2013 NHL ENTRY DRAFT POST 8: TOP 30

For the next 4 Fridays, I’ll be posting an evening edition of the 2013 top 30. As in previous years, there are a few things you need to know. This is a top 30 from a fan, using Desjardins’ NHLE as a guideline and also holding ‘wide range of skill’ players in high regard. There’s bias galore, and I enjoyed putting it together very much.

  1. L Jonathan Drouin: The best offensive player in the draft–ridiculous skills and an NHLE just shy of 50.
  2. C Nathan MacKinnon: Wide range of skills, outstanding prospect and a Sept 1 birthday.
  3. D Seth Jones: Incredible prospect, projects as a franchise defenseman.
  4. C Sasha Barkov: Size, across the board skills and he’s playing in a pro league.
  5. C Elias Lindholm: Outstanding talent, may end up playing the wing.
  6. L Valeri Nichushkin: King Kong on skates is an attractive player with a fascinating tool kit.
  7. C Sean Monahan: Oilers target, key tumbler for new MacT building up the middle. Wide range of skills.
  8. D Rasmus Ristolainen: I stubbornly believe he’s the second best D option.
  9. D Darnell Nurse: Nice range of skills, good size and has been trending since the end of the season.
  10. C Bo Horvat: Trending due to nice range of skills. Solid offense, tough and a load.
  11. C Curtis Lazar: Nice range of skills, strong player who provides enough offense to bat high in the order.
  12. C Hunter Shinkaruk: Somewhat one dimensional, but that dimension (shooter) is golden.
  13. L Artturi Lehkonen: Finland produces an outstanding skill W who could be underrated at this number.
  14. C Max Domi: Subpar Memorial Cup will hurt his final draft number.
  15. D Ryan Pulock: Nice skills, and a monster shot. Can play defense too, a nice 2-way defender.
  16. L Anthony Mantha: Goal scorers go high, always been thus.
  17. C Nicolas Petan: I know, he’s very small. Don’t care.
  18. C JT Compher: Wide range of skills, a very nice skill set.
  19. L Kerby Rychel: A trending player, he’s skilled and mean.
  20. D Mirco Mueller: A wonderful young defender. Size, speed, smarts.
  21. C Alex Wennberg: Lanky skill center with speed and quickness; playing in Swe2 league.
  22. L Adam Erne: Another exceptionally skilled winger, he’s also rugged and has average NHL size.
  23. D Josh Morrissey: good speed, excellent at moving the puck and solid defensively.
  24. C Fredrik Gauthier: 6.05, 210 C with skill, intimidating size and he’ll likely play on a skill line.
  25. D Nikita Zadorov: Huge defender with speed, don’t see the offense.
  26. R Valentin  Zykov: Solid offensive player with good size.
  27. D Madison Bowey: Puck moving defender with good wheels.
  28. C Laurent Dauphin: A very nice skill player.
  29. D Samuel Morin: 6.06, 220 and he’s mobile. The rest we’ll worry about later.
  30. L Morgan Klimchuk: Scoring winger has some nice things.

written by

The author didn‘t add any Information to his profile yet.
Related Posts

48 Responses to "2013 NHL ENTRY DRAFT POST 8: TOP 30"

  1. Rondo says:

    Seems like Scott Reynolds does not love anyone in the top 8

    Today Darnell Nurse

    http://www.coppernblue.com/2013/6/7/4405194/darnell-nurse-draft-comparables

  2. Lowetide says:

    I like Reynolds series. The Russian is a bit of a mystery, and Nurse imo is behind Ristolainen. If the Oilers go blue at 7, imo the Finn is the better man.

  3. Rondo says:

    Lowetide,

    The thing I like about Nurse is he is athletic and will only get stronger and better. I’m guessing but I think Scott Reynolds will say he is in a weak league Ristolainen .

    I like Guy Flaming review of Nurse. Probably because it mirrors my opinion.

  4. Lowetide says:

    Rondo: SM-Liiga may not be the league it was a decade ago, but a 17-year old defenseman in Finland’s highest pro league is still an impressive item.

  5. Rondo says:

    Rondo,

    Does Scott take into account that Nurse was a second pairing defenseman?

    TOI would be a very useful stat.

  6. russ99 says:

    Lowetide,

    Good article. With a lot of young prospers hitting AHL next year, it will be interesting to see what veteran group we end up with. Hoping the Oilers invest more into that than in years past.

    Since the #7 pick has been talked to death, and we all have our favorite pick/trade possibilities, how about our 2nd round pick?

    LT, any guesses on who may fall from the low end of the top 30 to our first second-round pick at #37? Somebody always does.

  7. MrEd says:

    Interesting in that article you posted that Eager is mentioned as an OIler. From what I’ve heard he played well on the farm, (particularly during the playoffs) and was good in the room. Also that he dropped the mitts a couple of times leads me to believe that he he’s managing the concussion demons. Seems like we have room for a player of his ilk on the roster.

  8. Lowetide says:

    Russ99: My guess is that they draft a goalie in the second round and also draft a C or D (depending on who they take at #7).

    Guesses?

    D
    Theodore
    Santini

    G
    Jarry
    Comrie

    F
    McCarron
    Arvidsen
    Bjorkstrand
    Chase

    And of course any players who slip out of the top 30 I’ve listed.

  9. Lowetide says:

    MrEd:
    Interesting in that article you posted that Eager is mentioned as an OIler. From what I’ve heard he played well on the farm, (particularly during the playoffs) and was good in the room.Also that he dropped the mitts a couple of times leads me to believe that he he’s managing the concussion demons.Seems like we have room for a player of his ilk on the roster.

    I don’t know. The problem Eager has now is the problem players who are on losing teams have had forever: the new GM has zero loyalty to him, the new GM has his own ideas and the new GM has a “culture” he wants to create.

    I do think Eager got addled by that crazy Russian Tulupov (IN THE JOEY MOSS!!!!!!!) and it had an enormous impact on his Oiler career (the concussion train).

  10. Marquee says:

    Man, I would love if Ryan Hartman fell to the 2nd round, he’s the perfect 2nd/3rd line tweener in my opinion. Can play in all situations, was one of the U.S.’s top penalty killers at the WJ’s, and and can contribute some offence as well. He reminds me of Ryan Callahan. Doubtful he falls though.

  11. bill needle says:

    Oilers management should do a cost-benefit analysis with this pick. If the guy they pick is no better than Paajarvi, they should trade the pick. Chances are the return will be better than Paajarvi.

  12. Lowetide says:

    bill needle:
    Oilers management should do a cost-benefit analysis with this pick. If the guy they pick is no better than Paajarvi, they should trade the pick. Chances are the return will be better than Paajarvi.

    Great point. I think this pick will be better, because it’s a deep draft and a slightly better selection. Point taken, though.

  13. striatic says:

    “C Sean Monahan: Oilers target, key tumbler for new MacT building up the middle. Wide range of skills.”

    and here is the problem.

    it is entirely conceivable that the Flames take Monahan instead of Nichushkin.

    what do the Oilers do then?

    pick D?

    go for one of the “3rd Tier” Cs?

  14. striatic says:

    or, of course, draft Nichushkin?

    i am not a believer in Nichushkin, and i don’t think picking the D available will help soon enough, so if Monahan and Lindholm are gone i think you trade the pick to a team more interested in Nichushkin.

  15. asiaoil says:

    striatic:
    “C Sean Monahan: Oilers target, key tumbler for new MacT building up the middle. Wide range of skills.”

    and here is the problem.

    it is entirely conceivable that the Flames take Monahan instead of Nichushkin.

    what do the Oilers do then?

    pick D?

    go for one of the “3rd Tier” Cs?

    Trade the Russian to Philly for Couturier……….center problem fixed and he’s ready to contribute now.

  16. RexLibris says:

    asiaoil: Trade the Russian to Philly for Couturier……….center problem fixed and he’s ready to contribute now.

    You read my mind and beat me to the post by a split second.

    We can only hope.

  17. RexLibris says:

    asiaoil: Trade the Russian to Philly for Couturier……….center problem fixed and he’s ready to contribute now.

    Or were you talking about Belov?

    ;-)

  18. Gerta Rauss says:

    I don’t know how Malkin missed that one late-I guess Chara with the 9 foot arms got in the way. Jeebus.

  19. Gerta Rauss says:

    RexLibris: Or were you talking about Belov?

