Who do you want vs. who do you expect at number 8?

[Blue Liner]

The entire hockey world would swung and missed on Barker. You got mostly what you were expecting in the 2008-09 season but still just couldn't quite keep up and couldn't sustain it. Weird timing where he was drafted right before the lockout and the NHL game changed and he just couldn't quite keep up with it, among other things.

 

[Rick C137]

Based on who has a chance (even slight) at being left, I'm hoping for Hughes, Wahlstrom, or Dobson. I just don't feel like Hughes makes it past Detroit but 3-8 is a complete guess at this point for everybody so who knows how it will play out.

I suspect there's a really strong chance Dobson is still there with the other two gone and if so, I would be plenty fine with that selection.

This is exactly where I’m at. Would be thrilled if we wind up with either of the three.

 

[Toews2Bickell]

Based on who has a chance (even slight) at being left, I'm hoping for Hughes, Wahlstrom, or Dobson. I just don't feel like Hughes makes it past Detroit but 3-8 is a complete guess at this point for everybody so who knows how it will play out.

I suspect there's a really strong chance Dobson is still there with the other two gone and if so, I would be plenty fine with that selection.

Wings fan mentioned in prospect thread that Detroit really likes Bouchard, but I agree about Hughes making it past 6. At that point Vancouver would have their pick between Bouchard, Boqvist and Dobson and remainder is who falls to Hawks, along with hopefully Wahlstrom.

 

[LordKOTL]

Cam Barker....so many tools but no place to put them.

The entire hockey world would swung and missed on Barker. You got mostly what you were expecting in the 2008-09 season but still just couldn't quite keep up and couldn't sustain it. Weird timing where he was drafted right before the lockout and the NHL game changed and he just couldn't quite keep up with it, among other things.

To be 100% fair I'm looking at future results, not expectations for this draft and with respect to my comment about "not another Barker or Beach". If we blagged Hughes, Wahlstrom, or Dobson and via divine intervention, they barely laced them up in the NHL through no fault of their own, it would be the same level of devastation as if we got another Barker who was all tools and no toolshed or a Beach who was simply a tool.

I'm placing that pick and to a lesser extent El Gato, Joker, and the fruits of the #27 pick as the start of the next gen. It would royally suck if #8 turned failed to be, well, anything.

 

[Blue Liner]

To be 100% fair I'm looking at future results, not expectations for this draft and with respect to my comment about "not another Barker or Beach". If we blagged Hughes, Wahlstrom, or Dobson and via divine intervention, they barely laced them up in the NHL through no fault of their own, it would be the same level of devastation as if we got another Barker who was all tools and no toolshed or a Beach who was simply a tool.

I'm placing that pick and to a lesser extent El Gato, Joker, and the fruits of the #27 pick as the start of the next gen. It would royally suck if #8 turned failed to be, well, anything.

this made me laugh.

 

[RememberTheRoar]

To be 100% fair I'm looking at future results, not expectations for this draft and with respect to my comment about "not another Barker or Beach". If we blagged Hughes, Wahlstrom, or Dobson and via divine intervention, they barely laced them up in the NHL through no fault of their own, it would be the same level of devastation as if we got another Barker who was all tools and no toolshed or a Beach who was simply a tool.

I'm placing that pick and to a lesser extent El Gato, Joker, and the fruits of the #27 pick as the start of the next gen. It would royally suck if #8 turned failed to be, well, anything.

You don’t think Schmaltz belongs in that group?

 

[Blue Liner]

Wings fan mentioned in prospect thread that Detroit really likes Bouchard, but I agree about Hughes making it past 6. At that point Vancouver would have their pick between Bouchard, Boqvist and Dobson and remainder is who falls to Hawks, along with hopefully Wahlstrom.

I hope this is true. He's not in my top 8 and that means the whole list slots down another spot if he's selected ahead of 8.

 

[ClydeLee]

I want Walstrom or Hughes... but expecting Bouchard or Boquist who I am the most worried about of the top 10 guys.

 

[LordKOTL]

You don’t think Schmaltz belongs in that group?

A couple of things work against Schmaltz there:

1. As a center, he has to learn to win a draw...or we move him to wing.
2. His contract timing. If he has a monster year he could price himself off of the 'hawks. There are no major contracts coming off the books at the end of this coming year with the guys we got (Rutta is the max at 2.3)--whereas when El Gato & Gus come due, Crawford comes off the books--and if Joker doesn't slide we got Hossa, Anisimov, and Saad off the books.

That's not to say I don't like him; he did as well as could have been expected from a young guy on the pustule we called a team this past season. I just there there's a chance he could be a cap casualty.

 

[LordKOTL]

this made me laugh.

Glad I did...I dare anyone to try and prove me wrong with that.

 

[piteus]

Why is everyone so down on Bouchard? It appears no Hawk diehard wants him at #8. If that's the case, why do you EXPECT Stan to make that move?

 

[bwana63]

Why is everyone so down on Bouchard? It appears no Hawk diehard wants him at #8. If that's the case, why do you EXPECT Stan to make that move?

Not a "down on Bouchard" issue. Much more of the regulars liking others more.

 

[Hawkaholic]

My top 6 players (leaving out Dahlin and Svechnikov) based off of what I have read and heard.

1: Zadina
2: Tkachuk
3: Wahlstrom
4: Dobson
5: Hughes
6: Kotkaniemi

 

[ClydeLee]

My reason is the same, of the top 10 consensus guys Bouchard I like 9th... but think he may be the best smart D choice for Stan at 8.

 

[piteus]

My reason is the same, of the top 10 consensus guys Bouchard I like 9th... but think he may be the best smart D choice for Stan at 8.

Interesting. I have no clue about the NHL draft, but when there is consensus about a prospect from all the diehards ... there's usually some truth. That's why I was curious about Bouchard.

It sounds like Bouchard is a high floor / low ceiling type of prospect. The safe choice. At #8, the Hawks should probably roll the dice on a prospect with a higher ceiling.

If the Hawks pick Bouchard, is it correct to consider it a "boring" pick?

 

[BK]

Why is everyone so down on Bouchard? It appears no Hawk diehard wants him at #8. If that's the case, why do you EXPECT Stan to make that move?

I personally would just rather have the other prospects due to their skill sets. Bouchard is not a bad prospect. Slow 1st step scares me a tiny bit.

Wahlstron, BT, Dobson, etc. are more dynamic in my eyes but I have soured a bit on Hughes recently.

Boqvist vs Bouchard? I think Boqvist has a crazy high ceiling but a bigger bust risk.

My top choices would Dobson or Wahlstrom.

 

[HawkeyTalkMan]

Really skeptical on wahlstrom

Kid leans to heavily on his shot whereas everything else is pretty "meh". Brandon pirri couldn't find any consistent NHL work just an elite release on his shot

Would prefer Hughes

 

[CallMeShaft]

Part of Pirri's problem was his speed. Not only was he one dimensional, but it took forever for him to get set up to perform that one dimension.

Wahlstrom's skating is good. Not blazing speed, but better than average for his size. He can get set up and be where he needs to be well before the opposing team regains possession.

 

[BK]

Really skeptical on wahlstrom

Kid leans to heavily on his shot whereas everything else is pretty "meh". Brandon pirri couldn't find any consistent NHL work just an elite release on his shot

Would prefer Hughes

Pirri is not even close to as talented.

 

[HawkeyTalkMan]

Pirri is not even close to as talented.

That wasn't the point. Granted pirri led the ahl in scoring before he finally got full time NHL work, point is, if a players game and talent is THAT heavily reliant on his shot, then there is a strong possibility that high of a draft pick is wasted on a guy with strong possibility to not live up expectation.

Yakupov is another example.

Would rather a guy on the blue line like Hughes if he's there or a more complete and/or cerebral forward. Not a guy sitting on the wing (the least valuable position) and hoping he's burying his shots because he's not doing much else

 

[BK]

That wasn't the point. Granted pirri led the ahl in scoring before he finally got full time NHL work, point is, if a players game and talent is THAT heavily reliant on his shot, then there is a strong possibility that high of a draft pick is wasted on a guy with strong possibility to not live up expectation.

Yakupov is another example.

Would rather a guy on the blue line like Hughes if he's there or a more complete and/or cerebral forward. Not a guy sitting on the wing (the least valuable position) and hoping he's burying his shots because he's not doing much else

And my point was that Wahlstom is nothing like Pirri because he can move well and is a much smarter player. He also has a quicker release and is just overall much better.

 

[HawkeyTalkMan]

And my point was that Wahlstom is nothing like Pirri because he can move well and is a much smarter player. He also has a quicker release and is just overall much better.

Alright you're not going to sell me on wahlstrom at #8. I think it will be a mistake

 

[BK]

Alright you're not going to sell me on wahlstrom at #8. I think it will be a mistake

Sell you on him?

Have you seen him play?

Honest question.

 

[HawkeyTalkMan]

Sell you on him?

Have you seen him play?

Honest question.

Uh yeah, I didn't just blindly critique a player without watching him play

The only reason he's a top 10 pick is his shot

 

[BK]

Uh yeah, I didn't just blindly critique a player without watching him play

The only reason he's a top 10 pick is his shot

You never know on here.

He has more than his shot but it is by far his biggest asset. He is not just a stationary shooter like some think.

Hughes on the other hand is a wreck defensively a decent amount but ultra dynamic offensively. He wont be able to be a rover like he was at U of M. This is why I think Boqvist turns out better than Hughes along with a better shot.