2013 NHL Draft Thread III (6/30, 3PM EDT)
- Thread starter Samkow
- Start date
- Status
How so? We've kept you around.
I beg to differ, EDM's irrational, uncontrolled rants are rarely of the screeching variety.
This would be roughly my BOPA rankings of the players realisitically in our range (assuming we don't move up):
Horvat
Wennberg
Shinkaruk
Lazar
Burakovsky
Gauthier
Mantha
Erne
Petan
Zykov
Hartman
Rychel
Poirier
Dauphin
There is alot of parity in this group, and I think if we walk away with 3 of these guys, we are stocking the shelves nicely and patching up the huge holes we have in our forward prospect corps. Anything less than 2 of these guys would be a fail imo.
Horvat
Wennberg
Shinkaruk
Lazar
Burakovsky
Gauthier
Mantha
Erne
Petan
Zykov
Hartman
Rychel
Poirier
Dauphin
There is alot of parity in this group, and I think if we walk away with 3 of these guys, we are stocking the shelves nicely and patching up the huge holes we have in our forward prospect corps. Anything less than 2 of these guys would be a fail imo.
"fail" is to be determined years down the road.
I still remember there were those claiming that the '08 draft would be a failure if Filatov was available and wasn't taken due to the "Russian Factor."
Dunno, maybe it is because of how busy my life has been, and knowing I can't come down for the draft party. Maybe I still feel a bit burned by the lockout, but I just can't bring myself to take the writings of people I've never met, on players I've never seen and use those to decide the success or failure of a particular draft 10 minutes after it finishes.
We'll get the guys we get. I just hope our record of drafting improves.
InjuredChoker
Registered User
I'd rank these players
Wennberg
Shinkaruk
Horvat
Lazar
Zykov/Gauthier
Burakovsky
Dauphine
Erne
Hartman
Poirier
Rychel
Petan
Mantha (kind of torn on him, can't figure him out... could be the best or the worst of the bunch)
Klimchuk would be around on par with Burakowsky. Lehkonen with Dauphine.
After the top 4 here, I honestly can't guess who is better. If we can get one of those 4, followed by 1 or 2 of the others, I'll feel good or be ignorant to facts that should dictate I feel otherwise.
Fro
Cheatin on CBJ w TBL
i put Erne at the bottom, just b/c he won't be a Blue Jacket, and Mantha is probably right there with Wennberg and Horvat for me...a pure goal scorer...I think we have the right clubhouse to make sure he stays motivated and works hard...
That's dangerously close to un-American/un-Canadian talk, Skraut! I'm sure you're on a list, somewhere.
Double-Shift Lasse
Just post better
Still thinking Shinkaruk and Horvat are gone by 14, so presuming CBJ doesn't move around, I'd put Mantha as the next best-get. I really like Hartman, and hope he's there at the third pick. In between, I guess Lazar or Erne. Zykov is interesting. I'd put those guys above the rest on Nord's list.
Fro
Cheatin on CBJ w TBL
I agree...going Mantha, Lazar, Hartman would be a phenomenal draft...
Double-Shift Lasse
Just post better
Fro
Cheatin on CBJ w TBL
i'll PM you since you are a mod...i can't tell the story that was passed along...
We need to draft BPA. I still don't know why some think we should only draft forwards. A big part of why the Reds are good now (though they aren't right now ) is because they draft BPA. They drafted a 1B (Alonso) in 2008 even though they had Votto. They drafted a C (Grandal) in 2010 even though they had drafted a C (Mesoraco) in 2007. They drafted a CF (Ervin) in 2013 even though their top prospect is a CF (Hamilton).
I know MLB isn't exactly the same as the NHL, but the Reds got better by taking who they thought was the BPA. They traded some of them to get guys like Latos. Others they have kept. Look at their 1st round success.
2004 - Bailey (Reds)
2005 - Bruce (Reds)
2006 - Stubbs (Indians)
2007 - Mesoraco (Reds)
2008 - Alonso (Padres)
2009 - Leake (Reds)
2010 - Grandal (Padres)
2011 - Stephenson (MiLB)
2012 - Travieso (MiLB)
2013 - Ervin (MiLB)
) is because they draft BPA. They drafted a 1B (Alonso) in 2008 even though they had Votto. They drafted a C (Grandal) in 2010 even though they had drafted a C (Mesoraco) in 2007. They drafted a CF (Ervin) in 2013 even though their top prospect is a CF (Hamilton).I know MLB isn't exactly the same as the NHL, but the Reds got better by taking who they thought was the BPA. They traded some of them to get guys like Latos. Others they have kept. Look at their 1st round success.
