7th Overall: 2018 CDC Draft Consensus

[theo5789]

58 minutes ago, Rush17 said:

^ with all that said though. I really like Dobson and he could be a physical presence on the Blueline. I have confidence his abilities would greatly help our team. I don't think we can go wrong with either Tkachuk or Dobson.

Just curious as I haven't looked much into it, is there indication that he will be a physical presence? Just because he has okay size right now doesn't tell me that because there are plenty of players with size that don't use it. Even though he might take advantage of his size in junior, it may not be as effective in the NHL. This is the main thing about the argument of size that I have a problem with. His PIMs seem low, less than 1PIM per game, which either means he's not overly physical (eg doesn't fight much or get into those altercations) or the PIMs aren't low enough to indicate that he doesn't take a bunch of minors.

 

Perhaps he just knows how to walk the line and play with an edge and doesn't get into trouble, which is the ideal situation and why I'm asking. For example, Weircioch was a guy with good size but doesn't utilize it at all and would make no difference to a guy that could do the same at 5'10.

[3rdGenCanuck]

Hughes

Tkachuk

Bouchard

 

Do not want: Denisenko

[MoneypuckOverlord]

Surprised as heck that a player we won’t even have a chance at picking is the least popular choice (Evan Bouchard)

 

the only one knock on him is his first step, yet he is the 2nd best available offensive dman available from the chl, (nope 1st is not Dobson, it’s merkley)

 

what was suppose to be a rebuild year for the knights was not.  The team was driven by Evan Bouchard, on a team with some skill, not a lot was able to post a whopping 87 points for a frickin dman, lead the league in among dmans in 5v5 points, was 2nd for shots on goals in the ohl which included forwards.

 

this guy is just grade a offensive dman.  His shot and goal scoring contribution is way much much higher then Dobson, and he is actually power play specialist, high iq, not a liability and all he does is generate offence.  Alex Petriangelo dman, now I’m not trying to change your decision since he’s unlikely available.

 

i believe our group of forwards can Benifit from a marksman from the blue line that can get pucks on net.

 

very unfortunate we won’t have a chance at this special dman.

[EuroCanuck]

10 minutes ago, MoneypuckOverlord said:

Surprised as heck that a player we won’t even have a chance at picking is the least popular choice (Evan Bouchard)

 

the only one knock on him is his first step, yet he is the 2nd best available offensive dman available from the chl, (nope 1st is not Dobson, it’s merkley)

 

what was suppose to be a rebuild year for the knights was not.  The team was driven by Evan Bouchard, on a team with some skill, not a lot was able to post a whopping 87 points for a frickin dman, lead the league in among dmans in 5v5 points, was 2nd for shots on goals in the ohl which included forwards.

 

this guy is just grade a offensive dman.  His shot and goal scoring contribution is way much much higher then Dobson, and he is actually power play specialist, high iq, not a liability and all he does is generate offence.  Alex Petriangelo dman, now I’m not trying to change your decision since he’s unlikely available.

 

i believe our group of forwards can Benifit from a marksman from the blue line that can get pucks on net.

 

very unfortunate we won’t have a chance at this special dman.

I think many hear one small criticism of a player and then decide they don’t want him. Most here and most fans have not actually seen even a few of these players play. They have read scouting reports from amateurs and tv pundits and watched some YouTube highlights. 

 

If you look at the post (either in the thread or a different draft thread), someone posted the results of the same poll here from past years. What is shows is this site is not very good at judging the best players in the draft. Now this is not a slight, it’s just the reality I mentioned above exhibiting itself. No one here has really seen enough to know who’s the bpa so people just make a pick and stick to it - thankfully that’s not what our scouts do!

 

i have watched 20 plus knights games and about the same of Kotkaniemi. I have not watched guys like Tkachuk, Wahlstrom or any of the other dmen in our range. That being said, the knock of Bouchards skating was always “comparative” to his peers in his draft class, not as a “stand alone” criticism. He is seen by many pro scouts as an above average skater, but relative to elite skaters like Dhalin, Hughes, Bovquist he isn’t at THAT level. Many here then translate into he can’t skate. In fact the interview with the Canucks army guy was suggesting he skated like Gaunce - clearly this guy had not watched even a YouTube highlight.

 

Both Bouchard and Kotkaniemi are going to be impact players in the NHL based on my watching of their games, skill, skating, mobility, and competitiveness. Relative to other players I can’t tell you who’s better, but if we end up with either, fans will be very happy in time imho. 

[Baratheon]

6 hours ago, theo5789 said:

Just curious as I haven't looked much into it, is there indication that he will be a physical presence? Just because he has okay size right now doesn't tell me that because there are plenty of players with size that don't use it. Even though he might take advantage of his size in junior, it may not be as effective in the NHL. This is the main thing about the argument of size that I have a problem with. His PIMs seem low, less than 1PIM per game, which either means he's not overly physical (eg doesn't fight much or get into those altercations) or the PIMs aren't low enough to indicate that he doesn't take a bunch of minors.

 

Perhaps he just knows how to walk the line and play with an edge and doesn't get into trouble, which is the ideal situation and why I'm asking. For example, Weircioch was a guy with good size but doesn't utilize it at all and would make no difference to a guy that could do the same at 5'10.

I believe the other day I was listening to either Bob Mackenzie or Craig Button (can't remember which)

They were saying that Dobson can change his style of play as needed.  They specifically mentioned that he can play tough physical game or a high speed and skill game.  I took that to mean that he may not be the absolute best in any one area but will be able to take advantage of his opponents weaknesses.

Sort of a GSP of defenseman if you will (if you follow mma at all lol)

[Phat Fingers]

Great OP!  The biggest standout for me was how no one saw Pettersson as our pick. The few guys that had him as their first choice should stand up and take a bow... you clearly have better onsite than the vast majority of us. 

 

For me its Bouchard, Dobson or Wahlstrom in no particular order. I do not want Farabee. I accidentally picked Brady, but he was my 4th choice. So much for reading the poll before answering it..  

 

EmW

[Phat Fingers]

57 minutes ago, MoneypuckOverlord said:

Surprised as heck that a player we won’t even have a chance at picking is the least popular choice (Evan Bouchard)

 

the only one knock on him is his first step, yet he is the 2nd best available offensive dman available from the chl, (nope 1st is not Dobson, it’s merkley)

 

what was suppose to be a rebuild year for the knights was not.  The team was driven by Evan Bouchard, on a team with some skill, not a lot was able to post a whopping 87 points for a frickin dman, lead the league in among dmans in 5v5 points, was 2nd for shots on goals in the ohl which included forwards.

 

this guy is just grade a offensive dman.  His shot and goal scoring contribution is way much much higher then Dobson, and he is actually power play specialist, high iq, not a liability and all he does is generate offence.  Alex Petriangelo dman, now I’m not trying to change your decision since he’s unlikely available.

 

i believe our group of forwards can Benifit from a marksman from the blue line that can get pucks on net.

 

very unfortunate we won’t have a chance at this special dman.

I agree!  Let’s hope that NHL GM’s follows the same fads as the fans.  That being said Dobson has a ton of potential and he has one less year played in Jr than Bouchard.  

 

He also managed 17 goals

and 52 assists.  If Bouchard is gone, Dobson would be a nice pick up too. 

 

I would be happy with either and consider it a win.

 

[JamesB]

2 hours ago, Eastcoast meets Westcoast said:

Great OP!  The biggest standout for me was how no one saw Pettersson as our pick. The few guys that had him as their first choice should stand up and take a bow... you clearly have better onsite than the vast majority of us. 

 

For me its Bouchard, Dobson or Wahlstrom in no particular order. I do not want Farabee. I accidentally picked Brady, but he was my 4th choice. So much for reading the poll before answering it..  

 

EmW

Thanks to @funkyfresh Great post. Very interesting to see previous CDC picks. Instead of stating my picks for this year this is what I had in previous years (I think)

 

2017: wanted: Glass  DNW: Rasmussen

2016: wanted: Dubois but he went early. I had Tkachuk next, so he would have been my pick. DNW: Brown at #5 (but would have been okay later)

2015. I think I had Juulsen (he went at 26) and did not want Kylington.

2014: I had Nylander, Ehlers, then Virtanen

 

So, Benning has Petterson, Juolevi, Boeser and Virtanen.

I would have had Glass, Tkachuk, Juulsen, and Nylander.

