2016 NHL Draft

[timbit]

Originally Posted by Flames Draft Watcher

Prepare to be surprised I would happily bet money that he does not go in that range.

I explained why a few weeks ago,would you please explain why not?

[GranteedEV]

Originally Posted by Flames Draft Watcher

What have we heard philosophically from Flames management lately? Needing to play a heavier game. Keller ... like the opposite direction of that stated goal.

You keep equating playing heavy with everybody being dimensionally large. That's not a fact. Joe Pavelski plays heavy. Brendan Gallagher plays heavy. Andrew Shaw plays heavy. Brad Marchand plays heavy. Jaden Schwartz plays heavy.

This is what Peter Chiarelli said about playing heavy:

. “Players are hard to find. It’s about the attitude and the heaviness for lack of a better word, whether it’s a heavy stick or a heavy player. There are teams that don’t have hard, heavy players but they play heavy, they’re strong on their sticks. That’s something that you have to instill.”

This is what Treliving said about size:

Originally Posted by Treliving

“Look at the way the game’s played today,” Treliving says. “Obviously, footspeed and skill is an important factor. Physical attributes — skill, skating, size. To me, internal attributes — character, compete — drive how well the person’s going to use the physical attributes. Is there a key inside to unlock those physical attributes, so you can hit the ceiling?”

...

"You have to be careful with size. We'd all like them to be 6-foot-4 and skate like the wind and shoot it a million miles-per-hour. You can't just get lost in size for the sake of size. They still have to be able to be players and be good players,"

"Look at the teams still playing, there's one characteristic -- foot speed. The game is not getting any slower," Treliving said. "We would like to combine good speed and size. You can't just get bigger without getting better. You have to be careful. You can't just get a big guy because he's a big guy. He has to be the right player."

And there is absolutely nothing implying Keller doesn't play heavy.

[Keller]'s a hard-nosed, fearless player with a lot of flash, but he’s been Team USA’s leader and go-to option for every critical situation – defensive zone draws, killing penalties, gaining entry into the offensive zone, etc. Does he have franchise potential?

Source

Despite his size [Keller]’s willing to play a gritty game

Source

. Keller possesses an almost-internal motor which helps propel his game not unlike Zach Parise.

source

But do continue painting Keller as some soft Mason Raymond clone because you can't see past his height.

Originally Posted by timbit

I explained why a few weeks ago,would you please explain why not?

Because he's short,

[The Fonz]

Keller has just become this year's Konecny, for me.

I must have him.

[Flames Draft Watcher]

Originally Posted by timbit

I explained why a few weeks ago,would you please explain why not?

First off I want to say that Keller is a fantastic talent. But he's not the only talented player at the top of this draft. Size does matter in the NHL because there are a lot of physical battles in certain areas of the ice and smaller players have a significant disadvantage in those battles. Keller's skill set seems to fit the centre position quite well as he is a fantastic playmaker and passer. But because the centre is responsible for covering down low in the defensive zone he will need to engage in physical battles on the cycle, along the boards, and heading to the front of the net. These are battles he has to engage in without the puck. If he's covering Getzlaf down low it doesn't matter how good his puck handling is, or his vision is. It does matter that Getzlaf can push him away with one arm, protect the puck with superior reach and drive the net unhindered. Because of this his match ups as a centre are problematic in the defensive zone when going up against big centres. Because of this I think he has to be sheltered a bit in the defensive zone. Because of this its hard or impossible to project him as a #1 centre in the NHL because you can't shelter your #1 centre defensively.

So to me he projects as a #2 centre if you wanna keep him at centre. Some teams may look to shift him to the wing where the defensive responsibilities in his own zone don't involve him trying to win physical battles down low against the like of the much bigger and stronger Kopitar, Getzlaf, Thornton, Toews, etc. But overall I think there are players who can project as 1st liners in the NHL or 1st pairing dmen available in the top 7. I think teams will prioritize those players over a kid who has undeniable talent but is more likely to be projected as an ideal 2nd liner because of his size.

I know that won't be a popular opinion with some. But how many #1 centres are there in the NHL at Keller's size? Giroux and Johnson? It's extremely rare. And frankly TB might prefer to have a bigger centre ahead of Johnson so that they can matchup better vs big centres on the opposition.

I think he's a great prospect with undeniable skill and talent. But you can't ignore the role of size in the NHL particularly at the centre position.

[Cecil Terwilliger]

Originally Posted by Canada 02

someone needs to leak a gas mask video of Laine

Haha. Someone please photoshop this. Dude totally looks like a stoner.

[Flames Draft Watcher]

Originally Posted by GranteedEV

You keep equating playing heavy with everybody being dimensionally large. That's not a fact. Joe Pavelski plays heavy. Brendan Gallagher plays heavy. Andrew Shaw plays heavy. Brad Marchand plays heavy. Jaden Schwartz plays heavy.