    He was talking about Horcov…:)

  20. speeds says:

    LT, what’s your take on Cammarata? Would you roll the dice on him at 56 (depending who else is avail, of course)?

  21. Lowetide says:

    speeds:
    LT, what’s your take on Cammarata?Would you roll the dice on him at 56 (depending who else is avail, of course)?

    Small and average footspeed according to Pronman. That’s death. His numbers look good, but I’d spend the pick elsewhere.

  22. cabbiesmacker says:

    I love this. Iginla with no Stanley. Not even a sniff. Nice reward for all your feigned injuries anytime an International tournament other than the Olympics rolled around ya jackass.

    Looks good on you Mr Centre of attention seeker. Nice enough player but yer a schmuck all the same and can’t hold a candle to Ryan Smyth when it comes to being a REAL Canadian hockey player.

    And to get thumped unceremoniously by the team you COULD have opted for? Well, Jarome, you prima donna perennial loser? That just makes it all the sweeter.

    Now back you go to Calgary where you can be a big wheel on a shit team all over again.

    Keep bringin it Jarome. Here’s to you never, ever getting close.

  23. striatic says:

    asiaoil: Trade the Russian to Philly for Couturier……….center problem fixed and he’s ready to contribute now.

    that sounds terrific if Philly is willing.

  24. speeds says:

    I’d seen that video with MacT talking about Drouin before, kind of forgot about it, but interesting to hear him talk about Drouin. Interesting to hear MacT talk about Drouin and MacKinnon and their synergy.

    On Oilers Now today, Bob was musing about trading up, asking Button what it would take to move up into the #2 OV slot. Bob proposed Gagner, Marincin, 7OV, and 2014 1st and Button shot that down saying it’s not enough – Button suggested EDM would need to move one of their top 5 (Hall, RNH, Yakupov, Eberle, Schultz) to move up to 2OV.

    I’m not saying the other teams would make these moves, but personally I would be willing to move Schultz or Eberle to get up to the #2 OV pick. And if you could move some combination of Schultz, Eberle, the 7OV, and other picks/prospects to fill in (if necessary) I’d consider making two trades to land MacKinnon and Drouin (assuming COL takes Jones).

  25. commonfan14 says:

    speeds: Button suggested EDM would need to move one of their top 5 (Hall, RNH, Yakupov, Eberle, Schultz) to move up to 2OV

    I love it. Let’s trade one of our guys who was first overall and is covering the bet at the NHL level for #2 overall. And I’m not even saying Button is wrong.

    The draft makes people nuts.

    If the #7 can be sold in that kind of market, let’s move it yesterday.

  26. Bar_Qu says:

    Hey! Klimchuk made top thirty! Cool.

  27. Wolfie says:

    The Oilers have a little bit of a conundrum with regards to their pick. They are in need of immediate help. Not help in two or three years. Hall, RNH and Yakupov had excellent rookie campaigns but none of them could or should have played a feature role right out of the gate.

    So what do the Oilers do? All this talk about dealing some of the young guys who are just establishing themselves in the league for a chance to draft Drouin and Mackinnon…. really?!? The Oilers don’t need to be perpetually rebuilding and always going after the next big thing.

    I would be happy with either Monahan or Nichuskin. I’m not sure I would draft a defenceman that high. Even though said defenceman, (Nurse, Ristolainen or Zadorov) could be that top pairing guy the Oilers desperately need.

    The fact is they need that top pairing d-man now. Apparently they also need centers that can contribute immediately as well. I’m not sure the Oilers can afford to wait for a Monahan or Lindholm to become what they need them to be.

    So the question once again is what should the Oilers do? If Nichuskin falls to 7 I think that would be the best case scenario for the Oilers. I think they would be able to either draft him and shelter him enough that he doesn’t get eaten alive or as mentioned above they could parlay him into some immediate help as in a trade for Couturier (if available).

    If the Oilers do manage to trade up and grab Barkov, so much the better. But don’t sell the farm to do it. Trading back and picking up more draft picks does not appeal to me at all. If the guy you want at 7 isn’t there then trade the pick for immediate help.

  28. MrSmitty says:

    I am all for gunning for the #2 pick, but certainly not at the price button suggests. If it costs us what Bob said I might be ok with that. But even that is pretty steep.

