[Rey]

passive voice, on Jun 27 2009, 02:42 PM, said:

Hmm. I do like the draft overall. Obviously, with Schroeder falling to us, we could have picked a collection of zoo animals with the rest and the draft would still have been decent. However, I do have some real problems:

-Not getting Elliott. Given that he fell into the mid-2nd, he would have been extremely gettable. It seems likely that we could have traded for a mid-40s pick without necessarily giving up this year's 53. The fact that Elliott eventually went to Colorado makes this the absolute nightmare scenario to me.

-Taking Connauton over Simon Bertilsson. I have no idea which player will turn out to be better. Connauton sounds like a very interesting pick. It just seems that Connauton could have been had a little later.

-Taking Price over Seth Helgeson. This one seems very, very strange to me. It could be that Helgeson's a total nutjob, and the Nucks were avoiding him because of it (or some other similar reason). But talent-wise, Helgeson sounds awesome. With one project offensive d-man already on board, why not diversify a bit?

Those three quibbles aside, this looks like a solid collection of guys. I think a B+ grade is well deserved.

I would not have traded picks to get Elliot. There are still flaws in his game. You don't trade picks unless its a huge upgrade over the player chosen at their position. That wasn't the case in this draft.


Helgeson has limited abilities. Helgeson will not possess any offensive skills. He is a defensive defense man. No more of a 4/5 defense man. I think, if everyone looks at the market. Defensive defense man and 3rd/4th lines do make much in the open market. The higher price guys are the skill talented players that can put up offense. That's what every team should look to take that advantage.

High risk High reward players are the way to go.

[GT]

I appreciate the scouting reports. But honestly, what is the point of this thread? How many of these guys have you seen play (other than Schroeder at the WJC)? First off, trying to rank picks immediately after the draft is silly - it will be 5+ years before we know how these picks worked out. In addition, ranking guys based on what other scouts and websites say is utterly pointless. Be happy we got J-Schro, but don't try and grade something which no one can properly grade at this point.

[Captain Planet]

Rey, on Jun 27 2009, 03:31 PM, said:

I would not have traded picks to get Elliot. There are still flaws in his game. You don't trade picks unless its a huge upgrade over the player chosen at their position. That wasn't the case in this draft.


Helgeson has limited abilities. Helgeson will not possess any offensive skills. He is a defensive defense man. No more of a 4/5 defense man. I think, if everyone looks at the market. Defensive defense man and 3rd/4th lines do make much in the open market. The higher price guys are the skill talented players that can put up offense. That's what every team should look to take that advantage.

High risk High reward players are the way to go.

Anton is worth it anyways. Elliot would've been nice, but I think our 2nd Round selection was pretty good any ways.

[Gnickers87]

GT, on Jun 27 2009, 03:34 PM, said:

I appreciate the scouting reports. But honestly, what is the point of this thread? How many of these guys have you seen play (other than Schroeder at the WJC)? First off, trying to rank picks immediately after the draft is silly - it will be 5+ years before we know how these picks worked out. In addition, ranking guys based on what other scouts and websites say is utterly pointless. Be happy we got J-Schro, but don't try and grade something which no one can properly grade at this point.

*sigh*

Did you read the full title of the thread? Or perhaps some other posts of mine in the thread?

I clearly stated this is an NFL-style practice of grading draft picks. I also said it makes more sense in the NFL since Draft Picks immediately jump into the NFL. Then I said I merely did this for fun using the general NFL formula of Need vs Value.

So what is the point of this thread? Nothing, there is no point to it other then discussion, just like any other thread on any forum. However, it also provides some basic info for people who might want to know some stuff about each draft pick without having to sift through all the other threads.

oh and just for the record, I have also seen Rodin and Cannata play.

This post has been edited by Gnickers87: 27 June 2009 - 03:57 PM

[canuck91]

To me Rodin is a steal. He was one of the fastest rising prospects and had a great year playing in junior. Lets hope he has a good year playing with men.

[GrassyPonderous]

Can MG just sign the undrafted ranked prospects out of NCAA during the year? Like the Bozak/Gilroy situations, but maybe not to that degree. Is there a way to sign them without screwing with their college eligibility, or is their scholarship void once they ink a deal? It would be great to just have them in the system without even having to draft them. Thanks for the help..

[Gnickers87]

GrassyPonderous, on Jun 27 2009, 04:53 PM, said:

Can MG just sign the undrafted ranked prospects out of NCAA during the year? Like the Bozak/Gilroy situations, but maybe not to that degree. Is there a way to sign them without screwing with their college eligibility, or is their scholarship void once they ink a deal? It would be great to just have them in the system without even having to draft them. Thanks for the help..

As soon as a NCAA player signs a contract, he cannot go back to College, he also cannot receive anything from the team. (such as a flight to training camp) This is one downsides of NCAA players.

On the plus side, with CHL players, you have two years to sign them before they go back into the draft. With NCAA players, you have up to 4 years before you to have to make your decision. The other positive is that they are more accustomed to playing against older players (up to 24/25 years old)

[Doctor Canuck]

It's a little premature to give grades to players you don't know much about, wouldn't you say?

