[Poll] Who do you think the Sens will draft?

You wait until 7 to see who is gone. After that... you make your decision. Im willing to bet the best forward from this draft comes from a later round pick.

N4L wrote:You wait until 7 to see who is gone. After that... you make your decision. Im willing to bet the best forward from this draft comes from a later round pick.

So you'd keep Foligno (perhaps only to make another move elsewhere), and remain at 16 or move back to the low 20s, and pick one of McFarland or Bennett, yes?

Out of curiosity, is there anyone who might be available at 8th who you have to move up for if the chance presents itself?

rooneypoo wrote:

N4L wrote:You wait until 7 to see who is gone. After that... you make your decision. Im willing to bet the best forward from this draft comes from a later round pick.

So you'd keep Foligno (perhaps only to make another move elsewhere), and remain at 16 or move back to the low 20s, and pick one of McFarland or Bennett, yes?

Out of curiosity, is there anyone who might be available at 8th who you have to move up for if the chance presents itself?

Well, put it this way, is there any guarantee or is it even worth the risk to move Foligno for a guy that might turn out to be just as good as him with maybe a little higher ceiling?

I think the guys with the serious upside but are a little riskier are in the middle to late part of the 1st round. A guy like MacFarland has everything Johansson has, just way more immature, so why do it? I think there is a reason why GM's are all trying to move down right now, this would be it.

rooneypoo wrote:Pop quiz:

Dreger is saying ATL's pick (the 8th) may be in play.

If you're ATL, do you trade that pick for anything like, say, the 16th overall + Foligno?

If you're OTT, does it make sense to give up Foligno to move up 8 spots? If so, who do you take at 8th? Nino, Connolly, Skinner?

Thoughts, please.

I would and then take Johansen. His upside is higher than Nino's IMO and he'll play centre, which I don't think any of Skinner, Nino or Connolly will do in the NHL. Connolly's the best forward in that list but I read from some "insider" somewhere that the Columbus GM commented on Connolly's hips by saying he had the body of a 40-year-old man.

Skinner's got good hands and a great shot, and has great character/determination, but I think people are getting carried away with the Richards comparisons - if he didn't play for Kitchener, they wouldn't come up. He's actually not great in the defensive zone, and he's small. His skating speed also needs to improve, though that can be remedied. Again, best case scenario is Richards/Parise, worst-case scenario is Nigel Dawes. I'm just not sure I see NHL defencemen letting him get to the net like he does in the OHL. Though, he'll have plenty of time to adjust.

FWIW I think Tarasenko is a better player than Skinner (or Nino).

N4L wrote:

rooneypoo wrote:

N4L wrote:You wait until 7 to see who is gone. After that... you make your decision. Im willing to bet the best forward from this draft comes from a later round pick.

So you'd keep Foligno (perhaps only to make another move elsewhere), and remain at 16 or move back to the low 20s, and pick one of McFarland or Bennett, yes?

Out of curiosity, is there anyone who might be available at 8th who you have to move up for if the chance presents itself?

Well, put it this way, is there any guarantee or is it even worth the risk to move Foligno for a guy that might turn out to be just as good as him with maybe a little higher ceiling?

I think the guys with the serious upside but are a little riskier are in the middle to late part of the 1st round. A guy like MacFarland has everything Johansson has, just way more immature, so why do it? I think there is a reason why GM's are all trying to move down right now, this would be it.

Hmm. Interesting.

How do you feel about Bjugstad, btw? He's enormous (6'5, 190) and is projecting to go in the late 'teens / early 20s, too, pretty much in the same neighbourhood as McFarland and Bennett. If you drop back and it backfires, is Bjugstad a good third option?

asq2 wrote:

rooneypoo wrote:Pop quiz:

Dreger is saying ATL's pick (the 8th) may be in play.

If you're ATL, do you trade that pick for anything like, say, the 16th overall + Foligno?

If you're OTT, does it make sense to give up Foligno to move up 8 spots? If so, who do you take at 8th? Nino, Connolly, Skinner?

Thoughts, please.

I would and then take Johansen. His upside is higher than Nino's IMO and he'll play centre, which I don't think any of Skinner, Nino or Connolly will do in the NHL. Connolly's the best forward in that list but I read from some "insider" somewhere that the Columbus GM commented on Connolly's hips by saying he had the body of a 40-year-old man.

