Rate the draft!

[BCNate]

3 minutes ago, ReggieBush said:

B+ based solely off the fact that I think we could have traded down a spot or two and picked up another asset. However I do recognize that if we were to trade down and not get our target than the trade would be for nothing. 

I think you could argue that Glass would have gone 5 if someone else were picking there.  Based on the way things played out, I don't think that Pettersson would have made it past the Rangers at 7 though.  If you agree with that, Benning only have LV and NY to trade with to get his guy.  Based on a few of his quotes and interviews, I really believe that Benning would have taken Pettersson at 3 if that is where we picked.

[Qwags]

Solid A for me. Pettersson has the highest potential upside in this draft besides Hirschier. Lind and Gadjovich sound like beauties. 

[Nucker 67]

I'm happy. Canucks now have their future #1C Horvat and #2C Pettersson. I like that they drafted Gadjovich, a big LW who can score, would make a good bookend with Virtanen or Lind on the right. Surprised we landed DiPietro, really pleased with that, now having Demko, Garteig and DiPietro in the system. Not familiar with the other players, Palmu has very impressive stats, but he's really small. Good additions by adding depth D. They're all left shots though, so Benning is still needing that puck moving RHD. Future team is shaping up nicely though.

 

Baertschi - Horvat - Boeser

Dahlen - Pettersson - Goldobin

Granlund - Gaudette - Virtanen

Gadjovich/Gaunce - McEwen/Zhukenov - Lind/Lockwood

 

Juolevi - Stecher

Hutton - Gudbranson

Brisebois - Chatfield

McEneny - Subban

Brassard

 

Demko

DiPietro

[Ghostsof1915]

B, only because some of the smaller guys worry me. 

 

First three picks are solid. 

 

A pity we didn't get a late first or another second rounder. I still would have liked Foote and Rasmussen. I think Detroit and Tampa made some good moves there. 

[PunjabiCanucks]

A- / B + , see where it works out with Pettersson in the end. Not too happy taking Gunarsson but still happy with the depth in the later rounds. 

[suomistyler]

I hate to throw ice on everyone's draft day stiffies, but the chances of any of our draft picks playing more than 200 games in the NHL is lower than the chances that they don't (19% chance).

Based on an analysis of previous drafts, history shows that:

• players drafted in the first round have a 63% of playing 200+ games with just over 50% of those hitting 500+ games.
• players drafted in the second round have only a 25% of playing 200+ games in the NHL
• players drafted past the second round have a 12% of playing 200+ games in the NHL

Realistically, Petersson is the only pick that has a statistically reasonable chance of becoming a regular NHL player. Considering the statistical odds on the rest, you wouldn't be putting any money down that any will succeed.In fact, if we do have one of the picks outside of the first round succeed, we would be beating the statistical odds and this would be considered a successful draft, especially in a weak draft.

Its a little early for people to take their pants off and start running around claiming how successful this draft was and how we have picked 3-4 future NHLers....only time will tell and history is against us.

[HerrDrFunk]

I give it B.

 

Lots of very solid and intriguing picks but it's going to be years before they actually help the Canucks, if they do.

[messier's_elbow]

Vegas and LA won the draft. Canucks did decent overall.

[Shekky]

15 minutes ago, messier's_elbow said:

Vegas and LA won the draft. Canucks did decent overall.

No way to tell that until 3-4 years down the road.

[J-Dizzle]

1 hour ago, canucklehead80 said:

4 forwards, including our future top centre, 3 defensemen and a goalie. Good balance in our picks.

I'd be very happy if Pettersson turns into a top six forward let alone a top centre.... being a top 5 pick by no means gaurantees top six status.  

[McBackup]

35 minutes ago, suomistyler said:

I hate to throw ice on everyone's draft day stiffies, but the chances of any of our draft picks playing more than 200 games in the NHL is lower than the chances that they don't (19% chance).

Based on an analysis of previous drafts, history shows that:

• players drafted in the first round have a 63% of playing 200+ games with just over 50% of those hitting 500+ games.
• players drafted in the second round have only a 25% of playing 200+ games in the NHL
• players drafted past the second round have a 12% of playing 200+ games in the NHL

Realistically, Petersson is the only pick that has a statistically reasonable chance of becoming a regular NHL player. Considering the statistical odds on the rest, you wouldn't be putting any money down that any will succeed.In fact, if we do have one of the picks outside of the first round succeed, we would be beating the statistical odds and this would be considered a successful draft, especially in a weak draft.

Its a little early for people to take their pants off and start running around claiming how successful this draft was and how we have picked 3-4 future NHLers....only time will tell and history is against us.

