Toggle sidebar

Prospect Info: The 2019 Entry NHL Draft Thread - Part VIII

Status
Not open for further replies.
Tweaky

Tweaky

Solid #2
Sponsor
Apr 5, 2009
5,548
1,801
Singapore/Thailand
I think his answer could be viewed either way. He says the cold go either way...which on the face seems to say they have a D and a F as 3 and 4, and will take whichever CHI does not. But it could also be taken as he does not want to tip his hand to the teams after us....if CHI takes Turcotte and they know we are taking a F, they have no incentive to make an offer to make it worth our while to give up #4. Even Detroit might be willing to take a chance that LA passes on Byram if they know it is only one team that might take him.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Mac Attack
Echo Roku

Echo Roku

Registered User
Jan 14, 2018
2,425
1,206
cgf said:
He could be willing to pick a blueliner in theory, but not think that Byram is worth taking top 5; without that contradicting what he said :dunno:
Click to expand...
Which would fall under the essentially "saying whatever to give a nonanswer" concept.

Though, personally, if he really wanted to give a nonanswer, I'd think he'd have just spouting off more vague and common cliches about taking BPA. Going out his way to answer like you suggest would be... weird, at least.
 
cgf

cgf

FireBednarsSuccessor
Oct 15, 2010
60,436
19,272
w/ Renly's Peach
Echo Roku said:
Which would fall under the essentially "saying whatever to give a nonanswer" concept.
Click to expand...

Answering a theoretical question isn't quite the same as a non-answer...because it can provide insight into his general thinking, even if it does so seeking to avoid giving up any information about their present prospect rankings...but I take your point.
 
cgf

cgf

FireBednarsSuccessor
Oct 15, 2010
60,436
19,272
w/ Renly's Peach
Echo Roku said:
Though, personally, if he really wanted to give a nonanswer, I'd think he'd have just spouting off more vague and common cliches about taking BPA. Going out his way to answer like you suggest would be... weird, at least.
Click to expand...

I think it's just Joe's upfront nature clashing with his strategic desire not to tip his hand. Answering the theoretical question of whether our current situation necessitates picking a forward at #4 lets him give a real answer, but without giving away whether they think Byram is that kind of Makar/Heiskanen caliber prospect that it would theoretically be worth taking despite our needs up front.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Barklez
Balthazar

Balthazar

I haven't talked to the trainers yet
Sponsor
Apr 25, 2006
49,609
52,859
Patagonia said:
Sakic never mentioned the type of player. He only stated about meeting with the scouts and they'll be getting a good player. The only confirmation is the Top 2 and will wait for CHI choice.

Draft discussion starts at 5:40.

Click to expand...


Now re-watching it, it's clearer than I remembered (I thought he was a little vague but he wasn't).

Journalist asks if he'll draft a forward, Joe says it could go either way depending of who Chicago pick. He didn't have to say that, it's pretty clear they have Byram in mind.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: avsfan09, burgundyblue and The Kingslayer
Patagonia

Patagonia

Keep Whining
Jan 6, 2017
7,624
3,246
Balthazar said:
Now re-watching it, it's clearer than I remembered (I thought he was a little vague but he wasn't).

Journalist asks if he'll draft a forward, Joe says it could go either way depending of who Chicago picks. He didn't have to say that, it's pretty clear they have Byram in mind.
Click to expand...

I have the same opinion.

There is also a chance to entice the Hawks to select Byram when Turcotte is the actual target, but doubtful Sakic plays these mind games.

With Mack they had the Top Choice, but was very clear it would be a Forward instead of Jones. He hinted seeking defensive help and looking overseas which is Heiskanen rather than Makar.

Sakic past responses are generally vague, but quite honest. Given his history and the unlikely possibility of changing, it seems that Byram (if available) is the choice.
 
AvsGuy

AvsGuy

Hired the wrong DJ again
Sep 13, 2002
10,594
2,738
Regina, SK
I'm readying my brain for us to pick Turcotte, as he seems the logical target and fit at 4.

He'd be realistically ready/key contributor by when ideally?
 