Skinner's got good hands and a great shot, and has great character/determination, but I think people are getting carried away with the Richards comparisons - if he didn't play for Kitchener, they wouldn't come up. He's actually not great in the defensive zone, and he's small. His skating speed also needs to improve, though that can be remedied. Again, best case scenario is Richards/Parise, worst-case scenario is Nigel Dawes. I'm just not sure I see NHL defencemen letting him get to the net like he does in the OHL. Though, he'll have plenty of time to adjust.

FWIW I think Tarasenko is a better player than Skinner (or Nino).

Fair enough. But will we seriously consider going Russian?

Devo wrote:Dreger is saying the 4th 8th and 15th picks are in play...There is opportunity to move up if they want to, or can put enough together to.

must be off his twitter account eh? so CBJ has that 4th pick, damn, here comes more Spezza speculation, but that 4th pick would be Fowler or Gormley, not that we necessarily need another D man, but is there a forward out there, that makes one of those two easy to pass on?

N4L wrote:A guy like MacFarland has everything Johansson has, just way more immature, so why do it?

There's definitely no doubting McFarland's tools, but there's definitely a camp out there that says he doesn't have the tool-box. He definitely hasn't done enough in Sudbury to warrant being a first round pick IMO, but his international play (e.g. at the Ivan Hlinka) puts me more in your camp in thinking it's a motivation/maturity problem

Check out his combine results:

• 1^st in Anaerobic Fitness: Peak Power Output (watts/kg)
  
• 3^rd in Anaerobic Fitness: Mean Power Output (watts/kg)
  
• 1^st in Musculoskeletal: Standing Long Jump (in)
  
• 1^st in Musculoskeletal: 4 Jump (Mat) Mode: Avg Jump
  Height (in)
  
• 7^th in Musculoskeletal: Right Hand Grip (lb)
  

http://thehockeywriters.com/2010draft-prospect-profile-john-mcfarland/

asq2 wrote:

N4L wrote:A guy like MacFarland has everything Johansson has, just way more immature, so why do it?

There's definitely no doubting McFarland's tools, but there's definitely a camp out there that says he doesn't have the tool-box. He definitely hasn't done enough in Sudbury to warrant being a first round pick IMO, but his international play (e.g. at the Ivan Hlinka) puts me more in your camp in thinking it's a motivation/maturity problem

Check out his combine results:

• 1^st in Anaerobic Fitness: Peak Power Output (watts/kg)
  
• 3^rd in Anaerobic Fitness: Mean Power Output (watts/kg)
  
• 1^st in Musculoskeletal: Standing Long Jump (in)
  
• 1^st in Musculoskeletal: 4 Jump (Mat) Mode: Avg Jump
  Height (in)
  
• 7^th in Musculoskeletal: Right Hand Grip (lb)
  

http://thehockeywriters.com/2010draft-prospect-profile-john-mcfarland/

holy cow batman

rooneypoo wrote:Fair enough. But will we seriously consider going Russian?

I doubt it. Not at 8, anyway - which is why I would go with Johansen. But, of course, I haven't been able to interview Tarasenko to try to gauge the likelihood of him coming over (though I think he will, at some point).

asq2 wrote:

N4L wrote:A guy like MacFarland has everything Johansson has, just way more immature, so why do it?

There's definitely no doubting McFarland's tools, but there's definitely a camp out there that says he doesn't have the tool-box. He definitely hasn't done enough in Sudbury to warrant being a first round pick IMO, but his international play (e.g. at the Ivan Hlinka) puts me more in your camp in thinking it's a motivation/maturity problem

Check out his combine results:

• 1^st in Anaerobic Fitness: Peak Power Output (watts/kg)
  
• 3^rd in Anaerobic Fitness: Mean Power Output (watts/kg)
  
• 1^st in Musculoskeletal: Standing Long Jump (in)
  
• 1^st in Musculoskeletal: 4 Jump (Mat) Mode: Avg Jump
  Height (in)
  
• 7^th in Musculoskeletal: Right Hand Grip (lb)
  

http://thehockeywriters.com/2010draft-prospect-profile-john-mcfarland/

Exactly. So if your The Sens and you are looking for a number 2 center behind Spezza and you actually have MacFalrand higher then Johanssen, why move up and give up assets? Same with Bennett.

