Ryan O Reilly

[Scoutski]

Originally Posted by codynw

It's not just McDavid in next years draft. The whole class is supposedly full of potential superstars. In terms of quality, it's being compared to the 2003 draft. That pick should be 100% off limits.

I see that this is a pretty strongly held idea on CP, I'm not really sure who's called it that, though I'm not saying you're wrong. If we were to agree that it is full of potential superstars, how many of the first rounders do you think it's realistic to assume will have fruitful NHL careers? I think you could make an optimistic argument that 20/30 of those picks turned into good NHL players if it's realistic to compare it to the 2003 draft:

List of first round picks in 2003

So if we just assume that this draft is definitely as good as 2003 and that we have a 66% chance of getting a great player, we also have to factor in if every single one of those 20/30 players is going to be BETTER than Ryan O'Reilly. We can stay optimistic though and say that 15/20 of those guys will have a better career and that puts us at having a 50% chance of drafting a player better than RoR, still decent for sure.

Even in that case, it's a 50/50 call on getting a better player (and not necessarily exceptionally better) or a worse player/bust. Or if we lose the pick, we get a very good player 100% of the time.

Essentially what I'm saying is do you think a 50% chance of a better player is worth the risk involved? This shouldn't really be a YES/NO situation, but you can definitely make strong arguments for each side.

Also remember that we are using pretty much the most optimistic scenario we can come up with here to get those numbers.

[codynw]

Ideally he's a 2nd line center (or 1A/1B type deal). He's a great player that will have a long career, and I'd trade a combination of almost anything that isn't Giordano, Monahan, Gaudreau or the 2015 1st for him.

This shouldn't even be a discussion. Offer sheets are not a good idea for a team that is picking top 5 this year, and likely will be again next year.

[Scoutski]

Originally Posted by codynw

Ideally he's a 2nd line center (or 1A/1B type deal). He's a great player that will have a long career, and I'd trade a combination of almost anything that isn't Giordano, Monahan, Gaudreau or the 2015 1st for him.

This shouldn't even be a discussion. Offer sheets are not a good idea for a team that is picking top 5 this year, and likely will be again next year.

Don't get me wrong, I would DEFINITELY prefer them to target him with assets that don't include any first round picks if they feel they really want him, because I understand the excitement of high drafting.

However, why shouldn't there at least be a discussion about it... Isn't that the point of making a thread about it? I still think there's enough reason to discuss it when the possibility of management doing it is very real. That said, even in the case that the Flames do offer, the last offer sheet to be accepted was in 2007 and before that it was in 1997.

[Hackey]

Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction

ROR is an ideal 2nd line center on a good team.

Is a 2nd line center worth more than our first rounder next year?

Is a 2nd line center holding us back from being Cup contenders?


If the answer is no to either of these questions, then you do not make an offersheet for him. It's as simple as that.

Exactly. I don't understand the love affair with ROR on this board. He's a good player but not even a top line talent.

[Roof-Daddy]

Originally Posted by Hackey

Exactly. I don't understand the love affair with ROR on this board. He's a good player but not even a top line talent.

His ice time and production say he is a top line talent.

[Flames Draft Watcher]

Originally Posted by Scoutski

I see that this is a pretty strongly held idea on CP, I'm not really sure who's called it that, though I'm not saying you're wrong. If we were to agree that it is full of potential superstars, how many of the first rounders do you think it's realistic to assume will have fruitful NHL careers? I think you could make an optimistic argument that 20/30 of those picks turned into good NHL players if it's realistic to compare it to the 2003 draft:

List of first round picks in 2003

So if we just assume that this draft is definitely as good as 2003 and that we have a 66% chance of getting a great player, we also have to factor in if every single one of those 20/30 players is going to be BETTER than Ryan O'Reilly. We can stay optimistic though and say that 15/20 of those guys will have a better career and that puts us at having a 50% chance of drafting a player better than RoR, still decent for sure.

Even in that case, it's a 50/50 call on getting a better player (and not necessarily exceptionally better) or a worse player/bust. Or if we lose the pick, we get a very good player 100% of the time.

