if we were not 2-3 years out would never consider moving him solid C material right now) 

 

start with Drafting Tij and groom him to be the C over the next 2-3 years with the above core of youth plus the young guys Conroy has acquired and will acquire (draft/trade)…this will build a proper culture and team identity worthy of a championship 

[tmac70]

We get a good player in this draft unless the scouts overreach on untapped potential. I was hoping we could land another top-10 pick as we could have gotten 2 excellent pieces moving forward. Not sure who it was I was listening to but they were talking comparative of 3 players in the top 10 that they believe based on projections have high high potential, Buium, Parekh, and everyone's hometown kid Iginla. Buium was the one that their projections have him in a level not seen for a long time. There risks in the top ten they had as Silvayev and Demidov. They also have Helenuis as a very SAFE choice compared him to Lindholm type of player.

 

Iginla is most likely gone before 9th, Catton has a high ceiling as well but size was the largest knock. Comparatives were Suzuki and Braydon Point but is already a better skater than Point at this time. He was the best player on a crap team and still put up those numbers. 

[cross16]

Bob McKenzie doing his final rankings show now. 

 

1. obvious by now...

2. Ivan Demidov 

3. Artoym Levshunov

4. Anton Silayev

5. Cayden Lindstrom

6. Sam Dickinson

7. Zeev Buium

8. Zayne Parekh

9. Konsta Helenius

10. Tij 

11. Beckett Sennecke

12. Catton

13. Yakemchuk

14. Cole Eiserman

15. Trevor Connelly. 

[JTech780]

I think with Michkov coming over to Philadelphia before expected, will mean that some teams at the top might look at Demidov differently. He should go 2nd, a few scouts see him as being better than Michkov.

 

I think Levshunov has put himself as the top defenseman in the draft. Then I think there is a group of defensemen that it all comes down to what you are looking for, Silayev, Buium, Dickinson, Parekh. Lindstrom leads the next group of forwards which has Iginla, Helenius and Catton. 
 

I have heard a lot of talk about guys like Helenius, Catton and Eiserman being overscouted and that teams are going to regret passing on those players, and I would tend to agree.

[robrob74]

How often have the Flames drafted a D in the first round? In the past 20 years we've drafted two Defensemen in the first round, and out of the 20 years we had about 16 picks in the first round. I didn't count any of the 2nd rounders that were our first picks in a specific draft. I think there would be a few more D there, as a first pick in a draft, in drafts we don't have a first rounder.

 

Valamaki

Erixon

 

 

I was going to go back thirty years... But, that would just age me and we drafted Phaneuf, Gautier and Morris in those drafts.

 

So what is it just by BPA or do we not like drafting defence in the first round?

 

Oh wow, looking at our Draft history, we drafted a Demidov in 1997.  

[The_People1]

7 minutes ago, robrob74 said:

How often have the Flames drafted a D in the first round? In the past 20 years we've drafted two Defensemen in the first round, and out of the 20 years we had about 16 picks in the first round. I didn't count any of the 2nd rounders that were our first picks in a specific draft. I think there would be a few more D there, as a first pick in a draft, in drafts we don't have a first rounder.

 

Valamaki

Erixon

 

 

I was going to go back thirty years... But, that would just age me and we drafted Phaneuf, Gautier and Morris in those drafts.

 

So what is it just by BPA or do we not like drafting defence in the first round?

 

Oh wow, looking at our Draft history, we drafted a Demidov in 1997.  

 

It's time to take a D but it's also out of our control at 9.  We pretty much have to take whoever falls to us... and if no D falls to us then take Catton/Tij.  I would prioritize D over Catton/Tij personally.  Year One of a retool/rebuild and all.

[cross16]

10 minutes ago, robrob74 said:

How often have the Flames drafted a D in the first round? In the past 20 years we've drafted two Defensemen in the first round, and out of the 20 years we had about 16 picks in the first round. I didn't count any of the 2nd rounders that were our first picks in a specific draft. I think there would be a few more D there, as a first pick in a draft, in drafts we don't have a first rounder.

