Jump to content
The Official Site of the Carolina Hurricanes
Sign in to follow this  
OBXer

2019 Draft

Recommended Posts

I would not be surprised to see Fleury moved. However, how much Fleury could bring back is what I wonder about. I went to the Checkers game last night and it appeared he played on the 3rd pair for Charlotte. It’s not like they announced it in the Coliseum, but that’s how it appeared to me. Not sure it is significant, but if that’s the case it’s not the way to showcase him for a trade. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, bluedevilcane said:

I would not be surprised to see Fleury moved. However, how much Fleury could bring back is what I wonder about. I went to the Checkers game last night and it appeared he played on the 3rd pair for Charlotte. It’s not like they announced it in the Coliseum, but that’s how it appeared to me. Not sure it is significant, but if that’s the case it’s not the way to showcase him for a trade. 

 

 

Winning the game has to take precedence over showcasing for a trade at this point.  Bean can school the kid offensively, Didier can school him defensively, and McKeown can school him in positioning.  He's lucky to be in the lineup to start with, if you ask me.  Call me crazy, but i'd have JWesley out there in his place if it were up to me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, realmdrakkar said:

 

 

Winning the game has to take precedence over showcasing for a trade at this point.  Bean can school the kid offensively, Didier can school him defensively, and McKeown can school him in positioning.  He's lucky to be in the lineup to start with, if you ask me.  Call me crazy, but i'd have JWesley out there in his place if it were up to me.

You are crazy .   Wesley was a reliability !  but everything else you said was true ! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, Canesfanforever said:

You are crazy .   Wesley was a reliability !  but everything else you said was true ! 

 

 

Fair enough.  I've only seen him play a couple games, but he did have a solid defensive game in those 2.  One thing's for sure, though - Fleury has to get where he excels or is even competent somewhere, whether defensively or offensively, and i haven't seen either.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, realmdrakkar said:

 

 

Fair enough.  I've only seen him play a couple games, but he did have a solid defensive game in those 2.  One thing's for sure, though - Fleury has to get where he excels or is even competent somewhere, whether defensively or offensively, and i haven't seen either.

I agree .  I was wondering if you could not get a 3rd round pick from detroit for him . 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, realmdrakkar said:

 

 

Winning the game has to take precedence over showcasing for a trade at this point.  Bean can school the kid offensively, Didier can school him defensively, and McKeown can school him in positioning.  He's lucky to be in the lineup to start with, if you ask me.  Call me crazy, but i'd have JWesley out there in his place if it were up to me.

Well, obviously, that being the case, for all of Ronnie’s drafting success, this was a blown pick at #7 overall. Wonder why one of the others doesn’t get called up when we need defensive help? CFF suggested we try to trade him for a 3rd round pick. If that’s an accurate assessment, getting. 3rd for a #7 overall pick is a kick in the cods. I know they say defensemen often take years to develop. Any chance he’s going to come around soon?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, gocanes0506 said:

Fleury should be kept on a 2 year bridge deal instead of shipping him off for a 3rd.

 

 

I keep forgetting the kid is only 22 - it feels like he's been here forever.  He was drafted when he was 17... sheesh.  Yeah, way premature to give up on him to the extent of trading him for a 3rd-rounder... time for some patience from some of us, me included.  He does have some coming on to do for sure though, and while a 3rd is selling way too low, you'd still have to give it some thought if you could get some real value for him.  Looking at some of the people we left on the table to draft him - Nylander, Ehlers, Larkin, Kapanen  (edit - and Pastrnak)  ... yow.  I still think either McKeown or Didier would have been better callups this time around.

Edited by realmdrakkar

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

12% of third round picks have any sort of meaningful NHL career, even pretty short ones. One study showed that only 15% of all second round picks become impact players in the NHL. 

 

I've made the point many times over the years, but our success in the second and even third round has been well above average lately. 

 

Second or Third round 2009-15: Aho, Ned, McGinn, Rask, Faulk, Doumalin, Foegele, Pesce, and Slavin in the 4th round.

Second or any later round 1999-2008 (Decade): Nothing. 

 

Yes, we hit on Eric Cole in the third round in 1998. But that was 20 years ago.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So, dumping Fleury for a third rounder makes no sense. Dumping anyone with a more than 12% chance of contributing in any way in the NHL makes no sense. This is why trading Fox for second or third rounders is not a good trade on it's face. Not even close. (We had no choice. Like with Skinner, I get it, but Fox is worth much more than two second rounders since he has FAR more than a 30% chance of being an impact player). 

