Jump to content
The Official Site of the Vancouver Canucks
Canucks Community

What asset(s) would you give up to move up in the draft? (Discussion)


J.I.A.H.N

Recommended Posts

I wonder what the benefit is to moving up

Ok, you are 19th and you know the first 11 will be taken in the 11 picks...................but now you have from say 12 to 20, would through Central Scouting have rankings are pretty even.................you like # 12, 14 and 15 in that order, but you just couldn't care......you will then take BPA without moving up..........

I say you try moving up to get that #12 which gives you a chance to really choose who you want.

Question is will #12, 14 or 15 take your 19thOA plus a Cassels or a Subban...or a Higgins

Or do you have to move up a step in asset and offer McCann or Demko or Shinaruk or Gaunce

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Great concept! Hunter

Let's see at the Deadline

Hamhuis........................12 to 20 OA + Prospect

Tanev.............................12 to 20 OA + Prospect

Edler...............................12 to 20 OA + Prospect

*Kassian..........................18 to 25 OA

Vrbata.............................26th to 30 OA

Miller...............................22th to 30, 46 to 60 OA

*Higgins............................46 to 60 OA + B prospect

Burrows + retain 1 Mil......46 to 60 OA + B prospect

Lack.................................26 to 50 OA

Dorsett.............................46 to 60 OA

*Richardson.......................46 to 60 OA

Matthais............................46 to 60 OA

Hansen.............................42 to 60 OA

*Markstrom.........................30 to 50 OA

After reviewing the past 15 years of 2nd round picks, I must say, the only ones I would trade are those that are bold high-lited, as 2nd Round Picks are just not that dependable. the rest I would keep or resign. The others I did just to place my value on those players for this years draft......not next years, this years!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Great concept! Hunter

Let's see at the Deadline

Hamhuis........................12 to 20 OA + Prospect

Tanev.............................12 to 20 OA + Prospect

Edler...............................12 to 20 OA + Prospect

*Kassian..........................18 to 25 OA

Vrbata.............................26th to 30 OA

Miller...............................22th to 30, 46 to 60 OA

*Higgins............................46 to 60 OA + B prospect

Burrows + retain 1 Mil......46 to 60 OA + B prospect

Lack.................................26 to 50 OA

Dorsett.............................46 to 60 OA

*Richardson.......................46 to 60 OA

Matthais............................46 to 60 OA

Hansen.............................42 to 60 OA

*Markstrom.........................30 to 50 OA

Thanks!

You're pretty spot on with Value, i just think Kassian's is a little high and Vrbata's value is too low. If Vrbata keeps producing he could definitely fetch a 1st from a seventh or eighth seed team (18th-22nd OA). I just hope some team will pay premium for one of our depth players (like the Gaustad trade a few years back).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Great concept! Hunter

Let's see at the Deadline

Hamhuis........................12 to 20 OA + Prospect

Tanev.............................12 to 20 OA + Prospect

Edler...............................12 to 20 OA + Prospect

*Kassian..........................18 to 25 OA

Vrbata.............................26th to 30 OA

Miller...............................22th to 30, 46 to 60 OA

*Higgins............................46 to 60 OA + B prospect

Burrows + retain 1 Mil......46 to 60 OA + B prospect

Lack.................................26 to 50 OA

Dorsett.............................46 to 60 OA

*Richardson.......................46 to 60 OA

Matthais............................46 to 60 OA

Hansen.............................42 to 60 OA

*Markstrom.........................30 to 50 OA

After reviewing the past 15 years of 2nd round picks, I must say, the only ones I would trade are those that are bold high-lited, as 2nd Round Picks are just not that dependable. the rest I would keep or resign. The others I did just to place my value on those players for this years draft......not next years, this years!

This is pretty wishful thinking on your part. Not a chance Markstrom gets the 30th pick, nor would Lack land a 1st rounder in this draft, pretty much every thing you wrote is highly unlikely.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks!

You're pretty spot on with Value, i just think Kassian's is a little high and Vrbata's value is too low. If Vrbata keeps producing he could definitely fetch a 1st from a seventh or eighth seed team (18th-22nd OA). I just hope some team will pay premium for one of our depth players (like the Gaustad trade a few years back).

