Discussion in 'Edmonton Oilers' started by Soli, Jun 26, 2018.
Nichuskin never had anywhere near the compete level of Podkolzin.
He also only had one offensive move, which was dip the shoulder and get around the edge....like a DL in football. Podkolzin has a big toolbox, and he’s a hard-working two-way player as well.
Jakob Pelletier with 70 points in 50 games now.
Turcotte is another play maker which this team doesn't need more of. We need guys who can score to compliment our 3 great playmakers.
I like Turcotte but imo there will be better guys to pick over him.
Strong top 2, pretty good drop. Average 3-15. Then IMHO a pretty big drop after that.
I really like this player, but unless we are drafting in the teens, he won’t be our pick.
Depending where we end up in the standings, if we missed on Turcotte, I wouldn’t be opposed to trading down, getting a mid-1st and a quality NHLer for our first and selecting Pelletier.
fast, tenacious, shooting winger who can stcikhandle and has a high IQ is what the Oilers need.
The only guy rated in the first round who fits that bill is Cole Caufield, and he’s 5’7, and likely to go in the 20s.
guys got the ability to hit top shelf with relative ease and can stickhandle in a phone booth.
Caufield and Yamamoto flanking McDavid would create a lot of size mismatches and be quite funny to see...
Who would be the 2nd best player to fit that bill? Cozens? Kaliyev?
They are both goal scorers, but I wouldn’t call them snipers. Lavoie is probably the next best sniper, but he doesn’t have the wheels.
Have you seen Samuel Poulin at all? Tough to find anything about him. He seems to be getting no hype even as a potential 1st rounder.
He might fit that billing too albeit likely in the 20s too.
If you expand that description to centers as well, there's a handful more guys that play that way that I'd love on the Oilers.
Turcotte, McMichael, Tomasino. Maybe Newhook too? Don't know much about him.
Really like Poulin. He's a very well rounded player, and will shoot the puck, but he's more power forward in nature. Doesn't take plays off. He competes hard, cycles well, but I don't think his offensive game is dynamic enough to translate to a scoring role in the pros. He's a solid complimentary player type. A middle six winger.
As far as players in the draft who I would say are going to be known for their shot above all else, it's Lavoie and Caufield. I don't even know if their is a defenseman I would say fits that bill this year. I think the Oilers just need to focus on a skilled forward who drives the play and competes above all else. In the first round, Turcotte, Krebs, Boldy and Pelletier are probably my favorites for their pick right now. Of course, all depends on how the rest of the season shakes out. I'm not writing the Oil off yet. We've all seen McDavid put this team on his back and dominate before, I keep expecting it to happen....maybe it's a lost cause, but I really believe in McDavid.
I would try to trade up with our second to nab one of Pelletier or Tomasino.
Coming out of the draft with Turcotte/Dach and Pelletier/Tomasino would be amazing.
7th/8th Overall Pick:
Alex Turcotte/Kirby Dach/Dylan Cozens
Trade up with 2nd into late 1st:
Kaliyev isn't the guy I'd target with a late 1st. McMichael, Pelletier, Tomasino, and Newhook are the ones I'd look at.
Why does this thread still have “premature” in the title? The Oilers are toast.
Toast is more fun
I love the draft more than most, but the last thing I want to see is the Oilers trading up. We have holes everywhere in our prospect pool and NHL club. Can’t afford to give up any assets. Trading down and acquiring multiple picks to target the middle of the first players like McMichael, Tomasino and Pelletier is an option I would entertain, but pretty much a 0% chance I trade up giving up valuable assets in the process.
All you have to do is look at my history and see what I thought of this team trading 2 picks for one two years in a row to get goaltenders who I would argue weren’t even the best available at the time (Skinner/Rodrigue).
If I had those picks, Scott and Skarek would have been the goalies, but I would have just waited for our own picks since there were multiple good goalies still on the board, and we’d have ended up with more picks. It wasn’t so bad the first time they did it, but two years in a row made me sick.
If we have the ~7th overall pick, and Columbus loses in the first round(which will probably happen), I might trade down to get their first + Oliver Bjorkstrand, or add a small piece and get Josh Anderson.
Because aside from Hughes, Kakko, Dach, Cozens, and Turcotte, there is nobody I'm really interested in in the top-10. The 10-20 range has guys like McMichael, Pelletier, and Newhook, guys I would love.
Agreed 100 %. We have lots of prospect depth on D, and bottom 6 depth up front. Overall one of the best prospect pools that we have ever had, but it is sorely missing high end top 6 forward potential. I would gladly part with a 2nd and 3rd to move up and get one of those players.
This isn't the draft you spend assets moving up in. It's just people looking at guys and projecting greatness for the sake of it. Outside the top 2 this is the weakest draft since 2012. Far more potential misses than wins imo.
I agree that there are lots of potential misses, but there are also lots of potential steals, like Pelletier, McMichael, Newhook, Tomasino, maybe Dorofeyev.
Awful asset management in my opinion. Think of the NHL player you could get for a 2nd and a 3rd. If we are trading draft picks, need to improve the NHL team.
If you really want into the first it’s likely 2nd + top prospect, not 2nd + 3rd.
That means Puljujarvi/Yamamoto/Benson + 2nd for a 15-25.... that is moving backwards in terms of assets.
Pelletier seems like a slightly lesser Yamamoto, McMichael I can't tell if he is a product of a deep London or not. Newhook I have no read on, the BCHL I struggle to get a read on. Tomasino.. really underwhelming offensive numbers imo.
Like always there is potential for a steal but we shouldn't be spending prospects or picks to move up.
Separate names with a comma.