TheGuardian_ Posted June 7, 2017 Share Posted June 7, 2017 Glass half full, glass half empty, a matter of perception. One way to gauge just how good/bad this draft class is after the top two just about every scouting list has players all over the place. Now this could mean that all these players are so good there is no difference or there is nothing that they have that is a difference. As an example the #3 overall pick from various lists Makar - Mittelstadt - Heiskanen - Mittelstadt - Heiskanen - Vilardi ....these players vary from 3 to 10 depending upon the list. It gets more diverse with each following pick. These estimations are done by professional scouts, that's all their jobs are, no GMing or other things so back to the first sentence, full, empty? This becomes pertinent to Vancouver with the recent rumours of trading Tanev for the #3 spot and fan perception if Benning trades a pick for a bonafide player. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
48MPHSlapShot Posted June 7, 2017 Share Posted June 7, 2017 10 minutes ago, TheGuardian_ said: Glass half full, glass half empty With you the glass is usually full of something brown and smelly... Anyways, It's a little unsettling to know that the guy we pick at 5 likely isn't much better than whoever might go at 10. I'd say empty, considering there's no real consensus and we happen to have a very high pick. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aliboy Posted June 7, 2017 Share Posted June 7, 2017 Is next year any better? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ForsbergTheGreat Posted June 7, 2017 Share Posted June 7, 2017 Just now, aliboy said: Is next year any better? Yep, next years is loaded Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lancaster Posted June 7, 2017 Share Posted June 7, 2017 Meh.... strong draft, weak draft..... they can only be confirmed years after the fact. I mean... wasn't the 1999 draft considered pretty strong going in? The 2003 initially believed to be only decent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derp... Posted June 7, 2017 Share Posted June 7, 2017 I would say this draft is about 100 players deep in terms of guys who have a decent chance of being NHLers. I'm glad the majority of our picks are 95 and below. If we don't move any picks I expect us to end up with 3 NHLers this draft, which would be fantastic. If we are incredibly lucky we could end up with 4. 2-3 are much more likely though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aliboy Posted June 7, 2017 Share Posted June 7, 2017 39 minutes ago, ForsbergTheGreat said: Yep, next years is loaded Then that's where we should be looking, so only sign UFA's who can traded at the deadline and take on contracts that come with picks for next year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ojibwa72 Posted June 7, 2017 Share Posted June 7, 2017 This is the draft you pick positions to fill holes not always BPA. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Toews Posted June 7, 2017 Share Posted June 7, 2017 1 hour ago, Lancaster said: Meh.... strong draft, weak draft..... they can only be confirmed years after the fact. I mean... wasn't the 1999 draft considered pretty strong going in? The 2003 initially believed to be only decent. There is a theory (for lack of a better word) about the strength of the 2003 draft. I have only seen it mentioned in passing but apparently the 2003 draft benefited from some rule changes in regards to I believe US hockey. I will do some digging, see if I can find something. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PunjabiCanucks Posted June 7, 2017 Share Posted June 7, 2017 I think why the top 5 changes a lot, is due to each teams needs. Nico + patrick most likely go top 2. With 3 and 4 , either Vilardi goes at 3 and a D at 4. But in all honesty, 2 D's can go at 3 and 4, to fill the needs of Dallas and Colorado. We may just have Vilardi fall to us at 5. The rest is all a mess. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tre Mac Posted June 7, 2017 Share Posted June 7, 2017 -487rep is impressive. Don't let people tell you otherwise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stelar Posted June 8, 2017 Share Posted June 8, 2017 If only there was a thread dedicated to discussing the draft class......... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roger Neilsons Towel Posted June 8, 2017 Share Posted June 8, 2017 8 hours ago, TheGuardian_ said: Glass half full, glass half empty, a matter of perception. One way to gauge just how good/bad this draft class is after the top two just about every scouting list has players all over the place. Now this could mean that all these players are so good there is no difference or there is nothing that they have that is a difference. As an example the #3 overall pick from various lists Makar - Mittelstadt - Heiskanen - Mittelstadt - Heiskanen - Vilardi ....these players vary from 3 to 10 depending upon the list. It gets more diverse with each following pick. These estimations are done by professional scouts, that's all their jobs are, no GMing or other things so back to the first sentence, full, empty? This becomes pertinent to Vancouver with the recent rumours of trading Tanev for the #3 spot and fan perception if Benning trades a pick for a bonafide player. This could have gone in any number of Draft Threads. There is nothing new here. Please bump one of the other Draft threads in the future instead of creating a new thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roger Neilsons Towel Posted June 8, 2017 Share Posted June 8, 2017 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.