Remainder of Flyers 2024 Draft Discussion

[flyercanuck]

9 hours ago, radoran said:

 

I'm not saying I would have done it, I'm saying they said they didn't go BPA they went BCA.

 

And maybe not even that....consensus was Helenius. 

[flyercanuck]

11 hours ago, radoran said:

 

All in all, pending how the kids develop, not a bad draft.

 

But certainly not a game changer.

 

So more of the same as every other draft (not counting Michkov falling into their lap) and the reason we always are where we always are. 

 

FOR THE LOVE OF GOD.....BLOW THIS THING UP!!!

Edited July 1 by flyercanuck

[OccamsRazor]

1 hour ago, flyercanuck said:

 

 

It's rare that I like the kid drafted and hate the draft. This is one of those times.

 

We are 'supposedly" in a rebuild. On the face of it, we have many draft picks. Last year we got lucky and had a potential franchise type player fall into our laps. This wasn't by any genius move by Flyers front office, this was a player who should have went 2nd or 3rd, fall to 7th. He'd go 1st in some drafts. This year, we had a potential top pair defenceman fall into our laps. The guy was rated by almost everyone in the 4-8 range, and we could have had him 12th. 

 

I think Luchanko will make the NHL in a few years, and it doesn't matter if its 2 or 3 or 4 years. He plays the game right. He'll be a fan favorite. That's all well  and good. But just look at what some of the other teams did, and have done at the draft, stockpiling several more blue chip prospects, and it's no wonder the Flyers are never a threat to do anything. 

 

As mentioned above and I mentioned it before, we trade back, pick up an asset, then dump it to move up in a later round and reach for a player we likely could have had anyway....who projects as a depth player! We're watching teams like Chicago and SJ building the Taj Mahal, Burj Khalifa, St. Basils Cathedral, Ankor Wat and the great Pyramids, and Briere and co. are using Lego blocks. 

 

I know but having the same agent as Cutter scared them off.

 

I get it.

 

But in 2 years when he walks to another team and the Flyers are left with nothing to show for it you would have been livid they took the risk.

[ruxpin]

2 hours ago, flyercanuck said:

It's rare that I like the kid drafted and hate the draft. This is one of those times.

 

We are 'supposedly" in a rebuild. On the face of it, we have many draft picks. Last year we got lucky and had a potential franchise type player fall into our laps. This wasn't by any genius move by Flyers front office, this was a player who should have went 2nd or 3rd, fall to 7th. He'd go 1st in some drafts. This year, we had a potential top pair defenceman fall into our laps. The guy was rated by almost everyone in the 4-8 range, and we could have had him 12th. 

 

I think Luchanko will make the NHL in a few years, and it doesn't matter if its 2 or 3 or 4 years. He plays the game right. He'll be a fan favorite.

 

This is completely where I am.   I truly hope he does well.   But I hate the Flyers draft.   Other than Luch, they shouldn't have bothered showing up.  And even with his pick I believe they could have done so much better.

 

I do think it's the pitfalls of a novice GM and sports commentator running a team.   I think Briere still will get there.

[mojo1917]

2 hours ago, flyer4ever said:

The GM could have had multiple picks in the top 15 but wouldn't pull the trigger on deals because he felt he was overpaying. The fact is if you are serious about a rebuild you pay to draft elite talent while simultaneously lowering yourself in the standings, which is how you accumulate additional elite talent.

I think the only things Danny wasn't parting with post season were the 2025 picks. 

If that's a deal breaker, and the other team insists, no sale. I think you may think the same way.

I don't think this is a case where teams were clamoring for Scott Laughton or Joel Farabee and Danny said no.

I think Danny was protecting his best assets. It seems to me from my seat here in Pennsyltucky, the 2025 picks are more valuable to him than using those assets to move up to pick a maybe.

[mojo1917]

2 hours ago, radoran said:

No, we don't. That narrative didn't emerge at the draft.

"But we all know that didn't happen"

 

[radoran]

25 minutes ago, mojo1917 said:

"But we all know that didn't happen"

 

But Briere learned from that experience...