People here are very aware of the statistics regarding making the NHL. We're talking about the players we drafted and their upside, not what round they were picked in.

[Ossi Vaananen]

I'm waiting for the interview with Benning when he predicts how many NHLers. In '14 he said 4, and looks to be right. In '15 said he was confident with 2-3, 16' he said 2. This one? Could be safe with 4 (Pettersson, Lind, Gadjovich, Dipietro), with some high risk/high reward in Rathbone/Palmu.

 

I can't say I know anything about Gunarsson or Brassard. The former we retain his rights almost forever, so he can develop, while Brassard has 2 years to earn a contract. No real risk there. 

[48MPHSlapShot]

C+ for me.

 

Pettersson is a big risk, but a gamble worth taking considering the upside.

 

Kole Lind is a nice pick at 33, but I can't help thinking we should have gone with a Dman here. 

 

Love the pick of Jonah Godjovich. Exactly the type of big, truculent power forward we need.

 

Not super high on any of the Dman we pulled. All seem to underwhelm in their own, unique way.

 

I like the pick of DiPietro. We needed another high end goalie prospect as a backup plan for Demko.

 

I also really like the pick of Petrus Palmu. Small player, but 98 points in 62 games, including 40 goals in 62 games. Might as well swing for the fences with a 6th rounder.

 

So overall I like much of what we did, but would have liked to nab a Dman at 33, and I'm still unsure of Pettersson at 5.

[Mattrek]

1 hour ago, suomistyler said:

I hate to throw ice on everyone's draft day stiffies, but the chances of any of our draft picks playing more than 200 games in the NHL is lower than the chances that they don't (19% chance).

Based on an analysis of previous drafts, history shows that:

• players drafted in the first round have a 63% of playing 200+ games with just over 50% of those hitting 500+ games.
• players drafted in the second round have only a 25% of playing 200+ games in the NHL
• players drafted past the second round have a 12% of playing 200+ games in the NHL

Realistically, Petersson is the only pick that has a statistically reasonable chance of becoming a regular NHL player. Considering the statistical odds on the rest, you wouldn't be putting any money down that any will succeed.In fact, if we do have one of the picks outside of the first round succeed, we would be beating the statistical odds and this would be considered a successful draft, especially in a weak draft.

Its a little early for people to take their pants off and start running around claiming how successful this draft was and how we have picked 3-4 future NHLers....only time will tell and history is against us.

 

 

You want to know the problem with statistics? Ask Tanev our undrafted top 10 NHL Defensive D-man. Or talk to Gaudette, Lockwood or even Tryamkin on how unlikely it is they will be NHL players. There will always be those who surprise and being utterly dismissive of the chance anyone makes it is petty. Any one of these players could become a superstar it just takes an insane amount of hard work and effort which is why most don't hit that level. Let's see where they are in a few years before throwing our guys under the bus eh?

[Ossi Vaananen]

Exceptional interview with Judd Bracket:

 

http://ckstam.streamon.fm/listen-pl-960?smc=10

 

 

[suomistyler]

2 minutes ago, Mattrek said:

 

 

You want to know the problem with statistics? Ask Tanev our undrafted top 10 NHL Defensive D-man. There will always be those who surprise and being utterly dismissive of the chance anyone makes it is petty. Any one of these players could become a superstar it just takes an insane amount of hard work and effort which is why most don't hit that level. Let's see where they are in a few years before throwing our guys under the bus eh?

i agree with you..but you are talking about the problem with predictive statistics...not statistics based on historical analysis of what actually happened. Historical analysis says the chances are very low that anyone outside of the first round has a realistic chance of making it as a NHL regular....that's not just with Canucks prospects but every other one as well. People are so fast to jump to conclusions on how great the draft was (happens every year on this site) and time inevitably tells a different story. Let's chat again in 10 years as see how things played out. then we can actually judge the success of this draft rather than the day after everyone was drafted.

[Phat Fingers]

1 hour ago, suomistyler said:

I hate to throw ice on everyone's draft day stiffies, but the chances of any of our draft picks playing more than 200 games in the NHL is lower than the chances that they don't (19% chance).

Based on an analysis of previous drafts, history shows that:

• players drafted in the first round have a 63% of playing 200+ games with just over 50% of those hitting 500+ games.
• players drafted in the second round have only a 25% of playing 200+ games in the NHL
• players drafted past the second round have a 12% of playing 200+ games in the NHL

Realistically, Petersson is the only pick that has a statistically reasonable chance of becoming a regular NHL player. Considering the statistical odds on the rest, you wouldn't be putting any money down that any will succeed.In fact, if we do have one of the picks outside of the first round succeed, we would be beating the statistical odds and this would be considered a successful draft, especially in a weak draft.

