Jim Benning has placed offer for 1st overall; impressed by local prospect Reinhart

[Brocklovich]

Id also say that while Stefan played in the nhl was only slightly better than Findlay. He was a bust of pretty big proportions

Id also say a point in koivus favor that makes that comparison equal is that mk still in nhl while ilya is in russia "retired"

[73 Percent]

You specifically said the first overall is ALWAYS better. You provide examples where that isn't the case.

LOL, Stefan may be "better" than the other guy, but he is still a bust. In that year, we picked the Sedins right after at 2 and 3. We got the better players that year. And yes, DiPietro still counts, whether you like it or not. Hall may be the better player, but that doesn't mean Zibanejad sucks.

And I looked at that site, and it's rather convenient you decided to stop at 1998. Remember Alexander Daigle? He was first overall and a bust. The fact is, there have been busts at first overall. Just because there are a lot that weren't, doesn't mean it can't happen again. Knowing our luck, we pick Reinhart and he becomes a bust.

Ryan Smith, Paul Coffey, and Peter Forsberg were picked at 6th. What do you think about them?

honestly the guy did a fair amount of research to prove his point and you cant admit hes right? in the last 15 years that he listed 1 time was the 6th pick better than the first AND IT WAS A GOALIE. stop being so stubborn and admit hes right instead of nit picking.

[Rush17]

Leon Draisaitl please!

[Standing_Tall#37]

You specifically said the first overall is ALWAYS better. You provide examples where that isn't the case.LOL, Stefan may be "better" than the other guy, but he is still a bust. In that year, we picked the Sedins right after at 2 and 3. We got the better players that year. And yes, DiPietro still counts, whether you like it or not. Hall may be the better player, but that doesn't mean Zibanejad sucks.And I looked at that site, and it's rather convenient you decided to stop at 1998. Remember Alexander Daigle? He was first overall and a bust. The fact is, there have been busts at first overall. Just because there are a lot that weren't, doesn't mean it can't happen again. Knowing our luck, we pick Reinhart and he becomes a bust.Ryan Smith, Paul Coffey, and Peter Forsberg were picked at 6th. What do you think about them?

Coffey was drafted what? 40 years ago??? How is that even relevant.

In 94 Jovanovski was drafted 1st overall, smyth was 6th.

In 91 Lindros was drafted 1st overall, Forsberg was 6th.

I would almost think both of those are even, hell maybe I'd say forsberg was the better player. But the nhl has changed in the last 10-15 years, so I'd say anything before 04 is or irrelevant anyways.

[Neko]

I hope the new GM and new coach changes the way the Canucks operate, because history says Canucks has never really treated local boys well.

[TheRussianRocket.]

Elliotte Friedman retweeted

@GeorgeRichards:

#FlaPanthers Tallon says he doesn't want to drop any farther than eighth in the first round. Let the rumors begin.

...Vancouver baby, come on!

[TheRussianRocket.]

@SNETPacific:

Benning on number one pick - "I've had a couple conversations with Dale (Tallon) and will continue to talk to him this week."

[VegasCanuck]

LOL, Stefan may be "better" than the other guy, but he is still a bust. In that year, we picked the Sedins right after at 2 and 3. We got the better players that year. And yes, DiPietro still counts, whether you like it or not. Hall may be the better player, but that doesn't mean Zibanejad sucks.

1999 isn't a fair year to compare for any team really! We got, by far, the best 2 players in the First round.

Look for yourselves: LINK

[Papayas]

No, 1st overall isn't always better. Good job cherry picking stats. There have been busts and first overall too.

there had been bust with those first overall picks, but the chance that happen is next to non.

Throughout the history of the NHL there was only a handful of first overall picks that were busts. 99% of the time the first/second overall WILL turn into franchise players.

he wasn't cherry picking stats since most of the time the first overall pick IS the best player in first round... or you want to give us some example?

[Metal Face Doom]

For people saying we shouldn't trade up for the 1st overall because we will get a player that is just as good with the 6th...

2011 - 1st overall RNH , 6th overall Mika Zibanejad. RNH is the better player.

2010 - 1st overall Taylor Hall , 6th overall Brett Connolly. Hall is the better player.

2009 - 1st overall John Tavares , 6th overall OEL. Tavares is the better player.

