Burrows for Dahlen Part 2 | Rage and Anger Edition

[Ice-Tray]

I agree.

but I can't really tolerate some of the comments people make about him when these comments by nature show that these posters have no idea and most probably have never watched Dahlen play. This is a discussion board, and I know this will always happen, but in this particular instance it's quite crazy we suddenly have so many "experts" considering maybe 1-5% of the entire board can accurately assess Dahlen.

Also Dahlen is definitely not an NHL player right now. However that doesn't justify trading him for what we did. Chabot is not an NHler, Brown is not an NHLer and Whitw is not an NHLer. This applies to all prospects. That would not justify trading them for a mediocre return. This is just the type of comment that makes no sense. Prospects are not NHlers, they are valued differently which you don't seem to understand unfortunately.

Saying Dahlen is not an NHLer is a comment with no substance. It means nothing.

Speaking of comments with no substance...

You're getting so worked up about a prospect that you also are unable to accurately assess. You have literally no information beyond what everyone else has access to and yet somehow you've convinced yourself that you are right and others are wrong.

 

[Hale The Villain]

I agree that Dahlen is an excellent prospect. I was one of the people here that followed him and was happy we drafted him and was tracking him pretty regularly. I was responding to why we didn't give up a 1st instead. Obviously Dorion knew that was an option, and it seems obvious as well that he felt the 1st was more valuable. He didn't have a 2017 2nd as a result of the Phaneuf trade , nor a 2018 2nd as a result of the Brassard trade. I am not privy to the trade talk on what else was discussed. I assume the Calgary - Lazar deal , although done later, was a possibility before hand. IE Dorion knew that he could get at least a 2nd for Lazar. I think a 2nd could have got us Burrows. So why didn't it happen like that ... no idea.

I have a hard time believing that Dorion values a late 2017 1st more than Dahlen, and I'm someone who thinks the 2017 draft is underrated. I think it's more likely that it is easier for Dorion to issue propaganda downplaying Dahlen's potential and likelihood of being a good NHLer than it would be for him to downplay trading a 1st round pick, as the pick can be directly compared to other picks traded at the deadline. In other words, it would be hard to justify giving up a 1st round pick for Burrows when other forwards like Vanek, Iginla and Stafford go for picks in the 3-7 rounds.

 

[JD1]

I have a hard time believing that Dorion values a late 2017 1st more than Dahlen, and I'm someone who thinks the 2017 draft is underrated. I think it's more likely that it is easier for Dorion to issue propaganda downplaying Dahlen's potential and likelihood of being a good NHLer than it would be for him to downplay trading a 1st round pick, as the pick can be directly compared to other picks traded at the deadline. In other words, it would be hard to justify giving up a 1st round pick for Burrows when other forwards like Vanek, Iginla and Stafford go for picks in the 3-7 rounds.

that's a bit of a bonkers statement. Dahlen went 42nd?This year's pick is likely 20 to 22nd range? It really isn't hard to understand which is more highly valued. A more likely scenario would be I'm not giving up a 1st for Burrows but a 2nd that doesn't look like he's going to play here for a few years and that we have rated behind several other property. ...that I can do.

 

[Sens of Anarchy]

I have a hard time believing that Dorion values a late 2017 1st more than Dahlen, and I'm someone who thinks the 2017 draft is underrated. I think it's more likely that it is easier for Dorion to issue propaganda downplaying Dahlen's potential and likelihood of being a good NHLer than it would be for him to downplay trading a 1st round pick, as the pick can be directly compared to other picks traded at the deadline. In other words, it would be hard to justify giving up a 1st round pick for Burrows when other forwards like Vanek, Iginla and Stafford go for picks in the 3-7 rounds.

I don't buy that. it's too convoluted imo. IMO he simply values the first more.

I played hockey at a high level and was involved in coaching AA and AAA, as well as team selections for many years and when I think a prospect is something based on what I have seen and Dorion (and his scouts) think something else, I am not confident enough with my sample size and evaluation skills to call him wrong and feel that I am totally right about it. Instead I think there is likely something I am missing.

I can still have an opinion about it like I think they paid more than they needed to for Burrows but... that's just an opinion.

That said I think Dorion can , has , and will make mistakes. In the arena where he works mistakes are easy to make.

 

[Hale The Villain]

I don't buy that. it's too convoluted imo. IMO he simply values the first more.