 

I have to admit that Benning wins by a pretty big margin. The biggest difference is probably Boeser v. Juulsen. Right now, Juulsen looks like long shot to ever play in the NHL on a regular basis. Boeser is a star already. And obviously it is great to have Pettersson, although Glass is a good prospect (but not in Pettersson's league). But even with strong home bias and confirmation bias, a few people besides me have to accept that Nylander and Tkachuk are significantly ahead of Virtanen and Juolevi. Think of what CDC would be saying if we had picked Nylander. How many people would be saying "Wish we had picked Virtanen." Not many. Same with Tkachuk and Juolevi. CDC would be doing cartwheels about having two quality forwards who are already good second line/borderline first line NHL forwards.

 

But no GM has a perfect record in the draft. Benning has a good record so far. If Boeser and Pettersson both develop into elite players, that probably changes to a great record, especially if Virtanen can become a good top 9 forward, Juolevi can become a solid top 4 D, Demko becomes a first-string goalie, and a couple of lower picks from this period turn out well (like Gaudette and Jasek, not to mention Tryamkin if he comes back).

 

We just need another good draft this year. It is weird how people have such strong views going into the draft. Obviously it is pretty much a guess given our information and it is hard to beat the "board".  And there is some luck in involved. Some guys develop their upside, some guys don't and that is hard to predict, even for GMs.  

 

But we really need a good D at #7 this year and, ideally, another good D at 37, where there should be some good D prospects available. And maybe #37 turns out better than #7. It happens quite often. That is one reason I hate trading away high second round picks.

[Nancouver]

19 minutes ago, JamesB said:

Right now, Juulsen looks like long shot to ever play in the NHL on a regular basis.

I would argue Juulsen looked pretty good at the end of the season playing with the habs. I’m thinking he’ll be on the team next year. He’s also a d man so will probably take a bit longer to develop. Obviously benning made the right pick taking boeser though 

[EuroCanuck]

13 minutes ago, JamesB said:

Thanks to @funkyfresh Great post. Very interesting to see previous CDC picks. Instead of stating my picks for this year this is what I had in previous years (I think)

 

2017: wanted: Glass  DNW: Rasmussen

2016: wanted: Dubois but he went early. I had Tkachuk next, so he would have been my pick. DNW: Brown at #5 (but would have been okay later)

2015. I think I had Juulsen (he went at 26) and did not want Kylington.

2014: I had Nylander, Ehlers, then Virtanen

 

So, Benning has Petterson, Juolevi, Boeser and Virtanen.

I would have had Glass, Tkachuk, Juulsen, and Nylander.

 

I have to admit that Benning wins by a pretty big margin. The biggest difference is probably Boeser v. Juulsen. Right now, Juulsen looks like long shot to ever play in the NHL on a regular basis. Boeser is a star already. And obviously it is great to have Pettersson, although Glass is a good prospect (but not in Pettersson's league). But even with strong home bias and confirmation bias, a few people besides me have to accept that Nylander and Tkachuk are significantly ahead of Virtanen and Juolevi. Think of what CDC would be saying if we had picked Nylander. How many people would be saying "Wish we had picked Virtanen." Not many. Same with Tkachuk and Juolevi. CDC would be doing cartwheels about having two quality forwards who are already good second line/borderline first line NHL forwards.

 

But no GM has a perfect record in the draft. Benning has a good record so far. If Boeser and Pettersson both develop into elite players, that probably changes to a great record, especially if Virtanen can become a good top 9 forward, Juolevi can become a solid top 4 D, Demko becomes a first-string goalie, and a couple of lower picks from this period turn out well (like Gaudette and Jasek, not to mention Tryamkin if he comes back).

 

We just need another good draft this year. It is weird how people have such strong views going into the draft. Obviously it is pretty much a guess given our information and it is hard to beat the "board".  And there is some luck in involved. Some guys develop their upside, some guys don't and that is hard to predict, even for GMs.  

 

But we really need a good D at #7 this year and, ideally, another good D at 37, where there should be some good D prospects available. And maybe #37 turns out better than #7. It happens quite often. That is one reason I hate trading away high second round picks.

I think after watching Nylander play his perimeter game in the playoffs, shy away from taking hits to be first on the puck, and seeing how Jake is progressing , I think many Jake detractors are walking on eggshells. I think many want him to fail because they don’t want to be seen as wrong. 

