2003 draft Revisited

[Meat Wave]

1) Eric Staal
2) Nathan Horton
3) Dion Phaneuf
4) Nikolai Zherdev
5) Marc-André Fleury
6) Patrice Bergeron
7) Ryan Suter
8) Jeff Carter
9) Milan Michalek
10) Zach Parise
11) Andrei Kostitsyn
12) Thomas Vanek
13) Ryan Getzlaf
14) Dustin Brown
15) Ryan Kesler
16) Eric Fehr
17) Mark Stuart
18) Dan Fristche
19) Mike Richards
20) Corey Perry
21) Brent Burns
22) Brent Seabrook
23) Braydon Coburn
24) Shea Weber
25) Anthony Stewart
26) Loui Eriksson
27) Patrick Eaves
28) Jeff Tambellini
29) Patrick O'Sullivan
30) Petr Vrana

 

[arnie]

Nobody pegged Fleury out of the top 4 on draft day.

You need some help in reading English properly.

 

[Jacob]

he definately drops out of the top 4, where he was pegged on draft day

Enlighten me.

 

[arnie]

Most scouts that day believed Marc-Andre Fleury would've been taken 2nd overall by Carolina had the trade not gone down. Pittsburgh was at #3 and was scared that Carolina might take "their man" so hence the trade. I think Carolina won out with Staal but Fleury has so much potential it could blow Staal's effects out of the water. I am actually pretty sure Carolina would've taken Fleury on draft day. This was before Fleury's WJC mishap and he was simply amazing in his last couple of years and absolutely went on fire the months prior to the draft. He was a great mix of raw ability and solid mechanics. Carolina had Weekes, Irbe and Cam Ward as their top prospect. I'm sure they wouldn't have minded Fleury with their pick.

What would most scouts know about what Carolina was thinking? There was little consensus the ranking of the top 4 guys, although Staal seemed to get the most support.

Carolina later said that they were never interested in Fleury and that Staal was always their man. I don't necessarily believe them with 100% certainty, but it is likely true. Besides, there are still a lot GM's who think that taking a goalie that high is very risky.

Your statement, "he was simply amazing in his last couple of years ," is simply untrue. He wasn't rated in the top 5 until the WJC before the draft.

 

[arnie]

Enlighten me.

Some things are simply impossible.

 

[sunb]

What would most scouts know about what Carolina was thinking? There was little consensus the ranking of the top 4 guys, although Staal seemed to get the most support.

Carolina later said that they were never interested in Fleury and that Staal was always their man. I don't necessarily believe them with 100% certainty, but it is likely true. Besides, there are still a lot GM's who think that taking a goalie that high is very risky.

Your statement, "he was simply amazing in his last couple of years ," is simply untrue. He wasn't rated in the top 5 until the WJC before the draft.

Its almost impossible for a goalie to be rated in the top 5 of the NHL entry draft. But Fleury's athleticism and ability has been widely regarded even when he was 16 years old. He was rated around 15th when he was 17 years old and in the months prior to the draft he went on a torrid pace and burned up competition. And on the day of the draft, many posters / scouts thought Fleury was going to go #2 or #3. No way was both Carolina and Pittsburgh going to pass him up. There was no chance he was going outside of the top 4 as he was clearly better than anyone not named Zherdev, Horton and Staal.

Craig Patrick is a good judge of hockey news as anyone and he didn't want to take a gamble so I assume there was some inkling in Carolina's game-plan of them taking Fleury.

 

[Jaded-Fan]

What would most scouts know about what Carolina was thinking? There was little consensus the ranking of the top 4 guys, although Staal seemed to get the most support.

Carolina later said that they were never interested in Fleury and that Staal was always their man. I don't necessarily believe them with 100% certainty, but it is likely true. Besides, there are still a lot GM's who think that taking a goalie that high is very risky.

Your statement, "he was simply amazing in his last couple of years ," is simply untrue. He wasn't rated in the top 5 until the WJC before the draft.

That sounds a lot like the 'we chose the best athelete available' you hear after every pick, every draft, every sport. I would judge by the actions of the Pens in moving up the more likely possibility that at the time Carolina was interested In Fleury. But impossible of course to say for sure.

 

[Sticky*]

Stunningly unbiased. You get a gold star. *claps* (doesn't hurt that you put my boy Fehr @ 12 either )

Hey, i like Bergeron as much as the next guy, and his bandwagon is certainly overflowing since the WJC, but you cannot justify having him ahean of Staal. Staal is everything Bergeron is, but with a boatload more potential. Probably already one of the better young two-way players in the game.

 

[Brodeur]

That sounds a lot like the 'we chose the best athelete available' you hear after every pick, every draft, every sport. I would judge by the actions of the Pens in moving up the more likely possibility that at the time Carolina was interested In Fleury. But impossible of course to say for sure.

I'm trying to remember where I saw it, but I think there was some video crew following Atlanta GM Don Waddell around on draft day.........and he ran into Carolina GM Jim Rutherford at some point, and Waddell asked him what he was gonna do with his pick. The conversation went something like:

"So who you taking? I know you probably don't want to tell me since we're in the same division but I'm just curious." -- Waddell

"If he's there, we're talking Staal." -- Rutherford

"He should turn out to be good player. We have him ranked #1 too." -- Waddell

 

[Jacob]

Hey, i like Bergeron as much as the next guy, and his bandwagon is certainly overflowing since the WJC, but you cannot justify having him ahean of Staal. Staal is everything Bergeron is, but with a boatload more potential. Probably already one of the better young two-way players in the game.

I was more impressed by Bergeron in the NHL than I was by Staal. It's that simple.

 

[Crosbyfan]

I was more impressed by Bergeron in the NHL than I was by Staal. It's that simple.

I agree...and why does the 9 month older Staal have all the "potential"?

Edit: and for the record I think Staal will be a great player

 

[Brodeur]

I agree...and why does the 9 month older Staal have all the "potential"?

Edit: and for the record I think Staal will be a great player

Because Staal is 3 inches taller and a few pounds heavier

I personally think Staal will be better, but I know plenty of folks (including NHL scouts) that seem to put too much of a premium on size.

 

[sunb]

Rochester is not the best team in the AHL at all and probably actually rated below Manitoba IMO. Manitoba are one of the highest scoring teams and Kesler's goals are only good enough for 3rd on his team while Vanek is leading his team. I agree Kesler's plus minus is good in that he is among the best on his team whereas Vanek is only average on his. Being a powerplay weapon however means less pluses in his column than Kesler.

Rochester has 50 points in 36 games
Manitobe has 51 points in 37 games

Both of them are comparable in terms of talent and performance so far.

Thomas Vanek has 15 goals and 25 points
Vanek has 10 powerplay goals and 5 even strength goals
Vanek is the 4th leading scorer on his team
Plays on the 1st line
Is primarily an offensive player and powerplay arsenal

Ryan Kesler has 18 goals and 35 points.
Kesler has 5 powerplay goals and 13 even strength goals
Kesler is the 3rd leading scorer on his team
Plays on the 2nd line
Is primarily a shut-down player against other teams' top lines and defense specialist


And Vanek is supposed to be a "sniper" while Kesler is supposed to be a "3rd liner"

It is obvious Vanek has a higher upside but you tell me who is the better player thus far in the past 36-37 games.

 

[Captain Conservative]

Hey, i like Bergeron as much as the next guy, and his bandwagon is certainly overflowing since the WJC, but you cannot justify having him ahean of Staal. Staal is everything Bergeron is, but with a boatload more potential. Probably already one of the better young two-way players in the game.

I didn't say I agreed with the rankings, I just said it was stunningly unbiased. Having MAF behind Zherdev and Bergeron is a pretty impressive display of objectivity when you're a Pens fan. Heres my 2003 draft if it was held today:


1.Eric Staal
2.Nik Zherdev
3.MA Fleury
4.Nathan Horton
5.Dion Phaneuf
6.Zach Parise
7.Jeff Carter
8.Ryan Suter
9.Thomas Vanek
10.Patrice Bergeron
11.Milan Michalek
12.Dustin Brown
13.Ryan Getzlaf
14.Andrei Kostitsyn
15.Patrick O'Sullivan
16.Mike Richards
17.Braydon Coburn
18.Eric Fehr
19.Anthony Stewart
20.Mark Stuart
21.Brent Seabrook
22.Steve Bernier
23.Shea Weber
24.Loui Eriksson
25.Ryan Kesler
26.MA Pouliot
27.Dan Fritsche
28.Hugh Jessiman
29.Brent Burns
30.Patrick Eaves

 

[Jaded-Fan]

I didn't say I agreed with the rankings, I just said it was stunningly unbiased. Having MAF behind Zherdev and Bergeron is a pretty impressive display of objectivity when you're a Pens fan. Heres my 2003 draft if it was held today.

Actually we believed that at the time, but that at the top it was pretty close. The Pens move to first was solely about Columbus and our want of a top goaltender. It was not an assessment that Fleury was head and shoulders above the others. Nothing has changed that assesment for me, things have pretty much played out that way. But even then, if there had been no movement by the Pens, Fleury would not have gone number one. Likely number two to Columbus, or if not, then to the Pens. The trade was for insurance, that was all, and I am sure with the assurance that the Pens would only take Fleury with the pick.

 

[McDonald19]

I didn't say I agreed with the rankings, I just said it was stunningly unbiased. Having MAF behind Zherdev and Bergeron is a pretty impressive display of objectivity when you're a Pens fan. Heres my 2003 draft if it was held today:


1.Eric Staal
2.Nik Zherdev
3.MA Fleury
4.Nathan Horton
5.Dion Phaneuf
6.Zach Parise
7.Jeff Carter
8.Ryan Suter
9.Thomas Vanek
10.Patrice Bergeron
11.Milan Michalek
12.Dustin Brown
13.Ryan Getzlaf
14.Andrei Kostitsyn
15.Patrick O'Sullivan
16.Mike Richards
17.Braydon Coburn
18.Eric Fehr
19.Anthony Stewart
20.Mark Stuart
21.Brent Seabrook
22.Steve Bernier
23.Shea Weber
24.Loui Eriksson
25.Ryan Kesler
26.MA Pouliot
27.Dan Fritsche
28.Hugh Jessiman
29.Brent Burns
30.Patrick Eaves

No Perry in the first round? I doubt it.

 

[AgentNaslund*]

As I remembered, back in 2003.... guys that were contenders for the 1st overall pick were the following chumps . That draft was so deep that, any of the following could be number 1 picks, because they were so good.

From Canada Eric Staal.
From Canada Nathan Horton.
From Ukraine Nikolai Zherdev
From CanadaM A Fleury
From Austria Tomas Vanek
From Czech Milan Michalek
From Usa Dustin Brown.

Any of those guys would have been number 1's.

 

[AgentNaslund*]

Rochester has 50 points in 36 games
Manitobe has 51 points in 37 games

Both of them are comparable in terms of talent and performance so far.

Thomas Vanek has 15 goals and 25 points
Vanek has 10 powerplay goals and 5 even strength goals
Vanek is the 4th leading scorer on his team
Plays on the 1st line
Is primarily an offensive player and powerplay arsenal

Ryan Kesler has 18 goals and 35 points.
Kesler has 5 powerplay goals and 13 even strength goals
Kesler is the 3rd leading scorer on his team
Plays on the 2nd line
Is primarily a shut-down player against other teams' top lines and defense specialist


And Vanek is supposed to be a "sniper" while Kesler is supposed to be a "3rd liner"

It is obvious Vanek has a higher upside but you tell me who is the better player thus far in the past 36-37 games.

you have a good point, about Kesler, suppose to be a 3rd liner, Vanek suppose to be a star player, but man, Kesler at 25 , its unbelievable. He has 33 points in 36 games. Do you actually think some of these guys stop improving? That once labled a 3rd liner, always a 3rd liner? This guy is doing what nobody expects him to do. Canucks basically just drafted another version of Mike Richards, its just that, he has more size then Richards, and more footspeed. He was basically, Mike Richards for team USA last season, and hes ranked 25th? IN 2003, he was ranked 17. Your revised list, you have him ranked even lower then that, when infact, out of all 2003 draft class, hes exceeding everyones expectation Obvsiously any Canuck fan will tell you, hes probably more then a 3rd liner. He has 16 points in the past 9 AHL games. on top of that, He has the tools, to be an effective top 6 foward. He has speed, he can shoot the puck, slap shot or wrist shot, he plays effecitive in his own end, and effective in the opposing end. He pk's and hes on the power play.

I dont see Eric Staal having a problem playing on the 1st line. If thats your excuse of Vanek having to face tougher checkers then Kesler, then so be it.

 

[sunb]

you have a good point, about Kesler, suppose to be a 3rd liner, Vanek suppose to be a star player, but man, Kesler at 25 , its unbelievable. He has 33 points in 36 games. Do you actually think some of these guys stop improving? That once labled a 3rd liner, always a 3rd liner? This guy is doing what nobody expects him to do. Canucks basically just drafted another version of Mike Richards, its just that, he has more size then Richards, and more footspeed. He was basically, Mike Richards for team USA last season, and hes ranked 25th? IN 2003, he was ranked 17. Your revised list, you have him ranked even lower then that, when infact, out of all 2003 draft class, hes exceeding everyones expectation Obvsiously any Canuck fan will tell you, hes probably more then a 3rd liner. He has 16 points in the past 9 AHL games. on top of that, He has the tools, to be an effective top 6 foward. He has speed, he can shoot the puck, slap shot or wrist shot, he plays effecitive in his own end, and effective in the opposing end. He pk's and hes on the power play.

