6th Pick: 2014 NHL Entry Draft

[BananaMash]

My first priority at 6th is if anyone from the top-5 (Reinhart, Ekblad, Bennett, Dal Colle, Draisaitl) falls to us. Then I'm tied between Kapanen, Nylander and Ehlers. Leaning towards Kapanen though.

I've seen a few mock drafts that have someone taking a risk on Nylander in the top-5, would sure be interesting if that happened. I think Nylander is my favorite pick aside from the top-5, but that being said I really wouldn't be upset with Kapanen or Ehlers either.

I'm excited, it's just a shame we got the 6th overall in such a weird draft year.

[Honky Cat]

Prediction here...If the top 5 go as predicted,I see the Canucks picking Nylander as their pick...Why?...I think it comes down to the tradition of Swedish players playing for the Canucks..and in their scouting staff..As we get nearer to the date, see him trending upwards.

[granpappy]

Never won anything with those swedes. They go big, Perlini or Ritchie as it stands

[Honky Cat]

Never won anything with those swedes. They go big, Perlini or Ritchie as it stands

Didn't win anything with the Canadians/US players either...?

[granpappy]

Linden said it, the 'Bruins' model. Historically, Bruins equates with big and bad; that is, always has been their model. Can/has to obviously include Europeans (ie: smaller skilled players) but the gist of it is big, physical players. These are usually North American. This is what is available right where we sit at the moment (Perlini, Richie). Kassian can't wear down opponents by hisself! Three or four 'Kassians' can, especially if they can score. Look how beat up they where during the last cup run. They wern't wearing opponents down, opponents were wearing them down. Came close but by the last series and a bit they were done. Unless they move up (MDC / German) I'm betting Lindens goes for Perlini / Richie

[Saskatchewan Canucks Fan]

I don't think he will go ahead of us, but I think his game translating to the NHL is almost as big of a question mark (if not more) as someone like Nylander. I'm always wary of early first round picks being used on kids who use their size to dominate players in the CHL leagues. It takes a completely different level of strength to be able to do it in the NHL.

Look at Kassian, an early first round pick who is only just starting to figure out how to use his size against NHL players now, at the end of the season, almost 5 years after he was drafted. Then you have someone like Beach who just never put his game together, ever.

I know they all develop differently and don't play exactly the same, but it's something that worries me.

I wanted to take a look at the size and weight of the "big three" in our division. Here's the top scorers from their teams (not in any particular order):

Kings

Carter 6'4 212lbs.

Kopitar 6'3 224 lbs.

Williams 6'1 189 lbs.

Ducks

Gezlaf 6'4 221 lbs.

Perry 6'3 212 lbs

Bonino 6'1 196 lbs

Sharks

*Pavelski only 5'11 190lbs.

Marleau 6'2 220lbs.

Thorton 6'4 220lbs.

Also have:

Burns 6'5 230lbs.

Couture 6'1 200lbs

Hertl 6'2 210lbs. (A lot fewer points because of injury)

I just don't see how a guy like Willie Nylander who's 5'11 176lbs. according to ISS is more appealing. Why not take the risk with Ritchie who has a better chance to excel in our division in my opinion. They both have risk, but I feel as though a smaller players risk sadly increases if they're playing against bigger teams. If we have a more physical core than a smaller goal scoring player would be able to make it. But right now we have Kesler and Kassian as our only truly "big" players. In my opinion, Booth, Higgins, Burrows etc. don't really give a beating to anyone on the Sharks, Kings, and Ducks.

[TOMapleLaughs]

If Nylander, Kapanen, or Ehlers are available (which, one should be at least lol) and we go with someone like Ritchie I will be very disappointed.

Why? Because you like impish euros?

I'm not a huge fan of Ritchie, but I'd take him in a heartbeat over those buttery-soft preseason flash players.

Canucks fans confuse me. They want this team to be able to compete with the big boys, but then they fall in love with ridiculously undersized prospects. Hey, I'd be more impressed with that idea if these smallish guys were legit stars, but they're not.

That being said if it came down to Ritchie or Virtanen, i'd lean towards Virtanen. That kid can SKATE. He's faster than Nylander and Kapanen and just as fast as Ehlers while coming with other valueable intangibles. Only problem is that he doesn't get enough assists. Oh noes.

[TOMapleLaughs]

Prediction here...If the top 5 go as predicted,I see the Canucks picking Nylander as their pick...Why?...I think it comes down to the tradition of Swedish players playing for the Canucks..and in their scouting staff..As we get nearer to the date, see him trending upwards.

So Linden was brought in just so we can continue our tradition of picking soft players and losing? YAY!

