That would cost us way more, and lol Backstrom on the 2nd line. (And I love Turris)
That would cost us way more, and lol Backstrom on the 2nd line. (And I love Turris)
ReginKarlssonLehner
Let's Win It All
I'd give up my left nut for Backstrom. He's going no where. Top 5-7 C in the game, excellent defensively and only 26.
I listed him because he's one of the best players we've ever had and we got him in the middle of the round.
Somewhat relevant when people talk about needing high picks.
Sorry I got Volchenkov's draft number wrong. Disregard the entire post, that's unacceptable.
Micklebot
Moderator
- Apr 27, 2010
- 53,854
- 31,069
I was just genuinely curious who you were referencing.
Every team finds good players late now and then, but the odds are much better with higher picks. We were extremely fortunate with our later picks early on and unfortunate with our high picks but that's not something you should count on continuing.
coladin
Registered User
- Sep 18, 2009
- 11,816
- 4,504
Part of me is not sure how next year will play out. I think the organization has to find out of their prospects can make an impact in the NHL. It could either mean we are a surprise team or our prospects are not good enough, perhaps leading to an actual rebuild.
The other part thinks if we retain Spezza and Hemsky this team has a lot of parts ready to bounceback. 2 scoring lines. I youth scoring/checking line. A 4th line with toughness.
The other part thinks if we retain Spezza and Hemsky this team has a lot of parts ready to bounceback. 2 scoring lines. I youth scoring/checking line. A 4th line with toughness.
No, the tough decisions come when you need to determine who replaces them and their production.
Greening isn't as bad as he showed this year. He isn't as good as he may have seemed on Spezza's wing but he can be an effective 3rd line player.
Spezza and Milo would be next to impossible to replace in terms of scoring.
Condra doesn't do much, easy to replace (except for his fancy stats...I guess). Philips is signed for 2 years with a NMC I thought?
Neil won't go anywhere, he is a lifer and given 4th line minutes can be an effective one.
Prince, Hoffman, Puempel...all could score 17 goals given Michalek's minutes.
Given that his knees are duct taped together, I can't think of an easier to replace winger.
Greening we are stuck with.
Given that his knees are duct taped together, I can't think of an easier to replace winger.
Greening we are stuck with.
trentmccleary
Registered User
Ottawa produced developed better players when they had better leadership, veteran support and a winning atmosphere. That's not surprising. However, I wouldn't extrapolate that to the draft as a whole.
An average draft tends to produce:
- 2 stars out of the first two picks.
- above average talent in the rest of the top-10 (mid pairing d-men and 50-ish point forwards).
- a random mix of outright busts, depth players and average talents throughout the 1st round. With the occasional star and a couple above average players.
- finding those players beyond the 1st round become more rare as the draft goes on.
Ottawa has picked two players who've had a 40 point season since Laich was picked in 2001 (Karlsson and Foligno).
My mistake, I meant Hemsky and Spezza. With the talent they both have I don't think it was a fluke they were lighting it up together.
Milo is fairly replaceable to be sure given his current condition. I know he looked more effective with Hemsky but I am not sold another player wouldn't look equally good on that line.
Wow, that brings it home right there...and Foligno never seemed to score as much as people wanted either.
Not sure if it was you but someone else posted something along the lines of the Senators not drafting a 20 goal scorer since before Laich? We have Karlsson now of course but that is a long time to not draft some top shelf talent.
Of course many of those years were under Muckler and I know it takes time to develop players but you would think by accident someone would have been able to put up some of those numbers.
I do think we have some very good players reads to make the jump to the NHL and think Stone, Hoffman and perhaps Puempel (if he keeps improving into next year) should all be 20 goal scorers in the NHL. Even if we don't have a 40 goal scorer having a bunch of 20 goal scorers (and some who challenge for 30) who work hard defensively would be very nice too.
trentmccleary
Registered User
Eaves had a 20 goal rookie season, but yeah... the way people sell draft picks and prospect on this board does not come close to reflecting reality.
Muckler took risks as very good Russian talents were falling in the draft. They didn't pay off because the KHL was too strong a draw and few were willing to develop properly in the AHL.
History tells us that we should be happy if even one of those guys becomes a semi-consistent 20 goal scorer.
That's a bit misleading, in terms of how you pulled 5 consecutive lottery picks - all of whom had lengthy careers and at least 600 games - and then compared them to a select and hand picked group of non-lottery 1st rounders spanning 10 years.
Sandwiched between Hossa and Karlsson during those 10 years (and several different GM's), there were 1st rounders such as Matthieu Chouinard (15th in '98), Jakub Klepis (16th in ''02), Patrick Eaves (29th in '03), Brain Lee (9th in '05) and Jim O'Brien (29th in '07). Five 1st rounders in 10 years that were virtual busts.
It shows that about 50% of late 1st rounders don't amount to much at all, where as every single lottery 1st rounder we had did.
trentmccleary
Registered User
Muckler was brutal at maintaining and growing the depth of the team. He was brought in to close the deal and came close but he put the org back many years with his poor drafting.
The KHL wasn't even established until 2008 - Muckler just picked terrible players over and over again.
I agree with the history aspect but my projection does have some context around it so I will reserve my right to be bitterly disappointed if all 3 don't score 20 in the NHL
There were 10 drafts BETWEEN the '97 and '08 drafts. 1998-2007. So 10.
So it was actually exactly what I said.
Skrymir
Registered User
These kinds of discussions after a tough season always bug me.
You trade Spezza and you are down one of the key pieces you need to be a contender in a bona fide #1 Center. Unless you are banking on the draft Lottery and picking up a McDavid type player I don't know where his replacement is going to come from. We certainly don't have a replacement within our system and teams aren't going to give that kind of asset away without an overpayment.
If you subtract Hemsky and Michalek on top of that and we are down one entire line from our line-up and that is tough to replace for any team. I'd do my best to re-sign Hemsky because I think he'll thrive in a role that doesn't expect him to be a "main guy" and he showed some chemistry with Spezza, but I'd let Michalek walk because I'm tired of waiting for his knees to rejuvenate themselves and I think of all the top line talent he's the easiest to replace.
Stone - Spezza - Hemsky
McArthur - Turris - Ryan
Lazar - Zibanejad - (Greening/Hoffman/Pageau)
(Greening/Hoffman/Pageau) - Smith - Neil
And that's without considering da Costa, Prince, Peumpel et al who will be pushing for jobs, but to ship people out to have a team full of inexperienced players doesn't do anyone any good.
The defence I do have some concerns as I'd like to see another veteran presence, but not at the expense Methot (who is one of our only 2 veteran dmen as it stands)
Methot - Karlsson
Cowen - Ceci
Phillips - Gryba
Borowieski, Claesson
I still think this team can contend, maybe not next year, but in the next year or 2 so to blow it up now would be a mistake.
And Dr. Sens(e) Zibanejad will probably join Karlsson and Foligno on that list next year and there are a few others in the system that could as well in a year or two so it's not as bleak as it seems.
You trade Spezza and you are down one of the key pieces you need to be a contender in a bona fide #1 Center. Unless you are banking on the draft Lottery and picking up a McDavid type player I don't know where his replacement is going to come from. We certainly don't have a replacement within our system and teams aren't going to give that kind of asset away without an overpayment.
If you subtract Hemsky and Michalek on top of that and we are down one entire line from our line-up and that is tough to replace for any team. I'd do my best to re-sign Hemsky because I think he'll thrive in a role that doesn't expect him to be a "main guy" and he showed some chemistry with Spezza, but I'd let Michalek walk because I'm tired of waiting for his knees to rejuvenate themselves and I think of all the top line talent he's the easiest to replace.
Stone - Spezza - Hemsky
McArthur - Turris - Ryan
Lazar - Zibanejad - (Greening/Hoffman/Pageau)
(Greening/Hoffman/Pageau) - Smith - Neil
And that's without considering da Costa, Prince, Peumpel et al who will be pushing for jobs, but to ship people out to have a team full of inexperienced players doesn't do anyone any good.
The defence I do have some concerns as I'd like to see another veteran presence, but not at the expense Methot (who is one of our only 2 veteran dmen as it stands)
Methot - Karlsson
Cowen - Ceci
Phillips - Gryba
Borowieski, Claesson
I still think this team can contend, maybe not next year, but in the next year or 2 so to blow it up now would be a mistake.
And Dr. Sens(e) Zibanejad will probably join Karlsson and Foligno on that list next year and there are a few others in the system that could as well in a year or two so it's not as bleak as it seems.
That really sums up how our ability to draft well has detiorated over the past decade. We should think about that before advocating that we tank for a high draft pick. Other than Karlsson and maybe Zibinijad who have the Sens drafted that can help make this team a contender?
Skrymir
Registered User
though their from more recent drafts I'd be inclined to put Ceci and Lazar (and Lehner too) in with quality draft picks that could help us become a contender again. There are several other diamonds in the rough that could surprise like Stone, Peumpel and Claesson that with time could prove to be good additions as well.
Our drafting over the last 6 years is probably right up there with the drafting we did from '97 to '02 - our best spell by far. We were basically landing three really solid NHLer's per draft during that spell, topped off in '01 when we landed 4 or 5.
We then went through a bad 5 year period until Murray took over and replaced the scouting team. Over the last 6 years, I think it's fair to say we probably are going to have 3 solid NHLers out of each draft, with a few homeruns mixed in there as well (Karlsson).
But there were some duds in the '97 to '02 period too, including some 1st rounders like Chouinard. No first rounds duds recently, as far we can tell (Karlsson, Cowen, Zib, Puempel, Noesen, Ceci, Lazar)
I don't like Muckler but during his tenure we were drafting later and not many NHL'ers came out during those years IMO,
No one will ever forgive Muckler for drafting Lee instead of Kopitar (LA fans aside)
Yes in 2005 Muckler should have drafted any of those: Staal, Kopitar, Hanzal, Oshie, Neal, Vlasic, Stasny, Yandle,
nater97
Registered User
- Jun 26, 2013
- 120
- 0
Yandle went 105, stasny went 44, vlasic 35, Neal 33.
You can't blame him for not identifying these talents and selected them with the 9th overall pick. Even Oshie at 24 and Hanzal at 17 are a stretch.
Kopitar and Staal though, that's where he screwed up big time.
