Bob McKenzie's Draft Ranking - June 23 5:30PM MT - TSN

[bax]

In my (limited) viewings, I don't think he has the skating ability that Seth Jones has either. And that's what I think could potentially make him a dynamic defenseman

[Clever_Iggy]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

This. Ekblad apparently has among the highest hockey IQs in the entire draft. That's why he's a shut-down guy, not because he goes around crushing boys.

Not to compare the unproven Ekblad to a HOFer, but Lidstrom was a smart, top pairing (one of the best all time) defenseman who's stick-work and positioning made him who he was... not his physical play.

[Bandwagon In Flames]

Originally Posted by codynw

You guys are high. Plays consistently died on Colborne's stick. If he's in the top 6 his team probably isn't going to be very good.

As long as he continues to progress at the Pro level, there's no reason for comments like this. If Jankowski has top 6 potential then so does Colborne as he can be considered a farther along version of Jankowski.

I'm excited to see what Joe can do with a slightly larger frame and more physical game which he's been showing signs of. He'll come in more confident and can create some room for the likes of Gaudreau, Sam B/R and Baertchi while still having the skill to make things happen himself.

[FlameZilla]

Originally Posted by bax

In my (limited) viewings, I don't think he has the skating ability that Seth Jones has either. And that's what I think could potentially make him a dynamic defenseman

If he's not as dynamic as Jones it may suit us even better: we need a big, RH-shot 2-way defenceman more than we need a dynamic offensive defenceman. A Brodie/Ekblad pairing is a really exciting proposition for the future, with Ekblad anchoring the D & Brodie driving the offence.

Just because he isn't Seth Jones does not mean he isn't a potentially elite defenceman. He might even have a longer & more successful career (especially if the Flames draft him... )

[bax]

Originally Posted by FlameZilla

If he's not as dynamic as Jones it may suit us even better: we need a big, RH-shot 2-way defenceman more than we need a dynamic offensive defenceman. A Brodie/Ekblad pairing is a really exciting proposition for the future, with Ekblad anchoring the D & Brodie driving the offence.



Just because he isn't Seth Jones does not mean he isn't a potentially elite defenceman. He might even have a longer & more successful career (especially if the Flames draft him... )

I agree, that would be very exciting and I'm not opposed to Ekblad at 4 at all if that's the way it shakes down. Just in my absolutely non-professional scouting opinion I would rather have one of the centers. I still think Florida or Edmonton grabs him before we get a chance anyways though

[Flames Draft Watcher]

Originally Posted by bax

I'm not sold on his game translating because he's been physically mature his entire junior career and therefore been able to dominate with his strength. Things are going to be much different at the NHL level.

Once again, not saying that he's not going to be good, just that for the flames needs I would rather have one of the 3 centers

Not really. He's already bigger and stronger than the average NHLer so he'll still have a sizeable size/strength advantage on the majority of forwards. He's already considerably bigger than any of our d-men and also pretty much all of our forwards. Don't understand that argument at all. ISS rates his size/strength as exceptional. It's not going to cause his game to not translate, in fact quite the opposite, his game will more easily translate than smaller defencemen. He already has the size/strength to manhandle most NHL forwards.

[Flames Draft Watcher]

Originally Posted by 19Yzerman19

He's a d-man. Not drafting d-men in the top 5 is quite simply a sound conservative drafting philosophy - they are inherently high risk, high reward. People ranking Ekblad below the other 3 are totally justified in doing so.

They are slightly harder to project than forwards but not nearly as risky as you màke them out to be. And Ekblad looks a pretty sure bet to be a high quality defenceman for a long time. He in particular seems less risky than your usual defenceman because he's had more development time at a high level, already has shown well internationally against players 2 years older than him ànd already has NHL size, smarts and shot.

[bax]

Originally Posted by Flames Draft Watcher

Not really. He's already bigger and stronger than the average NHLer so he'll still have a sizeable size/strength advantage on the majority of forwards. He's already considerably bigger than any of our d-men and also pretty much all of our forwards. Don't understand that argument at all. ISS rates his size/strength as exceptional. It's not going to cause his game to not translate, in fact quite the opposite, his game will more easily translate than smaller defencemen. He already has the size/strength to manhandle most NHL forwards.