[Down by the River]

I have a feeling Canuck fans are going to look back on this draft in five years and go "why didn't we daft _____________"

There are so many options with the sixth pick that it is easier to be wrong than right. One of the approximately ten players the Canucks could justifiably pick at the sixth position will end up being a star. So basically there is about a 90% chance that the Canucks won't get it right, though it will be to the fault of nobody as it is way too difficult to predict future success with this group of players.

[baumerman77]

Why? Because you like impish euros?

I'm not a huge fan of Ritchie, but I'd take him in a heartbeat over those buttery-soft preseason flash players.

Canucks fans confuse me. They want this team to be able to compete with the big boys, but then they fall in love with ridiculously undersized prospects. Hey, I'd be more impressed with that idea if these smallish guys were legit stars, but they're not.

That being said if it came down to Ritchie or Virtanen, i'd lean towards Virtanen. That kid can SKATE. He's faster than Nylander and Kapanen and just as fast as Ehlers while coming with other valueable intangibles. Only problem is that he doesn't get enough assists. Oh noes.

This is the smartest post on this thread.

[Lonny_Bohonos_14]

I have a feeling Canuck fans are going to look back on this draft in five years and go "why didn't we daft _____________"

There are so many options with the sixth pick that it is easier to be wrong than right. One of the approximately ten players the Canucks could justifiably pick at the sixth position will end up being a star. So basically there is about a 90% chance that the Canucks won't get it right, though it will be to the fault of nobody as it is way too difficult to predict future success with this group of players.

Unless the player picked ends up being a the next Crosby, Canuck fans will always say 'should have drafted x'

[TOMapleLaughs]

I have a feeling Canuck fans are going to look back on this draft in five years and go "why didn't we daft _____________"

There are so many options with the sixth pick that it is easier to be wrong than right. One of the approximately ten players the Canucks could justifiably pick at the sixth position will end up being a star. So basically there is about a 90% chance that the Canucks won't get it right, though it will be to the fault of nobody as it is way too difficult to predict future success with this group of players.

The early picks are actually far easier, because there's always so much info about the top prospects of any given draft.

It's the later ones that are harder because they require a lot more digging.

But I agree there is about a 90% chance the Canucks won't get it right, because that's their history.

[thad]

You actually think they're going to draft Draisaitl? IMO teams will do anything big or small to try to get an advantage at the draft.

He's going to draft who he thinks is the best player. Did you read the article? He broke down the top 5 and gave all of them great praise. He said Draisaitl played the best out of them in just one game. Not sure what he's talking about but I'm guessing it was the top prospects game.

He's a GM that attended a game, he's not stupid enough to think if he says that it will change the minds of the other teams pro scouts sitting 4 seats over.

The article was an Edmonton news paper writer giving his opinion on who buffalo will take.

[sting]

I wanted to take a look at the size and weight of the "big three" in our division. Here's the top scorers from their teams (not in any particular order):

Kings

Carter 6'4 212lbs.

Kopitar 6'3 224 lbs.

Williams 6'1 189 lbs.

Ducks

Gezlaf 6'4 221 lbs.

Perry 6'3 212 lbs

Bonino 6'1 196 lbs

Sharks

*Pavelski only 5'11 190lbs.

Marleau 6'2 220lbs.

Thorton 6'4 220lbs.

Also have:

Burns 6'5 230lbs.

Couture 6'1 200lbs

Hertl 6'2 210lbs. (A lot fewer points because of injury)

I just don't see how a guy like Willie Nylander who's 5'11 176lbs. according to ISS is more appealing. Why not take the risk with Ritchie who has a better chance to excel in our division in my opinion. They both have risk, but I feel as though a smaller players risk sadly increases if they're playing against bigger teams. If we have a more physical core than a smaller goal scoring player would be able to make it. But right now we have Kesler and Kassian as our only truly "big" players. In my opinion, Booth, Higgins, Burrows etc. don't really give a beating to anyone on the Sharks, Kings, and Ducks.

Great post.

im with you.

Horvat Shinkaruk Kassian

Cassels Ritchie Jensen

Gaunce Fox Kesler

Now thats a playoff roster.

[Blömqvist]

Uncovered an interesting tidbit about William Nylander.

Apparently, (well, according to a few posters on the HF boards), Nylander has played the North American game before which should help him adjust/transition to the AHL/NHL more easier:

SOURCE: http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/showthread.php?t=1646153

Nylander started playing and spent his first few years on NA ice. So he should adapt fairly quickly.

Yeah, I don't think the rink size will be an issue for Nylander. He has probably played more on NA sized ice than on international ice.

