2016 NHL Draft

[Finger Cookin]

Originally Posted by cowtown75

Joe's career PPG- 0.45. Frolik's PPG- 0.46. And big Joe is younger with more upside IMO

I would put Frolik and Colborne in the same bucket in terms of developmental upside. Joe is 26. He's done developing. What you see is what you get. I'll be shocked if he somehow finds a higher level of play in his NHL career.

[Vulcan]

Until Bennett ups his game, Backlund is our 2nd line centre with Frolik on his wing. Bennett has the upside to take the spot but he hasn't yet.

[Bourque's Twin]

Originally Posted by Finger Cookin

I would put Frolik and Colborne in the same bucket in terms of developmental upside. Joe is 26. He's done developing. What you see is what you get. I'll be shocked if he somehow finds a higher level of play in his NHL career.

I don't think he's done developing. He battled a wrist injury throughout his early 20's and didn't get a chance to round out his game. I think he has 1 more season of developing. It's a similar case to Ferland. Even though he's 23, he's essentially a sophomore who has lots of developing to do.

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by JiriHrdina

I think this is an excellent point.
I tend to think you need a true top line pair, and a true 2nd line pair.
And then the 3rd member of each line is a complimentary piece that wouldn't be on that spot in isolation.

Exactly. Teams tend to go with two scoring pairs, and then fill out the top two lines with complementary players. Frolik is a good complementary player because he can be the responsible guy on a scoring line and plays don't die on his stick. He's also one of the Flames' better penalty-killers.

[Calgary4LIfe]

Originally Posted by druetetective

The thing with Brown is if he isn't using his size or playing aggressive now, that likely will never be a huge part of his game.

The guy is an enigma, he constantly leaves you wanting more or asking "what if".

He likely is a better Joe Colbrne as others have pointed out, just a much better playmaker. I mean there is a chance everything goes perfect and he turns into a 80 point #1 center but I wouldn't bank on it.

I'd prefer we took a player with a higher floor even if his ceiling is a bit lower personally.

Actually, if you watch the U18s, Brown used his size at times absolutely wonderfully. It seems to me that he looks like he is just finally understanding that he has this wonderful tool to add to his arsenal that he hasn't been aware of yet, or has found a way to use yet - his ridiculous size. It just seems to me like he is finally gaining some confidence in using his size much more effectively, and the more he is trying it, the more he will continue to realize it.

He is tough to gauge in terms of future NHL production, but I can't help but think of a few things here:

Todd Button made a statement a few years ago at a draft that I have always remembered. He said that he prefers taking a lesser skilled player with good hockey sense over a highly skilled player with a lack of hockey sense. The way he explained it is if the high-end skill guy doesn't end up cracking a top 6 line right away, you may never see him in the NHL again as he just can't find a way to adapt. Sometimes that highly skilled player does crack the top 6, but he can't change his game if needed when other players have figured him out, and then he is also out of the NHL.

He likes guys with hockey sense because they can play different roles on the team and contribute. They can continue learning how to be effective and contribute positively.

Anyways, when I see Brown I see a guy with a tonne of hockey sense, an absolutely underrated shot, top-end (I mean, top end of the draft) passing ability, really good mobility (not even with the qualifier 'for his size' - I think he moves around well, period), and who already uses one aspect of his size fairly well - his reach to both get to lose pucks and get a shot/make a play quickly, or protect the puck by placing his body between the opposing player and the puck.

At the U18s, you saw him use his size effectively at separating the player from the puck - I thought he was magnificent that way. It was almost like this little light went off inside his head. Will he continue to do so? I am not sure, but to me it really does seem like a kid who is only realizing that he has this brand-new chainsaw to go along with all his other really great set of tools.

Originally Posted by druetetective

I still like Max Jones a lot. I wonder if there is a way to move back and get two picks between 11-20. I'd be open to using some of our 2nds or3rd to make it work.


Max Jones, plus one of Jost, Keller, Gauthier, Mcleoud, Fabbro or Mcavoy beats out one of Nylander, 'Big 3 D", Brown IMO. Even if you add a low 2nd to the guy Nylander/Brown package I'd still prefer 2 picks in the 11-20 range.

