I really am growing uncomfortable about this. If the Oilers think Seguin is the better player, do they have the collective balls to choose him in the face of all the Hall-hoopla?
And if not, how are they going to fare with Hall. We all know how well the management team communicates...I wouldn't be surprised if Hall pretty quickly figures out "Oh, they didn't actually want me, they just didn't have the stones to pass on me...guess I'll demand a trade".
More and more, the ideal situation is either that they trade down to #2 for something of value, OR they just commit 100% to Hall and embrace him. Anything in between scares me.
I will be thrilled with whatever MB decides, but part of me hopes that the Bruins go crazy and give us their first rounder or better yet, Toronto's from next year, if we promise to take Seguin and leave Hall.
I am very evenly split between the two so getting a big return from the Bruins is easily enough to sway me.
It's a damn tough choice between the two and I'm glad MB is the man charged with making it.
The proven winner vs. the player who addresses the obvious need and may have more long-term upside?
Coming off a last place finish and a dressing room that is clearly in disarray, my choice would be to go with Hall and the winning intangibles he brings. That said, if Tambo can get legitimate value out of laying off Hall for the B's to pick him, they've got to go that route as we're certainly more than 1 player away. The optimal scenario is grabbing both but Chiarelli doesn't seem to be buying into that with recent comments seeming to indicate that he's more than happy to select Seguin.
Can't wait to see what's under the tree in 4 days!
"I wouldn't be surprised if Hall pretty quickly figures out "Oh, they didn't actually want me, they just didn't have the stones to pass on me...guess I'll demand a trade".
Sounds more like Seguin's thinking. I haven't heard him say a single thing about playing for the Oilers, unlike Hall who has clearly stated he'd love to.
All Hall seems to want to do is play hockey, in a manner that's reminiscent of his agent.
Haven't brought in my Blades homerism in awhile but Hamilton is snuck into Mackenzie's list in the late second round.
Last year people in the dub were projecting this kid as a first rounder. Two broken collarbones and a playoff injury from a dirty hit later and he's fallen a bit.
He got back with the Blades for the first round of the playoffs and looked as awesome as he always has.
If the Oilers can get another second round pick I think he's worth it. Otherwise, he may be there in the third and he definitely will be a solid pick.
Who's a good comp for Hall? See plenty of good 2-way centermen and snipers in the top-5,top-10, but Hall has an edge on him and I'd be interested to hear who might be a comp for his particular package. Tyring to project him, I can't think who he lines up to. Hemsky a bit, but there must be some better ideas. Hunter, he's your guy - help me out here!
I've given up on comparing Hall and Seguin. I'll take McKenzie's word that Hall has the edge.
I have a different question, which I asked before, but I'l ask it again.
How good are both players? As star prospects, suppose Crosby was a 10, Stamkos a 9, Kane an 8, and Gagner a 7. (Mind you, Gagner had 118 points to 106 for Hall and Seguin, though Gagner was on that stacked Knights team.)
Where are Hall and Seguin? I'd like to say 9, but I'm worried it may be as low as 7.5
McKenzie says: Hall has been the consensus No. 1 prospect from start to finish this year, in spite of the fact the NHL Central Scouting Bureau ranked Seguin first overall on its final list.
TSN conducted surveys of NHL scouts on four occasions to determine four separate TSN draft rankings - pre-season in mid-September, mid-season in late January, draft lottery in early April and now final in mid June - and each and every time, Hall has come out on top.
Seven of 10 NHL scouts surveyed by TSN over the last week pegged the Spitfire winger as No. 1
While he may know a lot about hockey, he clearly does not understand the meaning of the word consensus.
3/10 selected Seguin suggesting that it is far from consensus.
Tarasenko would be amazing, but I don't see him slipping past the Rangers.
There's an outside shot at Connolly, but he's likely gone in the top 11-12.
Outside of those two, the only other top 10 talent that will be available late is likely Kabanov, and I'd be very happy with him at 48.
The other Russians are interesting as well with Burmistrov, Kuznetsov, and Galiev all looking to slide a bit. Galiev is most likely for an early 2nd round pick.
If we were to trade up I find myself wanting to try and get in a few spots higher to try and take Connolly.
We have our ace pick more or less in the bag, so I can't help but feel that makes this the perfect opportunity to take a gamble on a guy like that.
Acknowledging the fact that I have a serious "seen him good" crush from last season, I believe that if he played the entire season he would be the unquestioned number 3 pick.
It looks like your dream of sneaking McIlrath as a late first round sleeper has evaporated. He is ranked at 15 here - Boston could come away with your two guys (Hall and McIlrath).
If Tambo could get the 15th from Boston for laying off Hall, trade Hemsky for a top ten and keep #31, they could have 4 picks in the top 31! - of course they would really suck the next year or two (or three).
Seguin and 3 top D prospects would really jumpstart the rebuild.
1. Take Hall or extract next year's #1 (TO pick) from Boston to take Seguin.
2. Target the "second seven" defensemen with both second rounders. Gudrandson, Gormley and Fowler will be gone so see who is left of the others, especially those US d-men. I'd go in this order: 1. Forbert 2. Tinordi 3. McIlrath 4. Merrill 5. Faulk 6. Petrovic 7. Pysyk
I've got no interest at all in the "project" forwards...Bennett, Etem, Sheehan, Pitlick etc. so just ignore them. I'd also ignore the three Russians that early.
I'd like to see Hall, Forbert and Merrill and Christ, with things as wide open as they appear to be that's possible. If it's Hall, McIlrath, Faulk, fine by me.
3. The only exception is Jack Campbell. If he falls out of the first round then you grab him.
Also I would be super happy with Tinordi over Mclirath. IMO.
Everything I have read about Tinordi has him as a slower skater than McIlrath, and skating is McIlrath's biggest question mark.
Big kids usually have to work on skating as their muscles catch up to the frame.
Tinordi has the genes and the size though.
Interesting that Bob puts McIlrath right at Boston's 15th spot. I know ranks the kids with no respect for who is picking at the spot, it just seems like serendipity or fate.
Bob also has a lot of "reach" picks in his top 30. (i.e. Beau Bennet at 18 when CS has him at 32, ISS 34 and HN 35)
I think that is just an example of how deep the draft is in quality prospects.
Giving up 2 picks like 31 & 48 to get 15 is not advisable when so many players available at 48 could turn out well.
Better to take parts and pieces of your org that are expendable for whatever reason this year.
I wonder if the Oil would ever consider a scenario whereby they trade 1OV for 2 or three 1st rounders? And would that be a disaster?
One of the famous team rebuilding stories is Jimmy Johnson of the Cowboys trading Herschel Walker for a plethora of picks from the Vikings and then trading down to acquire even more picks. It put a dismal team (1-15) on the fast track to dynasty land.
This doesn't seem to work as well in the NHL with talent projections being considerably more difficult given the age of the draftees. That said, would the team be better off trading a package like 1 OV & Souray (and/or Cogs)for 2 or 3 first rounders, possibly over consecutive years if a team doesn't have a mittful of picks this year (ala Boston)? If the trading partner was suitably inept (Panthers, Thrashers, Jackets, etc.) it might be worth it? AND those teams might go for it as they could also use the cache of a 1st OV pick in their respective markets.
Sportsnet seems pretty confident that something is going to happen between the Oilers and Bruins, and given the history between the two franchises that seems reasonable.
Question is: what would you be willing to give up for 15th overall?
How does 'Always take the BPA' square with 'Team that gets the best player in the deal wins the trade'? Because the first (BPA) seems to depend on some friction-less market where you get 100 cents on the buck when you have to trade some of these BPA assets for your actual needs down the road. I'm just a bit concerned that we saw two teams with some stud defenders in the cup final, and out here in MPS/Eberle/1OV -land we're still talking about more quality forwards (Connolly, etc.). If you somehow got, say, a Mr. Connolly as your BPA, what's the use of getting 75% value for him later, when you wind up losing the trade where he's the best player involved?
Because the first (BPA) seems to depend on some friction-less market where you get 100 cents on the buck when you have to trade some of these BPA assets for your actual needs down the road.
I'm a BPA guy, and I think it has less to do with fungibility than it does with uncertainty: I don't say pick the BPA regardless of need because I think you'll be able to cash him in for full value in meeting your needs later, but because it's virtually impossible to predict what your needs will be down the road, because you don't know what trade opportunities will develop, how your existing prospects will pan out, etc.
kris: Kane was considered a fairly weak #1 pick despite his gaudy numbers because of his size. Hall or Seguin would definitely slot ahead of him and would probably be behind both Stamkos and Tavares. Based on your numbers, that would make them an 8.5 in terms of a rating.
Put another way, if I somehow knew with absolute certainty that, five years from now (or whatever timeframe over which it's reasonable to expect a pick to become a real difference-maker), the Oilers would be in more dire need of a left-winger than a centre, I'd say take Hall even Seguin was the best player available. But that kind of prediction is a fool's game, so take the BPA regardless of position.
(Of course, different developing times can also diminish the importance of BPA: if the BPA is a defenseman who you expect to become one of the top defensemen in the NHL at around age 28, you might still prefer to take the guy who's projected to be a top-line, but not truly elite, forward, since forwards generally progress faster than defensemen, and the defenseman will have hit UFA age before he really hits his stride. So probably "BPA regardless of position" doesn't reflect my view so much as "BPA regardless of team need" does.)
Steve, that's a good point. I've always been on the BPA side of the fence, but need to remind myself why once in a while. Esp. with the look of our D-corps(e) right now, and the flush of forwards on deck.
I don't think anyone has risen more lately than Ryan Johansen, but there's nobody that scares me more in this draft. He's got some Benoit Pouliot in him, and he and his 2 linemates are all slotted in the 1st round (or close to it), but none of them were able to hit 1PPG. That makes me wonder as well. I've only seen them play once, so I'm hardly an authority, but if we were looking to pick there, I'd probably feel better if we went another direction. Fortunately we won't pass up Hall/Seguin for him, and he won't be there at 31 anyway.
Jesus, Boston has a lot of good picks from TO. A player who will likely be as good -possibly better- as Kessel in Seguin or Hall. Then they get another first and second round pick on top of that.
I really can't understand at all how TSN and other Toronto sports media don't run a picture of Burke with a dunce hat every time they run any story from any sport. I mean, who starts a total rebuild by tossing his next two first round picks -likely to be lottery picks given the state of the team- on one first line forward? First you tank and get at least one lottery pick. Then and only then, do you start signing RFA's and dumping draft picks to buy players. Even Tambellini knows that.
Misfit, my thoughts exactly. It's tough to tell who's stirring the drink on that line, but it can't be all three guys. My bet is one of them under-performs in draft pedigree.
If you somehow got, say, a Mr. Connolly as your BPA, what's the use of getting 75% value for him later, when you wind up losing the trade where he's the best player involved?
You are also assuming players have equal value to all teams and when looking at a trade scenario, that isn't always true, and may rarely be true or else trades wouldn't happen.
If a team has Crosby, Malkin and Staal as their centers, they would value a winger higher than another center in a trade given what their immediate needs are.
If it is true that developing D takes too long to draft them high unless they generational talents (i.e. Doughty), then it would stand to reason that you take the BPA even its a forward because you can turn one of your stable of forwards into a usable D who is already in the NHL or close to NHL ready when you need them.
Skilled forwards are always in demand. You cannot have too many of them.
If you have a need on D, you find a team with a need for skilled forwards and pluck one of their D. If you have good forwards to dangle, you can grab a pretty good Dman.
This takes away all of development time you have to spend on the D, and since they take longer to develop, your "miss" ratio on your draft picks will be lower. (assuming time to develop increases the chance the pick doesn't become an NHL player, which I think is true, but cannot prove at this time)
This being said you still need to develop some Dmen to at the very least stock the AHL team, so you take them later, not early.
I'm not sure I believe all that, but I think that's the theory.
I'm sure how available Dmen like the top 5 of this draft will be in 3 years by the team that drafted them, probably not very.
That being said, you can never have too many skilled (actually skilled, not Nilsson, POS skilled) forwards.
I'd take Hall and try my damnedest to grab a pick that gets me Tarasenko (without parting with Hemsky or Penner). We'd be locked and loaded at forward for some time. You can always go get enough defencemen to win. Grabbing a superstar and a more talented Kovalenko in one draft would be just perfect.
I still can't see my way to being sold on taking a 24-point defenceman in the top 15. Has that worked before? Ever?
Main Entry: fungible Function: adjective Etymology: New Latin fungibilis, from Latin fungi to perform — more at function Date: 1818 1 : being of such a nature that one part or quantity may be replaced by another equal part or quantity in the satisfaction of an obligation 2 : interchangeable 3 : flexible
I'm of the opinion that an elite Dman is an important prerequisite to a successful team. I look at the influence of Pronger, Niedermayer, Lidstrom on their team's success at it appears to be damn near critical. Although D depth is important too as Philly found out.
Isn't it necessary to spend some good picks in order to luck out in the raffle? Sure, might get some sides of beef in there, but one might turn out to be a shiny new car. I'm not sure how I feel on the matter, or if there really is an over-riding philosphy that could be applied to all drafts regardless of context.
What are your thoughts on McIlrath and his development curve? Would you spend a 15 on him (and whatever it would take to get said 15th)?
The only way you take one of the Russians is if they fall to #31 (#61 in Kabanov's case).
Russians want to be in LA or New Yorks (large ex-pat communities), so the Ranger and the KIngs don't have to discount Russians half a draft round like teams in the boonies have to.
The NHL draft has nowhere remotely the depth of an NFL draft, so only the "clinically insane" would trade out of a high lottery pick.
It makes no sense to trade Hemsky or Penner for a first round pick unless it is a high lottery pick. This year that means you trade one of them only if it gets you Hall and Seguin.
The Oilers need Hemsky and Penner to take the tough minutes this year so the top prospects can have easier minutes. The Oilers already have plenty of good prospects. They are short of actual NHL players. So trading Hemsky or Penner for anything but an elite prospect would be dangerous and counterproductive to the rebuild.
Aside from Lidstrom (53rd overall in 1989 when all the cool kids weren't drafting from Sweden, although Sundin was 1OV, Lidstrom was the 3rd Swede taken), the Dmen you mentioned were all highly touted generational talents like Doughty.
Pronger 2nd OV (behind Daigle) Neidermeyer 3rd OV (behind Lindros and Falloon)
You take these guys when you see them. (see Doughty statement in previous post)
What you don't do is take McIlrath instead of Connolly or Skinner if they are still on the board.
You should be able to turn Skinner or Connolly into a better Dman than McIlrath in the future, or if you need a Dman now, you could turn them into a 22-23 year old Dman who is ready for the NHL and probably as good if not better than McIlrath.
The other side is that Skinner or Connelly hit their projection and they make other forwards on your team expendable to acquire Dmen and you are ahead.
D-Depth is very important. As you pointed out Philly this year, Vancouver this year, Buffalo in 2006 all could have gone further (or won) with better D-corps.
You don't ignore the D corp, or not draft them, you just don't draft them too high at the expense of adding skill.
Acquiring skill in FA is a guaranteed overpayment, and generally you need to overpay in trade too.
Solid stay at home Dmen are not expensive, nor are they hard to get in trade.
D-men who can move the puck like Whitney and Lubo seem to be available in trade as well.
The most expensive unit in the NHL economy is a skilled forward. They cost a lot in FA and trade, so you acquire them via draft.
You then turn your surplus or expendable ones into the assets you require given that you will be more likely to maximize return if you are the one with the skilled forward in the trade.
A pure guess example would be saying in 3 years one Skinner or Connolly would be worth 1 McIlrath + a top 10 pick, or two McIlraths, so you don't take McIrarth when a commodity with a better future value in on the board.
I fear taking Russians though. I would have to have some assurances to take Tarasenko. Russians can turn into smoke too easily and blowing a pick that high is a disaster.
If the Oilers have 15 and Skinner, Connolly, Granlund or Etem are available, it is wrong to take McIlrath.
I don't like any other forward who is supposed to be available around that pick more than McIlrath. I don't project their future value better than McIlrath's.
I'm assuming all Dmen above 15 are gone by them, I think Bob ranked the Dmen very well.
Have no idea how long it would take McIlrath to make the NHL. I would hire a power skating coach to live with him though.
I'm of the opinion that an elite Dman is an important prerequisite to a successful team. I look at the influence of Pronger, Niedermayer, Lidstrom on their team's success at it appears to be damn near critical. Although D depth is important too as Philly found out.
In a limited view that makes sense then you expand it to Pittsburgh, Carolina, and Chicago and it shows that being strong down the middle is more important.
The highest dman pick Chicago had was Cam Barker and look where he went.
Woodguy: For Tarasenko he's got superior numbers to Ovechkin. (Yes i know daddy's the coach) but it's still pretty hard to score regularly in a league of man, and probably 2nd league in the World (After the NHL). That's way better IMO than a PPG kid in the CHL.
Woodguy: For Tarasenko he's got superior numbers to Ovechkin. (Yes i know daddy's the coach) but it's still pretty hard to score regularly in a league of man, and probably 2nd league in the World (After the NHL). That's way better IMO than a PPG kid in the CHL.
There is no question as to Tarasenko's talent.
There are questions as to whether or not he plays in the NHL for any number of years.
Its a tougher league than the KHL, far away from his home, and someone in the KHL will probably offer him more than an NHL team to play there.
There is no use drafting a guy that high who has a high probability of not playing any meaning full years for your team.
If Tarasenko told me "I love North America, will play anywhere and love it, NHL that's for me!" then I might draft him, but you are rolling to dice with a high draft pick and in the new NHL those are very valuable commodities.
WG: Yeah sure, that's why we have a scouting team. To ask him questions lol. If they don't idk what they're doing. But if he does like Filatov and gives the thumbs up, should be good.
But I think there's already indicators that he's willing to play in the NHL.
1: If he wasn't interested (He or his dad) they probably wouldn't have pumped up his stats a bit.
2: It's rare that 1st rounders who are doing great don't come over. Usually it's guys who struggle more, and hence aren't really worth it anyway. (Exeption for some guys, but usually they ain't the bomb anyway)
If you have a need on D, you find a team with a need for skilled forwards and pluck one of their D. If you have good forwards to dangle, you can grab a pretty good Dman.
You can always get a "good" Dman but the stud #1 guys are pretty hard to come by. Seabrook, Doughty, Myers, ? ... the list of #1 young guys is not long. It would likely be tough to pry one out of anywhere.
The Dion seems to be the exception...
A top pairing might play close to 1/2 the game and cost you just 10 to 12 million. As far as bang for buck, its the best allocation of resources. Most GM's are going to be under little pressure to move guys in their prime or headed there.
Add in the fact that Edmonton is not a great free agent location (yet) and the Oilers should be focusing on developing their own.
Ducey while developing young stud #1 D sounds like a solid idea, I think the point that many are making here is that in this draft McIlrath and the others of his ilk are not projected as stud #1 defencemen. Therefore there is no point in trading away fairly high picks to move up to grab them.
Woodguy: He want because he missed his country. Normal I guess. Negotiations are underway for his possible return to the NHL.
Anyways, I'd take the best player that could go maybe, over the guy that just won't make the show, or be a plumber. It would be like passing on Connolly because of hip issues.
Seabrook went 14th overall which is in the range of the McIlrath discussion.
WG, I include an elite Dman as part of building down the middle. But that said, I'm on the record here as saying I think 15 OV is far too high to take a Dman of McIlrath's skill level.
I think getting a Hedman or a Doughty is important to success, but I think there needs to be some likelihood that the pick is going to end up a stud. Plante IMO, was more likely to be that guy in his draft year than McIlrath.
Ducey, is Chris Pronger also an exception along with Dion?
I would not waste any picks on Russians. They won't play in Edmonton for less money then the KHL and they won't play in the AHL at all. (I don't blame them either.)
With this much uncertainty, rather than blowing your brains out to show how right you are by jumping up to grab someone, wait and see who falls to you in the chance that the teams picking before you all were wrong.
It happens every year. Someone in the 3rd round makes the teams that took the 50 players selected before him look bad.
Perhaps the draft steal of the decade, but Shea Weber was drafted #49 OV in 2003. Nobody traded up to get him. He just happened.
Even Nashville drafted 2 other D (Ryan Suter and Kevin Klein) before him. Its pretty common with D and almost unanimous with goaltenders.
I am sure someone after the first 3 D this year will turn out to be a top-pairing stud. The trouble is knowing who it is.
Its one thing to bet with Katz's assets, but would you bet with your own money on your pick?
WG, I include an elite Dman as part of building down the middle. But that said, I'm on the record here as saying I think 15 OV is far too high to take a Dman of McIlrath's skill level.
Really depends who's available,
I don't think Bob if off the mark with Dmen ranking.
Let me posit a wholy unsubstantiated trade suggestion - if only to get the wrath of the Oilerblogosphere.
Gonchar looks set to test the open market leaving a big hole in the Pitsburgh d (Orpik and Goligoski are the only two d-men from last season currently under contract, Letang is an RFA). We send Souray (at $5.4 millin he's only $400K over Gonchar's hit from last year) to the Pens.
