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

2016 NHL Entry Draft [June 24-25th || Buffalo, New York]


Recommended Posts

Nylander - Matthews - Marner

 

eek looks pretty dope too me lol.

 

I'd take Lion-eh if thats the case :D

 

Sedin - Sedin - Hansen

Baertschi - Horvat - Laine

Etem - Sutter - Virtanen

Zalewski - Gaunce - Greiner

 

Edler - Tanev

Hutton - Tryamkin

Sbisa - Larrsen

 

I can really see Horvat Laine being dominent.  I like the idea of matthews but i still feel horvat will be a good #1 center.  Matthews be ez decision but ya lol.  Some believes Laine could be taken over Matthews but its hard for a time to pass on the strong center.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nylander - Matthews - Marner

 

eek looks pretty dope too me lol.

 

I'd take Lion-eh if thats the case :D

 

Sedin - Sedin - Hansen

Baertschi - Horvat - Laine

Etem - Sutter - Virtanen

Zalewski - Gaunce - Greiner

 

Edler - Tanev

Hutton - Tryamkin

Sbisa - Larrsen

 

I can really see Horvat Laine being dominent.  I like the idea of matthews but i still feel horvat will be a good #1 center.  Matthews be ez decision but ya lol.  Some believes Laine could be taken over Matthews but its hard for a time to pass on the strong center.

Matthews - Horvat garauntees a cup if you ask me.  GL shutting down that character combo!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One trend i've noticed over the past few drafts.  The d man selected because of their nhl rdy frame often underperform.  For that reason I would rather avoid Chucyhrun and rather get a more dynamic d man like the kid from the knights and the russian.  ^^  (excluding ekblad a 1st overall)

 

Chickeryn could be good but im worried about the gunbrandson, reinhart, etc etc.  Players taken later in drafts who were a little smaller were: 

 

 

rielly, lindholm, pouliot, trouba, fowler (rielly was pretty big but others are better examples)  

 

pretty sure anyone here would take all but maybe pouliot over gunbranson and reinhart in hindsight.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Rush17 said:

One trend i've noticed over the past few drafts.  The d man selected because of their nhl rdy frame often underperform.  For that reason I would rather avoid Chucyhrun and rather get a more dynamic d man like the kid from the knights and the russian.  ^^  (excluding ekblad a 1st overall)

 

Chickeryn could be good but im worried about the gunbrandson, reinhart, etc etc.  Players taken later in drafts who were a little smaller were: 

 

 

rielly, lindholm, pouliot, trouba, fowler (rielly was pretty big but others are better examples)  

 

pretty sure anyone here would take all but maybe pouliot over gunbranson and reinhart in hindsight.

No offense but have you seen Chychurn play? He is very dynamic and very good. He had a low shooting percentage this year (5.5%), but he did shoot 3.2 shots per game in the regular season and 4.7 shots per game in the playoffs. To get into shooting position and get shots on net at that rate you need to be very good. There is much more to his game than his NHL ready frame.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

52 minutes ago, 87Crosby said:

So I went to HF for the first time in a while. Their gist on the draft: Benning sucks at it and Juolevi shouldn't go top 6. 

I stopped posting on HF about a year and a half ago now. I really don't like it over there, a lot of over exaggeration, pre-mature statements and yea I don't know. Some of the Canuck fans over there are brutal at representing the rest of us.

 

I have to say I agree with Juolevi not being in the top six. I think people aren't giving Chychrun enough credit, he's the clear cut best d in this draft in my opinion. Seeing as the "worst" position the Canucks will draft is #6, this is my rankings of the top 6:

 

1. Matthews
2. Laine

3. Puljujärvi
4. Tkachuk
5. Chychrun
6. Dubois

 

I don't think Tkachuk is far off the Finns, then I think there is a bigger drop off in talent with Chychrun and Dubois. I have Juolevi at #8. I see Chychrun having the potential to be a #1 and Juolevi and Sergachyov #2/#3s

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Anyone else get the feeling if we fall out of the top 3 to say #5, that Benning makes a deal with Edmonton so they can draft a defenseman? I'm beyond excited at just the thought of being able to draft Laine or Puljujärvi. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, DeltaSwede said:

I stopped posting on HF about a year and a half ago now. I really don't like it over there, a lot of over exaggeration, pre-mature statements and yea I don't know. Some of the Canuck fans over there are brutal at representing the rest of us.

The difference between CDC and HF Canucks is that CDC has more homers while HF has more 'sky is falling' types.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, Junkyard Dog said:

Coyotes won't draft higher than 7th unless they win a lotto pick.

 

I wouldn't do that if I were Coyotes. Strome could be Getzlaf good. 7th could land them a defenseman that they definitely require. OEL and Murphy will definitely be great for them for years but they need to that.

