Alflives Posted June 26, 2016 Share Posted June 26, 2016 1 minute ago, shiznak said: Edler is not getting traded. If we trade D it will be Tanev. He's got huge value. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stawns Posted June 26, 2016 Share Posted June 26, 2016 15 minutes ago, shiznak said: so you believe that Edler is perfectly fine with waiving his ntc and JB simply has not asked? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
70seven Posted June 26, 2016 Share Posted June 26, 2016 After doing some more research on this years draft, I really like the picks we have this year. Lockwood, Candella, and Stekel all seem to have some real upside to their games. Excited to see how Lockwood transitions to NCAA. Not sure if Stekel will return to Calgary or if potentially eligible for Utica. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
R3aL Posted June 26, 2016 Share Posted June 26, 2016 1 hour ago, shiznak said: I don't know maybe, something involving Edler to Detroit. I know Holland was adamant in moving Datsyuk's contract. To Detroit: Edler, Burrows, 64th, and one of our second next year. To Vancouver: Datsyuk and the 16th. Edlers part of their plan. plus that wouldn't make us a better team next season as the goal is to have a winning environment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
newgm Posted June 26, 2016 Share Posted June 26, 2016 12 hours ago, Brobidus said: Juolevi is an alright pick, given the circumstances (Damn you, Columbus) But what makes it all feel a bit dodgy is that Juolevi seems extremely underwhelming compared to the top 3 defensman picked in last years draft. It kind of feels like Hanifin, Provorov and Werenski all have more upside and are all more flashy and have more value than a pick like Juolevi. I get the feeling that despite applauding Benning for taking the best defenseman, this wasn't the right draft to do that in. Anyone else feel this way? Is this based solely on their draft years performance, or including draft plus one, meaning this year? Not sure why you feel Juolevi's performance seems extremely underwhelming, he's second only to Provorov in points per game as a 17 year old, and winning WJC gold and a MEM Cup in the same year seems kind of overwhelming. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ForsbergTheGreat Posted June 26, 2016 Share Posted June 26, 2016 30 minutes ago, newgm said: Is this based solely on their draft years performance, or including draft plus one, meaning this year? Not sure why you feel Juolevi's performance seems extremely underwhelming, he's second only to Provorov in points per game as a 17 year old, and winning WJC gold and a MEM Cup in the same year seems kind of overwhelming. Here's where he stacked up against other D from the CHL in their draft years...Not too bad if you ask me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Off_The_Schneid! Posted June 27, 2016 Share Posted June 27, 2016 I am extremely happy with how the draft went. I like the current group of Canuck prospects I own a Virtanen jersey and I just didn't want to subtract this draft. By adding a top pairing defenceman to the list it drastically changes our prospect pool and solidifies our defensive core. It literally crosses off something from a list. I am a huge fan of Benning as a draftor of talent but was a little worried he would give up current prospects. it ended up going perfectly. We kept our current core and added a grade A defensive prospect. Wingers can be attained through FA Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shiznak Posted June 27, 2016 Share Posted June 27, 2016 20 hours ago, stawns said: so you believe that Edler is perfectly fine with waiving his ntc and JB simply has not asked? JB would've obviously asked Edler if he'd be willing to waive his NTC, once the season ended or prior to the draft. Plus, Benning went on record saying he would like to add an extra 1st/2nd round pick, at the combine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stawns Posted June 27, 2016 Share Posted June 27, 2016 2 hours ago, shiznak said: JB would've obviously asked Edler if he'd be willing to waive his NTC, once the season ended or prior to the draft. Plus, Benning went on record saying he would like to add an extra 1st/2nd round pick, at the combine. Obviously? I seriously doubt he ever brought it up Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MoneypuckOverlord Posted June 28, 2016 Share Posted June 28, 2016 20 hours ago, Off_The_Schneid! said: I am extremely happy with how the draft went. I like the current group of Canuck prospects I own a Virtanen jersey and I just didn't want to subtract this draft. By adding a top pairing defenceman to the list it drastically changes our prospect pool and solidifies our defensive core. It