Calgary offers picks 6, 22, 28 for the first overall: no dice

[Gord Wappel]

Originally Posted by the_only_turek_fan

If true, Feaster should go. That is massive overpayment.

The ridiculous denial and delay this season in recognizing need to rebuild - never mind the previous years - moved Flames out of top five picks.

And now more panic and desire to "do something - anything" by GM .. is like thrashing in quicksand. Haven't we seen enough.

[PlayfulGenius]

Originally Posted by Bertuzzied

Not interested in changing my name but I'll give you $50 if the Flames finish in the bottom5 and you give me $20 if they don't.

I want some if this action

[PlayfulGenius]

Originally Posted by t0rrent98

How massive is this compared to the one Garth Snow offered with all his 7 picks just for the 2md overall pick?

Feasters offer is bigger, IMO... Though I'm going on the memory of the top pick from the Isles being around 9th or something like that...worse than 6th, anyway.

[Ashasx]

Originally Posted by Gord Wappel

The ridiculous denial and delay this season in recognizing need to rebuild - never mind the previous years - moved Flames out of top five picks.

And now more panic and desire to "do something - anything" by GM .. is like thrashing in quicksand. Haven't we seen enough.

What? The Flames were bottom 2 before the Iginla trade... then the younger players came in and played better than the Flames did all year.

[Sylvanfan]

Originally Posted by PlayfulGenius

Feasters offer is bigger, IMO... Though I'm going on the memory of the top pick from the Isles being around 9th or something like that...worse than 6th, anyway.

Islanders had the 4 pick and took Griffin Reinhart. So this rumour is them offering 7 picks to go up two spots.

[PlayfulGenius]

Originally Posted by Sylvanfan

Islanders had the 4 pick and took Griffin Reinhart. So this rumour is them offering 7 picks to go up two spots.

Yikes, that's right... Isles offer was bigger, obviously.

I thought at the time the CBJs were nuts not to take the deal...and I still believe that...big error...I guess we'll see over time.

[GGG]

Originally Posted by Newfieflamefan

2003: Fleury vs. Michalek, Pouliot, Perry
2004: Ovechkin vs. Montoya, Kaspars, Fistric
2005: Crosby vs. Brule, Lashoff, Niskanen
2006: Johnson vs. Brassard, Giroux, Foligno
2007: Kane vs. Gagne, Pacioretty, Petrecki
2008: Stamkos vs. Filatov, Eberle, Tikhonov
2009: Tavares vs. Ekman-Larsson, Schroeder, Olsen
2010: Hall vs. Connolly, Tinordi, Coyle
2011: Nugent-Hopkins vs. Zibanejad, Biggs, Phillips
2012: Yakopov vs. Lindholm, Maata, Skjei

How many of the past ten years would you not take #1? Only clear cut examples where the 3 picks turn out better would be 2003 & 2006...both years have players that didn't live up to expectations taken at # 1 and absolute home runs with late picks (Perry @ 28 in 2003 & Giroux @ 22 in 2006).

The other thing with this is the only years you wouldnt trage 6,22,28 for 1 were years a goalie or a defensemen were drafted 1st overall.

[Sylvanfan]

Originally Posted by PlayfulGenius

Yikes, that's right... Isles offer was bigger, obviously.

I thought at the time the CBJs were nuts not to take the deal...and I still believe that...big error...I guess we'll see over time.

I think I would have made the deal if I was Columbus too. But for the most part it's the 2 and 3 round picks that have value, the rest are not worthless, but for the most part 4th and 5th rounders are the currency to move around in the 3rd round.

But lets say for example that some offers the Flames a 2, 5, 6 for the 22 pick. Than someone offers them a 3, 4, 7 for the 28 pick. Assume the offered picks are top 5 in each round, do you consider either deal? I wouldn't myself. So to offer 6, 22, 28 might be like offering all your picks to move up. But moving from 6 to 2 or 1 in this draft is different than going 4 to 2 last year.

