Would you trade our 1st round pick?

Mojo wrote:

hemlock wrote:

RobbyJ wrote:

TeamRenzo wrote:

asq2 wrote:

Tukker wrote:Kyle Turris, J. Toews, Kane, Gagner(maybe)

Not for Gagner, and the first three aren't going anywhere.

I wouldn't. Hedman has the ability to be something else.

Again you are over valuing Hedman, he will not be a generational player.

I have to ask, what are you basing your opinion on?

Ignorance. Noone here that's a "Hedman booster" has come right out and guaranteed or even stated that Hedman WILL be a generational defensive. He does have that potential though, and that's what we are saying.

It's funny TeamRenzo, you never seem to question DRR when he GUARANTEES that Tavares will be better than Hedman, but you question some of us when we talk about the potential of Hedman. Little bit of a double standard there isn't it?

I don't know, before the WJC there was a lot of Hedman loving going on here. It has died down quite a bit since then. He probably will become a good NHL player, but from his performance at the WJC, he is not as much of a shoe in as everyone thought. He has a lot of work to do. Tavares on the other, although having his faults, will probably immediately join an NHL squad next year and likely contend for the Calder.

After Ovechkin played agaisnt Canada as the go to guy for Russia, people questioned whether he could compete consistantly at the next level as well, same with Malkin. Hedman is in the same boat.

Playing against Team Canada has a way of making you look very average.

Also, people should remember that this is a tournament for 19 year olds, for the most part.

Hedman turned 18 I believe on the day of the Sweden-Canada friendly.

PKC wrote:Playing against Team Canada has a way of making you look very average.

Thats exaclty it, people who play for Canada tend to look better than they really are, and people who play against them tend to look worse. Plus, Hedman is also dealing with injuries.

I have not a lot of doubt that Tavares will be the number 1 guy, but I'm a firm believer you build from the back forward, and Hedman is my guy, no matter what.

I also seem to recall that before the 1993 draft there was something like an All-Star game for the prospects of sorts wherein Daigle was absolutely dazzling and Pronger looked like a dud.

Just goes to show you that performances in a Junior Tournament aren't always the end-all be-all.

Hedman could be in the NHL next season and be fine as well. Don't try to limit his game to being tall and skating fast. His on-ice vision is great, his puck skills are fantastic, he's got a big shot and a nice pass, end-to-end rushing ability and he's quite smart and effective defensively.

How many people played in the OHL as a 14 year old? One. Tavares.

How many people have entered the Swedish Elite League at the same or younger age than when Hedman entered? One. Hedman.

Both are great players and great prospects. I feel like Hedman has more ultimate potential and that he fills a greater need for us. Therefore, I'll take Hedman.

Actually, I think I was responding to DRR's post in they "If you were the GM of the Sens..." forum with the above post.

asq2 wrote:I also seem to recall that before the 1993 draft there was something like an All-Star game for the prospects of sorts wherein Daigle was absolutely dazzling and Pronger looked like a dud.

Just goes to show you that performances in a Junior Tournament aren't always the end-all be-all.

Hedman could be in the NHL next season and be fine as well. Don't try to limit his game to being tall and skating fast. His on-ice vision is great, his puck skills are fantastic, he's got a big shot and a nice pass, end-to-end rushing ability and he's quite smart and effective defensively.

How many people played in the OHL as a 14 year old? One. Tavares.

How many people have entered the Swedish Elite League at the same or younger age than when Hedman entered? One. Hedman.

Both are great players and great prospects. I feel like Hedman has more ultimate potential and that he fills a greater need for us. Therefore, I'll take Hedman.

Ill be objective here as I love Hedman, but his shot isnt anything to write home about haha. Its a nice shot, nothing special though.

Karlsson can fire that thing though, WOW. That kid has a monster shot!

I really couldn't care less about any prospect until he is drafted. I didn't watch five minutes of the WJC. Easily the most over-hyped sporting event I have ever seen, IMO.



The Sens would be foolish to part with their 1st rd. pick. If they could move the SJ pick for as part of a package for a young player that they have salary control over and can help the team get on a roll for next year, then do it. Or take a player and the SJ pick to move up in the 1st round. I would say that the same goes for the 2010 1st round pick.

If I had to I'd trade the SJ 1st if it meant moving up into the top 10 but preferably the top 5. My preference would be to move a player to get into the top 5 and keep both present 1st.

dennycrane wrote:I really couldn't care less about any prospect until he is drafted. I didn't watch five minutes of the WJC. Easily the most over-hyped sporting event I have ever seen, IMO.



The Sens would be foolish to part with their 1st rd. pick. If they could move the SJ pick for as part of a package for a young player that they have salary control over and can help the team get on a roll for next year, then do it. Or take a player and the SJ pick to move up in the 1st round. I would say that the same goes for the 2010 1st round pick.

