GDT: 2023 Upper Deck NHL Draft: 1st Round, June 28, 7 p.m. et | ESPN, SN, TVAS: Nashville, TN

Status
Not open for further replies.

HuGo Burner Acc

Registered User
Mar 30, 2016
4,702
5,334
Ok if a team is stupid enough to trade a blue chip prospect (Hughes wants young prospects not picks) and their high pick (6-9), I say go for it. The asset management on that deal would be crazy.

But I still say wait for the draft until your pick is up at 5 then make the decision and lean towards staying at 5
 
  • Like
Reactions: Gustave

Omar

Registered User
Oct 10, 2017
2,156
1,642
So they draft Slaf saying it would be a win if they didn't push for size later on and now Dreger says having Newhook now means there are too many smaller players if they take Michkov.

How about this idea? Who cares about RHP, Farrel or Newhook. If size is an issue, you keep the ones who matter, likely Caufield and Michkov. The rest can be dealt.

I can understand the contract risk and geopolitical risk. The rest seems to be a lot of overthinking and this is where they're losing me lately.
Great point.
 

Kennerback

Registered User
Jun 2, 2021
4,304
6,186
I think the issue for some fans is that last summer this draft was talked about as the Bedard-Michkov draft and were salivating at the thought of being able to draft one of these guys. Today, despite having the #5 overall pick we may still get a chance to draft one and to not do it because of non-hockey related reasons is a tough pill to swallow. That said, we're going to get a good player regardless and it is certainly not worth getting hung up on it.
f*** Michkov, f*** all the offers. It’s all background noise. Leonard is our guy.
 

waitin425

Registered User
Jan 10, 2009
8,224
12,411
Canada
Weighing 5 offers for 5th. Oh boy.
Episode 7: Branch Closing GIFs on GIPHY - Be Animated
 

Whitesnake

If you rebuild, they will come.
Jan 5, 2003
90,805
39,846
So they draft Slaf saying it would be a win if they didn't push for size later on and now Dreger says having Newhook now means there are too many smaller players if they take Michkov.

How about this idea? Who cares about RHP, Farrel or Newhook. If size is an issue, you keep the ones who matter, likely Caufield and Michkov. The rest can be dealt.

I can understand the contract risk and geopolitical risk. The rest seems to be a lot of overthinking and this is where they're losing me lately.
True. And it makes even more sense when I see people adding names like Kidney, Farrell, Mesar...geez...those guys are so expendable they are not worth mentioning.

But...still.. my only point is that we need a better mixture. And if the idea is to get Newhook really going to either keep him or trade him to get even more than what we gave...so be it. But you cannot have a contending team with 4 players out of 6 in your top 6 under 6.
 

HuGo Burner Acc

Registered User
Mar 30, 2016
4,702
5,334
He’s right in the sense that we already know 100% that it’s either Carlsson or Michkov or both at 5.

Smith is already gone. That ship has sailed. Smith almost told us as much yesterday. We can infer a team (probably Columbus) told him they were drafting him.
We gotta hope and pray that sharks draft Leonard. Because Grier definitely was not describing Smith or Carlsson
 

Paddy17

Registered User
Apr 10, 2021
2,032
4,117
Hughes had a tough choice at 5, but maybe other GM's will make it easy for him...
 

WentWughes

Registered User
Apr 16, 2023
237
504
Lol, what did he say ?
Nilan says “it seems like 1–10 this year you are getting a very good player that will play.” McCagg goes “unless maybe if you pick Michkov.” Paraphrasing of course. He then went on to compare Michkov to obscure Russian prospects and Yakupov for reasons he is unlikely to pan out.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Grate n Colorful Oz

Kennerback

Registered User
Jun 2, 2021
4,304
6,186
Can I repeat this...why would you deal right now when you don't know who is still available. Unless Hughes has already confirmed with the 4 teams ahead of him who they will pick.
I‘ll put the information we know.

1. Bedard and Fantilli are not falling to 5.
2. Columbus and now apparently SJ hinted they’re drafting a Center.
 

yianik

Registered User
Jun 30, 2009
11,152
6,724
If Carlsson is still there at 4, and we aren't drafting Michkov doe sit make sense to offer Anderson and the 5th to San Jose for the 4th. Or better to keep Anderson and drafy Leonard ?
 
  • Like
Reactions: phillytennis

Habs

It's going to be a long year
Feb 28, 2002
23,019
17,922
Yeah having Slafkovsky wasn't a super bold take seeing that Bob Mackenzie himself had him at 1 and he averages various rankings. But dude is being really dumb. Had michkov at 5 and basically said you can't control his development and that's why Leonard and dvorsky are better prospects. 🤡

I heard him say Mitch could be another Nail Yakupov lol, I mean... technically Bedard could be the next Pat Falloon if we are going to do this game
 

26Mats

Registered User
Jun 23, 2018
33,432
25,806
Too much small players is bullshit, that's why trades exist, if you have a special talent like Michkov, nothing is stopping you to trade one of your other talented smaller players except Caufield.
And Hughes seems to not mind loading up on a good thing.

He got Matheson even though we had many LD's. He got Newhook even though we have many sub 5'11 young forwards in the system.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Grate n Colorful Oz

PriceIsGod

Carey Please :)
Jul 15, 2012
6,131
766
You know...
I said it when I heard Philly could be offering 7+22+ and I'll gladly say it again... as much as I want Michkov, if management is 100% set on not taking him at least they can milk his value in a bidding war between other teams and squeeze value out of him.

The only way I lose my mind tonight is if they straight up just pass on Michkov to draft Leonard/Reinbacher at 5. Philly and Washington are solid trade down candidates because we can still get one of Leonard/Reinbacher/Dvorsky/Benson guaranteed.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad