Next Wednesday is the draft order day. Two or three very good dmen might go in top five. A dman wiz once projected for Chicago could be available. I doubt any more move up in draft trades, at least not involving Chicago

Although the next Maker not in this draft, Power would likely be considered a high impact NHL dman. How soon Iet wiz say. I could guess slight possibility we move up only a couple of slots if Kelly and Bowman really want someone more than whom they see at our own slot

Is there a particular top center, dman or even the top goaltender available at say #10 as any rate would be conditional. I just see it as unlikely to happen. There is a high price to move up. Regula or Beaudin. We get hung up on. One of them plus Suter. Not too much interest. Kubalik. That would get it done. I probably pass and just draft someone else we like our original slot.

Eventually we need to steal someone with our mid first round or move to a very early pick. The difference makers are for most part early first round picks. We will be merely an average team fighting to make playoffs if we do not add a couple top picks over next 2-3 years
- jhawk59

Strome was a third, Rantanen was 10th Barzal was 16th, Aho was 35th all in McDavid's draft, Eichel was second. I would say the 10th, 16th and 35th pick are on better teams than one through 3. Difference makers don't make differences unless you have the supporting cast around them. Hawks have picked #3 and #8 the last 2 years. They need the supporting cast to support the #3 and #8 picks. I do not see Stan moving up unless he really loves someone, and as you say pays a high price. He was looking to move up last year, and decided the price was too high

Strome was a third, Rantanen was 10th Barzal was 16th, Aho was 35th all in McDavid's draft, Eichel was second. I would say the 10th, 16th and 35th pick are on better teams than one through 3. Difference makers don't make differences unless you have the supporting cast around them. Hawks have picked #3 and #8 the last 2 years. They need the supporting cast to support the #3 and #8 picks. I do not see Stan moving up unless he really loves someone, and as you say pays a high price. He was looking to move up last year, and decided the price was too high
- LAHawk

Those high picks are pretty important though. With the exception of the Blues, every Stanley Cup winning team in the past 10 plus years has had a #1 or #2 overall pick. Ovechkin #1, Crosby #1, Malkin #2, Kane #1, Stamkos #1, Doughty #2 and Seguin #2.

Edit:
Forgot to add Hedman #2

Strome was a third, Rantanen was 10th Barzal was 16th, Aho was 35th all in McDavid's draft, Eichel was second. I would say the 10th, 16th and 35th pick are on better teams than one through 3. Difference makers don't make differences unless you have the supporting cast around them. Hawks have picked #3 and #8 the last 2 years. They need the supporting cast to support the #3 and #8 picks. I do not see Stan moving up unless he really loves someone, and as you say pays a high price. He was looking to move up last year, and decided the price was too high
- LAHawk

Agreed, but that blue line is so important and to me the teams lacking in that department, Edmonton, Capitals, Blues, probably Panthers, all went bye bye rather quickly, but Knight had a fantastic game last night main reason they are still alive

Agreed, but that blue line is so important and to me the teams lacking in that department, Edmonton, Capitals, Blues, probably Panthers, all went bye bye rather quickly, but Knight had a fantastic game last night main reason they are still alive
- BetweenTheDots

Seabrook 1st rounder 14th
Keith 2nd rounder
Jammer 4th rounder
Oduya 7th rounder
Leddy 1st rounder 16th overall.

I will take the top 4 in their prime anyday. Cam Barker was 3rd overall, his impact was he was traded for Leddy and the ghost of Kim Johnson

Seabrook 1st rounder 14th
Keith 2nd rounder
Jammer 4th rounder
Oduya 7th rounder
Leddy 1st rounder 16th overall.

I will take the top 4 in their prime anyday. Cam Barker was 3rd overall, his impact was he was traded for Leddy and the ghost of Kim Johnson
- LAHawk

Obviously a team has to draft well. Kelly has been around a long time and altough Bowman is big on getting everyone's input, Stan makes the call on whom is plucked each pick. I mention Kelly because he was around when Tallon made a lot of horrible moves. He got the right guy choosing first and third, but overall Tallon screwed up way too much.

