I am hoping the three 2nd rounders are used as currency for a goalie instead if at all possible. I think there will be a decent group of players to choose from at 6th that I wouldn't want them to blow their wad on moving up a few spots.
__________________
"A pessimist thinks things can't get any worse. An optimist knows they can."
Garrioch has actually been right about a couple Flames related things in the recent past... I am now giving his stuff more credence than I previously would have.
I am sure he has some credible sources (he was the only one to report that Gulutzan ahd met with King and Edwards), but I also believe he isn't above making some things up to fill up his weekly column (see the Spezza to Calgary rumor a couple of years ago).
The only reason not to shell out all 3 2nds is getting a goalie, which has to be more of a priority than 18 year old winger.
I would still do it, for the long term good of the club (he doesn't make us better in 2016 or even 2017). UFA goalies can anyways be had, the position is unpredictable, and we have more assests than just picks.
Even still I don't think CBJ do it, for all the same reasons. They'd want something we shouldn't be giving up.
given what Toronto wanted from Columbus last year, I think it's pretty realistic. And I think I'd do it ... Puljujarvi is just in another tier than Nylander.
to put names to it: we had our CPHL draft today, and the picks at 6, 35, 54 and 56 were Alexander Nylander, Dennis Cholowski, Jack Kopacka and Filip Gustavsson. Would you rather have Puljujarvi or Nylander, Cholowski, Kopacka and Gustavsson? To me it's an easy choice.
Keep in mind though, that Columbus refused to pay that.
And now, interestingly, here we are the very next year with Columbus on the opposite side of the (virtually) identical trade.
If they agree (from last year) that that is too much, they should be open to taking 2 2nds.
I am hoping the three 2nd rounders are used as currency for a goalie instead if at all possible. I think there will be a decent group of players to choose from at 6th that I wouldn't want them to blow their wad on moving up a few spots.
I would much rather spend assets to move up to get the quality player we need than spend the assets acquiring a stop-gap goalie (especially when there are UFA goalies available)
Keep in mind though, that Columbus refused to pay that.
because they wanted either Hanifin or Werenski and were confident that they'd get Werenski at 8. If that had been in doubt, they'd have surely pulled the trigger. I don't think that Calgary believes they can get a guy similar to Puljujarvi at 6 ... they have more reason to move up than CBJ had last year.
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to devo22 For This Useful Post:
I would much rather spend assets to move up to get the quality player we need than spend the assets acquiring a stop-gap goalie (especially when there are UFA goalies available)
All the UFA goalies are crap IMO.
__________________
"A pessimist thinks things can't get any worse. An optimist knows they can."
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to FlamesAddiction For This Useful Post:
because they wanted either Hanifin or Werenski and were confident that they'd get Werenski at 8. If that had been in doubt, they'd have surely pulled the trigger. I don't think that Calgary believes they can get a guy similar to Puljujarvi at 6 ... they have more reason to move up than CBJ had last year.
But Werenski isn't similar to what they could have gotten at 4 either (lets keep it apples to apples here.
Puljujarvi is a RW, exactly what Calgary needs. Puljujarvi is a great prospect, one that projects to be likely better then Bennett. There is a significant drop off from the top 3 this draft, despite Dubois's recent play. He is a big forward. He is also a very 'young' 18 years old similar to Bennett.
Calgary must try everything they can to move from 6 to 3 as this is likelt the last time they draft near the top for a very long time. If it takes all 3 2nd rounds picks, you still do it. Calgary needs quality, not quantity, and a player like Puljujarvi is a can't miss prospect with potential superstar ceiling. You have to go for it.
You also do it just to hear "18 year old Jesse Puljujarvi" in the playoffs a few times.
Last edited by Firebot; 06-18-2016 at 05:44 PM.
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Firebot For This Useful Post:
Crap is a strong word, but they're certainly not as formidable as the RFA's or those otherwise under contract. Having said this, if Calgary can get JP, they can take a flyer on Reimer for a single season and come March look to pick up a goalie that's weeks away from being left unprotected.
The Following User Says Thank You to jmac98 For This Useful Post:
But Werenski isn't similar to what they could have gotten at 4 either (lets keep it apples to apples here.
well they had Werenski very high ... in the draft video they posted, Kekalainen says it's very close between Hanifin and Werenski. Of course Treliving and the Flames could think the same about Puljujarvi and Nylander, but I don't think so.
The Following User Says Thank You to devo22 For This Useful Post:
If you think about it not as prospects that are draftable but rather as established players it helps.
Would you trade a Prime Ales Hemsky (Nylander) + X number of assets for a Prime Rick Nash (Puljujarvi)
Of course it depends how much the X number of assets, but it should be a top priority if they can do it without sacrificing any of the 6 key players (Gaudreau/Monahan/Bennett/Gio/Brodie/Hamilton).
__________________ Fireside Chat - The #1 Flames Fan Podcast - FiresideChat.ca
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Caged Great For This Useful Post:
