Craig's List 2014 Prospects

[H2SO4(aq)]

Originally Posted by Fire

Exactly, in the 2015 draft you do that trade in a heart beat but this year where the top 5 guys are quite close, a trade like that could turn into a disaster (if Gaudreau becomes a star). There is no guarantee the guy in the #1 spot will be better than the guy at the #5 spot.

couldnt agree more. Gaudreau is too much to give up just to move up. It's pretty damn hard to say Daisatl is THAT much worse (if at all) than Reinhart.

[jg13]

Originally Posted by H2SO4(aq)

couldnt agree more. Gaudreau is too much to give up just to move up. It's pretty damn hard to say Daisatl is THAT much worse (if at all) than Reinhart.

Pretty sure if we move up at all it's to take Ekblad and only Ekblad

[Savvy27]

http://ohlprospects.blogspot.ca/2014...-for-2014.html

OHL Top 10 with contributions from a variety of scouts.

1) Aaron Ekblad

"The absolute stud of the draft in my opinion....plays 25 minutes a night against all the best players in the league...physically ready right now....never gets to high or low...showed at world juniors that when paired with, and playing against better players, raises his game...will be a 15 year pro on a top pairing at NHL level in my opinion." - Anonymous

2) Sam Bennett

He plays the game with terrific poise in that he constantly anticipates plays before they happen allowing him to be in the right place at the right time. Approaches the game like a young Toews and/or Brind Amour; he oozes character."

3) Michael Dal Colle

"I've got Ritchie higher now. I like Dal Colle, but I don't love him. I just wish he was more physical and impacted the game more than just offensively. His offensive instincts and general skill level is super high, but sometimes it looks like he's coasting to me.

"Surprising to see Dal Colle drop a bit in some complete draft rankings as of late. This is still a player that can challenge to be a Top 3 pick in the draft. The accuracy and velocity on his wrist shot and snap shot are the best to come out of the OHL.

4) Nick Ritchie

"A bit of a Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde scenario for Ritchie. I have been to games this season where he looks like the undisputed top prospect for this draft. A real bull in a china shop who can force his will on anyone physically as well as possessing the offensive skills to singlehandedly dominate the game and carry the Petes to victory, and then some games where he looks disinterested and played like a real dog. Partly due to improved health but lately his contributions and efforts have been more consistent which has his stock rising. Think physical dominance like Milan Lucic but with better offensive abilities (shot, hands, sense)."

5) Brendan Perlini

"I'm kind of torn on Perlini. I really like a lot of things about his game. His size and north/south skating ability is terrific (think Jeff Carter). And he's got one hell of a shot. I also think he's made great strides as a two-way player this year. That said, his lack of intensity and his inability to use his size physically (at times) does concern me somewhat. I don't think he's a naturally aggressive player.

[Aarongavey]

WHL leading scorers from 88-89 (full disclosure the years before this they had a number of NHLers who led the league in scoring including Cliff Ronning, Rob Brown twice, Ray Ferraro and Joe Sakic)

88-89 - Dennis Holland no games in NHL
89-90 - Len Barrie - 184 games in NHL
90-91 - Ray Whitney - long career in NHL
91-92 - Kevin St. Jacques - no NHL games
92-93 - Jason Krywuluk - no NHL games
93-94 - Lonny Bohonos - 83 NHL games
94-95 - Daymond Langkow - long NHL career
95-96 - Mark Deyell - no NHL games
96-97 - Todd Robinson - no NHL games
97-98 - Sergei Varlamov - NHL superstar, 63 NHL games
98-99 - Pavel Brendl - NHL superstar 78 NHL games
99-00 - Brad Moran - 8 NHL games
00-01 - Justin Mapeltoft - 38 NHL games
01-02 - Nathan Barrett - No NHL games
02-03 - Erik Christensen - 387 NHL games, servicable player
03-04 - Tyler Redenbach - No NHL Games
04-05 - Eric Fehr - still playing, solid NHLer
05-06 - Troy Brouwer - still playing, solid NHLer
06-07 - Zach Hamill - AHLer
07-08 - Mark Santorelli - AHLer
08-09 - Casey Pierro-Zabotel ECHLer

It appears you get a NHLer player leading the league in scoring about once every 3 years or so.

