Sign in with your NHL account:
  • Submit
  • Or
  • Sign in with Google

Jump to content


Photo

2013 Draft: Who, When, And Why ?

draft nhl flames 2013 NHL Draft NHL Entry Draft NHL Draft

This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
791 replies to this topic

#1 Cecka

Cecka

    Advanced Member

  • SeniorMembers
  • PipPipPip
  • 133 posts

Posted 01 April 2013 - 09:16 PM

So we have stockpiled 3 picks in this draft. Assuming Stl makes the playoffs which I believe they will. I am curious who you guys take and why with those 3 picks. Assuming the draft was today, sort of like a mack draft. Obviously this is just based on speculation that the player will still be available.

 

3rd Overall Pick(Flames) -  Jonathan Drouin - QMJHL -  I strongly believe that Jones and Mackinnon go first and second. I know we have strived for that number 1 center for years, but I don't pass on Drouin to take Barkov or Lindholm. Drouin has shown this year even without Mackinnon at times... Looking just as dominant as ever. He had nearly a 2ppg in the Q, and in the playoffs has 10 points in 4 games! Incredible Talent. Future star.

 

17th Overall Pick(Blues) - Nikita Zadorov - OHL - Okay... I do not know if he falls to 17th. I have looked at lots of mock drafts which have him going any were from top 10 to 2nd round. I feel he most definitely has the size and talent to go top 10, but he is Russian and is still having trouble with English. This may scare some teams off. Now if you don't know who Zadorov is... He is a giant stay at home Dman with some offensive upside. The kid stands 6'5 and 230 pounds. Everything I read and see about this kid makes me think he is perfect for a 17th pick if possible. He has 25 Pts +33 in 63 games +with the London Knights. He most definitely still needs work in all areas of his game, but he definitely has the talent and the size to be a great top pairing dman in the league one day. I take him and give him the time to develop.

 

29th Overall Pick(Penguins) - Bo Horvat/Jason Dickinson - If I can get either of these guys here I do. Both strong on the puck, and decent skaters. The thing I like about both of them is they have some grit and look to be good 3rd line penalty killers, who will put up points.



#2 tachaudh

tachaudh

    Advanced Member

  • SeniorMembers
  • PipPipPip
  • 2,189 posts

Posted 01 April 2013 - 10:08 PM

MacKinnon and Jones may be taken 1 and 2 but we may have the first or second pick. 

 

If we have the first, no question, I think we take Jones. Been described as Chris Pronger with discipline. You can't pass up on that. 



#3 Cecka

Cecka

    Advanced Member

  • SeniorMembers
  • PipPipPip
  • 133 posts

Posted 01 April 2013 - 10:19 PM

Agree that Jones is a incredible Dman at his young age. However... at this point can we pass up on a true first line center ? If I'm picking number 1 its a hard pick!



#4 JTech780

JTech780

    Resident Know it All

  • SeniorMembers
  • PipPipPip
  • 2,081 posts

Posted 01 April 2013 - 10:20 PM

My question is...if we do end up at 3rd or 4th overall would you package that pick with Pittsburgh or St. Louis' pick to move up to 1st or 2nd to make sure you get one of MacKinnon or Jones?

 

I would. IMO you build around centers, defensemen and goaltenders. Drouin is a very talented winger but IMO he isn't a player you build around. I don't want Calgary making the same mistakes Edmonton has made with their rebuild. You are not going to win with a team built around small wingers.



#5 Cecka

Cecka

    Advanced Member

  • SeniorMembers
  • PipPipPip
  • 133 posts

Posted 01 April 2013 - 10:28 PM

I think I would be willing to trade up with the pits pick. I don't trade stl to move up. I would like to have a Drouin - Zadorov rather than a single Mackinnon or Jones. Maybe that is just me, but I really see something in both those guys and think we can grab them both in those spots.



#6 senor_incendiarse

senor_incendiarse

    Advanced Member

  • SeniorMembers
  • PipPipPip
  • 2,134 posts

Posted 01 April 2013 - 10:33 PM

My question is...if we do end up at 3rd or 4th overall would you package that pick with Pittsburgh or St. Louis' pick to move up to 1st or 2nd to make sure you get one of MacKinnon or Jones?

 

I would. IMO you build around centers, defensemen and goaltenders. Drouin is a very talented winger but IMO he isn't a player you build around. I don't want Calgary making the same mistakes Edmonton has made with their rebuild. You are not going to win with a team built around small wingers.

At most that I would throw in to move up is a third, giving up another first to move up one or 2 spots isn't worth it I do think quality is more important than quantity, but I think we would get better overall quality players with 3 picks in the top 60 than 2.