 

So using that same logic, what % chance is there that Fleury can have an NHL career? Correlate that with whatever number of draft pick that would be, look on Tulsky's chart and get an idea of how much one could move up with Fleury and a high second rounder. Then factor in that Fleury should be on a team-friendly contract, and is ready to go right now. I'd have to think Fleury's chance of a decent NHL career is at least 50-50. That's bottom middle first round (believe it or not, a pretty decent number of first rounders from the bottom half of the draft never amount to anything in the NHL. Another reason TO move up if possible). 

 

If we assume that Fleury is worth at least the #20 first rounder, that is worth 23 points. Our second highest second rounder is worth about 11 points and our 27 pick is worth 15 points. 23 + 11 + 15 = 69 points, which is the value of the #2 overall pick. Now this is historical, and this year there is a 1a -1b situation, so no one is trading the #2 pick. But based on Tulsky's chart, which is derived from actual trades, Fleury + #27 + #36 should = #3.

 

As they say, a thing's value is what someone would actually pay for it, so this is an exercise in futility, since lately it takes much more than it did historically to move up, and GM's sitting with top 5 picks so rarely ever trade them, it probably won't happen. 

 

But I'd do it in a heartbeat if we could find a partner. This year all eyes are on the super-elite guys at 1 and 2. Maybe someone in 3 or 4 might take a deal like that. Maybe they see a guy they think will fall to 27 and like Fleury and need D. But probably not. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I’d be shocked if anyone with a top 10 pick would trade it for a likely third pairing defenseman and a couple of draft picks. I could see someone in the mid or low teens doing a trade for Fleury and our first, or something along those lines. I kind of agree with folks who say we should give Fleury a couple more years. The NHL logjam is going to break sometime, and I think Fleury is being judged a little harshly because our expectations were so much higher when we used that #7 pick on him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, bluedevilcane said:

I’d be shocked if anyone with a top 10 pick would trade it for a likely third pairing defenseman and a couple of draft picks. I could see someone in the mid or low teens doing a trade for Fleury and our first, or something along those lines. I kind of agree with folks who say we should give Fleury a couple more years. The NHL logjam is going to break sometime, and I think Fleury is being judged a little harshly because our expectations were so much higher when we used that #7 pick on him.

I'm not saying you're wrong, because lately it seems no one makes these kinds of trades. Mostly it's a second rounder to move up a few slots. But moving up 10 spots for a guy who has played in the NHL seems low. But even if it is, the second rounder (high second) should push us up to at least the top 8 based on Tuslky's historical chart. The thing is that while that might be the value, you'd have to find a GM willing to do it, and I agree I doubt we could. Then again we found a GM willing to take Rask and give us a good player for him......

 

But mostly I agree with your point that we need to let Fleury play this out some more. I have to think we'll be able to sign him pretty cheap, and that is key. If we start spending more, eventually we need a bottom pair that is good but also cheap, and if Fleury has little trade value, then why trade him?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, bluedevilcane said:

I’d be shocked if anyone with a top 10 pick would trade it for a likely third pairing defenseman and a couple of draft picks. I could see someone in the mid or low teens doing a trade for Fleury and our first, or something along those lines. I kind of agree with folks who say we should give Fleury a couple more years. The NHL logjam is going to break sometime, and I think Fleury is being judged a little harshly because our expectations were so much higher when we used that #7 pick on him.

bluedevilcane, while I don't totally disagree here, the one thing I'd point out is that Fleury is a 3rd PAIRING DEFENSEMAN in our system, behind some pretty good 1st and 2nd pairings. After all he was rated pretty highly in his draft class, is still relatively young and does appear to be making few strides? In a defense starved system, perhaps he'd hold more value, but the trick would be to focus in on whose system of the 30 other teams he might hold that value, and I don't pretend to know. Perhaps one with aging defense where he might bring in some fresh air?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So I'm listening to NHL on XM yesterday, and they're talking to one of the prospect experts they have on during the weekends. He does prospect analysis and hosts their show Hockey Prospect Radio. (I think their total draft coverage is starting today). Anyways, they just mentioned a couple of prospects and one got my attention.

 

We are picking at a point in the draft where players are very hit or miss. But ironically a place where very highly touted goalies sometimes go. 

 

This year's "can't miss" future #1 goalie, best in the draft is Spencer Knight. This is hardly in debate. In fact, he's so good, that  mock drafts have him going as high as #13. (NHL.com's three mock drafts ALL pick him going to Florida at #13. (But will he if they sign Bob?). Other mocks have him going #16 to Colorado, or at least #19 to Ottawa. TSN dropped him all the way to #22.

