Poll: Lets rank the Treliving/Burke 2014 draft

[Badgers Nose]

Great draft, solid 8/10.

IMO only getting a second first round pick would have elevated them to a 10/10.

Very happy.

[Caged Great]

The past three years have been 10's. This one's an 8. Bennett Hickey and Mattsson are the three picks I liked from this draft with an okay to both McDonald and Smith. I like Smith better than I did Kanzig though from last year. Overall, there wasn't any stupid picks this year, and that gets you an 8. Bennett and Smith should become NHLers down the road (Smith due to size mostly) while the rest are wait and sees.

[bucksmasher]

One disappointing thing for me this draft was the lack of big trades after all the hype. I think a bit of excitement was lost by having the 4th pick determined by the first three teams. After Reinhart was announced I was pretty vanilla sure how the next 2 picks would go.

Every time Ritchie fell I got more wound up thinking Calgary would move up. All in all probably good thing there was only one Flame trade, good drafting doesn't need to be exciting.

I like the first three picks but I don't know enough to comment on anyone past Bennett. I was hoping for Draisitl based merely on size but that was probably a mistake after hearing more about Sammy B.

Sure hope we can pick up some more defense men and right handed forwards in the future.
I think the lopsided position depth shows that management is committed to picking BPA and that there is no rush to assemble another playoff-swing-and-a-miss team that used to drive me nuts a few years ago.

Good on CP overall for less WTF! and who is that than last year's draft. Its a good omen when the Flames and CP are both trending in a better direction.

Cheers

[Northendzone]

I am torn between saying the draft was great, all these guys are locks for the hall of fame and they all suck, as they have not played a game in the nhl......

[nik-]

I voted a 7, but mostly because Bennett drags it up. I think we missed a really good chance to address an organizational hole in the second round.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by nik-

I voted a 7, but mostly because Bennett drags it up. I think we missed a really good chance to address an organizational hole in the second round.

skilled C
goalie
size
toughness
RW
couple of Ds

only 'hole' we didn't fill was RD

there's another draft next year

[nik-]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

skilled C
goalie
size
toughness
RW
couple of Ds

only 'hole' we didn't fill was RD

there's another draft next year

Just because there are other opportunities, doesn't mean you didn't miss one that just passed.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by nik-

Just because there are other opportunities, doesn't mean you didn't miss one that just passed.

The point was, they addressed several

It's not like a RD is the only hole

[nik-]

I disagree that Goalie is a hole, I'd say it's pretty far from a hole.

[Enoch Root]

I voted 9 for 3 reasons:

1) Bennett - best player in the draft IMO
2) Hunter Smith - if he continues to develop like he did this year, will be an outstanding pick
3) McDonald - we needed a goalie and got the best one in the draft (and didn't waste a pick on Demko)

Everything else is gravy.

Only reason it wasn't a 10 was we didn't get a stud D as well (but got a G and an RW in the 2nd round and only had 2 picks, so...)

Also could have been a 10 if we had gotten a 2nd 1st and scored Ritchie as well.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by nik-

I disagree that Goalie is a hole, I'd say it's pretty far from a hole.

3 goalies in the system is definitely a hole - should be more like 6

there was a good post in the McDonald thread about the odds of a goalie playing 100 games. Even for those drafted in the 2nd round (very high for a goalie) only about 16% play 100 games.

That's one is 6. Essentially, we had 2 prospects and Ramo.

Huge hole.

[MrMastodonFarm]

One draft can't fill an organizational gap.

The Flames have drafted 9 blueliners in the past three drafts, that's pretty good. Obviously there is a gap because we haven't taken a blueliner in the first round in 5 years, but outside that 1st round they haven't exactly neglected the backend. Wotherspoon showed us what he had when he got a taste in the NHL, now let's see what the draft class after him has (Sieloff, Kulak, Culkin) as they start their pro careers.

[Caged Great]

The way I look at it is that we have 6 holes in this system. Top end skilled forwards, High end offensive defensemen, High end defensive defensemen, Overall Size, Right Wing, and Goaltending depth.

