[News] Sportsnet's Top 30 - Draft 2014

[Mazrim]

Originally Posted by MJK

Site blocked for me at work...anyone interested in posting the top 30 list in this thread?

Too lazy to do 30, but here's the top 10.

10. Kapanen
9. Nylander
8. Ehlers
7. Virtanen
6. Dal Colle
5. Reinhart
4. Draisaitl
3. Ritchie
2. Ekblad
1. Bennett

[Ashasx]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

Then you can imagine what will happen if the Flames pick him at 4. I will have to turn off my phone.

Tears of madness.

[Ashasx]

What I don't understand (moreso than Ritchie at 3) is Reinhart at 5.

What has he done since the season ended to drop from a top 2 spot?

He was great in the playoffs and he's one of the smartest players I've seen in a couple draft years.

He's my #1, in front of Ekblad.

[Rick M.]

Even Ryan Kennedy in post # 21 has Reinhart at 4 (Draisaitl is at 3 and Ritchie is at 7). I'd love to get Reinhart at 4.

[Erick Estrada]

Originally Posted by Ashasx

What I don't understand (moreso than Ritchie at 3) is Reinhart at 5.

What has he done since the season ended to drop from a top 2 spot?

He was great in the playoffs and he's one of the smartest players I've seen in a couple draft years.

He's my #1, in front of Ekblad.

Yeah I don't get how a guy that was incredible in the playoffs all of a sudden drops like he had a poor post season showing. IMO this kid is a victim of being overly analyzed due to him being a top prospect since last season while some of the shiny new kids have taken some of the luster off of what is easily one of the best 4 players in the draft.

[Bingo]

My thoughts ...

1. My biggest fear is the Flames doing something stupid. I have no reason to believe the staff would do something stupid, they have more mgmt depth strength than ever before, but if they skipped one of the top four for a Ritchie and struck out it would eat away at us all for years to come.

2. #1 above gets alleviated somewhat with the Ritchie talk from the Sportsnet guys. Flames aren't an island on this anymore.

3. If this is smoke and mirrors the Sportsnet thing helps the Flames a tonne. May generate that team that wants Ritchie to do something stupid, which is all right by me.

4. Volatility can only help a team like Calgary with Burke and draft trading experience in his hip pocket. If it's a slam dunk top four then you don't get moving pieces, and without moving pieces you don't get the chance to make moves that can really re-shape the draft.

5. I'm not so sure moving down isn't a better and better idea now that it's no longer a top 2, or 3 or possibly 4 draft. Given this draft is weaker than the predecessor and successor it could be a great chance to add draft assets.

[Ashasx]

I don't understand the desire to move down (trading quality for quantity).

The Flames need elite talent. Pick that player. Don't let the teams in front of you decide your fate.

[RyZ]

The blurb of text under Reinhart makes me wonder how much they actually watched him. Saying that he doesnt make players around him better is exactly the opposite of what everybody else and a few games of viewing would tell you about him. Making the players around him better is clearly one of his major strengths. Strange write up.

[FakenHaken]

Originally Posted by Ashasx

I don't understand the desire to move down (trading quality for quantity).

The Flames need elite talent. Pick that player. Don't let the teams in front of you decide your fate.

See that's why you are not getting the desire to maybe move down. The Flames do need elite talent, you are right there. However, with all the flip flopping of who that is suggests there isn't elite talent in this years draft. Good players yes but not elite. That's why there maybe a desire to move down to acquire quantity. Do I like that no, I say trust the scouts to select the BPA at 4, but I do understand a desire to maybe move down too.

[Erick Estrada]

Originally Posted by Bingo

My thoughts ...

1. My biggest fear is the Flames doing something stupid. I have no reason to believe the staff would do something stupid, they have more mgmt depth strength than ever before, but if they skipped one of the top four for a Ritchie and struck out it would eat away at us all for years to come.

2. #1 above gets alleviated somewhat with the Ritchie talk from the Sportsnet guys. Flames aren't an island on this anymore.

3. If this is smoke and mirrors the Sportsnet thing helps the Flames a tonne. May generate that team that wants Ritchie to do something stupid, which is all right by me.

4. Volatility can only help a team like Calgary with Burke and draft trading experience in his hip pocket. If it's a slam dunk top four then you don't get moving pieces, and without moving pieces you don't get the chance to make moves that can really re-shape the draft.

5. I'm not so sure moving down isn't a better and better idea now that it's no longer a top 2, or 3 or possibly 4 draft. Given this draft is weaker than the predecessor and successor it could be a great chance to add draft assets.

I hope it's all a smoke screen but while I'm a Burke supporter I've never been overly thrilled about his drafting prowess. I remember laughing when he drafted Schenn because IMO he looked like a low upside NHL defenseman but you just knew Burke was lusting over his size and as it turns out it was a bad pick. I'm not a fan of the size over skill mentality. Didn't like it when Sutter was running the show and I don't like it now with Burke. I'm hoping Treliving is smarter than this.

[ComixZone]

Originally Posted by Bingo

5. I'm not so sure moving down isn't a better and better idea now that it's no longer a top 2, or 3 or possibly 4 draft. Given this draft is weaker than the predecessor and successor it could be a great chance to add draft assets.

I just don't think trading down works. Go for the quality pick. Draft at 4, draft by your list. I don't want to sit back and watch Maatta and Hertl happen all over again.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by Ashasx

I don't understand the desire to move down (trading quality for quantity).

The Flames need elite talent. Pick that player. Don't let the teams in front of you decide your fate.

agreed, but the more players that enter the top of the draft mix, the less of a perceived gap you have between say the top four and the top 7.

or put another way, the line blurrs for where elite talent stops and average talent starts.

[dustyanddaflames]

Originally Posted by fotze

What is with that font? The c's are o's.

I was sitting here wondering what the hell a diamond outter's hands were...

[FakenHaken]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

I hope it's all a smoke screen but while I'm a Burke supporter I've never been overly thrilled about his drafting prowess. I remember laughing when he drafted Schenn because IMO he looked like a low upside NHL defenseman but you just knew Burke was lusting over his size and as it turns out it was a bad pick. I'm not a fan of the size over skill mentality. Didn't like it when Sutter was running the show and I don't like it now with Burke. I'm hoping Treliving is smarter than this.

To be fair when seeing the video posted by AC Burke says he goes off the scouts lists and if that list changes while on the draft floor then there will be a fist fight. He goes on to explain why Biggs was chosen before Percy and he told the scout who changed the order that was a fireable offense, but later found out that a team between those two would have taken Biggs so all was forgiven. Just taking him at his word EE, but it would suggest he trusts his scouts or as Burke said why have them.

[SHOGUN]

I'm not worried at all. Treliving doesn't strike me as a person who would make a stupid move to take Ritchie at #4. But then again, Todd Button was responsible for taking Jankowski.... so you never really know. I think Sportsnet's list is weird to make their list stand out from the rest, and the descriptions of some of the prospects are lacking.

[getbak]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

I remember laughing when he drafted Schenn because IMO he looked like a low upside NHL defenseman but you just knew Burke was lusting over his size and as it turns out it was a bad pick.

Burke was still in Anaheim when Fletcher drafted Schenn for the Leafs.

[nik-]

Originally Posted by Bingo

agreed, but the more players that enter the top of the draft mix, the less of a perceived gap you have between say the top four and the top 7.

or put another way, the line blurrs for where elite talent stops and average talent starts.

They're being talked about, but I don't really think they've really closed the gap on the top 4. There's no reason for us to trade out of the last spot of that group. It would be foolish imo.

[HitterD]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

I hope it's all a smoke screen but while I'm a Burke supporter I've never been overly thrilled about his drafting prowess. I remember laughing when he drafted Schenn because IMO he looked like a low upside NHL defenseman but you just knew Burke was lusting over his size and as it turns out it was a bad pick. I'm not a fan of the size over skill mentality. Didn't like it when Sutter was running the show and I don't like it now with Burke. I'm hoping Treliving is smarter than this.

Funny that you remember LAUGHING when Burke drafted Schenn, when in fact Burke was still working for the Ducks when the Leafs drafted him

[saillias]

Originally Posted by Ashasx

I don't understand the desire to move down (trading quality for quantity).

The Flames need elite talent. Pick that player. Don't let the teams in front of you decide your fate.

Couldn't agree more, I would go as far as to say Sutter's constant trading down in the 1st round crippled this franchise.

[PeteMoss]

You might not like Ritchie at 4... but saying he's not a surefire NHLer is a bit much.