2019 Draft

[Raskolnikov]

Bovquist has too much offensive skill and is too close to NHL for me to trade.

What about Joker? Of the top 3 D guys is Joker struggling the most and could he get us into top 15?

 

[MassHavoc]

Keith isn't going anywhere.

He has to agree to a trade and has publicly said he won't move.

But, I think Bovquist, and picks could put us back in the top ten....if a team really likes Bovquist over a Caufield.

Plus his contract seems a bargain anymore.

 

[MassHavoc]

Bovquist has too much offensive skill and is too close to NHL for me to trade.

What about Joker? Of the top 3 D guys is Joker struggling the most and could he get us into top 15?

I just think that the D is still the greatest need and you can't afford to be trading potential for possible potential you just have to roll with what you got and try to add more chances to hit the home around on top of it.

 

[LordKOTL]

Bovquist has too much offensive skill and is too close to NHL for me to trade.

What about Joker? Of the top 3 D guys is Joker struggling the most and could he get us into top 15?

Joker's been playing at a completely different level than the rest of our guys. Mitchell is in college. Boqvist is in the CHL. Joker's been NHL and AHL--playing against men, not boys. Case in point: Boqvist went 1.2 PPG (60pnts in 54GP) from the blueline with a +12 this season for London in the CHL. In 2018 Joker's last year for Portland in the CHL he has 1.1 PPG (71 pnts in 63 GP) but was a +47. So on an apples-to-apples comparison, Joker hasn't struggled--he's been playing against tougher competition. We'd have to see what Mitchell and Boqvist do against men at the NHL or AHL to draw an accurate conclusion.

And it's not like Joker's 1st foray into the NHL wasn't head and shoulder's above Duncan Keith's 1st foray into the NHL--at a younger age to boot.

Joker's been respectable on the backend--at least as respectable as a 19-year-old D-man could have been on a team that has relied on the goaltenders to bail out an anemic D for the past 4 years. So far he's looked like a Hjammer-type--which the team absolutely needs. I don't think he's moved unless Stan is adsorbing LSD rectally. Ditto on Boqvist--he does have O-upside, but he's also not a liability in the backend. Plus he can slide.

Mitchell is staying in college, so the point for him is moot.

We have to keep in mind that the draft is not surefire. You can hit a homerun with a top-3 pick like we did in Toews. But you can also hit into a triple-play like we did with Barker. The same goes for lower-1st round picks. Beach, anyone?

At this point I think the 'hawks just have to take stock of what they got and not look for immediate help in the draft ouside of their usual selections--i.e. don't look to mortgage a guys to get back into the top-15. The 'hawks had excellent O last season, and with 5 players all looking for a new contract in the summer of 2020 you know next year we'll have guys playing even better. Guys like Strome & Gus (El Gato is untouchable IMHO) should be playing for their next paycheck, and the 'hawks can take advantage and in turn if they so desire, move them for more of a haul than trying to parlay them into a pick this summer.

 

[KBIB]

Joker excelled in a zone defensive system under Q. JC plays man, he went down for minutes he wasnt going to get on the big club and him going down wasn't a bad thing.

I would trade Boqvist before I trade Joker, he's the real deal.

 

[KBIB]

Joker's been playing at a completely different level than the rest of our guys. Mitchell is in college. Boqvist is in the CHL. Joker's been NHL and AHL--playing against men, not boys. Case in point: Boqvist went 1.2 PPG (60pnts in 54GP) from the blueline with a +12 this season for London in the CHL. In 2018 Joker's last year for Portland in the CHL he has 1.1 PPG (71 pnts in 63 GP) but was a +47. So on an apples-to-apples comparison, Joker hasn't struggled--he's been playing against tougher competition. We'd have to see what Mitchell and Boqvist do against men at the NHL or AHL to draw an accurate conclusion.

And it's not like Joker's 1st foray into the NHL wasn't head and shoulder's above Duncan Keith's 1st foray into the NHL--at a younger age to boot.

Joker's been respectable on the backend--at least as respectable as a 19-year-old D-man could have been on a team that has relied on the goaltenders to bail out an anemic D for the past 4 years. So far he's looked like a Hjammer-type--which the team absolutely needs. I don't think he's moved unless Stan is adsorbing LSD rectally. Ditto on Boqvist--he does have O-upside, but he's also not a liability in the backend. Plus he can slide.

Mitchell is staying in college, so the point for him is moot.

