2019 NHL Entry Draft in Vancouver, BC

[86Viking]

17 hours ago, Horvat is a Boss said:

I agree with the poster a couple of pages ago talking about Korczak. He would have been a really nice fit with what we have and another potential Woo type player. I'm not upset that we took Hoglander as I like him, but that would have been a good opportunity to address a weakness we have at RD. 

Yup it was an odd pass by us in my opinion. There had to of been smaller skilled players we could have taken later, maybe not at the level of Hoglander but D are far more valuable and harder to find than an undersized winger.

 

It is a shock to me that our management felt the need to draft 0 D. They are going  to take time to develop obviously so we should always be looking to the future. I mean we draft a G it seems every year, I would pass on that considering we have marky and Demko. I dont know if Dipietro will become a full time NHL goalie but we have him too, so taking yet another G when we signed a College G seems odd to me.

 

RHD are hard to find, even harder to trade for. Does this mean we are going to extend Tanev for multiple years and gift Myers a 7year retirement payday? Leaving Stech to man the bottom pair while Woo develops?

[aGENT]

6 hours ago, Canuck Surfer said:

Hoglander is a great pick.  

 

But it still does not mean you can go (should go?) devoid of drafting any D.  Then top it up by trading your future draft picks, where on the odd chance a D is BPA, you might have a chance to right the ship.

 

And while I agree you can find players signing undrafted UFA's.  The odd's of finding the best physical talent on the planet with this method is not great.

I never suggested we should never draft D (been a huge proponent of it actually, same as you) but this notion that the missed D taken in the 4th, 5th, 6th round is somehow going to magically fix our present woes for top 4 NHL D (or remotely move the needle in Utica either) is...

 

Edited June 23, 2019 by aGENT

[mikeyman109]

8 minutes ago, aGENT said:

I never suggested we should never draft D (been a huge proponent of it actually, same as you) but this notion that the missed D taken in the 4th, 5th, 6th round is somehow going to magically fix our present woes for top 4 NHL D (or remotely move the needle in Utica either) is...

 

I think the miss is the Pick where we took Hoglander over Korczack.. Some here are excited and that's their prerogative

 I personally would have taken the D over the diminutive forward. I See it as Edmonton type move (see no D men) and we will still be looking for Defensemen in 2 years when Tanev and Edler are gone and Juolevi and Woo are on the team. I have little faith in the current D group as its still our biggest weakness. I was hoping we would draft D in the first round and then forwards in the second, or Forward at 10 and then D at 40.

The fact that JB professed to want to improve the D and then doesn't draft any is what i find ...

Edited June 23, 2019 by mikeyman109

[RetroCanuck]

1 minute ago, mikeyman109 said:

I think the miss is the Pick where we took Hoglander over Korczack.. Some here are excited and that's their prerogative

 I personally would have taken the D over the diminutive forward. I See it as Edmonton type move (see no D men) and we will still be looking for Defensemen in 2 years when Tanev and Edler are gone and Juolevi and Woo are on the team. I have little faith in the current D group as its still our biggest weakness. I was hoping we would draft D in the first round and then forwards in the second, or Forward at 10 and then D at 40.

The fact that JB professed to want to improve the D and then doesn't draft any is what i find ...

Difference being we have a lot of quality prospect defensemen. Hughes will be a top 4. Juolevi, Tryamkin and Woo could and most likely will be top 4D. Stecher is a top 4. Rathbone, Rafferty, Teves, Brisebois and Chatfield could all turn out to be NHL defensemen.

 

Therefore what we need now may not be what we need in a couple years time. Hughes and Juolevi will be integrated into the NHL this year with a good chance that Tryamkin and Woo could be added to the lineup in a years time

[aGENT]

6 minutes ago, mikeyman109 said:

I think the miss is the Pick where we took Hoglander over Korczack.. Some here are excited and that's their prerogative

 I personally would have taken the D over the diminutive forward. I See it ans Edmonton type move and we will still be looking for Defensemen in 2 years when Tanev and Edler are gone and Juolevi and Woo are on the team. I have little faith in the current D group as its still our biggest weakness. I was hoping we would draft D in the first round and then forwards in the second, or Forward at 10 and then D at 40.

The fact that JB professed to want to improve the D and then doesn't draft any is what i find ...

He's 185 lbs.

At 18.

You don't get to call that 'diminutive'.

 

That's the same weight the Sedins played at as full grown men in their primes. And again, he's 18. (Along with being highly skilled and an extremely fit athlete, stellar skater etc).

 

You don't 'improve the D', in the present day, at the draft. At least not without a top 5 pick. Any of the other D were likely 2+ years out.

 

And speaking of, the guy calling a 185lb 18 year old 'diminutive', you don't pass a high ceiling, F with size who plays like a freaking wrecking ball like Podkolzin. He should be right up your compensating-for-size alley.

 

Draft D, yes. Big proponent of it. But I'm also a proponent of selecting the BPA and when a late1st round talent like Hoglander lands in your lap at 40, you take him. Sometimes the cookies just crumble to F, sometimes it's to D. Sometimes it's to both. We drafted a lot of solid D last year AND signed a load of college UFA's. We have a few in the pipeline already. It's fine. We'll take more next year too.

[86Viking]

11 minutes ago, RetroCanuck said:

Difference being we have a lot of quality prospect defensemen. Hughes will be a top 4. Juolevi, Tryamkin and Woo could and most likely will be top 4D. Stecher is a top 4. Rathbone, Rafferty, Teves, Brisebois and Chatfield could all turn out to be NHL defensemen.

 

Therefore what we need now may not be what we need in a couple years time. Hughes and Juolevi will be integrated into the NHL this year with a good chance that Tryamkin and Woo could be added to the lineup in a years time

Woo is 2-3 years away, stecher is a fringe #4 solid #5 type D. All the rest of the D you listed are left shot D or long shots to be NHL D. Green likes to play his D on their shooting side, we also saw this with Tryamkin when he was here. I know some lefties can play the right side, but will our coach put them in that spot? Jake was drafted as a LW but has literally never seen that position in the AHL or NHL and likely wont under coach Green. Only player I can think of off the top of my head who does is Leivo, but he is a bottom 6 winger.

 

I just feel that Korczak was the right pick organizationally, just like taking Woo last year was. Can always find a winger with speed or skill a lot easier in College, Europe, UFA or via trade vs trying to acquire a RHD

[Alflives]

3 minutes ago, Canuckster86 said:

Woo is 2-3 years away, stecher is a fringe #4 solid #5 type D. All the rest of the D you listed are left shot D or long shots to be NHL D. Green likes to play his D on their shooting side, we also saw this with Tryamkin when he was here. I know some lefties can play the right side, but will our coach put them in that spot? Jake was drafted as a LW but has literally never seen that position in the AHL or NHL and likely wont under coach Green. Only player I can think of off the top of my head who does is Leivo, but he is a bottom 6 winger.

 

I just feel that Korczak was the right pick organizationally, just like taking Woo last year was. Can always find a winger with speed or skill a lot easier in College, Europe, UFA or via trade vs trying to acquire a RHD

Left shot players can play right side.  Savard, Lapoint, and Robinson were all left shot. Hughes will play right side.  He’s a great player.  It’s the level of the player that restricts some guys to their natural side.

[RetroCanuck]

11 minutes ago, Canuckster86 said:

Woo is 2-3 years away, stecher is a fringe #4 solid #5 type D. All the rest of the D you listed are left shot D or long shots to be NHL D. Green likes to play his D on their shooting side, we also saw this with Tryamkin when he was here. I know some lefties can play the right side, but will our coach put them in that spot? Jake was drafted as a LW but has literally never seen that position in the AHL or NHL and likely wont under coach Green. Only player I can think of off the top of my head who does is Leivo, but he is a bottom 6 winger.

 

I just feel that Korczak was the right pick organizationally, just like taking Woo last year was. Can always find a winger with speed or skill a lot easier in College, Europe, UFA or via trade vs trying to acquire a RHD

BPA and skill is often the best attribute to choose in a draft because its unteachable.

 

Woo, Stecher, Rafferty and Chatfield are all right shot D. Tryamkin is comfortable on both sides but your right he might be best suited on the left in the future

 

Id also add that Woo may be closer then you think. Kid has an NHL ready body and plays a style that is close to NHL ready. He will be the top D in Calgary this year which may make him NHL ready for the following season

Edited June 23, 2019 by RetroCanuck

[vannuck59]

I two would have preferred a D at 40 . This reminds me of taking Lind over Hague big mistake. This will turn out the same. 

[86Viking]

34 minutes ago, vannuck59 said:

I two would have preferred a D at 40 . This reminds me of taking Lind over Hague big mistake. This will turn out the same. 

I didnt mind the Lind selection but yes Hague was an intriguing D who was available. Seems to be developing well, also taken by Vegas...they look like they know what they are doing draft wise when it comes to taken a D when its available

[Boudrias]

2 hours ago, Canuckster86 said:

Yup it was an odd pass by us in my opinion. There had to of been smaller skilled players we could have taken later, maybe not at the level of Hoglander but D are far more valuable and harder to find than an undersized winger.

 

It is a shock to me that our management felt the need to draft 0 D. They are going  to take time to develop obviously so we should always be looking to the future. I mean we draft a G it seems every year, I would pass on that considering we have marky and Demko. I dont know if Dipietro will become a full time NHL goalie but we have him too, so taking yet another G when we signed a College G seems odd to me.

 

RHD are hard to find, even harder to trade for. Does this mean we are going to extend Tanev for multiple years and gift Myers a 7year retirement payday? Leaving Stech to man the bottom pair while Woo develops?

No 'D' drafted. Last year they drafted Hughes and Woo. Signed Teves and Rafferty out of college. Has Brisbois, Sautner, and Chatfield in Utica.  Benning had resigned Edler and has Joulevi ready for camp this fall. JB says he will sign a UFA d-man. I can see why he did not draft a d-man.

[Camel Toe Drag]

43 minutes ago, vannuck59 said:

I two would have preferred a D at 40 . This reminds me of taking Lind over Hague big mistake. This will turn out the same. 

I didn’t hear anyone complaining at the time. Grabbing Kole and Jonah in the 2nd round that year was huge. 

 

I remember we just missed out on Timmins. He  was the one I wanted at 41. But oh well. Hindsight is 20/20. 

[86Viking]

7 minutes ago, Boudrias said:

No 'D' drafted. Last year they drafted Hughes and Woo. Signed Teves and Rafferty out of college. Has Brisbois, Sautner, and Chatfield in Utica.  Benning had resigned Edler and has Joulevi ready for camp this fall. JB says he will sign a UFA d-man. I can see why he did not draft a d-man.

Teves, Rafferty, Brisebois, Sautner and Chatfield are at best going to be call ups do to injury as an NHL career in my honest opinion. Hughes is a top 4 for sure, we hope Woo can be that too but its still far too early to suggest that is at all a certainty.

 

So no, I dont feel we have good D depth, especially on the right side, but that is my opinion, you have your opinion. Wingers are way easier to sign and trade for than trying to find a quality steady D especially 1 who is right handed

[R3aL]

55 minutes ago, vannuck59 said:

I two would have preferred a D at 40 . This reminds me of taking Lind over Hague big mistake. This will turn out the same. 

I agree maybe passing on Hague for Lind was a mistake. But Hague had the size and strength to play with men in the AHL. Lind to effectively play his game needed to be stronger. The jury is still out on that one as neither are playing in the NHL yet. This year we will see what Lind can do and is all about, and if it’s a disappointment I’d give him one more year before really labelling him anything.

 

But on Hoglander completely different.

 

kid is an absolute steal at 40.

 

should have been drafted in the first round for sure. Not sure why your not excited about this pick.

 

he is not small he is average height with a solid build for his age.

 

His training and conditioning is advanced for his age.

 

hia production in the SHL is fantastic for his age.

 

hes got a great attitude and work ethic.

 

hes already playing with men so he has a higher floor than most of the draft and I truly think he has a very very high ceiling.

 

dont worry about this pick, be excited!

 

 

[86Viking]

4 minutes ago, R3aL said:

 

 

he is not small he is average height with a solid build for his age.

 

 

5ft 9in is average height for a male? I hope he pans out, if he is a hybrid of Zucarello and Arvidsson we are in luck. Passing on a rhd for me is tough tho

[R3aL]

Just now, Canuckster86 said:

5ft 9in is average height for a male? I hope he pans out, if he is a hybrid of Zucarello and Arvidsson we are in luck. Passing on a rhd for me is tough tho

He’s grown, he’s closer to 5 ft 10 at the combine measurement 

 

and the average male male height is actually 5 ft 9, not for hockey players sure but for men in general

 

hes already bigger than arvidsson, and with the way he trains and takes care of himself don’t think size will be something that holds him back at all.

 

ya well kaeden doesn’t really have a high ceiling imo so this pick was better. He was ranked number 19 I think or

something like that by the scoucher report dude and it’s hard to ignore the potential he has.

 

well he says he models himself after Fiala / Arvidsson so let’s hope for that! 

[86Viking]

15 minutes ago, R3aL said:

He’s grown, he’s closer to 5 ft 10 at the combine measurement 

 

and the average male male height is actually 5 ft 9, not for hockey players sure but for men in general

 

hes already bigger than arvidsson, and with the way he trains and takes care of himself don’t think size will be something that holds him back at all.

 

ya well kaeden doesn’t really have a high ceiling imo so this pick was better. He was ranked number 19 I think or

something like that by the scoucher report dude and it’s hard to ignore the potential he has.

 

well he says he models himself after Fiala / Arvidsson so let’s hope for that! 

damn 5'9'' is average height...guess myself and friends I have are just abnormally tall for being males...

 

Hope the kid is a gamer, can he come to Utica next fall or are we likely keeping him in Sweden for next season? I like the idea of having Euro picks come over to adapt to smaller ice and start to gel with future teammates sooner and learn a similar system to what the Canucks use.

[R3aL]

19 minutes ago, Canuckster86 said:

damn 5'9'' is average height...guess myself and friends I have are just abnormally tall for being males...

 

Hope the kid is a gamer, can he come to Utica next fall or are we likely keeping him in Sweden for next season? I like the idea of having Euro picks come over to adapt to smaller ice and start to gel with future teammates sooner and learn a similar system to what the Canucks use.

Haha 

 

pretty sure he can, dontthink he has any contract contraints but he’s probably gonna go to Sweden next year and play a bigger role. 

[cyoung]

3 hours ago, mikeyman109 said:

I think the miss is the Pick where we took Hoglander over Korczack.. Some here are excited and that's their prerogative

 I personally would have taken the D over the diminutive forward. I See it as Edmonton type move (see no D men) and we will still be looking for Defensemen in 2 years when Tanev and Edler are gone and Juolevi and Woo are on the team. I have little faith in the current D group as its still our biggest weakness. I was hoping we would draft D in the first round and then forwards in the second, or Forward at 10 and then D at 40.

The fact that JB professed to want to improve the D and then doesn't draft any is what i find ...

That doesn't matter, you pick the player who the scouts suggest who has the best chance to be an impact player, regardless of position. Acquiring assets is the goal, if we have an abundance of forwards then we have more valuable pieces to move to acquire a D. 

[KKnight]

1 hour ago, Canuckster86 said:

5ft 9in is average height for a male? I hope he pans out, if he is a hybrid of Zucarello and Arvidsson we are in luck. Passing on a rhd for me is tough tho

I have watch Korczak multiple times and I can tell you he was not that impressive. He was okay, but like bottom pairing okay. Hoglander was a no brainer pick.