Link67

in my opinion Broberg is a bit of a better choice over Heinola, they may have both played in adult leagues but the way their games translate against larger opponents is what really matters when you look at it. When a draft eligible player is playing against men, you aren't truly looking at how he handles higher skilled players, but how he handles a more mature, heavier and stronger game impacting his own. Of course all of it matters to some degree, but no matter where he is playing, if you are trying to evaluate him based on how he handled one league's skill vs another, it will still never come close to adding up to what he will see in the NHL. How his decisions are affected by the bigger stronger players, how he manages bigger stronger guys in his own zone, how he manages the physicality he will have to endure night after night, does his individual skills get diminished by that reality or not, etc. To me, that is what truly matters when I am trying to see if a skilled player can handle things once he gets to the NHL, the skill part of his evaluation, i keep individualized, and in this case I feel that Broberg has a bit of a higher ceiling. They will both be effective and very good NHL Dmen who can drive offence, but Broberg looks like he can cap out as a #1, and Heinola looks like he caps out as a #2. For that reason though, I doubt very highly that Broberg is still there at 15, and Heinola more likely will be, so that looks like our guy if we are indeed picking a D, and I would be very happy with that choice.

I'm going to go against the grain here and say, if we can get Karlsson to come here, it should be to play on his offside, on a top pair with Weber, and to play the minutes he will be paid to play. I don't want him playing on a second pair, I don't want Gardiner if we get Karlsson to then have to trade Petry, who is a better version of Gardiner while not costing us the same kind of cap and term Gardiner would. Karlsson, for me, is the main target, Gardiner is the consolation prize, but I honestly doubt he wants anything to do with another fishbowl market that will start social media raging every time he turns it over. A top 3 of Karlsson, Weber, and Petry is the stuff dreams are made of, handedness be damned, if anyone can handle playing his offside along side of Weber, it would be an elite defender like Karlsson. I've said it earlier in the offseason and i'll say it again, Karlsson should be target #1 on the UFA market, it doesn't mean we are going to get him, but anything else should be plan B.

I agree that if Drouin is the main piece in a deal, that is fine, or if the 15th pick is the main piece in a deal, that is fine. But I do not in any way, see how you could justify making both a part of a package for Gostisbehere, without having seriously overpaid at that point.

That would make it an overpay imo, If we have to throw in a forward with our 1st rounder, it would have to be in the Lehkonen range of value, our pick is the 15th not the 25th. Either way I think there is something that could be done if we do in fact offer our 15th pick in a conversation that involves Gostisbehere, and i would be all for it due to his age. But there really is no one else on LD worth throwing our 15th pick at that could be available, it is literally only him because of his age, his contract, and skill set.

Leddy just doesn't fit the need here, we need to acquire the kind of LD that makes it a no brainer, no discussion, to whether or not He or Mete are better off on the top pair, anything less, and you might as well just stick with status quo, which we obviously don't want. What we ideally want to find is a guy who bumps Mete with Petry, and Kulak down to solidify the 3rd pair, no rolling the dice, no "Our Compliments" brand top 4 LD. Another Petry type of guy who shoots left would be great, something slightly less would be acceptable, either way, I am hoping that is the kind of hunt we are on.

IMO, Mete post Bouchard/AHL time was our best LD down the stretch but Kulak offered very serviceable minutes, and at 1.85, no problem here.

Heinola is pretty much the best LD puck mover available from the 15 - 30 rank in my estimation, had a fantastic season against men for a rookie and some nice playoff production for a rookie. Lavoie, I have a feeling won't be available by our turn, especially with his playoff performance now, but you never know.

His scouting report is riddled with below average compete level, seems like the type of player they would steer clear of at this point. Raphael Lavoie or Ville Heinola, in my opinion, would be potentially available at #15, and either one would be a fantastic addition to the current prospect pool.

