Flames 2013 Draft Discussion - Page 219 - Calgarypuck Forums - The Unofficial Calgary Flames Fan Community

Hockey_Ninja · 05-26-2013, 01:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GreenLantern2814

Why?

Because the higher you pick the better chance you have of drafting a better player.

GreenLantern2814 · 05-26-2013, 02:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hockey_Ninja

Because the higher you pick the better chance you have of drafting a better player.

This will go on a sticky note above my computer... Possibly a signature as well.

H2SO4(aq) · 05-26-2013, 02:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hockey_Ninja

Because the higher you pick the better chance you have of drafting a better player.

i dont know man. think of all the zetterbergs and hornqvists out there vs the kane's and stamkos's

Max Cow Disease · 05-26-2013, 02:47 PM

All of this discussion about which positions we should be drafting in the first round etc. is rendered somewhat irrelevant if the method used to draft the players is the same as it has been for the past couple of years under Feaster's watch. Their mantra seems to be "best player available, best player available". Does that mean we'd walk out of a draft like this with three left wingers? Maybe, I don't know (I'd like that top center as much as anybody), but it doesn't sound like they'll be sitting at the table on the 30th attempting to fill positional holes per se.

Ryan Coke · 05-26-2013, 03:23 PM

Which is a vey good thing, IMO.

Max Cow Disease · 05-26-2013, 03:26 PM

^Agreed.

Incogneto · 05-26-2013, 03:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PlayfulGenius

I totally disagree... I it turns out they draft 3 Cs, I'd be just fine with that.

From a devopment perspective, it'd be nice to have a D or 2 early on in the rebuild as they take a bit longer than Fs.

So are you suggesting that all the future D-Men are already on this roster, or FA's? Otherwise, we should probably start stocking the shelves. Am I wrong?

Stampede2TheCup · 05-26-2013, 04:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by InCoGnEtO

So are you suggesting that all the future D-Men are already on this roster, or FA's? Otherwise, we should probably start stocking the shelves. Am I wrong?

Why would a defenseman have to be picked with one of the first three picks in order to stock the shelves?

FurnaceFace · 05-26-2013, 04:15 PM

I would think the "Best Player Available" sound bite would include the follow up "depending on the need" phrase if GMs or scouts were really pressed.

Vulcan · 05-26-2013, 04:51 PM

Taking the best player available makes sense when you won't see a player for 2 to 5 years but the first choice should be ready in a year or two. Since we will be looking for him to fill a need, drafting with the position in mind makes sense.

GreenLantern2814 · 05-26-2013, 04:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by blah blah

Why would a defenseman have to be picked with one of the first three picks in order to stock the shelves?

I would suggest that your chances of taking an impact defenseman is best in the top two rounds. Given the current absence of a 2nd round pick, it's probably wise to spend at least the Pittsburgh pick on a D.

If we had a 1st round of Monahan/Lindholm, Fucale, Morin, we'd improve our depth in every facet of the game in a day.

H2SO4(aq) · 05-26-2013, 05:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GreenLantern2814

I would suggest that your chances of taking an impact defenseman is best in the top two rounds. Given the current absence of a 2nd round pick, it's probably wise to spend at least the Pittsburgh pick on a D.

If we had a 1st round of Monahan/Lindholm, Fucale, Morin, we'd improve our depth in every facet of the game in a day.

id rather we steer clear of tendies. getting Barkov/monahan/lindholm a RW and a Defensemen would be ideal draft day IMO.

Ezio · 05-26-2013, 05:44 PM

Not sure if it's been posted, but Monahan seems like a very good center prospect. I hope he falls to the Oilers at #7, if not I am fine with Darnell Nurse.

Quote:

Monahan was ranked second behind Niagara's Ryan Strome (New York Islanders) as the Smartest Player and Best Playmaker. He earned a third-place finish behind Strome and Barrie's Andreas Athanasiou (Detroit Red Wings) for Best Stickhandler, and was third behind Oshawa's Boone Jenner (Columbus Blue Jackets) and Barrie's Mark Scheifele (Winnipeg Jets) as the Best on Face-Offs.

I am not sure what's not to like from Monahan. He'll probably be the best CHL player next year with McDavid. Well mature above his years, heart and soul player with a nice finesse game and bringing size to the table. Not to forget his big body frame and ability to shield the puck. He is EXACTLY what the Oilers need.

albertGQ · 05-26-2013, 05:52 PM

After the Memorial Cup is over, I think some lists will be revised and have Mackinnen rated #1.

GreenLantern2814 · 05-26-2013, 06:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by H2SO4(aq)

id rather we steer clear of tendies. getting Barkov/monahan/lindholm a RW and a Defensemen would be ideal draft day IMO.

I generally agree. In a world where you only have one first, hell even two, I want no part of a goalie in the first.

When you have three firsts and your franchise goalie is retiring with no clear cut heir apparent, I think you can burn one of them on the best goalie in the draft.

albertGQ · 05-26-2013, 06:10 PM

Burn one?

If a goalie is BPA, then you can make a case to pick him

But there is never a situation where you can "burn" any picks.

PlayfulGenius · 05-26-2013, 06:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by InCoGnEtO

So are you suggesting that all the future D-Men are already on this roster, or FA's? Otherwise, we should probably start stocking the shelves. Am I wrong?

No, I wasn't suggesting that... I can see how my post could have been read that way, though.

I was suggesting your point a out draftin a D is good in that its early in the rebuild and D take longer to develop, but that I believe they should just stick to BPA and worry about fine tuning later.

cowtown75 · 05-26-2013, 09:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GreenLantern2814

I would suggest that your chances of taking an impact defenseman is best in the top two rounds. Given the current absence of a 2nd round pick, it's probably wise to spend at least the Pittsburgh pick on a D.

If we had a 1st round of Monahan/Lindholm, Fucale, Morin, we'd improve our depth in every facet of the game in a day.

Something tells me that there may be a trade during the draft that may land us a 2nd rounder somehow. I think Feaster will be intent on having a second round pick, but, I could be wrong. I would like to see Tangs flipped for a pick- heck, maybe Columbus or someone may take him for a late first rounder. I think he should be easily good for a second rounder.

dammage79 · 05-26-2013, 10:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cowtown75

Something tells me that there may be a trade during the draft that may land us a 2nd rounder somehow. I think Feaster will be intent on having a second round pick, but, I could be wrong. I would like to see Tangs flipped for a pick- heck, maybe Columbus or someone may take him for a late first rounder. I think he should be easily good for a second rounder.

Nothing directed at you as I agree that there is a good possibility of a trade to acquire a second rounder. But before people get on about "no team is willing to take our scraps" and such, remember that someone took Blake Freakin Comeau off of the Flames hands. Regardless of contractual status, that is crazy.

albertGQ · 05-26-2013, 10:29 PM

Blake Comeau was a true rental. A 4th rounder seems fair market value to me for depth