Weekend Open Thread: Draft Week Scenarios

Ryan Pike
June 21 2014 09:00AM

Lads and ladies, we are now less than one week away from the Most Important Draft in Calgary Flames History*.

*- Well, since last year's.

There's a LOT of chatter in hockey circles about movement at the top end of the draft order.

So what happens? I can, with absolutely no insider info, speculate three main scenarios.

FLAMES DRAFT 1ST AND 4TH

Calgary utilizes organizational assets (later picks, prospects, roster players) to trade with Florida in exchange for the 1st overall pick. Calgary drafts 1st and 4th, in a similar manner to the Vancouver Canucks in 1999 Draft selecting 2nd and 3rd. Brian Burke and Brad Treliving are seen by TSN cameras high-fiving, Flames pick Aaron Ekblad and Sam Bennett and the rebuild is fast-tracked. Edmonton weeps.

(There's also a version of this where they trade down to 10th or so and use the assets they get for trading down to get 1st overall also. They draft Aaron Ekblad and one of the second tier guys like Nikolaj Ehlers, Haydn Fleury or Nikolai Goldobin. Edmonton weeps.)

Likelihood: Low.

Why?: The price tag to get 1st overall straight-away would be steep. We're talking next year's 1st rounder and/or a high end roster player. And Sven Baertschi. And other stuff. To get both Sedins, Brian Burke sent Bryan McCabe (who was good then) and a future 1st rounder to Chicago for 4th overall, then flipped that pick with two 3rd rounders for the 1st overall pick, and then traded down to 2nd on the condition Atlanta wouldn't take a Sedin. That's ridiculous, and I'm not sure it can be pulled off again, nor am I sure the Flames have the stomach to part with the assets required to do it.

FLAMES TRADE UP

Calgary takes their 4th overall pick, add a prospect and/or roster asset (Hudler?) and trade them to Florida in order to move up to 1st overall and get Aaron Ekblad. Edmonton weeps.

Likelihood: Low to moderate.

Why?: The price would be lower, and Florida would get a Flames roster player or prospect, as well as one of the top four guys in the draft. Everybody wins. Calgary's defense gets massively upgraded for the future. I'm not 100% sure Calgary does this, though, as the interest around 1st overall may bid the price above what Brad Treliving cares to give. "Hudler and Baertschi and 4th overall? Screw it, we'll see who's left when we pick 4th."

FLAMES STAY PUT

Calgary makes no trades, drafts 4th, picks whoever's left from the vaunted top 4.

Likelihood: Moderate to high

Why?: They don't give anything up and they gain an asset. The bidding war for 1st overall may become stupid, causing the Flames to "settle" for 4th and one of the Sams or Leon Draisaitl.

FLAMES TRADE DOWN

Calgary accepts an offer from a team drafting below them that wants one of the top 4. They get an asset, most likely a second or third rounder, to drop in the draft order.

Likelihood: Moderate

Why?: Remember the bidding war? Well, Calgary could be a beneficiary if someone a team below them covets falls to 4 and that coveting team makes a stupid big offer to get them to move down. And Colorado gave Calgary a second round pick for marginal NHL goaltender Reto Berra, so let's not pretend it's not possible. The Flames' management have mentioned a "top 6" rather than a top 4, and likely they have a liking towards someone like Jake Virtanen, Nick Ritchie or Michael Dal Colle. While they probably like Sam Reinhart more, if somebody gives you a chance to add to your prospect depth and give your scouting and development staff more kicks at the can, you can be convinced to "settle" for Virtanen and a second (for example) rather than Bennett or Draisaitl.

Teams often make foolish decisions when they're on the clock and have their Draft Goggles on.

What do you think is the most likely scenario next weekend?

51a8cdc527ce12d222fdc583f3cf4368
Ryan Pike is a Calgary native and FlamesNation's managing editor. He's covered the Flames and the NHL since 2010. His work can also be found at The Hockey Writers and The Wrestling Observer.
Avatar
#1 suba steve
June 21 2014, 10:04AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
21
props

I just hope that any deal involving the Flames moving their 2015 first rounder is OFF the table (barring an obscene overpay). The reported strength at the top of that draft just seems way more valuable than what the pick might get them in next weeks draft.

Avatar
#2 Graham
June 22 2014, 08:19AM
Trash it!
2
trashes
Props
21
props

To be honest, I am sick and tired of the Flames trading down to add another draft pick. The Flames have plenty of low to mid level prospects, so adding another by trading down adds little to the organization. The Flames really need high end prospects, so you either look at trading up (but I don't think the price will be worth it) package the fourth pick in a trade, or take the pick. Best advice for Burke and Treliving is to keep it simple on draft day.

Avatar
#3 piscera.infada
June 21 2014, 11:57AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
20
props

@T&A4Flames

Mentioned it before, apparently Nashville is looking to get immediate, established help for #11 overall. Look at their forwards, either of Hudler or Glencross would be an immediate upgrade in their forward ranks (that team was just horrible). They're over a barrel too, if they don't start winning immediately, no one wants to come out to their games, so they likely (and reportedly) don't care too much about prospects. They want a bona fide NHL player. Toss in a second, a third, or two, and make it happen.

