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

Different spin on "dropping" to the 5th....


19naslund19

Recommended Posts

Let me just say getting a higher pick would usually be preferred as the top 2/3 players are more "franchise players"...period. That being said we draft 5th and will get a kid that could turn into a great player for this franchise.

 

My thinking on the 5th pick is that it will likely be someone that goes back to junior next year and gets lots of playing time and experience. We will continue to develop our current kids next year and he will be ready to challenge for a lineup spot in 17/18. That year we will also have Boesser (assuming he signs) and Demko (after a year leading Utica) challenging for spots and yes I think they will after next season. Our current kids will have another year under the belt and players like Miller, Burrows, Higgins will be off the books (if not earlier). Next year will be another "rebuild" year and there will be no pressure....I am actually hoping for another top 6 pick next year to really stick the shelves before the road back.

 

I think if we had got one one of the top 3 picks there might have been more pressure to rebuild while making the playoffs....leading to irrational free agent pickups this summer, trading kids for the now and scraping into the playoffs. I think with a player like Tkachuk or Dubois going back to junior this year gives us the perfect setup for a another rebuild year....one that will be tough but one that will help solidify the future nicely.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You're right Rugby man. Why on earth would we want to get a franchise type plyer when we can get a slightly above average player. And this all because some thought to be tankers not being disciplined by the league. The tankers get what they aimed for and teams like Vcr suffer.... there's bit of democracy in play

 

This team has needed a franchise type player for decades and now as soon as we get close they change the rules.... just like they changed the rule in the new CBA so we suffer the Luongo rule just like they flipped the coin and we got Tallon rather than Perault

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You can spin it any which way that makes you feel better, but a top 3 pick would have been a game changer for this franchise. A game changer that we don't have and haven't had in a long time.

 

We'll get a good player at #5, but not that dynamic game breaker we were so close to.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, MJDDawg said:

You can spin it any which way that makes you feel better, but a top 3 pick would have been a game changer for this franchise. A game changer that we don't have and haven't had in a long time.

 

We'll get a good player at #5, but not that dynamic game breaker we were so close to.

Yup.  The Nucks haven't had players capable of properly supporting, let alone replacing the Sedins for over a decade.  With Hank and Danny aging and declining, the Nucks are in desperate need of high level talent, the kind that the top 3 in this year's draft provide. 

 

Without that kind of top talent, the Nucks will have to score by committee just like they had a D core by committee. Neither are overly effective and tend to leave a team in the middle or lower half of the league continually...picking mid first rounders that are mostly middle six potential/bottom pairing D-men. Tough to compete for the cup under that scenario. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

47 minutes ago, CanadianRugby said:

Yeah, why draft a franchise player when we could get another Virtanen?  :rolleyes:

What's wrong with Virtanen?  Let me guess, youd prefer ehlers and another generation of turning the other cheek?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, DIBdaQUIB said:

Yup.  The Nucks haven't had players capable of properly supporting, let alone replacing the Sedins for over a decade.  With Hank and Danny aging and declining, the Nucks are in desperate need of high level talent, the kind that the top 3 in this year's draft provide. 

 

Without that kind of top talent, the Nucks will have to score by committee just like they had a D core by committee. Neither are overly effective and tend to leave a team in the middle or lower half of the league continually...picking mid first rounders that are mostly middle six potential/bottom pairing D-men. Tough to compete for the cup under that scenario. 

 

 

It's almost like they've been picking near the end of the first round for the better part of a decade

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, MJDDawg said:

You can spin it any which way that makes you feel better, but a top 3 pick would have been a game changer for this franchise. A game changer that we don't have and haven't had in a long time.

 

We'll get a good player at #5, but not that dynamic game breaker we were so close to.

Funny how everyone on here is convinced Puljujarvi will be a game breaker because of one good world junior tournament. That's really where the hype for him was built. Really I don't see any difference (other than size) from him and a player like Ehlers or Nylander who we passed on in 2014.

 

Matthews and Laine will probably be game breakers, but I'm not convinced 3rd overall would have guaranteed us anything.

 

Tkachuk - Horvat - Boeser is the line I want. How could anyone not be happy with that?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dubois or Tkatchuk could be better than the Fins in the long run. Playing on North American ice has got to count for something doesn't it?

If Dubois or Tkatchuk develop well they both have potential to be within 10 points of the other big wingers on the right team in my opinion. That's a small difference during an 82 game season, it really comes down to the playoffs and who can thrive in that environment doesn't it?

If we go for a Dman my logical mind says Juolevi, but my go for broke heart says Sergachev or Bean. It's funny how Chychrun could have easily been seen as the best defender in the draft if he simply had a better u18 tournament.

He still has a lot of potential, and upside too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, DeNiro said:

Funny how everyone on here is convinced Puljujarvi will be a game breaker because of one good world junior tournament. That's really where the hype for him was built. Really I don't see any difference (other than size) from him and a player like Ehlers or Nylander who we passed on in 2014.

 

Matthews and Laine will probably be game breakers, but I'm not convinced 3rd overall would have guaranteed us anything.

 

Tkachuk - Horvat - Boeser is the line I want. How could anyone not be happy with that?

It does look good, but a lot of good things are possible.

 

Dubois could start on the wing or work as 4th centre gradually climbing the ranks.

Or Sergachev could average .6 ppg and play a physical game along with it. 

Or we could trade down and get the two Logans: Brown and Stanley.  Mount Logan(s) lol.

 

Yes, no Laine, but on the other hand, these or better deals could very well be better even than the Virtanen/McCann draft year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, DeNiro said:

Funny how everyone on here is convinced Puljujarvi will be a game breaker because of one good world junior tournament. That's really where the hype for him was built. Really I don't see any difference (other than size) from him and a player like Ehlers or Nylander who we passed on in 2014.

 

Matthews and Laine will probably be game breakers, but I'm not convinced 3rd overall would have guaranteed us anything.

 

Tkachuk - Horvat - Boeser is the line I want. How could anyone not be happy with that?

JP had a pretty good tournament as a 16 year old too.  I remember thinking "holy, who is this kid taking games over?".  

 

Like you, I will be thrilled if Tkachuk falls to #5.  

 

It's very possible the Oil go for Juolevi at #4, rather than trade down and risk losing him to the Nucks.  In my opinion, they need D more than Vancouver does, and I think Juolevi is a step up on both Chycrun and sergachev. The Oil could trade one of their young fwds, but compared to the cost the cost of a young dman (if you can even pry one free), they won't get great market value for RNH, Hall, Eberle etc.

 

Once the disappointment floats away, people will see what an interesting spot #5 is this year.  I'll bet GB has a little smirk deep down, because now he gets to do some serious GMing, rather than take whatever no brainer choice came in the top 3.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, DeNiro said:

Funny how everyone on here is convinced Puljujarvi will be a game breaker because of one good world junior tournament. That's really where the hype for him was built. Really I don't see any difference (other than size) from him and a player like Ehlers or Nylander who we passed on in 2014.

 

Matthews and Laine will probably be game breakers, but I'm not convinced 3rd overall would have guaranteed us anything.

 

Tkachuk - Horvat - Boeser is the line I want. How could anyone not be happy with that?

Yes that would be an awesome line. I am hoping for Pierre-Luc Dubois though......6'3" and 202 lbs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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