Flames 2013 Draft Discussion

[Willi Plett]

I'd be much more interested in bundling some of our picks / players for another top 10 pick than I would the other way around.

The top 10 picks have a much higher chance of becoming impact players statistically speaking.

[#-3]

Originally Posted by handgroen

So it looks like it will be a 3rd, 4th, or 5th pick in all likelihood.

Would you guys be open to trading that pick to columbus for all 3 of their 1sts?
currently 12th 15th and 23rd

3)duchene
for
12)de haan
15)holland
23)erixon

3)toews
for
12)little
15)helenius
23)varlomov

now most times that trade is a lose from a flames perspective, but with the multitude of 1sts we would be depending on the scouting staff to make the right choices in the bottom two thirds of the draft.

would you do it? and if not how high would the flames pick have to be before you would?

Interesting.

I think with 2011 and 2012 it is too soon to tell, but these are the only two I would say a losses for the team trading away the 3rd overall,

Even the Toews one, if he wasn't such a great leader I think allot of team would not mind having a young starter and a top 6 winger.

Infact I think most of the other ones would have been wins with players like Kessler, and Karalsson coming out of the late first round.

[Dienasty]

Originally Posted by T@T

Because any pick after the second round has about a 1% chance of ever being a regular NHL player let alone an impact player.

2006- Jamie McGinn, Michael Neuvirth, Andrea Nodl, Kulemin, Petry, Matthias, Anisimov, McBain are all NHL regulars 8/30 with 11 of the 30 playing over 100 games

2007- PK Subban, TJ Galliardi, Nick Spaling, Wayne Simmonds are everyday players and 5 total played more then 100 games. PK, and Simmonds are impact players

2008- Markstrom, Voynov, Josi, Schultz, Dalpe, Stepan, Hamonic, Scandella are all regulars 8/30 with Voynov, Josi, Markstrom and Schultz being impact players.

2009- O'Reilly, Clifford, Silvferberg, Lehner, Panik, Orlov, Tatar, Lander are all regulars, and Chaisson starting to play well for the Stars this year. That is 8/30 with O'Reilly, Silvferberg, and Lehnar being impact.

Sorry your assumption has just been proven incorrect.

2nd round is more a 25-30% success rate to get an everyday player of that about a 10% chance of getting an impact player. Hence, Flames severely undervalue there 2nd round picks and it has cost them at the draft.

[handgroen]

I've been all over the map with my affinity for the prospects in the top 8 over the past month.
I've been alternately high on mackinnon, barkov, lindholm, and recently monahan.
But i haven't really been excited about the idea of ending up with jones or drouin.
drouin is starting to look real real good to me.

http://thehockeywriters.com/2013-nhl...term-rankings/

Two words sum up the case (or least make a good starting point) for choosing the sublime winger over the two aforementioned potential cornerstone prospects – hockey sense. Often used when describing, but what really do we mean when we talk about hockey sense. Not easy to put to words, but his awareness, vision, anticipation, poise and focus are all off the charts. Jonathan doesn’t just go where the puck is; he goes to where the puck will be.
While MacKinnon and Jones both possess high level of hockey sense to go with their superlative skills, Drouin is at another level in this aspect – a level rarely witnessed, even in the NHL.

I don't know if this guy can be viewed as a consolation for us at all, and would likely be the best prospect ever drafted by this organization.

[H2SO4(aq)]

Originally Posted by Dienasty

2006- Jamie McGinn, Michael Neuvirth, Andrea Nodl, Kulemin, Petry, Matthias, Anisimov, McBain are all NHL regulars 8/30 with 11 of the 30 playing over 100 games

2007- PK Subban, TJ Galliardi, Nick Spaling, Wayne Simmonds are everyday players and 5 total played more then 100 games. PK, and Simmonds are impact players

2008- Markstrom, Voynov, Josi, Schultz, Dalpe, Stepan, Hamonic, Scandella are all regulars 8/30 with Voynov, Josi, Markstrom and Schultz being impact players.

2009- O'Reilly, Clifford, Silvferberg, Lehner, Panik, Orlov, Tatar, Lander are all regulars, and Chaisson starting to play well for the Stars this year. That is 8/30 with O'Reilly, Silvferberg, and Lehnar being impact.