I played hockey at a high level and was involved in coaching AA and AAA, as well as team selections for many years and when I think a prospect is something based on what I have seen and Dorion (and his scouts) think something else, I am not confident enough with my sample size and evaluation skills to call him wrong and feel that I am totally right about it. Instead I think there is likely something I am missing.

I can still have an opinion about it like I think they paid more than they needed to for Burrows but... that's just an opinion.

That said I think Dorion can , has , and will make mistakes. In the arena where he works mistakes are easy to make.

It's possible that he values the 1st more than Dahlen, but if that's the case he'd be wrong to do so in my view. Dahlen, as a '97, is a kid with two years of development on a '99 born kid about to be drafted, and has done nothing but justify his draft status, as a high 2nd round pick in the stronger draft of 2016.

It's certainly possibility that a 2017 1st could end up a better player than Dahlen going forward, but I wouldn't bank on it.

that's a bit of a bonkers statement. Dahlen went 42nd?This year's pick is likely 20 to 22nd range? It really isn't hard to understand which is more highly valued. A more likely scenario would be I'm not giving up a 1st for Burrows but a 2nd that doesn't look like he's going to play here for a few years and that we have rated behind several other property. ...that I can do.

It's not bonkers, it's logical.

The 2016 draft, by all estimations, is a better draft than 2017. The 42nd pick in 2016 is probably as valuable as the 30th pick in 2017. Then there is the time value part of it as well. Getting a prospect with an extra year of development has value. In Dahlen's case, as a '97 born kid who was a late-birthday draftee in 2016, he's got two years of development on most kids available in 2017. He's two years closer to the league than most kids in the 2017 draft. And of course Dahlen's excellent 2016/17 season increases his value beyond that of his status as the 42nd pick in 2016. I think it's absolutely conceivable that he could go top 30 in a re-draft of 2016.

In summary, Dahlen should be worth more than a pick in the 20-30 range of the 2017 draft.

 

[BondraTime]

It's possible that he values the 1st more than Dahlen, but if that's the case he'd be wrong to do so in my view. Dahlen, as a '97, is a kid with two years of development on a '99 born kid about to be drafted, and has done nothing but justify his draft status, as a high 2nd round pick in the stronger draft of 2016.

It's certainly possibility that a 2017 1st could end up a better player than Dahlen going forward, but I wouldn't bank on it.



It's not bonkers, it's logical.

The 2016 draft, by all estimations, is a better draft than 2017. The 42nd pick in 2016 is probably as valuable as the 30th pick in 2017. Then there is the time value part of it as well. Getting a prospect with an extra year of development has value. In Dahlen's case, as a '97 born kid who was a late-birthday draftee in 2016, he's got two years of development on most kids available in 2017. He's two years closer to the league than most kids in the 2017 draft. And of course Dahlen's excellent 2016/17 season increases his value beyond that of his status as the 42nd pick in 2016. I think it's absolutely conceivable that he could go top 30 in a re-draft of 2016.

In summary, Dahlen should be worth more than a pick in the 20-30 range of the 2017 draft.

Agreed.

I'd be lying if I said I was an expert, or have even seen Dahlen play more than 5 times. I'm far from someone who can accurately depict his future. Dorian has forgotten more than I know about hockey.

What I do know, just through following prospects since I've been 15, and just common sense, is that if Dorian valued Dahlen enough to pick him 42 last year (he said that they had him in their top 30....), and he's done nothing since being drafted aside from increase his value, Dahlen should have been valued, at worst, as a 1st rounder by Dorian. I see no possible way for his value to have dropped from his percieved 1st round value in a much stronger draft. That's what I'm not understanding.

More than happy to get Burrows. Just don't understand the comments by Dorian on Dahlen.

 

[Nac Mac Feegle]

here's where you go off the rails....l assume you are considering yourself amongst that 1 - 5%? That's a fair assumption based on the way you are talking isn't it?

So I have some unfortunate news for you.....you can put decimals and zeroes in front of your 1 - 5 and you've still overstated the number of people posting on HF boards that can accurately assess Dahlen. Someone with the ability to accurately assess Dahlen's potential has the ability to earn a living scouting professional and amateur hockey. Are you claiming you have the ability to earn a living in the hockey scouting industry? Geez if you do, thanks for gracing us with your presence so regularly I guess....our little Sens board is lucky to have you. So, sorry about the sarcasm, but did it drive my point home to you?

Here's the reality....within the hockey scouting industry there is not a consensus opinion on Dahlen. Or at least I assume that is a fact because our dearest Bobby Mac said so and he's the most honest guy and probably the most informed guy in the business.

So please stop with the "you know what he's going to be when he grows up stuff" because you have no more insight in to it than any other guy on the board with an opinion. You're a guy with an uneducated opinion and it's no more valid than others uneducated opinions, mine included. Saying you can't tolerate others uneducated opinions....jeezus how much more condescending can you get.

And if you truly are one of those very rare hockey fans, you know one of the 1,000 or so people out of the millions of hockey fans in Canada that knows the game well enough to earn a living at it, then my apologies to you sir and all I can say is I encourage you to follow your passion and go chase your dream.

now back to reality.... I like that we acquired Burrows...but maybe we gave too much up for him

carry on people lol

....and yet you seem confident that we absolutely won the trade. Where's your scouting credentials?

 

[Micklebot]

Agreed.

I'd be lying if I said I was an expert, or have even seen Dahlen play more than 5 times. I'm far from someone who can accurately depict his future. Dorian has forgotten more than I know about hockey.

What I do know, just through following prospects since I've been 15, and just common sense, is that if Dorian valued Dahlen enough to pick him 42 last year (he said that they had him in their top 30....), and he's done nothing since being drafted aside from increase his value, Dahlen should have been valued, at worst, as a 1st rounder by Dorian. I see no possible way for his value to have dropped from his percieved 1st round value in a much stronger draft. That's what I'm not understanding.

More than happy to get Burrows. Just don't understand the comments by Dorian on Dahlen.

I'm in no way an expert on prospects, but while this year is considered weaker than last year, I think what's more relevant is where the perceived drops are. Last year's drop off seemed to be pretty late in the first (around the mid to late 20s), but that drop-off was considered pretty big. How does this year compare? is the drop off just earlier, but that next tier is of a similar quality? I really don't know. Sens might think a pick in the ~25-45 range this year is the same as last year, but 15-25 was much better last year. Certainly the top end of this year isn't perceived as highly as last year either which for whatever reason has a tendency of colouring the quality of the entire draft.

Honestly, I think of Dahlen in the same vein as I did guys like Silf, Puempel, Noeson, and Wiercioch. Guys that could pan out and be very useful players, or could fail to amount to much. These guys certainly have value, but I won't lose sleep over them, nor get upset if they happen to pan out after being traded.

 

[JD1]

So Dorion said he had Dahlen rated as a 1st rounder did he? I know you're not the argumentative type Bondra but why is that little ditty from Dorion believed to be accurate but other things he's said that don't fit the "Dahlen is god" belief of some posters labelled as propaganda? I mean don't all GMs tell the media just after they draft a kid " we had him rated much higher"


I don't pretend to be an expert either but I do know that I listened to a lengthy interview with Dorion in the days following the trades where he clearly stated some of our prospects were deemed not expendable but that Dahlen wasn't one of them.

So that little bit has been said here before and responded to with "propaganda" just so he looks good so I'm asking isn't "we had him rated much higher" propaganda?

 

[aragorn]

I thought it was a fair deal then & I think it is still a fair deal given what Burrows has done so far in Ottawa. While no one likes to give away the future this business is about producing results at the NHL level & few care or remember what happens with these prospects once they are traded. The majority of fans who go to games care about & only know about the NHL players & know next to nothing about the team's prospects. They want their NHL team to win & win now & could care less about a prospect who has the potential to be a great player in 3 to 5 yrs.

 

[BonHoonLayneCornell]

Dorion was on the Team1200 the other day and argued pretty heavily that the first 2 rounds of this coming draft are actually really good, it's the depth of the draft he says is poor. He was saying that the fact that very few 1st and 2nd rounders have been traded this year that its a sign that they hold more value than fans/media seem to think.

Just his opinion of course, but it was interesting and could play in to this argument that a 1st rounder this year is worth less than a 42nd overall last year.

 

[JD1]

....and yet you seem confident that we absolutely won the trade. Where's your scouting credentials?

I don't seem confident about it at all. I think short term it will pay dividends....I don't have a clue what Dahlen turns out to be, think I might have seen him play twice in the WJC. The odds say he turns in to nothing. I also think it was the right time for the team to tweak a few things and add for the playoffs and I am happy they went the route they did rather than acquiring either of the Colorado guys.

Let me repeat....I have no idea what Dahlen might become. I do however take issue with people and the over the top criticism based on the FACT that they KNOW what Dahlen will become.

 

[JD1]

....and yet you seem confident that we absolutely won the trade. Where's your scouting credentials?