2004 - Bailey (Reds)
2005 - Bruce (Reds)
2006 - Stubbs (Indians)
2007 - Mesoraco (Reds)
2008 - Alonso (Padres)
2009 - Leake (Reds)
2010 - Grandal (Padres)
2011 - Stephenson (MiLB)
2012 - Travieso (MiLB)
2013 - Ervin (MiLB)
candyman82
Registered User
All kidding aside, I don't think you can find a "rant" from me of any kind since my primary concern was satisfied last Autumn by the hiring of JD and the banishment of a certain someone back to the accounting department where he belonged.
JacketsFanWest
Registered User
The issue with drafting the BPA in hockey is that with an 18 year old draft, there's so much development time for defensemen and goalies that the ability to trade to get what you need becomes difficult.
The top 10 may be nearly all forwards. The Oilers indicated they were after a forward, many of the teams need scoring like Calgary and Dallas. If 2-3 defensemen go in the top 13, then the Jackets could get Risto at #14 and Pulock at #19 or even #27.
Drafting two defensemen wouldn't make Murray expendable since he's practically two years older than them. Risto may need time to adapt to NA. It's going to help in 3 years, but in the mean time...? It doesn't make Goloubef or Prout expendable since they're needed for depth. They could trade Mike Reilly, but what could they get for him? Teams haven't gotten that much for trading young defensemen immediately (John Moore really didn't have that much trade value). Playing with 3 defensemen under the age of 20 isn't also going to work, so Tyutin, JJ and Wiz are still needed.
BPA works in the later rounds as part of stocking the pantry with quality prospects. But there does need to be a plan for how the prospects fit together as part of an overall plan for first and second rounders - unless someone the scouts are incredibly convinced about is available. If choosing between 2+ players the scouts really like, how the players fit into a plan is the best strategy since there are limited number of positions in the organization.
When there were 10-12 defensemen in Springfield, it meant the youngsters who were struggling never played and Theo Ruth and Anton Blomqvist are now complete busts. Maybe that was inevitable, but that situation was completely mismanaged. Competition is good, but defensemen need to play and after dozens of games in the press box, they're going to struggle and never get back on the ice.
The top 10 may be nearly all forwards. The Oilers indicated they were after a forward, many of the teams need scoring like Calgary and Dallas. If 2-3 defensemen go in the top 13, then the Jackets could get Risto at #14 and Pulock at #19 or even #27.
Drafting two defensemen wouldn't make Murray expendable since he's practically two years older than them. Risto may need time to adapt to NA. It's going to help in 3 years, but in the mean time...? It doesn't make Goloubef or Prout expendable since they're needed for depth. They could trade Mike Reilly, but what could they get for him? Teams haven't gotten that much for trading young defensemen immediately (John Moore really didn't have that much trade value). Playing with 3 defensemen under the age of 20 isn't also going to work, so Tyutin, JJ and Wiz are still needed.
BPA works in the later rounds as part of stocking the pantry with quality prospects. But there does need to be a plan for how the prospects fit together as part of an overall plan for first and second rounders - unless someone the scouts are incredibly convinced about is available. If choosing between 2+ players the scouts really like, how the players fit into a plan is the best strategy since there are limited number of positions in the organization.
When there were 10-12 defensemen in Springfield, it meant the youngsters who were struggling never played and Theo Ruth and Anton Blomqvist are now complete busts. Maybe that was inevitable, but that situation was completely mismanaged. Competition is good, but defensemen need to play and after dozens of games in the press box, they're going to struggle and never get back on the ice.
We need to draft BPA. I still don't know why some think we should only draft forwards. A big part of why the Reds are good now (though they aren't right now
I know MLB isn't exactly the same as the NHL, but the Reds got better by taking who they thought was the BPA. They traded some of them to get guys like Latos. Others they have kept. Look at their 1st round success.
2004 - Bailey (Reds)
2005 - Bruce (Reds)
2006 - Stubbs (Indians)
2007 - Mesoraco (Reds)
2008 - Alonso (Padres)
2009 - Leake (Reds)
2010 - Grandal (Padres)
2011 - Stephenson (MiLB)
2012 - Travieso (MiLB)
2013 - Ervin (MiLB)
Its just a philosophical difference. Some of us think you should draft to your needs, within reason. I don't think its unreasonable to expect a 1st round drafted forward to be on the ice with the big boys 2 or 3 seasons after the draft. I also understand the BPA approach and it has its merits, I just think our lack of top 6 forwards and depth/youth on the blueline dictate we use these picks to bolster the offense.
I don't disagree with some of what you say, but I still go BPA in the first round. It is the other rounds where I would draft more for need if there is a certain position(s) that we need.
BPA is in the eye of the beholder. In this case, GMJK and the scouting staff. By the time the draft rolls around (pretty much by now) they will have their list, from #1 through whatever. It is possible, in fact quite probable, that their list will differ significantly from another teams list, will differ from the consensus lists, will differ from all the mock drafts, and will differ from what most posters here think.
In other words, we really have no idea who will be BPA (according to the list that counts) at any point in the draft. Some statements by GMJK have indicated that the scoring side will be addressed. But that begs the question, by what means? If there is a trade from the D core (say roster and prospect) to obtain a roster forward, then perhaps now the need factor swings the other way.
The other factor to be considered is the depth of this draft. You only need look at the wild swings the projections of some players and you get the sense that past the top 7 or 8 there may be no BPA, other than on the list held by the team walking to the podium.
This is truly a tipping point in the history of the CBJ, whether forward or back is yet to be determined. But the certainty is that the opportunity is there to make huge strides, miserable failure, or something somewhere between the two.
About the only sure thing is that, it's going to be a lot of fun. And unless I miss my guess, there will be much joy and much gnashing of teeth. We all hope there is more joy than gnashing.
In other words, we really have no idea who will be BPA (according to the list that counts) at any point in the draft. Some statements by GMJK have indicated that the scoring side will be addressed. But that begs the question, by what means? If there is a trade from the D core (say roster and prospect) to obtain a roster forward, then perhaps now the need factor swings the other way.
The other factor to be considered is the depth of this draft. You only need look at the wild swings the projections of some players and you get the sense that past the top 7 or 8 there may be no BPA, other than on the list held by the team walking to the podium.
This is truly a tipping point in the history of the CBJ, whether forward or back is yet to be determined. But the certainty is that the opportunity is there to make huge strides, miserable failure, or something somewhere between the two.
About the only sure thing is that, it's going to be a lot of fun. And unless I miss my guess, there will be much joy and much gnashing of teeth. We all hope there is more joy than gnashing.
JacketsFanWest
Registered User
Trading down is the other option. It's possible they get into a situation where the BPA are all defensemen.
If the worst possible scenerio happens, and the Jackets are stuck picking between say Risto and Kerby Rychel, then they shouldn't take the forward only because he's a forward. But they could trade down and pick up a higher-risk forward like Pavel Buchnevich and NCAA-bound defensemen like Thomas Vannelli.
In the later rounds, it's a crap shoot, so they might as well go with players their scouts have good hunches about. They can't guarantee a player will or won't turn out as part of a larger strategy.
Double-Shift Lasse
Just post better
Good point. We've already spent some time in this thread discussing how consensus can be reached on players in groups or tiers but within those groups there can be some difference and there are always outliers. Then, when you consider a team's list may be impacted by a player's position, there may not be a definitive "BPA".
I want this kid so bad
I really think people will look back at him and wonder how he fell as far as he did. I wouldn't be surprised if someone "reached" on him and took him early
http:// http://thehockeywriters.com/hunter-shinkaruk-2013-nhl-draft-prospect/
I really think people will look back at him and wonder how he fell as far as he did. I wouldn't be surprised if someone "reached" on him and took him early
http:// http://thehockeywriters.com/hunter-shinkaruk-2013-nhl-draft-prospect/
Last edited by a moderator:
He seems to be the purest sniper available and there is some chance he could fall, and if the powers that be feel the same way also a slight chance to move up after him.
He is my choice as well. After the top 5 that is. There is the question about his size on the CBJ since we have more than our share of "smaller" types. My thought is a sniper is a sniper.
- Status
Ad
Latest posts
-
GDT: Joue au Pickard s'il te plaît. Les Pétroliers v l'Hab. 5:30 en Prime.- Latest: KeithIsActuallyBad
-
-