Sorry your assumption has just been proven incorrect.

2nd round is more a 25-30% success rate to get an everyday player of that about a 10% chance of getting an impact player. Hence, Flames severely undervalue there 2nd round picks and it has cost them at the draft.

you really showed him...

but of the guys you mentioned only subban is a real Star. where as if you draft in the top 10 there is probably a 50% or greater likelihood they are a star. This draft particularly id rather trade up and grab two guys in the top ten then let the flames try to find a couple "diamond in the ruff" players later in the draft.

[handgroen]

Originally Posted by #-3

Interesting.

I think with 2011 and 2012 it is too soon to tell, but these are the only two I would say a losses for the team trading away the 3rd overall,

Even the Toews one, if he wasn't such a great leader I think allot of team would not mind having a young starter and a top 6 winger.

Infact I think most of the other ones would have been wins with players like Kessler, and Karalsson coming out of the late first round.

Well the idea is that you'd be trusting your scouting staff to make the correct calls, and in those old drafts i just took the players selected at the current drafting positions, to give a comparative reference point for the trade. But when you look at the players still on the board at 12th, 15th, and 23rd there's a potential to win the trade BIG in every one of those drafts.

take 2008 based on available players and hindsight is 20/20 i know

3)bogosian
for
12)karlsson
15)eberle
23)carlson

2007

3)turris
for
12)shattenkirk
15)pacioretty
23)perron

2006

3)toews
for
12)C.Stewart
15)giroux
23)berglund

2005

3)j. johnson
for
12)oshie
15)neal
23)stastny

in fact with all 5 picks in 2005
12)m.staal
15)oshie
20)downie
23)neal
29)stastny

pretty big injection of everything if you pick em right.
(and yes i am aware that i have drifted out into fantasy land)

[Calgary4LIfe]

Exchanging quality for quantity in a draft I think is dependent on a number of factors:

1) The quantity of legitimate prospects in your organization.
2) The quality of legitimate prospects already in your organization.
3) Who is available at your selection(s)
4) How good your drafting is - how good your scouting staff is

Take the Flames for the first 'x' number of years under Darryl Sutter.
The Flames were terrible at drafting. Few scouts in the organization. Drafting mid-round is no guarantee of finding good players, so unless the Flames were 'sure' about someone, trading down and getting multiple picks was probably the right move. If they were sure about someone, then trading down would be the worst move organizationally. No idea what was the logic in each draft based on that, however. Trading those 2nd round picks for players actually paid off very nicely for the Flames. They managed to get developed impact players (Bourque, Kipper), and based upon their prior draft record, it was definitely the way to go.

'x' last years of Sutter - Scouting was becoming better. There was a semblance of an actual scouting team, and the Flames controlled (and didn't share) their AHL affiliate so they could actually develop players that needed long-term support. However, the drafting philosophy didn't change much. 2nd rounders were still being traded away, trading down was still happening. However, the picks were becoming much better - Backlund, Brodie, Reinhart, Ramage, Arnold, Erixon - and an organizational draft philosophy was starting to take place (BPA, High-Hockey IQ). Based on the prior successes of the draft, one can probably conclude that management (Sutter) still didn't have the confidence to draft his own players, but instead saw those picks less valuable to the Flames than to other teams (and thereby, getting better returns for those picks than he probably felt could be drafted).

Feaster thus far:
Feaster has traded down once (out of 2 drafts) when selecting Jankowski. Before the draft, Feaster had stated that "we can potentially get a high-end skill player where we are drafting at". They felt they could get Jankowski later in the round, and chose to gamble somewhat. It worked and the Flames got who they were targeting. Baertschi was drafted in the first round before then - no trading down.

However, Feaster has traded away a couple of 2nds (recouping 2nds from a failed 1st rounder does not count), and a few other picks. However, it appears Feaster has lots of confidence in his scouting staff. He keeps referring to Weisbrod about all the prospects.

