Craig's List 2014 Prospects

[Fire]

Would Sven + our 2nd round draft pick be enough to get a draft pick in the 8-10th pick range? That way the Flames could possibly pick up a much needed Nik Ritchie?

What is Sven worth? If for some reason the NHL decided Sven's contract was null and void and he had to re-enter the draft where would a team draft him? I would guess somewhere near the #15 position. So is a #34 draft pick enough to make up the difference?

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by Fire

Would Sven + our 2nd round draft pick be enough to get a draft pick in the 8-10th pick range? That way the Flames could possibly pick up a much needed Nik Ritchie?

What is Sven worth? If for some reason the NHL decided Sven's contract was null and void and he had to re-enter the draft where would a team draft him? I would guess somewhere near the #15 position. So is a #34 draft pick enough to make up the difference?

I think he would be worth around #10.

But even at 15, adding a 2nd would be overpayment to get 10th. I would much rather keep him and the 2nd.

[sureLoss]

Would Sven beat out Nylander or Ehlers in this draft?

[ForeverFlameFan]

Originally Posted by Fire

Would Sven + our 2nd round draft pick be enough to get a draft pick in the 8-10th pick range? That way the Flames could possibly pick up a much needed Nik Ritchie?

What is Sven worth? If for some reason the NHL decided Sven's contract was null and void and he had to re-enter the draft where would a team draft him? I would guess somewhere near the #15 position. So is a #34 draft pick enough to make up the difference?

I honestly think Sven is staying with us, we won't trade him.

Burke's draft picks will primarily be on size this year, and I am fine with that.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by sureLoss

Would Sven beat out Nylander or Ehlers in this draft?

That is about where I would put him.

Personally, I would say yes to your question, if only because he is 20 and more developed.

But in that ballpark

[Five-hole]

I wonder if we can package our 2nds to move up for Alex Tuch. 6'4" RW? Yes please.

[sureLoss]

Originally Posted by Five-hole

I wonder if we can package our 2nds to move up for Alex Tuch. 6'4" RW? Yes please.

I would love for that to happen but two 2nds gets you a late 1st round pick historically (25th to 30th)

Tuch is projected top 15 and might even go top 10

[Five-hole]

Originally Posted by sureLoss

I would love for that to happen but two 2nds gets you a late 1st round pick historically (25th to 30th)



Tuch is projected top 15 and might even go top 10

Still in the 20s on Buttons list, but yeah. We aren't going to be the only people with that idea. Also I'm hoping that since one is #34 we can do better than a 25th-30th but we may have to add a prospect to get in the teens.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Gaskal]

Originally Posted by Five-hole

I wonder if we can package our 2nds to move up for Alex Tuch. 6'4" RW? Yes please.

I'd go for it. Not a hugely deep 2nd round from the looks of it anyway and fits a huge organizational need by getting a big RH shot who's a natural RW.

I can picture this scenario happening on the offchance that we win the lotto and get Ekblad. If you're going to take the top defenseman in the draft you have to make sure to get a quality forward to make up a little for the high end forwards you skipped out on to pick him up.

Tuch's stock has shot skywards in the past little while though so he may get picked up earlier than expected.

[Fire]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

That is about where I would put him.

Personally, I would say yes to your question, if only because he is 20 and more developed.

But in that ballpark

I don't know, I think teams would be more interested in the new shiny toys in the draft over a guy that has lost of bit of his lustre.

I do think Sven can be a good player in the NHL but the Flames are deep at in the small skilled LW department and could use a big player that can play RW.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by sureLoss

I would love for that to happen but two 2nds gets you a late 1st round pick historically (25th to 30th)

Tuch is projected top 15 and might even go top 10

According to my template (which I think has its genesis with the NFL) the 34th and 54th picks would be worth approximately the 18th pick

(and yes, I know these are just guidelines)

So if he were still available around the 20-22 mark, it is possible someone (who just missed out on their first choice) would make that trade.

Personally, I would happily give up the 2 2nds for a big RW in the first round.

[sureLoss]

Historically, 2 2nds only give you a late 1st in the NHL

2003 Lightning traded #25 to Panthers for #34, #41, and #192
2003 Stars traded #28 to Ducks for #36 and #54
2005 Avalanche traded #27 to Caps for #47 and #52
2006 Wings traded #29 to Coyotes for #41 and #47
2007 Caps traded #28 to Sharks for #41 and #57
2008 Ducks traded #28 to Coyotes for #35 and #39
2009 Wings traded #29 to Lightning for #32 and #75
2010 Hawks traded #30 to Islanders for #35 and #58
2011 Wings traded #24 to Senators for #35 and #48

[moon]

I think a more realistic target with the 2nds is McKeown.