 

Valamaki

Erixon

 

 

I was going to go back thirty years... But, that would just age me and we drafted Phaneuf, Gautier and Morris in those drafts.

 

So what is it just by BPA or do we not like drafting defence in the first round?

 

Oh wow, looking at our Draft history, we drafted a Demidov in 1997.  

 

Missed Pelech. Drafted as a dman and played dman all through his time with the Flames. Changed to wing very late in his career trying to hang on.  Doesn't change your point just FYI. 

 

for me it's a BPA thing. If you look back over the draft there are not many times were going D would have made more sense. 

08 - Carlsson over Nemisz yes but keep in mind Nemisz was not a bad pick at the time

12- Maatta over Jankowski maybe

13- Monahan was the obvious choice imo at 6. Could argue that they should have targtted D later but they liked Porier a lot. 

 

Don't think it's anything but the way the board fell. 

 

 

 

 

[robrob74]

45 minutes ago, cross16 said:

 

Missed Pelech. Drafted as a dman and played dman all through his time with the Flames. Changed to wing very late in his career trying to hang on.  Doesn't change your point just FYI. 

 

for me it's a BPA thing. If you look back over the draft there are not many times were going D would have made more sense. 

08 - Carlsson over Nemisz yes but keep in mind Nemisz was not a bad pick at the time

12- Maatta over Jankowski maybe

13- Monahan was the obvious choice imo at 6. Could argue that they should have targtted D later but they liked Porier a lot. 

 

Don't think it's anything but the way the board fell. 

 

 

 

 

 

The site I was on they had him listed as a R which I thought would have been a RW, and I remembered him being a D. Thought it was odd he had an R next to it when all the other D's had D's. 

[robrob74]

46 minutes ago, cross16 said:

 

Missed Pelech. Drafted as a dman and played dman all through his time with the Flames. Changed to wing very late in his career trying to hang on.  Doesn't change your point just FYI. 

 

for me it's a BPA thing. If you look back over the draft there are not many times were going D would have made more sense. 

08 - Carlsson over Nemisz yes but keep in mind Nemisz was not a bad pick at the time

12- Maatta over Jankowski maybe

13- Monahan was the obvious choice imo at 6. Could argue that they should have targtted D later but they liked Porier a lot. 

 

Don't think it's anything but the way the board fell. 

 

 

 

 

 

Sorry I am replying to you twice... Just that thinking about Nemisz.... I think he was one of those players that had two really good line mates that propped him and he looked good as JR. 

 

I don't think I added the Poirier and Klimchuk picks to the total first rounders.... so we had 18 then maybe?

[robrob74]

1 hour ago, The_People1 said:

 

It's time to take a D but it's also out of our control at 9.  We pretty much have to take whoever falls to us... and if no D falls to us then take Catton/Tij.  I would prioritize D over Catton/Tij personally.  Year One of a retool/rebuild and all.

 

I am with you and Cross on BPA. Just curious what they'll pick... This is hockey fan's Christmas. The wait for New toys.

[sak22]

1 hour ago, The_People1 said:

 

It's time to take a D but it's also out of our control at 9.  We pretty much have to take whoever falls to us... and if no D falls to us then take Catton/Tij.  I would prioritize D over Catton/Tij personally.  Year One of a retool/rebuild and all.

Always remember that time Vancouver prioritized D, not only did they pass on the 2nd best player in the first round they also didn't get an NHL d man in a draft that produced several very great ones, even though they took the one ranked highest on most boards.  For me the only ones I take over Catton that I think could be in range are Buium and Dickinson, I would even take Iginla over Yak, I'm also certain Levshunov will be long gone and I still don't know how I feel about Silayev if he fell to #9.

