Why I think we should not move up in the draft

[Jame]

assuming we package our 2nds we wouldn't be able to move up higher than 14th. We'd get a real nice prospect at 14th but I don't think it's worth it to make that move.

If we could get in the top 10, I'd be all over that. But I'd rather stay put and pick up 2 good 2nd round talents at 31 and 39 than move up and grab a guy like Scherbak or Fiala for example. Basically what I'm saying is I'd rather have Karlsson AND Cornel over just Fiala.

This doesn't compute.

It's like you are trying to dream up a bad scenario for the sake of your argument...

according to you, we should be talking about these guys, in that range:
10-Barbashev
11-Ritchie
12-Kempe
13-Kapanen
14-Tuch
15-Milano
16-Perlini

Do you prefer Karlsson and Corner to 1 of them?
(barf)

The reason why I think we shouldn't move up is because the so called "quality" found at 15-20 is better than the guys rated between 25-35.

Another thing is, Bob McKenzie's list is often viewed as the most accurate in the hockey world, and he usually gets 25 out of 30 picks right, meaning there are usually 5 1st round rated players that fall out of round 1, we could get a Bleackley,Goldobin,Ho-Sang,Vrana type of guy at 31 anyway.

i'd rather get a high end prospect, than a project

Even with McKenzie's ratings... you can see the fall off after 18-20 range. He's not as high on Barbashev and Kempe... but still the drop off is huge...

You might be happy sitting around and grabbing a couple lotto tickets. But if there's an opportunity to turn a couple lotto tickets into a crisp benjamin... we should grab the money.

the success rate of 2nd rounders is well known... combine that with the weak depth of this draft... and we are probably looking at a 2nd round that won't produce more than 2-3 NHLers that matter

 

[Jim Bob]

I don't like the idea of giving up all 3 2nds for one mid-1st.

It will be interesting to see if they make a move similar to the Sekera deal last year where they move a roster player, or a prospect, and maybe one 2nd for a mid-1st.

 

[Djp]

I really think we could get in the top 10 without giving up a current player by using #31, #39, #49 and #61. We would have to make several trades to do it and take multiple salary dump players.

They cant do that. No team would take that.

Sure if you could say trade #17 for #31 +#39 you may be able to then trade #17 + #49+#61 to move up top #10.

Here is the problem---a team generally doesnt do pick swaps until they are on the clock. ateam at #17 will not make a trde for #31 + #39 until at the earliest a pick or two before they are on the clock.

Murray would be able to work his magic better with 3 second rounders vs a late first

I dont care how good a magician he is---they will fail on a few of the 2nds=---Id rather go with the safer pick by trading up.

Question:
Say you're the GM, and you have a guy rated 12th and now the draft has proceeded to the 18th pick. Would you try and move up then?

I would easily.

I don't think there is much separation between the guys rated between 17-25 compared to guys rated between 26-35

i think there is a big separation.

 

[Heraldic]

I think this is just a perfect draft for a scouting team above everyone else, which I hope we are.

The narrative sure is that the players between 10-40 are almost equal. We all know that every draft contains "steals" and players that only a few or even only one team has detected. The more that the teams buy this narrative, the more easier it is to trade up and pick your "Karlsson" or "Perry".

I don't personally have enough competence to detect these guys outside of the narrative, but I trust that Murray, Devine and co. are able to do that. If they believe that it is the right call to move up and get a specific guy, I think that risk is something we should take in our situation - even if he eventually ends up being nothing more than a guy you could have picked with one of our second rounders.

 

[EichHart]

I agree with the notion that we have a plethora of draft picks. I believe more draft picks in a 3 year span than anyone has ever had in the NHL, I believe someone stated only the Capitals rivaled how many we have? We need Quality>Quantity at this point. In a draft where you cannot get players of Compher/Baptiste quality in 2nd/3rd rounds we need to move up using the number of 2nds we have to get a guy in the 12-20 range.

 

[Savitar]

I hope they keep all three 2nds and trade CE to get another 1st or Stewart since neither have long term futures here

 

[Splintered Sherwood]

Buffalo should move up in the draft if a reasonable opportunity presents itself. The goal is to get the best players in the draft, not the most.

 

[ZeroPT*]

This doesn't compute.

You aren't dense, but you don't understand what I'm trying to say? I don't think we would get very high by packaging all 3 2nds to move up, the highest I think we could get is the 15-20 range, and I've repeteadly said that I don't believe there is a big enough separation between a prospect rated between 15-20 compared to one rated between 25-35.

according to you, we should be talking about these guys, in that range:
10-Barbashev
11-Ritchie
12-Kempe
13-Kapanen
14-Tuch
15-Milano
16-Perlini

Do you prefer Karlsson and Corner to 1 of them?
(barf)

I've said that by packaging all 3 seconds the highest I envision us getting would likely be 18th overall. Example, TM himself traded 35+48 for 24 in 2011, 2 2nds to move up 11 spots, add in another late 2nd when the draft starts getting weaker and weaker and I doubt you'd get in the 12-15 range. I also don't see a partner to dance with in this scenario apart from Detroit and I doubt the value would be good enough.
And yes I'd rather have Karlsson+Cornel over Perlini.

i'd rather get a high end prospect, than a project

Even with McKenzie's ratings... you can see the fall off after 18-20 range. He's not as high on Barbashev and Kempe... but still the drop off is huge...

