aziz Posted June 23, 2014 Share Posted June 23, 2014 @AJgoal well put. i don't want to ruin your guessing game, because it is a good way to illustrate the point, but i was just looking over historical draft lists, and it is a pretty sobering thing. defensemen drafted in the top 5 since 2000: Rostislav KleslaJay BouwmeesterJoni PitkanenRyan WhitneyCam BarkerJack JohnsonErik JohnsonThomas HickeyKarl AlznerDrew DoughtyZach BogosianAlex PietrangeloLuke SchennVictor HedmanErik GudbransonAdam LarssonRyan MurrayGriffin ReinhartMorgan RiellySeth Jones it's just not an impressive list. a lot of ok middle pair guys, a bunch of out and out busts, a few 2nd/3rd dmen, and i count 2 real omghe'samazing players. 2 players who are real difference makers. the rest, some would be minor upgrades on what the flyers have now, most are equal to the flyers' current stock. and a few downgrades. but you can bet each of them were really well thought of when they were 18, else they wouldn't have been taken so high. and so, we look at the next crop...does it really make any sense to move known effective NHL players, a real top 3 forward included...for a player that is likely to fall right in line with the pattern history has shown us? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pilldoc Posted June 23, 2014 Share Posted June 23, 2014 well put aziz. As I stated before, the price is simply to high. I believe we had this type of debate 2 yrs ago when Homer made a qualifying to Weber. It was going to cost us 4...1st round draft picks. Same scenario, they only difference is instead of costing picks...it would cost players for a player who has never played 1 minute of NHL brand hockey. Ekblad may very well be Weber 2.0 or he could turn out to be like Klesla. Simply put we just don't know. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AJgoal Posted June 23, 2014 Share Posted June 23, 2014 ok...i'll bite....though I do agree with @ruxpin I'm not trading for anyone of them However, "IF" I where to make the trade then...... #1 is tempting#2 sounds like a solid defense man#3 like rux said...might find a place for him#4 no way ...inconsistency might = laziness? not playing hard? Well, the year was 2003. So in that year, you'd have been making the trade using likely Gagne, Kim Johnsson, and the 1st that became Mike Richards to jump up and draft one of the following: 1: Ryan Suter (7th overall)2: Brayden Coburn (8th)3: Dion Phaneuf (9th)4: Brent Seabrook (14th) Shea Weber was drafted 49th that year - I couldn't find his pre-draft scouting report. But if you went back to re-draft, it's even odds that he'd go 1st overall. In the end, Junior stats and scouting projections are just that - they're not anything close to guarantees of how the player will do at the next level. As Aziz showed, history isn't on your side drafting a d-man high, and giving up valuable assets to take that chance makes it even more important that you are absolutely right in your projection. As FC has stated many times (paraphrasing), it's better to hold onto assets (like 2nd round picks) and stockpile as many players as you can and try to develop them. Putting all of your eggs into one basket could set you back significantly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
doom88 Posted June 23, 2014 Share Posted June 23, 2014 I'm comfortable with my blind test. That was surprisingly fun, thanks. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jammer2 Posted June 23, 2014 Share Posted June 23, 2014 I get what you guys are saying about overpaying for potential...I really do. Let's take a look at the cup winners the past 8 years.... 2014- Los Angles- Drew Doughty2013- Chicago- Duncan Kieth2012- Los Angles- Drew Doughty2011- Boston- Zedeno Chara2010- Chicago-Duncan Kieth2009- Pittsburgh- Orpik/Scuderi2008- Detroit- Nicklas Lidstrom2007- Anaheim- Chris Pronger Every one of the past 8 Cup winners had a stud #1 franchise defensemen. A rock that they could count on in *all* situations. The 09 Pens are a stretch, but lets face it....Orpik and Scuderi in that Cup run were awesome, better than any Flyer d-man in the playoffs since Mark Howe......so, the stud d-man still applies for the Pens. If you don't have one of those, you don't win. Who are we gonna throw out there up one goal with 2 mins left in Game 7....Coburn....McDonald??? Pffffft. We have tried stocking up on forwards, trying to skip by with a sub-par defense....it does not happen. If we don't make a move for Exblad....where do we get that guy? No one trades you one of them...sure, you could try to sign Subban to a max contract, but the whole thing is to develop your own star, get those 4-5 years where you're not paying out the nose. I would also consider Morin, Hagg, Ghost...all untouchables. Make it happen without giving up a single one. We are in a unique situation of being blessed with some promising young d-men...hoard them like you have never hoarded anything before. Exblad is the missing piece....6'4 and 220 with nice mobility, a wicked shot, super smart....and might even get to 6'5 235.....um....this kid has star written all over him. Take the gamble, fix the back end ONCE AND FOR ALL!!! Build from the net on out and replace the goals the way the Flyers always do. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OccamsRazor Posted June 23, 2014 Share Posted June 23, 2014 Who are we gonna throw out there up one goal with 2 mins left in Game 7....Coburn....McDonald??? Wow i clearly remember those two responsible for the first Rangers goal in game 7. Then on the 2nd and GWer it was bone head Coburn and Gus for the other one. But yeah they both had one thing in common Coburn....i know he is relied on the play against the other team best but really Flyers don't have a choice. But man when he effs up he effs up major and it just always seems to be a back breaker and it unfairly maybe negates all the other good things he does and it seems that after all is said and done all you remember is his gaffes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AJgoal Posted June 23, 2014 Share Posted June 23, 2014 Duncan Keith was drafted 54th overall - he didn't have star written all over him. Jay Bouwmeester did, and he, Joni Pitkanen, and Ryan Whitney were drafted 3-4-5 that year. Here is a pre-draft tidbit: Many in the scouting community have been waiting with baited breath for nearly three years already for Jay Bouwmeester, one of the most heralded blue-liners to come along since Denis Potvin in 1973. And Bouwmeester has done nothing in his draft year to dispel the notion that he will be a future perennial All-Star in the league. At 6-4 and 206 pounds, Bouwmeester has impeccable footwork and amazing skating ability that makes it virtually impossible for opposing forwards to forecheck effectively. He's simply immune to pressure and turnovers, making him the best and most complete blue line prospect since Chris Pronger. And Red Line sees Bouwmeester being joined by another four topflight rearguards among the top 10 overall picks. Close behind Bouwmeester in Red Line's pecking order is Finland's huge and mobile Joni Pitkanen, a mix of power, offensive skill, and toughness. Pitkanen is a certain top-five overall selection and has the skills to be a No. 1 defenseman in the NHL. Chara was 56th, and had played for two other teams before arriving in Boston. Lidstrom 53rd. Orpik, who you admit is a reach as a stud on your list, was drafted higher than any of those three at 18. Pronger was drafted 2nd overall but didn't win the cup for the team that drafted him. Doughty is the only 1st overall on your list. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AJgoal Posted June 23, 2014 Share Posted June 23, 2014 Another tidbit: Steve Eminger (yes, THAT Steve Eminger) was rated higher than Duncan Keith pre-draft 2002. True story. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AJgoal Posted June 23, 2014 Share Posted June 23, 2014 And more on the 2002 pre-draft scouting on Bouwmeester: Consensus selection to go first overall, he was NHL Central Scouting's top-ranked North American prospect at both midseason and the end of the season. Described by former NHLer Brent Sutter as "a jewel," he was named an All-Star at the World Junior Championships after helping Canada capture the silver medal. Had a goal and an assist at the Top Prospects Game, where he was named his team's best player. Had points streaks of six and eight games and was third in scoring among WHL defensemen. In 2000, joined Wayne Gretzky, Eric Lindros and Jason Spezza as the only 16-year-olds to play for Canada at the World Junior Championships. Was a member of the major junior All-Rookie Team in 1999-2000, a unit that included Columbus Blue Jackets defenseman Rostislav Klesla and New York Rangers goaltender Dan Blackburn. One of the fastest skaters in major junior hockey, he has quick acceleration and possesses the ability to control the flow of the game. Confident puckhandler and solid decision-maker on the ice. Already has the size to make it in the NHL, although he does not play an overtly physical style. Logs a lot of ice time and boasts a lethal one-timer. His junior coach, Bob Loucks, called him "a man among boys," adding, "He's one of those players who comes down the road once in a lifetime for most people. ... He's not going to be just another NHL player. He'll be exceptional because he wants to be as good as he can be." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aziz Posted June 23, 2014 Share Posted June 23, 2014 2014- Los Angles- Drew Doughty2013- Chicago- Duncan Kieth2012- Los Angles- Drew Doughty2011- Boston- Zedeno Chara2010- Chicago-Duncan Kieth2009- Pittsburgh- Orpik/Scuderi2008- Detroit- Nicklas Lidstrom2007- Anaheim- Chris Pronger ... If we don't make a move for Exblad....where do we get that guy? doughty - 2nd overallkeith - 54thchara - 56thorpik - 18thscuderi - 134thlidstrom - 53rdpronger - 2nd let's throw in some elite defensemen who have yet to win a cup subban - 43rdkarlsson - 15thweber - 49thsuter - 7thyandle - 105thOEL - 6thburns - 20thbyfuglien - 245thkronwall - 29thmcdonagh - 12thniskanen - 28thvlasic - 35th i'm sure i missed some, and some that i didn't miss are stretches. the point is the pattern. 19 high end dmen listed, most currently impact players, a few former impact players. the above list tells me you are more likely to find those guys in the first round than outside of it...but it also tells me that they can be anywhere in the first round. 2 of them were top 5 picks. 4 were top 10. this tells me there is no need to move up. the guy you pick at 17 is as likely to turn out as the guy you pick at 3. as for where do we get that guy? look at the list. you take your picks, and randomly one of them pays off big. that's how you get that guy. unless you are willing to pay HUGE in trade or free agency, you get him by putting your hat in the ring and hoping. you don't set off on a mission to grab the child that will become your savior, because that almost never works out. you take the picks as they come to you, develop them as best you can, and hope. that really is the extent of it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jammer2 Posted June 23, 2014 Share Posted June 23, 2014 @AJgoal I was just trying to say, regardless of where those guys got picked, they turned into franchise d-men and were absolutely essential to their teams Cup wins. Let's face it, we have a nice young crop of d-men for the first time in decades....but none of them have played a game in the NHL. Is one of these guys gonna step up and be the *man*.....cause their skill sets don't really lend themselves to a legit #1 guy. Where does this guy come from, this essential piece that we need and no one else can win without one. Pretty sure, Exblad is gonna be the man. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jammer2 Posted June 23, 2014 Share Posted June 23, 2014 2 or 3 years from now, there is gonna be a lot of "I told you so's" going on here. I can only hope it's the Flyers that make the bold move to make history. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aziz Posted June 23, 2014 Share Posted June 23, 2014 2 or 3 years from now, there is gonna be a lot of "I told you so's" going on here. I can only hope it's the Flyers that make the bold move to make history. sure, hindsight is a motherfcuker. 'course, hindsight is every bit as capable of saying, "hahaha, you traded roster assets, a prospect and a pick for a guy that ultimately became a 3rd pair dman with chronic knee problems, while the prospect you traded now has two norris trophies and the pick was used on last season's rocket richard winner, and the roster player has been to the last 4 all star games," as it is the other way around. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OccamsRazor Posted June 23, 2014 Share Posted June 23, 2014 Where does this guy come from, this essential piece that we need and no one else can win without one. Pretty sure, Exblad is gonna be the man. Yes and you are right and i understand the point made here by other here but like you stated "where is this #1 going to come from".....there are two choice you can draft him. Or you can trade for him. That is it. And with no crystal ball in hand and just because stud Dmen have been found in the later picks that have been noted. There isn't a #1 Dman in this draft really...except and that point to has been argued Ekblad. And just because Weber and Keith were found in the 2nd round to me is moot. Because bottom line Ek is the only one who has the potential to be a #1, so with that said anyone thinking he is going to fall into the Flyers lap is crazy to even say that. So like you said you only have one option and that is to move assets to move into #1 to get him. So there is only one thing that needs to be decided by Hextall and company is Ekblad your #1 you want to be the corner stone for the team???? If so then yes move up and get him....and it will cost. But to get that already "proven #1" it is going to cost a whole lot more than moving up to get Ekblad is going to cost. So Jammer i understand what you're saying about him and doing what it takes to get him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OccamsRazor Posted June 23, 2014 Share Posted June 23, 2014 sure, hindsight is a motherfcuker. 'course, hindsight is every bit as capable of saying, "hahaha, you traded roster assets, a prospect and a pick for a guy that ultimately became a 3rd pair dman with chronic knee problems, while the prospect you traded now has two norris trophies and the pick was used on last season's rocket richard winner, and the roster player has been to the last 4 all star games," as it is the other way around. I understand your point to but we can agree this so called #1 isn't on this roster now so there are two ways of getting him trading up for Ekblad who is arguable this so called #1. Or trading for this so called "proven" #1 which will be waaaay more costly than trading up to get Ekblad either way it will be a gamble. That is it....there is no other projected #1 guy in this draft. And yes i know that was said when Keith and Weber were drafted as well....but we don't have a crystal ball and all we can go off of now is the info on hand. And yes there is a chance Ekblad can be a total bust and there is a chance he can be the next Weber....so it's a gamble. But like Jammer stated none of the current guys in the Flyers system is projected to be this #1 guy. So we are back to the how do we get one then??????? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aziz Posted June 23, 2014 Share Posted June 23, 2014 Because bottom line Ek is the only one who has the potential to be a #1 how can you say that? how can you know that? the point to the big ol' list of examples of eventual standout dmen taken outside of the top 10 is that you CAN NOT know. if anyone at all thought nick lidstrom had the potential and the likelihood of becoming what he became, would 52 other guys have been taken before him? hockey at the youth and junior levels just are not even similar to hockey at the NHL level. and the physical talent of a 17 yearold just does not translate directly to adulthood. the game changes, the opposition changes, the player himself changes. success at one level does not mean success at the other. and, as the deep round draft success stories show, mediocrity at one level does not mean mediocrity at the other. it is all guessing and maybes. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aziz Posted June 23, 2014 Share Posted June 23, 2014 Ekblad who is arguable this so called #1. no, he isn't. he is a child who so far has played exclusively against children, and in short seasons. he has done very very well. better than most, even. that says he might be very very good against adults, too, but only "might". the draft is filled with 210+ "might"'s, some more likely than others, but none are sure things in either direction. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OccamsRazor Posted June 23, 2014 Share Posted June 23, 2014 how can you say that? how can you know that? You obviously just scanned my post i said i don't have a crystal ball and that i noted that Keith and Weber were yes found later but that always happens in every sports someone squeaks by....no crystal remember all you can go off of NOW is the info on hand and that is that none of these guys are projected as #1. It is the reality of the situation. Guys squeak by and prove they got away like it was stated had anyone KNOWN Weber and Keith were going to have the careers they did well it's a no brainer they would have been drafted sooner....you guys are using hindsight. And in their draft years Coburn was projected waaaay higher than Weber ( but with hindsight we can agree it ain't how it worked out) i don't make the projections i just read them. CAUTION: This isn't an exact science mistakes are made in every pro sport it happens with combines and private workouts guys still sneak by and later prove their projection wrong. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AJgoal Posted June 23, 2014 Share Posted June 23, 2014 I understand your point to but we can agree this so called #1 isn't on this roster now so there are two ways of getting him trading up for Ekblad who is arguable this so called #1. Or trading for this so called "proven" #1 which will be waaaay more costly than trading up to get Ekblad either way it will be a gamble. That is it....there is no other projected #1 guy in this draft. And yes i know that was said when Keith and Weber were drafted as well....but we don't have a crystal ball and all we can go off of now is the info on hand. And yes there is a chance Ekblad can be a total bust and there is a chance he can be the next Weber....so it's a gamble. But like Jammer stated none of the current guys in the Flyers system is projected to be this #1 guy. So we are back to the how do we get one then??????? As you say, you can either draft a #1 guy, or you can trade for him. If Ekblad is only arguably a #1, why in the world would you give up your best winger, your best defenseman, AND a pick to draft him? Ekblad is a prospect, nothing more, nothing less. Sure, he might end up being the best dman in the league in 4-5 years, but as you say, we don't have a crystal ball, and I don't give up that much known quantity for potential. And I would stand by not making that deal, even if he won the Norris 5 years running. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aziz Posted June 23, 2014 Share Posted June 23, 2014 You obviously just scanned my post i said i don't have a crystal ball and that i noted that Keith and Weber were yes found later but that always happens in every sports someone squeaks by....no crystal remember all you can go off of NOW is the info on hand and that is that none of these guys are projected as #1. i just don't understand how that gets brushed aside. i listed out the dmen that have been taken in the top 5 over the last 14 years. all of them projected as 1st pair players, at the least. 