 

[mojo1917]

8 minutes ago, radoran said:

 

But Briere learned from that experience...

 

I'm not letting this go, because, when did that information come out?

Was Danny alive? in the organization? that doesn't even matter, can he read?

Yes, to any of those?

He may have learned. 

Reading: It's how I learned to how play 46 and 2. 

Edited July 2 by mojo1917

[mkscrewy]

3 hours ago, flyer4ever said:

The GM could have had multiple picks in the top 15 but wouldn't pull the trigger on deals because he felt he was overpaying. The fact is if you are serious about a rebuild you pay to draft elite talent while simultaneously lowering yourself in the standings, which is how you accumulate additional elite talent. The Flyer philosophy of almost being a playoff team and rebuilding at the same time is a fools errand and will never be successful, the way most of the plant defines successful. The dysfunction that is the Flyers will wallow for many years until this broken mindset is gone. The truth is they could have had Biumm and Jett but the GM chickened out.

Not sure I agree with that gathering 6 (technically 7 (7!!!)) first round picks in three drafts is being unserious about a rebuild, especially when 3 of those are going to be in the draft everyone is anticipating will be the deepest in years.
 

Would you have traded the 2025 first round picks for 2 picks in the top 15 this year?

[Cheesesteak]

43 minutes ago, mkscrewy said:

Let’s hope it’s not LUUUUB-chenk-oooo and that sound is his leg flying off and hitting the crossbar. 
 

 

 

Wonder how much they could get on Ebay for that leg? 

[radoran]

54 minutes ago, mojo1917 said:

I'm not letting this go, because, when did that information come out?

 

I'm not letting it go, either.

 

IT NEVER HAPPENED.

 

There was, therefore, nothing to "learn from."

 

Jett may develop into the greatest center ever to play the game or he may never play in the NHL.

 

Has absolutely nothing to do with picking Patrick over Makar.

 

[flyer4ever]

1 hour ago, mkscrewy said:

Not sure I agree with that gathering 6 (technically 7 (7!!!)) first round picks in three drafts is being unserious about a rebuild, especially when 3 of those are going to be in the draft everyone is anticipating will be the deepest in years.
 

Would you have traded the 2025 first round picks for 2 picks in the top 15 this year?

I would trade picks 28 & 29 in next years draft for  top 10 picks in this draft. I also would have bundled them with some current roster players that do have value to make those moves, in order to plunge down the standings.

My biggest disappointment in the draft and the off season moves is that the needle hasn't moved. Holding on to the picks next year will put them at 12, 28, 29. Hardly a road to the holy grail.

The current Flyer MO of remaining a playoff near miss team whilst rebuilding will only ensure many more years of less than mediocre. I am as excited as anyone to see Michkov, however they will need 3 or 4 more of those shiny toys to ever be taken seriously in the playoffs, and the current asset management formula is a waste of time in trying to achieve that goal.

I really don't understand how they can not see that what they are doing isn't working. Unless of course they are striving for mediocre and just trying to run the island of misfit toys.

[mkscrewy]

19 minutes ago, flyer4ever said:

I would trade picks 28 & 29 in next years draft for  top 10 picks in this draft. I also would have bundled them with some current roster players that do have value to make those moves, in order to plunge down the standings.

My biggest disappointment in the draft and the off season moves is that the needle hasn't moved. Holding on to the picks next year will put them at 12, 28, 29. Hardly a road to the holy grail.

The current Flyer MO of remaining a playoff near miss team whilst rebuilding will only ensure many more years of less than mediocre. I am as excited as anyone to see Michkov, however they will need 3 or 4 more of those shiny toys to ever be taken seriously in the playoffs, and the current asset management formula is a waste of time in trying to achieve that goal.

I really don't understand how they can not see that what they are doing isn't working. Unless of course they are striving for mediocre and just trying to run the island of misfit toys.

 

You’re thinking too literally man. What did we do with our draft picks this year? We traded and moved them. 3 first round draft picks in a deep draft is a hell of a lot of capital if we want to move up . If chuck were still at the helm I’d agree 100% with you. With DB here I agree with you 45%. 

