Like us on Facebook


Follow us on Twitter





Page 28 of 125 FirstFirst ... 1826272829303878 ... LastLast
Results 406 to 420 of 1871
  1. #406
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    6,847
    Quote Originally Posted by phillyeaglesman View Post
    Dahlin is my #1 so yeah. Iím assuming you think Zadina should be in the conversation?

    Zadina is a strong player and I would love him on the Flyers but the more I look into things the more I think itís Dahlin and Svechnikov at the top with a clear separation after them.

    I think Zadina is in that next group with Wahlstrom, Tkachuk, Hughes, Dobson, Kotkaniemi, Boqvist, maybe Smith.

    Really good players, but Dahlin and Svechnikov are flat out special.
    Haha ... kinda. Mostly just wanted to confirm who you thought was #2.

    I agree about your assessment.

  2. #407
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    5,153
    Quote Originally Posted by phillyeaglesman View Post
    Dahlin is my #1 so yeah. Iím assuming you think Zadina should be in the conversation?

    Zadina is a strong player and I would love him on the Flyers but the more I look into things the more I think itís Dahlin and Svechnikov at the top with a clear separation after them.

    I think Zadina is in that next group with Wahlstrom, Tkachuk, Hughes, Dobson, Kotkaniemi, Boqvist, maybe Smith.

    Really good players, but Dahlin and Svechnikov are flat out special.
    Svech is without a shadow of a doubt #2. It really shouldn't even be a debate. I agree with this sentiment 100%

  3. #408
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    2,426
    I'd do Simmonds+14+19 for the #3 in heartbeat
    simmonds is worth about a 1 and a 3, right? maybe a bit more, but not much less, which makes that deal basically 14 + 19 + 25 + 80/ish. i've made this point before, and i think it's worth coming back to:

    hextall's biggest strength as a GM is drafting. if we can get 3 first round picks, get them and let hextall flex that muscle.

    i wouldn't hate trading up (my general instinct is to support bold moves), but it would be like trading 5 quarters for a dollar.

  4. #409
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    2,426
    and on a related note, stock up/down since being drafted by hextall:

    1st round picks:
    up: sanheim, frost, konecny, provorov
    even: patrick
    down: rubtsov

    2nd/3rd round picks:
    up: hart
    even: sandstrom, allison, ratcliffe
    down: ustimenko, twarynski, laberge, tomek, NAK, friedman

    4th-7th round picks:
    up: lindblom, marody, vorobyev, kalynuk, hogberg, bernhardt, laczynski
    even: kase, sushko, strome, fazleev, cates
    down: petterson, fedotov, bunnaman, salinitri, lycksell, dove-mcfalls


    minor quibbles aside, i think this is a pretty fair breakdown of hextall's first 4 drafts. laid out like that, you can see a few trends:
    he hits on his first round picks.
    he has not had much success in rounds 2 and 3.
    he hits rounds 4 through 7 out of the park (it's hard to draft players who don't immediately become worthless)
    his hit rate for goalies isn't great, but he hit on one of them.
    drafting CHL forwards after round 1 has not worked out.


    a lot of that reflects draft trends in general, so it's worth breaking down the areas where hextall seems to have a distinct advantage:
    1st round picks (5 of 6 retain value)
    scandinavians (4 of 6)
    defensemen (5 of 7)
    NCAA commits (5 of 7)

    and the areas where he doesn't:
    mid round skaters (2 of 6)
    mid/late round CHL forwards (4 of 10)
    goalies (2 of 5)
    post-soviets (2 of 5)
    Last edited by steagles; 05-10-2018 at 07:52 PM.

  5. #410
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    7,483
    Quote Originally Posted by steagles View Post
    simmonds is worth about a 1 and a 3, right? maybe a bit more, but not much less, which makes that deal basically 14 + 19 + 25 + 80/ish. i've made this point before, and i think it's worth coming back to:

    hextall's biggest strength as a GM is drafting. if we can get 3 first round picks, get them and let hextall flex that muscle.

    i wouldn't hate trading up (my general instinct is to support bold moves), but it would be like trading 5 quarters for a dollar.
    It really depends on what you're getting back. For example, would you trade 3 Morgan Frost-caliber prospects for 1 Patrick Laine? I probably would, to be honest. Is it an overpayment? Yeah. But We don't need 3 blue-chip prospects -- we need 1 franchise-changing one.