19, total, as i recall. and exactly 2 of them turned into what they were projected as. 2. so, you go trading a bunch of assets for a 2-in-19 chance of a #1 defenseman....does that seem like a wise way to go? not only are you likely to lose on that bet, you are extremely likely to lose on that bet. CAUTION: This isn't an exact science mistakes are made in every pro sport understood. i am saying that in this particular inexact science, mistakes are made literally almost every time. almost every defenseman taken high in the draft turns out to be far far far less than he was projected to be. that, to me, is an experiment you do NOT spend assets to participate in. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OccamsRazor Posted June 23, 2014 Share Posted June 23, 2014 As you say, you can either draft a #1 guy, or you can trade for him. If Ekblad is only arguably a #1, why in the world would you give up your best winger, your best defenseman, AND a pick to draft him? Ekblad is a prospect, nothing more, nothing less. Sure, he might end up being the best dman in the league in 4-5 years, but as you say, we don't have a crystal ball, and I don't give up that much known quantity for potential. And I would stand by not making that deal, even if he won the Norris 5 years running. The same reason everyone give up players and picks and prospects to get there coveted guys that is the only way the Flyers are going to have a chance to get a guy who is going #1 overall. That is it they only other way to get that pick is to suck like Florida has done to get that pick the only way you can get that pick is to give up assets to get him. You and Aziz seem to be hockey guys but don't know how drafts work and how you get these picks they don't just give them away. EVERY ONE IN THE DRAFT IS A GAMBLE ALL THE WAY TO THE LAST DAMN PICK! That is why you do your homework invest in scouts and then go from there. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OccamsRazor Posted June 23, 2014 Share Posted June 23, 2014 i just don't understand how that gets brushed aside. i listed out the dmen that have been taken in the top 5 over the last 14 years. all of them projected as 1st pair players, at the least. 19, total, as i recall. and exactly 2 of them turned into what they were projected as. 2. so, you go trading a bunch of assets for a 2-in-19 chance of a #1 defenseman....does that seem like a wise way to go? not only are you likely to lose on that bet, you are extremely likely to lose on that bet. understood. i am saying that in this particular inexact science, mistakes are made literally almost every time. almost every defenseman taken high in the draft turns out to be far far far less than he was projected to be. that, to me, is an experiment you do NOT spend assets to participate in. Look man i'm not saying to do this it is a risk. I'm just pointing out the fact of what it takes to get him i'm like you guys i'm on the fence with is all this worth the things it will cost to get him and then still it's not a 100% certain you are getting what you're paying for gambling to get. It is a risk it is one that you can look like a genius in a couple years doing or would you can look like a goat for doing and even costing you your job. It isn't an exact science because the one the biggest muscle you can see or measure is heart. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OccamsRazor Posted June 23, 2014 Share Posted June 23, 2014 that, to me, is an experiment you do NOT spend assets to participate in. Point noted so do you think the #1 guy on the blueline is in this organization now???? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aziz Posted June 23, 2014 Share Posted June 23, 2014 You and Aziz seem to be hockey guys but don't know how drafts work and how you get these picks they don't just give them away. we know how drafts work, and we know that the hype surrounding high picks is usually overblown. i don't know much about drafts in other sports. maybe a baseball player can be projected on draft day accurately. maybe a college football standout is a safe bet as he moves into the NFL. i don't know. i do know with hockey, high draft picks have a less than 50% chance of turning out as projected. look at the history, and the flyers are roughtly as likely to get a strong #1 defenseman with the 17th pick as they are with the 1st. that means it is straight up stupid to send resources for that 1st pick. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aziz Posted June 23, 2014 Share Posted June 23, 2014 Point noted so do you think the #1 guy on the blueline is in this organization now???? no, he isn't. he also probably isn't in this year's draft class. 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.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.