2017 NHL Draft - Chicago, Illinois June 23-24 2017

[kenhodgejr]

7 minutes ago, messier's_elbow said:

Vesalainen won't make it to the second round. I wish. 

Watching him play he looks a lot like Owen Tippett to me

[Rollieo Del Fuego]

Strome, Ratcliffe, Vesalainen or Kostin ....one of those guys will be available at 33....

Edited April 29, 2017 by Rollieo Del Fuego

[Odd.]

16 minutes ago, kenhodgejr said:

What do you guys think of drafting a big body like Issac Ratcliffe?

 

Granlund Hischier Boesser

Goldobin Horvat Dahlen 

McEwan Gaudette Virtanen

Ratcliffe Gaunce Lockwood

I'd take a chance on Jonas Gadjovich. 6'2 200lbs+ PWF. projected 2nd/3rd rounder. 

 

60gps and scored 46 goals and 28 assists for 74 points in the regular season. Under the radar. Guys like him I'd take a flyer for sure in the 2nd round. I'd use the potential CBJ 2nd round pick if he falls there. 

 

With our 33rd pick I'd like us to get either Vesalainen or Josh Norris

[Rollieo Del Fuego]

Tyler Steenbergen, 5' 10" and 188 Lbs.,...scored the most goals on the leaderboard at 51 goals in 72 games...why is rated under 50 in Craigs list?

 

He's not to small at 190 or so and will probably play at 5'11", 200 in the NHL....

Edited April 29, 2017 by Rollieo Del Fuego

[TheHitman]

1 hour ago, drummerboy said:

I'll be back to give you a - later. 

 

Great response. Look forward to getting more -'s for the below post.
 

51 minutes ago, Camel Toe Drag said:

Man, you had such a knowledgable and well out response to my Makar post. I truly believed you were a half

intelligent poster. Then you have to go and say something completely rubbish as this. How near sites are you my friend? I don't wanna go into this thoroughly because all of the topics you bring up have been beaten to death. I challenge you to look a little further than 1 year of development and the fact that a player such a Pastrnak was missed by many teams and in fact a diamond in the rough. You will constantly be in happy with yourself and the team if this is how you love be your life. 

Except the frustrating part of the Pastrnak pick was that Benning had identified that his ability to succeed in the NHL during his time in Boston and was planning on selecting him with the 24th pick had McCann not fallen so far. This is the issue with Benning, his reliance on calculated risk has failed him so far in the early rounds of each draft. Benning took a calculated risk that Pastrnak would be available at 36, but he wasn't. In both the case of Jake Virtanen and Jared McCann, he strayed from his motto of drafting hard-working hockey players rather than skilled players with raw potential and decided that the previously identified character issues with both guys was worth it and took the calculated risk again. At the time, he addressed those picks as filling team needs rather than picking the best player available. Also, if you remember, JV and JM were already having issues in their first year post draft, so it's no surprise Benning turned around and drafted Brock Boeser, widely regarded as having the strongest character at that point in the draft and tried to get into the second round and pick Jansen Harkins. Both were attempts at rectifying his previous mistakes, and revealed his strategies to the league. 

You can call me near sighted for viewing the OJ pick as a mistake, which could very well be true and OJ could be an amazing part of this team, but it's a decision Benning made that proved his vulnerability to other GM's. Again, his strategies are now public knowledge, he's not good at taking calculated risks and generally favours reacting to mistakes, and his choice to fill team needs makes it easy for other GM's to outmaneuver him. He had a promising young defensemen in Gustav Forsling, who was more than a few years away from helping this team, but he decided that the team needed older prospects and so Forsling was on the block. Knowing Benning's strategy and needs, Bowman swooped in and swapped Clendening for Forsling, an example of another move that was a clear miscalculation. Whether or not this trade led to the OJ pick is a massive stretch, but it did add to the thought that our next weakest position that needed to be filled was D. As soon as it was announced we were going to be drafting fifth overall, any thought of the Canucks drafting anyone other than OJ if he was available was slim to none. This isn't necessarily a bad thing, but OJ could've possibly been available one or two picks later and allowed for the Canucks to pick up an extra asset. Now, should we have drafted Tkachuk? IMO, we should have because everyone already knew the 2017 draft would have multiple intriguing choices to fill that defensive spot and the Canucks would most likely have a shot at getting one of them with where they would most likely end up. Now, is that short-sighted? Seems quite the opposite when you really think about it. 

