Draft Day Dilema (Discussion)

[J.I.A.H.N]

Been thinking this a lot lately and would love to have a discussion on it........I hope people are open to it!

 

First off.............I think we only talk about the top 7 picks, because short of a total miracle we draft absolutely no lower than there

 

I suggest the order of the top 7 picks will be in this order.................

 

#1. Dahlin ................6'2"

#2. Svechnikov.........6'2"

#3. Zadina.................6'0"

#4. Boqvist................5'11"

#5. Tkachuk..............6'2"

#6. Wahlstrom...........6'1"

#7. Bouchard.............6'2"

 

I am not sold on the fact we need to take a forward this draft, and in fact hope we take Dmen with both our first 2 picks, most of this is due to the fact that Dman take that year or 2 to develop over that of forwards, and when looking at our team, we need to stock up there more than anywhere, and I won't be mad if Benning went 3 for 3, and we may pass up some good offensive forwards on our way.............but this is the year of the defenseman, and the year we need to stock up on dmen.

 

My question is, should we pass/trade down if possible out of the 2/3 spot if we win either spot, and what would the different be in assets, if we did move down 1 or 2 spots?

 

To me Boqvist and Bouchard are looking more and more even all the time for different reasons, but would love either one, if we didn't get Dahlin. Yes Boqvist has been said to have a high ceiling, but really hasn't proved it to me, while Bouchard has singlehandedly put himself in the top 10 in scoring in the OHL for all players.

 

If we could move down, and pick up another pick, would it be worth it? And are any others thinking the same way?

 

Could we not pick up a forward in the 2019 draft and be just as well off, forward speaking...........in 2 years?

 

Maybe not...but I would like to talk about it, if you have an opinion on it!

[RetroCanuck]

Obviously if you get the first overall your not moving down but if we are 2-3-4 I would be fine moving down as far as 8 because that almost guarantees one of Boqvist, Bouchard or Hughes will be available to us. Honestly I would move down in that range for as little as a third round pick, preferably a second. It could happen too, as a team may really want a Tkatchuk, Zadina or Svechnikov. 

 

In the end I want us taking either Dahlin, Boqvist, Bouchard or Hughes in the first round and another D with our second such as Miller, Woo or Merkley.

 

Heres hoping Bennings of the same idea or we may very well be overpaying for defensemen in the coming years.

[PunjabiCanucks]

In my opinion, if we get #1 pick all is set and we can move Edler/ Tanev/ or Guddy for a 1st round pick (approx). This will allow us to take another dman or BPA in the 1st round.

 

Now if we get #2 we take Svech, easy as that. He is NHL ready imo and can be deadly if he is a Malkin comparable. Zadina at #3 would be amazing on our LW and is an upgrade on Daniel next year, Baertschi, and other LW in our system.

 

at #4 we take boqvist and run. now if we get the dreadful #5 I say we trade down if tkachuk is left to get Bouchard. ofc this works if the #6 and #7 want a forward and not a Dman. There was a reason we couldn't trade down last year to take Pettersson as NYR wanted a centre (Pettersson). This prevented us from trading with Buffalo as by then Pettersson would be gone.

 

As much as it sucks, take the BPA and hope we get #1 pick. We do need D like no tomorrow, but we also need to become well rounded in every aspect. We could have one of the deadliest offences and potential good goaltending. We could use future draft picks for NHL ready dman and/ or via free agency. Here is hoping, we can get a 2nd 1st rd pick this year, potentially in the top 10.

[WHL rocks]

No dilema

 

1st overall take Dahlin

2nd overall and later take Tkachuk if he's on the board.

[Crabcakes]

I'm all for moving down if they get the player they want.  

 

They still need to find a partner and that list would be limited to 1 or 2 teams so the odds of actually doing it are very limited

[IBatch]

7 hours ago, janisahockeynut said:

Been thinking this a lot lately and would love to have a discussion on it........I hope people are open to it!

 

First off.............I think we only talk about the top 7 picks, because short of a total miracle we draft absolutely no lower than there

 

I suggest the order of the top 7 picks will be in this order.................

 

#1. Dahlin ................6'2"

#2. Svechnikov.........6'2"

#3. Zadina.................6'0"

#4. Boqvist................5'11"

#5. Tkachuk..............6'2"

#6. Wahlstrom...........6'1"

#7. Bouchard.............6'2"

 

I am not sold on the fact we need to take a forward this draft, and in fact hope we take Dmen with both our first 2 picks, most of this is due to the fact that Dman take that year or 2 to develop over that of forwards, and when looking at our team, we need to stock up there more than anywhere, and I won't be mad if Benning went 3 for 3, and we may pass up some good offensive forwards on our way.............but this is the year of the defenseman, and the year we need to stock up on dmen.

 

My question is, should we pass/trade down if possible out of the 2/3 spot if we win either spot, and what would the different be in assets, if we did move down 1 or 2 spots?

 

To me Boqvist and Bouchard are looking more and more even all the time for different reasons, but would love either one, if we didn't get Dahlin. Yes Boqvist has been said to have a high ceiling, but really hasn't proved it to me, while Bouchard has singlehandedly put himself in the top 10 in scoring in the OHL for all players.

 

If we could move down, and pick up another pick, would it be worth it? And are any others thinking the same way?

 

Could we not pick up a forward in the 2019 draft and be just as well off, forward speaking...........in 2 years?

 

Maybe not...but I would like to talk about it, if you have an opinion on it!

This is definitely topic worthy and it is a head scratcher given the risks involved.   Recently read that Bouchard is both the best outlet passer and best 60 foot stretch in the draft (THN Future ).  If we miss in Dahlin and have second or third overall I'd be ok switching down to as low as fifth only if we were very confident that we'd still get Bouchard, or at least Boqvist.  Given that Svecknikov started the year number one by some lists, and some guys still maintain that view, he's a prize that could net a second and change in picks at least.  I'd do that.

[kloubek]

I honestly don't think the vast majority of us have enough information on any of these guys to form an accurate snapshot of who they are currently - let alone what they will become. Likely the majority of what we know about these guys is mainly from OTHER people's opinions in articles they have written, or forming our opinions of things like stats - which have so many variables between them that using it as a basis of opinion is spotty at best.

 

Then to try to figure out what Benning's plans are (ie: Rebuilding the d, etc), and to try to incorporate all that along with what little we know about the prospects, and it's all so heavily speculative.

 

Here's a couple of facts that nobody will dispute:

1) We have lots of talent coming down the pipe.  So much so that one may say we need more size and grit in the forward lines, but almost nobody is claiming we need more talent.  It's highly likely enough of our prospects will hit that our roster spots will be filled with a high quality top six.

2) We need to rebuild our d and bring in a couple of guys who can actually score and quarterback a pp.

3) Our forwards will be ready for the NHL prior to any drafted D (Juolevi aside) will be ready for the NHL.
 

So basically, we can draft a forward but unless he's going to be that big physical presence, it doesn't necessarily improve our club; it just adds to the prospect pool which is already full.  We can draft a D, but we need to realize he won't be likely ready to play for 2-3 years.

So I say there are two directions to go. 

 

Direction 1: if your mindset is that we are missing a physical forward then that is what should be focused on.

 

Direction 2: I say pick the guy who we think will be the best player in the future, regardless of position.  BPA.  Since picking doesn't likely make a big difference to our team for the next couple of years, then we might as well just try to increase the trading chips we have available to try to get the players we need via that route.

 

Of course, this is assuming we want to be contenders sooner than later.  If we are willing to wait another 4-5 years then we can rebuild exclusively through the draft and this entire post becomes pretty much moot.

[JM_]

7 hours ago, RetroCanuck said:

Obviously if you get the first overall your not moving down but if we are 2-3-4 I would be fine moving down as far as 8 because that almost guarantees one of Boqvist, Bouchard or Hughes will be available to us. Honestly I would move down in that range for as little as a third round pick, preferably a second. It could happen too, as a team may really want a Tkatchuk, Zadina or Svechnikov. 

 

In the end I want us taking either Dahlin, Boqvist, Bouchard or Hughes in the first round and another D with our second such as Miller, Woo or Merkley.

 

If you're going to drop as far as 8 I doubt Boqvist or even Bouchard would be there, so you'd have to be pretty sold on someone like Hughes or even Wilde and get a very good return on the trade. I'd prefer to keep the top 4 spot, we need elite talent everywhere. 

[IBatch]

1 hour ago, kloubek said:

I honestly don't think the vast majority of us have enough information on any of these guys to form an accurate snapshot of who they are currently - let alone what they will become. Likely the majority of what we know about these guys is mainly from OTHER people's opinions in articles they have written, or forming our opinions of things like stats - which have so many variables between them that using it as a basis of opinion is spotty at best.

 

Then to try to figure out what Benning's plans are (ie: Rebuilding the d, etc), and to try to incorporate all that along with what little we know about the prospects, and it's all so heavily speculative.

 

Here's a couple of facts that nobody will dispute:

1) We have lots of talent coming down the pipe.  So much so that one may say we need more size and grit in the forward lines, but almost nobody is claiming we need more talent.  It's highly likely enough of our prospects will hit that our roster spots will be filled with a high quality top six.

