Looking for answers on the 2018 draft (discussion/poll)

[aGENT]

1 minute ago, luckylager said:

It's quite the predicament eh. 

 

If we were to move Tanev, JB would be forced to find a UFA Dman that can settle things down. 

Yup, UFA or, as I say, taking a warm body like MacDonald back from PHI.

 

Regardless, I don't think anyone's expecting our D to be 'good' next year, with or without him. If there's a solid deal to be made for quality futures, I'd take it at this point and try to plug the hole as best I can with a UFA/warm body personally.

 

If we could swing a deal with CHI, how nice would it be to come out of this draft with say Hughes AND Dobson.  Suddenly that shallow D pool is looking pretty nice. Or either one of those guys and one of the nice F's there?

[luckylager]

3 minutes ago, aGENT said:

Yup, UFA or, as I say, taking a warm body like MacDonald back from PHI.

 

Regardless, I don't think anyone's expecting our D to be 'good' next year, with or without him. If there's a solid deal to be made for quality futures, I'd take it at this point and try to plug the hole as best I can with a UFA/warm body personally.

 

If we could swing a deal with CHI, how nice would it be to come out of this draft with say Hughes AND Dobson.  Suddenly that shallow D pool is looking pretty nice. Or either one of those guys and one of the nice F's there?

I have to put my faith in JB to do what's best for the club.

 

It just drives me nuts watching our D flail around in panic mode, blind throwing the puck at the boards, and swimming. Waaayyyy toooo muuuuch swimming

[J.I.A.H.N]

5 hours ago, NUCKER67 said:

Prospects (legit shot at NHL) and new young core

 

F - Horvat, Boeser, Virtanen, Goldobin, Gaudette, Pettersson, Dahlen, Lind, Jasek, Palmu, Gadjovich, Lockwood

D - Juolevi, Stecher, Hutton, Brisebois, Sautner, McEneny, Rathbone, Brassard

G - Demko, DiPietro

 

Needs: Top 6 C (Tkachuk, Wahlstrom, Kotkaniemi, Hayton) and Top pairing D (Dobson, Hughes, Bouchard, Boqvist) 

 

Yep, almost done

 

1 hour ago, billabong said:

You just listed almost every prospect we have haha that’s quite the efficient drafting benning has done then!

 

80% of those guys are not gonna be regular nhl’ers 

 

only dahlin projects as a top pair d in this draft. A top pair d is like a doughty, Keith, Karlsson, hedman, Burns etc. those guys are few and far between

 

Obviously they could get there but right now no one has then pencilled into that role 

Hey

 

Well considering the high-lited players are either already playing in the NHL or are high end prospects........we are already 50%........of those quoted....

 

I think you were a little hard on the  guy! lol I do understand your point though.......lol

[J.I.A.H.N]

I just do not understand those that say Tanev is not replaceable...........just don't get it!

 

Tanev can be replaced by any veteran Dman that can play good hockey on the RHD...........

 

Not easy to sign, but they are there every UFA season..........the problem for most teams, including us in the past, is cap

 

That is not a problem at this point for us , which makes Tanev's skill and contract very attractive to a lot of teams

[IBatch]

I've mentioned several times the Canucks rebuild won't hit bottom until the Sedins retire and we adjust but Bennings prospect pool may be good enough now with the placeholders in play that consider us past the midway point.  Its hard to predict,.we haven't played a season without them on the roster for a very long time. Who's going to take over the leaders role, who's going to replace their production?  Horvat probably and Pettersson maybe right away, eventually almost certainly.

 

To improve we have to be better than when the Sedins were here the last few years, and that's not a foregone conclusion (yet) but it does seem possible it could happen next year.

 

I'd still put my money on one more down year though, and that we've reached or exceeded the mid-way point.

 

Edit.  As for adding picks trade Tanev if he can (don't see the happening) but don't risk anything by trading down, there is too much uncertainty past 8-9,  and we simply can't afford a bust.

[bloodycanuckleheads]

7 hours ago, groovy said:

Thanks to the Cinderella finish this year we are missing out potentially on the top-end talent of the draft.

Not 'potentially' - we are actually missing out on Dahlin because of that stupid finish.  There was a point in time where, if we just tanked, we could have had the worst record in the NHL.  The team that did tank got the numbers that won them first overall.  Those numbers could/should have been our's.

 

The exact same thing happened a couple years ago too, we'd have Auston Matthews right now if we'd just tanked.  But, instead, we won our way through a meaningless California road-trip.

 

So, that really settles the argument about whether tanking is a good thing or a bad thing.  We'd have Dahlin and Matthews if we'd tanked.  Instead, we won a handful of meaningless games, and got screwed.

 

 

[Wilbur]

59 minutes ago, bloodycanuckleheads said:

Not 'potentially' - we are actually missing out on Dahlin because of that stupid finish.  There was a point in time where, if we just tanked, we could have had the worst record in the NHL.  The team that did tank got the numbers that won them first overall.  Those numbers could/should have been our's.

 

The exact same thing happened a couple years ago too, we'd have Auston Matthews right now if we'd just tanked.  But, instead, we won our way through a meaningless California road-trip.

 

So, that really settles the argument about whether tanking is a good thing or a bad thing.  We'd have Dahlin and Matthews if we'd tanked.  Instead, we won a handful of meaningless games, and got screwed.

 

 

Thanks Captain Hindsight.  What # will win the lotto next year so the Canucks know where to finish?

[Canuck Surfer]

I answered yes to ''trade Tanev for a mid first & a second.''

 

Problem is @janisahockeynut, can we get that return???  Should have had a second question, would you still trade Tanev if all we could get is a single pick in the 18 to 28 OA range?

 

I also believe we should concentrate on D if possible?  But not if an obvious better player is available.  Our first pick projects to have a D available.  But we'll see?

[Canuck Surfer]

3 hours ago, janisahockeynut said:

I just do not understand those that say Tanev is not replaceable...........just don't get it!

 

Tanev can be replaced by any veteran Dman that can play good hockey on the RHD...........

 

Not easy to sign, but they are there every UFA season..........the problem for most teams, including us in the past, is cap

 

That is not a problem at this point for us , which makes Tanev's skill and contract very attractive to a lot of teams

Which RHD will be avail this year that would be better; Carlson, possibly but not necessarily Mike Green?

 

After that it thins pretty seriously. Polak? Dalton Prout?? And we don't have a ready built RHD to replace him.

 

We really do need a good return to make moving Tanev worth it.  Get it, we're a rebuilding team, I'll deal with the consequences. My own real suggestion is let Tanev get healthy, draft Boqvist or Dobson, let them have a year to develop, let Tanev a good solid run. If he can avoid some of the freak injuries, just play 55 or 60 games by the deadline next year?  We would get a MUCH better return then. Or the deadline after when he is UFA. I firmly believe we will get a better return by being patient versus rushing a trade now.  

 

We would also sink a bit in the standings, position for another lottery, and have Dobson close, possibly the next camp?

 

I'll happily accept the deal & eat crow if the return you proposed in your poll surfaces. 

[J.I.A.H.N]

26 minutes ago, Canuck Surfer said:

Which RHD will be avail this year that would be better; Carlson, possibly but not necessarily Mike Green?

 

After that it thins pretty seriously. Polak? Dalton Prout?? And we don't have a ready built RHD to replace him.

 

We really do need a good return to make moving Tanev worth it.  Get it, we're a rebuilding team, I'll deal with the consequences. My own real suggestion is let Tanev get healthy, draft Boqvist or Dobson, let them have a year to develop, let Tanev a good solid run. If he can avoid some of the freak injuries, just play 55 or 60 games by the deadline next year?  We would get a MUCH better return then. Or the deadline after when he is UFA. I firmly believe we will get a better return by being patient versus rushing a trade now.  

 

We would also sink a bit in the standings, position for another lottery, and have Dobson close, possibly the next camp?

 

I'll happily accept the deal & eat crow if the return you proposed in your poll surfaces. 

Yup, I can't disagree

But I really want to capitalize on this years Dman draft! It is just such a good draft....so admittedly the picks have bigger value

But if we can get a good return and add a 1st and a 2nd.....

It could truly set us up well..............I love looking at Phili's defensive prospects.......

I would like to have that.....and all maturing before everyone else starts declining

But I think we are in agreement

 

The way I look at it right now is that if the UFA we sign as his replacement + the picks = more than Tanev, we are winning...........

 

I probably wouldn't look at it that way if we were a contender

[Canuck Surfer]

31 minutes ago, janisahockeynut said:

Yup, I can't disagree

But I really want to capitalize on this years Dman draft! It is just such a good draft....so admittedly the picks have bigger value

But if we can get a good return and add a 1st and a 2nd.....

It could truly set us up well..............I love looking at Phili's defensive prospects.......

I would like to have that.....and all maturing before everyone else starts declining

But I think we are in agreement

 

The way I look at it right now is that if the UFA we sign as his replacement + the picks = more than Tanev, we are winning...........

 

I probably wouldn't look at it that way if we were a contender

Like I said; if we get a mid first and a second...  Hell, if I can get a conditional deal with Philly for their 14th overall and Smith is still on the table? I might take it straight up.  

