Jump to content

Photo

2013 NHL Draft


  • Please log in to reply
1269 replies to this topic

#961 caron14

caron14

    All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,343 posts

Posted 26 June 2013 - 05:12 PM

Depend on who we draft... many believe that nichuskin is nhl ready... so if we draft him at 5 bingo...

 

Sean monahan could be our pick at 5 (if we trade with carolina...)


  • 0

#962 Triumph

Triumph

    A Legend

  • Mod
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 26,893 posts

Posted 26 June 2013 - 05:12 PM

You are twisting what I'm saying about Bailey.  I did not say he is a "bust and no good", and not even in so many words.  To this point though, he is a disappointment for a number 9 pick.  That he came into the league at 18, cry me a river.  Josefson made a much better Devils team as a 19 year old.  But hey, if it turns out that we had a shot to get a first line forward, feel free to say we made out just as well because we got a good defensive forward. 

 

Josefson 'made' (by make, he was an injury callup) a cap-strapped team with 0 depth.  He's going to be a good player, but please don't use that as an example.

 

A disappointment for a #9 pick is a guy who's not capable of playing in the NHL, which there are lots of scattered among top picks, and that it's entirely possible that someone like Shinkaruk or even Nichushkin is.


Edited by Triumph, 26 June 2013 - 05:16 PM.

  • 0

http://drivingplay.blogspot.com - The blog with three first lines
 


#963 njdevsftw

njdevsftw

    Senior Devil

  • Contributor
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 759 posts

Posted 26 June 2013 - 05:14 PM

Would it be plausible to move Greene or Fayne to get another 1st rounder?


  • 0
Posted Image

#964 Onddeck

Onddeck

    Assistant Coach

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,647 posts

Posted 26 June 2013 - 05:20 PM

Would it be plausible to move Greene or Fayne to get another 1st rounder?

not if its not another top 10 pick.

 

and not if its Greene.  Fayne, absolutely


  • 0

Somebody's gotta be the hero... Why not me?


#965 MadDog2020

MadDog2020

    A Legend

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,890 posts

Posted 26 June 2013 - 05:21 PM

Sorry to change the subject slightly, but just realized the Rangers don't pick to the 65th pick. That's disappointed that Sather escapes thunderous boos on TV (and that late into the draft, from the crowd too).

I wouldn't put it past those jerk-offs to trade into the first round by pawning off some sh!tty roster player on someone. Sather always seems to find patsies who- for reasons beknownst only to God- are willing to make a horrible trade to help him out.
  • 0
iq0p.pngUploaded with ImageShack.com

#966 SMantzas

SMantzas

    Assistant Coach

  • Mod
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,550 posts

Posted 26 June 2013 - 05:22 PM

Would it be plausible to move Greene or Fayne to get another 1st rounder?

Devils aren't rebuilding so no
  • 0

#967 DH26

DH26

    All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,671 posts

Posted 26 June 2013 - 05:23 PM

I wouldn't put it past those jerk-offs to trade into the first round by pawning off some sh!tty roster player on someone. Sather always seems to find patsies who- for reasons beknownst only to God- are willing to make a horrible trade to help him out.

 

Remember when the dumbass pre-Yzerman Lightning had a handshake deal to trade him Stamkos like 3 months after they drafted him? Yeah. 


  • 0
Follow Me on Twitter @mtorino75 I Need Followers!

Visit My Devils Blog! www.theTrapezoidConspiracy.com
Rutgers-New Brunswick '11, Rutgers School of Law-Newark '14

#968 Triumph

Triumph

    A Legend

  • Mod
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 26,893 posts

Posted 26 June 2013 - 05:30 PM

I wouldn't put it past those jerk-offs to trade into the first round by pawning off some sh!tty roster player on someone. Sather always seems to find patsies who- for reasons beknownst only to God- are willing to make a horrible trade to help him out.

 

The Rangers are out of assets they can deal.

 

Would it be plausible to move Greene or Fayne to get another 1st rounder?

 

Certainly not Fayne, and probably not Greene.  Only way NJ is getting another first rounder is by dealing with a team like Calgary or Columbus.


  • 0

http://drivingplay.blogspot.com - The blog with three first lines
 


#969 SMantzas

SMantzas

    Assistant Coach

  • Mod
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,550 posts

Posted 26 June 2013 - 05:33 PM

Tri- you never know. There may be a GM dumb enough to take on Girardi or Del Zotto

Edited by SMantzas, 26 June 2013 - 05:35 PM.

