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

Recommended Posts

9 minutes ago, Alexandre said:

 I was just thinking, in the Canuck defence of the future, if our top prospects fulfilled their promise, would Brisebois be more valuable than say a Tryamkin?

No, Tryamkin would be the big monster Dman we've been in a never ending search for.

I haven't seen much of Brisbeois seems simmilsr to Hutton, which is still good

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Spotted Zebra said:

No, Tryamkin would be the big monster Dman we've been in a never ending search for.

I haven't seen much of Brisbeois seems simmilsr to Hutton, which is still good

I haven't watched him myself but from what I've read he sounded more like a Tanev to me.

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Wild Sean Monahan said:

I haven't watched him myself but from what I've read he sounded more like a Tanev to me.

He plays more like Tanev, not fancy like Hutton, just makes the high percentage play. Good Skater, and good first pass. Shot will get better, but I think ahead of where Tanev was at the same age, behind Hutton though offensively. 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Derp... said:

He plays more like Tanev, not fancy like Hutton, just makes the high percentage play. Good Skater, and good first pass. Shot will get better, but I think ahead of where Tanev was at the same age, behind Hutton though offensively. 

 

And he's a lefty.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Derp... said:

He plays more like Tanev, not fancy like Hutton, just makes the high percentage play. Good Skater, and good first pass. Shot will get better, but I think ahead of where Tanev was at the same age, behind Hutton though offensively. 

 

Aren't most draft picks ? Lol

Link to post
Share on other sites

With Brisebois getting his new contract.  Does he receive any contract $$ well in Jrs?  Not sure how that works.  His years in jr count towards his entry level deal doesnt it or is it just based on AHL/NHL play time?

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Rush17 said:

With Brisebois getting his new contract.  Does he receive any contract $$ well in Jrs?  Not sure how that works.  His years in jr count towards his entry level deal doesnt it or is it just based on AHL/NHL play time?

The only money he would get is from his signing bonus. Until he plays 10 games in the AHL/NHL his contract slides, meaning he doesn't get his salary and he doesn't count towards our cap.

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Alexandre said:

 I was just thinking, in the Canuck defence of the future, if our top prospects fulfilled their promise, would Brisebois be more valuable than say a Tryamkin?

It is early enough that we can still daydream about both guys. So I am projecting Brisbois as Niklas Lidstrom and Tryamkin as Zdeno Chara. Not sure who will win the Norris trophy first.

More seriously, they both look like good prospects and are consistent with Benning's ability to get maximum value from the draft. Let's hope Benning has a lot of picks (including some high ones) to work with this year. 

The Canucks will probably need a Norris candidate type D if they are going to contend for a Cup again in the near future and those guys are very hard to project -- much harder than with forwards. So we need quite a few good D prospects to provide a decent chance that one will develop into the franchise-type D.

Brisbois and Tryamkin are a start, and we are very happy to well Hutton has done. But we need some more good D prospects in the pipeline.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I say we draft with our first pick a franchise centre man. if we have the ability to draft Matthews. I say we do it. our forward lines would be much deeper with Matthews in the line up. and then every other pick we have. focus on the dman. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, N4ZZY said:

I say we draft with our first pick a franchise centre man. if we have the ability to draft Matthews. I say we do it. our forward lines would be much deeper with Matthews in the line up. and then every other pick we have. focus on the dman. 

I totally agree with this. Dmen take a long time to develop that most of the great NHL dmen out there aren't even drafted in the first round.

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, N4ZZY said:

I say we draft with our first pick a franchise centre man. if we have the ability to draft Matthews. I say we do it. our forward lines would be much deeper with Matthews in the line up. and then every other pick we have. focus on the dman. 

That's the smart call. The Canucks don't need to waste a high pick on potential "high end bust" like Thomas Hickey (4th overall pick in 2007 by Kings, waived by Kings and picked up by Islanders. A respectable NHLer but nowhere near a Top 2 guy), Cam Barker (3rd overall pick in 2004. Never reached potential), Erik Johnson (1st overall in 2006. He's a solid NHLer but not a Top 2 guy and definitely not worth having been picked before Jonathan Toews that year), Zack Bogosian (3rd overall, over 400 NHL games played, people still wonder if he can become a Top 2 guy), and Erik Gudbranson (3rd overall in 2010, mediocore numbers, still young though). I'm not saying any of these guys are huge busts by any means (well, besides Barker and possibly Hickey, but that's soley based on where he was drafted his year) but find a stud defenseman is much harder then finding a stud forward... especially when picking high in the draft. I mean, if I was St. Louis, I'd still be kicking myself for not picking Jonathan Toews at 1st overall when I had the chance. You can find stud D-men high in the draft (Ekblad, Jovanovski, Hedman) but the risk is higher generally speaking... but that's my two cents.

  • Upvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, JamesB said:

It is early enough that we can still daydream about both guys. So I am projecting Brisbois as Niklas Lidstrom and Tryamkin as Zdeno Chara. Not sure who will win the Norris trophy first.

More seriously, they both look like good prospects and are consistent with Benning's ability to get maximum value from the draft. Let's hope Benning has a lot of picks (including some high ones) to work with this year. 

The Canucks will probably need a Norris candidate type D if they are going to contend for a Cup again in the near future and those guys are very hard to project -- much harder than with forwards. So we need quite a few good D prospects to provide a decent chance that one will develop into the franchise-type D.

Brisbois and Tryamkin are a start, and we are very happy to well Hutton has done. But we need some more good D prospects in the pipeline.

I checked all the prospects picked by Benning and Gillis. In 2 drafts, Benning picked 7 defensemen out of 14 picks. Gillis = 14 Dmen out of 37 picks from 6 drafts. So 50% of Benning's picks were Dmen and only 38% of Gillis's picks were Dmen. It seems Benning is thinking the same.

I am very happy with all the Dmen Benning has picked so far. They all seem to be good prospects. I also like that he used 2, 3rd round selections on D (Brisebois and Tryamkin). I am just hoping he finally picks one higher than round 3.

 

  • Upvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Alexandre said:

I checked all the prospects picked by Benning and Gillis. In 2 drafts, Benning picked 7 defensemen out of 14 picks. Gillis = 14 Dmen out of 37 picks from 6 drafts. So 50% of Benning's picks were Dmen and only 38% of Gillis's picks were Dmen. It seems Benning is thinking the same.

I am very happy with all the Dmen Benning has picked so far. They all seem to be good prospects. I also like that he used 2, 3rd round selections on D (Brisebois and Tryamkin). I am just hoping he finally picks one higher than round 3.

 

I think the difference will be what picks were used. In his first draft, Gillis used the 41st overall pick on Sauve. The following draft he used pick #83 on Connauton. All the other ones were chosen well beyond 100. It's no wonder that other than striking gold on Hutton, and cooking close with Corrado, we have no quality young D-men.

Now in back-to-back drafts, JB had used pick #66 to draft a D-man. And I bet he uses a couple of picks in the first two rounds this year on more.

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Alexandre said:

I checked all the prospects picked by Benning and Gillis. In 2 drafts, Benning picked 7 defensemen out of 14 picks. Gillis = 14 Dmen out of 37 picks from 6 drafts. So 50% of Benning's picks were Dmen and only 38% of Gillis's picks were Dmen. It seems Benning is thinking the same.

I am very happy with all the Dmen Benning has picked so far. They all seem to be good prospects. I also like that he used 2, 3rd round selections on D (Brisebois and Tryamkin). I am just hoping he finally picks one higher than round 3.

 

 

5 hours ago, D-Money said:

I think the difference will be what picks were used. In his first draft, Gillis used the 41st overall pick on Sauve. The following draft he used pick #83 on Connauton. All the other ones were chosen well beyond 100. It's no wonder that other than striking gold on Hutton, and cooking close with Corrado, we have no quality young D-men.

Now in back-to-back drafts, JB had used pick #66 to draft a D-man. And I bet he uses a couple of picks in the first two rounds this year on more.

I agree that it is encouraging to see Benning take drafting D-men more seriously than Gillis did. And when we factor in that Benning appears to be better at drafting and that Benning has not traded away as many high picks we can expect an improvement in the defensive pipeline.

I heard Gillis (and others) point out that it is not a good strategy to use high draft picks on Ds because they are so much harder to project than forwards at age 18. But that is not the whole story, You still need to get high quality Ds somewhere and they are very hard to trade for or to get as UFAs, so you still need to make a serious effort to get good Ds in the draft.