2008 - 1st overall Steven Stamkos , 6th overall Nikita Filatov. Stamkos is the better player.

2007 - 1st overall Patrick Kane , 6th overall Sam Gagner. Kane is the better player.

2006 - 1st overall Erik Johnson , 6th overall Derrick Brassard. Johnson is the better player.

2005 - 1st overall Sidney Crosby , 6th overall Gilbert Brule.

2004 - 1st overall Alex Ovechkin , 6th overall Al Montoya. Ovechkin is the better player.

2003 - 1st overall MA Fleury , 6th overall Milan Michalek. MA Fleury is the better player.

I left out 2012 and 2013 since its too early to decide.

So as you can see the 1st overall pick is always better than the 6th. People have misconceptions of this draft when they hear it is "weak". It is a weak draft because it does not have the type of depth that is normal in any other draft, NOT because the players at the top will not turn into first line/franchise players.

If we can move up for the right price then we should. People think we can get a player at 6th who will be just as good as the player chosen at 1st, that's not true.

btw I'm not saying trade Horvat+6th for the 1st that is just ridiculous, I think our untouchable prospects should be Horvat, Shinkaruk, and Jensen.

Agreed. Facts > Random Canuck fans opinion.

[Guest Dasein]

Let's keep in mind that in 1999, Atlanta was given the #1 pick on the condition that they don't draft a BPA - which was a Sedin.

[TOMapleLaughs]

My feelings on Reinhart is that he'll be good, but not that good. ie. Kinda like the Nuge, a bit better perhaps, but nothing to plan a parade about. Kinda saw this in world juniors, actually. He wasn't a big difference-maker in that tournament. He has a good hockey mind, sure, but the physical skills aren't quite up to speed to consider him NHL elite. Kinda knew this heading into the draft, which is a pretty weak one.

These thoughts were concurred by a father of one of Reinhart's junior teammates, who I just talked to regarding the rumour about the Canucks trading up for Reinhart:

"Reinhart might be the most-overrated player i've ever seen. (Me, eyebrows raised: Wow, really?) Ya, he's good and all, very smart, but I don't see him taking these points to the NHL. Now, he migh be a freakish 'huh?' scorer like the next Mike Bossy or something like that, but the reason Bossy comes up is in that case is because of how rare it is for that to happen.

No I don't want the Canucks to sell the farm for him. It's a weak draft class. If it was next years' class, then yeah go for it. Or at least pick the safer guy, like Ekblad. Reinhart's a bit small."

He thinks and I think the Canucks should just stay pat and draft the BPA this year. Then tank next year like it's been suggested over and over again.

Face it: Nobody expects a cup from this group. Quit killing our teams' future by not planning for more than a month/year ahead. Next years' draft contains some winning-capable franchise talent. Take steps to acquire it. Thanks.

[Papayas]

My feelings on Reinhart is that he'll be good, but not that good. ie. Kinda like the Nuge, a bit better perhaps, but nothing to plan a parade about. Kinda saw this in world juniors, actually. He wasn't a big difference-maker in that tournament. He has a good hockey mind, sure, but the physical skills aren't quite up to speed to consider him NHL elite. Kinda knew this heading into the draft, which is a pretty weak one.

These thoughts were concurred by a father of one of Reinhart's junior teammates, who I just talked to regarding the rumour about the Canucks trading up for Reinhart:

"Reinhart might be the most-overrated player i've ever seen. (Me, eyebrows raised: Wow, really?) Ya, he's good and all, very smart, but I don't see him taking these points to the NHL. Now, he migh be a freakish 'huh?' scorer like the next Mike Bossy or something like that, but the reason Bossy comes up is in that case is because of how rare it is for that to happen.

No I don't want the Canucks to sell the farm for him. It's a weak draft class. If it was next years' class, then yeah go for it. Or at least pick the safer guy, like Ekblad. Reinhart's a bit small."

He thinks and I think the Canucks should just stay pat and draft the BPA this year. Then tank next year like it's been suggested over and over again.

Face it: Nobody expects a cup from this group. Quit killing our teams' future by not planning for more than a month/year ahead. Next years' draft contains some winning-capable franchise talent. Take steps to acquire it. Thanks.

1. Wow you got everything reverse man.. A team SHOULD hold onto their high draft pick in a deep draft because it means you will get some pretty good players even without the first overall.

a weak draft year means the pool isn't as deep, it doesn't mean teh first overall will be weak.

