[News] Burke says he is unlikely to trade up... hasn't watched Bennett

[saXon]

Conroy on the Fan right now.

-joked about Ekblad being there at 4
-talked a little about Draisaitl
-compared him to Anze Kopitar
-he looked "sleepy" sometimes when he played
-with a little work on his skating, would be a good pickup
-said he loved all the top 5 consensus guys and would all be a good pickup
-pick whoever is left there at 4th.

[Caged Great]

The only way I'd trade our 1st next year for FLA's 1st is if Bjugstad was coming our way as well. 6-6 skilled winger + Ekblad would alleviate any "loss" if we were getting one of the top 4 guys next year.

[Gaskal]

Originally Posted by snipetype

But imagine a world where we won the lottery. And we had first.

Just stop.

Originally Posted by snipetype

Anyway you take the number 1 pick every time over a pick that MIGHT be a top five pick.

So:

a.) Ekblad

vs

b.) Outside chance at McDavid / Solid chance at a top 5 / Near certainty of top 10 in a 2003/2013-level of quality draft year

Where there's a possibility of Hanifin (who is projected as a franchise dman) falling one or two spots considering the quality of next year's draft.

I take option B 10/10 times.

Tired of people who suggest trading the 2015 1st while utterly disregarding the difference in quality between the 2014 and 2015 drafts.

[strombad]

I wouldn't get too worked up about it Gaskal. He was probably too busy being a lawyer to think the whole thing through.

[ForeverFlameFan]

Originally Posted by strombad

I wouldn't get too worked up about it Gaskal. He was probably too busy being a lawyer to think the whole thing through.

They met at a diner that had meat and potatoes.

[Rhettzky]

Originally Posted by strombad

I wouldn't get too worked up about it Gaskal. He was probably too busy being a lawyer to think the whole thing through.

Or building models. I think that's what he said his hobby was.

[Gaskal]

Brilliant.

Just pictured you three doing a 3 way fist bump, 3 musketeers style.

[MrMastodonFarm]

Originally Posted by Gaskal

Brilliant.

Just pictured you three doing a 3 way fist bump, 3 musketeers style.

[snipetype]

Originally Posted by Gaskal

Just stop.



So:



a.) Ekblad



vs



b.) Outside chance at McDavid / Solid chance at a top 5 / Near certainty of top 10 in a 2003/2013-level of quality draft year



Where there's a possibility of Hanifin (who is projected as a franchise dman) falling one or two spots considering the quality of next year's draft.



I take option B 10/10 times.



Tired of people who suggest trading the 2015 1st while utterly disregarding the difference in quality between the 2014 and 2015 drafts.

Man you guys must be hanging out with rob ford too much if you would trade first overall in 2014 for a 2015 first. That's crack smoking logic.

Several things could go wrong. 1) the top players in the draft regress by the 2015 draft . 2) the player selected with first overall,ekblad, could turn out to be better then mcdavid and the 2015 group ("Generational" talents have busted before lindross, Thornton, comes to mind. Not that they weren't true busts but both were expected to be the next Gretzky/ Crosby type player.)
3) mcdavid is not an explosive skater like most of the top players (Crosby, mackinnon, or ovechkin, Malkin.) in the nhl and his game still needs a lot if work, this kid is not as good at Crosby at the same age. He may not even be as good as Tavares at the same age. Everyone makes mcdavid out to be this messiah but he's a 17 year old kid and no 17 year old is a sure thing.
4. The draft pick we receive in 2015 from say Florida ends up being 20th overall as they go on a surprise run. And we gave away a first overall for it. That's why you don't trade a first overall for a first in 2015.
Also, ekblad is being underrated. He was the second player ever granted exceptional status into the OHL, Tavares was the first, and mcdavid was third.
He has steadily progressed every year. He was Canada's best blueliner (mayve griffin too) at the wjc and made more impact on the team than mackinnon or Drouin did in their draft year at the WJC.
He's big. He moves the puck well. He's physical. He has a strong stride, really his only weakness is his turns which big guys always take longer to learn anyways. His defensive positioning is outstanding.
And he's got that Shea webber shot that puts lasers in the back of the net.
Not to mention he's a right handed defencemen, our biggest need.
But you never answered my question. Do you seriously value a first rounder in 2015 from any team other then buffalo more than first overall in this draft?

[Yoho]

Florida wouldn't do the deal anyway

[snipetype]

Originally Posted by Yoho

Florida wouldn't do the deal anyway

I agree, I'm just saying it's pretty stupid that people wouldn't trade our 2015 first for first overall this year.