Its a little early for people to take their pants off and start running around claiming how successful this draft was and how we have picked 3-4 future NHLers....only time will tell and history is against us.

That means that JB literally had an unreal 2014 draft.  Even with all the questions surrounding Jake, he blew away the sastical model. Boeser looks to be another, OJ is money.  Lockwood, Brisbios and Gaudette are all showing potential. Early days to be rating even the 2014 draft, but JB has shown an ability to find talent past the top ten, missed out Pastrnak (BTW I wonder if Boston made that a condition on letting JB go to the Nucks... tin foil hat firmly in place). 

 

I like this draft even if my guys weren't chosen. I wanted Glass/Vlardi and Hague. One tweet is likely true, if Pettersson was 20lbs heavier he could have gone 1st OA. That's his only really glaring weakness.  Get that kid on the Jake Virtannen training regime pronto . 

 

The rest of the draft looks great.  Somewhere I feel that next season JB is taking a lot of d men.  The next draft is supposed to be loaded with d men and I expected JB to address that weakness with the 33rd and 55th pick. He went for really impressive forwards, great.  Next year draft really impressive d men. 

 

We got Dipietro in the 3rd?  This team is back on track to be a goalie factory again. 

 

EmW

 

 

[canucklehead80]

1 hour ago, J-Dizzle said:

I'd be very happy if Pettersson turns into a top six forward let alone a top centre.... being a top 5 pick by no means gaurantees top six status.  

It doesn't. He does have top 5 skills though. Nothing is guaranteed with him, but there is enough to get excited about.

[JM_]

3 hours ago, Down by the River said:

Other than Gunnarsson, I had no reason to question any of the picks. 

 

I give it an 'A'.

I don't mind this pick, he could make Utica next season and be a solid call-up the season after that. Pure depth but you also need that, and better to spend it using a 6th rounder imo. 

 

Overall I'm very pleased. This year was the year to take a risk, and for the most part Jim is risking on high end skill.

 

I wanted Makar, but Pettersson will do nicely given the potential upside here. He's already ahead of where Nylander was at and he's got the Sedin's to inspire him, I think he'll do very well. 

 

Petrus Palmu might end up being a real steal.

 

Gadjovich might be a great 3rd liner down the road. Lind dropped in our lap. 

 

Rathbone is the one that is going to be really interesting to keep an eye on. Its a huge longshot that he can continue that scoring in college but if he does Jim will look like a genius. 

 

 

[suomistyler]

29 minutes ago, Eastcoast meets Westcoast said:

That means that JB literally had an unreal 2014 draft.  Even with all the questions surrounding Jake, he blew away the sastical model. Boeser looks to be another, OJ is money.  Lockwood, Brisbios and Gaudette are all showing potential. Early days to be rating even the 2014 draft, but JB has shown an ability to find talent past the top ten, missed out Pastrnak (BTW I wonder if Boston made that a condition on letting JB go to the Nucks... tin foil hat firmly in place). 

 

I like this draft even if my guys weren't chosen. I wanted Glass/Vlardi and Hague. One tweet is likely true, if Pettersson was 20lbs heavier he could have gone 1st OA. That's his only really glaring weakness.  Get that kid on the Jake Virtannen training regime pronto . 

 

The rest of the draft looks great.  Somewhere I feel that next season JB is taking a lot of d men.  The next draft is supposed to be loaded with d men and I expected JB to address that weakness with the 33rd and 55th pick. He went for really impressive forwards, great.  Next year draft really impressive d men. 

 

We got Dipietro in the 3rd?  This team is back on track to be a goalie factory again. 

 

EmW

 

 

Actually none of the draftees from 2014 have played close to the 200+ games used to judge if a draftee has become an NHL regular. Virtanen and Mccann both regressed last year and are not guaranteed successes with either organization. Lockwood, Brisbios and Gaudette haven't even played a single game of professional hockey on any level. Calling the 2014 draft 'unreal" is still relying on a large dose of predictive assumption of a best case scenario. Only time will tell the real story and there is still a chance that all of the draftees end up being busts....i hope that's not the case, but the chance is a real one.

Using the term "potential" as an argument of drafting success is ridiculous as this represents all players drafted. If they weren't perceived as having the potential of becoming an NHLer, they wouldn't be drafted in the first place. Potential is a subjective thing within the eye of the beholder. But at the end of the day, it means nothing in understanding the longterm success of a draftee becoming a regular NHLer.