2nd Best Dman in 2018 Draft

[Nooks]

I strongly feel like Bouchard may end up being our guy.  Every time management/scouts went to go look at Juolevi he was right there often on his D partner.  Vancouver has seen a lot of this guy.  Vote for me is still Boqvist though.

[McBackup]

I just want to say its dangerous to rate defenseman solely based on points. I am aware the game has changed and the slow, physical stay at home d-man is going the way of the caveman, but being at least solid defensively is still critical. Its in the name. There are enough talented forwards out there who get left out to dry because they can't adapt to the defense required to play in the NHL, that's an even worse position to be in for a defenseman. I want that offensive dynamo PP quarterback as much as the next fan, but not if he's also going to get burned multiple times a game because he's forcing plays and can't get back into position.

[alfstonker]

15 hours ago, vinny_in_vancouver said:

Assuming we pick at 9 and Dahlin, Svechnikov and Zadina are all gone, can't really go wrong with any of the following: Tkachuk, Boqvist, Hughes, Dobson, Bouchard, Wahlstrom and quite a few others.

Yes and that is the very situation where we will be in the driving seat by having Jimbo.

Most of the other teams will be confused on who to pick, whereas Jimbo imo will know exactly who is going to flourish in the NHL. He's got a nose for talent it seems to me. 

 

We should insure Jimbo's nose and his sense of smell for millions of dollars like the great perfumers.

[spook007]

4 hours ago, Bitter Melon said:

I just want to say its dangerous to rate defenseman solely based on points. I am aware the game has changed and the slow, physical stay at home d-man is going the way of the caveman, but being at least solid defensively is still critical. Its in the name. There are enough talented forwards out there who get left out to dry because they can't adapt to the defense required to play in the NHL, that's an even worse position to be in for a defenseman. I want that offensive dynamo PP quarterback as much as the next fan, but not if he's also going to get burned multiple times a game because he's forcing plays and can't get back into position.

Agree, there is a reason they are called D-men...

Unless they know how to defend, its kind of irrelevant what else they are capable of....

[alfstonker]

3 minutes ago, spook007 said:

Agree, there is a reason they are called D-men...

Unless they know how to defend, its kind of irrelevant what else they are capable of....

Why is it, when I read both your reply and the post you replied to I could hear P.K.'s ......"My brother is a better player than I was." ringing in my ear. 

[spook007]

3 minutes ago, alfstonker said:

Why is it, when I read both your reply and the post you replied to I could hear P.K.'s ......"My brother is a better player than I was." ringing in my ear. 

Yeah perfect example Alf

 

So much offensive talent and such a bust.... 

Defence first.

[JeremyCuddles]

12 hours ago, Nooks said:

I strongly feel like Bouchard may end up being our guy.  Every time management/scouts went to go look at Juolevi he was right there often on his D partner.  Vancouver has seen a lot of this guy.  Vote for me is still Boqvist though.

I really hope not, all the scouting reports I read say he makes bad decisions defensively and is a poor skater. 2 things that are incredibly important for a D-man imo. Sure you can "teach" defense (not always true, Jordan Subban) and people can improve their skating (but at the same time some never do that either, like Future Captain Hodgson). If Management interviews him and see he has great character and work ethic I'd be okay with drafting Bouchard. But there is a lot to work on for him. There are players just as offensively gifted in the top 10, that are much better skaters. I'd rather gamble on Boqvist, Hughes or Dobson than Bouchard personally. Bouchard's height is the only real edge I give him, and it does not sound like he throws his body around either so it's pretty negligible. 

[IBatch]

15 hours ago, Nooks said:

I strongly feel like Bouchard may end up being our guy.  Every time management/scouts went to go look at Juolevi he was right there often on his D partner.  Vancouver has seen a lot of this guy.  Vote for me is still Boqvist though.

You never know.  Hockey guys often pull a bait and switch when drafting, that is they see a guy they have to get, then completely stop watching and focus on somebody else, and let themselves get noticed doing so.  It's fun to watch draft day and learn about how they find guys like Pavelski, Byfuglien etc.   Dallas knew they had a gem in Benn, instead of sending their scouts back for repeat visits they stayed away completely to keep the rest of the packs scent off him.  That way they didn't have to go way off the board early, and could snatch him up later.

[IBatch]

3 hours ago, N7Nucks said:

I really hope not, all the scouting reports I read say he makes bad decisions defensively and is a poor skater. 2 things that are incredibly important for a D-man imo. Sure you can "teach" defense (not always true, Jordan Subban) and people can improve their skating (but at the same time some never do that either, like Future Captain Hodgson). If Management interviews him and see he has great character and work ethic I'd be okay with drafting Bouchard. But there is a lot to work on for him. There are players just as offensively gifted in the top 10, that are much better skaters. I'd rather gamble on Boqvist, Hughes or Dobson than Bouchard personally. Bouchard's height is the only real edge I give him, and it does not sound like he throws his body around either so it's pretty negligible. 

What are you reading?  Seriously id like to see it because it's completely different than what I've read.  Not once did have i read he makes poor decisions (how could he get that many points with so little to work with by making poor decisions?). How can you really know who's just as gifted offensively when some aren't even in the same league and the OHLs points translate higher into NHL points because it's considered the best of the CHL group and everything but the SHL top league and the NCAA.

 

When they talk about his skating they use words like mobile and good on his edges, sure he's not a rug burner, but neither are Weber, Peitralangelo, Josi, Carlsson, Jones, Chara and a long list of others.  You only need turbo speed if you need to get back because of poor positioning (ie the Hedican), which he definitely does not have, but neither do the others with the exception of maybe Boqvist.   

 

Personally im sure one of Hughes, Boqvist, Dobson is going to be a bust, or at the very least not nearly as good as hoped, where Bouchard almost certainly will play a thousand games in the NHL, with the floor being a Chris Phillips type, the ceiling a Norris winner.  

 

Sometimes I think things get parroted around that need some investigation, like has anyone who says he's a bad skater actually watched him play?  

 

He scores goals from the point.  When's the last time we had a guy to score double digits?   The last defenseman to be top ten in the OHL was Ellis, he's also a goal scorer, albiet a bit smaller.    Maybe they won't draft Bouchard, and maybe he won't be the best of the group outside of Dahlin, but he's the lowest risk pick with an equally high upside IMO.

[mikeyman109]

11 minutes ago, IBatch said:

What are you reading?  Seriously id like to see it because it's completely different than what I've read.  Not once did have i read he makes poor decisions (how could he get that many points with so little to work with by making poor decisions?). How can you really know who's just as gifted offensively when some aren't even in the same league and the OHLs points translate higher into NHL points because it's considered the best of the CHL group and everything but the SHL top league and the NCAA.

 

When they talk about his skating they use words like mobile and good on his edges, sure he's not a rug burner, but neither are Weber, Peitralangelo, Josi, Carlsson, Jones, Chara and a long list of others.  You only need turbo speed if you need to get back because of poor positioning (ie the Hedican), which he definitely does not have, but neither do the others with the exception of maybe Boqvist.   

 

Personally im sure one of Hughes, Boqvist, Dobson is going to be a bust, or at the very least not nearly as good as hoped, where Bouchard almost certainly will play a thousand games in the NHL, with the floor being a Chris Phillips type, the ceiling a Norris winner.  

 

Sometimes I think things get parroted around that need some investigation, like has anyone who says he's a bad skater actually watched him play?  

 

He scores goals from the point.  When's the last time we had a guy to score double digits?   The last defenseman to be top ten in the OHL was Ellis, he's also a goal scorer, albiet a bit smaller.    Maybe they won't draft Bouchard, and maybe he won't be the best of the group outside of Dahlin, but he's the lowest risk pick with an equally high upside IMO.

This i agree with. I'm not sure what some have been smoking but any player that leads his team in scoring from the D, plays the minutes Bouchard has, runs the power play, has been called "the smartest player in the OHL" voted by the coaches in the OHL, is in the running for OHL player of the year, how is any of that not what we want? I love one of the posters here loves to throw out his "lack of compete"??? Where does that come from??? The guy does everything well. Parroting what you heard from some report 2 years ago isn't what matters today. Maybe we wont draft Bouchard because by the time we get to pick he will be gone but he will be a player in the NHL soon and a good one for whomever gets him. If we are lucky we land a player with the upside this kid has.

 

If you prefer another player that's fine but I agree with Ibatch that this kid will play 1000 games in the NHL and be a player for years to come

 

I am big on the top D in this draft. Dobson is another kid that has huge upside, Bode Wilde,Kevin Bahl, Mattias Samuelsson.

