Prospect Info: 2025 Draft: We are #1….1
- Thread starter Zirakzigil
- Start date
HandshakeLine
A real jerk thing
HandshakeLine
A real jerk thing
Empoleon8771
Registered User
HandshakeLine
A real jerk thing
With gigantic question marks. I dunno, I just don't see the need to spend assets to move up 3 whole spots to get the next potential Kevin Vellieux. I'd only trade up if it looks like one of the top 5 guys was dropping, but odds of them doing so are very small.
HandshakeLine
A real jerk thing
Put it this way, Emp. If this was a draft with more high-end prospects and we had more prospects in the system, I'd consider taking a swing at moving up if I felt the player was worth it.
But the system being as bare as it is, and us having holes everywhere, and both of these two draftees seeming pretty lackluster, I just don't get the appeal of trading up at all.
But the system being as bare as it is, and us having holes everywhere, and both of these two draftees seeming pretty lackluster, I just don't get the appeal of trading up at all.
Jag68Sid87
He's gone, gone gone!
If I am moving up, it's to draft Hagens or Misa. The next tier is all bunched together with various skill sets and various question marks.
So I would only trade up for one of the top two centers. As for the rest, just hope that one or more are there at 11. And quite frankly, they very well might.
Heck, one scouting resource, I wanna say elite prospects, has Frondell dropping to 13 or some such. Hey, if we end up with Frondell I will dance in the streets.
So I would only trade up for one of the top two centers. As for the rest, just hope that one or more are there at 11. And quite frankly, they very well might.
Heck, one scouting resource, I wanna say elite prospects, has Frondell dropping to 13 or some such. Hey, if we end up with Frondell I will dance in the streets.
HandshakeLine
A real jerk thing
Exactly. Paying to go a few spaces up for a likely mediocre prospect is just a sucker's bet. I don't really see much difference between anyone out of the top 5 and where we pick so just pick whoever is the best of the rest or trade down even.
Jag68Sid87
He's gone, gone gone!
Yeah, if the choices are Mrtka, Smith, Aitcheson, Bear, Lakovic or other, because Schaefer, Misa, Martone, Hagens, Frondell, Martin, O'Brien, McQueen, Eklund and Desnoyers are gone, I agree with the idea of trading down. If we could still draft a center by trading down, AND add a 2026 late first or something like that, put me down.
Somebody is going to drop everybody relax. At least 2-3 dmen are going in the top 10.
Fwiw, those Eklund measurements kinda worry me. Hoped he’d be closer to 175lb.
Fwiw, those Eklund measurements kinda worry me. Hoped he’d be closer to 175lb.
Big Friggin Dummy
Registered User
- Feb 22, 2019
- 25,029
- 28,636
I'm all for trading up to 8 but only if a guy like Martone or Hagens slips and is available in that spot. Otherwise, I'd entertain trading back if we're talking about McQueen or Mrtka here. Be a serious organization for once, ffs. 
HandshakeLine
A real jerk thing
Exactly.I'm all for trading up to 8 but only if a guy like Martone or Hagens slips and is available in that spot. Otherwise, I'd entertain trading back if we're talking about McQueen or Mrtka here. Be a serious organization for once, ffs.
Imagine furiously trading up for an Oli Juolevi.
McQueen was talked about going 1ov before his injury btw. Everybody is always complaining about swinging for the fences, well this is a big swing.I'm all for trading up to 8 but only if a guy like Martone or Hagens slips and is available in that spot. Otherwise, I'd entertain trading back if we're talking about McQueen or Mrtka here. Be a serious organization for once, ffs.
Really depends on what the ask is. But I’m higher on his upside than most here. I might for him but probably not O’Brien, again depending on the ask and who’s gonna available after him
Empoleon8771
Registered User
Idk I just don’t see paying a 2nd to trade up as being all that much. Like that’s basically just using what you got for Beauvillier as a rental to move up a few spots to get a guy you like more.
I’m definitely not trading a 1st to move up but a 2nd? They have a bunch of 2nds, I don’t really see an issue doing that to get a center like O’Brien at #8. They’ll likely acquire another 2nd to replace the one they moved to trade up anyway when they sell at the deadline next year.
You’re 100% not getting a 2026 1st to trade down.
HandshakeLine
A real jerk thing
Yeah, but I don't see it from the footage. Maybe I'm wrong, I don't pretend to follow these guys or care until a month before the draft. But scouts are generally dogshit stupid and I'm right about as much as they are, so I'm going to say that I don't get why anyone would have ranked McQueen so high except on his size.