A perenial problem in Pit has been the need for wingers to play with Crosby and Malkin. Guerin (and his $2 million) falls off the books so you ship Pit Nielson and his $2 million cap hit along with O'Sullivan ($2.925 million) and rfa rights to Cogliano.
All for the rights to J.Staal ($4.0 million hit). If we get a pick too, great, but really this is the proverbial "whale" we have looked for to fill the number one center spot for years.
Pitsburgh doesn't want to trade Staal but it doesn't look insane to me. Thoughts?
I tend to think Grebs for Kabanov is a pretty good deal if we can take him with that pick.
As far as the big pick goes, Tambo needs to start wearing an Oilers Hall jersey around town so that people can forward the pics to Chiarelli.
For those who want Seguin, Tambo needs to put some kind of gun to Boston's head to make them realize that they aren't getting Hall unless they get serious about a deal.
In a perfect world, Tambo would listen to that offer and come back with some kind of Penner, JDD, Cogs and Souray for #2 overall, Ryder and Thomas counter.
I would guess that PIT would want better quality wingers in return for Staal. I would also think they could pick up wingers of that quality on the UFA market/waiver wire without having to give up a sweet asset like Staal. They may also be in the Kaberle sweepstakes.
O'Sullivan and Nilsson have negative value. Souray probably has negative value.
Pittsburgh is targeting competent defensemen. Kaberle and/or Volchenkov.
O'Sullivan and Nilsson will probably be bought out since they are untradeable. To trade Souray probably requires taking an equivalent bad contract back.
If Pittsburgh doesn't make the final four next year, Malkin will be the guy traded, not Staal.
If the Pneguins liked Hemsky, he is about the only guy on the Oilers who could possibly tempt the Pensguins to part with Staal.
Highlander, let me see if I get you correct: you are suggesting we trade, Souray (who has a giant contract), Nilsson (2 million for a little inconstant flash), and O'Sully (the worst +/- in the league aat 2.9 million a season); so all of our garbage (minus the cap't) plus the RFA rights to Cogliano for Jordan Staal? Really?
I don't think any NHL GM, not even Sutter, would do that. It is insane. That is 10.325 (plus what ever Cogs' signs for) Million of salary going to Pittsburgh, and only 4 million coming back to Edmonton. That would cripple Pittsburgh's ability to shop on the Free Agent market and they would be an attractive team for veteran actual NHL players.
Souray to Pittsburg makes some sense but why would they dump Staal for three underachievers? A couple of those guys might be on the scrap heap for almost free.
uni,
I agree that McIlrath may not be the next Doughty. I am not suggesting we trade up to get him. I am suggesting they try and use a few picks in the 1st and second round to stockpile some defencemen who might surprise. A lot can happen between 18 and 23 and if you take a few guys with a some size, some grit, decent mobility and the ability to move the puck, you might hit paydirt. As some of the other posters have said, some studs can come from second round picks.
SpOILer,
re: Pronger, I was talking younger guys. He was untouchable for a longtime in his younger days with St Louis.
He also seems pretty unique as far as gun for hire Dmen go. He is likely in the top 5 Dmen in the game but keeps getting moved. I can't think of many guys like him.
If I am GM I don't count on being able to get one of these guys when I need him - especially in Edmonton.
kris said... I've given up on comparing Hall and Seguin. I'll take McKenzie's word that Hall has the edge.
I have a different question, which I asked before, but I'l ask it again.
How good are both players? As star prospects, suppose Crosby was a 10, Stamkos a 9, Kane an 8, and Gagner a 7. (Mind you, Gagner had 118 points to 106 for Hall and Seguin, though Gagner was on that stacked Knights team.)
Where are Hall and Seguin? I'd like to say 9, but I'm worried it may be as low as 7.5
To continue with this; without any hindsight where do Hall and Seguin slot in in the last few drafts? How many of the top 30 in this draft would have been 1st rounders in the previous 2-3 drafts if they were added to those classes?
Bob McKenzie's list is the Bible. It is here and his summary is here.
Here's a summary article with some of McKenzie's thoughts on the top prospects.
ReplyDelete102 hours and 45 minutes or so to go before we find out what's under the Christmas tree from MBS (Magnificent Bastard Santa?).
I really am growing uncomfortable about this. If the Oilers think Seguin is the better player, do they have the collective balls to choose him in the face of all the Hall-hoopla?
ReplyDeleteAnd if not, how are they going to fare with Hall. We all know how well the management team communicates...I wouldn't be surprised if Hall pretty quickly figures out "Oh, they didn't actually want me, they just didn't have the stones to pass on me...guess I'll demand a trade".
More and more, the ideal situation is either that they trade down to #2 for something of value, OR they just commit 100% to Hall and embrace him. Anything in between scares me.
Oilers and Bruins talking trade as per Sportsnet.
ReplyDeleteI will be thrilled with whatever MB decides, but part of me hopes that the Bruins go crazy and give us their first rounder or better yet, Toronto's from next year, if we promise to take Seguin and leave Hall.
ReplyDeleteI am very evenly split between the two so getting a big return from the Bruins is easily enough to sway me.
It's a damn tough choice between the two and I'm glad MB is the man charged with making it.
ReplyDeleteThe proven winner vs. the player who addresses the obvious need and may have more long-term upside?
Coming off a last place finish and a dressing room that is clearly in disarray, my choice would be to go with Hall and the winning intangibles he brings. That said, if Tambo can get legitimate value out of laying off Hall for the B's to pick him, they've got to go that route as we're certainly more than 1 player away. The optimal scenario is grabbing both but Chiarelli doesn't seem to be buying into that with recent comments seeming to indicate that he's more than happy to select Seguin.
Can't wait to see what's under the tree in 4 days!
"I wouldn't be surprised if Hall pretty quickly figures out "Oh, they didn't actually want me, they just didn't have the stones to pass on me...guess I'll demand a trade".
ReplyDeleteSounds more like Seguin's thinking. I haven't heard him say a single thing about playing for the Oilers, unlike Hall who has clearly stated he'd love to.
All Hall seems to want to do is play hockey, in a manner that's reminiscent of his agent.
PS: that sportsnet news is yesterday's fish.
Haven't brought in my Blades homerism in awhile but Hamilton is snuck into Mackenzie's list in the late second round.
ReplyDeleteLast year people in the dub were projecting this kid as a first rounder. Two broken collarbones and a playoff injury from a dirty hit later and he's fallen a bit.
He got back with the Blades for the first round of the playoffs and looked as awesome as he always has.
If the Oilers can get another second round pick I think he's worth it. Otherwise, he may be there in the third and he definitely will be a solid pick.
And Matt MacKenzie just makes the seeded cut at #73. Sounds about right to me: does nothing superbly but most things well. Solid third-rounder.
ReplyDeleteI'm stunned that no one's tried to market "Team Taylor" and "Team Tyler" T-shirts to this point. In both royal blue/orange and black/gold.
Who's a good comp for Hall?
ReplyDeleteSee plenty of good 2-way centermen and snipers in the top-5,top-10, but Hall has an edge on him and I'd be interested to hear who might be a comp for his particular package. Tyring to project him, I can't think who he lines up to. Hemsky a bit, but there must be some better ideas. Hunter, he's your guy - help me out here!
I've given up on comparing Hall and Seguin. I'll take McKenzie's word that Hall has the edge.
ReplyDeleteI have a different question, which I asked before, but I'l ask it again.
How good are both players? As star prospects, suppose Crosby was a 10, Stamkos a 9, Kane an 8, and Gagner a 7. (Mind you, Gagner had 118 points to 106 for Hall and Seguin, though Gagner was on that stacked Knights team.)
Where are Hall and Seguin? I'd like to say 9, but I'm worried it may be as low as 7.5
McKenzie says:
ReplyDeleteHall has been the consensus No. 1 prospect from start to finish this year, in spite of the fact the NHL Central Scouting Bureau ranked Seguin first overall on its final list.
TSN conducted surveys of NHL scouts on four occasions to determine four separate TSN draft rankings - pre-season in mid-September, mid-season in late January, draft lottery in early April and now final in mid June - and each and every time, Hall has come out on top.
Seven of 10 NHL scouts surveyed by TSN over the last week pegged the Spitfire winger as No. 1
While he may know a lot about hockey, he clearly does not understand the meaning of the word consensus.
3/10 selected Seguin suggesting that it is far from consensus.
I would say Iginla as a comp for Hall.
ReplyDeleteIf the Oilers get Boston's 15 th pick how do you pass up on Tarasenko if he's around.
ReplyDeleteSeguin and Tarasenko could be unbelievable.
Also I would be super happy with Tinordi over Mclirath. IMO.
Tarasenko would be amazing, but I don't see him slipping past the Rangers.
ReplyDeleteThere's an outside shot at Connolly, but he's likely gone in the top 11-12.
Outside of those two, the only other top 10 talent that will be available late is likely Kabanov, and I'd be very happy with him at 48.
The other Russians are interesting as well with Burmistrov, Kuznetsov, and Galiev all looking to slide a bit. Galiev is most likely for an early 2nd round pick.
If we were to trade up I find myself wanting to try and get in a few spots higher to try and take Connolly.
ReplyDeleteWe have our ace pick more or less in the bag, so I can't help but feel that makes this the perfect opportunity to take a gamble on a guy like that.
Acknowledging the fact that I have a serious "seen him good" crush from last season, I believe that if he played the entire season he would be the unquestioned number 3 pick.
Well LT,
ReplyDeleteIt looks like your dream of sneaking McIlrath as a late first round sleeper has evaporated. He is ranked at 15 here - Boston could come away with your two guys (Hall and McIlrath).
If Tambo could get the 15th from Boston for laying off Hall, trade Hemsky for a top ten and keep #31, they could have 4 picks in the top 31! - of course they would really suck the next year or two (or three).
Seguin and 3 top D prospects would really jumpstart the rebuild.
This is pretty easy from where I sit.
ReplyDelete1. Take Hall or extract next year's #1 (TO pick) from Boston to take Seguin.
2. Target the "second seven" defensemen with both second rounders. Gudrandson, Gormley and Fowler will be gone so see who is left of the others, especially those US d-men. I'd go in this order:
1. Forbert
2. Tinordi
3. McIlrath
4. Merrill
5. Faulk
6. Petrovic
7. Pysyk
I've got no interest at all in the "project" forwards...Bennett, Etem, Sheehan, Pitlick etc. so just ignore them. I'd also ignore the three Russians that early.
I'd like to see Hall, Forbert and Merrill and Christ, with things as wide open as they appear to be that's possible. If it's Hall, McIlrath, Faulk, fine by me.
3. The only exception is Jack Campbell. If he falls out of the first round then you grab him.
Also I would be super happy with Tinordi over Mclirath. IMO.
ReplyDeleteEverything I have read about Tinordi has him as a slower skater than McIlrath, and skating is McIlrath's biggest question mark.
Big kids usually have to work on skating as their muscles catch up to the frame.
Tinordi has the genes and the size though.
Interesting that Bob puts McIlrath right at Boston's 15th spot. I know ranks the kids with no respect for who is picking at the spot, it just seems like serendipity or fate.
Bob also has a lot of "reach" picks in his top 30. (i.e. Beau Bennet at 18 when CS has him at 32, ISS 34 and HN 35)
I think that is just an example of how deep the draft is in quality prospects.
Giving up 2 picks like 31 & 48 to get 15 is not advisable when so many players available at 48 could turn out well.
Better to take parts and pieces of your org that are expendable for whatever reason this year.
I wonder if the Oil would ever consider a scenario whereby they trade 1OV for 2 or three 1st rounders? And would that be a disaster?
ReplyDeleteOne of the famous team rebuilding stories is Jimmy Johnson of the Cowboys trading Herschel Walker for a plethora of picks from the Vikings and then trading down to acquire even more picks. It put a dismal team (1-15) on the fast track to dynasty land.
This doesn't seem to work as well in the NHL with talent projections being considerably more difficult given the age of the draftees. That said, would the team be better off trading a package like 1 OV & Souray (and/or Cogs)for 2 or 3 first rounders, possibly over consecutive years if a team doesn't have a mittful of picks this year (ala Boston)? If the trading partner was suitably inept (Panthers, Thrashers, Jackets, etc.) it might be worth it? AND those teams might go for it as they could also use the cache of a 1st OV pick in their respective markets.
Wow, huge late move by Johansen. Ratings on Pysyk are all over the board. Hall gets the love, yet it's with a bit of a caveat.
ReplyDeleteSportsnet seems pretty confident that something is going to happen between the Oilers and Bruins, and given the history between the two franchises that seems reasonable.
ReplyDeleteQuestion is: what would you be willing to give up for 15th overall?
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteSpeaking of love, why does this kid get none? 20 goals as a Dman! He's one of my favorite sleeper picks.
ReplyDeleteGare Joyce has this explanation on why JGL has been overlooked.
ISS and THN have him ranked 75+, but he rings in at 55 on Mac's list.
I have a small question:
ReplyDeleteHow does 'Always take the BPA' square with 'Team that gets the best player in the deal wins the trade'?
Because the first (BPA) seems to depend on some friction-less market where you get 100 cents on the buck when you have to trade some of these BPA assets for your actual needs down the road. I'm just a bit concerned that we saw two teams with some stud defenders in the cup final, and out here in MPS/Eberle/1OV -land we're still talking about more quality forwards (Connolly, etc.). If you somehow got, say, a Mr. Connolly as your BPA, what's the use of getting 75% value for him later, when you wind up losing the trade where he's the best player involved?
Let's find some Dmen.
Because the first (BPA) seems to depend on some friction-less market where you get 100 cents on the buck when you have to trade some of these BPA assets for your actual needs down the road.
ReplyDeleteI'm a BPA guy, and I think it has less to do with fungibility than it does with uncertainty: I don't say pick the BPA regardless of need because I think you'll be able to cash him in for full value in meeting your needs later, but because it's virtually impossible to predict what your needs will be down the road, because you don't know what trade opportunities will develop, how your existing prospects will pan out, etc.
kris: Kane was considered a fairly weak #1 pick despite his gaudy numbers because of his size. Hall or Seguin would definitely slot ahead of him and would probably be behind both Stamkos and Tavares. Based on your numbers, that would make them an 8.5 in terms of a rating.
