How Would the Flames Handle a 2016 Top 3 Pick Next Season?

[dammage79]

I am of the opinion that a team in a rebuild simply does not trade their 1st round pick in two consecutive years. That's poor. Even if you're not a fan of the players after the top 6, you trade down at worst if you think you can get the player you want plus a couple of assets.

[flames_fan_down_under]

Auston Matthews would be an absolute dream come true.

I am definitely in the camp that you hold on your top 10 draft pick.

Always take BPA in my opinion.

Flames are looking like a good bet to have a top 3 pick, which is kind of cool.

Seeing as we have never had a 1st overall pick it might be our time.

[Table 5]

Originally Posted by The Yen Man

I look at it this way. Most teams (unless you're like a Detroit) are going to once in awhile have years where they just outright suck. I think this year and 2012-2013 were those type of years. You take it in stride, and hope to get as high in the draft as possible and hopefully get your hands on a franchise player.

Hell, even Detroit used to suck (for pretty much most of the 70s and 80s). They too had their fair share of top picks, even picking at #1, which the Flames have never done. It's all part of the cycle.

I know people like to always warn against becoming the Oilers, but there are 29 other teams in the league, and the vast majority of Stanley Cup winners in the last couple of decades have come from teams who have spent time at the bottom of the standing for a few years. Sure, drafting high doesn't mask incompetence, and slipping into a "losing culture" is a real threat, but drafting in the Top 3 is still the most proven way to win a Cup in this league.

[ScorchyScorch]

Originally Posted by dammage79

I am of the opinion that a team in a rebuild simply does not trade their 1st round pick in two consecutive years. That's poor. Even if you're not a fan of the players after the top 6, you trade down at worst if you think you can get the player you want plus a couple of assets.

The only reason for doing so would be acquiring a player for the future that is also further along their development path and can help the team sooner. It also means a more defined basement when you already know the development is going as planned. There's nothing wrong with that, and that's what they did in acquiring Dougie Hamilton. You hope that a draft pick turns into a player when you make it, but if you're getting a young player who you already know will be a player, then you're skipping steps 1 and 2 and you're essentially trading a high pick for a high pick of a couple drafts ago. There's no real loss. So I don't understand why it would be poor, if a trade was made under the same circumstances as last year, especially if we don't draft top 3 where the surefire top end forwards will be picked.

[Poe969]

Trading away this years first, even if it's at 5 or 6, would be a huge mistake. The team doesn't have a first rounder from last year and needs to have some prospects in the system. With the top prospects in this draft all looking fairly big, I think it would be an even bigger mistake to trade that pick for a smaller forward like Drouin (and I want the Flames to get Drouin somehow).

if the Flames finish 28th or so, the lowest they could pick would be 6th. There are still some really good players around that range and I'd hate to pass the up for Drouin.

[polak]

Originally Posted by JJ1532

He's 6ft 1in, the same size as Bennett. Slightly heavier too. Bennett's coped with the step up to the NHL ok, no reason why Tkachuk can't either.

But Bennett doesn't dominate with his physicality. In fact he gets pushed around quite a bit right now. Luckily for him is game isn't dependant on being physically imposing.

I don't know anything about Thachuk but if he relies on his physicality to play well and he's only average size he will probably have big issues adjusting. Eventually he might fill out (if he isn't just an early bloomer) but if there is an extended adjustment period that can ruin prospects by destroying confidence, creating frustration and potentially lead to attitude issues.

If he does rely on size for his game then Pass.

[dammage79]

Originally Posted by ScorchyScorch

The only reason for doing so would be acquiring a player for the future that is also further along their development path and can help the team sooner. It also means a more defined basement when you already know the development is going as planned. There's nothing wrong with that, and that's what they did in acquiring Dougie Hamilton. You hope that a draft pick turns into a player when you make it, but if you're getting a young player who you already know will be a player, then you're skipping steps 1 and 2 and you're essentially trading a high pick for a high pick of a couple drafts ago. There's no real loss. So I don't understand why it would be poor, if a trade was made under the same circumstances as last year, especially if we don't draft top 3 where the surefire top end forwards will be picked.

I've got no qualms moving 14 or 15 OA for Hamilton, and they traded two other picks for him as well. That was good. But to do so twice in a row early in a rebuild is foolish. Even if there is a steep drop from the top 3 to 4-7 theres still some really really good players to pick from in that range. And the Flames system is not flush or brimming over with top end talent which those in the top end still are. No they're not surefire gamers like the top 3 but still great.

As a team in an early re-build I don't think they can afford to short the system at the top end for a more surefire NHL'er right now. I'd rather pass on Drouin than give that pick to TB so they can stock their shelves more.

And I certainly don't see a Cory Schneider type trade in the market this year either. At any rate, this conversation is better suited for after the draft lottery where everyone will know where they stand.

EDIT: Let's not forget that the Flames have another potential 1st to use as trade bait this year.

[Jaydee]

Originally Posted by Ashasx

this is way too much...

so Tampa essentially gets a do-over with a top 5 pick for a player who won't even play for them anymore

and a 1st + Shinkaruk + early 2nd round goalie prospect for a below average, 30 year old starting goaltender?

why?

Below average? Have you looked at who the league leader for GAA is?

[Tbull8]

I'd much rather see them take a guy like Pierre-Luc Dubois, a big winger who is praised for his dedication to improving his game.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by Jaydee

Below average? Have you looked at who the league leader for GAA is?

It's still way too much. Bishop will be 30-years-old and is little more than an above average starter. Top-ten draft picks should be reserved for acquiring young, high end players.