  29. Wolfie says:

    Also, the fact the Penguins flamed out makes me think Malkin might be on his way elsewhere. I’m sure the Oilers could put together a package to get Malkin. Whether or not the price would be too dear is the big question but the only 3 guys I wouldn’t include in a deal would be Hall, RNH and J. Schultz.

    Would something along the lines of Eberle, the 7th overall, Marincin and next year’s 1st get the conversation started?

    I’m thinking along the lines of what the Oilers got for Pronger. It’s been quite awhile since a superstar forward has been traded. The packages for Thornton, Kovalchuk, Heatley were all somewhat underwhelming. I guess it depends on how/if Pittsburgh wants to restructure their club.

  30. oilswell says:

    Wolfie: The Oilers have a little bit of a conundrum with regards to their pick. They are in need of immediate help. Not help in two or three years. Hall, RNH and Yakupov had excellent rookie campaigns but none of them could or should have played a feature role right out of the gate.

    I don’t see it as much of a conundrum. If the pick was in the 22nd range rather than 7th a lot more commentators would be talking about trading it away and feeling good about it. The fact that it’s 7th seems to make many starry-eyed and lusting for a top 3. MacT could easily and justifiably be thinking “the fact that we really sucked last season will improve the type of player I can get in a trade”. “Impatient”, to me, means you’re starting to trade in the future for the present. I think this is probably a good idea. You create heightened value in 2014 and 2015 by doing two things across time: (1) trading for future value in 2009-2013 and letting that mature, and also (2) translating future value to create present value. You pile the value together across past and future and compress them into a few short, glorious seasons that you revel in for years because nothing is for certain while hoping you can later keep going because suddenly you’re a destination for players. The youth of the team are built leading up the contention window and the older players built by time traveling the future value. But you have to play the cards when you have them. If you’re committing to the pain of one, don’t stop half way, commit to the other too.

    So trade it already. Now is the time to start. The Oilers already are going to have a full farm club on relatively slow perk (see LT’s post about decisions), and the roster top to bottom is young player heavy. They have the “kings” and “jacks” in place, the 7th is not going to displace them: any D will kick out one of the other kids on the farm, reducing that asset value, and none of the F on the board then should displace anyone in the top 6 unless they downgrade a C, plus you can only keep so many top players on a roster for so long before you start the exodus. The Oilers can either trade down to where they’d be picking if they were a team on the playoff cusp last season and pick up a useful piece (reward for sucking, just enjoy it), or they can trade it outright for an upgrade in the vets and critical role players. I’d prefer the latter.

    But get on it. This year or the next at the latest. 7th overall plus Hemsky or Gagner should get you something very useful. Not as impactful as Pronger + Roloson but useful. Add next years’ pick and you might be able to change the team meaningfully. Probably better than offer sheeting worth 2 firsts and a 2nd. The 7th is likely to be over-valued now that there’s movement up there and Nichushkin’s coming over.

    The only reason I see for keeping it (apart from trade options — you can’t control other GMs) is that you think the player available solves a key organizational need next year or the year after at the latest. A robust C above Gagner in the order, or top end D that comes in right away.

    But at 7?

    Bold move time. Commit to the 2nd half of the rebuild.

  31. speeds says:

    oilswell,

    I think it’s reasonable to consider trading the 7th in a package for the right player. The problem is I’m not sure a player worth the 7th will be available. I have no doubt you could trade for a decent player with that pick, I’m just not sure you can trade for one that has the value of the pick itself. Myself, I would tend to keep the 7th and look at offer sheets this summer if interested in moving picks for immediate help – I think that gives you the best of both worlds (although I might be looking to lock up Schultz and RNH beforehand, depending on the cost of extensions). Although I suppose there’s nothing that says you couldn’t do both.

  32. OilLeak says:

    If Lindholm is available with the 7th pick you have to take him, you can’t pass on that kind of talent and offense unless the return is an established impact player. Lindholm would be BPA and also fill an organizational need (C/LW are not deep positions for the Oilers). I guess what I’m really saying is that I really like Lindholm and the Oilers would be stupid not to draft him. :)

  33. oilswell says:

    speeds: I have no doubt you could trade for a decent player with that pick, I’m just not sure you can trade for one that has the value of the pick itself

    Sage comment and I do not disagree, this question cuts swiftly to the core. The proposal I’ve placed before us is to lose total value on the future to make the past worthwhile. Possibly a stupid proposal, but something I think is well worth considering.