If he is strong enough to be able to manhandle NHL forwards already then I am even more concerned.

If that's the case then shouldn't he be absolutely tearing up junior players? Don't get me wrong, he had a great year, but lots of players gave him fits at the world juniors and at the prospects game.

Either way, I can't remember a draft with this much uncertainty in it. Can't wait!

[dammage79]

There's too much concern going on over Ekblads' strengths as a player. He's going to be a keeper for a long long long time. I think he'll be a more well rounded, less dazzling skating type with a dash more personality version of Bouwmeester.

[dustygoon]

This draft sounds like a pretty weak one. If we have to trade a 2nd to move up and grab the guy we like, then I'm fine with it.

[Poe969]

Just watching this now and it's making me think een higher of Ekblad. Winning teams are built from the back up and Ekblad looks like he can be someone to build around.

At this point i trade what it takes to get him

[Rick M.]

I'm starting to warm up to Ekblad, though I wouldn't trade up to get him. For quite a while I feared that he was Dana Murzyn v. 2.0.

[A Shot Wide]

Originally Posted by Poe969

Just watching this now and it's making me think een higher of Ekblad. Winning teams are built from the back up and Ekblad looks like he can be someone to build around.

At this point i trade what it takes to get him

I like Ekblad too, but depending on what Tallon is demanding or expecting there might be more value in standing pat, especially when we don't know who could fall to 4. If the rumoured Shinkaruk + 6 + Roster player (who could be Tanev) is true, it seems to me they're trying to gouge some team who is desperate to make a splash on draft day. In terms of managing long-term assets and not trading away valuable assets to move up from a position where we could get an equal player, I would prefer if we took our chances at 4 and hold on to whatever assets Tallon would be demanding. I've been a victim of falling in love with a player before, and I really like Ekblad, but I'm really hoping Brad doesn't jump at some ridiculous deal just because he feels he needs to make some fireworks in his first draft... but I'm not worried, he doesn't seem like that type of GM tbh.

[Scoreface]

Dana Murzyn?! Wow. That's quite the reach! Haha

To your credit, I'm glad you've seen more of him and that he's grown on you. I want this guy and if we have to trade our own Second and a B prospect like Hanowski or Agostino to get him, I'm alright with that. However Florida wants help now.

If he's available at Buffalo's pick, they may be more inclined, as they can probably still get a Sam or Draisaitle at 4 and they have a dearth of prospects on D. I could see this scenario happening if it arises, but my true bet is standing pat at 4 and getting one of those three, which is hunky dorey with me.

[OzSome]

I just checked out Ryan Leslie's interview with Ross MacLean from ISS and Peter Loubardias.

https://twitter.com/nhlflames/status/481512144530587648

ISS Top 5 ranking looks so much different from Bob McKenzie's ranking. I was actually surprise. Here are their Top 5 :

5. William Nylander
4. Sam Bennett
3. Michael Dal Colle
2. or it could even be 1B : Aaron Ekblad
1 or 1A : Sam Reinhart

Not sure how they ranked Leon Draisaitl, Virtannen or Ritchie. Not sure I agree with their ranking but I won't argue. If the draft goes as ISS ranking, then I'll be happy to see Bennett as the Flames draft.

[EldrickOnIce]

Draisatl 6th, Virtannen 7, Ritchie 10 at ISS

http://www.isshockey.com/iss-top-30/

[Monahan23]

That ISS list

[Erick Estrada]

Originally Posted by EldrickOnIce

Draisatl 6th, Virtannen 7, Ritchie 10 at ISS

http://www.isshockey.com/iss-top-30/

Why do they have Dal Colle as a center?

[Rick M.]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

Why do they have Dal Colle as a center?

It's odd that 'center' keeps showing up as his position even though he hasn't played center since his pre-junior days.

[dammage79]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

Why do they have Dal Colle as a center?

ISS Employs Roman Cervenkas agent? Hoodwinking the masses again?

Another angle, Feaster works for ISS now?

Hey-yo!