fourth overall pick!!!!!!

[caron14]

Josefson is not a winger he a center....

What about Huberdeau.... Im from quebec and i saw both couturier and Huberdeau plays... In my opinion huberdeau has been better then couturier this year... More dominant

[ghdi]

sure, but so what. Steckel, or whomever replaces him, will be a 4th line guy getting very little minutes. The devils are in no position to pay this person $2.75MM next year.

But thats the point. If it serves no purpose playing Couturier in juniors or Albany another year, why do it? The future is now for this team, especially considering the breakthroughs we had this year and Marty being a year older. If he had an impact like Stamkos, Duchene or Tavares now (50 pts in their first years except Stamkos who had 46) thats a great contribution and worth the consideration.

IMO it can be made to work if it comes down to it, why run with lesser players if deals can be made to make it work? Moving Rolston, Clarkson, and the uncertainty with Salvador would obviously open up options for us, it just remains to be seen. I wouldnt bet on any of that, but I dont think anything is set in stone at this point for next season. This is almost uncharted for us.

Edited April 13, 2011 by ghdi

[caron14]

http://

Look at those sweet hands

[Triumph]

But thats the point. If it serves no purpose playing Couturier in juniors or Albany another year, why do it? The future is now for this team, especially considering the breakthroughs we had this year and Marty being a year older. If he had an impact like Stamkos, Duchene or Tavares now (50 pts in their first years except Stamkos who had 46) thats a great contribution and worth the consideration.

because elias is a way better player than couturier ever could be as an 18 year old. the future is now for this team, that's why having 18 year olds on it is silly. i don't care how many points those guys put up in their first year, they were on totally different teams than couturier would be, and they were used in totally different roles than couturier would be.

IMO it can be made to work if it comes down to it, why run with lesser players if deals can be made to make it work? Moving Rolston, Clarkson, and the uncertainty with Salvador would obviously open up options for us, it just remains to be seen. I wouldnt bet on any of that, but I dont think anything is set in stone at this point for next season. This is almost uncharted for us.

who are these lesser players? moving couturier to wing would be beyond silly. he's not going to be better than elias, zajac, or josefson. and we already zapped a year of josefson's contract somewhat unnecessarily. playing him on a 4th line, having to move players off the team to accommodate his contract, wasting a year of his ELC, and moving him closer to UFA, would just be preposterously bad management.

if i'm GM and NJ drafts couturier, he's not playing for NJ as a regular until 2013-14.

Edited April 13, 2011 by Triumph

[ghdi]

because elias is a way better player than couturier ever could be as an 18 year old. the future is now for this team, that's why having 18 year olds on it is silly. i don't care how many points those guys put up in their first year, they were on totally different teams than couturier would be, and they were used in totally different roles than couturier would be.

who are these lesser players? moving couturier to wing would be beyond silly. he's not going to be better than elias, zajac, or josefson. and we already zapped a year of josefson's contract somewhat unnecessarily. playing him on a 4th line, having to move players off the team to accommodate his contract, wasting a year of his ELC, and moving him closer to UFA, would just be preposterously bad management.

if i'm GM and NJ drafts couturier, he's not playing for NJ as a regular until 2013-14.

I never suggested moving him to wing. Lets say he comes into training camp and shows that he's a better player now than someone else i.e. a Josefson, or worse, say theres an injury to one of our centers.

You're not GM though and you've been wrong before. Im not disagreeing with anything either you or sundstrom suggest as its the most probable scenario on paper, but playing Devils Advocate for the possibility of whoever we draft being on this team next year. And recent history in terms of the draft shows that its highly possible whoever we get is on this team sooner. Obviously, the salary cap is the major hurdle, but if this player shows that he deserves to be on this team, it needs to be done. How's Boston fared having Seguin on the team all year? What if we end up with Landeskog or Larsson? You're the only one Ive read crowing about his SEL contract, but analysts are all saying he's going to be in the NHL next season, so there must be some sort of deal with the SEL to make that happen + theres plenty of cases of recent success by top 5 rookies on defense in the NHL. There's many instances where the player we take is playing here sooner. Nothing is certain right now for next season. Zach's not re-signed. None of our UFA's are locks to return. We dont even know whos going to be coaching this team and may have a markedly different philosophy than Lemaire.

Im not betting on the draftee being a Devil in 11-12, but with this high of a pick its definitely a possibility.

[Devils731]

I think only Larsson would have a chance to make the Devils out of camp, the Devils are just too talented up front. Even so, I doubt Larsson is good enough to get a large enough role for the Devils to take him. Hedman, who I think would be taken before Larsson if they were the same age and draft year, certainly is playing fine but isn't lighting the league up.

So for the Devils, would Larsson bring enough additional to the team, in a limited role, to make up for his high cap hit and burning time off his ELC and making him an UFA earlier? The answer could be yes, but I think he would have to blow the team away in camp to the point that they felt he was going to take a major role in the defense, which seems unlikely to happen.

