Calgarypuck Forums - The Unofficial Calgary Flames Fan Community

Go Back   Calgarypuck Forums - The Unofficial Calgary Flames Fan Community > Main Forums > Fire on Ice: The Calgary Flames Forum

View Poll Results: Which C to choose?
Lindholm 327 48.30%
Monahan 319 47.12%
Someone Else (Other C, Not a C, Etc) 31 4.58%
Voters: 677. You may not vote on this poll

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 05-06-2013, 02:51 AM   #641
TheREDarmY
Draft Pick
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Maple Ridge
Default

Seems to me that most people would be happy with either one of these guys as a Flame come draft day. Of course, some have preference, but myself, I'd be ecstatic to have either one. So I'll throw a situation at you guys and you can flame away. (apologies if this scenario has already been discussed)

I think it's pretty safe to predict that the first four picks will be Mackinnon, Jones, Drouin and Barkov(not necessarily in that order). Now lets say Carolina picks Nurse or Nichushkin at 5th. Now Lindholm and Monahan are both available to us. What if Calgary Management view/rank both players as equal and had no preference to who they draft. Would it be smart to trade down to 7th to add a 2nd rd pick?

Obviously this is a stretch. But it could be possible management would be happy with either Lindholm or Monahan. It would be a way to add a second in this deep draft. Would you do it?

Lets stretch this out even more. Lets say Carolina picks Nichushkin, we trade down to 7th and add a 2nd. Edmonton then surprises everyone by selecting their much needed dman in Nurse at 6th. We could then trade down to 8th for another 2nd and pick whoever Buffalo leaves us. Would you do it? and do you think this is even remotely possible?
TheREDarmY is offline  
Old 05-06-2013, 03:08 AM   #642
moon
Lifetime Suspension
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Lethbridge
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheREDarmY View Post
Seems to me that most people would be happy with either one of these guys as a Flame come draft day. Of course, some have preference, but myself, I'd be ecstatic to have either one. So I'll throw a situation at you guys and you can flame away. (apologies if this scenario has already been discussed)

I think it's pretty safe to predict that the first four picks will be Mackinnon, Jones, Drouin and Barkov(not necessarily in that order). Now lets say Carolina picks Nurse or Nichushkin at 5th. Now Lindholm and Monahan are both available to us. What if Calgary Management view/rank both players as equal and had no preference to who they draft. Would it be smart to trade down to 7th to add a 2nd rd pick?

Obviously this is a stretch. But it could be possible management would be happy with either Lindholm or Monahan. It would be a way to add a second in this deep draft. Would you do it?

Lets stretch this out even more. Lets say Carolina picks Nichushkin, we trade down to 7th and add a 2nd. Edmonton then surprises everyone by selecting their much needed dman in Nurse at 6th. We could then trade down to 8th for another 2nd and pick whoever Buffalo leaves us. Would you do it? and do you think this is even remotely possible?
I think it has been discussed and I think that for the most part the answers go along with my thinking and that is a. I don't think we are getting a 2nd and b. if there is a guy we like don't get cute and take him. Trading back takes too any risks that we can't take.

If Lindholm and Monahan are there at 6 take the guy you like and go.
moon is offline  
Old 05-06-2013, 06:05 AM   #643
gargamel
First Line Centre
 
gargamel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Cambodia
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheREDarmY View Post
What if Calgary Management view/rank both players as equal and had no preference to who they draft. Would it be smart to trade down to 7th to add a 2nd rd pick?

Obviously this is a stretch. But it could be possible management would be happy with either Lindholm or Monahan. It would be a way to add a second in this deep draft. Would you do it?

Lets stretch this out even more. Lets say Carolina picks Nichushkin, we trade down to 7th and add a 2nd. Edmonton then surprises everyone by selecting their much needed dman in Nurse at 6th. We could then trade down to 8th for another 2nd and pick whoever Buffalo leaves us. Would you do it? and do you think this is even remotely possible?
The problem with that is that Edmonton likely rates Lindholm and Monahan very similarly as well, and probably wouldn't give up much if anything to swap firsts with us. Maybe they'd give us a late round pick, but a 2nd or 3rd is unrealistic.