Nowadays is appears young dmen are so fragile. So I am not against grabbing another dman in round one. The rub is, whom exactly is the better player - one call - and our list has players rated differently than another team. So do we go by Wiz lists?

The players drafted next few years, most are not going to be NHL capable for a couple years or longer. Therefore I am all for even moving up one or two spots and drafting the top tier. If the cost to do so is prohibitive, ok no deal. But try hard,Stan. Top tier talent usually is the talent whom are difference mAkers. NOt always but often LAHAWK

Obviously a team has to draft well. Kelly has been around a long time and altough Bowman is big on getting everyone's input, Stan makes the call on whom is plucked each pick. I mention Kelly because he was around when Tallon made a lot of horrible moves. He got the right guy choosing first and third, but overall Tallon screwed up way too much.

Nowadays is appears young dmen are so fragile. So I am not against grabbing another dman in round one. The rub is, whom exactly is the better player - one call - and our list has players rated differently than another team. So do we go by Wiz lists?

The players drafted next few years, most are not going to be NHL capable for a couple years or longer. Therefore I am all for even moving up one or two spots and drafting the top tier. If the cost to do so is prohibitive, ok no deal. But try hard,Stan. Top tier talent usually is the talent whom are difference mAkers. NOt always but often LAHAWK
- jhawk59

A bold statement indeed.

Obviously a team has to draft well. Kelly has been around a long time and altough Bowman is big on getting everyone's input, Stan makes the call on whom is plucked each pick. I mention Kelly because he was around when Tallon made a lot of horrible moves. He got the right guy choosing first and third, but overall Tallon screwed up way too much.

Nowadays is appears young dmen are so fragile. So I am not against grabbing another dman in round one. The rub is, whom exactly is the better player - one call - and our list has players rated differently than another team. So do we go by Wiz lists?

The players drafted next few years, most are not going to be NHL capable for a couple years or longer. Therefore I am all for even moving up one or two spots and drafting the top tier. If the cost to do so is prohibitive, ok no deal. But try hard,Stan. Top tier talent usually is the talent whom are difference mAkers. NOt always but often LAHAWK
- jhawk59

I have all the respect in the world for Bill, but i think the Hawks are going with their list. The Hawks appear to be the only team that rated Reichel as high as they did. Too soon to tell, but it looks like a sneaky good pick.

Did I read that correct? In three games the Canadian team has only scored 2 goals? Must be Gallant’s fault.

Did I read that correct? In three games the Canadian team has only scored 2 goals? Must be Gallant’s fault.
- Chunk

Obviously it’s Colliton’s fault, Gallant doesn’t make mistakes.

Obviously it’s Colliton’s fault, Gallant doesn’t make mistakes.
- paulr

Yep JC should be more like Gallant and play Pirri about 6 minutes more per game than Hagel.

I think if you look over the last 5 years our scouting Dept has been as good as anybody in regard to draft and UDUFA. were we have falutered are hockey trades and NHL siginings. I trust our scouting Dept. I think reichel is going to end up a top 10 player in that class and Arvid is going to be a NHL starter.

And that’s exactly why you don’t give up a but ton of picks to sign a guy like Makar
- Ogilthorpe2

Okay sure, probably the Hawks shouldn't, but if you suck at drafting like Edmonton, why not

Seabrook 1st rounder 14th
Keith 2nd rounder
Jammer 4th rounder
Oduya 7th rounder
Leddy 1st rounder 16th overall.

I will take the top 4 in their prime anyday. Cam Barker was 3rd overall, his impact was he was traded for Leddy and the ghost of Kim Johnson
- LAHawk

And yet, during the cup run they couldn't draft a dman who could handle 20 minutes a night, not one. I like the young talent they drafted and signed but a lot of things must go right

https://twitter.com/JFres...97282829764075529/photo/1

https://twitter.com/JFres...97282957933617155/photo/1

this is only in the Def zone. and does not factor OFF. I did feel like keith gave up on plays way more the last 2 years then he ever did before. I wonder if a change of scenery might recharge him. when he is playing hard he is still pretty effective.

