2011 NHL Entry Draft Watch

shabbs wrote:Is Saad in there?

yep yep

roster:

http://www.homehardwaretopprospectsgame.com/

of course landeskog is injured, replaced by Shane prince pf the 67's

shabbs wrote:Is Saad in there?

He sure is.

That Strome dude may be a worthy grab if we don't end up with a lottery pick and drop a bit...

What a pass by RNH and he is putting his stamp on this game.

What a pass

shabbs wrote:That Strome dude may be a worthy grab if we don't end up with a lottery pick and drop a bit...

Trade up and get RNH!

Landeskog was interviewed and you would never know he was Swedish.

marakh wrote:Did you guys see that shift by RNH? Pfff ridiculous, I don't take Landeskog over that, as Pierre would say, "off the charts" hockey sense.

Overall tons of skilled guys in this game. Catenacci with blazing speed and St-Louis esque release. Strome, Lessio, Jurco, Jensen, Couturier... all look pretty good.

Landeskog has had some pretty impressive shifts too. He was rockin' in the first period against Canada at the WJCs pre-tourney games.

It comes down to team need, I think. For the Sens, as much as people try to force the whole "neo-Alfie" angle, I think RNH is a better pick because we really need that potential offensive focal point.

Conversely, a team like Pittsburgh with established young centre superstars would be moronic to choose RNH over Landeskog.

Hadn't ever seen much of him before, but I've been pretty impressed with Phillip Danault of Team Cherry. That and Trochek.

Could be solid 2nd rounders.

EDIT: or possibly 3rds.

SeawaySensFan wrote:
I just think that you're stuck then trying to find big wingers for RNH and you already need better wingers for Spezza. Just digging a hole so to speak. That's just the way I see it. Mostly going with my gut on this too.

Yeah I guess in that regard. The Flyers are doing it really well though, rolling 3 tough, offensive lines and one griding line. Kind of thinking that's the model to copy, good offensive weapons in the top 9, grinders on line 4 who take most of the PKing.

I'm sure by now everyone's looked at Landeskog and thought of a young, big Alfie.

SpezDispenser wrote:

SeawaySensFan wrote:
I just think that you're stuck then trying to find big wingers for RNH and you already need better wingers for Spezza. Just digging a hole so to speak. That's just the way I see it. Mostly going with my gut on this too.

Yeah I guess in that regard. The Flyers are doing it really well though, rolling 3 tough, offensive lines and one griding line. Kind of thinking that's the model to copy, good offensive weapons in the top 9, grinders on line 4 who take most of the PKing.

I'm sure by now everyone's looked at Landeskog and thought of a young, big Alfie.

i'm dissapointed i can't watch this game...

i have to agree, the flyers have the best model if you ask me. we're such a long way from being there that i don't even want to think about it. we'd need another 5 years of BM drafting. and then we don't have a GM like in philly. he's pulled trade after trade to make his tema what it is. it makes you speachless sometimes.

i don't want to be a party pooper but i doubt we get close to picking Landeskog. it's a day dream.
i think we have to look beyond the top 3. i mean we're not far off but i doubt edmonton NJ and NYI suddently get any better. NJ and NY look to be entering selling mode any day now and the oil is looking at several players injured. i think realisticaly we are looking at couturier, huberdeau but at best RNH. both larsson and landeskog will be gone in the top 3.

SeawaySensFan wrote:I just think that you're stuck then trying to find big wingers for RNH and you already need better wingers for Spezza. Just digging a hole so to speak. That's just the way I see it. Mostly going with my gut on this too.

SeawaySensFan wrote:I wouldn't bet on it Spez. We still might end up with a good player in 3 or 4 years but I personally like the addition of an immediate impact player.

RNH needs wingers but probably less than Landeskog needs a centre. RNH has more potential to be the focal point of the offensive line he plays on whereas Landeskog is unbelievably well-rounded but has questions about his ultimate offensive upside. I also believe that the way to go is to build down the middle.

