Would you rather..draft edition

[keppel146]

Would you rather have one pick inside the top 8? Or two picks in the 10-25 range (wild not moving and not winning #1 overall) Top 8 example being trading with NJ or Buffalo.

Click to read more...

 

[16thOverallSaveUs]

Depends whose there. Probably 11 and 25 unless Rossi/Perfetti is there

 

[AKL]

Depending on who's available at 7 or 8. I'd do it for Lafreniere, Byfield, Stutzle, Drysdale or Raymond.

I really believe Lundell will still be on the board at 11, but almost certainly either he or Mercer would be there, and then I'd want to snag either Reichel, Peterka, Zary or Bourque with PIT's 1st.

 

[Dr Jan Itor]

So Bob McKenzie's final draft rankings went:

1. Laf
2. Stutzle
3. Byfield
4. Drysdale
5. Perfetti
6. Raymond
7. Rossi

As far as the top 7 goes. If that's how the actual draft went, I would absolutely rather trade up to #7. If Rossi and Raymond were switched, I would stay put and be comfortable getting any one of Raymond, Holtz, Sanderson, Lundell, Mercer or Quinn at #11.

 

[grN1g]

If I can move up for Rossi that's the only player I'd realistically do it for. I think he's going to end up being one of the best of the draft.

 

[57special]

I think that there is going to be a decent player still around at #25. A guy like Reichel, Jarvis, Perrault, Lapierre. I'll stick with 11, though if Lundell is gone I'll rage. If Sanderson, Quinn, Amirov, and Askarov are there at 11 and Lundell, Rossi, Perfetti are gone then I'll move back a bit and get a guy like Zary. We need C's.

 

[Dr Jan Itor]

Sanderson is interesting at #11 if he falls there. It's not too farfetched that we'd be sitting here exactly 1 year later with no Soucy, no Brodin and a 36 year old Suter.

 

[16thOverallSaveUs]

Sanderson is interesting at #11 if he falls there. It's not too farfetched that we'd be sitting here exactly 1 year later with no Soucy, no Brodin and a 36 year old Suter.

I wouldn’t be mad about it at all. I mean, not super mad, because Obviously I’ve got a lot riding on us winning the lottery.

 

[a79krgm]

Most years I'll take the two picks in the lower half. But, honestly some years there's no one worth taking down there.

 

[2Pair]

Most years I'll take the two picks in the lower half. But, honestly some years there's no one worth taking down there.

There's always someone worth taking in the 1st round

 

[keppel146]

Sanderson is interesting at #11 if he falls there. It's not too farfetched that we'd be sitting here exactly 1 year later with no Soucy, no Brodin and a 36 year old Suter.

If we take Sanderson, we better trade for a center.

 

[2Pair]

If we take Sanderson, we better trade for a center.

They need to trade for a center regardless of the draft

 

[57special]

Sanderson won't be ready for at least a year, probably more due to Pejorative Slured development caused by the AHL being shut down.


WTH was that autocorrect about?

 

[16thOverallSaveUs]

Sanderson seems like her could be a 3rd pair guy in a year. I think the hope with a guy like that is that he's the next Suter. I have my doubts. he can skate well apparently, but I haven't watched many defensemen think the game like suter. Sanderson probably becomes comparable in most aspects of the game, but I don't think he's ever going to be able to replace what suter has been doing for this franchise for a while now.

 

[57special]

Sanderson is not a need for us. Simple as that.

 

[AKL]

Sanderson is not a need for us. Simple as that.

You don't draft for need. Simple as that.

 

[Dr Jan Itor]

Sanderson is not a need for us. Simple as that.

Could be awfully quickly.

 

[DANOZ28]

You don't draft for need. Simple as that.

well we wouldn't be is this fine mess if we would have drafted for need so i disagree with you. if we had newhook , veleno , khovanov then this year snag lundell we'd be fine.

 

[57special]

I mean, after next year's abbreviated season we'll have JEE, Rask, Sturm, and maybe Khovanov under contract as C's. That's two guys guys who have never played NHL C, one guy who is a 4C at best, and a defensive middle six C. Lundell might not be a game changer, but he has been playing with men for two years, has good size, and will probably be ready to play in the NHL after next season.

If Guerin makes some brilliant trade for a top C, then we reassess, and maybe pick Sanderson, though to me he's the defensive counterpart to Lundell.

 

[AKL]

I mean, after next year's abbreviated season we'll have JEE, Rask, Sturm, and maybe Khovanov under contract as C's. That's two guys guys who have never played NHL C, one guy who is a 4C at best, and a defensive middle six C. Lundell might not be a game changer, but he has been playing with men for two years, has good size, and will probably be ready to play in the NHL after next season.

If Guerin makes some brilliant trade for a top C, then we reassess, and maybe pick Sanderson, though to me he's the defensive counterpart to Lundell.

You. Don't. Draft. For. Need.

 

[Dr Jan Itor]

Our best C prospect is a lot better/more promising than our best LD prospect, at the moment.

A player drafted this year will be 23 in 5 years, probably just getting his footing in the NHL at that time. Guess what else happens in 5 years?

 

[16thOverallSaveUs]

Our best C prospect is a lot better/more promising than our best LD prospect, at the moment.

A player drafted this year will be 23 in 5 years, probably just getting his footing in the NHL at that time. Guess what else happens in 5 years?

Suter’s contract expires?

 

[AKL]

Suter’s contract expires?

I was gonna guess the next expansion draft happens but yours is good too

 

[Dr Jan Itor]

Suter’s contract expires?

That’s a bingo.