[nik-]

Originally Posted by snipetype

I agree, I'm just saying it's pretty stupid that people wouldn't trade our 2015 first for first overall this year.

[snipetype]

Originally Posted by nik-

Or you could post a rebuttal? To prove me wrong.
So if nyi would have won the draft lottery and were picking first... You would opt to give away first overall to buffalo? And keep your 2015. Come on? Really?

[nik-]

Originally Posted by snipetype

Or you could post a rebuttal? To prove me wrong.
So if nyi would have won the draft lottery and were picking first... You would opt to give away first overall to buffalo? And keep your 2015. Come on? Really?

Why? Is anyone going to change your mind? Are we going to engage in a reasoned, well thought out debate with one side convincing the other in the end?

I'll save my time.

[Calgary4LIfe]

Originally Posted by snipetype

No you are saying we shouldn't trade our first next year for Florida's first.

But imagine a world where we won the lottery. And we had first. So basically you are saying a first for a real bad team (Florida or calgary) in the 2015 draft is more important than first overall in 2014.

So I ask you again. if your logic is true, then if the flames possessed the number one pick in this draft, you would trade it to one of the ####ty teams in the nhl (Florida Carolina or Edmonton(not buffalo that team is too bad they wouldn't trade it)) for their 2015 pick.

I feel like people are underrating ekblad.

Anyway you take the number 1 pick every time over a pick that MIGHT be a top five pick.

Your logic seems sound.. until you figure out that once you make that trade you lose full control over the pick next year.

In a complete vaccum, I would 100% trade this year's first overall selection to a team I was 'positive' would finish in the bottom three next year. Why? At worst, you are getting an equal prospect next year. At best, you are getting a significantly better prospect. Perhaps you rate Ekblad as equal to the top 3 picks. I don't. I haven't seen any scouts that do either. McDavid, Eichel and apparently Hanifin (whom I haven't seen play myself, but who is often talked about as the very best defensive prospect in the last 10 years - better than Jones and Ekblad) are vastly superior. You don't agree, and that is fine. Time will tell. If my scouts feel it, I make that trade every single time.

HOWEVER...

Only an idiot GM would take that risk, without demanding a premium for doing so. You are never going to be able to draft for the 1st overall pick in any draft for your 'potential' first overall pick in a subsequent draft. Why? Because the team trading away this year's first would of course expect that the other team make significant moves to improve.

So, why don't the Flames make those moves?

There is still risk involved. You are going to end up having to trade from your futures for a 'win now' mode. I think it ends up forcing you to do what the Leafs did after the Kessel trade - make moves to try and win now. You end up with a couple of really good players, but a non-contending team. Improved? Absolutely. Contenders? Nope. You also run the risk of failing and ending being the GM that traded away "Sidney Crosby" for "Erik Johnson". Not to say that either McDavid nor Ekblad are exactly those players - but you can see the point I am trying to make with the disparity gap between the first overall in one year, vs a first overall the following year.

I don't think the Flames are ready for that step yet. I think they are still two solid drafts away - this year, and next - before they can start making those types of moves.

There is no way that Florida would accept that trade - this year's first overall for a CHANCE at the top 3 picks next year - when they would assume the Flames would try and make improvements. I think if the Flames did manage to make that trade one for one, it would still set them back somewhat, as they would then almost be forced to ensure that they don't finish that low - would deviate from the patience required in building a contender. It is not out of the question that if the Flames make some pressure moves to accelerate the rebuild that they couldn't finish just outside (or even with a heck of a season, squeak into) the playoffs.

From your standpoint, you make that trade because you see Ekblad as an equitable prospect to that offered in the first few picks next year, correct? You also see the team as being a fairly competitive one next year, right? I don't see either one of those statements being true, so I would not make that trade. If Florida does make that trade, however, I would do my very best as the GM of this team to improve as much as possible - and I think that deviates away from building correctly with patience.

It is a drawn-out argument, and you can counter with a lot of points and arguments yourself. I just see it as too much risk involved, you would most likely have to pay a premium to exchange, and there would be way too much pressure to avoid 'infamy' as a GM which could deter from a solid rebuild plan.

[Muta]

Originally Posted by snipetype

Or you could post a rebuttal? To prove me wrong.
So if nyi would have won the draft lottery and were picking first... You would opt to give away first overall to buffalo? And keep your 2015. Come on? Really?