Nylander is a product of North American hockey. He was in the states until 2011.

IMO I still think we should draft offensive skill over size with our pick. If none of the top 5 slip to 6th then we should go with either Nylander or Ehlers (preferably Nylander as he can be an elite 1C). If and only if we add another draft pick (like Ottawa's 10th overall) we go for the local boy Virtanen, that way we can trend towards a more Bruin-style of hockey while still maintaining top-end skill.

Virtanen - Nylander - Jensen

Shinkaruk - Horvat - Kassian

If Linden plays his cards right he can set us up offensively for the next decade (assuming our prospects pan out).

[Honky Cat]

Why? Because you like impish euros?

I'm not a huge fan of Ritchie, but I'd take him in a heartbeat over those buttery-soft preseason flash players.

Canucks fans confuse me. They want this team to be able to compete with the big boys, but then they fall in love with ridiculously undersized prospects. Hey, I'd be more impressed with that idea if these smallish guys were legit stars, but they're not.

That being said if it came down to Ritchie or Virtanen, i'd lean towards Virtanen. That kid can SKATE. He's faster than Nylander and Kapanen and just as fast as Ehlers while coming with other valueable intangibles. Only problem is that he doesn't get enough assists. Oh noes.

Personally,I would like to draft a big Canadian kid over a Euro....but I also think we should pick the best player available...I've seen Virtanen ranked around #17 on some mock drafts (Craig Button ,even though he's a doofus,had Jake at #41)..So we should take him with #6..?..Again,this is why I see Nylander falling to the Canucks......

[73 Percent]

okay so why were there 300 "we should have drafted nuchuskin" threads this season if everyone wants canadian kids now?

or is it just a no matter what gillis does its the wrong choice kind of thing?

[elvis15]

Not sure if anyone has posted this already but here are some highlights for Nylander.

...

His skill set is one of the most enticing of the draft for me, but whether he can do that in the NHL is another story. I'd still look at who falls out of the top 5 (maybe Draisaitl or Dal Colle, if we're luck Bennett or even Reinhart) first but would definitely consider him otherwise.

Uncovered an interesting tidbit about William Nylander.

Apparently, (well, according to a few posters on the HF boards), Nylander has played the North American game before which should help him adjust/transition to the AHL/NHL more easier:

SOURCE: http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/showthread.php?t=1646153

...

IMO I still think we should draft offensive skill over size with our pick. If none of the top 5 slip to 6th then we should go with either Nylander or Ehlers (preferably Nylander as he can be an elite 1C). If and only if we add another draft pick (like Ottawa's 10th overall) we go for the local boy Virtanen, that way we can trend towards a more Bruin-style of hockey while still maintaining top-end skill.

Virtanen - Nylander - Jensen

Shinkaruk - Horvat - Kassian

If Linden plays his cards right he can set us up offensively for the next decade (assuming our prospects pan out).

Interesting. While I'd love size as well what we're really missing in our prospect pool is a top end skill player at forward. To a slightly lesser degree, we're missing top end D for the future as well, but I think we really have a chance to get what we're missing in our forward prospects at this draft, where I don't see Fluery or the other D in the same tier as Ekblad to fill our defensive needs.

Size is great, but when we have Kassian, Jensen, Gaunce, Grenier, LaBate, etc. that could all be successful on the wing in the top 6/top 9 for us I don't think we have as pressing a need to go after someone like Ritchie.

[TOMapleLaughs]

Personally,I would like to draft a big Canadian kid over a Euro....but I also think we should pick the best player available...I've seen Virtanen ranked around #17 on some mock drafts (Craig Button ,even though he's a doofus,had Jake at #41)..So we should take him with #6..?..Again,this is why I see Nylander falling to the Canucks......

I'd go by NHL central scouting over mock drafts any day. And on there he's #6, based on speed, size, shooting ability, and compete level, which are all superior to Nylander's.

The 'dangerously undersized' assessment on Nylander here http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1735670-pros-and-cons-of-the-top-prospects-in-the-2014-nhl-draft is enough to make Nylander fall harshly. He doesn't have the chippiness or battle level to counter his lack of size.

I say let him fall. We have too many undersized prospects as it is.

[TOMapleLaughs]

okay so why were there 300 "we should have drafted nuchuskin" threads this season if everyone wants canadian kids now?

or is it just a no matter what gillis does its the wrong choice kind of thing?

Well, Nichushkin was a man, not a boy, for starters. This year the top euros are teeny tiny cute little things that I WANT NO PART OF ON THIS TEAM! (Sorry for the caps.)