What if there is no season and we get the 1st pick

[Godric]

I'm bored.

[Gaucho]

I guess we'd draft a prospect, maybe a defenseman.

[Godric]

I guess we'd draft a prospect, maybe a defenseman.

Another 5'10 good old North American Dman

[pittsports87]

I guess we'd draft a prospect, maybe a defenseman.

Maybe?

[Gaucho]

I guess we'd draft a prospect, maybe a defenseman.

Maybe?

Or a center.

[Godric]

I guess we'd draft a prospect, maybe a defenseman.

Maybe?

We could trade the pick

[Gaucho]

For a defenseman?

[pittsports87]

I guess we'd draft a prospect, maybe a defenseman.

Maybe?

We could trade the pick

In that case we would trade for 2 defensive prospects and 2 draft picks where they would take defensmen.

[Godric]

Malkin-esque player would be avaliable @ number 1

[IanMoran]

God the "NHL RIGS FOR PITTSBURGH" would be lulz worthy

[blurryhaze312]

That guy looks exciting to watch...wow.

[no name]

You bring up a good question, if there is no season will they have another Lottery draft, like how we got Sid.

[Lt. Dish]

Living in Flyerland, I think it would be hilarious.

[SolidSnake]

Then obviously Bettman rigged it for the Penguins

[mikey287]

Trade it for Filip Forsberg or Teuvo Teravainen...

[TheBigLebowski]

Regarding the snub of Forsberg at #8, I still find myself shaking my head. The kid was the overall fourth rated prospect in the draft, who plays a position of need. A position where the Pens fall short at every level.

I realize the importance of having a good scouting report on prospects, and with Joe Morrow in Portland the Pens staff had plenty of opportunities to scout Derrick Pouliot. That said, lots of scouts had Olli Matta ranked higher than Pouliot and the Pens grabbed him at #22. Would DP have been available at #22? It's hard to say but methinks I would've taken the talented winger while taking my chances that either Pouliot or Matta were available at #22.

[mikey287]

It's been hashed out a lot already...no need to go through it again. Drafting for need is generally foolish. He was only the fourth rated prospect by one source (though 4 sounds high...but that's not the point...it could have been 1, it doesn't matter)...many NHL teams did not have him that high. Many teams had Pouliot higher than 22 or where ever, more than just Pittsburgh had him top-10. No one has a clue who Forsberg is (period) if not for that arbitrary number to the left of his name, same for Teravainen. If Pouliot had a 6 next to his name on one list and Forsberg has a 27, no one says anything...the arguments aren't based on talent analysis, they're based on an arbitrary number. Garbage in, garbage out.

[Rylan]

It's been hashed out a lot already...no need to go through it again. Drafting for need is generally foolish. He was only the fourth rated prospect by one source (though 4 sounds high...but that's not the point...it could have been 1, it doesn't matter)...many NHL teams did not have him that high. Many teams had Pouliot higher than 22 or where ever, more than just Pittsburgh had him top-10. No one has a clue who Forsberg is (period) if not for that arbitrary number to the left of his name, same for Teravainen. If Pouliot had a 6 next to his name on one list and Forsberg has a 27, no one says anything...the arguments aren't based on talent analysis, they're based on an arbitrary number. Garbage in, garbage out.

:slowclap:

[TheBigLebowski]

Drafting for need is foolish. But when the prospects are close in ranking, take the player of need. Plus, Matta was a nice consolation prize at #22.

[MRandall25]

Drafting for need is foolish.

Um, what? That what the entire draft is for.

[mikey287]

Drafting for need is foolish. But when the prospects are close in ranking, take the player of need. Plus, Matta was a nice consolation prize at #22.

They were not that close in ranking on the Penguins list. So, they didn't pick that guy.

[Godric]

Drafting for need is foolish.

Um, what? That what the entire draft is for.

Most generally, drafting the best player avaliable regardless of position and roster needs is the best business

[Rylan]

BPA is better period. When you draft for need you either end up reaching or glossing over flaws to sell yourself on said player. When this happens you end up missing far more than you hit.

[MRandall25]

Drafting for need is foolish.

Um, what? That what the entire draft is for.

Most generally, drafting the best player avaliable regardless of position and roster needs is the best business

"The best player available", as mikey has pointed out, is extremely subjective.

Typically, if you don't want to ruin your team, you draft what you need, and you take the best guy at what you need (especially if you're in the Pens' position and don't really have many high draft picks).

[mikey287]

Needs are current. Draft picks are prospective NHLers. They aren't congruent. You can't draft for need, unless you plan on not fixing your need for years...you can supplement your pipeline and development systems with an adequate balance of players, but to actively ignore better talent to get a player that very likely will never play an NHL game (Teravainen, for instance) is just a bad plan. You draft the player you feel is the best mix of talent/potential/likelihood of achievement.