2) We need to rebuild our d and bring in a couple of guys who can actually score and quarterback a pp.

3) Our forwards will be ready for the NHL prior to any drafted D (Juolevi aside) will be ready for the NHL.
 

So basically, we can draft a forward but unless he's going to be that big physical presence, it doesn't necessarily improve our club; it just adds to the prospect pool which is already full.  We can draft a D, but we need to realize he won't be likely ready to play for 2-3 years.

So I say there are two directions to go. 

 

Direction 1: if your mindset is that we are missing a physical forward then that is what should be focused on.

 

Direction 2: I say pick the guy who we think will be the best player in the future, regardless of position.  BPA.  Since picking doesn't likely make a big difference to our team for the next couple of years, then we might as well just try to increase the trading chips we have available to try to get the players we need via that route.

 

Of course, this is assuming we want to be contenders sooner than later.  If we are willing to wait another 4-5 years then we can rebuild exclusively through the draft and this entire post becomes pretty much moot.

The information is available to you if you have the desire and time to look it up.  The top ten this year has some real gems, most have a good chance of stepping in right away and making their teams depending on how deep they are at their draft picks position.  A few may need one year, but they should still make the NHL and make an impact.

 

Dahlin is a slam dunk, the announces at the WJs suggested he could be playing right now as a 17 year old.  Svecknikov and BT next year for sure.   Boqvist might need a year to add some pounds, but maybe not.  Bouchard could play for us and be the best defenseman by the end of the year.   Sure these guys are next year's prospects, but the top of the draft (top ten)  is loaded with guys that could make their teams next year, unlike last year.

 

Edit: I like the idea of taking the best player available too, loading up with stars in one position has its perks  ...it also has its pitfalls see EDM.

 

This year I think we need to pick a defenseman, unless we are 2nd in which case picking Svecknikov would be awesome too.

[J.I.A.H.N]

Well and there in lies my problem

I believe in BPA, but I also feel we need to take a Damn.......excluding Dahlin. I like Bouchard

I also have a problem with our forwards Prospects coming on line within the next 1 to 2 years,

and if we do not pick a dman this year, it could be 4 to 5 years before we see a dman prospect other than Joulevi ready for our team

So I am very mixed and it pushes me to think we trade down and pick a dman if we get 2 or 3......I am very torn on this

And as much as I see the need to get bigger (BT), I don't see him as our most urgent need.

I also am not totally convinced in Hughes (size)

We will get a good pick.......but it will be very interesting as to who it is.

[kloubek]

2 hours ago, IBatch said:

The information is available to you if you have the desire and time to look it up. 

Information is presented by someone, and unless you are strictly looking at stats, that someone probably put their own interpretation on what they've seen. You can look at highlight reels (which I use for my own personal opinions mostly), but they typically show lower level opponents as competition, so it can be had to judge from that. It is possible that the high end defensemen drafted might be able to step in soon (Dahlin, probably), but it is possible they would not be either.

 

If Benning feels that there is a defenseman who will be able to make a quick transition and he is available in our draft position then great - go for it.  But if we are likely to have to wait to see that guy, I say he just selects the BPA in his opinion, and then use the excess forward talent we have (or will have) to get the defense sorted asap.

[IBatch]

2 hours ago, kloubek said:

Information is presented by someone, and unless you are strictly looking at stats, that someone probably put their own interpretation on what they've seen. You can look at highlight reels (which I use for my own personal opinions mostly), but they typically show lower level opponents as competition, so it can be had to judge from that. It is possible that the high end defensemen drafted might be able to step in soon (Dahlin, probably), but it is possible they would not be either.

 

If Benning feels that there is a defenseman who will be able to make a quick transition and he is available in our draft position then great - go for it.  But if we are likely to have to wait to see that guy, I say he just selects the BPA in his opinion, and then use the excess forward talent we have (or will have) to get the defense sorted asap.

Thats ok too.  NJ iced six rookies this year because they could, their pool of under 21ers is good enough.  With that and Halls Hart worthy season they've lept up the standings.  Not saying that will be us next year but it is within the realm of possibility within the next two years.  Once we don't resign the Sedins and we've had enough development time for our guys I believe we have a decent chance of also having a quick turn around year.  Part of that definitely could be directly related to whom we draft this year and how he's used in the future, either on the team or to grab a significant piece like Tampa did with Sergechev this year.

[J.I.A.H.N]

As much as I started this post to discuss trading down, if the need arose, I can't help but think that the Canucks should go heavy on Dman this year, and would not have a problem at all if the Canucks used their first 3 picks all on Dmen this year.