[flyer4ever]

17 minutes ago, mkscrewy said:

 

You’re thinking too literally man. What did we do with our draft picks this year? We traded and moved them. 3 first round draft picks in a deep draft is a hell of a lot of capital if we want to move up . If chuck were still at the helm I’d agree 100% with you. With DB here I agree with you 45%. 

I hope you are right. So far I haven't seen enough evidence to separate DB from the past mistakes. Once again I say I hope you are right. I also stick to my position of a total blow up. None of us are getting any younger. Unfortunately winning a Stanley Cup is in a literal world. Perhaps the Flyers would excel in a virtual one.

[BobbyClarkeFan16]

55 minutes ago, flyer4ever said:

I would trade picks 28 & 29 in next years draft for  top 10 picks in this draft. I also would have bundled them with some current roster players that do have value to make those moves, in order to plunge down the standings.

My biggest disappointment in the draft and the off season moves is that the needle hasn't moved. Holding on to the picks next year will put them at 12, 28, 29. Hardly a road to the holy grail.

The current Flyer MO of remaining a playoff near miss team whilst rebuilding will only ensure many more years of less than mediocre. I am as excited as anyone to see Michkov, however they will need 3 or 4 more of those shiny toys to ever be taken seriously in the playoffs, and the current asset management formula is a waste of time in trying to achieve that goal.

I really don't understand how they can not see that what they are doing isn't working. Unless of course they are striving for mediocre and just trying to run the island of misfit toys.

We might trade those picks and players for picks in the top 10, but will other teams do that? That's the conundrum with that. Most teams with top 10 picks aren't trading down for a package of players and picks.

[JR Ewing]

If you want high picks, it's a hell of a lot cheaper to just lose. Trading up on draft day is really hard to do while getting anything approaching decent value. I'm honestly not sure why it's talked about so much.

 

[pilldoc]

(again trying to clean up some threads as multiple topics got merged into one ..... )

 

Keep this thread for the remainder of the Flyers 2024 Draft picks .....

 

all other topics have been moved to Flyers 2024 off season thread

[flyerdog]

On 7/1/2024 at 8:13 AM, OccamsRazor said:

 

I know but having the same agent as Cutter scared them off.

 

I get it.

 

But in 2 years when he walks to another team and the Flyers are left with nothing to show for it you would have been livid they took the risk.

I've heard rumblings that the Cutter situation (among others?) has prompted some in the NHL to advocate for changes in the rules..specifically, requiring that a player drafted by a team MUST play their rookie deal for the team that drafted them..none of this "I don't want to play for you" stuff...unless there is a mutual parting of ways, of course...

[flyer4ever]

I'm not sure anyone could explain to me the difference between an 18 yr old committed to a US college and an 18 yr old playing major junior hockey in the CHL and 18 yr olds playing in mens leagues in Europe. I would love to hear the rationale and how the whole thing evolved. Doesn't say much for the IQ levels of hundreds of  GMS and ownership if nobody has ever questioned this.

[ruxpin]

2 hours ago, flyer4ever said:

I'm not sure anyone could explain to me the difference between an 18 yr old committed to a US college and an 18 yr old playing major junior hockey in the CHL and 18 yr olds playing in mens leagues in Europe. I would love to hear the rationale and how the whole thing evolved. Doesn't say much for the IQ levels of hundreds of  GMS and ownership if nobody has ever questioned this.

 

The biggest difference (possibly the only difference) between an NCAA hockey draftee and the rest is that the NCAA player can be drafted but will not be eligible to play in the NCAA if they sign a contact. 

 

So, if they sign a contact and lose playing eligibility, they lose the route they chose to play hockey and to develop but are generally not developed enough quite yet to play in the NHL.  Often, they want to play in the US, so they won't go the Canadian juniors route and the AHL would be a mistake.

 

The deadline to sign a juniors player is 2 years from draft.  The deadline to sign an NHL players is 4 years (presumably to give them the opportunity to graduate and to continue playing).