Seriously, there is no reason why they can't have a look at the jumbotron, and see the same replays that analysts, and fans, are going to be seeing and torching them over the next day. Take the 20 seconds it takes to watch the replays live on the big screen in the 3 angles they show and in slow mo at every damn game. Problem solved, they see what we see, no phone calls, no bs, just a simple, "Hold on guys i'm taking a look at this real quick to make sure i got that last call right.....Nope, totally buggered it, the goal does no stand because there was a hand pass back there that I missed in the action, face off in the offensive zone, lets go." There is seriously something wrong if the people at home watching, and commentators/analysts, can tell within 30 seconds of a play that something blatant is missed, but the actual refs have to do this job with 100% accuracy, in real time only? How many times could a play, a penalty, or a goal, be overturned just by simply watching the multiple angles on the jumbotron for 30 seconds, we have to stop acting like this would take 5 min of our time every time. That would only be the case if everything they wanted to see had to go through Toronto, if they can see what we see, they would be able to make quick decisions on a matter if they felt it was conclusive enough to over turn their prior judgement. How many times would they look up and see a replay of 2 guys going at it in a scrum, and notice the guy they didn't penalize started the whole thing with a cross check under the ribs that went undetected and you only penalized one guy for retaliation? They could then over turn their previous decision and penalize the other guy as well, as it should have, instead we hear the analysts talk about that's just how it is, it is always the guy who retaliates that gets the call. How many weak penalties could be over turned with a quick look at the replay on the jumbotron, the same one the player watches in the box before he starts freaking out about how bad of a call it was in the box? How many diving calls get changed? How many players near the crease get off on situations where the D from the other team shoves him into his own goalie, but all the refs see is a body tumbling over the goalie and call it right then and there? The list of potential resolutions something this simple would provide goes on and on, the fact it hasn't even been introduced yet, to me, is a joke, and complete utter nonsense, it is like stubborn and dated views of how this game should be officiated still remain, impeding logical progress as a result. Lets keep officiating the game on the ice the same way we did 30 years ago, even though the game has sped up leaps and bounds since then, making it insanely difficult to nail every call from ice level, that should work just fine...

I'll gladly accept any offensive minded LD added to the prospect pool at this time and hope for a breakout at some point.

He's no genius, every GM is capable of mistakes, but he is among the top of his class, and no GM can be lucky enough to keep a championship caliber team for over a decade without some pretty good skills at his craft. Now did he string his team along for too long when his main catalysts were starting to fade? Of course, i'm sure if you talked to him he would admit the same, but he learned something from that I am sure. If he could do it again I bet he pulls the plug and goes into rebuild mode right around when Babcock's contract was expiring and Datsyuk and Zetterberg were on the edge of the twilight zone. Instead of being forced into a rebuild now like they are with little to show for. Still, they were lucky enough, if you want to call it that, to add guys like Larkin and Mantha to their young core moving forward. He still remains the most qualified and competent exec that team has hired in quite some time. I expect to see him do like he did in Detroit, surround himself with good hockey guys, take this roster to new heights, draft well, hire well, and be a big factor in whether they finally jump the hurdle and start turning into a championship caliber team themselves. Is he slightly overrated because of the success in Detroit? Surely, never as good as your best, and never as bad as your worst, but that is still one hell of an upgrade for the Edmonton organization.

Well, that would likely be the best non-player personnel acquisition they have in at least a decade, I expect Holland will right that ship in ways no one before him could figure out, the man is a brilliant GM really.

I'm not sure the rationale behind skepticism though, we are not talking about bringing him in on a 3 or 4 million dollar 1 year deal here. We are realistically talking about a PTO or even a really cheap 1 year deal to retire a Hab, got to stop acting like we will be entering these negotiations on the same grounds as last time around. The fact he could potentially be an insurance policy on LD and pull it off to some degree if we place him in the right role is just simply a byproduct of how bad a state the LD position on this team is. If he is even 50% of the Markov that left here, he could prove he can still be useful on a PTO, or a cheap 1 year deal. Even if he comes in and ends up getting the Plekanec treatment because other pieces within the organization bounce him out, what's the harm in that? I don't see how that hurts us in anyway, because there is still the possibility that he is useful enough to plug into the line up every other game or so, with managed minutes and lots of PP time next to Weber. If not then someone in the organization shows there is a solution at LD, and we send him back home, retired a Hab, and the chapter closed properly and once and for all. At the very least we should be exploring the option if we can't land any big fish LD via trade by August.

I welcome giving him an opportunity to crack the roster, he could probably still be a serviceable 18 min a night guy.

I think Tatar like production is the middling average of what he could translate to in the NHL, his ceiling imo could be somewhere near a Mitch Marner, that high skill, crafty, hockey genius stuff could take him far, if everything works out amazingly in his development.

