Did the Oilers make the right draft picks in the last 5 years?

[Petes2424]

Cant wait until next year when Yak scores 25/25/50 and all the haters are back on his jock talking about limitless potential and what a great pick he was.

I don't think anyone's "hating" on him. I didn't want him but I think he's as skilled as anyone.

 

[Moose Coleman]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Adq5KYBEokA

So you've honestly never seen this? How long have you been an Oiler fan?

First off congratulations on figuring out the basic functionality of this website. It's just too bad you couldn't have figured out how to post links earlier, then I could have seen and laughed at this "evidence." I have no idea how this proves your point that his size is to blame for him aggravating an injury that had been bothering him since junior (a key point you seem completely oblivious to).

Either you're playing stupid again, or there's no real reason for me to explain this to you.

Short version - shoulder heavily muscled with thick connective tissue takes a lot of force to dislocate. Weaker shoulder, like that of an infant or a small girl, takes a small amount of force to become dislocated.

See the incredible collision with the boards that caused his injury? Would that have hurt my 95 yr old grandma?

The shoulder was already injured. How do you not know that? If that shoulder isn't already injured, that bump into the boards probably doesn't do anything. And on the flip side, if he's a bigger guy playing with an injured shoulder, it still wouldn't take much to aggravate the injury.

I didn't say they were shorter and stockier, I just said stocky.

Funny how you never hear tall people described with that particular adjective, eh. Why's that?

 

[Oi'll say!]

First off congratulations on figuring out the basic functionality of this website. It's just too bad you couldn't have figured out how to post links earlier, then I could have seen and laughed at this "evidence." I have no idea how this proves your point that his size is to blame for him aggravating an injury that had been bothering him since junior (a key point you seem completely oblivious to).



The shoulder was already injured. How do you not know that? If that shoulder isn't already injured, that bump into the boards probably doesn't do anything. And on the flip side, if he's a bigger guy playing with an injured shoulder, it still wouldn't take much to aggravate the injury.



Funny how you never hear tall people described with that particular adjective, eh. Why's that?

Insulting, and nothing at all to add as usual. Have a nice day moose.

 

[Moose Coleman]

Insulting, and nothing at all to add as usual. Have a nice day moose.

If my position was "a player is weak because of the way he injured his already injured shoulder" I'd scamper away, too.

 

[McDrailers]

Yes for 4/5. RNH being the pick that I see as a **** up. RNH is too small too weak to be a successful NHL player. Hate on me!

 

[StoveTopStauffer]

If given the chance,I believe Tyler Seguin would do just fine at being a leader.Don't forget at how he put the Plymouth Whalers on his back, and got that team in the playoffs, when it was basically a team of nobodies but Tyler Seguin.


Is it just me or are many Oilers Fans very biased towards Hall.

No. I've seen your posts towards Hall and they are incredibly bias.

Hall is superior and there are only really a handful of players better and seguin ain't one.

 

[smackdaddy]

Yes for 4/5. RNH being the pick that I see as a **** up. RNH is too small too weak to be a successful NHL player. Hate on me!

Done.

 

[StoveTopStauffer]

Yes for 4/5. RNH being the pick that I see as a **** up. RNH is too small too weak to be a successful NHL player. Hate on me!

Here's the thing with RNH. He's a great powerplay guy and guess what? We got 5 coaches who don't know a damn thing about a PP. And a coach who doesn't know diddly about how to play to his players strengths.

He has had little to no shelter time in the league and has held his own admirably. Out of 3 seasons 1 was practically written off. This season was a hot mess for more than just him.

I'll give him some time. He's got ALL the tools to be much better than average.

 

[redgrant]

Word on the street is that Shero is out of Pittsburgh. Apparently its not enough to draft anyone expecting them to score 100 with Sid and Gino then pat yourself on the back and do absolutely nothing the next 7 years in the draft.

Management is apparently unhappy with the lack of toughness on the team and crap development of their draft picks.

If only our ownership would call out this mess of a team aside from the no brainer first round picks.

Riley Nash and Alex Plante....uggghhhh.

 

[misfit]

2009

The Pick: Magnus Paajarvi-Svensson

Consensus BPA: Paajarvi Svensson was definitely the BPA at the time. When MacKenzie released his final pre-draft list, he had MPS as the #10 pick, but the idea was that nobody thought it would ever happen and that if it did, it would be a major steal.

In the Range: Leading up to the draft, most people thought we'd probably end up with whichever one of Glennie or Kulikov fell to us. Glennie was gone at 7, but Kulikov was available. Names like Moore, Ellis, and Schroeder were discussed as possibilities, but for the most part Kulikov and Glennie were the guys that we were hoping for.

Who We Should've Picked: While Ryan O'Reilly is probably the best player to come out of that draft after #10, he was a projected 2nd rounder who did go in the 2nd so I didn't include him (even though he wasn't an option for our 2nd pick). Kulikov probably would've ended up the better pick, and Leddy has developed well too, but would we have been able to trade for Perron if we didn't have Paajarvi? I'm not sure, and I also think I'd rather have Perron than those two defensemen. An argument could be made for a couple of guys, but I prefer what we ended up with.



2010

The Pick: Taylor Hall

Consensus BPA: Despite all the Taylor/Tyler debating that took place, I'd say Hall was definitely the front-runner all along. I'm confident that there would've been no debate at all if Seguin was a winger.

In the Range: It was a two-horse race. Taylor or Tyler. One was going to go #1 and the other would go #2. #3 was a distant 3rd.

Who We Should've Picked: Taylor Hall. We definitely took the right player. That's not a shot at Seguin at all, but I would take Taylor 10 times out of 10.



2011

The Pick: Ryan Nugent-Hopkins

Consensus BPA: RNH was ranked #1 pretty much everywhere. But that's not to say there wasn't debate.

In the Range: Couturier, Landeskog, Huberdeau, and Larsson were all talked about as legitimate contenders for the top spot. The year prior it was seen as a two-horse race between Couturier and Larsson, but by draft day, Couturier had fallen in the public eye. Most likely due to a defensive role at the WJC and a bout of mono. Huberdeau shot up the charts over the course of the year.

Who We Should've Picked: I think I still take RNH at the end of the day, but lordy that Landeskog is a player. I like Couturier too, but I think the top 2 picks made in this draft year were the right ones.



2012

The Pick: Nail Yakupov

Consensus BPA: Yakupov. There really wasn't a realistic second option at the time.

In the Range: Even though Yakupov was the top rated player everywhere, there was still talk of guys like Murray, Galchenyuk, and Grigorenko. Forsberg was in some discussions, but not at all at the level of the others. Before we won the lottery, there were basically two camps here. The Murray group and the Grigorenko supporters. This is because everyone knew there was no chance Yakupov wouldn't go #1 overall.

Who We Should've Picked: I'm in the minority, but I still say Yakupov. It's a shame the BPA was another winger, but I still think he ends up the best player in this draft. One bad season not withstanding. And I'm not even blaming the coach on this. Yakupov struggled out of the gate with some bad luck and it snowballed from there. If some of those early bounces went in, I'm sure we would've seen a much different season from him. Success breeds confidence and a lack of confidence can seep into other areas of a player's game. This isn't something that's uncommon among young players, especially ones as passionate as Nail. Overall, I'm sure he'll be fine.

 

[joestevens29]

I feel the picks were right. They just need time to develop. This is coming from a Canuck fan

I'd add while the picks were right the way we tried to develop them and bring them in has been an issue. Sure you are kinda screwed with guys drafted from the CHL and need to bring them in early, but the surrounding cast should've been better.

 

[SK13]

Hindsight being 50/50:

2009) No, but it was a good pick at the time.
2010) Yes. Couldn't have gone wrong here either way.
2011) Yes. That's probably the #1C for the next few years.
2012) No, but the right choice would have been insanely unpopular at the time. Even I would have been irked.
2013) Too early to tell.

I'd add while the picks were right the way we tried to develop them and bring them in has been an issue. Sure you are kinda screwed with guys drafted from the CHL and need to bring them in early, but the surrounding cast should've been better.

If the surrounding cast was better, beyond Taylor Hall, we would not have drafted the talent we did in the first place.

That's kind of the whole point of tanking.

 

[joestevens29]

Hindsight being 50/50:

2009) No, but it was a good pick at the time.
2010) Yes. Couldn't have gone wrong here either way.
2011) Yes. That's probably the #1C for the next few years.
2012) No, but the right choice would have been insanely unpopular at the time. Even I would have been irked.
2013) Too early to tell.



If the surrounding cast was better, beyond Taylor Hall, we would not have drafted the talent we did in the first place.

That's kind of the whole point of tanking.

Probably still would've ended up with decent picks.

At some point we should've been adding guys to help and we just never really did that. Even this year. Why after Yak didn't we add guys? Could've still tanked and got those 3, but been further ahead today.

The answer is easy though, we were always looking for the sexy/perfect fit players and didn't settle with proven guys that were sitting around come mid-summer that have proven to be decent NHLers.

 

[Everest]

Amazingly...most of the top pick opportunities the Oilers have had in the past 5-6 years were almost impossible to screw up.

And yet...even with unprecedented flex at multiple drafts...they've built nothing. Absolutely nothing.

 

[SK13]

Amazingly...most of the top pick opportunities the Oilers have had in the past 5-6 years were almost impossible to screw up.

And yet...even with unprecedented flex at multiple drafts...they've built nothing. Absolutely nothing.

They've achieved nothing. There is a difference.

 

[Oi'll say!]

No. I've seen your posts towards Hall and they are incredibly bias.

Hall is superior and there are only really a handful of players better and seguin ain't one.

Hall is a phenominal player, noone could be anything but a fan of how hard he works and his skill level.

Would this team be better if we had Seguin and Landeskog from those two draft years is the question.

It doesn't have to be emotional, just pretend you are betting on horses.

 

[The Big Unit]

RW is far easier to fill than D. bottom line is they have been stockpiling prospects for far too long and neglecting the actually building part for just as long. Now, with their players approaching their mid twenties the lightbulb goes on in KLowe's head: "duuuh, hey, maybe it's time to actually fill the lineup, eeyuk, eeyuk, eeyuk'

you can pick BPA even if he isn't what you need if you want, by at some point you've got to build the team, and that point actually passed two years ago. they are playing catch up, and they look like the biggest idiots in the business (just ask Hextall). Looks good 'em.

I can't disagree that they've neglected building the team, you're absolutely right on that one. But now that those prospects that we've been stockpiling are on the brink of being NHL ready, especially Defense, imo it's a mistake to open up a hole on the right side when you don't have a prospect ready to step in on a 2nd line RW role. Furthermore, we have the D to solve our problems in the prospect pool but nobody with enough skill in the forward prospect pool.

To just say, well it's easier to fill RW than D, ok sure but that doesn't fix our huge secondary scoring problem. So in essence you end up with what I said to begin with. Trade Yak or Ebs for D and you might fix one major issue but now you've just made another big problem worse.

 

[Everest]

They've achieved nothing. There is a difference.

There is a difference...but...both statements are true.

Right now...they've got a pile of exciting pieces of construction material laying around in a heap. There is no way you can honestly say this team has taken any kind of shape or identity.

And that's why they've achieved nothing.

Because they haven't built anything.

 

[Paralyzer008]

Stu MacGregor's 2nd rounders:

Anton Lander
Tyler Pitlick
Martin Marincin
Curtis Hamilton
David Musil
Mitch Moroz
Marc-Oliver Roy
Ryan Martindale (3rd round, but 61st overall so barely out of the 2nd)

This is our other problem. ONE guy has turned out so far (being Marincin) and I know it's early, but we already traded Martindale and I don't see much NHL skill with Lander, Moroz, Musil, Hamilton or Pitlick.

 

[Up the Irons]

I can't disagree that they've neglected building the team, you're absolutely right on that one. But now that those prospects that we've been stockpiling are on the brink of being NHL ready, especially Defense, imo it's a mistake to open up a hole on the right side when you don't have a prospect ready to step in on a 2nd line RW role. Furthermore, we have the D to solve our problems in the prospect pool but nobody with enough skill in the forward prospect pool.

To just say, well it's easier to fill RW than D, ok sure but that doesn't fix our huge secondary scoring problem. So in essence you end up with what I said to begin with. Trade Yak or Ebs for D and you might fix one major issue but now you've just made another big problem worse.

fair enough. pick your poison. Yak has been so poorly handled, he probably can't get us a decent D anyways.

 

[Oi'll say!]

Stu MacGregor's 2nd rounders:

Anton Lander
Tyler Pitlick
Martin Marincin
Curtis Hamilton
David Musil
Mitch Moroz
Marc-Oliver Roy
Ryan Martindale (3rd round, but 61st overall so barely out of the 2nd)

This is our other problem. ONE guy has turned out so far (being Marincin) and I know it's early, but we already traded Martindale and I don't see much NHL skill with Lander, Moroz, Musil, Hamilton or Pitlick.

