2016 NHL Draft

[Randall Flagg]

I would risk taking one of the defenders over trading it for Fowler. I think Fowler is good but I think you have the very real potential of getting a better player at #8.  

Hard to say because they are both older. I saw more of Vessey than I did Caligula.  Vessey is good and I think would rank in that Dubois/Nylander/McLeod grouping. 

Risto and Nylander are the only people on the list of 8th overall selections for the last 28 years (Roenick in 1988) that have a shot at being better players than Fowler, so I'm not sure I'd call it "very real" potential. 

[Crusader1969]

I 

 

Dubois or Nylander if we don't win the lottery please and thank you.

 

Also, not sure this belongs in the trade thread or here.  If we end up with pick 8 is he worth Cam Fowler straight up?  Who would have to add?

 

 

My concern would be his contract. He is 2 seasons away from being an UFA and I hate to see him walking out the door just as this team is ready to be a cup contender.

 

You may say just re-sign him but it may not be that easy with Eichel, Reinhart and Risto coming up for UFA's sometime after.

 

I think the time frame works really well to keep the 8th pick. Should be really ready to contribute the year Fowler is coming up to Unrestricted Free Agency.

[LGR4GM]

Risto and Nylander are the only people on the list of 8th overall selections for the last 28 years (Roenick in 1988) that have a shot at being better players than Fowler, so I'm not sure I'd call it "very real" potential. 

I hate it when people do this. No offense to you, but just looking at 8th overall players doesn't tell us anything. At best you should look at 8-11th overall to get a picture of the type of player. Fowler was taken 12th overall but that doesn't mean we have to draft 12th overall to get a player like him. I actually think a better way to do this would be to look at the top 3 defenders taken in each draft of the past 10 years (start with 2013) and then average out where they were picked. Just taking a quick look some drafts don't have 3 defenders off the board until the late teens.  

[WildCard]

Risto and Nylander are the only people on the list of 8th overall selections for the last 28 years (Roenick in 1988) that have a shot at being better players than Fowler, so I'm not sure I'd call it "very real" potential. 

8th+ is where you should look. Drafting 8th doesn't give you the 8th best player, it gives you the opportunity to draft him

[LGR4GM]

Julius Honka for instance was taken 14th overall. He will be a good defender and if Murray could trade for him I would be ecstatic.  I am sorry I am too lazy to find the top 3 defenders for the last 10 decade but I will say the quick look shows some drafts are ridiculously talented on defense. How Sergachev/Juolevi/Chychrun stack up to them we will have to wait and see.

[Randall Flagg]

I hate it when people do this. No offense to you, but just looking at 8th overall players doesn't tell us anything. At best you should look at 8-11th overall to get a picture of the type of player. Fowler was taken 12th overall but that doesn't mean we have to draft 12th overall to get a player like him. I actually think a better way to do this would be to look at the top 3 defenders taken in each draft of the past 10 years (start with 2013) and then average out where they were picked. Just taking a quick look some drafts don't have 3 defenders off the board until the late teens. 

That's fine, I'm not offended. I hate when people claim that an 18 year old has 'very real potential' to be better than a player that is currently the best defender on a cup contender, to the point that they wouldn't make that trade straight up. I think it's outrageous to turn down that theoretical trade. I would fire a GM for turning down that trade.

 

And for the record, highlighting past 8th (and 9th, and 10th, and 6th, and so on) overall selections isn't meant to show that the guy we draft isn't going to be good because they historically aren't. It depends on the player, the scouting staff, and the year. But ignoring the plummeting success rate as the first round progresses, which symbolizes the lack of predictability of the development of 18 year old hockey players, on an issue like trading that pick specifically for Cam Fowler, is very dangerous, which is why I brought it up. A snapshot of that pick that shows that maybe we shouldn't be so confident in getting an impact player. I trust GMTM and our scouting but it's so easy to up, and to turn down a sure thing for that is just something I can't do.

Edited April 11, 2016 by Randall Flagg

[LGR4GM]

I don't think Cam Fowler is the best defender on that team. I think Hampus Lindholm is. No I wouldn't trade straight up for Fowler using the #8 pick. I like Fowler but I don't love him. Hampus Lindholm for #8 overall, I would do all day. We just value that pick and player different, that's all. 