Hobey Baker Award Winners

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hobey_Baker_Award

NHLers from 89-90 to 08-09 include Kip Miller, Scott Pellerin, Paul Kariya, Brian Holzinger, Brendan Morrison, Chris Drury, Jason Krog (borderline), Ryan Miller, Jordan Leopold, Matt Carle, Kevin Porter (borderline) and Matt Gilroy (borderline).

It appears that the Hobey Baker award winners are more likely to become NHLers than the WHL leading scorers.

[Table 5]

Originally Posted by jg13

Pretty sure if we move up at all it's to take Ekblad and only Ekblad

I'm even less inclined to do it for a Defenseman than I am for a Centre. With the Centre chances are you're going to get a pretty good product (top Centres in a draft year rarely bust)...Dmen are just too hard to predict, and often the best Dman in a draft is taken much later anyway.

Giving up Gaudreau and a 5/6 pick for a Dman who may or may not turn out? Way too much risk involved if I'm the GM.

Yes we need dmen, but there are smarter ways of going about it.

[Calgary4LIfe]

Originally Posted by nik-

Even if he ends up being Martin St. Louis, if you trade Martin St. Louis for a top end blueliner who plays a decade for your team, (assuming they both hit top end projections), or a solid topline/1B center, is that a bad trade? Is anyone losing a lot of sleep over than other than in an Internet world where you have to absolutely win every trade?

It is DEFINITELY a terrible trade in this scenario because you are forgetting one critical component - Flames would be adding Gaudreau to their first. So would you trade a St. Louis + another possible top-line player for a top pairing defender?

It is hard to guess at what type of career Gaudreau will have in the NHL. There is ample reason to be optimistic, and there is ample reason to be apprehensive. There are probably very few teams in the NHL that would value Gaudreau as highly as the Flames (maybe his organizational value is lower because of Burke? Maybe?).

I don't see any teams drafting higher than the Flames being willing to trade their pick straight across for Gaudreau. They would demand Calgary's first as well. That makes the deal unacceptable (imo) unless the the top 2 or 3 players are can't miss franchise players, and the next are 2nd liners.

My max offer would be a 2nd (in addition to the first, of course) for any spot where Reinhart, Ekblad and Bennett are. I think Draisaitl, Dal Colle, and a few other prospects aren't that far behind, and I would be happy seeing the Flames pick one of them up without expending any more assets.

[Tinordi]

Don't know, I just have the feeling Burke will dangle Gaudreau to move up for Ekblad. The interesting scenario there what would Edmonton do if they were picking second? They'll be damned to see Calgary try to sweep Ekblad out from under their noses.

[FakenHaken]

Originally Posted by Calgary4LIfe

It is DEFINITELY a terrible trade in this scenario because you are forgetting one critical component - Flames would be adding Gaudreau to their first. So would you trade a St. Louis + another possible top-line player for a top pairing defender?

It is hard to guess at what type of career Gaudreau will have in the NHL. There is ample reason to be optimistic, and there is ample reason to be apprehensive. There are probably very few teams in the NHL that would value Gaudreau as highly as the Flames (maybe his organizational value is lower because of Burke? Maybe?).

I don't see any teams drafting higher than the Flames being willing to trade their pick straight across for Gaudreau. They would demand Calgary's first as well. That makes the deal unacceptable (imo) unless the the top 2 or 3 players are can't miss franchise players, and the next are 2nd liners.

My max offer would be a 2nd (in addition to the first, of course) for any spot where Reinhart, Ekblad and Bennett are. I think Draisaitl, Dal Colle, and a few other prospects aren't that far behind, and I would be happy seeing the Flames pick one of them up without expending any more assets.

Thanks and while I do see your point and really it is nothing short of a gamble. While Gaudreau is talented he isn't built like St. Louis either. So let's say you gamble and Gaudreau ends up playing most of his career in Europe. Then all you really did was trade up to a Reinhart, Ekblad for a Draisaitl, Dal Colle.

I don't know I am so on the fence about that whole thing and my 8 ball is broken. It's funny you know I'd use Sven and a first but I have trouble with Gaudreau and our first to try and get 1st overall. There is just something about Gaudreau ever since the WJC.

[Goodlad]

As someone who is not completely sold on Ekblad as a franchise defenseman, my ideal scenario would be Burke offering our 1st + Gaudreau, and have Edmonton out-bidding us to get the 1st overall.

