2016 NHL Draft

[Flames Draft Watcher]

Originally Posted by Bingo

Agree on Edmonton and Vancouver

but don't see Toronto or Columbus going that route. If both rivals get lottery picks the Flames may see the top 5 forwards gone.

I dunno I think TOR has more depth and game breakers up front then they do on the blue line. They have Reilly and Gardiner as top 4 guys and guys like Corrado and Marincin as depth guys. Reilly will probably end up top pairing but nobody else in their system.

Meanwhile up front they have former top 10 picks in Nylander, JVR, Marner, Kadri plus another former 1st in Kapenen. 4 of their top 5 ranked prospects by Craig Button are forwards (Nylander, Marner, Johnson and Timashov.)

Arguably their need for a top 3 defenseman is as high or higher than their need for a top 6 forward. However I could easily see them liking Tkachuk/Dubois/Nylander more than the available defensemen. But I wouldn't rule out the idea of them picking a defenseman completely, their depth back there just isn't where you'd want it to be moving forward.

[dissentowner]

Originally Posted by GranteedEV

Juolevi is a bit redundant in our system. Average sized puck moving left shot non-physical D with an average shot? That's basically a poor man's Brodie, and what Kylington, Kulak, even Culkin project as. Hamilton, Andersson, Hickey, Giordano, and even Sieloff/Wotherspoon are also guys who contribute to a tough-out for Juolevi.

If we didn't have Kylington, Juolevi would make a lot more sense. If we did take a D, Sergachyev seems to better address systemic weaknesses with his superior size and booming shot to go with great skating. But I really don't want to take a D so early in the draft due to the sheer unpredictability of the developmental nature of the position. You're as likely to get a Zach Bogosian in Juolevi as you are a Duncan Keith in a Luke Green. None of the D this year appear to be a Doughty or Ekblad type immediate contributor talent.

Somebody has not seen Joulevi play. How is he average sized at 6'3? He is not non-physical either, he just is not a hammer on the back end. Average shot? Not at all, he does not have a cannon from the point but he has a very accurate shot and a very good wrist shot, he gets pucks through to the net. Great at joining the rush and is an exceptional passer. What separates him the most though is his hockey IQ and stick work, that is where he reminds me of Lidstrom. I think you need to do more homework on this player.

http://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/junio...run-nhl-draft/

[druetetective]

I'm still not a big fan of Juolevi. For me it comes down to him having 0 elite skills while the other 2 guys have at least 1.

I'd still take Chychrun above the other 2 because I think he can fit in best on the Flames. I do think Sergachev will be the best all-around though by a slight margin.

Maybe Sergachev is Brent Burns to Chychruns Vlasic.

[Flames Draft Watcher]

I think hockey sense is very important to the Flames scouting staff. Juolevi seems to be ranked higher in hockey sense than Chychrun. Therefore it wouldn't surprise me if the Flames were one of the teams that don't have Chychrun top 10 and have Juolevi higher.

If we're trying to guess who the Flames might like it seems that Tkachuk/Dubois tick a lot of boxes that they like and that the Flames need. After that? That's the real question. Do the Flames like the pure skill of Nylander even though he doesn't have ideal size/strength/physicality? Or would his slight frame and non-physical play drop him slightly for the Flames? It's almost impossible to guess which blue liner the Flames might like best and whether those blue liners are ahead of Nylander or not.

[GranteedEV]

Originally Posted by dissentowner

Somebody has not seen Joulevi play. How is he average sized at 6'3? He is not non-physical either, he just is not a hammer on the back end. Average shot? Not at all, he does not have a cannon from the point but he has a very accurate shot and a very good wrist shot, he gets pucks through to the net. Great at joining the rush and is an exceptional passer. What separates him the most though is his hockey IQ and stick work, that is where he reminds me of Lidstrom. I think you need to do more homework on this player.

http://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/junio...run-nhl-draft/

- Juolevi is listed at ~6'2 / 180 everywhere. I've seen him listed at 6'1 a few places. For a defenseman that is average size or even smaller if he doesn't add the muscle over the next handful of years. Size is not a strength of his even if it's not a glaring weakness.

- Juolevi is not a hammer. Exactly. He's about as physical as our puck movers, Brodie, Hamilton etc. Which is what I'm saying. Physicality is not a strength of his even if it's not a glaring weakness.

- Juolevi had 0.16 goals per game in his CHL draft year, playing on a stacked London Knights team. This is very average. Your description of his shot is a description you ready about every puck moving defenseman who isn't above average at shooting.

-As for Lidstrom comparisions, Lidstrom is just another example of an elite defenseman drafted in a later round to go with guys like Keith, Chara, Josi, Weber, Subban, Brodie, etc. I see no reason to take Juolevi in the top 10 because his overall set of attributes, while currently more refined than 2nd rounders, isn't unique relative to 2nd rounders. I don't see an Erik Karlsson type elite offensive player, I don't even see Alex Pietrangelo level draft-year numbers. Does Juolevi have a ton of upside? Sure he does, most puck moving D have sweet upside and there's no predicting how they develop. I look at Luke Green, a guy who has issues in his own zone right now, and that means nothing going forward because defense can be taught and the rest of their skillsets are more similar than dissimilar.

Lidstrom is a stylistic comparision but really, half the top 4 NHLers in the league these days are stylistically modelled after Lidstrom, whether it's Brodin, Adam Larsson, Klefbom or even guys who didn't make it at all - like our old friend Tom Erixon.

I'm not saying there aren't defensemen worth taking in the top 10 but you have to explore what Juolevi potentially brings five years from now that a Luke Green potentially doesn't. You can see that in guys like Drew Doughty, Viktor Hedman, and Aaron Ekblad. It's not as obvious in other top 10 drafted D in the past. Would you be happy with an Olli Juolevi that ends up as Hampus Lindholm? Sure. But would you be happier with Filip Forsberg? I would because I think Hampus Lindholms are a lot more common later in the draft, Forsbergs not so much.

[Itse]

Originally Posted by druetetective

I'm still not a big fan of Juolevi. For me it comes down to him having 0 elite skills while the other 2 guys have at least 1.

Considering his age and position, I think Juolevi has elite hockey sense.

Very sturdily built D-man that leans into his hits, competes hard, and possesses elite-level vision and hockey sense. Looks stronger game-by-game and adapts very quickly to his surroundings and situations. Scouts liken Olli Juolevi to Olli Maatta of the Pittsburgh Penguins. Both are fluid skaters and have deep-rooted understandings of their position. Both have tremendous skill and talent, and both will go far in their careers. - See more at: http://www.eliteprospects.com/player....LnnOoAep.dpuf

[Funkhouser]

If the top three + Tkachuk + Dubois are gone by the time we pick what are the chances we go for someone like Jost??

[GranteedEV]

Scouts liken Olli Juolevi to Olli Maatta of the Pittsburgh Penguins.

Olli Maatta had 19 points in 67 games this season. He is functionally the penguins' #2D but would be our #4D. Is that really what people want out of a top 10 pick?

Compare to Rasmus Ristolainen, 41 points in 82 games to go with a Pronger-esque physical style.

Maatta's can be found outside the top 10, Ristolainens less often. Sergachyev is the only D I see in this draft with that kind of potential and even then not as much.

[Itse]

Originally Posted by GranteedEV

Maatta's can be found outside the top 10, Ristolainens less often. Sergachyev is the only D I see in this draft with that kind of potential.

I'm going to take professional scouting rankings over your word on that. They put Juolevi and Sergachyov at about the same level. (With Juolevi seemingly ranked a bit higher more often even.)

Besides, Juolevi actually had more points per game in the same league than Sergyachov, so if it's point you're worried about, I don't know what makes you say the latter is actually better in that regard.

[1qqaaz]

Originally Posted by Funkhouser

If the top three + Tkachuk + Dubois are gone by the time we pick what are the chances we go for someone like Jost??

Probably fairly low, as the Flames are more likely to pick BPA with those top 5 gone. At the 6th pick, the BPA is most likely Nylander or a defenseman.

That being said, I wouldn't be surprised if the Flames' scouting staff likes Tyson Jost more than most other teams do. If they really love Jost, they would have to trade down rather than take him at 6th. It simply wouldn't be good asset management to take him at 6th. But I think the Flames would like one of Nylander/the Dmen enough to take them at 6th.

Coming from the BCHL gives Jost a bit more risk than other prospects IMO. The Flames can't afford to take large risks with such a high pick.

[BIG M]

If the top three + Tkachuk + Dubois are gone I would like the Flames to draft Logan Brown. The Flames don't need more defenceman at this time. We need big forwards to compete in the Pacific Division.

[Robbob]

Originally Posted by BIG M

If the top three + Tkachuk + Dubois are gone I would like the Flames to draft Logan Brown. The Flames don't need more defenceman at this time. We need big forwards to compete in the Pacific Division.

Always take the best player available IMO. If it is a dman then it's a dman. You can always trade from that position of strength.

[Fighting Banana Slug]

Originally Posted by Funkhouser

If the top three + Tkachuk + Dubois are gone by the time we pick what are the chances we go for someone like Jost??

