Lombardi's pre-draft comments

(Looking to keep the pick or shopping it around?)
In these situations, you have to do everything. If you're not shopping it, you're not doing your job. Right now you're looking at everything: moving it, moving down, and then you make a decision. I think the best answer I can give you is that I'm not close to anything right now. But in terms of doing it, yeah, you'll do it right up until you make your pick.

(Is there a lot of trade talk out there?)
Actually, it's still a little early, as crazy as that sounds. Guys are just getting in. Remember, we're not the NFL, where we've all got to get into the city. We traveled all day yesterday. Some GMs went to the league meetings so they're just getting in today. I guess tomorrow there will be a little more (talk) but logistically it's been a little slow. A lot of guys are traveling and just getting in. A couple guys I talked to tonight were in the hotel lobby and had just flown in.

(Can you talk about Alzner and Ellerby, and whether either one would be ready to jump into the league next year?)
I wouldn't disagree with the sentiment out there that Alzner is probably more of a finished product. With Ellbery you're looking at a little more in terms of upside. Alzner is pretty well defined. He's a good player. He has played ahead of the curve because he's gone through four years of juniors already. He played in the World Juniors so he's a more mature player and that's the way his game is. His game is also more mature. Ellerby is still growing and still defining himself. In the end, people might see Ellerby as having more upside but Alzner is a guy who, you know what you're getting. And that doesn't often happen with 18-year-olds.

(Can you compare this draft class to recent years?)
It's funny. You always hear, `Well, it's not a great draft,' but I think it's, for the most part, a normal draft. I've said it before. The (2003) draft that Getzlaf and Perry and Michalek and (Dustin Brown)... you look at that draft and that was a really good draft. Most people knew going into it that there were a lot of players in that draft. So when you look at Brownie's draft year, that was a pretty strong class, and I think most hockey people figured that was a really strong draft. The thing about it is though, that was an aberration. It's not that that year is a good draft and the next year is a down draft. Most drafts are like this one, and then you have a special draft like that one. It's like any other year. When you're dealing with 18-year-olds, in most cases you don't know. I guess the difference with this one is that you don't have, at this point, a high-end Ovechkin or Kovalchuk or Crosby, these type of guys where maybe there's two or three guys that are wow, you know they're going to be stars. But after that, it's pretty much the same. The draft shotguns and it's the same as every other draft. When you're in a normal draft, the shotgun maybe develops sooner, meaning that the guy who is 20th on our list might be fifth on another guy's list. That's not unusual when you're dealing with 18-year-olds. It will probably shotgun sooner this year, or the line is not as clear this year because you don't have a Crosby or one of those top guys. But as far as the term `good draft,' those drafts like Brownie's draft... if you go back, everybody was excited at the depth of that draft. That's a special draft, that's not a normal draft. I wouldn't say we're in that type of draft year. It's high end. Maybe it shotguns a little sooner but I don't look at it as a huge difference.

(After the change in the scouting staff, have you had extensive meetings in L.A.?)
Oh yeah. It's been a real grind. The one thing they've shown is that they've gone around the clock and hung in there. I grind pretty good. We knew we were going to have to do this and I think in the last month, they've really stepped up. The biggest thing is that you're starting to see, actually quite quickly, guys... if they work together and like to work, they're going to come together sooner and develop trust. And that's the one thing I've said. If you go to any organization, it takes time to build that staff, and those staffs have to get a feel for each other. That feel comes from trusting each other, in terms of their work ethic and their evaluation. We're in the process of that right now. That's not going to come together in one year. But the one thing I know is that I think they've accelerated it much quicker than I expected, but it still has a ways to go. We will be so much better next year at this time than we are this year. That doesn't mean we're not going to do a good job, but where I want it, and the way I expect things to be done, I know they're going to get there quicker than I had anticipated. Their work ethic has been second to none. But again, when you have people that like hockey, it's not work. I've always said that, and that's the kind of people you want to be around.

(Do either Ellerby or Alzner, or both, play a similar style to Jack Johnson?)
No, I would say they're different players from Jack. Again, you're dealing with 18-year-olds so it wouldn't be fair to pigeonhole Ellerby or Alzner just yet. But if you're looking at both of them in their draft year, I think it would be fair to say that Jack is more of a risk-taker. I don't mean risk-taker in a bad way. I guess he just creates more offense and is dynamic at times in terms of jumping into the play and creating offense. I'd say they're probably different types of players at this point. Can the other kids add that to their game? Well, time will tell, but those dimensions really haven't been part of their game up to this point.

(There seems to be a defined top three and then some debate about who might go after the third pick. Do you guys see it the same as the conventional wisdom out there?)
The thing with conventional wisdom is that I'd like to see those lists two years after the draft. I guess overall you're probably accurate, but I think there might be more of a shotgun this year than in other years, even within your layers. Like you're drawing a line at three (top players), then you're drawing a line at 11, I think those layers would be different. So I guess this is trying to answer the question without answering it. I'd say overall, the conventional-wisdom thing is probably the way most people see it, but again, I've never really been one for that.

(Last year is when you made the big Demitra deal. You were focused on getting some depth then. Are you at a different place in the building process now, to where you don't need to do that again?)
Right now, I don't see that type of deal. You never say never, but you look at our list and I don't know if we have that type of player to deal, even if we wanted to. You asked me at the beginning about the idea of trading for a young player, and you could do that, or the idea of trading up or trading down. That is definitely being discussed here and will be discussed right up until the bell. As far as that type of (Demitra) deal, I haven't seen anything like that yet. Things can change, but a Demitra-type deal hasn't crossed my desk yet.

(Is that something you feel is not as necessary for you this year?)
No, I don't. You never say never, but I don't really want to do that at this point. We've put some young players in the organization and we're going to add, hopefully, another good couple players in this draft here. We're loaded with picks next year. I don't know if I want to strip any more out, in terms of the veterans. But you never know. Somebody could knock your socks off. As far as the overall scheme, you've got a plan but you've got to be willing to adjust it at times. It would take a major proposal from somebody to make us adjust it to that breadth. So to answer your question, I guess I don't see a Demitra-type deal there. But call me tomorrow and you never know.

(Do you pick based on position or take the best player available?)
It's the best player available. The rub comes when there are two players who are really close. If they're close, then you look to position. In theory, it should work easy, but at times it can be really close. You have to make sure they're close (in ability). That's where a lot of the arguments can happen.

(What do you think about Cherepanov and the possibility of getting him to come to the NHL?)
I don't think anyone questions his ability. When he wants to bring it, he's a pretty good player. As far as the other things, you just don't know. Obviously the Russian landscape has changed, not only in terms of their ability to get them over here but with the money the Russians can pay. You have to make sure he wants to be a NHL player and doesn't turn into the Morozov category, where he's a young guy in the prime of his career who turns down $3 million and goes home.