[getbak]

The idea that moving up in the draft will require a top prospect simply doesn't fit with what the historical cost has been.

If you go back over 20 years to the Pronger deal that Burke swung, the first thing you notice is that trades to move up in the top 5 don't happen very often; but when they do, the cost to move up isn't that high, and almost never include a player going back the other way.

Once in a while, we see player/prospect for pick deals like the Schneider trade last year, but when one team is trading its own first rounder to move up a few picks, the additional cost isn't usually too steep.


Here is every "move up" draft deal made since 1993 involving a top-5 pick...

1993 : Hartford traded with San Jose to move up from 6 to 2 for the additional cost of picks 45 & 58.

1998 : Nashville traded with San Jose to move up one spot. The Preds gave up picks 3 & 29 and received picks 2 & 85.

1999 got a little crazy. Burke didn't move Vancouver's own third overall pick because he needed that for Henrik, so he first needed to swing a deal to get another top-5 pick. Vancouver traded Brian McCabe and either their 2000 or 2001 1st round pick to Chicago for pick 4. Once he had the additional asset, he swung two more deals to move from 4 to 1, then from 1 to 2.

Vancouver traded with Tampa Bay to move from 4 to 1 for the additional cost of picks 75 & 88. Then, Atlanta traded their #2 pick and their 2000 3rd round pick for the #1 pick.

2002 : Columbus traded with Florida to move from 3 to 1. The only thing Florida got in return was the option to swap picks with Columbus in the 2003 Draft (Florida ended up with the first overall pick in 2003 and did not exercise their option).

2003 : Pittsburgh traded picks 3 & 55 plus Mikael Samuelsson to Florida for picks 1 & 73. This is the only top-5 "move up" trade to involve an established roster player as part of the deal.

2004 : Carolina traded picks 8 and 59 to Columbus for pick 4.

2008 : Toronto traded pick 7 plus 2 conditional picks (either a late 2nd in 2008 and a 3rd in 2009, or an early 3rd in 2008 and a second in 2009) to the Islanders for pick 5.

[The Fonz]

Wow, seems like a much smaller price than I'd thought it would be.

So from 5th to 1st could potenially be had if Burke tossed in Colorado's 2nd rounder, and our own 3rd rounder?

1st
For
5th, 55th, 65th?

[Phanuthier]

nm

[codynw]

Buffalo might be more willing to move their pick because they (might) have the NYI pick this year as well. It's a possibility for sure.

[Anduril]

I see Buffalo being even less inclined to make any trades if they take 1st overall considering the number of 1sts and 2nd round picks they have. If I were them, I would move one of the extra second round picks with a lower 1st round pick in order to get quality.

[Five-hole]

When I said I'd consider moving JG for Buffalo's pick, I meant keeping our first. So something like JG, two 2nds, and a roster player or another prospect on the verge of stepping in (Granlund, Wotherspoon, etc.). Would Buffalo do this?

[moon]

Originally Posted by codynw

Buffalo might be more willing to move their pick because they (might) have the NYI pick this year as well. It's a possibility for sure.

Highly unlikely though and a really, really stupid move by NYI if they give it up.

If they do have that pick I would think it makes it less likely they move the first pick as they can pick tr best player and get a guy they may like with the NYI pick.

[Sidney Crosby's Hat]

Originally Posted by Tinordi

Don't know, I just have the feeling Burke will dangle Gaudreau to move up for Ekblad. The interesting scenario there what would Edmonton do if they were picking second? They'll be damned to see Calgary try to sweep Ekblad out from under their noses.

I don't think they would care. I also think Edmonton will be picking 3rd or 4th. I'd put money on 4th since I have a feeling a longshot is going to win the lottery this year.

[Vulcan]

Originally Posted by Sidney Crosby's Hat

I don't think they would care. I also think Edmonton will be picking 3rd or 4th. I'd put money on 4th since I have a feeling a longshot is going to win the lottery this year.

Yeah, I could see the Coyotes winning.

[The Fonz]

I've accepted it. We're getting Dal Colle. Time for me to convince myself that he is the right choice for this team...

[nik-]

Yeah, 5th spot is locked down for us. Florida is losing again, and the Islanders are in full tailspin.