We have to keep in mind that the draft is not surefire. You can hit a homerun with a top-3 pick like we did in Toews. But you can also hit into a triple-play like we did with Barker. The same goes for lower-1st round picks. Beach, anyone?

At this point I think the 'hawks just have to take stock of what they got and not look for immediate help in the draft ouside of their usual selections--i.e. don't look to mortgage a guys to get back into the top-15. The 'hawks had excellent O last season, and with 5 players all looking for a new contract in the summer of 2020 you know next year we'll have guys playing even better. Guys like Strome & Gus (El Gato is untouchable IMHO) should be playing for their next paycheck, and the 'hawks can take advantage and in turn if they so desire, move them for more of a haul than trying to parlay them into a pick this summer.

Barker had "issues" on top of a limited hockey IQ. He was a legitimate forward playing defense. He was a beast on the PP, and that's pretty much it.

Beach was a piece of shit. Tallon knew he was a piece of shit when he drafted him, too.

I don't think scouting doesn't do the due diligence now that it looked past then. Tallon fell in love with size, Beach and Barker had both, instead of skill. Stan and Kelly look for skill and IQ.

You can't teach a box of rocks to become caviar.

 

[Raskolnikov]

Just curious for the knowledgable, but how far does a guy like Turcotte fall just because he committed to Wisconsin?

I assume everyone is wary of a Hayes type situation where you get nothing.

 

[KBIB]

Just curious for the knowledgable, but how far does a guy like Turcotte fall just because he committed to Wisconsin?

I assume everyone is wary of a Hayes type situation where you get nothing.

Turcotte doesn't fall past four

 

[Raskolnikov]

Bryam, Pods, Turcotte

I could see 5.

I kinda hope we go Pods but if the future is Byram/Bovquist/Joker/Mitchel...with the corpses of Keith/Seabs...

maybe thats our shot,

I've been led to be ecstatic whicher of the 3 above goes to the Hawks.

 

[LordKOTL]

Just curious for the knowledgable, but how far does a guy like Turcotte fall just because he committed to Wisconsin?

I assume everyone is wary of a Hayes type situation where you get nothing.

Hayes notwithstanding, generally if a team picks high because they were that bad and didn't win the lottery or get a gifted 1st, they're expecting immediate help. It doesn't always happen; Toews did spend a year as a Sioux. However, if a team was really one of the worst teams in the league chances are they're expecting a young stud (Kane, McJesus, etc.) to come in immediately and help out. How far would they fall? Depends on where the 1st team that doesn't need immediate help picks--and that varies per year. This year I could see that as the Avs since they're neck-deep in the playoffs. The Rags and Devils need immediate help, and the 'hawks have needed D help for seasons now (note: D-help meaning at all skater positions, so a defensively-minded FWD cut from the Toews/Hossa cloth fits the bill more than a Gus-like D-man). It really depends on how much long-game a team is playing vs needing help right now and how much immediate help the kid can give.

Barker had "issues" on top of a limited hockey IQ. He was a legitimate forward playing defense. He was a beast on the PP, and that's pretty much it.

Beach was a piece of shit. Tallon knew he was a piece of shit when he drafted him, too.

I don't think scouting doesn't do the due diligence now that it looked past then. Tallon fell in love with size, Beach and Barker had both, instead of skill. Stan and Kelly look for skill and IQ.

You can't teach a box of rocks to become caviar.

Barker may have had issues, but it was still a wasted pick. Given the Buff experiment, if playing him at a FWD was ever tried (I'm a bit hazy there if it ever happened), it certainly didn't stick. To be fair to the 'hawks Barker was the top-ranked NA skater, but even so: Ladd, Olesz, Bolland, Bickell, Glass, Versteeg, & Brouwer all were more notable Blackhawks than he was--and came out of the same draft class.

As for Beach, yeah, he was touted as a project, but a project that failed miserably. Even so, he was the 7th NA skater. Still was painful considering that Karlsson was like, 2 picks below him.

I wouldn't exonerate Stan though. Tallon had his issues--a ton of them. But Stan is not squeaky clean. He did have that abnormal Runblad fetish that he favored for years, even though Runblad was fake-tits-on-a-zombie level of worthless--not to mention guys like Pisani, trying to force Versteeg, Handzus, & Rosival way past their sell-by date, as well as, if rumor is true, caving to Q and forcing that worthless puke Manning on us.

