Ottawa out of top 5, who will they pick?

[Coco the Monkey*]

They are. He was on Ottawa radio last night talking about the possibility of moving up to 3rd. I think he might really play ball with Tallon too.

Targets sound like Landeskog first and Strome second....could change, he's going to watch Strome live tonight he said.

LOL, Strome second based on what? "insiders"? He was talking about Couturier more than he was Strome

 

[hawksfan50]

THE "BPA" is stinking vs. the HAT ---ZERO pts in 3GP and -4 ...ALEX DAIGLE anyone?

WHAT if teams 1-5 ALL have 2nd thoughts on him nd keep passing such that MURRAY could take himat #6 -but he lousey MURRAY surely won't buck the trend -I mean 5 GM's ahead of him can't allbe wrong (in such a scenario)...

BUT it won;t happen because:

1. EDM take LARSSON -you need a D-man--don't be stupid and go forward.
2. COL -trades down with OTT for #6 and the NASHVILLE pick OTT holds .
OTT gets LANDESKOG .
3. FLA takes COUTURIER (BPA SHMEPA,TALLON will avoid the smaller skill guy for
the big physical centre so hard to get in drafts-this is a huge--pardon the pun
opportuntity).
4. NJ --DOUGIE HAMILTON.

5. NYI - HUBERDEAU ---memories of BOSSY revived.

6. COL - STROME

7.ATL -ZIBANEJAD (DUDLEY like BIG physical guys).

8. CBJ -RNH --yes the CBJ's make another stupendous error and instead of the next Gretzky get DAIGLE...

9. BOS -BEAULIEU ...

10. MINN - MURPHY

11. COL SEIMENS

12. CAR - ARMIA (we all know Rutherford never drafts D-men in round one--even when he NEEDS them!)

13.CGY -JASKIN .

14.DAL -BARTSCHI .

15.MTL -OLEKSIAK .

16. BUF-JONAS BRODIN

17. NYR- ZACK PHILLIPS

18. MAGNUS HELLBERG or SAMU PERHONEN --in any case the BPA on the board at this time will be the first goalie taken

(i) they may not be able to fit Crawford under their cap -if not in the next contract this summer--maybe on the contract after that--MUST start preparing in case they lose him at some point).

ii) the injury to SALAK is apparently serious and may require surgery to the shoulder
==even if healthy he has to prove himself at the NHL level--so it doesn't hurt to prepare with greater goalie depth in the system for one GREAT one to emerge..

Perhaps either of these 2 BIG goalies HELLBERG (6'5) or PERHONEN (6'4) is a franchise goalie.at any rate HAWKS could get their choice of the very best goalie talent of this draft ..

While PERHONEN is 2 years younger HELLBERG played at a higher level than Jrs
in the Allsvenskan League and was the top goalie there,so he's closer to being 'ready' to challenge for a back-up to Crawford.

IF the Hawks decide to ignore my hunch that they would go goalie at #18,then
while their need is for a big physical but talented 2nd line centre-I doubt that either
Mark McNeill,Mark Scheifele or Boone Jenner have enough to justify taking them over the goalie talent oppotunity cost here. Unless McNeill or Scheifele lights it up at the U-18's (so far they have not scored a goal in 3 pre-tournament games)
to change minds, the only real alternative I would recoomend would be: STEFAN NOESEN (LW) --but his Central Scouting ranking is "only" 35 and STAN even if he thinks that is too low as I do ,might not credit the value more than a mid-20's ...

THUS I can see young Mr. Bowman either being smart and taking one of the goalie BPA's --or being stupid and making a big error by taking BRANDON SAAD who for some reason scouts rank way above a really good player like Noesen.


OF course if CHI beats VAN,then beats (likely) SJ ,then beats the winner of (ANH/NASH) vs. (DET/PHX) to get to the CUP FINAL--then CHI won't be drafting 18th ,but 29th (I don't think it willbe 30th as Cup winner again).

STAN could trade the #18 up or down -and that would change the strategy-but if my scenarios hold ,the #18 pick by cHI could be the most intriguing one of the first round.


BTW --with the NASH pick oTTAWA gives COL to move up, COL will ake a goalie ..

SO in my scenarios CHI willget first crack at whichever goalie they like best at #18 --UNLESS COL trades the NASHVILLE spot they got from OTTAWA in some package to move up before CHI can choose the 1st goalie.

However that frees someone else up who CHI never expected to be there-and so in that case maybe the strategy changes.