 

They are in no need to overpay for Matthews. They have insane depth at C prospect wise. Dvorak 2nd, MacInnis 2nd, Dauphin 2nd, Letunov 2nd and Strome at 3rd overall, all of them 21 or younger. Their defense is ugly prospect wise. Their defense has no one that I would consider having high upside. Lacks depth.

Austin Mathews to the Coyotes for their high 1st round pick, Max Domi AND Christian Dvorak. (Coyotes have the NYR 1st round pick this year as well from the Yandle deal)

 

Use the pick on one of Sergachev/Bean/Juolevi that's a given. So we get our 1 D and we reunite Horvat with Domi which would elevate Horvat to 1 C and we get a legit C prospect in Dvorak. 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, *Buzzsaw* said:

At this point if I have #1 I'd take one of the Finns ahead of Matthews.

 

I like the speed of the Finns... Matthews seems a step behind.

 

But I'm sure Benning will take the BPA.

As much as I love the Finns I cannot agree with this, Auston is clearly the best prospect in the draft 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

50 minutes ago, Toews said:

The difference between CDC and HF Canucks is that CDC has more homers while HF has more 'sky is falling' types.

Aha common we have plenty of sky is falling types :) Just wait for if we dont get a lotto pick! :frantic:THE MOON WILL HAVE CRASHED INTO EARTH

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, DeltaSwede said:

I stopped posting on HF about a year and a half ago now. I really don't like it over there, a lot of over exaggeration, pre-mature statements and yea I don't know. Some of the Canuck fans over there are brutal at representing the rest of us.

 

I have to say I agree with Juolevi not being in the top six. I think people aren't giving Chychrun enough credit, he's the clear cut best d in this draft in my opinion. Seeing as the "worst" position the Canucks will draft is #6, this is my rankings of the top 6:

 

1. Matthews
2. Laine

3. Puljujärvi
4. Tkachuk
5. Chychrun
6. Dubois

 

I don't think Tkachuk is far off the Finns, then I think there is a bigger drop off in talent with Chychrun and Dubois. I have Juolevi at #8. I see Chychrun having the potential to be a #1 and Juolevi and Sergachyov #2/#3s

Pretty Awesome we are going to get one of these prospects indeed! 

 

Agree 1-3 Order.

 

4-6 Pretty wide open.

 

But I honestly will be very happy with any of the 6.

 

Even Nylander could go top 6, but I do not think Benning will have him rated higher than Dubois or Tkachuk for the vision of the team based on their playing styles 

 

No matter what the outcome of the lotto I am going to be very happy going into the draft knowing we will be get either a franchise player 1-3, an elite top line forward or the best d prospect we have ever drafted. (Although a lotto selection would make me even more happy ;) )

 

CDC Rejoice:)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Pears said:

Anyone else get the feeling if we fall out of the top 3 to say #5, that Benning makes a deal with Edmonton so they can draft a defenseman? I'm beyond excited at just the thought of being able to draft Laine or Puljujärvi. 

Nah cannot see this happening. I think Benning cant wait to make his pick and will be very happy with who he picks where ever we end up after the lotto. Can already imagine him sitting beside him with microphones with the biggest smile on his face saying hes going to be a great player for us for a long time.

 

After selecting Boeser over Koenecny and McCann over Scherbak I trust him completely. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, R3aL said:

Pretty Awesome we are going to get one of these prospects indeed! 

 

Agree 1-3 Order.

 

4-6 Pretty wide open.

 

But I honestly will be very happy with any of the 6.

 

Even Nylander could go top 6, but I do not think Benning will have him rated higher than Dubois or Tkachuk for the vision of the team based on their playing styles 

 

No matter what the outcome of the lotto I am going to be very happy going into the draft knowing we will be get either a franchise player 1-3, an elite top line forward or the best d prospect we have ever drafted. (Although a lotto selection would make me even more happy ;) )

 

CDC Rejoice:)

 

Entirely possible! All teams have the players ranked differently. Who knows, Benning might have Chychrun at #2?

I have Nylander at #7 so I wouldn't be surprised if he goes top six. I don't know if Benning would have him higher than those I have ranked 1-6 based on needs as I think Baertschi offers a similar skill set and role to the team already. Saying that, always pick BPA when picking this high no matter what, organizational needs can be adressed later in the draft. You are picking in the top end of the draft for more than lack of depth in one position

 

The entire top 10 this year features a lot of potential, the drop off is more noticable than last year after that point however. It's really going to be all over the place after #10 I think. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, J.R. said:

We're building a new core, not continuing to prop up the old one. I want very little to do with Lucic or Ladd and the anchors of contracts that would be required to sign them. 

I'd love to have them but your right, the cost and term will be way to much. Not worth it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • b3. unpinned this topic

Archived

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

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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