Craig Conroy Fan960 - Page 2 - Calgarypuck Forums - The Unofficial Calgary Flames Fan Community

Erick Estrada · 03-14-2016, 09:28 AM

It sounded like Conny really liked the two Fins but if the Flames win the draft lottery you can order your Matthews jersey as they will keep the pick and take the best player. The Fins are great players but Matthews is a cut above them.

FiveSeven · 03-14-2016, 09:31 AM

I'd rather have a battle of Alberta 1st overall picks. Just please bless us with a top 3 pick oh hockey baby Jesus.

sureLoss · 03-14-2016, 09:35 AM

I believe the closest that someone came to trading up to #1 that is public knowledge in the salary cap era is when the Islanders tried to move up from #4 in the 2012 draft to #2.

The Islanders offered all their draft picks (#4, 34, 65, 103, 125, 155 and 185 OA) to Columbus for #2. Wasn't enough to get Columbus to drop down, although Howson said it was "very attractive".

DJones · 03-14-2016, 09:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sureLoss

I believe the closest that someone came to trading up to #1 that is public knowledge in the salary cap era is when the Islanders tried to move up from #4 in the 2012 draft to #2.

The Islanders offered all their draft picks (#4, 34, 65, 103, 125, 155 and 185 OA) to Columbus for #2. Wasn't enough to get Columbus to drop down, although Howson said it was "very attractive".

Actually would have turned out well for the Islanders. Reinhart at #4...

sureLoss · 03-14-2016, 09:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DJones

Actually would have turned out well for the Islanders. Reinhart at #4...

Luckily they had Chiarelli bail them out of that pick.

bubbsy · 03-14-2016, 09:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sureLoss

I believe the closest that someone came to trading up to #1 that is public knowledge in the salary cap era is when the Islanders tried to move up from #4 in the 2012 draft to #2.

The Islanders offered all their draft picks (#4, 34, 65, 103, 125, 155 and 185 OA) to Columbus for #2. Wasn't enough to get Columbus to drop down, although Howson said it was "very attractive".

in hindsight, who actually got picked with those picks (at least first few rounds), am curious if it would have been worth it.

Roof-Daddy · 03-14-2016, 09:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sureLoss

I believe the closest that someone came to trading up to #1 that is public knowledge in the salary cap era is when the Islanders tried to move up from #4 in the 2012 draft to #2.

The Islanders offered all their draft picks (#4, 34, 65, 103, 125, 155 and 185 OA) to Columbus for #2. Wasn't enough to get Columbus to drop down, although Howson said it was "very attractive".

...and then the Isles proceeded to draft a D-man with every single one of those picks, after being turned down.

Roof-Daddy · 03-14-2016, 09:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bubbsy

in hindsight, who actually got picked with those picks (at least first few rounds), am curious if it would have been worth it.

Reinhart (Traded away)
Pokka (traded away for Leddy)
Pelech (still with Isles)

Then a few D-men that are Ahl/ECHL or college still.

EDIT: Link

Hockey Fan #751 · 03-14-2016, 09:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sureLoss

I believe the closest that someone came to trading up to #1 that is public knowledge in the salary cap era is when the Islanders tried to move up from #4 in the 2012 draft to #2.

The Islanders offered all their draft picks (#4, 34, 65, 103, 125, 155 and 185 OA) to Columbus for #2. Wasn't enough to get Columbus to drop down, although Howson said it was "very attractive".

Knowing that one player was Murray and the other Reinhart, it's looking like a smart move. Though the Islanders at least salvaged the Reinhart pick in the past draft.

DJones · 03-14-2016, 09:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bubbsy

in hindsight, who actually got picked with those picks (at least first few rounds), am curious if it would have been worth it.

Griffin Reinhart
Ville Pokka
Adam Pelech
Loic Leduc
Doyle Somerby
Jesse Graham
Jake Bishcoff

http://www.hockeysfuture.com/article...-draft-review/

Have to admit, I don't recognize any of those names after Griffin.

sureLoss · 03-14-2016, 09:48 AM

Oh yes and Feaster's attempt to trade up from #6 to #1 in 2013.

6, 21, 28 for #1. Rejected by Avs.

