Vinny in Vancouver Posted May 27, 2016 Share Posted May 27, 2016 Here's the transcript of: http://www.tsn.ca/radio/vancouver-1040-i-1410/benning-knew-it-was-a-steep-price-to-pay-for-gudbranson-1.495875 JB: With the 5th pick overall, I think we're going to add another top 6 forward. That's the direction we decided to go in, so I feel good about this deal and the draft coming up. Moj: Speaking of the draft, does this almost guarantee the fact that you will draft a forward in your draft slot? JB: Well, we're going to draft the best player at 5 so you know depending on what happens with the first 4 picks, like if we feel that the fifth player is a defenseman, then we're going to draft a defenseman, but we're going to go with a strategy that we're going to draft the best player available at 5. Moj: Alright, let me throw this to you. You probably have your board set - your top 5 or 6. Is there a defenseman in your top 5 or 6? JB: Yeah, there is. Here's my initial breakdown: - We all know who the top 3 picks will be (Matthews, the 2 Finns). - JB said that a D-man is in his top 6. - JB also said that he thinks there's a good chance they'll end up with a top-6 forward. - JB said that there's definitely a chance he can draft a D-man at 5 if the D-man is the best player available (BPA). Based on the above breakdown, we can discount that his 6th BPA is the D-man because if his 4th and 5th BPA are both forwards, then he'll be guaranteed that at least one of his 2 forwards will be available at 5. So this means that a D-man is at least his 5th BPA. The next question is: is the D-man at number 4 or 5? Let's see if we can discount the possibility that the JB's 4th BPA is actually a forward - for him to say that he'll end with that forward, he must be quite confident that Edmonton (or whoever they end up trading the pick to) will NOT pick that forward. The only way to be confident of that is if one or more of the following hold true: there's 0 fit for that forward with Edmonton (a centre - perhaps, Dubois?) if JB thinks that Edmonton will be drafting a D-man if the forward they want is not an obvious pick (Brown?) Since those are all probable, we can't discount it so I think we can't tell based on the above statements whether the D-man is in the 4th spot or the 5th spot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Curmudgeon Posted May 27, 2016 Share Posted May 27, 2016 On the other hand, it might have been Mr. Mustard in the library with a lead pipe. Or something. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cdubuya Posted May 27, 2016 Share Posted May 27, 2016 i get the sense we're taking a forward. JB has hinted at that multiple times but doesn't wanna feed the animals in the media by promising to take a forward.... if you've followed all his interviews since we were assigned the no 5 pick this is pretty apparent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeNiro Posted May 27, 2016 Share Posted May 27, 2016 I think he's hoping Edmonton takes a D-man after failing to get Gudbranson or any other D through trade. Then he'll have his pick of either Tkachuk or Dubois, whichever one he thinks more highly of. Tkachuk - Horvat - Boeser just looks right to me for some reason. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SaintPatrick33 Posted May 27, 2016 Share Posted May 27, 2016 Who cares? After watching what JB done in the draft the past 2 seasons I am confident he will draft us a gem! Boeser, Demko, Trymakin, Brisebois, and to be continued! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ice orca Posted May 27, 2016 Share Posted May 27, 2016 1 hour ago, Curmudgeon said: On the other hand, it might have been Mr. Mustard in the library with a lead pipe. Or something. Mean Mister Mustard. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Twilight Sparkle Posted May 27, 2016 Share Posted May 27, 2016 18 minutes ago, ice orca said: Mean Mister Mustard. Sleeps in the park Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canucks1527 Posted May 27, 2016 Share Posted May 27, 2016 Gudbrandson is proof that a defenseman taken in the top five is no guaranteed top pairing guy. Not a knock on gudbrandson, I don't mind the deal and like what he brings to the team, but personally I think it makes more sense to take someone with some offensive flare and goal scoring upside in the draft. From what it sounds like to me, if Dubois is available, we will take him, if not benning has a d man in mind. I hope not. I would rather take tkachuk than any of this years defensive prospects. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