I don't like the smurfs. I agree one of them will be a bust because at D in the NHL game not too many under 5'10 survive. There are exceptions but they are few and far between.

[IBatch]

Just as a comparison to 2016 and that draft class which has already turned out some good defenseman, here's their ranking and production as of April 2016 edit: FYI Juolevi shot up the ranks from a probable second rounder to best in class because of his junior tournament, winning defenseman MVP (thanks to Laine and Puljajarvi)

 

Juolevi 6 

London 57 games 9 g 42 pts

 

Sergechev 8

Windsor 67 games 17 g 57 pts

 

Chychrun 9

Sarnia 62 games 11g 49pts

 

Bean 16

WHL Cal. 68 games 24 goals 64 pts

 

McAvoy 18

Boston HE 37 games 3 goals 25 pts

 

 

This year's second best defenseman...

 

Evan Bouchard 67 games  25 goals 82 pts.

 

Also he outscored Juolevi last year, and this year without him and much of a supporting cast he dominated.

 

 

 

[canucklehead44]

Bouchard's skating isn't a strength but it isn't terrible either. He has high-end offensive instincts, a good frame, and is a right handed shot which is also valuable. 

Bouchard to me sounds a bit like a right handed Ehrhoff. Similar size, offensive instincts, ability to log big minutes. Not shutdown guys but capable enough to play 2nd PK unit and is more or less "average" in his own zone. Due to the offensive nature of his game, I can also see Bouchard get ripped apart for glaring errors that will be blown out of proportion. 

I don't see Bouchard being a 60-70 point player or a top defensive guy, but 40-50 points in his prime and being a solid #2 dman seems realistic, like Erhoff during his best years (although Ehrhoff did finish 6th in Norris voting as a Canuck, so technically a #1 at is very best). 

 

 

 

[mikeyman109]

2 minutes ago, canucklehead44 said:

Bouchard's skating isn't a strength but it isn't terrible either. He has high-end offensive instincts, a good frame, and is a right handed shot which is also valuable. 

Bouchard to me sounds a bit like a right handed Ehrhoff. Similar size, offensive instincts, ability to log big minutes. Not shutdown guys but capable enough to play 2nd PK unit and is more or less "average" in his own zone. Due to the offensive nature of his game, I can also see Bouchard get ripped apart for glaring errors that will be blown out of proportion. 

I don't see Bouchard being a 60-70 point player or a top defensive guy, but 40-50 points in his prime and being a solid #2 dman seems realistic, like Erhoff during his best years (although Ehrhoff did finish 6th in Norris voting as a Canuck, so technically a #1 at is very best). 

 

 

 

Add Hughes, Boqvist, Dobson and any other Offensive D man to that list

[canucklehead44]

2 minutes ago, mikeyman109 said:

Add Hughes, Boqvist, Dobson and any other Offensive D man to that list

Yup you are correct. Although the difference with Hughes (I haven't watched enough of Boqvist & Dobson) is that his offense is generated much more by his skating. He is fantastic at rushing the puck up the ice and plays the game at a faster pace. Although the same could be said for Jovo and he also was very error prone. 

 

To me Hughes skating and Bouchard's size cancel each other out. The deciding reason I'd pick Bouchard over Hughes now is the fact he is a RH shot. I can really envision him and Juolevi being our future top d-pairing, reminding me a bit of Edler and Ehrhoff when they were in their prime. I don't think either will be a "true #1" like a Hedman, Keith, Karlsson, Weber, Doughty etc, but overall they will make a good top pairing. 

[mikeyman109]

10 minutes ago, canucklehead44 said:

Yup you are correct. Although the difference with Hughes (I haven't watched enough of Boqvist & Dobson) is that his offense is generated much more by his skating. He is fantastic at rushing the puck up the ice and plays the game at a faster pace. Although the same could be said for Jovo and he also was very error prone. 

 

To me Hughes skating and Bouchard's size cancel each other out. The deciding reason I'd pick Bouchard over Hughes now is the fact he is a RH shot. I can really envision him and Juolevi being our future top d-pairing, reminding me a bit of Edler and Ehrhoff when they were in their prime. I don't think either will be a "true #1" like a Hedman, Keith, Karlsson, Weber, Doughty etc, but overall they will make a good top pairing. 

