6th Pick: 2014 NHL Entry Draft

[Smashian Kassian]

I say take Ehlers at #6.

And then take Pollock at #36 which would give us a bigger offensive player for those who are fixated on size.

[DrChill]

zero at the draft, the Kesler trade in July or August.

I say 1-2 significant trades from the NHL by the draft.

2-8 minor deals.

We will see. I think kes deal at draft and one other canucks deal.

[baumerman77]

New article...

http://thehockeywriters.com/2014-nhl-draft-rankings-war-room-june-edition-intro/

[WonderTwinPowers]

I say take Ehlers at #6.

And then take Pollock at #36 which would give us a bigger offensive player for those who are fixated on size.

Or take Virtanen at #6

And take one of the smaller skilled guys who drop, Like they always do at #36 like Fabbri or Vrana

[Smashian Kassian]

Or take Virtanen at #6

And take one of the smaller skilled guys who drop, Like they always do at #36 like Fabbri or Vrana

Vrana might be available though he doesn't have the upside of an Ehlers or Nylander, Fabbri won't however.

[WonderTwinPowers]

Vrana might be available though he doesn't have the upside of an Ehlers or Nylander, Fabbri won't however.

I agree Fabbri might be a bit of a reach at #36 was just trying to think of smaller guys who may drop a bit.

I like the idea of Virtanen/Vrana over Nylander-Ehlers/Pollock but that's just me. Smaller players with talent fall more then larger ones with talent lots of teams might take a flyer on Pollock between 25-35 . I just think we should grab a bigger skilled guy while they're available.

But saying all this at the end of the day I'll be happy whoever we walk away with.

[Canuck Surfer]

I'm not entirely sold on this work ethic and drive to develop a 200ft game if he didn't have it to stick around in the SHL this season.

I think he was poised to be a consensus #1 pick this season, but he fell because of various concerns.

There are safer picks to make at 6th, certainly. I just don't see him lighting up SoCal teams, just as the Sedins have had a lot of trouble. Even if he's as skilled as hoped, he's going to have to be a sheltered player, imho. A power play-type. Doesn't sound all that appealling, given what we know about relying on these types for playoff victories.

I think we can all agree that the Sedin's were great draft picks. Drawing a comparison where we cannot beat SoCal teams and a discussion about drafting is like bitching about your boss over beers on a wednesday arvo.

The TEAM has to be able to stack up physically and create match up problems. Not one guy we will draft at #6.

In a different world, look at the Miami Heat? One of the smallest teams in recent history. They still have some of the most challenging match ups in Dwayne Wade, Lebron James and Chris Bosch by position. Point is match ups can be created with, and without, size but also with extreme levels of skill and athletic ability. Chicago does this in the NHL.

And in our world look at So Cal teams? They are a challenge more because Patrick Maroon and Dwight King skate circles around Kassian than because the Twins are small. When put in an offensive role, the Twins have ELITE fitness, win corner battles and cycle the puck until guys are exhausted. Then pop out of the corner and score. They win their match ups. It was a mistake asking them to draw defensive matchups against SJ, Anaheim or LA. What we need is a defensive line that offered more than just Ryan Kesler as a brute athlete that could match up to Getzlaf and Perry, Thornton, Marleau and Hertl.

We are in strife, even though I love him, because Richardson is near 30 lbs smaller than Manny Malhotra. Because Kassian and Booth were only physical factors for small parts of the season. And when they were (see games against St Louis, Toronto), surprise, we did well (hint, hint). Because Higgins is smaller than Torres. We had a team capable of match ups and let it wither away.

We should set some rules for comparison. What's the point of using the year after MacA was drafted? Not only that, but why use MacA at all if scouts deemed him a 3rd round talent?

Stats aren't everything. And while i pointed out Nylander's as compared to Backstrom's, that's only because Nylander apparently offers relatively nothing but offense. Perhaps if he was a 200ft player, hit the odd guy, or scored es goals in intense traffic, you could come up with some non-stats-related hoopla. But bottom line is the only excitement is based on qualcomp power play u18 tourney numbers and an inflated combine (which didn't feature Virtanen.)

Nylander's red flags concern me more than Virtanen's. The skill, whatever it is, just doesn't seem transferable. Magnus Paajarvi?

Correct, stats are not everything.

Its supposed to be an exercise in scouting?

Scouting tells us who has what skills. Ritchie IS extremely skilled. So is Draisatl. Probably more so.

