Flames 2013 Draft Discussion

[azzarish]

I know it's only a video, but Barkov looks outstanding in that compilation.

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by JiriHrdina

Even better - they trade down and then take someone else.

Or we trade up to the top 3 or 4 and pick someone like Lindholm or Monahan.

The (terrible) possibilities are endless.

[Henry Fool]

Originally Posted by Flames_F.T.W

I read somewhere that Barkov's skating isn't all that great??

Not great, obviously, but he has a good stride for a big guy. I don't see him worse than someone like Thornton especially when he develops more muscle in his legs. He needs a bit more explosiveness in short distances but his reach is great and he's intelligent in his positioning so I don't see an issue there either. Pretty much a classic big center type in how he moves.

I think the idea of trading up is based more on Feaster's "elite 4" comment than any public list. If some other team has an "elite 3" or "elite 7", that's an opportunity for a trade.

[saillias]

Originally Posted by Henry Fool

Not great, obviously, but he has a good stride for a big guy. I don't see him worse than someone like Thornton especially when he develops more muscle in his legs. He needs a bit more explosiveness in short distances but his reach is great and he's intelligent in his positioning so I don't see an issue there either. Pretty much a classic big center type in how he moves.

I think the idea of trading up is based more on Feaster's "elite 4" comment than any public list. If some other team has an "elite 3" or "elite 7", that's an opportunity for a trade.

Agreed, if Feaster sees 4 franchise players, of course he's going to try and trade into the top 4 before hand. And yes that will put our other firsts on the table.

Nashville is the obvious target to me, I'm pretty sure it was Feaster who was already calling Poile. It would be necessary to find out if he likes the same 4 guys as much as the Flames do.

If it's the difference between a franchise player and the average top 10 prospect in the 6-10 range, I'll gladly accept the Flames giving up a late 1st for that franchise guy.

[Flames Draft Watcher]

Originally Posted by puckedoff

^^ Pitt pick wouldn't get us to 4, and the Stl pick doesn't get us to 2.

How would you know?

[FlameZilla]

Originally Posted by Flames Draft Watcher

Would people trade CGY 1st (6th overall) + PIT 1st (??? overall) for NSH 1st (4th overall)?

If they really feel MacKinnon and Barkov are the two elite centres of the draft then I'd say hey, lets do it.

Would NSH deal down 2 spots for an extra 1st rounder? It's certainly possible. I'd say that is a very tempting offer. They probably wouldn't do it if they have Barkov in an elite top four but I think there's some teams out there who don't have Barkov in the top grouping.

I'd say that's more than fair. I think in past drafts that would be an overpayment, but if the drop-off between 4 & 5 is that steep then I believe a late first is a good return.

As I've said in the Lindholm/Monahan thread, I'm happy to stay at 6 & hope Barkov drops to us. If he doesn't then one or both of Lindholm & Monahan will be available & from my limited viewings I like them both. There are some strong prospects available late in the round.

To guarantee getting Barkov at 4, is it worth it to miss out on a Compher/Klimchuck/Morrissey at 25-27? Is it really Barkov >>> Lindholm + Compher?

[dammage79]

Originally Posted by FlameZilla

I'd say that's more than fair. I think in past drafts that would be an overpayment, but if the drop-off between 4 & 5 is that steep then I believe a late first is a good return.

As I've said in the Lindholm/Monahan thread, I'm happy to stay at 6 & hope Barkov drops to us. If he doesn't then one or both of Lindholm & Monahan will be available & from my limited viewings I like them both. There are some strong prospects available late in the round.

To guarantee getting Barkov at 4, is it worth it to miss out on a Compher/Klimchuck/Morrissey at 25-27? Is it really Barkov >>> Lindholm + Compher?

Yes. Now it would not be worth it if all three first rounders were involved but losing one to get the Player you want is worth it.

I get the whole stuffing the cupboards full and I think they will still do that. But Barkov is worth the removal of one of the other firsts. But not both.

[FlameZilla]

Originally Posted by dammage79

Yes. Now it would not be worth it if all three first rounders were involved but losing one to get the Player you want is worth it.

I get the whole stuffing the cupboards full and I think they will still do that. But Barkov is worth the removal of one of the other firsts. But not both.

I'd sacrifice one of the 1st rounders to move up to 2nd for Mackinnon. For Barkov at 4? When there's a solid chance Nurse & Nichushkin could go top 5 and drop Barkov to 6? I think it's an unnecessary overpayment.

[oldschoolcalgary]

Originally Posted by FlameZilla

I'd sacrifice one of the 1st rounders to move up to 2nd for Mackinnon. For Barkov at 4? When there's a solid chance Nurse & Nichushkin could go top 5 and drop Barkov to 6? I think it's an unnecessary overpayment.

Agreed. That's a big risk to move up only 2 spots. McKinnon is one thing, but Barkov?

Don't forget, we don't have a second round pick this year, so the late 1st, is basically our second...a team like Calgary needs to accumulate picks, not trade them

[Bonded]

Originally Posted by FlameZilla

I'd sacrifice one of the 1st rounders to move up to 2nd for Mackinnon. For Barkov at 4? When there's a solid chance Nurse & Nichushkin could go top 5 and drop Barkov to 6? I think it's an unnecessary overpayment.

