Tim Panaccio: What If ...

drafting by positional need when you're trying to project what a kid will become in 3,4,5 years is beyond stupid.

Your spot on with jones. He is that good. A level above everyone in the draft. I think the flyers just weigh centers heavily in the draft. They say they draft best available, but it's completely subjective when your comparing dmen to forwards.

Flyers won't win a cup until they land a great defenseman

this blog is 100% fluff

drafting by positional need when you're trying to project what a kid will become in 3,4,5 years is beyond stupid.
- OrangeBlack27

Drafting by positional need only is definitely beyond stupid. But I think ignoring a defenseman you have ranked at 9.8 because there is a cetner you have ranked at 9.9 isn't the way to go. Is it the only criteria to go off of? No, and that's a recipe for disaster. But I do think that it should have some bearing. With that being said, I hope we draft Pulock. I love his O game, he's got plenty of time on his defensive developmental curve.

Tim Panaccio: What If ...
- tpanaccio

Jones will likely be able to play immediately in the NHL, but he's not likely to step right in and be a top defenseman or "impact" player right away.

Look at Dougie Hamilton. He played well for the Bruins, but he also was protected in how he was used and he was also a healthy scratch in a couple playoff games.

Not that he won't be an impact player, but to say a guy will be right out of the box is probably expecting too much.

Drafting by positional need only is definitely beyond stupid. But I think ignoring a defenseman you have ranked at 9.8 because there is a cetner you have ranked at 9.9 isn't the way to go. Is it the only criteria to go off of? No, and that's a recipe for disaster. But I do think that it should have some bearing. With that being said, I hope we draft Pulock. I love his O game, he's got plenty of time on his defensive developmental curve.
- GirouxForTheShow

sure, if you think two kids are even, position definitely plays a large part in the decision

but the way tim talks about how they WILL take a dman at the draft--like it's a certainty because that's what they need--is insane. the flyers have no idea what will happen ahead of them. what if one of those forwards expected to go 4-6 drops to 12? you just turn a blind eye to a potential first line forward to draft a potential #3-4 dman?

drafting by positional need when you're trying to project what a kid will become in 3,4,5 years is beyond stupid.
- OrangeBlack27

Absolutely. And as the JVR for Schenn deal shows. You draft the best player available. You don't pass up the better projected player because of a need. You can always trade from surplus ot fill a need.

Absolutely. And as the JVR for Schenn deal shows. You draft the best player available. You don't pass up the better projected player because of a need. You can always trade from surplus ot fill a need.
- MJL

yep. flyers could maybe deal laughton in package for dman or even sign one of the many solid UFA wingers which would give them flexibility to deal one of their roster forwards for that elusive dman.

sure, if you think two kids are even, position definitely plays a large part in the decision

but the way tim talks about how they WILL take a dman at the draft--like it's a certainty because that's what they need--is insane. the flyers have no idea what will happen ahead of them. what if one of those forwards expected to go 4-6 drops to 12? you just turn a blind eye to a potential first line forward to draft a potential #3-4 dman?
- OrangeBlack27

If a kid like Nichushkin or Monahan drops to 11, and the best defensemen left are guys like Zadorov or Morrissey, they should absolutely take the forward, because it'd be a better prosect.

The other thing is, the Flyers system has needs everywhere. They have little depth at wing, defense and goal. Part of that is a result of the Pronger trade and resulting loss of two first rounders and the other part of that is guys like Couturier and Schenn basically stepping right into the NHL. Laughton is very likely to make the immediate jump as well.

If a kid like Nichushkin or Monahan drops to 11, and the best defensemen left are guys like Zadorov or Morrissey, they should absolutely take the forward, because it'd be a better prosect.

The other thing is, the Flyers system has needs everywhere. They have little depth at wing, defense and goal. Part of that is a result of the Pronger trade and resulting loss of two first rounders and the other part of that is guys like Couturier and Schenn basically stepping right into the NHL. Laughton is very likely to make the immediate jump as well.
- Jsaquella

Those were the exact names I was thinking. Though I'd bet Nicushkin would be the more likely to fall that far (like Grirorenko, perhaps?).

Zadorov scares me. The next Boris Valabik.

What if Panotch was as smart as his cat

Those were the exact names I was thinking. Though I'd bet Nicushkin would be the more likely to fall that far (like Grirorenko, perhaps?).

Zadorov scares me. The next Boris Valabik.
- OrangeBlack27

Zadorov moves better than Valabik does, but he's been inconsistent in showing his offensive game. He played well in the OHL playoffs, though, so I'm not against taking him.

Teams get scared at the Russian thing, but Nichushkin can play, and he's not some perimeter player, who avoids the dirty areas.

sure, if you think two kids are even, position definitely plays a large part in the decision

but the way tim talks about how they WILL take a dman at the draft--like it's a certainty because that's what they need--is insane. the flyers have no idea what will happen ahead of them. what if one of those forwards expected to go 4-6 drops to 12? you just turn a blind eye to a potential first line forward to draft a potential #3-4 dman?
- OrangeBlack27

Absolutely not. Say Nichushkin drops because of the Russian factor, I would have to think long and hard about pulling the trigger on him. Same goes for Monahan or Lindholm.

Absolutely not. Say Nichushkin drops because of the Russian factor, I would have to think long and hard about pulling the trigger on him. Same goes for Monahan or Lindholm.
- GirouxForTheShow

Don't think, just draft.

The Flyers can blame the Sens & the Jackets for them not getting Hamilton. When those teams passed on Couturier, it was nearly impossible for Homer to pass on him (and rightfully so). That said, having Hamilton in the organization sure would be nice right now as I assume that's who they would have chosen at #8.