[Crusader1969]

That's fine, I'm not offended. I hate when people claim that an 18 year old has 'very real potential' to be better than a player that is currently the best defender on a cup contender, to the point that they wouldn't make that trade straight up. I think it's outrageous to turn down that theoretical trade. I would fire a GM for turning down that trade

 

so you would trade for him knowing that you would have him for 2 years only before he walks cause you can't afford to keep him?

[WildCard]

so you would trade for him knowing that you would have him for 2 years only before he walks cause you can't afford to keep him?

Why can't we afford Fowler? He's gonna get $11m?

[Crusader1969]

I guess the real question is what are you paying Reinhart and Eichel and Risto?

[Randall Flagg]

Lindholm's potential is sky high, for sure, I can do a statistical comparison later maybe, but the Ducks fans I talk to claim that Fowler had a tremendous season and was their best defenseman. Lindholm was good too, obviously, and is younger. I believe this team could win a cup with Risto-Fowler as #1 and #2 defensemen, which is why I do it.

 

so you would trade for him knowing that you would have him for 2 years only before he walks cause you can't afford to keep him?

Um, I absolutely do not know two years in advance that I will not be able to afford him. If we're set up so that we can't pay a defenseman of that level in 2 years, and haven't even made the playoffs once yet with this new core, we're in some deep dogshit.

Also, I'd add that I'd rather trade for Lindholm than Fowler in a vacuum, but I think that he's the one they choose to keep pretty easily, which is why my sights are set on Cam

[Crusader1969]

the level of the top defenceman on a stanley cup contender?

[TrueBlueGED]

I'm willing to trade #8 for Fowler, but for me, it's more of a last resort type of thing. I have a strong preference to keep that pick if possible.

[WildCard]

the level of the top defenceman on a stanley cup contender?

Yeah

I guess the real question is what are you paying Reinhart and Eichel and Risto?

the level of the top defenceman on a stanley cup contender?

Wait, what? Are these related? Are you saying Risto/top defenceman on Cup champions cost $11m+? 

[Randall Flagg]

the level of the top defenceman on a stanley cup contender?

Well in this hypothetical situation Risto winds up better, so in two years he's our Shattenkirk/Seabrook/Josi-level guy. And yeah, I'd give him a nice big contract, and I'd hope that I didn't screw up the cap so bad that he has to leave.

 

I'm willing to trade #8 for Fowler, but for me, it's more of a last resort type of thing. I have a strong preference to keep that pick if possible.

FWIW, I'd love one of the young defensemen in this draft, but I also make the move because I think going into next season with Fowler-Risto helps Risto reach his ceiling a lot better than another season of Risto-Gorges, who is a year older, or putting him with the defensive liability that is Yandle/Goligoski/etc. as Juolevi,Chychrun/Sergachev spends a couple years developing. We wouldn't know this until after the fact, of course, but I think a Fowler type trade helps make the team better both short and long term, because of its effect on Risto and even players like McCabe who get less responsibility because of the move.

 

And I really want a shot at the cup before Jack and Sam get new contracts.

[Crusader1969]

No but eventually you have to think that Eichel and Reinhart could be in that ball-park. What will you be paying Risto $7mill? 8million?

 

Last think I would want is to be going into contract years for Eichel and Reinhart and not have the ability to sign them? or be susceptible to someone coming in with a huge offer sheet.

 

Plus, you can't force Fowler to re-sign. He could walk away after 2 seasons. Right when Sergi, Juolevi or Chyrchrun are making huge contributions for the Ducks. 

 

Let me ask you this. if Fowler is truly a top Dman on the Ducks, why would they trade him?

Well in this hypothetical situation Risto winds up better, so in two years he's our Shattenkirk/Seabrook/Josi-level guy. And yeah, I'd give him a nice big contract, and I'd hope that I didn't screw up the cap so bad that he has to leave.

 

FWIW, I'd love one of the young defensemen in this draft, but I also make the move because I think going into next season with Fowler-Risto helps Risto reach his ceiling a lot better than another season of Risto-Gorges, who is a year older, or putting him with the defensive liability that is Yandle/Goligoski/etc. as Juolevi,Chychrun/Sergachev spends a couple years developing. We wouldn't know this until after the fact, of course, but I think a Fowler type trade helps make the team better both short and long term, because of its effect on Risto and even players like McCabe who get less responsibility because of the move.

 

And I really want a shot at the cup before Jack and Sam get new contracts.

 

 

Again you are making a HUGE assumption that he re-signs with the Sabres. There is a very good possibility he will text FA and thats that. Right when the Sabres are truly a cup contender he could leave.

 

I don't mind trading for him but giving up the 8th pick for a guy with 2 years left on his contract? Count me out. Especially when the 3 Dmen (possibly 4) are all thought as high end talents.

Well in this hypothetical situation Risto winds up better, so in two years he's our Shattenkirk/Seabrook/Josi-level guy. And yeah, I'd give him a nice big contract, and I'd hope that I didn't screw up the cap so bad that he has to leave.

 

 

 

Im hoping that Murray does a lot more than hope he doesn't screw up the salary cap.

[TrueBlueGED]

Well in this hypothetical situation Risto winds up better, so in two years he's our Shattenkirk/Seabrook/Josi-level guy. And yeah, I'd give him a nice big contract, and I'd hope that I didn't screw up the cap so bad that he has to leave.

 

FWIW, I'd love one of the young defensemen in this draft, but I also make the move because I think going into next season with Fowler-Risto helps Risto reach his ceiling a lot better than another season of Risto-Gorges, who is a year older, or putting him with the defensive liability that is Yandle/Goligoski/etc. as Juolevi,Chychrun/Sergachev spends a couple years developing. We wouldn't know this until after the fact, of course, but I think a Fowler type trade helps make the team better both short and long term, because of its effect on Risto and even players like McCabe who get less responsibility because of the move.

 

And I really want a shot at the cup before Jack and Sam get new contracts.

 

I think realistically, the only QB-types (to use Murray's phrasing) available are going to come with defensive warts--teams don't let guys with high end offense & defense walk, nor do they trade them. I think that's no small part of the hesitation to trade #8--the pick probably doesn't have the value to be the centerpiece of a deal for a Lindolm-type blueliner. Fowler is certainly better defensively than Yandle, but he's not exactly Shea Weber back there either. I'd probably ultimately pull the trigger on it, but I'd rather explore other options on the left side.

 

And I still don't think Fowler gets moved, although maybe that's just me trying to fend off potential disappointment.

[Trettioåtta]

Sadly Phoenix will take a defender as they are short on them. Which means we will not get to pick, we will just draft whichever is left. Like whoever ends up arriving late to Professor Oak and ending up with Bulbasaur

[LGR4GM]

Sadly Phoenix will take a defender as they are short on them. Which means we will not get to pick, we will just draft whichever is left. Like whoever ends up arriving late to Professor Oak and ending up with Bulbasaur

Hahaha. Bulbasaur makes a mean salad though.

[inkman]

I guess the real question is what are you paying Reinhart and Eichel and Risto?

10,9,6?

[3putt]

Anaheim could make the WCF, turning the pick they sent us into a two. They may want it back, plus a Bailey or Fasching. Throw in Pysyk and presto all good. I would like to keep the pick because I have a strange feeling someone will reach in front of us and a surprise falls in our lap.

[Crusader1969]

10,9,6?

 

If you pay them that (may be a bit high in 2018/19 for Eichel and Reinhart) you sure as heck can't be paying Fowler $7million or whatever he wants as he hits FA status unless the Salary Cap escalates quickly. 

 

Which isn't saying from a pure hockey sense Fowler for the 8th pick doesnt make sense, it just doesn't make sense from a financial stand-point to me.

[kas23]

I think people are forgetting the reasoning behind a draft. It's a sustainable source of incoming talent. If we traded all of our 1sts/2nds over a span of 3-4 years for proven vets, we may get a Cup (or not), but then be forced to dismantle and our prospect pool would be depleted, sort of as it is now). We'll get our Cup, then it'll be another million years before we get another.

 

We need the continuous wave of cheap talent the draft provides. Prospects in the draft are like trees. Free and sustainable. This is exactly why most of us don't remember the last time Detroit missed the playoffs. We'll need to make some unpopular moves in the future to keep Eichel, Sam, and Risto together. We'll need good players to be ready to step up to continue to be competitive.

[inkman]

I think people are forgetting the reasoning behind a draft. It's a sustainable source of incoming talent. If we traded all of our 1sts/2nds over a span of 3-4 years for proven vets, we may get a Cup (or not), but then be forced to dismantle and our prospect pool would be depleted, sort of as it is now). We'll get our Cup, then it'll be another million years before we get another.