That is my most likely scenario. Get another pick at 11, if they want too much don't do it. But that should be the mantra from management - if they can acquire a pick without giving up a lateral asset (ie. Baertschi, #4 overall), then do it.

Avatar
#4 FlamesinToronto
June 21 2014, 05:58PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
19
props

I'd have no problem trading Glenncross or Hudler. This team is still far away from being a contender and it be nice to get assets back for these players while they still have value. That being said, i think it be insane to trade the 4th overall pick and move down. This organization desperately needs elite level talent.

It really does get pretty insane leading up to the draft when you see fans taking such strong and over the top opinions on players they've seen once or twice. I have zero preference when it comes to who the Flames draft out of the top 5 names being presented, my only hope is they would pass on Ritchie based on everything I've read up on him.

Avatar
#5 RexLibris
June 21 2014, 10:04PM
Trash it!
1
trashes
Props
19
props

Lowetide held a mock draft of top ten picks today using media members from each city, including the inimitable Kent Wilson.

I only caught the top four but it went Ekblad, Reinhart, Bennett (LT's choice), at which point Kent took Draisaitl.

For the record I think it shakes down as Ekblad, Reinhart, Draisaitl, Bennett - barring trade.

Avatar
#6 wot96
June 22 2014, 07:39PM
Trash it!
1
trashes
Props
18
props

If we are content with the Shelbyville Strategy for a year, Calgary does trade a top six forward and an asset or two, whether picks or players, for a second but later first round pick. That second first round pick probably won't play in the NHL next year and there is a good chance the first first round pick won't either.

Any scenario in which the Flames trade one of their better (or expensive) roster players for a later first round pick also involves having to spend more in free agency regardless of what they do with Cammy even if they keep some salary of whomever they trade. They would have to spend even more on some rebuild rentals if they don't resign Cammy.

With the roster the Flames have, some expect them to regress (though I'm not sure that happens if Johnny G is playing and the Flames resign Cammy). However, if the Flames regress, that would push Calgary into one of the top three spots next year, barring being torpedoed at the lottery. If Calgary trades a Hudler or Glencross and doesn't resign Cammy, I don't see them getting better.

In so doing, they might have a chance at the generational talent at the very top in 2015. Hitting the cap floor this year will be hard unless they keep salary.

So who's okay with regressing slightly to pick up better chance at a generational talent next year?

Avatar
#7 piscera.infada
June 21 2014, 03:25PM
Trash it!
1
trashes
Props
16
props

@Jeff Lebowski

Sorry guys, I just don't see the logic in trading for the #1 pick. You lose Hudler and Glencross, this team is going to be even worse than it looks now - not to mention with more gaping holes, as well as even less spent to the cap. I can see a Hudler trade because he has term, a reasonable cap-hit, and is coming of a strong season.

If you go into the draft with #4 and #11 you're laughing (think Reinhart/Bennett/Draisaitl and Virtanen/Fleury for example). Quite simply though, the cost to move to first overall is going to have to be a whale of a package for what could be great or what could just as easily not be great.

As I said earlier, I'm not a fan of acquiring any draft pick if it means a lateral exchange. Why give up Baertschi and a 2nd or 3rd (and possibly more) to be able to draft 7th - 11th? You're hoping that prospect can do what Baertschi has done in his short time as a pro (remember, this was his second year as a pro between the AHL and NHL).

Personally, I make the trade with Nashville if I can give up a player that will help them now, but unequivocally won't help us long-term - if you have to throw in a later pick to make it work, that's fine. This simply means that trading away real talent for prospective talent (ie. the move to first overall), just seems like a waste that is sure to backfire.

Moreover, if they do in fact, end up trading the world to Florida for the first overall pick it will confirm one thing to me: that the BB/BT experiment is more about optics than it is about building a contender. It would be one thing to sell the farm for the chance to draft a player with known generational upside, but none of the players in this draft look like that at this time (that not to say no one will end up that way). It's fine to make a splash, but it needs to be a calculated move so it doesn't end up an unmitigated disaster.

Avatar
#8 The Last Big Bear
June 22 2014, 08:17PM
Trash it!
3
trashes
Props
16
props
wot96 wrote:

If we are content with the Shelbyville Strategy for a year, Calgary does trade a top six forward and an asset or two, whether picks or players, for a second but later first round pick. That second first round pick probably won't play in the NHL next year and there is a good chance the first first round pick won't either.

Any scenario in which the Flames trade one of their better (or expensive) roster players for a later first round pick also involves having to spend more in free agency regardless of what they do with Cammy even if they keep some salary of whomever they trade. They would have to spend even more on some rebuild rentals if they don't resign Cammy.

With the roster the Flames have, some expect them to regress (though I'm not sure that happens if Johnny G is playing and the Flames resign Cammy). However, if the Flames regress, that would push Calgary into one of the top three spots next year, barring being torpedoed at the lottery. If Calgary trades a Hudler or Glencross and doesn't resign Cammy, I don't see them getting better.

