Speculation: Nashville plan moving forward
- Thread starter knowITALLkevin
- Start date
-
Xenforo Cloud will be upgrading us to version 2.3.5 on March 3rd at 12 AM GMT. This version has increased stability and fixes several bugs. We expect downtime for the duration of the update. The admin team will continue to work on existing issues, templates and upgrade all necessary available addons to minimize impact of this new version. Click Here for Updates
We're drafting top 3 rn and have 4 additional top 50 picks this year and a top prospect pool.
"Grandpa" Forsberg is 30 and a ppg there's plenty of gas left in that tank.
"Grandpa" Forsberg is 30 and a ppg there's plenty of gas left in that tank.
Yeah we for sure should get a decent center prospect this season to go along with Svech, Surin and Edstrom. Molendyk and Gibson are both good defensive prospects.
What we lack is a coach that would know how to use them.
What we lack is a coach that would know how to use them.
Sure Forsberg isn't that old but at 30yo it's worth questioning what level he'll be at by the time Preds dig themselves out of the current mess.
It is worth the conversation, but plenty of stars play at a high level during their 32+ years. But he does have high trade value as well. I want to see him with whomever we draft first and foremost.
Porter Stoutheart
Seen Stamkos?
- Jun 14, 2017
- 16,700
- 13,617
Until the team fires the coach and Trotz shows a willingness to make sure that deserving youngsters play bigger roles than veteran AHL grinders, we're not going anywhere. We'll just keep drafting guys, then watching them stall out and vanish on waivers when they come off their ELCs and still don't have any defined role on the team.
herzausstein
Registered User
If we bring Bruno back next year, then the is no plan
Short term. Bring in a coach that can run an aged, veteran roster and get the most out of them as well as integrate a few young players.
Long term. Hope that Trotz figures out how to be a GM or go get one of Briaebois, Zito or McCrimmon’s right hand guys to run this franchise, clear out all the nepotism in the front office, steal the scouting department from Dallas, find the next Cooper, Maurice or DeBoer to coach the team.
Long term. Hope that Trotz figures out how to be a GM or go get one of Briaebois, Zito or McCrimmon’s right hand guys to run this franchise, clear out all the nepotism in the front office, steal the scouting department from Dallas, find the next Cooper, Maurice or DeBoer to coach the team.
+100 to everyone saying Bruno and Trotz have to go.
I forsee a really bad 3-5 years in front of us from a win/loss perspective, just about regardless of what we do. Given that, I prefer we trade guys like Saros and Forsberg for young, NHL ready pieces and lean into the youth movement. Not fully try to lose, but get notably younger while keeping a few veteran leaders around and building draft capital and a top-tier prospect pipeline.
I forsee a really bad 3-5 years in front of us from a win/loss perspective, just about regardless of what we do. Given that, I prefer we trade guys like Saros and Forsberg for young, NHL ready pieces and lean into the youth movement. Not fully try to lose, but get notably younger while keeping a few veteran leaders around and building draft capital and a top-tier prospect pipeline.
glenngineer
Registered User
Having the additional picks means nothing as this is a weak draft so while it was exciting to accumulate the draft capital, the team didn’t a crappy job of which drafts they should’ve gotten the capital in. Another major blunder.
Let's wait until we actually do something with them before we declare the draft another major blunder. There's still another 30 games in the season and a trade deadline to get through.
glenngineer
Registered User
Every scouting service and anyone in the know has said this. Outside of the top 7-8 and then another small bunch until about 15 it’s slim pickings. Could there be a gem in there, sure but getting a shit ton of picks in a shitty draft is a blunder. It’s hard to be optimistic when you’ve seen what this organization has done recently and you go, why did you do the things you did?
The weakness of this draft is basically that picks 20-40 are on par with 40-60 last year. It’s not that guys we take in late 1st or 2nd aren’t good prospects, they are just going about a half round higher than last year (which had great depth).
Further, it’s likely that both Preds and teams we dealt with knew this was weaker draft and that was baked into the value we received.
Last edited:
We're in the top 7-8 though and have the ammo to get into the top 15. There are moves Trotz has made that are worthy of criticism, but this isn't one of them. We don't even know what players might be made available that we can use our other firsts to acquire. We're months away from the draft.
Armourboy
Hey! We suck!
Drafts are drafts, you use the picks you have and hope for the best, just like every other year.
It feels like this is the new draft analysis every year. "This one isn't great, but next year will be one of the best!" And then next year comes and it's the same thing.
But the truth is, almost every single draft is the same outside of the top 3-5 players. There will always be a couple of late 1st rounders who surprise, and there will always a few guys in round 2 who everyone thinks "how was he not a 1st rounder?" And then there is always a handful of gems from 2-7 that everyone passed by several times, as they just develop later.
I posted it several years ago and would have to dig for it again. But basically, if you look at the odds to get just 200 NHL games out of a draft pick, the first overall pick is basically guaranteed, the second overall pick is close to that, the third a little further. Then picks 4-5 fall off a pretty good amount, but still have reasonable expectations to play 200... Then the bottom falls out from 5-10, and anything after that is almost pure luck that you find the 200 game players.
Welcome to HF! We may appear to be a bit dysfunctional, but it's all a love/hate relationship, everyone here is a solid Preds fan and okay people, but we will argue like middle schoolers!
Porter Stoutheart
Seen Stamkos?
- Jun 14, 2017
- 16,700
- 13,617
Just look at the bottom end of the draft order... we're not even at the Trade Deadline yet, and already 9 of the last 13 picks in the 1st round have been traded. The odds are pretty good that several of the remaining ones will be also in the next few weeks. Heck, the pick Columbus got from Minnesota could be traded again too. Teams have been bailing en masse from these picks for a long time.
AtlantaWhaler
Thrash/Preds/Sabres
- Jul 3, 2009
- 20,521
- 3,962
Welcome! Happy to have you aboard. Please stick around and post often.
For me, I'd primarily focus on young talent and our prospect pool. We have a very good farm and tons of upcoming picks. I do think we have good vets who can help, but they shouldn't be the primary focus.
We do have an armchair GM thread where a lot of "what would you do" is discussed. I'll leave it up to the board if they want this merged or not.
Predsanddead24
Registered User
- Mar 7, 2019
- 6,118
- 7,140
Yeah I'd be interested to see how drafts that are projected to be terrible vs. great actually pan out. The one that I distinctly remember being labelled as terrible was 2017 (proof here: In 'terrible' draft year, will more first-round picks be traded?) has actually ended up producing both a top player in the league (Makar), a lot of very good players (Hischier, Heiskanen, Pettersson, Necas, Suzuki, Thomas, Oettinger, Robertson), and a bunch of guys who are nice pieces to have too (Mittelstadt, Vilardi, Tippett, Chytil, Frost, Tolvanen).
Porter Stoutheart
Seen Stamkos?
- Jun 14, 2017
- 16,700
- 13,617
Yeah, I don't think these predictions are very reliable.
However, there probably is a little something to be said for years when you have a McDavid/Eichel at the top of a draft vs. a year like this one where you can't really peg any of the #1 candidates as being a guaranteed franchise player. So sometimes the pundits are just kind of going with that top end view? Whereas the reality for all the rest of the picks later on depends a lot on development and unknowables.
It can also just mean your scouts need to work harder/do better... Tanner Molendyk was ranked outside the 1st round by ALL of these agencies... and now he's our #1 prospect....
There will ALWAYS be guys like this, who on draft day when they are 17/18 aren't seen as the prospects they might be seen as just 6 months later. Find more of these guys. I don't watch junior/college hockey anymore, so I have zero clue who they are. But our scouting department needs to keep hitting on these types of picks.
I get the sense it wasn't "just dumb luck" with Molendyk. Somebody saw something and bumped him up on our list. Whereas I wonder about picks like Wood or Kemell, where they were "consensus" highly rated and falling into our laps... but were they actually guys we had that inside scoop and were targeting? I don't know... but I do believe that every draft has its hidden gems, and I would invest heavily in my scouting department to find the right people to employ who can find these guys.
Last edited:
Porter Stoutheart
Seen Stamkos?
- Jun 14, 2017
- 16,700
- 13,617
The other thing I'd note with regards to our scouting department is that I reallllllly don't think it makes a lot of sense to hand out spots based on old-boys-network/patronage. I have met a lot of former pro hockey players in my days shuffling my kids through competitive hockey. I can't say very many of them impressed me at all with their hockey acumen. They are great guys for running on-ice drills or putting on the bench to argue with the refs. For identifying talent, aka "scouting"... eh... it's a pretty mixed bag. Not to say some can't. It's a huge population and you can't automatically eliminate somebody either just because the were a former high level player, because some of them are also really sharp and perceptive. But anyway, I just would want to make sure my hires weren't PURELY on a hockey-nepotism basis.
I kind of like the look of our amateur scouting roster, where I'm like "WHO?" ... the names aren't very recognizable. Which is probably a good thing? Of course we know Franson, and I remember Carson as a player. But it's not a very high profile list of "old boys network" types of names in general? Our pro scouts are definitely all former high level players. Again, no judgement, they might be the best of the best in terms of those types of guys. We'll never really know how to evaluate the jobs any of these guys is doing - because no matter what reports they are filing, it's always possible the higher-ups to the GM level are just running their own show and not factoring in much of what the pro scouts send them. It's always going to be a completely opaque process to us as fans.
Which is just a long-winded way to come around to the point that... at least I don't really see our scouting department as being very obviously over-stocked with "patronage appointments".
(That's a good thing)
I kind of like the look of our amateur scouting roster, where I'm like "WHO?" ... the names aren't very recognizable. Which is probably a good thing? Of course we know Franson, and I remember Carson as a player. But it's not a very high profile list of "old boys network" types of names in general? Our pro scouts are definitely all former high level players. Again, no judgement, they might be the best of the best in terms of those types of guys. We'll never really know how to evaluate the jobs any of these guys is doing - because no matter what reports they are filing, it's always possible the higher-ups to the GM level are just running their own show and not factoring in much of what the pro scouts send them. It's always going to be a completely opaque process to us as fans.
Which is just a long-winded way to come around to the point that... at least I don't really see our scouting department as being very obviously over-stocked with "patronage appointments".
(That's a good thing) 
