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

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


19naslund19

Recommended Posts

2 hours 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?

we just might get tkachuk. benning probably believes we need a d. oilers may go juli, that leaves jakob or serv. or trade down and go for bean

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, In_Linden_we_trust said:

Maybe I missed it but I'm surprised I haven't seen much talk about trading up. There's been tons of trading down talk.

I'm not talking about the number 1 pick more the number 3 at least . Without destroying the future I think we could reasonably offer something of that's what Benning decides.

I made a discussion/proposal about moving up but it was locked because it was

"redundant". Because theres already a

discussion saying "Canucks have 5th OVR"

 

Not really alike those two threads but

whatever, give it a read if you like, I think we should seriously consider phoning

Cheveldayoff or Kekalainen. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Junkyard Dog said:

Dubois can do everything, 200 f game, pass, shoot or power threw you but Tkachuk is a lot more successful in the tough areas, has great offensive instincts and hands in tight and isn't a slouch in his own end either.

 

It is tough to say really. I, personally, don't have one over the other.

Nice!  Thanks for the info, much appreciated!  Its tough to say out of the 2.  6'3'' at 17 years old is nothing to scoff at, jeez, thats something right there, I might be leaning towards PLD.  Gonna be a long, long, long summer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, Wrecken said:

Good for them and you. He is my 5th if Tkachuk is gone.

Good for you and your sarcasm.

 

Youd rather take a player that's probs a 3rd liner rather than a guy compared to

Patrick Kane in A.Nylander.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Junkyard Dog said:

Dubois can do everything, 200 f game, pass, shoot or power threw you but Tkachuk is a lot more successful in the tough areas, has great offensive instincts and hands in tight and isn't a slouch in his own end either.

 

It is tough to say really. I, personally, don't have one over the other.

Couldnt agree more. Like them both for different reasons.

However, the more Z says he doesnt like him... I dont know... I seem to want Dubois even more.

 

6 minutes ago, Z Hockey said:

My comment about Dubois' name I said was a ("silly observation")

But it has some truth I said, which it does.

Go look it up, NHL players named Pierre or Pierre Luc, you'll find two if I'm correct that were significant NHLers, 

one being Pierre Larouche and one being Pierre-Marc Bouchard.

The other ones are AHLers and

minor-leaguers. 

:picard: omg. I think you are just stating some fun facts, but I cant help but feel that his name is actually bearing on your opinion of him in some way too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, 19naslund19 said:

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.

I see what you are saying there.

 

But the problem is, I don't think they will look at another rebuild year.

 

So they are going to do the same thing with a non top 3 player

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Z Hockey said:

You have a few good points there. 

You're right but I just am not high on Dubois and feel there's better players we can take.

 

Dubois should go between 9-15.

Not top 5.

 

M.Tkachuk has better hands in tight yes.

Better hands in tight around the net usually means better hands in general than

someone with good hands in open ice like Dubois.

As it's tougher to dangle in tight obviously.

M.Tkachuk also plays a physical game,

I'd like to see Dubois play his physical game in the Dub or OHL.

I'd also like to see Dubois score outside the Q.

 

Im quite aware a lot of good players are from the QMJHL, the best player in the world is from the Q (Sid). 

It's also been a league where 4th liners look like Pavel Datsyuk...

 

My comment about Dubois' name I said was a ("silly observation")

But it has some truth I said, which it does.

Go look it up, NHL players named Pierre or Pierre Luc, you'll find two if I'm correct that were significant NHLers, 

one being Pierre Larouche and one being Pierre-Marc Bouchard.

The other ones are AHLers and

minor-leaguers. 

 

I think Dubois and Tkachuk can be good NHLers. I don't have one over the other. I really like them both. Same goes with Chychrun and Juo.

 

Scouts have Dubois high for good reasons. He does have real good hands, better than Tkachuk by a considerable margain, just because Tkachuk has good hands in tight doesn't mean Dubois doesn't as well. Dubois is also a good playmaker and his release is up there with the best in this draft(outside top 3). He's up their in physicality and isn't afraid to drop the mitts as well. He is the complete package 200 f forward that can do it all at a high level.

