GerbeSonOfGloin
Registered User
- May 27, 2011
- 1,105
- 0
"worst case" draft scenario... we finish 29th and the team below us loses the lotto and pushes us to third. Do we draft a Hanifin or do we look to move the #3 in a deal? Does it depend on where the Islanders pick falls? I'm assuming they are bubble team at best and that the Blues are in the playoffs.
Agree after this next draft there will be tweaking but also time to move assets to pick up bigger pieces for the rebuild.
Draft Hanifin. As the draft stands right now, after the top three, it sounds like the #4 is, if anyone, Kylington. If 2015 is anything like 2003, a 1C could still be available later in the first round (and 2015 seems to be more center-heavy than 2003 was). Take BPA, no questions asked, with our first pick; with our subsequent picks, we can take centers over marginally more touted dman or winger, and the concept of BPA becomes looser and more subjective at that point anyway.
What we do in the 2015 offseason depends so much on what happens in the draft. If we get McEichel, I'd want that big trade to happen next year. In fact, one of our later 1st round picks could be the centerpiece for it. If we don't, I'd want us to keep all our picks and hold off on the big trade for at least another year.
I disagree with those who are talking about the big trade being for a scoring winger. I'd rather get a top pairing dman. I just don't see that elite scoring winger as being all that necessary to build a contender nowadays. As many cup finalists as not in recent years have not had a single winger who would qualify as an elite talent, while the same cannot be said for top dmen. If Risto and Zadorov end up fulfilling every bit of their potential and we end up with an embarrassment of top-pairing riches, then we can trade one of our excess dmen for a stud winger. But until then, I know which position I'd rather not take chances with.
I understand how it may seem like all our top forward prospects are/will be more on the playmaking side of the puck, but this aspect of scouting reports often turn out to be wrong. Stamkos was supposed to good at everything including goal-scoring, but I don't remember anyone predicting perennial Rocket Richard winning caliber goal scoring upside. Conversely, Tavares was the purest of pure goal scorers at the junior level, that's what everyone knew him as, who ended up more of a generic 30-50-80 1C. I think the odds of one of our top forward prospects, touted to be an elite puck distributor, leveraging their general offensive talent for a surprising goal-scoring upside, are better than our odds of moving major assets for a known question mark like Evander Kane and our ending up winning the trade.