DickieDunn 2,571 Report post Posted April 26, 2017 Starting at the '14 draft, going back: Haydn Fleury Darnell Nurse Mark Schiefele Jeff Skinner Nazem Kadri Colin Wilson Jakub Voracek Kyle Okposo Jack Skille Rostislav Olesz Ryan Suter Joffrey Lupul Mike Komisarek Lars Jonsson So not many real stars, not many busts either. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
LeftWinger 4,959 Report post Posted April 26, 2017 Yah, it'd be great if we could land a Kyle Okposo or Ryan Suter type at #7ish. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BadgerBob 297 Report post Posted April 26, 2017 I'd say Jack Skille is definitely a bust for being drafted that high. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Andy Pred 48 337 Report post Posted April 26, 2017 I'd say that Kenny would find a bust at the #7 pick ! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ChristopherReevesLegs 7,022 Report post Posted April 26, 2017 Shawn Burr - 1984 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PavelValerievichDatsyuk 1,935 Report post Posted April 27, 2017 You left out Matt Dumba in 2012. With Suter that's 2 top pairing defencemen in the bunch. 2 high end #7 picks: Shane Doan in 1994, Jason Arnott in 1993 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
LeftWinger 4,959 Report post Posted April 27, 2017 Cannot forget Rodney Presswood in 1963. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
chaps80 1,591 Report post Posted April 27, 2017 Nurse, Schiefele, Skinner, Suter, Dumba, Voracek, Okposo I'd be more than happy with. 2 DRW Dominance and PavelValerievichDatsyuk reacted to this Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DickieDunn 2,571 Report post Posted April 27, 2017 The point isn't cherry picking busts or superstars. The point is we should be expecting a good player but not necessarily a cornerstone type player.Sent from my LGLS676 using Tapatalk 1 chaps80 reacted to this Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
chaps80 1,591 Report post Posted April 27, 2017 7 minutes ago, DickieDunn said: The point isn't cherry picking busts or superstars. The point is we should be expecting a good player but not necessarily a cornerstone type player. Sent from my LGLS676 using Tapatalk Gotcha. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kliq 3,755 Report post Posted April 27, 2017 1 hour ago, Jonas Mahonas said: You're not going to get an Yzerman in the 7th draft spot. I doubt you will even get an Yzerman with the 1st pick, but you're probably right. To be fair though, who knows if we are even picking 7th, its all still up in the air. 2 PavelValerievichDatsyuk and krsmith17 reacted to this Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
joesuffP 1,746 Report post Posted April 27, 2017 Absolutely no more wingers 1 F.Michael reacted to this Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Bannedforlife 403 Report post Posted April 27, 2017 Stars selected after the seventh pick Lundquist (205) Keith (54) Seabrook (14) Parise (17) Getzlaf (19) Burns (20) Perry (28) Bergeron (45) Weber (49) Pavelski (205) Byfuglien (245) Green (29) Rinne (258) Kopitar (11) Rask (21) Letang (62) Quick (72) Bishop (85) Yandle (105) Giroux (22) Marchand (71) Couture (9) Shattenkirk (14) Subban (43) Simmonds (61) Benn (129) Karlsson (15) Holtby (83) Tarasenko (16) Faulk (37) Gaudreau (104) Forsberg (11) 4 chaps80, krsmith17, PavelValerievichDatsyuk and 1 other reacted to this Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
krsmith17 7,191 Report post Posted April 27, 2017 1 hour ago, Bannedforlife said: Stars selected after the seventh pick ..................... This. Why constrict it just to the players that were picked at number 7? We should be looking at players that have recently been "available" at number 7. There are steals in every single draft, it's just a matter of finding that gem. There will be a franchise type player available for us to pick wherever we end up picking, I just hope we make the right decision... 2 PavelValerievichDatsyuk and F.Michael reacted to this Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Nondescript_D 22 Report post Posted April 27, 2017 Nurse's sister Tamika played PG for my alma mater (BGSU). She was a lil' cutie (in street clothes...basketball uniforms..unlike volleyball..aren't very flattering) I would LOVE to trade up from the second to the mid teens....take a run at C's like Suzuki, Glass or a D like Foote or Hague. Say "no" to Makar...we have him already in Vili and Hronek Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DickieDunn 2,571 Report post Posted April 27, 2017 3 hours ago, krsmith17 said: This. Why constrict it just to the players that were picked at number 7? We should be looking at players that have recently been "available" at number 7. There are steals in every single draft, it's just a matter of finding that gem. There will be a franchise type player available for us to pick wherever we end up picking, I just hope we make the right decision... I used #7 because that's where they're sitting right now. Those players were taken later because they weren't as highly regarded. The players I listed are the types that are generally considered to be worthy of a #7 pick. Similar types went in the 6-9 range. Again, some busts, some that ended up being elite level players, but mostly just guys who are good. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
krsmith17 7,191 Report post Posted April 27, 2017 43 minutes ago, DickieDunn said: I used #7 because that's where they're sitting right now. Those players were taken later because they weren't as highly regarded. The players I listed are the types that are generally considered to be worthy of a #7 pick. Similar types went in the 6-9 range. Again, some busts, some that ended up being elite level players, but mostly just guys who are good. I understand why you used that criteria, I'm just saying that, in my opinion, it should be expanded beyond the picks made at #7. If we do end up picking 7th overall, we have the opportunity to pick from a dozen or so players, any of which could become anything from a complete bust to a future Hall-of-Famer... Look at the 2008 draft where Nashville took Wilson at 7. Chances are they had their eyes on many other players before they made their final decision. Maybe one of them was Karlsson (maybe not). The point is, at number 7 you're not always going to get an elite talent, but there is always elite talent available. 1 F.Michael reacted to this Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DickieDunn 2,571 Report post Posted April 27, 2017 And like I said, expand it to picks 6-10 or whatever you want, you're going to get a similar mix of players. Go back farther than 9 or 10 though, you get higher chances of not getting a star and a lesser chance of getting one. It doesn't change my original point at all. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