  • 0

#970 TheRedStorm

TheRedStorm

    Senior Devil

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 748 posts

Posted 26 June 2013 - 05:42 PM

Devils aren't rebuilding so no

 

Who really knows what this team is doing? I'm a firm believer that they will operate under an internal cap and they will not spend over this cap until the debt is paid down to a level that allows them to spend more. Debt happens in business, it's refinanced and the debt is paid down at the expense of employees and possibly in day to day operations and growth, development, etc, etc. You continue to maintain the best way possible to continue a business until the time comes to operate "normally" again. That's the way it works in everyday life so why do people think this isn't the way the Devils will operate?  


  • 0

The Devil wears Prada....and has the luggage to match :-)


#971 Daniel

Daniel

    Hall of Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,133 posts

Posted 26 June 2013 - 05:43 PM

Josefson 'made' (by make, he was an injury callup) a cap-strapped team with 0 depth.  He's going to be a good player, but please don't use that as an example.

 

A disappointment for a #9 pick is a guy who's not capable of playing in the NHL, which there are lots of scattered among top picks, and that it's entirely possible that someone like Shinkaruk or even Nichushkin is.

 

Now you are talking nonsense.  A team that drafts consistently in the 10 to 6 range that only has a bunch of players that are "capable of playing in the NHL" to show for it will always be drafting there because that team won't be any good.  Steve Bernier and Ryan Carter are capable of playing in the NHL.  Even if you don't take into account plausible alternatives, any GM that told you he wasn't disappointed because he got one of those players at number 9 would be considered a clown.  

 

Or how about this, imagine if Lou traded the number 9 pick for, I don't know, Cal Clutterbuck, a perfectly capable NHL player.  You can tell me how much he "drives play" all you want, but, if you were being honest at all, you would be screaming that Lou has lost his mind. 


  • 0
Posted Image
I collect spores, molds and fungus.
Hello fellow American. This you should vote me. I leave power. Good. Thank you, thank you. If you vote me, I'm hot. What? Taxes, they'll be lower... son. The Democratic vote is the right thing to do Philadelphia, so do.
How do you spot risk? How do you avoid risk? And what makes it so risky?

#972 Devils731

Devils731

    A Legend

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 17,436 posts

Posted 26 June 2013 - 05:48 PM

Or how about this, imagine if Lou traded the number 9 pick for, I don't know, Cal Clutterbuck, a perfectly capable NHL player.  You can tell me how much he "drives play" all you want, but, if you were being honest at all, you would be screaming that Lou has lost his mind.

 

 

When did Cal Clutterbuck start driving play?  The problem with trading for Clutterbuck, ignoring the fact that he doesn't fit what you were going for, is that you lose out on all the mysterious upside that drafted players have and you lose out on RFA seasons.

 

I think disappointment was the wrong word, but there are lots of middle-ish round picks who only become 2nd/3rd line type guys.  If there wasn't then the NHL would have way more stars than slots they could play in.  So a guy who just ends up having a nice solid NHL career isn't ideal but it certainly wouldn't be unusual. 


Edited by Devils731, 26 June 2013 - 05:49 PM.

  • 0
Your unconditional rejection of violence makes you smugly think of yourselves as noble, as enlightened, but in reality it is nothing less than abject moral capitulation to evil. Unconditional rejection of self-defense, because you think its a supposed surrender to violence, leaves you no resort but begging for mercy or offering appeasement.

-Terry Goodkind


Sex Panther cologne -- 50 percent of the time, it works every time.

-Anchorman

The best time to plant a tree is 20 years ago. The second best time is now.

-Anonymous

Keeper of Section 212-213's wayward step

#973 MadDog2020

MadDog2020

    A Legend

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,890 posts

Posted 26 June 2013 - 05:49 PM

Tri- you never know. There may be a GM dumb enough to take on Girardi or Del Zotto

That's what I was thinking- some moron GM who's team needs help on the blue line will see Del Zotto or Girardi (more likely Del Zotto) as an immediate upgrade and do something stupid. I could see it happening, there are some really stupid GM's out there.
  • 0
iq0p.pngUploaded with ImageShack.com

#974 SterioDesign

SterioDesign

    Hall of Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,443 posts

Posted 26 June 2013 - 05:51 PM

Josefson 'made' (by make, he was an injury callup) a cap-strapped team with 0 depth.  He's going to be a good player, but please don't use that as an example.

 

A disappointment for a #9 pick is a guy who's not capable of playing in the NHL, which there are lots of scattered among top picks, and that it's entirely possible that someone like Shinkaruk or even Nichushkin is.