2. just because someone said something over and over again, it doesn't mean they are saying the right thing. Saying "tank next year for draft pick" is something only a brain dead person can do. In case if you can't understand why I will break it down for you:

a) a GM, or litreally any staffs on the team, dont get pay for tanking the team. You think anyone would want to damage their reputation on purpose ? Hell this is vancouver, all it take is a 5 game losing streak and we will see people shouting fire the gm and coach.

b)We are NOT Montreal, Edmonton or Toronto. Most people here only follows the team because they are winning. Tanking for another season would create a big loss in profit that could take a couple years to earn back. No sane owner would agree to tank millions of dollars a year so they can earn back the money in the next few years.

[TOMapleLaughs]

1. Wow you got everything reverse man.. A team SHOULD hold onto their high draft pick in a deep draft because it means you will get some pretty good players even without the first overall.

a weak draft year means the pool isn't as deep, it doesn't mean teh first overall will be weak.

2. just because someone said something over and over again, it doesn't mean they are saying the right thing. Saying "tank next year for draft pick" is something only a brain dead person can do. In case if you can't understand why I will break it down for you:

a - a GM, or litreally any staffs on the team, dont get pay for tanking the team. You think anyone would want to damage their reputation on purpose ? Hell this is vancouver, all it take is a 5 game losing streak and we will see people shouting fire the gm and coach.

b - We are NOT Montreal, Edmonton or Toronto. Most people here only follows the team because they are winning. Tanking for another season would create a big loss in profit that could take a couple years to earn back. No sane owner would agree to tank millions of dollars a year so they can earn back the money in the next few years.

1. All that should concern us in the moment is the lack of a winning-capable franchise player. Next year they're up. This year? Nope.

2.

a - A GM gets paid to win. Using the next draft gets us the player(s) needed to win. What is so complicated with that? Nothing.

b - Nobody expects this team to do anything next season regardless of what we do this summer, but you tell me what your precious sales figures would be like with a legit, winning-capable franchise player onboard?

Again, it's not a tank if you honestly suck. And this team as-is, and esp. without Kesler, fits the bill.

Now is not the time to burn prospects for the 1st overall. That move is pure flash and the player (Reinhart) isn't even worth it. Will it bring us closer to the cup? Doubtful. But the implementation of a proper rebuild would. That's how all the successful teams around us are doing it anyway.

I noticed none of your response actually addressed the assessment of Reinhart. Pretty significant miss imho.

[Guest Dasein]

These thoughts were concurred by a father of one of Reinhart's junior teammates, who I just talked to regarding the rumour about the Canucks trading up for Reinhart:

"Reinhart might be the most-overrated player i've ever seen. (Me, eyebrows raised: Wow, really?) Ya, he's good and all, very smart, but I don't see him taking these points to the NHL. Now, he migh be a freakish 'huh?' scorer like the next Mike Bossy or something like that, but the reason Bossy comes up is in that case is because of how rare it is for that to happen.

No I don't want the Canucks to sell the farm for him. It's a weak draft class. If it was next years' class, then yeah go for it. Or at least pick the safer guy, like Ekblad. Reinhart's a bit small."

Wow jealous parent much?

You look at the Kootenay Ice, and there is no star player outside of Reinhart. He literally does everything.

Unless that father also happens to be a big-name scout who has a good reputation for eyeing talent, this has zero input on how good Reinhart actually is. Heck, this guy probably thinks his son is almost as good as Reinhart. Weak source, if it even is true.

And I don't recall ANYBODY comparing Reinhart to Bossy... Why is this father of a teammate talking about Bossy? Of course Reinhart is gonna look ridiculous when compared to one of the greatest of all time... I'm not sure there has been someone worth of Bossy's name in any of the recent draft class outside of Ovechkin and Stamkos. Even those two are a reach.

[Metal Face Doom]

Wow jealous parent much?

You look at the Kootenay Ice, and there is no star player outside of Reinhart. He literally does everything.

Unless that father also happens to be a big-name scout who has a good reputation for eyeing talent, this has zero input on how good Reinhart actually is. Heck, this guy probably thinks his son is almost as good as Reinhart. Weak source, if it even is true.

