2019 Draft Talk

[TheDachKnight]

Boldy is committed to go to college, my point was if anyone of those kids can make it to the NHL next year I would give Boldy the higher probability because he is more physically mature and ready for the grind..on skill I obviously think Zegras and Turcotte are better overall, but we do get surprises from time to time and Boldy wouldn't shock me if he impressed....but, kids cannot go to camp and make their case from the NCAA, the can only attend the rookie camp then decide to turn pro or not after that,

He definitely has the skillset for it. I just don’t see him not going to BC. I could be wrong though. It would depend on where he goes too.

 

[AmericanDream]

He definitely has the skillset for it. I just don’t see him not going to BC. I could be wrong though. It would depend on where he goes too.

Boldy reminds me of a young Billy Guerin and that is a very good thing...

 

[Kevin Musto]

according to Bobby Mac, there are none of his scouts that have Kakko ahead of Hughes- none. I haven't seen a legit scouting service that has him ahead as well yet...not saying it can't happen, but I think the odds are overwhelmingly that Hughes is going #1.

In the unlikely event that we pick 2nd, I hope the team picking 1st is the one team in the league that has Kakko over Hughes haha.

 

[BK]

I am a huge fan of Kakko as a fit for this team going forward. Hughes would be interesting as out top 2 center slots are filled unless you see Hughes as a wing. To be clear, I would take BPA but it is interesting fit wise.

 

[ColdSteel2]

Knight is a legit top flight goalie prospect. Would I take him in the 1st with our pick? No but if we had a late 1st from something else I would 100% consider it. I think he is going to be a good one.

I’m going to be honest. I know it makes absolutely no sense to do it and that it will not happen. But given the choice between letting him go to another team or taking him with our 1st, I would take him. The guy is that special IMO. And at the end of the day, if he pans out, he will be viewed top 5 in a redraft. For example, if you look back at Gibson’s draft, many would have him at 1 OA and almost everyone would put him top 5.

Long story short, get another 1st rounder and get this guy Stan. Please.

 

[hawksfan50]

But Hughes cannot fit the Hawks needs....he gets 50%of his points from pp ...He has to be 1C or 2C on a team and get featured on the pp...Are you people who agree with the "conensus" hype that he is "generational" and therefore is the clear #1 such that any team drafting #1 would be crazy to not take him saying the Hawks if in that position must bow to the BOA consensus even IF he does not fit our immediate needs well?Are you saying we get him and Immediately $10.5 #1 must go from 1C to 3C instead of the expected time line for that move. In 3 or 4 years down the road (at tgexearlurst) once Toews s gets to 34 or 35 and no longer can fulfill the 1C role and no longer be featured in the top pp unit?


Methinks our captain would not take kindly to immediate demotion next season to 3C to make room for "generational Jack" as the new big superstar on the scene...Plus that is going to be enormous pressure on any 18 year old let alone a 5'10 160 lb smurf with an average shot and who is not really a great 200ft player.

He may be the solution as a 1C or 2C to start say on the Kingston Vancouver ..but we have Tores as 1C and Stone as 2C and Hughes is not really cut out to do the things you want from a 3C...yes we need scoring and driving a line as 3C but we also want much better defensive.xa ility than Anisimpv too..I cannot see how Hughes fits a 3C role for Our ten needs.. Turcotte fits it much better.. and after 3-5 more years when Tores is ready to pass on from the 1C role ...then Turcotte can move up to that job.

So who cares if Hugheso is "generational" ..he cannot be that for us Right Away given only a 3C role and not on the top pp unit (no room at tgebinn).

He is not the right guy for us to take.

Give him featured 1C minutes and top pp minutes on say L.A. or Vancouver ...or give him the 2C role for The Avs (if the Ottawa pick they own wins the lottery for #1) ...in the
Hose featured roles for those teams as 1C or 2C plus top pp catalyst..yes he could be immediate star (though I am still skeptical on that till he adds more weight for the rigors of playing g NHL men) ...

He may or may not live upto his hype ..but that cannot happen if he were on the Hawks at 3C ND no pp featured time ...at least till Tores moves to a lesser role.

This is what I really am saying..Not that he has no talent...he is a generational skater and assists playmaker.....I am more skeptical on his goal scoring and defensive abilities...but as far as the Hawks situation goes,his so called greatness maybe is delayed 3-4 years till he does get the opportunity to be "the giy" as 1C and featured on the 1st pp unit.. And so I merely question why take him if we got the chance?

