Poll: Lets rank the Treliving/Burke 2014 draft

[Jay Random]

Originally Posted by IgiTang

After the 1st pick, some questionable acquisitions but I like the thought process behind them.

That's the thing, isn't it? The thought process. I don't pretend to know whether Burke, Treliving, and Button made the best choice with each pick they had, but there's a definite philosophy that comes through. The picks weren't all over the map – they had a plan and stuck to it.

If I had to summarize the plan in one sentence, it would be, 'Don't dig a deeper hole.' They didn't exactly fix the problem of the team being undersized – you can't do that in one draft – but they didn't make it worse. They didn't fill the holes on D and RW, but they kept them from getting bigger. They acted with foresight to get one of the highest-rated goaltending prospects, just ahead of the point where every other GM went nuts and there was a run on goalies.

It's great that we'll see Bennett in a Flames uniform, but that was an easy pick to make at #4. I give them credit for not throwing away assets to move up.

The Bollig trade, I think, was a good idea. Probably could have had Bollig for a 4th or 5th, but they didn't have one to trade. So while it was a slight overpayment, they got a player who can take Westgarth's spot, but is much more versatile than Westgarth.

People tend to think in terms of good players and bad players. I like to think in terms of good-team players and bad-team players. On a really good team, every player is capable of contributing in more than one way. Bad teams have to settle for players who are only good at one thing, and they get in trouble because there aren't enough roster spots to have a specialist for everything.

Bollig is a good-team player, even if not a good player, because of his versatility. Compare that with Taylor Hall, who is a bad-team player, even if he is a good player, because he only does one thing well and is pretty useless without the puck. (Stempniak I also consider a bad-team player. He can put up decent numbers if he gets the minutes, but on a really good team he wouldn't get the minutes, and if he isn't putting up the numbers he is not much help. So going forward, I would rather have Bollig.)

I particularly like Hunter Smith because he looks like a good-team player who might also be a good player. I could see him on anything from the second line (if his offence continues to improve) to the fourth. He could be a BIIIIG body in front of the opposing net on the PP or Big Ern Jr. When I heard that the Flames had drafted him, I burst into creepy evil laughter.

[kehatch]

Somebody will be creating a Hunter Fricken Smith thread next season. This kid is going to have a huge season next year.

[Gaskal]

Voted 8 and I shall stand by this rating until they bust or make it. But I'm pretty sure we got a new soon to be fan favorite in Bollig.

[RUS]

Bennett - 10/10
MacDonald - 4/10
Smith - 7/10
Hickey - 5/10
Bollig - 5/10
Mattsson - 10/10
Carroll - 5/10

[FireGilbert]

I gave a 10 because I can only judge the first round. After the first 20 picks I hadn't heard of any of the players.

Do some of the posters here work as scouts or just spend a lot of free time reading scouting reports and watching junior hockey? You would need to be very involved in hockey to have any idea how to rank picks from the 2nd to 7th round.

[FlameZilla]

https://video.nhl.com/videocenter/em...ue&site=flames

As posted elsewhere, Treliving discusses a wide range of topics. Mainly relates to the 2nd to 7th rounds.

Relating to the draft:

• Had a very concise list.
• Had McDonald ahead of Demko (duh) but it was close. Deliberated on it at length the night before.
• Knew there would be a run on goalies in the 2nd round and didn't want to miss out on the one they wanted
• Added size; young, small skill players about to break into the lineup so wants to surround them with size (Burke said virtually the same thing a few months ago)
• Had a player in mind for the 83rd pick but he became unavailable.
• Thinks Bollig has more to offer if he's given more responsibilities.

[Enoch Root]

After 178 votes, the average rating is 7.6

[zoom]

Draft Grades are starting to appear. So far i have seen a 'C' and and 'A-'. I anticipate quite a range of grades.

[MrMastodonFarm]

Voted 1 because voting or grading drafts this early is a fools game.