  6. #411
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    7,483
    Quote Originally Posted by steagles View Post
    and on a related note, stock up/down since being drafted by hextall:

    1st round picks:
    up: sanheim, frost, konecny, provorov
    even: patrick
    down: rubtsov

    2nd/3rd round picks:
    up: hart
    even: sandstrom, allison, ratcliffe
    down: ustimenko, twarynski, laberge, tomek, NAK, friedman

    4th-7th round picks:
    up: lindblom, marody, vorobyev, kalynuk, hogberg, bernhardt, laczynski
    even: kase, sushko, strome, fazleev, cates
    down: petterson, fedotov, bunnaman, salinitri, lycksell, dove-mcfalls


    minor quibbles aside, i think this is a pretty fair breakdown of hextall's first 4 drafts. laid out like that, you can see a few trends:
    he hits on his first round picks.
    he has not had much success in rounds 2 and 3.
    he hits rounds 4 through 7 out of the park (it's hard to draft players who don't immediately become worthless)
    his hit rate for goalies isn't great, but he hit on one of them.
    drafting CHL forwards after round 1 has not worked out.


    a lot of that reflects draft trends in general, so it's worth breaking down the areas where hextall seems to have a distinct advantage:
    1st round picks (5 of 6 retain value)
    scandinavians (4 of 6)
    defensemen (5 of 7)
    NCAA commits (5 of 7)

    and the areas where he doesn't:
    mid round skaters (2 of 6)
    mid/late round CHL forwards (4 of 10)
    goalies (2 of 5)
    post-soviets (2 of 5)
    I agree with this generally. I think Radcliffe is definitely in the "Up" category for me -- he had one hell of a season last year (41 goals) and did well in the playoffs (9 points in 6 games). He's looking like the real deal. Ditto for Strome -- skating issues aside, I thought he had a strong year overall.

    If you look at the OHL, the Flyers had 3 of the top-15 goal scorers this year. That's insane.

    I also thought Wade Allison was having one hell of a season for Western Michigan until he was injured -- I think he was at 30 points in 22 games? Obviously the injury taints that a bit and pulls him down, but had he been healthy, I think it would've been fair to put him in the "up" category.

    The only other one I'd take issue with is NAK -- he looks awesome for LV. His advanced stats are strong, his eye-test is superb, he's playing aggressive, engaged hockey...while there have been ups-and-downs, after this season, Im inclined to say he's even or up.

    As to the goalies, honestly -- they're voodoo. Hart is a record-shattering goalie prospect. Sandstrom is excellent. The other ones? Who knows. Hard to judge them at this point. But I'd say keep drafting them. Most are going to fizzle. It's whatever.

  7. #412
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    5,153
    Quote Originally Posted by steagles View Post
    and on a related note, stock up/down since being drafted by hextall:

    1st round picks:
    up: sanheim, frost, konecny, provorov
    even: patrick
    down: rubtsov

    2nd/3rd round picks:
    up: hart
    even: sandstrom, allison, ratcliffe
    down: ustimenko, twarynski, laberge, tomek, NAK, friedman

    4th-7th round picks:
    up: lindblom, marody, vorobyev, kalynuk, hogberg, bernhardt, laczynski
    even: kase, sushko, strome, fazleev, cates
    down: petterson, fedotov, bunnaman, salinitri, lycksell, dove-mcfalls


    minor quibbles aside, i think this is a pretty fair breakdown of hextall's first 4 drafts. laid out like that, you can see a few trends:
    he hits on his first round picks.
    he has not had much success in rounds 2 and 3.
    he hits rounds 4 through 7 out of the park (it's hard to draft players who don't immediately become worthless)
    his hit rate for goalies isn't great, but he hit on one of them.
    drafting CHL forwards after round 1 has not worked out.


    a lot of that reflects draft trends in general, so it's worth breaking down the areas where hextall seems to have a distinct advantage:
    1st round picks (5 of 6 retain value)
    scandinavians (4 of 6)
    defensemen (5 of 7)
    NCAA commits (5 of 7)

    and the areas where he doesn't:
    mid round skaters (2 of 6)
    mid/late round CHL forwards (4 of 10)
    goalies (2 of 5)
    post-soviets (2 of 5)
    I just can't even...he hasn't had success in the 2nd-3rd round yet he plucked maybe the best goalie prospect since Carey Price? Sandstrom, Nak, Ratcliffe, Allison, and Friedman all look like future NHL players. That's still a pretty good hit rate if guys in those rounds are reaching the nhl. Truthfully the only picks he's made that look like complete whiffs are Laberge, Tomek, Dove-Mcfalls, and that's about it. If 4-7th rounds show any kind of promise at any point that's a good pick. What I wouldn't give to go back in time and take Dahlen or Mascherin where he took LaBerge though. The one pick I loathed when it was made and still hate it.

  8. #413
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    1,718
    Winnipeg is so fun to watch. We absolutely need to add scoring wingers. The blueprint is there with Couts and Patrick up the middle, just need to add a big scoring winger or two to the top-6. This is why I would love to add Wahlstrom in this draft or Stone via trade. Or both would be nice

  9. #414
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    2,426
    It really depends on what you're getting back. For example, would you trade 3 Morgan Frost-caliber prospects for 1 Patrick Laine? I probably would, to be honest. Is it an overpayment? Yeah. But We don't need 3 blue-chip prospects -- we need 1 franchise-changing one.
    i just completely disagree with that, philosophically. i'll take three 50/60 point forwards over one 80 point forward 9.5 times out of 10.

    depth of talent is (one of) the most important factor(s) in building a sustainable contender. maybe we're near the point where one guy like laine can make the difference for us, but if you get that kind of decision wrong, you're pretty well ****ed.