#7 Crzydrvr

Crzydrvr

    Resident Draft Junkie

  • SeniorMembers
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,517 posts

Posted 01 April 2013 - 11:01 PM

Depending on where our 1st goes, I'd like MacKinnon as a running mate. He has chemistry with Drouin who's a darn good playmaker, so I'd go for it on the notion that Baertschi can provide a similar level of talent and chemistry. That would immediately turn us around as a team, as long as they still have some support around them. Nathan may not have the offensive wizardry of Drouin, but he's got a more projectable game; it's not hard to imagine a Hall/Seguin type from him, whereas with Drouin it's a little less certain.

 

Number 2 choice for me would be Lindholm, I like Swedes (they seem to project their skills better to the NHL for the most part than say Finland) and Lindholm is IMO the best Swedish forward available in the draft since the Sedins. Backstrom, his draft year, was pretty impressive as well, but I also believe that his development curve went through the roof after he landed with Ovechkin, the 60-goal version. I don't know if Lindholm could hit 100 points in the current style of game, but I can definitely see a perennial PPG player.

 

Although, if anyone's gone to the Draft Thread, you guys already know that I'm high on these two guys.

 

Depending on how things shake down, I'd like to see another skill forward and a defender be drafted. Go for a Ristolainen, Morrissey or Theodore with our 2nd pick if it isn't traded. Burakovsky, Lehkonen, Klimchuk would be guys I'd target late-first. The only problem is they're smallish, and that would leave us with quite a few small skill players as our core.



#8 bronco73

bronco73

    Advanced Member

  • SeniorMembers
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,829 posts

Posted 01 April 2013 - 11:06 PM

So, Calgary should have three picks in the first round depending on what happens with St. Louis, right?  I'm wondering if Feaster uses these picks to trade up.



#9 ScottMacMahon

ScottMacMahon

    Advanced Member

  • SeniorMembers
  • PipPipPip
  • 584 posts

Posted 02 April 2013 - 08:08 AM

There is always the chance that he picks up another first rounder from trading cammy/tangs/glenX if Feaster decides to go this route...

 

Anyways, I'd also like to point out that with the cap coming down, the weak crop of FA's this summer, and Calgarys large amount of cap space, is it possible that we take on a bad contract/contracts we buy out for other teams in order to move up in the draft?

 

For example,

 

To CGY:

Top 10 Pick

Bad/Crappy Contract

 

To ________ Team:

St. Louis Pick (~#16) 

 

Could anyone see something like this happening given all the open cap space we now have?



#10 geos

geos

    Advanced Member

  • SeniorMembers
  • PipPipPip
  • 3,291 posts

Posted 02 April 2013 - 10:54 AM

As one of the first to suggest Baertschi in 2011, my call for this year's must have is Rasmus Ristolainen. He might go as high as 4th, but hey, maybe we can trade up our St. L pick or something to get two in the top 5.



#11 Cecka

Cecka

    Advanced Member

  • SeniorMembers
  • PipPipPip
  • 133 posts

Posted 02 April 2013 - 11:37 AM

As one of the first to suggest Baertschi in 2011, my call for this year's must have is Rasmus Ristolainen. He might go as high as 4th, but hey, maybe we can trade up our St. L pick or something to get two in the top 5.

 

I personally don't like this pick in the top 5.

Jones

Drouin

Mac

Barkov

Lindholm

 

All better prospects to have in my opinion.



#12 geos

geos

    Advanced Member

  • SeniorMembers
  • PipPipPip
  • 3,291 posts

Posted 02 April 2013 - 11:48 AM

Lindholm is too small for this team. We have enough undersized players. If he added ALOT for that size, then maybe, but he doesn't. I'd rather go with a similarly skilled guy with more beef.



#13 Young_Guns_V2

Young_Guns_V2

    Advanced Member

  • SeniorMembers
  • PipPipPip
  • 330 posts

Posted 02 April 2013 - 11:51 AM

Flames will win enough game just not to make the playoffs and screw the draft up... Or we pick some of the best highschool kids we can find in the first round. I am actually afraid who they are going to pick at the draft.



#14 Flames_Dynasty

Flames_Dynasty

    Advanced Member

  • SeniorMembers
  • PipPipPip
  • 98 posts

Posted 02 April 2013 - 11:51 AM

First let’s look at the flames needs (in order of importance); 1st Line C, Top 4/2 RHD, Top 9 RW depth, Top 4 D depth and Goaltending.  What they have lots of depth in; LW depth, 3/4 Line C, 3rd Pair D, Goaltending.  With our pick(top 5) I will pick a Top 6RHC, Top 4 RHD, Top 6 LHC then I pick the BPA.  For me our pick should be as follows; MacKinnon, Jones, Lindholm, Ristolainen, Barkov, Monahan, Drouin then Shinkaruk.  StLouis' pick for me would be the same but since we have little idea where it ends up I will leave it for later discussion, I really like the idea of packaging this up and moving up to take what we didn’t get with our pick in the top 5.  Pittsburgh's pick which looks to be bottom 4 would look the same (using McKenzie's ranking) and falls like; Pulock (15th), Lazar (25th), Zykov, Hartman(my pick), Compher, Bowey(my pick unless we trade up), Bailey, Duclair or Santini.