 

The point is that no one sees him dropping to #27, although, interestingly SBNation who does an actual simulated mock draft with it's sub sites that pick for the actual team they write about, still has him on the board at pic #20 (past Ottawa). 

 

But this would be a guy to, IMO trade up for. But we have Ned! But first, a new goalie takes a few years to round out, and second, ultimately you need two goalies, and third, Ned was not the prospect Knight is, and forth, they are different with Knight being bigger and more positional, and fifth you need a lot of goalie seeds planted to find that rare breed of star goalie. 

 

According to my trusty Tulsky what does it cost to move up card, using one of our high seconds should move us up to #15. This would most likely be a conditional move made IF the Panthers pass on Knight at #13. If however, we could move up to #12 or #13, we would have pretty much a lock on picking Knight. 

 

When I look at this team and try to envision us say 4 years down the line. The biggest wild card I see, will be goalie. Teams with stud goalies make the playoffs year after year and contend. This would be the highest rated prospect we've ever drafted, substantially higher than even Cam Ward. 

 

It is always way harder than this to make such a move. We'd probably have to throw in a prospect. But I would do it if we could end up with Spencer Knight in a draft where we are picking at the very bottom.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

rem, I vaguely recall seeing Spencer Knight's bio, and thought at the time that I would go all out to try to move for him. Talk about a coup, I would do a Happy Dance if Waddell et al could pull that off. Wonder which team we could tempt to get to their spot around the 13-15 area? Florida, Arizona and Montreal are there and I'm just not sure if they would need anything we could supply in the D arena I'd suppose, plus a high 2nd? Oh well, one can dream? 

Edited by KJUNKANE

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't really know Knight but that prospect guy has been right on a lot. He says he's a future #1. 

 

It is exponentially harder to actually make a move far up the draft board than Tulsky's chart suggests. Those might be the historical prices, but I think the value of entry level contracts has pushed the price higher. Then you still need to get a willing trade partner. But it would be a good move IMO if we could pull it off, even if we sweetened the pot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, remkin said:

So I'm listening to NHL on XM yesterday, and they're talking to one of the prospect experts they have on during the weekends. He does prospect analysis and hosts their show Hockey Prospect Radio. (I think their total draft coverage is starting today). Anyways, they just mentioned a couple of prospects and one got my attention.

 

We are picking at a point in the draft where players are very hit or miss. But ironically a place where very highly touted goalies sometimes go. 

 

This year's "can't miss" future #1 goalie, best in the draft is Spencer Knight. This is hardly in debate. In fact, he's so good, that  mock drafts have him going as high as #13. (NHL.com's three mock drafts ALL pick him going to Florida at #13. (But will he if they sign Bob?). Other mocks have him going #16 to Colorado, or at least #19 to Ottawa. TSN dropped him all the way to #22.

 

The point is that no one sees him dropping to #27, although, interestingly SBNation who does an actual simulated mock draft with it's sub sites that pick for the actual team they write about, still has him on the board at pic #20 (past Ottawa). 

 

But this would be a guy to, IMO trade up for. But we have Ned! But first, a new goalie takes a few years to round out, and second, ultimately you need two goalies, and third, Ned was not the prospect Knight is, and forth, they are different with Knight being bigger and more positional, and fifth you need a lot of goalie seeds planted to find that rare breed of star goalie. 

 

According to my trusty Tulsky what does it cost to move up card, using one of our high seconds should move us up to #15. This would most likely be a conditional move made IF the Panthers pass on Knight at #13. If however, we could move up to #12 or #13, we would have pretty much a lock on picking Knight. 

 

When I look at this team and try to envision us say 4 years down the line. The biggest wild card I see, will be goalie. Teams with stud goalies make the playoffs year after year and contend. This would be the highest rated prospect we've ever drafted, substantially higher than even Cam Ward. 

 

It is always way harder than this to make such a move. We'd probably have to throw in a prospect. But I would do it if we could end up with Spencer Knight in a draft where we are picking at the very bottom.

Im going to go out on a limb and say if Spender Knight Drops too deep  then  TAKE HIM !!!   But I'm Willing to bet the  Golden Knights pick him up .  It makes too much sense , not only for marketing but the fact  MAF   is not getting any younger and  they will need someone soon to step in  net for that team in the next few years . 