  10. #415
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    6,847
    1st round picks:
    up: sanheim, frost, konecny, provorov, Patrick (end of the year was amazing)
    even:
    down: rubtsov

    2nd/3rd round picks:
    up: hart, Allison, ratcliffe
    even: sandstrom, Friedman, NAK
    down: ustimenko, twarynski, laberge, tomek
    (Allison before he got hurt was going to win the hobey baker)

    4th-7th round picks:
    up: lindblom, marody, vorobyev, kalynuk, hogberg, bernhardt, laczynski
    even: kase, sushko, strome, fazleev, cates
    down: petterson, fedotov, bunnaman, salinitri, lycksell ... dove-mcfalls isnít a prospect anymore (I agree with this assessment)

  11. #416
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    3,593
    Quote Originally Posted by steagles View Post
    i just completely disagree with that, philosophically. i'll take three 50/60 point forwards over one 80 point forward 9.5 times out of 10.

    depth of talent is (one of) the most important factor(s) in building a sustainable contender. maybe we're near the point where one guy like laine can make the difference for us, but if you get that kind of decision wrong, you're pretty well ****ed.
    There's so many more factors you'd have to consider here.

    From the state of the rest of the team.
    Cap space used on this 3 other plays Vs the 1 superstar.

    Many more.


    But I'll take 1 sure fire all star, over 3 middle 6 guys most of the time.

  12. #417
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    1,718
    I wouldnít necessarily rate Rubtsov as ďdownĒ. 2016 had a massive drop off after the top 12-14 or so and not many of those guys have made it yet. Actually, I think only one player taken after pick 14 has played a game in the NHL. Most have gone the same route as Rubtsov and are playing as in juniors still or with development teams. 2016 was a fairly weak class overall.

  13. #418
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    2,426
    I agree with this generally. I think Radcliffe is definitely in the "Up" category for me -- he had one hell of a season last year (41 goals) and did well in the playoffs (9 points in 6 games). He's looking like the real deal. Ditto for Strome -- skating issues aside, I thought he had a strong year overall.
    ratcliffe barely put up a PPG, and he was -28. for an age 19 season, i expect to see more.
    i might have been too harsh on strome, but for guys like him, ratcliffe, allison and sandstrom, i just don't think they're more valuable than the picks that were used to draft them. not yet anyway.
    The only other one I'd take issue with is NAK -- he looks awesome for LV. His advanced stats are strong, his eye-test is superb, he's playing aggressive, engaged hockey...while there have been ups-and-downs, after this season, Im inclined to say he's even or up.
    how many people said the same things about taylor leier? if he turns into a good player, it doesn't matter whether some random message board ******* like me says about him.

    something like this isn't set in stone.
    As to the goalies, honestly -- they're voodoo. Hart is a record-shattering goalie prospect. Sandstrom is excellent. The other ones? Who knows. Hard to judge them at this point. But I'd say keep drafting them. Most are going to fizzle. It's whatever.
    i completely agree about drafting a bunch of goalies and just letting them develop. i like that hextall does it, i just don't think he's particularly good at it.

    i disagree about sandstrom. i'm happy he signed, but this was not a good year for him.
    Last edited by steagles; 05-10-2018 at 10:37 PM.

  14. #419
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    2,426
    There's so many more factors you'd have to consider here.

    From the state of the rest of the team.
    Cap space used on this 3 other plays Vs the 1 superstar.

    Many more.

    But I'll take 1 sure fire all star, over 3 middle 6 guys most of the time.
    as i said, it's a philosophical difference.

    one laine can only play 20 minutes per game; three ehlers can play 50+.

    as you said, there can be more to it, but considering the flyers position, i think the optionality of 3 first round picks is more valuable than the certainty of one top 5 pick.

  15. #420
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    2,426
    I just can't even...he hasn't had success in the 2nd-3rd round yet he plucked maybe the best goalie prospect since Carey Price? Sandstrom, Nak, Ratcliffe, Allison, and Friedman all look like future NHL players. That's still a pretty good hit rate if guys in those rounds are reaching the nhl. Truthfully the only picks he's made that look like complete whiffs are Laberge, Tomek, Dove-Mcfalls, and that's about it. If 4-7th rounds show any kind of promise at any point that's a good pick. What I wouldn't give to go back in time and take Dahlen or Mascherin where he took LaBerge though. The one pick I loathed when it was made and still hate it.
    when your definition of "good pick" is 'not lighting your own underwear on fire', pretty much everything will look like a good pick.

    i think it's important to have a more critical standard than that.

Page 28 of 125 FirstFirst ... 1826272829303878 ... 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
  •