 

[Hasbro]

You've gotta be kidding me that Florida would be more likely to trade down if Larsson is still on the table vs Landeskog. We'd probably give you the same return for either, if Larsson's 1st on our list which it's been speculated all over the place, there's probably good reason for that. Our best scout over the past 3 years is now his coach, we've had eyes on him all year.

Hence the bolded "maybe"

 

[TheGroceryStick]

Sit and wait. See who falls.
If all top forwards are taken. Draft Murphy or Hamilton.
If Couturier or huberdeau fall, take them.

They arent in a horrible spot. however, they dont really get to decide who they want. Unless they take someone off the board.

 

[YEGJuniorFan]

THE "BPA" is stinking vs. the HAT ---ZERO pts in 3GP and -4 ...ALEX DAIGLE anyone?


8. CBJ -RNH --yes the CBJ's make another stupendous error and instead of the next Gretzky get DAIGLE...

wow every post i see from you your really harking on RNH, you think he is gonna bust completely? whats your rationale? if you dont mind me asking

 

[4thliner*]

It's a no brainer that Ottawa needs a top 6 forwards, who will be available, will they trade up? Best case scenario, Couturier falls to 6.
"worst" case we take Strome.

Oh man, thats some BAD luck

Only the most electric out of your seat player in the draft, who competes and plays with grit....one dimensional though compared to Huberdeau and Couturier.

 

[YNWA14]

LOL, Strome second based on what? "insiders"? He was talking about Couturier more than he was Strome

They've been talking about Strome for a while. They've watched him live multiple times and expressed their 'love' for him. A Sens insider posted a while back that some of the Sens scouts, at the time, had Strome ranked as high as #2 overall on their board.

Oh man, that some BAD luck

Only the most electric out of your seat player in the draft, who competes and plays with grit....one dimensional though.

He's not one dimensional, but what are you referring to? He causes a lot of trouble in the neutral zone and follows defensive plays well enough. He's no Landeskog, but he isn't a defensive liability. In terms of offense he's always taking a different approach -- he can dangle, he can pass and he can score goals. He's pretty much the opposite of one dimensional.

 

[4thliner*]

They've been talking about Strome for a while. They've watched him live multiple times and expressed their 'love' for him. A Sens insider posted a while back that some of the Sens scouts, at the time, had Strome ranked as high as #2 overall on their board.



He's not one dimensional, but what are you referring to? He causes a lot of trouble in the neutral zone and follows defensive plays well enough. He's no Landeskog, but he isn't a defensive liability. In terms of offense he's always taking a different approach -- he can dangle, he can pass and he can score goals. He's pretty much the opposite of one dimensional.

Strome is easily the worst defensive forwards of Couturier, Huberdeau, Strome group Ottawa will likely pick from. He could be the best offensively but Strome is not as complete a player as the other 2 right now. Not overating the size factor, but he is also the smallest of the group.

But he has grit and compete level to his game. That is why I don't think he will turn to another dangling Tim Connolly, his grit and his one-time shot.

 

[YNWA14]

Strome is easily the worst defensive forwards of Couturier, Huberdeau, Strome group Ottawa will likely pick from. He could be the best offensively but Strome is not as complete a player as the other 2 right now.

That doesn't make him one-dimensional. There's more than just "offence" and "defence" in the NHL but I see your point. Yes he's behind those three defensively, but he's still not a defensive liability and he's actually pretty good at causing turnovers in the neutral zone. I was just wondering what your basis was for calling him one dimensional.

 

[Hale The Villain]

Who cares if Strome is one-dimensional? I want a player that can produce offensively on my top line.

Which is why I dont want Landeskog. His offensive potential is overrated. He's fast but not that fast. His shot is good but not that good. He has little creativity in his offense and I doubt he produces at the level of a top line forward.

 

[4thliner*]

So no one wants Landeskog but everyone would kill for TIN MAN that is pulling off a disappearing Houdini against the Medicine Hat Tigers??

 

[Minister of Offence]

LOL, Strome second based on what? "insiders"? He was talking about Couturier more than he was Strome

Might not want to give that interest away. And yup, insiders that have been correct with their information many times this year. Could it all be smoke and mirrors? Sure.

 

[Minister of Offence]

So no one wants Landeskog but everyone would kill for TIN MAN that is pulling off a disappearing Houdini against the Medicine Hat Tigers??

They judge the whole season...

 

[Minister of Offence]

Who cares if Strome is one-dimensional? I want a player that can produce offensively on my top line.

Which is why I dont want Landeskog. His offensive potential is overrated. He's fast but not that fast. His shot is good but not that good. He has little creativity in his offense and I doubt he produces at the level of a top line forward.

Sounds like the scouting report on Toews. Another total package player that just wins battles. When you play alongside a talent like Spezza, he will overrate your stats for you.

 

[Coco the Monkey*]

They've been talking about Strome for a while. They've watched him live multiple times and expressed their 'love' for him. A Sens insider posted a while back that some of the Sens scouts, at the time, had Strome ranked as high as #2 overall on their board.

Give me one link or quote where they've expressed their love for him. That's complete BS. I have never heard one member of the team talk about Strome.

I don't even know why I'm asking this due to your ridiculous bias for Strome.

 

[Coco the Monkey*]

Who cares if Strome is one-dimensional? I want a player that can produce offensively on my top line.

Which is why I dont want Landeskog. His offensive potential is overrated. He's fast but not that fast. His shot is good but not that good. He has little creativity in his offense and I doubt he produces at the level of a top line forward.

No way in hell Strome becomes a top line player in Ottawa, so I don't see your point. Landeskog is the better pick, period. You're saying you'd be sad if he gets 70 points every year? That's like the definition of a top line player. Mike Richards is a top line forward and he produces just fine.

 

[The Expert]

if Larsson's 1st on our list which it's been speculated all over the place

Meh, Landeskog seems more like the target. I suspect trade discussions with Florida would be contingent on RNH and Larsson being the first two picks. It's Landeskog, Huberdeau or Strome at this point.

 

[Coco the Monkey*]

Meh, Landeskog seems more like the target. I suspect trade discussions with Florida would be contingent on RNH and Larsson being the first two picks. It's Landeskog, Huberdeau or Strome at this point.

...and Couturier.

 

[Minister of Offence]

Meh, Landeskog seems more like the target. I suspect trade discussions with Florida would be contingent on RNH and Larsson being the first two picks. It's Landeskog, Huberdeau or Strome at this point.

I think he'd do it for anyone, just most likely to be successful with Landeskog. Larsson, Cowen, Karlsson, Rundblad is 15 years worth of players knowing you have a championship caliber defense...and that could potentially be some sort of understatement.

 

[GDU]

So no one wants Landeskog but everyone would kill for TIN MAN that is pulling off a disappearing Houdini against the Medicine Hat Tigers??

pretty sure landeskog "disappeared" from the playoffs already, didnt he though?

 

[Manny*]

The answer to this thread:

Whoever is left. Larsson, Nugent-Hopkins, Landeskog, Couturier, Huberdeau and Strome and realistically our only targets, and out of the six, we'll get the last remaining one.

It's not complicated.

 

[puckfan13]

I see Landeskog as the type of player Andrew Ladd is. Gritty, in your face, leader who will do what it takes to win and can score goals and make plays. In junior, Ladd played with a playmaker in Getzlaf and had great success and I think Landeskog could find that with Spezza. I see GL as a 55-65 pt guy with a 70 pt peak normally, but beside Spezza he could put up 65-70 normally. It's not just that, he brings the leadership component that Spezza lacks. Him playing 110% every night helps set a culture and tone in the dressing room.

 

[trentmccleary]

The answer to this thread:

Whoever is left. Larsson, Nugent-Hopkins, Landeskog, Couturier, Huberdeau and Strome and realistically our only targets, and out of the six, we'll get the last remaining one.

It's not complicated.

With the legitimate possibility that one or both of Murphy/Hamilton are picked 4/5. We might have a choice of 2 or 3 forwards.

 

[Sens With Benefits]

I see Landeskog as the type of player Andrew Ladd is. Gritty, in your face, leader who will do what it takes to win and can score goals and make plays. In junior, Ladd played with a playmaker in Getzlaf and had great success and I think Landeskog could find that with Spezza. I see GL as a 55-65 pt guy with a 70 pt peak normally, but beside Spezza he could put up 65-70 normally. It's not just that, he brings the leadership component that Spezza lacks. Him playing 110% every night helps set a culture and tone in the dressing room.

Agree with everything except this, Spezza has really stepped his role up lately, we'll see what next year brings. He's pretty much carried Ottawa for the last 4 months.

 

[SilverSeven]

I see Landeskog as the type of player Andrew Ladd is. Gritty, in your face, leader who will do what it takes to win and can score goals and make plays. In junior, Ladd played with a playmaker in Getzlaf and had great success and I think Landeskog could find that with Spezza. I see GL as a 55-65 pt guy with a 70 pt peak normally, but beside Spezza he could put up 65-70 normally. It's not just that, he brings the leadership component that Spezza lacks. Him playing 110% every night helps set a culture and tone in the dressing room.