Like us on Facebook


Follow us on Twitter





Page 5 of 47 FirstFirst ... 3456715 ... LastLast
Results 61 to 75 of 693

Thread: 2016 NHL Draft

  1. #61
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    7,947
    Quote Originally Posted by phillyeaglesman View Post
    Hahaha wait, what? 25 lbs.? Are you serious?


    You know Keller is like 165 MAYBE 170 lbs., right? You think Marner was 145 lbs. when drafted?


    LOL come on, castan.
    soaking wet he was like 155? ... keller is a legit 165/170 ... i think marner was more like 150 ... just saying! he did add weight and muscle which i didn't think he would, and i was wrong about that ... but at the time marner was drafted, i think he legit was 145/150 lbs

  2. #62
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    8,722
    Quote Originally Posted by Randall Stevens View Post
    FYI our 2nd pick (not the one from Chicago) alone should be enough to trade up to #10.

    Pick #10 and get Keller/Jost/McLoed and a hopefuly a decent prospect with the Chicago 2nd...

    or pick #17 and get Bellows and trade our 2 2nds for pick #24ish to get Debrincat/Kunin/Jones/Brown

    Thats a tough call.
    I don't know if our 2nd (#47) gets you from #17 to #10 -- that's a bit of a stretch on the valuation charts. Plus, you're going to have the throw in something extra to entice the trading partner (since you're the one who wants to move up; not they are looking to trade down -- they've got some leverage).

    You're other option (and it's a bit of a risk) is something like: move Streit or Gudas --> 2nd; parlay the 2nd and our first into #10/#11/#12; then package Flyers 2nd + CHI 2nd --> late first and select DeBrincat or Abramov.

  3. #63
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    South Jersey
    Posts
    15,550
    I actually like Abramov more than DeBrincat; I think he's more versatile.

    Just my two cents haha.

  4. #64
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    8,722
    Quote Originally Posted by phillyeaglesman View Post
    I actually like Abramov more than DeBrincat; I think he's more versatile.

    Just my two cents haha.
    He's more of a playmaker/Kucherov clone -- brings a bit more to the table. But DeBrincat can score.

    If you've already drafted Keller, probably makes sense to go DeBrincat to diversify the prospect pool.

  5. #65
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    2,986
    He's more of a playmaker/Kucherov clone -- brings a bit more to the table. But DeBrincat can score.

    If you've already drafted Keller, probably makes sense to go DeBrincat to diversify the prospect pool.
    is that a sustainable way to build a team? konecny is only 5'10; keller is 5'10; debrincat is 5'8.

    if you keep going down that road, you're asking for trouble.

  6. #66
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    South Jersey
    Posts
    15,550
    You can't have an entire team of midgets, no, but like I've said countless times, you can never have too much of a good thing.

    You shouldn't draft or trade for or sign a worse player simply because they are bigger than someone else.

    A talented small player is going to have more value than an average or mediocre big player. So worst case scenario, you trade one of your surplus small guys for a bigger guy of similar value down the road.


    Plus, having 2 picks of your 8 or 9 doesn't all of a sudden mean your prospect pool is undersized. You have 6-7 more picks to add bigger players.


    Add talent. Period.

  7. #67
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    2,986
    A talented small player is going to have more value than an average or mediocre big player. So worst case scenario, you trade one of your surplus small guys for a bigger guy of similar value down the road.
    if teams undervalue someone like debrincat now because he's small, what makes you think their opinion of him will be higher later on? and especially when they know the reason you want to trade him is the reason they chose not to draft him in the first place?

    i don't have any firm opinions on this draft yet -- i'm not even sold on logan brown -- but doubling and tripling down on forwards who are 5'10 and under seems like a poor strategy.

  8. #68
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    2,986
    Plus, having 2 picks of your 8 or 9 doesn't all of a sudden mean your prospect pool is undersized. You have 6-7 more picks to add bigger players.

    Add talent. Period.
    hextall's doing good work finding guys like lindblom/marody/fazleev in later rounds, but in general, any forward you get after the 2nd round is lucky to be AHL fodder. if you spend 1st round pick after 1st round pick on undersized forwards, that's what your team is going to look like.

    i wonder if that might be exploitable. would it be better to have 2 first rounds picks (and only 2 first round picks) every year or to keep the standard slate of 7 picks in 7 rounds year-in/year-out?

  9. #69
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    South Jersey
    Posts
    15,550
    Well, it's not really a "strategy". You don't go into a draft saying we're going to draft kids who are only 5'10" and shorter. Just like you don't go into a draft saying we're only drafting kids who are big hulking monsters.


    The point is, you don't pass up talent for a perceived need. Your need today may not be your need 2-3 years from now when that player is ready to be an NHL player.


    It's why you take a player like Max Domi over a player like Sam Morin. The Flyers may have "needed" a D man when they took Morin, but it's now been 3 years that he hasn't played in the NHL, and it's likely going to be at least another half a season before he sees the ice. Meanwhile, the Flyers have drafted 2 D men since then who are ahead of him in terms of readiness and Max Domi just completed an impressive rookie year in the NHL as a versatile winger who I think anyone would agree the Flyers could use right now.


    Looking at the team now, do you feel the Flyers would be better off with Sam Morin or Max Domi? Because what I saw this year and especially this past series vs. WSH was a team that couldn't score, lacked speed and skill, and had a devil of a time trying to exit their own zone; not a team that needed a big hulking D man who moves well but is not so great with the puck on his stick.