If we did get the #1...better we should trade down with teM #2 or #3 or maybe #4 if we thought Kakko and Podkolzin go right after Hughes taken at #1 by team we traded down to .

Maybe the price those teams give us to move up plus us getting a better fit in Turcotte would be of more value .

If Hughes is so "generational"maybe teams draft #2 or #3or #4 would give us their pick PLUS a 2020 or2021 1st for the #1 this year (if we gotvit) and our 2nd rounder in 2020 or 2021 ?

That would be a great deal for us!

If they think Hughes is gerational and fits their needs..maybe we could extract such a price.

I am saying that I am skeptical Hughes is generational in impact ..but I may be wrong...still even so I suggest a package of Turcotte (if we move down a bit) plus getting a 1st in 2020 or 2020 from a current bottom feeder that probably still will not be a playoff team next season or maybe even season after ...would be better than drafting Hughes who us a definite mis-fit with us.

 

[BK]

I’m going to be honest. I know it makes absolutely no sense to do it and that it will not happen. But given the choice between letting him go to another team or taking him with our 1st, I would take him. The guy is that special IMO. And at the end of the day, if he pans out, he will be viewed top 5 in a redraft. For example, if you look back at Gibson’s draft, many would have him at 1 OA and almost everyone would put him top 5.

Long story short, get another 1st rounder and get this guy Stan. Please.

I 100% get what you are saying.

 

[crazyhawk]

I would think Stan is looking at acquiring another 1st rounder say in the 15 -25 range.
That's where to grab Knight ... unless Vegas just has to have him!

 

[Giovi]

But Hughes cannot fit the Hawks needs....he gets 50%of his points from pp ...He has to be 1C or 2C on a team and get featured on the pp...Are you people who agree with the "conensus" hype that he is "generational" and therefore is the clear #1 such that any team drafting #1 would be crazy to not take him saying the Hawks if in that position must bow to the BOA consensus even IF he does not fit our immediate needs well?Are you saying we get him and Immediately $10.5 #1 must go from 1C to 3C instead of the expected time line for that move. In 3 or 4 years down the road (at tgexearlurst) once Toews s gets to 34 or 35 and no longer can fulfill the 1C role and no longer be featured in the top pp unit?


Methinks our captain would not take kindly to immediate demotion next season to 3C to make room for "generational Jack" as the new big superstar on the scene...Plus that is going to be enormous pressure on any 18 year old let alone a 5'10 160 lb smurf with an average shot and who is not really a great 200ft player.

He may be the solution as a 1C or 2C to start say on the Kingston Vancouver ..but we have Tores as 1C and Stone as 2C and Hughes is not really cut out to do the things you want from a 3C...yes we need scoring and driving a line as 3C but we also want much better defensive.xa ility than Anisimpv too..I cannot see how Hughes fits a 3C role for Our ten needs.. Turcotte fits it much better.. and after 3-5 more years when Tores is ready to pass on from the 1C role ...then Turcotte can move up to that job.

So who cares if Hugheso is "generational" ..he cannot be that for us Right Away given only a 3C role and not on the top pp unit (no room at tgebinn).

He is not the right guy for us to take.

Give him featured 1C minutes and top pp minutes on say L.A. or Vancouver ...or give him the 2C role for The Avs (if the Ottawa pick they own wins the lottery for #1) ...in the
Hose featured roles for those teams as 1C or 2C plus top pp catalyst..yes he could be immediate star (though I am still skeptical on that till he adds more weight for the rigors of playing g NHL men) ...

He may or may not live upto his hype ..but that cannot happen if he were on the Hawks at 3C ND no pp featured time ...at least till Tores moves to a lesser role.

This is what I really am saying..Not that he has no talent...he is a generational skater and assists playmaker.....I am more skeptical on his goal scoring and defensive abilities...but as far as the Hawks situation goes,his so called greatness maybe is delayed 3-4 years till he does get the opportunity to be "the giy" as 1C and featured on the 1st pp unit.. And so I merely question why take him if we got the chance?

If we did get the #1...better we should trade down with teM #2 or #3 or maybe #4 if we thought Kakko and Podkolzin go right after Hughes taken at #1 by team we traded down to .

Maybe the price those teams give us to move up plus us getting a better fit in Turcotte would be of more value .

If Hughes is so "generational"maybe teams draft #2 or #3or #4 would give us their pick PLUS a 2020 or2021 1st for the #1 this year (if we gotvit) and our 2nd rounder in 2020 or 2021 ?

That would be a great deal for us!

If they think Hughes is gerational and fits their needs..maybe we could extract such a price.