[Dan403]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

...Top-ten draft picks should be reserved for acquiring young, high end players.

This.


But I don't mind moving pics for a young high end player like Hamilton. It removes some of the 'crap shoot' that you get with the draft.

[CliffFletcher]

Chychrun sounds like he would be a perfect fit to round out the Flames top-4 on D. We really need a guy who can play big minutes in a shut-down role.

[Mister Yamoto]

What's wrong with a 29 year old goalie? Kiprusoff was 28 when the Flames got him and look how many good seasons he had left.

Really, 28-30 is about the age that you should target if what you want is to get the best 3 or 4 years of a goalies career IMO.

Sometimes I think people get too wrapped up on age. The Panthers are doing just fine by bringing in Luongo and he is 36. Or as Textcritic would say, will be 37.

[Jay Random]

Nothing is wrong with a 29-year-old goalie per se. But Bishop has a lot more miles on him than Kiprusoff had at the same age. Playing that position is incredibly hard on your lower body, which, I'm told, is why retired goalies playing rec hockey rarely choose to play goal. Besides, Kiprusoff was a freak of nature and you can't generalize from that.

I'd be fine with bringing in Bishop as a bridge #1 until Gillies (or whoever) is ready. But not at the cost of a top-3 or even top-10 pick. If the Flames wind up with Dallas's 1st, I'd have no objection to them trading that for a goalie.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by Mister Yamoto

What's wrong with a 29 year old goalie? Kiprusoff was 28 when the Flames got him and look how many good seasons he had left.

Really, 28-30 is about the age that you should target if what you want is to get the best 3 or 4 years of a goalies career IMO.

Sometimes I think people get too wrapped up on age. The Panthers are doing just fine by bringing in Luongo and he is 36. Or as Textcritic would say, will be 37.

You should recognise that I am pointing to a player's age at the start of next season precisely because this is the age that any player the Flames acquire will indeed be upon the start of his playing career with the Flames.

Like Jay, I also have no problem with a 30-year-old goalie so long as that goalie is not viewed as a long-term solution for this hockey team. I would be fine with the Flames trading for Ben Bishop, but there is absolutely no way they should trade a top-ten draft pick for him. My problem is with the parameters that have been suggested for acquiring Bishop, and I think the cost is far too much. If the Flames are pursuing a goalie with that particular draft pick, then he had better be a lot younger, and with the promise of being a high-end NHL player for a long time.

[Mister Yamoto]

Originally Posted by Jay Random

Nothing is wrong with a 29-year-old goalie per se. But Bishop has a lot more miles on him than Kiprusoff had at the same age. Playing that position is incredibly hard on your lower body, which, I'm told, is why retired goalies playing rec hockey rarely choose to play goal. Besides, Kiprusoff was a freak of nature and you can't generalize from that.

I'd be fine with bringing in Bishop as a bridge #1 until Gillies (or whoever) is ready. But not at the cost of a top-3 or even top-10 pick. If the Flames wind up with Dallas's 1st, I'd have no objection to them trading that for a goalie.

Fair enough, but like a lot of goalies, Bishop was a late bloomer. Wasn't an NHL starter until 13-14

I really like Bishops resume. If he had 6 or 7 60+ game seasons I would call that a lot of miles on him. But 2 60+ game seasons just means that he has already proven that he can do it. I guess it just all depends on how you want to spin it.

[Mister Yamoto]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

You should recognise that I am pointing to a player's age at the start of next season precisely because this is the age that any player the Flames acquire will indeed be upon the start of his playing career with the Flames.

I was nitpicking and I apologize. Too me, If you are talking about someones age you should just say their age, not what their age will be sometime in the future. I noticed that you refer to Ortio as being 24. Not will be 25 (in a month). I know, I'm nitpicking, just bugs me.

[Imported_Aussie]

I would trade the Dallas pick if late 1st or Flames 2nd + a prospect for Drouin + Bishop. Maybe even add a lesser piece to that deal if needed.
But not a pick in the top 5. Not a pick in the top couple of tiers of this draft
Just because Drouin was picked there doesn't mean he gets that as a return - he has depreciated in value.
Say the Flames pick Chychrun, making a D prospect tradeable due to depth at that position, getting a D prospect and a pick to get another prospect, albeit with less upside than Drouin, would be a return Yzerman could sell. Especially if in tying Bishop to the deal they cash in on that asset, promote Vasilyevskiy and have the $$$ to keep Stamkos, if that is still an option.
Drouin gets a look at 2nd line LW, adding to thet top 6, the Flames have a solid top 4 with prospects to challenge on D, they get a goalie who can help them win now and transition to Gillies when he is ready.

[GoJetsGo]

Originally Posted by Imported_Aussie

I would trade the Dallas pick if late 1st or Flames 2nd + a prospect for Drouin + Bishop.

Why on earth would Tampa do this?

I understand your point is that you don't want to give up our high first round pick for those two... but why even add the next thought?

You're basically saying you'd take Drouin + Bishop if Tampa was willing to gift them to us, which is basically what that horrid return would be. I can't fathom how comments like this get made here so often.

[Money Baer]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

Chychrun sounds like he would be a perfect fit to round out the Flames top-4 on D. We really need a guy who can play big minutes in a shut-down role.

Question: (for anyone who has watched him regularly)

Does Chychrun play a physical game? Any nastiness to his game? I know he's an excellent skater with a bomb of a shot. I know he has great positioning and projects as a top pairing D. I just want to know if he has a physical component?

It's really refreshing to know that even if we missed out on the top 3 we could land Chychrun or Dubois!