If they have their eyes on Nurse, they might be willing to trade a slightly better pick in order to swap firsts with us if they're convinced that we might take him, but they probably suspect that we want a forward anyway.
gargamel is offline  
Old 05-06-2013, 08:22 AM   #644
Enoch Root
Franchise Player
 
Join Date: May 2012
Exp:
Default

So just to recap, if we were going to trade down from 6th to 7th, we would probably get a late round pick, maybe a 3rd if we're lucky.

And if we trade up from 6th to 4th, it will cost us two 1st round picks, and maybe a player too.

Got it.
Enoch Root is offline  
The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to Enoch Root For This Useful Post:
Old 05-06-2013, 08:34 AM   #645
gargamel
First Line Centre
 
gargamel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Cambodia
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Enoch Root View Post
So just to recap, if we were going to trade down from 6th to 7th, we would probably get a late round pick, maybe a 3rd if we're lucky.

And if we trade up from 6th to 4th, it will cost us two 1st round picks, and maybe a player too.

Got it.
I didn't say anything about what it would cost to move from 6 to 4, but, yes, it would cost a lot more to upgrade from Monahan/Lindholm to Barkov than it would to make a fairly lateral move from one of Monahan and Lindholm to the other of them.
gargamel is offline  
Old 05-06-2013, 09:02 AM   #646
Goodlad
Powerplay Quarterback
 
Goodlad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Central CA
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Enoch Root View Post
So just to recap, if we were going to trade down from 6th to 7th, we would probably get a late round pick, maybe a 3rd if we're lucky.

And if we trade up from 6th to 4th, it will cost us two 1st round picks, and maybe a player too.

Got it.
Yes, because the 1st "significant" drop in quality is after Barkov. After that, depending on which rankings you're looking at, it looks like after Lindholm, Monahan, Nichushkin and maybe Nurse there's another drop in talent.

So for instance it would take more to move from the 10th pick down to the 8th pick than in would to move from the 7th pick to the 5th because you're moving into a higher quality tier.
Goodlad is offline  
Old 05-06-2013, 09:03 AM   #647
Enoch Root
Franchise Player
 
Join Date: May 2012
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by gargamel View Post
I didn't say anything about what it would cost to move from 6 to 4, but, yes, it would cost a lot more to upgrade from Monahan/Lindholm to Barkov than it would to make a fairly lateral move from one of Monahan and Lindholm to the other of them.
Of course it would cost more. I was just illustrating how crazy and one-sided some suggestions have been.
Enoch Root is offline  
Old 05-06-2013, 09:03 AM   #648
PlayfulGenius
Franchise Player
 
PlayfulGenius's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Vancouver, BC
Exp:
Default

To answer the question as asked, yes, I'd absolutely take those deals in those scenarios...it would be beyond silly not to do so.
PlayfulGenius is offline  
Old 05-06-2013, 09:06 AM   #649
Enoch Root
Franchise Player
 
Join Date: May 2012
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Goodlad View Post
Yes, because the 1st "significant" drop in quality is after Barkov. After that, depending on which rankings you're looking at, it looks like after Lindholm, Monahan, Nichushkin and maybe Nurse there's another drop in talent.

So for instance it would take more to move from the 10th pick down to the 8th pick than in would to move from the 7th pick to the 5th because you're moving into a higher quality tier.
The drop is probably not as large as you are suggesting (and certainly not as large as the above trade suggestions implied). Some rankings have even had Lindholm (or Nichushkin or Nurse) ahead of Barkov.

As for your suggestion with respect to 10 to 8 vs 7 to 5. With all due respect, I will simply agree to disagree.
Enoch Root is offline  
Old 05-06-2013, 02:54 PM   #650
Hockey_Ninja
 
Hockey_Ninja's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Cleveland, OH (Grew up in Calgary)
Exp:
Default

Feaster won't be trading down folks. He already said that he would trade our 1st rounders to move up.
__________________
Just trying to do my best
Hockey_Ninja is offline  
Old 05-06-2013, 02:58 PM   #651
Bonded
Franchise Player
 
Bonded's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hockey_Ninja View Post
Feaster won't be trading down folks. He already said that he would trade our 1st rounders to move up.
Source?
Bonded is online now  
Old 05-06-2013, 03:00 PM   #652
dammage79
Franchise Player
 
dammage79's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Calgary
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bonded View Post
Source?
http://video.flames.nhl.com/videocen...d=11&id=243852 Part 1

http://video.flames.nhl.com/videocen...d=11&id=243852 Part 2

It's in there. The Flames' original First rounder is not going to be moving down. He will explore all options to move up including adding one of the other first rounders they acquired.
dammage79 is online now  
Old 05-06-2013, 03:21 PM   #653
Rapidfire999
Lifetime Suspension
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Exp:
Default

We should trade all 3 1st rounders for #2/3!
Rapidfire999 is offline  
Old 05-06-2013, 07:02 PM   #654
Southside
Powerplay Quarterback
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Deep South
Exp:
Default

No. It's a deep draft we'll get 3 really good players. Another loss or 2 down the stretch would have been OK though.
Southside is offline  
Old 05-06-2013, 08:16 PM   #655
Pierre "Monster" McGuire
Franchise Player
 
Pierre "Monster" McGuire's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Abbotsford, BC
Exp:
Default

Tampa's so deep with good young forward prospects, I wonder if they're willing to swap places with us. I can't see any of the other teams wanting to give up their pick ahead of us.
Pierre "Monster" McGuire is offline  
Old 05-06-2013, 08:16 PM   #656
Bonded
Franchise Player
 
Bonded's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Southside View Post
No. It's a deep draft we might get 3 really good players. Another loss or 2 down the stretch would have been OK though.
3 really good players would be amazing, but unlikely
Bonded is online now  
Old 05-06-2013, 09:14 PM   #657
T@T
Lifetime Suspension
 
T@T's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Exp:
Default

All this conjecture on who to pick at #6, I have doubts we'll be picking there.
T@T is offline  
Old 05-06-2013, 09:41 PM   #658
Loyal and True
Powerplay Quarterback
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Exp:
Default

I am hoping Cgy has #6, #21 and #30. Then I could see a few options to trade up, but I am not sure if it is worth it.

TB could trade #3 and #33 for three first rounders #6, #21 and #30.

I have no doubt that Carolina would trade #5 and #35 for three first rounders #6, #21 and #30. That's not worth it in my opinion.

Nsh would likely trade #4 (they have no other picks in first 2 rounds) for three first rounders #6, #21 and #30

To be honest, I might prefer to keep 3 picks and hope that #6 (in particular) ends up being a very good player. Then see how the other 2 first rounders develop.
Loyal and True is offline  
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Loyal and True For This Useful Post:
Old 05-06-2013, 09:58 PM   #659
Vinny01
Franchise Player
 
Vinny01's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: CGY
Exp:
Default

I don't see how Tampa doesn't keep that pick and take Drouin. He and Stamkos have potential to be a legendary combo. I think that pick would be untouchable

If Drouin goes in the top 2 Barkov would be a nice fit as a 2nd line C behind Stamkos
Vinny01 is offline  
Old 05-07-2013, 01:58 AM   #660
cowtown75
Powerplay Quarterback
 
cowtown75's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Airdrie
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ricardodw View Post
Are you the same guy that argued that Brodie is a bruiser and that Tanguay is not soft???

to play 48 games taking 1 minor penalty means that he is soft... full stop.

Hayley Wickenheiser had 22 PIM playing in European men's leagues.
Logan Couture had 2 penalties in 48 games this year- is he soft ?
cowtown75 is offline  
Closed Thread

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 01:39 PM.

Calgary Flames
2024-25




Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright Calgarypuck 2021 | See Our Privacy Policy