timberz21 Posted May 27, 2016 Share Posted May 27, 2016 2 hours ago, SaintPatrick33 said: Who cares? After watching what JB done in the draft the past 2 seasons I am confident he will draft us a gem! Boeser, Demko, Trymakin, Brisebois, and to be continued! He maybe has some potential, but Brisebois is far from a gem! But I agree with you that I completely trust Benning. I'm not fond of Dubois but if Benning is, I'm fine with it. I think it is easy to assume we take a forward because of the McCann/Gudbranson trade, but realistically nobody beside the top 3 and maybe Tkachuk will play NHL next year. Therefore whether we take a F or D, nobody will play in the NHL in 2016-17 and might start the 2017-18 in the AHL. A lot will change since. So like JB mentioned I think whoever they have as BPA with the 5th thats who they should take. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DonaldBrashear Posted May 27, 2016 Share Posted May 27, 2016 He said JB: With the 5th pick overall, I think we're going to add another top 6 forward. That's the direction we decided to go in, so I feel good about this deal and the draft coming up. End of story. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JeremyCuddles Posted May 27, 2016 Share Posted May 27, 2016 Something tells me he is not fond of one of Tkachuk or Dubois. Aren't they the consensus 4/5? Edit: He does say a d-man in his top 5 OR 6. He might just have a d-man at 6, which is irrelevant given we are picking 5. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FrankieCorrado Posted May 27, 2016 Share Posted May 27, 2016 I've had this feeling that if Dubois is gone at 4 then we will be picking Juolevi. As long as that isn't just to fill a need and JB really thinks Juolevi is the real deal, then I'd be good with it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrJockitch Posted May 27, 2016 Share Posted May 27, 2016 Having listened to the interview, it seemed to me he was saying he has a d-man ranked 6th and is being a little cagey. He may not like one of Dubois or Tkachuk, but really seemed like his 6th player ranked is a D. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alflives Posted May 27, 2016 Share Posted May 27, 2016 14 minutes ago, DonaldBrashear said: He said JB: With the 5th pick overall, I think we're going to add another top 6 forward. That's the direction we decided to go in, so I feel good about this deal and the draft coming up. End of story. thanks. I stopped reading after your post. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
higgyfan Posted May 27, 2016 Share Posted May 27, 2016 12 minutes ago, FrankieCorrado said: I've had this feeling that if Dubois is gone at 4 then we will be picking Juolevi. As long as that isn't just to fill a need and JB really thinks Juolevi is the real deal, then I'd be good with it. This. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Long Posted May 27, 2016 Share Posted May 27, 2016 I dont see anything there that barring some injury or something bizarre happens like during the NFL draft we're not picking Dubois. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vinny in Vancouver Posted May 27, 2016 Author Share Posted May 27, 2016 19 minutes ago, DrJockitch said: Having listened to the interview, it seemed to me he was saying he has a d-man ranked 6th and is being a little cagey. He may not like one of Dubois or Tkachuk, but really seemed like his 6th player ranked is a D. But if the D-man is only ranked 6th, then that D-man will never be his 5th BPA. If you don't think he was lying, the only way to reconcile that is if he has at least 2 BPA at 5th - one a forward and another a D-man. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
timberz21 Posted May 27, 2016 Share Posted May 27, 2016 Kinda of contradicts himself. First saying they want to add a top 6 forward, then depending on the top 4, he will select BPA (F or D). The only way I see that happening is: - Top 3 will go as planned - JB doesn't like either Dubois or Tkachuk - His conversation with his friend Chiarelli makes him believe Oilers will pick a Dman. - Leaving JB with the choice of Dubois or Tkachuk - If for some reason Oilers pick JB's forward, JB will pass on Dubois/Tkachuk and select Juolevi/Chychrun as his 5th BPA. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crabcakes Posted May 27, 2016 Share Posted May 27, 2016 34 minutes ago, DrJockitch said: Having listened to the interview, it seemed to me he was saying he has a d-man ranked 6th and is being a little cagey. He may not like one of Dubois or Tkachuk, but really seemed like his 6th player ranked is a D. ^^^ This. He just doesn't want to tip his hand. He has 4/5 as Tkachuk and Dubois and the D as 6 like everybody else. Also, there will be no decision until the combine when he gets to interview the candidates to suss out their character. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neko Posted May 27, 2016 Share Posted May 27, 2016 No it didn't sound like he was confirming it, he was just giong with what the interviewer was asking, he doesn't want other GM's poking their noses into what he plans on doing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.