At Number 10 Who do we take?

[Tomatoes11]

26 minutes ago, theo5789 said:

I agree that Markstrom's value is high right now, but he's our clear cut starter right now. Demko has played a total of 10 NHL games and hasn't been lights out in them. We don't know how Demko will fare in the next couple of years (look how long Marky took before hopefully finding a new level to his game).

 

Again we don't know two years down the road if there are more players of value that may be exposed. We also don't know if the market will be flooded with decent goaltending that may ours won't be appealing. Maybe we strategically don't protect Markstrom if his value is declining in a couple of years and his contract isn't worth taking. There are many ways around this where we don't have to rush to move a goalie. Personally I think if we lose one, then we lose one, as long as we protect the best goalie to carry us forward. If we feel comfortable in a position that we won't lose someone of too much value, then surely there will be a team out there that may want to look to add a goalie and we make a swap that helps both clubs strengthen their team and protect their assets. The ED is still a couple of years away and we will lose (only) one player regardless, so why mess with the build over this?

Our rebuild won’t be affected if demko is not ready yet lol. It’s this misconception team playoffs has that rebuilding teams need to be competitive throughout the process. They don’t. 

[JM_]

22 minutes ago, aGENT said:

I don't really agree that's entirely true. Demko looked pretty damn good his last 3-4 games (behind a very suspect team and defense). And they were far from 'gimme' games. It really didn't take him long to adjust and that's after an unlucky injury filled season.

 

He's also got the pedigree and history to make him a pretty solid bet for a team looking for an early 20's, future starter for the next decade'ish. I think NHL GM's and their scouting staffs/goalie coaches would have a very good idea of exactly what he represents.

yeah I can see for sure thats the way it would be sold. 

 

We have a while to wait in all likelihood but man is the draft and free agency going to be an interesting time for us.... if Jim ends up doing nothing I do have to wonder what his future is, I suspect Aqulini wants to see some kind of improvement and not just youth development. 

[theo5789]

8 minutes ago, Tomatoes11 said:

Our rebuild won’t be affected if demko is not ready yet lol. It’s this misconception team playoffs has that rebuilding teams need to be competitive throughout the process. They don’t. 

And what happens if he isn't ready and we move Markstrom and expose Demko even more? What will that do to his confidence? Why do you think we have brought in vets and stop gaps to shelter our young players? Markstrom right now is that vet that will help shelter Demko until if/when he is ready. So yes it can affect the rebuild and has nothing to do with being competitive throughout the process.

[theo5789]

23 minutes ago, aGENT said:

Disagree.

 

 

Unfortunately 3-4 games is not indicative enough. I certainly wouldn't give up a 1st rounder or potential top pairing dman for him at this point. Markstrom at one point was called the best goalie not in the NHL and look at how long it took for him to find his game. Would anyone have traded a 1st or whatever for Binnington last year?

 

I do think that Demko does have starter potential, but I don't think he will be worth to teams what we are looking for quite yet. Give him another season with solid numbers and we might start to get there.

[D-Money]

36 minutes ago, GarthButcher5 said:

I think they did OK with some of these guys.

Bourdon was developing nicely and would have been a player for this team for years to come.

Butcher was one of the meanest and toughest defensive d-men to ever play for the Canucks. Opposing players feared coming near the net when he was there, he also played 897 NHL games and was awesome.

 

Butcher was great, but there hasn't been much to show for our #10's since then.

 

Both Bourdon (RIP) and Hodgson had their careers derailed by unforeseen events/problems. But without trying to minimize the personal tragedy and health problems of those two, the simple fact is the picks did not work out for the team.

 

[DeltaSwede]

Can't believe I just saw someone say that Luc Bourdon was an unsuccessful pick... gross

 

We are getting a good player at 10 here. I am guessing the Canucks will have a chance at any of Boldy, Krebs, Zegras, and Soderstrom, I'd be happy with any of those guys. 

 

Stay away from Kaliyev. 

