Post-Game Talk: 2015 NHL Entry Draft: The Boston Ruins Edition

[Emperoreddy]

What is Palmeiri's contract status? How much does he make? How long b4 ufa?

I believe one more year then he is a RFA so we have control over him for a bit.

 

[ForeverJerseyGirl]

I believe one more year then he is a RFA so we have control over him for a bit.

That's what I think too, and I'm pretty sure his current contract is pretty cheap.

 

[Emperoreddy]

That's what I think too, and I'm pretty sure his current contract is pretty cheap.

It is. About 1.5 tops. I think its a bit less. If he works out obviously worth giving a decent RFA contract considering he is really young.

 

[Devilsgrl35]

I believe one more year then he is a RFA so we have control over him for a bit.

I think he's a UFA in 3 years. But a contract extension longer than 2 years next summer would delay that obviously.

 

[JimEIV]

I don't mind the trade down, a 3rd pick for 6 spots seems about right.

I just don't like picking a goalie there.

The rest of the draft looks real good imo. A big fast talented fwd, trading for a fairly proven 24 yr old, speers looks good, the little guy in the 6th rnd looks good.

So when I look at it like that the draft as a whole was excellent. Just didn't like using a 2nd rnd pick on a goalie. Why the heck are we drafting a goalie? But Im coming to grips.

First I dont like the deal...
A middle round 4th, #109 shouldn't have been enough to move up from #42 to #36. That's a big jump in a deep draft for a random 4th. At the very least it is a bit weak for moving from the middle of the 2nd round to near the top.

If we used #109 this year because we had someone in mind, maybe I would've felt differently about the trade down. But that obviously wasn't the case...it seems as though we were lost after Aho was picked, like in yahoo fantasy when you hit the "Suggest" button during the draft.

So #42 and a 3rd in 2016 for #36 in a deep draft doesn't make much sense to me at all...even if your guy was Blackwood all along you let go 6 spots in a deep draft for essentially nothing when you could've just taken your guy which Blackwood obviously wasn't.

 

[NJDevs26]

Honestly I have no problem with using a deep draft to address 'every' area of need...why limit yourself? Young NHL forward, check. High end forward prospect, check. A couple other young forwards with offensive upside, check. A LHD and G for depth there, check. If you have a supposedly deep draft why only exclusively fill the forward spot? Might as well take advantage of the depth in all areas.

It's not as if they didn't primarily address forward (which they did need to do)...four out of six picks, all guys with skill and speed. Three of them with top 67 picks. If we took a dman with the two - which I kind of figured on - and goalie in the fourth everyone would love this draft without any qualifiers.

 

[devilsblood]

First I dont like the deal...
A middle round 4th, #109 shouldn't have been enough to move up from #42 to #36. That's a big jump in a deep draft for a random 4th. At the very least it is a bit weak for moving from the middle of the 2nd round to near the top.

If we used #109 this year because we had someone in mind, maybe I would've felt differently about the trade down. But that obviously wasn't the case...it seems as though we were lost after Aho was picked, like in yahoo fantasy when you hit the "Suggest" button during the draft.

So #42 and a 3rd in 2016 for #36 in a deep draft doesn't make much sense to me at all...even if your guy was Blackwood all along you let go 6 spots in a deep draft for essentially nothing when you could've just taken your guy which Blackwood obviously wasn't.

Oh, I was thinking it was a 3rd rndr.

Still, of our top 4 picks we got 3 fwd's, one of whom is NHL proven, so I can't get too upset about the whole draft.

 

[Triumph]

First I dont like the deal...
A middle round 4th, #109 shouldn't have been enough to move up from #42 to #36. That's a big jump in a deep draft for a random 4th. At the very least it is a bit weak for moving from the middle of the 2nd round to near the top.

If we used #109 this year because we had someone in mind, maybe I would've felt differently about the trade down. But that obviously wasn't the case...it seems as though we were lost after Aho was picked, like in yahoo fantasy when you hit the "Suggest" button during the draft.

So #42 and a 3rd in 2016 for #36 in a deep draft doesn't make much sense to me at all...even if your guy was Blackwood all along you let go 6 spots in a deep draft for essentially nothing when you could've just taken your guy which Blackwood obviously wasn't.

The Devils did have someone in mind for that potential 4th round pick, or else they wouldn't have had the qualifier on it. That person was picked and so they saved the pick for next year. This is what Shero said, at least.

The Devils were in a bind, they had to find a team to trade up to them, did they get perfect or full value, no, but they got some value, which is much better than just taking Blackwood at 36.

 

[Missionhockey]

The Devils did have someone in mind for that potential 4th round pick, or else they wouldn't have had the qualifier on it. That person was picked and so they saved the pick for next year. This is what Shero said, at least.

The Devils were in a bind, they had to find a team to trade up to them, did they get perfect or full value, no, but they got some value, which is much better than just taking Blackwood at 36.

I thought #67 was the pick they acquired when they traded down? Didn't TG say that they opted to use it this year? Maybe I'm mistaken.

 

[ForeverJerseyGirl]

It is. About 1.5 tops. I think its a bit less. If he works out obviously worth giving a decent RFA contract considering he is really young.

Totally agree about giving him a nice raise as an RFA if he works out here. The good thing about this trade is the fact that he could be with this team for the future in addition to improving the team now.

