TSN's Final Draft Rankings

Sometimes people go off the board and take a guy like Lee at Number 9... yikes...

I believe Lee was supposed to be LLLLLATE first or second round. I am not one who has given up on him but I am one who thinks we wasted a high pick when it was unnecessary.

MurderOnIce wrote:Sometimes people go off the board and take a guy like Lee at Number 9... yikes...

I believe Lee was supposed to be LLLLLATE first or second round. I am not one who has given up on him but I am one who thinks we wasted a high pick when it was unnecessary.

Was he late first? I thought (and I could be wrong, lord knows it happens), that he was one of those guys that had risen up the board pretty quickly before the draft.

Looking back though.... Lee at 9 =

Lucky Day wrote:

MurderOnIce wrote:Sometimes people go off the board and take a guy like Lee at Number 9... yikes...

I believe Lee was supposed to be LLLLLATE first or second round. I am not one who has given up on him but I am one who thinks we wasted a high pick when it was unnecessary.

Was he late first? I thought (and I could be wrong, lord knows it happens), that he was one of those guys that had risen up the board pretty quickly before the draft.

Looking back though.... Lee at 9 =

If memory serves, the big scouting bureaus had him late first round, he may have climbed at the last minute as high as the teens but many individual teams had him slotted second round...

MurderOnIce wrote:

Lucky Day wrote:

MurderOnIce wrote:Sometimes people go off the board and take a guy like Lee at Number 9... yikes...

I believe Lee was supposed to be LLLLLATE first or second round. I am not one who has given up on him but I am one who thinks we wasted a high pick when it was unnecessary.

Was he late first? I thought (and I could be wrong, lord knows it happens), that he was one of those guys that had risen up the board pretty quickly before the draft.

Looking back though.... Lee at 9 =

If memory serves, the big scouting bureaus had him late first round, he may have climbed at the last minute as high as the teens but many individual teams had him slotted second round...

That really stings to take him at 9 then. Especially since we'd be gifted a much higher pick due to the lottery.

Lucky Day wrote:

MurderOnIce wrote:Sometimes people go off the board and take a guy like Lee at Number 9... yikes...

I believe Lee was supposed to be LLLLLATE first or second round. I am not one who has given up on him but I am one who thinks we wasted a high pick when it was unnecessary.

Was he late first? I thought (and I could be wrong, lord knows it happens), that he was one of those guys that had risen up the board pretty quickly before the draft.

Looking back though.... Lee at 9 =

he had to be a muckler doing, don't think Murray would draft him that high, but to be honest, Lee can still improve and if anyone can make him improve, it's Clouston.

I haven't given up on Lee. He's young and D men take a long time to develop. I do agree that it was a wasted 9th overall pick though. Lee could have been snagged lower and we could have had a much nicer player at 9th that year.

Cap'n Clutch wrote:I haven't given up on Lee. He's young and D men take a long time to develop. I do agree that it was a wasted 9th overall pick though. Lee could have been snagged lower and we could have had a much nicer player at 9th that year.

Agreed. People also seem to forget that what we saw this year was his rookie season. Lee has less NHL experience than Schenn or Doughty.

asq2 wrote:

Cap'n Clutch wrote:I haven't given up on Lee. He's young and D men take a long time to develop. I do agree that it was a wasted 9th overall pick though. Lee could have been snagged lower and we could have had a much nicer player at 9th that year.

Agreed. People also seem to forget that what we saw this year was his rookie season. Lee has less NHL experience than Schenn or Doughty.

I haven't given up on him. However, if the right deal came along, I won't be heartbroken if he left.

asq2 wrote:

Cap'n Clutch wrote:I haven't given up on Lee. He's young and D men take a long time to develop. I do agree that it was a wasted 9th overall pick though. Lee could have been snagged lower and we could have had a much nicer player at 9th that year.

Agreed. People also seem to forget that what we saw this year was his rookie season. Lee has less NHL experience than Schenn or Doughty.

being older and more mature can only serve to benefit Lee rather than being a green 18 year old in the league, learning the hard way.

Cap'n Clutch wrote:That seems like a massive oversite. No way MPS is taken that low IMO.

He's been sinking like a stone in the rankings. As I said before, he was actually forecast at #9 in a couple of mock drafts.

If he is indeed available by 9, we must take him and I'd even like to see us trade up to make sure...

Lucky Day wrote:
That really stings to take him at 9 then. Especially since we'd be gifted a much higher pick due to the lottery.

Don't forget that was one of the weakest drafts in history. After Crosby, there was no definitive number two, let alone 3-30.

And then to make matters worse for us, O'Brien's year was another horrendous year.