[Flame Of Liberty]

Too bad the deal didn't go thru BUT it does signal a little bit that Feaster and Weisbrod aren't too confident that they can get two good supporting players with the 22 and 28...

[GirlySports]

Originally Posted by Flame Of Liberty

Too bad the deal didn't go thru BUT it does signal a little bit that Feaster and Weisbrod aren't too confident that they can get two good supporting players with the 22 and 28...

Don't know about that, it's just that MacKinnon is a can't miss prospect and the 22 and 28 are assets to be used.

I heard that Buffalo is offering Miller, Grigorenko, and their 1st (8th) to the Avs which is much much better than the Flames 3 picks.

It's a bidding war. The Flames 1st next year or a top young player Backlund/Baetschi/Gaudreau must be in play or walk away.

[PlayfulGenius]

Originally Posted by Sylvanfan

I think I would have made the deal if I was Columbus too.

But lets say for example that some offers the Flames a 2, 5, 6 for the 22 pick. Than someone offers them a 3, 4, 7 for the 28 pick. Assume the offered picks are top 5 in each round, do you consider either deal? I wouldn't myself. So to offer 6, 22, 28 might be like offering all your picks to move up. But moving from 6 to 2 or 1 in this draft is different than going 4 to 2 last year.

Agreed... But I think the 4th vs 6th overall gives the Isles offer the nod, especially as it was to move up to 2nd, not 1st.

Anyway, I was choked to hear Feaster had made this offer...but I'm having second thoughts, for sure.

I think partly I'm attached to really enjoying watching the draft with 3 CGY picks dispersed throughout the 1st round.

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by AltaGuy

Even in a deep draft, the chances are the Flames end up with only one or two decent players from the three picks in the first round. Chances of any of our picks being at the level of a Tavares or Stamkos are slim to nil, while the chances of Mackinnon being at that level are about 50/50 I'd say.

Shaking my head at people who don't like the offer.

I think the problem is a lot of folks here have looked at the draft profiles and are projecting our 22 and 28 picks to develop to their max potential. But that rarely happens - not for both of them. One of those picks will likely end up a fringe NHLer, or a complete bust.

So it's not MacKinnon vs three front-line NHLers. It's likely MacKinnon vs a 2nd line center + an average roster player. Which is why the Avs said no thanks.

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by kyuss275

I think anybody who thinks Calgary will not be a bottom 3 team next year is in full denial.

Feaster would have to pull, not one, but 2 rabbits out of a magic hat, for us not to be in the bottom 5.

Or throw a bunch of money at UFAs and spend to the cap again. Non-Oiler teams that finish bottom 5 typically have internal budgets well below the cap.

Don't get me wrong - the Flames will be terrible again. But it takes a special kind of incompetence (or a bad run of injuries) to spend to the cap and finish bottom three.

[ricosuave]

Originally Posted by Buff

The Flames were a notoriously tight lipped franchise until Feaster took over. The Avs are also notoriously quiet...

Originally Posted by FlameZilla

I hate to say it, but I cringe every time I read about Feaster trying to make a move. Whether it's justified or not I just don't feel comfortable with him in charge. I have no faith in him despite my best efforts to feel otherwise.

Time for a change.

Originally Posted by Reign of Fire

How does this get out? Probably Avs returning the favour for the offer sheet. Feaster shows his hand as usual

This. I much prefer the days of Darryl Sutter and things were kept on the down low.

[vilzeh]

Originally Posted by Ashasx

Kipper didn't even play well. He let in a goal from centre ice.

Detroit and Anaheim were just plain awful.

Quick let in a goal from centre ice against phoenix last playoffs

Rask let in a " pass " goal against Rangers these playoffs.

They suck.

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by djsFlames

I'm also gonna go out on a limb and predict the Flames are in the running for 8th until March or so next season.

It's rational for most of you to think we'll be steaming dumpster bad. But what I saw from these kids in the home stretch, and what pissed most of us off, was a bunch of players who maybe weren't the most talented, but played like they never wanted to leave, and they had a world to prove. And we shut down top 8 teams that were desperate to hold their positions, not like we were killing teams that had nothing to play for. End of the year or not, that showed something. Whether this years' draftees make the lineup next season or not, I think this team will hold out in that playoff mix much longer than people will expect. Just a hunch..

