Triumph Posted April 3, 2015 Share Posted April 3, 2015 No, it assumes that our scouting staff hasn't been nearly good enough for the last decade to be dicking around with our top pick just to land that extra pick in a later round when the thing we need most out of this draft is an impact player. No matter whose list it is, if you make a draft list, you clearly feel the guy you rank as the 6th best player in the draft has a better shot at being an impact player than the guy you would rank 10th, 15th or 20th. Obviously, it may not end up that way but again, I don't think our current scouting staff should be getting cute with this pick. Just grab the guy that you think will be the best possible NHL player and move on. Regarding your second paragraph, I already said I have no problem dropping back a pick or two if they still think they can get the guy they rank as the 6th BPA at 8. NJ could grab 2 extra picks. The Islanders got 3 picks moving from 5 to 7 to 9. If you move down from 5 or 6, and it's any more than one slot, you would expect to have to acquire multiple picks if that team doesn't have a low 1st round pick available. You wouldn't expect to ever move down one slot though I guess it could happen. This figures to be a special draft and they don't come around a lot - the 2nd round looks like it could be pretty good too. It's an extreme example on both ends but if you take the 2nd round from 2003 and compare it to the 1st round of 1996, the 2nd round of 2003 probably produced better players, and it looks like it could be that kind of a year where the 2nd round from this draft looks like picks 15-30 from an average draft. if Strome, Marner, McEichel and Hanifin are all off the board I'll be a little disappointed if they don't shop that pick around. There's the same reason to be skeptical of the scouting if they do or don't trade down - they're not going to trade down if they think one forward is an impact player and he's still on the board. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lateralous Posted April 3, 2015 Share Posted April 3, 2015 We already have 2 picks in the second round and an early 3rd, so if a guy they really like starts to drop, they already have the necessary tools to grab him. It's almost like any extra pick we get from moving down with the 6th would be to draft the guys Conte thinks is the 3rd most likely to be their diamond in the rough. I know the top of this draft is supposed to be special, but I don't think it has anywhere close to the depth of 2003. I get your point, if you could land guys that our scouts project to be Richards and Carter or Perry and Getzlaf with two lower picks instead of just Ryan Suter in the top 10, trading down makes sense. In this case, we have the scouting staff that pulled Jakob Vrana out of that epic 2003 second round so I just want them to pick BPA at 6. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dmann422 Posted April 3, 2015 Author Share Posted April 3, 2015 (edited) Almost no one has 2 1st round picks so that sort of deal is virtually impossible. I can't think of an instance in the last 10 drafts where someone took 2 1sts and moved up to get a 1st - can anyone else? I wouldn't be averse to it in this draft - it looks quite deep - but I think there's only a couple teams with 2 1st round picks and it doesn't make sense for any of those teams to make a deal like this. If there isn't a consensus 5 or 6, I wouldn't mind NJ moving down and picking up more 2nd round picks - this draft seems suitably deep to expect a good 2nd round. They could flip one of those 2nds for help up front while keeping 2 others. The Islanders moved down twice from 5 to 9 in 2008 and got 2 2nds and a 3rd out of it. yeah I should have clarified moving back probably wouldn't mean two first rounders, it would be dropping back a few spots and grabbing additional picks and/or prospects.The argument for this would be that if you feel there isn't a great deal of difference in quality from spot 6 to spot 12ish (and history shows there's not necessarily a big one), maybe you can drop back and get more quantity without sacrificing the quality. And lord knows we need both... Edited April 3, 2015 by dmann422 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Triumph Posted April 3, 2015 Share Posted April 3, 2015 We already have 2 picks in the second round and an early 3rd, so if a guy they really like starts to drop, they already have the necessary tools to grab him. It's almost like any extra pick we get from moving down with the 6th would be to draft the guys Conte thinks is the 3rd most likely to be their diamond in the rough. I know the top of this draft is supposed to be special, but I don't think it has anywhere close to the depth of 2003. I get your point, if you could land guys that our scouts project to be Richards and Carter or Perry and Getzlaf with two lower picks instead of just Ryan Suter in the top 10, trading down makes sense. In this case, we have the scouting staff that pulled Jakob Vrana out of that epic 2003 second round so I just want them to pick BPA at 6. You're looking at this in a far too binary fashion - yes, the Devils took Petr Vrana in 2003 and he didn't work out. They also took Damon Severson in what is looking like a horrific 2012 2nd round - early returns are that there were not a ton of future NHLers there, as a lot of guys are in their 1st pro year and having a bad time of it. More picks means more chances to grab an NHLer, it's not like they can't see the 'Future NHLer' birthmark on these players' bodies - even if they're categorically bad at drafting, more picks still means more chances - blind squirrels have turned up plenty of nuts. Lou has already talked about moving some of the extra picks for NHL bodies now, if he could pick up a 3rd 2nd rounder that would be nice, leaving one for trading and 2 for keeping. yeah I should have clarified moving back probably wouldn't mean two first rounders, it would be dropping back a few spots and grabbing additional picks and/or prospects. The argument for this would be that if you feel there isn't a great deal of difference in quality from spot 6 to spot 12ish (and history shows there's not necessarily a big one), maybe you can drop back and get more quantity without sacrificing the quality. And lord knows we need both... It's very hard to move back this high in the draft - traditionally it hasn't happened a lot. The one example I keep bringing up is the Islanders because it's the one I can remember - I really can't remember many others within the last 15 drafts. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vadvlfan Posted April 4, 2015 Share Posted April 4, 2015 Jordan Eberle? too small? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Muevelos Posted April 4, 2015 Share Posted April 4, 2015 He is one of the best guys at his position, but you already know Edmonton is gonna try for Cory or Damon and that's a no no Jordan Eberle? too small? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RizzMB30 Posted April 6, 2015 Share Posted April 6, 2015 I don't like to immediately hop on Triumphs bandwagon, but I think if we can trade down and get another 2nd along with a later 1st rounder. I tend to believe the more picks you have the better. You have no way as just fans to really gauge whether or not these players will give you what you want years down the road. Yeah, first-round picks can become core players, but with our history, I'd take two 2nd rounders over a 1st anyday. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vadvlfan Posted April 6, 2015 Share Posted April 6, 2015 I was thinking a similar scenario that example say Filly's @ # 8 or 9, and they would give us Matt Read or Braydon Shenn in exchange for switching picks? Filly's probably not a good example because Lou would probably not do business w them. It's not absurd, a GM like Hextall might entertain this idea. Teams may be willing to give more for Shenn in a trade, but in the heat of the moment, he might just do it. We still get a low draft pick, and a young player that contributes right off the bat. Then on the other hand, hopefully scouting (who i have lil faith in) feels especially important to pick a specific pick , like Carolina did with Skinner. They knew then and there (on draft day) this kid was going to be nhl ready in short order. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daniel Posted April 6, 2015 Share Posted April 6, 2015 I was thinking a similar scenario that example say Filly's @ # 8 or 9, and they would give us Matt Read or Braydon Shenn in exchange for switching picks? Filly's probably not a good example because Lou would probably not do business w them. It's not absurd, a GM like Hextall might entertain this idea. Teams may be willing to give more for Shenn in a trade, but in the heat of the moment, he might just do it. We still get a low draft pick, and a young player that contributes right off the bat. Then on the other hand, hopefully scouting (who i have lil faith in) feels especially important to pick a specific pick , like Carolina did with Skinner. They knew then and there (on draft day) this kid was going to be nhl ready in short order. Even if Lou and Hextall were willing to set aside being division rivals, Philly would most likely be a mismatched trading partner. They are clearly looking for help -- or at least should be looking for help -- on defense, and there should be a very good defense prospect available at 8 or 9, whether it's Provorov, Werenski or Kylington. The only way the calculus changes is if Hannifin is somehow available at 6. At that point, I imagine a nice bidding war could break out. Speaking of that, do GMs have what you might call pre-draft contingency discussions about potential deals if a specific player is available? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Triumph Posted April 6, 2015 Share Posted April 6, 2015 Even if Lou and Hextall were willing to set aside being division rivals, Philly would most likely be a mismatched trading partner. They are clearly looking for help -- or at least should be looking for help -- on defense, and there should be a very good defense prospect available at 8 or 9, whether it's Provorov, Werenski or Kylington. The only way the calculus changes is if Hannifin is somehow available at 6. At that point, I imagine a nice bidding war could break out. Speaking of that, do GMs have what you might call pre-draft contingency discussions about potential deals if a specific player is available? The Flyers' D prospects are as impressive as they've been in years, with Sanheim, Morin, Gostisbehere making up an excellent top 3, and people like Hagg and Alt aren't without NHL potential as well. They therefore will likely not be looking at defense as their last 2 1st round picks were used on a defender. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redruM Posted April 6, 2015 Share Posted April 6, 2015 I would be open to trade the pick in a package(d-men included) if a) we were able to get an impact player like a Malkin, Stamkos or Hall or b)we can get a McDavid or at worst Eichel. Otherwise, nope. Lets be realistic, you are not getting Malkin or Stamkos with the 6th pick, trade the 1st or 2nd in the this draft and maybe, I'd trade the 6th pick, as everything I have read tells me there are 5 players in this draft and then a big drop off... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daniel Posted April 6, 2015 Share Posted April 6, 2015 The Flyers' D prospects are as impressive as they've been in years, with Sanheim, Morin, Gostisbehere making up an excellent top 3, and people like Hagg and Alt aren't without NHL potential as well. They therefore will likely not be looking at defense as their last 2 1st round picks were used on a defender. I'm aware of the they have been concentrating on drafting defensemen over the past couple of years, but am not sure how well they've been doing since then. All I know is that their defense at the pro level is pretty bad, but their forward prospects are almost as bad as the Devils, so I suppose you're right. Still Werenski -- an underaged college freshman -- would seem like the type who could make the leap to the pros pretty soon, so I could still see them drafting someone like him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SterioDesign Posted April 6, 2015 Share Posted April 6, 2015 Lets be realistic, you are not getting Malkin or Stamkos with the 6th pick, trade the 1st or 2nd in the this draft and maybe, I'd trade the 6th pick, as everything I have read tells me there are 5 players in this draft and then a big drop off... Well there's always a drop off but who knows there was a "drop off" after Seguin and Hall in 2010. But then there was niederreither, connolly, skinner, johanson, gudbranson... and then Tarasenko went 16th and Kuznetsov 26th... you just never know Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jerzey Posted April 6, 2015 Share Posted April 6, 2015 It's true that you never know but I think it's better for us to play the odds and draft at #6. It would be more of a gamble to trade down and hope whoever we draft turns into something special. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nessus Posted April 6, 2015 Share Posted April 6, 2015 Well there's always a drop off but who knows there was a "drop off" after Seguin and Hall in 2010. But then there was niederreither, connolly, skinner, johanson, gudbranson... and then Tarasenko went 16th and Kuznetsov 26th... you just never know That's why I'm really hoping the Devils are taking a good look at Svechnikov Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redruM Posted April 7, 2015 Share Posted April 7, 2015 Well there's always a drop off but who knows there was a "drop off" after Seguin and Hall in 2010. But then there was niederreither, connolly, skinner, johanson, gudbranson... and then Tarasenko went 16th and Kuznetsov 26th... you just never know Very true, you never know, so if its possible to trade the #1 for a KNOWN entity ( JVR or Kessel), IMHO you make the trade... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SterioDesign Posted April 7, 2015 Share Posted April 7, 2015 Very true, you never know, so if its possible to trade the #1 for a KNOWN entity ( JVR or Kessel), IMHO you make the trade... Yeah, the player who you wont pick might after awhile outscore your "established" player but then there's other things to look at. How long til the drafted players gets there... So was it worth it to sacrifice a few years of "not having a roster player at all" or see him going through all the kinks... wonder if he'll actually be something.... IMO there's case where down the road in 5-6 years if the younger guy is outscoring the other guy... doesnt mean it wasnt worth it its really not something you can look at black and white... every case is different obviously and its always gonna be a gamble Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sokar Posted April 8, 2015 Share Posted April 8, 2015 Unless the Devils can get a Taylor Hall or Jonathan Drouin. The Devls need to rebuild this team through the draft Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zubie#8 Posted April 8, 2015 Share Posted April 8, 2015 For the love of God please win the lottery. We need this, we need a generational talent for once, I want to be on NBC, I want the hype. PLEASE I say to the hockey gods. /rant Sorry I had to get that out. After witnessing the sh!tshow that was tonight I am dying for a quick turn around and landing McDavid will do it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Wensink Posted April 8, 2015 Share Posted April 8, 2015 For the love of God please win the lottery. We need this, we need a generational talent for once, I want to be on NBC, I want the hype. PLEASE I say to the hockey gods. /rant Sorry I had to get that out. After witnessing the sh!tshow that was tonight I am dying for a quick turn around and landing McDavid will do it. I am so on board with this. A forty year old franchise that has never had a fifty goal scorer or 100 point player. It's time we got one. Especially since the one we were supposed to get was stolen by Pitt back in the day. Fingers crossed, prayers spoken and the search for any extra luck continues. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dmann422 Posted April 8, 2015 Author Share Posted April 8, 2015 Unless the Devils can get a Taylor Hall or Jonathan Drouin. The Devls need to rebuild this team through the draft absolutely agreed that we need to build up the prospect pool, but one high draft pick won't solve all problems. The point is maybe we can get a better return by trading it rather than crossing our fingers on a 50% chance whoever we pick may be a top line player in 5 years. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thecoffeecake Posted April 8, 2015 Share Posted April 8, 2015 7.5% aren't the worst odds in the world. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daniel Posted April 8, 2015 Share Posted April 8, 2015 7.5% aren't the worst odds in the world. I think they're better than when the Devils won the lottery in 2011. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jerzey Posted April 8, 2015 Share Posted April 8, 2015 absolutely agreed that we need to build up the prospect pool, but one high draft pick won't solve all problems. The point is maybe we can get a better return by trading it rather than crossing our fingers on a 50% chance whoever we pick may be a top line player in 5 years. I think the odds of the 6th overall draft pick becoming a top line player are a lot better than 50%. If we were drafting anywhere between 15-30 (where we usually draft in the first round) then I'd say the odds are substantially lower but a top 6 pick in this years draft should be worth it. I think everyone is a little nervous about the pick because a lot of our recent first rounders have been less than spectacular. But as I pointed out they were mid to late first round picks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sundstrom Posted April 8, 2015 Share Posted April 8, 2015 For the love of God please win the lottery. We need this, we need a generational talent for once, I want to be on NBC, I want the hype. PLEASE I say to the hockey gods. /rant Sorry I had to get that out. After witnessing the sh!tshow that was tonight I am dying for a quick turn around and landing McDavid will do it. to be fair, the devils absolutely had generational talents - they just weren't forwards. 30, 4 and 27 are generationally good players. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.