Flames Needs and Wants Heading Into The Draft

Ryan Pike
May 23 2013 11:22AM

 

 

As we barrel head-long into the off-season, the 2013 NHL Draft approaches rapidly. Estimations of what your Calgary Flames will do at the draft, in terms of picks, can be guided in terms of what they've said publicly on the subject and what they've done in the past.

NEEDS and VALUES

Based on GM Jay Feaster's public comments, the Flames have identified their specific needs: size and grit, centers and a physical presence on their blueline. They won't necessarily try to fill those gaps just at the draft, but those thoughts are in the back of their mind.

We can filter that needs assessment with the draft tendencies/value the club has established under the new regime. Jay Feaster has been at the helm of the Flames through two drafts and has made 12 selections, the last seven at the recommendation of John Weisbrod, who heads all scouting.

The Flames have chosen two goalies, four defensemen and six forwards. By source league, that's four from the USHL, five from the WHL, one from the QMJHL, one from Finland and one from Quebec prep school. There's some evidence of the club varying its sources a bit and trying not to select too many of the same “type” of player.

Based on interviews and conversations with Flames management and scouts, the team values hockey sense the most, followed by character, skill and skating. In other words, if you think the game really well – or the scouts say you do – you're high on the Flames scouting list.

BIG CENTERS

I've mentioned Ottawa 67s pivot Sean Monahan recently. He's reasonably big, and arguably he's the best of the non “Big 6” (Jones, MacKinnon, Drouin, Lindolm, Barkov and Nichushkin). He was also a very strong player on a lousy team and would have been a very high pick even in the 2012 draft had he been eligible.

But don't sleep on Edmonton Oil Kings Curtis Lazar, the London Knights Bo Horvat or Regina's Morgan Klimchuk. Horvat in particular has been a strong player on a great London Knights, and one that drives the club's offense. Lazar isn't as crucial to Edmonton's success, but has one of the best, most accurate shots in this draft class.

GRITTY FORWARDS

I will continue to tout Ryan Hartman of the Plymouth Whalers until the draft, as I think he's great.

Andre Burakowsky of Malmo is a bit less gritty, but has arguably more skill. Corey Pronman (of the vaunted Hockey Prospectus) quoted a source in his analysis who pegged Burakowsky's “work ethic as equal to his skill level.” That's a good sign. Swedish forward Jacob de la Rose, of Leksand IF, is also said to be excellent as a physical, two-way player, but projects more as a second rounder.

Another name to keep in mind is Adam Erne out of the Quebec Remparts. The Flames have seen quite a bit of him (via scouting Ryan Culkin), and he's said to be big, fast and physically strong. He'll be available in the mid-to-late first round.

BIG DEFENDERS

This is where this first round shines. There are a lot of big, physical defenders available in this year's draft.

Rasmus Ristolainen is arguably the best. He's Finnish and has played in the SM-Liiga all season against grown-ass men, as a 17-year-old, and done quite well. Another high-level defender is Darnell Nurse, of the OHL's Sault Ste. Marie Greyhounds. He's big, physical and is Donovan McNabb's nephew. And both of his parents are athletes, too. Nurse is roundly considered the best defender available after Seth Jones.

Outside of those two, standouts include London's huge Nikita Zadorov, Kelowna's Madison Bowey, Everett's Mirco Mueller and a pair of USHL blueliners – Steven Santini of the U.S. National Development Team and Ian McCoshen of the Waterloo Blackhawks. Both players are committed to join Johnny Gaudreau and Bill Arnold at Boston College for the 2013-14 season, so they are no doubt on the Flames radar.

HIGH SCHOOL KIDS

I'd be remiss if I didn't mention two key things about high school kids.

First, there's a few decent lowly-ranked, long-term project type high school prospects out of Minnesota that stand out in the Central Scouting rankings. Jacob Jackson had 56 points in 25 games with Tartan High School, while Zach Glienke of Egan High School had 60 points in 25 games, and is 6'3” and 190 pounds. Either could be worth a shot in the seventh round.

Second, the best high school kids in the draft are supposedly Tommy Vannelli out of Minnetona High School in Minnesota – he's a decently big defenseman – and Connor Hurley out of Edina High School, also in Minnesota, who's a center. Vannelli's committed to the University of Minnesota, but may play a year with the UHSL's Tri-City Storm before he heads to college. Hurley's joining the Muskegon Lumberjacks of the USHL next year and then heading to Notre Dame.

51a8cdc527ce12d222fdc583f3cf4368
Now in his third full season covering the Calgary Flames and the NHL, Ryan Pike is a Calgary native and FlamesNation's managing editor. He's trying to keep his head up, his stick on the ice and is giving it 110% every shift. You can also find his work at The Hockey Writers, the Wrestling Observer and Tough Talk MMA.
Avatar
#51 Jeff Lebowski
May 23 2013, 07:54PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

I'd like to see skill, size, skating. A right shooting D (compliment Brodie down the road)right shooting centre (we have a lot of skilled left shooting LW).

So I hope Calgary lands: Lindholm Gauthier Santini I'd be happy with Rychel or Hartmann too.

As Gillis noted, the league is shifting to a more physical style, while still demanding ability. A guy like the Kings Jake Muzzin is the prototypical D men I'd like to see obtained by the Flames.

Avatar
#52 T&A4Flames
May 23 2013, 07:55PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props
Kurt wrote:

I don't think it would cost you that much for Burmistrov.

But I do like the idea of going for him! A 21 year old semi seasoned prospect would fit perfectly into the rebuild (assuming he isn't a complete bust, which he might be) But I'd rather trade away one of our vets and keep our 1st rounders (hopefully using them together to trade up somehow).

I agree. Considering that its now public that he wants out. Someone also said that WNP would likely prefer roster players to picks. Maybe they would take Stajan and Butler for Burmistrov and a 2nd. We could also add a prospect like Byron or something.

Avatar
#53 RexLibris
May 23 2013, 09:25PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

@Kevin R

Lindholm and Gagner are not really comparable in terms of strengths and weaknesses.

Lindholm is a stronger two-way player at this stage of his development than Gagner was at the same age. This may or may not translate to a higher defensive ceiling. He is also considered an above-average skater whereas Gagner's own father told him that while he would never be a jackrabbit he could work to become a really fast turtle.

The Oilers would probably take one or the other (being Monahan) and the rhetoric suggests Monahan is the favourite behind Barkov. That being said, the rhetoric 48 hours before the draft last June was that it was Murray all the way.

For my money, if I'm MacTavish, I listen carefully to what Frank Musil has to say about Lindholm, or offer up the pick to Philadelphia for Couturier.

Avatar
#54 Brent G.
May 23 2013, 10:07PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props
T&A4Flames wrote:

I agree. Considering that its now public that he wants out. Someone also said that WNP would likely prefer roster players to picks. Maybe they would take Stajan and Butler for Burmistrov and a 2nd. We could also add a prospect like Byron or something.

You are on smack if you think us getting rid of our absolute garbage will net us burmistrov. There is no way they would do that. Remember there are 28 other teams to help drive up his price regardless of what he tells anyone...

Avatar
#55 Kevin R
May 23 2013, 10:26PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props
T&A4Flames wrote:

I agree. Considering that its now public that he wants out. Someone also said that WNP would likely prefer roster players to picks. Maybe they would take Stajan and Butler for Burmistrov and a 2nd. We could also add a prospect like Byron or something.

Buffalo seem to really like Barkov or Nichushkin. If either fell to us at 6th, would you take the #8 & 16 picks for our 6th pick. That would be awful tempting.

Avatar
#56 Franko J
May 23 2013, 11:02PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

Going into the draft this is who I think the Flames should target (as it stands right now):

Centres:

Monahan

Lindholm

Kujawinski

Hayden

Crus-Rydberg

Hart

RW:

Bailey

Fasching

Westermark

Auger

Baptiste

LW:

Mantha

Sanford

Hill

Tambellini

Del la Rose

Dickinson

Cammarata

Bertuzzi

Montgomery

DMEN:

Sanitini

Bowey

Theodore

McCoshen

Arnesson

Lees

Smith

McNulty Wheaton

Any of these players I would like to see in a Flames uniform in the future.

Avatar
#57 Baalzamon
May 23 2013, 11:03PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
1
props
Kevin R wrote:

Buffalo seem to really like Barkov or Nichushkin. If either fell to us at 6th, would you take the #8 & 16 picks for our 6th pick. That would be awful tempting.

I'd rather just take Barkov.

Avatar
#58 Baalzamon
May 23 2013, 11:04PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

@Franko J

no Erne?

Avatar
#59 clYDE
May 23 2013, 11:06PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props
Baalzamon wrote:

I'd rather just take Barkov.

Agreed. We can't pass up an opportunity to add a potential impact player.

Avatar
#60 cunning_linguist
May 23 2013, 11:22PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
1
props

Assuming the big 4 are taken (Mac/Drouin/Jones/Barkov) by the time 6th rolls around, we MUST take Monahan. The Flames finally have the opportunity to get a blue chip, prototypical number 1 center. Something we as an organization haven't had since Niewendyk. My biggest nightmare is that a Sven or JG develops into a star winger and the Flames spend a decade trying to acquire a number 1 center. No knock on Lindholm, who has a higher ceiling than Monahan, but if we project our top line to include the smaller wingers we seem to love drafting, then we need to give them some size and range up the middle. If the Iginla era taught us anything, it's that centers like Monahan are nearly impossible to come by without the draft.

Avatar
#61 First Name Unidentified
May 24 2013, 05:54AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

Kent,

can you please do a profile on Freddy Gauthier?

I am absolutely infatuated with this kid from whatever i've heard/read about him so far. He is the real deal when it comes to big, 2-way centres.

However, I doubt that he will be available at 21 or 22. If he is, we HAVE to draft him.

Avatar
#62 Austin
May 24 2013, 07:07AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props
First Name Unidentified wrote:

Kent,

can you please do a profile on Freddy Gauthier?

I am absolutely infatuated with this kid from whatever i've heard/read about him so far. He is the real deal when it comes to big, 2-way centres.

However, I doubt that he will be available at 21 or 22. If he is, we HAVE to draft him.

He has a good game for sure but there are questions about how his offense will translate to the NHL. I say we do a profile on Burakowsky. Seen him as high as 12 to as low as 34 or something like that. Also it sounds like we'll be picking 21 if Detroit can win their next game.

Avatar
#63 the-wolf
May 24 2013, 07:45AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props
cunning_linguist wrote:

Assuming the big 4 are taken (Mac/Drouin/Jones/Barkov) by the time 6th rolls around, we MUST take Monahan. The Flames finally have the opportunity to get a blue chip, prototypical number 1 center. Something we as an organization haven't had since Niewendyk. My biggest nightmare is that a Sven or JG develops into a star winger and the Flames spend a decade trying to acquire a number 1 center. No knock on Lindholm, who has a higher ceiling than Monahan, but if we project our top line to include the smaller wingers we seem to love drafting, then we need to give them some size and range up the middle. If the Iginla era taught us anything, it's that centers like Monahan are nearly impossible to come by without the draft.

Agree with you that it's that size factor that sort of sways me to Monahan over Lindholm, but it's a tough one to predict.

I would love Zykov and Hartman with our 2nd and 3rd first rounders.

Lots of compete, good skaters, they play physical, can play a 2-way game and they can score and Zykov is already 210 lbs.

Erne, I think, will be gone by 22.

Erne and Gauthier, btw, are 2 more guys that seem to have very different scouting reports depending on who you read.

Avatar
#64 icedawg_42
May 24 2013, 08:53AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

Tough to say who would be the better pick at 6 between Lindholm and Monahan (for me it HAS to be one of those two, assuming Barkov is gone by then, which he will be) Both are big kids, skilled, centers, supposedly hockey IQ is through the roof. I'd be happy with either, but watching highlights etc, I lean just a tad towards Lindholm.

that said, completely carrying a crap team also tips the scales in Monahan's favor. Looking forward to Kent's profiles on both (hint hint)

For the record, whichever one the Flames get, it p*sses me off that the cOilers will likely grab the other.

Avatar
#65 Parallex
May 24 2013, 09:01AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

@First Name Unidentified

Gauthier is the guy that I think the Flames need to stay far far away from.

He smells like Nemisz to me. People are focusing way to much on the size and aren't bothering to ask why this guy with such a height and weight advantage on his peers couldn't do better then 6th on his team in scoring. YMMV but a guy with the size of a large man, playing against boys, on a potent team ought to be dominating not putting up just decent stats. If this really is the deepest draft since 2003 then I think Gauthier is the 2013 Hugh Jessiman.

Avatar
#66 icedawg_42
May 24 2013, 09:07AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props
Austin wrote:

He has a good game for sure but there are questions about how his offense will translate to the NHL. I say we do a profile on Burakowsky. Seen him as high as 12 to as low as 34 or something like that. Also it sounds like we'll be picking 21 if Detroit can win their next game.

Let's go Wings!!!

Avatar
#67 SmellOfVictory
May 24 2013, 09:12AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props
Kevin R wrote:

Buffalo seem to really like Barkov or Nichushkin. If either fell to us at 6th, would you take the #8 & 16 picks for our 6th pick. That would be awful tempting.

I wouldn't trade Barkov for that, no. However, if there were Lindholm, Nichuskin, and Monahan left at 6, and Buffalo guaranteed they were going to take Nichuskin, I'd do that trade. The Edmonton gets whichever centre (most likely Monahan) and Calgary gets the other one.

Avatar
#68 icedawg_42
May 24 2013, 09:17AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

@SmellOfVictory

I think there'd be some very weird stuff going on if both Barkov and Nichushkin were available at 6. IMO if there's any chance Barkov is available for us that means Nichushkin went top 5 - I'm not sure I see any chance of that happening

Avatar
#69 icedawg_42
May 24 2013, 09:19AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

@the-wolf

I always cringe when I hear "skating needs work", which I've heard about Monahan. Personally I'd rather give up the 4 inches in height for the uber high-end work ethic Lindholm reportedly has.

Avatar
#70 piscera.infada
May 24 2013, 09:28AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props
the-wolf wrote:

Agree with you that it's that size factor that sort of sways me to Monahan over Lindholm, but it's a tough one to predict.

I would love Zykov and Hartman with our 2nd and 3rd first rounders.

Lots of compete, good skaters, they play physical, can play a 2-way game and they can score and Zykov is already 210 lbs.

Erne, I think, will be gone by 22.

Erne and Gauthier, btw, are 2 more guys that seem to have very different scouting reports depending on who you read.

As far as Lindholm-Monahan, the difference seems largely negligible in my eyes.

Monahan: 6'2" 170 lbs. Lindholm: 6'0" 192 lbs. (Both figures from Hockey's Future)

Honestly, I'm happy with either. I just think at this point in the Flames rebuild you want the guy with the higher offensive ceiling. The Flames have been a defense first team for two long, and while I agree that a defensive aspect is hugely important, I just want the Flames to realize that putting the puck in the net is the way the league is going - especially if we are going to be playing in front of a young d-corps.

In everything I've read defensive ceiling is pretty similar between the two, size is pretty similar between the two, Lindholm is the better skater, Lindholm projects as a better offensive player.

So I take Lindholm if he's available. But I'm not going to shed a tear if it's Monahan. I really like the guy - and seeing him in Edmonton is something I would hate.

Avatar
#71 the-wolf
May 24 2013, 09:29AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props
icedawg_42 wrote:

I always cringe when I hear "skating needs work", which I've heard about Monahan. Personally I'd rather give up the 4 inches in height for the uber high-end work ethic Lindholm reportedly has.

I hear you, but my impression from everything I've read on him is "average NHL skater." Which means he's not slow, just not above the pack. But his size, compete, work ethic, hockey IQ, character, 2 way game, faceoff ability and ability to make those around him better (which I LOVE to hear) should mitigate that. It's not like he's a poor skater.

I really don't know. To truly judge you need to see these guys live several times, test them physically, get behind the scenes assessments from those close to them on a regular/daily basis, etc.

Lindholm is ranked higher in every list I've seen, so maybe that's all there is to say. Yet, it's funny, you read the reports and Monahan's always seem more glowing than Lindholm's. In THN a scout says Monahan has 1st line potential and lindhol only 2ns line potential, yet Lindholm is ranked higher.

I'm torn. And confused.

Avatar
#72 Baalzamon
May 24 2013, 09:56AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

@icedawg_42

"I'd rather give up the 4 inches in height"

It's actually more like 2 inches, and Lindholm actually out-weighs Monahan at present by about 6 pounds.

@the-wolf

"In THN a scout says Monahan has 1st line potential and lindhol only 2ns line potential, yet Lindholm is ranked higher"

Where is this? I haven't seen that. Until recently THN ranked Lindholm ahead of Monahan. The switch happened for seemingly no reason at all at a completely random point of the season IIRC.

--------------------------------------------

The ONLY concern about Lindholm for me is Calle Jarnkrok--was the Redwings prospect carrying the mail? Given how fanastic Lindholm looked at the WJC, I'm willing to believe that he helped Jarnkrok at least as much as Jarnkrok helped him.

As for Monahan, it's all about the skating. When people try to make up a comparison for Monahan, it's always a player (Bergeron, Toews) who is actually more like Lindholm. It's understandible how difficult it is to find a comparison for Monahan. All the players in the NHL I can think of with similar skillsets are better skaters, and they're often smaller too.

For me, the Monahan comparison has to be someone like Backes or Hanzal. That makes me wonder what Monahan's offensive ceiling actually is.

The caveat, though, is that Monahan really hasn't grown into his frame yet. I wonder if, when he does, his skating will improve by virtue of him actually having proportional muscle to his height. Because right now, he's out-weighed by a player two inches shorter than him (Lindholm).

Avatar
#73 RexLibris
May 24 2013, 09:59AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

@the-wolf

It is a tough place to be in, facing the prospect of your team making a decision between two very good prospects and worrying over making the wrong choice.

That being said, from my perspective, Flames fans have a pretty good spring/summer ahead of them if this is the major concern right now.

As an Oilers' fan, I'd be happy with either Monahan or Lindholm and can't really say that I clearly prefer one over the other. It'd make for one heck of a good prologue to a new BoA if we included a draft-debate into the mix.

Avatar
#74 SmellOfVictory
May 24 2013, 09:59AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props
icedawg_42 wrote:

I think there'd be some very weird stuff going on if both Barkov and Nichushkin were available at 6. IMO if there's any chance Barkov is available for us that means Nichushkin went top 5 - I'm not sure I see any chance of that happening

Whoops, I'm retarded. I meant Lindholm. Had Barkov on the brain.

Avatar
#75 Jeff Lebowski
May 24 2013, 10:28AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

@Baalzamon

Backers is a phenomenal skater. Monahan is not yet (according to reports) Will he? I think he can get marginally better.

I think the comparison is Couturier. I'm personally not impressed by this. Calgary's top pick should be about production.

Defensive prowess can be obtained other ways.

Remember Langkow? Good player no doubt, but nobody wanted him as a number 1 here. Remember Sutter's three 2's quote?

It's really hard to obtain offensive talent. Cheap, young, offensive talent is what Calgary does not have much of.

Monahan could be, but I don't think blue chip when I read about him. I think Couturier.

Lindholm v Monahan is really tough. I'd just ask Calgary's scouts, who is more naturally skilled?

I mean how do the lists compare player v player in determining ranking? Is it merely offensive ceiling? How does one rank a defensive hitter over a smaller offensive guy then? Do paper physical attributes tip the scales ie Monahan is 2 inches taller so he gets the nod over Lindholm? I'm curios how they decide on rankings. Especially after the top 5.

Avatar
#76 the-wolf
May 24 2013, 10:36AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props
Baalzamon wrote:

"I'd rather give up the 4 inches in height"

It's actually more like 2 inches, and Lindholm actually out-weighs Monahan at present by about 6 pounds.

@the-wolf

"In THN a scout says Monahan has 1st line potential and lindhol only 2ns line potential, yet Lindholm is ranked higher"

Where is this? I haven't seen that. Until recently THN ranked Lindholm ahead of Monahan. The switch happened for seemingly no reason at all at a completely random point of the season IIRC.

--------------------------------------------

The ONLY concern about Lindholm for me is Calle Jarnkrok--was the Redwings prospect carrying the mail? Given how fanastic Lindholm looked at the WJC, I'm willing to believe that he helped Jarnkrok at least as much as Jarnkrok helped him.

As for Monahan, it's all about the skating. When people try to make up a comparison for Monahan, it's always a player (Bergeron, Toews) who is actually more like Lindholm. It's understandible how difficult it is to find a comparison for Monahan. All the players in the NHL I can think of with similar skillsets are better skaters, and they're often smaller too.

For me, the Monahan comparison has to be someone like Backes or Hanzal. That makes me wonder what Monahan's offensive ceiling actually is.

The caveat, though, is that Monahan really hasn't grown into his frame yet. I wonder if, when he does, his skating will improve by virtue of him actually having proportional muscle to his height. Because right now, he's out-weighed by a player two inches shorter than him (Lindholm).

Yes, they have Lindholm ahead of Monahan. Can't recall the exact quotes, but it's something like "probably only be a 2nd line center" for Lindholm and "1st line center" for Monahan. Unless I'm crossing over scouting reports, but I don't think so.

Avatar
#77 the-wolf
May 24 2013, 10:37AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props
Baalzamon wrote:

"I'd rather give up the 4 inches in height"

It's actually more like 2 inches, and Lindholm actually out-weighs Monahan at present by about 6 pounds.

@the-wolf

"In THN a scout says Monahan has 1st line potential and lindhol only 2ns line potential, yet Lindholm is ranked higher"

Where is this? I haven't seen that. Until recently THN ranked Lindholm ahead of Monahan. The switch happened for seemingly no reason at all at a completely random point of the season IIRC.

--------------------------------------------

The ONLY concern about Lindholm for me is Calle Jarnkrok--was the Redwings prospect carrying the mail? Given how fanastic Lindholm looked at the WJC, I'm willing to believe that he helped Jarnkrok at least as much as Jarnkrok helped him.

As for Monahan, it's all about the skating. When people try to make up a comparison for Monahan, it's always a player (Bergeron, Toews) who is actually more like Lindholm. It's understandible how difficult it is to find a comparison for Monahan. All the players in the NHL I can think of with similar skillsets are better skaters, and they're often smaller too.

For me, the Monahan comparison has to be someone like Backes or Hanzal. That makes me wonder what Monahan's offensive ceiling actually is.

The caveat, though, is that Monahan really hasn't grown into his frame yet. I wonder if, when he does, his skating will improve by virtue of him actually having proportional muscle to his height. Because right now, he's out-weighed by a player two inches shorter than him (Lindholm).

Agreed - we need a WOWY for Jarnkrok/Lindholm

Avatar
#78 the-wolf
May 24 2013, 10:39AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

@Baalzamon

Monahan - I've seenhim as heavy as 185lbs, but his fram sugegst he will definitely be bigger than Lindholm.

As for a comparison - Couture, maybe?

Avatar
#79 BJ
May 24 2013, 11:24AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

@ Cunning Linguist.

Although I have posted about this before and although there is clearly no consensus among fans about who should be taken between Monahan and Lindholm, I agree with your reason for Monahan completely. If we can't move up and get Barkov then we have to take the center with size. based on his weight and age, Monahan clearly has room to grow.

One thing that is confusing is the player comparisons I am hearing. Some have compared Lindholm to Sam Gagner, some to Bergeron. Both players seem really tough to acurately project but if Monahan can improve his skating???

Could be a really tough choice at six. Do we pass on Zetterburg and end up with a Hanzal. Or do we pass up a Bergeron and end up with a Gagner. I can see this going wrong no matter who we pick.

That said:

Cal 1st + an offensive winger (we have enough of them) - maybe Hudler or Tanguay to Nashville so that we can ensure we get Barkov. Guy has Kopitar written all over him. A steep price to pay but Barkov could be the rock that this team can be built around.

Avatar
#80 Kent Wilson
May 24 2013, 12:00PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

@First Name Unidentified

I can take a look.

Avatar
#81 everton fc
May 24 2013, 12:49PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

Nurse would be a good pick, though he needs to learn to scrap a little better, and put on some muscle and weight.

I also have liked Eric Roy of Brandon for some time. He's big, and could be a sleeper. 6'3", 190 lbs already. Can score. Can play physical. I like him a lot.

Speelers: Another little scrapper, a forward who could be a sleeper 3rd/4th liner, is Jerome Verrier. In fact, he'd be a good pick up for the Oilers. Maybe! I think he has the potential to be another Derek Dorsett, whom I've always liked (how do we pry him from the Rangers?! I actually think he's better than Prust)Another, similar player from the QMJHL - Adam Chapman of Gatineau. Austin Carrol out of Victoria/WHL is another guy who could add grit to the Flames. Zach Pochiro with Prince George is another fiesty guy I think has potential, but I'm not sure he's draft eligible.

Justin Hickman of Seattle's another possible sleeper with grit. I'm talking 3rd/4th line guys for the future. Perhaps Verrier's a bit better than that, but probably a 3rd liner, "max".

Avatar
#82 Baalzamon
May 24 2013, 01:40PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

Would Jordan Subban be around in the 3rd? Might be worth a look. Right shooting offensive dman (even if he is quite small).

Avatar
#83 Parallex
May 24 2013, 01:51PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props

@Baalzamon

Given the pedigree and the reportably high skill level I would guess that he goes in the second round. I think that's where folk have him pegged to go anyways. First round talent in a third round body split the difference.

If he's there I think the Flames should strongly consider taking him. I guess the third round is my small guy flyer round given that I'd also take Cammarata in that round.

Avatar
#84 If Only HIs Name Was Olli Postandin
May 24 2013, 02:35PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
0
props
Parallex wrote:

Gauthier is the guy that I think the Flames need to stay far far away from.

He smells like Nemisz to me. People are focusing way to much on the size and aren't bothering to ask why this guy with such a height and weight advantage on his peers couldn't do better then 6th on his team in scoring. YMMV but a guy with the size of a large man, playing against boys, on a potent team ought to be dominating not putting up just decent stats. If this really is the deepest draft since 2003 then I think Gauthier is the 2013 Hugh Jessiman.

Maybe because it was his rookie year, and he was only 17? You have to wait for the draft +1 year to get a better idea of most of these guys after the top 10.

That being said, the prospect reports are all over the place. REdline scouts and the Hockey Writers absolutely love the guy and his potential. Corey Pronman and others have their doubts. I guess all we can do is wait and see.

Would be a great haul for us with the Pitt pick, imo.

Comments are closed for this article.