By adding RNH you're taking away from this team's dependence on Spezza and his injury concerns. It's also a move for the long-term for this franchise - I mean, let's face it, the majority of the players we've begun pinning our hopes on are guys like Karlsson, Rundblad, Cowen, Lehner etc. none of whom is over 20, so with the exception of EK I don't think we can expect them to carry this team in the immediate future. I think getting an asset for when these guys are ready to contend is probably better. And we'll have plenty of time, picks, and potentially cap-space to add ancillary offensive pieces, with the core guy (potentially) already in place.

I get the argument on the other hand that Landeskog is a more rare prospect than a RNH is - generally you can find players similar to Nugent-Hopkins in a draft, but infrequently do you see a guy like Landeskog - but considering our forward situation I think RNH is a piece the team needs more. As far as the "immediate impact player" idea is concerned, I'm curious: when was the last time an 18-year-old played on the Sens? And I'm not sure he's likely to be a big-time impact player at that age.

Lastly, this is potentially the highest we'll have picked in a decade (since Spezza in '01) and could be monumental in deciding the direction of the franchise. With that in mind, I think we'd all regret ending up with the lesser player long-term because we wanted a guy who could step in right away even though we had at best a feeble chance at competing at the time. Now, if you feel Landeskog is the best asset long-term, you go for it and the relative NHL-readiness is just the icing on the cake. But if you think RNH will be the better player 4 years or so from now, you've gotta go with him even if he takes one or two years longer to crack the roster.

Obviously, though, I'd be thrilled to get either and I'm not holding my breath that we will. NJ still sucks, NYI is decimated by injuries and has already begun selling away assets (like Wisniewski), Toronto and Calgary just got owned by the Rangers and Wild, respectively, and Edmonton is just terrible. We've lost a lot of games too but at least recently we've started looking good while doing it.

Man, RNH does look pretty damn sick. Not too sure if I see the Patrick Kane comparisons though, call me crazy but I see him more as a Datysuk-lite kind of player.

SDH89 wrote:Man, RNH does look pretty damn sick. Not too sure if I see the Patrick Kane comparisons though, call me crazy but I see him more as a Datysuk-lite kind of player.

He has Kane-like agility, though Kane is probably still a better skater (actually Kane is better in almost every facet, but that's to be expected; he's one of the most electrifying players in the world).

Style-wise, he's a mix of a lot of guys. Datsyuk, Duchene, B. Richards, Sakic, Ribeiro, Briere, etc.

Wish he'd shoot more, though.

I like Landeskog, I really do. I've seen those pre-tournaments games in the WJC and he was certainly without a doubt the best or second best Swedish player in those games.
However, seeing how this team is built with their younger players (foligno, winchester, smith, silfverberg etc), plus the Fishers, Neils and Kellys, I think we have enough hard-working-going-to-the-net-strong-on-the boards players to keep the momentum in a game. We've seen that in the last few weeks.
I just feel we lack that N1 centre that will have that extra patience with the puck and will make that big play in tie games. PLus, I like what I see from Butler and he needs a real good centre here for the future. Size is getting too much overblown these days, I don't know why. It's not like he's 5'8, he'd probably be 6'1 200 when all is said and done. And the way he skates the defensemen will probably get tired before even touching him. IMO he has SPezza attributes without the brain farts. Pretty damn good if you ask me.

TO sum up, I would say, Landeskog is a pretty amazing package, but the intangibles he got can be found elsewhere IMO. MAybe not in a total package like that, but I'd rather get the best offensive prospect and another guy who brings the other intangibles, than settle for a guy who has a bit of everything and lack that offensive touch to put us over the top.

BTW, I believe Huberdeau is just a little bit behind in terms of offensive potential. WOuld be a good pick if we do get better in the next weeks and lose the lottery pick.

SeawaySensFan wrote:

SpezDispenser wrote:

SeawaySensFan wrote:

SpezDispenser wrote:Again, gotta weigh the options really closely. Do we need Mike Richards or Pat Kane?

I personally think it's pretty obvious. You either get a top line of Landeskog - Spezza - Michalek next season, or the status quo. NPH will not step in next season and will be behind Spezza, and possibly Fisher when he finally does step in. Unless he gets converted to wing.

