Porter Stoutheart
We Got Wood
- Jun 14, 2017
- 14,925
- 11,327
I would assume you need to cross the first 3 names off the list, because those picks simply aren't available, Bedard not if we traded our whole team and every asset we own, and the other two not far short of that. So it's the next level down we could talk about... Smith, Dvorsky, Danielson. In which case...I guess that's Bedard, Fantilli, Carlsson, Smith.
It's all good. Maybe if we watched these players more, we could really have more faith in whether they're truly something more than Johansen/Duchene/Glass, and not just be subject to the whims of the hype-fest.Look, I'm not a hype-buyer when It comes to draft picks either, we hear the same type of stuff every year about these prospects and it rarely seems to pan out that way. That said, if we are making a big move in the draft and spending that level of assets, I'm more amenable to it for a position we've always historically lacked and is generally vital to organizational success.
I'm willing to take a miss on Michkov even if he does match the hype level because winger is an easier position to fill in the gaps for and you rarely see teams finding lasting success when built around a winger--in the cap era that would really only be Chicago around Kane (and di they win anything without Toews?) and Washington with Ovechkin.Tampa with Kucherov is also maybe there, but they just had a deep forward group and he was a later round pick anyway. Landeskog and Kessel are the only other notable wingers taken top 5, both won Cups, neither won anything when the "centerpiece" of their squads.
I feel like maybe this isn't yet quite the year to throw everything into one big dice roll. I would be the guy saying "hold... hold... hold... LOOSE!!!" to my archers. With the idea that this year is still a year to "hold" and keep stocking the tier 2 prospects with our big draft pick bonanza. If we do well enough, we might soon hit the point where we are just so loaded with tier 2 prospects that we can't even project how to fit them into our lineup anymore, plus we might dip in the standings next season such that our own pick is a little higher which would make a future trade-up easier. In which case, the move up gets easier. Either way, I think we're "not quite there yet"... not quite at the point where we should be able to justify a big gamble on a 3-for-1 type of move up. Not for the Smith/Dvorsky/Danielson prospect anyway.
It's kind of parallel to the UFA/trade front, really. Sure, there are names like DeBrincat and Dubois floating around who are "pretty good" players. But if we blow our load on these guys... it may take us out of the running later if Matthews, Draisatl types ever go UFA.
Over to you, Barry Trotz. I don't think he's just looking to "make a splash"... he's in this for the long haul, and if he doesn't see the right cost/benefit ratio, I think he'll be fine punting some of these things a year. Well, I hope I'm reading him right on that, anyway.
Last edited: