2016 NHL Draft

[Samonadreau]

Originally Posted by Calgary4LIfe

During one of Craig Button's interviews, he stated that he wasn't finished compiling his overall ranking list yet, but that he 'promises to have Brown in his top 5, probably at 5'.

I am sure it was during one of his interviews posted somewhere in this thread, but I can't remember it off-hand. I know it wasn't his mock draft, but his upcoming overall rankings.

How does someone go from almost in the 2nd round to top 5 in a month? Seems a bit wishy-washy. Not saying he doesn't belong there, just wondering why Button would have him so low and then BOOM!... top 5 the next month.

[Calgary4LIfe]

Originally Posted by Samonadreau

How does someone go from almost in the 2nd round to top 5 in a month? Seems a bit wishy-washy. Not saying he doesn't belong there, just wondering why Button would have him so low and then BOOM!... top 5 the next month.

Well, apparently Brown entered the season ranked really high, but disappointed coming out of the gate. His second half to the season essentially just brought him back up where he was 'expected' to be at the start of the season, but that was certainly a very good second half. Perhaps scouts were too down on him when he started slowly?

Also, Button I find is guilty of quite large variances at times with individuals. I usually do agree with most of his rankings overall, however.

[VladtheImpaler]

Originally Posted by Calgary4LIfe

Well, apparently Brown entered the season ranked really high, but disappointed coming out of the gate. His second half to the season essentially just brought him back up where he was 'expected' to be at the start of the season, but that was certainly a very good second half. Perhaps scouts were too down on him when he started slowly?

Also, Button I find is guilty of quite large variances at times with individuals. I usually do agree with most of his rankings overall, however.

Plus, if he knows the Canucks will take him at 5 or his brother at 6, he wants to get with the program.

[868904]

Originally Posted by Regorium

Why can't Nylander be like other "pure skill finesse types" like Kane, Voracek, Gaudreau and Tarasenko? I feel like you picked a couple of failed finesse types, but there are quite a few finesse types that manage to drive offences in the playoffs.

I think you're underrating the value of a pure finesse type that can drive a line.

The one thing we have about Nylander that we usually dont, is familial background. Michael was an elite talent, maybe one of the most skilled players ever to put on a Flames jersey, but he was definitely one to shy away from contact and the physical play. Now it's hard to penalize Alex for his fathers game but as they say “the Apple doesn't fall far from the tree”.

Chances are, Alex Nylander is more likely to be similar to Michael Nylander than Johnny Gaudreau or Martin St. Louis when it comes to the grit department.

[Rick M.]

Originally Posted by 868904

The one thing we have about Nylander that we usually dont, is familial background. Michael was an elite talent, maybe one of the most skilled players ever to put on a Flames jersey, but he was definitely one to shy away from contact and the physical play. Now it's hard to penalize Alex for his fathers game but as they say “the Apple doesn't fall far from the tree”.

Chances are, Alex Nylander is more likely to be similar to Michael Nylander than Johnny Gaudreau or Martin St. Louis when it comes to the grit department.

I think it's silly to base anything on the play of his father. Scouts are saying he is not a perimeter player. That means more to me than what Michael did or did not do years ago.

[Bingo]

I'm just not sweating this pick as much as some.

I think it's a combination of seeing a bunch of these things and having a pretty good level of trust in the Calgary brainstrust.

If they get Dubois I'll like the versatility and tenacity.
If they get Tkachuk I'll be on board with the grit and skill in the top six.
If it's Nylander I'll be happy to see the insertion of another weapon.
If they go for a defenseman I'll happily add that chip and feel safe that they won't panic and trade the kid because they have other options further down the development road.
If they go off the board a bit I will guess they have a call, which I've always liked.

It's a top ten pick, they're all good options. They're out of the big three so it won't be a Sam Bennett type pick this year, but still a good piece to add a lot higher than most teams with 8 building blocks already in their stable usually are awarded.

