Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

davinci

6th Pick: 2014 NHL Entry Draft

6th Pick   

478 members have voted

  1. 1. Who would you select with the 6th overall selection?



Recommended Posts

Although I don't have too strong an opinion on who is better between Nylander and Ritchie, if the Canucks draft Nylander, watching the fallout from BanTSN will be pretty entertaining.

among others. i would enjoy it thoroughly!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm torn on one hand I want first line caliber players and the closest available (unless a top 5 drops) is Ehlers and Nylander on the other hand I look at are division and have thoughts of them getting pushed and struggling against big heavy teams and I lean towards Virtanen and Ritchie.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For hockey the causal mechanism doesn't need to be established.

I agree skill is the most important criterion but if a player doesn't reach a certain size he can't implement his skill-set. Remember Nic Petan why do you think he went 43rd overall last year? It wasn't because of a lack of skill...

I'm not too sure what you mean by this first statement. Weren't you trying to establish that the cause for success in the NHL is size.

And the flip side to this is that if a larger player does not have the skill he will not be able to implement the benefits of his size anywhere near the NHL ice surface. It is not as simple just as narrowing it down to one quality or another.

Of course size is important and sure smaller players can be very risky but the players that may be available at 6th (Ehlers, Nylander) are not even close to Petan. I do not see the relevance of this comparison.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We need people that can pass when the Sedins retire though. Nylander will be ready by then or even before.

Offensive hockey is Canucks hockey.

No, blue collar hard working hockey is Canucks hockey. It has been our history since the beginning. Obviously you need the the skilled stars to shine bright(Brodeur, Bure, Sedins) but traditionally our teams that have been the most successful have had a physical edge and a never quit attitude. People like to think of it as offensive vs defensive when in reality I want tough players, not fighting wise(although need a few guys like that) but with high compete levels, who can grind it out on the boards and fight through some adversity instead of hope for a powerplay in the hopes our skilled guys aren't to beat up to score. Even with our last SCF run our supposed offensive team was great defensively and their forechecking and hits were brutal all season long, I still remember some of the hits from smaller guys like higgins being awesome. Our physicality decreased after that and we never seemed able to right the ship. Obviously there were other problems that added to the demise but the team seemed like it lost its attitude.

There is a balance to be struck for sure but I have no problem being in 2-1 games if they were hard fought. If our team decides they think Nylander's skill is to good to pass on I will fully support him like every prospect. But with some people just dismissing guys like Ritchie and Virtanen because they don't play a high skilled deking game is ridiculous. Bringing up Beech then calling Ritchie fat isn't a solid argument. Same with the Nylander looking like a girl, who cares. Plus nobody knows how next draft will look maybe we will have a shot at whatever we need(ritchie/2015 skill player or Nylander/2015 powerforward). I just hope whoever we pick ends up as a top 6 guy....hopefully for our team. :lol:

Personally I hope we get Ritchie as I'm not a huge fan of the options after the top 5 from the brief glimpses I've had. I don't expect Bertuzzi or anything but a Ladd or Hartnell type player would be more realistic to hope for. A big body that can pot 20-30 goals and 50-60 points would be such a valuable addition to our top 6. Even if we already have Kassian they can either stack em on a line for impact or split them up and have a couple lines with big bodies. I wish were more like Detroit of old that way, a guy on every line to go create traffic in front of the net. Also Virtanen would be cool as a hometown pick although that is not what I would want them to pick him for.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not too sure what you mean by this first statement. Weren't you trying to establish that the cause for success in the NHL is size.

And the flip side to this is that if a larger player does not have the skill he will not be able to implement the benefits of his size anywhere near the NHL ice surface. It is not as simple just as narrowing it down to one quality or another.

Of course size is important and sure smaller players can be very risky but the players that may be available at 6th (Ehlers, Nylander) are not even close to Petan. I do not see the relevance of this comparison.

The Petan point was just to illustrate that skill isn't everything.

I think we can agree that guys need to be a certain size to succeed in the NHL regardless of skill. And conversely guys need a certain amount of skill regardless of size.

I just think a lot of people are overestimating the skill of Ehlers and Nylander. Moreover, they are underestimating their impact of their smaller size.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's great to have guys that can shoot the puck and hit, but you need a mix of guys, who have the ability to make a play that gets the shooter a shot.

I love the idea of having guys like Kassian in the top 6, but they need someone who confident with the puck in traffic.

I'm okay with JB's decision what ever it is, but I prefer Dal Colle, Nylander or Ehlers to Virtanen with the 6th.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, you're totally not the guy who said that Nylanders points came against "inferior" teams, which isn't even true. So i just said that Perlini didn't impress at all in the whole tournament. Funny that you mention the CHL playoffs, where Perlini did next to nothing. Also, it's hard for Nylander to showcase himself in the CHL playoffs since he doesn't even play in the CHL, don't ya think?