[devilsrule33]

I think only Larsson would have a chance to make the Devils out of camp, the Devils are just too talented up front. Even so, I doubt Larsson is good enough to get a large enough role for the Devils to take him. Hedman, who I think would be taken before Larsson if they were the same age and draft year, certainly is playing fine but isn't lighting the league up.

So for the Devils, would Larsson bring enough additional to the team, in a limited role, to make up for his high cap hit and burning time off his ELC and making him an UFA earlier? The answer could be yes, but I think he would have to blow the team away in camp to the point that they felt he was going to take a major role in the defense, which seems unlikely to happen.

I've heard a couple so-called experts say Larrson is ahead of Hedman at this age.

[Devils731]

I've heard a couple so-called experts say Larrson is ahead of Hedman at this age.

I heard that too, but it was almost a year ago. Hedman was talked about to go before Tavares possibly, and Tavares would go before all the guys in this draft, it appears to me. Hedman's SEL numbers certainly look more impressive than Larsson's but I don't see that league so have no idea if that's a true reflection of play.

Basically if Larsson is ahead of where Hedman was, then there should be no doubt that Larsson is the #1 pick in this draft. Since Larsson isn't, I find it hard to buy into what those guys were saying. Heck, we see silly mock drafts where Larsson is going behind Murphy. That would never have happened to Hedman.

[Triumph]

I never suggested moving him to wing. Lets say he comes into training camp and shows that he's a better player now than someone else i.e. a Josefson, or worse, say theres an injury to one of our centers.

very highly unlikely and it wouldn't matter if he did. Josefson costs $900,000, Couturier would cost twice that.

if there's an injury, fine.

How's Boston fared having Seguin on the team all year?

terribly. they wasted a year of his entry level contract. now he's going to be UFA in 2017, and they have to find a way to fit him on next year's team.

What if we end up with Landeskog or Larsson? You're the only one Ive read crowing about his SEL contract, but analysts are all saying he's going to be in the NHL next season, so there must be some sort of deal with the SEL to make that happen + theres plenty of cases of recent success by top 5 rookies on defense in the NHL. There's many instances where the player we take is playing here sooner. Nothing is certain right now for next season. Zach's not re-signed. None of our UFA's are locks to return. We dont even know whos going to be coaching this team and may have a markedly different philosophy than Lemaire.

the UFAs don't matter - the only major UFA is andy greene - and i doubt the incoming coach would have a markedly different philosophy than lemaire, nor do i see what bearing that has.

Im not betting on the draftee being a Devil in 11-12, but with this high of a pick its definitely a possibility.

i don't think i'd bet against it either, it would just be a terrible decision.

Edited April 13, 2011 by Triumph

[ghdi]

I heard that too, but it was almost a year ago. Hedman was talked about to go before Tavares possibly, and Tavares would go before all the guys in this draft, it appears to me. Hedman's SEL numbers certainly look more impressive than Larsson's but I don't see that league so have no idea if that's a true reflection of play.

Basically if Larsson is ahead of where Hedman was, then there should be no doubt that Larsson is the #1 pick in this draft. Since Larsson isn't, I find it hard to buy into what those guys were saying. Heck, we see silly mock drafts where Larsson is going behind Murphy. That would never have happened to Hedman.

http://oilers.nhl.com/club/news.htm?id=549000

As of January 2011

http://oilers.nhl.com/club/news.htm?id=555353

As of March 8th.

http://www.kuklaskorner.com/index.php/tmr/comments/adam_larsson_the_next_nicklas_lidstrom/

March 20th

[elias2600]

It's not a guarantee, but let's just assume that when our pick is up, RNH, Larsson, and Landeskog are off the board.

That leaves us a choice of 3 highly regarded centers: Couturier, Huberdeau, and Strome. All 3 dominated in their junior leagues this year.

I am very happy with these options, as well as some of the defensemen, too. Ultimately, we need to select BPA, and at #4 with the other 3 off the board already, these are likely the 3 players we will be looking at (with Hamilton possibly being considered as well).

Of course, if for some reason RNH, Larsson, or Landeskog are there, we immediately make that pick.

I agree that there is no reason to rush any of these players in to the lineup either. A lot can change between now and the draft, and also the start of the regular season though!

[Devils731]

http://oilers.nhl.com/club/news.htm?id=549000

As of January 2011

http://oilers.nhl.com/club/news.htm?id=555353

As of March 8th.

http://www.kuklaskorner.com/index.php/tmr/comments/adam_larsson_the_next_nicklas_lidstrom/

March 20th

Then apparently this "weak" draft has about 5 or 6 all time greats in it.

If the Internet was more prevalent in 1996 then I bet I can find quotes talking about how Andrei Zyuzin is the next great Russian star.

If the Oilers think Larsson is ahead of Niklas Lidstrom as equal points in their career, and everyone thinks they'll take RNH, then do they think RNH is ahead of Crosby at this point?

[Triumph]

i wouldn't doubt that larsson is ahead of where lidstrom was during his 18 year old season. the problem is that that's kind of irrelevant.

[justdo3043]

Then apparently this "weak" draft has about 5 or 6 all time greats in it.

If the Internet was more prevalent in 1996 then I bet I can find quotes talking about how Andrei Zyuzin is the next great Russian star.

If the Oilers think Larsson is ahead of Niklas Lidstrom as equal points in their career, and everyone thinks they'll take RNH, then do they think RNH is ahead of Crosby at this point?

lol only the best vision since 99 himself

[SterioDesign]

Per McKenzie

Other draft related jr notes: Huberdeau scores GWG in OT. His 10th of playoffs. Couturier minus-4 in 6-1 loss.

[insanity_gallops]

If the Internet was more prevalent in 1996 then I bet I can find quotes talking about how Andrei Zyuzin is the next great Russian star.

"Andrei Zyuzin - Zyuzin is the Sharks power play quarterback of the future. Zyuzin is most often compared to a Zubov or Ozolinsh. The Sharks have a lot of veteren defensemen so he won't be rushed into pressure situations which is good for his long-term development but not for his Calder Trophy chances."

HockeysFuture archived article. This is from their projections for the Calder in '97-'98. If you go back through the archives, HF has some hilariously entertaining mis-projections, written like total fans with very little overall analysis.

Tangent: my favorite is a recap of the Rangers' 1999 draft.

(Jamie) Lundmark is a steal at number 9. He is the type of kid you win with. A legit first line center prospect. When you see him you think Jeremy Roenick. Marc Savard is a good player. But lets face it, on a team like NY a generously listed 5'11 pass only center is kind of not what is needed. Savard is closer to 5'9.. trust me on that one. In his prime Savard would be barely a second liner who gets maybe 55 points... 40 of which would be goals. At 5'11 he isn't a fit for a Rangers team that needs size. The Western Conference is good for him and he is the type of player the Flames need. The picks cancel themselves out. Having seen Lundmark play I don't think twice about this deal. I fell in love with this kid back in November.. and he doesn't worry be at all. He is a player. His game is perfect for the NHL.... give him a year or two to add another 15 or 20 pounds and you're going to forget Savard.

Hopefully karma isn't really a b*tch in all cases, 'cause I also enjoy this description of Pavel Brendl, selected 4th overall:

This kid knows how to score... actually let me restate that, this kid IS AN OFFENSIVE FACTORY!!!....Ranger fans should remember this day, because this could prove to a monumental in Rangers history thanks to one certain Right winger.

[moustic]

where can i find this kind of monumental statement on hf ? ; )

[moustic]

(sorry double post)

Edited April 14, 2011 by moustic

[Revan]

Tangent: my favorite is a recap of the Rangers' 1999 draft.

Hopefully karma isn't really a b*tch in all cases, 'cause I also enjoy this description of Pavel Brendl, selected 4th overall:

LOL, this is hysterical.

The Rangers management was doing a hell of a job in the late 90s-early 00s and the results speak for themselves.

[elias2600]

Per McKenzie

Other draft related jr notes: Huberdeau scores GWG in OT. His 10th of playoffs. Couturier minus-4 in 6-1 loss.

I saw these results last night as well. I would hope we wouldn't let one nights results affect a drafting decision though.

[Risky]

I think a bunch of scouts have warned that Huberdeau is benefiting from playing on an unfairly stacked team, so his numbers are inflated. He's on like the 60s Canadiens of junior teams.

[SterioDesign]

to me RNH is a sure shot in the NHL... so is Landeskog. Then Larsson will be good but might need time.

Then Couturier and Huberdeau i'm curious to see

[Daniel]

The more I read, we should draft whoever's left of Larson, Landeskog and Couutrier (I'm assuming RNH is taken one overall). I want no part of Huberdeau).

The only other thing I would consider is if the situation presents itself is to swap picks with Ottawa and draft Strome and insist that Ottawa takes Clarkson off our hands.

[sundstrom]

The more I read, we should draft whoever's left of Larson, Landeskog and Couutrier (I'm assuming RNH is taken one overall). I want no part of Huberdeau).

The only other thing I would consider is if the situation presents itself is to swap picks with Ottawa and draft Strome and insist that Ottawa takes Clarkson off our hands.

you don't have to give clarkson away and you certainly don't have to swap a 4 for 6 to do that either. rolston + 4 for 6 - maybe.

but i agree with you that the top 4 are RNH, Larsson, Landeskog for sure and most likely courturier unless someone picks huberdeau instead. i don't see how anyone else cracks that top 5.

[Daniel]

you don't have to give clarkson away and you certainly don't have to swap a 4 for 6 to do that either. rolston + 4 for 6 - maybe.

Rolston won't waive his no-trade clause to go to Ottawa.

I've said it before, my offer would be our first, second from Washington next year, Clarkson for Ottawa's first, Ottawa's second this year and another midrange pick/prospect.

Perhaps you can substitute Salvador for Clarkson or add him to the mix.

Edited April 15, 2011 by Daniel