ReadingTHN's draft issue now. Some interesting defensemenin the bottom of the first round. Just from reading the summaries, it seems quite possible that anyone of Chabot, Roy or Larsson could turn out better than the guys at the top of the draft... So, I would not mind if we dropped down ~5 spots and picked up another good pick, or if we picked up another draft choice in the 22-28 range... Keeping in mind that I have not seen anyone play, I just have this feeling that Larsson in particular could be the gem. All 3 of those guys sound like Brodie to me... I think I would also be happy with taking Svechnikov at 15, unless by some miracle the Finnish kid drops.
Yeah there quite a few promising D men down in the 2nd and 3rd rounds, guys like Meloche, Juulsen, Andersson, Spencer, Gavrikov and more are great reasons why I hope the Flames do not trade picks or at the very least trade more than one in the 2nd round.
I wouldn't mind pulling another Jankowski esk deal by moving down from 15 to the early 20's if it meant we could add another 2nd. There isn't much difference between 13 and 25 really.
__________________ Fireside Chat - The #1 Flames Fan Podcast - FiresideChat.ca
The Following User Says Thank You to Caged Great For This Useful Post:
I wouldn't mind pulling another Jankowski esk deal by moving down from 15 to the early 20's if it meant we could add another 2nd. There isn't much difference between 13 and 25 really.
Depends. Flames might not see it that way. Or a guy they have in their top 10-12 may fall to 15.
I think the only way you deal down into the early 20's is if you really like a guy that you think everybody else is underrating, you could deal down to pick up that kid. Other than that I think you probably just take the guy you like the best.
It's a strong draft. In another strong draft in 2003 the Oilers dealt down and took Marc-Antoine Pouliot. Instead of dealing down they could've taken Parise, Getzlaf or Brent Burns. I suppose where they took Pouliot they could've had Kesler or Perry as well. What's the morale of that story? Hire some good scouts and let them pick the kid they like best. Flames scouting has been pretty good lately, Button and Treliving will have a pretty solid plan and a bunch of scenarios available where they might trade up or trade down.
Personally I think there's usually more compelling reasons to try and deal up to take a guy your scouts love than to deal down. In a draft where we already have three 2nd rounders and two 3rds I don't think our philosophy in the first round should be to deal down to acquire more 2nds or 3rds. All those 2nds and 3rds will be useful if the Flames feel it's worth it to move up. I think our resources have never been better for a trade up in the first round. And we're not too far back so it is reasonable to think they could deal up to 11-13 and potentially nab a guy they have in their top 8-10.
Should be an interesting one. I'd be excited if we dealt up and I'd be excited if we just use all the picks. Not really huge on dealing down unless its like 2-3 spots and they're convinced they can get the same guy they like in that later position.
The Following 15 Users Say Thank You to Flames Draft Watcher For This Useful Post:
Depends. Flames might not see it that way. Or a guy they have in their top 10-12 may fall to 15.
I think the only way you deal down into the early 20's is if you really like a guy that you think everybody else is underrating, you could deal down to pick up that kid. Other than that I think you probably just take the guy you like the best.
It's a strong draft. In another strong draft in 2003 the Oilers dealt down and took Marc-Antoine Pouliot. Instead of dealing down they could've taken Parise, Getzlaf or Brent Burns. I suppose where they took Pouliot they could've had Kesler or Perry as well. What's the morale of that story? Hire some good scouts and let them pick the kid they like best. Flames scouting has been pretty good lately, Button and Treliving will have a pretty solid plan and a bunch of scenarios available where they might trade up or trade down.
Personally I think there's usually more compelling reasons to try and deal up to take a guy your scouts love than to deal down. In a draft where we already have three 2nd rounders and two 3rds I don't think our philosophy in the first round should be to deal down to acquire more 2nds or 3rds. All those 2nds and 3rds will be useful if the Flames feel it's worth it to move up. I think our resources have never been better for a trade up in the first round. And we're not too far back so it is reasonable to think they could deal up to 11-13 and potentially nab a guy they have in their top 8-10.
Should be an interesting one. I'd be excited if we dealt up and I'd be excited if we just use all the picks. Not really huge on dealing down unless its like 2-3 spots and they're convinced they can get the same guy they like in that later position.
Definitely, agree with you, it would entirely depend on what's up when they go to pick. I guy like Zacha (insert random guy here) might fall randomly to 15 for no reason other than the teams from 7-14 might not like him as much as the guy they picked. I could see this draft being a bit of a repeat of 2010 with the D-men falling because all the teams from 3-8 have rather stocked defense pools and a lack of forward talent.
It's so hard to determine exactly what would be on the board and what the Flames are looking at. If they are going to take a guy like Sprong, who should be available later, it might make sense to trade down. If they like Svechnikov, then they should stick at 15 to see if he's on the board. I just trust the scouting staff to find the right players regardless of where they pick.
__________________ Fireside Chat - The #1 Flames Fan Podcast - FiresideChat.ca
ReadingTHN's draft issue now. Some interesting defensemenin the bottom of the first round. Just from reading the summaries, it seems quite possible that anyone of Chabot, Roy or Larsson could turn out better than the guys at the top of the draft... So, I would not mind if we dropped down ~5 spots and picked up another good pick, or if we picked up another draft choice in the 22-28 range... Keeping in mind that I have not seen anyone play, I just have this feeling that Larsson in particular could be the gem. All 3 of those guys sound like Brodie to me... I think I would also be happy with taking Svechnikov at 15, unless by some miracle the Finnish kid drops.