Edited by Canesfanforever

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The mock drafts and the guy I was listening to really highly doubted he'd drop to us. If he did, it would be amazing. But I'm thinking we'd need to trade up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Okay, draft is a little over a week away, and with the Stanley Cup about to be awarded tonight (Go Blues), I am curious. Has anyone heard yet about a Draft Party? I wanted to start making plans, but certainly would boycott a return to that beer garden fiasco they had last year. Got an event to attend at the OCME office which is almost right across the street from PNC Arena, so I hope they'll return to there. Also likely to be a long day with our draft position, UNLESS WE TRADE UP? Anyone please post if you know.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/8/2019 at 3:36 PM, remkin said:

The mock drafts and the guy I was listening to really highly doubted he'd drop to us. If he did, it would be amazing. But I'm thinking we'd need to trade up.

He did drop past us on the SB mock draft, where each local affiliate actually picks a guy for their team (Canes Country picked for us: Samuel Poulin). Though that is an outlier mock draft. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Trading Fleury with an unspecified draft pick should make 100% sense to all.  Fleury is waiver ineligible, so even if the Canes signed him to a bridge contract, as I have read in another post, they could not send him down to Charlotte without passing him through waivers, and losing him for nothing.  Thus, they would have to keep him in Raleigh for the entire season, even if he sat in the press box for 82 games.  With the 6 NHL Dmen that are returning, plus Bean and hopefully McKeown, that would make no sense at all.  They have the 28th pick in round 1, two early picks in round 2, and a late pick in round 2.  They can package Fleury with one or more of those picks, depending how far up the 1st round order they are trying to go.  I will be surprised if something like this does not happen.  Maybe one of the early 2nd round picks plus Fleury to Montreal for their 15th pick.  They may be looking at Lavoie, a RH shooting big winger.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm clearly with you on the notion of moving up bepolar. However, it's really hard to do. Having watched a lot of drafts closely over the past 10 years or so, those kinds of deals seem rare. The vast majority of GMs don't make any moves, and the ones that do get made tend to be small moves up or down a few spots. I think that there have been a couple of big moves, but not many. 

 

I really wonder too how much value Fleury would have in terms of moving up. Tulsky's point system I've referenced many times, is only about packaging picks, not roster players. 

 

Still, personally I like moving up. While there are always exceptions, there is a clear trend from #1 all the way down to the last guy taken in the total draft of decreasing returns. People's eyes tend to go to the exceptions, but as a rule the lower in the first round you go, the more misses are packed all around the names that proved exceptions. The higher you pick the better your chances. 

 

This is, of course, a more difficult argument with our recent success in round 2, but that's been an amazing run statistically. 

 

I stand by my strategy to try to get Spencer Knight. I think one of our seconds could be enough by itself, but who knows. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, beboplar said:

Trading Fleury with an unspecified draft pick should make 100% sense to all.  Fleury is waiver ineligible, so even if the Canes signed him to a bridge contract, as I have read in another post, they could not send him down to Charlotte without passing him through waivers, and losing him for nothing.  Thus, they would have to keep him in Raleigh for the entire season, even if he sat in the press box for 82 games.  With the 6 NHL Dmen that are returning, plus Bean and hopefully McKeown, that would make no sense at all.  They have the 28th pick in round 1, two early picks in round 2, and a late pick in round 2.  They can package Fleury with one or more of those picks, depending how far up the 1st round order they are trying to go.  I will be surprised if something like this does not happen.  Maybe one of the early 2nd round picks plus Fleury to Montreal for their 15th pick.  They may be looking at Lavoie, a RH shooting big winger.

Lavoie is another Gauthier. Big guy who has put up big numbers in the QMJ.  

 

If we trade Fleury for a better player, that would be great. Fleury doesn’t hold a lot value right now. Selling low isn’t good.  We won’t need to send him down. We can keep him and allow him to play while CDH is out. Hopefully he’ll play well either increasing his value or allowing us to move another defender for a better winger.  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/12/2019 at 12:17 PM, KJUNKANE said:

Okay, draft is a little over a week away, and with the Stanley Cup about to be awarded tonight (Go Blues), I am curious. Has anyone heard yet about a Draft Party? I wanted to start making plans, but certainly would boycott a return to that beer garden fiasco they had last year. Got an event to attend at the OCME office which is almost right across the street from PNC Arena, so I hope they'll return to there. Also likely to be a long day with our draft position, UNLESS WE TRADE UP? Anyone please post if you know.

According to this https://www.nhl.com/hurricanes/news/key-offseason-dates-for-hurricanes/c-307594846 Canes will not hold draft party this year

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...