2016 NHL Draft

[Boreal]

Originally Posted by New Era

Both would have been sufficient picks and met their need. What is your point? As it turns out, drafting Monahan would have met their need and got the BPA, so I fail to see the other crap in your post.

My point is hind sight is 20/20 & you cherry picking Monahan 3 years after the fact is irrelevant fools gold, being that...

1. You have no idea what Nashvilles Draft list looked like
2. Lindholm was drafted before Monahan
3. Jones was obviously the best player available on their draft list and they traded him for a quality return.

If you're suggesting that Nashville would/should/could trade Jones for Lindholm, I have some used cars I would love to sell you.

Would they trade Jones for Monahan? Debatable until both are signed to new contracts. That being said, would Monahan been given the opportunity to play in Nashville vs Calgary? Another hypothetical which you failed to consider.

It's self evident that it is easy to cherry pick the draft after the fact and select best player available at a certain position.

[Wolfman]

Wow, have I been ignorant towards my knowledge of Olli Joulevi. Maybe some research of my own should be done before I pass judgement on players in this years draft. If the Flames want to draft him at 6 I'm fine with that decision. However, I would prefer a skilled RW at 6.

[Fire]

If Dubois an Tkachuk are gone I can't see the Flames passing on Nylander for one of the defensemen. The Flames desperately need another skilled future top-6 forward and I can't see how they would think any of the available defensemen are clearly better than Nylander.

[sureLoss]

I forgot about this rule with regards to Nylander:

Ryan Kennedy @THNRyanKennedy
Talked to Alex Nylander; because he was "loaned" from Europe to OHL, he can play AHL next year (or NHL, OHL or Europe), like Julius Honka

So thanks to this technicality, Nylander could end up in Stockton to start the season if the Flames did draft him. And if he can be assigned to Stockton off the bat, the Flames could call him up and down through the season with impunity.

[Fighting Banana Slug]

Originally Posted by Fire

If Dubois an Tkachuk are gone I can't see the Flames passing on Nylander for one of the defensemen. The Flames desperately need another skilled future top-6 forward and I can't see how they would think any of the available defensemen are clearly better than Nylander.

I am fine with Nylander, but you can't see how they would think that any of the Dmen are better? Nylander is no slam dunk. There are a fair number of forwards and defensemen that might lay claim to #6.

[dammage79]

Mmm, flexibility.

[Vinny01]

Originally Posted by sureLoss

I forgot about this rule with regards to Nylander:

Ryan Kennedy @THNRyanKennedy
Talked to Alex Nylander; because he was "loaned" from Europe to OHL, he can play AHL next year (or NHL, OHL or Europe), like Julius Honka

So thanks to this technicality, Nylander could end up in Stockton to start the season if the Flames did draft him. And if he can be assigned to Stockton off the bat, the Flames could call him up and down through the season with impunity.

That certainly makes it far more intriguing to draft Nylander this summer I won't lie. I don't see any way he is ready for the NHL in September but maybe he could be a call up or ready sooner if he plays pro right away

[dammage79]

The Combine content is pretty thin this year, no?

Think it has been this way the last couple of seasons.

Maybe i'll just hop on over to the Oilers site for a gander, they're always on top of Combine stuff. Like best in the NHL for providing draft coverage. They may suck on the ice but they sure have the off season content down to a science.

[Crumpy-Gunt]

This thread is basically a giant clash between people who want a big physical RW in the draft, people who want to trade up and get Puljujarvi (lol), and people who trust the scouts and just want them to stay at 6 and take the BPA.

Count me in the group that trust our scouts with a 6th overall pick. I dont know who they will take, but I'm confident we will get a great young player.

As far as Columbus trading down...they would be absolutely stupid to pass up JP at 3. I dont think they move the pick, definitely not for a pick trade, plus a 2nd and a prospect. To me there is a huge gap between Puljujarvi and Logan Brown (the top center available outside of Matthews). If Columbus gives up that much skill and offensive ceiling, just to get someone who is more likely to be a C, in Brown - I would be totally shocked. I like Brown, but theres no way I do that if I'm the BJs. Brown is like a taller Draisaitl, Puljujarvi could be a superstar in the NHL. He has that wow factor. There is quite a gap there imo.

As for trading down and taking Gauthier, Max Jones, etc... I love those 2 if we can get another pick.. but HELL to the NO NO. Dont move down from 6 to take a big physical RWer. Thats the worst thing a team can do in a draft, in any sport. Take the BPA, even if you are stacked there. There is a reason that professional world class hockey scouts have about 10 spots between Tkachuk/Nylander/3Dmen and Gauthier/Jones.