HandshakeLine
A real jerk thing
Yeah, I guess I just don't see the big deal about McQueen tbh. If I saw what others are seeing in him, I'd probably feel better. But I would rather use all of our picks to get more prospects because I'd rather have more scratch-offs.
Big Friggin Dummy
Registered User
- Feb 22, 2019
- 25,029
- 28,636
A replica Bjugstad of our very own after losing the genuine article years ago? Oh boy!
I dunno man. I've said McQueen's the biggest bait pick in recent memory for like 8 months. If he turns out to be a gem, cool, I'll eat crow. I just don't think he's a guy people would really give a shit about if he was like 5 inches shorter.
I dunno man. I've said McQueen's the biggest bait pick in recent memory for like 8 months. If he turns out to be a gem, cool, I'll eat crow. I just don't think he's a guy people would really give a shit about if he was like 5 inches shorter.
Last edited:
Jag68Sid87
He's gone, gone gone!
I am definitely with you on the 2nd idea. Absolutely.
As for the 2026 1st, I tend to agree. You are probably right. Then again, you think NHL teams are going to land Erik Karlsson with 50% retention for pennies on the dollar. So...
Empoleon8771
Registered User
I can see this argument for McQueen but I strongly disagree with O’Brien. O’Brien has an elite trait already in his playmaking that he can build off of as a base of a good NHLer. If he lasts until #8, which seems pretty likely (seems like Boston wants Martin at #7), I think you push like hell to trade up for him.
O’Brien has question marks, but he also clearly has the base (namely playmaking and PP ability) that you can easily see him panning out into a good top-6 center based on.
HandshakeLine
A real jerk thing
Yeah, if he's a huge breakout star for us or someone else and we pick someone dumb, I'm okay with getting called out on it. I just watch the clips of McQueen and I don't get the hype at all.
And I'm normally the guy calling for us to draft lo-res Super Mutants.
HandshakeLine
A real jerk thing
Paying more assets for Bjugstad 2.0, obviously. That's why he friggin' loves. He can't get enough of it, the pervert.
Big Friggin Dummy
Registered User
- Feb 22, 2019
- 25,029
- 28,636
If the Rangers send over the 12th overall, the Pens walking out of the first day with two of Martin, Eklund, O'Brien, Bear, Smith, and Aitcheson.
If the Rangers punt to next year, Martin, Eklund, O'Brien, or trading back a handful of spots and "taking a swing" with Lakovic plus pocketing an extra 2nd rounder.
Empoleon8771
Registered User
I think if you’re talking purely HR swing picks around where the Penguins are drafting, I think O’Brien, Smith and Lakovic are the main guys to be looking at. All of those guys have some sort of elite traits about them that suggests they could have a huge upside, while their path to becoming a NHLer is more about refining the weaknesses of the rest of their game. The issue is some of those issues are a lot easier to fix than others.
With O’Brien, I think it’s mostly improving skating and improving his pace of play. IMO these issues aren’t major, it’s just the things that will limit him from reaching his highest upside if he doesn’t improve. But the other two, they’re both major improvements needed. With Smith, it’s major improvements needed on hockey IQ. With Lakovic, it’s major changes needed to play style. But the base for those guys becoming really good NHLers is there, they just need to develop it well.
With someone like Eklund, I think he has numerous good traits and is already a very good player for his age. I think he’s basically a sure fire middle-6 winger at worst, but what in his skillset could really cause him to boom into a super high upside player? I don’t think he has that like O’Brien has his playmaking or Smith has his skating. But his skill set is so good right now that I’d still be happy with taking him, I just don’t think he’s the highest upside guy you can get at that pick.
With O’Brien, I think it’s mostly improving skating and improving his pace of play. IMO these issues aren’t major, it’s just the things that will limit him from reaching his highest upside if he doesn’t improve. But the other two, they’re both major improvements needed. With Smith, it’s major improvements needed on hockey IQ. With Lakovic, it’s major changes needed to play style. But the base for those guys becoming really good NHLers is there, they just need to develop it well.
With someone like Eklund, I think he has numerous good traits and is already a very good player for his age. I think he’s basically a sure fire middle-6 winger at worst, but what in his skillset could really cause him to boom into a super high upside player? I don’t think he has that like O’Brien has his playmaking or Smith has his skating. But his skill set is so good right now that I’d still be happy with taking him, I just don’t think he’s the highest upside guy you can get at that pick.