 

So, during those four years, the NCAA player holds the cards because the source and vehicle to be able to play hockey is completely independent of the NHL team that drafted them. Because unlike the better juniors players that often sign a contact right away and have really no leverage, the NCAA player is not an employee and has no legally-binding obligation to give the drafting team any deference.  The longer it goes, if they indicate they do not want to play for the drafting team, they hold the cards while the NHL drafting team's position and leverage diminishes the longer the clock ticks.

 

So, given how the Flyers were recently bitten by this, it seems they might have taken a "once bitten, twice shy" mindset.  I can't say i blame them. 

 

I also wonder if this isn't exactly why Buium fell like he did, because not only NCAA, but same agent. 

 

I was angry about the team not drafting him, but as time passes I'm falling into the "can't blame them" camp.  They can't afford to come out of yet another must win draft with a Cutter situation.

Edited July 10 by ruxpin

[flyercanuck]

6 hours ago, ruxpin said:

but as time passes I'm falling into the "can't blame them" camp.  They can't afford to come out of yet another must win draft with a Cutter situation.

 

If only there was a way of making it a destination players wanted to go to....instead of one of the jokes of the league.

 

Maybe keep hiring and building the same way they always have will do it? 

[ruxpin]

31 minutes ago, flyercanuck said:

 

If only there was a way of making it a destination players wanted to go to....i

Like if they opened more bars by UPENN.

[mojo1917]

11 hours ago, ruxpin said:

I was angry about the team not drafting him, but as time passes I'm falling into the "can't blame them" camp.  They can't afford to come out of yet another must win draft with a Cutter situation.

 

I thought wow, another gift. When Buium was still there at 12.

But, I think he wasn't that that high on their board. For whatever reason. 

I think the same thing about Helenius. Helenius really felt like a Scott Laughton "we need this guy to make the NHL" kind of pick. 

It's tough to know what the boys will turn into.

I also found it funny that no one really beat up the Ducks for taking Senekae at 3. That was a super-mega reach. Now I'm certainly not hanging out on that forum and this one because I don't hate myself. But, that pick?

It tells me he was their guy or Vebeek went too heavy on the Delta 9s

So for the Flyers with Luchenko? so they took the player 5 spots too early. I don't think he was getting past Detroit, he may not have gotten past Buffalo's second 1st. If that's your guy why risk it?

 

The one pick that I wonder about is the Swede Jack Berglund. That pick seems so different from "fast & skilled " I'm wondering if he had the Oscar Lindblom path of being a terrible skater but good at all the other things? I wonder if the scout who advocated for Lindblom pounded the table for Berglund ? If so, and he doesn't get cancer, that could be a better pick than I thought it was real time.

 

Edited July 10 by mojo1917

[OccamsRazor]

11 hours ago, ruxpin said:

So, during those four years, the NCAA player holds the cards because the source and vehicle to be able to play hockey is completely independent of the NHL team that drafted them. Because unlike the better juniors players that often sign a contact right away and have really no leverage, the NCAA player is not an employee and has no legally-binding obligation to give the drafting team any deference.  The longer it goes, if they indicate they do not want to play for the drafting team, they hold the cards while the NHL drafting team's position and leverage diminishes the longer the clock ticks.

 

So, given how the Flyers were recently bitten by this, it seems they might have taken a "once bitten, twice shy" mindset.  I can't say i blame them

 

They need a rule like they have for the AHL.

 

Let the college kids sign a contract with their drafting club but let it slide like they do when a European kid comes over and he is 18 or 19 the entry level contract doesn't kick in an actually count till the year the are playing in the AHL and they turn 20 by the end of that same physical year.

 

Like let's use Quitter Gauthier as an example.

 

He is already 20 now but he has a January 19th birthday but for arguements sake let's pretend he was 19 now and not 20 till January. So then he would be eligible to play in the AHL and his contract slide till the following season.

 

So if they let college players sign the contract but yet they get no money yet till they are at least in the AHL.

 

So as long as they are in school their contract can toll.

 

Wouldn't be many and it would help them sign them early if they want for their rights and then they couldn't just walk for free.

 

[OccamsRazor]

48 minutes ago, mojo1917 said:

For whatever reason. 

 

Because he had the same agent as Gauthier and they were scared of the kid pulling the same thing but to me the talent was worth the risk.