NHL Entry Draft Which draft selections would disappoint you? (Select all)

[Mark Stones Spleen]

A bunch of us were upset with the Tkachuk selection and it's made us all look like idiots. Thought it would be fun to look back at this in a couple years.

Assuming our first pick goes as planned, select all players that you would not be happy drafting using our second.

Click to read more...

 

[Taluss]

Sanderson, Holtz, Lundell, Askarov. Accidently clicked Perfetti since im on the fence about him

 

[Six Assets]

Drysdale,Holtz,quinn, Lundell,askarov

 

[Mark Stones Spleen]

Only a few hours left to get in your votes. Let's see how wrong we all are.

 

[Senscore]

Would love to get Askarov but not at 5.

 

[DrakeAndJosh]

I voted but I’m still in the “trust dorion” camp. I will start fanboying whoever we pick immediately, but for now, I’m hoping for Raymond/Rossi/Drysdale/Perfetti and will be slightly disappointed if we don’t get one of them.

 

[bert]

A bunch of us were upset with the Tkachuk selection and it's made us all look like idiots. Thought it would be fun to look back at this in a couple years.

Assuming our first pick goes as planned, select all players that you would not be happy drafting using our second.

I think at this point collectively we have all learnt our lesson with Tkachuk. Hopefully everyone is supportive of whoever the team picks. Unless we know Melnyk meddled and made management pick a player they had no intention of picking.

 

[Hale The Villain]

I think at this point collectively we have all learnt our lesson with Tkachuk. Hopefully everyone is supportive of whoever the team picks. Unless we know Melnyk meddled and made management pick a player they had no intention of picking.

If there's any lesson to be learned from our history of drafting in the 1st round, it's that the scouts don't always know best.

Cowen, Rundblad, Ceci, Lazar, Bowers, Thomson - all picks deserving of criticism.

Track record in the 1st is spotty at best. It's day 2 of the draft where they should get a bit of leeway.

 

[bert]

If there's any lesson to be learned from our history of drafting in the 1st round, it's that the scouts don't always know best.

Cowen, Rundblad, Ceci, Lazar, Bowers, Thomson - all picks deserving of criticism.

Track record in the 1st is spotty at best. It's day 2 of the draft where they should get a bit of leeway.

The team didnt draft Rundblad. Only Cowen is the really bad pick out of those players, look at those players compared to their draft class and where they were picked. This is about the 5th overall pick none of those players were in that range. There is alot of elite depth at 5, its not the same situation. I think you believe that teams should be perfect at the draft table if I remember correctly which is just ridiculous when picking a 17 and 18 year old no one in the history of time no matter how good they are at drafting never misses.

 

[Tkachuckycheese]

None really. Didn't vote. They all have their pro's.

Only disappointment would be the people who bitch and then turtle when they find out they are a good player.

 

[IranCondraAffair]

A-S-K-A-R-O-V

 

[Sun God Nika]

Perfetti , Rossi, Raymond, Drysdale and the rest is meh at #5.

 

[Hale The Villain]

The team didnt draft Rundblad. Only Cowen is the really bad pick out of those players, look at those players compared to their draft class and where they were picked. This is about the 5th overall pick none of those players were in that range. There is alot of elite depth at 5, its not the same situation. I think you believe that teams should be perfect at the draft table if I remember correctly which is just ridiculous when picking a 17 and 18 year old no one in the history of time no matter how good they are at drafting never misses.

They essentially did by trading for him one year after he was drafted by the Blues.

Cowen was not the only bad pick. Lazar and Bowers were low-upside picks, Thomson and Ceci have zero hockey IQ and Rundblad couldn't skate.

All of those were bad picks at the time. The scouting staff is not omnipotent and if they do something stupid with our picks they should get criticism and not blind faith.

 

[hockey20000]

don't want sanderdon,askarov,quinn,rossi,perfetti lundell.... Holtz is 50/50 but i will say him also.

 

[Butchy Dakkar]

Not a goalie please.

 

[Matsens15]

No Sanderson at 5 please!!!!!

 

[BondraTime]

Askarov is the only truly dumb pick to make at 5

 

[NyQuil]

I voted honestly for the lolz a few years from now.

 

[Crosside]

A-S-K-A-R-O-V

Wrong tread . I think you want Askarov badly . Why I like lol

 

[Micklebot]

They essentially did by trading for him one year after he was drafted by the Blues.

Cowen was not the only bad pick. Lazar and Bowers were low-upside picks, Thomson and Ceci have zero hockey IQ and Rundblad couldn't skate.

All of those were bad picks at the time. The scouting staff is not omnipotent and if they do something stupid with our picks they should get criticism and not blind faith.

I think it's a bit unfair to criticize picks of guys chosen around where the consensus has them ranked.

If Thomson disappoints (it's a bit early to be calling him a poor choice yet) then he's fair game, but all of Cowen, Ceci, Lazar, and Bowers were chosen where they were expected to go. The reality is not every pick is going to be made on upside, it's a balance of upside vs likelihood of making it that has to be made, and a team that always weights upside above all else runs the risk of finding itself lacking the depth to take advantage of the top talent they did find.

As for Runblad, his value exploded after we traded for him and the return we got when we decided to move on exceeded what can normally be expected out of a 16 OA selection. Tarasenko aside, we were better off with how things went than had we chosen any of the next 9 guys, and given our reluctance to draft russians at that time (be it because of the Melnyk factor or the threat of the KHL), there probably isn't a guy taken in the first that we realistically would have taken that would have been a better option.

Had we focused on upside, we could have ended up with Bjugstad, Jankowski, Shinkaruk, and Paarjarvi. All sorts of players can bust, some times it's development related, sometimes injury, but nobody has a crystal ball so if the guy is picked in the range where he should be expected to go, I have a hard time saying it's because of bad drafting.

 

[Micklebot]

There are two tiers to my vote, I'll be disappointed in the sense that I'd have preferred somebody else if we select Holtz or Quinn, but I'll get over it quickly enough.

I'll be disappointed in the "what were you thinking" sense if we select Askarov or Lundell (Both would be great adds to the team, I just don't see them as 5th OA material, prove me wrong boys...).

 

[Matsens15]

Wrong tread . I think you want Askarov badly . Why I like lol

This make me laugh!!!!

 

[L'Aveuglette]

Interesting to see that Rossi would be the third least disappointing pick, considering how some vocal posters around here are so lukewarm on him.

 

[BonHoonLayneCornell]

Askarov with either 3 or 5. No issue if they can figure out another way to get him, but would prefer 2 high end forward prospects with those picks.

 

[Sweatred]

I want nothing to do with Quinn at 5. I also cringe at the idea of Rossi being our future 1C .