Doesn't matter, if the Sens want RNH as the 2nd line center, then Fisher will be there next year, dealt the summer after next and that's that !

I wouldn't bet on it Spez. We still might end up with a good player in 3 or 4 years but I personally like the addition of an immediate impact player.

Exactly. Get me someone who can step onto the roster right away and give the vets a kick in the Donkey while he takes away their ice time.

asq2 wrote:

SeawaySensFan wrote:I just think that you're stuck then trying to find big wingers for RNH and you already need better wingers for Spezza. Just digging a hole so to speak. That's just the way I see it. Mostly going with my gut on this too.

SeawaySensFan wrote:I wouldn't bet on it Spez. We still might end up with a good player in 3 or 4 years but I personally like the addition of an immediate impact player.

RNH needs wingers but probably less than Landeskog needs a centre. RNH has more potential to be the focal point of the offensive line he plays on whereas Landeskog is unbelievably well-rounded but has questions about his ultimate offensive upside. I also believe that the way to go is to build down the middle.

By adding RNH you're taking away from this team's dependence on Spezza and his injury concerns. It's also a move for the long-term for this franchise - I mean, let's face it, the majority of the players we've begun pinning our hopes on are guys like Karlsson, Rundblad, Cowen, Lehner etc. none of whom is over 20, so with the exception of EK I don't think we can expect them to carry this team in the immediate future. I think getting an asset for when these guys are ready to contend is probably better. And we'll have plenty of time, picks, and potentially cap-space to add ancillary offensive pieces, with the core guy (potentially) already in place.

I get the argument on the other hand that Landeskog is a more rare prospect than a RNH is - generally you can find players similar to Nugent-Hopkins in a draft, but infrequently do you see a guy like Landeskog - but considering our forward situation I think RNH is a piece the team needs more. As far as the "immediate impact player" idea is concerned, I'm curious: when was the last time an 18-year-old played on the Sens? And I'm not sure he's likely to be a big-time impact player at that age.

Lastly, this is potentially the highest we'll have picked in a decade (since Spezza in '01) and could be monumental in deciding the direction of the franchise. With that in mind, I think we'd all regret ending up with the lesser player long-term because we wanted a guy who could step in right away even though we had at best a feeble chance at competing at the time. Now, if you feel Landeskog is the best asset long-term, you go for it and the relative NHL-readiness is just the icing on the cake. But if you think RNH will be the better player 4 years or so from now, you've gotta go with him even if he takes one or two years longer to crack the roster.

Obviously, though, I'd be thrilled to get either and I'm not holding my breath that we will. NJ still sucks, NYI is decimated by injuries and has already begun selling away assets (like Wisniewski), Toronto and Calgary just got owned by the Rangers and Wild, respectively, and Edmonton is just terrible. We've lost a lot of games too but at least recently we've started looking good while doing it.

i agree that NJ will probably stay where they are but i can se them picking up larsson as they are in need of some D. next we're likely to see Edmonton and NYI both those teams need could use RNH but i have a feeling that both would go for that NHL ready player since both are trying to make an impact now(Landeskog). now my hope is some defensemen shoots up in the rankings since both those teams could really use some need in the back. that could leave RNH to be picked 4rth. i think with the burke mentality of improve now, he might be a buyer of some sort in the playoffs while we will in all hopes be sellers. they will likely finish ahead of us + burke doesn't want the bruins getting anymore top 5 picks. now florida, buffalo and calgary could all fall past us. but i think it will depend on the state of teams past the deadline and injuries. i don't see buffalo buying or selling, florida will likely try and sell but might be trading closer to the draft since alot of the players they want to move have multi-years left. calgary might be our threat. for 4rth IMO. basicaly i think we finish in the top 5 but most likely in 4rth. so there's a chance we land RNH


BTW i totally agree we need more of a RNH then a landeskog.

Really, there's only one way to settle this Nugent-Hopkins/Landeskog debate once and for all....


Draft both players.