    The issue is cost of investing in draft picks like the Oilers have done recently, and the consequent value of seasons versus careers. I think the econ geeks talk of “opportunity cost” but to me the fundamental driver is finite value/year in draft picks (monopoly money doled out by the NHL every year) and the delay in the playing value of the picks. The proposal is that you don’t win (starting from nothing) by constant accumulation of value from the draft, but by collecting the value of many drafts into fewer years.

    The Oilers have paid heavy, heavy cost to get players they were not successful in acquiring in other ways. Seasons lost wandering in the woods. Its an enormous toll that should never be forgotten. James’ disciples tend to cling, I find, to the notion that you always maximize value in your deals amortized over a long time. I wonder if this is sometimes a simplification: a “greedy algorithm” (look it up) that is blind to the global optimum: realizing that once you’ve paid in full for the opportunity you need to pay extra in terms of compressed value. This is not a naive sunk-cost argument, it is rather a multiplier-effect argument, and a recognition that you need to pile together the fixed rate of value injected into your organization by the yearly draft.

    Over the time frame of a career the Oilers may derive good value from the player they could pick 7th in summer 2013. But the peak value is probably in 2016-2019 and then there’s second contracts and buying UFA years, etc. Quibble about the dates but young players are questionable on ice and D doubly so. In the meantime, Hall becomes older, Nugent-Hopkins’ ELC is wasted, and Yakupov is starting to become a real positive and licking his chops. How much were paid for those players to have them wait until a supporting cast comes along through draft? How much value/cap hit is drained as their distance from ELC increases?

    Brass tacks, MacT is faced with the problem of improving his roster before the core starts the bleeding process. I can’t imagine a greater burden keeping him awake at night. Waiting for the players on the farm or the player selected this year to start contributing doesn’t change the date and the pain. Would one lose total career value on trading a pick for a player that pushes the river right now? Sure, arguably, but you need that player now. That’s not a flippant statement. I’m pretty sure that Weight’s career with Edmonton has more total value than Tikkanen’s career with NYR. But Weight was not as useful as Tikkanen in 1993 and he never once won a cup. Its not a question of 80 cents on the dollar for 7th over a career, but 150 cents on the dollar for 2013-2015 (say) when you factor in the value of that player to the squad at that time.

    The Oilers already have paid in the past for value in the 2013-2014 frame. Dearly. The Oilers were willing to lose games to get value in the future, and Hall and the 1sts are costly spoils. The question to ponder is: are the Oilers wise to also bite the bullet the other direction? Pay great players in 2017-2027 for very good players in 2014-2017 so that the pain in 2007-2013 was worthwhile? Moneypuck be damned I think its a worthwhile question.

    10-12 years ago I remember LT talking about “clusters” as forming the heart of a champion but it always seemed like a partial theory. Sure, if you drafted like the ’79-’82 Oilers maybe good drafting seems like the natural way to build a champion. But the “clusters” through draft are only one way of juxtaposing talent within the arc of a team’s timeline. A #1 overall in year X is complemented by a good 3rd rounder in year X-4 as a result of selling a real player at the deadline in year X-5. Likewise a solid vet in year X is paid for by a quality winger in year X+4 that you sold at the draft in year X-1. That’s another cluster right there.

    When does MacT’s cluster begin? If it’s not 2014 paid for by the future, then when and how?

  34. art vandelay says:


    I love this. Iginla with no Stanley. Not even a sniff. Nice reward for all your feigned injuries anytime an International tournament other than the Olympics rolled around ya jackass.

    Looks good on you Mr Centre of attention seeker. Nice enough player but yer a schmuck all the same and can’t hold a candle to Ryan Smyth when it comes to being a REAL Canadian hockey player.

    Now back you go to Calgary where you can be a big wheel on a shit team all over again.

    Keep bringin it Jarome. Here’s to you never, ever getting close.

    Remind me of the time Ryan Smyth carried the Stanley Cup around the rink.

    You’re comparing a guy w/ 500+ goals scored off his stick to a guy with 150 fewer goals, most of which were bounced in off his own ass like Bub Slug’s famous goal.

    No wonder people regard Oilers fans as marginally functional.

  35. art vandelay says:

    Also, the fact the Penguins flamed out makes me think Malkin might be on his way elsewhere. I’m sure the Oilers could put together a package to get Malkin. Whether or not the price would be too dear is the big question but the only 3 guys I wouldn’t include in a deal would be Hall, RNH and J. Schultz.

    Would something along the lines of Eberle, the 7th overall, Marincin and next year’s 1st get the conversation started?

    Jeebus, seriously. No wonder I’m stuck paying for an arena. Oilers fans wouldn’t even pass for mentally defective circus monkeys.

  36. hunter1909 says:

    art vandelay,

    I’ve personally bumped into Malkin twice; the first time he laughed at my suggestion he might want to play for the oilers, the second time he said a few things more.

    Forget about Malkin. Maybe “Punch” MacTavish replaces the bottom six, adds a credible goalie, and doesn’t fuck up the draft again, like Lowe etc did in 2007, and 2003.

  37. hunter1909 says:

    Bandwagon Bruins fan signing in: Love their five on play power play. Bruins play good hockey.

    BEST THING ABOUT PLAYOFFS SO FAR: ESPN’s Kathryn Tappen(penultimate nordic hottie) virtually shouting at Kevin Weekes, to stop him from grabbing at her during their spot on ESPN’s between periods entertainment.

    The LAKings play the WORST hockey I’ve seen – football tactics on ice; but countered by Los Angeles King’s coach Sutter’s awkward during the game comments.

  38. edwards_daddy says:

    ‘Button suggested EDM would need to move one of their top 5 (Hall, RNH, Yakupov, Eberle, Schultz) to move up to 2OV’

    If this is the price for a move from 7 to 2OV, then I’m sure MacT could cut a better deal for a team moving up to 7OV from, say, the middle of the round. For example, we swap picks with Toronto for Bozak and Fraser – then take Mueller with the pick.
    We end up with a young, tough D-man, more depth at centre and a quality D prospect. The Maple Leafs end up with the huge Russian.
    Just an example – but I do think trading down has real possibilities to fill holes in this roster – which at the moment should be priority 1.

  39. speeds says:

    oilswell,

    Excellent post.

    I might quibble with the timelines, but I think quibbling here can make a pretty big impact.
    I don’t know how quickly the Oilers can realistically count on being a “great”‘ team. It’s possible, probable even, that anyone you draft at 7 doesn’t become a significant, positive contributor until the 15/16 season. But if you don’t think the team can be a significant factor in the Cup race until at least 14/15, is it sensible to move the 7th for a player signed for 3 years? When compared to a cost controlled player who (while unlikely) could be more valuable than the player acquired within 2 years, especially when factoring in the probable saved cap space? Not to mention that you’d still have that player in 5 years (and he’ll be rounding into his peak) when players like Yakupov, Hall, RNH, Eberle, and Schultz are still all in a 25-28 year old cluster.

    If the draft were the only way to acquire talent I might look at things the same way, but there are other ways to acquire talent and other pieces than the 7th that could be converted into current value. I understand that things have to start moving forward sometime, yet I also believe it’s important not to sacrifice the long term future for the current if the current potential to compete is illusory, or overstated. I just think that even if you’re looking to improve right now, it’s important to keep in mind that the true competitive window might not start for this team until 2015. If that’s the case, it doesn’t make a ton of sense, to me, to give up an asset that can contribute in that window for a player that may be UFA and gone by 2016.

    And it’s not that I’m necessarily against using picks and prospects to improve, I’m advocating for the team to use 2014 picks to improve via trade/offer sheet – it’s just this specific pick in this draft that gives me pause. I just think there are other avenues to upgrade outside that particular asset. Teams have been able to acquire useable pieces making money for 2nd round picks the past few seasons. By all means, make a couple moves like that. Or use the 7th and other assets to move up in the draft, and land a player likely to be both better and more useful earlier. In my mind, the 7th is too likely to be a core piece in the competitive window from 2015-2020 to be moved, barring a great deal.