[MolsonInBothHands]

10
I had a linear algebra prof come in on the first day of class, and say, "Why do you look so sad? Today, you all have A's!"

It's the perfect draft, until it isn't.

[Rhettzky]

http://video.flames.nhl.com/videocen...27235&catid=11

Like Burke's quote about ranking the draft on this video. When asked how he would rate this draft among last years and some of the others Burke said "You evaluate drafts with a calendar and not with a stop watch."

[cral12]

Originally Posted by Wolven

No point in judging by the first round. Picking Bennett is too obvious.

Didn't like how the second round went. With our current prospects at G I really would have rather seen our second pick go to a consolation RH D.

I think I like the Smith pick... If the guy can bring that size into the top 6 it will transform the team.

Third round disappointment really stems from the second pick but the frustration continues.

On to McDavid and Day!

Bennett pick was obvious, but I was super nervous they would go slightly off the board for Nick Ritchie. Since size was such a focus, this could have happened. Thankfully, they went with the lad they should and had to take.

[dammage79]

Originally Posted by cral12

Bennett pick was obvious, but I was super nervous they would go slightly off the board for Nick Ritchie. Since size was such a focus, this could have happened. Thankfully, they went with the lad they should and had to take.

And instead picked up Smith to counter Anaheims answer in Ritchie.

[cral12]

One concern I do have moving forward with Flames focus on drafting size is Rick Dudley Lightning Syndrome. I actually discussed this with Jay Feaster after he was named GM. Jay said that Dudley did focus too much on size, physical tools and projections over skill and hockey IQ. I think Treliving and crew still have a better overall focus on what they want - just hope that size doesn't blind them to talent...

Success of teams like LA & Chicago seem to focus on the size of these teams - analyze the rosters though and many of the key cogs of the teams are far from behemoths. Like everything I guess, balance is needed - seems like what the Flames are trying to do - hope they are able to accomplish...

[burn_baby_burn]

Determining a grade or a ranking of a draft is too difficult at this stage. Bennett could wind up a hall of famer or a complete bust, at this point we don't know. The other prospects may never set foot in an NHL game. I'll reserve judgement for a later date. I did vote 5, glass half full, glass half empty.

[Ring of Fire]

Originally Posted by FlameZilla

https://video.nhl.com/videocenter/em...ue&site=flames

As posted elsewhere, Treliving discusses a wide range of topics. Mainly relates to the 2nd to 7th rounds.

Relating to the draft:

• Had a very concise list.
• Had McDonald ahead of Demko (duh) but it was close. Deliberated on it at length the night before.
• Knew there would be a run on goalies in the 2nd round and didn't want to miss out on the one they wanted
• Added size; young, small skill players about to break into the lineup so wants to surround them with size (Burke said virtually the same thing a few months ago)
• Had a player in mind for the 83rd pick but he became unavailable.
• Thinks Bollig has more to offer if he's given more responsibilities.

I think the player they wanted at 83 was Jake Walman, a defenceman going to Providence next year drafted by the Blues at 82. They only made the trade after that pick.

[Flames Draft Watcher]

Originally Posted by Caged Great

It's just difficult to acquire high end D-men. Imagine what it would take to acquire a guy like Trouba or Ristolainen/Zadorov. It wouldn't be cheap at all. How many times do top D men get traded? Bordering on never, same with 1st line centers.

Right now we have Brodie as a great #3 or adequate #2. None of the other D are showing similar upside as of right now.

It's just a lost opportunity to at least throw a couple names in the ring as possibilities is all.

Pretty slim chance that we would've found a top pairing defenseman in the 2nd round of this draft. Even Fleury the second one taken this draft is looked at as a 2nd pairing guy. Why would we believe any of the guys in the 2nd would be top pairing guys? That's just a fantasy, wishful thinking

[AcGold]

So then how are going to reach the cap floor and also find a top pairing dman. We are going to need to find 2 in the next few years, it's going to take some magic from Burke and company to get us a solid d-core.