I am not a fan of undersized D men that play like a forward at the back end. You need an offensive minded D man but we don't need him to be the offense.

 

I see Bouchards game more like Edlers used to be. A guy that can join the rush, will join it when needed. Be a right handed shot on the power play. Make the first pass like Erhoff. Spring forwards with the pass. Pass the puck on the power play to the Boesers and Pettersons.Get the shot through. Can finish!!

 

Hughes is a great skater and so is Boqvist. I am not sold on their defensive ability. Especially once they start playing against the bigger forwards in the west.

Half the season is played in the other teams arena where they have the last change, Kopitar will be out against a Boqvist every shift and will dominate him. same for Hughes

 

Jovo brought a lot of intangibles to the game to make up for his Defensive lapses. Toughness, emotion,etc. He was a great middleweight.

[Gaudette Celly]

4 hours ago, N7Nucks said:

I really hope not, all the scouting reports I read say he makes bad decisions defensively and is a poor skater.

 

1 hour ago, IBatch said:

What are you reading?  Seriously id like to see it because it's completely different than what I've read.  Not once did have i read he makes poor decisions (how could he get that many points with so little to work with by making poor decisions?). How can you really know who's just as gifted offensively when some aren't even in the same league and the OHLs points translate higher into NHL points because it's considered the best of the CHL group and everything but the SHL top league and the NCAA.

Agreed, most of the "scouting reports" deriding his skating and decision-making are on CDC, which tends to turn into an echo chamber.  There's a reason why he's typically rated the highest among North American defencemen.

 

Quote

When they talk about his skating they use words like mobile and good on his edges, sure he's not a rug burner, but neither are Weber, Peitralangelo, Josi, Carlsson, Jones, Chara and a long list of others.  You only need turbo speed if you need to get back because of poor positioning (ie the Hedican), which he definitely does not have, but neither do the others with the exception of maybe Boqvist.  

I've had the same question -- how is his mobility compared to them?  People said Tryamkin needed work on his skating and that Gudbranson is a poor skater.  Really?

 

I think it's a matter of people comparing Bouchard with the likes of Hughes and Boqvist, who make most other players look "slow" in comparison.  His skating is fine, and more important for defencemen is positioning, angles, reading the play, etc.  The "new NHL" is about speed, but that doesn't necessitate rushing defencemen, rather ones that make great passes and can move the puck, something Bouchard is noted for.

[Gaudette Celly]

5 minutes ago, mikeyman109 said:

I am not a fan of undersized D men that play like a forward at the back end. You need an offensive minded D man but we don't need him to be the offense.

There are a good number of them in the league now, but it's a matter of balance.  If our D was made up exclusively of Stecher, Krug, Spurgeon, Ellis, Girard, and Klingberg, they'd put up a tonne of points but how well would they defend as a group?  Yes they can retrieve and clear the puck quickly, but under sustained pressure and net-front battles they would be overmatched.  Teams would attack them aggressively and really take the body and physically overpower them.

[mikeyman109]

Just now, Hutton Wink said:

There are a good number of them in the league now, but it's a matter of balance.  If our D was made up exclusively of Stecher, Krug, Spurgeon, Ellis, Girard, and Klingberg, they'd put up a tonne of points but how well would they defend as a group?  Yes they can retrieve and clear the puck quickly, but under sustained pressure and net-front battles they would be overmatched.  Teams would attack them aggressively and really take the body and physically overpower them.

Balance is important this i agree with. I have said many times you have room for one undersize type player. If Stech is our man then that the one.. Again Most here know of my preferences on D. Id take the bigger guys because there is less risk in them not turning into the type of D they are. I know there are players playing well under 6 feet. I prefer the Doughtys to the Karlssons. The Byfugliens to the Krugs, Hedmans, Charas etc

[D-Money]

49 minutes ago, mikeyman109 said:

Balance is important this i agree with. I have said many times you have room for one undersize type player. If Stech is our man then that the one.. Again Most here know of my preferences on D. Id take the bigger guys because there is less risk in them not turning into the type of D they are. I know there are players playing well under 6 feet. I prefer the Doughtys to the Karlssons. The Byfugliens to the Krugs, Hedmans, Charas etc

Boston is doing well with 2...

 

 

Sure, they shouldn't play together, and should be insulated by a D partner with size. But there is certainly room for both of them on the team.

[on the cycle]

Hughes