 

If Jake continues on the trajectory he showed in the last 20 games ( where it seems he went from a nervous, confused and young player lacking confidence, to the switch turning on and emerging into a young pro who seems to be getting it now), most fans will be very thankful come the time we’re in the playoffs that we have that big fast kid, with no fear. That’s what you need come playoff time.  I wanted Ehlers, didn’t want Nylander as I saw him as soft but was intrigued by Jake and “understood” Bennings strategy.

 

Benning is building a “team”. You can’t have all flash and no intimidation. Jake is going to be a big part of this team’s success if he continues to develop the way he has, so much so he may be integral to us winning a cup. How many guys are as fast as Mcdavid and can run a guy through a wall? His hands can finish but he’s been snake bitten. 

 

Honestly, if you told me Ehlers for Jake right now, given the way he slots into our team, what he brings and what he could develop into for us, I’d have a tough time making that trade.

 

what the leafs should have shown Canucks fans this year was a great, fancy / pretty game in the regular season is exciting and fun. However, grit and determination and a no fear attitude wins in the playoffs. Jake has that, as does Bo, as does Boeser, as does Stecher, etc etc. Benning is building that and that is in Jake. 

[JamesB]

3 hours ago, EuroCanuck said:

I think after watching Nylander play his perimeter game in the playoffs, shy away from taking hits to be first on the puck, and seeing how Jake is progressing , I think many Jake detractors are walking on eggshells. I think many want him to fail because they don’t want to be seen as wrong. 

 

If Jake continues on the trajectory he showed in the last 20 games ( where it seems he went from a nervous, confused and young player lacking confidence, to the switch turning on and emerging into a young pro who seems to be getting it now), most fans will be very thankful come the time we’re in the playoffs that we have that big fast kid, with no fear. That’s what you need come playoff time.  I wanted Ehlers, didn’t want Nylander as I saw him as soft but was intrigued by Jake and “understood” Bennings strategy.

 

Benning is building a “team”. You can’t have all flash and no intimidation. Jake is going to be a big part of this team’s success if he continues to develop the way he has, so much so he may be integral to us winning a cup. How many guys are as fast as Mcdavid and can run a guy through a wall? His hands can finish but he’s been snake bitten. 

 

Honestly, if you told me Ehlers for Jake right now, given the way he slots into our team, what he brings and what he could develop into for us, I’d have a tough time making that trade.

 

what the leafs should have shown Canucks fans this year was a great, fancy / pretty game in the regular season is exciting and fun. However, grit and determination and a no fear attitude wins in the playoffs. Jake has that, as does Bo, as does Boeser, as does Stecher, etc etc. Benning is building that and that is in Jake. 

Speaking for myself, I would be absolutely delighted to be "wrong" about Jake. After all, no-one if even knows who I am or would care if they did. But it would mean a lot to me if the Canucks would build another Cup contender soon.

 

But I am not sure exactly what wrong means. I have been more focused observed facts. In his Draft+1 year he dropped 45 goals in 71 games to 21 goals in 50 games. That is unusual and was disappointing to a lot of people, including me. As a 19-year old on the Canucks in his draft+2 years he struggled a fair amount, as acknowledged by WD, Linden, and others. He went to Utica in his draft+3 year where he made some progress but had an unimpressive 19 pts in 65 games in the AHL. I am focusing on scoring, but Jake is not noted as a particularly good defensive player.

 

In his draft+4 year with the Canucks, he looked pretty marginal for most of the season until, as Euro indicates, he seemed to make a lot of progress in the final 20 games. Even so he ended up with 20 pts in 75 games. In terms of scoring, that is a good 4th line level, maybe marginal 3rd line. And his speed and physical play are assets.

 

But, as Benning, Linden, and many others have pointed out at various times, you have take the final few weeks of the season (sometimes called "garbage time") with caution because the good teams usually hold back a bit as they prepare for the playoffs and the bad teams are often dispirited. The intensity jumps up a lot when the playoffs start.

 

So, can Jake play at the same level and maybe even improve at the start of next year? I absolutely hope he does. And there is a chance. Maybe he becomes the elusive "power forward" who can play in the top 6. It could happen, but guys with his trajectory much more commonly top out as decent bottom 6 forwards (which would be in line with Craig Button's original projection when Jake was drafted).