 

I just don't see Tanev commanding a 14th or 16th pick and another pick. He may not even get that?  Would you do it for Philly's 19th pick? 

 

Wilde, Lundqvist or Sandin may be the best avail there, Samuelsson...

[J.I.A.H.N]

46 minutes ago, Canuck Surfer said:

Like I said; if we get a mid first and a second...  Hell, if I can get a conditional deal with Philly for their 14th overall and Smith is still on the table? I might take it straight up.  

 

I just don't see Tanev commanding a 14th or 16th pick and another pick. He may not even get that?  Would you do it for Philly's 19th pick? 

 

Wilde, Lundqvist or Sandin may be the best avail there, Samuelsson...

Surfer

 

14th straight across..........yes

19th + 2nd for Tanev....... I would do .........probably others would not...but I really want those picks

even collectively, we would do great

 

7th OA, 14th OA, 37th OA, 68th OA.......preferred

 

7th OA, 19 OA, 37th OA, 50th OA, 68th OA.......would take

 

I think I have been pretty consistent on this........this is the year to make the moves .....why?

 

1. This draft is full of great dmen.........what we need in spades

2. Our veterans have replacements now.....never really had this before!

3. We will have a decent draft next year as well......8 to 12th OA, etc.............

4. Possible strike/lockout the year after.....which means, everyone gets an extra year of development

5. I think we have enough good forward prospects, that we will be moving up the ladder soon

and want our Defensive prospects to be maturing soon after.

6. I am just friggin greedy and impatient

7. And we have extra cap space..........we can afford the replacements

 

Laugh at me if you like, but the first 4 would be defensemen, and the next a goalie 

We can then focus on adding to our forward squad next year........

Probably be looking to move one of Granlund/Baertschi + Pouliot/Hutton for picks in the 2019 draft.

I believe that it is time to condense, and let some of our LW prospects and LHD prospects have a shot

 

I think Benning has done a great job of drafting and stock pilling,

and condensing each of the next 2 years, just seems like the next logical thing to do.

 

Cheers

 

PS...I like Wilde, Lundqvist, Sammulsson, and Ginning.......no so hot on Sandin

 

 

[Canuck Surfer]

10 minutes ago, janisahockeynut said:

Laugh at me if you like, but the first 4 would be defensemen, and the next a goalie 

No laughing. I admire your spirit.

 

And bonus points for being transparent about what you want!

 

[coastal.view]

8 hours ago, luckylager said:

It's quite the predicament eh. 

 

If we were to move Tanev, JB would be forced to find a UFA Dman that can settle things down. He's our only guy with patience, doesn't fold under pressure. Edler did play better last year but he still spends a lot of time doing the front crawl when pressured

that sort of quality ufa dman

will cost high annual average and term

feels like just moving the chairs around on the titanic ?

[spook007]

2 hours ago, coastal.view said:

that sort of quality ufa dman

will cost high annual average and term

feels like just moving the chairs around on the titanic ?

Yes and no....

if we accept we won’t be really relevant for another 3 years + (making noise noise in play offs) it should be posible to find some Ufa d man to cover. 

That together with an extra 1st for taking on an anchor contract (a la Seabrook, if he’ll waive)... that way we should have the d positions covered from 2021 onwards... 3 1st round picks would do wonders this year for our future. Tanev, I fear, won’t be part of that future. 

[alfstonker]

Surprisingly I answered NO to every question.

 

1. - NO, I think we are about a 3rd of the way through the rebuild.

2 - So NO

3. - NO I don't think it is particularly deep. I think we are over estimating most of the players below the top 3-5. I also think only time tells whether a draft is deep.

4. - NO, same answer as above

5. - Is silly. You can't have imo equality between a D and a F draft pick. As I have always said I prefer to pick a forward, every time in the first round after the top 5 have gone.

6. - NO, imo Tanev is an asset you either hold onto or you trade for a really good prospect 2-3 years into development AND a first round pick. We totally underestimate Tanev (as we do Edler) on here.

7. - NO that is just silly imo. There are some great D men in UFA plus we have 2 or 3 of our own coming through.

[IBatch]

2 hours ago, alfstonker said:

Surprisingly I answered NO to every question.

 

1. - NO, I think we are about a 3rd of the way through the rebuild.

2 - So NO

3. - NO I don't think it is particularly deep. I think we are over estimating most of the players below the top 3-5. I also think only time tells whether a draft is deep.

4. - NO, same answer as above

5. - Is silly. You can't have imo equality between a D and a F draft pick. As I have always said I prefer to pick a forward, every time in the first round after the top 5 have gone.

6. - NO, imo Tanev is an asset you either hold onto or you trade for a really good prospect 2-3 years into development AND a first round pick. We totally underestimate Tanev (as we do Edler) on here.

7. - NO that is just silly imo. There are some great D men in UFA plus we have 2 or 3 of our own coming through

So what your saying is another eight years and our rebuild is complete?  Given that Benning went to work and started rebuilding our prospect pool right away, and that JV and Boeser are playing in the NHL as two rebuilding parts from year one and year two,  and that every year going forward we should expect an exponential number of prospects making the show to start replacing the Gagnes and overaged guys, im confident we have reached the mid way point.   .. Because no rebuild takes 12 years.   Well almost none 

 

Or do you consider the start of the rebuild just over a year ago when Burrows and Hansen were traded, and we need two more year before it's mostly complete?

 

To me the rebuild started with Kesler moving out, but hasn't gained much traction.   Burrows, Hansen and a pick for Beiksa isnt of rebuilding, but thems the brakes (screw you NYR).  

 

Just curious as to the reasoning behind the one third done, we have cap space which can be used to help with the defense, and draft picks the next couple years including this year for defenseman too (better late then never).  I'm pretty sure one for our goalies will be at least good enough for a backup, it's not hard to find decent talent with cap space while we wait for someone else too.

 

Honestly I'd be surprised if we made the playoffs next year and hope we don't, we need at least another top five pick or we could get trapped as a mid round team for the duration of Boesers second contract.

 

A safe guess is two more non playoff years followed by two or three wild card years before we get things on track.    Which would put us right about half way done the rebuild.

[SingleThorn]

4 hours ago, alfstonker said:

Surprisingly I answered NO to every question.

 

1. - NO, I think we are about a 3rd of the way through the rebuild.

2 - So NO

3. - NO I don't think it is particularly deep. I think we are over estimating most of the players below the top 3-5. I also think only time tells whether a draft is deep.

4. - NO, same answer as above

5. - Is silly. You can't have imo equality between a D and a F draft pick. As I have always said I prefer to pick a forward, every time in the first round after the top 5 have gone.

6. - NO, imo Tanev is an asset you either hold onto or you trade for a really good prospect 2-3 years into development AND a first round pick. We totally underestimate Tanev (as we do Edler) on here.

7. - NO that is just silly imo. There are some great D men in UFA plus we have 2 or 3 of our own coming through.

When CDC goes into herd mode and starts to pick on one player, things turn to pure emotion and logic goes out the window.

 

Tanev is our best d-man. Our only other top 4 d is Edler. All the rest are mediocre to good 3rd pairing d.

 

I don't understand the frenzy to lose the type of player that we need more of, not less. Being the 'off' season, I guess the 'shiny new toy' forces are overwhelming too many posters.

 

Sign a UFA to replace Tanev sounds so easy. It isn't !

[Pete M]

13 hours ago, bloodycanuckleheads said:

Not 'potentially' - we are actually missing out on Dahlin because of that stupid finish.  There was a point in time where, if we just tanked, we could have had the worst record in the NHL.  The team that did tank got the numbers that won them first overall.  Those numbers could/should have been our's.

 

The exact same thing happened a couple years ago too, we'd have Auston Matthews right now if we'd just tanked.  But, instead, we won our way through a meaningless California road-trip.

 

So, that really settles the argument about whether tanking is a good thing or a bad thing.  We'd have Dahlin and Matthews if we'd tanked.  Instead, we won a handful of meaningless games, and got screwed.

 

 

would rather have Laine...you cannot fool the reaper or the final destination...if we finished bottom of the league in both years, "the curse" would have gotten us Dubois and probably one of Tkachuk, Zadina or Sech...we would have got the 3rd pick in both years. just say'n, it's a lottery and the dynamic would have changed the result because it is Vancouver that we are talking about.

[Pete M]

I really believed that the first year JB took the reigns he had a good opportunity to fix the D with so many good UFAs available...The D has been the problem from the first year JB got here. 

Fixing the D got side tracked when Tryamkin walked and Sbisa was lost to the ED. 

If Tanev is traded, JB needs to replace him if this team wants to get better...he needs to be replace by a player that is the same or better, then JB needs to bring in another very good UFA dman to put out this tire fire.

The trade of Tanev would get a 1st round pick and a good prospect...JB then has to bring 2 good UFA defenseman plus Kane. The Canucks would then be in a position to compete for a playoff spot depending on how well Pettersson, Dahlen, and Gaudette can contribute to the team.

 

Gagner is such an obvious flaw when I see him in everyone's projected line ups...he too can be traded or waived.