I just dont think this year is the year to move up into the top 5. We have 3 picks, in a draft where JD at least feels he can get 3 A+ players in the first rd. So unless someone offers us a deal to move back I dont see us doing a lot. Which is definitely a possibility. Just not a top 5 spot, none of those teams are in a position to give up a top 5 talent. And JD and JK are wise enough not to overpay for 1 player.
2013 NHL Draft Thread III (6/30, 3PM EDT)
- Thread starter Samkow
- Start date
- Status
Xoggz22
Registered User
I realize I'm adding to this "tired" thread but what I keep seeing is for several people expecting this draft to provide us with the offensive fire power we need (or think we need) NEXT YEAR! Not going to happen. Even Drouin and McKinnon aren't going to carry their teams next year.
I would be happy with a move up in the draft but the only way this draft helps us immediately is to move the picks for "now" players. As for Nichushkin, I would be happy to take him and have him join the team in 2 years. There is risk but he's a possible high reward player that has a chance to be the best in the draft. It appears, however, that there are a lot of high end options deep into the 3rd round. They'll help the CBJ regardless, it just won't be next year. Let's rebuild the farm and continue to add talent to develop
I would be happy with a move up in the draft but the only way this draft helps us immediately is to move the picks for "now" players. As for Nichushkin, I would be happy to take him and have him join the team in 2 years. There is risk but he's a possible high reward player that has a chance to be the best in the draft. It appears, however, that there are a lot of high end options deep into the 3rd round. They'll help the CBJ regardless, it just won't be next year. Let's rebuild the farm and continue to add talent to develop
One thing that hasn't been mentioned (or at least not mentioned a lot) is what "1st line" players often get traded for. Look at what the Rangers traded for Nash and what we traded for Gaborik. Not a bunch of top guys. Usually it is a few 2nd/3rd line guys and a good young player.
So, why not continue to build our depth with very good players. The more good players we have, even if they aren't first line guys, the more likely we are able to trade for a top player we need. If we have the depth we can trade some players/prospects for the player we want/need.
So, why not continue to build our depth with very good players. The more good players we have, even if they aren't first line guys, the more likely we are able to trade for a top player we need. If we have the depth we can trade some players/prospects for the player we want/need.
I'm not totally against that approach, I just think it's hard to trade for a true star top-liner. Gaborik to my mind almost doesn't count, because we're not even sure he'll ever score 30 for us (I'm not saying he won't). But true stars, who aren't passed their prime, very rarely can be acquired. Meanwhile star draft picks remain RFA's until they're well into their primes. That gives you many years, added stability for a franchise, and a player to build around that free agents will want to play with. Of course, if I wasn't confident that Barkov, Mackinnon and Drouin would be stars I would feel differently.
georgiabluejacket
Registered User
georgiabluejacket
Registered User
We are the CBJ, drafters of "great player drafted(top 4 selection)" as Zherdev(in 2003 non the less) & Klesla. Drafters of top 10 "Idiot proof players" as Filatov, Brule, Leclair, & Picard. We've had 5 top 4 picks in our franchise history(Klesla, Nash, Zherdev, Johansen, Murray) & are 1-2-2 on those picks. We are still the CBJ until proven otherwise, so please stop this obsession with "top 4" cause we've proven we can screw that up spectacularly.
georgiabluejacket
Registered User
I HATE Detroit, but part of me wants them to beat ANA so maybe the Ducks will be a little more willing to part with B. Ryan. Think he'd be a great addition for us
I'd say 2-1-2 on those picks with a possible 3-1-1 if Murray pans out. Johansen had an excellent year in his development. The dude is 20 years old for crying out loud. He is right on track. Might be great.
Compare that to our history after drafting in the top 5. LeClaire. lol..Picard. lol..Filatov..lol.Voracek. (good but not here). Brassard (star crossed career). Moore...time will tell. I liked him but not a top pairing guy. Tops out as a 2nd pairing guy on some teams probably.
It's not an obsession....just an opinion. We'll see what happens.
EspenK
Registered User
- Sep 25, 2011
- 15,842
- 4,445
EspenK
Registered User
- Sep 25, 2011
- 15,842
- 4,445
Odds are that most of the top 4 will be pretty good if not great players in the NHL. 14th and wherever the Rangers & LA picks wind up not such great odds.
The folks who drafted in the past are not here anymore so our history is irrelevant.
And other than Zherdev, Nash & Klesla are legitimate NHLers although Nash hasn't been the kind of overall #1 pick that everyone expected and the jury is still out on Murray & Joey.
Given a choice between a top 4 pick and our 3 picks, I'd take the top 4. The odds of getting a real superstar is so much greater there.
With our 3 picks I see us building 2nd/3rd line depth with a chance to get lucky and draft a legitimate 1st liner. Not a bad alternative.
Yeah, I am not saying it is the best way to do things. I am just pointing out that there are other ways to acquire top players. It isn't bad to have a ton of good players and no elite ones.
I don't think we can trade for him, but he is someone I have always wanted us to get.
I'd take this a step further because I don't think of this year's top-4 as even comparable to previous year's top 4's. I'd take all of them ahead of Yakupov and Murray. I'd put the comparables as guys like Tavares, Seguin, and Kane. The fact that all of those players have succeeded gives a hindsight bias in their favor, but my point is they went into their drafts with a set of expectations comparable to the set of expectations for this year's top 4.
And for those very same reasons is why we are not moving up. Those top 4/5 teams know that and arent going to be willing to give up that type of player.
All it takes is for one team to need a player a little more than another, or for there to be differences in scouting. Word is Tampa's head scout has Nichushkin at #1. I'm not saying we will see movement into the top 4, because there is a lot of stickiness in striking a deal, but it's far from impossible.
Last edited:
Sore Loser
Sorest of them all
If we trade into the top 5, I will not only eat my shoe, but will wear it for a full day of landscaping around my house first.
I would go as far as to say that if the above scenario plays out and Tampa take Nicushkin over Drouin it makes moving up less likely. If you are picking at 4 and a guy like Drouin suddenly is available it would mean that you could either get the guy you wanted by trading back a place or taking a guy you really didn't think was going to reach you, making you mighty protective of your draft pick and even less likely to give it up than you were before.
Drafting is a roulette wheel but having a guy like Jarmo tilts the odds slightly by making your number slot a big bigger and the 0 a touch smaller. Having three first round picks is like the croupier saying "please have another go on the house". I am genuinely excited by having three picks, more so than I would be with, say, just a fifth overall...especially with such a potentially good draft class.
CBJfan4evr
Registered User
How about Wiznewski and our 1st rnd pick for Edmonton's 1st. Oil need experienced help on the blue line and can hardly afford to pay off all of these first rnd picks they've acquired over the last several years.
If we trade into the top 5, I will not only eat my shoe, but will wear it for a full day of landscaping around my house first.
CBJWerenski8
Rest in Peace Johnny
- Jun 13, 2009
- 43,696
- 26,737
If we trade into the top 5, I will not only eat my shoe, but will wear it for a full day of landscaping around my house first.
I second this.
Then why would they trade for Wisniewski? He makes way too much money and isn't really the type of defenseman (IMO) they need. They would probably be more interested in Tyutin and maybe even Nikitin.
Last edited:
Sore Loser
Sorest of them all
Make it Tyutin, and instead of their pick make it Paarjarvi. As much as I would like one of their top 4 guys(Hall, Yakupov, RNH, Eberle) Tyutin and a 1st wouldnt be enough, and im sure most here would agree that would be overpayment for Paarjarvi. I dont know, just trying to get away from trading into the top 5.
I would love to have him, but I wonder how willing Edmonton would be to trade him now.
Double-Shift Lasse
Just post better
Sore Loser
Sorest of them all
- Status
