6th Pick: 2014 NHL Entry Draft

[Herberts Vasiljevs]

.

[BanTSN]

He never mentioned using a #6 overall pick to draft size. His two high end picks were Phil Kessel and Tyler Seguin.

You guys are parsing every single word the guy says to see and hear what you want to see. Perhaps it would be better to spend time doing something else

Edit : Just to save yourselves some time, here is Bennings record inside the top 10 as a Bruin since 2000.

2006 Phl Kessell 5ft 11 168lbs (at the time)

2007 Zack Hamill 5ft 10 170 (super bust)

2010 Tyler Seguin 6ft .05 182 (at the time)

2011 Douggie Hamilton -monster defenseman

Stands to reason pretty stongly -almost conclusively- he drafts for skill in that position (for forwards anyways) in the top 10.

You Ritchie and Virtanen supporters should really quit while you are behind. This one backfired.

Everybody who watched the Benning conference came to the conclusion that he won't be picking Ehlers or Nylander. You're starting to look like a fool now.

[Merci]

He did not mention specifically using the pick for size.

He mentioned the top 6 needs to have space to use it's skill, that means the 3rd and 4th need to have tons of physicality

He mentioned the entire team needs to be big and grittier overall

He Mentioned how big La, SJ, and Anaheim were and said they were our direct competition for the foreseeable future.

No we won't be drafting Ritchie because we need size in our top 6, we'll be drafting him because he has size along with the skill of a top 6.

[Absent Canuck]

For what it is worth Jason Botchford saw it the same way I did.

http://blogs.theprovince.com/2014/05/23/jim-bennings-first-day-what-we-learned/

Benning thinks he can fix the scouting issues with better communication:

“Vancouver plays in what may be the toughest division in the league. To win our division, we’re going to have to go through the Anaheims, the San Joses, and the LAs.

“They’re big, heavy teams.

“So, when we talk to our scouting staff, one of our mandates is let’s try to get bigger. Let’s get more rugged. So we can play both styles. So we can play a skilled, skating style when we need. But when it’s a rugged physical game, we can play that style, too.”

Goodbye Nylander and Ehlers. Unless it’s all a smokescreen?

But, seriously, how can you fix the scouting department which has been struggling for a decade at the draft, Jim?

“This is what I’m going to do, I come from a scouting background. We’re going to give these guys direction. I’m going to communicate to these guys what we want. What we think a Vancouver player should be.

“I’m going to work with them. I’m going to get out and see games. I’m going to be a part of that group. I’m going to try and make that group better.

“I know some of the guys and they’re excellent people. I’m not going to sit up here today and promise any changes.”

This idea that the scouts didn’t get proper direction is the same line they gave Gillis when he took over.

Benning is well aware of this.

Yes because we only draft in the first round. Bennings own draft record with the bruins shows he drafted skill at the forward position when he was lucky enough to draft that high.

You guys are reading what you want to read. Spinning what you want to spin. Is this really the corner you have ended up in? Trying to pick out words out of an opinion guess piece ? This is where you are making your last stand? Parsing Botchford?

You are starting to sound like partisan political hacks.

[Herberts Vasiljevs]

Everybody who watched the Benning conference came to the conclusion that he won't be picking Ehlers or Nylander. You're starting to look like a fool now.

My guess is that the pick will be Ritchie, unless we move up.

However, Ritchie has had consistency issues. Benning and Linden want guys who bring it every night.

[chickenman92]

Looked at Boston's roster and they are roughly 60% Canadian.

My guess is you'll see Canadians drafted and since Smyl, Linden, Delome and Benning all are WHL guys, we'll be drafting more Dub guys

[Smashian Kassian]

Disagree. The Canucks may consider him because he's ranked 6th in CSS, has superior skating, shooting and the intangibles package that Linden was starting to refer to in his initial talks.

Ritchie's superior hockey IQ, a myth, led to just 3 more points scored this season. And his superior power forward ability led to just 3 fights, and Virtanen fought more.

One major factor is age. Virtanen's upside is higher because he's quite a bit younger. Leading team Canada with a shoulder injury? Not bad. Wonder what he would've done if he was 100%. Likely he'd be in the top-5.

Ritchie's a bit overweight. Ehlers massively underweight. Virtanen at where you'd like players to be. Since he's just as fast as Ehlers with A-rated skating, at 40lbs more, wow, yes please. He also has a cannon of a shot. He can score in all sorts of ways and pushes defenders over instead of getting physically dominated. He's definitely worthy of consideration.