 

 

[Canuck Drogo]

On 2018-05-03 at 2:23 PM, 3rdGenCanuck said:

Hughes

Tkachuk

Bouchard

 

Do not want: Denisenko

I went with:

 

Hughes

Wahlstrom 

Dobson

 

Do not want: Kravtsov (sp?)

 

I gotta say though that I’m shocked by how many people chose Bouchard as their do not want. I would be very happy if we ended up with him. 

 

Also, I’m so pleased with myself as last year I took Pettersson as my first pick. Maybe I’ll get  lucky two years in a row

[Hairy Kneel]

Krug's injury is why I don't want small D men. 

[canuckpuckluck1]

22 hours ago, JamesB said:

Thanks to @funkyfresh Great post. Very interesting to see previous CDC picks. Instead of stating my picks for this year this is what I had in previous years (I think)

 

2017: wanted: Glass  DNW: Rasmussen

2016: wanted: Dubois but he went early. I had Tkachuk next, so he would have been my pick. DNW: Brown at #5 (but would have been okay later)

2015. I think I had Juulsen (he went at 26) and did not want Kylington.

2014: I had Nylander, Ehlers, then Virtanen

 

So, Benning has Petterson, Juolevi, Boeser and Virtanen.

I would have had Glass, Tkachuk, Juulsen, and Nylander.

 

I

@JamesB I like your thought process so I went back and checked who I selected and this is the way it panned out for me. After thinking about things it re enforces how little I know.

 

2017: wanted: Liljegren/Glass/ Heiskannen  DNW: Rasmussen

2016: wanted: Chychrun/Juolevi/Sergachyov DNW: Brown

2015. wanted Rasmus Anderssen/ Kylington/ Jeremy Roy DNW: Bittner

2014: I wanted:Ehlers/Travis Sanheim/Nylander 

 

So, Benning has Petterson, Juolevi, Boeser and Virtanen.

I would have had Lilijegren/ Chychrun, Anderssen, and Ehlers.

 

Lots of young D on my team. I have been hoping for years to pick up some more D. I hope this year Benning selects some more support for OJ.

After watching the drafts I am excited by Bennings choices.

The only real question mark I have is the 2014 first round pick, but it was his first and I feel there was a push to pick the local kid.

2016 is a bit thin after the first pick ( i hope Lockwood bounces back from injury this year)

Anyways its exciting times leading up to the draft ( a couple of extra picks in the first round would be sweet)

[JamesB]

3 hours ago, canuckpuckluck15 said:

@JamesB I like your thought process so I went back and checked who I selected and this is the way it panned out for me. After thinking about things it re enforces how little I know.

 

2017: wanted: Liljegren/Glass/ Heiskannen  DNW: Rasmussen

2016: wanted: Chychrun/Juolevi/Sergachyov DNW: Brown

2015. wanted Rasmus Anderssen/ Kylington/ Jeremy Roy DNW: Bittner

2014: I wanted:Ehlers/Travis Sanheim/Nylander 

 

So, Benning has Petterson, Juolevi, Boeser and Virtanen.

I would have had Lilijegren/ Chychrun, Anderssen, and Ehlers.

 

Lots of young D on my team. I have been hoping for years to pick up some more D. I hope this year Benning selects some more support for OJ.

After watching the drafts I am excited by Bennings choices.

The only real question mark I have is the 2014 first round pick, but it was his first and I feel there was a push to pick the local kid.

2016 is a bit thin after the first pick ( i hope Lockwood bounces back from injury this year)

Anyways its exciting times leading up to the draft ( a couple of extra picks in the first round would be sweet)

Your group (Liligren, Chychrun, Anderssen, Ehlers) looks pretty good. Obviously no-one on CDC would want to give up Pettersson for Liligren or Boeser for Anderssen, but your strategy of building from the D out is a pretty good strategy. It works well in terms of timing given that D-men normally take a bit longer to develop. 

 

If we look ahead a couple of years and assume the same other draft picks, a D with Liligren, Chychrun, Anderssen, Tanev, Edler, and Stecher/Hutton might look pretty good. And maybe Tryamkin would be there.  With this approach it would not make sense to trade for Guddy, so he would not be there, but McCann would be, along with whoever would have been picked with the high second round pick that went in that trade. With Horvat, Ehlers, McCann, Gaudette. Dahlen, Goldobin etc in the forward group, that is not a bad-looking nucleus of a team -- along with whoever would be picked this year.