ReplyDeleteAlice, I'll play devil's advocate here. What has more trade value and would net you a better return between Iginla or a package of Regehr & Sutton.
ReplyDeleteI'd think Iginla would net more in a trade than the two D but I could be wrong.
Put another way, if I somehow knew with absolute certainty that, five years from now (or whatever timeframe over which it's reasonable to expect a pick to become a real difference-maker), the Oilers would be in more dire need of a left-winger than a centre, I'd say take Hall even Seguin was the best player available. But that kind of prediction is a fool's game, so take the BPA regardless of position.
ReplyDelete(Of course, different developing times can also diminish the importance of BPA: if the BPA is a defenseman who you expect to become one of the top defensemen in the NHL at around age 28, you might still prefer to take the guy who's projected to be a top-line, but not truly elite, forward, since forwards generally progress faster than defensemen, and the defenseman will have hit UFA age before he really hits his stride. So probably "BPA regardless of position" doesn't reflect my view so much as "BPA regardless of team need" does.)
Steve, that's a good point. I've always been on the BPA side of the fence, but need to remind myself why once in a while. Esp. with the look of our D-corps(e) right now, and the flush of forwards on deck.
ReplyDeleteI don't think anyone has risen more lately than Ryan Johansen, but there's nobody that scares me more in this draft. He's got some Benoit Pouliot in him, and he and his 2 linemates are all slotted in the 1st round (or close to it), but none of them were able to hit 1PPG. That makes me wonder as well. I've only seen them play once, so I'm hardly an authority, but if we were looking to pick there, I'd probably feel better if we went another direction. Fortunately we won't pass up Hall/Seguin for him, and he won't be there at 31 anyway.
ReplyDeleteJesus, Boston has a lot of good picks from TO. A player who will likely be as good -possibly better- as Kessel in Seguin or Hall. Then they get another first and second round pick on top of that.
ReplyDeleteI really can't understand at all how TSN and other Toronto sports media don't run a picture of Burke with a dunce hat every time they run any story from any sport. I mean, who starts a total rebuild by tossing his next two first round picks -likely to be lottery picks given the state of the team- on one first line forward? First you tank and get at least one lottery pick. Then and only then, do you start signing RFA's and dumping draft picks to buy players. Even Tambellini knows that.
"who starts a total rebuild by tossing his next two first round picks"
ReplyDeleteOther than Kevin Lowe of course.
Misfit, my thoughts exactly. It's tough to tell who's stirring the drink on that line, but it can't be all three guys. My bet is one of them under-performs in draft pedigree.
ReplyDeleteIf you somehow got, say, a Mr. Connolly as your BPA, what's the use of getting 75% value for him later, when you wind up losing the trade where he's the best player involved?
ReplyDeleteYou are also assuming players have equal value to all teams and when looking at a trade scenario, that isn't always true, and may rarely be true or else trades wouldn't happen.
If a team has Crosby, Malkin and Staal as their centers, they would value a winger higher than another center in a trade given what their immediate needs are.
If it is true that developing D takes too long to draft them high unless they generational talents (i.e. Doughty), then it would stand to reason that you take the BPA even its a forward because you can turn one of your stable of forwards into a usable D who is already in the NHL or close to NHL ready when you need them.
Skilled forwards are always in demand. You cannot have too many of them.
If you have a need on D, you find a team with a need for skilled forwards and pluck one of their D. If you have good forwards to dangle, you can grab a pretty good Dman.
This takes away all of development time you have to spend on the D, and since they take longer to develop, your "miss" ratio on your draft picks will be lower. (assuming time to develop increases the chance the pick doesn't become an NHL player, which I think is true, but cannot prove at this time)
This being said you still need to develop some Dmen to at the very least stock the AHL team, so you take them later, not early.
I'm not sure I believe all that, but I think that's the theory.
I'm sure how available Dmen like the top 5 of this draft will be in 3 years by the team that drafted them, probably not very.
That being said, you can never have too many skilled (actually skilled, not Nilsson, POS skilled) forwards.
I am very evenly split between the two so getting a big return from the Bruins is easily enough to sway me.
ReplyDeleteThis is where I'm at-if Chia wants to pay rack rate then I would take Seguin,otherwise I take Hall and I'm thrilled with the pick.
I'd take Hall and try my damnedest to grab a pick that gets me Tarasenko (without parting with Hemsky or Penner). We'd be locked and loaded at forward for some time. You can always go get enough defencemen to win. Grabbing a superstar and a more talented Kovalenko in one draft would be just perfect.
ReplyDeleteI still can't see my way to being sold on taking a 24-point defenceman in the top 15. Has that worked before? Ever?
fun·gi·bil·i·ty \ËŒfÉ™n-jÉ™-ˈbi-lÉ™-tÄ“\ noun
ReplyDeleteMain Entry: fungible
Function: adjective
Etymology: New Latin fungibilis, from Latin fungi to perform — more at function
Date: 1818
1 : being of such a nature that one part or quantity may be replaced by another equal part or quantity in the satisfaction of an obligation
2 : interchangeable
3 : flexible
WG,
ReplyDeleteI'm of the opinion that an elite Dman is an important prerequisite to a successful team. I look at the influence of Pronger, Niedermayer, Lidstrom on their team's success at it appears to be damn near critical. Although D depth is important too as Philly found out.
Isn't it necessary to spend some good picks in order to luck out in the raffle? Sure, might get some sides of beef in there, but one might turn out to be a shiny new car. I'm not sure how I feel on the matter, or if there really is an over-riding philosphy that could be applied to all drafts regardless of context.
What are your thoughts on McIlrath and his development curve? Would you spend a 15 on him (and whatever it would take to get said 15th)?
Jordan Weal ranked 49th by TSN and Bobby Mac.
ReplyDeleteI'd be very happy if the Oilers grab him in the 3rd or 4th as this year's Rajala =).
Still crossing my fingers for Kabanov at 48 though.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteGerta
ReplyDeleteOn a somewhat related note:
http://tinyurl.com/3yzvmqf
:)
The only way you take one of the Russians is if they fall to #31 (#61 in Kabanov's case).
ReplyDeleteRussians want to be in LA or New Yorks (large ex-pat communities), so the Ranger and the KIngs don't have to discount Russians half a draft round like teams in the boonies have to.
The NHL draft has nowhere remotely the depth of an NFL draft, so only the "clinically insane" would trade out of a high lottery pick.
It makes no sense to trade Hemsky or Penner for a first round pick unless it is a high lottery pick. This year that means you trade one of them only if it gets you Hall and Seguin.
The Oilers need Hemsky and Penner to take the tough minutes this year so the top prospects can have easier minutes. The Oilers already have plenty of good prospects. They are short of actual NHL players. So trading Hemsky or Penner for anything but an elite prospect would be dangerous and counterproductive to the rebuild.
spOILer,
ReplyDeleteAside from Lidstrom (53rd overall in 1989 when all the cool kids weren't drafting from Sweden, although Sundin was 1OV, Lidstrom was the 3rd Swede taken), the Dmen you mentioned were all highly touted generational talents like Doughty.