I can't think of a better person to ask this of than you.

I read that Max Jones had time with Marner and Dvorak, but he simply wasn't putting up any points. Tkachuk goes back in, and that line gets better. Is this true? Did Jones have a long look on that top line, but wasn't able to generate much?

That seems the book on Jones - people are openly wondering if his offensive ability will translate in the NHL, while Tkakchuk's ability to translate is almost a given. I like Jones as a prospect, and wouldn't mind the Flames even trading up a bit from the 2nd round to get him as I think he could be a good piece down the road, but it seems there is quite a lot of talk about his ability to produce at the next level.

Anyways, with three second round picks, I would think it wouldn't be too tough to get into the 20th spot with a couple of trade-ups. 2 seconds should get you into the earlier 20's I would think (hasn't that been the case in a lot of drafts - 2 2nds = a '20-ish' 1st rounder), with another 2nd to crawl up a few more spots from there.

[cowtown75]

Originally Posted by Flames Draft Watcher

I wonder if Tkachuk has a chance of dropping just due to his mediocre skating? Is it just me or does he look slower than earlier in the year? I think the foot injury from last round of the OHL Playoffs might be bothering him. I wonder if that causes any worrying in the war rooms. I mean he really shouldn't drop because of that since skating is something that can be improved on. Horvat looked way faster this year for example, his skating wasn't exceptional in his draft year. But maybe some scouts forget he had that foot injury and that skating nags at them.

I think VAN really values skating although Benning has talked Tkachuk up. EDM seems to like Tkachuk from hearing Chiarelli talk about him. If Tkachuk and Dubois are fairly equally liked by certain teams than maybe Dubois gets the nod due to skating?

If EDM takes Dubois at #4 then I'm not sure Benning automatically takes Tkachuk. Their last two picks are wingers (Virtanen/Boeser) and they've got young Baertschi as well. How on earth does VAN find top pairing dmen or a 1st line centre if they don't draft one this year? IMO it would be a huge mistake for VAN to draft wingers in three straight drafts with two top 6 picks when wing is the least important position in the NHL. Of course we shouldn't overestimate Dim Jim

IMO the following scenario is not out of the question:
#4 - EDM - Dubois (C/W)
#5 - VAN - Brown (C) or Sergachev (D) or Chychrun (D) or Juolevi (D)
#6 - CGY - Tkachuk (LW)

Maybe it's wishful thinking. I've also reconsidered my stance on trading up to #4. Not sure it would be worth it to do so if the Flames are truly comfortable with the kids in the 4-6 range. Pretty comfortable we'll get a great prospect at #6.

I would be surprised if Edm or Van don't take Juolevi. I just pray someone takes either Juolevi or Chychrun before Tkachuk. But I'm hearing Chychrun's stock has dropped a bit due to the last half of his season.

[Roof-Daddy]

Originally Posted by Finger Cookin

I would put Frolik and Colborne in the same bucket in terms of developmental upside. Joe is 26. He's done developing. What you see is what you get. I'll be shocked if he somehow finds a higher level of play in his NHL career.

I sure wouldn't.

Frolik has 576 NHL games, Colborne only 233.

Frolik's last 3 seasons ppg are 0.52, 0.51 and 0.50 all with 16-17 minutes of ice. That's his last 3 out of 8 total NHL seasons.

Colborne? He has only had 3 full NHL seasons to date, and has gone from 0.35 to 0.44 to 0.60 ppg with his ice time staying steady at about 15 minutes per game.

[Flames Draft Watcher]

Originally Posted by cowtown75

I would be surprised if Edm or Van don't take Juolevi. I just pray someone takes either Juolevi or Chychrun before Tkachuk. But I'm hearing Chychrun's stock has dropped a bit due to the last half of his season.

I think Sergachev has a chance to be the top defenseman taken as well.

To me it makes a ton of sense for VAN and EDM to take a d-man but they may believe Tkachuk/Dubois are clearly BPA at those spots. It's really hard to say. I think they should be prioritizing dmen in EDM's case or dmen and top line centres in VAN's case.

It's possible that both teams fairly equally like 2-3 of Tkachuk, Dubois, Brown, and 2-3 of the dmen and that both teams would be fine trading back a couple spots and still grabbing one of the kids in that 4-8 range.

It's hard to rule much out this point. I could see EDM taking Tkachuk, Dubois or a dman if they stay at 4. I could see VAN taking Tkachuk, Dubois, Brown or a dman if they stay at 5.

We're guaranteed to get one of Tkachuk, Dubois, Brown, Chychrun, Sergachev, Juolevi or Nylander so I'm pretty happy. In fact we'll have our pick of 5 of those guys. This top end looks pretty deep to me so whichever kid the Flames scouts like at #6 I'm going to be pretty happy with. I'd be pretty surprised if it wasn't one of those seven names.

[cowtown75]

Originally Posted by Flames Draft Watcher

I think Sergachev has a chance to be the top defenseman taken as well.

To me it makes a ton of sense for VAN and EDM to take a d-man but they may believe Tkachuk/Dubois are clearly BPA at those spots. It's really hard to say. I think they should be prioritizing dmen in EDM's case or dmen and top line centres in VAN's case.

It's possible that both teams fairly equally like 2-3 of Tkachuk, Dubois, Brown, and 2-3 of the dmen and that both teams would be fine trading back a couple spots and still grabbing one of the kids in that 4-8 range.

It's hard to rule much out this point. I could see EDM taking Tkachuk, Dubois or a dman if they stay at 4. I could see VAN taking Tkachuk, Dubois, Brown or a dman if they stay at 5.

We're guaranteed to get one of Tkachuk, Dubois, Brown, Chychrun, Sergachev, Juolevi or Nylander so I'm pretty happy. In fact we'll have our pick of 5 of those guys. This top end looks pretty deep to me so whichever kid the Flames scouts like at #6 I'm going to be pretty happy with. I'd be pretty surprised if it wasn't one of those seven names.

oh for sure, this is a nice draft and we will definitely get someone of great quality. I wonder if the Flames will take a run at signing # 87 off of Russia's world cup team ? Can't spell his name.. Shipachev ?

[Sylvanfan]

From what I hear in Edmonton media they are not likely to use the 4th pick on a defenceman. They're targeting an existing defenceman via trade and praying Klefbom will be healthy.

They might be willing to move down and draft one. But it doesn't sound like they think they need to add one so desparately to their prospect pool that they'll use the #4 pick to get one.

[Yoho]

Originally Posted by cowtown75

oh for sure, this is a nice draft and we will definitely get someone of great quality. I wonder if the Flames will take a run at signing # 87 off of Russia's world cup team ? Can't spell his name.. Shipachev ?

Sounds like the Habs have the inside track on this guy. Dave Reid was talking about it pre bronze medal game

[cowtown75]

Originally Posted by Yoho

Sounds like the Habs have the inside track on this guy. Dave Reid was talking about it pre bronze medal game

Oh okay, cheers. Well, good thing about BT being at this tournament is that he got a bird's eye view on perhaps other talent as well.

[Flames Draft Watcher]

Originally Posted by Sylvanfan

From what I hear in Edmonton media they are not likely to use the 4th pick on a defenceman. They're targeting an existing defenceman via trade and praying Klefbom will be healthy.

They might be willing to move down and draft one. But it doesn't sound like they think they need to add one so desparately to their prospect pool that they'll use the #4 pick to get one.

That just sounds so EDM doesn't it? I mean they did draft Klefbom and Nurse in the 1st round, how many 1st rounders can they afford to waste on defensemen while trying to assemble the best forward cast since the 80's Oilers?

They've found out painfully that drafting pure offensive skill every time regardless of their size and grit isn't the answer. Now it seems they've brought in Chiarelli who has the grand vision of supplementing their soft, skilled forwards with some grit and size. From that perspective how can they not draft Tkachuk or Dubois? Power and skill?!? It's everything they lack right?

I think it'll be super funny if we take a d-man that ends out turning into a top pairing guy and the Oilers and Canucks have to face that player for years instead of having him.

