Ossi Vaananen Posted June 24, 2016 Share Posted June 24, 2016 It's just a few CanucksArmy writers, but it appears it's out there. The belief is, if Dubois/Puljujarvi are gone by the 5th pick, the Canucks will trade down and select a defenseman or Brown. http://canucksarmy.com/2016/6/24/source-canucks-giving-serious-consideration-to-trading-down-from-fifth-overall Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ItsMillerTime Posted June 24, 2016 Share Posted June 24, 2016 Nah Jim Benning said he would most likely keep the pick even if Dubois is gone. He has his eye on 3 players. So that tweet is false. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LM11 Posted June 24, 2016 Share Posted June 24, 2016 I would agree with that approach. I want Dubois. If he is gone, then trade down. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gaudette Celly Posted June 24, 2016 Share Posted June 24, 2016 Quote Vancouver covets two players in this draft above anyone else likely to fall to them at fifth. At the top of that list is Pierre-Luc Dubois of the Cape Breton Screaming Eagles. Not far behind Dubois is Olli Juolevi of the London Knights. The thinking, according to my source, is that if the Canucks can't secure the former of those two, they will do everything in their power to maximize their value with fifth overall and secure a selection later in the top ten of the draft. Though the Canucks think Juolevi is the best defenceman in this draft, it is believed that they regard Mikhail Sergachyov of the Windsor Spitfires in a similar light and are willing to draft him should they find themselves without access to the Finnish stud defenceman. Not sure how that makes any sense. They want Dubois and "not far behind", Juolevi. Yet if Dubois is gone they'll trade down and maybe take Sergachyov? One of either Dubois or Juolevi WILL be there -- why not just take one or the other? What if they trade down to 7th or 8th, and both Juolevi and Sergachyov are both gone? Unless there's a big premium to move, it doesn't sound like a smart ploy unless they truly see little difference between the players. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nucker 67 Posted June 24, 2016 Share Posted June 24, 2016 Well, Benning never said which 6 players he was hoping to get. Matthews, Laine, Puljujarvi, Dubois.........Brown or Sergachev? This would be surprising, considering he was most impressed with Tkachuk's interview at the combine. Just more outsiders trying to stir up some controversy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
R3aL Posted June 24, 2016 Share Posted June 24, 2016 trading down and still getting sergachev would be okay for me if dubois is gone Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ossi Vaananen Posted June 24, 2016 Author Share Posted June 24, 2016 1 minute ago, Hutton Wink said: Not sure how that makes any sense. They want Dubois and "not far behind", Juolevi. Yet if Dubois is gone they'll trade down and maybe take Sergachyov? One of either Dubois or Juolevi WILL be there -- why not just take one or the other? What if they trade down to 7th or 8th, and both Juolevi and Sergachyov are both gone? Unless there's a big premium to move, it doesn't sound like a smart ploy unless they truly see little difference between the players. Ya it's a pretty soft article, I even mentioned that. In theory, I like the play. If Dubois is the Canucks guy, and he's not there - then move back, acquire extra assets and snag the next best guy you wanted. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
riffraff Posted June 24, 2016 Share Posted June 24, 2016 I will be surprised if we trade down... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LM11 Posted June 24, 2016 Share Posted June 24, 2016 4 minutes ago, Hutton Wink said: Not sure how that makes any sense. They want Dubois and "not far behind", Juolevi. Yet if Dubois is gone they'll trade down and maybe take Sergachyov? One of either Dubois or Juolevi WILL be there -- why not just take one or the other? What if they trade down to 7th or 8th, and both Juolevi and Sergachyov are both gone? Unless there's a big premium to move, it doesn't sound like a smart ploy unless they truly see little difference between the players. well, if they trade down, it would have to be somewhere between 6-10 where they are fairly certain that juolevi,sergachev and brown aren't all gone by their turn. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Vanderhoek Posted June 24, 2016 Share Posted June 24, 2016 9 minutes ago, ItsMillerTime said: Nah Jim Benning said he would most likely keep the pick even if Dubois is gone. He has his eye on 3 players. So that tweet is false. tweet is real, we don't really know what the Canucks intend on doing other than the common thought that the team wants Dubois. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aGENT Posted June 24, 2016 Share Posted June 24, 2016 7 minutes ago, Hutton Wink said: Not sure how that makes any sense. They want Dubois and "not far behind", Juolevi. Yet if Dubois is gone they'll trade down and maybe take Sergachyov? One of either Dubois or Juolevi WILL be there -- why not just take one or the other? What if they trade down to 7th or 8th, and both Juolevi and Sergachyov are both gone? Unless there's a big premium to move, it doesn't sound like a smart ploy unless they truly see little difference between the players. Then they take Jost, Chycrun etc. They may feel there's little drop from Juolevi, to Chychrun, Jost, Serg etc (I tend to agree) and if they can pick up additional assets... As you noted, the key is 'the premium'. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
timberz21 Posted June 24, 2016 Share Posted June 24, 2016 If we trade down, it would have to be a massive overpayment, like 7th and 20th from Arizona. Still lots of good option at 7th, I think. Plus possibility of Benning finding another gem at 20th. Doubt Arizona does it though Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gaudette Celly Posted June 24, 2016 Share Posted June 24, 2016 Just now, Ossi Vaananen said: Ya it's a pretty soft article, I even mentioned that. In theory, I like the play. If Dubois is the Canucks guy, and he's not there - then move back, acquire extra assets and snag the next best guy you wanted. Certainly if they view Dubois as their main guy and Juolevi, Sergachyov, and Tkachuk as roughly equal then by all means -- if no Dubois then trade down to 8th and take the asset for it and grab whomever's left. But JB hasn't really worked that way. He seems to get in mind who he wants and goes after him, paying what's necessary to do so. Would prefer one of PLD or Tkachuck but if he's sold on one of the D and PLD is gone then yeah, go for it. Sergachyov is very intriguing and if that's who he feels is best then i have no problem with it at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aGENT Posted June 24, 2016 Share Posted June 24, 2016 1 minute ago, timberz21 said: If we trade down, it would have to be a massive overpayment, like 7th and 20th from Arizona. Still lots of good option at 7th, I think. Plus possibility of Benning finding another gem at 20th. Doubt Arizona does it though If Dubois is gone that almost certainly mean Tkachuck is still there and ARZ is rumoured to be VERY interested... They may just be willing to pay up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Long Posted June 24, 2016 Share Posted June 24, 2016 tampering!!! tampering!!! i think it would have to have an immediate lineup upgrade for us coming back... but who? not sure anyone in the top 10 has a roster guy to give back Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nucker 67 Posted June 24, 2016 Share Posted June 24, 2016 Maybe Benning will kill three birds with one stone. Trade down to a team who will give us back their 1st pick, plus a 2nd pick and a player - Instead of trying to sign an expensive UFA. eg. To MTL 5th (Dubois) To VAN 9th (Brown) 2nd round pick Eller Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Long Posted June 24, 2016 Share Posted June 24, 2016 1 minute ago, J.R. said: If Dubois is gone that almost certainly mean Tkachuck is still there and ARZ is rumoured to be VERY interested... They may just be willing to pay up. Are you thinking 7th and 20th? or is there a player back? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
luongotv Posted June 24, 2016 Share Posted June 24, 2016 4 minutes ago, timberz21 said: If we trade down, it would have to be a massive overpayment, like 7th and 20th from Arizona. Still lots of good option at 7th, I think. Plus possibility of Benning finding another gem at 20th. Doubt Arizona does it though Tkachuk is from AZ, maybe he could be a way of bring more fans in for them?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Warhippy Posted June 24, 2016 Share Posted June 24, 2016 Lemme channel my inner elvis. This is kind of redundant as there's already been unending speculation about this over the last month. Of course if he can maximize value he'll move down if his perceived BPA is gone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Warhippy Posted June 24, 2016 Share Posted June 24, 2016 3 minutes ago, NUCKER67 said: Maybe Benning will kill three birds with one stone. Trade down to a team who will give us back their 1st pick, plus a 2nd pick and a player - Instead of trying to sign an expensive UFA. eg. To MTL 5th (Dubois) To VAN 9th (Brown) 2nd round pick Eller if he did that and drafted Charlie Brown instead of Jost for center position he should be slapped and fired on the spot Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.