STH Info Sessions (May 24, May 25, June 15)

[dammage79]

Originally Posted by Demetric

Your points are irrelevant. BPA is BPA. By your logic if the Pittsburgh somehow got 1st overall last year they would not have picked McDavid cause they have Crosby and Malkin as top 2 centers.

You can always trade good players fir good players. BT always says having too much of a good thing is a good problem to have

Sent from my SM-G900W8 using Tapatalk

BPA is BPA? To whom? Out of the 30 teams I'm more than certain youll have 30 different looking lists. Doesn't have to be from #1 down. But the variance is as great as the lotto combinations.

[Flames Draft Watcher]

Originally Posted by dammage79

BPA is BPA? To whom? Out of the 30 teams I'm more than certain youll have 30 different looking lists. Doesn't have to be from #1 down. But the variance is as great as the lotto combinations.

To the Flames obviously. If they have Juolevi top 6 its because they feel he has top pairing potential and is BPA compared to the other options.

[dammage79]

Originally Posted by Flames Draft Watcher

To the Flames obviously. If they have Juolevi top 6 its because they feel he has top pairing potential and is BPA compared to the other options.

Well duh. It still doesn't make sense. The math doesn't work. And I feel I have to reiterate very clearly I like Juolevi. On paper it doesn't make sense to me that the Flames would prefer him to other players who have a different skillset yet are equivalent to him. When that dimension would make the team tougher to play against. Sergachev to me would be the better fit given there less of his type in the stable.

And if BPA is BPA, Nylander still has the greatest skillset put of them all. So again it doesn't make sense. And don't give me the size argument.

[Roof-Daddy]

That's the point. The Flames wouldn't see those other players as "equivalent" to Juolevi if they believe he's BPA.

[dammage79]

I guess we will find out draft day.

[Vulcan]

Originally Posted by Flames Draft Watcher

To the Flames obviously. If they have Juolevi top 6 its because they feel he has top pairing potential and is BPA compared to the other options.

IIRC Button has Juolevi as a potential top pairing defenceman while the others are top 4 so there is that. He also has Edmonton taking him in his mock draft. Maybe he's part of the subterfuge to get Edmonton to take him before Calgary does.

[Flames Draft Watcher]

Originally Posted by dammage79

Well duh. It still doesn't make sense. The math doesn't work. And I feel I have to reiterate very clearly I like Juolevi. On paper it doesn't make sense to me that the Flames would prefer him to other players who have a different skillset yet are equivalent to him. When that dimension would make the team tougher to play against. Sergachev to me would be the better fit given there less of his type in the stable.

And if BPA is BPA, Nylander still has the greatest skillset put of them all. So again it doesn't make sense. And don't give me the size argument.

Well if they feel Juolevi is flat out the best defenseman in this draft it doesn't really matter what style he plays. Lets say they project him as a #1/2 defenseman. If they project Chychrun and Sergachev as #2/3 defensemen then you take Juolevi regardless of style. That's what BPA means.

As for Nylander, we've seen Burke himself say that if two players are close then they'll take Defense over Centres and Centres over Wingers. So yeah, Nylander is very skilled and is probably in our top 10. But a finesse winger is the least important position in hockey so you'll take a potential top pairing dman over it every day of the week regardless of your depth chart. That's what BPA means. A top pairing dman is worth way more than a 1st line finesse winger. You take the most valuable asset.

I mean how many times have you seen me argue that the Flames are likely to have a defenseman in their top 6 because they value defensemen more than other teams do? Dmen are going to be higher for the Flames because philosophically they value them more highly than some other teams do.

How does it not make sense? You've read my arguments as to why it makes sense for like the last month. Guess I did a really poor job explaining my argument?

[dammage79]

Originally Posted by Flames Draft Watcher

Well if they feel Juolevi is flat out the best defenseman in this draft it doesn't really matter what style he plays. Lets say they project him as a #1/2 defenseman. If they project Chychrun and Sergachev as #2/3 defensemen then you take Juolevi regardless of style. That's what BPA means.

As for Nylander, we've seen Burke himself say that if two players are close then they'll take Defense over Centres and Centres over Wingers. So yeah, Nylander is very skilled and is probably in our top 10. But a finesse winger is the least important position in hockey so you'll take a potential top pairing dman over it every day of the week regardless of your depth chart. That's what BPA means. A top pairing dman is worth way more than a 1st line finesse winger. You take the most valuable asset.

I mean how many times have you seen me argue that the Flames are likely to have a defenseman in their top 6 because they value defensemen more than other teams do? Dmen are going to be higher for the Flames because philosophically they value them more highly than some other teams do.

How does it not make sense? You've read my arguments as to why it makes sense for like the last month. Guess I did a really poor job explaining my argument?

At what point will you understand that your perception does not equate to the truth? At what point will you understand that I do not see your POV as any validation of logic towards the Flames? At what point will you understand that we see things so completely different that repeating yourself ad nauseum is not going to change my mind? You've offered little more in our continued debate outside of the first time you've made your POV known that it's now just nails on a chalkboard every single time you quote my posts with the same stale regurgitation.

