Vicky Posted March 29, 2013 Share Posted March 29, 2013 MG reminds me a lot of the Blue Jay's GM AA before this year in terms of method. Very cautious and methodical. But this year AA made ballsy moves to get the Marlin's best players which helped attract one of the best pitchers in baseball. But if he didn't make the first move, the second wouldn't have happened. Right now the Canucks are a declining team unless moves are made to bring them back up. I'd like to see MG make some ballsy moves to get top rated players and prospects because he overvalues the grinders. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RobberLuongo Posted March 29, 2013 Share Posted March 29, 2013 Draft picks are inherently as big of a gamble as trading for a rental player anyways. Gambling either way Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Salmon Arm Canuck Posted March 30, 2013 Share Posted March 30, 2013 One thing that has not been written about much is the signing of college free agents (CFA's). Many advantages in that model as you get an older player so predicting the upside is possibly more accurate. As well, they can be a cheaper signing in many cases. Canucks have started to take this approach under Gillis with good results (Ex: Tanev). Because of this, maybe "relying" on the draft is not as pressing if you're able to sign and develop a CFA. Remember, it's all about developing the entry level players you get, not necessarily the number of draft choices you have or where they are located between slots #1 and #270. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
THERETOOL Posted March 30, 2013 Share Posted March 30, 2013 Draft picks are inherently as big of a gamble as trading for a rental player anyways. Gambling either way Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canuckfan1968 Posted March 30, 2013 Share Posted March 30, 2013 Your funny lets give a way the farm, has it ever occurred to you that not all top 10 or top 20 turn out to be what you expected. Look at Pavel bure example In the sixth round of the 1989 NHL Entry Draft, the 113th player taken overall, by the Vancouver Canucks was a young player named Pavel Bure. look what he turned out to be for us, sometimes gems are missed, but you dont trade your farm for rentals to try and win the cup because its no guarantee. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Butcher Posted March 30, 2013 Share Posted March 30, 2013 . And all those talented young players never get a shot, ever. I mean, those Sedin kids were riding the pine under AV, grinding it out on the fourth line the moment he took over from Crawford. . . oh wait, they outscored Naslund and Bertuzzi in AVs first year? What? Clearly that was all future hall-of-famer Anson Carter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ray_Cathode Posted March 30, 2013 Share Posted March 30, 2013 Time and time again I read "I wouldn't trade a first round pick for *insert veteran player who is a proven playoff performer*". Really? How often do 1st round draft picks REALLY pan out? H Sedin, D Sedin, Kesler, Schneider, Hodgson, Grabner, Schroeder, Bourdon, Umberger, even White who was turned into Ehrhoff say hello. Only dud since 1998 was Nathan Smith. Seriously, unless it's a top 5 picks, who cares? Only two of those were top five picks. There is just a s good of a chance that a 3rd round pick will be as successful; as a first round pick. Sorry, Kyle Freadrich, Justin Morrison, Rene Vydarney, Thatcher Bell, Tim Branham, Fedor Dederov, Brett Skinner, Lukas Mensator, Daniel Rahimi, all testify to just how ill advised that comment is - only ONE - Alex Edler - of our third round picks did ANYTHING since 1998. We realistically have a 2 year window here where we could contend for a cup, now is not the time to be worried about draft picks. Please explain yourselves I suggest that you explain yourself and where you vomitted up your crap theory from. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ray_Cathode Posted March 30, 2013 Share Posted March 30, 2013 Which is what MG needs to look at himself. Apparently next year he has plans of using rookies but I highly doubt it as were will you slot them in? What rookies were used last year a Kassian only cause he made the mistake of bad timing and had to incorporate. Especially if everyone's healthy and you don't trade anyone one. Then there's only one position if any Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
adniel_g Posted March 30, 2013 Share Posted March 30, 2013 This is the answer. First of all, draft picks matter. Take a look at our lineup and who is in it: Daniel Sedin 1st round, 2nd overall Henrik Sedin 1st round, 3rd overall Cam Barker 1st round, 3rd overall Roberto Luongo 1st round, 4th overall Manny Malholtra 1st round, 7th overall Keith Ballard 1st round, 11th overall Dan Hamhuis 1st round, 12th overall Zack Kassian 1st round, 13th overall Chris Higgins 1st round, 14th overall Jordan Schroeder 1st round, 22nd overall Ryan Kesler 1st round, 23rd overall Cory Schneider 1st round, 26th overall Mason Raymond 2nd round, 51st overall David Booth 2nd round, 53rd overall Maxim Lapierre 2nd round, 61st overall Obviously higher placement increases significantly the chances a player will make it to the NHL. Yes, I know, we have some good late round draft picks, but by and large, the team is made of 1st and 2nd round draft picks. The biggest struggle a team has is keeping quality players at affordable prices. Ryan O'Reilly would have been awesome to add to our lineup, but not his 5M salary. Igyy would be great here, but 7M? Jussi Jokinen could have helped us, but another year at 3M, ouch. Gaborik could add some scoring touch, but next year at 7.5M, ouch again. So, we need to build internally, and as we go along, we keep some, we lose some, but we stay under the cap. The next poster said Edmonton, Edmonton is building from picks, they just tanked to get good ones, not a method I am in favor of. But what about Toronto? Toronto traded draft picks, by the bagful, and look at them now. In 2010 they traded away the pick that got Tyler Seguin a 65 point player whose salary is just going up after this season. They also got an ace in the hole with Jared Knight on the same transaction. In 2011 still the same transaction lost them the pick that is Dougie Hamilton. a 6'5" defenceman, now in the NHL with 13 points in 33 games, and a +/- of 0 in his first year so far. On the other hand, they kept their 1st round 2009 pick, Nazem Kadri. If they would have kept their picks, and provided they would have picked the same, they could have had Seguin and Hamilton playing for Kessel's salary. Which would you rather have? Lets not dump draft picks in some misguided attempt to fix the team. Steady as she goes Captain Gillis, steady as she goes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pears Posted March 30, 2013 Share Posted March 30, 2013 2013 NHL draft lacks depth of talent “The 2013 draft is not as strong or as deep as we first thought,” said one scout, echoing the thoughts of many others. “It’s a deep top 10 and an OK first round, but I don’t see a lot of depth. Is it deeper than 2012? I’m not so sure.” Your move. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
combover Posted March 30, 2013 Share Posted March 30, 2013 we need prospects. the best example of a team that threw away prospects/picks is calgary that team has a horrible future the canucks are dangerously close to following that model. i agree with the time to win is now. BUT really this season we need to be honest about this team. who knows what kesler will be like when he returns booth is gone malholtra finished coaches are wishy washy about the goaltender the pp has been horrible the d looks lost some nights and goal scoring has been a issue,not to mention the face off % trading for a rental this season does seem to make sense since we need about three high caliber players to make this team a true contender. now if CS or lou get traded and some pieces fall into place then by all means but as it stands now i think keeping and getting draft picks is more important for years to come. not just for the prospects but to have the assets to trade for those top player that do come available. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
adniel_g Posted March 30, 2013 Share Posted March 30, 2013 Id rather gamble on a young man than an old one .. when it turns out right , its a way bigger win with a young prospect .. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
adniel_g Posted March 30, 2013 Share Posted March 30, 2013 we need prospects. the best example of a team that threw away prospects/picks is calgary that team has a horrible future the canucks are dangerously close to following that model. i agree with the time to win is now. BUT really this season we need to be honest about this team. who knows what kesler will be like when he returns booth is gone malholtra finished coaches are wishy washy about the goaltender the pp has been horrible the d looks lost some nights and goal scoring has been a issue,not to mention the face off % trading for a rental this season does seem to make sense since we need about three high caliber players to make this team a true contender. now if CS or lou get traded and some pieces fall into place then by all means but as it stands now i think keeping and getting draft picks is more important for years to come. not just for the prospects but to have the assets to trade for those top player that do come available. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hunter.S-Kerouac Posted March 30, 2013 Share Posted March 30, 2013 Because Jensen Corrado are about the only prospects we have with any real potential to make the NHL and stay. It's time the nucks start stockpiling picks even late picks in hopes of turning up some hidden jems. Because by the time our fist pick roles around it's already becoming a crap shoot. Although I feel we did well With Gaunce Shred CoHo Jensen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canada Hockey Place Posted March 30, 2013 Share Posted March 30, 2013 One thing Gillis has done really well or has been really lucky with is signing undrafted players. For example 3 players that you could add for he 2007 draft, Chris Tanev: 88 NHL games played. That's more than 1st rounders in 2007 like Thomas Hickey, Alex Plante, Ian Cole, Jon Blum and Brendan Smith. You could replace his name with White or Ellington. I'm sure most Canuck fans would be happy with that. Bill Sweatt: 2007 38th overall. Again, you could replace his name with White or Ellington. Eddie Lack: Corey Schneider was drafted in 2004 and secured the back-up spot in 2010. If you do the math.... So in theory, even though trading draft picks is risky, it's doesn't mean it's assured the Canucks will suffer decades of failure. Especially considering the picks have been near the bottom of the drafting order. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
freaky.styley Posted March 30, 2013 Share Posted March 30, 2013 Because our prospect pool is already weak enough as is, after Corrado, Schroeder, Jensen and Gaunce there isn't too much to get excited about, when the Twins leave it will be sad days. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
- PikaBOO - Posted March 30, 2013 Share Posted March 30, 2013 If its for a young player who's proven that they can play in the NHL (ex. Jamie Benn), than sure :D By the time the Sedins retire, they can replace them immediately instead of waiting for a couple of years Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Opmac Posted March 30, 2013 Share Posted March 30, 2013 Lol, you're taking a random scouts opinion?? Please explain to me why central scouting has said there are potentially 38 FIRST ROUND PICKS. And to answer your question OP, take a look at our prospect pool past Jensen, Gaunce, Corrado, Connauton and Lack Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
combover Posted March 30, 2013 Share Posted March 30, 2013 Calgary never had a really dominant first line/just straight up enough talent to make it past the first round of the playoffs. We have been past that point for 3-4 years now...There is a HUGE HUGE difference. Calgary might be one of the worst managed teams in the LEAGUE. They traded away players and then traded back for them paying a greater price on several occasions which is pretty much the only thing you try to avoid doing as a GM. To even bring them up for comparison is ridiculous. One example: Acquired Olli Jokinen and a 3rd for Matthew Lombardi, Brandon Prust and a first round pick. Traded away Olli and Jim Vandermeer in exchange for Aleš Kotalík and Christopher Higgins Net trade: Acquired Olli Jokinen's services for a year+ 3rd pick for Matthew Lombardi, Brandon Prust , Jim Vandermeer and a first round pick Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
awalk Posted March 30, 2013 Share Posted March 30, 2013 Time and time again I read "I wouldn't trade a first round pick for *insert veteran player who is a proven playoff performer*". Really? How often do 1st round draft picks REALLY pan out? Seriously, unless it's a top 5 picks, who cares? There is just a s good of a chance that a 3rd round pick will be as successful; as a first round pick. We realistically have a 2 year window here where we could contend for a cup, now is not the time to be worried about draft picks. Please explain yourselves Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.