I think it is possible, but only if they have him above Nylander or the Dmen. We need help pretty much everywhere, so BPA for sure. As much as I want the Flames to get bigger and tougher to play against, I don't think Nylander should be automatically dismissed because he isn't a giant. If the scouts think he is the best guy, I have no problem with them going in that direction. Same with any of the Dmen.

[GranteedEV]

Originally Posted by Itse

I'm going to take professional scouting rankings over your word on that. They put Juolevi and Sergachyov at about the same level. (With Juolevi seemingly ranked a bit higher more often even.)

I'm not claiming to be a scout. I'm just pointing what we know (like Juolevi is 180lbs and plays a pretty common style, even if he's effective at it, and Sergachyev is 205lbs and plays a slightly more uncommon style due to his physical engagement).

Hockey IQ matters, I don't want a Darnell Nurse I want a Rasmus Ristolainen. But Sergachyev's hockey-sense has been described as "high-end" too.

And again, my primary point is I'd much rather take a forward, because high end forwards so rarely slip into later rounds, whereas availability of high-end defensemen are a safe assumption in later rounds. Every draft produces a handful of later picked defensemen who would go top 5 in a redraft, very few produce such forwards. Shayne Gostisbehere was undrafted in 2011 but would go top 3 in that draft. Jonas Brodin was a top 10 pick in that draft but is he a guy you would trade 6th overall for? Not I.

Besides, Juolevi actually had more points per game in the same league than Sergyachov, so if it's point you're worried about, I don't know what makes you say the latter is actually better in that regard.

Sergachyev had 0.851 PPG, 1.00 PPG in the playoffs. The Spitfires scored 252 goals.
Juolevi had 0.737 PPG, 0.846 PPG in the playoffs. The Knights scored 319 goals.

So that claim is incorrect. Sergachyev outproduced Juolevi while playing on a less offensively talented team. Further, Juolevi had 0.158 goals per game, Sergachyev had 0.254. Sergechyev scored 61% more goals-per-game in the same league.

[albertGQ]

Would not be upset at all if we are stuck with Nylander at 6. Not sure if I would rather have him or Chuchryn though.

Who do the rankings have rated higher out of these two players?

[Bingo]

until recently (last month)

there were three, then four more, so having a solid chance at a top 7 was just fine by me. Now though it seems like 3 and 2 and then 5 which is a shame given the Flames chances of landing 6th or 7th.

however, since so much has changed in less than a calendar month, maybe we'll see more changes between now and 8 weeks from now.

Enjoy the ride I guess.

But can't wait until Saturday to get more clarity. This is killing me.

[JJ1532]

Originally Posted by Bingo

until recently (last month)

there were three, then four more, so having a solid chance at a top 7 was just fine by me. Now though it seems like 3 and 2 and then 5 which is a shame given the Flames chances of landing 6th or 7th.

however, since so much has changed in less than a calendar month, maybe we'll see more changes between now and 8 weeks from now.

Enjoy the ride I guess.

But can't wait until Saturday to get more clarity. This is killing me.

Same, we are going round in circles at the moment. Not sure why they had the lottery so long after the season finished. Anyone know why its been scheduled for this date?

[Vulcan]

Originally Posted by albertGQ

Would not be upset at all if we are stuck with Nylander at 6. Not sure if I would rather have him or Chuchryn though.

Who do the rankings have rated higher out of these two players?

McKenzie has Nylander at 6 with Chychrun at 9th. He also has Juolevi at 7th and Sergachev at 8th. My feeling is that these 4 are probably interchangeable.

[Itse]

Originally Posted by GranteedEV

Sergachyev had 0.851 PPG, 1.00 PPG in the playoffs. The Spitfires scored 252 goals.
Juolevi had 0.737 PPG, 0.846 PPG in the playoffs. The Knights scored 319 goals.

So that claim is incorrect. Sergachyev outproduced Juolevi while playing on a less offensively talented team. Further, Juolevi had 0.158 goals per game, Sergachyev had 0.254. Sergechyev scored 61% more goals-per-game in the same league.

Okay, apparently I can't use a calculator.

So that's a fair point. I don't really agree it's enough to go saying that one is definitely a higher-end prospect than the other, but it'a fair argument.

[JJ1532]

Should we be looking for the guy with the greatest offensive potential? For me, to round out our top 4, I'd rather we prioritised a big bodied guy who is defensively sound in his own end, can shut down other teams offence and has the potential to match up well against the big centres he'll be facing in our division/conference. All 3 guys in our range are tall guys, so no issue there. But who projects to be the best defenceman in his own zone?