A good example of this is in the NFL, I'm a chiefs fan. I remember we had one of the absolute best running backs in football, probably the 2nd best after Ladanian Tomlinson, in Priest Holmes. In 2003 he broke Marshall Faulks NFL record for rushing TDs in one season with 27 (later broken by Tomlinson : 31). That same year we had the record setting running back in his PRIME, albeit injury prone...we took a running back in the 1st round at 27 overall.

That running back, Larry Johnson, became a superstar and a pro-bowl (all star player)

In his prime, we select a RB in the 3rd round who is our current best player and arguably the 2nd best RB in the NFL (Jamaal Charles). He holds the NFL career record for average yards per carry at 5.5.

Some people would say the Chiefs have been lucky to go from hall of fame RB, to pro bowl running back to another potential hall of famer.

We just took the BPA and it happened to be a running back even when we already had fantastic running backs, we still took them.

Similar to the Seth Jones draft. Brilliant pick by Nashville. If they would have decided they had Shea Weber and very good defense, they wouldnt have taken him. He was the BPA, he wasnt even supposed to slide to their spot in the draft - so they happily took him. Now they have a very good, high skill center to show for it. If they would have gone for a center in that draft, they likely wouldnt have the value today to be traded for Johansen OR Jones.

Our scouts are great. 6th is a high pick. There are some fantastic players ranked from 4-10. Lets let the scouts do their thing. The Hamilton trade was awesome last year, but I'm sure the scouts were super disappointed after doing all of that work, to lose 3 picks in the top few rounds. I'm also sure size will be one of the last factors the scouts debate. Nobody is sitting their arguing Logan Brown over Dubois solely because of size. I'm sure they cover IQ, growth curve, development, birth day, skating, shot, defensive instincts etc before they start doing the 6'6 vs 6'3 vs 5'11 or 225lbs vs 178lbs thing. Its ridiculous how much some of us amateurs factor position and size into a 6th overall pick. I'm 99% sure our scouts are totally open to a LD RD, LW, C, RW. Someone who's 6'6, or someone who is 5'9. 225, or 160. That will be one of the very last comparisons and discussions imo, as it should be when you are at the top of the 1st round. The discussion should all be about skill, skating, IQ, how they project, age, improvement etc.

Its frustrating and painful to see people purpose trading down for an extra 2nd rounder to hop from 6 to 15, so we can take Gauthier - since hes exactly the bruising 6'4 RW that we need on the 1st line. I'd have a heart attack if we did that. Just as I'd have a heart attack if I was a Blue Jackets fan and we traded from 3 to 6 to get Logan Brown. Remember how sad people were that we missed Teuvo Teravainen and Olli Maata? Imagine if we skip about 10 prospects who could be all stars to grab one guy that fits our team needs right now. As a sidenote; I like the Jankowski pick and I think he'll pan out - but I think its way way too dangerous to do that at 6 + we did that in that draft because we needed a 2nd and we somehow had Janko really high on our list so it made sense. We dont need a 2nd this year and there is no way we have Gauthier or anyone in the late teens ranked higher and anyone in the top 8

[FanIn80]

Question: Is our 1st and 3 2nds an overpayment for WPG's 1st?
If not, ensuing question: Would WPG take that?

[AC]

Originally Posted by FanIn80

Question: Is our 1st and 3 2nds an overpayment for WPG's 1st?

A statistical analysis of each pick's "value":
http://www.broadstreethockey.com/201...lue-trading-up

#2 = 69.9

#6 = 45.9
#35 = 11.3
#54 = 4.8ish
#56 = 4.6ish
---------------
Total = 66.6

So this would suggest all 4 picks wouldn't be enough for #2.
Logically Winnipeg wouldn't downgrade from that top 3 tier unless they're getting #6 and a more sure thing type of prospect or player I figure.

[home_sweet_dome]

Originally Posted by FanIn80

Question: Is our 1st and 3 2nds an overpayment for WPG's 1st?
If not, ensuing question: Would WPG take that?

It's an underpayment, and no chance the Jets would do that.

Quality trumps quantity every day and twice on draft day.

[Crumpy-Gunt]

Answer: Thats underpayment. Winnipeg isnt moving this pick. A young potential 50 goal scoring, 6'5 225 FINNISH right winger. SelLainne. They wont move it for 1st and 3 2nd round picks. I wouldnt either. Not to mention we're rivals and in close markets and we'd be one of the last teams they would trade with to let us potentially grab a demonic goal scoring winger to abuse them with.

That being said, even though they would consider it underpayment, I wouldnt be willing to do that deal even if they accepted. Its underpayment to them and overpayment to us. You only do that deal if everyone outside the top 3 makes you want to puke or you think Laine is the missing piece to this franchise. I dont think the flames think either of those things.

