GDT: 2016 NHL Draft

[Navin R Slavin]

....

Click to read more...

 

[Unsustainable]

5-1, Hainsey with 6 goals.

 

[Roboturner913]

 

[w e l o s t b o y s]

i hope we don't take a bad player

 

[Unsustainable]

Yup, that's who we need, Bellows.

 

[GoldiFox]

That was a A+ dipsy doodle. Bellows real highlights are the sheer volume of goals he scores from every area of the slot. He hits corners and inner posts like a boss. Great shooter. Snap shot and wrister is accurate, high velocity, and he gets them off very quickly.

 

[Brock Anton]

I actually really don't care who we pick. There's no real guy out there that I officially do not want.

 

[Roboturner913]

we need Bellows like a fat kid needs cake

 

[Wolfpuck]

we need Bellows like a fat kid needs cake

But fat kids need salad.

 

[Finnish Jerk Train]

jfwp

we win gaem

DISCUSS!

 

[w e l o s t b o y s]

21 for 27+44?

 

[Roboturner913]

But fat kids need salad.

you know what you are? you're a metaphor ruiner

 

[DaveG]

21 for 27+44?

Depends. If our list of 8 is off the board I'd do it. Still very solid shot at Howden, Rubstov, or Asplund at #27.


(assuming none of the top 6 D are still there of course)

 

[Boom Boom Apathy]

21 for 27+44?

I don't see why the Canes would move down from 21 for more picks, particularly when we already have 1 2nd and 3 thirds. I'm thinking they take BPA or they use it in a trade for a player.

It obviously would depend on who the Canes brass like though at that spot.

 

[Surrounded By Ahos]

wearegoingtodie.gif

 

[Brock Anton]

I don't see why the Canes would move down from 21 for more picks, particularly when we already have 1 2nd and 3 thirds. I'm thinking they take BPA or they use it in a trade for a player.

Maybe, but 27+44 is a pretty good deal for 21. Unless someone like Gauthier or Jones is there, a good number of the guys we're looking at #21 are probably going to be there at #27.

 

[DaveG]

yessir. Wife and I are walking over around 6

Nice. Should be there around 6-6:15 myself.

 

[Roboturner913]

I would not mind moving down at all. If what "they" say is true, 21 is sort of on the outside looking in, in terms of where the best talent is.

In response to the other now-closed draft thread, I will never discount the importance of a good playmaker, but I can count on one hand the number of times in their entire existence the Canes have had a true finisher, natural goal scoring winger. Ray Sheppard, Jeff O'Neill and that's kind of it.

 

[Finnish Jerk Train]

Spent too much time looking for an amusing "in before the lock" picture for the other thread. Did not get in before the lock.



Remarkable timing on that one, I might add. Opened almost 6 months ago, hit 1,000 less than 3 hours before the draft.

 

[Boom Boom Apathy]

Maybe, but 27+44 is a pretty good deal for 21.

Maybe, but at that point, it's about what the Canes scouts think of the players. If they have a guy they LOVE at 21 and he's there, then picking up an extra pick to move down 6 spots isn't a good deal. If they don't have anyone they really like, then yes, it's a good deal. Look at last year. If someone had offered the Canes another 2nd round pick to move back a number of spots in the 2nd round, it would have looked like a pretty good deal at the time. We likely would have missed out on Aho had we done that though.

I'm not against moving down in a deal like that, particularly with how well the Canes have done in recent years with 2nd round picks, but it would depend a lot on which players are there and how the Canes feel about them.

 

[geehaad]

Too much effort in this GDT. We're doomed.

 

[the halleJOKEL]

2-1 win

 

[geehaad]

I don't see why the Canes would move down from 21 for more picks, particularly when we already have 1 2nd and 3 thirds.

MacDonald says there's an equitable group from about 20 to 40. If none that they like from the group above that falls, they may try to get two picks in that 20-player group.

 

[Boom Boom Apathy]

I would not mind moving down at all. If what "they" say is true, 21 is sort of on the outside looking in, in terms of where the best talent is.

I'm not sure that's the case though. MacDonald has stated otherwise.

“It’s a good year to have the extra picks because it’s a little deeper at the top,†MacDonald said. “As you get down into the draft, it’s not one of the deeper drafts we’ve ever had, but in terms of where we are and where we’re picking, it’s going to be helpful.

 

[Sens1Canes2]

MacDonald says there's an equitable group from about 20 to 40. If none that they like from the group above that falls, they may try to get two picks in that 20-player group.

I think he's senile tho.