I think I was pretty clear on assessing my own abilities in that post when I said

You're a guy with an uneducated opinion and it's no more valid than others uneducated opinions, mine included.

 

[JD1]

I don't pretend to be an expert either but I do know that I listened to a lengthy interview with Dorion in the days following the trades where he clearly stated some of our prospects were deemed not expendable but that Dahlen wasn't one of them

Look Nac Mac Feegle....there I am again talking about my scouting abilities.....so no, I am not on here professing to know more than everyone else about this prospect or that prospect and that I know someone will pan out or won't.

 

[L'Aveuglette]

Willing to bet that the people saying it's a good trade "unless Dahlen turns out to be a top line NHLer" will justify it later when he does play in Vancouver's top-6 by saying "you just can't predict these things so it was worth the gamble".

Those of us who dislike the trade just don't think the gamble is worth it right now, and nothing that happens within the next few years changes that. Dorion should simply have lowered the price, especially knowing that the real clincher to get Alex here was the extension no one else seemed willing to offer. I don't think you can argue much against that, can you?

 

[Tobi Wan Kenobi]

I have a hard time believing that Dorion values a late 2017 1st more than Dahlen, and I'm someone who thinks the 2017 draft is underrated. I think it's more likely that it is easier for Dorion to issue propaganda downplaying Dahlen's potential and likelihood of being a good NHLer than it would be for him to downplay trading a 1st round pick, as the pick can be directly compared to other picks traded at the deadline. In other words, it would be hard to justify giving up a 1st round pick for Burrows when other forwards like Vanek, Iginla and Stafford go for picks in the 3-7 rounds.

The Canucks weren't willing to move either Burrows or Hansen for picks. They wanted prospects because they apparently don't like this draft. They got Goldobin and Dahlen. They probably had a prospect from each team that was on their lists in mind.

 

[BondraTime]

So Dorion said he had Dahlen rated as a 1st rounder did he? I know you're not the argumentative type Bondra but why is that little ditty from Dorion believed to be accurate but other things he's said that don't fit the "Dahlen is god" belief of some posters labelled as propaganda? I mean don't all GMs tell the media just after they draft a kid " we had him rated much higher"


I don't pretend to be an expert either but I do know that I listened to a lengthy interview with Dorion in the days following the trades where he clearly stated some of our prospects were deemed not expendable but that Dahlen wasn't one of them.

So that little bit has been said here before and responded to with "propaganda" just so he looks good so I'm asking isn't "we had him rated much higher" propaganda?

It very well may be propaganda (I don't think it is, he was rated in many top 30's and was targeted by the Sens). Let's take his comments out of the picture. One thing is for sure, they had him no lower than 42nd (had his nametag for the jersey when drafted, they were targeting him there). So at the worst, they valued him as a high 2nd rounder in a very strong draft. So let's just assume that his value is the same as when he was drafted. Dorian valued him at worst, as a high 2nd rounder.

Now let's assume Dahlen's value wasn't the same as June 2016. Since then, Dahlen has done nothing but improve his stock as a prospect by quite a large margin in my opinion. That should have, using common sense, made Dorian value Dahlen more than the pick he was drafted.

I don't think we have 7-8 guys ahead of Dahlen like Dorian claimed, that doesn't fly with me. Trading for Burrows was great, I just disagree/don't believe for a second, his comments on Dahlen since then.

 

[Micklebot]

It very well may be propaganda (I don't think it is, he was rated in many top 30's and was targeted by the Sens). Let's take his comments out of the picture. One thing is for sure, they had him no lower than 42nd (had his nametag for the jersey when drafted, they were targeting him there). So at the worst, they valued him as a high 2nd rounder in a very strong draft. So let's just assume that his value is the same as when he was drafted. Dorian valued him at worst, as a high 2nd rounder.

Now let's assume Dahlen's value wasn't the same as June 2016. Since then, Dahlen has done nothing but improve his stock as a prospect by quite a large margin in my opinion. That should have, using common sense, made Dorian value Dahlen more than the pick he was drafted.

I don't think we have 7-8 guys ahead of Dahlen like Dorian claimed, that doesn't fly with me. Trading for Burrows was great, I just disagree/don't believe for a second, his comments on Dahlen since then.

Just out of curiosity, where is this number coming from? All I remember is him saying we didn't give up anyone they felt would be an impact player (by which I think they meant the big three), assuming I missed the 7-8 guys ahead interview.

