In the OOT thread, I was asked by Timbit if I'd take Jones ahead of any the 4 forwards (Lindholm/Barkov/McKinnon/Drouin)
I figured that my reply would work better in this thread.
I wouldn't take Jones unless the other 4 guys are off the board.
You can just as easily find defensemen that can become top pairing guys in the middle/end of the first round as you can near the top.
Defensemen seem to be similar to goalies in that their draft position doesn't necessarily equate to end product talent. Keith, Seabrook, Weber, Schultz, Letang, Goligoski, Brodie, Giordano, Shattenkirk, Green, Subban, Chara, Martin, Z. Michalek, Erik Karlsson and many many other defensemen were all taken with the #14 pick in the draft or later. Because of that, I wouldn't place as much emphasis on addressing the D core with our first pick, especially when we have 3 picks in the first round.
With our first pick, I'd rather go with a forward that has elite upside instead. It is vastly more difficult to find first line forwards after the top 5 picks. Usually there's only one or two really good forwards in each draft in the 15-30 zone with usually a few serviceable 2nd/3rd liners.
In 04, only Wolski and Zajac were notable
In 05, Hanzal, Cogliano, Oshie, and Downie
In 06. Chris Stewart, Giroux, Berglund, and Foligno
In 07, Pacioretti, Perron, and Backlund
In 08, Eberle and Ennis
In 09, Kreider, Josefson, Johansson, Caron and Palmeri
After that, it's a little harder to tell as there hasn't been enough of a sample size with those guys as most are rookies or not in the NHL.
Unless you happen to get lucky and there's an Eberle, or Giroux available, you aren't likely going to get a star player with those later picks, so if we can get a star calibre (or even just a decent first liner) with our first pick, it makes more sense to try for that.
The Following User Says Thank You to Caged Great For This Useful Post:
I think Nate McKinnon is a no-brainer at #2 or 3. If we get #1, then trade down a spot or 2. I would actually trade up withe the STL pick, and target the CBJ pick, if the are top 10, to try and draft nishkushkin. (I also am not going to learn a kids name until he plays for me team). With those 2 guys u might have your Crosby and malkin. I also think that's the reason why Tanguay and Cammalleri are still flames.
I think u look for ur franchise defenseman with the Pittsburgh pick. Remember: Shea Weber was a 2nd round pick. And the 2003? draft was the most comparable to this one.
Mike Richards, Jeff carter, Ryan Getzlaff, Cory perry, weber, phanuef. None of them were top 5 picks. 1superstar and any of those 2 coming out of this draft, and this team is a cup contender within 3yrs.
Very deep draft, and it was known at the time. Flames biggest failure was picking the Swiss d-man, who's name eludes me, in the second round.
In the OOT thread, I was asked by Timbit if I'd take Jones ahead of any the 4 forwards (Lindholm/Barkov/McKinnon/Drouin)
I figured that my reply would work better in this thread.
I wouldn't take Jones unless the other 4 guys are off the board.
You can just as easily find defensemen that can become top pairing guys in the middle/end of the first round as you can near the top.
Defensemen seem to be similar to goalies in that their draft position doesn't necessarily equate to end product talent. Keith, Seabrook, Weber, Schultz, Letang, Goligoski, Brodie, Giordano, Shattenkirk, Green, Subban, Chara, Martin, Z. Michalek, Erik Karlsson and many many other defensemen were all taken with the #14 pick in the draft or later. Because of that, I wouldn't place as much emphasis on addressing the D core with our first pick, especially when we have 3 picks in the first round.
With our first pick, I'd rather go with a forward that has elite upside instead. It is vastly more difficult to find first line forwards after the top 5 picks. Usually there's only one or two really good forwards in each draft in the 15-30 zone with usually a few serviceable 2nd/3rd liners.
In 04, only Wolski and Zajac were notable
In 05, Hanzal, Cogliano, Oshie, and Downie
In 06. Chris Stewart, Giroux, Berglund, and Foligno
In 07, Pacioretti, Perron, and Backlund
In 08, Eberle and Ennis
In 09, Kreider, Josefson, Johansson, Caron and Palmeri
After that, it's a little harder to tell as there hasn't been enough of a sample size with those guys as most are rookies or not in the NHL.
Unless you happen to get lucky and there's an Eberle, or Giroux available, you aren't likely going to get a star player with those later picks, so if we can get a star calibre (or even just a decent first liner) with our first pick, it makes more sense to try for that.
Agreed, I think its easier to grab a Keith or a Webber with a lower pick than a Tavares or a Stamkos with a lower pick.
Not sure if posted yet. Here's some highlights of Barkov
Here is a much better video featuring Barkov. This one is actually primarily composed of hockey highlights, as opposed to an excess of footage of his goal-celebrations and moody-montage off-ice images.
The kid looks like a real player. Of special interest in these videos is that he is wearing his team's golden helmet in half of them. This has to be a pretty tremendous accomplishment for any seventeen-year-old playing professional men's hockey.
__________________
Dealing with Everything from Dead Sea Scrolls to Red C Trolls
Quote:
Originally Posted by woob
"...harem warfare? like all your wives dressup and go paintballing?"
Still believe Barkov to be in a lower class than McKinnon or Droun. And I still want a center. A franchise center. That said, I obviously not watched Barkov play.
Here is a much better video featuring Barkov. This one is actually primarily composed of hockey highlights, as opposed to an excess of footage of his goal-celebrations and moody off-ice images.
The kid looks like a real player. Of special interest in these videos is that he is wearing his team's golden helmet in half of them. This has to be a pretty tremendous accomplishment for any seventeen-year-old playing professional men's hockey.
Still believe Barkov to be in a lower class than McKinnon or Droun. And I still want a center. A franchise center. That said, I obviously not watched Barkov play.
Barkov is a centre. A big, young, strong scoring centre with very keen defensive instincts.
He is probably not quite at the same level as McKinnon at least, but I expect mostly because of his skating. I'm not in any position to make judgments about these players individually, only I believe that any team picking in the top-four can't really go wrong with any of them.
__________________
Dealing with Everything from Dead Sea Scrolls to Red C Trolls
Quote:
Originally Posted by woob
"...harem warfare? like all your wives dressup and go paintballing?"
As I've watched more of Barkov, the less I am liking him. He'll be a decent player, but I don't think he's all that and then some.
I think the clear cut best player in terms of skill of the top forwards 4 is Jonathan Drouin, with Nathan McKinnon coming in second. I actually am leaning more towards Lindholm being a better impact player than Barkov moving forward. The more I watch Barkov, the more I see Olli Jokinen, and the less enthusiastic I become over the possibility of picking him.
Just because Drouin is listed as a winger, he plays the same type of game as Sidney Crosby and has been a center until paired with McKinnon. Even if Drouin only becomes 80% of what Crosby has been for the Pens, we'll have a star player on our hands.
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Caged Great For This Useful Post:
CG, you're absolutely right. I've been watching Barkov all season long, and to be honest, I haven't been that impressed with the kid, sure, he's pretty good holding the puck, but if he didn't play with Ville Nieminen (He's a warrior, does everything right and the space he creates is sick), I don't think he would have been so high in the scoring standings. Just a bummer he got injured in the playoffs, now he won't be playing the finals, which could have grown the kid some more.
I don't think people always fully appreciate the fact that Barkov is playing in a professional league as opposed to a junior league. You're expected not to shine in WJC when you're just 17, since you're playing against guys a little older than yourself. Here we have the same factor, just multiplied.
That said, I haven't followed him closely enough to have an informed opinion about his potential. But I'm hoping Flames get to pick Ristolainen with their second pick. His stock has probably dropped due to being on a bad team, but the guy is a beast. Big, mean and has good offensive instincts plus a good shot. He is not going to be available on our second pick as it stands, though.
I don't think people always fully appreciate the fact that Barkov is playing in a professional league as opposed to a junior league. You're expected not to shine in WJC when you're just 17, since you're playing against guys a little older than yourself. Here we have the same factor, just multiplied.
As much as people like him, this is a league where Ville Nieminen is a leading scorer. It's a league worse than the AHL.
I'd be fine with him at 4, but disappointed nonetheless.
The Following User Says Thank You to Ashasx For This Useful Post:
But it still ranks ahead of every junior league in the world, including the CHL.
That is probably true, but I think he'd be putting up something more like Landeskog's numbers in the CHL rather than MacKinnon or Drouin numbers. Barkov is able to have success in a men's league because of his style and size. MacKinnon and Drouin have a lot more maturing to do.
Barkov is interesting because he plays a more North American game. He goes to the net and plays a more physical brand of hockey. That is probably why he stands out in Finland - he plays such a different game compared to his peers. How that will translate to him coming to North America and playing against other players who are used to that is what should be discussed.
I don't think his game will translate very well. He's not a good skater from we've seen in these video clips. He's opportunistic and finds the soft spots well, but on the big sheet of ice and lack of physical play there is nothing but soft spots to exploit. His size and physicality will be countered by players who play the same way, so he won't stand out over here because of that factor.
I would shy away from this guy. Then again, I would shy away from Europeans in general because of the difference in the style of games. Unless the player has proved himself on the smaller sheet of ice I would not be investing a top pick in them. The top pick has to be a clear cut winner and fill a pressing need. I see those needs as being, in order: 1 - a franchise center. 2 - a franchise scoring forward. 3 - a proven scoring forward. 4 - a top pair defenseman. 5 - a player that will play regularly in the NHL in some capacity in the next two years. I'm not certain any of the Europeans I've seen so far can fill those needs.
I agree with a lot of the comments on Barkov, but that's only because what I've seen of him, which is limited. All the highlight packages you can find of him are horrible. His skating seems fine but maybe he's more of a winger to a playmaker in the NHL?
I dunno, he has an obvious nose for the net, but when I watch him, I'm left with a "where is it?" feeling. I wish I could see more of his play.
also the SM-Liiga is not a physical league, that's a huge step to take when you come over to the NHL/AHL, because players do play fast and with power. The good example is Mikael Granlund, he has silky smooth hands and hockey IQ but he can't keep up with the speed & physicality going on.
I agree with a lot of the comments on Barkov, but that's only because what I've seen of him, which is limited. All the highlight packages you can find of him are horrible. His skating seems fine but maybe he's more of a winger to a playmaker in the NHL?
I dunno, he has an obvious nose for the net, but when I watch him, I'm left with a "where is it?" feeling. I wish I could see more of his play.
It's starting to look like there's a drop-off after the top 3 (Jones, MacKinnon and Drouin), and that the Flames will be drafting at 4, 5 or possibly 6
From everything I've seen and read now, it looks like Lindholm would be a better option at 4 for the Flames, though he probably wouldn't play in the NHL next season.