I'm not convinced he'll ever be the physical force that Gallagher and Marchand are and I'm not convinced he'll ever be as physically strong as either of those players. So I think those are poor comparables. Not all small players can play that heavy and not all do. You are assuming he can, that's dangerous.

Originally Posted by GranteedEV

This is what Treliving said about size:

“Look at the way the game’s played today,” Treliving says. “Obviously, footspeed and skill is an important factor. Physical attributes — skill, skating, size. To me, internal attributes — character, compete — drive how well the person’s going to use the physical attributes. Is there a key inside to unlock those physical attributes, so you can hit the ceiling?”

...

"You have to be careful with size. We'd all like them to be 6-foot-4 and skate like the wind and shoot it a million miles-per-hour. You can't just get lost in size for the sake of size. They still have to be able to be players and be good players,"

"Look at the teams still playing, there's one characteristic -- foot speed. The game is not getting any slower," Treliving said. "We would like to combine good speed and size. You can't just get bigger without getting better. You have to be careful. You can't just get a big guy because he's a big guy. He has to be the right player."

It's funny how you gloss right over the sections where Treliving emphasizes that size does play a significant role. I guess we see what we want to see and we hear what we want to hear. To me that only reinforces the point that they see size as a valuable attribute along with the rest. These Treliving quotes strengthen my argument, not weaken it as far I as see it. Keller lacks size so that is going to drop him a bit in the rankings despite his high skill level.

Ideally they want speed AND size. At the top end of a draft with a strong top end you can get both. So why would they take someone who doesn't have both? I don't think they would. We should be able to pick someone who has everything Treliving wants. We should be able to get a complete package type player who has speed, skill, size, compete, drive and character. Why settle for one at #6 that lacks one of those? I don't think the Flames would.

Originally Posted by GranteedEV

But do continue painting Keller as some soft Mason Raymond clone because you can't see past his height.

I've never said he was soft. I do think his size can limit his upside, especially if you want to keep him as a centreman. Centres have defensive zone responsibilities where they have to engage in physical battles along the boards, behind the net, in front of the net. I think Keller is going to lose a lot of those battles vs players like Kopitar, Toews, Getzlaf, Thornton. Guess what? 3 of those centres are in our division.

[timbit]

Originally Posted by Flames Draft Watcher

First off I want to say that Keller is a fantastic talent. But he's not the only talented player at the top of this draft. Size does matter in the NHL because there are a lot of physical battles in certain areas of the ice and smaller players have a significant disadvantage in those battles. Keller's skill set seems to fit the centre position quite well as he is a fantastic playmaker and passer. But because the centre is responsible for covering down low in the defensive zone he will need to engage in physical battles on the cycle, along the boards, and heading to the front of the net. These are battles he has to engage in without the puck. If he's covering Getzlaf down low it doesn't matter how good his puck handling is, or his vision is. It does matter that Getzlaf can push him away with one arm, protect the puck with superior reach and drive the net unhindered. Because of this his match ups as a centre are problematic in the defensive zone when going up against big centres. Because of this I think he has to be sheltered a bit in the defensive zone. Because of this its hard or impossible to project him as a #1 centre in the NHL because you can't shelter your #1 centre defensively.

So to me he projects as a #2 centre if you wanna keep him at centre. Some teams may look to shift him to the wing where the defensive responsibilities in his own zone don't involve him trying to win physical battles down low against the like of the much bigger and stronger Kopitar, Getzlaf, Thornton, Toews, etc. But overall I think there are players who can project as 1st liners in the NHL or 1st pairing dmen available in the top 7. I think teams will prioritize those players over a kid who has undeniable talent but is more likely to be projected as an ideal 2nd liner because of his size.

I know that won't be a popular opinion with some. But how many #1 centres are there in the NHL at Keller's size? Giroux and Johnson? It's extremely rare. And frankly TB might prefer to have a bigger centre ahead of Johnson so that they can matchup better vs big centres on the opposition.

I think he's a great prospect with undeniable skill and talent. But you can't ignore the role of size in the NHL particularly at the centre position.

I understand your position.

It is my belief that Keller is a special player....elite skater with elite vision and very good stick skills. He plays with great energy and excels in tight spaces/ areas.

In my opinion, his superior attributes and skills trump his current lack of size.
See him as a probable and very projectable #1 C in the NHL.

High end speed , vision , and character can never be underestimated in today's NHL.
Size would be a bonus, but does very little to dissuade me.

Faster Joe Pavelski?

4-7 it is.

[Rick M.]

If the Flames were to take Keller they would likely shift him to the wing anyway. His playmaking skills can operate just fine there as they do for Gaudreau.

[GranteedEV]

Originally Posted by Rick M.