Essentially what I'm saying is do you think a 50% chance of a better player is worth the risk involved? This shouldn't really be a YES/NO situation, but you can definitely make strong arguments for each side.

Also remember that we are using pretty much the most optimistic scenario we can come up with here to get those numbers.

We're looking to have another top 5-10 pick. You shouldn't be looking at the entire first round then but at the odds of getting a player better than O'Reilly near the top end of the draft. The top end of next years draft actually looks better than 2003. Why 2003 is so touted was the depth but it didn't actually have a McDavid/Eichel type at the top end. So 2015 is supposed to both be deep but also have a nice top end. So you could be missing out on a potential superstar or at worst a likely foundational piece.

Here's the RFA compensation list:
Over $5,046,585 to $6,728,781: 1st, 2nd, and 3rd round pick
Over $6,728,781 To $8,410,976: Two 1st’s, one 2nd, one 3rd round pick

I like O'Reiily a lot. But in order to get them to not match we'd probably have to offer long term in the 7 million range. That means giving up two 1sts, a 2nd and a 3rd. Your analysis isn't taking that into account at all. Heck the Avs got O'Reilly in the 2nd. You wanna give up a 1st, 2nd and 3rd OR MORE in a deep draft? Good lord.

It's pretty much a no brainer that given our potential draft position next year that giving up even a 1st, 2nd and 3rd for O'Reilly is overpayment. It made some sense back when we had Iginla and it was only a 1st and a 3rd but it doesn't make any sense at all now.

The idea doesn't merit any serious consideration IMO. Too many picks in a deep year where we're expected to have high picks in every round.

[Flames Draft Watcher]

Originally Posted by Hackey

Exactly. I don't understand the love affair with ROR on this board. He's a good player but not even a top line talent.

What?

O'Reilly finished 32nd in points in the entire NHL. 30 teams X 3 top line players = 90 players being top line players. And you wanna try to argue that someone who finished in the top 35 in scoring isn't a top line player in the NHL?

Laughable.

[nik-]

I don't know if Ryan O'Reilly is a top line player, I'd say he's close, but points aren't the way to determine that though.

Sharp isn't a top line player and he outscore O'Reilly significantly.

[Roof-Daddy]

Originally Posted by nik-

I don't know if Ryan O'Reilly is a top line player, I'd say he's close, but points aren't the way to determine that though.

Sharp isn't a top line player and he outscore O'Reilly significantly.

O'Reilly doesn't just score though, he's well known for his complete 200 ft game as well.

...and Sharp isn't a top line player? Come on dude.....

[Major Major]

Originally Posted by nik-

I don't know if Ryan O'Reilly is a top line player, I'd say he's close, but points aren't the way to determine that though.

Sharp isn't a top line player and he outscore O'Reilly significantly.

So, if he has top line player points, lead one of the best teams in the league in ice time for forwards, and is a selke favorite, what metric would you like to use in order to say he's not a top line player? Is it the I hate feaster measurement?

[Scoutski]

Originally Posted by Flames Draft Watcher

We're looking to have another top 5-10 pick. You shouldn't be looking at the entire first round then but at the odds of getting a player better than O'Reilly near the top end of the draft. The top end of next years draft actually looks better than 2003. Why 2003 is so touted was the depth but it didn't actually have a McDavid/Eichel type at the top end. So 2015 is supposed to both be deep but also have a nice top end. So you could be missing out on a potential superstar or at worst a likely foundational piece.

Here's the RFA compensation list:
Over $5,046,585 to $6,728,781: 1st, 2nd, and 3rd round pick
Over $6,728,781 To $8,410,976: Two 1st’s, one 2nd, one 3rd round pick

I like O'Reiily a lot. But in order to get them to not match we'd probably have to offer long term in the 7 million range. That means giving up two 1sts, a 2nd and a 3rd. Your analysis isn't taking that into account at all. Heck the Avs got O'Reilly in the 2nd. You wanna give up a 1st, 2nd and 3rd OR MORE in a deep draft? Good lord.

