2016 NHL Draft - Page 267 - Calgarypuck Forums - The Unofficial Calgary Flames Fan Community

Par · 06-12-2016, 04:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Southside

It would hurt to see JP fall to the Oil though. If Columbus do not want him, the Flames need to acquire that #3 pick.

This is very true. Please get the 3rd pick BT. Please make it happen BT.

polak · 06-12-2016, 04:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MrMastodonFarm

Arms race? Starting with quite the lead? Edmonton had already selected three players 1st overall by the time the Flames got Monahan. Then a year later they selected Draisaitle 3rd overall when we got Bennett 4th. If it's an arms race and about collecting high end talent Edmonton wins, and had a massive head start.

Not worried about that.

Its a nice safety blanket for Flames fans to look back and see how the oil have failed so far and assume that will keep going

Flames Draft Watcher · 06-12-2016, 05:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jayswin

That list really shows the ledge after number 5.

Yeah I dunno about that conclusion. What it shows is that there is a wide variance of opinion after the top 5. That doesn't necessarily mean there's a ledge there or a drop-off. For all we know most teams see 2-3 players as being fairly close to Tkachuk/Dubois but if all those teams don't agree on those 2-3 players then you get this wide variance.

And this is why I think these consensus or averaged lists can be very misleading. It's easy to draw conclusions from them that aren't necessarily supported by what the scouts actually think.

SebC · 06-12-2016, 05:30 PM

Variance in opinion is a pretty good proxy for proximity in talent. It's a ledge.

Red Menace · 06-12-2016, 05:33 PM

Agreed, that is the definition of a ledge.

MrMastodonFarm · 06-12-2016, 05:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by polak

Its a nice safety blanket for Flames fans to look back and see how the oil have failed so far and assume that will keep going

Sure, sure.

They're just one of twenty nine teams the Flames must be better than. I'll start worrying about the Oilers when there is something to worry about. Draft for your own team, not because you're panicking about who someone else might get.

sureLoss · 06-12-2016, 05:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Flames Draft Watcher

Here's an averaged "consensus" list made by someone on HF. Please note it is editable so watch out if you change things you're changing it for everybody.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets...gid=1854770418

Thanks for that saves me the data entry:

Top of the vertical line is the highest the prospect was ranked. Bottom of the vertical line is the lowest the prospect was ranked. Circle is average.

MrMastodonFarm · 06-12-2016, 05:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SebC

Variance in opinion is a pretty good proxy for proximity in talent. It's a ledge.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Red Menace

Agreed, that is the definition of a ledge.

And if a team in the top five takes someone outside of it?

Those lists and publications are really just parroting each other, especially when you get outside the top couple picks. I wouldn't put too much thought into it. What really matters is what the scouts and teams do on the day.

Fire · 06-12-2016, 06:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jayswin

That list really shows the ledge after number 5.

In ten years I think it's safe to say the best 5 players from this draft will not be the first five players selected.

Red Menace · 06-12-2016, 06:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MrMastodonFarm

And if a team in the top five takes someone outside of it?

Those lists and publications are really just parroting each other, especially when you get outside the top couple picks. I wouldn't put too much thought into it. What really matters is what the scouts and teams do on the day.

If they were parroting each other they would all have the same #6 pick.
The numbers prove that is where a big variance begins.
Of course it is likely that someone outside of that top 5 gets picked higher, or ends up a better player, that is entirely beside the point.
The point is that there is a consensus top 5, and after that there is a much larger variety of opinion.
It's not rocket science.

CliffFletcher · 06-12-2016, 07:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sureLoss

Thanks for that saves me the data entry:

Top of the vertical line is the highest the prospect was ranked. Bottom of the vertical line is the lowest the prospect was ranked. Circle is average.

Quite the difference in variance between Juolevi and Brown. Juolevi looks like a very safe pick. I don't see him making it past Arizona. And it sure looks like there could be a deal to be made between a team that's in love with Brown and a team looking for a safer pick.

Flames Draft Watcher · 06-12-2016, 10:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sureLoss

Thanks for that saves me the data entry:

Top of the vertical line is the highest the prospect was ranked. Bottom of the vertical line is the lowest the prospect was ranked. Circle is average.

Well this tells us one thing we already knew. The two wildcards at the very top are Chychrun and Brown. Some teams and scouts believe they are franchise players while other teams and scouts don't believe.

Based on my own beliefs and predictions I will say that the players I think are the favourites to go top 10 this year are:

Matthews, Laine, Puljujarvi, Tkachuk, Dubois, Juolevi, Brown, Sergachev, Nylander and Chychrun.

My honourable mention is Jost, I think he has a chance of cracking that top 10 and perhaps Chychrun could fall out.

PlayfulGenius · 06-12-2016, 11:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sureLoss

Thanks for that saves me the data entry:

Top of the vertical line is the highest the prospect was ranked. Bottom of the vertical line is the lowest the prospect was ranked. Circle is average.

Jesse has zero variance...doesn't that mean there's no chance of him falling past Columbus?? Or is NOT using scouts from ALL teams??

Fire of the Phoenix · 06-13-2016, 12:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PlayfulGenius

Jesse has zero variance...doesn't that mean there's no chance of him falling past Columbus?? Or is NOT using scouts from ALL teams??

Our only hope is the saying "where there's smoke, there's fire" proves to be true. I've read, as have many, that CBJ is not sold on Puljuarvi, or that they prefer Brown or another. I think we are hoping that they employ one really influential mad scientist scout that just turns out to be just mad with no redeeming scientist descriptor. Maybe Kekalainen knows him really well because Finnish guys can do a a Finnish Vulcan mind meld thing and they did one and now he thinks he is no good but not so no good that we don't want him.

sureLoss · 06-13-2016, 06:19 AM

Damien Cox @DamoSpin
Seems Oilers now unlikely to move the No. 4 pick next week. Matthew Tkachuk may be too good to pass up.

iloveicedhockey · 06-13-2016, 08:03 AM

I saw that and chuckled. He does seem to have sources. I imagine the top five go as everyone expects then it's a gong show from us onwards.

oldschoolcalgary · 06-13-2016, 08:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sureLoss

Damien Cox @DamoSpin
Seems Oilers now unlikely to move the No. 4 pick next week. Matthew Tkachuk may be too good to pass up.

Lol oilers...

Let's see if anyone trades a top 4 dmen for their failed forwards...

Red Menace · 06-13-2016, 09:16 AM

What happened to the draft prediction contest?
I was looking forward to defending my title.

dissentowner · 06-13-2016, 09:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Red Menace

What happened to the draft prediction contest?
I was looking forward to defending my title.

Yeah, I have been waiting for that as well.

dissentowner · 06-13-2016, 09:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by oldschoolcalgary

Lol oilers...

Let's see if anyone trades a top 4 dmen for their failed forwards...

It is going to have to be Hall on the move if they are serious about nabbing a top 2 D. The Tenderness or Eberle are not getting it done and they would be stupid to move Draisatle or whatever the hell his name is.