I am saying that I am skeptical Hughes is generational in impact ..but I may be wrong...still even so I suggest a package of Turcotte (if we move down a bit) plus getting a 1st in 2020 or 2020 from a current bottom feeder that probably still will not be a playoff team next season or maybe even season after ...would be better than drafting Hughes who us a definite mis-fit with us.

Absolutely no credible scouting source that i know of is calling him generational. Yet you keep referring to him as such.

If the Hawks are lucky enough to win the lotto and pick first, its BPA. Drafting for need at #1 is pretty much unheard of, especially when there is a strong consensus as to who that pick is.

 

[AmericanDream]

Absolutely no credible scouting source that i know of is calling him generational. Yet you keep referring to him as such.

If the Hawks are lucky enough to win the lotto and pick first, its BPA. Drafting for need at #1 is pretty much unheard of, especially when there is a strong consensus as to who that pick is.

once he comes up with a term that he knows draws attention like his "smurf" shit, he will keep on using it..he is like a 5 year old at times despite the fact that he is over 40 years old I believe.

 

[AmericanDream]

I would think Stan is looking at acquiring another 1st rounder say in the 15 -25 range.
That's where to grab Knight ... unless Vegas just has to have him!

if you are the Avs, how on Earth do you not draft Knight with your 2nd first round pick?? or the Rangers who have 3 first rounders?? there is zero chance Knight gets past either of those two teams IMO.

 

[Rooh]

But Hughes cannot fit the Hawks needs....he gets 50%of his points from pp ...He has to be 1C or 2C on a team and get featured on the pp...Are you people who agree with the "conensus" hype that he is "generational" and therefore is the clear #1 such that any team drafting #1 would be crazy to not take him saying the Hawks if in that position must bow to the BOA consensus even IF he does not fit our immediate needs well?Are you saying we get him and Immediately $10.5 #1 must go from 1C to 3C instead of the expected time line for that move. In 3 or 4 years down the road (at tgexearlurst) once Toews s gets to 34 or 35 and no longer can fulfill the 1C role and no longer be featured in the top pp unit?


Methinks our captain would not take kindly to immediate demotion next season to 3C to make room for "generational Jack" as the new big superstar on the scene...Plus that is going to be enormous pressure on any 18 year old let alone a 5'10 160 lb smurf with an average shot and who is not really a great 200ft player.

He may be the solution as a 1C or 2C to start say on the Kingston Vancouver ..but we have Tores as 1C and Stone as 2C and Hughes is not really cut out to do the things you want from a 3C...yes we need scoring and driving a line as 3C but we also want much better defensive.xa ility than Anisimpv too..I cannot see how Hughes fits a 3C role for Our ten needs.. Turcotte fits it much better.. and after 3-5 more years when Tores is ready to pass on from the 1C role ...then Turcotte can move up to that job.

So who cares if Hugheso is "generational" ..he cannot be that for us Right Away given only a 3C role and not on the top pp unit (no room at tgebinn).

He is not the right guy for us to take.

Give him featured 1C minutes and top pp minutes on say L.A. or Vancouver ...or give him the 2C role for The Avs (if the Ottawa pick they own wins the lottery for #1) ...in the
Hose featured roles for those teams as 1C or 2C plus top pp catalyst..yes he could be immediate star (though I am still skeptical on that till he adds more weight for the rigors of playing g NHL men) ...

He may or may not live upto his hype ..but that cannot happen if he were on the Hawks at 3C ND no pp featured time ...at least till Tores moves to a lesser role.

This is what I really am saying..Not that he has no talent...he is a generational skater and assists playmaker.....I am more skeptical on his goal scoring and defensive abilities...but as far as the Hawks situation goes,his so called greatness maybe is delayed 3-4 years till he does get the opportunity to be "the giy" as 1C and featured on the 1st pp unit.. And so I merely question why take him if we got the chance?

If we did get the #1...better we should trade down with teM #2 or #3 or maybe #4 if we thought Kakko and Podkolzin go right after Hughes taken at #1 by team we traded down to .

Maybe the price those teams give us to move up plus us getting a better fit in Turcotte would be of more value .

If Hughes is so "generational"maybe teams draft #2 or #3or #4 would give us their pick PLUS a 2020 or2021 1st for the #1 this year (if we gotvit) and our 2nd rounder in 2020 or 2021 ?

That would be a great deal for us!

If they think Hughes is gerational and fits their needs..maybe we could extract such a price.