It's pretty much a no brainer that given our potential draft position next year that giving up even a 1st, 2nd and 3rd for O'Reilly is overpayment. It made some sense back when we had Iginla and it was only a 1st and a 3rd but it doesn't make any sense at all now.

The idea doesn't merit any serious consideration IMO. Too many picks in a deep year where we're expected to have high picks in every round.

Thanks for responding with something more than "no". I will more than happily admit that my little numbers game was very rudimentary, I just wanted to illustrate that our pick next year is not a sure thing. I still feel like it's heavily overvalued unless of course we're right back in the same range again, so the more difficult bridge to gap depends on how badly you think the Flames will do next season.

I would think the issue for Colorado would be term as opposed to dollars and I agree that pushing it to two first round picks would make this unbalanced and I would not want to see that under any circumstances. I would hope that if the move were to be presented, it would not exceed the 6.7m cap hit.

I am not advocating this move, but I would understand if management did it and I'm looking at it purely from how they would see it. Management truly believe (and they have to) that they will improve on the performance of last year and that being the case they wouldn't see the pick holding nearly as much value because they are banking on themselves to improve.

[Fuzzy14]

Sharp isn't a top line player and he outscore O'Reilly significantly.

An argument can be made that sharp isn't a top line player simply because of Chicago's depth and that he'd likely be a top line player on alot of teams. Chicago has pretty close to two full lines of top-line players.

[nik-]

yeah, Sharp is probably a poor example because of his team. Still though, just saying "he finished in top 90 points" is not a good indicator in my opinion. I think O'Reilly could be fine as a first line player though.

[Major Major]

^ And it is easily demonstrable that Oreilly is an even worse example of points not telling the whole story, so what is your point?

[nik-]

My point is that I think O'Reilly is pretty much a top line player, like I said twice already, and that points aren't the best way to determine it.

I thought it was pretty clear.

[Sylvanfan]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

Seguin in his first season where he got top line ice time finished 4th overall in league scoring a feat ROR will never accomplish likely ever. ROR will be a great 2nd line centre over his career but the Flames will get that just from picking one of the Sam's or the German kid this year and they aren't going to command $6 million for a long time.

At times I feel like I must be missing something because O'Reilly seems to get valuated like he's the second coming of Joe Sakic.

Realistically players come available every season at this time of the year. The Flames aren't ready to make the move now. When they are in a couple of years there will be someone who is comparable who can probably edge a team on the brink into playoff contention if the rest of the plan works out. That is when you make the move to add that extra piece. Right now unless you are able to buy really low, making these types of moves shouldn't happen unless it really is a rare opportunity to get a really special player. I don't think O'Reilly is that special. Someone similar or he himself will be made available two years from now when the team is better set up to make that bold move.

[Roof-Daddy]

Originally Posted by nik-

yeah, Sharp is probably a poor example because of his team. Still though, just saying "he finished in top 90 points" is not a good indicator in my opinion. I think O'Reilly could be fine as a first line player though.

You're right it's not, but when you combine it with the fact that he played more minutes per game than any other forward on his team......one of the top teams in the West this season, then I think it's safe to say he's a pretty decent top line player.

[Major Major]

Originally Posted by nik-

My point is that I think O'Reilly is pretty much a top line player, like I said twice already, and that points aren't the best way to determine it.

I thought it was pretty clear.

Not really that clear whether you are detracting or downplaying the significance of a player like oreilly since your argument that points aren't the only determiner of top line talent is completely irrelevant to Oreilly, a cut and dry first line player using any way to gauge this.

So you are not sold? You aren't very familiar with his game? It's really not that clear.

[nik-]

Originally Posted by Major Major

Not really that clear whether you are detracting or downplaying the significance of a player like oreilly since your argument that points aren't the only determiner of top line talent is completely irrelevant to Oreilly, a cut and dry first line player using any way to gauge this.

So you are not sold? You aren't very familiar with his game? It's really not that clear.

I'm sorry it's not clear.

[edslunch]

I'd say he's easily worth a 15-30 pick. Top 5 no way, 5-15 need to think long and hard.