Flames 2013 Draft Discussion - Page 3 - Calgarypuck Forums - The Unofficial Calgary Flames Fan Community

$ven27 · 03-31-2013, 11:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bourque's Twin

I'd like the Flames to build around Jones or Mackinnon.
If Colorado or Florida choose first they'll take Jones. The Avs may take Drouin 2nd because they have Duchene, ror, and Stastny up the middle.

I could see the Avs taking MacKinnon, and then trade off Stastny or ROR for help on D/ the wings.

the_only_turek_fan · 03-31-2013, 11:31 AM

Feaster should do whatever it takes except moving Sven, Jankowski, and Wotherspoon to get MacKinnon. Package the Pittsburgh pick, with ours, or whatever is on our roster.

Move Brodie if you have to or even Gudreau. If I am Jay Feaster, I would be trying to do everything under the sun to pull off what Burke did in 1999 and walk out of this draft with MacKinnon.

HPLovecraft · 03-31-2013, 11:35 AM

No midgets please.

Hockey_Ninja · 03-31-2013, 11:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HPLovecraft

No midgets please.

Nate Mackinnon: 5'11, 175 pounds....

Yoho · 03-31-2013, 11:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by the_only_turek_fan

Feaster should do whatever it takes except moving Sven, Jankowski, and Wotherspoon to get MacKinnon. Package the Pittsburgh pick, with ours, or whatever is on our roster.

Move Brodie if you have to or even Gudreau. If I am Jay Feaster, I would be trying to do everything under the sun to pull off what Burke did in 1999 and walk out of this draft with MacKinnon.

Feaster just mass selling players with value at the deadline should do the trick

drPepper1 · 03-31-2013, 11:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by the_only_turek_fan

Feaster should do whatever it takes except moving Sven, Jankowski, and Wotherspoon to get MacKinnon. Package the Pittsburgh pick, with ours, or whatever is on our roster.

Move Brodie if you have to or even Gudreau. If I am Jay Feaster, I would be trying to do everything under the sun to pull off what Burke did in 1999 and walk out of this draft with MacKinnon.

Take Mackinnon and Drouin? Our version of the Sedins

Niemo · 03-31-2013, 11:48 AM

I'm surprised no one has mentioned Lindholm yet. I personally would take him assuming Nate MacKinnon is gone. The worst draft positions for us would be 1st and 3rd overall. Seth Jones reminds me of Erik Johnson and I'd much rather draft a franchise center than a franchise winger.

Reading and watching highlights of Lindholm, his style is really similar to Forsberg (although I wish he was 2 inches taller).

The russian (Nischuskin????) would be a nice consolation prize, but the KHL thing likens him to Kuznetsov. Barkov would be on my wish list if we missed out on Lindholm though. Best case scenario is if Jones and Drouin go 1-2 and we get Nate.

Mith · 03-31-2013, 11:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by drPepper1

Take Mackinnon and Drouin? Our version of the Sedins

Think it would be pretty hard to turn even all of the flames assets in to TWO top 5 picks. A top 5 and a top 10? Maybe. More likely they end up with one of the 1-3 picks, a middle-ish pick, and the pens pick.

Does the middle of the pack pick plus a 30th overall pick get you a top 5 pick? I'd argue it doesn't. Not without another good prospect going back along with it. There's a huge drop off in talent after the first 5-10 players in this draft, tough to stomach dropping out of the top 5 to get late 1st rounders.

playmaker · 03-31-2013, 11:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by StrykerSteve

Also worth noting that Monahan has been performing at a higher level (stats-wise) for a longer period of time than the other guys in major junior.

Also worth noting that he's Ottawa 67's captain.

the_only_turek_fan · 03-31-2013, 12:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by drPepper1

Take Mackinnon and Drouin? Our version of the Sedins

Not both of them necessarily, but just get MacKinnon without moving Sven or Jankowski.

We need him and in a big way.

FlamesAddiction · 03-31-2013, 12:21 PM

Does MacKinnon have higher upside than Langkow? For some reason I have this association in my head, but I am not sure if it is fair.

Hockey_Ninja · 03-31-2013, 12:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction

Does MacKinnon have higher upside than Langkow? For some reason I have this association in my head, but I am not sure if it is fair.

The dude at one point in time was being compared to Crosby so i would say yes.

FlamesAddiction · 03-31-2013, 12:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hockey_Ninja

The dude at one point in time was being compared to Crosby so i would say yes.

I'm not sure how much that matters now. Phil Kessel was at one time considered America's answer to Sidney Crosby, but by the time the draft came up, he sure wasn't.

I don't think anyone is comparing MacKinnon to Crosby now, or has in the past year or 2.

MrMastodonFarm · 03-31-2013, 12:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction

Does MacKinnon have higher upside than Langkow? For some reason I have this association in my head, but I am not sure if it is fair.

He's no Crosby but he's certainly not Langkow either.

you got PHANUEFED · 03-31-2013, 12:41 PM

Monaham is my pick he has all the assests the Flames need size, speed and skill and as for any other pick I say go Center heavy this draft you can always move them to the wing at some point.

Sean Monaham
Max Domi
Bo Horvat
jimmy Lodge

That would make for some nice pieces up the middle.

drPepper1 · 03-31-2013, 12:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hockey_Ninja

The dude at one point in time was being compared to Crosby so i would say yes.

weren't taylor hall and john tavares called the next crosby? not that their bad, but they are no crosby

FlamesAddiction · 03-31-2013, 12:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MrMastodonFarm

He's no Crosby but he's certainly not Langkow either.

Ok, I'll buy it.

But one thing to keep in mind about Langkow though is that he was very highly touted the couple of years before he was drafted and slipped to #5 (I am pretty sure he was considered the likely #1 overall pick at one time). He was actually a more prolific scorer in junior than MacKinnon, although I am not sure how the leagues and eras can compare.

With MacKinnon, I see a player that has trended down over the past year. He went from being the consensus #1, to being a top 3 (some people predict him going 4th this year). IMO, you have to be wary of players that are slipping and consider more so players that are trending up.

Not that there is anything wrong with drafting a Langkow in the top 5.

StrykerSteve · 03-31-2013, 12:50 PM

Mackinnon has excelled at every level he's played. Drouin is a relatively late bloomer by comparison. Some Mackinnon highlights...

- 200 points in 50 games as an atom
- played at the AAA bantam level in Cole Harbour when he was 12 years old - against boys who were more than two years his senior - and scored 110 points
- 145 points in 35 games as a 13-year-old
- 101 points in 58 games with Shattuck-St. Mary's
- 153 points in 102 games in major junior

If he's available, you take him. I can't imagine he won't go first overall.

bubbsy · 03-31-2013, 12:51 PM

i don't know. Couturier dropped a hefty amount in his draft year, but now is looking like a steal at his draft position.

#-3 · 03-31-2013, 01:09 PM

That Frederick Gauthier looks all to interesting.

6'5'' point per game a a rookie in the Q.
Although he was 17, i'm not sure where he was his 16 year old season.
+22, the team was 6th out of 18 in Goal Differential, and he is second on the team, so +/- is not just because he is on a good team.

Assuming our pick is a top 5, I don't see the flames moving down, they need that truly elite prospect. And I am sure that Pitts pick will be way to low to get him. So if Cammi, Tangs, or Bouw can be moved to another 20 - 30 pick. I would not mind seeing a package to move up into the 10 - 15 range and grab this guys.

This guy could be a scary second line center some day.