 

to me "in this deep draft" a disappointment would be a player not eventually being a solid top 6 forward (and i wouldnt feel like im pushing thaaaaat much saying top 3) or a top 4dman playing in ALL situations in the long run.


  • 0

www.SterioDesign.com

 


#975 Daniel

Daniel

    Hall of Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,133 posts

Posted 26 June 2013 - 06:02 PM

That's what I was thinking- some moron GM who's team needs help on the blue line will see Del Zotto or Girardi (more likely Del Zotto) as an immediate upgrade and do something stupid. I could see it happening, there are some really stupid GM's out there.


I don't think Del Zotto is fooling the dumbest GM out there. Trading something like the number 27 pick for Girardi wouldn't be wise, but not totally unreasonable. However stupid a GM might be, anyone that values his job or his team's welfare probably is aware of the stupidity of Mike Milbury and doesn't want to be known as the next one.
  • 0
Posted Image
I collect spores, molds and fungus.
Hello fellow American. This you should vote me. I leave power. Good. Thank you, thank you. If you vote me, I'm hot. What? Taxes, they'll be lower... son. The Democratic vote is the right thing to do Philadelphia, so do.
How do you spot risk? How do you avoid risk? And what makes it so risky?

#976 Triumph

Triumph

    A Legend

  • Mod
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 26,893 posts

Posted 26 June 2013 - 06:35 PM

The Rangers don't have any legitimate defense prospects, so them trading Del Zotto or Girardi would be a nightmare for them.  They are already down Sauer and quite possibly Staal

 

Now you are talking nonsense.  A team that drafts consistently in the 10 to 6 range that only has a bunch of players that are "capable of playing in the NHL" to show for it will always be drafting there because that team won't be any good.  Steve Bernier and Ryan Carter are capable of playing in the NHL.  Even if you don't take into account plausible alternatives, any GM that told you he wasn't disappointed because he got one of those players at number 9 would be considered a clown.  

 

Or how about this, imagine if Lou traded the number 9 pick for, I don't know, Cal Clutterbuck, a perfectly capable NHL player.  You can tell me how much he "drives play" all you want, but, if you were being honest at all, you would be screaming that Lou has lost his mind. 

 

Because GMs also don't know how to think probabalistically.  Josh Bailey probably represents the 50th percentile or so of 9th overall picks.  Here, I'll extend a band between 7 and 11, and go over the drafts since 1998 to 2009:

 

1998:  Malhotra, M. Bell, Rupp, Antropov, Heerema (1 out of 5 became a 'top 6 forward' - Bell was very briefly, maybe)

1999:  Beech, Pyatt, Lundmark, Mezei, Saprykin (0 of 5 became a top 6 F/top 4 D)

2000:  Jonsson, Alexeev, Krahn, Yakubov, Vorobiev (0 of 5)

2001:  Komisarek, Leclaire, Ruutu, Blackburn, Sjostrom (I'll be generous and call this 3 of 5)

2002:  Lupul, Bouchard, Taticek, Nystrom, Ballard (Again, generous, 3 of 5)

2003:  Suter, Coburn, Phaneuf, Kostitsyn, Carter (5 of 5, again, being generous)

2004:  Olesz, Picard, Smid, Valabik, Tukonen (1 of 5, generous)

2005:  Skille, Setoguchi, Lee, Bourdon, Kopitar (2 of 5, generous)

2006:  Okposo, Mueller, Sheppard, Frolik, Bernier (jury's out on Bernier, I'm calling this 1.5 out of 5)

2007:  Voracek, Hamill, Couture, Ellerby, Sutter (2 of 5)

2008:  Wilson, Boedker, Bailey, Hodgson, Beach (Generously giving 3.5)

2009:  Kadri, Glennie, Cowen, Paajarvi, Ellis (2.5 out of 5)

 

So that's 24.5 out of 60 players who became top 4 D or top 6 Fs, and I pretty much gave everyone who was marginal a pass.  This draft is supposed to be stronger, but again, you really can't go overrating a pick this high, it is by no means a sure thing, and if the Devils come out of it with a 2nd/3rd line player, it's not a disappointment, nor is it a triumph.


