The general consensus with this draft is that there's a dip in quality after 35 or so.

If I can trade the 11th and 41st picks and get the 14th and 23rd/24th, I'd seriously consider it. Still getting a good player at 14 and have a shot at a far better player than they'd see at 41 by adding another pick in the top 30
- Jsaquella

weber was a 2nd round pick...

weber was a 2nd round pick...
- 2Real

Yes he was. In one of the deepest drafts of the last 20 years. The thing is, most scouts feel that the quality dips around the 35 player mark. They pick 41st. Rather drop 3 spots to 14 and move up 17 slots, and have two picks in the top 25

Yes he was. In one of the deepest drafts of the last 20 years. The thing is, most scouts feel that the quality dips around the 35 player mark. They pick 41st. Rather drop 3 spots to 14 and move up 17 slots, and have two picks in the top 25
- Jsaquella

unless there's someone we cannot pass up we should stay put and not trade away picks

unless there's someone we cannot pass up we should stay put and not trade away picks
- 2Real

They wouldn't be trading away picks, they'd still have the same number of picks.

Yes he was. In one of the deepest drafts of the last 20 years. The thing is, most scouts feel that the quality dips around the 35 player mark. They pick 41st. Rather drop 3 spots to 14 and move up 17 slots, and have two picks in the top 25
- Jsaquella

With this draft I'd absolutely do that

Simmonds is a solid player. But that's getting a little carried away. He is not a player for the ages.
- MJL

I know what you mean. It's just so hard to get guys like him because the teams who have them don't want to let go of them.

He's a 22 year old power forward with above average skating and puck skills.
He's a great fighter and he plays hard.
He's becoming a real leader on this team.
He's locked in at a good cap hit ($4M) through his prime years.
He's got great PP chemistry with Giroux.

I could go on, but you get my point. I don't know what the standard is for "player for the ages," but time will how good he will be.

After 1

Saskatoon - 0
Portland - 0

Leier is not likely to return, no update has been provided.

Do you guys think it's hard for every announcer ever to kiss Crosby with that shield on?

I know what you mean. It's just so hard to get guys like him because the teams who have them don't want to let go of them.

He's a 22 year old power forward with above average skating and puck skills.
He's a great fighter and he plays hard.
He's becoming a real leader on this team.
He's locked in at a good cap hit ($4M) through his prime years.
He's got great PP chemistry with Giroux.

I could go on, but you get my point. I don't know what the standard is for "player for the ages," but time will how good he will be.
- Coburns_Nose

ALL ABOARD THE WAYNE TRAIN BABY WOO WOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

I know what you mean. It's just so hard to get guys like him because the teams who have them don't want to let go of them.

He's a 22 year old power forward with above average skating and puck skills.
He's a great fighter and he plays hard.
He's becoming a real leader on this team.
He's locked in at a good cap hit ($4M) through his prime years.
He's got great PP chemistry with Giroux.

I could go on, but you get my point. I don't know what the standard is for "player for the ages," but time will how good he will be.
- Coburns_Nose

He's def not an above average skater. He's a very nice player at 22 and can be viewed as a core guy going forward

I know what you mean. It's just so hard to get guys like him because the teams who have them don't want to let go of them.

He's a 22 year old power forward with above average skating and puck skills.
He's a great fighter and he plays hard.
He's becoming a real leader on this team.
He's locked in at a good cap hit ($4M) through his prime years.
He's got great PP chemistry with Giroux.

I could go on, but you get my point. I don't know what the standard is for "player for the ages," but time will how good he will be.
- Coburns_Nose

He's a very good player, who I certainly would like to keep. But if he needs to be included in a deal that lands the defenseman they need. No problem trading him. He's good, but not that good.

He's a very good player, who I certainly would like to keep. But if he needs to be included in a deal that lands the defenseman they need. No problem trading him. He's good, but not that good.
- MJL

And the changes begin in Vancouver...

Edler next?

I hope so.

And the changes begin in Vancouver...

Edler next?

I hope so.
- stveshdy

Our next 4 2nd rounders for him.

Homer's all over that poop.