It is encouraging that based on their play this year both Neill (5th round) and Olson (7th round) look like very good picks for where they were taken. They are both longshots to ever play in the NHL, of course, but their progress is impressive so far.

Just looking at the numbers, last year Olson had 24 pts in 68 games (0.35 PPG) and was -13 on the year. This year so far he has 23 pts on 28 games (0.82 PPG) and is +15. And he is listed at 6-2. He could add another inch in height over the next couple of years (which is typlcal) and once he fills out, he could be a decent size even by NHL standards.

Maybe the Canucks will end up with Chychrun this year.

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, JamesB said:

 

I agree that it is encouraging to see Benning take drafting D-men more seriously than Gillis did. And when we factor in that Benning appears to be better at drafting and that Benning has not traded away as many high picks we can expect an improvement in the defensive pipeline.

I heard Gillis (and others) point out that it is not a good strategy to use high draft picks on Ds because they are so much harder to project than forwards at age 18. But that is not the whole story, You still need to get high quality Ds somewhere and they are very hard to trade for or to get as UFAs, so you still need to make a serious effort to get good Ds in the draft.

It is encouraging that based on their play this year both Neill (5th round) and Olson (7th round) look like very good picks for where they were taken. They are both longshots to ever play in the NHL, of course, but their progress is impressive so far.

Just looking at the numbers, last year Olson had 24 pts in 68 games (0.35 PPG) and was -13 on the year. This year so far he has 23 pts on 28 games (0.82 PPG) and is +15. And he is listed at 6-2. He could add another inch in height over the next couple of years (which is typlcal) and once he fills out, he could be a decent size even by NHL standards.

Maybe the Canucks will end up with Chychrun this year.

That is true. Of the top-25 scoring forwards in the league, nearly half were top-5 picks (Kane, Seguin, Hall, D. Sedin, Wheeler, Ryan, Backstrom, H. Sedin, Draisatl, Ovechkin, Malkin, MacKinnon), and most of the remainder were still first rounders. Very few currently elite forwards were late round steals and/or free agents.

Whereas among the top-20 scoring D-men, it's a much different story. Here is where they were drafted:
15th overall, 5th round, 20th, 37th, 27th, 38th, 49th, 8th, 7th, 43rd, 3rd round, 14th, 8th round, 14th, 6th, 4th round, 3rd round, 2nd, 6th round, and 54th

However, as you can see above, nearly half of the top scoring D-men were still 1st rounders. 3/4 of them were picked in the first two rounds. And of the 5 guys above who were found in the 3rd round and beyond, only two are under 30 (Klingberg and Barrie), indicating that teams are getting better at evaluating draft eligible D-men. Also of note, none of them were undrafted free agents.

The main thing the Canucks desperately need is a top-pairing defenseman...ideally, two of them. And, in this day and age, it is extremely rare to find a top pairing D-man 1) by trade, 2) in free agency, or 3) beyond the 2nd round of the draft. And we haven't used a first or second rounder on a D-man since 2008.

  • Upvote 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, D-Money said:

That is true. Of the top-25 scoring forwards in the league, nearly half were top-5 picks (Kane, Seguin, Hall, D. Sedin, Wheeler, Ryan, Backstrom, H. Sedin, Draisatl, Ovechkin, Malkin, MacKinnon), and most of the remainder were still first rounders. Very few currently elite forwards were late round steals and/or free agents.

Whereas among the top-20 scoring D-men, it's a much different story. Here is where they were drafted:
15th overall, 5th round, 20th, 37th, 27th, 38th, 49th, 8th, 7th, 43rd, 3rd round, 14th, 8th round, 14th, 6th, 4th round, 3rd round, 2nd, 6th round, and 54th

However, as you can see above, nearly half of the top scoring D-men were still 1st rounders. 3/4 of them were picked in the first two rounds. And of the 5 guys above who were found in the 3rd round and beyond, only two are under 30 (Klingberg and Barrie), indicating that teams are getting better at evaluating draft eligible D-men. Also of note, none of them were undrafted free agents.

The main thing the Canucks desperately need is a top-pairing defenseman...ideally, two of them. And, in this day and age, it is extremely rare to find a top pairing D-man 1) by trade, 2) in free agency, or 3) beyond the 2nd round of the draft. And we haven't used a first or second rounder on a D-man since 2008.

Nice analysis. Thanks for going to the effort of doing the background research.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...