[robrob74]

1 minute ago, sak22 said:

Always remember that time Vancouver prioritized D, not only did they pass on the 2nd best player in the first round they also didn't get an NHL d man in a draft that produced several very great ones, even though they took the one ranked highest on most boards.  For me the only ones I take over Catton that I think could be in range are Buium and Dickinson, I would even take Iginla over Yak, I'm also certain Levshunov will be long gone and I still don't know how I feel about Silayev if he fell to #9.

 

Juelevi also had a ton of injury problems after he was drafted. I dunno what he would have projected to if he didn't have those, but like Valamaki, he had a few injuries that derailed his career. We could pick a great player but if they go into injury trouble, there's nothing that can be done. Juelevi may still not have been the correct choice, and other D might have been better options, and just adding to your discussion. 

 

I think if we can grab a Top6/TopLine forward, or a Top4D/prefer Top2 player in this draft, that would be amazing! But we need to get an impactful player regardless... Impact can be defined many ways, I don't necessarily mean a game-breaker, but someone like a Backlund as an example... If we had another Backlund in his prime, that would have been great! Bennett should have been that, but... Just saying having depth is great!

[sak22]

2 minutes ago, robrob74 said:

 

Juelevi also had a ton of injury problems after he was drafted. I dunno what he would have projected to if he didn't have those, but like Valamaki, he had a few injuries that derailed his career. We could pick a great player but if they go into injury trouble, there's nothing that can be done. Juelevi may still not have been the correct choice, and other D might have been better options, and just adding to your discussion. 

 

I think if we can grab a Top6/TopLine forward, or a Top4D/prefer Top2 player in this draft, that would be amazing! But we need to get an impactful player regardless... Impact can be defined many ways, I don't necessarily mean a game-breaker, but someone like a Backlund as an example... If we had another Backlund in his prime, that would have been great! Bennett should have been that, but... Just saying having depth is great!

True, I do think its very fair to point to his injuries as part of his problems.  I just think its a case of reaching on a position and not drafting the guy who was ranked higher on most boards, even if he hit his draft day potential I still take what I know about Tkachuk over that any day of the week.

[cross16]

28 minutes ago, robrob74 said:

 

The site I was on they had him listed as a R which I thought would have been a RW, and I remembered him being a D. Thought it was odd he had an R next to it when all the other D's had D's. 

 

ended his career as a winger so it makes sense. Sharks tried to turn him into a 4th line enforcer. 

 

24 minutes ago, robrob74 said:

 

Sorry I am replying to you twice... Just that thinking about Nemisz.... I think he was one of those players that had two really good line mates that propped him and he looked good as JR. 

 

I don't think I added the Poirier and Klimchuk picks to the total first rounders.... so we had 18 then maybe?

 

You can make that argument sure. Worth pointing out that that Henrique didn't produce as much as Nemiz did playing with Hall. I personally don't buy the "he was propped up" argument. 

 

Nemisz was a good player that was just drafted about 2 years too late. The speed of the game really took off after he was picked and I think his skating held him back. Could argue the Flames should have seen it coming but that's hindsight bias IMO. 

 

If you starting at 2004 then yes the Flames have picked 18 players in the first round.

[cross16]

7 minutes ago, robrob74 said:

 

Juelevi also had a ton of injury problems after he was drafted. I dunno what he would have projected to if he didn't have those, but like Valamaki, he had a few injuries that derailed his career. We could pick a great player but if they go into injury trouble, there's nothing that can be done. Juelevi may still not have been the correct choice, and other D might have been better options, and just adding to your discussion. 

 

I think if we can grab a Top6/TopLine forward, or a Top4D/prefer Top2 player in this draft, that would be amazing! But we need to get an impactful player regardless... Impact can be defined many ways, I don't necessarily mean a game-breaker, but someone like a Backlund as an example... If we had another Backlund in his prime, that would have been great! Bennett should have been that, but... Just saying having depth is great!

 

While true it was still a really bad pick at the time and IMO is one of the better example you have of prioritizing position over the better player. Vancouver were public they wanted a dman and passed on a better player to take the position. 

 

Most of their own fans boo'd the pick at the draft party.