The most glaring needs were high end skill, and defensemen. Size, Right Wing, and Goalie depth were all there, but not really a big big problem comparatively.

We addressed the high end skill, RW depth, goalie depth and size. While Hickey and Mattsson are good, they aren't high end talents and as of right now slide into the group of Kulak Culkin Roy and Gilmour in the "long shots" category. I'm optimistic and hopeful that they both become something, but they are not anywhere near a sure thing.

We now only have three major needs. High End Skilled forwards, High End Offensive D, and High End Defensive D. Next year, anything other than defense is not really acceptable (unless we get one of the top two picks overall in McDavid or Eichel)

[Enoch Root]

A trade offering up one or two of our forward prospects for a solid D prospect would go a LONG way to eliminating that hole.

The draft is the primary means of acquiring talent, but not the only one

[jayswin]

Originally Posted by Caged Great

The way I look at it is that we have 6 holes in this system. Top end skilled forwards, High end offensive defensemen, High end defensive defensemen, Overall Size, Right Wing, and Goaltending depth.

The most glaring needs were high end skill, and defensemen. Size, Right Wing, and Goalie depth were all there, but not really a big big problem comparatively.

We addressed the high end skill, RW depth, goalie depth and size. While Hickey and Mattsson are good, they aren't high end talents and as of right now slide into the group of Kulak Culkin Roy and Gilmour in the "long shots" category. I'm optimistic and hopeful that they both become something, but they are not anywhere near a sure thing.

We now only have three major needs. High End Skilled forwards, High End Offensive D, and High End Defensive D. Next year, anything other than defense is not really acceptable (unless we get one of the top two picks overall in McDavid or Eichel)

So if we set up a scenario;

Flames have the 6th overall pick

Projected draft order, and an order that the Flames agree with in terms of "best player available".

6 - Forward
7 - Forward
8 - Forward
9 - Defenseman

You're saying anything other than taking what they consider to be the 9th best player over the 6-8th best players is unacceptable?

Organizational needs have to be addressed, but I don't think you put enough emphasis on "best player available". There's other ways to shore up holes in a team, but to me you really cant stray too far from BPA.

[Calgary4LIfe]

Gave it an 8, but should have selected 9.

Bennett - 10 - one of the best players in the draft, and COULD be the best player in the draft. He is what the Flames are trying to be - hard-nosed but skilled. I think the Flames are trying to build themselves into a team much like the '89 Flames - can beat you with skill, or can beat you physically. Though he isn't big, he isn't small either being 6'0" already. The way he plays you can add another 2 inches.

McDonald - 9 - SLIGHTLY disappointed in getting a goalie. However, he has very high upside, and can be argued he was the prospect with the best chance of making an impact with the club down the line. You never know with goalies it seems for a few years at least, but getting the best goalie at that spot is not a bad move at all. Reading up on his scouting reports sure does sound promising.

Smith - 10 - One of the most intriguing prospects in the draft. A bit of a project, but one that has had a huge increase in his performance. Considering this team has a number of undersized skill players, selecting someone who is huge but yet fairly skilled is a very good compliment. I had a feeling the Flames had this guy on the radar. Just looking at the teams in the Pacific and it isn't difficult to see how the Flames have to build in order to become competitive there. Even Vancouver is trying to become a much bigger team. Unlike others, I don't mind selecting a project as long as there is real potential, and Hunter has sure been showing lots of potential. Apparently he has been playing against other teams' top lines (thereby his Bennett comment), and still managed to have a plus rating. I am betting he takes a huge jump next year as he further catches up to his huge frame, gained a lot of confidence this season, and has teammates that will probably graduate giving him an even bigger role.

Hickey - 8 - This kid seems to have potential. I have not seen him play (or noticed him if I did), but seems to have some very glowing reviews with regards to his potential. An above-average sized Alberta-born defencemen with fantastic skating and upside? At this point in the draft, you are getting very low chances, but a wonderful skating above-average defencemen seems like a really shrewd value pick.

