2nd Annual HF Chat Mock Draft - RESULTS!

[Classic Devil]

I think you did very well with what you had. The Hartnell and Belanger trades were exactly what you needed, and while I think the trade you made to get Stafford was overkill (you probably would have been able to draft him in any event) there's nothing wrong in getting your guy, especially when you've already added so many other quality near-NHL ready players to the lineup. I made a trade down for NJ, 22nd for 30th and 57th thinking I would draft Wharton really early at 22nd and then take Klubertanz at 57th. Turns out my net crashed and I didn't get the opportunity, but I would have been able to get Wharton, though Klubertanz went at 56th. I like Voloshenko, however, so I'm happy with how it turned out anyway.

 

[Jason MacIsaac]

No, J-Mac didn't make it. That's two drafts he's signed up for but didn't make it. Be the last time I include him any of them.

By the way: All those who didn't make it to the draft I'm banning from the GM Game I host right after the draft is over. Kudos to all those who DID make it though.

I told you on thursday night I wouldn't make the draft and to contact PEli to take my place. I also told you to add SopelFan.....something else I doubt you did.

 

[Chimaera]

How can the Caps not win?



Adding a few quality prospects and getting Ovechkin!


I think that's game set match.

 

[Jason MacIsaac]

No, J-Mac didn't make it. That's two drafts he's signed up for but didn't make it. Be the last time I include him any of them.

By the way: All those who didn't make it to the draft I'm banning from the GM Game I host right after the draft is over. Kudos to all those who DID make it though.

Plus, the first one wasn't "your" draft. I set the thing up, all you did was take credit once I couldn't make it (aliant was on strike and cut off people's phone connections)

 

[Jaded-Fan]

How can the Caps not win?



Adding a few quality prospects and getting Ovechkin!


I think that's game set match.

If 1 out of 3 'prospects' pan out you are lucky . . . remember when we (the Pens) picked up your 'top three prospects' in Beech and company for Jagr (and do not give me revisionist history, that was the take on them from your play by play radio guys, I remember them interviewed on the Pittsburgh stations. The Caps were saying 'cup' as they had to only give prospects, their best ones, but prospects, no roster players in adding Jagr). Beech may finally come through, mildly . . . but will never star, we will be lucky if he even plays in Pittsburgh. The others? . . . who knows.

One more point, we actually had Mario, the real thing, not this 'best since Mario' clone, and he scored the equivilent of Michael Jordan numbers, 130, 140, 150, 160 points a year and won nothing . . . until we got Barrasso and Stevens and a team around him that would have won cups even without Mario.

You are counting those chickens way before hatching time.

 

[Slats432]

I think you did very well with what you had. The Hartnell and Belanger trades were exactly what you needed, and while I think the trade you made to get Stafford was overkill (you probably would have been able to draft him in any event) there's nothing wrong in getting your guy, especially when you've already added so many other quality near-NHL ready players to the lineup. I made a trade down for NJ, 22nd for 30th and 57th thinking I would draft Wharton really early at 22nd and then take Klubertanz at 57th. Turns out my net crashed and I didn't get the opportunity, but I would have been able to get Wharton, though Klubertanz went at 56th. I like Voloshenko, however, so I'm happy with how it turned out anyway.

If he didn't make the deal he wouldn't have got Stafford. That is why he had to make the deal. The Oilers had Stafford next on the list, but although he was higher, not enough higher that moving down to get Radulov and the 36th pick wouldn't cure.

 

[Classic Devil]

If he didn't make the deal he wouldn't have got Stafford. That is why he had to make the deal. The Oilers had Stafford next on the list, but although he was higher, not enough higher that moving down to get Radulov and the 36th pick wouldn't cure.

In that case, it was the right move. If you're really high on a player, you do what you need to so you can get him.

 

[Chimaera]

If 1 out of 3 'prospects' pan out you are lucky . . . remember when we (the Pens) picked up your 'top three prospects' in Beech and company for Jagr (and do not give me revisionist history, that was the take on them from your play by play radio guys, I remember them interviewed on the Pittsburgh stations. The Caps were saying 'cup' as they had to only give prospects, their best ones, but prospects, no roster players in adding Jagr). Beech may finally come through, mildly . . . but will never star, we will be lucky if he even plays in Pittsburgh. The others? . . . who knows.

One more point, we actually had Mario, the real thing, not this 'best since Mario' clone, and he scored the equivilent of Michael Jordan numbers, 130, 140, 150, 160 points a year and won nothing . . . until we got Barrasso and Stevens and a team around him that would have won cups even without Mario.

You are counting those chickens way before hatching time.

You wouldn't have won Cups without Mario. That's a joke if you think so. Stevens and Barasso were good in there time, just like Jagr, but it's silly to think you'd have won those Cups without him.

And no where have I even made reference to Ovechkin being next to Mario. He's not. He's the first Ovechkin.


But... honestly, I think draft wise, the Caps would probably have gotten at least a B, and it's hard not to with the parts they had coming in.

 

[Jaded-Fan]

You wouldn't have won Cups without Mario. That's a joke if you think so. Stevens and Barasso were good in there time, just like Jagr, but it's silly to think you'd have won those Cups without him.

And no where have I even made reference to Ovechkin being next to Mario. He's not. He's the first Ovechkin.


But... honestly, I think draft wise, the Caps would probably have gotten at least a B, and it's hard not to with the parts they had coming in.

The point is, you said, and I quote . . . 'How can the Caps not win? . . . Adding a few quality prospects and getting Ovechkin! . . . I think that's game set match'

. . . I was pointing out, with examples, that prospects, even well thought of ones, are prospects . . . and even were AO the greatest thing since white bread (still an if but I like his chances of being very good), we actually had the greatest, Mario, and won nothing for years other than scoring titles for him. Let me see those prospects on the ice and how many become players and then we can talk . . . I never said that they would not become what you hope, but your statement says that it is impossible that they become anything less.

ps, the same goes for my pens, I like what they have done, are doing, and see lots of bright lights at the end of the tunnel, but until those bright lights prove themselves to be more than illusions, I am not counting any chickens.

 

[Chimaera]

The point is, you said, and I quote . . . 'How can the Caps not win? . . . Adding a few quality prospects and getting Ovechkin! . . . I think that's game set match'

. . . I was pointing out, with examples, that prospects, even well thought of ones, are prospects . . . and even were AO the greatest thing since white bread (still an if but I like his chances of being very good), we actually had the greatest, Mario, and won nothing for years other than scoring titles for him. Let me see those prospects on the ice and how many become players and then we can talk . . . I never said that they would not become what you hope, but your statement says that it is impossible that they become anything less.

ps, the same goes for my pens, I like what they have done, are doing, and see lots of bright lights at the end of the tunnel, but until those bright lights prove themselves to be more than illusions, I am not counting any chickens.

See, where you're getting lost is I'm rating what was done in the draft, on the basis of prospects. You're trying to rate on the basis of result of those prospects.


The problem with those differences being, you can't rate on the basis of prospects and their result. They've never played an NHL game. So you can't do much more on rate other than with the quality of those prospects. And... considering that, the Capitals come out with some extremely high quality players in this draft, anyway you look at it. Though I don't like the Montoya pick, getting him at 22 is a steal.

 

[Gwyddbwyll]

I made a trade down for NJ, 22nd for 30th and 57th thinking I would draft Wharton really early at 22nd and then take Klubertanz at 57th. Turns out my net crashed and I didn't get the opportunity, but I would have been able to get Wharton, though Klubertanz went at 56th. I like Voloshenko, however, so I'm happy with how it turned out anyway.

Thanks for Wharton.. got him with the #52

Coyotes:
5. Tukonen
35. Nokelainen
52. Wharton
53. Shantz

Was surprised to see Nokelainen, Dubnyk and Korpikoski available at 35 as we had thought they would all be gone by then. Salmonsson or Schwarz had been our targets. Coyotes will likely pick one of the 2nd round goalies and Shantz fell to us along with Wharton who we picked over Tesliuk.

 

[Jaded-Fan]

See, where you're getting lost is I'm rating what was done in the draft, on the basis of prospects. You're trying to rate on the basis of result of those prospects.


The problem with those differences being, you can't rate on the basis of prospects and their result. They've never played an NHL game. So you can't do much more on rate other than with the quality of those prospects. And... considering that, the Capitals come out with some extremely high quality players in this draft, anyway you look at it. Though I don't like the Montoya pick, getting him at 22 is a steal.

A miscommunication then, I thought that you were talking about these prospects putting the Caps over the top to winning . . .

I agree about Montoya btw, young guns has him rated #3 among all prospects in their May draft update. Though I think that is high still is a steal at 22. I disagree with it being a bad pick . . . granted goal is hardly a need, but you take quality when it falls that far and worry about how he fits later. If things are close then go position, but goaltending especially you can never have too much quality of. Pens are fet in goal (obviously) with Fleury and no less than four NHL caliber goaltenders in the system as well, and yet if I had a chance at Montoya at 22 I would not hesitate to grab him