As others have pointed out, there are other organizational needs besides D so going after the greatest need is a foolish way to run a draft. Should it be a tie or close to a tie, you maybe go after the need but otherwise, the best talent/player needs to be chosen.

Tim Panaccio: What If ...
- tpanaccio

What if...you retired?

I think instead of saying draft by need or by BPA you really need to do a combination of both. You need to rank the guys you need higher, and they will be the BPA for your team.

People say trade from strength, but lets take the JVR trade as an example. It might have seemed like a trade from strenght for need, but look at it from a draft position view. They traded a 2nd overall pick for a 5th overall pick. That is losing value, and anytime you have a surplus, people will under-cut your value. Just imagine if once Kane was off the board and the Flyers decided they didn't need JVR if they traded the 2nd overall to Montreal for the 12th and 22nd overall picks. They end up with McDounah or Shattenkirk and Paciorcetti

Do you Guys have to wait until after the Playoffs to Buy out Bryz??

If a kid like Nichushkin or Monahan drops to 11, and the best defensemen left are guys like Zadorov or Morrissey, they should absolutely take the forward, because it'd be a better prosect.

The other thing is, the Flyers system has needs everywhere. They have little depth at wing, defense and goal. Part of that is a result of the Pronger trade and resulting loss of two first rounders and the other part of that is guys like Couturier and Schenn basically stepping right into the NHL. Laughton is very likely to make the immediate jump as well.
- Jsaquella

Sure they lost two first (four if you count Lupul and Sbisa)... But, its all give and take. Homer has been one the winning side more often then not. If you just look at numbers. They traded 2first (Richard/Carter) for 3 firsts and a 2nd (voracek, schenn, coots and Simonds.).

I know a lot are upset with the Bob trade, but Homer signed Bob for free and got 3 picks out of it. Bob was just going to ride the bench. Our future #1 goalie could be one of those picks.

I think instead of saying draft by need or by BPA you really need to do a combination of both. You need to rank the guys you need higher, and they will be the BPA for your team.

People say trade from strength, but lets take the JVR trade as an example. It might have seemed like a trade from strenght for need, but look at it from a draft position view. They traded a 2nd overall pick for a 5th overall pick. That is losing value, and anytime you have a surplus, people will under-cut your value. Just imagine if once Kane was off the board and the Flyers decided they didn't need JVR if they traded the 2nd overall to Montreal for the 12th and 22nd overall picks. They end up with McDounah or Shattenkirk and Paciorcetti
- youarewrong

Thats assuming Flyers would have picked those guys...not sure they would have with their drafting history. Me personally I think the Flyers are always in a win now mentality and like it or not, forwards mature in the NHL much quicker then d-men. I just dont think this organization is patient enough to draft a d-man cause they know it will take years before you get results.

Tim Panaccio: What If ...
- tpanaccio

Draft picks are educated guesses. It is much easier to judge potential in Centers, then Winger, then Defenseman, then Goalies - in that order. It takes Defenseman and Goalies longer to develop. The smart thing to do is go after the sure thing... the talented Centers. Comcast/Flyers are not shy to spend money. Belly up and buy the top notch UFA goalie and defenseman when the time comes. If need be, polish-off the developing talented centers and trade them for defense or goalies.

The theory of grab the best guy is valid (if your scouting is good), you should be able to trade that guy for what you need in the future.

This may not hold true for all the other teams. Some teams are in less desirable track records, or locations (like ATL was... beautiful town, just not a hockey mecca). Or, don't have the cash to spend on the UFA.

Do you Guys have to wait until after the Playoffs to Buy out Bryz??
- Jimmy_wiener

Yep, and you guys have to wait until the playoffs are over to trade Dion Phaneuf.

I think instead of saying draft by need or by BPA you really need to do a combination of both. You need to rank the guys you need higher, and they will be the BPA for your team.

People say trade from strength, but lets take the JVR trade as an example. It might have seemed like a trade from strenght for need, but look at it from a draft position view. They traded a 2nd overall pick for a 5th overall pick. That is losing value, and anytime you have a surplus, people will under-cut your value. Just imagine if once Kane was off the board and the Flyers decided they didn't need JVR if they traded the 2nd overall to Montreal for the 12th and 22nd overall picks. They end up with McDounah or Shattenkirk and Paciorcetti
- youarewrong

JVR and L. Schenn were not in the same draft - but, let's say they were... If the Flyers were picking by position only they may have pick Schenn instead of JVR. I agree to an extent but there needs to be a greater gap between players; 2nd vs 5th after the fact is not a big deal. 2nd round to 5th round is...

I think instead of saying draft by need or by BPA you really need to do a combination of both. You need to rank the guys you need higher, and they will be the BPA for your team.


- youarewrong

So if you need a defenseman, and the only defenseman available is rated as a late first round pick. The Flyers should move that player up in the rank, over a forward who fell to them at the 11th pick, that they had ranked in the top 8 of players in the draft. Makes sense.

People say trade from strength, but lets take the JVR trade as an example. It might have seemed like a trade from strenght for need, but look at it from a draft position view. They traded a 2nd overall pick for a 5th overall pick. That is losing value, and anytime you have a surplus, people will under-cut your value. Just imagine if once Kane was off the board and the Flyers decided they didn't need JVR if they traded the 2nd overall to Montreal for the 12th and 22nd overall picks. They end up with McDounah or Shattenkirk and Paciorcetti
- youarewrong

So if Nashville was willing to trade Shea Weber, who was drafted in the 2nd round, to the Flyers for Luke Schenn. Who was drafted in the first round with the 5th pick. The Flyers should turn it down, because they are losing value.