Pouria

Why would you ever go to calgarypuck, when they talk trash about canucks 24/7. In fact they would hold a celebration if the canucks plane crashed and all the canucks players, staff and coaches died. They hate us that much to wish death upon our team. Wouldn't be surprised if half of their members are criminals.

Would Henrik play if Daniel's career is over? Am just thinking what Henrik would do?

You must be joking, right? Bertuzzi also didn't leave his feet or use his elbow, so he didn't deserve any suspension for ending Moore's career. Give me a freaking break...

Virtanen or Ehlers are possible players that you can pick outside of top 10 so am not sure why people are still debating on taking Virtanen at #6. I'd be fine with Virtanen if we had an extra 1st round pick to use on him. Although when you have the top 6 pick, you always go BPA.

The players that are ready and one we have a high chance picking is Dal Colle. Ekblad and Reinhart are the other two and they are the consensus #1 and #2 pick. Don't rule out a player we pick in this draft not cracking the roster. There could be some surprises in the summer camp.

Ritchie is the higher skilled version of Kassian with a much accurate shot. He will be ranked high in most of the draft lists the GMs prepare before the draft. Ehlers is also a more skilled player compared to Virtanen.

I see one of the big 5 sliding down. I see Edmonton trying to get a defenseman in the draft and might bypass getting a forward. I also see the Flames picking a big guy like Ritchie. There is definitely a high chance that we would get a crack at the top 5 players in the draft: Reinhart, Ekblad, Bennette, Dal Colle and Draistal. I would be fine with any of those players mentioned and I see one of them dropping to #6.

I see the NHL ready prospects as Ekblad, Reinhart and Dal Colle (who has NHL caliber wrist shot). It is the reason why I hope somehow Linden or the new GM can trade up to get those players if available.

Central scouting isn't always right. I have watched Virtanen play and he just seems less skilled compared to a guy like Ritchie or Ehlers. But I don't know why we would take Virtanen that high. If we want another pick in the 1st round, then we could trade our 2nd plus a roster player to get into the top 15 and pick Virtanen. I still go with the guys I ranked higher than Virtanen.

If we are trading Kesler, I would like to get an NHL ready prospect. I would definitely trade Kesler if we got Mantha and a roster player like Nyquist or Tatar. That would really speed up the re-tool process.

Rather pick Ritchie or Ehlers than Virtanen. They are more of a safe pick compared to Virtanen who seems to be really hyped in this forum just because he is a "local" kid.

No way, you don't gamble all your money on a random number in roulette. In fact, I like to see Linden trade for a higher pick, maybe #2 if Ekblad is still available. We didn't sink this low just to draft Virtanen who could easily be picked at #16 or #17. There are a bunch of players that could be picked ahead of Virtanen like Ho Sang or Tuch.

No way we pick Virtanen at #6. I don't care if he is from BC or Lower mainland. I want the best player available that is a fit for this team and addresses our need. #6 pick is a really important pick and is too high of a pick to go off board for a player like Virtanen. My ranking is: 1. Ekblad 2. Reinhart 3. Bennett 4. Draistail 5. Dal Collie 6. Ritchie 7. Ehlers 16. Virtanen So If we had another mid 1st round pick, maybe we could've risked that pick for Virtanen. Although I would probably prefer Tuch over Virtanen.

I'd rather take Dal Collie at #6 if he is available. He is Cole Cassels linemate and has good chemistry with him. I also think he is a better sniper than Ehlers.

Torts actually is not a fit for this team when we initially thought he was a fit, we were wrong. I think his system is more suited for a tougher, grittier teams like Boston Bruins and LA Kings. The Canucks still are more on the skills and finesse side of things when you evaluate players. Look at how many injuries we sustained playing Torts style. You really want to repeat this season next year too?

Why? Because he would be a GM of a team instead of an assistant GM with a higher salary, more responsibility and more satisfaction. Its not up to the Bruins if he wants to go to another team, the Bruins can't lock him up unless he doesn't want to leave. The decision will be up to Benning, and what organization wouldn't allow their workers the ability to land a job at a higher position.

No way, they need an experienced coach especially since we have an inexperienced president of hockey operations. The Bruins assistant GM is perfect, since he knows what it takes to build a cup winning team. Markus Naslund could be hired as an advisor or maybe a scout.

How is he qualified to hand pick a great president? Because he is the owner of the team and can do what he wants. Maybe you should buy the team so you can hand pick a great president. Or better yet, go cheer for the laffs since canucks are a "laughing stock".

considering the other option being Feaster.....yeah, I'd be ecstatic if they hired Nicholson. Not hiring Feaster is a win in itself.

So what? We beat Los Angeles too and dominated them physically. Its not like they were better than Anaheim or LA. Any team can beat any other team at a given night.

Shouldn't you be following the laffs or the oilers , since you like tanking and losing so much?

He can be with torts in a retirement home soon enough once Torts gets fired by a new GM.

Well then... Goodbye sedins, Kessler etc...all will be traded for Jankowski. Canucks fans got their wish, AV fired, MG fired... Now we will see what happens next.

Canucks fans have the memory of a gold fish. Then you have another poster saying that ownership should listen to it's fans when it comes to hockey decisions like it's a pizza franchise.

When it comes to critical hockey decisions, yeah, it will be a huge problem. Then we would have millions of GMs instead of one.