I have all the respect in the world for Bill, but i think the Hawks are going with their list. The Hawks appear to be the only team that rated Reichel as high as they did. Too soon to tell, but it looks like a sneaky good pick.
- LAHawk

The task to determine which player is a better athlete, or whom learns and improves quick......
......is not easily discernable. Especially in a draft year when you do not have as many games played. And to decide whom is the better athlete when you have contrasting style, and contrasting positions they play. So I think you go by tier level. Does the list you go by have all in same tier, or in next tier.

The Blackhawks liked Aaskarov, Guhle, Reichel. What about Jary or Lapierre, rated a steal raTed at his choice since he has some injuries in junior. Lundell was as high as #5 by some scouts.

Do I think if you want a dman and you don't see a big difference in athletic ability, you go ahead draft dman

Years from now whom is going to say Reichel was the more athletic than the defensive minded rock 'em Guhle? Yet Guhle went #15 and Reichel.#22. Honestly you see from #10-25 or so and all or most will play NHL. I've seen enough signs from many of them this shortened season to say they have NhL written all over. If you have a lack of talent and depth at a certain position, unless you are so convinced one kid is such a better athlete or such better ceiling, you draft the position you need. Who knows if you are really making a mistake. Either choice is good but you have needs. I cannot blame a team for taking need

Did the goaltender interest truly peak when Florida took Knight in round one, or did they panic about their future in net and grab Knight a few picks early.

This best athlete has merit but don't get hung up on it

https://twitter.com/JFreshHockey/status/1397282829764075529/photo/1

https://twitter.com/JFres...97282957933617155/photo/1

this is only in the Def zone. and does not factor OFF. I did feel like keith gave up on plays way more the last 2 years then he ever did before. I wonder if a change of scenery might recharge him. when he is playing hard he is still pretty effective.
- kmw4631

Karlsson

So according to this, Q. Hughes, Nate Schmidt, J. Klingberg, S. Jones, D. Nurse, J.Morrissey, S. Theodore, D. Keith, Morgan Reilly, and R. Ristolainen are all viewed MUCH less favorably than N. Zadorov in the defensive zone. (Top rated in the league vs. bottom rated in the league). Per the guy who tweeted it: Remember these stats are ONLY defensively - impact on limiting scoring chances against. No offence included here.

I think we can all attest to the fact that there are some severe flaws in this measurement. Unless there is zero weight given to turnovers or being out of position. I'd be very interested to see how the hell they calculate this value.

This stinks of the "Runblad is really good according to the stats" argument.

The task to determine which player is a better athlete, or whom learns and improves quick......
......is not easily discernable. Especially in a draft year when you do not have as many games played. And to decide whom is the better athlete when you have contrasting style, and contrasting positions they play. So I think you go by tier level. Does the list you go by have all in same tier, or in next tier.

The Blackhawks liked Aaskarov, Guhle, Reichel. What about Jary or Lapierre, rated a steal raTed at his choice since he has some injuries in junior. Lundell was as high as #5 by some scouts.

Do I think if you want a dman and you don't see a big difference in athletic ability, you go ahead draft dman

Years from now whom is going to say Reichel was the more athletic than the defensive minded rock 'em Guhle? Yet Guhle went #15 and Reichel.#22. Honestly you see from #10-25 or so and all or most will play NHL. I've seen enough signs from many of them this shortened season to say they have NhL written all over. If you have a lack of talent and depth at a certain position, unless you are so convinced one kid is such a better athlete or such better ceiling, you draft the position you need. Who knows if you are really making a mistake. Either choice is good but you have needs. I cannot blame a team for taking need

Did the goaltender interest truly peak when Florida took Knight in round one, or did they panic about their future in net and grab Knight a few picks early.

This best athlete has merit but don't get hung up on it
- jhawk59

A couple things from my perspective jhawk. First, I think you are putting the cart way before the horse on a lot of these kids. Some fo these rookies come in and play well for a stretch (month or two) then they struggle. It immensely depends on how they handle that struggling as to how their career progresses.

