The Fan Blog : Ek on Flyers: Crowdsourcing: Who would you take at #2, #4, or #6

I'd stand pat at 6 and take whoever falls. From what I've read not even misa is a sure thing 1c.

2. Misa
4. Hagens
6. Desnoyers or Frondell
This is assuming Schaefer goes #1 Martone at #3 and whoever goes #5 Frondell or Desnoyers you pick the other. I'm not opposed to Jake O'Brien at 6 but if Misa ,Hagens, Desnoyers and Frondell all go before 6 you take Martone.

At #2 Misa
At #4 Hagens
At # 6 Mrtka

Cant recall who it was but there was an interview with Flahr or Briere and one of them stated that they wouldnt necessarily take a C with the #6. They stated they would take the BPA which to me means they prob rank Martone or Mrtka ahead of some of the Cs

If they do select one of those 2 perhaps they try and move up with the COL pick and take McQueen?

The Fan Blog : Ek on Flyers: Crowdsourcing: Who would you take at #2, #4, or #6
- the_fan_blog

If you believe the scouts are right and you have Misa as a potential #1, go for it. Otherwise, why did you acquire all that draft capital? To accumulate more middle six players? Or to hold your breath that one of the later picks turns an unbelievable corner? Chances are that ain't hapnin'.

You're dealing with house money. Take a swing.

If they do stand pat, take the BPA regardless of position. Winger, D, whomever. Don't reach up again like last year. That was disappointing. It you believe O'Brien, McQueen, Martin, Aitcheson, etc., will fit best, move down and pick up an extra piece or two for the effort.

hagens seemed to like philly

It'll end up being 1 of Desnoyers, Frondell, or Obrien. I actually see McQueen dropping.

you gotta wonder why teams like San Jose or Utah are shopping their top picks this year. I'd still be happy to get the #2 or #4 - but why aren't they?

you gotta wonder why teams like San Jose or Utah are shopping their top picks this year. I'd still be happy to get the #2 or #4 - but why aren't they?
- black_francis

Because theyve already got a ton of young talent. The pick can be sold off ans still grab a good player few picks back. Theres a clear frop off after the first two picks. Ilses likely yaking Schaefer. SJ doesn't need Misa which is why they can afford to move down and get assets to help them take the next step

Looks like its all but confirmed we are getting Maxim Shabanov. Flyers are the fav right now

you gotta wonder why teams like San Jose or Utah are shopping their top picks this year. I'd still be happy to get the #2 or #4 - but why aren't they?
- black_francis

If either think guys like O’brien, Hagens or Desnoyers are as good or better….maybe even a McQueen? Then why not move back….although I don’t see it happening.

Looks like its all but confirmed we are getting Maxim Shabanov. Flyers are the fav right now
- xShoot4WarAmpsx

Adding skill is good…. But my god this forward core is tiny.

Jake O'Brien is the correct answer.

Because theyve already got a ton of young talent. The pick can be sold off ans still grab a good player few picks back. Theres a clear frop off after the first two picks. Ilses likely yaking Schaefer. SJ doesn't need Misa which is why they can afford to move down and get assets to help them take the next step
- xShoot4WarAmpsx

i get that but why not stock the cupboard with potential elite talent and then sell them off later? with San Jose's case they aren't going to be picking #2 forever with some of the guys they already have. And Utah is starving for some elite talent to join Keller and Crouse. Why not just make the picks? I get they can afford to trade them but seeing as how we are always saying "we need top 5 picks for elite talent" it seems strange those teams are willing to forgo that. It would have to be for a guy like Matthews. That's the only thing that makes sense.

Adding skill is good…. But my god this forward core is tiny.
- landros 2

i agree if they can guarantee their guy a few picks back then that makes perfect sense.

you gotta wonder why teams like San Jose or Utah are shopping their top picks this year. I'd still be happy to get the #2 or #4 - but why aren't they?
- black_francis

Don’t need to wonder at all. Every year teams are “shopping” their top 5 picks. How many times does to happen? Nothing to see here.

You wouldn’t be doing your job if you didn’t “shop” it.

Don’t need to wonder at all. Every year teams are “shopping” their top 5 picks. How many times does to happen? Nothing to see here.

You wouldn’t be doing your job if you didn’t “shop” it.
- Striiker

well i'd wonder if we want to spend assets to move up to those spots if the players available aren't good enough for those teams who are also in need of elite talent.

well i'd wonder if we want to spend assets to move up to those spots if the players available aren't good enough for those teams who are also in need of elite talent.
- black_francis

Who said those players are not good enough for those said teams?

The GM is doing his job feeling out what value is out there. It’s simple GM’ing.

i get that but why not stock the cupboard with potential elite talent and then sell them off later? with San Jose's case they aren't going to be picking #2 forever with some of the guys they already have. And Utah is starving for some elite talent to join Keller and Crouse. Why not just make the picks? I get they can afford to trade them but seeing as how we are always saying "we need top 5 picks for elite talent" it seems strange those teams are willing to forgo that. It would have to be for a guy like Matthews. That's the only thing that makes sense.
- black_francis

SJ has Celebrini, Smith and Eklund. Grier is desperate for a preferably young roster player with a solid track record.