Pronger 2nd OV (behind Daigle)
Neidermeyer 3rd OV (behind Lindros and Falloon)
You take these guys when you see them. (see Doughty statement in previous post)
What you don't do is take McIlrath instead of Connolly or Skinner if they are still on the board.
You should be able to turn Skinner or Connolly into a better Dman than McIlrath in the future, or if you need a Dman now, you could turn them into a 22-23 year old Dman who is ready for the NHL and probably as good if not better than McIlrath.
The other side is that Skinner or Connelly hit their projection and they make other forwards on your team expendable to acquire Dmen and you are ahead.
D-Depth is very important. As you pointed out Philly this year, Vancouver this year, Buffalo in 2006 all could have gone further (or won) with better D-corps.
You don't ignore the D corp, or not draft them, you just don't draft them too high at the expense of adding skill.
Acquiring skill in FA is a guaranteed overpayment, and generally you need to overpay in trade too.
Solid stay at home Dmen are not expensive, nor are they hard to get in trade.
D-men who can move the puck like Whitney and Lubo seem to be available in trade as well.
The most expensive unit in the NHL economy is a skilled forward. They cost a lot in FA and trade, so you acquire them via draft.
You then turn your surplus or expendable ones into the assets you require given that you will be more likely to maximize return if you are the one with the skilled forward in the trade.
A pure guess example would be saying in 3 years one Skinner or Connolly would be worth 1 McIlrath + a top 10 pick, or two McIlraths, so you don't take McIrarth when a commodity with a better future value in on the board.
I fear taking Russians though. I would have to have some assurances to take Tarasenko. Russians can turn into smoke too easily and blowing a pick that high is a disaster.
If the Oilers have 15 and Skinner, Connolly, Granlund or Etem are available, it is wrong to take McIlrath.
I don't like any other forward who is supposed to be available around that pick more than McIlrath. I don't project their future value better than McIlrath's.
I'm assuming all Dmen above 15 are gone by them, I think Bob ranked the Dmen very well.
Have no idea how long it would take McIlrath to make the NHL. I would hire a power skating coach to live with him though.
I'm of the opinion that an elite Dman is an important prerequisite to a successful team. I look at the influence of Pronger, Niedermayer, Lidstrom on their team's success at it appears to be damn near critical. Although D depth is important too as Philly found out.
ReplyDeleteIn a limited view that makes sense then you expand it to Pittsburgh, Carolina, and Chicago and it shows that being strong down the middle is more important.
The highest dman pick Chicago had was Cam Barker and look where he went.
Woodguy: For Tarasenko he's got superior numbers to Ovechkin. (Yes i know daddy's the coach) but it's still pretty hard to score regularly in a league of man, and probably 2nd league in the World (After the NHL). That's way better IMO than a PPG kid in the CHL.
ReplyDeleteWoodguy: For Tarasenko he's got superior numbers to Ovechkin. (Yes i know daddy's the coach) but it's still pretty hard to score regularly in a league of man, and probably 2nd league in the World (After the NHL). That's way better IMO than a PPG kid in the CHL.
ReplyDeleteThere is no question as to Tarasenko's talent.
There are questions as to whether or not he plays in the NHL for any number of years.
Its a tougher league than the KHL, far away from his home, and someone in the KHL will probably offer him more than an NHL team to play there.
There is no use drafting a guy that high who has a high probability of not playing any meaning full years for your team.
If Tarasenko told me "I love North America, will play anywhere and love it, NHL that's for me!" then I might draft him, but you are rolling to dice with a high draft pick and in the new NHL those are very valuable commodities.
WG: Yeah sure, that's why we have a scouting team. To ask him questions lol. If they don't idk what they're doing. But if he does like Filatov and gives the thumbs up, should be good.
ReplyDeleteBut I think there's already indicators that he's willing to play in the NHL.
1: If he wasn't interested (He or his dad) they probably wouldn't have pumped up his stats a bit.
2: It's rare that 1st rounders who are doing great don't come over. Usually it's guys who struggle more, and hence aren't really worth it anyway. (Exeption for some guys, but usually they ain't the bomb anyway)
If you have a need on D, you find a team with a need for skilled forwards and pluck one of their D. If you have good forwards to dangle, you can grab a pretty good Dman.
ReplyDeleteYou can always get a "good" Dman but the stud #1 guys are pretty hard to come by. Seabrook, Doughty, Myers, ? ... the list of #1 young guys is not long. It would likely be tough to pry one out of anywhere.
The Dion seems to be the exception...
A top pairing might play close to 1/2 the game and cost you just 10 to 12 million. As far as bang for buck, its the best allocation of resources. Most GM's are going to be under little pressure to move guys in their prime or headed there.
Add in the fact that Edmonton is not a great free agent location (yet) and the Oilers should be focusing on developing their own.
With no formal transfer agreement with the KHL, its still a huge risk.
ReplyDeleteSee Radulov, Alexander taken 15th overall by Nashville in 2004.
Played 11 games in the AHL and 145 games in the NHL for Nashville before bolting for the KHL.
That's a huge risk.
Ducey while developing young stud #1 D sounds like a solid idea, I think the point that many are making here is that in this draft McIlrath and the others of his ilk are not projected as stud #1 defencemen. Therefore there is no point in trading away fairly high picks to move up to grab them.
ReplyDeleteWoodguy: He want because he missed his country. Normal I guess. Negotiations are underway for his possible return to the NHL.
ReplyDeleteAnyways, I'd take the best player that could go maybe, over the guy that just won't make the show, or be a plumber. It would be like passing on Connolly because of hip issues.
Smarmy Boss,
ReplyDeleteSeabrook went 14th overall which is in the range of the McIlrath discussion.
WG, I include an elite Dman as part of building down the middle. But that said, I'm on the record here as saying I think 15 OV is far too high to take a Dman of McIlrath's skill level.
I think getting a Hedman or a Doughty is important to success, but I think there needs to be some likelihood that the pick is going to end up a stud. Plante IMO, was more likely to be that guy in his draft year than McIlrath.
Ducey, is Chris Pronger also an exception along with Dion?
Oh Woodguy, I should add that despite his incredible straight line speed, Etem doesn't have me convinced.
ReplyDeleteConnolly likely won't make it past Tampa, if that far (see Cowan, Jared).
For fun:
ReplyDeletehttp://ykoil.blogspot.com/2010/06/nhl-entry-draft-2010-best-bmc.html
Tarasenko takes a big hit when it comes to team scouts slotting him in.
I would not waste any picks on Russians. They won't play in Edmonton for less money then the KHL and they won't play in the AHL at all. (I don't blame them either.)
ReplyDeleteWith this much uncertainty, rather than blowing your brains out to show how right you are by jumping up to grab someone, wait and see who falls to you in the chance that the teams picking before you all were wrong.
It happens every year. Someone in the 3rd round makes the teams that took the 50 players selected before him look bad.