The value is way off.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This isn't a CDC proposal section draft of "throw extra players at a wall and see if anything sticks". Make no mistake, the cost of moving up in the 1st round of the 2015 draft will be painful. Trying to get into the Top 7 or so will be excruciating in it's cost.

Throwing in expendable extra pieces along with a bottom 10 pick in an effort to move into the top ten will get the Canucks nowhere fast.

i.e. NONE

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hey Guys, we've been doing pretty good on what we have right now, and the Canucks have fooled me, but they are 10th right now, with 11 teams that could catch them.

So in fairness, I will say that is very possible that 5 of the teams could catch them........so for a moment, just humor me and concede that they could end up around 16th overall in the final standings.......the standings are jumping around all over the place so it is possible.

Anyways, are you saying that the Canucks could not move one of Kassian, Lack, Higgins, McCann, Jensen, Shinkaruk, or Cassels and move up 5 or 6 spots? Or move up more with 2 separate moves? Burke did some wheeling and dealing and arrived at the 1999 draft with just one pick and moved pieces to pick up another high first and got into position to draft the Sedins

If Benning finds that the player at the 8th position he wants is still available, he could move his pick up.....it has been done before with not too much cost.....if he sees that OFC or PMD, he could move any 2 of those players

Example: Trade 1 from 16th to 12 th, and then trade 2 from 12 to 8 th.........you don't know who other GM's covet......it is possible

Look at Gaunce, Shinaruk and McCann.......they all drop in 3 consecutive drafts...it will happen this year, again

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hey Guys, we've been doing pretty good on what we have right now, and the Canucks have fooled me, but they are 10th right now, with 11 teams that could catch them.

So in fairness, I will say that is very possible that 5 of the teams could catch them........so for a moment, just humor me and concede that they could end up around 16th overall in the final standings.......the standings are jumping around all over the place so it is possible.

Anyways, are you saying that the Canucks could not move one of Kassian, Lack, Higgins, McCann, Jensen, Shinkaruk, or Cassels and move up 5 or 6 spots? Or move up more with 2 separate moves? Burke did some wheeling and dealing and arrived at the 1999 draft with just one pick and moved pieces to pick up another high first and got into position to draft the Sedins

If Benning finds that the player at the 8th position he wants is still available, he could move his pick up.....it has been done before with not too much cost.....if he sees that OFC or PMD, he could move any 2 of those players

Example: Trade 1 from 16th to 12 th, and then trade 2 from 12 to 8 th.........you don't know who other GM's covet......it is possible

Look at Gaunce, Shinaruk and McCann.......they all drop in 3 consecutive drafts...it will happen this year, again

What if Benning moves down to get an extra 2nd rounder?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ice

"IF" .....Basically, I am all for it "If" we are getting the player in the first we wanted, but it is a fair question. People always talk about what can be picked out of the second round.......but it is always a crap shoot.

Point is the further you get away from the 1st Overall.........the higher the chance of failure.......for the most part, the NHL is divided into 2 types of players..........first rounders and lucky picks..........with good scouting you can increase your chances, compared to those that do not have strong scouting systems, but even that said, after the first round it is luck.

Yes, you can say Detroit picked Datsyuk in a later round, but really the truth is that 30 teams passed on him for a lot of rounds, that is luck.........Really what Detroit did is run out of option and he was next on their list...........but they chose a lot of players before they choose him.

So, I a not a advocate of moving down as a rule.....maybe a couple of spots....but would much rather move up 2 or 3 spots, X2 if possible.....even the theory of picking Dman in later rounds is flawed.......most good Dman come out of the first round, and early second(first 10 picks),,,,,,,,,,,,after that if is luck!......I am not saying Teams don't find Gems in later rounds, but it is fortunate to find them.

I am starting to get the fact that Benning chose to trade for Vey rather than use the pick............Vey was already partially developed and more of a sure thing..............basically there was a higher chance of Vey making the NHL than a late second round pick would have.....what is that saying....a bird in the hand is worth 2 in the bush

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pretty much anyone on our roster except for Horvat

add virtanen and after yesterdays game demko to that list and i am ok with anyone else going. i am really liking the possibility of landing barzal.

he may not be mcdavid but very very possible Hank replacement. once Hank retires we are absolutely Boned if we dont land a legit first line centre...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hey Guys, we've been doing pretty good on what we have right now, and the Canucks have fooled me, but they are 10th right now, with 11 teams that could catch them.

So in fairness, I will say that is very possible that 5 of the teams could catch them........so for a moment, just humor me and concede that they could end up around 16th overall in the final standings.......the standings are jumping around all over the place so it is possible.

Anyways, are you saying that the Canucks could not move one of Kassian, Lack, Higgins, McCann, Jensen, Shinkaruk, or Cassels and move up 5 or 6 spots? Or move up more with 2 separate moves? Burke did some wheeling and dealing and arrived at the 1999 draft with just one pick and moved pieces to pick up another high first and got into position to draft the Sedins

If Benning finds that the player at the 8th position he wants is still available, he could move his pick up.....it has been done before with not too much cost.....if he sees that OFC or PMD, he could move any 2 of those players

Example: Trade 1 from 16th to 12 th, and then trade 2 from 12 to 8 th.........you don't know who other GM's covet......it is possible

Look at Gaunce, Shinaruk and McCann.......they all drop in 3 consecutive drafts...it will happen this year, again

Unless the moves allow for the Canucks to pick up a "generational player", what's the point of moving a known quality/quantity for an unknown quality/quantity prospect? Change for sake of change? Discussion for the sake of discussion?

The Canucks are deep with prospects that have the capability of being forwards in the 4-12 spots on the depth chart. What's lacking are top-flight forward prospects that have the potential to replace the Sedins in the very near future along with an elite d-prospect (though McNally and Hutton may be making a case for themselves).

I'm all for JB being a seller at the deadline if we are a borderline playoff team. IMO, there are no "untouchables" though the Sedins with their NMC will be near impossible to move, and all with an NTC (full or modified) will be challenging to move.

I'm also of the opinion that the Canucks need to get younger, faster and bigger (that's an obvious statement) and the easiest way to do this is by moving Vrbata, Burrows and Higgins, but who are you going to replace these guys with? A draft pick in 2015 in the 8 to 15 spot isn't going to make an impact or be good enough to replace any of the vets anytime soon.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

add virtanen and after yesterdays game demko to that list and i am ok with anyone else going. i am really liking the possibility of landing barzal.

he may not be mcdavid but very very possible Hank replacement. once Hank retires we are absolutely Boned if we dont land a legit first line centre...

Is Barzal a legit 1st line center in this division? can he match up against the big centers? things you have to look at. Hank has a hard time with the Cali teams and his iq is off the charts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Unless the moves allow for the Canucks to pick up a "generational player", what's the point of moving a known quality/quantity for an unknown quality/quantity prospect? Change for sake of change? Discussion for the sake of discussion?

The Canucks are deep with prospects that have the capability of being forwards in the 4-12 spots on the depth chart. What's lacking are top-flight forward prospects that have the potential to replace the Sedins in the very near future along with an elite d-prospect (though McNally and Hutton may be making a case for themselves).

I'm all for JB being a seller at the deadline if we are a borderline playoff team. IMO, there are no "untouchables" though the Sedins with their NMC will be near impossible to move, and all with an NTC (full or modified) will be challenging to move.

I'm also of the opinion that the Canucks need to get younger, faster and bigger (that's an obvious statement) and the easiest way to do this is by moving Vrbata, Burrows and Higgins, but who are you going to replace these guys with? A draft pick in 2015 in the 8 to 15 spot isn't going to make an impact or be good enough to replace any of the vets anytime soon.

The point of moving up is to increase our chances of drafting that 1C or Elite D. Like you said, the canucks are deep with players that can fill our bottom 9, and by moving up nucks have a better shot at securing the future. While outside of the top 2 might not be generational, they still have 1C, Top2D potential.

I agree with you that some of the contracts will be difficult to move, but the Canucks should only move a couple players. Rather them not sell the team and become the Oilers 2.0

The solution is through Free Agency. Keep the team respectable while allowing Canuck prospects to develop, not throw the to the wolves a la Oilers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is Barzal a legit 1st line center in this division? can he match up against the big centers? things you have to look at. Hank has a hard time with the Cali teams and his iq is off the charts.

Never thought too much of it, but i believe the Cali teams will start to dismantle, or regress by the time these prospects step in. Its definately a good thing to think about, but a lot can change in a year or two.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...