King Heffy Posted March 22, 2017 Share Posted March 22, 2017 If I could minus the OP again, I would. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lmm Posted March 22, 2017 Share Posted March 22, 2017 20 minutes ago, King Heffy said: If I could minus the OP again, I would. i plussed him for you Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bernzie71 Posted March 22, 2017 Share Posted March 22, 2017 I like what canucks management has done so far i always look forward to the NHL draft, these are just young men 17-20 yrs of age depends on college as well. it doesn't matter where u get drafted as long as your drafted and every year a player gets passed over 7 times sometimes it's 14 times( 2+ draft year) or more . it's called late bloomers. i for one agree the age should be raised to 19-20 yrs of age. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
selkirkcraig Posted March 22, 2017 Share Posted March 22, 2017 On 3/21/2017 at 1:23 PM, Butters Stoch said: Never had much hockey IQ to start with so many considered him a pretty high risk pick while we still had some guys with high end skill to pick from. To me, at least, the pick was easily narrowed down to 2 players for us to choose from.. I don't think I need to specify which guys since it was pretty obvious. i know what you are saying but could JB really turn down the chance to draft a big, hard hitting BC born - Canuck loving prospect? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
selkirkcraig Posted March 22, 2017 Share Posted March 22, 2017 On 3/21/2017 at 2:26 PM, Harvey Spector said: Our woes are gone. We now have a draft guru. Jack Gordon is not running our draft any longer. Jim Benning is the man in change. Nikita Tryamkin Thatcher Demko Brock Boeser Ollli Juolevi Adam Gaudette Guillaume Brisebois Right there we have potentially 6 impact players from Benning's 3 drafts. Of course Virtanen is still a wild card. He could be a bust or he could be Bertuzzi 2.0. We don't know yet. Throw in Lockwood, Olson, Neill and Zhukenov and you have 3 pretty stellar draft years with really no busts as of yet. Also we have Gudbranson from the McCann trade so he's indirectly a part of the drafting of Benning. hockey futures ranked the Canucks at # 24 in 2013-14 and # 14 in 2015-16, and that's with a graduated horvat and not factoring in juolevi. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
selkirkcraig Posted March 22, 2017 Share Posted March 22, 2017 on a side note, i'm shocked at how high most people rank gudbranson. imo, unless he's willing to give the team a break on term or salary, then he is expendable; i just don't see a role for him with the team with the emergence of hutton, stetcher, and especially tryamkin, who possesses a similar skill set. add in vets like tanev and edler, and a spot for juolevi, and there's the top 6 for the next 3 years. i guess some may argue that edler should go, but eric is hardly an offensive player - he's a 10-15 pts. a year player, and lets not forget that it is highly unlikely edler ever waives his ntc. i would be disappointed if the canucks offered eric anymore than 2-3 years at 3 million a year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.