And I don't recall ANYBODY comparing Reinhart to Bossy... Why is this father of a teammate talking about Bossy? Of course Reinhart is gonna look ridiculous when compared to one of the greatest of all time... I'm not sure there has been someone worth of Bossy's name in any of the recent draft class outside of Ovechkin and Stamkos. Even those two are a reach.

Don't bother. He IS the elite hockey scout.........

Again, 6th overall plus a prospect and a roster player is not over payment for the 1st overall pick. Nor is it mortgaging our future.

[Gstank29]

Wow jealous parent much?

You look at the Kootenay Ice, and there is no star player outside of Reinhart. He literally does everything.

Unless that father also happens to be a big-name scout who has a good reputation for eyeing talent, this has zero input on how good Reinhart actually is. Heck, this guy probably thinks his son is almost as good as Reinhart. Weak source, if it even is true.

And I don't recall ANYBODY comparing Reinhart to Bossy... Why is this father of a teammate talking about Bossy? Of course Reinhart is gonna look ridiculous when compared to one of the greatest of all time... I'm not sure there has been someone worth of Bossy's name in any of the recent draft class outside of Ovechkin and Stamkos. Even those two are a reach.

TOMapleLaughs was that parent of a teammate a fourth liner?

[TOMapleLaughs]

Wow jealous parent much?

You look at the Kootenay Ice, and there is no star player outside of Reinhart. He literally does everything.

Unless that father also happens to be a big-name scout who has a good reputation for eyeing talent, this has zero input on how good Reinhart actually is. Heck, this guy probably thinks his son is almost as good as Reinhart. Weak source, if it even is true.

And I don't recall ANYBODY comparing Reinhart to Bossy... Why is this father of a teammate talking about Bossy? Of course Reinhart is gonna look ridiculous when compared to one of the greatest of all time... I'm not sure there has been someone worth of Bossy's name in any of the recent draft class outside of Ovechkin and Stamkos. Even those two are a reach.

While the crust of the argument is different, the assessment is similar to what i've read from many scouts: Good, but not franchise good. And probably not worth selling the farm for.

ps. He was talking about Bossy in terms of transferability. If you knew anything about Bossy's history you'd know that he wasn't even supposed to make it in the NHL according to those who scouted him. He proved them wrong in that rare case and dominated his draft class.

TOMapleLaughs was that parent of a teammate a fourth liner?

A defenseman. How that's relevant I don't know. His son isn't the issue, it's his assessment on Reinhart. He's watched all sorts of players and this assessment on Reinhart came as a surprise to me, but it goes along with some amateur scouting assessments on his expected ceiling as well as what i've seen off and on. He'll be good, but not worth trading the farm for. He also admitted that he could very well transfer his talents to the NHL (like Bossy) and in that case time will tell. Either way, it's a roll of the dice.

There are smarter ways to go about a rebuild imho.

[TOMapleLaughs]

Don't bother. He IS the elite hockey scout.........

Again, 6th overall plus a prospect and a roster player is not over payment for the 1st overall pick. Nor is it mortgaging our future.

Are you psychic? How do you know how those players will perform? In this draft the 6th pick could pan out as well as the 1st.

Oh crap, it's you. Never mind.

[Guest Dasein]

While the crust of the argument is different, the assessment is similar to what i've read from many scouts: Good, but not franchise good. And probably not worth selling the farm for.

ps. He was talking about Bossy in terms of transferability. If you knew anything about Bossy's history you'd know that he wasn't even supposed to make it in the NHL according to those who scouted him. He proved them wrong in that rare case and dominated his draft class.

A defenseman. How that's relevant I don't know. His son isn't the issue, it's his assessment on Reinhart. He's watched all sorts of players and this assessment on Reinhart came as a surprise to me, but it goes along with some amateur scouting assessments on his expected ceiling as well as what i've seen off and on. He'll be good, but not worth trading the farm for. He also admitted that he could very well transfer his talents to the NHL (like Bossy) and in that case time will tell. Either way, it's a roll of the dice.

There are smarter ways to go about a rebuild imho.

I'm just saying a teammate's parent's opinion on Reinhart has absolutely no value unless they happen to be a reliable pro scout also. I think the whole point of bringing this parent up is to establish that Reinhart isn't "franchise good," as you say.

Then give me quotes from pro scouts that say Reinhart isn't "franchise good," not a teammate's parent.