[Rumour] Buffalo's and Florida's 1st round picks are in play

[bettman]

If you throw in Gudbranson in the deal...it might work.

Originally Posted by kn

The Fan960 morning show was speculating 4th OV, 2nd round pick, and Brodie to move up to first to take Ekblad.

My first reaction, and the reaction on CP would be chaos. But, (a big but), IF Ekblad turns into a top-10 defenceman in the NHL and a perennial Norris candidate in a few years, then the trade would be worth it.

The consensus is that Ekblad is good but not great. That doesn't mean the consensus is correct or that the Flames feel the same way.

[thethumwood]

Originally Posted by kn

The Fan960 morning show was speculating 4th OV, 2nd round pick, and Brodie to move up to first to take Ekblad.

My first reaction, and the reaction on CP would be chaos. But, (a big but), IF Ekblad turns into a top-10 defenceman in the NHL and a perennial Norris candidate in a few years, then the trade would be worth it.

The consensus is that Ekblad is good but not great. That doesn't mean the consensus is correct or that the Flames feel the same way.

No, no. no. Brodie just signed a bridge contract to see if he can maintain his play for these two years. He played very well last year. And he is only 23 years old... Giving up him and #4 OA are not worth it for Ekblad. Ekblad is good, but not great. Brodie is good, but not great either. But Brodie is already playing in the NHL and is putting in big minutes. I would be very upset if we do this trade. I am completely content with staying at 4 and drafting whoever falls to us out of the 4.

[CliffFletcher]

I won't be surprised at all if the Flames move up to take Ekblad. Burke hasn't hesitated to move assets to get someone he really wants. And Ekblad ticks three boxes:

Top pairing defenceman. When Burke went after Phaneuf, he commented that the number one need for any team that wants to contend is a stud defenceman. I doubt his thinking has changed, and Treliving has also said he likes to build teams out from the back end.

Size. Team needs more of it. And sooner rather than later. We don't have much coming down the pipe in terms of size, so one way or another we're going to have to move assets to get big players who can actually play.

Ability to step in now and improve the team. The braintrust of the team doesn't want this to be a long rebuild. They don't plan on sticking around the bottom of the pack for long. You have to think they're looking at ways to improve the team now. Ekblad is NHL ready.

The others in the big four only tick one box:

1st/2nd line centre. That's an important box. But no more important than top-pairing defenceman. And none of the other top prospects really help with size (except Draisatl) or win now.

[Lanny_McDonald]

Originally Posted by Ashasx

y u do dis fan 960

Because it got this type of reaction. This what talking heads are paid to do; generate a reaction and outrage. Mission accomplished by Boomer.

I hope the Flames brain trust wake up and realize there is no franchise player in this draft. To me this looks like the 2006 draft. Some pretty good hockey players in the top 4, but no one that is going to change the fortunes of this franchise. Any of the top four will be a very good player but they will be but a cog in the machine, not the engine that drives the franchise. Take the BPA at #4 and find some other gems with the other picks. Next draft you aim for that franchise player. I think they would be dumb in going big game hunting in a draft where there is no big game.

[thethumwood]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

I won't be surprised at all if the Flames move up to take Ekblad. Burke hasn't hesitated to move assets to get someone he really wants. And Ekblad ticks three boxes:

Top pairing defenceman. When Burke went after Phaneuf, he commented that the number one need for any team that wants to contend is a stud defenceman. I doubt his thinking has changed, and Treliving has also said he likes to build teams out from the back end.

Size. Team needs more of it. And sooner rather than later. We don't have much coming down the pipe in terms of size, so one way or another we're going to have to move assets to get big players who can actually play.

Ability to step in now and improve the team. The braintrust of the team doesn't want this to be a long rebuild. They don't plan on sticking around the bottom of the pack for long. You have to think they're looking at ways to improve the team now. Ekblad is NHL ready.

The others in the big four only tick one box:

1st/2nd line centre. That's an important box. But no more important than top-pairing defenceman. And none of the other top prospects really help with size (except Draisatl) or win now.

They check size box too... Reinhart is same size as Monahan when he was drafted. As I previously stated, too early to trade Brodie as he is just stepping into his game. This trade is way over priced.

[The Fonz]

Originally Posted by kn

The Fan960 morning show was speculating 4th OV, 2nd round pick, and Brodie to move up to first to take Ekblad.

My first reaction, and the reaction on CP would be chaos. But, (a big but), IF Ekblad turns into a top-10 defenceman in the NHL and a perennial Norris candidate in a few years, then the trade would be worth it.

The consensus is that Ekblad is good but not great. That doesn't mean the consensus is correct or that the Flames feel the same way.

What a stupid trade.

Trade a promising young defender, for a promising younger defender. And add in high draft picks.

That's not proper asset management, that's a recipe for treading water indefinitely, and being a perrenial bottom feeder.

A lot of scouts have speculated lately that Ekblad doesn't have franchise dman potential, and that he's just going to be a solid top pairing guy, possibly just 2nd pairing. Brodie is already a solid 2nd pairing guy, and showing great top pairing potential.

Horrible horrible horrible trade proposal, and no way it costs that much to move up 3 spots to #1.

[theoforever]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

I won't be surprised at all if the Flames move up to take Ekblad. Burke hasn't hesitated to move assets to get someone he really wants. And Ekblad ticks three boxes:

Top pairing defenceman. When Burke went after Phaneuf, he commented that the number one need for any team that wants to contend is a stud defenceman. I doubt his thinking has changed, and Treliving has also said he likes to build teams out from the back end.

