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
I think mindset also has to come into play. For instance, does whomever has the #2 pick believe in filling a need or just simple BPA, etc?
I think the most interesting debate at 6 could be between Tkachuk if he falls and Nylander - and both of them VS the 3 defencemen. There is a lot to like in Juolevi, Sergachev and Chychrun. I can see even one of them being off the board by 6.
Sergachev is extremely underrated by many people on here it seems. He was named the OHL defencemen of the year. He is the youngest player ever to win that award in the history of the OHL and only the second rookie to ever win it (first was Bryan Berard in 94). He finished 3rd in points for d-men in the OHL as a rookie. Very big, very talented, good on the PP, physical, calm, composed player.
Juolevi is a great prospect as well. I have a feeling the Oilers will take him which makes me a bit scared tbh. He is fantastic, good skating, good vision, passing etc. He isnt as physical and he is also on the best junior team so he benefits from his teammates and they benefit from him as well. I think he would be better suited to the eastern conference on a high flying offensive team rather than in our divison as a d-man.
Chychrun is the most intriguing player in the draft IMO. He's so strange. He has literally everything you could ever want in a young defenceman except for his IQ and decision making. I think its overblown and he's simply trying to do too much or be too cute, kind of like Kylington. The more I think of it - the more I see him at the top D-man in the draft. He is probably the best skater in the whole draft, if there is better - I'd love to see who that is. Everytime I see him I'm stuck between thinking hes going to be the next best Dman in the NHL and thinking he would be a dangerous pick because of his brain and how he thinks the game. But I think he's not been challenged enough at his current level and he will think the game better once he needs to grow. I think if he learns when to play simple and how to do the easiest, most obvious plays - he will be an absolute stud in the NHL. I really really hope Edmonton doesnt take him.
I think Tkachuk is the scariest player for me. He isnt a good skater and he wont be able to play his physical game he does in junior in the NHL. He reminds me of a worse skating Virtanen. I think he's the only player in the top 8 i'd be truly scared of taking. He is the 3rd best player on his line and I believe he is the 4th best player on his team. I think he has awesome vision, good shot, goes to the net alot and plays a smart game. But as far as skill and skating I think on another team without Marner, Dvorak and Juolevi + Max Jones, Pu etc he would have less production and be ranked outside the top 10. I dont think he could be the offensive force or generator on a line with 2 other random OHL players not named Marner or Dvorak.
At the top of the draft, you have to go for skill and potential. If Nylander falls to 6 the scouts will be thrilled. You dont pass on a player of that skill level with a 6'1 frame, excellent skating and who is still growing in height and weight to add some gritty physical type forward with worse skating and not as much skill. Another interesting thing is that Nylander is a hair under 6'1 and Tkachuk is about 5'11. The latter weighs more and is more physical in junior but we're evaluating kids who are barely legal and in 2 years their bodies will be much different. Its not unlikely that Nylander gets to 200lbs in the next 2 seasons.
I am very much on the Nylander train simply due to raw skill, skating and the fact he projects to have a higher ceiling. His hands are elite. His vision and hockey IQ is shockingly good. He thinks the game lighting fast. I think if you put Nylander on Marner and Dvorak's line he would be ranked higher and be WAY more impressive + probably have a ton more points. If you put Tkachuk on McLeod's line, on a much less talented team I think he would be ranked lower and have less points.
The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to Crumpy-Gunt For This Useful Post:
I think the most interesting debate at 6 could be between Tkachuk if he falls and Nylander - and both of them VS the 3 defencemen. There is a lot to like in Juolevi, Sergachev and Chychrun. I can see even one of them being off the board by 6.
Sergachev is extremely underrated by many people on here it seems. He was named the OHL defencemen of the year. He is the youngest player ever to win that award in the history of the OHL and only the second rookie to ever win it (first was Bryan Berard in 94). He finished 3rd in points for d-men in the OHL as a rookie. Very big, very talented, good on the PP, physical, calm, composed player.
Juolevi is a great prospect as well. I have a feeling the Oilers will take him which makes me a bit scared tbh. He is fantastic, good skating, good vision, passing etc. He isnt as physical and he is also on the best junior team so he benefits from his teammates and they benefit from him as well. I think he would be better suited to the eastern conference on a high flying offensive team rather than in our divison as a d-man.
Chychrun is the most intriguing player in the draft IMO. He's so strange. He has literally everything you could ever want in a young defenceman except for his IQ and decision making. I think its overblown and he's simply trying to do too much or be too cute, kind of like Kylington. The more I think of it - the more I see him at the top D-man in the draft. He is probably the best skater in the whole draft, if there is better - I'd love to see who that is. Everytime I see him I'm stuck between thinking hes going to be the next best Dman in the NHL and thinking he would be a dangerous pick because of his brain and how he thinks the game. But I think he's not been challenged enough at his current level and he will think the game better once he needs to grow. I think if he learns when to play simple and how to do the easiest, most obvious plays - he will be an absolute stud in the NHL. I really really hope Edmonton doesnt take him.
I think Tkachuk is the scariest player for me. He isnt a good skater and he wont be able to play his physical game he does in junior in the NHL. He reminds me of a worse skating Virtanen. I think he's the only player in the top 8 i'd be truly scared of taking. He is the 3rd best player on his line and I believe he is the 4th best player on his team. I think he has awesome vision, good shot, goes to the net alot and plays a smart game. But as far as skill and skating I think on another team without Marner, Dvorak and Juolevi + Max Jones, Pu etc he would have less production and be ranked outside the top 10. I dont think he could be the offensive force or generator on a line with 2 other random OHL players not named Marner or Dvorak.
