Quote:
Originally Posted by Fire of the Phoenix
Would you add our late 2nds to 6+Backlund? I know I would. Both picks have a very small chance of even being bit players.
I would even do Backlund+Poirier+6+35. But I am a huge fan of JP, and I doubt think Poirier or 35 will be anything significant. Backlund is good, but hardly irreplaceable. Get Helm in UFA and the loss of Backlund doesn't matter.
People get too caught up in the optics of "moving up three spots". We would be trading for Puljujarvi, the pick upgrade optics are irrelevant. JP is probably one of the top 3-5 prospects in the world right now, whoever is available at 6 is not on that level, so we would need to pay to make up the gap. That some people would be opposed to 'sweetening the pot' by adding 10% lottery tickets or a good 3C is interesting to me. IMO, at this stage of the rebuild, management should be all about adding quality at the expense of quantity wherever possible. We don't need more B prospects or a 3C in the same way we need a impact top 6 RH forward.
|
"One of the top 3-5 prospects in the world right now"
For sure.
Still, the difference between his chance of being an impact player and whoever else we could take at 6th overall being an impact player isn't Backlund plus our 2nd rounders.
A few years ago there was a player who was the "best prospect in the world not playing in the NHL yet"
He played in Liiga too, and put up much better numbers than Puljujarvi in his draft year. Then he played two more seasons in Liiga and was a point per game in those years combined. That's when he was given the "best prospect in the world not in the NHL yet".
Now, after a few seasons in the NHL he's a quality NHLer, but he's pretty much a 40 point player. Nothing special really. He has something like 30 goals in 250 NHL games.
People get too caught up in the hype around prospects, especially at draft time.
Trading for #3 straight up? Yeah, that's going to cost you.
Moving up from #6 to #3 is a lot different, and you shouldn't overpay for it.