The u18 tournament definitely didn't hurt Nylanders stock, please tell me how. It would be silly to state such a thing. He showed people why scouts thinks so highly of him and his offensive game.

Didn't his team (who is barely squeak into the playoffs) take North Bay (went to the OHL finals) to game 7? As I mentioned numerous times, not ONE single player on Niagara had a good playoffs, offensively, but they still manage to stick with the top teams. Just because Perlini isn't lighting up the scoresheet, doesn't mean he's unnoticeable. He does other things out there (defensively) to make his team win. You can't say that about Nylander. I rather build my team with players who can play a 200 ft game, than a guy who cares too much about being the superstar.

People are too fixated about getting a superstar, a player who can wow you on the ice. If you look at the LA Kings or Bruins, tell me one player on those teams who is a true "superstar", who carries the offense for the team? Those team score by committee, not rely on one single player.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

a lot of solid responses, from the Ehlers/Nylander party, and a lot of stupid responses. too.

The thing about Ehlers/ Nylander is that there is a history of European players, that went into the their draft with a lot of promise, but then when it came down to the NHL, they failed miserably, some of them didn't even have a sniff at the NHL level. I'm not saying Ehlers or Nylander is going to go down that route. It's just that someone like Ritchie and Virtannanen who are also offensive players that are also play a physical game, gives our team more intangibles vs some like Ehlers, and Nylander, these guys are also high risk high reward, and some of us already made this arguement, that we already have someone like that in Shinkaruk.

The lame counter argument is that we have Kassian, already so we don't need a Ritchie. This is one a retarded argument, one would know... that the more big and fast physical players a team can accumulate, a more devastating effect it will actually have in a 7 game playoff. It can really ware down the other team, and as a defencemen, shutting down a line of 6'2 and taller players is extremely difficult.

A guy like Ritchie doesn't really come by very often. sure there are other 6'2.5 215 (apparently he she-dded some weight) who can also generate offense, fights hits, protects the pucks, runs the power play, parks in for the net, fearless, lead his team when they were down 3 games to zero, why wouldn't you want to draft him? Sure his upside is not as high as Nylanders or Ehlers... lets put it his way...look at Lucic's stats..... hes around 60 points... he's never a point per game... but it doesn't take a genius to realize, what a positive effect he has on his team....... in fact, you can say he's more important as a 60 point per player then some 75 point guys in the leauge. He hits, he's wreckless, he's tough, gets the job done, some players actually fear him....

Now am I expecting him to be as good as Lucic?? He has superior starts to Lucic at the same draft year... and Lucic was on a powerful Vancouver Giants team... nuff said........

This is how I see it...

Jake Virtannen = Dustin Brown ( his best season was only a 60 point season)

Nick Ritchie = Milan Lucic. (his best season is a 62 point season)

this is based on playing styles only.

and whats with the IQ bull crap? Were you guys getting the Virtannen has no IQ??? I don't get this...

also what do you guys mean it's useless if we can't score goals????? Virtannen and Ritchie ironically these 2 are ranked as one of the best shooters in the draft. Ritchie has the deadliest wrist shot out of all prospects.

Also I have nothing against small players. I will gladly take 6'0 170lb 0 pull up Sam bennet in a heartbeat over Ritchie or Virtannen. It's just i'm not at all sold on Ehlers or Nylander, I think these 2 actually have Filatov, Brendl, Robert Nillson written alllll over these guys.

Take Ritchie. He can play offense, he can put on the power play... you can put him in front of the net... he can power his way through.... he has a deadly wrist shot... safe pick.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Your post just points out the philosophical differences of this whole size/skill debate. Most peoe who lean towards drafting skill would tell you Ritchie was able to do what he did in junior just by virtue of being physically stronger and larger than the other players; something he will not be at the nhl level.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No one knows who Bennings top 6 is. It's completely subjective to the organization.

I would say Nylander is in there, but really I have no idea.

Neither do you!

Unless you do, then please share :)

I still feel us getting either Dal Colle Nylander or Bennett at 6

I hope your right. Either of those players, and ill be glad we tanked the last 2 months of the year.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If we get the rumoured deal with ANA done(Kesler 36th for Etem 10th and 24th) then we should have more than enough pieces to trade with Buffalo who is still a rebuilding team. FLA wants to make the playoffs ASAP so picks and prospects wouldn't interest them.

I can see EDM making a move for 1st for Ekblad.

How much are you willing to give up? You rather have Reinhart then say Nylander and Virtanen? I wouldnt.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

BanTSN be trollin' hard and arguing for the sake of argument.

Guy's probably got the biggest woody out of it right now.