Lee's a good player the more I think about it. We were really hard on him, but the entire team was crashing and burning. It must have been tough for Lee to come here and deal with going through Murray as coach and being excellent, then coming up next year and having Dung for brains Hartsburg trying his best to impersonate an NHL coach, then having the coaches changes and having yet another young coach come in and alter the style again.

A lot of the veterans on the team couldn't do anything until Clouston was brought it, so there's no question that the rookies would have a hard time. Unluckily for Lee - and perhaps for us too - I wouldn't bet money that Clouston likes Lee. He sent him down after he talked back to the ref, he had him in Bingo and Lee didn't really put up big numbers.

The future is a weird, cloudy picture for Lee, but he's definitely a good defender when he finally gets some solid ground the go on.

SpezDispenser wrote:

Lucky Day wrote:
That really stings to take him at 9 then. Especially since we'd be gifted a much higher pick due to the lottery.

Don't forget that was one of the weakest drafts in history. After Crosby, there was no definitive number two, let alone 3-30.

And then to make matters worse for us, O'Brien's year was another horrendous year.

Lee's a good player the more I think about it. We were really hard on him, but the entire team was crashing and burning. It must have been tough for Lee to come here and deal with going through Murray as coach and being excellent, then coming up next year and having Dung for brains Hartsburg trying his best to impersonate an NHL coach, then having the coaches changes and having yet another young coach come in and alter the style again.

A lot of the veterans on the team couldn't do anything until Clouston was brought it, so there's no question that the rookies would have a hard time. Unluckily for Lee - and perhaps for us too - I wouldn't bet money that Clouston likes Lee. He sent him down after he talked back to the ref, he had him in Bingo and Lee didn't really put up big numbers.

The future is a weird, cloudy picture for Lee, but he's definitely a good defender when he finally gets some solid ground the go on.

Rack him.

SpezDispenser wrote:

Lucky Day wrote:
That really stings to take him at 9 then. Especially since we'd be gifted a much higher pick due to the lottery.

Don't forget that was one of the weakest drafts in history. After Crosby, there was no definitive number two, let alone 3-30.

And then to make matters worse for us, O'Brien's year was another horrendous year.

Lee's a good player the more I think about it. We were really hard on him, but the entire team was crashing and burning. It must have been tough for Lee to come here and deal with going through Murray as coach and being excellent, then coming up next year and having Dung for brains Hartsburg trying his best to impersonate an NHL coach, then having the coaches changes and having yet another young coach come in and alter the style again.

A lot of the veterans on the team couldn't do anything until Clouston was brought it, so there's no question that the rookies would have a hard time. Unluckily for Lee - and perhaps for us too - I wouldn't bet money that Clouston likes Lee. He sent him down after he talked back to the ref, he had him in Bingo and Lee didn't really put up big numbers.

The future is a weird, cloudy picture for Lee, but he's definitely a good defender when he finally gets some solid ground the go on.

hopefully a good work ethic and a good training camp under clouston will get his head set straight.

SeawaySensFan wrote:

Cap'n Clutch wrote:That seems like a massive oversite. No way MPS is taken that low IMO.

He's been sinking like a stone in the rankings. As I said before, he was actually forecast at #9 in a couple of mock drafts.

If he is indeed available by 9, we must take him and I'd even like to see us trade up to make sure...

I want both MPS/Schenn and a defenceman though.

If, say, both MPS and OEL were on the table at #9 (doubtful), it'd be a tough call.

I still don't think he slips past Burke.

Apparently you don't even have to worry about MPS or OEL. The ISS has done a mock draft for Sun Media, they have Scott Glennie slotted at 9 and Ryan Ellis at 10.

Their draft order:

1. John Tavares
2. Victor Hedman
3. Matt Duchene
4. Magnus Paajarvi-Svensson
5. Evander Kane
6. Dmitry Kulikov
7. Brayden Schenn
8. Jared Cowen
9. Scott Glennie
10. Ryan Ellis
11. Nazem Kadri
12. Jacob Josefson
13. Oliver Ekman-Larsson
14. David Rundblad
15. Zack Kassian
16. John Moore
17. Peter Holland
18. Chris Kreider
19. Jordan Schroeder
20. Dylan Olsen
21. Nick Leddy
22. Landon Ferraro
23. Kyle Palmieri
24. Louis Leblanc
25. Calvin de Haan
26. Jeremy Morin
27. Jordan Caron
28. Edward Pasquale
29. Zach Budish
30. Carter Ashton

A very, very interesting list to the say the least.

I don't give a Dung about MPS is we can get Schenn. :drooling:

OEL at 13? I have my doubts.

SpezDispenser wrote:I don't give a Dung about MPS is we can get Schenn. :drooling:

Definitely a great complementary centreman to Spezza, although I'd like to have a speedier two-way centre to make it harder to play against the top-2 lines.

Duchene?

Albeit he doesn't come close to the physical element that Schenn brings to the table.