hearditall Posted November 5, 2016 Share Posted November 5, 2016 40 minutes ago, oldnews said: I 'knew' "we" were taking a D at 5. I called Juolevi from the start. I later Ithought Chychrun might make a run (I listened to what Benning had to say about seeking a future #1) - but he fell down the stretch. If we'd remained in the 3 spot it probably would have been JP, but I had little doubt they were wanting a D, and I have absolutely no protests regarding considering Juolevi the BPA at 5. I find it all fairly comical that people are attempting to judge the draft in the first week of November. A kid has a two goal game and the chicken little gang jump in the collective fishbowl. The top 5 was always 1. Mathews 2. Laine 3. Puljujarvi 4. Tkatchuk 5. PL Dubois 6.? http://www.draftsite.com/nhl/mock-draft/2016/ - 1st D picked Sergachyov #6 http://draftutopia.com/2016nhlmockdraft.html -1st D picked Sergachyov #8 http://www.si.com/nhl/2016/06/23/2016-nhl-mock-draft-first-round-auston-matthews -1st D picked Sergachyov #8 http://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/nhl/damien-coxs-2016-nhl-mock-draft/ -1st D Juolevi #7 http://thehockeywriters.com/5th-annual-nhl-mock-draft-2016-round-1/ -1st D picked Juolevi #8 http://www.tsn.ca/mock-draft-here-s-what-happens-after-no-3-1.512895 With all these Tkatchuk was rated #4 on almost everyones list. Higher than any D.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldnews Posted November 5, 2016 Share Posted November 5, 2016 3 minutes ago, hearditall said: The top 5 was always lol. There's no such thing until the draft takes place. You're mistaking some bystanders opinions for having any weight where irl NHL teams are concerned. All teams have their own scouting - amateur and pro - they have their own lists - they're running misdirections and don't really care how other teams evaluate players (with the exception of predicting where targets of interest might go) - and they all make their own decisions in the end. There is no such thing as consensus - particularly where something as unpredictable and complicated as the future development of teenagers is concerned. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hearditall Posted November 5, 2016 Share Posted November 5, 2016 59 minutes ago, oldnews said: I 'knew' "we" were taking a D at 5. I called Juolevi from the start. I later Ithought Chychrun might make a run (I listened to what Benning had to say about seeking a future #1) - but he fell down the stretch. If we'd remained in the 3 spot it probably would have been JP, but I had little doubt they were wanting a D, and I have absolutely no protests regarding considering Juolevi the BPA at 5. I find it all fairly comical that people are attempting to judge the draft in the first week of November. A kid has a two goal game and the chicken little gang jump in the collective fishbowl. Canucks (JB) was clearly after PL Dubois. Once Columbus screwed that plan up. JB for some reason had no interest in taking the NHL bloodlines again. (eg. Nylander, Ronning, Tkatchuk.) I'm not against Juolevi, I just think we should've taken the #4 seed (Tkatchuk) or traded down if we were going to take a D that were clearly rated from #6 at best to #15 seed... 107 points in 57 games is hard to turn down, no? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theilluminati Posted November 5, 2016 Share Posted November 5, 2016 9 minutes ago, hearditall said: Canucks (JB) was clearly after PL Dubois. Once Columbus screwed that plan up. JB for some reason had no interest in taking the NHL bloodlines again. (eg. Nylander, Ronning, Tkatchuk.) I'm not against Juolevi, I just think we should've taken the #4 seed (Tkatchuk) or traded down if we were going to take a D that were clearly rated from #6 at best to #15 seed... 107 points in 57 games is hard to turn down, no? Hahahaha...you're trying to reason with oldnews...you do realize he is the most ardent of the Canuck homers and ANY sleight against his beloved Canucks elicits nothing but zero judgement, childish responses and long winded fruitless posts...he is literally the one person on here that should not be posting at all... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldnews Posted November 5, 2016 Share Posted November 5, 2016 16 hours ago, theilluminati said: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
William_Clarkson Posted November 6, 2016 Share Posted November 6, 2016 On 7/1/2016 at 7:13 PM, Sean Avery said: Etem, D. Sedin, and Baertschi are all snipers on the LW 1st, 2nd, and 3rd line and even though Horvat, Sutter, Eriksson, and Hansen are all TWF, they can score. Virtanen is another sniper as well that could have a good season. We don't need another sniper. NHL 17's a pretty good game, ain't it? And yeah, I'd say this team needs a bit more than just a sniper...Like, most things a winning team needs, the Canucks currently lacks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kingofsurrey Posted November 6, 2016 Share Posted November 6, 2016 18 hours ago, theilluminati said: Hahahaha...you're trying to reason with oldnews...you do realize he is the most ardent of the Canuck homers and ANY sleight against his beloved Canucks elicits nothing but zero judgement, childish responses and long winded fruitless posts...he is literally the one person on here that should not be posting at all... So true. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.