Size. Team needs more of it. And sooner rather than later. We don't have much coming down the pipe in terms of size, so one way or another we're going to have to move assets to get big players who can actually play.

Ability to step in now and improve the team. The braintrust of the team doesn't want this to be a long rebuild. They don't plan on sticking around the bottom of the pack for long. You have to think they're looking at ways to improve the team now. Ekblad is NHL ready.

The others in the big four only tick one box:

1st/2nd line centre. That's an important box. But no more important than top-pairing defenceman. And none of the other top prospects really help with size (except Draisatl) or win now.

I would agree that Burke may want to make this move.
However, to expect Ekblad to make an impact in NHL in his first year in any other form than a huge minus and liability on backend is a joke.
Forwards develop faster than d-men, so not sure how that speeds up anything unless speeding up means having a first or second paring dman in 3 to 4 years.

[theoforever]

Boomer likes to make proposals that fly against reason and logic.
He follows up by some weak arguments and gets defensive when cornered by facts. All in all he is doing his job of steering the pot.

[devo22]

4th overall + a 2nd + Brodie is way too steep. Would not touch that with a ten foot pole.

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by thethumwood

They check size box too... Reinhart is same size as Monahan when he was drafted. As I previously stated, too early to trade Brodie as he is just stepping into his game. This trade is way over priced.

My post made no reference to the Brodie deal thrown out on 960. I think the Flames will try to move up to grab Ekblad. I don't know what they'll offer.

Originally Posted by theoforever

I would agree that Burke may want to make this move.
However, to expect Ekblad to make an impact in NHL in his first year in any other form than a huge minus and liability on backend is a joke.
Forwards develop faster than d-men, so not sure how that speeds up anything unless speeding up means having a first or second paring dman in 3 to 4 years.

I doubt he'll be an impact player next season, but he'll probably play. And I'm willing to bet his second season he'll be a top-4 guy. That helps the team more than Reinhart, who will probably take 3 or more years just to surpass Backlund's overall game. The Flames have a lot more depth at centre than at defence. And the real notable quality about Ekblad is how NHL ready he appears to be.

Or to look at it another way, let's say we don't draft that stud d-man until next year. Or the season after. And let's say, unlike Ekblad, they're projected to take the more typical 3-5 seasons to develop. How does that affect the timing of the rebuild? Monahan is already on his second contract and hitting his prime when the new core d-men are just stepping up to the plate. I think you gotta take d-men earlier in the rebuild so your core grows together. And if you can find a blue-chipper who is more NHL ready than most, that has to be a plus.

[Roof-Daddy]

Thank god Boomer and thefan960 aren't running the Flames then.

Trading a 23 year old top pairing defenseman just to move up three spots in the draft would be so bad for Calgary value wise that I can't even wrap my head around the thought process behind that idea.

[Ashasx]

People were suggesting that Montreal should trade their 3rd overall pick + Subban for the 1st overall pick (Edmonton) in 2012, so ridiculous proposals are abound just before the draft.

[Lanny_McDonald]

A reminder to all with wood for Ekblad. When was the last time a defenseman drafted number one ended up being a sure fire all star? Denis Potvin? Ekblad just doesn't seem to be in the class of players that you give up extra assets to acquire. Not when three centers with high upsides are available. You can trade for top end defensemen, as has been proven over the years. You can't trade for top end centers. Take the BPA and let the dust settle. The Flames look to win any way you look at the player available at four.

[theoforever]

If everyone said Ekblad is a franchise player in the making I would be more encouraged, but odds are he is not. One would think Panthers could use him, if he is projecting to be that good. Nothing sadder, and we have had many examples when comes to Flames, when they try to squeeze a square peg into a round hole.

[CliffFletcher]

Ekblad doesn't have to be a franchise player to be worth the #1 overall pick. The other three don't look like franchise players either - or even surefire #1 centres.

[Flames_F.T.W]

The only way Brodie is packaged to Florida for #1OA is if our #4OA isn't part of the deal. If it cost us Brodie to get Ekblad and Reinhart/Bennett, then I'm okay with that (I'm a big Brodie fan too)

[theoforever]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

Ekblad doesn't have to be a franchise player to be worth the #1 overall pick. The other three don't look like franchise players either - or even surefire #1 centres.

Yeah, but to give up Brodie who is already a #3 guy and could become #2 and who is in the right age bracket is a steep price to pay to move up 3 spots.

[Burke Salad]

I find that one problem of the Canadian franchises is they tend to overthink things with quicker fixes, if there is four top notch prospects and we are picking 4th, why get sucked into a bidding war?

[_Q_]

Giving up Brodie in any trade for the first over all is just plain stupid. Giving up Brodie AND the 4th over all AND a second round pick is idiotic and fire worthy.

I would do first + second. I would throw in a veteran roster player not named Giordano (read Glencross, Hudler, Stajan or Smid) and downgrade that second to a third or fourth. I would also trade a B level prospect instead of the roster player (read Knight, Reinhart, Sieloff, Culkin or Kulak).

[flylock shox]

For Florida it might make sense to simply trade the 1st overall for the Flames' 4th overall and two second round picks. They could then flip the 4th overall (which for some teams would be equivalent to the 1st overall pick anyway) for another high pick and immediate help.

That seems to be Florida's best move really - two swaps - and might make sense for Calgary too if they value one guy well above the others.