I am saying that I am skeptical Hughes is generational in impact ..but I may be wrong...still even so I suggest a package of Turcotte (if we move down a bit) plus getting a 1st in 2020 or 2020 from a current bottom feeder that probably still will not be a playoff team next season or maybe even season after ...would be better than drafting Hughes who us a definite mis-fit with us.

Is someone calling Hughes generational or something? The only generational player around these streets is Cool Strome fiddster.

 

[CallMeShaft]

I always thought Fiddy was way older than 40. Like whatever the age of the current president is...

 

[Kevin Musto]

Is someone calling Hughes generational or something? The only generational player around these streets is Cool Strome fiddster.

 

[TLEH]

Top 5, you're going to end up with a good player this year.

 

[ChiHawks10]

I always thought Fiddy was way older than 40. Like whatever the age of the current president is...

Yeah, I'm pretty sure Fiddy is at least 10-15 years past fiddy...

 

[crazyhawk]

if you are the Avs, how on Earth do you not draft Knight with your 2nd first round pick?? or the Rangers who have 3 first rounders?? there is zero chance Knight gets past either of those two teams IMO.

You just never know how teams will draft. Goalies are a funny animal when it comes to the 1st round. Yeah maybe he's gone to NY or Colorado but he may fall to us too if we get lucky ... and if Stan even decides to take him if available!

 

[pvr]

I think the worst/highest the Hawks get to is sixth, and then they have to hope for the ball to bounce in their favor.

 

[ChiHawks10]

You just never know how teams will draft. Goalies are a funny animal when it comes to the 1st round. Yeah maybe he's gone to NY or Colorado but he may fall to us too if we get lucky ... and if Stan even decides to take him if available!

I can guarantee if the Hawks have a top 7 pick they're not taking a goalie.

 

[crazyhawk]

I can guarantee if the Hawks have a top 7 pick they're not taking a goalie.

I am referring to us having a second 1st rounder in case we can make a trade before or during the draft.

 

[Kevin Musto]

I am referring to us having a second 1st rounder in case we can make a trade before or during the draft.

I think if we acquired another 1st it would be a late one like somewhere between 27-31. I think Knight will be gone by then.

 

[TheDachKnight]

I think if we acquired another 1st it would be a late one like somewhere between 27-31. I think Knight will be gone by then.

Unless of course we got #2 and Colorado wanted it bad enough to give up #4 and #12. They get Kakko, we get Zegras and Knight. I’d even consider it if we won the draft lottery but I don’t like the idea of giving Colorado #1. Maybe the Rangers would be a better trade target. We get their 2 higher 1sts and get Zegras and Knight, they get Hughes or Kakko. I’m admittedly very high on both Zegras and Knight. I think they both end up as elite players.

 

[Kevin Musto]

Unless of course we got #2 and Colorado wanted it bad enough to give up #4 and #12.

In the event that this plays out, and Hughes goes 1st, I do this in a heartbeat. If Hughes drops to #2, I'd keep the pick. Otherwise #4 + #12 would be amazing.

If you pick say Byram + Knight with those picks, you fill up all of our holes aside from wingers, but you can acquire them in free agency easily.

 

[TheDachKnight]

In the event that this plays out, and Hughes goes 1st, I do this in a heartbeat. If Hughes drops to #2, I'd keep the pick. Otherwise #4 + #12 would be amazing.

If you pick say Byram + Knight with those picks, you fill up all of our holes aside from wingers, but you can acquire them in free agency easily.

Byram is also close to Zegras and Turcotte. I’d be very happy with any of those 3 at 4 and Knight at 12. I love Hughes but getting Zegras/Turcotte/Byram and Knight for him might make me make that trade. I’d probably ask for all 3 of NYR’s 1sts or the higher two and one of their 2nds if we were at 1. I don’t think I’d willingly trade Hughes to Colorado since they’re in division. It’d have to be something stupid from them for me to give them Hughes. Like #4, #12, Bowers/Jost, and possibly another pick. I don’t think they’d pay that but that would be my asking price for them to acquire Hughes.

 

[AmericanDream]

You just never know how teams will draft. Goalies are a funny animal when it comes to the 1st round. Yeah maybe he's gone to NY or Colorado but he may fall to us too if we get lucky ... and if Stan even decides to take him if available!

agreed, but teams with multiple first round picks can go for that home run swing, and he is that. also what does NYR really have in net for the future? outside of Georgiev they have Halverson and that is about it..I would say I am close as 100% the Rangers will go draft Knight with their 2nd pick in the 1st round..so if we want Knight, better start working the damn phones.