Yeah sometimes hes funny and has a good point. Other times you wondering what exactly hes been injecting into his blood stream.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Trolling? No. Just stating obviousnesses. Wait, why am i even responding to you?

We need size. We have guys with size already, but not much scoring is coming from them. So we need size with scoring. This is what will get us to be able to compete with Anaheim, LA and San Jose. Even San Jose's chokers, Jumbo and Marleau, are still going to roll on our top players, the twins, more often than not.

This impression that Nylander and Ehlers' 'mad skillz' are enough to trump this fact is just false. They will be buried every shift against these teams.

Perhaps if they had elite skill like MacKinnon we could consider it, but they don't. Nylander can't even light up the SHL and Ehlers was overshadowed very much by Drouin in the Q. Both are years and years away from being NHLers, and even then they're still going to be buried by our divisional opponents.

Benning addressed this on day one. He wants/NEEDS a team that can play that type of game that's been well-established, like, forever, as what's needed to win important games with. He's seen his Sabres lose because of this and his Bruins win because of this. Think he's learned?

Linden knows it too. The Canucks lost in '94 because the Rangers had more skilled size than the Canucks, led by that dirty sob Messier, who happens to be one of the biggest, baddest players of all time. Think Linden learned?

There is no way in hell either guy is looking at undersized preseason flash-types as franchise saviours. At least they bloody well shouldn't be.

I think Nylander is only two years away. He already plays with men.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

petan was 165 pounds too and put up 120 points in his draft year in the WHL and fell all the way to 43

How the hell does that happen?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Petan point was just to illustrate that skill isn't everything.

I think we can agree that guys need to be a certain size to succeed in the NHL regardless of skill. And conversely guys need a certain amount of skill regardless of size.

I just think a lot of people are overestimating the skill of Ehlers and Nylander. Moreover, they are underestimating their impact of their smaller size.

Fair enough.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Didn't his team (who is barely squeak into the playoffs) take North Bay (went to the OHL finals) to game 7? As I mentioned numerous times, not ONE single player on Niagara had a good playoffs, offensively, but they still manage to stick with the top teams. Just because Perlini isn't lighting up the scoresheet, doesn't mean he's unnoticeable. He does other things out there (defensively) to make his team win. You can't say that about Nylander. I rather build my team with players who can play a 200 ft game, than a guy who cares too much about being the superstar.

People are too fixated about getting a superstar, a player who can wow you on the ice. If you look at the LA Kings or Bruins, tell me one player on those teams who is a true "superstar", who carries the offense for the team? Those team score by committee, not rely on one single player.

Lol. The guy had 1 point. 1 assist in 7 games. That's not what you wanna see from 1 of your top players, no matter what they do on the ice. You're not gonna win if your top players don't produce. Verhaege wasn't great in the playoffs, but he was still waaaaaaaay better than Perlini. And general opinion is that Perlini wasn't that noticeable at all, a disappointment for sure.
Then tell me, how do you know that Nylander wants to be a "superstar", more than anything? And would you kindly define exactly what a superstar is? This sounds like preconceptions to me, just like this attitude thing surrounding Nylander that someone just made up. Also, these guys are 18/19 years old. They're not complete hockey players. Sure, Nylander might not be the best player in the draft defensively (not that he's awful like people here are stating), but it doesn't mean he will be better in that regard in the future. He will never be your typical shut-down center, but he will most likely be a more defensively aware player.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Personally, I stay the heck away from Nylander. Everyone gets caught up in the hype of his 16 points in seven games, but if you take a closer look, he did nothing against the North American teams.

One point in three games against Canada and the USA.

All in all, since the NHL is about 70-75% North American still, stay away from guys that don't produce against the guys we know will be in the NHL one day.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How much are you willing to give up? You rather have Reinhart then say Nylander and Virtanen? I wouldnt.

Statistically, very likely REINHART turn out to be a great player, and a six and ten pick quite likely at least one is a flop. So yes, rather 1c of the future than 2 prospects that are top of second line and likely one will flop.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Personally, I stay the heck away from Nylander. Everyone gets caught up in the hype of his 16 points in seven games, but if you take a closer look, he did nothing against the North American teams.

One point in three games against Canada and the USA.

All in all, since the NHL is about 70-75% North American still, stay away form guys that don't produce against the guys we know will be in the NHL one day.

You should go back a page or 2 and read Bilbro's post. Just because he didn't put up 10 points against USA and Canada doesn't mean he didn't do "anything" as you're stating. If you watch Nylander in the U18, you see a man amongst boys. Totally dominant, even against the US. Nylander also didn't have the most talented line-mates, or as much of a talented team as the US or Canada. Nylander made Axel Holmstrom in the tournament. That speaks for itself.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.