If the Flames were to take Keller they would likely shift him to the wing anyway. His playmaking skills can operate just fine there as they do for Gaudreau.

If he's strong on faceoffs you still want him to develop as a center first, so he can take winger draws and PK draws.

[dissentowner]

People are forgetting what Burke likes as far as his build. Skill in top 6, the bangers in the bottom six. Nylander absolutely fills a huge need on this team, a highly skilled player who is a RH shot and can play RW. If Dubois and Tkatchuk are gone when we draft who are you drafting? Brown? Great size but he is not bringing that physical game. So you pass up the more skilled player with the cannon accurate wrist shot for him? I think not. A defence man? Not nearly as needed as a guy like Nylander is.

[Flames Draft Watcher]

Originally Posted by Rick M.

If the Flames were to take Keller they would likely shift him to the wing anyway. His playmaking skills can operate just fine there as they do for Gaudreau.

Agreed. But how many small wingers can we have in the top 6 at once? Gaudreau, Shinkaruk, Mangiapane, Keller? If the Flames truly believe in Shinkaruk and Mangiapane then how can they all fit long term given the organization's philosophy? We already possess one of the top 3 skilled tiny wingers in the game and have a couple promising ones in the system.

Drafting top 6 in a draft with a strong top end allows you to get a rare commodity that you lack. We lack potential 1st line wingers with size and power. We lack potential top pairing defensemen in our system. It's hard to find those players outside of the top 10. Why stock up on something we're already somewhat deep in when you can grab a rare and valuable commodity that we aren't deep in? That would be my question.

[jg13]

If we do pick 6 I think Nylander is who we will end up taking.

That being said I wouldn't be the least bit surprised if we drop as far as 11th (Brown, Keller, Sergachev, Joulevi, Chychrun) are all great options if you can pick up a 4th 2nd round pick in this draft.

[timbit]

Originally Posted by dissentowner

People are forgetting what Burke likes as far as his build. Skill in top 6, the bangers in the bottom six. Nylander absolutely fills a huge need on this team, a highly skilled player who is a RH shot and can play RW. If Dubois and Tkatchuk are gone when we draft who are you drafting? Brown? Great size but he is not bringing that physical game. So you pass up the more skilled player with the cannon accurate wrist shot for him? I think not. A defence man? Not nearly as needed as a guy like Nylander is.

Not looking to belabor the point, however, I believe Keller is way faster, more skilled and has better vision and character than Nylander.

[Flames Draft Watcher]

Originally Posted by dissentowner

A defence man? Not nearly as needed as a guy like Nylander is.

How many times have we heard the phrase, "You can never have too many defensemen"? Treliving sees some ledges in this top 8. If they have a d-man in that 2nd group of 4-6 then they aren't going to pass on him just because we need RWers.

You can always fill your immediate needs through trade. I think its very conceivable that they see a potential top pairing d-man as the straight up BPA at #6. Defensemen are SO valuable in trade. Having Andersson, Hickey, Kylington, Wotherspoon plus the d-men on the Flames that we have allows Treliving to use a d-man as an asset in trade. I think we could quite easily deal something like Andersson + 2nd for a scoring RWer with size. Or you just let all your young defensemen blossom and then make a deal like NSH did to fill their #1 centre need with Johansen.

I think they'll take Nylander if they feel he's the best player available. I just am skeptical that they would think he would be the BPA at #6. He has the ideal skill and skating but I'm not sure he has the ideal size and compete. A player like Chychrun or Sergachev may have the ideal combination of skill, skating, size and compete that scouts and GMs are always looking for.

[timbit]

Originally Posted by Flames Draft Watcher

Agreed. But how many small wingers can we have in the top 6 at once? Gaudreau, Shinkaruk, Mangiapane, Keller? If the Flames truly believe in Shinkaruk and Mangiapane then how can they all fit long term given the organization's philosophy? We already possess one of the top 3 skilled tiny wingers in the game and have a couple promising ones in the system.

Drafting top 6 in a draft with a strong top end allows you to get a rare commodity that you lack. We lack potential 1st line wingers with size and power. We lack potential top pairing defensemen in our system. It's hard to find those players outside of the top 10. Why stock up on something we're already somewhat deep in when you can grab a rare and valuable commodity that we aren't deep in? That would be my question.

Mangiapane and Shinkaruk are not in the same "league " as Keller projection wise
You take the best player available. My point is, at 6 , don't be surprised if the flames staff think Keller is that guy.

[Calgary4LIfe]

I would be surprised if the Flames take Keller - it is far from a secret that the Flames want (and need) to get bigger.

With that being said, I also think that the Flames have Keller higher in the rankings than Nylander. I actually think they are more or less comparable in terms of skill, but Keller is much more tenacious. Having that tenacity on the puck makes Calgary a more difficult team to play against. Perhaps not 'black and blue', but definitely a tougher team to play against.