    To put it another way, competing now would be great, I just don’t think the window of a player you get for moving the 7th will fit properly. I don’t think PHI would move Couturier for the 7th, but I think it’s easier to understand trading the 7th for a player like Couturier (under team control for 5 years) than it would be to trade it for a Yandle (more expensive and only under control for 3 years). You only have 2 Couturier for 2 extra years, but those 2 extra years fall exactly where you want them.

  40. Ducey says:

    OilLeak:
    If Lindholm is available with the 7th pick you have to take him, you can’t pass on that kind of talent and offense unless the return is an established impact player.Lindholm would be BPA and also fill an organizational need (C/LW are not deep positions for the Oilers).I guess what I’m really saying is that I really like Lindholm and the Oilers would be stupid not to draft him.

    Is Lindholm likely to be better than Gagner?

  41. OilLeak says:

    Ducey,

    More offense? Probably not, but already has a strong reputation of being a good 2 way player.

  42. thebiggestmanintheworld says:

    Love the draft stuff.

    The trade scenarios are comedy gold, though.

    From now till the draft, anytime I need a chuckle, just come on any Oiler blog and BAM! 3-1 package for Malkin, a golden child and the 7th for 2ov, Hemsky for Umberger, etc, etc….

    Good stuff guys, good stuff…..

  43. Oilanderp says:

    I’m secretly hoping the big russian fwd falls to 7 so that we can finally end this awful ‘Looking for Lucic’ saga wherein we leave talent on the board every year since the Big Bang.

  44. Rondo says:

    LT,

    Re: Nurse

    http://ohlprospects.blogspot.ca/2013/05/my-final-top-50-ohl-players-for-2013_27.html

    Had this to say about Scott Reynolds opinion of Nurse.

    “The article seems to insinuate that Nurse is primarily a stay at home defenseman, which he is not. Offensively, he’s very solid and there’s massive room for growth in that department. He played on the second powerplay unit because the Hounds had two of the best (including the CHL d-man of the year) running the top unit, which got 75% of the time. When he’s on the first unit next year, his stat line will jump.

    I’m also not sure I see Nurse ever being as dominantly physical as Hatcher was in his prime. In his prime, Hatcher might have been one of the top crease movers of the era. Nurse can play a physical game, but I don’t ever see it developing to that level.

    Then there’s the comparison (or downgrade) to Luke Schenn. Again, something that is way off base to me.

    Nikita Zadorov would be a much better comparison to Hatcher.

    I’m not one for player comparisons, so I won’t go that route, but Derian Hatcher he is not.”

    Many opinions when it comes to the draft.

  45. cabbiesmacker says:

    art vandelay:

    I love this. Iginla with no Stanley. Not even a sniff. Nice reward for all your feigned injuries anytime an International tournament other than the Olympics rolled around ya jackass.


    Looks good on you Mr Centre of attention seeker. Nice enough player but yer a schmuck all the same and can’t hold a candle to Ryan Smyth when it comes to being a REAL Canadian hockey player.

    Now back you go to Calgary where you can be a big wheel on a shit team all over again.

    Keep bringin it Jarome. Here’s to you never, ever getting close.

    Remind me of the time Ryan Smyth carried the Stanley Cup around the rink.

    You’re comparing a guy w/ 500+ goals scored off his stick to a guy with 150 fewer goals, most of which were bounced in off his own ass like Bub Slug’s famous goal.

    No wonder people regard Oilers fans as marginally functional.

    Reading comprehension isn’t an attribute on your resume right Art?

    My point was all regarding Jarome “failing to launch” internationally unless he felt it would put him in a better light.

    But no matter. The guys a schlub and you really should stop pretending to be anything other than a Flames fan. That my friend was obvious from post one.

  46. dessert1111 says:

    striatic:
    or, of course, draft Nichushkin?

    i am not a believer in Nichushkin, and i don’t think picking the D available will help soon enough, so if Monahan and Lindholm are gone i think you trade the pick to a team more interested in Nichushkin.

    You might’ve impacted my growing skepticism of Nichuskin…I think he’s more risky than a guy like Nurse and might prefer the Oilers take a D if the other six best guys are gone. Someone usually goes at least slightly off the board by pick 7 though, no?

Leave a Reply

Want to join the discussion?
Feel free to contribute!

Leave a Reply

© Copyright - Lowetide.ca