2016 NHL Draft - Page 180 - Calgarypuck Forums - The Unofficial Calgary Flames Fan Community

The Yen Man · 05-10-2016, 01:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

The #6OA, next year's 1st, and 2 2nds is MASSIVE overpayment. Massive.

And you guys are talking about adding Jankowski and Backlund as well?

FFS, just stop.

Gotta agree with this. Why would you cripple your own prospect pool for years just for one prospect? I don't see the trade making sense for either side, to be honest.

TheOnlyBilko · 05-10-2016, 01:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mass_nerder

/Bennett is Bennett, but the mystery Puljujarvi could be anything, he could even be a Bennett!

Lol he could even be another "Dougie Hamilton"

Poe969 · 05-10-2016, 01:44 PM

or Puljujarvi could be an Ovechkin...

TheOnlyBilko · 05-10-2016, 01:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

Bennett was the top ranked skater by CSS in his draft. Hard to say where Puljujarvi would have gone in that draft, but I think it's very safe to say that he would not have been a clear 1st overall (i.e. ranked higher than Bennett).

Also, Bennett has an additional 2 years of development under his belt, where he has continued to show that he is on a path to be a top line player (whereas Puljujarvi is still very much a teenage risk).

Bennett is also a C and has leadership/grit intangibles.

I could see some people thinking Puljujarvi might have similar value to Bennett, but it's hard to argue that he has more. And I would argue that he has a fair bit less.

If I were trading Bennett for Puljujarvi, I would be expecting that the other side would be adding.

We as Flames fans also highly overrate Sam Bennett. Don't get me wrong I love him and think he becomes a 60 point player and I can be a homer just as much as anyone but I am also a realist.

Enoch Root · 05-10-2016, 01:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheOnlyBilko

We as Flames fans also highly overrate Sam Bennett. Don't get me wrong I love him and think he becomes a 60 point player and I can be a homer just as much as anyone but I am also a realist.

Meaning what?

Bennett plays in the NHL and we have a pretty good idea of what he will become.

As far as anyone on these boards has actually seen, Puljujarvi has played a handful of games against juniors.

There is over-rating going on in this thread, and it is the same over-rating that happens every year: the massive overvaluation of the shiny new toys.

Remember just 2 or 3 years ago when Granlund was the top rated prospect on the planet? There are no guarantees.

TheOnlyBilko · 05-10-2016, 01:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Poe969

or Puljujarvi could be an Ovechkin...

I can remember when Pens fans were so upset losing out on 2004 number 1 draft pick Alex Ovechkin. They had to settle for Evgeni Malkin with #2 who was going to be in Russia at least 1 or 2 more years longer then Ovechkin. When you are a rebuilding team with #2 overall pick, 2 years before the player can even come over to be in your system seems like an eternity. Turns out both players became really great, winning Hart's and Art Ross trophies. Malkin won the BEST individual trophy a player can win though, the Conn Smythe. Same thing can happen with Jesse Puljujärvi over Laine & Matthews.

RyZ · 05-10-2016, 02:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheOnlyBilko

We as Flames fans also highly overrate Sam Bennett. Don't get me wrong I love him and think he becomes a 60 point player and I can be a homer just as much as anyone but I am also a realist.

Only 44 players in the NHL had 60 or more points last season. At 60 points you are an offensive star in todays NHL. A 60 pt player with snarl and intagibles (I hate that term) is an extremely rare and valuable commodity in todays game. Nothing wrong or dissapointing with Bennett becoming that level of player.

TheOnlyBilko · 05-10-2016, 02:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

Remember just 2 or 3 years ago when Granlund was the top rated prospect on the planet? There are no guarantees.

I never remember this lol. The meaning was in a realistic world Columbus wouldn't trade #3 overall for Bennett straight up. Not a chance.

Enoch Root · 05-10-2016, 02:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheOnlyBilko

I can remember when Pens fans were so upset losing out on 2004 number 1 draft pick Alex Ovechkin. They had to settle for Evgeni Malkin with #2 who was going to be in Russia at least 1 or 2 more years longer then Ovechkin. When you are a rebuilding team with #2 overall pick, 2 years before the player can even come over to be in your system seems like an eternity. Turns out both players became really great, winning Hart's and Art Ross trophies. Malkin won the BEST individual trophy a player can win though, the Conn Smythe. Same thing can happen with Jesse Puljujärvi over Laine & Matthews.

Of course it can. But the chances of ANY of them becoming another Ovechkin or Malkin is pretty slim.

Enoch Root · 05-10-2016, 02:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheOnlyBilko

I never remember this lol. The meaning was in a realistic world Columbus wouldn't trade #3 overall for Bennett straight up. Not a chance.

Then they would be fools. The Flames wouldn't trade Bennett for the #3 straight up.

The Yen Man · 05-10-2016, 02:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheOnlyBilko

I never remember this lol. The meaning was in a realistic world Columbus wouldn't trade #3 overall for Bennett straight up. Not a chance.

On the flipside, in a realistic world, Flames wouldn't trade Bennett for the #3 overall either. Why would trade a guy you spent 2 years developing for another guy who may or may not be as good eventually, but reset the development clock back to zero? Makes no sense.

