|
|
Post by GoMtl on Jun 15, 2003 23:03:17 GMT -5
So if our d is SO much better than Atlanta's why did we only sqeek by in the season series 3 wins to 2 wins?  ] You're going to judge our defence against theirs soley on how the season series went?! Well i guess our defence is MUCH better than Detroit's considering we won the season series handily 1-0!!! |
|
|
|
Post by Rimmer on Jun 16, 2003 5:15:54 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by BillPickles on Jun 16, 2003 6:09:55 GMT -5
anyone know what's the deal with Locke? His stats are sick, he is not THAT small(5'10' 180) and this link says he is a great skater why is he ranked so low? Marc Savard, my friend, Marc Savard. |
|
|
|
Post by BillPickles on Jun 16, 2003 6:23:45 GMT -5
I don't know why, but I have a bad feeling that they'll pick Getzlaf at #10. It would be the "typical" safe Hab 1st pick. I hope I'm wrong and they select someone with more of a "home run" upside. I'm really hoping for either Parise or Phaneuf to be available at 10. Only 6 days left! Getzlaf had similar numbers to Iginla at his age. He's big(121PIM), has a great shot and is said by some to have a big upside, just like Horton, Brown etc. as well, he's a great 2-way player and quarterbacks the powerplay like Alfredsson. His style has been compared to Jeff O'neill. To me, he seems to be one of the top 5 forwards available at the draft. |
|
|
|
Post by BillPickles on Jun 16, 2003 6:45:11 GMT -5
I was talking about this over at HF...does anyone think we should take a gamble and draft Stewart, or trade for a pick to get him?
Personally, I don't like his numbers for a guy who's supposed to lead his team offensively. However, I really like Jessiman's numbers. They're comparable to Danny Heatley when he was drafted, and quite a bit higher than Chris Higgins, last year's selection. Only thing is...can he skate well? If so, I think Savard will take him.
|
|
|
|
Post by MPLABBE on Jun 16, 2003 7:29:40 GMT -5
Marc Savard, my friend, Marc Savard. explain: - is he a cancer like Savard has been in NY and CGY? - or is it because of his lack of size? Getzlaf had similar numbers to Iginla at his age. He's big(121PIM), has a great shot and is said by some to have a big upside, just like Horton, Brown etc. as well, he's a great 2-way player and quarterbacks the powerplay like Alfredsson. His style has been compared to Jeff O'neill. To me, he seems to be one of the top 5 forwards available at the draft. Still not convinced he's the best player available at 10... |
|
|
|
Post by BillPickles on Jun 16, 2003 7:55:38 GMT -5
explain: - is he a cancer like Savard has been in NY and CGY? - or is it because of his lack of size? Still not convinced he's the best player available at 10... Lack of size, and the fact that he plays in the CHL, just like Bernier and Pouliot don't get much respect because they play in the Q. I see where you're coming from, and the skating could be an issue. I just have a good feeling about him ;P. I've changed my mind and I don't think the Habs will take him, though... |
|
|
|
Post by BillPickles on Jun 16, 2003 8:11:15 GMT -5
First of all, thanks for the welcome, Marc and Siebzehn  Hello to all the posters and lurkers on this board. And a special greeting to PTH, Yeti, HA and all the other guys I've met two years ago at HF. Ok, enough of this stuff Marc and Thomas, I don't agree with your idea of trading down to get Andrei Kastsitsyn with pick 13 or 14 or Hugh Jessiman with a pick in the same range. I wanna illustrate my points with the "layer" concept which I think firstly came to my mind with a posting of Sturminator two years ago on the Prospects Board over there on HF. Have an ice day, Dschens One significant advantage to trading down in a draft this deep is potentially aquiring 3 2nd round picks. Now, say Savard attempts to trade up to 5-9th but no one bites, and Parise is taken. Savard could potentially have no one he really likes to take at 10, whereas ranked 20-40 is a player or 3 he's got on his list of top 10. It's a gamble that the player could be taken but what if you could offer a switch of picks with Chicago, for example, and unload Perrault for their 2nd and 4th. Would you do it? There's bound to be another player Savard has his eye on that's still available, he maxes out the value of his draft pick, and selects another solid player with the new 2nd rounder. That's not to mention getting rid of a 3 million dollar player that would otherwise have low value. Now I'm not saying teams in the range of 13-20 would take our deadwood even if we switched with them, but it's worth a phonecall to find out. I wouldn't be surprised to see the Habs grab 5th or 9th though. |
|
|
|
Post by Dschens on Jun 16, 2003 13:36:58 GMT -5