IMO aside from a few guys like Hall, Seguin, and Gudbransson, I dont think the tallent in the top 10 is so far beyond that of picks 15-30 that you should move up. If anything, you should move down because of how deep the draft is.

And Bjugstad? Any opinions on him? 6'5 scoring centre -- seems like he fits the bill, too. Am I missing something?

rooneypoo wrote:

N4L wrote:

rooneypoo wrote:

N4L wrote:You wait until 7 to see who is gone. After that... you make your decision. Im willing to bet the best forward from this draft comes from a later round pick.

So you'd keep Foligno (perhaps only to make another move elsewhere), and remain at 16 or move back to the low 20s, and pick one of McFarland or Bennett, yes?

Out of curiosity, is there anyone who might be available at 8th who you have to move up for if the chance presents itself?

Well, put it this way, is there any guarantee or is it even worth the risk to move Foligno for a guy that might turn out to be just as good as him with maybe a little higher ceiling?

I think the guys with the serious upside but are a little riskier are in the middle to late part of the 1st round. A guy like MacFarland has everything Johansson has, just way more immature, so why do it? I think there is a reason why GM's are all trying to move down right now, this would be it.

Hmm. Interesting.

How do you feel about Bjugstad, btw? He's enormous (6'5, 190) and is projecting to go in the late 'teens / early 20s, too, pretty much in the same neighbourhood as McFarland and Bennett. If you drop back and it backfires, is Bjugstad a good third option?

Could be, but I still think MacFarland becomes a Sen. Just such a Murray type player with a Murray type attitude. The guy has an edge to him and is highly skilled. Tough to find a guy with those intangibles along with his raw skill. Aside from Skinner, I think MacFarland is the 2nd best center outside of Seguin.

MacFarland could be an absolute homerun pick at 16-19.

N4L wrote:

asq2 wrote:

N4L wrote:A guy like MacFarland has everything Johansson has, just way more immature, so why do it?

There's definitely no doubting McFarland's tools, but there's definitely a camp out there that says he doesn't have the tool-box. He definitely hasn't done enough in Sudbury to warrant being a first round pick IMO, but his international play (e.g. at the Ivan Hlinka) puts me more in your camp in thinking it's a motivation/maturity problem

Check out his combine results:

• 1^st in Anaerobic Fitness: Peak Power Output (watts/kg)
  
• 3^rd in Anaerobic Fitness: Mean Power Output (watts/kg)
  
• 1^st in Musculoskeletal: Standing Long Jump (in)
  
• 1^st in Musculoskeletal: 4 Jump (Mat) Mode: Avg Jump
  Height (in)
  
• 7^th in Musculoskeletal: Right Hand Grip (lb)
  

http://thehockeywriters.com/2010draft-prospect-profile-john-mcfarland/

Exactly. So if your The Sens and you are looking for a number 2 center behind Spezza and you actually have MacFalrand higher then Johanssen, why move up and give up assets? Same with Bennett.

IMO aside from a few guys like Hall, Seguin, and Gudbransson, I dont think the tallent in the top 10 is so far beyond that of picks 15-30 that you should move up. If anything, you should move down because of how deep the draft is.

ISS have McFarland ranked at # 30, so unless Murray thinks he will last to the 3rd round or trades down to get this guy either with a later 1st round or early 2nd round pick, he will be gone between our 1st and 3rd picks.

Flaws/Aspects He Needs To Work On:

• Continue to train to increase strength and mass.
  
• Consistency.
  
• Prove he has the necessary drive necessary to make it at the next level.
  
• Improve play without the puck
  

rooneypoo wrote:And Bjugstad? Any opinions on him? 6'5 scoring centre -- seems like he fits the bill, too. Am I missing something?

High School kid, tough to actually get a solid read on him. It's like being drafted out of midget hockey. Sure, he domiantes but really, the compition is lacking to say the least.