TheOnlyBilko · 05-10-2016, 02:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RyZ

Only 44 players in the NHL had 60 or more points last season. At 60 points you are an offensive star in todays NHL. A 60 pt player with snarl and intagibles (I hate that term) is an extremely rare and valuable commodity in todays game. Nothing wrong with Bennett becoming that level of player.

I know nothing is wrong with this and I'm reading a few pages back about people talking about trading Bennett for Jesse Puljujärvi. I'm basically saying we have a pretty good idea of Bennetts ceiling, which is great, but Jesse Puljujärvi's ceiling could be much greater and is still a "wildcard". The position that Columbus is in, is that they would much rather "risk" keeping Jesse Puljujärvi for what he could become then trade him for Bennett.

Royle9 · 05-10-2016, 02:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

The #6OA, next year's 1st, and 2 2nds is MASSIVE overpayment. Massive.

And you guys are talking about adding Jankowski and Backlund as well?

FFS, just stop.

Again, I'm not saying I WOULD OFFER THAT, I'm simply reiterating another poster's proposal that was shot down for the fact it wasn't good enough to entice CBJ.

Post in question I was referring to, again I didn't PROPOSE this trade, I simply disagree that this POST BELOW THIS LINE is "not enough" for CBJ to even look at it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Flames Draft Watcher

Hmmm I wonder if we could put together an appealing enough proposal. Just spitballing here but maybe:

1st rounder + Jankowski + Andersson + two 2nds FOR #3

Is that close? Too little? Too much? I think CBJ would have to be really high on Janko/Andersson for that to work.

Jesus Christ people, get off the train.

Poe969 · 05-10-2016, 02:07 PM

For the record, I don't think I'd trade Bennett for Puljujarvi but I'd ask "would you trade Bennett for the #3 pick" just to gauge their response. If they say no, it would take more then you walk away, if they say yes then tell them that you're not going to give them Bennett but you'd offer something else.

I do think 6 OA + the stars first, 2 seconds would get it done or at least something along those lines. If they're even considering moving the pick, you have to do see if you can get it. Puljujarvi would really help this team so if he's available, you try your best to get him.

If they want Bennett + the conversation is over and at least you tried.

SuperMatt18 · 05-10-2016, 02:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheOnlyBilko

I never remember this lol. The meaning was in a realistic world Columbus wouldn't trade #3 overall for Bennett straight up. Not a chance.

Not the Flames Granlund but the Minnesota Wild Granlund. Corey Pronman had him as the top prospect in the NHL that had already been drafted at one point.

The kid actually had similar hype to Puljujarvi and put up a higher PPG in his draft year in the SM-Liiga than both Laine & Puljujarvi. Also had a dominant U-18 and WJC in his draft year.

People figured he was a lock to be an offensive star in the NHL and it never really panned out.

The Yen Man · 05-10-2016, 02:13 PM

I definitely remember the hype on Granlund. They were touting him as Minny's franchise forward of the future.

Gaskal · 05-10-2016, 02:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Poe969

For the record, I don't think I'd trade Bennett for Puljujarvi but I'd ask "would you trade Bennett for the #3 pick" just to gauge their response. If they say no, it would take more then you walk away, if they say yes then tell them that you're not going to give them Bennett but you'd offer something else.

Isn't that what Burke was saying before about how he worked deals? He'd mention "Would you give it to me for 5 first round picks?" Guy says yes.
"Well I'm not giving you 5. What about 4?" Guy says yes.
"Okay well I'm not giving 4 1sts, what about 3?" Guy says no, and you either negotiate or drop it.

TheOnlyBilko · 05-10-2016, 02:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Yen Man

On the flipside, in a realistic world, Flames wouldn't trade Bennett for the #3 overall either. Why would trade a guy you spent 2 years developing for another guy who may or may not be as good eventually, but reset the development clock back to zero? Makes no sense.

Makes no sense for a GM who could be fighting to keep his job in a couple years, yes I agree, but looking for the best of the Franchise long term? it could very well make sense. Same thing could have been said in 2004 with the Penguins. Why draft Malkin when he is stuck with Metallurg Magnitogorsk for at least 2 more years when we could draft Cam Barker or Andrew Ladd and get them now (and get much needed help they needed badly) and start developing them in our system? Giving up those 2 years well worth it for the Franchise long term.

Poe969 · 05-10-2016, 02:17 PM

That's exactly what I mean. First they have to find out if CBJ would trade #3 then find the breaking point and see if they can live with it. I just think the Flames should keep Gio, Bennett, Monahan, Gaudrea, Brodie & Hamilton. If one of those guys is the sticking point then you know a deal won't work out. It would have to be a deal around picks and prospects with maybe one or two roster players involved but other than those 6 I think everyone is on the table. If it can be done that way, do it. If it can't be done, move on.

TheOnlyBilko · 05-10-2016, 02:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SuperMatt18

Not the Flames Granlund but the Minnesota Wild Granlund. Corey Pronman had him as the top prospect in the NHL that had already been drafted at one point.

The kid actually had similar hype to Puljujarvi and put up a higher PPG in his draft year in the SM-Liiga than both Laine & Puljujarvi. Also had a dominant U-18 and WJC in his draft year.

People figured he was a lock to be an offensive star in the NHL and it never really panned out.

Ahhh gotcha I was thinking of the Flames Grandlund and I thought he was talking about how Flames fans (and all fans) hype their own prospects.