 

Dubois is one of the few players with little to no flaws in this draft. He may be the most complete player.

 

Just because players have the same name doesn't mean they fall into the same stigma. I bet you that a lot of players that are projected to go top 10, especially 4-6 in a deep draft, usually turn out good.

 

Not knocking Tkachuk at all just stating that Dubois is a lot better than you are led to believe. Both should go 4-6 I have no doubts about that. Like I said, I don't have one over the other, I am really high on both players.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, CanadianRugby said:

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

Do you even watch the games? I swear only our fan-base has people that rip on their 19 YEAR OLD players after 1 season. Give me a break.

Virtanen, as a teenager, has the ability to take over games and get under the other teams skin(which by the way he did on more than one occasion last year).

Much can be said about his consistency but he is 19 YEARS OLD.. Jesus..

Reminds me of what people were saying after Horvats first year "3rd line center at best".. lol :lol: 

 

Say what you want, whats done is done, be happy for our youngin's coming up! They sure are an exciting bunch to watch. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Z Hockey said:

Good for you and your sarcasm.

 

Youd rather take a player that's probs a 3rd liner rather than a guy compared to

Patrick Kane in A.Nylander.

uhh, no sarcasm. Straight forward reply. That was my opinion, and many others.

For a guy who defended stating his own OPINION so strongly, you sure like to come down on other peoples when they are not the same as yours.

Obviously we think higher of Dubouis then you do.

If Nylander was the next Kane, he would be top 3, 4th at the most. Funny no one has him that high.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Wrecken said:

Couldnt agree more. Like them both for different reasons.

However, the more Z says he doesnt like him... I dont know... I seem to want Dubois even more.

 

:picard: omg. I think you are just stating some fun facts, but I cant help but feel that his name is actually bearing on your opinion of him in some way too.

I'm stating a fun fact dude, relax Lol.

 

However my opinion on Dubois is simply that I'm concerned about his translation of size and strength from the

"easy going QMJHL" to pro.

And I think his skill is OK but not top six NHL calibre. Tell you what if we trade down and around and have two or three first rounders, I'd have no issue drafting Dubois with one of them at 10-15.

But I'm sorry there's way more talented players we should be eyeing at 5th overall.

Like I said this morning I heard somewhere that if the Canucks draft 5th OA,

(barring a trade up or down I guess), that were drafting Alex Nylander, and I like I said with my list of draft targets, A.Nylander should be #1 on it.

 

-Z

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Z Hockey said:

I'm stating a fun fact dude, relax Lol.

 

However my opinion on Dubois is simply that I'm concerned about his translation of size and strength from the

"easy going QMJHL" to pro.

And I think his skill is OK but not top six NHL calibre. Tell you what if we trade down and around and have two or three first rounders, I'd have no issue drafting Dubois with one of them at 10-15.

But I'm sorry there's way more talented players we should be eyeing at 5th overall.

Like I said this morning I heard somewhere that if the Canucks draft 5th OA,

(barring a trade up or down I guess), that were drafting Alex Nylander, and I like I said with my list of draft targets, A.Nylander should be #1 on it.

 

-Z

Nice reply. I understand. Nylander is no doubt a talent. I just like the all around, complete guys, more then the high flying flashy ones. Thats just me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If we're drafting Dubois to be our number one centre and there's still lots of question marks on him I'd pass. 

 

IMO there's less doubt about Tkachuk becoming a top 6 winger or Juolevi and Chychrun becoming top 4 D-men.

 

I don't think we can afford to pick a boom or bust player.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Junkyard Dog said:

I think Dubois and Tkachuk can be good NHLers. I don't have one over the other. I really like them both. Same goes with Chychrun and Juo.

 

Scouts have Dubois high for good reasons. He does have real good hands, better than Tkachuk by a considerable margain, just because Tkachuk has good hands in tight doesn't mean Dubois doesn't as well. Dubois is also a good playmaker and his release is up there with the best in this draft(outside top 3). He's up their in physicality and isn't afraid to drop the mitts as well. He is the complete package 200 f forward that can do it all at a high level.

 

Dubois is one of the few players with little to no flaws in this draft. He may be the most complete player.

 

Just because players have the same name doesn't mean they fall into the same stigma. I bet you that a lot of players that are projected to go top 10, especially 4-6 in a deep draft, usually turn out good.

 

Not knocking Tkachuk at all just stating that Dubois is a lot better than you are led to believe. Both should go 4-6 I have no doubts about that. Like I said, I don't have one over the other, I am really high on both players.

 

I did not say because M.Tkachuk has good hands in tight that therefore Dubois has bad hands. 

 

Thats great that Dubois is a complete

player but it doesn't make him a 1st line center, take away his scoring because

anyone can score in the Q and that's what people don't seem to understand.

He plays in the smallest, least physical, and  easiest Major Junior league.

I doubt he's that skilled at the next level.

 

I see Dubois as being Manny Malhotra,

Malhotra has the same fundamentals and went in a similar spot at 7th overall.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Wrecken said:

Nice reply. I understand. Nylander is no doubt a talent. I just like the all around, complete guys, more then the high flying flashy ones. Thats just me.

I like high flying skill guys that have a little more of a complete game too,

but the type of "complete" player that Dubois is not a complete star like

Patrice Bergeron that people think he is.

But more of a Manny Malhotra. 

Therefore it's risky using him as a 5th

overall, we should look at Dubois, but take him at like 14th overall

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Z Hockey said:

I did not say because M.Tkachuk has good hands in tight that therefore Dubois has bad hands. 

 

Thats great that Dubois is a complete

player but it doesn't make him a 1st line center, take away his scoring because

anyone can score in the Q and that's what people don't seem to understand.

He plays in the smallest, least physical, and  easiest Major Junior league.

I doubt he's that skilled at the next level.

 

I see Dubois as being Manny Malhotra,

Malhotra has the same fundamentals and went in a similar spot at 7th overall.

I see him more as a winger.

 

You underrate the Q. You're stating it as if it is a bush league when it is definitely not. It is a lesser league but not by a mile.

 

Malhotra is not a good comparison. More like Ryan offensively and Neal overall.

 

Has potential to be a top line player. Has huge upside and a ton of skill. Hence why scouts have him ranked 4-6.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

54 minutes ago, Z Hockey said:

You have a few good points there. 

You're right but I just am not high on Dubois and feel there's better players we can take.

 

Dubois should go between 9-15.

Not top 5.

 

M.Tkachuk has better hands in tight yes.

Better hands in tight around the net usually means better hands in general than

someone with good hands in open ice like Dubois.

As it's tougher to dangle in tight obviously.

M.Tkachuk also plays a physical game,

I'd like to see Dubois play his physical game in the Dub or OHL.

I'd also like to see Dubois score outside the Q.

 

Im quite aware a lot of good players are from the QMJHL, the best player in the world is from the Q (Sid). 

It's also been a league where 4th liners look like Pavel Datsyuk...

 

My comment about Dubois' name I said was a ("silly observation")

But it has some truth I said, which it does.

Go look it up, NHL players named Pierre or Pierre Luc, you'll find two if I'm correct that were significant NHLers, 

one being Pierre Larouche and one being Pierre-Marc Bouchard.

The other ones are AHLers and

minor-leaguers. 

 

 

 

Turgeon?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, CanadianRugby said:

What are those videos supposed to prove?  There were 36 rookies with more impressive highlight reels last season.  He scored 13 points, 64 less than the top rookie.  His work ethic was so bad he got trash talked by Sedin.  So even compared to only rookies he doesn't score, doesn't play good D and is lazy.  But yeah, totally franchise player.  :rolleyes:

 

McCann and Virtanen are so overrated by this fanbase. 

They're 19...

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...