Thinking about this heading into the 2017 draft, let's look at the facts at hand: 
1. We're picking anywhere from 1st to 5th, with most chances we pick 4th or 5th meaning we probably won't get Patrick or Hischier. 
2. Tanev is going to be a commodity when the expansion draft is finished, moreso for teams that want to compete next year.
3. Tryamkin decided that the Canucks weren't worth his time and went back to the KHL, leaving another gap in the future core . 
4. We could be losing Sbisa or Sutter in the expansion draft, opening up some salary space. 
5. The Sedins are leaving next year, giving us another year to bring in youth.
6. The 2017 draft has good defensemen, and the 2018 draft is loaded with forwards.

It's clear how Benning is going to act knowing these things, and not very hard to figure out what his options are. I hope that is enough of a well thought out response for you. 
 

[aGENT]

I can't even bother replying to that much delusion. Way too far down their own rabbit hole 

[TheHitman]

59 minutes ago, Rollieo Del Fuego said:

Strome, Ratcliffe, Vesalainen or Kostin ....one of those guys will be available at 33....

Kostin would be an awesome pick at 33, but one of the contending teams will probably take him. 

[funkyfresh]

1 hour ago, Rollieo Del Fuego said:

Tyler Steenbergen, 5' 10" and 188 Lbs.,...scored the most goals on the leaderboard at 51 goals in 72 games...why is rated under 50 in Craigs list?

 

He's not to small at 190 or so and will probably play at 5'11", 200 in the NHL....

He's in his draft +1 year.

[Herberts Vasiljevs]

Watching the ANA vs. EDM series, Timothy Liljegren's skating reminds me a lot of Brandon Montour's. They are both outstanding skaters. I see a lot of similarities in their games as well, but Liljegren definitely has more offensive upside. 

Edited April 29, 2017 by Herberts Vasiljevs

[Gaudette Celly]

3 hours ago, Rollieo Del Fuego said:

Strome, Ratcliffe, Vesalainen or Kostin ....one of those guys will be available at 33....

And hopefully someone else takes Strome.

[ForsbergTheGreat]

2 hours ago, Herberts Vasiljevs said:

Watching the ANA vs. EDM series, Timothy Liljegren's skating reminds me a lot of Brandon Montour's. They are both outstanding skaters. I see a lot of similarities in their games as well, but Liljegren definitely has more offensive upside. 

Montour.... one of the many players we could have had with the pick we traded away for linden Vey.

[DinoTambo]

. 

Edited April 29, 2017 by DinoTambo

[DinoTambo]

11 hours ago, Camel Toe Drag said:

Playmaking centre = CM

pp QB = Makar

My thought's exactly. Vilardi &  Mittlestadt at 3/4, but if they take a Dman with a Top 5 pick, I'm praying they take Makar and not Liljigren. 

[Wolfgang Durst]

5 hours ago, Rollieo Del Fuego said:

Strome, Ratcliffe, Vesalainen or Kostin ....one of those guys will be available at 33....

would like the canucks to pick a D-Man with QBPP ability at # 33. There's a good chance that such a D-Man will be available at # 33. I think it's common sense that the Canucks need a D-Man in this years draft. I don't see a need for the canucks to pick a winger like Vesalainen in this year's draft. Vesalainen heavily struggled to adjust to the men's game in the top league in sweden (SHL) and subsequently in the top league in Finland. Not convinced that this guy should be worth a second round pick.

[DownUndaCanuck]

To be honest I think the Canucks pick is going to come down between Vilardi and Mittelstatd, and we really can't go wrong with either at 3-5th overall. I just hope Benning and our scouts have done their work and they get the right player, because if we have another Virtanen-Nylander fiasco and get out-picked again, that should be JB's job and our scouts need to be cleaned out. We've drafted TERRIBLY in the first round in the last few years, with Boeser the only real good pick. Taking Virtanen right over Nylander/Ehlers and McCann directly before Pastrnak is proof of that. I stand by the Juolevi pick, but even that was a bit controversial, even though he was the safe pick.

 

I've said it before, when JB started as a Canuck GM it would be 3 years before we can really see what we've got. He started the rebuild then, he's well and truly in it now, and for me, this draft makes or breaks his career as a Canuck GM. He's done some great jobs moving pieces around to get what this team needs (ie. defence last off-season, size and strength in Tryamkin/Gudbranson, skill up front in Goldobin and Dahlen) but now's the most important part - picking the right cornerstone franchise center to complement Horvat.

 

If we get Hirschier or Nolan we'll be lucky and JB gets a free pass, but his worth will be tested if we're picking 3rd because there's a lot more pressure to pick the wrong guy. Consequentially if we're picking 4th he's got a good bet he'll be gifted one of Vilardi and Mittelstatd and won't have to chose. The big problem will be if we're picking 5th and the pressure's on to trade that pick up or sit with it and hope we get a sleeper of a stud center. Don't envy his position. Here's what I'd do with each pick.

