2016 NHL Draft

[dammage79]

Originally Posted by New Era

I think Sergachev is probably the best of the defenders available, but I don't put any of them in the top 10 at this point. On the Flames list they might even be lower. I don't see anything about them that says top end talents, with the exception of Chychryn's skating. I definitely don't see any bit of Giordano in any of them.

The way Sergachev cuts to the net and let's his wrist shot go is very similar to how Gio does it.

I see top end talent in Sergachev and Juolevi for sure. Kind of surprising you or anyone else doesn't. They look damn good.

[nik-]

I'll be ok with one of the D men since the forwards will likely be gone.

[cral12]

Consider this (the following link) your live home page for information for THW's coverage of the 2016 NHL entry draft. Bookmark and check back often as it will be constantly updated leading up to hockey’s version of Christmas. THW’s 2016 NHL Entry Draft Guide – The Next Ones is your quintessential draft resource featuring:

- Detailed unique prospect profiles in The Next Ones format
- Mock Drafts
- Exclusive rankings (The Next Ones/Chris's List, E-Mac's War Room, Pike's Picks, Consensus Rankings, Central Scouting Combined Lists)
- Fantasy-based rankings
- Team Previews
- Looking ahead to the 2017 draft and beyond
- Other unique insight into the draft
- historical draft pieces

LINK

[Lanny_McDonald]

Originally Posted by dammage79

They way Sergachev cuts to the net and let's his wrist shot go is very similar to how Gio does it.

I see top end talent in Sergachev and Juolevi for sure. Kind of surprising you or anyone thwrs don't. They look damn good.

I appreciate your enthusiasm for the defenders, I just don't see them that way. I looked at guys like Ekblad and Hanafin and saw top end talent. They controlled the game at both ends of the ice and were noticeable every time they stepped on the ice. They controlled both ends and owned the front of their net. I don't see that from any of the top four defensemen in this draft, not in the slightest. I see some good offensive skills but I think they are sorely lacking in the defensive zone. That's my opinion of them anyways. I think this is a pretty thin draft for defensemen.

[Itse]

Originally Posted by New Era

I think we need a lexicon around this place to reference because some terms get thrown around way too liberally. Franchise player, generational talent, and power forward are just a few terms that get tossed around without recognizing what the word has traditionally meant. It would be very helpful if those words were properly defined so people would use them in an appropriate manner.

God forbid definitions changing over time. Traditions must be upheld.

[Fighting Banana Slug]

Originally Posted by New Era

I appreciate your enthusiasm for the defenders, I just don't see them that way. I looked at guys like Ekblad and Hanafin and saw top end talent. They controlled the game at both ends of the ice and were noticeable every time they stepped on the ice. They controlled both ends and owned the front of their net. I don't see that from any of the top four defensemen in this draft, not in the slightest. I see some good offensive skills but I think they are sorely lacking in the defensive zone. That's my opinion of them anyways. I think this is a pretty thin draft for defensemen.

I think assessing the D position is tougher generally and certainly more difficult for many of us reviewing highlight packages. Crisp passes out of the zone, or chipping pucks off the glass aren't really interesting. Pretty fair there isn't an Ekblad in the group, but I don't think it is a reach to suggest there is a Hanafin, Provorov or Werenski in there (somewhere in the 5-8 range). Further, if the top end forward talent starts to weaken at or about 5, then I think it makes a choice of D at 6 entirely reasonable.

There are probably 6-7 guys I would be excited about as a Flames pick at 6. That includes the 3 Defensemen. For the reasons you gave above, Bean scares the bejezus out of me, but I could even see him be picked way higher than the consensus seems to suggest.

[edslunch]

Originally Posted by Itse

God forbid definitions changing over time. Traditions must be upheld.

It's ok for definitions to change as long as people using them in arguments understand the same meaning. Maybe we should have a sticky post with definitions, though I shudder to think about the process of coming to agreement on them

[dammage79]

I'm not of the belief that the Flames will take a D man with #6. There's some really intriguing D options in the 2nd or barring a miracle the late 1st they could get with Dallas.

I would just prefer Sergachev out of the big 3 IF they were keen on taking a D man at #6. I like his style more than the other two. Just preference.

[Erick Estrada]

I don't see a defenseman being picked by the Flames as they used their first two picks last year on the position. This will likely be a forward and I'm not ruling out Nylander as he plays the forward position that the team covets.

[CliffFletcher]

In an alternative reality the Flames didn't deal for Hamilton last draft and instead took Connor. That would make this draft a lot more straightforward - take the best d-man available.

[GranteedEV]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

no

Yes, that's what the term 'franchise player' has come to mean in recent years. But that's not the way it was always used. Back in the 80s-90s, it meant a player who could single-handedly turn a franchise around, revive its fortunes on and off the ice. Sakic, Yzerman, Bourque, Lemieux, Hawerchuk, Brodeur. There were only a handful in the league at any time. Most teams did not have a franchise player.