Second, if you are drafting for need, you are doing it wrong. You are essentially saying that I'm selecting a player that i need now, but won't realistically be ready to play for at least a year, if not 2-3. If you are drafting to fill a hole in your development ranks, that is fine.

Third, I would never take the best athlete strictly on that criteria. I would look to draft the best player. The league has tons of guys that are either really fast, or big and strong (or both), and can't play above the third or fourth line because they don't know how to play hockey. Find more of those guys and you will ultimately have a good team.

A couple things from my perspective jhawk. First, I think you are putting the cart way before the horse on a lot of these kids. Some fo these rookies come in and play well for a stretch (month or two) then they struggle. It immensely depends on how they handle that struggling as to how their career progresses.

Second, if you are drafting for need, you are doing it wrong. You are essentially saying that I'm selecting a player that i need now, but won't realistically be ready to play for at least a year, if not 2-3. If you are drafting to fill a hole in your development ranks, that is fine.

Third, I would never take the best athlete strictly on that criteria. I would look to draft the best player. The league has tons of guys that are either really fast, or big and strong (or both), and can't play above the third or fourth line because they don't know how to play hockey. Find more of those guys and you will ultimately have a good team.
- Chunk

I reiterate if it is close then you do not have to take the best player. I meant to imply best athlete is best player. But you are right in that best athlete is not best player. Not necessarily. Look at Athansiou (sic?) or Duclair. Never going to stick as a top line player. But may be among best skaters, for example. I doubt either one will ever produce a 30 goal season. If Duclair does, only after what ten-year in league.

And to your first point even the highest drafed do not come in and produce right away. I know this. Last few drafts rife with this. In fact, look at NYR. K koppo, Lafraniere. As opposed to Fox who stepped in on defense. He was not a high #1.

I reiterate if it is close then you do not have to take the best player. I meant to imply best athlete is best player. But you are right in that best athlete is not best player. Not necessarily. Look at Athansiou (sic?) or Duclair. Never going to stick as a top line player. But may be among best skaters, for example. I doubt either one will ever produce a 30 goal season. If Duclair does, only after what ten-year in league.

And to your first point even the highest drafed do not come in and produce right away. I know this. Last few drafts rife with this. In fact, look at NYR. K koppo, Lafraniere. As opposed to Fox who stepped in on defense. He was not a high #1.
- jhawk59

Indeed, he was a 3rd rounder.

I reiterate if it is close then you do not have to take the best player. I meant to imply best athlete is best player. But you are right in that best athlete is not best player. Not necessarily. Look at Athansiou (sic?) or Duclair. Never going to stick as a top line player. But may be among best skaters, for example. I doubt either one will ever produce a 30 goal season. If Duclair does, only after what ten-year in league.

And to your first point even the highest drafed do not come in and produce right away. I know this. Last few drafts rife with this. In fact, look at NYR. K koppo, Lafraniere. As opposed to Fox who stepped in on defense. He was not a high #1.
- jhawk59

Always take the best player, you can always trade from your surplus. Now all things being equal, and you rate two players the same, then and only then should you draft for need.

Zad was the 3rd worst off zone D man iin the league. No hawk made the best off Def list hamilton was 2nd best off zone Def. shea theodore was the best but was also on the worst D man list in the Def zone

Habs look so slow vs Leafs

Canes and Preds both have suffocating defenses, forget how good Teuvo is at playing defense

Obviously it’s Colliton’s fault, Gallant doesn’t make mistakes.
- paulr

Then Stan's fault of course too. Looks like the Habs won't be able to send the Leaves to the links early. WPG vs TOR could be a good series.

Always take the best player, you can always trade from your surplus. Now all things being equal, and you rate two players the same, then and only then should you draft for need.
- Angotti

You’re 100% right. Always best available.

Then Stan's fault also of course too. Looks like the Habs won't be able to send the Leaves to the links early. WPG vs TOR could be a good series.
- HawkintheD

Hate to say it but I think the Leaves will dispatch Winnipeg very quickly.

And it’s always Stan’s fault.