Blah blah, Burke said this, blah blah, size this, blah blah blah blah, finesse winger not good blah blah. I got it the first 20 or so times you've posted the same thing.

Burke also said he loves skill in his top six and the size in his bottom six. Burke's said a lot of contradictory things in his tenure. So again, whether it is true or not, which is still unclear, Juolevi doesn't make sense to me as the #6 BPA. And I like the player. I'll be happy if he is the pick. You seriously grind my gears man. It's not your POV as much as you trying to brainwash or force-feed it every chance you get. And like it's the only truth there is.

[SebC]

Originally Posted by Doug_Dadswell

- Thinks that Brown and Nylander will be in the gap for the Flames and therefore not relevant

As in, the gap between pick 6 and 35?

[dammage79]

Originally Posted by SebC

As in, the gap between pick 6 and 35?

Yeah that was a muddy response I didn't understand. Perhaps lacks context.

[Calgary4LIfe]

Originally Posted by Flames Draft Watcher

Well if they feel Juolevi is flat out the best defenseman in this draft it doesn't really matter what style he plays. Lets say they project him as a #1/2 defenseman. If they project Chychrun and Sergachev as #2/3 defensemen then you take Juolevi regardless of style. That's what BPA means.

As for Nylander, we've seen Burke himself say that if two players are close then they'll take Defense over Centres and Centres over Wingers. So yeah, Nylander is very skilled and is probably in our top 10. But a finesse winger is the least important position in hockey so you'll take a potential top pairing dman over it every day of the week regardless of your depth chart. That's what BPA means. A top pairing dman is worth way more than a 1st line finesse winger. You take the most valuable asset.

I mean how many times have you seen me argue that the Flames are likely to have a defenseman in their top 6 because they value defensemen more than other teams do? Dmen are going to be higher for the Flames because philosophically they value them more highly than some other teams do.

How does it not make sense? You've read my arguments as to why it makes sense for like the last month. Guess I did a really poor job explaining my argument?

Totally agree here with BPA.

I honestly think that if a team is not taking BPA, they are setting themselves up for possible failure. Most of these kids drafted will never make it. You want to hit as well on a prospect as possible, regardless of position played, or organizational depth in said position. If that player hits, he adds a lot of value to the organization.

You draft a 1st pairing defencemen, you save yourself the expense of trying to trade for one on the open market - they are expensive. Don't let Dougie Hamilton fool you. Conversely, if you find that your organization has an abundance of top-pairing defencemen, you can trade them for valuable assets to fill other holes.

Instead of just filling a top line winger hole, you fill that winger hole + another asset on top of it, seeing as defencemen do hold much more currency than wingers - few exemptions notwithstanding.

Organizations take BPA because franchise players - at any position - are the most difficult to acquire. If Juolevi is the closest thing to a franchise defencemen in this draft, while Sergachev and Chychrun are a step (or more) below that, then it becomes foolhardy to draft one of the other defencemen just because it is different.

I am hoping that the Flames draft Brown due to his size and skill combo - but I would be horrified if the Flames felt that he would only be a 2nd line winger while thinking Keller or Nylander would be a 1st line 'franchise' type winger.

You always draft the BPA because they add the most value to the organization long-term.

If two or three players are essentially tied, then you can pick for organizational need first, value be damned.

The draft is all about adding value to the organization, and the goal is to add the most value as possible. You can always trade players to fill positions - and you will be much more successful doing so because your organizational depth chart has a lot of value.

You want to trade for a Seth Jones - a young but 'franchise type' defencemen? It costs you your 1st line center with size. Nashvilles laughs at the Oilers and an RNH offer.

Conversely, I would imagine only a franchise-level defencemen would be acceptable to Chicago in exchange for Kane's services. Elite franchise player trumps position. That is why as an organization, they simply must draft by BPA- whether it be winger, center, defencemen or goalie. If there are ties, then an organization gets to decide between a position that holds more value down the road (defencemen over centers, centers over wingers) or pick the guy that helps to address a hole organizationally. It just doesn't make sense to do it differently.

Draft to fill holes, and what holes would have been filled by Calgary over the last 5 years? This team has seen itself as having one of the best defensive cores in the NHL, to perhaps one of the worst, to one of the best again. Defencemen take a few years usually - the landscape could be vastly different.

This organization has also seen RW being an embarrassment of riches during Iginla's tenure, and it quickly evaporated into LW players playing their off-wing.

Lastly, just look at LW. 2 years ago, look at the depth charts people were making. Now look at them again. Gaudreau.. and??? What happened to Baertschi? Glencross??

Trades and FA signings are there to fill the holes. Drafts are all about adding the most value to the organization as possible.

[Vulcan]

It's all a ruse guys to get the Oilers to take Juolevi. After they do this dim Jim sees the defencemen starting to be taken and jumps on Chychrun. Flames brass all jump up onto the table giving high fives as they get their choice of Dubois or Tkachuk.

Than again I'm on side with taking Juolevi. He isn't a bad choice for the Flames and may turn out as the best player.

