Mr.Proposal Posted May 16, 2014 Share Posted May 16, 2014 I can see the Canucks taking Fluery unless someone from the top 5 falls this is what CDC people are saying about the top 3 player they want chosen with the 6th overall unless someone from top 5 falls (Not everyone but quite a few) Virtanen - Best Shot,Skatings Great but lacks IQ. One dimensional Ritchie - Just anyone big player demoinating junior? Injury problems weight issues Ehlers - Too small, High Risk High Reward,could bust out of all of them Fluery seems to honestly be the safest pick. that do you guys/girls think? we lack Defenseman Prospects and I think Fluerys potential is top 4 d-man that can play a solid 2 way game Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Time Lord Posted May 16, 2014 Share Posted May 16, 2014 Fleury will be a really good D-man, but we need offense much more than defense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canucks155 Posted May 16, 2014 Share Posted May 16, 2014 FleuryNylanderRitchieEhlersI'd be fine w/ any of those 4 tbh Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Madness Posted May 16, 2014 Share Posted May 16, 2014 Nope. Don't see us taking him at 6. Too high. Plus we could use a solid offensive prospect with this pick. I'd rather draft someone like Nylander or Ehlers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
c00kies Posted May 16, 2014 Share Posted May 16, 2014 We should NOT take him at 6th. If we want him we should trade down and pick up another 2nd rounder or/and 3rd rounder in the process. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Go Faulk Yourself Posted May 16, 2014 Share Posted May 16, 2014 If we draft a defenseman, we don't need someone like Fleury. We'd need someone like Ekblad with Top-pairing potential, which quite honestly, isn't going to happen. I'd rather draft Virtanen over Fleury, and I don't want us anywhere near Virtanen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mathew Barzal Posted May 16, 2014 Share Posted May 16, 2014 The strong points of Fleury's game are things we already have in excess on this squad. Hamhuis, Garrison, Tanev and sometimes Bieksa are all excellent shutdown blueliners. There is really no reason to draft the kid unless we plan to completely dismantle this squad and I would be astonished if he's in our organizations top 10-12 draft list. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Absent Canuck Posted May 16, 2014 Share Posted May 16, 2014 I can see the Canucks taking Fluery unless someone from the top 5 falls this is what CDC people are saying about the top 3 player they want chosen with the 6th overall unless someone from top 5 falls (Not everyone but quite a few) Virtanen - Best Shot,Skatings Great but lacks IQ. One dimensional Ritchie - Just anyone big player demoinating junior? Injury problems weight issues Ehlers - Too small, High Risk High Reward,could bust out of all of them Fluery seems to honestly be the safest pick. that do you guys/girls think? we lack Defenseman Prospects and I think Fluerys potential is top 4 d-man that can play a solid 2 way game Love your take on the prospects. Virtanen - so stupid he burns Kraft dinner. Ritchie- fat tub of lard walks around with a bucket of KFC in one hand and a band aid in the other. Ehlers - smaller than an eunuch , the only hitting this clown does is on his teammates after the game Seems legit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Absent Canuck Posted May 16, 2014 Share Posted May 16, 2014 If we draft a defenseman, we don't need someone like Fleury. We'd need someone like Ekblad with Top-pairing potential, which quite honestly, isn't going to happen. I'd rather draft Virtanen over Fleury, and I don't want us anywhere near Virtanen. I wouldnt take Fleury until 15 . There are 10 other guys I take at #6 first. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rounoush Posted May 16, 2014 Share Posted May 16, 2014 Absolutely not. You don't skip out on that great offensive potential that early in this draft. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CanuckFanForever1123 Posted May 16, 2014 Share Posted May 16, 2014 No thanks. Hamhuis Bieksa Tanev Edler Garrison Stanton Corrado Weber Alberts Subban Cederholm We may not have that "elite" prospect, but we are deep at the NHL level, and have enough solid prospects to get by.for several years. While a top defensive prospect would be nice to get, offense is far more important right now. Were finally building a strong young core of offensive depth for the future, and with the Sedins aging rapidly, uncertainty long term about Kesler and Burrows, offense is still a need. I say try to find a couple more potential gems later in the draft. We do a great job at drafting defense.\ Corrado - 5th round Cederholm - 5th round Subban - 4th round Tanev - Undrafted Stanton - Undrafted While Tanev is the only one truly 100% proven so far, the others seem to have a lot of potential. Only way I draft defense in round 1 is if Ekblad somehow falls. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-AJ- Posted May 16, 2014 Share Posted May 16, 2014 Well there's still Nylander. But I'm cool with Virtanen. Sorta reminds me of a Dustin Brown type of player. Hopefully less diving and more consistent production. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