Bollig trade - 8 - "Goes through the wall for his teammates". That is the kind of veteran presence this team needs. He fought McGrattan, so this guy has some hart. Led the Chicago in hits, and this team desperately needs more of that in the lineup. I think the price is a little bit steeper than I wanted, but the Flames added size, physicality and character in a package that includes decent (for the type of player) skill. Vancouver got acquire who? F-U Vancouver!

Mattson - 9 - Big defencemen. Scouting reports are mostly positive. Seems to have some upside there. At pick 175, it is an extremely low percentage pick anyways. Big and physical defencemen apparently with some skill and upside, and which many scouting services ranked much higher. All signs point to a good value pick it seems.

Carroll - 8 - Position of need? Check. Size? Check. I only vaguely remember him from last year (and Brabant was much more noticeable, as was Harrisson who the Flames selected that year). Flames obviously know him well having him here last year, and probably watching Kanzig often, so one can assume they really have a solid book on this kid and felt he was worth drafting.

Flames needed size this year as much as they needed skill back then. They got a franchise center, a possible starting goaltender, and a huge RW with skill and plenty of physicality and potential upside. That is huge organizationally. They then went on and added size, skill and mobility on D and RW. I liked the picks, and most of them were very good value I thought.

[mile]

Originally Posted by Caged Great

The way I look at it is that we have 6 holes in this system. Top end skilled forwards, High end offensive defensemen, High end defensive defensemen, Overall Size, Right Wing, and Goaltending depth.

The most glaring needs were high end skill, and defensemen. Size, Right Wing, and Goalie depth were all there, but not really a big big problem comparatively.

We addressed the high end skill, RW depth, goalie depth and size. While Hickey and Mattsson are good, they aren't high end talents and as of right now slide into the group of Kulak Culkin Roy and Gilmour in the "long shots" category. I'm optimistic and hopeful that they both become something, but they are not anywhere near a sure thing.

We now only have three major needs. High End Skilled forwards, High End Offensive D, and High End Defensive D. Next year, anything other than defense is not really acceptable (unless we get one of the top two picks overall in McDavid or Eichel)

We still lack high end skilled forwards after this draft? Bennett is arguably the most skilled player in the draft - our prospect depth is actually quite deep in terms of skilled forwards.

If the clear BPA at our pick next year is a centre, we could always shift one or more of our centers to the wing - I'm hoping that the BPA will be a defenseman though.

[Caged Great]

Originally Posted by flameswin

So if we set up a scenario;

Flames have the 6th overall pick

Projected draft order, and an order that the Flames agree with in terms of "best player available".

6 - Forward
7 - Forward
8 - Forward
9 - Defenseman

You're saying anything other than taking what they consider to be the 9th best player over the 6-8th best players is unacceptable?

Organizational needs have to be addressed, but I don't think you put enough emphasis on "best player available". There's other ways to shore up holes in a team, but to me you really cant stray too far from BPA.

Of course you evaluate scenarios as they appear. If you're picking 5th next year and things remain as they have been rankings wise, you take whichever of Strome, Barzal, Hanifin, McDavid or Eichel that's on the board. Only Hanifin is a D-man.

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.

[Caged Great]

Originally Posted by mile

We still lack high end skilled forwards after this draft? Bennett is arguably the most skilled player in the draft - our prospect depth is actually quite deep in terms of skilled forwards.

If the clear BPA at our pick next year is a centre, we could always shift one or more of our centers to the wing - I'm hoping that the BPA will be a defenseman though.

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.

[calumniate]

Originally Posted by SebC

I give 'em about a 4/10.

We took a goalie and a re-entry in the second round (with picks that could've been traded for a first). They might turn into Brodeur and Leclair, but at the moment the value just isn't there.

If we had gone off the board instead of taking Bennett, I'd give them about a 2.

Flames picks = big.
Big = irrelevant.

Says the guy that didn't even like Kipper!

Hehehe