SensFan71 wrote:holy cow batman

Great shot, great speed, great over-all athleticism, plays with an edge, PKs, etc. There's a reason he was taken 1st over-all in the OHL draft, but there's also a reason why he hasn't ripped the OHL a new ***hole. Murray just has decide whether it's a maturity/motivation thing (like Getzlaf, who Murray picked at - to add fuel to Neely's fire - 19 in 2003) or a lack of a tool-box to put everything together (though, again, people will point out the international play where he was tremendous).

SensFan71 wrote:

N4L wrote:

asq2 wrote:

N4L wrote:A guy like MacFarland has everything Johansson has, just way more immature, so why do it?

There's definitely no doubting McFarland's tools, but there's definitely a camp out there that says he doesn't have the tool-box. He definitely hasn't done enough in Sudbury to warrant being a first round pick IMO, but his international play (e.g. at the Ivan Hlinka) puts me more in your camp in thinking it's a motivation/maturity problem

Check out his combine results:

• 1^st in Anaerobic Fitness: Peak Power Output (watts/kg)
  
• 3^rd in Anaerobic Fitness: Mean Power Output (watts/kg)
  
• 1^st in Musculoskeletal: Standing Long Jump (in)
  
• 1^st in Musculoskeletal: 4 Jump (Mat) Mode: Avg Jump
  Height (in)
  
• 7^th in Musculoskeletal: Right Hand Grip (lb)
  

http://thehockeywriters.com/2010draft-prospect-profile-john-mcfarland/

Exactly. So if your The Sens and you are looking for a number 2 center behind Spezza and you actually have MacFalrand higher then Johanssen, why move up and give up assets? Same with Bennett.

IMO aside from a few guys like Hall, Seguin, and Gudbransson, I dont think the tallent in the top 10 is so far beyond that of picks 15-30 that you should move up. If anything, you should move down because of how deep the draft is.

ISS have McFarland ranked at # 30, so unless Murray thinks he will last to the 3rd round or trades down to get this guy either with a later 1st round or early 2nd round pick, he will be gone between our 1st and 3rd picks.

Flaws/Aspects He Needs To Work On:

• Continue to train to increase strength and mass.
  
• Consistency.
  
• Prove he has the necessary drive necessary to make it at the next level.
  
• Improve play without the puck
  

That's BS right there. He killed at the combine so these knocks are just people trying to knock a kid off his high horse, which he is defently on.

Like I said, I think MacFarland is the next Ottawa Senator and Murray trades down to get him. 100% reminds me of the Getzlaf pick in 03.

SensFan71 wrote:

N4L wrote:

asq2 wrote:

N4L wrote:A guy like MacFarland has everything Johansson has, just way more immature, so why do it?

There's definitely no doubting McFarland's tools, but there's definitely a camp out there that says he doesn't have the tool-box. He definitely hasn't done enough in Sudbury to warrant being a first round pick IMO, but his international play (e.g. at the Ivan Hlinka) puts me more in your camp in thinking it's a motivation/maturity problem

Check out his combine results:

• 1^st in Anaerobic Fitness: Peak Power Output (watts/kg)
  
• 3^rd in Anaerobic Fitness: Mean Power Output (watts/kg)
  
• 1^st in Musculoskeletal: Standing Long Jump (in)
  
• 1^st in Musculoskeletal: 4 Jump (Mat) Mode: Avg Jump
  Height (in)
  
• 7^th in Musculoskeletal: Right Hand Grip (lb)
  

http://thehockeywriters.com/2010draft-prospect-profile-john-mcfarland/

Exactly. So if your The Sens and you are looking for a number 2 center behind Spezza and you actually have MacFalrand higher then Johanssen, why move up and give up assets? Same with Bennett.

IMO aside from a few guys like Hall, Seguin, and Gudbransson, I dont think the tallent in the top 10 is so far beyond that of picks 15-30 that you should move up. If anything, you should move down because of how deep the draft is.

ISS have McFarland ranked at # 30, so unless Murray thinks he will last to the 3rd round or trades down to get this guy either with a later 1st round or early 2nd round pick, he will be gone between our 1st and 3rd picks.

Flaws/Aspects He Needs To Work On:

• Continue to train to increase strength and mass.
  
• Consistency.
  
• Prove he has the necessary drive necessary to make it at the next level.
  
• Improve play without the puck
  

Or BM will just take him at 16 and be done. It's not a reach if BM and his scouts have McFarland as one of their targets.