 

[KBIB]

Hawks Talk Podcast: Building the Blackhawks draft board with Mark Kelley

On the latest edition of the Hawks Talk Podcast, Blackhawks vice president of amateur scouting Mark Kelley joins Pat Boyle and Charlie Roumeliotis to discuss NHL Draft preparations. Kelley talks about whether there’s added pressure in picking third overall, what goes into the scouting meetings...

www.nbcsports.com

This is a draft that needs multiple first rounders.

Byram
Turcotte
Caufield

This is the perfect scenario.

 

[Raskolnikov]

Hawks Talk Podcast: Building the Blackhawks draft board with Mark Kelley

On the latest edition of the Hawks Talk Podcast, Blackhawks vice president of amateur scouting Mark Kelley joins Pat Boyle and Charlie Roumeliotis to discuss NHL Draft preparations. Kelley talks about whether there’s added pressure in picking third overall, what goes into the scouting meetings...

www.nbcsports.com

This is a draft that needs multiple first rounders.

Byram
Turcotte
Caufield

This is the perfect scenario.

Well...if they don't want the D-man given Bovquist, Mitchell, Joker, Forsling, Gus, Keith, Seabs...

Perhaps trade down for Caufield + another ready player...

They are caught between building or

 

[KBIB]

Well...if they don't want the D-man given Bovquist, Mitchell, Joker, Forsling, Gus, Keith, Seabs...

Perhaps trade down for Caufield + another ready player...

They are caught between building or

Caufield just scores.

I can't see anybody not willing to trade up for Byram. There's noise the Avs want Byram. He's going three.

If Caufield is a faster DeBrincat, sign me the **** up. He's also pretty good in his own zone

 

[LordKOTL]

Thing is you can never have too many D-prospects. While I haven't followed Mitchell, Beaudin, or Boqvist as closely as I have Joker, Joker pegs out as a top-4 guy. None of those three have been head-and-shoulders above Joker at the same level--if above (i.e. CHL vs. CHL).

I've heard some compare Byram to top-2 potential--and a lefty to boot. That right there might be the next guy in Keith's D-anchor role.

Not that I'd be against any of the FWDs in the draft--not in the least, but I think it'd be somewhat short-sighted to assume the D-coffers are stacked and everyone will pan out and thus don't draft the D-man. Good D-men are hard to come by and if the 'hawks have multiple middle-pairing guys, they can always trade them out for FWD pieces at a later date.

If Wiz could blag Pahlsson, then Murph, Gus, Joker (if he pans out), Boqvist (if he pans out), Beaudin (if he pans out), or Mitchell (if he pans out) could all pull a #2 or #3 center. That's 6 middle pairing guys we got (potential or proven) and 4 of them could be trade chips.

 

[Probie2429]

Barker and Beach were drafted before the Hawks started pouring more resources into scouting and player development. Hawks have hit on every 1st rounder for awhile now. TT, Hayes, Schmaltz, and Joker are all NHL players with TT looking like a stud. Hawks haven’t had many 1st rounders in the last decade, but they have been good when they have had picks. I can’t see the Hawks missing on the 3rd pick unless they take the Russian and he decides to stay in the KHL long-term. Trust the Hawks’ scouting department and sleep well.

 

[Probie2429]

I’m still leaning towards taking Byram because you simply can’t find top 4 dmen through trade or FA these days. Look at all the forwards that are available in FA this year and compare that to dmen. Karlsson is more of a forward than a dman anyway.

 

[Raskolnikov]

I’m still leaning towards taking Byram because you simply can’t find top 4 dmen through trade or FA these days. Look at all the forwards that are available in FA this year and compare that to dmen. Karlsson is more of a forward than a dman anyway.

Doughty is a bit extreme in my mind.

As a Hawk fine I have a biased opinion due to seeing some of his all-time greatest moments...but he is a guy that should be discussed in top 100 conversations. The Hawks are a thing that happened that changed hockey, and he is one of a select few that vanquished them in their prime...and I say he because they don't win those series without him. Quick and Him, but alot of him.

So to say Byram is Doughty to me is draft pressure I don't believe in. Or "next Gretsky" type talk...etc...with a Jack Hughes...

too often you will be disappointed. I think an all-star game or two is even a high mark to judge a #3 pick...but is a reachable mark that certainly justifies the selection.

Given the KHL fears on Pods, and Turcotte hip, and fact that the Hawks have enough scoring already, as well as tradable

 

[ruprecht]

Kakko making a pretty strong case to be #1.

 

[ZOMBIE@CTESPN]

 

[Raskolnikov]

I accept our fate.