Where CSS has him ranked holds absolutely no barring on what the Canucks think about who to take. Absoutely none, I can't stress that enough.

The Canucks had Burmistrov ranked #3 in 2010. CSS didn't have him in their top 10 for NA skaters alone.

Ritchie had more points in 10 less games, a higher PPG, but he also had a higher GPG. Interesting since goal scoring is Virtanen's calling card, and while its clear Ritchie is a better playmaker, he also has a higher GPG, so does that mean he is atleast on par if not better when it comes to goal scorer? If so, consider he projects as a better physical player, is more dynamic, bigger, exc. Why would Virtanen be preferred to Ritchie?

I don't see what would it is that makes Virtanen a better choice than Ritchie.

The "low hockey IQ" argument is dumb IMO. Bo Horvat didn't exactly ooze playmaking talent (he also said he patterns his game after Mike Richards, a playmaker, yet had 33 goals to 28 assists) when he was drafted either which is something you want out of a centerman unless you are Roenick or Stamkos. It isn't uncommon for players in their draft years to focus on scoring goals to get themselves noticed. Virtanen is a good passer, the only problem is he passes when he wants to pass and his 26 assists don't mean he "lacks hockey IQ." Mike Bossy disproportionately scored goals in both juniors and early in his career and he clearly didn't have low hockey IQ. I'm pretty sure any team that drafts him will discuss the fact he needs to utilize his teammates better and I'm sure he will do this if he wants to make the team. You can teach him to do that, but you sure as hell ain't teaching any player to have that deadly combination of game-breaking speed and an elite shot.

Eh, not the greatest comparison, Horvat is an extremely smart player on both sides of the puck, hockey IQ is a strength of his.

If you watched the Mem cup, you would have noticed Max Domi being selfish at times, holding onto the puck, looking off the easier play to try and make things happen himself, that's what I see in Virtanen (And I saw it at the U17's).

Except Virtanen is a pure goal scorer/sniper, Domi is more of a playmaker/dangler with a higher skill level, which goes against Virtanen in the comparison.

But in that sense I said about doing things themselves, Virtanen is this year's Domi, IMO.

Listening to Benning today, I think it is fair to say we won't be drafting Nylander or Ehlers. He continually emphasized physicality and strength. I think it is fair to say he will draft either Virtanen or Ritchie (unless one of the top 5 drop).

He said his philosophy to draft is:

1A. Skills/ability

1B. Intangables/character

He also said they want to get back to playing an uptempo offensive game, which would lean in the favour of someone like Nylander or Ehlers.

He said things both ways, I don't think he tipped his hat one way or another. And looking back at the draft records of the team's he's worked for. I don't think that points to a clear bias of one over another. Like for example, Haggerty said Khoklachev (smaller player, with grit & willingness to battle) was one of his favorite prospects in Boston.

Everything is about balance, he also said he wanted Canucks to go back to the way of relentless will to score goals and speed.

Yeah I agree with you on this, I don't think he really said definitively that he wanted one over another, he wants both in different areas.

[chickenman92]

I think it will be trade up for Reinhart or take Virtanen at 6.

[FlyLow_]

I definitely got the impression we'll be picking size at #6, doesn't mean that's the case but definitely how it sounded.

[baumerman77]

Yes because we only draft in the first round. Bennings own draft record with the bruins shows he drafted skill at the forward position when he was lucky enough to draft that high.

You guys are reading what you want to read. Spinning what you want to spin. Is this really the corner you have ended up in? Trying to pick out words out of an opinion guess piece ? This is where you are making your last stand? Parsing Botchford?

You are starting to sound like partisan political hacks. : :D

I am simply stating that someone else (botchford) saw it the same way I did.

I have provided quotes to back up my points. You're coming off as the spin doctor. You do realize Benning was not the GM of the Bruins correct? That the Bruins picks don't necessarily reflect his own preferences? Regardless, you do understand that the Canucks are a different organization than the Bruins with different needs? And that what he did or did not do with the Bruins does not necessarily reflect what he will do with the Canucks?

[baumerman77]

There is some serious cognitive dissonance going on here. You don't have to reconcile your drafting philosophy with Benning's philosophy. I seem to agree with Benning's philosophy, that being said I am not overly happy he is our GM.

[Smashian Kassian]

I want us to take Ehlers.

But my gut tells me that they take Ritchie. I hope my gut is wrong.