 

We need the continuous wave of cheap talent the draft provides. Prospects in the draft are like trees. Free and sustainable. This is exactly why most of us don't remember the last time Detroit missed the playoffs. We'll need to make some unpopular moves in the future to keep Eichel, Sam, and Risto together. We'll need good players to be ready to step up to continue to be competitive.

I don't know how unpopular the moves would be if we kept that core together. GMTM seems as shrewd as any GM we've seen in this league. Moving players like Kane, Ennis, Bogo, Girgensons if they are unaffordable will only garner future talent to be plugged into the lineup with the core.

[Randall Flagg]

1.) No but eventually you have to think that Eichel and Reinhart could be in that ball-park. What will you be paying Risto $7mill? 8million?

 

2.) Last think I would want is to be going into contract years for Eichel and Reinhart and not have the ability to sign them? or be susceptible to someone coming in with a huge offer sheet.

 

3.) Plus, you can't force Fowler to re-sign. He could walk away after 2 seasons. Right when Sergi, Juolevi or Chyrchrun are making huge contributions for the Ducks. 

 

4.) Let me ask you this. if Fowler is truly a top Dman on the Ducks, why would they trade him?

 

 

5.) Again you are making a HUGE assumption that he re-signs with the Sabres. There is a very good possibility he will text FA and thats that. Right when the Sabres are truly a cup contender he could leave.

 

I don't mind trading for him but giving up the 8th pick for a guy with 2 years left on his contract? Count me out. Especially when the 3 Dmen (possibly 4) are all thought as high end talents.

 

Im hoping that Murray does a lot more than hope he doesn't screw up the salary cap.

1.) I'm hoping Risto gets locked up long term for around 6mil, but it depends on what he and his agent are shooting for, so I'm not sure.

 

2.) Has this ever happened to a team on the rise after making a trade/signing a player the level of Fowler? Are we that cap-strapped? People have done the math to show that we can add Stamkos at $11mil per (though we'd suffer building other parts of the roster), where I would give much less than that to the part of our roster that needs the most work. I'm not convinced at all that signing Fowler in two years makes us lose Eichel/Reinhart/Risto. I'm incredibly skeptical of that. Worst possible scenario I could see is losing Kane, and since I'd trade Kane for Fowler straight up, that doesn't bother me. 

 

3.) I'm legitimately interested in understanding your mindset here. Any hockey move any GM makes has the risk that the player can walk when their current contract ends. It could have happened with O'Reilly. I think it will end up happening with Kane. What's the cut-off where you stop worrying, as far as years-left-on-contract goes, for you, and how did you determine that? I'll also add that I think it takes a bit longer for defensemen to have a real impact. Risto has been great, in his third season, but still has a lot of work to do to be a top-pairing defenseman on a contender (I'm confident he'll get there). I don't think those guys are Ekblad level. Jones is just scratching the surface of his potential. The 2012 defensemen are in general just about to start really establishing themselves. I just want to speed that up a few years, because I think it's important to have a shot while Samson/Eichel are on their ELCs, and I don't think making a move to speed up the rebuild a bit, when it adds a quality player, will trash everything we're trying to do.

 

I don't think the 8th pick this year is as important to our rebuild as others do, I guess. I've seen rebuilding teams take their last high pick of the rebuild and have that pick not work out, and they were fine. (Tampa with Drouin, Chicago with Cam Barker/Jack Skille/Kyle Beach all picked in the top 12 within 6 years of their cup win, Kings with Forbort at 15 in 2010 and no first rounder in 2011 after assembling Doughty/Kopitar, etc)

 

4.) They have to trade someone because they are a budget team, and have 2 really good LHD that will get combined cap hits (along with RHD Vatanen soon) that won't let them balance their team under their self-imposed budget. Sort of like the ROR situation in Colorado. 

 

5.) I don't think the assumption that he'd resign with a Sabres team you claim will be contenders is as crazy as allowing the fear that he'll leave in two years stop you from making a hockey move. That sounds like Darcy-think to me.

 

This was a fun discussion, I just got shat on with schoolwork and probably won't be able to continue it though. I appreciate the prospect writeups you always make and link here, btw.