There was also a smaller talent/development pool and less parity back then, though. The bottom feeder Jets, Kings, Canucks etc of the time were just jobbers for teams with franchise players. I don't think the term is changed, but it's simply impossible for individuals to be dominant like that. The value of a franchise player itself is diminished with the nature of the modern game. And most teams may have a franchise player now, because non playoff teams are only a few tweaks away from contender status and contender a cap hell away from lottery status. Two-way play negates a lot of offensive prowess.

I also disagree the 89 Flames did not have a franchise player - they may not have been recognized as such at the the time but MacInnis, Gilmour, even maybe even Nieuwendyk and Theo would all go on to become franchise players elsewhere in the 90s. That team was stacked for its era... MacInnis went on to win a Norris and add three second place finishes, two third place finishes. How's that not a franchise defenseman? Gilmour had a 2nd place Hart Finish to go with a Selke at his peak. Theo I think had some top 5 scoring finishes, but don't quote me on that.

Anyways, I still think Laine and Matthews are franchise talents.

[Benched]

Is there any chance the Flames can create a package to move up to #2 or #3? Or we think the Finns are basically locked for the Jets/Jackets?

Curious if that's the magic that BT could make...

[bax]

Originally Posted by Benched

Is there any chance the Flames can create a package to move up to #2 or #3? Or we think the Finns are basically locked for the Jets/Jackets?



Curious if that's the magic that BT could make...

Not even worth discussing imo.

Less than 1% chance at best

[GranteedEV]

Originally Posted by Benched

Is there any chance the Flames can create a package to move up to #2 or #3? Or we think the Finns are basically locked for the Jets/Jackets?

Curious if that's the magic that BT could make...

It's a pipe dream. Even 4 might cost too much.

[Benched]

roger that. thanks

[druetetective]

Originally Posted by New Era

I appreciate your enthusiasm for the defenders, I just don't see them that way. I looked at guys like Ekblad and Hanafin and saw top end talent. They controlled the game at both ends of the ice and were noticeable every time they stepped on the ice. They controlled both ends and owned the front of their net. I don't see that from any of the top four defensemen in this draft, not in the slightest. I see some good offensive skills but I think they are sorely lacking in the defensive zone. That's my opinion of them anyways. I think this is a pretty thin draft for defensemen.

Since I watched Sergachev 50+ times this year I'll offer my opinion of him versus other draft-eligible defencemen I watched extensively.

Cam Fowler- At the beginning of his draft year it was him and Taylor Hall ranked 1-2(Before Seguin took off). He ended up dropping on draft day but ended up developing into a top pairing guy. He should of been taken in the top 5 that year. His skating his ahead of Sergachev's but Mikhail is ahead in all other categories IMO. (at the same age of course)

Ryan Ellis- He has an amazing JR career but you could tellall of his skills wouldn't translate to pro's. Still he has turned into one of the best 2nd pairing defencemen in the league and is still developing, perhaps even into a top pairing guy. He is quite underrated presently IMO. Ryan had better PP "awareness" at the same age but Sergachev has superior skills everywhere else IMO.

The only JR defenceman out of Windsor who I'd rate above Mikhail is Ed Jovanovski. Jovo had agood career but under achieved based on his potential. He went 1st overall for a reason. Florida rushed him to the NHL a bit early I think. Plus he was coached by Doug Maclean his first 3 years. If he enters the league in a better situation he is HOF'er IMO.

Anyways I'm rambling, but I'm starting to just think the Flames should draft Sergachev if Tkachuk and Dubois are gone. It could give us potentially 4 #1 defenceman and we can ride the NHL's best defense corps into long playoff runs annually. It also opens the door to trading a guy like Dougie Hamilton for a #1 RW in the future. I just think the Serfgachev's extremely high ceiling/ relatively high floor is too much to pass up.

[druetetective]

Has a Brian Burke team ever drafted a Russian in the first round? I know BT seems to have control but you have to think Burkie still has significant pull...

[GranteedEV]

Originally Posted by druetetective

Has a Brian Burke team ever drafted a Russian in the first round?

Chris Pronger
Daniel Sedin
Henrik Sedin
Nathan Smith
RJ Umberger
Ryan Kesler
Bobby Ryan
Mark Mitera
Logan MacMillan
Jake Gardiner
Nazem Kadri
Tyler Biggs
Stuart Percy
Morgan Rielly

So he's drafted Swedes, Americans, Canadians, and Tyler Biggs.

[Erick Estrada]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

In an alternative reality the Flames didn't deal for Hamilton last draft and instead took Connor. That would make this draft a lot more straightforward - take the best d-man available.

True although that likely means they would have likely re-signed Russell.

[Flames Draft Watcher]

Have you seen Chychrun and Juolevi enough this year to get a good read on them dru?