rotiman187 Posted June 21, 2014 Share Posted June 21, 2014 People here saying Tanev>Hamhus need to settle down. Hamhuis is our best defensive defenseman. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kloubek Posted June 21, 2014 Share Posted June 21, 2014 Well, I WAS suggesting that Reinhart was ranked at 3, but that was based off of what I had read on only a few sites. (Based off Central Scouting). Now I see ISS is ranking him as #1, and another is ranking him at #2. So really, who knows. Looks like if Vancouver wants to secure their man they'll have to get and retain the 1st pick after all. Are you suggesting Reinhart will be available at three or that the Canucks really want one of the other "top 5" guys? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peaches5 Posted June 21, 2014 Share Posted June 21, 2014 Well, I WAS suggesting that Reinhart was ranked at 3, but that was based off of what I had read on only a few sites. (Based off Central Scouting). Now I see ISS is ranking him as #1, and another is ranking him at #2. So really, who knows. Looks like if Vancouver wants to secure their man they'll have to get and retain the 1st pick after all. Some sites have Bennett ranked number 1 none of them are in that allstar category that people here seem to think that's why giving up Tanev for them is just dumb. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Me_ Posted June 21, 2014 Share Posted June 21, 2014 I think you have a different definition of "future considerations" than the rest of the hockey world. A second overall draft pick wouldn't be part of a deal with that kind of wording. It's the same kind of thing in MLB. Teams just don't give away potential superstars or in the NHL's version, first round picks that involve possible superstars. Indeed... But NOT picking a certain player 2nd overall could be had, and that was the point. Same as when the Sedins were safe get as the 2nd and 3rd picks after dealing with Atlanta, who then picked Stefan 1st overall. That kind of deal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nicklas Bo Hunter Posted June 21, 2014 Share Posted June 21, 2014 I took draft day off of work... idk if that makes me a loser or not but Idc I love the draft! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr.Habitat Posted June 21, 2014 Share Posted June 21, 2014 I took draft day off of work... idk if that makes me a loser or not but Idc I love the draft! Draft is at 4 pm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShakyWalton Posted June 21, 2014 Share Posted June 21, 2014 Draft is at 4 pm well...he has all day to drink and get ready for it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
riffraff Posted June 21, 2014 Share Posted June 21, 2014 I took draft day off of work... idk if that makes me a loser or not but Idc I love the draft! Lol...nice one....unfortunately ill be back in saskatoon away from our hometown media coverage...good on you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
73 Percent Posted June 21, 2014 Share Posted June 21, 2014 well...he has all day to drink and get ready for it.the draft is wven better this year that we dont have to waiy 58573939 hours for our pick! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nicklas Bo Hunter Posted June 21, 2014 Share Posted June 21, 2014 Draft is at 4 pm Yea I work shift work though. So probably would have had to work 4-10 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nicklas Bo Hunter Posted June 21, 2014 Share Posted June 21, 2014 well...he has all day to drink and get ready for it. that too! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SabreFan1 Posted June 21, 2014 Share Posted June 21, 2014 Indeed... But NOT picking a certain player 2nd overall could be had, and that was the point. Same as when the Sedins were safe get as the 2nd and 3rd picks after dealing with Atlanta, who then picked Stefan 1st overall. That kind of deal. That of course certainly does happen, but that rarely involves giving up anything substantial beyond a trade. That kind of thing usually has to do with a GM's reputation. If you negotiate and the other team "cuts you a break" then the receiving GM better not try and "bleed" the other team during events such as moderate term future trading involving the 2 GM's. Since I know them the best, I'll use my hometown team as an example. The trade in which Tim Murray seriously fleeced St. Louis for Miller and Ott. If Murray owed the other GM, for lack of a better word, a "favour" for a previous dealing, then he could have dropped the conditional 3rd round pick demand to even the score. Unfortunately for Armstrong, Murray didn't owe him a thing so he was able to take the shirt off of Armstrong's back for 2 rentals. However all bets are off when it comes to things such as top 10 draft picks. They are much too