Hogberg is not on Black Book and not ranked on Central Scouting, but we took a 5th on him. I was confused and searched for anything resembling a scouting report. This is the definition of boom potential in the 5th.

Hogberg is very young for this draft class, being born 11 days before the cutoff -- which helps his cause. As discussed many times, the difference of 6-8 months is huge in the development of 17 and 18-year-olds.

As we can see from his numbers in U20 SuperElit league, Hogberg is an offensive defenceman who isn't afraid to jump in the rush. He finished the season with the 11th most points amongst defenceman in the SuperElit with all the players around him being ranked by NHL CSS. He also saw two regular season games and one playoff game in the SHL.

He has the size and skating abilities to be worth the risk.

When we use pGPS to look at Hogberg, he is the highest rated of this grouping with 18.9% going on to become NHL regulars. Obviously, we don't if a team has their eye on him, but it's entirely possible that he will be available in the 6th or 7th round, and an almost 20% success rate will be very good odds at that point.


- Mononoke

Boom or bust baby!

can't have hagg and hogberg that's just too much

3 picks left, keep these picks coming. These are ones to get excited about the raw potential.

Not the prospects, team. Trades, type of selections, got 'your guy' etc.
- coffee junkie

How about this: I am fairly stunned the logjam on trades didn't break. Not because it's easy to move money around, but because guys like Nash have submitted lists upon request (reportedly) and there are teams that needed to do more than they did

For instance: Calgary. I mean, seriously. Brian Elliott is not a horrible option. But he also played for one of the most disciplined systems in the league and with a truly talented defense corps

Now, does that mean Elliott is not going to help the Flames? He probably will. But if you've called on Fleury and you called on Bishop but just cheaped out on paying for a true No. 1, then don't blame anyone but yourself when you don't get the kind of goaltending you need

To me, teams continue to overvalue the future over the present. You can't always be a slave to one over the other, but these teams are so skittish about closing deals...it's crazy to me

Boom or bust baby!
- coffee junkie

According to Canucks Army website (where I pulled that from), he actually has one of the highest floors based on comparable players in all of the late rounds. It's almost a high floor/high ceiling pick late. Hmm.

Hogberg is not on Black Book and not ranked on Central Scouting, but we took a 5th on him. I was confused and searched for anything resembling a scouting report. This is the definition of boom potential in the 5th.

Hogberg is very young for this draft class, being born 11 days before the cutoff -- which helps his cause. As discussed many times, the difference of 6-8 months is huge in the development of 17 and 18-year-olds.

As we can see from his numbers in U20 SuperElit league, Hogberg is an offensive defenceman who isn't afraid to jump in the rush. He finished the season with the 11th most points amongst defenceman in the SuperElit with all the players around him being ranked by NHL CSS. He also saw two regular season games and one playoff game in the SHL.

He has the size and skating abilities to be worth the risk.

When we use pGPS to look at Hogberg, he is the highest rated of this grouping with 18.9% going on to become NHL regulars. Obviously, we don't if a team has their eye on him, but it's entirely possible that he will be available in the 6th or 7th round, and an almost 20% success rate will be very good odds at that point.


- Mononoke

there's your lottery pick

there's your lottery pick

- 2Real

3 more, (frank)er

can't have hagg and hogberg that's just too much
- -davies-

How about this: I am fairly stunned the logjam on trades didn't break. Not because it's easy to move money around, but because guys like Nash have submitted lists upon request (reportedly) and there are teams that needed to do more than they did

For instance: Calgary. I mean, seriously. Brian Elliott is not a horrible option. But he also played for one of the most disciplined systems in the league and with a truly talented defense corps

Now, does that mean Elliott is not going to help the Flames? He probably will. But if you've called on Fleury and you called on Bishop but just cheaped out on paying for a true No. 1, then don't blame anyone but yourself when you don't get the kind of goaltending you need

To me, teams continue to overvalue the future over the present. You can't always be a slave to one over the other, but these teams are so skittish about closing deals...it's crazy to me
- AllInForFlyers

Do you wish the Flyers made more moves?

Brayden Burke, Dmitry Sokolov, Jake Ryczek, Matthew Phillips, Kyle Maksimovich, Domenic Commisso!

Give me some bold picks, Hexy.

So i guess Philly will be getting Arizona's 3rd rounder next year...will take that!

What team was the trade with? Maybe they're banking on that team sucking next year? Even then, yeah gotta get a 6th or something. Strange move.
- hereticpride

I think it's just a matter of having so many picks this year and figuring they should have an extra asset to use next year is a good idea. As of today they only had one pick besides there own for next year. Now they will have two 3rds and two 4ths

I think it's just a matter of having so many picks this year and figuring they should have an extra asset to use next year is a good idea. As of today they only had one pick besides there own for next year. Now they will have two 3rds and two 4ths
- FlyerAdam30

Good point.

I understand why Dallas did it, but why would LA trade for Jack Campbell...he WILL be exposed during the expansion draft unless for some reason LA decides not to protect Quick.

So i guess Philly will be getting Arizona's 3rd rounder next year...will take that!
- Glak18

thought one of the 4ths we had this year was the Arizona pick, no?

So i guess Philly will be getting Arizona's 3rd rounder next year...will take that!
- Glak18

I don't think so. They gave them their 4th this year to fulfill that deal. Flyers then traded a 4th for next year 4th. They do have bostons 3rd nextyr though

So is it safe to say the Pens are stuck with Fluery yet?

I understand why Dallas did it, but why would LA trade for Jack Campbell...he WILL be exposed during the expansion draft unless for some reason LA decides not to protect Quick.


- Glak18

Because he has been utterly horrendous and Vegas is not taking him

Because he has been utterly horrendous and Vegas is not taking him
- Mononoke

Ummm

Glossing over the picks... I think Wade Allison is going to be the best for the price pick.

Ummm
- Glak18

Methinks you need to look at his actual stats and not his reputation.

Methinks you need to look at his actual stats and not his 6 year old reputation and draft pick status.
- Mononoke

Methinks people need to stop judging purely on stats, he has struggles and had some injuries like every goalie, but he will be a decent starter for someone.

Glossing over the picks... I think Wade Allison is going to be the best for the price pick.
- JoeRussomanno

Why Joe?

Methinks people need to stop judging purely on stats, he has struggles and had some injuries like every goalie, but he will be a decent starter for someone.
- Glak18

He's an ECHL goalie. They traded Nick Ebert for him.

Do you wish the Flyers made more moves?
- coffee junkie

I'm just...I'm surprised sometimes at how much these picks are valued.

They have value, of course -- I'm not saying it's good to just burn picks on whatever.

But the Flyers had 11 picks even before they traded down. That is a metric (frank)-ton of picks. You're telling me there's no way to move a pick for a player ANYWHERE?

That's what baffles me about this sport now. Teams hold onto picks like they are the last bit of drinking water on Earth, when the math shows that after the first few picks, then a cut of the first round, you are basically throwing darts at a board

It's good to have more darts than the guy next to you; basic math tells you that. But at the same time, better odds of basically nothing is still basically nothing, you know?