In so doing, they might have a chance at the generational talent at the very top in 2015. Hitting the cap floor this year will be hard unless they keep salary.

So who's okay with regressing slightly to pick up better chance at a generational talent next year?

Yes, I think the Flames regress this year.

The only concern I have is whether or not this will impact the corporate culture we've seen that appears to be establishing itself in the Flames, of hard work and determination, and not-quittingness.

The 2013-14 season was a good one for me, better than the previous seasons in which the team finished higher in the standings.

How I view the 2014-15 will likewise have nothing to do with how they finish in the standings, and very little to do with whether or not they land Connor McDavid. It will depend on how it looks like the rebuild is going as a whole.

If you had told me last summer that Sven would be sent back to the AHL, and Monahan would be stuck in a major role all season as the Flames plummet into Oilers territory in the standings, I would have called that a failure, but in the end I'm happy with the season, because the rebuild as a whole looks like it is going well.

So I will take a holistic view on next season, and not fuss about standings, draft position, or certain players progressing or regressing.

Avatar
#9 Colin.S
June 21 2014, 10:31AM
Trash it!
1
trashes
Props
15
props

I've seen Sportsnet now rate Bennet as the #1 prospect on their draft list. Hopefully with the little bit of negative press that Reinhart got along with all the heaping praise Bennet is currently getting I somehow hope that Reinhart falls to four.

I think that's a perfect test of management. If he falls to four and we don't pick him, something is seriously wrong.

Avatar
#10 CTibs
June 21 2014, 09:52AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
14
props

A scenario not mentioned here is the Flames keeping #4 and acquiring a lower 1st round pick. It's not the most likely scenario, but it's still something to consider. There are plenty of teams with mid round picks that want to move down, and the Flames could take advantage of that for an inexpensive price.

Avatar
#11 herringchoker
June 22 2014, 07:01AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
14
props

Hey Guys here my take. Please leave everything alone. Take your fourth pick and get the best player available. Do not draft for need yet. Do not move Glenny or Hudler for a second first round pick...this draft is to iffy at best. I believe if you move Glencross or Hudler it needs to be for a Nino Niederreiter (when he was in NY) type of prospect. Under 24, former high prospects needing new surroundings. Especially ones that fit organizational needs like defense. Use a Glencross or Hudler as a trade to team with for example a deep prospect base in defense....pull out one or two solid prospects and a salary dump.Try and make sure the salary dump is at least a leader even if he's past his best before date.

Avatar
#12 Kevin R
June 22 2014, 04:24PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
14
props
DragonFlame wrote:

Finally, Jeff in Lethbridge, if you do a little math, you might come to the conclusion that BT's dad is worth somewhere around 600 million dollars. His son, Brad, really doesn't need the work.

So, tell me, why would a multi-millionaire's son leave a good gig in Phoenix if he was only going to be a "shadow" GM here, which would be a sideways' move?

You worry way too much.

One thing many aren't mentioning when they are Burke bashing & making Feaster a victim. Rangers just dumped a huge pile of $$$ on Brad Richards of which, Flames Feaster actually offered him more $$$ in the wheel barrel than the Rangers did. I don't think Murray Edwards would have been too happy about writing that buyout cheque.

Avatar
#13 ultrathinzigzags
June 22 2014, 09:22PM
Trash it!
5
trashes
Props
14
props

if the Flames trade down from their highest draft position ever I will make a baby Oiler in my shorts

Avatar
#14 Baalzamon
June 22 2014, 01:26PM
Trash it!
1
trashes
Props
13
props
Burnward wrote:

Just for funsies...

If Draisatl is Kopitar and Ritchie is Lucic...which would you prefer?

Seems to be the best case scenarios for both.

I take Lucic.

You're welcome to him. Kopitar all the way.

Avatar
#15 DragonFlame
June 22 2014, 05:05PM
Trash it!
6
trashes
Props
13
props

Well, for those of you convinced that Burke is running the show and only likes BIG players, please look at the guys drafted AFTER Nazim Kadri in the 2009 Draft:

This is all from Hockey DB:

7) Nazim Kadri 6.0 188 8) Scott Glennie 6.1 200 9) Jared Cowen 6.5 230 10) Magnus Paarjarvi-Svenson 6.3 208 11) Ryan Ellis 5.10 179 12) Calvin de Haan 6.1 187 13) Zack Kassian 6.3 214 14) Dmitri Kulikov 6.1 196 15) Peter Holland 6.2 185

So, let's see . . . seven players are taller than Kadri and 5 players are heavier.

Damn, why didn't Burke draft Jared Cowen or Zack Kassian?

Career numbers between Kadri and those two "truculent" individuals:

Kadri: 113 points in 177 games Cowen: 33 points in 158 games (okay, he's a D) Kassian: 5o points in 156 games

I reiterate, those of you who insist Burke will do nothing but undermine the scouting staff and the consensus of some very smart hockey people (because he doesn't like "flag football") and will tell his staff it is, "Ritchie or no one," are so out-to-lunch it's laughable.

If it's Ritchie, I assure all of you that it is the consensus of a lot of people who are well-paid and know a lot more about hockey than you and I ever will.

Avatar
#16 BurningSensation
June 22 2014, 11:27AM
Trash it!
1
trashes
Props
12
props
MK? LOL wrote:

@ mk

"I like all the options where 'Edmonton weeps'. I generally enjoy this happening. I'm actually kind of hoping that Edmonton trades up to #1 overall and then the kid flat out refuses to sign with them."

Cowboy hat on too tight for ya? LOL

I bet you have a teeny willy and drive a big truck. Heehehee

Your obsession with poster's willies is a clear indication you are in the wrong place.

Avatar
#17 Reidja
June 22 2014, 02:14PM
Trash it!
1
trashes
Props
12
props

@BurningSensation

I disagree that trashing an 18 year old's career on the public record is not "bad" armchair GMing. It's at best petulant and at worst shameful. I have no time for posters who would treat a kid like that. Folks should show some common sense and at least acknowledge their limited repotoire of live viewings of the kid (i.e. likely none) and thier ability to divine the future (zero) when posting troll-level negativity about a player who has yet to play a single pro game. End of rant.

Boy would I be stoked if Edmonton somehow let one of those top 3 guys slip to us. I almost feel like the rumour that thier managment like Driasaitl over the Sam's was a plant to get Flames fans hopes up! It's a Lowe blow if you will. Ah ha haha ha.

Avatar
#18 DragonFlame
June 22 2014, 05:15PM
Trash it!
5
trashes
Props
12
props
Jeff In Lethbridge wrote:

My point was: Feaster, when in charge, made the decisions, now Burke is in charge... and therefore will have his stamp on decisions.

Your point was: Feaster made bad moves.

your point does not disagree with mine, in fact it supports my point. Yet you launch into childish antics and name calling. You must be WW who, as everyone knows, has multiple personalities. Nobody else would bother to attack me when they are actually in fact reinforcing my point.

You are attacking people the minute you compare them to WW.

Were I WW, my grammar and punctuation would leave something to be desired.

Avatar
#19 DragonFlame
June 22 2014, 08:07PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
12
props
? wrote:

Tyler Biggs

This was addressed by Burke somewhere here http://video.flames.nhl.com/videocenter/

To your comment, Biggs was 22nd overall, not a top five, six, or even a ten.

Biggs, at 22nd, has been no bigger a bust than most of the Flames' first round picks over the past ten years.

Avatar
#20 coachedpotatoe
June 21 2014, 05:58PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
11
props

The great thing is that by this time next week we will have a better understanding of bt/bb direction for this team. I suspect we draft at 4 and pick either who is left from the big 4. The ground work will have been done and I suspect the draft floor will be rather fluid depending on what happens ahead of number 4, I expect if Florida trades #1 the price will be higher than the flames would be willing to pay. However I also guess that the Flames might be prepared to over pay for a 7-11 to try and get Ritchie. It will be fun.

Avatar
#21 DragonFlame
June 22 2014, 03:56PM
Trash it!
25
trashes
Props
11
props
Jeff In Lethbridge wrote:

If you recall, Brian Burke came in and reviewed the drafting and trades of the last number of years which all culminated in the firing of Jay Feaster. It wasn't the scouts that were fired it was Jay Feaster. The Scouts will put their list together but the man whose job is on the line is the one who makes the decisions even if the decision is just do agree with the scouts.

Jeff, you might want to consider a tinfoil hat. First, who will argue that Feaster almost single-handedly killed any hopes the Flames had of a re-build when he didn't know enough about the rules regarding ROR? Second, Feaster and Flames' fans got screwed by Jarome Iginla when Feaster didn't get Iggy to commit on paper where he would go, and Iginla basically told the Flames and the people of Calgary, "Screw you." Third, Feaster thought we'd get a king's ransom for Bouwmeester and hung onto him until the last minute and (while it's well-documented I don't like JayBo) the Flames should have done better on that deal. Burke was working for Anaheim last year during the draft, and he CLEARLY acknowledged that that the Duck's scouting staff felt the Flames had the best draft last season out of all the teams involved.

Avatar
#22 DragonFlame
June 22 2014, 04:15PM
Trash it!
9
trashes
Props
11
props

@DragonFlame

Finally, Jeff in Lethbridge, if you do a little math, you might come to the conclusion that BT's dad is worth somewhere around 600 million dollars. His son, Brad, really doesn't need the work.

So, tell me, why would a multi-millionaire's son leave a good gig in Phoenix if he was only going to be a "shadow" GM here, which would be a sideways' move?

You worry way too much.

Avatar
#23 KH44
June 22 2014, 10:45PM
Trash it!
1
trashes
Props
11
props

My prediction: we will keep the pick, if its a Sam at fourth we take them, if not, its Dal Colle.

With the first, fifth and maybe a couple other top ten picks available, it could be a wild draft and its going to be fun.