The combines add an honest measure of where guys are at in terms of physical prowess. No surprise, Ritchie had the best brute strength. But he did not stack up in VO2 and endurance stuff. I would not draft Bennet when he could not do a pull up! To truly project a big guy as being able to use his size, they need to be able to skate all day (see Kopitar, Seabrook). So Virtanen, even though a tad smaller, (who displays this as an explosive skater on ice ranks higher than Ritchie to me. One who has to teach his body, say Kassian (or Ritchie), to play at an NHL pace and still be explosive is a bigger risk factor than lacking size. That player may, or may not learn to be the athlete that many guys he will compete against in the NHL already are.

That Nylander exhibited that he was one of the most explosive and gifted athletes (athlete, I'm not talking about skills) is extremely telling. A guy who can offer agility, power, explosiveness when other guys are out of puff is a potentially lethal weapon. Especially when scouted as having perhaps the best skill in the draft. He would be a very good pick IMO.

[Hedman]

If passing to the other pointman on the power play is 'dominant' then yes. Didn't he have a 7-point night featuring this play? The other pointman apparently had a pretty hard shot. Too much is being put into this performance imho. It's not transferable.

You have to go beyond a narrow amount of games against some pretty weak competition if you want a better grasp of what the production is imho.

The one goal in 22 shl games is a concern to me. This is well behind Backstrom's draft year pace. Backstrom became a ppg shl player the year after he was drafted. Will Nylander? Doubtful.

But why does this matter? Well, if Nylander is reportedly horrible at defense like most amateur scouts say, then he'll need to put up Backstrom-like offense to counter it. Otherwise he'll be in the doghouse more often that not.

If that offense isn't there then he may become a well-sheltered qualcomp player. That just doesn't sound too exciting to me. I would much rather have a guy who the coach wouldn't be scared to play against top opponents in any situation.

For this draft at #6 i didn't expect an elite talent anyway. It's not there at 6. It might not even be there at 1 or 2.

The Canucks would be better suited chosing a low-risk, big, fast dependable winger type like Virtanen than a low-percentage chance at being one-dimensionally elite, small qualcomp-type player like Sergei Shirokov, er, Willie Nylander.

If the Canucks had made moves like what i'm suggesting in the past, they'd probably have ROR instead of Schroeder. Makes sense, doesn't it?

I'm not talking about the way he's getting his points. I'm talking about the way he's PLAYING. And this crap about him getting his points against weak opponents became old long time ago. Come up with something new.

Of course it is a concern for you. You gotta have something to whine about cuz you're just another guy on CDC who's obsessed with size. Also, look up guys like Oliver Ekman Larsson, Hampus Lindholm, Andre Burakovsky and Filip Forsberg. Where did they play in their draft years? That's right, in the same league as Nylander played for the major part of his draft year. And their numbers weren't even close to his. You've no freaking idea why he didn't produce in MoDo. But he did produce in the swedish 2nd league, a league that's still very good. Waaaay better than any CHL league.

Yeah let's pick a guy with 3rd line ceiling and questionable hockey IQ. Great idea.

Yes you're truly a drafting guru. We should've pick Jamie Benn (5th rounder) with our 1st round pick. That would've been great, not so likely though. You probably didn't even know who O'Reilly was coming into that draft anyways.

[TOMapleLaughs]

I think we can all agree that the Sedin's were great draft picks. Drawing a comparison where we cannot beat SoCal teams and a discussion about drafting is like bitching about your boss over beers on a wednesday arvo.

The TEAM has to be able to stack up physically and create match up problems. Not one guy we will draft at #6.

In a different world, look at the Miami Heat? One of the smallest teams in recent history. They still have some of the most challenging match ups in Dwayne Wade, Lebron James and Chris Bosch by position. Point is match ups can be created with, and without, size but also with extreme levels of skill and athletic ability. Chicago does this in the NHL.

And in our world look at So Cal teams? They are a challenge more because Patrick Maroon and Dwight King skate circles around Kassian than because the Twins are small. When put in an offensive role, the Twins have ELITE fitness, win corner battles and cycle the puck until guys are exhausted. Then pop out of the corner and score. They win their match ups. It was a mistake asking them to draw defensive matchups against SJ, Anaheim or LA. What we need is a defensive line that offered more than just Ryan Kesler as a brute athlete that could match up to Getzlaf and Perry, Thornton, Marleau and Hertl.

We are in strife, even though I love him, because Richardson is near 30 lbs smaller than Manny Malhotra. Because Kassian and Booth were only physical factors for small parts of the season. And when they were (see games against St Louis, Toronto), surprise, we did well (hint, hint). Because Higgins is smaller than Torres. We had a team capable of match ups and let it wither away.

Correct, stats are not everything.

Its supposed to be an exercise in scouting?

Scouting tells us who has what skills. Ritchie IS extremely skilled. So is Draisatl. Probably more so.