I dont see Eric Staal having a problem playing on the 1st line. If thats your excuse of Vanek having to face tougher checkers then Kesler, then so be it.

I think you want to quote Captain Conservative, not me. I ranked Kesler #16 on my list, he was the one who pegged RK at 25.

 

[Captain Conservative]

No Perry in the first round? I doubt it.

Did I make a stupid comment in response to something I didn't like on your list? Don't be a prat.

you have a good point, about Kesler, suppose to be a 3rd liner, Vanek suppose to be a star player, but man, Kesler at 25 , its unbelievable. He has 33 points in 36 games. Do you actually think some of these guys stop improving? That once labled a 3rd liner, always a 3rd liner? This guy is doing what nobody expects him to do. Canucks basically just drafted another version of Mike Richards, its just that, he has more size then Richards, and more footspeed. He was basically, Mike Richards for team USA last season, and hes ranked 25th? IN 2003, he was ranked 17. Your revised list, you have him ranked even lower then that, when infact, out of all 2003 draft class, hes exceeding everyones expectation Obvsiously any Canuck fan will tell you, hes probably more then a 3rd liner. He has 16 points in the past 9 AHL games. on top of that, He has the tools, to be an effective top 6 foward. He has speed, he can shoot the puck, slap shot or wrist shot, he plays effecitive in his own end, and effective in the opposing end. He pk's and hes on the power play.

I dont see Eric Staal having a problem playing on the 1st line. If thats your excuse of Vanek having to face tougher checkers then Kesler, then so be it.

You do realize that there is more to a prospect than just stats, right? He was not Mike Richards. There is only one Mike Richards, and thats Mike Richards. I get so sick of these prospect comparisons being used as a be all, end all to discussions. If you have such a big problem with Kesler @ 25, then make the argument as to which prospects above him he is better than and why. Do you really believe that Ryan Kesler is so clearly a better prospect than Shea Weber, or Steve Bernier...don't take my rankings so personally, this is JUST WHO I PREFER.

 

[McDonald19]

Did I make a stupid comment in response to something I didn't like on your list? Don't be a prat.

The fact is 30 NHL teams would not pass over Corey Perry in the first round if the draft was held again tomorrow.

Sorry if that makes you upset.

 

[Captain Conservative]

The fact is 30 NHL teams would not pass over Corey Perry in the first round if the draft was held again tomorrow.

Sorry if that makes you upset.

Oh, and which franchise is it that you manage?

 

[Jamie]

The fact is 30 NHL teams would not pass over Corey Perry in the first round if the draft was held again tomorrow.

Sorry if that makes you upset.

I wouldn't be surprised if they did... Of course I wouldn't surprised if they didn't either.

Perry's good, but he's not suddenly some top prospect. It was a deep draft year, and there's still a lot of developing for these guys. Most are still a long way from the NHL, even though few on a prospects board are willing to admit. Players like Bergeron deserve a little credit. He made it to the show, and he did himself proud there. Most prospects can't say that.

 

[arnie]

And on the day of the draft, many posters / scouts thought Fleury was going to go #2 or #3. No way was both Carolina and Pittsburgh going to pass him up.

What part of Carolina said that Staal was there man didn't you understand? Youy opinion is based on nothing but speculation. Mine is based on words that cam out of Rutherford's mouth.

 

[arnie]

That sounds a lot like the 'we chose the best athelete available' you hear after every pick, every draft, every sport. I would judge by the actions of the Pens in moving up the more likely possibility that at the time Carolina was interested In Fleury. But impossible of course to say for sure.

They probably moved up because, like all off you here, they didn't know what Carolina was thinking. Afterwards, they said that they had no interest in Fleury. I believe them. Picking a goalie at #1 for two years running is a not desirable.

Further, even the Pens believed that Carolina would not take Fleury. Florida tried at first to drive a hard bargain, but the Pens held out and ultimately gave up very little. This proves that even the Pens didn't really believe that Carolina would take Fleury. Of course, it was given that Florida with Luong wouldn't either.