Avatar
#24 Baalzamon
June 21 2014, 09:57AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
10
props

The only thing that scares me about the possibility (apparently very real) of Reinhart falling to 4th is that the Canucks probably go hard after that pick. I'd rather the Flames just kept it with Treliving announcing Reinhart's name on the podium with Burke making this face at Benning & Linden.

Avatar
#25 Lordmork
June 21 2014, 10:58AM
Trash it!
1
trashes
Props
10
props

Obviously, the Flames should do whatever nets the team the most/best assets.

I wonder if we're talking to Toronto about Gardiner/Kadri. I keep hearing that Toronto is, if not actively shopping them, then floating their names as trade bait.

Avatar
#26 The Sultan
June 22 2014, 12:20PM
Trash it!
1
trashes
Props
10
props
Burnward wrote:

Just for funsies...

If Draisatl is Kopitar and Ritchie is Lucic...which would you prefer?

Seems to be the best case scenarios for both.

I take Lucic.

I'll take Kopitar over Lucic every day of the week. Draisatl over Ritchie. The Flames need to draft BPA, and regardless of whatever fetish they have over size, there is a clear top 4, and I'd even say a clear top 5. You have Ekblad, the Sam's, Draisatl and Dal Colle, in whichever order you choose to perceive them in.

Avatar
#27 Rockmorton65
June 22 2014, 04:39PM
Trash it!
3
trashes
Props
10
props

I've said it before and I'll say it again. It would be hilarious if the two Sams went 1-2 and Edm had to choose between Ekblad and Draisaitl, knowing they would be giving us the other one. I'd love to watch MacT and Lowe sweat it out on national tv with Burke smiling in the background. Good times.

That being said, it'd be sweet if we could move up to 1OA without selling the farm.

Avatar
#28 Jeff Lebowski
June 21 2014, 11:01AM
Trash it!
12
trashes
Props
9
props

Will Nick Ritchie be our Tyler Biggs? I think many are getting worried about this.

I'm not. For 2 reasons: 1- I really think the decision is a BT / TB call. I think they are zeroing in on highest offensive impact. Ritchie is a blend, a hybrid - does many things well but much of his appeal doesn't directly impact scoresheet as the top 4 does.

2- So what if they do pick Ritchie? We have no control, why let it bug you?

Besides, Button has done well of late. If he genuinely likes him ( and not because BB likes him) then he might just be a helluva player.

Also, it's blasphemous to take Ritchie seemingly ONLY because the sources people use to form opinion haven't put him there. Who cares? What do they REALLY know? Just look at some past redraft scenarios. Things change.

If Lucic's draft was done over - where does he go? Where would Bowman, Lombardi and BT/BB slot him? Top 3,5,10?

Avatar
#29 Kevin R
June 22 2014, 09:09AM
Trash it!
1
trashes
Props
9
props
Graham wrote:

To be honest, I am sick and tired of the Flames trading down to add another draft pick. The Flames have plenty of low to mid level prospects, so adding another by trading down adds little to the organization. The Flames really need high end prospects, so you either look at trading up (but I don't think the price will be worth it) package the fourth pick in a trade, or take the pick. Best advice for Burke and Treliving is to keep it simple on draft day.

Agreed. Keep the 4th pick & take who ever is left of the big 4. Any GM would listen to any offers for that 4th & if it's not a whaacko price,lets just take whose left. For the life of me I have no idea why everyone is so down on the German kid. He is a big Johhny hockey with skills. I have no qualms adding this kind of player to our stables. I have no problem trading Hudler or GlenX to pick up a top 3rd 1st rounder either. If Nashville or Anaheim(Ottawas pick) are trolling, why not, it's hard not to spend money to get to the cap floor. There are some teams that are in big Cap dodo like Boston. We may be able to get a Boychuk for a very reasonable price.

Too many worry about BB or BT doing some wild deal & the comments are retarded. These guys are hockey people & they aren't stupid. There is no magical GM shortcut to this rebuild, they know that, just very astute moves is all I expect from the Flames come Friday.

Avatar
#30 Alt
June 22 2014, 06:03PM
Trash it!
4
trashes
Props
9
props
DragonFlame wrote:

You are attacking people the minute you compare them to WW.

Were I WW, my grammar and punctuation would leave something to be desired.

Get over yourself!

Avatar
#31 Bring Back Tim Hunter
June 21 2014, 11:17AM
Trash it!
5
trashes
Props
8
props

I hope BBBT stay the course. If the flames pick top 4, it looks like they'll land a very good player. With the prospects the Flames have in their system, they should be good soon. Obviously more picks in the first round would be awesome. I just hope Baertschi isn't in play though. It appears that Burky isn't high on him, but I think he is too good to give up on yet.

Avatar
#32 Tonk
June 22 2014, 10:37AM
Trash it!
2
trashes
Props
8
props

I am not a fan of the trade down from 4 plan but I am prepared to see it. It has taken some time but if the chips fall a certain way I believe it may even be the best scenario. Or making the best of the situation, which is what we hope the Flame do.

Trying to read between the lines and read minds I believe I know what the various Flames are getting at when they talk about a top 6 or even 8. Based on interviews and other scouting (not viewing) I think the Flames see a top 3, and deep down I think most agree. I am totally sold on taking Ekblad or which ever Sam falls to 4, but if Draisaitl falls to 4 I am not sure it is as clear cut. Lets face it Draisaitl is the only one of the 4 that would shock you if he went first overall.

I think it could be said that Draisaitl is the best of the next 3+2. DalColle and of course Ritchie also offer things the Flames covet, character and size with a level of skill. Now at this level some organizations may even be looking at Ehlers and Nylander, they are the +2. These 5 could be shuffled how you like depending on the "type of player you are looking to draft" (that is a loose BB quote).

So if a trade down can be made with someone looking to get to Ehlers/Nylander and the flames are still in range to get at DalColle/Ritchie (and yes the target may be Ritchie) and have the ammunition for another first round pick... So we could go from taking Draisaitl at 4 to Ritchie and Sanheim (my personal choice, insert your favourite). That would make the Ritchie choice much easier to swallow.

Now that is a fair bit of horse trading, and none of it should be finalized before the 3 pick is made. The one thing I like about Burk is he will swing for the fences and you know Trelivng would like to make a splash.

So if I have to swallow Ritchie at 4, I will put on my best fan face and wait see if he turns out to be what Burk loves, before I loose my mind and go on rants about how they blew it. But I am truly hoping the Oilers are as hard for Draisaitl as some say and we are bringing a Sam to Calgary.

Avatar
#33 MonsterPod
June 22 2014, 01:52PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
8
props
Monaertchi Gaudnett wrote:

I generally agree with your comment above, but we don't actually know for sure that "they aren't stupid" or that they think that "There is no magical GM shortcut to this rebuild".

I hope for astute moves, but I'm certainly not ruling out BBBT (sorry @FireItUp, this is happening) going for size and truculence over NHL level skill.

I dunno. I feel pretty confident at this point that Brian Burke is not stupid.

Avatar
#34 Jeff In Lethbridge
June 22 2014, 03:38PM
Trash it!
1
trashes
Props
8
props
DragonFlame wrote:

For everyone who insists it's BB and BT's draft, please read:

http://flames.nhl.com/club/news.htm?id=723052

Give the man (Burke) some leeway. He's not going to step in and undermine the scouting staff if they don't think Ritchie is the BPA.

It's kind of like the CEO at the Royal Bank trying to explain to a teller how to do their job. While the words may carry weight, the bottom line is the CEO would suck behind the counter, because they've likely never done it.

If you recall, Brian Burke came in and reviewed the drafting and trades of the last number of years which all culminated in the firing of Jay Feaster. It wasn't the scouts that were fired it was Jay Feaster. The Scouts will put their list together but the man whose job is on the line is the one who makes the decisions even if the decision is just do agree with the scouts.

Avatar
#35 Austin
June 21 2014, 09:45AM
Trash it!
3
trashes
Props
7
props

Great speculative post!! I would love having the Flames get first but I'm sure there is someone else willing to pay more than Hudler+a prospect. I would rather have us just try and add an extra first rounder (top 15) , and keep our 4th overall. I could also see us trading down to somewhere in the 7-10 range and then take Virtanen, because I feel like Burke is in love with the guy! I'd much rather have Virtanen over Ritchie. Either way, it's gonna be an exciting draft!

Avatar
#36 mk
June 21 2014, 04:12PM
Trash it!
8
trashes
Props
7
props

I like all the options where 'Edmonton weeps'. I generally enjoy this happening. I'm actually kind of hoping that Edmonton trades up to #1 overall and then the kid flat out refuses to sign with them.

Avatar
#37 dotfras
June 21 2014, 11:11PM
Trash it!
2
trashes
Props
7
props
DragonFlame wrote:

Except the Flames' D finished 10th in NHL scoring among defensemen (despite the injuries), you mean?

Kind of irrelevant. Scoring does not mean depth. It means Gio & Brodie had a lot of points.

Avatar
#38 Jeff In Lethbridge
June 22 2014, 05:00PM
Trash it!
8
trashes
Props
7
props
DragonFlame wrote:

Jeff, you might want to consider a tinfoil hat. First, who will argue that Feaster almost single-handedly killed any hopes the Flames had of a re-build when he didn't know enough about the rules regarding ROR? Second, Feaster and Flames' fans got screwed by Jarome Iginla when Feaster didn't get Iggy to commit on paper where he would go, and Iginla basically told the Flames and the people of Calgary, "Screw you." Third, Feaster thought we'd get a king's ransom for Bouwmeester and hung onto him until the last minute and (while it's well-documented I don't like JayBo) the Flames should have done better on that deal. Burke was working for Anaheim last year during the draft, and he CLEARLY acknowledged that that the Duck's scouting staff felt the Flames had the best draft last season out of all the teams involved.

you must be WW

Avatar
#39 Jeff In Lethbridge
June 22 2014, 05:07PM
Trash it!
7
trashes
Props
7
props
Kevin R wrote:

One thing many aren't mentioning when they are Burke bashing & making Feaster a victim. Rangers just dumped a huge pile of $$$ on Brad Richards of which, Flames Feaster actually offered him more $$$ in the wheel barrel than the Rangers did. I don't think Murray Edwards would have been too happy about writing that buyout cheque.