timberz21 Posted May 16, 2014 Share Posted May 16, 2014 Fleury will be a really good D-man, but we need offense much more than defense. It is not like this year's pick will make a difference for at least 2-3 years. In 2-3 years, Hamhuis, Bieksa, will be close to 35, Edler and Garrison will be passed 30. Corrado and Tanev should be good top 4, but none of them is top 2 material. And we don't have much else in the pool (except long shot Subban, who's either a homerun or bust). Not saying we should pick Fleury with the 6th overall, but it shouldn't be based on our actual scoring need (This is what Shinkaruk, Horvat, Gaunce and Jensen are for) With that said if we identify Fleury as our pick, I think we should traded down a few spots and maybe turn our 2nd pick into a late first or our 3rd into another mid-early 2nd pick in the process. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wiznac Posted May 16, 2014 Share Posted May 16, 2014 If we take a D man it should be because we traded up for Ekblad. Otherwise i hope we take Virtanen or any of the top 5 picks that some how might fall out............................ Or trade our pick with a prospect and a player to Buffalo for Hodgson back!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JeremyCuddles Posted May 16, 2014 Share Posted May 16, 2014 Love your take on the prospects. Virtanen - so stupid he burns Kraft dinner. Ritchie- fat tub of lard walks around with a bucket of KFC in one hand and a band aid in the other. Ehlers - smaller than an eunuch , the only hitting this clown does is on his teammates after the game Seems legit. Best way to make your favourite prospect sound good, crap on everyone else. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blömqvist Posted May 16, 2014 Share Posted May 16, 2014 The strong points of Fleury's game are things we already have in excess on this squad. Hamhuis, Garrison, Tanev and sometimes Bieksa are all excellent shutdown blueliners. There is really no reason to draft the kid unless we plan to completely dismantle this squad and I would be astonished if he's in our organizations top 10-12 draft list. He is similar to Hamhuis in that he is an excellent skater and can play the top shutdown role. In addition to that, he can play physical if he needs to. Honestly, I think Fleury has the potential to be a top pairing defenseman if he can refine his offensive game. His offensive game has been night and day from his first season in the WHL to his second season (this past one). He can now carry the puck up the ice with confidence and speed and can quarterback a power play. He doesn't have a bomb of a shot but has a sneaky wrister that is just as effective. If he can continue to work on his offensive game and become more creative in the offensive zone then he can become one of the top defenseman in the league. IMO if he reaches his full potential I can see him as a perennial 40-50 point defenseman who can both quarterback the power play and shutdown the league's best. That's IF he can refine his offensive game. Keep in mind, he's only 17 and will spend a few more years in junior and the minors to develop his game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kevo882 Posted May 17, 2014 Share Posted May 17, 2014 I can see the Canucks taking Fluery unless someone from the top 5 falls this is what CDC people are saying about the top 3 player they want chosen with the 6th overall unless someone from top 5 falls (Not everyone but quite a few) Virtanen - Best Shot,Skatings Great but lacks IQ. One dimensional Ritchie - Just anyone big player demoinating junior? Injury problems weight issues Ehlers - Too small, High Risk High Reward,could bust out of all of them Fluery seems to honestly be the safest pick. that do you guys/girls think? we lack Defenseman Prospects and I think Fluerys potential is top 4 d-man that can play a solid 2 way game Virtanen? One dimensional? Have you watched highlights of him? Anybody that gets in his way gets rocked. Anyways, yes. I agree with you that we need elite prospect dmen and Fleury is the next best dman after Ekblad (who we probably won't get unless we offer a huge package to Florida). He looks great and definitely top 4 potential. If not Fleury, I'd like Dal Colle if he falls out of the top 5. If not, Virtanen or Ehlers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kevo882 Posted May 17, 2014 Share Posted May 17, 2014 No thanks. Hamhuis Bieksa Tanev Edler Garrison Stanton Corrado Weber Alberts Subban Cederholm We may not have that "elite" prospect, but we are deep at the NHL level, and have enough solid prospects to get by.for several years. While a top defensive prospect would be nice to get, offense is far more important right now. Were finally building a strong young core of offensive depth for the future, and with the Sedins aging rapidly, uncertainty long term about Kesler and Burrows, offense is still a need. I say try to find a couple more potential gems later in the draft. We do a great job at drafting defense.\ Corrado - 5th round Cederholm - 5th round Subban - 4th round Tanev - Undrafted Stanton - Undrafted While Tanev is the only one truly 100% proven so far, the others seem to have a lot of potential. Only way I draft defense in round 1 is if Ekblad somehow falls. You need an elite defenceman in the NHL to win. Look at the last 4 or 5 Stanley Cup winners. Alberts is gone and who said Subban or Cederholm are guaranteed to work out? You missed Hutton who could be good along with a couple other interesting guys coming up who may turn into gems but you only get the chance to draft a guy like Fleury once in a blue moon. I say do it, especially considering we have a number of talented forwards coming up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UFCanuck Posted May 17, 2014 Share Posted May 17, 2014 Fleury or Ritchie would be the picks for me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kevo882 Posted May 17, 2014 Share Posted May 17, 2014 It is not like this year's pick will make a difference for at least 2-3 years. In 2-3 years, Hamhuis, Bieksa, will be close to 35, Edler and Garrison will be passed 30. Corrado and Tanev should be good top 4, but none of them is top 2 material. And we don't have much else in the pool (except long shot Subban, who's either a homerun or bust). Not saying we should pick Fleury with the 6th overall, but it shouldn't be based on our actual scoring need (This is what Shinkaruk, Horvat, Gaunce and Jensen are for) With that said if we identify Fleury as our pick, I think we should traded down a few spots and maybe turn our 2nd pick into a late first or our 3rd into another mid-early 2nd pick in the process. Exactly! People on here are acting like our current top 4 will be around forever (that, or Tanev is God)! Like you said, we already have scorers coming up. We don't have much on the d front though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.