[canuck73_3]

2 hours ago, GarthButcher5 said:

I think they did OK with some of these guys.

Bourdon was developing nicely and would have been a player for this team for years to come.

Butcher was one of the meanest and toughest defensive d-men to ever play for the Canucks. Opposing players feared coming near the net when he was there, he also played 897 NHL games and was awesome.

 

Yeah calling Garth Butcher an unsuccessful pick is foolish at best. One of my favourite Canucks growing up, super nice guy too. Would hate to cut in the crease with him around back in the day though. 

[Tomatoes11]

2 hours ago, theo5789 said:

And what happens if he isn't ready and we move Markstrom and expose Demko even more? What will that do to his confidence? Why do you think we have brought in vets and stop gaps to shelter our young players? Markstrom right now is that vet that will help shelter Demko until if/when he is ready. So yes it can affect the rebuild and has nothing to do with being competitive throughout the process.

I don’t think Demko is mentally weak enough to need sheltering. He will live if he gets lit up at first.

[Tomatoes11]

Hmm apparently podkoltzin or however you spell his name might drop like a rock. If he drops to 10 do we gamble on him? Definitely intrigued.

[BobbyClarke]

48 minutes ago, canuck73_3 said:

Yeah calling Garth Butcher an unsuccessful pick is foolish at best. One of my favourite Canucks growing up, super nice guy too. Would hate to cut in the crease with him around back in the day though. 

Not to mention, he was so valued that he helped land us Courtnall, Ronning and Momesso who were key contributors for our success in the 90's.

 

You can't just google 10th overall picks and assume that anybody you haven't heard of was a dud.

Edited April 11, 2019 by BobbyClarke

[canuck73_3]

4 minutes ago, BobbyClarke said:

Not to mention, he was so valued that he helped land us Courtnall, Ronning and Momesso who were key contributors for our success in the 90's.

 

You can't just google 10th overall picks and assume that anybody you haven't heard of was a dud.

Truth, I was so mad at that trade at first too cause I loved Butcher. Good trade in the long run. 

[Alflives]

13 hours ago, KKnight said:

1. Zegras

2. Boldy 

3. Soderstrom

4. Krebs 

 

Although there are always off the board picks. So I expect some fallers. 

 

If on the board for players who should be in our range, in order who I would pick. Although i like Boldy and Zegras both the same. I take Zegras, cause he has such a good read on the offensive zone. Reminds me of marchand. 

Been watching a lot of game video on Zegras, and don't care for him.  Seems like a guy feeding off of Hughes.  I get the Hunter Shinkaruk vibe from him.  Perimeter guy, who doesn't like the dirty areas.  Not sure though, of course.  Just my opinion. 

[theo5789]

8 minutes ago, Tomatoes11 said:

I don’t think Demko is mentally weak enough to need sheltering. He will live if he gets lit up at first.

You want to gamble on that? And what if he is and you've moved on from Markstrom already? I guess we will just overpay for whatever UFA goalie is out there easy peasy? We are in a good situation right now. We have a goalie full of confidence putting up solid starter numbers now. We have a legit prospect coming up the ranks and learning the game at the NHL level finally with less pressure on his shoulders to take over immediately. If Demko proves he can withstand the mental toughness needed to be an NHL goalie, then we go from there. Now is not the time to make a move for one of our goalies and especially not for the reason of worrying about the expansion.

 

Look at a team like St. Louis where a goalie playing well can suddenly turn a team around or Calgary when some stability finally happened in goal. If Demko is lit up regularly, perhaps he can bounce back from it eventually, but it takes a toll on the rest of the team as well when you start to lose confidence in your netminder. Development is important and building confidence the right way goes along with that (why do you think we didn't want guys like Pettersson, Boeser, etc dealing with the hard minutes and signed the best of the bunch to take on those duties?). We have time to be patient with Demko, so we should take advantage of that. We don't need to make the move to try and win the Cup, but we should be moving in the direction where the team wants to win and feels like they can. The alternative is being stuck with a bunch of talented guys and spinning the wheels like Edmonton and what Buffalo is trending to right now.