My point was: Feaster, when in charge, made the decisions, now Burke is in charge... and therefore will have his stamp on decisions.

Your point was: Feaster made bad moves.

your point does not disagree with mine, in fact it supports my point. Yet you launch into childish antics and name calling. You must be WW who, as everyone knows, has multiple personalities. Nobody else would bother to attack me when they are actually in fact reinforcing my point.

Avatar
#40 Ed Wailin'
June 22 2014, 06:39PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
7
props

I'm hoping for the player that can do the most pull ups at 4... ;)

In all seriousness though, I hope they keep 4 (price for ekblad is too high) and get another in the top 20. With those hopefully get Reinhardt/Draistl and Ritchie/Virtannen, take some risks with the rest of the picks, and then make a run at Fayne or Stralman to shore up the d. I also think there is some real potential to fleece TO in there somehow as well, gardener would be nice.

Avatar
#41 McRib
June 23 2014, 11:33AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
7
props

@DragonFlame

Agree completely, Top. 10 Picks (Nazim Kadri, Morgan Reilly) are very different than 22nd Overall picks (Biggs) in an average year. Burke showed twice in Toronto that when he had a high first rounder (a most likely surefire NHL player) he took the most skilled player on the board.

It's funny everyone criticizes Burke for that Biggs pick, but at the time Biggs was a consensus first rounder and was excepted to go in that range. Also that was a very weak draft year and many of the picks right after Biggs are looking like busts as well (Joe Morrow, Matt Puempel, Phillip Danault, Zack Phillips, Nicklas Jensen, etc). You can hand pick a couple second rounder’s that look great (Boone Jenner, Brandon Saad, etc), but a lot of teams passed on them after Toronto as well and there were things keeping those guys from being consensus first rounder’s on draft day (mediocre skating, inconsistent play) that those two fixed in the next few seasons and rewarded the teams for taking a chance on them. But Boone Jenner was not a first rounder by anyone on draft, Brandon Saad was a Top. 10 to start the season, but by the time the draft day rolled around he was a second rounder on almost every NHL Teams board.

When Calgary says they have a consensus Top. 5, I really think they are talking about Michael Dal Colle not Nick Richie. It just seems like they are trolling the media with Nick Richie. I really don't see us taking him and if anything Brian Burke has learned with Tyler Biggs pick that size isn't everything in evaluating talent. Not to mention AGAIN that Michael Dal Colle is 6'2"+ anyway.

Avatar
#42 KingQuong
June 21 2014, 10:20AM
Trash it!
7
trashes
Props
6
props

My ideal scenario would be Either Sam R or Sam B or Ekblad and another top ten ish pick used on Virtanen or Nylander, Maybe package the 2 2nd rounders plus a prospect or roster player maybe both hopefully less and fleece Toronto?

Avatar
#43 Monaertchi Gaudnett
June 21 2014, 10:53AM
Trash it!
4
trashes
Props
6
props

I could see BBBT making a play for the Leaves pick at 8 if Virtanen is still available. Not sure what it would take, but maybe BB can pull one over on Nonis.

Edit: Virtanen or Ritchie.

Avatar
#44 MonsterPod
June 21 2014, 03:47PM
Trash it!
1
trashes
Props
6
props

This all depends on what the management wants. The phones ring between picks. If the Flames keep their pick and both Sams are gone, they may not want Draisaitl and decide to pull the trigger on someone's offer to drop down -- flip picks with Toronto perhaps and take Ritchie/Virtanen/Fleury.

But if Edmonton is in love with Draisaitl and one of the Sams is there for us, then maybe we take him. They will not trade the pick until they see how the chips are falling. Did anybody in the draft world expect to see Seth Jones drop to #4? Maybe a drop to #2, but certainly not #4.

Avatar
#45 dotfras
June 21 2014, 09:15PM
Trash it!
2
trashes
Props
6
props

Hoping for a repeat of last year where the top D prospect falls to us. Ekblad is NHL ready and immediately improves our team. We go into Free Agency, add a second pairing Dman and our Defense looks solid.

We have a ton of LW & C depth and little Defense depth.

Avatar
#46 Reidja
June 22 2014, 09:08AM
Trash it!
4
trashes
Props
6
props
Jeff Lebowski wrote:

Will Nick Ritchie be our Tyler Biggs? I think many are getting worried about this.

I'm not. For 2 reasons: 1- I really think the decision is a BT / TB call. I think they are zeroing in on highest offensive impact. Ritchie is a blend, a hybrid - does many things well but much of his appeal doesn't directly impact scoresheet as the top 4 does.

2- So what if they do pick Ritchie? We have no control, why let it bug you?

Besides, Button has done well of late. If he genuinely likes him ( and not because BB likes him) then he might just be a helluva player.

Also, it's blasphemous to take Ritchie seemingly ONLY because the sources people use to form opinion haven't put him there. Who cares? What do they REALLY know? Just look at some past redraft scenarios. Things change.

If Lucic's draft was done over - where does he go? Where would Bowman, Lombardi and BT/BB slot him? Top 3,5,10?

I really think Flames fans should heed this post above. Not because I love Ritchie, truth be told I've never seen him play live (like many of you, I suspect), but because none of you have that knowledge of the player. Ostracizing an 18 year old because you liked one of the other 18 year olds who you also don't know much about, other than regurgitated scouting reports and YouTube videos, is bad armchair GM stuff. I love the speculation and hope that somehow we can wrangle one of the Sams or Ekblad too but this is really the time to let the guys who get paid, do their job. Should we take Ritchie, tell me he will be a bust 3 years from now when you have expirience to back up the opinion.

Avatar
#47 MonsterPod
June 22 2014, 02:04PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
Props
6
props
BurningSensation wrote:

There is no 'bad' armchair GM stuff, because there is no 'good' armchair GM stuff.

Just enjoy it for what it is.

That said, I agree that people should chill a little with the panic over Ritchie potentially being our pick at #4. I don't see it, but at least one team's scouts had Ritchie as the top player in the draft per Boomer in the morning.

The red flags for me;

- wasn't a ppg - late bloomer - older prospect - only took off offensively when he was with an elite linemate

But maybe the kid turns into a goalscoring young Todd Bertuzzi, and at #4 that's about the best you could hope for.

Neutral armchair GM here, like you said...

I can't help but think people are being a bit hypnotized by Ritchie's size. I still feel Virtanen would be a better pick at 6,7,8.

We'll see what Van and TO think next weekend.

The knock on Ritchie is his skating, and according to reports, Virtanen is an excellent skater. Size AND speed in a sniper? Sign me up.

Avatar
#48 ?
June 22 2014, 07:52PM
Trash it!
1
trashes
Props
6
props
DragonFlame wrote:

Well, for those of you convinced that Burke is running the show and only likes BIG players, please look at the guys drafted AFTER Nazim Kadri in the 2009 Draft:

This is all from Hockey DB:

7) Nazim Kadri 6.0 188 8) Scott Glennie 6.1 200 9) Jared Cowen 6.5 230 10) Magnus Paarjarvi-Svenson 6.3 208 11) Ryan Ellis 5.10 179 12) Calvin de Haan 6.1 187 13) Zack Kassian 6.3 214 14) Dmitri Kulikov 6.1 196 15) Peter Holland 6.2 185

So, let's see . . . seven players are taller than Kadri and 5 players are heavier.

Damn, why didn't Burke draft Jared Cowen or Zack Kassian?

Career numbers between Kadri and those two "truculent" individuals:

Kadri: 113 points in 177 games Cowen: 33 points in 158 games (okay, he's a D) Kassian: 5o points in 156 games

I reiterate, those of you who insist Burke will do nothing but undermine the scouting staff and the consensus of some very smart hockey people (because he doesn't like "flag football") and will tell his staff it is, "Ritchie or no one," are so out-to-lunch it's laughable.

If it's Ritchie, I assure all of you that it is the consensus of a lot of people who are well-paid and know a lot more about hockey than you and I ever will.

Tyler Biggs

Avatar
#49 Jeff In Lethbridge
June 21 2014, 11:17AM
Trash it!
6
trashes
Props
5
props

It's Burke that is the wild card here... he clearly does not like to sit on his hands, and prefers to make things happen. All the rumors and speculation around Ritchie has me nervous as well... not because it makes any sense, but because he is Burke's kind of player, and when Burke is dialed in, he will do what he thinks is best.

The issue with trading picks plus players is the salary floor... if we start dropping salaries, we will need to pick up even more salary. Which would mean that a trade involving a higher end roster guy (Hudler, Wideman, Glencross, Cammy) would also need to include the signing of an expensive replacement... a Spezza or ROR type at least.

This would not be a big stretch or surprise with Burke at the helm - to see a series of trades fall quickly like dominoes. this is really his M.O. Move up in the draft and pick up a high caliber player.

Makes it more curious as to what the heck Colorado is doing with ROR - they definitely are playing hardball with him and not playing nice at all, but you can't blame them as ROR has been pretty demanding and self serving himself. But hey, it's a business and you can't blame either side for looking to maximize their options and opportunities.

Back to Burke - I would be most surprised if he takes the route of doing nothing and going with 4th pick and stands pat as is, no tinkering.

Avatar
#50 Jeff In Lethbridge
June 21 2014, 11:20AM
Trash it!
3
trashes
Props
5
props
Bring Back Tim Hunter wrote:

I hope BBBT stay the course. If the flames pick top 4, it looks like they'll land a very good player. With the prospects the Flames have in their system, they should be good soon. Obviously more picks in the first round would be awesome. I just hope Baertschi isn't in play though. It appears that Burky isn't high on him, but I think he is too good to give up on yet.

I just ~HOPE~ BBBT stay the course, but I certainly wouldn't bet on it, given Burke's track record and dislike for sitting on his hands or treading water.

Comments are closed for this article.