Re: “ And given the opportunity on Friday night to get a potential 1C, they instead went wing.”

I see this as a scouting decision, not a strategic/FO decision. The FO has always said they want the BPA, and that top centers are hard to get. So O’Brien (my pre-draft crush) or Hagens or even McQueen were regarded on the same level as Martone (a top line player), i am pretty sure the Flyers would have picked a center.

So this seems to have been a scouting based decision, where they felt Martone had a higher payoff (either in terms of ceiling or likelihood of reaching that ceiling).

Can’t disagree with the process at all – now, whether or not the scouting evaluation was on point, we’ll see.

As for Nesbitt – rationally speaking, when even players like Frondell and Hagens have questions about whether or not they could have become true 1C, it isnt rational to expect 1C potential in a #12 pick. Still, would have been nice to have a player with a possibility of reaching that level – but maybe Briere is downplaying expectations. And worst case, if you have 2 2Cs (Luchanko and Nesbitt), there are still moves you can make.

Now the big question is – how do they approach this coming season? I know they are getting into the adding phase, but that doesnt necessarily mean “win now”. I wouldn’t mind seeing them go into the season with the same goaltending and do a soft tank. But what will it do to the psyches of the players, I dont know.

PS – do you have any insider clues about Shabanov?

If the Flyers were going to get Nesbitt, it was going to be an overpay. Regardless of where Button and others had him going, I didn’t see him getting past the Canadiens, and if the Flyers wanted to address center and size—both being the top issues for the prospect pool, Nesbitt was a guy they needed. I don’t think Pittsburgh’s pick would have been available if McQueen dropped. Kind of threading that needle. I’m very okay with these picks.

FWIW, Flyers are trying to model their team after success of Panthers and Hurricanes. There’s too many sub-6 footers on the roster and the farm system to have a physical presence on the ice. If they want size and guys who can actually play, then they’re competing against the rest of the league for those guys who seem rare.

Jett and Nesbitt train together all summer and Jett teaches him to skate and Nesbitt teaches Jett a little skill. They enter camp as 1 C caliber prospects. No problem – that’s how this works right? 😂

The Martone pick makes sense as BPA and high upside but if you knew you were going to move up it seems it would have made more sense to get O’Brien at 6 and then either sit tight at 22 or move up to 12 for someone who dropped. In this case it would have been Bear or Eklund.

The FO has shown patience and vision so I’ll give them the benefit of the doubt.

Just glad Martin was off the board and a shame CD went a pick before as he was my ideal pick.

Apropos of nothing in this article, but Charlie/Alex, do you suppose we can get an update on last year’s picks, especially Gill and Berglund and how they are developing?

I saw that Berglund scored over a PPG in the Swedish under-20 minors, as well as in the U19 tournament, but didnt score nearly as well in the SHL or the U20 tournament. I have no idea how to evaluate that performance, however.

Gill has put on weight (as have I, come to think of it). But what’s his game like?

Would be great to get some info on this at some point in the offseason, if it is feasible/possible.

I have to admit I bounced from excitement to bewilderment within 5 minutes with the trade and pick. When they moved up, I was guessing a big D-man. But it’s always tough to guess where a player will go. The NHL, more than any other league, is a game of liars poker, wrapped in a smokescreen, played in a funhouse room of mirrors. So when you target a guy you then need a partner to trade with, and I think that may be why it might be considered a reach. My guess (we’ll never know) is Danny couldn’t find someone willing to trade until he got to 12 and this was the price. It actually was an underpay for 12. The value of 22 and 31 was roughly equal to 13 and generally when you are looking to move up, you have to overpay. So 14 was likely what 22 and 31 would have netted in most years. After the Flyers trade, it wasn’t until the 21st pick that a move was made last night. Doesn’t sound like Nesbitt would have been there at that point. So circumstances dictate action. An overpay? Not for the slot. Time will tell if it was the wrong player.

I don’t think we can spend months lamenting the lack of true 1C type prospects in the Flyers range and then question the Nesbitt pick because he doesn’t project as one. No they didn’t solve the issue in round 1 and probably weren’t going to. A 1C is insanely tough to get outside of the top 5, and if the plan is to field a good and deep playoff team first and see what you have, that’s not a bad plan to get the franchise back off the ground.

Now onto the team depth building rounds. I am okay with what was done in Round 1. Like the NFL draft these rounds build depth and championship teams. If the model is simulate the Panthers, then the FO needs to hit on 3-4 of these picks.

The Flyers brass says it wasn’t about adding size but then they drool over the size of these guys. They entered the draft with three 1st round picks and still have the worst center / center prospects in the league. I would have preferred Hagens at 6 and trading up for a wing or dman later in the 1st round.

Great article on the first round, Charlie! They land perhaps the surest prospect at six and swing for the fences with a tall center at twelve. I commend the picks and I appreciate you not condemning the second selection, as most fans seem to be doing. Just missing out on McQueen a few picks earlier, this seems like a good consolation prize. Your listing of the Flyers current size limitations including their top two players shows the front office’s mindset with these picks whether or not they will admit it.