[ChuckNORRIS4Cup]

17 hours ago, D-Money said:

Don't like my reply? Don't read it either then.

 

Or man up and don't take it personally when people disagree with you.

 

You think this about me being mad that you're disagreeing with a hypothetical idea  no, it's that you were such a sissy by the sounds of it and couldn't handle reading another post with this kind of suggestion. What am I supposed to care that you are fed up with reading this narrative, guess what I don't give a crap if you were reading them all and it's got you upset, what am I supposed to feel sorry because you're sitting here reading everyone's post I guess suggesting the same idea. I didn't come on here to throw out a suggestion to have a poster cry to me because he's fed up with reading the same thing, don't like it don't read it, pretty simple.

[SingleThorn]

18 hours ago, D-Money said:

Don't like my reply? Don't read it either then.

 

Or man up and don't take it personally when people disagree with you.

 

 

11 minutes ago, ChuckNORRIS4Cup said:

You think this about me being mad that you're disagreeing with a hypothetical idea  no, it's that you were such a sissy by the sounds of it and couldn't handle reading another post with this kind of suggestion. What am I supposed to care that you are fed up with reading this narrative, guess what I don't give a crap if you were reading them all and it's got you upset, what am I supposed to feel sorry because you're sitting here reading everyone's post I guess suggesting the same idea. I didn't come on here to throw out a suggestion to have a poster cry to me because he's fed up with reading the same thing, don't like it don't read it, pretty simple.

Not sure how you know you don't like something if you don't read it !

[ChuckNORRIS4Cup]

7 minutes ago, SingleThorn said:

 

Not sure how you know you don't like something if you don't read it !

Lol touche 

 

There is always the ignore button  

Edited April 11, 2019 by ChuckNORRIS4Cup

[Team Bagues]

I was bored and looked at the last 15 years of draft # 9, 10, & 11 respectively. Whatever mindset the scouting staff needs to consider guys written in bold would be good.

 

I'm guessing the Canucks' internal ranking system has gotten much better in recent years, thus the team won't be swayed much by central scouting.

 

The ability to buck central scouting trends seems an important factor for drafting success - particularly outside of the top 3. Also, BPA would help to keep position specific blinders off - tending toward overvaluing due to positional need.

 

2004: (9) Smid, )10) Valabek, (11) Tukonen ---- drafted afterward in the 1st round >>> Dubniyk, Radulov, Green, Schneider

2005: Lee, Bourdon, Kopitar ---- Rask, Oshie, Niskanen

2006: Sheppard, Frolik, J. Bernier ---- Little, Giroux, Varlamov, Foligno

2007: Couture, Ellerby, B. Sutter ---- Paciorety, Backlund, Perron, McDonagh

2008: Bailey, Hodgson, Beech ---- E. Karlsson, Myers, Eberle, J. Carlson

2009: Cowen, Paajarvi-Svensson, Ellis ---- Krieder, Palmeiri

2010: M. Granlund, Mcllrath, Campbell ---- Swartz, Tarasenko, Hayes, Kuznetsov, Fowler

2011: D. Hamilton, Brodin, Siemens ---- J.T. Miller, Rackell

2012: Trouba, Koekkoek, Forsberg ---- Hertl, Terraveinen, Vasilevsky

2013: Horvat, Nichuchkin, Morin ---- Domi, Morrissey, Theodore

2014: Ehlers, Ritchie, Fiala ---- Larkin, Vrana, Kapanen, Pastrnak

2015: Meier, Rantanen, Crouse ---- Debrusk, Connor, Chabot, Boeser

2016: Sergachev, Jost, Brown ---- Mcavoy, Borgstrom

2017: Rasmussen, Tippett, Valardi ---- Brannstrom, Thomas, Jokiharju, Tolvanen

2018: Kravstov, Bouchard, Wahlstrom ---- too early

[Salming]

Matthew Boldy for sure, two way forward with Selke Trophy potential. Would be a perfect pick for the otherwise more offensivly talent in the roster.