The combines add an honest measure of where guys are at in terms of physical prowess. No surprise, Ritchie had the best brute strength. But he did not stack up in VO2 and endurance stuff. I would not draft Bennet when he could not do a pull up! To truly project a big guy as being able to use his size, they need to be able to skate all day (see Kopitar, Seabrook). So Virtanen, even though a tad smaller, (who displays this as an explosive skater on ice ranks higher than Ritchie to me. One who has to teach his body, say Kassian (or Ritchie), to play at an NHL pace and still be explosive is a bigger risk factor than lacking size. That player may, or may not learn to be the athlete that many guys he will compete against in the NHL already are.

That Nylander exhibited that he was one of the most explosive and gifted athletes (athlete, I'm not talking about skills) is extremely telling. A guy who can offer agility, power, explosiveness when other guys are out of puff is a potentially lethal weapon. Especially when scouted as having perhaps the best skill in the draft. He would be a very good pick IMO.

Thanks, i'm sure there are some points in there, but I stopped reading at basketball talk.

[TOMapleLaughs]

I'm not talking about the way he's getting his points. I'm talking about the way he's PLAYING. And this crap about him getting his points against weak opponents became old long time ago. Come up with something new.

Of course it is a concern for you. You gotta have something to whine about cuz you're just another guy on CDC who's obsessed with size. Also, look up guys like Oliver Ekman Larsson, Hampus Lindholm, Andre Burakovsky and Filip Forsberg. Where did they play in their draft years? That's right, in the same league as Nylander played for the major part of his draft year. And their numbers weren't even close to his. You've no freaking idea why he didn't produce in MoDo. But he did produce in the swedish 2nd league, a league that's still very good. Waaaay better than any CHL league.

Yeah let's pick a guy with 3rd line ceiling and questionable hockey IQ. Great idea.

Yes you're truly a drafting guru. We should've pick Jamie Benn (5th rounder) with our 1st round pick. That would've been great, not so likely though. You probably didn't even know who O'Reilly was coming into that draft anyways.

Hmm, 2nd swedish league better than any chl league? Not sure if i'm agreeing with that. I always find this 'he plays against men' argument to be irrelevant, as there are a lot of kids in the chl who are physical beasts that would manhandle any of that league's 'men.' But that i suppose is subjective and pointless to argue about.

All i'm saying is that the kid has some definite red flags. There is no sure fire talent there. It's a big risk. Just like with Virtanen, who has an a-rated shot and a-rated speed and imho has more of an upside than Kassian, who we still think is a potential top-liner here.

I knew Schroeder was a bad pick the second I saw him. He's clinging onto an Nhl career at this point and will need to be a qualcomp player, like Nylander and Ehlers, to succeed in any fashion. Just how many sheltered-types are we planning to build with anyway? Time to get real.

[baumerman77]

There is no doubt Nylander had a good year in Sweden. The reason people are skeptical of Nylander is because he is a European under 6 feet. European hockey is less physical for whatever reason (big ice plays a part). Because it is less physical size matters less. There are dozens of cases of smaller, highly skilled, European players not being able to implement their skill in NA because of their smaller size.

Take for example Ehlers, he was very smart to come over and play in the CHL. He showed scouts that he can adapt to the NA game and be successful (albeit at the junior level). Some European players just can't make the transition and it can become apparent in Juniors if they decide to play in the CHL.

The other thing that makes some people uncomfortable is that there is comfort for European players to go back to Europe. This is most often brought up with regard to Russian players going back to the KHL (Radulov, Filatov) but can often be applied to other European players.

The reward of Nylander is tantalizing but the risk turns many off.

[TOMapleLaughs]

Or take Virtanen at #6

And take one of the smaller skilled guys who drop, Like they always do at #36 like Fabbri or Vrana

Hoping one day the team will learn to let these guys drop further.

[Smashian Kassian]

I agree Fabbri might be a bit of a reach at #36 was just trying to think of smaller guys who may drop a bit.

I like the idea of Virtanen/Vrana over Nylander-Ehlers/Pollock but that's just me. Smaller players with talent fall more then larger ones with talent lots of teams might take a flyer on Pollock between 25-35 . I just think we should grab a bigger skilled guy while they're available.

But saying all this at the end of the day I'll be happy whoever we walk away with.

I actually have Fabbri & Vrana at #14 & #15 on my personal list (though that middle section of the 1st round I need more thought on as far as rankings go) so I can't see either available, we might get Ho-Sang later on, but players with the upside of Nylander/Ehlers go higher because there upside is so great.

Virtanen I think has good upside, but someone like Pollock I think has the chance to be as good a player overall as far as caliber of player if everything goes right. I think both could be good 2nd line goal scorers who have size.