[oldschoolcalgary]

depends on the Oilers and canucks boards...

everyone knows, even Edmonton's idiotic management, that they need a DMan, not another forward... sure, they could try trading one of the forwards, but why would anyone want Oiler castoffs like a Eberle or RNH? would any team trade a potential 1 or 2 DMan for either of those guys?

no way.

so, the only way to really get a 1 or a 2 DMan is to trade equally good assets or picks, or you draft them...

If the Oilers have a DMan ranked on their board as 5, 6, 7, really, its not like gigantic reach just to pick them at 4, especially considering how desperately they need a DMan. They have Hall, McDavid and Draistl up front already... how many top forwards do they think they need?

and van has Boesner, Virtanen and Horvat... all play pretty much the same game as Tkachuk...Dubois they take, but Tkachuk might be too redundant possibly?

[Matty81]

Originally Posted by Flames Draft Watcher

That just sounds so EDM doesn't it? I mean they did draft Klefbom and Nurse in the 1st round, how many 1st rounders can they afford to waste on defensemen while trying to assemble the best forward cast since the 80's Oilers?

They've found out painfully that drafting pure offensive skill every time regardless of their size and grit isn't the answer. Now it seems they've brought in Chiarelli who has the grand vision of supplementing their soft, skilled forwards with some grit and size. From that perspective how can they not draft Tkachuk or Dubois? Power and skill?!? It's everything they lack right?

I think it'll be super funny if we take a d-man that ends out turning into a top pairing guy and the Oilers and Canucks have to face that player for years instead of having him.

Not only getting dazzled by the flashy junior point producers every draft, but often wingers, the least valuable position out there, to boot. Everyone mindlessly parrots the BPA line but when players are close upside wise, take the centre or defenceman every time unless you are already set there for a long long time.

I think it's hilarious that they're talking about taking Tkachuk or Dubois with 3 defenceman considered to be roughly equivalent in that next tier of 6 or 7 players. And even if you think the marginal gap is there, trade down and take the asset when you literally have one decent NHL blueliner.

Every year they draft based on goal highlight reels. Just too bad they got McDavid or they'd be even more hilarious... team building is a totally foreign concept

[sureLoss]

I think an interesting trade down scenario is with Buffalo.

Based on organizational need both Arizona (7th OA) and Buffalo (8th OA) need defencemen.

If Sabres are in love with one of Chychrun, Sergachev, or Juolevi, they might trade 8+38 for 6 to get the one they want?

This of course assumes both Oilers and Canucks take Dubois and Tkachuk.

[Poe969]

I'd do something like #3 pick + Clarkson for #6 pick and Stajan or something like that. I think Puljujarvi has the potential to be a franchise player. A few tough years wouldn't seem like that big of a trade of for something like that.

[Matty81]

Originally Posted by sureLoss

I think an interesting trade down scenario is with Buffalo.

Based on organizational need both Arizona (7th OA) and Buffalo (8th OA) need defencemen.

If Sabres are in love with one of Chychrun, Sergachev, or Juolevi, they might trade 8+38 for 6 to get the one they want?

This of course assumes both Oilers and Canucks take Dubois and Tkachuk.

It's a good point, I think Arizona especially. The only thing that concerns me about trading down is the depth of the draft, it just seems like it drops off pretty good this year after 25, so are you getting anything worthwhile, but maybe that's just me because the dub is weak this year and that is what I see most. If they could swing 6, 35th and something else for 7 and 20, that would be totally worth it though, could add another really decent player at 20 like Debrincat or Stanley.

[cowtown75]

Originally Posted by Poe969

I'd do something like #3 pick + Clarkson for #6 pick and Stajan or something like that. I think Puljujarvi has the potential to be a franchise player. A few tough years wouldn't seem like that big of a trade of for something like that.

I would do that in a heartbeat. That Clarkson contract is horrendous buyout or not. That contract is handcuffing Columbus for the next 4 years. And this might be their only chance at getting rid of it and still getting a good draft pick at the same time.

[Poe969]

And the Flames could even try out Clarkson for the year at RW on the first line to see if he can still play hockey and then expose him at the expansion draft. Then if Puljujarvi could make the team next year, you'd have a top 6 winger in an elc to compensate for paying Clarkson so much and wouldn't have to spend a lot on UFA's