literally crosses off something from a list. I am a huge fan of Benning as a draftor of talent but was a little worried he would give up current prospects. it ended up going perfectly. We kept our current core and added a grade A defensive prospect. Wingers can be attained through FA 100% agreed. and I swear , ever since LAST YEARS draft we wanted a dman. We went into this year, hoping we can tank and hopefully land THIS YEARS top dman, and... we actually got what we want.... to some extent of course I rather have Dubois, I think even Benning thought Dubois was done, Columbus takes J.P rumor was Dan C was going to select Juolevi with the 4th pick leaving us with Dubois, like cmon, anyone with a brain will know J.P is better then Dubois. but agreed. I think we can easily obtain a Tkachuk level player who we probably didn't think will become anything more then a second line winger via free agency. Awesome move by Benning. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
73 Percent Posted June 28, 2016 Share Posted June 28, 2016 On 26/06/2016 at 6:54 PM, ForsbergTheGreat said: Here's where he stacked up against other D from the CHL in their draft years...Not too bad if you ask me. This is kind of skewed. Where are these extra games coming from? Is this including playoffs and memorial cup? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ForsbergTheGreat Posted June 28, 2016 Share Posted June 28, 2016 Just now, Gooseberries said: This is kind of skewed. Where are these extra games coming from? Is this including playoffs and memorial cup? Yep, it's a pretty good showing to how a player produced over the corse of the entire year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darius Posted June 28, 2016 Share Posted June 28, 2016 On 26/06/2016 at 3:22 PM, newgm said: Is this based solely on their draft years performance, or including draft plus one, meaning this year? Not sure why you feel Juolevi's performance seems extremely underwhelming, he's second only to Provorov in points per game as a 17 year old, and winning WJC gold and a MEM Cup in the same year seems kind of overwhelming. I think Juolevi was the right choice for this organization not only because they have no high end d prospects in their system. 20-30 goal scoring wingers like Tkuchuk are easier to obtain via free agency or trades than top pairing d men are. That said I think that the fan base seems underwhelmed by the Canuck draft pick. I dont think it has anything to do with how skilled he is or how high his potential is. I think a lot of the cold reception of Benning's choice has to do with: - The team moved down (yeah lost) in the draft lottery. - feels like a loss. - Columbus went off of the board and selected Dubois instead of going with the consensus Fin #2. Local media have been hyping Dubois as our pick. I think everyone and their dog knew that Benning was after him. - feels like a loss. - The cOilers, who have a shamrock up maggie the monkey's ar$e, end up winning again. When it was their turn to pick we could almost smell Puljujarvi falling into our laps because the cOil really needed a dman. Instead they take fin #2. Feels like a loss. - The lames who were not supposed to be this bad this hockey year got the player they wanted and it feels like the Canucks had something to do with it. - Feels like a loss. So a lot of feeling like a loss went around our #5 pick, but if someone told us a few months ago we would be adding the best D man in the draft to the roster i think everyone would be happy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
messier's_elbow Posted June 28, 2016 Share Posted June 28, 2016 3 hours ago, Darius71 said: I think Juolevi was the right choice for this organization not only because they have no high end d prospects in their system. 20-30 goal scoring wingers like Tkuchuk are easier to obtain via free agency or trades than top pairing d men are. That said I think that the fan base seems underwhelmed by the Canuck draft pick. I dont think it has anything to do with how skilled he is or how high his potential is. I think a lot of the cold reception of Benning's choice has to do with: - The team moved down (yeah lost) in the draft lottery. - feels like a loss. - Columbus went off of the board and selected Dubois instead of going with the consensus Fin #2. Local media have been hyping Dubois as our pick. I think everyone and their dog knew that Benning was after him. - feels like a loss. - The cOilers, who have a shamrock up maggie the monkey's ar$e, end up winning again. When it was their turn to pick we could almost smell Puljujarvi falling into our laps because the cOil really needed a dman. Instead they take fin #2. Feels like a loss. - The lames who were not supposed to be this bad this hockey year got the player they wanted and it feels like the Canucks had something to do with it. - Feels like a loss. So a lot of feeling like a loss went around our #5 pick, but if someone told us a few months ago we would be adding the best D man in the draft to the roster i think everyone would be happy. Yeah I agree with everything except when Puljujarvi dropped to 4th I knew there was no chance they passed on him. It's Edmonton for Petes sake. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