[Flames Draft Watcher]

Originally Posted by Caged Great

High end skilled forwards is always a need, no matter how deep of a team you are. You need replacements for players as contracts eventually become a problem.

As of right now the only sure thing high end forwards we have are Monahan and Bennett. Colorado for example this year had Duchene Landeskog O'Reilly MacKinnon and Stastny. Whether Granlund, Gaudreau, Sven or Poirier become good enough to be in the same conversation as those above and we have 4-5 of those guys then we'll be set for the moment. We're not there yet.

We're looking pretty decent at top end forward for the first time I can recall.

Monahan, Bennett, Gaudreau, Baertschi, Poirier, Backlund, Jankowski, Granlund, Klimchuk

That's 9 rolls of the dice at top two line forwards, 7 of which were first rounders. You'd have to think at least 2/3 of them will pan out, considering that is a list of most of our top prospects and young players.

I definitely wouldn't call adding another top end forward a huge need for us. That said if we can grab a potential superstar we'll obviously take it. A high end powerforward on RW would be a perfect fit really.

Top pairing d-man with size is our clear #1 priority, I think we can agree on that.

[Jakester]

Bennett: Not much to say on this pick. While the orders varied, nearly everyone had Ekblad, Reinhart, Draisaitl, and Bennett as the top four. A safe pick, much like Monahan was last year. This early in the draft, safe=good.

McDonald: I was hoping that they would use one of their third rounders on this guy if he was still around, but I don't mind picking him here. He rose from being ranked 7th mid-season to 2nd, which is always a good sign. The Flames are weak in goal, and only have 2 decent goaltending prospects, neither of whom have proven anything at the NHL level. The debate between whether we should have picked McDonald or Demko will likely not be settled for another half decade.

Smith: I would have waited to see if he was still around in the 3rd round. The comparisons I keep hearing are to either Brian Bickell and Brian Boyle: big 3rd or 4th line wingers. That said, he did jump from being ranked 140 mid-season to being ranked 39 in the final rankings. Maybe the scouts saw something some random idiot posting on a message board didn't.

Hickey: Not much to say on this one. Expected to be an early third rounder, was an early third rounder. Have to wait and see in comparison to TJ Brodie is worth anything.

Mattson: It's not often you see a guy fall from being expected 2nd rounder to being picked in the sixth round. If the initial projections of his potential were correct, he's a hell of a steal in the 6th round. If whatever it was that teams didn't like about him turns out to be correct and he doesn't make it, no big deal.

Carroll: Over-ager. Not sure why the Flames didn't just offer him a contract in the (likely) event that he went through un-drafted. Hard to get too upset about this one (it is a 7th rounder after all).

Bollig: I'd hesitate to call this guy a plug. He managed to stay in the line-up for 82 games on a very deep Chicago team. Thought a 3rd rounder was a bit steep, but the Flames didn't have any 4th or 5th rounders and a 6th rounder probably wouldn't have been enough. All in all, not a bad gamble.

Overall, I'd say the Flames did what they needed to do. Bennett was a no-brainer, although I have to give them credit given how often brains seem to be a rare commodity. They also added some more depth on right wing and defense and took a high risk-high reward gamble on McDonald. It would have been preferable to pick up some more good defensive prospects in the earlier rounds, but given that the defensive talent in this draft seems to drop off sharply after Ekblad, there may not have been any available. I'm glad they didn't pick McKeown; he was expected to be a mid 1st round mid-season, dropped to late 1st rounder/early second rounder territory and was picked 50th. It's worrying any time a guy falls like that. I was hoping Sanheim would fall to 34, but no dice. Any of the other defensemen available in the 2nd round might have carried a lower risk than McDonald, but they also carried a much lower reward. Maybe Hickey or Mattson will turn out to be a hidden gem.

Initial ranking: 8/10 Final Ranking: Incomplete (will know 3-4 years from now)