To each their own, but the last three games Canada played (USA, Russia, Sweden) was the most entertaining hockey I've seen in quite some time. Being at the gold medal game, I can honestly tell you I've never felt that kind of energy at any Senators game.

I can see what you're saying with prospects not always being highlights at the WJC and not coming into their own until the bigs- but to call it the most overhyped sporting event you've ever seen either makes you completely ignorant or just completely oblivious

Phoenix30 wrote:If I had to I'd trade the SJ 1st if it meant moving up into the top 10 but preferably the top 5. My preference would be to move a player to get into the top 5 and keep both present 1st.

That would be ideal.

On the hedman subject... I know he wasn't overly impressive in the juniors but I'm thinking of his size and skill. Chara was not considered a top prospect thanks to his lack of skill at the time and with some time to mature he became a premiere dman. Hopefully the case can be the same with hedman

Neely4Life wrote:

Mojo wrote:

hemlock wrote:

RobbyJ wrote:

TeamRenzo wrote:

asq2 wrote:

Tukker wrote:Kyle Turris, J. Toews, Kane, Gagner(maybe)

Not for Gagner, and the first three aren't going anywhere.

I wouldn't. Hedman has the ability to be something else.

Again you are over valuing Hedman, he will not be a generational player.

I have to ask, what are you basing your opinion on?

Ignorance. Noone here that's a "Hedman booster" has come right out and guaranteed or even stated that Hedman WILL be a generational defensive. He does have that potential though, and that's what we are saying.

It's funny TeamRenzo, you never seem to question DRR when he GUARANTEES that Tavares will be better than Hedman, but you question some of us when we talk about the potential of Hedman. Little bit of a double standard there isn't it?

I don't know, before the WJC there was a lot of Hedman loving going on here. It has died down quite a bit since then. He probably will become a good NHL player, but from his performance at the WJC, he is not as much of a shoe in as everyone thought. He has a lot of work to do. Tavares on the other, although having his faults, will probably immediately join an NHL squad next year and likely contend for the Calder.

After Ovechkin played agaisnt Canada as the go to guy for Russia, people questioned whether he could compete consistantly at the next level as well, same with Malkin. Hedman is in the same boat.

I saw him at the first Sweden-Slovakia game. He only stuck out because of his size, not his performance. Karlsson looked way better.

Mojo wrote:

Neely4Life wrote:

Mojo wrote:

hemlock wrote:

RobbyJ wrote:

TeamRenzo wrote:

asq2 wrote:

Tukker wrote:Kyle Turris, J. Toews, Kane, Gagner(maybe)

Not for Gagner, and the first three aren't going anywhere.

I wouldn't. Hedman has the ability to be something else.

Again you are over valuing Hedman, he will not be a generational player.

I have to ask, what are you basing your opinion on?

Ignorance. Noone here that's a "Hedman booster" has come right out and guaranteed or even stated that Hedman WILL be a generational defensive. He does have that potential though, and that's what we are saying.

It's funny TeamRenzo, you never seem to question DRR when he GUARANTEES that Tavares will be better than Hedman, but you question some of us when we talk about the potential of Hedman. Little bit of a double standard there isn't it?

I don't know, before the WJC there was a lot of Hedman loving going on here. It has died down quite a bit since then. He probably will become a good NHL player, but from his performance at the WJC, he is not as much of a shoe in as everyone thought. He has a lot of work to do. Tavares on the other, although having his faults, will probably immediately join an NHL squad next year and likely contend for the Calder.

After Ovechkin played agaisnt Canada as the go to guy for Russia, people questioned whether he could compete consistantly at the next level as well, same with Malkin. Hedman is in the same boat.

I saw him at the first Sweden-Slovakia game. He only stuck out because of his size, not his performance. Karlsson looked way better.

People are overlooking the fact that Hedman was coming off a fairly serious shoulder injury in late November. That isn't the sole reason for his perceived less than stellar play, but it does affect it I'd say. Bottom line, right now, I think Hedman has alot more upside than Tavares. Tavares won't be much better, if at all in the NHL. Not unless he works on his skating and defensive game. Hedman is still raw and is certainly in need of polish no question, but I think he's got more potential going forward. Plus, like I've said, given the choice between a stud foward and stud d-man, I take the d-man everytime, especially considering Ottawa's needs.

504Heater wrote:

Phoenix30 wrote:If I had to I'd trade the SJ 1st if it meant moving up into the top 10 but preferably the top 5. My preference would be to move a player to get into the top 5 and keep both present 1st.

That would be too good to be true.

Fixed :afro: