Tawnos
A guy with a bass
Quality should be priority, because we already got quantity.
We do?
Our prospect pool has no depth at wing or D, but sure... plenty of quantity.
Quality should be priority, because we already got quantity.
We do?
Our prospect pool has no depth at wing or D, but sure... plenty of quantity.
We just signed 2 depth wingers. We will probably draft wingers with our picks in the 20s and 30s range
And we just traded for 4 Dmen prospects and started developing 3 more young Dmen.
The mistake is thinking organizations can identify quality with such precision in order to make it more valuable than quantity. They can't.
Agreed in general – with the one exception of trading up to get into a higher talent tier, or to snag a guy who's dropping.The mistake is thinking organizations can identify quality with such precision in order to make it more valuable than quantity. They can't.
Yes, I know we did... but we were pretty much starting from zero, so the depth is still pretty thin.
I honestly would say the same about the center position if Andersson and Chytil hadn’t already pushed their progress to the next level and we hadn’t acquired Howden. The overall need at center is lower.
Good thing about centers is most of them can play wing as well, so there is more versatility making them the most valuable commodity.
Be like the Jets. Trading up to 2 or 3 does it. Trading from 9 to 6, save you money.Agreed in general – with the one exception of trading up to get into a higher talent tier, or to snag a guy who's dropping.
I have little interest in moving from 9 to 7 or even 5, (unless the price is comparatively low), but if somehow against all reason Svechnikov is still available at that point? By all means, make the move.
The mistake is thinking organizations can identify quality with such precision in order to make it more valuable than quantity. They can't.
This is valid. I just do not like the "at any cost" contemplation.I could live with the Rangers identifying targets they like before 9 and before 26 and using some assets to move up a few slots if they feel there is a significant risk of losing their guy.
If that means having two first rounders, one second and two thirds instead of 3+2+2, I can live with that.
This is valid. I just do not like the "at any cost" contemplation.
Those are intriguing thoughts. Admit to rooting for Tampa for those reasons.I'm also pretty intrigued to see which conversations, if any, resume from the trade deadline. If, by some chance, there is a window to add a first in a Zucc trade, and if we end up with another 2019 pick because Tampa wins, that gives us a lot of ammunition --- even if we bundle some picks in deals.