Organizationally, the Flames are relatively deep with prospects. Lots of 'potential NHL players', but few 1st line players or top 2 defencemen (impact players). Trading down and gaining extra picks would most likely be the wrong approach in this draft - unless the Flames were SURE about a few players mid-late round who they feel will develop into franchise players themselves. This draft does have the best potential for that (most drafts do - but extremely difficult to find those). Unless the Flames are VERY high on a few players, or unless the Flames finish below 7th or so (where most of the 'franchise level' talent is supposedly had in this draft) I don't expect the Flames to move down.

If anything, the Flames should be moving up this year. Best case scenario is that they package up one of their 1st rounders + existing players/prospects and move up, but still select 3x in a draft. Don't think there are that many assets to move up very far (without packaging one of the few blue-chippers or near blue-chippers they own already).

I bet the Flames do not move up or down at all (except a couple spots either way) and just select the best players at that spot. I also expect the Flames to take a run on some high-ceiling players who may need a bit more development time. They don't need more 2nd, 3rd and 4th line centers organizationally. They need more 1st line centers (at least one), they need 3 or 4 RW'ers, and they need a top 1-2 defencemen at least organizationally speaking. Not stating that they should draft based on need, but that is what they 'need' organizationally in both the Flames and the Heat.

I am really interested in how the Flames manage their draft this year. I can see Feaster wanting to make a splash during this rebuild, but I trust the scouting staff (based on their performances in the last 3-4 drafts) to make value picks at most of their selections.

[handgroen]

Originally Posted by frinkprof

As for the suggestion above of attaining potentially 4 or 5 first round picks, I'm not so sure that's the best idea. Presuming that you would certainly want all of those picks to become a part of your system for their entry-level deals, that gives you potentially 4 or 5 entry-level contracts expiring in the same year or within a year of each other, without any one of them being a superstar-level player (i.e. top 5 pick). Not quite the same situation as the Oilers, but similar. I think a big part of building a team is staggering the big contracts and having a diversity in age groups. You can't just go all in one year and construct a World Juniors team. Having 3 first rounders is certainly a good thing. Doing a combination of trade-downs to end up with 4 or 5 might get to be too many all in the same draft. Could just as easily pay off big time though.

Just some thoughts.

Outstanding post, lots of work and thought went into that case study
thanks frinkprof

[FlameZilla]

Originally Posted by handgroen

So it looks like it will be a 3rd, 4th, or 5th pick in all likelihood.

Would you guys be open to trading that pick to columbus for all 3 of their 1sts?
currently 12th 15th and 23rd

I think columbus does that deal, they already have a deep prospect pool and if they believe there is an impact player available at the flames pick i think they would trade up to get him.
for the flames it makes sense too, adding 5 first rounders (currently 12th, 15th, 20th, 23rd, and 29th), would instantly transform the flames into one of the deepest prospect pools in the league.

here's how the trade would look based on current standing

iss list

3)mackinnon
for
12)pulock
15)zykov
23)hagg

craig's list

3)mackinnon
for
12)shinkaruk
15)morrisey
23)dickenson


here's how the trade would have went down in previous draft classes

2012

3) galchenyuk
for
12) grigorenko
15)ceci
23)matheson

2011

3)huberdeau
for
12)ryan murphy
15)jt miller
23)joe morrow

2010

3)gudbranson
for
12)fowler
15)forbort
23)pysyk

2009

3)duchene
for
12)de haan
15)holland
23)erixon

2008

3)bogosian
for
12)myers
15)karlsson
23)cuma

2007

3)turris
for
12)mcdonagh
15)plante
23)blum

2006

3)toews
for
12)little
15)helenius
23)varlomov

2005

3)j.johnson
for
12)m.staal
15)o'marra
23)bergfors

2004

3)barker
for
12)aj thelen
15)radulov
23)meszaros

2003

3)horton
for
12)jessimen
15)nilsson
23)kesler


now most times that trade is a lose from a flames perspective, but with the multitude of 1sts we would be depending on the scouting staff to make the right choices in the bottom two thirds of the draft.

would you do it? and if not how high would the flames pick have to be before you would?

I would not do it in this draft. We already have an extra pick, probably 2 in the first round. Where we stand now we will get one blue-chip, impact player & 2 other decent prospects.

1 Blue Chip top 10 prospect >>>>>> 3 decent mid-late round prospects

[Poe969]

LOL, looking back on that list I think I'd make that trade once!

