DeNiro Posted June 15, 2016 Share Posted June 15, 2016 Just now, Cowichan Canuck said: Yes, I agree, risk with every pick. We can't afford that risk DeNiro. Well then you might as well not make any move because any move comes with risk. Even trading for a so called "proven" young player comes with risk because most young players haven't proven enough yet to call them a bonafide anything. People are starting to propose trading the pick for Drouin and Domi as if these guys are proven first line talent after one season. A trade like that doesn't eliminate the risk. If anything it just changes the risk from hoping that these players can keep developing, while hoping the pick we gave up doesn't become a top player. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cowichan Canuck Posted June 15, 2016 Share Posted June 15, 2016 6 minutes ago, DeNiro said: Well then you might as well not make any move because any move comes with risk. Even trading for a so called "proven" young player comes with risk because most young players haven't proven enough yet to call them a bonafide anything. People are starting to propose trading the pick for Drouin and Domi as if these guys are proven first line talent after one season. A trade like that doesn't eliminate the risk. If anything it just changes the risk from hoping that these players can keep developing, while hoping the pick we gave up doesn't become a top player. So all risks are the same? Drouin is as much a risk as Dubois, don't think so. Players that have had a 53 point rookie NHL season, and one 14 playoff points in 17 playoff games are so much less risky than Dubois transitioning to a #1C...its not even close. Dubois has played about 30 games at center...that is nothing. Chances are he becomes a LW, that's just reality. Having all the tools, doesn't make you a carpenter. So we take Dubois, he doesn't come our #1C...now where is this #1C and #1D coming from because without those two players we are screwed by the teams that have them. If you think we are a lottery team again next year, I think you are wrong. We need this asset to be a homerun, even if we need to spend more than the #5 to get it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeNiro Posted June 15, 2016 Share Posted June 15, 2016 1 minute ago, Cowichan Canuck said: So all risks are the same? Drouin is as much a risk as Dubois, don't think so. Players that have had a 53 point rookie NHL season, and one 14 playoff points in 17 playoff games are so much less risky than Dubois transitioning to a #1C...its not even close. Dubois has played about 30 games at center...that is nothing. Chances are he becomes a LW, that's just reality. Having all the tools, doesn't make you a carpenter. So we take Dubois, he doesn't come our #1C...now where is this #1C and #1D coming from because without those two players we are screwed by the teams that have them. And Domi and Drouin aren't #1 centers either so how is that solving the problem of lacking those pieces? It doesn't. The only real way to get these pieces is through good drafting, not trading away a top pick. If they have faith in their coaches and farm system, they've got to believe that they can develop Dubois into a number 1 center. If you don't have that belief, then good luck every building a championship team. It won't happen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cowichan Canuck Posted June 15, 2016 Share Posted June 15, 2016 Just now, DeNiro said: And Domi and Drouin aren't #1 centers either so how is that solving the problem of lacking those pieces? It doesn't. The only real way to get these pieces is through good drafting, not trading away a top pick. If they have faith in their coaches and farm system, they've got to believe that they can develop Dubois into a number 1 center. If you don't have that belief, then good luck every building a championship team. It won't happen. No they are not #1C, and they wouldn't be my first choice as a trade. Domi, Drouin is a safer choice than either of Tkachuk/Dubois. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cowichan Canuck Posted June 15, 2016 Share Posted June 15, 2016 3 minutes ago, DeNiro said: And Domi and Drouin aren't #1 centers either so how is that solving the problem of lacking those pieces? It doesn't. The only real way to get these pieces is through good drafting, not trading away a top pick. If they have faith in their coaches and farm system, they've got to believe that they can develop Dubois into a number 1 center. If you don't have that belief, then good luck every building a championship team. It won't happen. I posted this in a topic I started, it explains my view more clearly. You don't have to agree, and I could very well be an idiot. Here it is. Problem with this is that almost everyone thinks that #1D isn't in this draft, and if it happens to be, then which one is it? I'm sure one of the many D men do become a #1, but nobody is sure of who that is. 2017 is known to be a weak draft and I have no idea who would be considered a potential #1D man from the 2017 class. We need three things, #1D, #1C, and #1LW. With this pick #5, it is imperative to our future that we address one of these