    You draft for talent IMO, regardless of what it is. With all the players there are every year in the draft, it's highly unlikely that every time you pick the highest player on your board is going to play the same position or be the same height or style or whatever.


    Drafting for need gets you in trouble most of the time.


    If the top player on your board happens to also fill an organizational need, fantastic. Draft that kid. If he doesn't, you draft him anyway and figure out the rest later. Because again, especially when you're picking in the middle of a round, your team is likely to look different from the time you draft that player to the time that player is ready to contribute for you at the NHL level.

  10. #70
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    South Jersey
    Posts
    15,550
    Quote Originally Posted by steagles View Post
    hextall's doing good work finding guys like lindblom/marody/fazleev in later rounds, but in general, any forward you get after the 2nd round is lucky to be AHL fodder. if you spend 1st round pick after 1st round pick on undersized forwards, that's what your team is going to look like.

    i wonder if that might be exploitable. would it be better to have 2 first rounds picks (and only 2 first round picks) every year or to keep the standard slate of 7 picks in 7 rounds year-in/year-out?

    It's always better to have more picks. The draft is a crapshoot, and not just after the 2nd round. It's a crapshoot period.


    The more picks you have, the better shot you have at finding the Datsyuk's and Benn's and Timonen's and Lundqvist's of the world.

  11. #71
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    2,986
    It's always better to have more picks. The draft is a crapshoot, and not just after the 2nd round. It's a crapshoot period.

    The more picks you have, the better shot you have at finding the Datsyuk's and Benn's and Timonen's and Lundqvist's of the world.
    the likelihood of drafting an all-star in the last 10 picks of the first round is about 25%. if you get an extra one of those every single year, that seems likely to stack the deck in your favor.

    granted, there are some areas where this strategy is problematic. it's better suited for drafting forwards than goalies or defensemen; it'll salt your farm system; it would be unsustainable if it works. still, it's interesting.

  12. #72
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    2,986
    If the top player on your board happens to also fill an organizational need, fantastic. Draft that kid. If he doesn't, you draft him anyway and figure out the rest later. Because again, especially when you're picking in the middle of a round, your team is likely to look different from the time you draft that player to the time that player is ready to contribute for you at the NHL level.
    the board itself is subjective and every team has their own. if your board had sam morin over max domi, taking morin does not go against it. you can argue about the evaluation that put morin above domi, but that's a different conversation.

    anyway, something just hit me. alex debrincat's value cannot go up from the moment he's drafted until the moment he produces in the NHL. there is no level of offensive performance that will raise anyone's opinion of him until he's doing it in the NHL.

  13. #73
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    South Jersey
    Posts
    15,550
    Quote Originally Posted by steagles View Post
    the board itself is subjective and every team has their own. if your board had sam morin over max domi, taking morin does not go against it. you can argue about the evaluation that put morin above domi, but that's a different conversation.

    anyway, something just hit me. alex debrincat's value cannot go up from the moment he's drafted until the moment he produces in the NHL. there is no level of offensive performance that will raise anyone's opinion of him until he's doing it in the NHL.

    I don't mean to imply that you specifically have to trade DeBrincat. If I did say that I apologize, that wasn't what I meant.


    I'm saying you can trade any of those surplus players you feel you have to many of to fill a need down the road, should it come to that.


    But you don't - or shouldn't - draft a player today, to fill a need you have today. Unless you're drafting in the top 5 or so of the draft, it's highly unlikely the player you are drafting is going to be in the NHL that season, or even the next year. It's usually 2-3 years down the road until you see that player in the NHL giving you regular minutes.


    So if you have a need today, that guy isn't helping you today anyway. Therefore, you should take who you feel is the most talented player on the board, not the person you feel best fills a need you have on your team.

  14. #74
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    2,986
    So if you have a need today, that guy isn't helping you today anyway. Therefore, you should take who you feel is the most talented player on the board, not the person you feel best fills a need you have on your team.
    if jake bean is the best player on hextall's board, should hextall take him?
    I'm saying you can trade any of those surplus players you feel you have to many of to fill a need down the road, should it come to that.
    aren't you opposed to trading morin?

    on a related note, what if we could trade morin on draft day and walk out of the first round with both mcleod and jost?

  15. #75
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    South Jersey
    Posts
    15,550
    Quote Originally Posted by steagles View Post
    if jake bean is the best player on hextall's board, should hextall take him?
    aren't you opposed to trading morin?

    on a related note, what if we could trade morin on draft day and walk out of the first round with both mcleod and jost?


    Yep, 100%. Likelihood of that isn't great, though, given the top of the draft is very forward heavy. At that point you're dealing from a position of strength. You then have nearly a full D corps worth of high potential D prospects. Either you keep them all and have the potential to have an unbelievable D corps, or some team comes calling to try and raid your cabinet. D prospects are extremely valuable. You can never have too many.


    I'm not against trading Morin, I'm against trading him for the sake of trading him. If you're trading Morin it needs to be for a purpose, not just because you don't like him or didn't like that we drafted him. People automatically assume that because he's not in the NHL yet he's a bust and that's just wrong. You don't know until he plays/never makes it.


    In terms of getting a 1st rounder for him, that's doubtful. Would I do it? Absolutely, but you're not gonna get a high first rounder for Sam Morin.

Page 5 of 47 FirstFirst ... 3456715 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •