J-P

Agree. Ek would be the perfect 3C for us. A pest to play against, can play matchup and still talented enough for top 6.

Regarding trading the pick we should of course consider it for the right deal, but one thing that often gets overlooked is that you need a constant pool of young players on ELC making the team to stay good over time. So having a player from this draft make the team in 2-3 years is equally important vs adding a good player via trade this year. Especially since we're not ready to contend yet anyway.

He did that last time. 6 mil was market value but he easily would have gotten more term somewhere else. Instead he agreed to a shorter deal that expires before expansion draft. My guess is he'll sign for one year, NMC and 2 mil. That would still be a considerable hometown discount.

I think it makes sense what the agent said with a shorter deal for EP and a longer deal for QH. QH is a bit of an unknown as to how effective he will be in the defensive parts of the game in his prime, but apart from that quite certain he will develop into an elite passer, play driver and puck handler. He sort of already is of course but will get better. EP on the other hand is an established 1C who will bring a solid two way game along with elite shooting and playmaking, but there are question marks on durability (although the wrist injury is hopefully just a freak incident) and nobody really knows yet if he will be one of the 30 best centers in the league or one of the five best, so a bridge deal makes sense for all parties. So 7x7 for QH and 3x7 for EP in current economic climate? One can hope...

I think that's pretty spot on, could even see him get less, and of course he needs to take the next step during that contract - which will definitely be 2 years max - otherwise he won't get a next one. Doesn't mean he's not a first round talent though, time will tell. Not expecting him to explode offensively, although I could see 30-40 points in the future, but that's a good thing since we need good D that won't break the bank.

Oh yes, exactly the type of gamble I want in the lower rounds. Jurmo oozes potential, and although there are question marks around his hockey IQ I don't think there's any general conclusion that it is or will remain bad. You need decent IQ too be a good defender but I wouldn't say it's the strong suit for e.g. Myers or Edler and they have still done ok . Don't remember the odds for a 3rd rounder being a regular NHL player, probably under 10%, so we should keep that in mind I suppose...

I for one have a lot of faith in our amateur scouting and feel quite safe about the first two picks. When Hoglander fell to 40, JB said they felt his game would translate well to the NHL. Not that it could translate well or that he was "talented" etc but that he WOULD be an NHL player. That IMO seems like a good advantage vs all the teams that overlooked him (although I don't think anyone expected him to establish himself as a top 6 F right away). Same reasoning with Podz, they feel his game will translate perfectly to NA...

There is a difference. Of course we shouldn't draft players with questions around hockey IQ in the first round if the skills aren't out of this world. But in the third round it's another matter. Hockey IQ alone is not enough to be an NHL player in most cases. If they don't have an elite toolbox (speed, strength, skill, vision) the IQ will only take most players so far. Brendan Gaunce is a good example drafted in the first round. Players with elite IQ and tools get selected in the first round generally. From the third round down you have to gamble a bit more since all players have shortcomings. IMO it's a good strategy to at least partially avoid safe picks with low ceiling in the later rounds and go for the home runs.

Isles are a tough team so play, just so consistent. Feel TB have the better players but Isles the better team play. Isles in 7 still feels right.

Really bad take imo. Toffoli and Tanev were never going to be part of our contending window so I support not prioritizing them and am fine with Tanev leaving as I wouldn't want him on our team on that contract. Toffoli stings a bit but as mentioned not really part of our future anyway. The Jake contract is a tough one. Had a good regular season for large parts but showed nothing in the playoffs. As a high pick with untapped potential I understand the signing but I would have liked to see him traded at the precious deadline. Easy to say in hindsight though.

It is a factor and yes we need to add some more size. That said, NYI and TB are among the fastest teams and Vegas are also a fast team, so that is more of a factor IMO.

If OJ belonged to another franchise and we had say the 9th pick and the 24th pick this year I would have no issues trading the 24th pick but wouldn't trade the 9th. He's still a bit of an unknown but has tremendous upside and his ceiling is a two way #2-4D on any team in the league and that's worth a 1st rounder. There are of course question marks regarding his injuries and skating so not a clear cut decision.

No rational reason but I'll cheer for the Islanders til the end, after that i don't know. Tampa after their cup circumventon? No. Love their roster though. Col, maybe. Vegas? Well, no... Montreal? No, just no... Will say though that i never expected Vegas or Montreal to go this far, so kudos for that. Nobody to root for in the final four? Business as usual then... ;-)

Agree on Dumba, IMO we should go after Adam Larsson to play with QH if we can get reasonable term and cap hit (4 x 5.5 or so). We'd still need to move Schmidt to make that work, which is fine by me as I don't really think he's a great fit here, at least not with current deployment. I also belive he can be replaced over time by OJ and Rathbone. Maybe there could also be other trades to be made as part of the expansion draft, but not sure who the target would be. A physical RD that has the hockey IQ to excel with QH is not that easy to find. Or maybe a defensive minded physical partner is not what QH needs? A bit surprised that Schmidt hasn't been given more of a chance with QH. Not saying it would work, but it could work. Not all D pairings need to be physical. Still remember 97 when Lidstrom and Murphy matched up against legion of doom. Seemed like a strange concept at first, but it was a brilliant move by Bowman as the puck just never stayed long enough in the D zone or on the sticks of Lindros etc. for them to create anything. A player I'd really want from Minny though is Joel Eriksson Ek who's RFA and a perfect 3C for us.

I think it would be enough with 4 x 5.5m for Larsson to consider Vancouver. I would definitely do that if we can afford it, but if it takes more term or money it isn't worth it. I believe Larsson would be an ideal partner for QH, and he also fills a clear need as a physical RD that can play all situations. I think over time OJ and Rathbone will make Schmidt redundant, so trading Schmidt (guess he needs to regain some value first though...) for a top 6 forward or 3C would be ideal.

I somewhat like the idea about a trophy corresponding to the Selke for D:s. On the other hand it's weird that there is actually no best offensive forward trophy apart from the ones based purely on numbers. Also - tradiition and history is a big point in having trophies at all, so I guess they shouldn't be changed unless necessary. The description for Norris clearly states it's for the best all-around defenseman, so there's that...

Yeah, agree even though I don't like the projected cap hit for Jones, but I think we'll have to add quite a bit. A signed Jones at 8 mil + Domi for our pick and one of our better prospects/younger players is still worth exploring even if it would hurt.

I still see most teams being reluctant to take on Jones cap hit. Otherwise yes, Minnesota doing something like that is a good theory. Still feel some desparate team will take on Jones. Likely Toronto or NYR. As bad as Toronto's D is something like Nylander + Muzzin for a signed Jones + maybe a slight add would actually make some kind of twisted sense. Because Toronto would never be foolish enough to trade a package like that for an unsigned Jones, right..?

Good point that most teams where Jones would be a fit would have a hard time getting a good package together. Montreal and Toronto are the teams at the top of my mind who would be both inclined and have the assets. And I guess they are both mid tier teams after all, although Montreal has time left on this season to prove me wrong... My point still stands - we don't have the assets to sacrifice and Jones cap hit is not something we want to take on at this stage.

Sorry, don't agree. If CBJ are really shopping Jones they can get a lot better offers compared to this one. And that's while I still feel it's not in our best interest to give up those assets for Jones.

Talking next contract, not worth it to trade for one year of his current contract. But if his next contract is not at the expected 9 mil+ but instead 7.5 mil tops, then maybe, but I think someone will pay more than that and I'd rather it not be us.

I have two issues with this. 1) Columbus would never do that trade 2) Jones has a cap hit that you don't win with nowadays IMO, no player in the league is worth 9-10 mil or more in current climate if we're judging by contribution in post season wins.

You mean apart from the obvious one - himself! Not sure how current season motivates that, but, ah well... Kopitar is still one of the best centers in the league I guess,

Myers straight up? Would fit both teams I believe. Columbus is a good trading partner for us and I always loved the idea of Domi as a top 9F on our team, so if there are no red flags on his health long term I'm all for playing the patient game here. Not sure what we could offer up in a trade otherwise though? Sign and trade for both Jones and Domi for our 1st +? Don't want Jones cap hit though and I don't think they price we'd have to pay is worth it.

Totallly agree, and I think Benning & co has done really well in that aspect after 2014, and expect that to continue. Good point though, you need both skill and the competitive nature for a high pick. As for MacT, haven't really watched him play, I understand he's taken a really big leap forward in the last year or so, but also that he's really more of a winger than C in some people's view? Anyone with a good video clip or two that could give me some insight?