 

1st overall - Hirschier, don't even think twice

2nd overall - Nolan

3rd overall - The big decision, depends on his scouts but I'd take Vilardi at the moment, although JB seems high on Mittelstatd. This pick will split fans 50-50 and to be honest won't really matter, either player is just as good.

4th overall - Take whoever's left of Hirschier, Nolan, Vilardi or Mittelstatd

5th overall - If one of those top-4 centers are somehow still available take them. Otherwise we're thinking Heiskanen, Class, Tippett, Rasmussen, Petersson etc. Don't really like any of those guys and they don't really fill any of our needs, so I'd strongly consider trading up with a team like Arizona. Package Tanev, get a higher 1st and a depth prospect (hopefully a D-man).

[Wolfgang Durst]

16 hours ago, Beary Sweet said:

Liljegren has been a hard faller this season and I hope we trade one of our D in Edler and Sbisa for a 1st and possibly more depending on if there are any desperate teams out there and pick this kid up. He still has Karlsson and Ekman Larsson upside imo and had he not had been out for most of the season he would be in the top 10 at the very least. Hischier is my pick all day especially when even TSN can't even set in straight who's the #1 prospect in this draft as I've said in the past. My top 5 to round off is

2. Patrick

3. Vilardi

4. Middlestadt

5. Heiskanen

im starting to get the Middlestadt train if we drop but Heiskanen looks like a decent choice also after his performance for the Finns in the U18s.  He looks to be a solid playmaker with 12 points in 7 in the tourney. The fact that we are almost guaranteed one of these players is exciting and tomorrow can't come soon enough.

I am also high on Heiskanen and would take him over Makar and Liljegren, because of  the fact  that  the has a pretty complete game and he has played one full season in the finnish top league, the Liiga. Based on that playing experience he should be far more close to the NHL than Makar. I have read the draft profile from Liljegren published by Janik Beichler on the canucksway and Janik doubted the hockey sense of Liljegren. Liljegren has the advantage that he is a RHS. Nevertheless I wouldn't take him. The Canucks need prospects that make the NHL soon. Liljegren is too much of gamble right now. ....

[Phat Fingers]

6 hours ago, TheHitman said:

Great response. Look forward to getting more -'s for the below post.
 

Except the frustrating part of the Pastrnak pick was that Benning had identified that his ability to succeed in the NHL during his time in Boston and was planning on selecting him with the 24th pick had McCann not fallen so far. This is the issue with Benning, his reliance on calculated risk has failed him so far in the early rounds of each draft. Benning took a calculated risk that Pastrnak would be available at 36, but he wasn't. In both the case of Jake Virtanen and Jared McCann, he strayed from his motto of drafting hard-working hockey players rather than skilled players with raw potential and decided that the previously identified character issues with both guys was worth it and took the calculated risk again. At the time, he addressed those picks as filling team needs rather than picking the best player available. Also, if you remember, JV and JM were already having issues in their first year post draft, so it's no surprise Benning turned around and drafted Brock Boeser, widely regarded as having the strongest character at that point in the draft and tried to get into the second round and pick Jansen Harkins. Both were attempts at rectifying his previous mistakes, and revealed his strategies to the league. 

You can call me near sighted for viewing the OJ pick as a mistake, which could very well be true and OJ could be an amazing part of this team, but it's a decision Benning made that proved his vulnerability to other GM's. Again, his strategies are now public knowledge, he's not good at taking calculated risks and generally favours reacting to mistakes, and his choice to fill team needs makes it easy for other GM's to outmaneuver him. He had a promising young defensemen in Gustav Forsling, who was more than a few years away from helping this team, but he decided that the team needed older prospects and so Forsling was on the block. Knowing Benning's strategy and needs, Bowman swooped in and swapped Clendening for Forsling, an example of another move that was a clear miscalculation. Whether or not this trade led to the OJ pick is a massive stretch, but it did add to the thought that our next weakest position that needed to be filled was D. As soon as it was announced we were going to be drafting fifth overall, any thought of the Canucks drafting anyone other than OJ if he was available was slim to none. This isn't necessarily a bad thing, but OJ could've possibly been available one or two picks later and allowed for the Canucks to pick up an extra asset. Now, should we have drafted Tkachuk? IMO, we should have because everyone already knew the 2017 draft would have multiple intriguing choices to fill that defensive spot and the Canucks would most likely have a shot at getting one of them with where they would most likely end up. Now, is that short-sighted? Seems quite the opposite when you really think about it. 