 

Those are just my thoughts until we get closer to the draft and know exactly what we have.

 

Lindholm is too small for this team. We have enough undersized players. If he added ALOT for that size, then maybe, but he doesn't. I'd rather go with a similarly skilled guy with more beef.

 

At 6'1" & 191lbs unlike MacKinnon who is 5'11" & 177lbs or Barkov at 6'2" & 191lbs?



#15 geos

geos

    Advanced Member

  • SeniorMembers
  • PipPipPip
  • 3,291 posts

Posted 02 April 2013 - 12:10 PM

I have Lindholm at 5'11", 181lbs and McKinnon at 6 even, 182lbs. Not a big difference, but I also wouldn't be interested in MacKinnon if he didn't have superb skills. Lindholm isn't on that level.

 

On another note, late in the first, I'm picking Robert Hagg for sure. Huge intangibles, good leader, great skater for a big guy. Big dman that can play tough minutes.



#16 Flames22

Flames22

    Advanced Member

  • SeniorMembers
  • PipPipPip
  • 235 posts

Posted 02 April 2013 - 02:17 PM

Trade Cammalleri for a 1st, trade Kipper for a 2nd, and trade Tanguay for a package of picks. Those picks, combined with St. Louis' and Pittsburgh's should allow us to trade up, and pick 1st and 2nd in the draft (ours and somebody elses).

 

Then take Jones at number 1, Mackinnon at number 2.



#17 Cecka

Cecka

    Advanced Member

  • SeniorMembers
  • PipPipPip
  • 133 posts

Posted 02 April 2013 - 04:39 PM

Flames will win enough game just not to make the playoffs and screw the draft up... Or we pick some of the best highschool kids we can find in the first round. I am actually afraid who they are going to pick at the draft.

 

I seriously doubt this. I don't see us drafting out of the top 5 the way we have been playing. Now with our best players being shipped out, I only see us dropping lower.



#18 Crzydrvr

Crzydrvr

    Resident Draft Junkie

  • SeniorMembers
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,517 posts

Posted 02 April 2013 - 05:34 PM

Lindholm is too small for this team. We have enough undersized players. If he added ALOT for that size, then maybe, but he doesn't. I'd rather go with a similarly skilled guy with more beef.

 

 

I have Lindholm at 5'11", 181lbs and McKinnon at 6 even, 182lbs. Not a big difference, but I also wouldn't be interested in MacKinnon if he didn't have superb skills. Lindholm isn't on that level.

 

On another note, late in the first, I'm picking Robert Hagg for sure. Huge intangibles, good leader, great skater for a big guy. Big dman that can play tough minutes.

 

 

Lindholm is listed on the Elitserien website as 6'0.5" and 192 pounds. Not undersized. MacKinnon has been listed as 5'11" and around 180 pounds, and that's pretty much right from what I see on the ice.

 

Lindholm doesn't play feisty like Mac does, and he doesn't overpower guys, but he uses his body and size the best of any prospect I've seen this year, including Seth Jones. Gets body positioning, shields the puck well, has nifty hands and has a trickster streak in him that allows him to just dangle the puck at will against grown men a la Crosby vs. Spezza. He has no weaknesses beyond putting on a little more muscle, and with another year of seasoning in Brynas he's going to be an immediate contributor in the NHL just like Backstrom was.

 

I like Hagg, I just think he's a little overrated. Looked overmatched against international competition. Still think he's easily a top-40 prospect, but his skating and defence are questions. He's like a less-capable version of Oscar Klefbom. I do agree that he's a guy you target late in the first if he's still on the board.



#19 ifiwaschucknorris

ifiwaschucknorris

    Advanced Member

  • SeniorMembers
  • PipPipPip
  • 398 posts

Posted 02 April 2013 - 07:18 PM

Considering our ridiculous amount of success sans jbouw and Iginla thus far I don't think it's out of the realm of possibility that we are likely picking top two.

If we are picking top 2 I would like to see us package both our lower first rounders and try and move up to number three while keeping one of our top 2 .

If we could get both MacKinnon and Drouin that would be quite the coupe I think. Like having our future Kane and Toews.

If we can't and we can only get one top 3 pick I take jones if I can get him.

#20 ScottMacMahon

ScottMacMahon

    Advanced Member

  • SeniorMembers
  • PipPipPip
  • 584 posts

Posted 02 April 2013 - 09:34 PM

Considering our ridiculous amount of success sans jbouw and Iginla thus far I don't think it's out of the realm of possibility that we are likely picking top two.

If we are picking top 2 I would like to see us package both our lower first rounders and try and move up to number three while keeping one of our top 2 .

If we could get both MacKinnon and Drouin that would be quite the coupe I think. Like having our future Kane and Toews.

If we can't and we can only get one top 3 pick I take jones if I can get him.

 

This was exactly what I have been saying! Although i equated them more to the sedin twins :P