Junkyard Dog Posted March 22, 2016 Share Posted March 22, 2016 I don't think you win cups with guys like Nylander and Ehlers on your team, they are not generational talents and that seems to only be the exception on the past teams that have won cups with offensively skilled players(Kane/Crosby) leading them. I think you win cups with guys like Virtanen as well as a good balance of size, speed and skill. Skill based teams won't beat the LA Kings or Chicago. Chicago is the perfect balance of size, speed and skill. They have Franchise players in key positions and the perfect supporting cast built around them. Look at what a guy like Ferland did in a series. Gaudreau never brought a presence, in fact he only decided to show up for one game(Game 6). Meanwhile Ferland was making his presence felt game after game and changed the tide of the series by getting in our heads. Virtanen has the potential to do that and much more offensively Virtanen is the type of player that can bring that kind of physical presence and has the potential to have a scoring presence as well. His skill is raw and it will take time to develop it unlike Ehlers or Nylander. it is unfortunate that some people don't have the patience for him to develop his scoring ability and demand NHL skill now. I always saw Virtanen as a project type pick. Not a player who would light the league right away like Ehlers or Nylander. Size speed and skill is what JB is trying to transition the next core of players to being. Boeser, Virtanen, McCann all fit the description in one way or another. All have their issues though. Virtanen needs to develop his offense, McCann needs to get bigger and Boeser needs to get a bit faster(Not that his speed is a major problem just it is probably what he needs to improve upon the most). Kind of a bit ironic when the best forwards JB drafted all have different areas of concern when talking about size speed and skill in a player. I am on board with how JB wants to build this team, whether or not it comes to fruition and succeeds I don't know and nobody will unless one of you can travel to the future. Nonetheless I hope it does succeed because all signs would point to us being a playoff built team if it does succeed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Junkyard Dog Posted March 22, 2016 Share Posted March 22, 2016 Regarding shoulda woulda coulda? I don't really dwell on what could of been. Seems like a huge waste of time IMO. I am happy with who we drafted, they will have my support and I hope they succeed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Caboose Posted March 22, 2016 Share Posted March 22, 2016 I laughed all the way to the bank when Benning called Virtanen's name. Leafs will be reaping the rewards of that gaffe for years to come. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WonderTwinPowers Posted March 22, 2016 Share Posted March 22, 2016 11 hours ago, desiboynux4lifee******* said: Jim Benning ignores skill and goes for grit. It's funny because the team he praises eg the Sedins are skill and hardly no grit. Benning's blunders - last year should have drafted Konecy, year before that gambled on Jake Virtanen- even though Button nailed the homerun on Jake's hockey iq. Gambled on trading Hunter Shinkurak because his ego told him too, honestly saw zero point behind that trade and btw he is getting going now and look who we got another grinder, but a soft grinder. yaay! Uh oh he found us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gurn Posted March 22, 2016 Share Posted March 22, 2016 Maybe someday someone will compare the Canuck drafting record against Central Scouting's list of best available player at the spot the Canucks picked. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mathew Barzal Posted March 22, 2016 Author Share Posted March 22, 2016 9 hours ago, Junkyard Dog said: Regarding shoulda woulda coulda? I don't really dwell on what could of been. Seems like a huge waste of time IMO. I am happy with who we drafted, they will have my support and I hope they succeed. You are a better man than I. I think Jake will be a player for us, I just don't buy into the theory that we needed his player 'type' (goal scoring powerforward) as desperately as some seemed to think. We needed scoring period. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WonderTwinPowers Posted March 22, 2016 Share Posted March 22, 2016 16 minutes ago, Caboose said: I laughed all the way to the bank when Benning called Virtanen's name. Leafs will be reaping the rewards of that gaffe for years to come. The Leafs needed all the help they could possibly get at the time no matter your outlook. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rocky Balboa Posted March 22, 2016 Share Posted March 22, 2016 I had high hopes for Jason Herter. Mainly because I got his hockey card and figured he must be good if he has one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GB5 Posted March 22, 2016 Share Posted March 22, 2016 12 hours ago, Nuxfanabroad said: Sorry, Sandlak was so long ago(mid-80's) can't recall who we should have picked. Seemed fans waited forever for him to become the kind of player that Neely did. Which just compounded frustrations, after we dealt him, to get fleeced. The 80's were a mess. Trev & '82 the only bright spots. Then(as Chon Derry mentioned), Nedved was a flaky lil' bugg*r that would always remind us of bypassing Jagr. Top-5 that draft were some pretty big names, as usual we picked the lemon. Remember Nedved chasing Gretzky down the ice to ask for his stick after being eliminated from the playoffs in 1993? That was pretty embarrassing and certainly defines flaky. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ReggieBush Posted March 22, 2016 Share Posted March 22, 2016 Personally I always loved Bo, super pumped we got him. I remember I was just about to leave for a baseball game and I told my mom wait one more pick and then we made the trade and picked Bo and I was ecstatic. I wanted Ehlers, mostly due to his Danish decent and game breaking ability but was fine with the JV pick due to his potential, rare mix of power/speed, hometown kid. Looking back I really like the pick and am kind of glad we didn't pick Ehlers. Konecny was the guy for me. Heart and soul player, a guy you can build a team around imo. Although I doubted the boeser pick at the time, he is growing on me and his offensive instincts and shot make his potential very high. Really wish we had both TK and BB Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeltaSwede Posted March 22, 2016 Share Posted March 22, 2016 Anyone who voted for Bo Horvat at #9 is lying to themselves and everyone else. When that trade was announced and Nichushkin was still on the board I believe that 99% of everyone watching believed that the Canucks were taking the Russian. Bo has proven that he was worth that pick but at the time I know a lot of us were scratching our heads. Boeser was a similar situation. I really wanted the Canucks to pick a defender so I was hoping for Noah Juulsen or Jeremy Roy. Very happy that Benning and co. know a heck of a lot more than me. One of the rare times I have been correct about a player was back when the Canucks drafted Nick Jensen, really wanted Brandon Saad. Not that I expected him to develop into the player he is today or had any clue about it, but I liked him a lot and Jensen didn't impress me at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Junkyard Dog Posted March 22, 2016 Share Posted March 22, 2016 3 hours ago, Mathew Barzal said: You are a better man than I. I think Jake will be a player for us, I just don't buy into the theory that we needed his player 'type' (goal scoring powerforward) as desperately as some seemed to think. We needed scoring period. Everyone has their cup of tea. I am not going to argue that we need goal scoring because we do. We also do get pushed around a lot, even to this day, so size is a needed aspect. Both are grave concerns in my mind. I do however think we can draft skill later in this rebuild because of the fact that skilled players are capable of making the jump early. Two way guys, and Powerforwards especially, take time to develop. I am also in the belief that skill needs size around them to help them flourish, especially in the playoffs. JB started target that size early during his tenure and has tried to acquire size with skill. That being said if we draft top 3 we should draft a skilled player almost all the time. In that range you could get a world class talent. I don't think Ehlers or Nylander will ever be considered world class talents or be as talented as McDavid, Eichel, Reinhart, Matthews, Draisaitl, The Sedins etc. Those are the type of world class talents that you want to build around. Not trying to change anyone's perspective, that might probably be a waste of my time, I am just explaining my view this specific topic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Toews Posted March 23, 2016 Share Posted March 23, 2016 They shoulda traded Schneider for Edmonton's pick and other assets. They coulda then drafted Rasmus Ristolainen with that pick. They woulda then had a future #1 defenseman. Hindsight is 20/20 though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DownUndaCanuck Posted March 24, 2016 Share Posted March 24, 2016 Just compare the stat lines of all those players and you have your answer. 13 picks for Nylander to 12 for Virtanen, looks like I'm not the only one. In all seriousness though, we messed up big time with our last few drafts. Not saying the players we picked aren't great, but this is typical Benning - draft big, strong, north-south scorers. That's all well and good but you need BALANCE if you're going to have a successful team. In just about every draft we've had a chance at a big, strong powerforward or a more skilled, highly offensive-minded forward. Each time, we picked the powerforward. Horvat - great pick, I'm happy with him and Benning walks into a team with him already as our cornerstone. Virtanen - great pick but we've already got a north-south forward in Horvat. Ehlers and Nylander are both more lateral, highly offensively, high hockey IQ, cerebral types of players. They're the sort of players we needed to complement Horvat. Boeser - a carbon copy of Virtanen, another north-south scorer type who isn't a great playmaker in particular but more a scorer. That gives us 3 north-south scorers, no real playmakers. McCann is much more of a playmaker and is all well and good but he was the 24th overall pick, there is definately a quality drop off between Nylander and McCann in terms of offensive ability. Looking at our top picks, we haven't used them on that high hockey-IQ type of player which is what we should have done in at least one of the last few drafts. Look at the Blackhawks - Toews is a great two-way center, Kane is purely a small high-talented, hockey IQ offensive force and whoever's on their wing is usually a big tough guy or now Panarin. This is the league we're in right now - skill predominates, not toughness. The 2011 Bruins were a once-off but even they had the perfect BALANCE of skill, toughness and two-way centers up front. That's what we're lacking right now. Our most skilled young forward offensively is Baertschi who doesn't really stack up to the likes of Panarin/Ehlers/Nylander and the other future skilled small guys. Sure you need to be tough in the playoffs, but you need skill to score and we just don't have enough of that pure offensive talent. A bunch of straight-minded goal scorers with no one to set them up is a recipe for disaster. IDEAL DRAFTS: Nichushkin + Nylander + Boeser Horvat + Ehlers/Nylander + Boeser (would be one of the best future lines in the NHL with all the right components, very similar to the top lines right now) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mathew Barzal Posted March 24, 2016 Author Share Posted March 24, 2016 22 minutes ago, DownUndaCanuck said: That gives us 3 north-south scorers, no real playmakers. This is kind of what I see too, and as a huge advocate of playmakers (see -> Barzal) it's kind of tough to see we aren't taking advantage of two of the best in that regard. Having either (we still have a chance at one of em) Nylander learn from the Sedin's would be HUGE for their development because the way they approach the game is very similar. What Junkyard Dog said makes sense to me though. It looks like Benning is picking up players who will take longer to develop now because skilled players can usually jump in and do their thing relatively quickly (like what William is doing now). So while a lot of people have advocated taking BPA with our first rounders I don't think that's what Benning is doing. He seems to be targeting what he thinks are the teams weaknesses and addressing that first. I'm not sure if I agree with it but at least it makes a little sense to me if it's true. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil_314 Posted March 24, 2016 Share Posted March 24, 2016 At this point in time I question whether anyone would really say that Nuke is better than Bo. Nuke has been inconsistent, while Bo's been a regular at #2C while taking on tough assignments (most defensive zone starts on the team) with Sutter out and he's been doing that while scoring at around the same clip as the big Russian. League-worst plus-minus notwithstanding (it's not representative of the player's quality as is, as there are more contextual circumstances to consider), Bo's been showing signs of all-round potential, from being a solid play-driver, to his line with Hansen and Kenin-Ball during the playoffs producing when the rest of the team was stagnant, to him making dazzling offensive plays (like deking Carl Gunnarsson just this past week). I think we'll realize his true potential in the next two seasons, if not sooner. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monty Posted March 24, 2016 Share Posted March 24, 2016 Wanted Nylander at the time, just glad the Jets got Ehlers as he's being playing terrific two way hockey. Knew he was going to contribute offensively, but the fact that he's playing responsibly and has one fight already, definitely has more to his game than I originally thought. Not a fan of one dimensional offensive players, so Virtanen is someone I've never been a fan of. Hope he pans out, but I prefer centers (ie. Nylander) and skilled wingers (ie. Ehlers than wingers like Virtanen. Wanted Juulsen, but really wanted Rasmus Andersson for months, which made trading the 2nd round pick to Calgary unbearable. Canucks haven't drafted a defenseman before the 3rd round since 2008, so passing on both Juulsen and trading away our pick which ended up being Andersson is painful. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vanisleryan Posted March 24, 2016 Share Posted March 24, 2016 Probably still to early to really judge any of these picks. I really like the players we have. They each have different intangibles so all combined they are a great mix. Horvat his leadership and two way play. Boeser and his scoring ability and Jake with power forward game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DownUndaCanuck Posted March 24, 2016 Share Posted March 24, 2016 11 hours ago, Mathew Barzal said: This is kind of what I see too, and as a huge advocate of playmakers (see -> Barzal) it's kind of tough to see we aren't taking advantage of two of the best in that regard. Having either (we still have a chance at one of em) Nylander learn from the Sedin's would be HUGE for their development because the way they approach the game is very similar. What Junkyard Dog said makes sense to me though. It looks like Benning is picking up players who will take longer to develop now because skilled players can usually jump in and do their thing relatively quickly (like what William is doing now). So while a lot of people have advocated taking BPA with our first rounders I don't think that's what Benning is doing. He seems to be targeting what he thinks are the teams weaknesses and addressing that first. I'm not sure if I agree with it but at least it makes a little sense to me if it's true. I certainly understand this idea, but in that case why aren't we drafting defencemen who take the longest to develop? No defencemen in the past 3 first rounds and we've had a stab at a few very good ones, especially in the last draft. I've always thought we were a bit top-heavy with our prospects up front, and Benning is doing a lot of work moulding our future forward crew, but has really neglected our defence and I hope he doesn't think he can start drafting good D-men now and hope their development catches up because look around the league and at all the good teams. Pittsburgh, Boston, Chicago and the other continuous Cup contenders are drawing 22 year old defencemen into their lineup only now after having sent them back to junior for a year or two, then left them to develop in the AHL for a year or two. Pouliot and Morrow are prime examples of this. Theodore in Anaheim is about to be another. These guys take about 3-4 years before they should even get a sniff of the NHL, then another couple of seasons in the NHL until they're top-4 defenders. That's around 5-6 years from being drafted before they can make a real impact in the NHL. We should have been drafting defencemen with our top picks a long time ago to catch up with our faster-developing forwards. Instead, we've completely neglected the defence and look what we have now - a lucky pick in Hutton who's getting thrown into the fire, Tryamkin who is expected to be our saviour and Subban who may even be too small to play in the NHL for another season. Edler and Hamhuis are on the down-slide, Tanev and Sbisa have peaked, that's all we have. A 5th rounder who will be a fantastic top-4 defenceman next season but certainly could have used an extra year in the AHL, and Tryamkin who I hope we don't burn out too early as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D-Money Posted March 24, 2016 Share Posted March 24, 2016 1 hour ago, DownUndaCanuck said: I certainly understand this idea, but in that case why aren't we drafting defencemen who take the longest to develop? No defencemen in the past 3 first rounds and we've had a stab at a few very good ones, especially in the last draft. As much as I personally was thinking Juulson at the time, it looks like Boeser was most certainly the best player available. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.