Kevin Musto
Hard for Bedard
- Feb 16, 2018
- 22,630
- 29,302
Weak birth year. Doesn’t help that the top late birthday US players aren’t available (Hagens, Hensler) while the CHL ones are (Martone, Spence)An unfortunate showing for the Americans
Very one sided game
I think the draft is similar enough 1-4, that if there were a significant sweetener attached to the #3 or 4 pick to move down a spot or 2, I would do it. If someone loves Schaefer at #2 and offered 3 or 4 with a future 1st or an equivalent prospect, I would do that. Until/Unless the draft board changes, I have Hagens, Misa, Martone, and Schaefer relatively equal or in the ball park of each other enough that a 2nd premium asset to pass on one to be left with another would be a win.
I wanted Lev last year and would have no issue doubling down on D. Kid is a stud.
if there was a sure fire toews/malkin in this draft would this be a discussion? seems we'll likely end uo in a position of convincing ourselves there is one to justify passing on a dman because of the log jamThis is a dilemma for me.
On one hand you gotta get bedard his Malkin/Toews but on the other you gotta make sure you have a 1D.
Schaefer Levshunov
Vlasic rinzel
Korchinski Allan/Kaiser/EDM
You win cups with a D core that deep. But somebody besides Bedard will need to score.
I guess you can’t really go wrong with either direction as long as you get one of those four prospects.
Second this. Trade Korchinski as part of a package for a forward and be in on either Marner or Rantanen if one of them hits the market.Hopefully Korchinski plays well to build his value, draft Scheaffer and trade Korchinski at the draft for a young forward.
Also pay through the nose for another forward in UFA. But this time one that is actually good.
if there was a sure fire toews/malkin in this draft would this be a discussion? seems we'll likely end uo in a position of convincing ourselves there is one to justify passing on a dman because of the log jam
I'm really liking what I'm seeing from Boisvert so far. He's looking like a guy that might overachieve his draft slot.If Schaefer is a sure fire 1D and he’s available when the Hawks pick, logjam at D and need for a forward be dammed. Take BPA, this team still sucks bad. It’s in no position to be passing on BPA.
As @HawksDub89 said, that defensive group makes this franchise a true contender in a few years. But that’s the key, still a few years and that means more time to sign/trade for/draft impact forwards. Just need to have them in place once Schaefer and Levshunov are ready and still playing on ELCs or second contracts.
Seems like some in the media think the competitive window revolves around Bedard, but it’s more likely around Levshunov and whoever is picked in the top five this year.
Also, if Nazar actually does land somewhere between a Trochek and Point type of center, then that will make a huge difference. Obviously remains to be seen.
Agree with all of this but would probably add Rinzel and Korchinski into the Schaefer & Lev development pile and once we get to at least two of those guys turning into a top pairing and a 2nd pairing guy is when the window will start to open.If Schaefer is a sure fire 1D and he’s available when the Hawks pick, logjam at D and need for a forward be dammed. Take BPA, this team still sucks bad. It’s in no position to be passing on BPA.
As @HawksDub89 said, that defensive group makes this franchise a true contender in a few years. But that’s the key, still a few years and that means more time to sign/trade for/draft impact forwards. Just need to have them in place once Schaefer and Levshunov are ready and still playing on ELCs or second contracts.
Seems like some in the media think the competitive window revolves around Bedard, but it’s more likely around Levshunov and whoever is picked in the top five this year.
Also, if Nazar actually does land somewhere between a Trochek and Point type of center, then that will make a huge difference. Obviously remains to be seen.
Agree.Agree with all of this but would probably add Rinzel and Korchinski into the Schaefer & Lev development pile and once we get to at least two of those guys turning into a top pairing and a 2nd pairing guy is when the window will start to open.
Unfortunatley the development curve is usually longer for D (see Vlassic as the most recent and Keith further back as a core piece of Cups where both did not become impactful NHL players until 22 and in Keiths case it was another season or 2 to reach the pinnacle of top handful of D in the league as opposed to just good). Lev is 19, Korch and Rinzel 20, and Schaefer is 17. Even if we ended up adding Schaefer to the prospect pool we are probably looking at 2 seasons out before those guys are starting to sniff their ceilings simply based on age, physical maturation, and going through the growing pains adjusting to pro and then NHL hockey. This development process is why I was not overly "disappointed" in taking Lev instead of Demidov as we need an impact D if we are going to turn the corner and those simply take longer to develop.
I feel like they have them already.Agree.
Rebuilding without a stable of potential impact defensemen seems like a flawed way to go, so I would have no problem with them taking a D again if he’s BPA.
You absolutely need someone like Keith, Doughty, Hedman, Makar, Pietrangelo. But if you can have one of those types paired with a Seabrook, Sergachev, D. Toews, Theodore then you can have a real shot to contend every year.
Please read edit.Like they have who?
Defensemen need time to develop, you don’t know what any of them are yet. No reason to immediately trade Korchinski before you have to/someone offers ridiculous value, imo.I feel like they have them already.
I'm really high on Levshunov and Rinzel. I think both have a shot to be 1D and even Norris contenders. Not to say they get there.
If you take Schaefer, IMO you trade Korchinski for a forward immediately.
Yeah true.Defensemen need time to develop, you don’t know what any of them are yet. No reason to immediately trade Korchinski before you have to/someone offers ridiculous value, imo.
Not in point %, which is the only relevant way to look at this.Back into last place again.
Were now back to the bottom in points percentageNot in point %, which is the only relevant way to look at this.