The possibility of securing a McDavid, an Eichel or a Hanifin is just too tempting to pass up on. We could very well be picking in that area if our team doesn't play like they did post-Olympics this season.

Plus, I personally heard Burke state that the 2015 draft is hugely, hugely important to the organization. Didn't even make a mention of this year.

[snipetype]

Originally Posted by nik-

Or you could post a rebuttal? To prove me wrong.
So if nyi would have won the draft lottery and were picking first... You would opt to give away first overall to buffalo? And keep your 2015. Come on? Really?

[SuperMatt18]

Issue is it is a ridiculous argument in each direction because of the risk.

Florida wouldn't trade the 1st overall this year for a potential top 5/10 pick next year. You take the sure thing because you look like an idiot then if the Flames have a good season and finish 10th., and you trade Ekblad for 10th overall.

From the Flames perspective you are guaranteed the first overall pick if you make that trade. Even if that 2015 pick becomes 2nd or 3rd overall next year and you get Hanifin or Eichel you can argue that you got a sure thing 1st overall pick that is 1 year ahead in his development.

I say you take the sure thing 1st overall pick because you never know what is going to happen next season.

[snipetype]

Originally Posted by Calgary4LIfe

Your logic seems sound.. until you figure out that once you make that trade you lose full control over the pick next year.

In a complete vaccum, I would 100% trade this year's first overall selection to a team I was 'positive' would finish in the bottom three next year. Why? At worst, you are getting an equal prospect next year. At best, you are getting a significantly better prospect. Perhaps you rate Ekblad as equal to the top 3 picks. I don't. I haven't seen any scouts that do either. McDavid, Eichel and apparently Hanifin (whom I haven't seen play myself, but who is often talked about as the very best defensive prospect in the last 10 years - better than Jones and Ekblad) are vastly superior. You don't agree, and that is fine. Time will tell. If my scouts feel it, I make that trade every single time.

HOWEVER...

Only an idiot GM would take that risk, without demanding a premium for doing so. You are never going to be able to draft for the 1st overall pick in any draft for your 'potential' first overall pick in a subsequent draft. Why? Because the team trading away this year's first would of course expect that the other team make significant moves to improve.

So, why don't the Flames make those moves?

There is still risk involved. You are going to end up having to trade from your futures for a 'win now' mode. I think it ends up forcing you to do what the Leafs did after the Kessel trade - make moves to try and win now. You end up with a couple of really good players, but a non-contending team. Improved? Absolutely. Contenders? Nope. You also run the risk of failing and ending being the GM that traded away "Sidney Crosby" for "Erik Johnson". Not to say that either McDavid nor Ekblad are exactly those players - but you can see the point I am trying to make with the disparity gap between the first overall in one year, vs a first overall the following year.

I don't think the Flames are ready for that step yet. I think they are still two solid drafts away - this year, and next - before they can start making those types of moves.

There is no way that Florida would accept that trade - this year's first overall for a CHANCE at the top 3 picks next year - when they would assume the Flames would try and make improvements. I think if the Flames did manage to make that trade one for one, it would still set them back somewhat, as they would then almost be forced to ensure that they don't finish that low - would deviate from the patience required in building a contender. It is not out of the question that if the Flames make some pressure moves to accelerate the rebuild that they couldn't finish just outside (or even with a heck of a season, squeak into) the playoffs.

From your standpoint, you make that trade because you see Ekblad as an equitable prospect to that offered in the first few picks next year, correct? You also see the team as being a fairly competitive one next year, right? I don't see either one of those statements being true, so I would not make that trade. If Florida does make that trade, however, I would do my very best as the GM of this team to improve as much as possible - and I think that deviates away from building correctly with patience.

It is a drawn-out argument, and you can counter with a lot of points and arguments yourself. I just see it as too much risk involved, you would most likely have to pay a premium to exchange, and there would be way too much pressure to avoid 'infamy' as a GM which could deter from a solid rebuild plan.

I agree with what you are saying for the most part. All I'm saying is that first overall this year is more valuable than an undetermined draft pick in 2015 from my team other than buffalo. That is my thesis. I don't think I can be any more explicit than that. Too much could go wrong to pass on a guy like ekblad. That's all I'm saying nothing more nothing less.

[snipetype]

And I also agree, as I've already stated, there is no way Florida takes a 2015 first for first overall. It just doesn't make sense. Therefor, a 2015 first is not as valuable as ekblad. At this point.