One significant advantage to trading down in a draft this deep is potentially aquiring 3 2nd round picks. Now, say Savard attempts to trade up to 5-9th but no one bites, and Parise is taken. Savard could potentially have no one he really likes to take at 10, whereas ranked 20-40 is a player or 3 he's got on his list of top 10. It's a gamble that the player could be taken but what if you could offer a switch of picks with Chicago, for example, and unload Perrault for their 2nd and 4th. Would you do it? There's bound to be another player Savard has his eye on that's still availabl.e, he maxes out the value of his draft pick, and selects another solid player with the new 2nd rounder. Mhm, I didn't have a chance to see any of these players, but you've mentioned yourself that's a deep draft, and in the next sentence you're arguing that there's maybe no one you would like already at #10? I doubt that. Of course there are reasons for trading down, e.g. the unloading of players as you've mentioned. I also doubt very strongly that a GM does have just a list with some players from each layer. As I've said already in another post, you can't do that in the higher rounds, cause it means you're acting from a weak position. The highly paid GM would risk his job if he's going to give up a potential top scorer because he doesn't have him on his list. Another point. What are you looking for in a draft? Potential 3rd liners or 1st liners, maybe franchise players? How many roster spots do you have for 3rd or 4th liners? Don't get me wrong, 3rd line players are part of the team and important, but you should look for potential 1st line material at draft day, at least if you don't have an $ in your team name. Of course there are players taken in the later rounds having great careers, and busts in the 1st round, but I guess the odds to find your scoring machine are better in the first round. So my slogan would be, get as high picks as possible, and therefrom as much as possible. Dschens |
|
|
|
Post by GoMtl on Jun 16, 2003 16:24:14 GMT -5
Marc Savard, my friend, Marc Savard. I'd definitely take a Marc Savard type player (without the attitude) that can put up 20 goals and 40+ points for us a season with one of our second round choices. But i also seen Locke on the NHL awards show last week, and he's definitely not 5'10" 180 unless the rest of the guys he was with were all 6'6" 230. |
|
|
|
Post by BillPickles on Jun 16, 2003 16:42:40 GMT -5
Mhm, I didn't have a chance to see any of these players, but you've mentioned yourself that's a deep draft, and in the next sentence you're arguing that there's maybe no one you would like already at #10? I doubt that. Of course there are reasons for trading down, e.g. the unloading of players as you've mentioned. I also doubt very strongly that a GM does have just a list with some players from each layer. As I've said already in another post, you can't do that in the higher rounds, cause it means you're acting from a weak position. The highly paid GM would risk his job if he's going to give up a potential top scorer because he doesn't have him on his list. Another point. What are you looking for in a draft? Potential 3rd liners or 1st liners, maybe franchise players? How many roster spots do you have for 3rd or 4th liners? Don't get me wrong, 3rd line players are part of the team and important, but you should look for potential 1st line material at draft day, at least if you don't have an $ in your team name. Of course there are players taken in the later rounds having great careers, and busts in the 1st round, but I guess the odds to find your scoring machine are better in the first round. So my slogan would be, get as high picks as possible, and therefrom as much as possible. Dschens I said it's a deep draft, but does it mean anyone in the top 10 are potential superstars? Perhaps Fleury, Zherdev, Parise, even Vanek. Just because Staal will be a good player doesn't mean I'd waste a first round selection on him. Give me the first selection in 2001 any day over this year's. Like you said, would I want a potential 3rd line player? No, that's why I suggest trading down if Getzlaf, Parise, Vanek, Zherdev are gone. It's not as if 1st line players are yielded half the time out of every 1st round, because if you look at past drafts, even in a deep draft only 1/2 of the picks are worth a first round selection. I'd put money on at least 10 picks being busts from the first round, and maybe 8 being average NHL players. Whereas the opportunity to snatch a first liner is great, someone may have caught Savard's eye as a potential 2nd liner, and if you can trade down to draft him, as well as aquire a pick to draft ANOTHER 2nd liner...well that justifies it for me. The 2nd round will yield some powerful assets this year... And I do agree with you that there's no guarantee you can get the player you want if you trade down. I'm saying that if you see a few players you really like that are ranked low, might as well max out the value of your draft pick. |
|
|
|
Post by Dschens on Jun 16, 2003 18:37:01 GMT -5