Not a big fan of trading down out of top 15 as the talent level starts dropping off a little. Unless the Flames are high on Werenski and he falls into their lap it doesn't look like good value picking a defeneman at 15. There are a couple RH forwards in Barzal, Boeser, and Merkley available. I would opt to go that route and use the 2nd round picks on defensemen as there seems to be a glut of talented but a little undersized defensemen in that range and you have to hope one or two of them turn out to be players.
Trading down doesn't make a lot of sense to me. I am of the belief that this will probably be the highest the Flames will for a long time. 6 picks in the top 83 or whatever and four picks... FOUR in the top 53. That's plenty. I like the range of players in the Flames wheelhouse at 15. I feel there a great mix of quality and quantity.
I just hope Burke and Treliving don't go overboard on the size thing as there are a lot of good players in this draft that are average or a little undersized and a lot of 6 foot defensemen in particular.
The Following User Says Thank You to Erick Estrada For This Useful Post:
Trading down doesn't make a lot of sense to me. I am of the belief that this will probably be the highest the Flames will for a long time. 6 picks in the top 83 or whatever and four picks... FOUR in the top 53. That's plenty. I like the range of players in the Flames wheelhouse at 15. I feel there a great mix of quality and quantity.
I agree - I think the Flames should keep 15. But I wouldn't mind seeing them try to move up from 6 picks in the top 83 to having 3 or 4 picks in the top 40-45 (pick up a couple of early 2nd rounders if a late 1st seems pricey). It seems like there is a bit of a drop off after that.
The thing that intrigues me a bit is how the Flames used Bennett in the playoffs as a LW. If they make that permanent, there is one player that has been mentioned that would make a ton of sense.
Jansen Harkins plays a similar game to Monahan. He doesn't have one skill that is spectacular but everything is a notch or two below that.
If the Flames were to draft him, he would be a good option to have a center because he is bigger than Bennett and is a good set up guy. That would allow the Flames to have two lines that are very similar with a steady two way center with a flashy offensive left winger.
__________________ Fireside Chat - The #1 Flames Fan Podcast - FiresideChat.ca
The thing that intrigues me a bit is how the Flames used Bennett in the playoffs as a LW. If they make that permanent, there is one player that has been mentioned that would make a ton of sense.
Jansen Harkins plays a similar game to Monahan. He doesn't have one skill that is spectacular but everything is a notch or two below that.
If the Flames were to draft him, he would be a good option to have a center because he is bigger than Bennett and is a good set up guy. That would allow the Flames to have two lines that are very similar with a steady two way center with a flashy offensive left winger.
From what I've read I really like Harkins. If the Flames picked a forward I think he would be a great choice, and for me would probably be at the top at the list of forwards around where we pick.
I still think though that Bennett should end up as a center, because he will have the most impact on a game there. He'll most likely be the better center, and from what I've seen that's where his two-way game and defense shines the most. Also, having your top two centers playing the same style isn't necessarily a good reason to pick someone - part of the reason why I was so excited when Bennett was drafted was because the Flames having two top centers with different styles would give them more options when it comes to matchups and strategy. What position Bennett plays won't have any impact on who the Flames pick in the draft. If Harkins is picked, it's because the Flames believe he is the BPA - where he'll play is something that can be figured out later. Even as a #3 center who can step in as a #2, that would be great.
In that scenario, I agree with you and can see Bennett playing shifting to wing on the powerplay in order to put the best possible forwards on the ice.
I am starting to really like Svechnikov, I think he'd be a great pick up. Would be a fantastic 2nd line LW behind JG.
From the clips I've seen of him I believe Svechnikov is a left shooting RW. But I suppose you could move him to the left wing. I like Svechnikov, and Korostolev as well but Korostolev is more of a late first/early second pick imo.
Every year it's the same discussion on teams trading into the top 5 and every year it never happens. I don't discount that the Flames could trade up a few spots but top 5, even top 10 picks are simply too valuable these days to teams. This isn't like the NFL where you know you can find week one starters in rounds 2 and 3. Most 2nd and 3rd round picks in the NHL never pan out. Trading out of the top 10 for 2nd round picks is poor management.
Yeah, I'll be shocked if anyone manages a trade to move into the top 10.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by fotze
If this day gets you riled up, you obviously aren't numb to the disappointment yet to be a real fan.
From the clips I've seen of him I believe Svechnikov is a left shooting RW. But I suppose you could move him to the left wing. I like Svechnikov, and Korostolev as well but Korostolev is more of a late first/early second pick imo.
Maybe he is a LW/RW?
As for Korostelev, I would love to pick him 45th OA. Him or Gagne.
From the clips I've seen of him I believe Svechnikov is a left shooting RW. But I suppose you could move him to the left wing. I like Svechnikov, and Korostolev as well but Korostolev is more of a late first/early second pick imo.
There are some right shooting RWers available but how much of a priority do you put that over BPA? It just seems like most Canadian kids these days shoot left handed. Interestingly enough I believe I read once US players are the opposite.
There are some right shooting RWers available but how much of a priority do you put that over BPA? It just seems like most Canadian kids these days shoot left handed. Interestingly enough I believe I read once US players are the opposite.
When I was a kid, if you were right handed, you also shot right usually, and that's how I ended up. Somewhere along the way that got switched up and right handed kids all shoot left (my kid does this). It still seems odd to me, since my right wrist does most of the work in my wrist shot.
When I was a kid, if you were right handed, you also shot right usually, and that's how I ended up. Somewhere along the way that got switched up and right handed kids all shoot left (my kid does this). It still seems odd to me, since my right wrist does most of the work in my wrist shot.
Not to get off on too much of a tangent but I have always been confused by this as well. I feel like when I was a kid the majority of players, including me, were RH...now they're LH.