I do think that Brown is in that 5/6/7/8 spot for the Flames. He seems to have everything checked off as to what the Flames look for in a player. Size? Check. Skill? Check. Hockey IQ? Check. Character? Check. Speed? Check.

Getting big guys who can skate well and make plays is tough enough to find. Getting THAT big of guys with THAT amount of skill is just so extremely rare. He won't play 'black and blue' hockey by definition, but he makes it very difficult on opposing forwards and defencemen. He can park out in front of the net and will end up as this immovable behemoth who can tip shots really well, and has those smooth hands to make plays around the goalie for rebounds instead of just trying to jam it in.

I think for a big man, he can play on the rush well or in the corners well. You just don't see that many guys at 6'3" + with that much skill.. but 6'7"? He has such soft mitts.

The only guy I would really not be all that enthused about drafting at this stage is Nylander. I just don't think he has enough tenacity and consistency in his game to be a legitimate game-breaker, and if he is not doing that, then he is not contributing. Keller adds so much speed and seems to cause a lot of turnovers. Brown adds skill and a sickening amount of size.

Keller and Gaudreau on the PP would be fun to watch.

Brown 6'7" - Jankowski 6'4" - Colborne 6'5" would be a line that could cause opposing teams fits in the playoffs, or simply really great wingers to have spread through the first 3 lines.

Nylander would definitely be a boon on the PP with his RHS one-timer. But.. just doesn't seem as dynamic or versatile.

Jost is a bigger puck-hound than Keller, but slightly lower skill, but he is averaged-sized. Kid just does everything so well, and I think he will be a more offensive Frolik in the sense that he can 'fix' any line he is on. That is how I view Jost. Will be able to play on any line and provide depth scoring, as well as be such a danger on the forecheck. Him and Bennett on a line would drive the other teams nuts and I bet they would cause turnovers.

I was hugely disappointed not getting into the top 3, and then realizing that Tkachuk and Dubois are probably not going to be there either... but the Flames are going to draft a heck of an addition to the organization - and that isn't even counting the defencemen available. They also have 3 2nd rounders (unless of course Dallas beats St. Louis and one of them gets turned into a first) - there are a lot of guys with good upside in the draft and who have good size too. I think guys like Gauthier and Jones are both prospects that have huge question marks beside them, but these are 'black and blue' players that are perhaps worth taking a chance on by moving up from the 2nd round. This draft should provide the Flames with a lot of options near the end of the first round and into the 2nd round. There is a big drop off in talent after 20, but there is still good talent past 20 and almost into the 3rd round by what a lot of scouts have said. It isn't 2013 good, but there is a good amount of talent in the 2nd.

[jg13]

Maybe it's possible to pick twice in the top #11

Would #36, #50 and #55 do it for example?

[Flames Draft Watcher]

Originally Posted by timbit

Mangiapane and Shinkaruk are not in the same "league " as Keller projection wise
You take the best player available. My point is, at 6 , don't be surprised if the flames staff think Keller is that guy.

Shinkaruk was talked about as a potential top 10-15 pick in a deep draft exactly like Keller is talked about this year. Different style of player of course as Shinkaruk is more a goalscorer and Keller more of a playmaker but I think Shinkaruk and Keller aren't as dissimilar in upside as you suggest. Both had/have questions about whether their games will translate at their size.

I would be absolutely floored, shocked and flabbergasted if the Flames thought Keller was the BPA at #6. I wouldn't hate the pick per se but I think the chance of that happening is slim to none with the management group we have.

There will be players with 1st line forward/1st pairing defense upside available at #6 who have skill, skating, size and drive/character available. Why would we take a player who doesn't possess one of those attributes when we could take a player that possesses all of them? That is my question. The top end of this draft is VERY strong. There may be players taken outside the top 10 with 1st line/1st pairing upside. It is no slight to Keller to believe he won't go top 8.

[GranteedEV]

If Hunter Shinkaruk makes Clayton Keller redundant, then Mark Jankowski makes Logan Brown redundant and Hunter Smith makes Tkachuk redundant and undersized.

[GoJetsGo]

Originally Posted by timbit

I understand your position.

It is my belief that Keller is a special player....elite skater with elite vision and very good stick skills. He plays with great energy and excels in tight spaces/ areas.

In my opinion, his superior attributes and skills trump his current lack of size.
See him as a probable and very projectable #1 C in the NHL.

High end speed , vision , and character can never be underestimated in today's NHL.
Size would be a bonus, but does very little to dissuade me.

Faster Joe Pavelski?

4-7 it is.

Makes me wonder if the Canucks might grab him at five with this in mind as that is the kind of talent they sorely lack.