Craig's List 2014 Prospects

[Rick M.]

I'd say this is the year to trade up if we don't win the draft lottery. This will be impossible in the 2015 draft and we likely will be finishing well out of the top 5 then.

[ForeverFlameFan]

Very interesting that Ritchie didn't come up in b/r... But then again, it's b/r.

This draft after the top 5 will be about rolling the dice and going with your instincts on what the BPA is for your NHL club.

[Rick M.]

I saw Barbashev play in Charlottetown earlier this year. He's OK but I'd say a mid-first rounder at best. His half-pint Russian buddy had just come over to North America and was far more impressive.

[ForeverFlameFan]

I found it interesting that b/r put Barbarshev and Pastrnak in the top 10. It just pretty much tells you that there aren't very many top tier picks than last year. This year's first rounder can go from projecting to be 7th to be picked at 20, vise versa.

[OutOfTheCube]

Originally Posted by Wolfman

[/B]

I agree, I really hope the NHL implements the rule for teams who have been in the top 5 for drafts for years don't get a shot at the generational players next year. That would be Edm, Fla, Buf and NYI.

Hey now, don't rank us with the annual cellar dwellers/tankers. Picking 1 or 2 this year, but before that our last top 5 pick was 2003 (Vanek). Before that it was 1987 (Turgeon).

And "If you take away the month we totally sucked, we were actually pretty good!" sounds like Leafs fan talk to me.

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by The Fonz

I can't see us even getting a top 5 next season. If you were to cut out the Flames blip this year from Dec 20 - Jan 20, the team has been 32-27-6 in the other 65 games. That's a .538 pts%, pro-rates to 88 points over a full 82 games.

That's one way to look at it. Another is that the Flames have caught the disease the Leafs had for about a decade - putting together a strong enough finish once they're out of contention to fall out of a high draft position.

[JayP]

Originally Posted by MissTeeks

Sounds like we might get the backup backup for the Jets game:

PATRICK WILLIAMS‏@pwilliamsNHL17 mins

Hutchinson starts tonight for the Jets against the team that drafted him in 2008. Wouldn't be surprised if he starts at Calgary as well.

This is actually probably a good thing for the Flames draft chances. Pavelec should be a back-up goalie at this point.

[Day Tripper]

Originally Posted by OutOfTheCube

Hey now, don't rank us with the annual cellar dwellers/tankers. Picking 1 or 2 this year, but before that our last top 5 pick was 2003 (Vanek). Before that it was 1987 (Turgeon).

Here are the times the Calgary Flames have picked top 5, in all their 34 year history:

Never

By the way, there was an idea a little while ago where the draft order would be determined by a team's record after they were mathematically eliminated from the playoffs. This would both reward teams that don't tank and give terrible teams that needed help a better chance at a top pick (since they would be eliminated early and would have more games to get points).

Here are the dates when teams were mathematically eliminated:

March 16 - Buffalo
March 24 - Edmonton
March 27 - Florida
March 30 - Calgary
April 3 - NY Islanders, Winnipeg
April 7 - Vancouver
April 8 - Toronto, Ottawa, Carolina, Nashville
April 9 - Washington, New Jersey

For some of them, they may be off by a day or two since I couldn't find precise dates for all of them. But if that system were in place, here would be the draft standings as of today:

1. Calgary (4-1-0, 8 PTS)
2. Edmonton (3-5-0, 6 PTS)
3. Buffalo (2-8-1, 5 PTS)
4. Winnipeg (1-1-0, 2 PTS)
5. Florida (1-5-0, 2 PTS)
6. NY Islanders (0-2-1, 1 PTS)
7. Vancouver (0-0-0, 0 PTS)
8. Toronto (0-0-0, 0 PTS)
9. Ottawa (0-0-0, 0 PTS)
10. Carolina (0-0-0, 0 PTS)
11. Nashville (0-0-0, 0 PTS)
12. Washington (0-0-0, 0 PTS)
13. New Jersey (0-0-0, 0 PTS)

It would be nice...

[nik-]

I'm sure if we're horrible next year, significantly more people will be fine with the worst teams getting the high picks.

[SuperMatt18]

Originally Posted by nik-

I'm sure if we're horrible next year, significantly more people will be fine with the worst teams getting the high picks.

I actually think a lot of people have never liked the idea of rewarding failure, I know I personally don't like it.

All non-playoff teams having a chance in the lottery was a good first step but I think there should be an equal distribution at the bottom 5 for your odds.

I team actually trying at the end of the season to win games (Islanders and Flames this year) should not punish them in their draft pick.

[nik-]

The only change I want to see is a window where you can't be in the top 3 if you picked number 1st overall.

Get 1st overall pick? Next 2 years, the highest you can pick is 4.

[djsFlames]

#### you Jets, starting your backup vs Boston, then us in back to backs? They're trying to get their hands on Dal Colle.

[Flames Draft Watcher]

Originally Posted by ForeverFlameFan

Is there a Ritchie comparable? If he reaches his highest ceiling, I would like a Corey Perry on our team.

One report I read said Bertuzzi. The Tkachuk comparable seems pretty decent. Ritchie seems a lot more physical than Neal doesn't he?

[djsFlames]

Originally Posted by nik-

The only change I want to see is a window where you can't be in the top 3 if you picked number 1st overall.

Get 1st overall pick? Next 2 years, the highest you can pick is 4.

That's exactly what I'd like to see implemented as well. Would've taken Edm out of 1st in those second and third years, and the top prospect would go somewhere different every year.

[codynw]

Originally Posted by SuperMatt18

I actually think a lot of people have never liked the idea of rewarding failure, I know I personally don't like it.

All non-playoff teams having a chance in the lottery was a good first step but I think there should be an equal distribution at the bottom 5 for your odds.

I team actually trying at the end of the season to win games (Islanders and Flames this year) should not punish them in their draft pick.

I don't think they should reward CONSTANT failure. One or two bad seasons resulting in a couple high picks is fine, but a team shouldn't be rewarded for it year after year.

[Bourque's Twin]

Originally Posted by Frequitude

It's not possible for us to catch Vancouver after the shootout win last night. We're 4 points back with 2 to play.

Tiebreaker 1: Regulation/Overtime wins. We're 2 behind with 2 to play so at worst would tie and go to tiebreaker 2.
Tiebreaker 2: Points earned in the season series. Vancouver's got 8 and we've got 2 so can't catch them.

I assumed that if we won our 2 games and Vancouver went 0-3, we would have 37 wins and they would have 35. I thought that's how it worked.

[CKPThunder]

Originally Posted by Bourque's Twin

I assumed that if we won our 2 games and Vancouver went 0-3, we would have 37 wins and they would have 35. I thought that's how it worked.

I believe it comes down to ROW instead of overall wins. Vancouver has 30 and Calgary currently has 28. If Calgary wins out, they will be tied, so it would have to go to the 2nd tiebreaker.

I think that is how it works.

[albertGQ]

ROW is first tie breaker

[TjRhythmic]

I thought it was wins. Then if both teams had the same amount of wins then it went to ROW.

Or it's points, and if those are tied then it goes to ROW

[Rhettzky]

Originally Posted by albertGQ

ROW is first tie breaker

So if we only win 1 of our last 2 games we stay in 5th? We would tie Carolina but they have 33 ROW and we would have 29 ROW.