But do we really want to go through the whole Center is playing Wing thing again? Lol

They have shown us they are not afraid to award a roster spot to any youngster having a hell of a training camp, that ball is in their court, nothing will or should be handed to them. Regardless of how Suzuki or Poehling have done this year, next September, they will have to prove themselves a new, if they succeed, they will earn their spot, if they fail, they will continue to develop in Laval, as they should. You can't leave your team's depth floating down the river because you are counting on a couple of kids to show up at training camp and knock your socks off, they can just as easily show you they might need some time in the minors, and you now have to go last minute shopping for depth forwards. I'd much rather sign the Oulettes of the world and bury them in the minors if a youngster surpasses them, than not have the Oulettes of the world around incase none of the kids prove worthy yet.

It is obvious they wouldn't be "Heavy" enough to deal with the teams built that way, but are those teams fast enough to keep up to the pace we are built for? You build your team a certain way, and you run with it, you can't expect to be a great team in every facet, there is no such thing. Some teams are built fast, some heavy, some teams are built around a couple really high end skilled players, some are built deep and play a hard working team oriented game. The list goes on of the variety of ways these things get put together, one thing is for sure, there is no team that has great speed, really heavy, Is very deep, has a couple high end skilled guys, and works extremely hard at both ends of the ice. That team, if it existed, would be a cup winner every season, no point even playing. I am not convinced in the slightest that a team with smaller, very fast guys, who have a bulldog, hard nosed,mentality, would get moped up by a heavier, slower team in the playoffs. A bunch of smaller guys who shy away from contact, sure that team will suffocate when the game tightens up. Guys like Domi, Gallagher, Shaw, Byron, Danault, not really in their DNA, i'm not worried about entering a playoff run with those kind of warriors. What would worry me about them in the playoffs currently is the fact they are an incomplete team, missing some key pieces to truly tie it all together as a team who can do some damage and go on a run. But certainly not how they play the game and who they have playing it that way, these guys are built on speed and tenacity, and tenacity is as important a stat, not on paper, during the playoffs as any. There are simply big holes that need filling holding them back from reaching their potential, but it is certainly a model that can work when fully constructed, properly.

When I saw this on my feed, I couldn't help but think to myself, I've seen this kind of sorcery before, that kind of blend of skill and crafty thinking....

Our center line looks the best it has in years, and with Poehling and Suzuki adding themselves in the crowded mix, it looks even better. Our LD situation however has looked like its worst in years, so I have to ask, what makes you guys think the extra cap we have gathered should be spent on yet another Center, instead of a top 4 LD? Unless this team plans on using Domi or Danault in a trade for a LD, then I would understand signing Duchene as a replacement, otherwise I just don't get it, and would consider it an ill advised move, personally.

Our fanbase does not have the patience or rationale to deal with Gardiner's odd blunders, he will get paid good money and be micro scrutinized game after game. Quite frankly I think his treatment in Toronto will have him running from a similar market like our own on July 1st. The pieces just don't fit other than he drives offense and we lack that on the Left side, he will get torn to shreds here by media and fans, it is easy to predict.

I can honestly see him as a double digit goal scorer in the 35 point range from the bottom 6 position, with occasional PP, and top 6 play when injuries hit. I will gladly accept that for 1.4 mill

This has a Paul Byron scenario written all over it, how we got him for 1.4 mill for 2 years, I don't know. What I do know is when bodies start dropping, and he moves up the line up to fill in, he will translate the same performances regardless of line up spot, just like Byron has during his time here. I was very pleased with how Weal played for us, he blew every depth player acquisition away since Paul Byron. Just another guy who needed a solid chance in the right situation to showcase what he can bring to the table. In our case, being built around speed and transition was a peanut butter and jelly type of union for the player and the team, both for Byron and now, Weal.

For me personally, Gardner is not the solution, the solution has to be someone you can at least some what trust against the other team's big lines for 22+ min a night. I can't say based on what I see of Gardner all year that I would trust him out there night after night against the big lines any more than I trust Mete, so why overpay for the same risk? Edler I can live with, he is more steady and trustworthy and still carries a good transition game, but he won't be that good for much longer. Karlsson provides the most obvious upgrade, though he occasionally looks soft in his own zone, his pros far outweigh his cons, and he is used to the role we would require of him, big minutes against big lines. The way I'm seeing this, the right player in UFA is a long shot, getting Karlsson to sign here would be a monumental task, but one we must try none the less. The consolation prize, and still not very ideal, but acceptable, would be Edler. But I think honestly if we can't land Karlsson, the ideal; solution would come from a trade, for a LD about to be commanding bigger money which we can handle but his current team might not be. Or a cap strapped team looking to shed some salary from the middle of their D core perhaps. Maybe even make the move at the draft depending on the situation and the asking price,