Honestly this season was so odd, it almost feels like the Flames won a bizarro lottery pick.

[Lanny_McDonald]

Originally Posted by Flames Draft Watcher

Great find, thanks for that.

Great find? That reads like it was published by TMZ or People magazine. They say very little about his skills at all and write about his time growing up or who he's played with. I remember when Red Line used to produce quality information about a player's skills and weaknesses, not some fluff piece that has little relevance to how the guy plays the game.

Their arbitrary report card is useless and they provide nothing to support the rankings. The give Tkachuk. an A+ for size and strength when the bigger and stronger Max Jones gets an A and bigger Dubois gets an A-. Their "scouting report" is a bit of a joke as well. "Makes power moves to the net. Will hit, fight, score..." Not a very accurate assessment at all. Tkachuk has had one documented fight. Alex DeBrincat has had more! The way Red Line makes it sound Tkachuk should be filling the net like his father, not the master of 2nd assists. To me, it looks like they reviewed his old man's game and applied the same characteristics to his son instead of actually watching the kid's game and writing about their observations. To make matters worse, even though Dubois has the superior report card Red Line still ranks Tkachuk higher on their draft list.

This is a great find if you want to talk about the downfall of hockey journalism or the integrity of Red Line as a publication, but it's adds nothing to the discussion of what type of player Tkachuk is or how he projects as a professional. This is the exact type of article that does nothing to provide clarity on a player. If anything they promote greater ambiguity about the assessment of players in general. There's nothing in these articles but fluff.

I hope the Flames do more work on assessing these players than we've seen from these oh-so-informative sources of information. I hope their scouts can articulate the strengths of a player by talking about mechanics of his skating, shooting and passing, how he thinks his way around the ice, how his instincts provide an advantage, and then discuss the physique of the player and whether he is likely to translate his play to the next level. If not, we're screwed.

[dammage79]

If we're basing thought on scouting reports, Nylander isn't a wuss. He's not going to bowl you over and bash skulls but he doesn't shy away form the boards.

I witnessed a few instances where he flapped his stick loosely at the puck in the corner instead of tying his guy up and fighting for the puck at the U-18's, but that seems to not be the norm.

[Itse]

Originally Posted by Bingo

I'm just not sweating this pick as much as some.

I think it's a combination of seeing a bunch of these things and having a pretty good level of trust in the Calgary brainstrust.

Pretty much this. Our scouting has done well in recent years. I trust them, and all the possibilies sound good.

EDIT:
By that I don't mean that I think the discussion has been overboard or unnecessary or anything like that. I enjoy it. I just mean that I'm feeling pretty relaxed about our draft pick, nothing more.

[dammage79]

For me I find myself more comfortable with the idea of not honing in on the size of the player mainly due to the fact I think this pick is going to be the guy they pair with Bennett. As Bennett progresses and adds that bit more size and experience he is going to be that Gritty PWF type (loosely used term here) to drive his line. You could see last season it's all there just needed a bit more oomf. He bounced off of his checks more than laying people out last year. But when he did get his licks in, he owned.

So if we add a dynamic talent like Nylander to Bennetts line I think it'll end up being equally successful as if we added a Dubois or Tkachuk. And I really don't think this Nylander is a cream puff either which is an added benefit.

Sure it'd have been amazing to add Puljujarvi or Laine but that ship has sailed.

I wish Jost was a RH shot, he's got that Bennett style drive and a RH shot would compliment the team so nicely.

Flames scouts got this, they've been on the ball for a while now, Like Bingo said, no reason to sweat this, they've got it under control.

[GranteedEV]

Originally Posted by dammage79

For me I find myself more comfortable with the idea of not honing in on the size of the player...

I don't have the same reasoning as you, but the same conclusion. My reasoning is a bit more simple:

You draft the best player available (the player you believe will become the most valuable NHLer), and if that player doesn't fit your roster makeup you trade him or you trade a player on your roster who is holding that player back. The only time position or size become a holdup in that is if you don't have room in your system to develop that player properly.