You might be happy sitting around and grabbing a couple lotto tickets. But if there's an opportunity to turn a couple lotto tickets into a crisp benjamin... we should grab the money.

the success rate of 2nd rounders is well known... combine that with the weak depth of this draft... and we are probably looking at a 2nd round that won't produce more than 2-3 NHLers that matter

This is the disconnect. I don't think there are high end prospects available in the range we could realistically move into apart from someone sliding from his projected draft slot. You're definitely the hardest person to convince one way or another so we'll leave it to agree to disagree.

 

[Djp]

I agree with the notion that we have a plethora of draft picks. I believe more draft picks in a 3 year span than anyone has ever had in the NHL, I believe someone stated only the Capitals rivaled how many we have? We need Quality>Quantity at this point. In a draft where you cannot get players of Compher/Baptiste quality in 2nd/3rd rounds we need to move up using the number of 2nds we have to get a guy in the 12-20 range.

Over a 4 yr period of 2012-2015 Buffalo has: 8 1sts(1,2,1,3) and 10 2nds ( 1,3,4,2)

I am counting #61 as a 2nd round pick because 5 out of the last 10 years #61 was a 2nd round pick.

Jeremy White posted something that complied there picks compared with other teams.

 

[Jame]

You aren't dense, but you don't understand what I'm trying to say? I don't think we would get very high by packaging all 3 2nds to move up, the highest I think we could get is the 15-20 range, and I've repeteadly said that I don't believe there is a big enough separation between a prospect rated between 15-20 compared to one rated between 25-35.

I've said that by packaging all 3 seconds the highest I envision us getting would likely be 18th overall. Example, TM himself traded 35+48 for 24 in 2011, 2 2nds to move up 11 spots, add in another late 2nd when the draft starts getting weaker and weaker and I doubt you'd get in the 12-15 range. I also don't see a partner to dance with in this scenario apart from Detroit and I doubt the value would be good enough

I get that you are trying to narrow it to one negative scenario that you can control, because under a larger scope of possibilities, your statements are just silly.

And yes I'd rather have Karlsson+Cornel over Perlini.

you'd rather have McKenzie's 39th and 41st ranked players.... over his 13th????????

reminder: you are the one who brought up Mackenzie's rankings and how good they are.

This is the disconnect. I don't think there are high end prospects available in the range we could realistically move into apart from someone sliding from his projected draft slot. You're definitely the hardest person to convince one way or another so we'll leave it to agree to disagree.

Based on whose projection?
Barbashev is 10th on your list, and 23rd on Mackenzie's...

Would you take Karlsson (your #25) and Cornel (>#30) and garbage late 2nd over Barbashev?

 

[B U F F A L O]

I'll trade all three 2nds to jump up as high as I could in the first round. I feel like it could get us to 15 (DET, who doesnt have their 2nd rounder).

I'd also consider using some of the 2nd rounders next year.

 

[ZeroPT*]

I don't want Perlini. If we moved up and take him I'd be very disappointed

 

[Dirty Dog]

"I’d like to get a couple of more first round picks and I have those three second-rounders to use." - Tim Murray

You believe everything you hear before the draft? Did you even read the OP as he specifically talked about the small difference between picks in the 20s and the 30s/40s. You don't know if TM agrees or disagrees with that. Maybe TM wants to trade back into the top 15 only and after that it isnt worth it (which would agree with the OP).

 

[Jame]

You believe everything you hear before the draft?

no. but that is a pretty straight forward quote.

do you think he's trying to deceive..."hahahaha i've now convinced the other GMs that I want to trade for their 1st round pick.... but i really don't.... bwahahahah"

Did you even read the OP as he specifically talked about the small difference between picks in the 20s and the 30s/40s.

Yes, i did. And he's very wrong about that.

You don't know if TM agrees or disagrees with that.

He disagrees, which is why he's calling every team trying to get back into the first.

the big drop off in talent is around 30, not 20.

Maybe TM wants to trade back into the top 15 only and after that it isnt worth it (which would agree with the OP).

nope

"There are a lot of potential deals out there that have a No. 1 coming back," he said. "I just feel if I can just get something in the 20s or the teens that maybe you can do something with that too."

So there you go... glad we settled that....

oh wait... is this where you are going to tell me not to believe him?

 

[Bps21*]

I'd like to get barbashev, kempe or tuch if they're going to move back into the mid first or so. I think Ritchie is long gone. I have no interest in Milano or Perlini