CroFlames · 03-14-2016, 09:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by FiveSeven

I'd rather have a battle of Alberta 1st overall picks. Just please bless us with a top 3 pick oh hockey baby Jesus.

ComixZone · 03-14-2016, 09:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Roof-Daddy

Don't want to trade down from #1 overall if the Flames are lucky enough to get it.
Don't want to trade Monahan either.

Gaudreau - Monahan - ?????????
Bennett - Matthews - ?????????

Yes please.

Exactly. It would be crazy to trade down from Matthews. This isn't a Taylor Vs Tyler draft (and even then - draft the centre ahead of the winger if the players are so close).

Flames Draft Watcher · 03-14-2016, 09:49 AM

2002 was weird. The top 3 players were a defence-man (Bouwmeester) and goalie (Lehtonen) and a forward (Nash). Bouwmeester was considered the best player and Florida was going to take him at #1. ATL at #2 wanted Lehtonen. CBJ wanted Nash. Maclean made the trade up for optics, it didn't end up changing which teams got which players at all. FLA would've been happy to take Bouwmeester #1.

This year is very different from 2002 in terms of dynamic in the top 3.

Super-Rye · 03-14-2016, 09:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vinny01

A first overall pick has not been traded in over 10 years. The Fins are awesome but Matthews is on another level. A 15th pick plus 3 is not enough to trade down in my opinion

The 3rd and 15th for the 1st would be a no brainer, especially for the Flames. Matthews is definitely the #1 but the 2 Finns are also really good and fill a need for the Flames.

But I stand by my statement that you'd be lucky to get much to move down from 1st to the 3rd. There isn't that big of a dropoff between Matthews and the 2 Finns. I would be surprised if whoever finished with the 3rd was willing to give up a top prospect or another first rounder for the top pick. They would have to be absolutely desperate for a franchise center, otherwise it would make more sense to just keep the 3rd and your picks/prospects and pick BPA.

Now if you had the 4th or 5th pick and wanted to move up it would cost you more as there seems to be a ledge at 3.

jmac98 · 03-14-2016, 09:56 AM

You certainly don't trade down if you're Calgary and win the 1st overall selection, however, it's not a disappointment to win 2nd or 3rd for this group considering their situation and positions of strength by comparison. Any of the top 3 picks is a massive win with no empty feeling like teams who lost out of McDavid last season.

The final few weeks is going to irritate me to no avail, knowing 1,2 wins will be the difference between a potential top 3 versus selecting 7,8th.

nik- · 03-14-2016, 09:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Super-Rye

The 3rd and 15th for the 1st would be a no brainer, especially for the Flames. Matthews is definitely the #1 but the 2 Finns are also really good and fill a need for the Flames.

But I stand by my statement that you'd be lucky to get much to move down from 1st to the 3rd. There isn't that big of a dropoff between Matthews and the 2 Finns. I would be surprised if whoever finished with the 3rd was willing to give up a top prospect or another first rounder. They would have to be absolutely desperate for a franchise center, otherwise it would make more sense to just keep the 3rd and your picks/prospects and pick BPA.

Now if you had the 4th or 5th pick and wanted to move up it would cost you more as there seems to be a ledge at 3.

It wouldn't be a no brainer, but they might do it. I'd just keep the pick and draft Matthews personally.

IamNotKenKing · 03-14-2016, 10:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sureLoss

5 years is not an option because it will bring Gaudreau right to UFA and won't buy any UFA years.

Exactly. He did not say it will be more than 5, just that it would not be 5.
My read of that is that it could still be less than 5, and could be more than 5, just not exactly 5.

Bingo · 03-14-2016, 10:08 AM

with the new lottery system I think the big worry is the drop by two or three spots.

if the Flames finish 28th I think I'll be more concerned about keeping a top 5 pick then I am really thinking they'll end up 1st.

shotinthebacklund · 03-14-2016, 10:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by IamNotKenKing

Exactly. He did not say it will be more than 5, just that it would not be 5.
My read of that is that it could still be less than 5, and could be more than 5, just not exactly 5.

I was talking to a customer at the time so may be wrong but I believe he said specifically it would be longer.