I said it's a deep draft, but does it mean anyone in the top 10 are potential superstars? Perhaps Fleury, Zherdev, Parise, even Vanek. Just because Staal will be a good player doesn't mean I'd waste a first round selection on him. Give me the first selection in 2001 any day over this year's. I'm more keen on the first overall of next year. Agreed. Huh? What's your definition of a second line player? For me it's just an offensive player who's not as good as your first liner, of course notwithstanding such things like line chemistry. Therefore I wouldn't make differences between potential 1st liners or 2nd liners at the draft. Because this is common sense around the league these picks will be costly as well. Well, I've consented to this scenario already in my answer to PTH. My point is, don't trade down to #20 if you sit at #10, only because you've seen a specific wanted player on no other list then your own this high. If all other GMs have him at #20, who cares, take him at #10. But if you get an offer where you can draft two players from the same layer instead of one, I'm all over it. Dschens |
|
|
|
Post by PTH on Jun 16, 2003 21:57:24 GMT -5
Well, I've consented to this scenario already in my answer to PTH. My point is, don't trade down to #20 if you sit at #10, only because you've seen a specific wanted player on no other list then your own this high. If all other GMs have him at #20, who cares, take him at #10. But if you get an offer where you can draft two players from the same layer instead of one, I'm all over it. Well, I'm all for trading down if the guys left in the current layer just don't interest our scouts, or if they simply aren't comfortable with them. It happens all the time, the players you wanted all go just before your pick. You might as well trade down, take a guy you like at #20 and get extra picks later on. Of course, if the guy you want at #20 is a guy you REALLY like, then of course pick him at #10. |
|
|
|
Post by Rimmer on Jun 17, 2003 5:46:00 GMT -5
I said it's a deep draft, but does it mean anyone in the top 10 are potential superstars? Perhaps Fleury, Zherdev, Parise, even Vanek. Just because Staal will be a good player doesn't mean I'd waste a first round selection on him. Give me the first selection in 2001 any day over this year's. From TSN on Stall: "Staal, the worst he's going to be is a Ron Francis type and the best he's going to be is a Steve Yzerman type," said one scout. "What you see is what you're going to get," said Hockey Canada director of scouting Blair Mackasey. "I don't think he's going to be a flashy player that a (Ilya) Kovalchuk is or a (Marian) Gaborik is, but I think he's going to be a good solid two-way player in the NHL. Kirk Muller comes to mind." www.tsn.ca/nhl/news_story.asp?ID=44588&hubName=nhlalso, from NHL.com: "He has a lot of the attributes of a (Chris) Pronger, a (Mike) Ricci and a (Steve) Yzerman. He has the same make-up in a lot of ways." - Jeff Twohey, the GM of the Peterborough Petes www.nhl.com/futures/2003draft/staal061603.htmlAdd to that the comparisons with Mike Modano and this kid is being compared to half the league. R. |
|
|
|
Post by Rimmer on Jun 17, 2003 6:10:58 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by M. Beaux-Eaux on Jun 17, 2003 7:52:04 GMT -5
Seems like a worthy mid-round choice. Though I'd like us to take Michal Barinka with our 61st, if he's still available. |
|
|
|
Post by MPLABBE on Jun 17, 2003 7:55:15 GMT -5
From TSN on Stall: "Staal, the worst he's going to be is a Ron Francis type and the best he's going to be is a Steve Yzerman type," said one scout. "What you see is what you're going to get," said Hockey Canada director of scouting Blair Mackasey. "I don't think he's going to be a flashy player that a (Ilya) Kovalchuk is or a (Marian) Gaborik is, but I think he's going to be a good solid two-way player in the NHL. Kirk Muller comes to mind." www.tsn.ca/nhl/news_story.asp?ID=44588&hubName=nhlalso, from NHL.com: "He has a lot of the attributes of a (Chris) Pronger, a (Mike) Ricci and a (Steve) Yzerman. He has the same make-up in a lot of ways." - Jeff Twohey, the GM of the Peterborough Petes www.nhl.com/futures/2003draft/staal061603.htmlAdd to that the comparisons with Mike Modano and this kid is being compared to half the league. R. good stuff. No downside in being at worst a Francis/Muller type and at best a Modano/Yzerman type. |
|
|
|
Post by BadCompany on Jun 17, 2003 8:08:26 GMT -5
good stuff. No downside in being at worst a Francis/Muller type and at best a Modano/Yzerman type. The trouble is of course, that they all look good right about now. I can remember watching this special on Terry Ryan, about how he felt he got screwed over by the Habs, and was never really given a chance, and how they ruined his NHL career, blah, blah, blah. Anyways, at one point they showed Ryan watching his draft on tape, and him talking about how it was the happiest day of his life, but how it now makes him sick to watch Montreal calling out his name. As he is watching this, you can hear Bob Mackenzie saying in the background "Terry Ryan is going to score a lot of goals for the Montreal Canadiens..." Funny things happen to prospects once they get drafted. People start expecting things from them... |
|
|
|
Post by Yeti on Jun 17, 2003 8:17:18 GMT -5