 

 

[hammertime]

1 hour ago, janisahockeynut said:

As much as I started this post to discuss trading down, if the need arose, I can't help but think that the Canucks should go heavy on Dman this year, and would not have a problem at all if the Canucks used their first 3 picks all on Dmen this year.

 

 

It depends who they leave on the table. With their first most of all Svechnikov and Zadina are both very good consolation prizes. Don't pass up on those cats for Bouchard/Boqvist/Hughes unless they are gone.

[IBatch]

17 hours ago, kloubek said:

Information is presented by someone, and unless you are strictly looking at stats, that someone probably put their own interpretation on what they've seen. You can look at highlight reels (which I use for my own personal opinions mostly), but they typically show lower level opponents as competition, so it can be had to judge from that. It is possible that the high end defensemen drafted might be able to step in soon (Dahlin, probably), but it is possible they would not be either.

 

If Benning feels that there is a defenseman who will be able to make a quick transition and he is available in our draft position then great - go for it.  But if we are likely to have to wait to see that guy, I say he just selects the BPA in his opinion, and then use the excess forward talent we have (or will have) to get the defense sorted asap.

I have enough trust in the scouting system.  Nobody has time to watch days of entire game footage to get a feel for a player what does outside the highlight reel, and travel around watching various levels looking for players that stand out for the next higher one, but the scouts.  

 

It's a bit of a crappy job, locally watched a Junior B game, (yawn) and found myself watching a Junior A scout looking miserable, watching far inferior hockey trying to see who might tick enough boxes for the next level up.  He left half way through, felt bad for him, off to another town for a later game.  

 

They never get it exactly right, there are always kids who get better later and end up been steals, and guys that should be amazing (Daigle) and end up ok, and even a few total disasters (Stefan).  But in general the lists are a good gauge of whoms coming up next etc, and provide the information the GMs use .... including the Future Watch and THN mock draft which comes next.  They can be seen on the tables during the draft.

 

I also like video but am too lazy to be bothered with much outside of highlights.  Bravo if you have an eye, maybe you can be a scout?

[kloubek]

3 hours ago, IBatch said:

I also like video but am too lazy to be bothered with much outside of highlights.  Bravo if you have an eye, maybe you can be a scout?

I would love that.   No, I don't have a better eye than anyone else.  Like I said, you see these guys who undress the competition, but when the competition is Junior B, it doesn't really mean much. I guess when you get seasoned enough you can determine if those same moves would work against greater competition, and I also trust the scouts to a large degree - but you pointed out yourself, they DO make mistakes. Who would have thought Yakupov would have ended up a total bust? And now they are touting Dahlin as a franchise player (and I would tend to agree from what I've seen), but again, that's in the SHL where the competition isn't as high and the ice surface is a different size.  Will he adapt to the NHL game?  Probably. But does anyone *really* know?

That was really just a sub-point to my whole post though. I really just wanted to mention that unless Benning is planning on rebuilding the D through the draft, then we are best off just taking whoever they collectively feel is the best player on the board. And if he IS planning on building through the draft, we are lucky in that there are multiple defensemen who could go in the 3-6 range.

[AC Readership]

You take the BPA.

 

Look what Nashville did by drafting well and taking the BPA. They were able to deal from a position of strength (D) Seth Jones for Ryan Johansen a 1C that their team desperately needed.

[IBatch]

2 hours ago, kloubek said:

I would love that.   No, I don't have a better eye than anyone else.  Like I said, you see these guys who undress the competition, but when the competition is Junior B, it doesn't really mean much. I guess when you get seasoned enough you can determine if those same moves would work against greater competition, and I also trust the scouts to a large degree - but you pointed out yourself, they DO make mistakes. Who would have thought Yakupov would have ended up a total bust? And now they are touting Dahlin as a franchise player (and I would tend to agree from what I've seen), but again, that's in the SHL where the competition isn't as high and the ice surface is a different size.  Will he adapt to the NHL game?  Probably. But does anyone *really* know?

That was really just a sub-point to my whole post though. I really just wanted to mention that unless Benning is planning on rebuilding the D through the draft, then we are best off just taking whoever they collectively feel is the best player on the board. And if he IS planning on building through the draft, we are lucky in that there are multiple defensemen who could go in the 3-6 range.

It would be hard to pass 2 and 3, if they think those guys could be superstars, we'd probably be better off than drafting any defenseman not named Dahlin.  I like your points.  We won't know for several years whom the best players really are, and no doubt there will be a bust or two in the top ten ... Good thing we are going to draft top five.