If you were to trade for this year's #1 pick...

Status
Not open for further replies.

Flames Draft Watcher

Registered User
Feb 27, 2002
4,793
0
Calgary
Visit site
Mizral said:
Kovalchuk I believe was offered a deal with something like Markov, Garon, and Montreal's 1st. (This was when Garon was not nearly as well known as he is now)

I don't know that you can argue he wasn't well known. Scouts have known about him since before he was drafted into the NHL and would have had plenty more opportunities to have watched him after he was drafted.

Rumours I heard had both Montreal's firsts that year in the deal (Komisarek and Perezhogin.) I'd say that offer is better than yours considering where the Canucks pick is this year, that Garon has more upside than a Cooke and the fact you wanted a prospect back (Cutta).
 

jincargo

Registered User
Jan 28, 2004
521
0
Mizral said:
I quite like Ovechkin (was one of the first to bring people to his attention on this board!)..

.. but that isn't true. Ovechkin's biggest knock is his inconsistancy and his work ethic, two things that could mean he has issues in the NHL.
Ummmm...Ive heard different...plus here's an article from 2003 from canadianhockey.ca on a Zherdev/Ovechkin comparsion.

"One NHL scout who worked the world under-18 tournament in Piestany, Slovakia, last spring said that in a straight contest of skills--in a race around the rink or in stick-handling drills or in a hardest-shot competition--Zherdev might actually best Ovechkin. But the scout added that Ovechkin's play in his own end of the rink and his work ethic raised his stock over Zherdev."

:huh:
 

BlackJack21

Registered User
Nov 6, 2002
863
0
Montreal
Visit site
Mizral said:
I quite like Ovechkin (was one of the first to bring people to his attention on this board!)..

.. but that isn't true. Ovechkin's biggest knock is his inconsistancy and his work ethic, two things that could mean he has issues in the NHL. Having talent in the NHL isn't enough these days - to be a superstar, you have to work hard. I'm not saying it's going to happen or it's not going to happen, but 1% is truely not the case. Ovechkin talent wise is up there with some of the best picks in a while, but he's really no different than Lecavalier when he was entering the draft (don't buy into this Rick Dudley BS about him being the best prospect he's ever seen).

That's not the first time (maybe second) I heard about Oveckin work ethic, but it makes no sense to me.

I mean, how could some poeple think he is highly concerned about his work ethic and some other that he have issues there?

What are the sources that claims the work ethic of Ovechkin is a problem?

Not saying it's not true, just wondering how this could happen...

BJ21
 

pittengineer

Registered User
Jan 1, 2004
1,275
0
BlackJack21 said:
That's not the first time (maybe second) I heard about Oveckin work ethic, but it makes no sense to me.

I mean, how could some poeple think he is highly concerned about his work ethic and some other that he have issues there?

What are the sources that claims the work ethic of Ovechkin is a problem?

Not saying it's not true, just wondering how this could happen...

BJ21

Sometimes talents can overcome work ethic. Ask an 18 year old Mario.
 

BlackJack21

Registered User
Nov 6, 2002
863
0
Montreal
Visit site
pittengineer said:
Sometimes talents can overcome work ethic. Ask an 18 year old Mario.

I may havent been clear...
(my english is a little weak)

My opinion, according to what I heard and read from all scouting repport, is that not only Alex have no work ethic problem, but has an excellent work ethic.

My question is: Where these few poeples that said he has those problems took the info?

BJ21
 

Foppa_Rules

Registered User
Nov 1, 2003
2,019
0
Earth...how about you?
"I quite like Ovechkin (was one of the first to bring people to his attention on this board!).... but that isn't true. Ovechkin's biggest knock is his inconsistancy and his work ethic, two things that could mean he has issues in the NHL. Having talent in the NHL isn't enough these days - to be a superstar, you have to work hard. I'm not saying it's going to happen or it's not going to happen, but 1% is truely not the case. Ovechkin talent wise is up there with some of the best picks in a while, but he's really no different than Lecavalier when he was entering the draft"



Ummm, where exactly did you get the "work ethic problems" from? I myself have never heard that about Ovechkin from ANYONE, EVER. In fact, quite to the contrary.
 
Last edited:

Classic Devil

Spirit of 1988
Dec 23, 2003
39,327
3,997
Columbus, Ohio
DownFromNJ said:
Parise, Martin, couple of spare picks, maybe adding Suglobov or Pilhman or Foster in.

So... Parise, Martin, 2nd, 3rd, Suglobov?
No way in bloody Hell. I'm sorry. That's too much to give up for Ovechkin. You're giving up the #1 prospect, arguably the #2 prospect, Paul Martin who has already proven his worth in the majors, and two picks, for a player who probably won't bust but is still an unproven prospect. No. Just no.
 

bigeasy

Registered User
Mar 18, 2003
549
0
Yankee in South Ga.
Visit site
MrKnowNothing said:
Agreed. I will be very surprised if Washington deals the pick. They have prospect depth just as Pittsburgh does, although unbiasedly, I think you give the defensive edge to Pittsburgh with Whitney, Welch, and Nemec (to list a few), who is not in my avatar for no reason.

The only trade that the Caps would likely consider is a trade involving probably the second pick with at least Whitney or Welch, probably both, and maybe something else. The Penguins won't give that up as they've said many times, and I really don't think it benefits either team, especially the Pens, to make a trade like that.

Both teams essentially need a top player like Ovechkin. The Caps not as much with Semin there, but a franchise forward is still lacking (I would say Semin would be a very high point producing support forward, not a franchise guy... somewhat like what Kovalev is or was). The Caps could use some more defensemen, but good drafting and/or trading can solve that.

They both need a top player and both will get one. Washington gets the better one of the two, regardless of what anyone is saying to cloud the picks up. We Pens fans might want to cross our fingers for Crosby, but I don't think a franchise type forward is essential to success. It can't hurt though, especially with depth.

To be blunt, I wouldn't trade for the pick. The Pens should stay at two and bank on Malkin having great offensive success, maybe leading the team in points some day. With Fleury and the drafting of several defensemen in the past few years, I believe the Penguin franchise has set the precedent that they are building from the goal out anyways, so a real top offensive forward may not be critical. They'll need offense from somewhere, and Malkin is potentially that player.

While Ovechkin is clearly the better player at this time, picking up Malkin and staying the course with Fleury, Whitney, Welch et al is still potentially a great foundation for the future. It would be better to pick Ovechkin, but the cost at which he would come would actually end up making getting Ovechkin worse for long term success, which is why I say no to trading up.

:bow: excellent post - i have been attacked by several other pen fans for suggesting it would cost them whitney & 1 or 2 top guys. excellent thoughs i agree :bow:
 

pittengineer

Registered User
Jan 1, 2004
1,275
0
bigeasy said:
:bow: excellent post - i have been attacked by several other pen fans for suggesting it would cost them whitney & 1 or 2 top guys. excellent thoughs i agree :bow:

its the same reason no one will trade with washington.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->