[Salmon Arm Canuck]

I appreciate the information on the prospects from the OP. Thanks!

[billabong]

stawns, on Jun 27 2009, 01:09 PM, said:

has no idea who most of those guys are. It's Delorme, Mellanby and Smyl making those picks.

ya so what, do you think nonis would have made that pick and who did nonis pick (besides edler) and gillis has the final say in who they draft

[Gnickers87]

Doctor Canuck, on Jun 27 2009, 05:07 PM, said:

It's a little premature to give grades to players you don't know much about, wouldn't you say?

I give up

[Jermi]

i jsut like how gillis dealt for a pick to get a guy he felt like was a steal in the 7th round. nice job.

[passive voice]

Rey, on Jun 27 2009, 06:31 PM, said:

I would not have traded picks to get Elliot. There are still flaws in his game. You don't trade picks unless its a huge upgrade over the player chosen at their position. That wasn't the case in this draft.


Helgeson has limited abilities. Helgeson will not possess any offensive skills. He is a defensive defense man. No more of a 4/5 defense man. I think, if everyone looks at the market. Defensive defense man and 3rd/4th lines do make much in the open market. The higher price guys are the skill talented players that can put up offense. That's what every team should look to take that advantage.

High risk High reward players are the way to go.

Well, of course there are still flaws in Elliott's game. Short of Datsyuk, Zetterberg, and Malkin, there are flaws in everybody's game. I'd rather look at what he brings to the table: an excellent offensive game (which Gilly was clearly looking for), an improving defensive game, intelligence+character, and a "Made in British Columbia" sticker. That fact that we could have had him if we'd traded for a mid-2nd, and the fact that he eventually went to Colorado, kill me.

As for Helgeson, I dunno how else to characterize a guy who's 6-3, 220, and can skate, besides "high reward". And even if he does become nothing more than a 4/5, we're talking about a fourth-round pick here. If a team can find solid roll players consistently in the fourth round, they're gonna have a huge advantage over other teams. BTW, how confident are you that Price becomes more than a 4/5?

[link]

Doctor Canuck, on Jun 27 2009, 05:07 PM, said:

It's a little premature to give grades to players you don't know much about, wouldn't you say?

Well making predicitions is apart of being a fan, how is it any different from predicting the your teams record during the regular season. Just sit back and chill dude ..


On the side note : I quite interested in how the 7th pick will pan out

Some of the quotes I have seen :

Quote

Anthony admittedly hasn’t lived up to somewhat lofty expectations in the QMJHL, struggling with his confidence under Sea Dogs bench boss Jacques Beaulieu — a coach with a hard-nosed reputation — who was fired in the off-season.

“He’s hard on some of his players … He didn’t give you positive feedback,” Anthony says. “As a young kid, you’ve never had that before from a coach. You’ve always had positive coaching. I took it personally and got down on myself and that’s my fault. But I’ve learned and become better for it.”

it will interesting how the developmental staff will handle him

This post has been edited by link: 27 June 2009 - 05:42 PM

[passive voice]

gaborik10, on Jun 27 2009, 08:26 PM, said:

ya so what, do you think nonis would have made that pick and who did nonis pick (besides edler) and gillis has the final say in who they draft

Actually, it's hard to fault Nonis for his drafting:

2004
Schneider, Edler, Brown, Hansen

2005
Bourdon, Raymond

2006
Grabner, Shirokov, Juraj Simek(included in trade for O'Brien, so not completely worthless)

Add in a bunch of guys still working their way through the system (White, Ellington, etc.), and it's pretty clear that, whatever you have to say about Nonis, it's not like he left the farm a barren wasteland.

[riske1]

passive voice, on Jun 27 2009, 05:35 PM, said:

Well, of course there are still flaws in Elliott's game. Short of Datsyuk, Zetterberg, and Malkin, there are flaws in everybody's game. I'd rather look at what he brings to the table: an excellent offensive game (which Gilly was clearly looking for), an improving defensive game, intelligence+character, and a "Made in British Columbia" sticker. That fact that we could have had him if we'd traded for a mid-2nd, and the fact that he eventually went to Colorado, kill me.

As for Helgeson, I dunno how else to characterize a guy who's 6-3, 220, and can skate, besides "high reward". And even if he does become nothing more than a 4/5, we're talking about a fourth-round pick here. If a team can find solid roll players consistently in the fourth round, they're gonna have a huge advantage over other teams. BTW, how confident are you that Price becomes more than a 4/5?

Overall I give the draft a C+. If the top two picks turn out to be players, then it will be a succesful draft IMHO.


I am still in shock that we did not pick this guy. The Canucks are quickly becoming one of the teams with the smallest prospects. I do not know about the rest of you but it worries the hell out of me. Take a look at the teams that went down the road of speed and skill and did not put a high priority on size like Buffalo who are trying to reverse course as soon as they can. A good big man will always beat a good little man.

[Rey]

Cause Helgeson is at best a 5-6 defense man. He's a safe pick, but he doesn't have top end potential. 5-6 defense man are easy to afford in the market.