Patagonia

Patagonia

Keep Whining
Jan 6, 2017
7,624
3,246
AvsGuy said:
I'm readying my brain for us to pick Turcotte, as he seems the logical target and fit at 4.

He'd be realistically ready/key contributor by when ideally?
Click to expand...

Maybe 1-2 years?

Committed to the UWisc, so at least 1 year. Depends if he decides on additional season ie. Makar.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Perratrooper
Echo Roku

Echo Roku

Registered User
Jan 14, 2018
2,425
1,206
cgf said:
I think it's just Joe's upfront nature clashing with his strategic desire not to tip his hand. Answering the theoretical question of whether our current situation necessitates picking a forward at #4 lets him give a real answer, but without giving away whether they think Byram is that kind of Makar/Heiskanen caliber prospect that it would theoretically be worth taking despite our needs up front.
Click to expand...
I think that’s way overthinking an off the top of the head kind of answer

That’s an extremely roundabout way to do what you’re saying. Even to achieve that he could have still just given the BPA cliche. Not like he’s sitting down and considering his answer specifically before giving it

There are much simpler and more sensible ways to achieve what you suggested.

If anything, the honest nature with a desire to not give specifics... more leads to the idea that he let a little info slip as part of his impromptu answer.

Specifically the idea that they’ve seriously considered a defenseman there. Nothing more, nothing less

Everything else is just deduction based on other info. Like Byram being the only defender in that range. Or him saying that their list is all but finalized for a week or so by that point
 
Last edited:
cgf

cgf

FireBednarsSuccessor
Oct 15, 2010
60,436
19,272
w/ Renly's Peach
Echo Roku said:
I think that’s way overthinking an off the top of the head kind of answer

That’s an extremely roundabout way to do what you’re saying. Even to achieve that he could have still just given the BPA cliche. Not like he’s sitting down and considering his answer specifically before giving it

There are much simpler and more sensible ways to achieve what you suggested.

If anything, the honest nature with a desire to not give specifics... more leads to the idea that he let a little info slip as part of his impromptu answer.

Specifically the idea that they’ve seriously considered a defenseman there. Nothing more, nothing less

Everything else is just deduction based on other info. Like Byram being the only defender in that range. Or him saying that their list is all but finalized for a week or so by that point
Click to expand...

lol maybe, but Joe has had PR-training...he isn’t just your average schmoe. And answering a hypothetical instead of the question asked of you is a very common technique for sidestepping topics you don’t want to answer specifically; since you make the interviewer feel like you’re engaging & giving them something, rather than combating them with cliches that say absolutely nothing at all.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Barklez
Cousin Eddie

Cousin Eddie

You Serious Clark?
Nov 3, 2006
40,152
37,330
It’s not just coincidental that the Gretzky’s are the highest scoring brothers in NHL history.

If New Jersey, New York and Chicago somehow pass on Taylor Makar I think it’s a no brainer to take him at 4.
 
SoundwaveIsCharisma

SoundwaveIsCharisma

Moderator
Nov 29, 2003
52,373
36,821
Screw You Blaster
Visit site
BigMack29 said:
Um family. genes , Ryan is the best player in junior :dunno:
Click to expand...

Yep, makes sense. Think of all the amazing brother duos. Eric and Brett Lindros. Joe and Brian Sakic. Sam, Griffin and Max Reinhart. The wonder twins Teemu and Paavo Selanne. Of course, who could forget the highest scoring brothers in the history of the NHL Wayne and Brent Gretzky. You can never go wrong drafting the brother of a prospect who was drafted two years ago.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ryan Patsky
Foxtail

Foxtail

Registered User
Mar 31, 2018
2,182
585
Nova Scotia
SoundwaveIsCharisma said:
What do you mean? If a sibling is playing well it clearly means that other members of that family will be awesome too. That's how the Reinharts all got drafted.
Click to expand...
They have tremendous skill and had the same question marks during their draft year's. Both 1st rounders? Lots of examples of family lineage being successful , i mean why I Hughes going #1 if there is no possibility of him amounting to anything :dunno:.

I mean come on guys it's not like he's rated in the 4th round. After the top 15 or so this year it's a crapshoot anyway .
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Latest posts

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

Top Bottom