valuable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tangerines Posted June 21, 2014 Share Posted June 21, 2014 I think everything is pretty much a done deal already with attaining the #1st OA unless another team comes out of no where and blows the socks off the panthers. I read that Tallon didn't interview the top 3 guys in the draft. Does that sound like he wants to keep that pick? Unless of course he's already decided that Ehlers/Nylander/ are #1 worthy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ryan Strome Posted June 21, 2014 Share Posted June 21, 2014 I think everything is pretty much a done deal already with attaining the #1st OA unless another team comes out of no where and blows the socks off the panthers. I read that Tallon didn't interview the top 3 guys in the draft. Does that sound like he wants to keep that pick? Unless of course he's already decided that Ehlers/Nylander/ are #1 worthy.Ya know, I'm thinking Tallon will in fact draft AE. I think he is looking for a ridiculous offer to alter his opinion. I don't think he'll get it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ryan Strome Posted June 21, 2014 Share Posted June 21, 2014 http://www.thescore.com/nhl/news/517084 I realize this is over a week old but like I said I'm just thinking its more likely then not he drafts AE. If AE is indeed a true #1 dman then Tanev and Ehlers/Nylander wouldn't be worth giving up AE. I thought for sure he would move the pick now I really don't think he will. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Karlsson`s Flo Posted June 21, 2014 Share Posted June 21, 2014 http://www.thescore.com/nhl/news/517084 I realize this is over a week old but like I said I'm just thinking its more likely then not he drafts AE. If AE is indeed a true #1 dman then Tanev and Ehlers/Nylander wouldn't be worth giving up AE. I thought for sure he would move the pick now I really don't think he will. Why? He still has a week to keep teams bidding. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ryan Strome Posted June 21, 2014 Share Posted June 21, 2014 Why? He still has a week to keep teams bidding. Like I said I just have a feeling he drafts AE Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wai_lai416 Posted June 21, 2014 Share Posted June 21, 2014 We better not be giving up too much for the 1st. We need to be gaining assets, not giving them up for a better pick. Horvat and Shinkaruk better be off limits. If we really want Reinhart, that is all the more reason why you keep Horvat so they could be our 1-2 punch down the middle. 6th pick should actually cover much of the cost of the first. We shouldn't be giving up anything more than Tanev or another defensemen. what's good are assets if you are going to have a bunch of average/mediocre ones? i'd take one top end asset over 2-3 average/good ones.. top end asset don't come along often. look at all the teams that's been stocking up on lots of good/average assets.. where are they now? look at buffalo/florida/carolina/nyi/calgary etc.. they have a ton of good/average prospect.. but where are they now? still floating near the bottom of the league standing? by the time those prospect beings decent NHL players.. they'll prolly run into cap problems as they'll be out of elc contracts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
He-Lord Posted June 22, 2014 Share Posted June 22, 2014 what's good are assets if you are going to have a bunch of average/mediocre ones? i'd take one top end asset over 2-3 average/good ones.. top end asset don't come along often. look at all the teams that's been stocking up on lots of good/average assets.. where are they now? look at buffalo/florida/carolina/nyi/calgary etc.. they have a ton of good/average prospect.. but where are they now? still floating near the bottom of the league standing? by the time those prospect beings decent NHL players.. they'll prolly run into cap problems as they'll be out of elc contracts.Too bad one player doesn't make a team. We need depth. We aren't going to be trading average/medicore assets for a great one. Giving up Horvat for Reinhart doesn't actually make us better, unless you think Reinhart will center every single line. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr.53 Posted June 22, 2014 Share Posted June 22, 2014 Too bad one player doesn't make a team. We need depth. We aren't going to be trading average/medicore assets for a great one. Giving up Horvat for Reinhart doesn't actually make us better, unless you think Reinhart will center every single line. well said. Yes, you need high end top prospects, but they also need to be accompanied by a series of good/average prospects. You need both to be successful. It would make no sense for us to trade one for another when we are trying to reach both Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.