2008

3)bogosian
for
12)myers
15)karlsson
23)cuma


3)toews
for
12)little
15)helenius
23)varlomov
Anyone who does this trade should be fired!


The Flames have no realy blue chip prospects at this point and they have a chance to get a potential franchise player. If they give that up, they don't want to win.

[azzarish]

Originally Posted by devo22

hypothetical question for you guys: let's say we draft 3rd overall. COL and FLA draft #1 and #2 and select Jones and MacKinnon, respectively. Do you take Drouin at 3 or go for Barkov? Drouin obviously fits the BPA philosophy, but arguably our two best prospects, Sven and Johnny, are LW already and Barkov would fit better position-wise. What do you do? Go!

Good question. It's a toss up between organizational need and best player available. In this case the best player available might also be the best player in the draft - Drouin. So I think it's a pretty easy choice.

I still think that if we miss out on Mackinnon in our top 3/4/5 pick, we should dangle the other 2 first round picks we have to move further up and try and get that center (Barkov).

[#-3]

/\

I think for sure I would do '04 & '05, Injuries aside Mezaros > Barker. M Staal = JJ (+ you add two prospects).

And I would probably do '03. Kessler and Horton are pretty = to me and I would always take the center over the winger.

'07 I think is a hard one to call based on need, for allot of teams that could be a 2nd line center for a 2nd d pairing next season.

[$ven27]

Originally Posted by #-3

/\

I think for sure I would do '04 & '05, Injuries aside Mezaros > Barker. M Staal = JJ (+ you add two prospects).

And I would probably do '03. Kessler and Horton are pretty = to me and I would always take the center over the winger.

'07 I think is a hard one to call based on need, for allot of teams that could be a 2nd line center for a 2nd d pairing next season.

You seriously think Horton and Kesler are equal in value? No chance.

[albertGQ]

I'd pick Barkov over Mackinnen now that I know Pierre Maguire would do that.

[SuperMatt18]

Originally Posted by $ven27

You seriously think Horton and Kesler are equal in value? No chance.

They are pretty equal comparisons. Everything being equal (health, etc) I would probably take Kesler.

[$ven27]

Originally Posted by SuperMatt18

They are pretty equal comparisons. Everything being equal (health, etc) I would probably take Kesler.

I might be in the minority but to me healthy Kesler >>> healthy Horton.

[SuperMatt18]

Originally Posted by $ven27

I might be in the minority but to me healthy Kesler >>> healthy Horton.

I thought you were arguing the other way due to the context of his post.

[Flames Draft Watcher]

ISS vaults Bo Horvat up 14 spots this month.

http://www.tsn.ca/draftcentre/story/?id=420822
http://www.tsn.ca/draftcentre/feature/?id=92324

[nik-]

Worth it just because we could make his nickname Borvat. Very nice.

[playmaker]

Very good player profile of Sean Monahan:

http://lastwordonsports.com/2013/04/...yer-profile-6/

some interesting points:

Monahan’s two way game is amongst the best developed in this draft. His face-off ability is very good, and he was voted by OHL’s coaches as the 3rd best faceoff man in the Eastern Conference, impressive for a draft eligible player. He uses his size and strength effectively in the defensive end of the ice, and contains opponents off the cycle

Monahan has all the tools you’d want in a centre. He is big and powerful, with ideal NHL size. His stickhandling is very good, and he protects the puck well. He is able to make plays, off the rush, in the cycle game, and get in quickly with a strong and aggressive forecheck. Monahan drives the net hard, and gets to the dirty areas, where he can use soft hands to score goals. He also has a very good wrist shot, and a quick release.

Monahan’s game and style remind us of Eric Staal. He can be effective in all areas of the ice, in all situations, and make the players around him better. He plays a strong physical game as well. Potential wise, Monahan has everything necessary to say that his ceiling is as a point-per-game, first line NHL centre.

Monahan’s hard work and leadership earned him the position of co-captain of the 67s before the season began, and full-time 67s captain after the trade of Cody Ceci in early January.

This kid would be an excellent fit for the Flames - he's exactly the type of center Baertschi and Gaudreau need.