In the end, I think it's clear 3 guys were definitively ahead in the eye of the team and the vast majority of scouts out there. I think it's reasonable that they may have Chlapik ahead or on par with him. After that, I suspect it depends on what they mean by ahead. If NHL ready is a big factor in what they mean, guys like Englund and Jaros could be ahead (both of whom I suspect will be bottom 4 dmen as a peak). Then you have Perron who Dorion called very similar (which imo was code for not quite as good, suggesting that's who Dahlen slots definitively ahead of). Lastly there is Paul, who the team was pretty high on but has been critical of lately.

In terms of how Dahlen would be valued by the team, I suspect he'd be valued by Ottawa in the 1st round if taken this year, but lets say our pick is in the low 20's (we'd pick 23rd today). That means at worst, we'd get our 23rd ranked player, but I imagine it's quite possible the team thinks it can get somebody that falls in the 15-20 range of its list, so for us to be willing to trade our first instead of Dahlen, we'd probably have to value him in that range.

 

[BondraTime]

Just out of curiosity, where is this number coming from? All I remember is him saying we didn't give up anyone they felt would be an impact player (by which I think they meant the big three), assuming I missed the 7-8 guys ahead interview.

In the end, I think it's clear 3 guys were definitively ahead in the eye of the team and the vast majority of scouts out there. I think it's reasonable that they may have Chlapik ahead or on par with him. After that, I suspect it depends on what they mean by ahead. If NHL ready is a big factor in what they mean, guys like Englund and Jaros could be ahead (both of whom I suspect will be bottom 4 dmen as a peak). Then you have Perron who Dorion called very similar (which imo was code for not quite as good, suggesting that's who Dahlen slots definitively ahead of). Lastly there is Paul, who the team was pretty high on but has been critical of lately.

In terms of how Dahlen would be valued by the team, I suspect he'd be valued by Ottawa in the 1st round if taken this year, but lets say our pick is in the low 20's (we'd pick 23rd today). That means at worst, we'd get our 23rd ranked player, but I imagine it's quite possible the team thinks it can get somebody that falls in the 15-20 range of its list, so for us to be willing to trade our first instead of Dahlen, we'd probably have to value him in that range.

I was just throwing a vague number out based on his comments about our guys deemed not expendable, we know 3 guys that were ahead of Dahlen for sure, and I'm just assuming he meant some of Chlapik/Englund/Jaros/Hogberg/Perron. I shouldn't have thrown that number out as a fact when it's just an educate assumption. That's my fault.

 

[Real Smart Sens Fan]

I was just throwing a vague number out based on his comments about our guys deemed not expendable, we know 3 guys that were ahead of Dahlen for sure, and I'm just assuming he meant some of Chlapik/Englund/Jaros/Hogberg/Perron. I shouldn't have thrown that number out as a fact when it's just an educate assumption. That's my fault.

The quote was that there are 4 or 5 guys that they were for sure not trading and that Dahlen wasn't one of them. I'd take that to mean that Dahlen is possibly 5th, likely no lower than 6th - i.e there is a consensus 4 above him, and then another guy who is closely debated amongst their scouts.

There are the 3 obvious ones, and I'd bet a whole lot that the other two players are Englund and Chlapik.

My gut says Englund is the 4th consensus guy, but that hypothesis is based entirely on the fact that even Englund's biggest "non-industry" fans seem to underrate him in comparison to the industry guys.

 

[Ice-Tray]

Willing to bet that the people saying it's a good trade "unless Dahlen turns out to be a top line NHLer" will justify it later when he does play in Vancouver's top-6 by saying "you just can't predict these things so it was worth the gamble".

Those of us who dislike the trade just don't think the gamble is worth it right now, and nothing that happens within the next few years changes that. Dorion should simply have lowered the price, especially knowing that the real clincher to get Alex here was the extension no one else seemed willing to offer. I don't think you can argue much against that, can you?

Who cares about a CHANCE that some people MIGHT say something, IF something happens in a few years from now? Do you not see how ridiculous this is getting? Seriously dude, give it a rest.

I love how your solution is that Dorian should have just up and offered less. I mean, why in the world didn't he think of doing that?!? Forget mention that there were 8 or 9 teams offering for Burrows, but we were willing to give term in order to win out the trade. The extension was to get burrows to allow the trade, not to get Vancouver to accept the trade. Given NTC both Burrows and Vancouver had to be dealt with. Vancouver got the prospect, Burrows got term, and we got the player. Everyone's happy, except you that is, you continue to make up scenarios that make you 'right' and anyone who

Just relax, everyone understands why people who don't like the trade don't like it. We all understand, it's just not an issue any more, who cares, it's over. You have nothing new to add here about this, just accept that normal people also like the trade as well, and don't feel like PD was a bumbling fool who never considered 'just offering less'.

