Ottawa Senators (present and past) TIDBITS & QUICK HITS!

Flo The Action wrote:So weird to see some names slip and slip and slip. Sens pass on raty.

I think it’s weird because Raty is a sure bet to be an NHLer. I think his floor is 3rd line C. He could still be a top 6 C. I would definitely take him.

tim1_2 wrote:Yeah, tough to harp on the Sens picks when:

A) This draft and this draft year is very wonky.
B) They have a proven track record.
C) The guys they picked seem like good picks regardless of where they were picked.
D) Teams always make "off the board" selections.

wprager wrote:There was some talk that the Rangers were very high on Boucher, explaining why they didn't trade down. A middle-round pick is not worth the risk of missing *the* player you are really high on.

I can't really comment on the others except to say I'm ok with them not getting a goalie. Too much hype and too little history showing how you can make this kind of assessment on 17-18 year olds (assessment being they are franchise altering picks).

wprager wrote:There was some talk that the Rangers were very high on Boucher, explaining why they didn't trade down. A middle-round pick is not worth the risk of missing *the* player you are really high on.

I can't really comment on the others except to say I'm ok with them not getting a goalie. Too much hype and too little history showing how you can make this kind of assessment on 17-18 year olds (assessment being they are franchise altering picks).

Ev wrote:

wprager wrote:There was some talk that the Rangers were very high on Boucher, explaining why they didn't trade down. A middle-round pick is not worth the risk of missing *the* player you are really high on.

I can't really comment on the others except to say I'm ok with them not getting a goalie. Too much hype and too little history showing how you can make this kind of assessment on 17-18 year olds (assessment being they are franchise altering picks).

Everyone’s an expert from their couch come draft time. It’s sad.

Flo The Action wrote:

Ev wrote:

wprager wrote:There was some talk that the Rangers were very high on Boucher, explaining why they didn't trade down. A middle-round pick is not worth the risk of missing *the* player you are really high on.

I can't really comment on the others except to say I'm ok with them not getting a goalie. Too much hype and too little history showing how you can make this kind of assessment on 17-18 year olds (assessment being they are franchise altering picks).

Everyone’s an expert from their couch come draft time. It’s sad.

It’s not just people at home. A bunch of hockey writers are giving Ottawa a bad grade for the how they made their selections or the selections themselves.
I still have to do some reading up to do on the last two we drafted but the overall theme seems to be size. We just drafted big guys. I’m not overly excited like I usually am.

Ev wrote:

Flo The Action wrote:

Ev wrote:

wprager wrote:There was some talk that the Rangers were very high on Boucher, explaining why they didn't trade down. A middle-round pick is not worth the risk of missing *the* player you are really high on.

I can't really comment on the others except to say I'm ok with them not getting a goalie. Too much hype and too little history showing how you can make this kind of assessment on 17-18 year olds (assessment being they are franchise altering picks).

Everyone’s an expert from their couch come draft time. It’s sad.

It’s not just people at home. A bunch of hockey writers are giving Ottawa a bad grade for the how they made their selections or the selections themselves.
I still have to do some reading up to do on the last two we drafted but the overall theme seems to be size. We just drafted big guys. I’m not overly excited like I usually am.

Wasn’t bashing you personally for the record

Draft grades literally don’t matter. the same “writers” and “analysts” (who are not experts)  said the same thing last fall, then just about every pick Ottawa made had fantastic development seasons. People bashed on Pinto and he looks great. People bashed on Sanderson and now he might be the best or second best prospect on defense in hockey. Hell even morons such as Wheeler bashed on Stutzle, who everyone had as a top 2-3 picks aside from some stat nerds, and we all know how he looks. People bashed the tkachuk pick incessantly too.

There’s no way they draft just for size - it’s a combination  of everything. To me size is very important though. We are building a Boston/LA cup winning type of team. We don’t want a Toronto maple leafs roster.

I have no idea who the players we drafted are outside of Boucher, who I was studying pre-draft as he checked all the boxes for Ottawa. The second rounder out of Vancouver looks legitimate in his film though. Some of the players didn’t even play at all last year - it’s literally the least scouted and toughest draft to get right of all time

I wouldn’t say they had a good draft or a bad one at this juncture. All these guys could bust and it will make no difference for our future though. Our future will hinge on the core we already have.

tim1_2 wrote:

Ev wrote:

Flo The Action wrote:

Ev wrote:

wprager wrote:There was some talk that the Rangers were very high on Boucher, explaining why they didn't trade down. A middle-round pick is not worth the risk of missing *the* player you are really high on.

I can't really comment on the others except to say I'm ok with them not getting a goalie. Too much hype and too little history showing how you can make this kind of assessment on 17-18 year olds (assessment being they are franchise altering picks).

Everyone’s an expert from their couch come draft time. It’s sad.

It’s not just people at home. A bunch of hockey writers are giving Ottawa a bad grade for the how they made their selections or the selections themselves.
I still have to do some reading up to do on the last two we drafted but the overall theme seems to be size. We just drafted big guys. I’m not overly excited like I usually am.

Wasn’t bashing you personally for the record

Draft grades literally don’t matter. the same “writers” and “analysts” (who are not experts)  said the same thing last fall, then just about every pick Ottawa made had fantastic development seasons. People bashed on Pinto and he looks great. People bashed on Sanderson and now he might be the best or second best prospect on defense in hockey. Hell even morons such as Wheeler bashed on Stutzle, who everyone had as a top 2-3 picks aside from some stat nerds, and we all know how he looks. People bashed the tkachuk pick incessantly too.

There’s no way they draft just for size - it’s a combination  of everything. To me size is very important though. We are building a Boston/LA cup winning type of team. We don’t want a Toronto maple leafs roster.

I have no idea who the players we drafted are outside of Boucher, who I was studying pre-draft as he checked all the boxes for Ottawa. The second rounder out of Vancouver looks legitimate in his film though. Some of the players didn’t even play at all last year - it’s literally the least scouted and toughest draft to get right of all time

I wouldn’t say they had a good draft or a bad one at this juncture. All these guys could bust and it will make no difference for our future though. Our future will hinge on the core we already have.

Yeah, I get the writers and "analysts" Dung on teams' drafts....they need to do that, and their entire basis of rating drafts is if a team drafts the next player that is ranked highly on some list or not.  You'd think Ottawa would have garnered a bit more of the benefit of the doubt from at least its own fan base given how the last few drafts have gone, but apparently people are still brain washed.

wprager wrote:Like I said, Boucher, specifically was rumoured to be targeted by the Rangers, explaining why they didn't trade down.

Flo The Action wrote:

tim1_2 wrote:

Ev wrote:

Flo The Action wrote:

Ev wrote:

wprager wrote:There was some talk that the Rangers were very high on Boucher, explaining why they didn't trade down. A middle-round pick is not worth the risk of missing *the* player you are really high on.

I can't really comment on the others except to say I'm ok with them not getting a goalie. Too much hype and too little history showing how you can make this kind of assessment on 17-18 year olds (assessment being they are franchise altering picks).

Everyone’s an expert from their couch come draft time. It’s sad.

It’s not just people at home. A bunch of hockey writers are giving Ottawa a bad grade for the how they made their selections or the selections themselves.
I still have to do some reading up to do on the last two we drafted but the overall theme seems to be size. We just drafted big guys. I’m not overly excited like I usually am.

Wasn’t bashing you personally for the record

Draft grades literally don’t matter. the same “writers” and “analysts” (who are not experts)  said the same thing last fall, then just about every pick Ottawa made had fantastic development seasons. People bashed on Pinto and he looks great. People bashed on Sanderson and now he might be the best or second best prospect on defense in hockey. Hell even morons such as Wheeler bashed on Stutzle, who everyone had as a top 2-3 picks aside from some stat nerds, and we all know how he looks. People bashed the tkachuk pick incessantly too.

There’s no way they draft just for size - it’s a combination  of everything. To me size is very important though. We are building a Boston/LA cup winning type of team. We don’t want a Toronto maple leafs roster.

I have no idea who the players we drafted are outside of Boucher, who I was studying pre-draft as he checked all the boxes for Ottawa. The second rounder out of Vancouver looks legitimate in his film though. Some of the players didn’t even play at all last year - it’s literally the least scouted and toughest draft to get right of all time

I wouldn’t say they had a good draft or a bad one at this juncture. All these guys could bust and it will make no difference for our future though. Our future will hinge on the core we already have.

Yeah, I get the writers and "analysts" Dung on teams' drafts....they need to do that, and their entire basis of rating drafts is if a team drafts the next player that is ranked highly on some list or not.  You'd think Ottawa would have garnered a bit more of the benefit of the doubt from at least its own fan base given how the last few drafts have gone, but apparently people are still brain washed.

I don’t think (or maybe I’m wrong, I’m not on Twitter much) that fans bash the players they pick. It’s more a question of asset management or if there are other types of players they should be going for. The boucher pick is an interesting pick. Could very well turn out to be a great power forward down the line. It’s just that if that was their guy, they could have dropped back a few and still get him.
We also passed on some more interesting, higher ceiling picks IMO with our seconds to draft guys that could have been had later on.

Where we are situated in terms of talent in the system, I’d personally want them to take swings at guys who are more skillful and could pan out to be top 6 guys. Even if there is a bust factor. We can risk that at this moment. Not that our picks were safe but they were guys that projected to be top 9 or bottom pairing with less output.

It was said that they drafted for guys that fill the grit needs we could have. But those guys just generally form anyways and they are usually easy enough to trade for for a minimal cost.

I guess I have a different philosophy than pierre Dorion when it comes to what I’d get the team to draft.

DefenceWinsChampionships wrote:Take this with a grain of salt. Posted from Hockeybuzz