krsmith17 7,191 Report post Posted April 27, 2017 So what is your original point? Just to say that we aren't guaranteed a star at #7? Because that I agree with, and the same can be said if we win a lottery pick as well. It's common sense that the later you draft in each round, the less likely you are to get a star, especially with the way scouting is today. My point is that just because we aren't guaranteed a star at #7 (or wherever we end up), it is still very possible that we could land an elite, build-your-team-around type player. Will it be Vilardi? Glass? Tippett? Suzuki? Liljegren? Or some other lesser known? Who knows... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Buppy 1,720 Report post Posted April 27, 2017 5 hours ago, krsmith17 said: This. Why constrict it just to the players that were picked at number 7? We should be looking at players that have recently been "available" at number 7. There are steals in every single draft, it's just a matter of finding that gem. There will be a franchise type player available for us to pick wherever we end up picking, I just hope we make the right decision... Well, not really that. 30-odd players in like 12 draft years...less than 2% of the players drafted. There really isn't a "right" decision in that regard. There are no franchise type players available, a lot of years there isn't even a franchise player at #1. There are a ton of players with franchise potential, but only a rare few will fulfill that potential. Many of those that do will be those showing few if any signs of even having that potential at draft time. The luxury of picking high is that you'll almost certainly have multiple options of players showing good signs of that potential, and there's a high chance that those players will at the very least become good. But there's no skill in picking stars, it's luck. Sure, you can be hopeful. Can even be hopeful at 15 or 25 or 45. Just don't expect too much. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DickieDunn 2,571 Report post Posted April 27, 2017 So what is your original point? Just to say that we aren't guaranteed a star at #7? Because that I agree with, and the same can be said if we win a lottery pick as well. It's common sense that the later you draft in each round, the less likely you are to get a star, especially with the way scouting is today. My point is that just because we aren't guaranteed a star at #7 (or wherever we end up), it is still very possible that we could land an elite, build-your-team-around type player. Will it be Vilardi? Glass? Tippett? Suzuki? Liljegren? Or some other lesser known? Who knows...It was to show the type of guy we can expect. Sent from my LGLS676 using Tapatalk Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
krsmith17 7,191 Report post Posted April 27, 2017 37 minutes ago, Buppy said: Well, not really that. 30-odd players in like 12 draft years...less than 2% of the players drafted. There really isn't a "right" decision in that regard. There are no franchise type players available, a lot of years there isn't even a franchise player at #1. There are a ton of players with franchise potential, but only a rare few will fulfill that potential. Many of those that do will be those showing few if any signs of even having that potential at draft time. The luxury of picking high is that you'll almost certainly have multiple options of players showing good signs of that potential, and there's a high chance that those players will at the very least become good. But there's no skill in picking stars, it's luck. Sure, you can be hopeful. Can even be hopeful at 15 or 25 or 45. Just don't expect too much. Maybe I shouldn't have said "franchise type player", because I assume you took that strictly as the Yzerman, Sakic, Gretzky, Lemieux, Crosby, McDavid, types. What I said initially -elite, is what I'm referring to, and there absolutely are elite players available every year at or after the number 7 pick. The bolded I completely disagree with. Sure, there is some luck involved, but there's definitely a ton of skill involved in drafting of these 17/18 year old kids. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Buppy 1,720 Report post Posted April 27, 2017 1 hour ago, krsmith17 said: Maybe I shouldn't have said "franchise type player", because I assume you took that strictly as the Yzerman, Sakic, Gretzky, Lemieux, Crosby, McDavid, types. What I said initially -elite, is what I'm referring to, and there absolutely are elite players available every year at or after the number 7 pick. The bolded I completely disagree with. Sure, there is some luck involved, but there's definitely a ton of skill involved in drafting of these 17/18 year old kids. Franchise, elite, star...whatever you want to call it. Very few players in any given year are even NHL caliber players on draft day. Drafting is an evaluation of potential, not current ability. But potential won't always be reached. What a player can become is not necessarily what they will become. There are a lot more players who have star potential than there are players who will actually be stars. There is skill in recognizing potential, but not in predicting the degree of achievement. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
krsmith17 7,191 Report post Posted April 27, 2017 2 hours ago, Buppy said: Franchise, elite, star...whatever you want to call it. Very few players in any given year are even NHL caliber players on draft day. Drafting is an evaluation of potential, not current ability. But potential won't always be reached. What a player can become is not necessarily what they will become. There are a lot more players who have star potential than there are players who will actually be stars. There is skill in recognizing potential, but not in predicting the degree of achievement. No skill. All luck. I think I'm getting it now... But you give LeftWinger a hard time because he thinks some here would make good scouts... I guess you feel people on here wouldn't be lucky enough... Anyway, what does this have to do with anything I was saying? There are stars picked after 7th overall every single year, in every single draft. My point is, there will be stars available for us to pick wherever we end up, we just need to pick the right player (or luck into it...). 1 kliq reacted to this Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Bannedforlife 403 Report post Posted April 27, 2017 (edited) This entire argument obviously depends on your definition of a "star player", but there are currently more All Stars playing in the NHL that were selected 7th overall or later than in the top 6. There are also more players in the Hall of Fame that were selected 7th or later. Edited April 27, 2017 by Bannedforlife 1 krsmith17 reacted to this Share this post Link to post Share on other sites