R3aL Posted June 28, 2016 Share Posted June 28, 2016 On June 26, 2016 at 6:43 PM, 70seven said: After doing some more research on this years draft, I really like the picks we have this year. Lockwood, Candella, and Stekel all seem to have some real upside to their games. Excited to see how Lockwood transitions to NCAA. Not sure if Stekel will return to Calgary or if potentially eligible for Utica. I feel this way as well. Lockwood I knew nothing about but seems like a decent project pick. Candella I believe will be our next late D round steal: completely underrated because of injuries. I think he is going to have a great year! I was was down on draft day, but feeling good and optimistic about who we selected now with what picks we have! i am nervous Sergachev will be the best dman out the draft but Juolevi was certainly the smartest selection at 5. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
R3aL Posted June 28, 2016 Share Posted June 28, 2016 6 hours ago, Darius71 said: I think Juolevi was the right choice for this organization not only because they have no high end d prospects in their system. 20-30 goal scoring wingers like Tkuchuk are easier to obtain via free agency or trades than top pairing d men are. That said I think that the fan base seems underwhelmed by the Canuck draft pick. I dont think it has anything to do with how skilled he is or how high his potential is. I think a lot of the cold reception of Benning's choice has to do with: - The team moved down (yeah lost) in the draft lottery. - feels like a loss. - Columbus went off of the board and selected Dubois instead of going with the consensus Fin #2. Local media have been hyping Dubois as our pick. I think everyone and their dog knew that Benning was after him. - feels like a loss. - The cOilers, who have a shamrock up maggie the monkey's ar$e, end up winning again. When it was their turn to pick we could almost smell Puljujarvi falling into our laps because the cOil really needed a dman. Instead they take fin #2. Feels like a loss. - The lames who were not supposed to be this bad this hockey year got the player they wanted and it feels like the Canucks had something to do with it. - Feels like a loss. So a lot of feeling like a loss went around our #5 pick, but if someone told us a few months ago we would be adding the best D man in the draft to the roster i think everyone would be happy. lol well said - I was down draft day ur right all of those felt like losses! however after reflecting on what we did I think it was for the best! We did well and Juolevi was the right pick! kids a champion plain and simple and we need champion players let alone he was the number 1 dmen in both of the two championships he could win. (Memorial Cup and World Jrs) extremely impressive for a draft eligible d that just came over to North America! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GettinGuddyWithIt Posted June 28, 2016 Share Posted June 28, 2016 7 hours ago, Gooseberries said: This is kind of skewed. Where are these extra games coming from? Is this including playoffs and memorial cup? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GettinGuddyWithIt Posted June 28, 2016 Share Posted June 28, 2016 On June 26, 2016 at 3:54 PM, ForsbergTheGreat said: Here's where he stacked up against other D from the CHL in their draft years...Not too bad if you ask me. I think they should add Juolevi's 7 points in 4 games in the Memorial Cup because leading your team to the Finals is very hard and he deserves credit where it's due. So 63 points in 79 games. Not bad at all for a 17 YEAR OLD ROOKIE IMPORT adjusting to the new rink size and country. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SID.IS.SID.ME.IS.ME Posted June 28, 2016 Share Posted June 28, 2016 Jake Goldberg, London Knights Assistant Director of Scouting, and a lawyer in his day job, released a very interesting series of tweets yesterday regarding the draft. I'll put them together in one quote (instead of ten tweets), so to make it easier to read: Quote Building models to predict "successful" NHLers can be very dangerous without a proper definition of "success". GP is not an indicator of "success". Showing up to work is not enough. It's what you produce in those GP that matters. The draft is about value creation. Picking a player with bottom-6 F, 5-6 D and 2 G potential = value destruction. Smart teams will sign them as FAs at near league minimum AAV. No draft pick spent and no uncertainty if they will reach their ceiling. Success can only be defined as a prospect who achieves above replacement value status. This is what we call an asset. Take a player with a 5% chance of becoming a top-6 F and a 95% chance of being a bust over one with 100% certainty of being a 4th liner. Top-6F, top-4D and starting G can't be signed on cheap AAV deals, that is, unless you draft them. But how do you find top-6F, top-4D and starting Gs outside of the first 2 rounds? There are tools to increase your odds of "success". 1st, make sure you have the right definition of "success" in your model. 2nd, find trends in late picks who become successful NHLers. From 1990-2010, 50% of successful forwards picked after Rd 2 were re-entry players. No coincidence the Leafs took 5 of them in 2016. https://twitter.com/Jake__Goldberg?ref_src=twsrc^tfw Interesting stuff and much of it mirrors my own strategy for approaching the draft. Personally, I think the Canucks did pretty well under these criteria. Some people might feel our picks didn't swing for the fences in terms of their upside. But I actually thing the Canucks feel like most of the guys they drafted do project pretty high if they reach their ceilings. Obviously, they believe Juolevi is a first pairing D and has #1D potential. And I agree with that. But for their picks in rounds 3-7, some have suggested they targeted low ceiling types and rejected high risk "darts" that might produce top-end players if they hit. I actually think the Canucks see Lockwood as having legitimate top-6 potential. Others might not agree (and many draft guides project him as more of a bottom-six "character" winger) but I believe our scouts drafted him because they see the same potential "high end offensive talent" that Corey Pronman suggests Lockwood has. They see this pick as "swinging for the fences" because they believe he has some untapped ability and could become a much higher end player than his previous results might suggest. But this is a "home run swing" that probably gives us a "sacrifice fly" if the hit doesn't quite have the distance (to extend the metaphor). With Cole Candella, the Canucks see a future top-4 D, and many scouts seem to agree with that kind of projection. For the most past, this has been universally considered a "good pick" with some very nice upside (especially relative to draft position). I think most scouts agree that the Canucks did very well here. And then we get into our three "re-entry" picks in Stukel, Abols, and McKenzie (players that were passed over in previous drafts). First, I'll just say that I don't believe Abols has top-6 potential (and I question whether he even has NHL potential). I think this pick probably fits more in line with what Goldberg calls "value destruction" in this Abols (or a similar player) could probably have been signed as an undrafted free agent. But with Stukel and McKenzie, I do actually see some nice potential. Stukel is the type of "re-entry forward" that just might be in that group Goldberg identifies as the best bets for "successful forwards picked after Rd 2". His is the story of a player whose first year of draft eligibility was sent off the rails by an injury. But his second time around, you can see the offensive potential in his stats and, if the Canucks scouts have done their jobs, his next season should show even more progression. With McKenzie, we have a guy that some scouting services project as a bottom-six defensive forward. But this is also a kid who at age 15-16 was known as one of the most skilled offensive players in the GTA. He joined an OHL program in North Bay where the coaches really push defensive responsibility and two-way play with their new recruits. Scouts who've followed McKenzie for years (like Brock Otten) say this kid has "far more offensive potential than he's shown to the naked eye [as an OHL player to-date]" so maybe again we have a case of the Canucks scouts having identified a "high potential player" in what to the naked eye looks like a "safe pick." We'll have to see how these kids progress over the next few years but I wouldn't be surprised if several of the players picked in rounds 3-7 this year offer something of the best of both worlds. We seem to have drafted a few players that have both high "floors" and potentially, much higher "ceilings" that they might be getting credited for. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sean Monahan Posted June 28, 2016 Share Posted June 28, 2016 Great post @SID.IS.SID.ME.IS.ME, very interesting and informative read. Should help quell some of the whining too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.