And the changes begin in Vancouver...

Edler next?

I hope so.
- stveshdy

The price will be high.

And the changes begin in Vancouver...

Edler next?

I hope so.
- stveshdy

If I were a Canucks fan, I would want to keep Edler and jettison Gillis.

The price will be high.
- MJL

Always is. I would rather be a team that focuses on defense first. When you play good defense you create mistakes and turnovers which leads to offensive chances.

Always is. I would rather be a team that focuses on defense first. When you play good defense you create mistakes and turnovers which leads to offensive chances.
- stveshdy

A player like Edler would help both. And I agree 100% with that philosophy. I don't want a passive team that sits back and isn't aggressive. You can be a strong forechecking team, while also being strong defensively.

If I were a Canucks fan, I would want to keep Edler and jettison Gillis.
- Doc_Sarcasm

You'd think jettisoning edler wouldn't sit well with the twins

I don't want a passive team that sits back and isn't aggressive. You can be a strong forechecking team, while also being strong defensively.
- MJL

Like Boston and LA.

A player like Edler would help both. And I agree 100% with that philosophy. I don't want a passive team that sits back and isn't aggressive. You can be a strong forechecking team, while also being strong defensively.
- MJL

Yup. Anderson not having a great series for Ottawa.

Yes he was. In one of the deepest drafts of the last 20 years. The thing is, most scouts feel that the quality dips around the 35 player mark. They pick 41st. Rather drop 3 spots to 14 and move up 17 slots, and have two picks in the top 25
- Jsaquella

My only concern would be losing out on possible elite prospects by moving to 14. I'd rather have 1 elite defenseman than 2 top 4s. Chances are higher, by moving to 14 and 17, that we lose our shot at an elite prospect.

After 2

Saskatoon - 1
Portland - 1

Yup. Anderson not having a great series for Ottawa.
- stveshdy

PENS looking unstoppable right now. Come on BOS!!

It's a no-brainer as to what to do regarding your selection and the best player available. Regardless of position.
- 77rams

There is no list of prospect rankings that has it all correct. Every year scouts and other so called "experts" miss things...sometimes, big things. Each team's staff has their tendencies in terms of how they value players.

In determining the "best player available" I think it's ok (and probably pretty common) to factor in, to some extent, things like:

-the existing mix of organizational talent..strengths, weaknesses etc.

-the direction in which they want to go, their philosophy as an organization/team.

-the current and expected value of specific types of players in the marketplace (puck moving D men with size, versus say, defensive forwards)

If, after looking at all the factors, a GM and his staff feel that a player is the best player at that spot, for their needs, then I'm ok with it. In this case, since I feel the Flyers have a particularly egregious lack of young, offensive-defensemen in the system, drafting one of the top two-way/offensive defensemen, in a draft that has a few really good ones, isn't an unreasonable bias to have going into the draft. With that said, I am not advocating making too far a reach for a D man versus a forward they may have ahead of him.

I have my own list that has a Flyer based bias toward a few of the D men in the draft, but if certain select forwards are still there when the Flyers pick, like say, a Nichushkin if he falls, I would take them over anyone else not names Jones.

Here's my (current) list for the Flyers pick at #11:

assuming that the first four are gone...

(Jones)
(Drouin)
(MacKinnon)
(Barkov)

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

Whoever is left out of those below (in order) when the Flyers pick, I would take them:

Nichushkin
Nurse
Zadorov
Pulock
Lindholm
Shinkaruk
Monahan

Worst case scenario is that you have an excess of quality players at one position who can be used as chips to shore up other areas of need.
- 77rams

Yes, but that is easier said than done and has it's risks. For one thing, opposing GMs have you over a barrell because it's obvious you need to make a deal...easy to end up overpaying. You can sign a free agent, but you end up overpaying to land any top 4 guys.

You could even try and place the player at another position. Gagne was drafted as a center but I'd say had a decent career once being shifted to wing
- 77rams

While some can make a smooth transition, other players struggle to adapt to that kind of change and/or simply aren't as good as they are when they play their natural positon. You can't just take it for granted that you can just move these guys around any which way imo.