He should be there around 20-25 which is where those two picks look to get us.

[ForeverFlameFan]

If and only if we pick 1st overall, depending on who we pick (Ekblad or Reinhart), then I would trade both of our seconds for the late first rounder to fill the other position we wanted.

Ekblad/Tuch or Reinhart/McKeown

Now that would be a good draft.

Draft another defenseman and a goalie in the third round, and then just throw a dart with the 6th and 7th.

[Calgary4LIfe]

Originally Posted by nik-

I've never seen a scout to this point describe Ritchie's Hockey IQ as a strong point. Where have you seen this?

In fact, you yourself said the same thing



What's changed your mind?

That post came up in a google search for "nick ritchie hockey iq" btw, on the first page of results. That's how thin the commentary is on it.

I never said the same thing - I read some poster's comments about him on here and on HF stating that he was dumb, and asked the question as I was not familiar with him. Upon reading as many scouting reports that I could find and seeing his highlights, it seems he does possess good IQ.

http://prospects.dobbersports.com/in...7-nick-ritchie

Ritchie is an intelligent two-way player who is an excellent skilled playmaker, using his hockey sense, vision and slick puck handling ability to execute top-end passes. His size and aggressiveness allows him to provide a physical presence and he has been known to drop his mitts to defend teammates. Ritchie is a 200-foot player who reads the play equally well in the defensive zone as he does on the attack.

http://futureconsiderations.ca/ritch...rothers-steps/

This one doesn't say "hockey IQ", but comments on his decision making (which is essentially the same thing).

“He handles the puck tremendously – one of his best assets, in fact – and can both shoot the puck as well as make a good pass when presented with the decision,” Mulligan said. “He knows when to join the rush and when to hold off, keeping his positioning in check. Jumps into the play really well and always seems to get open in the offensive zone.”

http://www.hockeyprospect.com/2014-n...-nick-ritchie/

Audio link on a radio show. Starts at the 11:15 mark.

He's got a shot, he's got some vision, he plays a pretty smart brand of hockey.

http://www.draftsite.com/nhl/player/nick-ritchie/18385/

This is another 'read between the lines' breakdown::

Tough and quick, he is a good playmaker and scorer. Strong on the forecheck and in the battle areas. 200lber with great size, good on-ice vision soft mitts, quick release and natural goal scoring instincts. Working to be a stronger forechecker, and improve as a two-way player.

I haven't seen a single scouting report that rates Ritchie as having poor hockey sense. Most don't make any comments (and they generally don't on most picks, except for the extremely high-end hockey sense guys like Reinhart).

There was a number of other articles I read that mentioned his hockey sense as being good or even above-average. Never saw one that said it was "Elite" or anything - but seems to generally get praise on his hockey sense.

[Calgary4LIfe]

I always like to hear Ross MacLean interviews. Here is one from today on Team 1050 (Toronto). They start with talking about prospects available at around Toronto's pick - but they go on to talk about the entire draft.

http://www.isshockey.com/tsn-radio-t...western-scout/

ISS releases their final rankings tomorrow:

ISS Top 5
Reinhart
Ekblad
Bennet
Dal Colle
Nylander

Ross MacLean personally prefers Ekblad at #1. For those that really like Ekblad, you will really appreciate this interview. Very high praise indeed.

Buyer Beware:
DeAngelo

[Ashasx]

I'm a really big fan of McKeown. Every time he was on Sportsnet I thought he was the best defencemen on the ice.

Reminded me a lot of Doughty

[sureLoss]

McKenzie's rankings:

1. Ekblad 7/12 ranked him #1
2. Reinhart 3/12 ranked him #1
3. Bennett 2/12 ranked him #1
4. Draisaitl
5. Dal Colle
6. Ritchie
7. Ehlers
8. Virtanen
9. Kapanen
10. Fleury

Honorable mentions:
Nylander, Perlini

[AC]

Craig Button is predicting the draft:

Florida: Ekblad
Buffalo: Reinhart
Edmonton: Draisaitl
Calgary: Bennett
NYI: Dal Colle
Vancouver: Virtanen
Carolina: Kapanen

[snipetype]

I would love that