needs via just drafting Tkachuk/Dubois (slight risk for either to become #1LW, high risk Dubois does not become a #1C), trading for an established #1D,C, or LW with a probable overpayment (very low risk as already established) or drafting a dman (extremely high risk this player does not become a #1D) Because this is our best draft pick since the Sedins, my belief is you draft either Tkachuk/Dubois and live with the slight risk they become 2nd liners, or you trade that #5 pick for a proven/highly projected #1C, LW, D. Here is why: Drafting a dman or trading down to get one of them could prove to be a massive error that does not address our three needs, this is by far the highest risk in my opinion. The ONLY thing our defense needs is the highly offensive pp QB, that is not Chychrun, i don't think it is Juolevi, and it could be Sergachev/Fabbro/Bean but it just so happens Sergachev/Fabbro/Bean are also the most likely to not fulfill their potential. I'm not willing to take that risk. We don't need another Hutton, Edler or Gudbranson, we need a bonafide #1 The second highest risk is trying to draft that #1C. Dubois is the lowest risk for this because if he doesn't translate at C then fine, he's a LW. Dubois still is a slight risk to not be a #1LW, which I think he would eventually be. Brown is a massive risk/reward, his deficiences are all heart and mind in my opinion. He could be a huge bust, 3rd line center floor, #1C ceiling. Jost/Keller both have major ?'s. The chance of getting that #1c in my opinion through this draft is slightly higher than getting the #1D. The lowest risk is trading for an established young player, rookie last year or rookie this upcoming year further in their developement than we can draft @ #5. This player will cost more (ie Domi now, costs more than the #12 he was drafted at because of proven devopement, lower risk) The reason why I don't think we can afford to F around with this #5 asset and take a unnecessary risk is for 3 reasons: 1. Ownership/management will not allow us to be as bad as we were again this past year. We probably won't get an asset like #5 again for some time. 2. Jake Virtanen probably won't end up being a #1RW. I really like Jake. It's not his fault he was drafted #6, but even if we didn't have Boeser I still don't think Jake's ceiling is anything more than a #2 RW. If balancing lines is important then sure Jake can play #1RW, but I think everyone knows what I'm getting at for a realistic expectation of him. He offers things Nylander/Ehlers don't and vice versa. Either way, I think our RW top 2 is perfect, but in hindsight, that #6 could have gained us some much needed Skill, or Hayden Fleury. 3. We need top end talent, we have everything else. This is why we should make a trade, because the consequences of not getting a sure thing, could really be the diff in winning a stanley cup and losing one. Drafting a dman outside of the lottery (even in the lottery) is a massive crapshoot. I bet Chicago never expected Keith to be Keith at #54. You take Keith away from Chicago and bye bye cups. It's a fluke Keith translated. We can't base our chances on luck. My order: 1Trade #5 and more for young #1D man (hardest, most expensive) Provorov, Bowey, Jones, Hanifin, Theodore, Sanheim, etc 2Trade #5 and more for young #1C (very hard, expensive) Reinhart, Galchenyuk, Mackinnon 3Trade #5 for a #1LW basically straight across or slight add depending (Domi, Drouin) 4Draft Tkachuk/Dubois 5Trade down for a D or C pick. 6.Trade down and take Nylander (i bet for marketing Toronto would offer a nice package to have the Nylander brothers like we have the Sedin twins) he plays both wings and would probably address our future #1 LW. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeNiro Posted June 15, 2016 Share Posted June 15, 2016 3 minutes ago, Cowichan Canuck said: No they are not #1C, and they wouldn't be my first choice as a trade. Domi, Drouin is a safer choice than either of Tkachuk/Dubois. They're also safer than Laine and Puljujarvi, does that mean Winnipeg or Columbus trade those picks for Drouin or Domi? Probably not. You don't give up top picks because of fear they won't develop properly. You can't build a championship team that way. Nobodies giving up a top young center or D for a 5th pick anyways if they come with as much risk as you say. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cowichan Canuck Posted June 15, 2016 Share Posted June 15, 2016 1 minute ago, DeNiro said: They're also safer than Laine and Puljujarvi, does that mean Winnipeg or Columbus trade those picks for Drouin or Domi? Probably not. You don't give up top picks because of fear they won't develop properly. You can't build a championship team that way. There is no rules on how you get your #1C and #1D, but you need them, and we don't have them, and Dubois has a big chance to not be that #1C. If you can spend just a few minutes and read the above. Thanks Deniro, I respect your opinion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeNiro Posted June 15, 2016 Share Posted June 15, 2016 Just now, Cowichan Canuck said: There is no rules on how you get your #1C and #1D, but you need them, and we don't have them, and