I didn't think much of Lander until his most recent call-up, he was actually looking prett sharp imo.

 

[GretzkytoKurri9917]

2009

The Pick: Magnus Paajarvi-Svensson

Consensus BPA: Paajarvi Svensson was definitely the BPA at the time. When MacKenzie released his final pre-draft list, he had MPS as the #10 pick, but the idea was that nobody thought it would ever happen and that if it did, it would be a major steal.

In the Range: Leading up to the draft, most people thought we'd probably end up with whichever one of Glennie or Kulikov fell to us. Glennie was gone at 7, but Kulikov was available. Names like Moore, Ellis, and Schroeder were discussed as possibilities, but for the most part Kulikov and Glennie were the guys that we were hoping for.

Who We Should've Picked: While Ryan O'Reilly is probably the best player to come out of that draft after #10, he was a projected 2nd rounder who did go in the 2nd so I didn't include him (even though he wasn't an option for our 2nd pick). Kulikov probably would've ended up the better pick, and Leddy has developed well too, but would we have been able to trade for Perron if we didn't have Paajarvi? I'm not sure, and I also think I'd rather have Perron than those two defensemen. An argument could be made for a couple of guys, but I prefer what we ended up with.



2010

The Pick: Taylor Hall

Consensus BPA: Despite all the Taylor/Tyler debating that took place, I'd say Hall was definitely the front-runner all along. I'm confident that there would've been no debate at all if Seguin was a winger.

In the Range: It was a two-horse race. Taylor or Tyler. One was going to go #1 and the other would go #2. #3 was a distant 3rd.

Who We Should've Picked: Taylor Hall. We definitely took the right player. That's not a shot at Seguin at all, but I would take Taylor 10 times out of 10.



2011

The Pick: Ryan Nugent-Hopkins

Consensus BPA: RNH was ranked #1 pretty much everywhere. But that's not to say there wasn't debate.

In the Range: Couturier, Landeskog, Huberdeau, and Larsson were all talked about as legitimate contenders for the top spot. The year prior it was seen as a two-horse race between Couturier and Larsson, but by draft day, Couturier had fallen in the public eye. Most likely due to a defensive role at the WJC and a bout of mono. Huberdeau shot up the charts over the course of the year.

Who We Should've Picked: I think I still take RNH at the end of the day, but lordy that Landeskog is a player. I like Couturier too, but I think the top 2 picks made in this draft year were the right ones.



2012

The Pick: Nail Yakupov

Consensus BPA: Yakupov. There really wasn't a realistic second option at the time.

In the Range: Even though Yakupov was the top rated player everywhere, there was still talk of guys like Murray, Galchenyuk, and Grigorenko. Forsberg was in some discussions, but not at all at the level of the others. Before we won the lottery, there were basically two camps here. The Murray group and the Grigorenko supporters. This is because everyone knew there was no chance Yakupov wouldn't go #1 overall.

Who We Should've Picked: I'm in the minority, but I still say Yakupov. It's a shame the BPA was another winger, but I still think he ends up the best player in this draft. One bad season not withstanding. And I'm not even blaming the coach on this. Yakupov struggled out of the gate with some bad luck and it snowballed from there. If some of those early bounces went in, I'm sure we would've seen a much different season from him. Success breeds confidence and a lack of confidence can seep into other areas of a player's game. This isn't something that's uncommon among young players, especially ones as passionate as Nail. Overall, I'm sure he'll be fine.

If you ask the question: Taylor vs Tyler to an Oilers fan the answer is 85% to 95% Taylor Hall.


If you ask the question:Taylor vs Tyler to NHL Hockey Fans that aren't Oilers fans the answer is 50/50 for Hall and Seguin.

 

[Oscar Acosta]

If you ask the question: Taylor vs Tyler to an Oilers fan the answer is 85% to 95% Taylor Hall.


If you ask the question:Taylor vs Tyler to NHL Hockey Fans that aren't Oilers fans the answer is 50/50 for Hall and Seguin.

If you ask hockey fans that watch western conference games or the Dallas Stars...

 

[GretzkytoKurri9917]

If you ask hockey fans that watch western conference games or the Dallas Stars...

Nope,if you ask fans of the entire NHL that watch both conferences,and are not fans of the Oilers.

 

[GretzkytoKurri9917]

It was also stated at the draft that at the draft Hall was the best player but that Seguin could be the better player long term.