Actually above all, I hope both my gut & personal preference end up wrong, and we end up with a faller.

[Absent Canuck]

Looked at Boston's roster and they are roughly 60% Canadian.

My guess is you'll see Canadians drafted and since Smyl, Linden, Delome and Benning all are WHL guys, we'll be drafting more Dub guys

You honestly expect anyone to believe that?

I am simply stating that someone else (botchford) saw it the same way I did.

I have provided quotes to back up my points. You're coming off as the spin doctor. You do realize Benning was not the GM of the Bruins correct? That the Bruins picks don't necessarily reflect his own preferences? Regardless, you do understand that the Canucks are a different organization than the Bruins with different needs? And that what he did or did not do with the Bruins does not necessarily reflect what he will do with the Canucks?

Ok since Bennings draft record doesnt fit your narrative then it doesnt count but parsing the very same Bennings words do. Your posts are non productive at this point.

[FlyLow_]

Where CSS has him ranked holds absolutely no barring on what the Canucks think about who to take. Absoutely none, I can't stress that enough.

The Canucks had Burmistrov ranked #3 in 2010. CSS didn't have him in their top 10 for NA skaters alone.

Ritchie had more points in 10 less games, a higher PPG, but he also had a higher GPG. Interesting since goal scoring is Virtanen's calling card, and while its clear Ritchie is a better playmaker, he also has a higher GPG, so does that mean he is atleast on par if not better when it comes to goal scorer? If so, consider he projects as a better physical player, is more dynamic, bigger, exc. Why would Virtanen be preferred to Ritchie?

I don't see what would it is that makes Virtanen a better choice than Ritchie.

Eh, not the greatest comparison, Horvat is an extremely smart player on both sides of the puck, hockey IQ is a strength of his.

If you watched the Mem cup, you would have noticed Max Domi being selfish at times, holding onto the puck, looking off the easier play to try and make things happen himself, that's what I see in Virtanen (And I saw it at the U17's).

Except Virtanen is a pure goal scorer/sniper, Domi is more of a playmaker/dangler with a higher skill level, which goes against Virtanen in the comparison.

But in that sense I said about doing things themselves, Virtanen is this year's Domi, IMO.

He said his philosophy to draft is:

1A. Skills/ability

1B. Intangables/character

He also said they want to get back to playing an uptempo offensive game, which would lean in the favour of someone like Nylander or Ehlers.

He said things both ways, I don't think he tipped his hat one way or another. And looking back at the draft records of the team's he's worked for. I don't think that points to a clear bias of one over another. Like for example, Haggerty said Khoklachev (smaller player, with grit & willingness to battle) was one of his favorite prospects in Boston.

Yeah I agree with you on this, I don't think he really said definitively that he wanted one over another, he wants both in different areas.

Virtanen is a much better skater, considering Benning was pretty clear skating would be a focus for the team going forward it might be a reason to favor him and others over Ritchie.

[Absent Canuck]

There is some serious cognitive dissonance going on here. You don't have to reconcile your drafting philosophy with Benning's philosophy. I seem to agree with Benning's philosophy, that being said I am not overly happy he is our GM.

Admit it. You are posting because you just want people to pay attention to you.

[baumerman77]

You honestly expect anyone to believe that?

Ok since Bennings draft record doesnt fit your narrative then it doesnt count but parsing the very same Bennings words do. Your posts are non productive at this point.

Yes. You are judging Benning based on actions which may or may not been of his own accord. Moreover, those actions took place in a different organization.

I would rather judge or speculate on his further actions based on his current stated opinions.

[Absent Canuck]

Virtanen is a much better skater, considering Benning was pretty clear skating would be a focus for the team going forward it might be a reason to favor him and others over Ritchie.

Skating would be a focus. Toughness would be a focus. Skill would be a focus. Bringing excitement would be a focus.

Ok, the Canucks draft everyone in the first round. That should satisfy every parsed word.

[Absent Canuck]

Yes. You are judging Benning based on actions which may or may not been of his own accord. Moreover, those actions took place in a different organization.

I would rather judge or speculate on his further actions based on his current stated opinions.

It is utterly irrelevant what you want to speculate on or how you want to parse Bennings words to fit your own narrative.

[Nicklas Bo Hunter]

I really think we will be moving up and drafting reinhart.

[baumerman77]

It is utterly irrelevant what you want to speculate on or how you want to parse Bennings words to fit your own narrative.

I really hope your confirmation bias serves you better in life than it does analyzing hockey.