 

[Sens of Anarchy]

Just out of curiosity, where is this number coming from? All I remember is him saying we didn't give up anyone they felt would be an impact player (by which I think they meant the big three), assuming I missed the 7-8 guys ahead interview.

In the end, I think it's clear 3 guys were definitively ahead in the eye of the team and the vast majority of scouts out there. I think it's reasonable that they may have Chlapik ahead or on par with him. After that, I suspect it depends on what they mean by ahead. If NHL ready is a big factor in what they mean, guys like Englund and Jaros could be ahead (both of whom I suspect will be bottom 4 dmen as a peak). Then you have Perron who Dorion called very similar (which imo was code for not quite as good, suggesting that's who Dahlen slots definitively ahead of). Lastly there is Paul, who the team was pretty high on but has been critical of lately.

In terms of how Dahlen would be valued by the team, I suspect he'd be valued by Ottawa in the 1st round if taken this year, but lets say our pick is in the low 20's (we'd pick 23rd today). That means at worst, we'd get our 23rd ranked player, but I imagine it's quite possible the team thinks it can get somebody that falls in the 15-20 range of its list, so for us to be willing to trade our first instead of Dahlen, we'd probably have to value him in that range.

The 7-8 came out very shortly after the trade it was posted here somewhere (from memory) he had

Chabot, White, Brown, Jaros, Hogberg, and Chlapik ahead of him (I think) ... That's only 6 so either it was 5 or 6 vs 7 or 8 or I am missing someone.

The thing about the draft is that unexpected things happen as well. A player you may rank at say 15 falls to you. So there is that element to factor in as well.

I think some of us Sens fans feel a bit starved of we perceive to be skilled players that can finish. We see other teams drafting skill and we want that too. IMO our team lacks some skill and finish. Dahlen has that offensive skill and has shown it at the level he is playing and has improved in his draft + 1 year. He is still a prospect but he seems to have the goods some people are looking for. Will it pan out in the NHL ... according to BMac ~ 2/3 scouts think it will.

This comment has nothing to do with Burrows. I am glad we got him.

 

[Ice-Tray]

The quote was that there are 4 or 5 guys that they were for sure not trading and that Dahlen wasn't one of them. I'd take that to mean that Dahlen is possibly 5th, likely no lower than 6th - i.e there is a consensus 4 above him, and then another guy who is closely debated amongst their scouts.

There are the 3 obvious ones, and I'd bet a whole lot that the other two players are Englund and Chlapik.

My gut says Englund is the 4th consensus guy, but that hypothesis is based entirely on the fact that even Englund's biggest "non-industry" fans seem to underrate him in comparison to the industry guys.

Apparently our young Swedish goalie is having himself quite the season. Given the performances of our other young tenders, and Andy's age, I would suspect that he would have been in the top 4 and untouchable.

 

[Real Smart Sens Fan]

Apparently our young Swedish goalie is having himself quite the season. Given the performances of our other young tenders, and Andy's age, I would suspect that he would have been in the top 4 and untouchable.

I considered him as an option, too. It's definitely possible, although I have substantial doubts about guys who aren't contracted to a North American team. Swedish protectionism is starting to become a (hopefully-not-to-be-substantiated) worry of mine.

 

[JD1]

so in the interview on 1200 a couple weeks ago, Dorion talked at length about our prospect pool

Up front, guys he didn't want to move and clearly valued higher than Dahlen were White, Brown, Chaplk and Burrows. On D, he talked about Chabot, Englund and Harpur as guys he didn't intend to trade and in nets he talked about Hogberg.

He clearly said he wasn't going to move those guys

Now, you can look at that and say that Dahlen was our 5th ranked prospect up front or you can look at that and say the organization has 8 guys that he ranked ahead of Dahlen.

PD was clear that he expects all 8 of these guys to be NHLers, some sooner than others as well.

He then went on to talk about a lot of other guys that have the potential to possibly play in the NHL one day. He mentioned Nick Paul and McCormick amongst them. And he had Dahlen lumped in with this group...guys that might make the league some day but that are tradable.

He also talked at length about being disappointed in Nick Paul.