Worth it if feaster and co feel he his franchise.

[Bonded]

Originally Posted by oldschoolcalgary

Agreed. That's a big risk to move up only 2 spots. McKinnon is one thing, but Barkov?

Don't forget, we don't have a second round pick this year, so the late 1st, is basically our second...a team like Calgary needs to accumulate picks, not trade them

I don't see Nashville passing on him for a Russian or a Dman.

[FlamesAddiction]

As much as I want Barkov (Jones, Drouin and MacKinnon are likely out of reach), I think I would like to gamble on him falling a little this year.

And I mean this with all due respect to Barkov because I think he is going to be the real deal, but I also think that Nichushkin and possibly Nurse could disrupt the predicted order, as well as Barkov's injury (likely not an issue, but maybe small factor in pushing someone away). While it might only be a 35% chance or something (completely pulled out of this air) that Nurse and Nichushkin sneak in there, I think Lindholm and Monahan are decent enough consolation prizes that the gamble is worth taking.

[thymebalm]

Originally Posted by oldschoolcalgary

Agreed. That's a big risk to move up only 2 spots. McKinnon is one thing, but Barkov?

Don't forget, we don't have a second round pick this year, so the late 1st, is basically our second...a team like Calgary needs to accumulate picks, not trade them

I'd rather roll the dice 3 times. The talent available in the top 10 is probably 80% NHLers.

Jones
McKinnon
Drouin
Barkov
Lindholm
Monahan
Nurse
Nichushkin

are probably the 8 of 10.

Of the bottom 10 picks the chances are more like 15%. I'd rather two chances.

[oldschoolcalgary]

Originally Posted by Bonded

Worth it if feaster and co feel he his franchise.

Big risk for 2 spots, losing a first rounder, for a guy that might not be better than Lindholm or Monahan...

But we'll see.

[FlameZilla]

Originally Posted by Bonded

I don't see Nashville passing on him for a Russian or a Dman.

Nashville are pretty thin on D. They need an elite talent to partner Weber (if they can even keep him) and Nurse fits the bill IMO. Meanwhile they have Colin Wilson as a big & talented top 6 center, Legwand is still around & Nick Spaling is developing well. I wouldn't think center would be a top priority for Nashville.

[Bonded]

Originally Posted by oldschoolcalgary

Big risk for 2 spots, losing a first rounder, for a guy that might not be better than Lindholm or Monahan...

But we'll see.

Draft is all about risk. Any could bust or light up the world. I wouldn't mind a trade if they think Barkov is franchise. Although I don't see Nashville trading the pick, so it is most likely moot.

[Brad Marsh]

Originally Posted by oldschoolcalgary

Big risk for 2 spots, losing a first rounder, for a guy that might not be better than Lindholm or Monahan...

But we'll see.

That and losing out on the late first-round player, which, given the draft depth this year, has a reasonable chance of being a solid NHLer.

If those two late picks are somehow leveraged to get get a second top10 pick then I'm all for trading them. Same if one of them could be used to jump from 6 to top 3. But I don't see a scenario where either of those moves play out. For example, the teams holding those top 10 picks are likely as enthused about the top end quality as we are, and so they probably aren't entertaining many reasonable offers to part with them.

Interesting debate though. These are the kind of decisions and potentialities that us arm chair GMs dream about!

I think I still like 3 first rounders in this deep draft, especially if parting with one of them would only move the team up one or two spots. Not enough for me.

[thymebalm]

That's the only strategy that makes sense to me, try to trade the two low picks + something for another crack at the top-10. Maybe Hanowski or Cundari. (lol)

[dammage79]

Originally Posted by FlameZilla

I'd sacrifice one of the 1st rounders to move up to 2nd for Mackinnon. For Barkov at 4? When there's a solid chance Nurse & Nichushkin could go top 5 and drop Barkov to 6? I think it's an unnecessary overpayment.

These decisions are normally made minutes before the pick is made, it will be very interesting to see how it all shakes down. I guess what I am saying is, is that I will not be upset if they moved up to grab Barkov with one of the extra firsts. I know a lot of people will though and that is understandable as well. It is never ever a bad thing to pick three times in a deep draft like this.

Really just depends on how much viagra they have taken in the name of a player.

[bucksmasher]

Originally Posted by FlameZilla

Nashville are pretty thin on D. They need an elite talent to partner Weber (if they can even keep him) and Nurse fits the bill IMO. Meanwhile they have Colin Wilson as a big & talented top 6 center, Legwand is still around & Nick Spaling is developing well. I wouldn't think center would be a top priority for Nashville.

Rumor is that Weber is pissed b/c of lack of scoring. Supposedly he wants someone to start scoring goals or maybe he wont resign. This is being tossed around on Nashville boards. I would guess Nashville would be more interested in a right now player than waiting 2-3 years for a Nurse. Whether that player is one of the top 4 draftees of 2013 or Squid/Tangs/Hudler or some other combo we will wait and see.