  • 1

http://drivingplay.blogspot.com - The blog with three first lines
 


#977 CMONPETEYD

CMONPETEYD

    Assistant Coach

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,571 posts

Posted 26 June 2013 - 07:11 PM

The Rangers don't have any legitimate defense prospects, so them trading Del Zotto or Girardi would be a nightmare for them.  They are already down Sauer and quite possibly Staal

 

 

Because GMs also don't know how to think probabalistically.  Josh Bailey probably represents the 50th percentile or so of 9th overall picks.  Here, I'll extend a band between 7 and 11, and go over the drafts since 1998 to 2009:

 

1998:  Malhotra, M. Bell, Rupp, Antropov, Heerema (1 out of 5 became a 'top 6 forward' - Bell was very briefly, maybe)

1999:  Beech, Pyatt, Lundmark, Mezei, Saprykin (0 of 5 became a top 6 F/top 4 D)

2000:  Jonsson, Alexeev, Krahn, Yakubov, Vorobiev (0 of 5)

2001:  Komisarek, Leclaire, Ruutu, Blackburn, Sjostrom (I'll be generous and call this 3 of 5)

2002:  Lupul, Bouchard, Taticek, Nystrom, Ballard (Again, generous, 3 of 5)

2003:  Suter, Coburn, Phaneuf, Kostitsyn, Carter (5 of 5, again, being generous)

2004:  Olesz, Picard, Smid, Valabik, Tukonen (1 of 5, generous)

2005:  Skille, Setoguchi, Lee, Bourdon, Kopitar (2 of 5, generous)

2006:  Okposo, Mueller, Sheppard, Frolik, Bernier (jury's out on Bernier, I'm calling this 1.5 out of 5)

2007:  Voracek, Hamill, Couture, Ellerby, Sutter (2 of 5)

2008:  Wilson, Boedker, Bailey, Hodgson, Beach (Generously giving 3.5)

2009:  Kadri, Glennie, Cowen, Paajarvi, Ellis (2.5 out of 5)

 

So that's 24.5 out of 60 players who became top 4 D or top 6 Fs, and I pretty much gave everyone who was marginal a pass.  This draft is supposed to be stronger, but again, you really can't go overrating a pick this high, it is by no means a sure thing, and if the Devils come out of it with a 2nd/3rd line player, it's not a disappointment, nor is it a triumph.

 

 

The problem with your logic is that from year to year there are varying strengths to each draft class.  As you see with 2003, 5 of 5.  This draft is talked about in similar fashion to 2003, maybe not as many stars, but certainly deeper into the top 40. 


  • 0
My name changes every summer
Posted Image

#978 Devils731

Devils731

    A Legend

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 17,436 posts

Posted 26 June 2013 - 07:15 PM

So if this is a less top heavy, but deeper 2003 draft then the Devils should move down, not up.
  • 0
Your unconditional rejection of violence makes you smugly think of yourselves as noble, as enlightened, but in reality it is nothing less than abject moral capitulation to evil. Unconditional rejection of self-defense, because you think its a supposed surrender to violence, leaves you no resort but begging for mercy or offering appeasement.

-Terry Goodkind


Sex Panther cologne -- 50 percent of the time, it works every time.

-Anchorman

The best time to plant a tree is 20 years ago. The second best time is now.

-Anonymous

Keeper of Section 212-213's wayward step

#979 Triumph

Triumph

    A Legend

  • Mod
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 26,893 posts

Posted 26 June 2013 - 07:20 PM

The problem with your logic is that from year to year there are varying strengths to each draft class.  As you see with 2003, 5 of 5.  This draft is talked about in similar fashion to 2003, maybe not as many stars, but certainly deeper into the top 40. 

 

2008 was supposed to be like 2003.  Look at those 5 players - none of them is a top line player, it doesn't look like any will become one, and one of them is already a straight up bust.  The other 4 are decent players and guys you'd like to have on your team, but none of them are going to turn the franchise around.  That's why the hyperbole around here has to be checked, even with the presumed strength of the draft class.


  • 0

http://drivingplay.blogspot.com - The blog with three first lines
 


#980 DH26

DH26

    All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,671 posts

Posted 26 June 2013 - 07:35 PM

2008 was supposed to be like 2003.  Look at those 5 players - none of them is a top line player, it doesn't look like any will become one, and one of them is already a straight up bust.  The other 4 are decent players and guys you'd like to have on your team, but none of them are going to turn the franchise around.  That's why the hyperbole around here has to be checked, even with the presumed strength of the draft class.

 

This is why I'd have no problem with taking Ristolainen or Nurse if Conte thought they were the best player available and and the Monahan/Lindholm guys were gone and it wasn't worth trading down even if I'd rather have a forward. Just get the guy you think's gonna be better (even if forwards admittedly project more easily) and don't worry about need unless there's a tie 


  • 0
Follow Me on Twitter @mtorino75 I Need Followers!

Visit My Devils Blog! www.theTrapezoidConspiracy.com
Rutgers-New Brunswick '11, Rutgers School of Law-Newark '14




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users