Gstank29 Posted June 14, 2015 Share Posted June 14, 2015 My favorite player in this draft that we a have a chance to get is Boeser. But i think the fact that 28 teams interviewed him at the combine means that he's going to be be picked in the 15-20 range Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
73 Percent Posted June 14, 2015 Share Posted June 14, 2015 Kings draft Kempe last year. Canucks draft Eriksson-Ek this year. what's the relevance in that HV? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gstank29 Posted June 14, 2015 Share Posted June 14, 2015 Apparently Mantha and 19 are avaliable. Would be the perfect pick to get one of Chabot, Boeser, and Zboril. FYI Mantha and Rychel were my favorite players out of the 2013 draft and i would love to get one of them Maybe Higgins and 23 will get you 19 and a 3rd/4th, don't know how you would get Mantha though Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thejazz97 Posted June 14, 2015 Share Posted June 14, 2015 Apparently Mantha and 19 are avaliable. Would be the perfect pick to get one of Chabot, Boeser, and Zboril. FYI Mantha and Rychel were my favorite players out of the 2013 draft and i would love to get one of them Maybe Higgins and 23 will get you 19 and a 3rd/4th, don't know how you would get Mantha though Hamhuis + 23? I don't actually want Mantha tho... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
asian player Posted June 14, 2015 Share Posted June 14, 2015 Hamhuis + 23? I don't actually want Mantha tho... Moving hammer to move up 4 spots is definitely not worth it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grape Posted June 14, 2015 Share Posted June 14, 2015 Moving hammer to move up 4 spots is definitely not worth it If a can't miss player is there, and he would for sure be taken within the next 4 picks, i'd do hammer + pick 23 as well. Just think of trading Hammer for a second round pick. Basically 23rd + 2nd rounder for 19th. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Knucklehd Posted June 14, 2015 Share Posted June 14, 2015 If a can't miss player is there, and he would for sure be taken within the next 4 picks, i'd do hammer + pick 23 as well. Just think of trading Hammer for a second round pick. Basically 23rd + 2nd rounder for 19th. Hammer is worth more than a second round pick, hell he's worth more to us just staying on the team Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baumerman77 Posted June 14, 2015 Share Posted June 14, 2015 Second round picks have around a 50% (at the most) shot of playing 200 games in the NHL. That being said, draft picks are always traded for inflated values, especially around this time of year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grape Posted June 14, 2015 Share Posted June 14, 2015 Second round picks have around a 50% (at the most) shot of playing 200 games in the NHL. That being said, draft picks are always traded for inflated values, especially around this time of year. I can guarantee you it's less than a 50% chance. At most a 30% chance in a good draft class. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baer. Posted June 14, 2015 Share Posted June 14, 2015 I can guarantee you it's less than a 50% chance. At most a 30% chance in a good draft class. Yup, even in 2003, around 60% played 100+ games and only around 40% played 200+. And that was in the best draft of the decade. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baumerman77 Posted June 14, 2015 Share Posted June 14, 2015 I can guarantee you it's less than a 50% chance. At most a 30% chance in a good draft class. You're correct. TSN did a study putting it at 44% (with a lesser 50 game threshold) http://www.tsn.ca/playing-the-percentages-in-the-nhl-draft-1.206144 It makes you really question what Benning is willing to give up for a second rounder. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chickenman92 Posted June 14, 2015 Share Posted June 14, 2015 You're correct. TSN did a study putting it at 44% (with a lesser 50 game threshold)http://www.tsn.ca/playing-the-percentages-in-the-nhl-draft-1.206144 It makes you really question what Benning is willing to give up for a second rounder. The thing about that stat is, I bet if you look at certain teams they are well above that 44% nnumber...then there is Vancouver keeping that avg. down. 12 2nd rd picks in 20 years...and two, Druken and Raymond, have been solid picks. That's a 17% success rate Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grape Posted June 14, 2015 Share Posted June 14, 2015 Yup, even in 2003, around 60% played 100+ games and only around 40% played 200+. And that was in the best draft of the decade. yup haha i think it's exactly 40% over 200 (12/30). I think it's a bit lower for 100+ games though, I think it was around 15/30 and that's one of the two best draft classes in NHL history. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baer. Posted June 14, 2015 Share Posted June 14, 2015 yup haha i think it's exactly 40% over 200 (12/30). I think it's a bit lower for 100+ games though, I think it was around 15/30 and that's one of the two best draft classes in NHL history. Contrast to the 2008 draft, which, excluding the top 4 picks, Derek Stepan, Erik Karlsson and Roman Josi, was basically one big draft of busts. Only 7 players drafted in the second round played over 100 games. And only 5 played over 200. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mpt Posted June 14, 2015 Share Posted June 14, 2015 Contrast to the 2008 draft, which, excluding the top 4 picks, Derek Stepan, Erik Karlsson and Roman Josi, was basically one big draft of busts. Only 7 players drafted in the second round played over 100 games. And only 5 played over 200. I wouldn't go that far, there are some pretty good players coming from 2008, I don't think it's nearly as bad as 1999. But yes, it was a pretty poor year overall besides the 1st round Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baumerman77 Posted June 14, 2015 Share Posted June 14, 2015 The thing about that stat is, I bet if you look at certain teams they are well above that 44% nnumber...then there is Vancouver keeping that avg. down. 12 2nd rd picks in 20 years...and two, Druken and Raymond, have been solid picks. That's a 17% success rate Yup. And if you look at Benning's 2nd rounders from his time at Boston (2007-2013) only 2 (Spooner and Cunningham) played over 50 games so far. In fact you could expand that to include any pick outside of the first round. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
70seven Posted June 14, 2015 Share Posted June 14, 2015 Apparently Mantha and 19 are avaliable. Would be the perfect pick to get one of Chabot, Boeser, and Zboril. FYI Mantha and Rychel were my favorite players out of the 2013 draft and i would love to get one of them Maybe Higgins and 23 will get you 19 and a 3rd/4th, don't know how you would get Mantha though Yeah... after spending some time over the last month on researching the prospects whom might be available, I also really like Boeser and Zboril as targets. I dont think Chabot will be there with the hype he seems to be recently generating and I personally like the snarl Zboril plays with a bit more. Boeser if available seems like he'd be the best natural goal scorer available. He doesnt seem to have any specific flaws as he skates well, has a great shot, solid build... Im actually okay with forgoing a dman pick and taking Boeser with our only 1st as I feel he presents the natural skill set to become a legit top line scoring winger, which we need more of on the right side. He's also why Id be looking very hard at trading a Vrbata/Bonino/Kassian/Lack package for a significant defensive prospect from a team looking to add for a cup run. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BanTSN Posted June 14, 2015 Share Posted June 14, 2015 I can guarantee you it's less than a 50% chance. At most a 30% chance in a good draft class. I guess we can afford to trade our second rounders for so-so prospects all the time then. Because getting a 30% chance at landing the next Shea Weber for free is just a waste of time. The 2003 draft was around 45% btw. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
two drink minimum Posted June 14, 2015 Share Posted June 14, 2015 The thing about that stat is, I bet if you look at certain teams they are well above that 44% nnumber...then there is Vancouver keeping that avg. down.12 2nd rd picks in 20 years...and two, Druken and Raymond, have been solid picks. That's a 17% success rateWhat about the missing picks. You have to account for that. Who did they get in exchange for the 8 missing picks? If they got 8 players who played significant time with the Canucks then their success rate goes to 50% yo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hatedkid666 Posted June 14, 2015 Share Posted June 14, 2015 FOR EVERYONE WANTING DANIEL SPRONG I HAVE MET HIM AND HAVE FRIENDS WHO KNOW HIM PRETTY WELL: He is a complete idiot. From the stories I have heard, when he got home from school his dad would take his homework and tell Daniel to go to the rink. He never did anyone homework or any of that. That's why he is such a talented player but has an awful plus/minus, there is no work ethic in him. He grew up as a spoiled brat and he still is a spoiled brat. I don't think we need that I the dressing room. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.