At the top of the draft, you have to go for skill and potential. If Nylander falls to 6 the scouts will be thrilled. You dont pass on a player of that skill level with a 6'1 frame, excellent skating and who is still growing in height and weight to add some gritty physical type forward with worse skating and not as much skill. Another interesting thing is that Nylander is a hair under 6'1 and Tkachuk is about 5'11. The latter weighs more and is more physical in junior but we're evaluating kids who are barely legal and in 2 years their bodies will be much different. Its not unlikely that Nylander gets to 200lbs in the next 2 seasons.
I am very much on the Nylander train simply due to raw skill, skating and the fact he projects to have a higher ceiling. His hands are elite. His vision and hockey IQ is shockingly good. He thinks the game lighting fast. I think if you put Nylander on Marner and Dvorak's line he would be ranked higher and be WAY more impressive + probably have a ton more points. If you put Tkachuk on McLeod's line, on a much less talented team I think he would be ranked lower and have less points.
I don't think Tkachuk is 5'11. NHL.com has him at 6'1, 195.
Last edited by StrykerSteve; 06-03-2016 at 04:59 PM.
The Following User Says Thank You to StrykerSteve For This Useful Post:
Everywhere I've looked Tkachuk is listed at 6'1 or 6.05 which is about the same for Nylander. I think Tkachuk and Dubois will be gone when we pick and we'll probably take Nylander over a defenceman.
Was thinking about starting a new thread but wasn't sure how it would be received. Basically want to expand on the discussion from the thread about which pick we've soured on.
What are people's thoughts about dropping down to pick up another second rounder? It seems there is a lack of consensus on the board about who to pick at 6 and I can imagine the Flames are having similar discussions. There seems to be players that we would be ok picking at 7-10 but not at 6. So question begs, if we can probably pick up a high second to slot down a few spots depending if a team is in love with a player they think might get taken above them, do we do it? As it stands, the player we might have ranked at 6 could be available a few spots down or the Flames might have a group of players ranked equally and would be comfortable taking whoever is left from that bunch. All this is premised on Dubois and Tkachuk being gone when we pick.
If we look at getting a late second, Florida, Dallas, Washington and Anaheim don't have second round picks. Perhaps these teams would be ok slotting down a few spots in order to recoup a second. TB already has 2 seconds but Stevie Y has shown a willingness to drop down in order to get additional picks so we could add them to the mix. Those would appear to be the targets if we are wanting to trade up into the first, which might be tough as someone pointed out due to the drop in the 25 pick range.
Would be interesting to hear what others feel about dropping down in the first and how low they would go and for what cost. And what are thoughts about trying to get a late first using our seconds.
Last edited by The Original FFIV; 06-03-2016 at 10:43 PM.
Was thinking about starting a new thread but wasn't sure how it would be received. Basically want to expand on the discussion from the thread about which pick we've soured on.
What are people's thoughts about dropping down to pick up another second rounder? It seems there is a lack of consensus on the board about who to pick at 6 and I can imagine the Flames are having similar discussions. There seems to be players that we would be ok picking at 7-10 but not at 6. So question begs, if we can probably pick up a high second to slot down a few spots depending if a team is in love with a player they think might get taken above them, do we do it? As it stands, the player we might have ranked at 6 could be available a few spots down or the Flames might have a group of players ranked equally and would be comfortable taking whoever is left from that bunch. All this is premised on Dubois and Tkachuk being gone when we pick.
If we look at getting a late second, Florida, Dallas, Washington and Anaheim don't have second round picks. Perhaps these teams would be ok slotting down a few spots in order to recoup a second. TB already has 2 seconds but Stevie Y has shown a willingness to drop down in order to get additional picks so we could add them to the mix. Those would appear to be the targets if we are wanting to trade up into the first, which might be tough as someone pointed out due to the drop in the 25 pick range.
Would be interesting to hear what others feel about dropping down in the first and how low they would go and for what cost. And what are thoughts about trying to get a late first using our seconds.
You realize the Flames already have three 2nd round picks right? There's absolutely zero chance they trade down just to accumulate another 2nd. The Flames will be picking 6th and the question is more centered around possibly packaging up those 2nd round picks to move into a late 1st round pick.
You realize the Flames already have three 2nd round picks right? There's absolutely zero chance they trade down just to accumulate another 2nd. The Flames will be picking 6th and the question is more centered around possibly packaging up those 2nd round picks to move into a late 1st round pick.
I'm aware, but if you can get another asset and the player you want, why wouldn't you move down? Don't believe there's a limit on how many 2nd rounders we can accumulate.
If we are going to move a second(s) for a goalie, moving down to accumulate another second to replenish any that we might deal won't hurt.
Great set of posts Crumpy-Gunt. Lots of intelligent posters in here, but those were the most well-reasoned, well-explained and unemotional thoughts for a simpleton like me. Put me in the Nylander camp.
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Frequitude For This Useful Post:
Was just going through "Is There Another Hamiltonesque Trade the Flames Could Pull Off ?" thread, while watching 2016 NHL draft prospects highlights, while watching the highlights, I was just focused on three players(Matthews, Laine and Puljujarvi), I really hope that moving up and getting one of these players is the Flames " Hamiltonesque Trade", I think these are heads and shoulders above the rest.
