Jump to content

The Offseason Plan™


Triumph

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, NJDfan1711 said:

I don't really see Buffalo taking a defenseman.  Of the 8 d-men listed on their roster, they only have THREE over the age of 25, and those three are age 28, 31, and 33.  So they're extremely young on the blue line, and probably just need to continue adding scoring, since they were again one of the bottom 5 teams in Goals For again this past year.

You can make cases for both an F and a D. I think most F will go before that and they'll be in a good spot to nab a defender. I don't think how they performed this year should dictate their draft board in any way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/3/2016 at 11:04 AM, Marshall said:

 I don't think how they performed this year should dictate their draft board in any way.

lol, why? Isn't that pretty much the determining factor for most/all teams, and rightfully so?  What do you want them to base their decisions off of, throwing darts on the wall and see what sticks? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

56 minutes ago, NJDfan1711 said:

lol, why? Isn't that pretty much the determining factor for most/all teams, and rightfully so?  What do you want them to base their decisions off of, throwing darts on the wall and see what sticks? 

Because the player you're drafting will probably not be that good for at least two years after he's drafted, at which point, how the team performed in the draft year is pretty much irrelevant.  If the player is ready to make an immediate impact, it likely means that he's easily better than whoever else is available, in which case how well the team performed in the draft year is also irrelevant.

You can always draft for need based on organizational depth, but that's something different than judging needs based on what was lacking in particular year at the NHL level. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, NJDfan1711 said:

lol, why? Isn't that pretty much the determining factor for most/all teams, and rightfully so?  

The good ones don't. 

Quote

What do you want them to base their decisions off of, throwing darts on the wall and see what sticks? 

Take the best player available.

And also, what Daniel said. Need at the NHL roster level is way different than drafting for organizational depth.

Edited by Marshall
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Disagree with those points, at least for us -- we're a team with little depth, almost at all areas, and virtually anyone, particularly a first round top 11 pick, could immediately be plugged into the starting 18.  Zacha is a prime example of this and could've easily made the team last year and performed better than most of the other 12 forwards who played with the big club.   Even if the guy isn't immediately ready, two years or so isn't that long so the idea to draft a guy as BPA rather than immediate or at least short-term needs doesn't solve much.  I could understand if that BPA was eventually traded or moved for something else, but that hardly ever happens, so basically you end up picking up someone who sure is talented, but doesn't really give you what you need.  It's like if you're driving a 5 year old car that's in good shape inside and out, but it needs new tires as they're going bald, and instead of investing in a new set you decide to upgrade the exhaust system for more horsepower.  It might be an upgrade in that area, but you didn't need it, and it didn't fix the problem you really should have addressed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, NJDfan1711 said:

Disagree with those points, at least for us -- we're a team with little depth, almost at all areas, and virtually anyone, particularly a first round top 11 pick, could immediately be plugged into the starting 18.  Zacha is a prime example of this and could've easily made the team last year and performed better than most of the other 12 forwards who played with the big club.   Even if the guy isn't immediately ready, two years or so isn't that long so the idea to draft a guy as BPA rather than immediate or at least short-term needs doesn't solve much.  I could understand if that BPA was eventually traded or moved for something else, but that hardly ever happens, so basically you end up picking up someone who sure is talented, but doesn't really give you what you need.  It's like if you're driving a 5 year old car that's in good shape inside and out, but it needs new tires as they're going bald, and instead of investing in a new set you decide to upgrade the exhaust system for more horsepower.  It might be an upgrade in that area, but you didn't need it, and it didn't fix the problem you really should have addressed.

My guess is that the general idea is still to err on the side of drafting forwards unless there's a defenseman that's available at a particular time that's too good to pass up relative to who else is available. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, NJDfan1711 said:

Disagree with those points, at least for us -- we're a team with little depth, almost at all areas, and virtually anyone, particularly a first round top 11 pick, could immediately be plugged into the starting 18.  Zacha is a prime example of this and could've easily made the team last year and performed better than most of the other 12 forwards who played with the big club.   Even if the guy isn't immediately ready, two years or so isn't that long so the idea to draft a guy as BPA rather than immediate or at least short-term needs doesn't solve much.  I could understand if that BPA was eventually traded or moved for something else, but that hardly ever happens, so basically you end up picking up someone who sure is talented, but doesn't really give you what you need.  It's like if you're driving a 5 year old car that's in good shape inside and out, but it needs new tires as they're going bald, and instead of investing in a new set you decide to upgrade the exhaust system for more horsepower.  It might be an upgrade in that area, but you didn't need it, and it didn't fix the problem you really should have addressed.

The reason I disagree with this is because there are times when the BPA is substantially better than the other player who fits an organizational need. In the case of this draft, the forwards that will be available at 11 may at best be 2nd line players. That's not to say that legit 2nd line players are not something that the organization needs. But, if a potential #1 D like Chychrun falls to 11 for some reason, he's the type of player you take regardless of organizational need. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, sundstrom said:

the devils do go BPA almost always - josh jacobs is a great example.

This is the first draft in however many years without Conte. It'll be interesting to see who they pick because it's a new group of scouts. I'm curious to see if they take the consensus BPA, team needs, size, or completely do their own thing with the 11th. Pens fans say Shero likes drafting PMD's. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.