[Lanny_McDonald]

Originally Posted by dammage79

BPA is BPA? To whom? Out of the 30 teams I'm more than certain youll have 30 different looking lists. Doesn't have to be from #1 down. But the variance is as great as the lotto combinations.

This is right on the money. Draft lists are all over the road map. I don't know why people keep buying into this fantasy consensus draft list where this BPA concept has come from? So Bob McKenzie talks to 10 scouts, out of the 500+ that work for NHL clubs, finds a few consistencies in the lists they are willing to release, and tosses out what he thinks the draft order is going to look like. That is picked up all of a sudden becomes canon to draft watchers. It is so highly regarded that it is the basis for the blog set, regurgitated ad nauseam, and repeated to the point where is becomes entrenched in people's thinking. It really is silly.

If the members of this site blindly submitted a list of the top 30 players at each position in the NHL each list will be dramatically different. Some players will be included, some will be left off. The order will vary from sheet to sheet. Some will rely on stats while others will rely on other measures to build their list. Some will put a ton of thought into it and justify every pick, while others will just regurgitate the list generated off the NHL stats page. Variance is the important factor here. Yet there is a belief that 30 member clubs, that employ 500+ individuals with various philosophies on what makes the best prospect, will some how come up with a list that is pretty much the same as every other team. This just doesn't make much sense.

Even in the example of the best players at every position, there is likely not going to be agreement on the best at each position. There is going to be variation. This is a very natural thing as we all view things differently. So when it comes to scouting these amatuers, from different leagues and different countries, with different styles of play, you have to expect a great deal of variation. 500+ opinions on 500 players, but it is going to be distilled down to a single list that all 30 teams are going to use? I don't believe that is possible let alone happening. The Flames draft list will be different from every other team's list, because variation dictates it will be so. If there is a BPA to be had, it will be the one on the Flames list (which is still a work in progress and will be up until the eve of the draft), which we have no idea who is on it or where.

Burke's comments seem to be classic disinformation. He is not going to risk exposing the team's list by blabbing about it at some season ticket holder event. He knows his audience and he'll know that many read the Gospel According to Bob, and he's going to play on that. He'll toss out some names, that some teams are probably on the fence about. He'll make some platitudes about how this player is going to better than another. He'll tell you that he channeled his dead great-grandmother who told her that Ace Bailey told him player X was destined to be the next great superstar in the game. All of it is bunk because the Flames play their cards close to their vest. They don't share important information with others, especially who is on their draft list.

[Bingo]

^
I think you guys are missing the point

The BPA crowd aren't necessarily suggesting that the league has come to some sort of agreement of what the BPA is in every single pick position.

Just that each team has a list, and the majority don't sort the lists by current need, or current prospect cupboard stocking situation. They list them in BPA order.

So the Flames think the better NHL player at 6 regardless of position or current or future need is the best player available

They don't care if other teams agree.

[Bingo]

And I love what the Burke comments will do to the Oilers.

Chiralli and crew have smart guys in the room. They're not idiots (this could cause some debate), they are fully aware of the games that get played and that comments are meant to confuse not educate.

But they can't ignore them either.

And that alone makes the Burke comments gold because they now have to worry about the 6th pick if they want to move down.

Classic.

[jmac98]

Originally Posted by New Era

Burke's comments seem to be classic disinformation. He is not going to risk exposing the team's list by blabbing about it at some season ticket holder event.

This is exactly right.


The problem with these events is that people go in asking questions they very well know they're not going to get a valid answer to. Asking for specifics on the draft 3+ weeks out is like asking about injuries to players during the playoffs.

[Fischy13]

Conroy on the Fan this morning pumping the idea that "he" really likes one D-man more than the other 2... Building on Burke's comments. Nicely done. Whether other teams believe it or not, it has to put some worry in their minds.

[dustygoon]

Originally Posted by dissentowner

Joelevi is clearly a smoke screen to try and put pressure on the Oilers and Canucks feel pressured to grab him. I have almost no doubt at this point the actual ledge of 4-6 is Tkachuk, Dubois, and Nylander, probably in that order. One of those 3 imo will be a Flame after the draft.

I was thinking something totally different.....they want to trade this pick. If you either know he is best blue liner of the crop or know that certain teams above or below value him and you want to trade your pick, then you shout it from the hilltops.

Everyone now knows that Juolevi is not slipping past Calgary. It only works if Calgary thinks others think J is top blue liner or they know a certain team prefers him. If Oilers want him, then they don't have to use #4...they can have him and also get a 2nd rounder or more. Someone below hoping he slipped to them, now knows he won't.

And if they keep the pick and don't take J at 6, then that fib costs them reputation. Just like holding the line on the cammy trade.

[Russic]

(paraphrasing the question, not the answer)

"What do you think about the Coyotes and their 26 year old GM?"

"I'm happy they're in our division"

That was pretty awesome.

[Fighting Banana Slug]

Originally Posted by SebC

As in, the gap between pick 6 and 35?

Yeah, that is what Burke implied.