Those guys were running on the adrenalin of being in the show for the first time. That's lasts about 5-8 games.

[Gord Wappel]

Originally Posted by Ashasx

What? The Flames were bottom 2 before the Iginla trade... then the younger players came in and played better than the Flames did all year.

That's true. There was some bad luck there. A relatively meaningless winning streak by the rookies.
But you saw how the bottom teams really locked in on the draft at end.. sitting borderline injured players. Playing players out of comfort zone "to evaluate them for future" Flames too eventually stopped winning by design but they were out jockeyed .. a week later than the others.

It shouldn't have even been so close. Management slept at a critical time and now they want to trade the total proceeds of Iginla and Bowmeester to make up for it.

[Heavy Jack]

I dunno. Looking back at the drafts so far I think I'm taking the 3 picks over the top pick. Obviously you would take the top pick over the 3 picks looking at most of them one on one, but the combination of picks over the years looks quite strong.

2003:
MA Fleury

Vs

Milan Michalek
MA Pouliot
Corey Perry

Have to go with the 3 vs A shaky #1

2004
Ovechkin

Vs

Al Montoya Smid drafted right after (9th)
Lukas Kapers (16 games) Meszaros (500+ drafted 23rd)
Mark Fistric

Still takin Ovi here though, obviously

2005
Crosby

Vs

Brule
Lashoff
Niskanen

Crosby Obviously

2006
Erik Johnson

Vs.

Brassard
Giroux
Foligno

A great combination of forwards vs. Erik Johnson Here definitely going with the 3

2007
Patrick Kane

Vs

Gagner
Pacioretty
Petrecki (1 game)

With a player like Subban taken in the 2nd the potential is there to take the 3 vs 1 here but u have to go with Kane in this situation.

2008
Stamkos

Vs

Filatov
Eberle
Tikhonov

Again if some better picks are made there is potential to desire the 3 vs 1 but Stamkos is who you go with obviously.

2009
Tavares

Vs.

Ekman-Larrson
Jordan Schroeder
Dylan Olsen, guys like O'Rielly and Clifford taken soon after

Again with the right drafting the 3 vs 1 could be more desirable, going with Tavares though based on the picks.

2010
Taylor Hall

Vs

Brett Connolly
Jarred Tinordi
Charlie Coyle

If the 6th and 28th picks continue to develop and Tinordi emerges I might take the combination of picks vs Hall here.

2011
RNH

Vs

Zibanejad
Tyler Biggs
Zach Phillips

Have to wait and see right now but after his year and the playoff series against Montreal Zibanejad is competitive against RNH IMO.

2012
Yakupov

Vs.

Hampus Lindholm
Olli Maatta
Brady Skeji

Obviously Yakupov right now but like the last 2 it's a wait and see.

[Sylvanfan]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

I think the problem is a lot of folks here have looked at the draft profiles and are projecting our 22 and 28 picks to develop to their max potential. But that rarely happens - not for both of them. One of those picks will likely end up a fringe NHLer, or a complete bust.

So it's not MacKinnon vs three front-line NHLers. It's likely MacKinnon vs a 2nd line center + an average roster player. Which is why the Avs said no thanks.

There is a lot more risk with the three picks later on vs the one high pick, and you can argue there might not be a great deal of reward. Many cite the 2003 draft for examples, but I think it needs to be mentioned that there really was no clear cut top guy in that draft. The top 4 teams all felt they picked the best player. San Jose and Buffalo felt like they got top 3 guys too. Whereas this year the top 3 seem to stand out. Really in 2004 for example going from 3 to 2 would have cost more than going from 10 to 3. Had Pittsburgh moved out of the two spot....they'd still be regretting it today.

[PlayfulGenius]

I would like to see the 28th pick used to trade up as it increases the likelihood of maintaining the lineage of Flames Greats (Iggy from Nieuwy, etc)