Dubois has a big chance to not be that #1C. But why would a team give up a proven young number 1 center or D for a player that has a high risk of becoming a 2nd line player according to you? They wouldn't, it doesn't make sense for them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cowichan Canuck Posted June 15, 2016 Share Posted June 15, 2016 4 minutes ago, DeNiro said: But why would a team give up a proven young number 1 center or D for a player that has a high risk of becoming a 2nd line player according to you? They wouldn't, it doesn't make sense for them. Because you would need to offer more than just the #5. That team might need cap relief, or an abundance at that position and a deficiency at forward. Or they need to win now and can't wait for a Bowey to mature, just an example Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cowichan Canuck Posted June 15, 2016 Share Posted June 15, 2016 your buying position, and less risk, at a cost. It's just like why people buy hondas over fords when they do the same thing. Ones more of a sure thing, so you pay for it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeNiro Posted June 15, 2016 Share Posted June 15, 2016 7 minutes ago, Cowichan Canuck said: My order: 1Trade #5 and more for young #1D man (hardest, most expensive) Provorov, Bowey, Jones, Hanifin, Theodore, Sanheim, etc 2Trade #5 and more for young #1C (very hard, expensive) Reinhart, Galchenyuk, Mackinnon 3Trade #5 for a #1LW basically straight across or slight add depending (Domi, Drouin) 4Draft Tkachuk/Dubois 5Trade down for a D or C pick. 6.Trade down and take Nylander (i bet for marketing Toronto would offer a nice package to have the Nylander brothers like we have the Sedin twins) he plays both wings and would probably address our future #1 LW. It would be great to have some of those guys but most of those trades likely don't happen or come with just as much risk. If we're targeting Provorov, Bowey, Theodore, or Sanheim we might as well just take Juolevi or Chychrun who are the same level. A chance of being number 1's but most likely #2's. And I don't see why Carolina or Columbus trade Hanifin or Jones when these guys are the most likely number 1's and they would just have to be replaced by them. This would be harder to do than to get another player like Tkachuk/Dubois. Again for Galchenyuk, Mackinnon, and Reinhart, it doesn't make sense for those teams to trade those guys for a more risky pick where they would just select another forward. The only way for us to become a team that doesn't have to give up a bunch of assets for other teams young stars is to draft and develop our own. There's no shortcuts to this. Giving away multiple picks and prospects this way will put one step forward and two steps back. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cowichan Canuck Posted June 15, 2016 Share Posted June 15, 2016 They likely don't, but Jim should be exploring. If he's in the "Not trading it no matter what camp" that is not an intelligent form of asset management. I respect your opinion and I can't offer anymore opinion than I already have on this topic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeNiro Posted June 15, 2016 Share Posted June 15, 2016 11 minutes ago, Cowichan Canuck said: Because you would need to offer more than just the #5. That team might need cap relief, or an abundance at that position and a deficiency at forward. Or they need to win now and can't wait for a Bowey to mature, just an example So we're going to pay a premium for a player that has yet to play an NHL game? Tell me how that isn't a risky strategy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cowichan Canuck Posted June 15, 2016 Share Posted June 15, 2016 Deniro, right after that I said "just an example." A player in his draft class is more risky that the same player 1 minute older. Provorov is less risky this year than he was last year. You don't agree, I went into massive detail...i'm fine with that. If we pick Dubois, fine, i'll hope he turns into that #1C...if he doesn't, oh well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goal:thecup Posted June 15, 2016 Share Posted June 15, 2016 I hope JB does the necessary to get Jesse Puljujärvi. Most likely way to do this seems to be through Columbus for their 3rd overall. If they would be satisfied with our 5th overall, plus some extras, this may be the most simple way to get it done. If they see the "negative" trade value Scott Hartnell seems to have become, this might form the bare bones of a trade. That is, Scotty and their 3rd for our 5th. I don't think they have to worry about "their fans going nuts" or anything like that. The people who actually come to the games and pay for their tickets are most likely pretty smart hockey fans. Management need only show the negative impacts of keeping Hartnell; after all they are only moving down 2 spots. And they could say they liked Dubois or Tkachuk better than Puljujärvi; the people will understand. If Columbus doesn't want our 5th, they can have a shopping list of Canucks, nux prospects, and picks for their 3rd. Then we would pick 3rd and 5th, landing Puljujärvi while still getting Tkachuk or Dubois; that would firm up the forward lines of the new core. I think (after only watching video, I know, I know), Puljujärvi is a better prospect than Matthews (or Laine, for that matter). He reminds me (physically) of Sundin and he has a definite passion for the game and winning with his teammates. He drives the play more than Matthews or Laine, and looks very creative out there, yet still does traditional stuff like screening the goalie and getting to the front of the net. Anyway, it's just my opinion, and we only have about a week and a half left to wait! C'mon Trader Jim, get us some Jess-eh. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Camel Toe Drag Posted June 15, 2016 Share Posted June 15, 2016 3 minutes ago, Goal:thecup said: I hope JB does the necessary to get Jesse Puljujärvi. Most likely way to do this seems to be through Columbus for their 3rd overall. If they would be satisfied with our 5th overall, plus some extras, this may be the most simple way to get it done. If they see the "negative" trade value Scott Hartnell seems to have become, this might form the bare bones of a trade. That is, Scotty and their 3rd for our 5th. I don't think they have to worry about "their fans going nuts" or anything like that. The people who actually come to the games and pay for their tickets are most likely pretty smart hockey fans. Management need only show the negative impacts of keeping Hartnell; after all they are only moving down 2 spots. And they could say they liked Dubois or Tkachuk better than Puljujärvi; the people will understand. If Columbus doesn't want our 5th, they can have a shopping list of Canucks, nux prospects, and picks for their 3rd. Then we would pick 3rd and 5th, landing Puljujärvi while still getting Tkachuk or Dubois; that would firm up the forward lines of the new core. I think (after only watching video, I know, I know), Puljujärvi is a better prospect than Matthews (or Laine, for that matter). He reminds me (physically) of Sundin and he has a definite passion for the game and winning with his teammates. He drives the play more than Matthews or Laine, and looks very creative out there, yet still does traditional stuff like screening the goalie and getting to the front of the net. Anyway, it's just my opinion, and we only have about a week and a half left to wait! C'mon Trader Jim, get us some Jess-eh. This will simply not happen, my friend. Not without out is giving up Horvat, Boeser, or Demko. And I don't think Benning is willing to throw away all his progress to move up 2 spots. JP is very impressive and I think he'll be a star but we're picking a very good player too. We'll be alright. Kek can have JP. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sedintwinpowersactivate Posted June 15, 2016 Share Posted June 15, 2016 Cowichan... I think your argument of knowing the player further along in development holds some weight. The problem is that if you are trading for a young NHL player using a high draft pick you will never get that #1 D or #1 C because teams just don't trade players like that unless there are character issues with the player or you offer so much that they can't refuse. Where as your draft pick in the top 5 may develop into that player. I would argue that you have not seen Bennings draft board. If he believes that Dubois with proper development could be a future #1 centre then he is not going to trade that pick for a young #2C playing in the NHL. If Benning sees Tkachuk and Dubois as #1 LW, but Dubois as only a #2 C then he will listen to offers that could land him that #1 C if that is his ultimate goal to substitute H. Sedin in the near future. And you are giving up a tonnes for a young #1C that may have baggage (eg. Drouin, Seguin, Johannsen). Would you give up #5 for the Nuge or Reinhart? These guys may have #1 C potential (probably #2C) but are behind better centreman. They are also smaller centres that would be playing in the west. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Noseforthenet Posted June 15, 2016 Share Posted June 15, 2016 Yeah, this team will be fine picking 5. Dubois is worth it and will surprise alot of people. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chickenman92 Posted June 15, 2016 Share Posted June 15, 2016 Did anyone watch the TSN quiz with the prospects? They asked them, which prospect could pull off the crop-top dress suit like Ezekiel Elliott. Two for McAvoy, he has a very mature body according to Matthews. And Laine & Nylander suggested Joulevi, kids an animal physically Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chickenman92 Posted June 15, 2016 Share Posted June 15, 2016 1- Toronto – Matthews 2- Winnipeg – Laine 3- Columbus – Puljujarvi 4- Edmonton – Tkachuk 5- Vancouver – Juolevi, I think secretly he’s the guy Benning wants 6- Buffalo – Chychrun, Sabres make a move for the D they want 7- Arizona – Dubois, With the two top D off the board (I really think they want Chychrun or Juolevi in that order), they take Dubois 8- Calgary – Jost, Treliving has roots in Penticton and he will know Jost well, might even be a darkhorse at 6 9- Montreal – Brown 10- Colorado – Nylander Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.