I think we can hit a homerun with 6, then use those 3 2nds to hit a few more home runs if we are lucky. Look at Rasmus, Kylington and Hickey. Our last 6th pick was Monahan. Keep the dang pick, its not worth it trading up or down. We need to use our 6th and our 2nds this year. I know we can find some more gems.

[Roof-Daddy]

Originally Posted by FanIn80

Question: Is our 1st and 3 2nds an overpayment for WPG's 1st?
If not, ensuing question: Would WPG take that?

Hard to say, it hasn't happened in a while.

2003 - #3, #55 for #1, #73 (up two spots)
2004 - #8, #59 for #4 (up four spots)
2005 - #12, #49, #207 for #8 (up four spots)
2007 - #13, #44, future 3rd rounder (#87) for #9 (up four spots)
2008 - #7, #68, future 2nd (#37) for #5 (up two spots)
2008 - #9, #40 for #7 (up two spots)

Going by history I'd say you are over paying to move up 4 spots with your offer, but they still might not make that trade despite the over payment. It all depends on team needs and what GM's & their scouting staffs think of their list and where they can drop to while still getting a player they really want.

[FanIn80]

Some of the recent mock drafts have us getting Tkachuk at 6th, so the question might be simplified by asking is (LW) Tkachuk + #35, #54, #56 enough to get (RW) Laine from a team that has the following ("quality") depth:

(RW) Wheeler (LW) Ehlers
(RW) Stafford
(RW/D) Byfuglien

Edit: There is also the possibility (I think) of WPG moving to the East, which would eliminate the "conference rival" aspect from the deal.

[Crumpy-Gunt]

Winnipeg's deicison wont have anything to do with Tkachuk or their winger depth. It will have to do with their valuation of Laine vs their valuation of what they could get back. the 6th is obvious, but its what they get on top of the 6th. I think any team making the offer would have to add in a top level prospect or a good NHL player. Picks alone likely wont get you Laine. Its not about the value of the picks you want to trade, for the value of the pick they have. Its about the value of the player they could pick at 2 vs the value of what you are offering. In essence the team wouldnt be trading for the 2nd overall picks value, they would be trading for the value of Laine. Which is a heck of a lot more than your typical 2nd overall imo.

When scouts are saying he has a top 5 shot in the NHL...and hes not even in NHL.. It makes me think they would sneeze at the thought of Tkachuk + a few 2nds to move down. If they move down, it wont be with us. We're literally the next team over from them, probably the closest NHL franchise. They arent letting us pick Laine, even if we offer the best trade.

Reverse the roles, you receive 25 calls about your 2nd overall pick, get 25 different offers and the best 3 come from WPG, VAN and EDM. Do you deal with them and let them potentially grab someone who projects to be basically a taller Stamkos/Ovechkin type pure scorer? If I was WPG and I even wanted to move the pick, I'd move it out east so I never have to worry about the kid lighting you up in your division or in the 1st round of the playoffs for the next decade.

[FanIn80]

Originally Posted by AC

A statistical analysis of each pick's "value":
http://www.broadstreethockey.com/201...lue-trading-up

#2 = 69.9

#6 = 45.9
#35 = 11.3
#54 = 4.8ish
#56 = 4.6ish
---------------
Total = 66.6

So this would suggest all 4 picks wouldn't be enough for #3.
Logically Winnipeg wouldn't downgrade from that top 3 tier unless they're getting #6 and a more sure thing type of prospect or player I figure.

I've looking for a way to quantify the value of draft picks. Discussing pick value is often like discussing player intangibles; very difficult to nail down.

Thanks for the link!

[Robbob]

Originally Posted by AC

A statistical analysis of each pick's "value":
http://www.broadstreethockey.com/201...lue-trading-up

#2 = 69.9

#6 = 45.9
#35 = 11.3
#54 = 4.8ish
#56 = 4.6ish
---------------
Total = 66.6

So this would suggest all 4 picks wouldn't be enough for #3.
Logically Winnipeg wouldn't downgrade from that top 3 tier unless they're getting #6 and a more sure thing type of prospect or player I figure.

I think you mean wouldn't be enough for #2 or would be enough for #3 (which has a value of 59.4).

Interestingly enough 66.6 would be overpaying for #3 for the equivalent of a late second (50).

[d_phaneuf]

I think those values need to be more subjective though based on the year

this year very much feels like it's tiered

1-2
3
4-8

I would think that in a situation like that 2 is worth more than the average year its available, whereas pick 4 is worth less this year than last year when the top 4 was so set in stone

[FanIn80]

Wow, for some reason I was thinking the West had 16 teams, and so a couple teams would be moving east (WPG?, MIN?, CHI?, NSH?)... Obviously I was on crack though, because it's the East that has 16 teams.