 

Or... Philip Broberg, mobile big strong two way defender. Only downside is his left handiness perhaps.

 

Or... Victor Söderströn, smooth skater and right handed defender and like Broberg already got senior hockey experience.

 

Or wild card(!)... Brett Leason, big late blooming center who's expected to go late in round one. Dominant in Canada -20 team, born 99, but would pretty much get right into our roster.

 

 

Surprised to see so many of you thinking Zegras will be availible at nr 10. He's ranked 7th but may even get picked higher than that. (This years Jesperi Cuntaniemi )

Edited April 11, 2019 by Salming

[IBatch]

45 minutes ago, Team Bagues said:

I was bored and looked at the last 15 years of draft # 9, 10, & 11 respectively. Whatever mindset the scouting staff needs to consider guys written in bold would be good.

 

I'm guessing the Canucks' internal ranking system has gotten much better in recent years, thus the team won't be swayed much by central scouting.

 

The ability to buck central scouting trends seems an important factor for drafting success - particularly outside of the top 3. Also, BPA would help to keep position specific blinders off - tending toward overvaluing due to positional need.

 

2004: (9) Smid, )10) Valabek, (11) Tukonen ---- drafted afterward in the 1st round >>> Dubniyk, Radulov, Green, Schneider

2005: Lee, Bourdon, Kopitar ---- Rask, Oshie, Niskanen

2006: Sheppard, Frolik, J. Bernier ---- Little, Giroux, Varlamov, Foligno

2007: Couture, Ellerby, B. Sutter ---- Paciorety, Backlund, Perron, McDonagh

2008: Bailey, Hodgson, Beech ---- E. Karlsson, Myers, Eberle, J. Carlson

2009: Cowen, Paajarvi-Svensson, Ellis ---- Krieder, Palmeiri

2010: M. Granlund, Mcllrath, Campbell ---- Swartz, Tarasenko, Hayes, Kuznetsov, Fowler

2011: D. Hamilton, Brodin, Siemens ---- J.T. Miller, Rackell

2012: Trouba, Koekkoek, Forsberg ---- Hertl, Terraveinen, Vasilevsky

2013: Horvat, Nichuchkin, Morin ---- Domi, Morrissey, Theodore

2014: Ehlers, Ritchie, Fiala ---- Larkin, Vrana, Kapanen, Pastrnak

2015: Meier, Rantanen, Crouse ---- Debrusk, Connor, Chabot, Boeser

2016: Sergachev, Jost, Brown ---- Mcavoy, Borgstrom

2017: Rasmussen, Tippett, Valardi ---- Brannstrom, Thomas, Jokiharju, Tolvanen

2018: Kravstov, Bouchard, Wahlstrom ---- too early

This is a great post.  It shows how much of a crap shoot this really is.  I hope Benning goes off board (again), becuase this statistically shows that there’s more after 11 than is picked in the 9-11 range each year.  Doesn’t have to be a crazy outlier.  Last year MTL did ok going for a positional need, maybe we should too.  I can’t find much not to like about Boldy, but hey a lot of good things were said about a lot of duds too in the past.  Drive is a big thing to look for, I’d rather pick a guy with tons of that then a guy who’s pretty content with how easy it is to play against other juniors and thinks it will be that easy going forward (and it never is).

 

Interestingly the best players usually are the ones who never stop practicing on their skills (EP is like that and a book a mountain high has already been written about this for guys like Crosby and McDavid).  I hope the scouting staff really digs in and asks the right questions and does their homework.  Another best of the draft type pick would be all we need to push us over the top.  Undoubtedly their will be some busts and some guys picked later that in a re-draft would go top five.  This is a strange draft in that there really is only one tier at the top, and then maybe two or three guys  above the rest of the top fifteen.  

[rekker]

Seems the top 9 of the draft is very centre loaded? This may bode well for us as we need a scoring winger with size and a dman. Hopefully we find that gem.