Thinking about this heading into the 2017 draft, let's look at the facts at hand: 
1. We're picking anywhere from 1st to 5th, with most chances we pick 4th or 5th meaning we probably won't get Patrick or Hischier. 
2. Tanev is going to be a commodity when the expansion draft is finished, moreso for teams that want to compete next year.
3. Tryamkin decided that the Canucks weren't worth his time and went back to the KHL, leaving another gap in the future core . 
4. We could be losing Sbisa or Sutter in the expansion draft, opening up some salary space. 
5. The Sedins are leaving next year, giving us another year to bring in youth.
6. The 2017 draft has good defensemen, and the 2018 draft is loaded with forwards.

It's clear how Benning is going to act knowing these things, and not very hard to figure out what his options are. I hope that is enough of a well thought out response for you. 
 

Hitman,

 

 

A few things in your well written post that don't quite add up.  First, why would JB think that Pastrnak would fall past Boston, his former team?  He would have been aware of their scouting program because he led it.  Could it be that both he and Boston had McCann ranked higher because scouting/drafting is not an exact science.  No GM gets it prefect every time.  

 

Benning picked Boeser because he is good scout.  Not many even knew who Brock was prior to his selection.  

 

Your post has a tinge of the 'X files' about it.... Linking the Forsling Clendenning trade as the catalyst for the OJ selection over Tkachuk. Added to that, if Brock was a good pick due to his abilities and his character, why would OJ not be good for the same reasons.  

 

Look at it in a different light, JB selected OJ because he thought highly of his potential to lead our D corps.  JB might have passed on MT because he already had Boeser and JV filling similar roles with varying potential.  Had JB drafted MT, where would that leave the club?  Yes we would have a dearth of wingers vying for spots and looking for breakout passes, but who would be there to pass to them?  NHL d men usually take longer to develop, so could the team wait on the next draft to address its biggest weakness?

 

Other than the 2014 first round, where has JB missed out on making a good pick?  OJ was a solid pick, you may very well be 'near sighted' about that one.

 

You are suposing/guessing what others were thinking but are not supporting your arguments well.  If JB was so easy to read, how did we get Baer and Granlund for scraps?  The Burrows and Hansen deals were positively viewed by pundits, the Guddy deal is on hold for review.  I still like the Sutter deal, I hated Bonino.  The only place JB has done really poorly is in the FA market, in attempting to short cut the rebuild with quick fixes.  Had he held back from the Eriksson deal, which I liked at the time, but what do I know... We would be looking better.  

 

We don't know why Trymakin left, family issues, Olympics, unhappy wife, unhappy player...

sutter will not be exposed in the expansion draft

 

 

I don't know what JB will do, but I do hope he adds even more to the talent pool, makes some good trades and either gets Trymakin back or trades his rights for something good.  

 

Respectfully

EmW

 

 

 

Report post

 

[messier's_elbow]

5 hours ago, Herberts Vasiljevs said:

Watching the ANA vs. EDM series, Timothy Liljegren's skating reminds me a lot of Brandon Montour's. They are both outstanding skaters. I see a lot of similarities in their games as well, but Liljegren definitely has more offensive upside. 

Liljegren is barely in my top 10. If we pick him at 4 or 5 I'll be choked. I think Neiskanen , who I like more then Liljegren, is high on Bennings list though. 

 

The combine might change things  for me, but right now I have Patrick at #1 unless he dodges the combine or does poorly. If he doesn't participate, I take Hischier. Vilardi is my #3 but sometimes I feel like he might end up better then the top 2 picks. Mittelstadt is #4 and is a bit mysterious. I think Benning did a good thing, going to see Mittelstadt play when he was up in college for a few games. Gives me a Keller vibe. It's a debate who I'd take at #5. Probably Neiskanen over Glass slightly. Glass looks good but if all things are even I'm taking the Dman. 

Edited April 29, 2017 by messier's_elbow

[funkyfresh]

11 hours ago, kenhodgejr said:

Watching him play he looks a lot like Owen Tippett to me

Nah, he's a better on the forecheck and can play an east-west game.

[funkyfresh]

5 hours ago, Wolfgang Durst said:

would like the canucks to pick a D-Man with QBPP ability at # 33. There's a good chance that such a D-Man will be available at # 33. I think it's common sense that the Canucks need a D-Man in this years draft. I don't see a need for the canucks to pick a winger like Vesalainen in this year's draft. Vesalainen heavily struggled to adjust to the men's game in the top league in sweden (SHL) and subsequently in the top league in Finland. Not convinced that this guy should be worth a second round pick.

Jokiharju might be available at that spot, or Brannstrom. 

 

Vesalainen would not be available with a second round pick. If he is, then you have to take him. He's played well everywhere he's gone except this year in the SHL. He just had an off season but he reaffirmed his 1st round status at the U18s. He was a projected top ten pick before the season started so It's not like he came out of nowhere. If he somehow gets to the second round, I can see a Saad situation where teams regret passing on him because he had one bad season. The talent and tools are there for him to be top 6 player.