Virtanen is a better prospect, but its not really far off IMO as far as potential upside, and on the other side of things, I don't see anyone being available around our 2nd with the comparable ability/upside to Ehlers/Nylander like Pollock/Virtanen.

[Smashian Kassian]

And honestly, if we get to the early 20's and Scherbak is still available due to his nationality, I would look packaging pick #36 with something else to move up to the early 20's and take him.

He's a big guy with great offensive ability, I really like the bite to his game, his skating ability and ability to create offense.

[baumerman77]

Is anyone opposed to trading Kesler for the 10th, 24th and 38th?

[Hedman]

Hmm, 2nd swedish league better than any chl league? Not sure if i'm agreeing with that. I always find this 'he plays against men' argument to be irrelevant, as there are a lot of kids in the chl who are physical beasts that would manhandle any of that league's 'men.' But that i suppose is subjective and pointless to argue about.

All i'm saying is that the kid has some definite red flags. There is no sure fire talent there. It's a big risk. Just like with Virtanen, who has an a-rated shot and a-rated speed and imho has more of an upside than Kassian, who we still think is a potential top-liner here.

I knew Schroeder was a bad pick the second I saw him. He's clinging onto an Nhl career at this point and will need to be a qualcomp player, like Nylander and Ehlers, to succeed in any fashion. Just how many sheltered-types are we planning to build with anyway? Time to get real.

As far as competition goes, it's way better than any CHL league. It doesn't mean that the league itself produces more NHL calibre players than CHL, but it's a way tougher league. I guess it depends on which players you're talking about. I doubt that there are too many players from the CHL that would be physically dominant in Allsvenskan or in the SHL.

If we're not leaning towards the more skilled option in Nylander, then i think Ritchie is a way more interesting option than Virtanen. I also think that he's a safer option than Virtanen. If you're gonna bring up what "scouts are saying about Nylander", then you should also bring up that there are plenty of scouts that are questioning Virtanens high-end potential. Doesn't really sound 6th overall worthy to me.

Don't you think it's unfair to compare a 5'8 with a 18 year old 5'11 player that could even grow an inch, or even 2? To me, that's like comparing oranges with bananas. Sure, Nylander is not huge, but don't make him sound like a dwarf. Also, Nylander is a better skater than Schroeder, and his hockey IQ is also higher. They're nothing alike.

The reason why the Canucks drafted Schroeder was because he was a top-rated player in the draft. Top 5 on the NA skaters list. He dominated the NCAA at a very young age, and even had a successful u20 tournament under his belt. There was a risk there for sure, because of his size for an instance. Canucks management gambled hard when they picked Schroeder. As Gillis said, they didn't think that Schroeder would be available at their spot, so they picked him. They thought he was the BPA. He didn't pan out great, but neither did Scott Glennie or Magnus Paajarvi who were selected earlier. Now we are in a great position. We have the 6th overall, and we have a feeling of which players will be there at our spot. There's a group of players that will most likely go top5, outside of that, there are a few players that are 6th overall worthy. None of those are heavily undersized, like Schroeder was/is. Can't really compare the situation we're in now, with the situation we were in when we picked Schroeder at 22.

[Standing_Tall#37]

Is anyone opposed to trading Kesler for the 10th, 24th and 38th?

not if it means flipping, the 6th+24th + roster player for the #1

Then we draft Reinhart at 1 and Deangelo at 10th

[R3aL]

And honestly, if we get to the early 20's and Scherbak is still available due to his nationality, I would look packaging pick #36 with something else to move up to the early 20's and take him.

He's a big guy with great offensive ability, I really like the bite to his game, his skating ability and ability to create offense.

Id really like snagging him, I have had a feeling about him all year, when we were picking in 20s I was a big scherbak promoter.

I see him being in WHL top 3 or 5 scoring next year.

[Smashian Kassian]

Is anyone opposed to trading Kesler for the 10th, 24th and 38th?

I'd probably rather have Etem instead of the 24th pick.

Id really like snagging him, I have had a feeling about him all year, when we were picking in 20s I was a big scherbak promoter.

I see him being in WHL top 3 or 5 scoring next year.

Yeah he was someone I wanted earlier in the year aswell,.

I really liked him in the top prospects game, and he's been doing great on a bad Saskatoon team where he basically carrying the offense.

I think he will be pretty high in WHL scoring next year aswell. I'd love to somehow get another pick & take him, or better yet, as unlikely as it might be, have him fall to #36.

[R3aL]

Yeaaa he adapted to the culture language game style so fast, lead his team offensively first yr, quite impressive if he dropped to our second I would be shocked, but u never know te risky ruskies scsre teams, I don't think he has any flight risk tho!