2016 NHL Draft

and how many of these disapproving Philly fans have seen these 17/18 year olds play and how many are just lapping up what phlennie is serving?

 

Can we get a list of Philly's picks? I'm at meetings so I cannot pull them up easily.

I will say that I can recall thinking "fuck it! The hockey team from Philadelphia is having a strong draft".

Another thing, goals in Juniors are important, but they are not an all-important indicator of future success. Take Buffalo's third round pick, C. Pu, for example. He played for a stacked London team and got zero PP opps. Now, we cannot as easily project his NHL potential, but we should not be surprised if he appears to be an OHL breakout player next year when all the horses in front of him are gone.

Or, just listen to Bob & Matty rather than Lenny.

 

I don't know about the goalie, but I really liked 3 of their first 4 picks.

To me, the rest is a crap shoot and I didn't follow jrs much last year.

 

Ask, and ye shall receive...

Flyers Draft Picks...
German Rubstov
Pascal Laberge
Carter Hart
Wade Allison
Carsen Twarynski
Connor Bunnaman
Linus Hogberg
Tanner Laczynski
Anthony Salinitri
David Bernhardt

 

Bob, beat me lol...

 

Cat, fer feck sake, quitcher bitchin'! I like Gauthier, but I like Laberge more. As for Hart, he was the top G in this draft IMO. I had him at ~#54 so this was hardly a reach. I think your top 3 all make the NHL in time, and that's bucking raw odds.

I recognize several other names on the list, and think you may have a gem or two.

Quitcher bitchin', and tell your Philly friends that they're giving your city a bad name.

 

never thought Id see the day that quick draw Willy was beat to the punch.

the Flyers picking the goalie, Hextall mustve really liked him taking him 1st off the board.

Dan, wish I had paid more attention to McAvoy last year. we even saw him at the Beanpot.

 

Yeah, and I chatted briefly with him in Helsinki. Hope Sweeney decided he needs to trade him for Matt Moulson.

Honestly, I thought this was a weak draft for G, (and apparently so did all the GM's since this was the lowest the first G was off the boards in years). Still, every team needs about a half dozen prospects at G because they usually need extra years to develop, and most of them are whack jobs. Picking a future NHLer is much harder at this position.

 

It was bound to happen in one of my thousands of posts.

 

cant speak for Robert but you probably know as much, or more, about the prospects than anyone here. i just know what im spoon fed and then the opinions i have of the kids i see- primarily Massholes or kids playing at N.E. schools.

 

Dan has stayed on top of this better than I have.

 

If you're a Sabres fan you have no choice but to immerse yourself in prospects and the draft.

The NHL roster was a tad depressing for a few years.

 

Geez cat, I was having fun with the drug issue on rubstov. I posted a video of his 2015/16 season somewhere. In that video he looked very promising. As far as the drug thing went, the whole team was told to take these pills with juice.

 

you shouldn't draft for position. best player available. fill your needs with free agency.

 

You kinda have to draft for need in the NHL early if your successful looking prospects at a certain position are low. Center, size and defense are the main ones. Perhaps goalie earlier than later.

 

I've always advocated the BAP approach to the draft. After all, we're talking about 18 year old kids that will require years of development for the most part. Who knows what your org. needs will be in 3 or 4 years?

If you're lucky, half your picks will ever make the NHL, and some of them will be traded first. The middle rounds of the draft are usually what defines a successful team, and late round gems can separate great teams from good ones.

Stack the odds of having draft success manifest itself at the NHL level in a few years by focusing on the best talent, not position.

However, "best" in BAP is subjective, and that's where the team blends organizational need with BAP. In other words, a team may want to increase org. physicality in general, so they may grade big prospects higher than sparkplugs. Obviously there's more to a prospect's grade than one attribute, but a team can skew their draft board towards more size.

That is exactly what TOR did, IMO. I've been claiming that BUF needs some positional upgrades (wing & LHD) but TM is addressing those needs primarily though trades & free agents. The org. needs more speed, and that is why I'm very happy with the Sabres draft; 8 of their 10 picks have rocket boosters on their skates.

In the end, I think draft philosophy should be centered on BAP, but that organizational needs should be factored in when defining "best".

 

dan k 1 problem with your post...

the flyers didn't take Laberge first. They passed on Gauthier for Rubtsov. That's my issue. I think Holmstall stole Laberge but to pass on Bellows and Gauthie for a Russian doper seemed odd to me. I wanted Gauthier for his size and strength. I don't see Rubtsov being much. he's not a sniper like Bure was or Ovie is now.

 

red - i didn't say anything to you ? i never saw your video or posts about the doping ?

 

they don't have that much money to fill ALL their holes!

 

There's no problem in my post, Cat, since the precise sequence of picks is not critical to my point. I had Rubtsov & Bellows in my tier 3 (5-16) and Laberge & Gauthier in my tier 4 (17-28). In fact, I would have taken all three of the others before Gauthier. Bellows vs. Rubtsov were so close IMO that they're virtually tied, and to get either of them at 22 was a steal. Gauthier would have been decent value (although I had him ranked 28th).

At 36 Laberge was another steal. That's two steals at the top of the draft for Philly - outstanding! And, as we've discussed, I think Hart was the best G in this draft and he as certainly not a reach pick.