Perhaps the draft steal of the decade, but Shea Weber was drafted #49 OV in 2003. Nobody traded up to get him. He just happened.
Even Nashville drafted 2 other D (Ryan Suter and Kevin Klein) before him. Its pretty common with D and almost unanimous with goaltenders.
I am sure someone after the first 3 D this year will turn out to be a top-pairing stud. The trouble is knowing who it is.
Its one thing to bet with Katz's assets, but would you bet with your own money on your pick?
YKO,
ReplyDeleteWhat's your website called again? I'd rather click thru the link on the blogroll than cut and paste that address into my browser here at work.
Deano, Keith was #54 overall.
ReplyDeleteIs Tambellini still evauating?
ReplyDeleteNothing 2 See Here
ReplyDeletesee if that works
Tambellini just finished the snapper.
ReplyDeleteMulling dessert.
WG, I include an elite Dman as part of building down the middle. But that said, I'm on the record here as saying I think 15 OV is far too high to take a Dman of McIlrath's skill level.
ReplyDeleteReally depends who's available,
I don't think Bob if off the mark with Dmen ranking.
He may be the BPA at 15.
I really hope we don't pick a goalie with that second pick.
ReplyDeleteIf we win the lottery next year we can pick Adam Larsson #1 OV.
ReplyDeleteThere's the generational talent, elite D.
Let me posit a wholy unsubstantiated trade suggestion - if only to get the wrath of the Oilerblogosphere.
ReplyDeleteGonchar looks set to test the open market leaving a big hole in the Pitsburgh d (Orpik and Goligoski are the only two d-men from last season currently under contract, Letang is an RFA). We send Souray (at $5.4 millin he's only $400K over Gonchar's hit from last year) to the Pens.
A perenial problem in Pit has been the need for wingers to play with Crosby and Malkin. Guerin (and his $2 million) falls off the books so you ship Pit Nielson and his $2 million cap hit along with O'Sullivan ($2.925 million) and rfa rights to Cogliano.
All for the rights to J.Staal ($4.0 million hit). If we get a pick too, great, but really this is the proverbial "whale" we have looked for to fill the number one center spot for years.
Pitsburgh doesn't want to trade Staal but it doesn't look insane to me. Thoughts?
I tend to think Grebs for Kabanov is a pretty good deal if we can take him with that pick.
ReplyDeleteAs far as the big pick goes, Tambo needs to start wearing an Oilers Hall jersey around town so that people can forward the pics to Chiarelli.
For those who want Seguin, Tambo needs to put some kind of gun to Boston's head to make them realize that they aren't getting Hall unless they get serious about a deal.
In a perfect world, Tambo would listen to that offer and come back with some kind of Penner, JDD, Cogs and Souray for #2 overall, Ryder and Thomas counter.
I'd like to live in that world.
Deano said...
ReplyDeleteIf we win the lottery next year we can pick Adam Larsson #1 OV.
There's the generational talent, elite D.
That's exactly my hope too. I'm not sure about the Oiler fanbase's willingness for another year of outright suckage though.
Highlander: Not to piss on your optimism but
ReplyDeleteA: Souray has no real value
B: Letang was resigned at 3,5 per year
C: It's Nilsson not Nielson.
Highlander,
ReplyDeleteI would guess that PIT would want better quality wingers in return for Staal. I would also think they could pick up wingers of that quality on the UFA market/waiver wire without having to give up a sweet asset like Staal. They may also be in the Kaberle sweepstakes.
flamingpavelbure said...
ReplyDeleteHighlander: Not to piss on your optimism but
A: Souray has no real value
B: Letang was resigned at 3,5 per year
C: It's Nilsson not Nielson.
Not to piss on your cynicism but you/we have no idea if A is correct. B & C are irrelevant to Highlander's point.
Pittsburgh is not nuts.
ReplyDeleteO'Sullivan and Nilsson have negative value. Souray probably has negative value.
Pittsburgh is targeting competent defensemen. Kaberle and/or Volchenkov.
O'Sullivan and Nilsson will probably be bought out since they are untradeable. To trade Souray probably requires taking an equivalent bad contract back.
If Pittsburgh doesn't make the final four next year, Malkin will be the guy traded, not Staal.
If the Pneguins liked Hemsky, he is about the only guy on the Oilers who could possibly tempt the Pensguins to part with Staal.
Highlander, let me see if I get you correct: you are suggesting we trade, Souray (who has a giant contract), Nilsson (2 million for a little inconstant flash), and O'Sully (the worst +/- in the league aat 2.9 million a season); so all of our garbage (minus the cap't) plus the RFA rights to Cogliano for Jordan Staal?
ReplyDeleteReally?
I don't think any NHL GM, not even Sutter, would do that. It is insane. That is 10.325 (plus what ever Cogs' signs for) Million of salary going to Pittsburgh, and only 4 million coming back to Edmonton. That would cripple Pittsburgh's ability to shop on the Free Agent market and they would be an attractive team for veteran actual NHL players.
Highlander,
ReplyDeleteSouray to Pittsburg makes some sense but why would they dump Staal for three underachievers? A couple of those guys might be on the scrap heap for almost free.
uni,
I agree that McIlrath may not be the next Doughty. I am not suggesting we trade up to get him. I am suggesting they try and use a few picks in the 1st and second round to stockpile some defencemen who might surprise. A lot can happen between 18 and 23 and if you take a few guys with a some size, some grit, decent mobility and the ability to move the puck, you might hit paydirt. As some of the other posters have said, some studs can come from second round picks.
SpOILer,
re: Pronger, I was talking younger guys. He was untouchable for a longtime in his younger days with St Louis.
He also seems pretty unique as far as gun for hire Dmen go. He is likely in the top 5 Dmen in the game but keeps getting moved. I can't think of many guys like him.
If I am GM I don't count on being able to get one of these guys when I need him - especially in Edmonton.
Pronger: Yes i guess them having another big contract doesn't interfere with Souray?
ReplyDeletekris said...
ReplyDeleteI've given up on comparing Hall and Seguin. I'll take McKenzie's word that Hall has the edge.
I have a different question, which I asked before, but I'l ask it again.
How good are both players? As star prospects, suppose Crosby was a 10, Stamkos a 9, Kane an 8, and Gagner a 7. (Mind you, Gagner had 118 points to 106 for Hall and Seguin, though Gagner was on that stacked Knights team.)
Where are Hall and Seguin? I'd like to say 9, but I'm worried it may be as low as 7.5
To continue with this; without any hindsight where do Hall and Seguin slot in in the last few drafts? How many of the top 30 in this draft would have been 1st rounders in the previous 2-3 drafts if they were added to those classes?
ReplyDeleteOther than Kevin Lowe of course.
What a terrible offer-sheet that was. 4 first round picks for Vanek?!?
You do that deal for generational talent. Not for a guy who was coming off career highs on an extremely high scoring team.
If Boston didn't match, this team doesn't have:
Penner
MPS
Hall (hopefully)
2011 first
Where's the facepalm emoticon when you need it?
^Should have read Buffalo.
ReplyDeleteDucey,
ReplyDeleteyou know Pronger was traded after two seasons, right?
And you know the Oilers traded for him during one of his "prime" years, right?