 

[Emperoreddy]

Totally agree about giving him a nice raise as an RFA if he works out here. The good thing about this trade is the fact that he could be with this team for the future in addition to improving the team now.

Honestly it should be getting more press because it was one of the better trades for one team of the day. We have up so little for a talented cost controlled, YOUNG, RW.

 

[JimEIV]

Honestly I have no problem with using a deep draft to address 'every' area of need...why limit yourself? Young NHL forward, check. High end forward prospect, check. A couple other young forwards with offensive upside, check. A LHD and G for depth there, check. If you have a supposedly deep draft why only exclusively fill the forward spot? Might as well take advantage of the depth in all areas.

It's not as if they didn't primarily address forward (which they did need to do)...four out of six picks, all guys with skill and speed. Three of them with top 67 picks. If we took a dman with the two - which I kind of figured on - and goalie in the fourth everyone would love this draft without any qualifiers.

That's quite the spin...we went in the draft with #36, 41, 67 and 97 and walk away with 1 forward prospect from those 4 picks. And it came from #67 no less.

Let's not even talk about #6, we were getting talent there no matter what...to have a successful draft we needed to kill rounds 2-4 with those 4 picks in the top 100.

This was the portion of the draft to restock the cupboard with viable talent and we really didn't do that.

 

[devilsblood]

That's quite the spin...we went in the draft with #36, 41, 67 and 97 and walk away with 1 forward prospect from those 4 picks. And it came from #67 no less.

Let's not even talk about #6, we were getting talent there no matter what...to have a successful draft we needed to kill rounds 2-4 with those 4 picks in the top 100.

This was the portion of the draft to restock the cupboard with viable talent and we really didn't do that.

Wait a minute, haven't you been arguing for the last 2 months how the fwd prospect pool is way better then it's given credit for?

 

[JimEIV]

The Devils were in a bind, they had to find a team to trade up to them, did they get perfect or full value, no, but they got some value, which is much better than just taking Blackwood at 36.

Doesn't all of this making passing on Bittner, Kylington, Sprong, Dunn. Harkins, Hintz, Bracco or anyone even worse?

You essentially just said that Devils had to make a weak deal as opposed to making a poor value choice from #36. Think about that. It was an all around ****ty use of the #36.

 

[SeidoN]

this is gonna be the debate that makes me leave the boards for a while again isnt it. its been about 30hrs and im already bored to death of it

 

[JimEIV]

Oh, I was thinking it was a 3rd rndr.

Still, of our top 4 picks we got 3 fwd's, one of whom is NHL proven, so I can't get too upset about the whole draft.

It is a 3rd next year...

The offer was #109 this year or a 3rd next year.

So a 4th(#109 or a 3rd next year) to move from #42 to #36.

We got robbed.

 

[Devilsgrl35]

I hope this goalie turns into a star. I really rooting for him even more.

 

[JimEIV]

this is gonna be the debate that makes me leave the boards for a while again isnt it. its been about 30hrs and im already bored to death of it

Don't worry there isn't much of a debate.

But this is a draft thread what do you expect to talk about here?

 

[JimEIV]

I hope this goalie turns into a star. I really rooting for him even more.

Me too...but it won't change the fact that it was a horrible use of this pick.

 

[Devilsgrl35]

Me too...but it won't change the fact that it was a horrible use of this pick.

You're judging him by his position not his ability. If you get a NHL quality goalie in round 2, you did well.

 

[Missionhockey]

You're judging him by his position not his ability. If you get a NHL quality goalie in round 2, you did well.

I think that's an understatement when you consider what the price of acquiring a starting goaltender cost. Afterall, Cam Talbot had a good 36 games behind the best defense in the league and it took the Oilers three picks to get him.

 

[Emperoreddy]

That's quite the spin...we went in the draft with #36, 41, 67 and 97 and walk away with 1 forward prospect from those 4 picks. And it came from #67 no less.

Let's not even talk about #6, we were getting talent there no matter what...to have a successful draft we needed to kill rounds 2-4 with those 4 picks in the top 100.

This was the portion of the draft to restock the cupboard with viable talent and we really didn't do that.

Who is spinning now? We had 6 picks and we added 4 forwards to the system. Two with serious upside that can contribute to the NHL now.

One more of a project but again lots of upside and a boom and bust in the 6th.

 

[Devilsgrl35]

I think that's an understatement when you consider what the price of acquiring a starting goaltender cost. Afterall, Cam Talbot had a good 36 games behind the best defense in the league and it took the Oilers three picks to get him.

And we traded a top 10 pick from Schneider. But I also imagine they may have been thinking what if Kinkaid is ready to be a #1 in 2 years and leaves. Not that Blackwood would be ready by then but you have to prepare for everything.

 

[TheUnseenHand]

I agree with you about the goalie Jim, but I think you're trying really hard to not like Shero.

 

[JimEIV]

Wait a minute, haven't you been arguing for the last 2 months how the fwd prospect pool is way better then it's given credit for?

Yes. Absolutely. That doesn't mean there aren't needs. I do believe we have a lot of NHL candidates and for some reason people want to down play that.

We still today don't have any RW's in the pipeline and I don't believe we increased the talent level at all (aside from Zacha, which is a big aside)

But what does our current pipeline even have to do with passing on a slew of talent in the 2nd round of this draft? I don't see the connection quite honestly?