 

However, it would not have the wow-factor that Pettersson and Boeser provide. Let's hope that we can a D to go with those high-end forwards, with good picks at #7 overall and #37 overall this year.

[Rollieo Del Fuego]

15 hours ago, Canuck Drogo said:

I went with:

 

Hughes

Wahlstrom 

Dobson

 

Do not want: Kravtsov (sp?)

 

I gotta say though that I’m shocked by how many people chose Bouchard as their do not want. I would be very happy if we ended up with him. 

 

Also, I’m so pleased with myself as last year I took Pettersson as my first pick. Maybe I’ll get  lucky two years in a row

After watching Hughes look good and eat up big minutes in the game against Sweden....I can't see how he will be available at #7 but he vaulted up several spots on my list.

Dahlin

Svech

Zadina

Hughes

Bouchard

Boqvist

Wahlstrom

Dobson

 

That still leaves us with Walstrom or Dobson unless Tchapuke goes earlier...

[bernzie71]

The canucks will go with a player  that doesn’t have as much hype on CDC and the Computer GMs on here will be like how did we miss that player, new flash the scouts don’t look on highlights on youtube or social media they actually talk to coaches players GMs about said player.

[EuroCanuck]

On 2018-05-04 at 4:32 AM, JamesB said:

Speaking for myself, I would be absolutely delighted to be "wrong" about Jake. After all, no-one if even knows who I am or would care if they did. But it would mean a lot to me if the Canucks would build another Cup contender soon.

 

But I am not sure exactly what wrong means. I have been more focused observed facts. In his Draft+1 year he dropped 45 goals in 71 games to 21 goals in 50 games. That is unusual and was disappointing to a lot of people, including me. As a 19-year old on the Canucks in his draft+2 years he struggled a fair amount, as acknowledged by WD, Linden, and others. He went to Utica in his draft+3 year where he made some progress but had an unimpressive 19 pts in 65 games in the AHL. I am focusing on scoring, but Jake is not noted as a particularly good defensive player.

 

In his draft+4 year with the Canucks, he looked pretty marginal for most of the season until, as Euro indicates, he seemed to make a lot of progress in the final 20 games. Even so he ended up with 20 pts in 75 games. In terms of scoring, that is a good 4th line level, maybe marginal 3rd line. And his speed and physical play are assets.

 

But, as Benning, Linden, and many others have pointed out at various times, you have take the final few weeks of the season (sometimes called "garbage time") with caution because the good teams usually hold back a bit as they prepare for the playoffs and the bad teams are often dispirited. The intensity jumps up a lot when the playoffs start.

 

So, can Jake play at the same level and maybe even improve at the start of next year? I absolutely hope he does. And there is a chance. Maybe he becomes the elusive "power forward" who can play in the top 6. It could happen, but guys with his trajectory much more commonly top out as decent bottom 6 forwards (which would be in line with Craig Button's original projection when Jake was drafted).

 

 

Let’s give the kid a few more years before we start deciding what his ceiling is. 

 

As I recall, Ryan Kesler was supposed to be at best a good 3c. He turned into a 40 goal Selke winner, and Jake has more size, skill and speed that Kesler did. And players develop offensively at different times, comparing D+1, 2 is nonsense, what we care about his his ceiling and can he get there. How fast another player got there has no bearing on Jake. 

 

Baer is 25 and people think there is still more to come. Why do other players who are older get more leash than a kid who really just had 20 games of what he was drafted for on display. So what if it took a few years, he’s 20 years old.

 

I agree next year is a big year for him, was the last 20 games an abbertion or has it clicked.

 

Finally, suggesting the last 20 games meant nothing is absurd. Every team they played was fighting for a playoff spot or players fighting for jobs. They didn’t play buffalo 20 times guy. 

[McBackup]

Im pretty torn on this. Each of the players we could be picking have great strengths and weaknesses. I trust Benning to make a good pick. The only player I dont really want is Tkachuk, but if we end up picking him, so be it.

[Scottydzik]

Funny how people don't want  tkachuk like he'll be there and we're gonna have choose between Hughes Dobson wahlstrom so make that choice