You don't let the makeup of your NHL roster deviate from that philosphy because by the time this player is ready you might have traded Monahan+Gaudreau in a package for McDavid (obviously extremely unlikely, but just for emphasis).

[Angelino]

I am sure it has been discussed before but what about a trade down for Calgary...

6th overall to Carolina for 13th and 19th overall
6th overall to Boston for 14th and 25th overall

Not sure if that is enough value, what else would need to be added, etc.

[dammage79]

Originally Posted by Angelino

I am sure it has been discussed before but what about a trade down for Calgary...

6th overall to Carolina for 13th and 19th overall
6th overall to Boston for 14th and 25th overall

Not sure if that is enough value, what else would need to be added, etc.

Trading down is a realistic option if some lower picking team really wants their pick of the litter. I won't name names but I'd love the Flames to trade down and grab one of maybe 3 players around the 10 spot.

[albertGQ]

Originally Posted by Angelino

I am sure it has been discussed before but what about a trade down for Calgary...

6th overall to Carolina for 13th and 19th overall
6th overall to Boston for 14th and 25th overall

Not sure if that is enough value, what else would need to be added, etc.

I would think about the Canes offer but not the Bruins one.

Alex Nylander or Julien Gauthier and Jake Bean?
Close call. I think I would still prefer Nylander though.

[Enoch Root]

No thanks on trading down.

If Dallas can knock off St Louis, we are looking at something like the 28th and 35th picks, along with about the 56th and 65th picks.

Quantity we have. Trading more quality for quantity makes no sense.

I would rather trade some of the quantity for more quality.

[VladtheImpaler]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

No thanks on trading down.

If Dallas can knock off St Louis, we are looking at something like the 28th and 35th picks, along with about the 56th and 65th picks.

Quantity we have. Trading more quality for quantity makes no sense.

I would rather trade some of the quantity for more quality.

I think I like trading down, from my limited knowledge perspective. Would I rather have Nylander/Brown or Jost + Fabbro/Gauthier? Well, since I have no issues with picking Jost at 6, seems like a good deal to me. Since I fail to see a big spread from 4 to 15-20, I would much rather have 2 of those guys than one. Doubles the chance that someone "outperforms"...

[Angelino]

Originally Posted by VladtheImpaler

I think I like trading down, from my limited knowledge perspective. Would I rather have Nylander/Brown or Jost + Fabbro/Gauthier? Well, since I have no issues with picking Jost at 6, seems like a good deal to me. Since I fail to see a big spread from 4 to 15-20, I would much rather have 2 of those guys than one. Doubles the chance that someone "outperforms"...

That is good asset management from what I can see. I agree after the first three to five there is a lot of the similar type of prospects in the first round.

• I wouldn't mind trading down for 2 firsts with Carolina (13th and 19th overall)
• Using extra assets in the 2nd round to try and get back into the 1st round (late first rounder)
• Hope Dallas wins 2 more games (another late first rounder)

If everything works out you could have 4 first rounders. I wouldn't mind that but it would take a lot of work on the GMs part. Probably wishful thinking...

[Flames Draft Watcher]

Interview with Jeff Brown, coach for the Ottawa 67's and Logan Brown's dad. Jeff Brown weighs in on his son and Matt Tkachuk and other OHL players

https://soundcloud.com/tsn-radio-van...opy-of-his-dad

[Flames Draft Watcher]

I can agree with both sides of the trade down debate. But if its true that the Flames have a ledge after #6 on their list then I think you don't trade down.

[Rick M.]

Originally Posted by Flames Draft Watcher

I can agree with both sides of the trade down debate. But if its true that the Flames have a ledge after #6 on their list then I think you don't trade down.

Absolutely right. I would be more interested in packaging second round picks (one of which might turn out to be a late first rounder, fingers crossed) to get a mid-first round pick to go with our #6.