The trouble is of course, that they all look good right about now. I can remember watching this special on Terry Ryan, about how he felt he got screwed over by the Habs, and was never really given a chance, and how they ruined his NHL career, blah, blah, blah. Anyways, at one point they showed Ryan watching his draft on tape, and him talking about how it was the happiest day of his life, but how it now makes him sick to watch Montreal calling out his name. As he is watching this, you can hear Bob Mackenzie saying in the background "Terry Ryan is going to score a lot of goals for the Montreal Canadiens..." Funny things happen to prospects once they get drafted. People start expecting things from them... Well, I'm always a bit surprised to hear scouts saying the first thing they look for is character, even before skills sometimes. It may not be like that for every organization but I remember hearing Savard mentioning how important it is in his views. It was probably not that way for the habs in the 90s, and I guess we got lucky in Ward who has a great work ethic compared to Chouinard, Ribeiro, Hainsey... You can be sure Savard and/or Madden met with every player likely to go in the first two or three rounds. |
|
|
|
Post by MPLABBE on Jun 17, 2003 8:28:32 GMT -5
You can be sure Savard and/or Madden met with every player likely to go in the first two or three rounds. anyone know if Madden will be helping us out with the 03 draft? or will he be absent as his departure gets closer and closer? |
|
|
|
Post by M. Beaux-Eaux on Jun 17, 2003 8:31:51 GMT -5
anyone know if Madden will be helping us out with the 03 draft? or will he be absent as his departure gets closer and closer? I fear Madden will be far from the madding crowd come draft day. In short, this draft will not be a Maddening experience. Sniff and la-dee-da. |
|
|
|
Post by coconut on Jun 17, 2003 11:19:28 GMT -5
I wouldn't be dissapointed with Kastystin, he seems like a high reward pick, and epilepsy is curable so it aint as bad. But I don't see 3 teams passing up on Phaneuf. Epilepsy is a clinical entity (a group of similar "diseases")... Most of them are *not* curable... Epilepsy can usually be held under control (medicated or not), but not cured. An exception, which you are probably referring to, is the "petit mal", a form of epilepsy most common in young children that disappears in early adulthood... |
|
|
|
Post by TheHabsfan on Jun 17, 2003 11:46:54 GMT -5
Epilepsy is a clinical entity (a group of similar "diseases")... Most of them are *not* curable... Epilepsy can usually be held under control (medicated or not), but not cured. An exception, which you are probably referring to, is the "petit mal", a form of epilepsy most common in young children that disappears in early adulthood... Yes. I had that when I was young. It was induced by a lack of sleep. I am happy to say that I grew out of it.  PS. Welcome aboard Coconut! This is a great place, hope you enjoy your stay!!! THF |
|
|
|
Post by TheHabsfan on Jun 17, 2003 12:03:23 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by MPLABBE on Jun 17, 2003 12:18:17 GMT -5
I feel like a kid in a toy or candy store. So many players who sound like great picks...Phaneuf, Parise, Brown, Kastsitsyn, heck even the Carter's, Jessiman's, Pouliot's, Nillson's, Bernier's, Stewart's,etc all seem to have very good skill sets and nice packages even though they should all go in the 15-30 range... |
|
|
|
Post by MPLABBE on Jun 18, 2003 15:52:38 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by roke on Jun 18, 2003 16:07:31 GMT -5
Just wondering here, does anyone think that Atlanta would be able to part with their first rounder for Hainsey and a veteran?
|
|
|
|
Post by MPLABBE on Jun 18, 2003 16:08:35 GMT -5
Just wondering here, does anyone think that Atlanta would be able to part with their first rounder for Hainsey and a veteran? they would do it if the veteran is not a sucky one with a big contract. But I don't see much purpose for us unless we are convinced whoever we pick with that pick is better than Hainsey. |
|
|
|
Post by habruti on Jun 18, 2003 20:35:37 GMT -5
they would do it if the veteran is not a sucky one with a big contract. But I don't see much purpose for us unless we are convinced whoever we pick with that pick is better than Hainsey. I would definitively consider it as a way to get rid of one of our veterans.....But I think that Chicago would definitively be a better location: Hainsey, Perreault, Hossa, 2nd For Ruutu and the 14th . That would still give us the possibility of drafting a guy like Jessiman or Bernier and would bring us a center that would look even better the Parise.... I think I could really sleep well with Koivu, Ruutu and Higgins as our top three centers. |
|
|
|
Post by MPLABBE on Jun 18, 2003 20:43:21 GMT -5
Hainsey, Perreault, Hossa, 2nd For Ruutu and the 14th . That would still give us the possibility of drafting a guy like Jessiman or Bernier and would bring us a center that would look even better the Parise.... wow, blockbuster. if that 2nd is ours...maybe there is a possibility it can happen...but Ruutu is really good so I don't think the Hawks are even thinking of dealing him right now(despite the contract problems) |
|
