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

[aGENT]

8 minutes ago, ForsbergTheGreat said:

The fact that linden came out and said that this team hasn't drafted a D in the first round in 10+ years, ya i do think i was based on team needs.  The reason there wasn't that much shock was because he rated fairly close. But close doesn't equal consensus BPA. Again not saying JB made the wrong choice.

 

I wanted Sergachev, on my personal list, Sergachev was BPA #5.  But what I think, doesn't change what the consensus experts think.

Pretty sure if PLD was still there at 5 as predicted (BPA!), he'd be a Canuck prospect right now. So no.

 

Pretty sure their list was Mathews, Laine, Puljujarvi, PLD, Juolevi, Tkachuck from the get go. and it wasn't just because 'we haven't picked a D'.

 

 

[Honky Cat]

3 hours ago, stawns said:

the BPA for them was Tkachuk, the BPA for the Canucks was, obviously, Juolevi.

Thank you...That's the point ( which was in response to a poster that said most mock drafts had the Canucks picking Juolevi which.. was completely false).......The BPA for them (scouting agencies) was universally Tkachuk..at the time of the draft...end of story.

 

 

[Alflives]

2 minutes ago, Honky Cat said:

Thank you...That's the point ( which was in response to a poster that said most mock drafts had the Canucks picking Juolevi which.. was completely false).......The BPA for them (scouting agencies) was universally Tkachuk..at the time of the draft...end of story.

 

 

Wasn't Tkatchuk actually ranked fourth?  

[Zhukini]

33 minutes ago, I.Am.Ironman said:

Curve ball here... Do you think Philly is open for business to finally attain that dman to anchor their blue line to support their already high powered offense?

 

Let's say NJ takes Nolan Patrick 1st OA... What would Philly be willing to sway for Nico Hischier? They certainly need a guy like Tanev on their team. However, if I am JB I am not trading 5th OA and Tanev just for the 2nd OA on its own.

 

I just feel that Philly has enough high powered offensive guys. Unless they use the power of Hischier's ELC and end up trading one of their forward to save cap.

We are talking about Philadelphia right? They are LOADED on the back end. The last thing they need is another defenceman. 

 

Now if you want to throw Thatcher Demko ++ their way, maybe they'd listen. 

[Honky Cat]

1 minute ago, Alflives said:

Wasn't Tkatchuk actually ranked fourth?  

In the consensus draft...yes.

[Alflives]

1 minute ago, Zhukini said:

We are talking about Philadelphia right? They are LOADED on the back end. The last thing they need is another defenceman. 

 

Now if you want to throw Thatcher Demko ++ their way, maybe they'd listen. 

Why should we bow to Philly?  They can live without a goalie and suffer.  

[Honky Cat]

1 minute ago, Zhukini said:

We are talking about Philadelphia right? They are LOADED on the back end. The last thing they need is another defenceman. 

 

Now if you want to throw Thatcher Demko ++ their way, maybe they'd listen. 

We would be plugging one hole,and springing another....

[missioncanucksfan]

3 hours ago, stawns said:

I think people assume that central scouting, iss, tsn, sportsnet etc are some scouting mecca.  In reality, they don't have the resources to send the numbers out the way the teams do and rely on a lot of info sharing rather than direct scouting the way teams do.  

Not just that, it's a question of...

 

If a team simply drafts the "consensus" guy then when do they solidify a positional need? 

Benning gave his reason why he didn't pick Tkachuk and that was that he just finished drafting power forward wingers the past 2 drafts. In his view at that selection was that Canucks had a chance to pick what was the "consensus" top D and he took it and the Canucks NEED a D prospect since we didnt have any. 

 

I wish ppl could seriously STFU about this subject and actually discuss THIS draft going forward. Otherwise create a thread called "players we shoulda picked but didnt".

If you seriously eliminate every post in this thread that debates the past 3 drafts, we might only be at 100 pages.

[Alflives]

1 minute ago, missioncanucksfan said:

Not just that, it's a question of...

 

If a team simply drafts the "consensus" guy then when do they solidify a positional need? 

Benning gave his reason why he didn't pick Tkachuk and that was that he just finished drafting power forward wingers the past 2 drafts. In his view at that selection was that Canucks had a chance to pick what was the "consensus" top D and he took it and the Canucks NEED a D prospect since we didnt have any. 

 

I wish ppl could seriously STFU about this subject and actually discuss THIS draft going forward. Otherwise create a thread called "players we shoulda picked but didnt".

If you seriously eliminate every post in this thread that debates the past 3 drafts, we might only be at 100 pages.

Maybe people are frustrated with Benning drafting for a positional need rather than selecting the BPA with those picks?  In this coming draft who will (likely) be the BPA at five?  Vilardi, Glass?

[missioncanucksfan]

2 hours ago, R3aL said:

I really do not see the Aves taking Vilardi over Heiskanen 

 

Duchene/Mackinnnon/Jost/Compher/Grigorenko

 

When the draft is flat between D and Forwards they taking a D for sure

 

Dallas I could see taking either Vilardi or Heiskanen and if they take Heiskanen I wouldn't be surprised to see Aves take a winger or one of Liljegren/Makar

AJ Greer and Cam Morrison are also past 2nd rounders that are developing nicely. 

Sakic is slowly stockpiling assets and yes, Col has a chance to be great again but I do predict Joe to select the D he has ranked the highest. Don't be surprised if he selects Makar.

[Honky Cat]

Villardi
Glass
Mittlestadt
Heiskanen
 

I would be happy with any of these players..

[missioncanucksfan]

2 minutes ago, Alflives said:

Maybe people are frustrated with Benning drafting for a positional need rather than selecting the BPA with those picks?  In this coming draft who will (likely) be the BPA at five?  Vilardi, Glass?

Who freaking knows....I promise you...nobody will know until after #4 is picked.

I love that we are discussing who to pick here but by golly...let the past drafts go. Not just that....let the damn kids develop before prematurely ejaculating over the guy that we DIDNT puck and has had early success.

 

I would love to go back to those drafts on here and quote what half of the doubters here really wanted.

 

Ya, I admit, I too wanted Tkachuk and followed him all of that year and was excited when we were in a position TO draft him but thought to myself....ya well we just got the best rated D so let's see in a few years who is right.

When drafting Virtanen, we NEEDED a Jake for his size, ability to score, and physicality. We have just had our butts handed to us by the big bad Kings and the rest of the big boys in our division so ya....Jake was the logical choice.

I can't wait till he shows everyone wrong too when he finally gets a center with real talent to work with and show why he was picked #6.

Again...how many years did it take for Naslund to arrive? Andrew Ladd? Todd Bertuzzi? Heck even Sedins took 6 years before they started putting up numbers.

You ppl seriously need to relax.

Virtanen, Juolevi, Boeser and whoever we puck this year will ALL turn into something good

[Canucks Curse]

Tkachuk was arguably more of an organizational need (tough top 6 forward) than Juolevi. JB picks who he thinks is BPA

, likely this draft the BPA will be a C which fills and organizational need

[missioncanucksfan]

5 minutes ago, Canucks Curse said:

Tkachuk was arguably more of an organizational need (tough top 6 forward) than Juolevi. JB picks who he thinks is BPA

, likely this draft the BPA will be a C which fills and organizational need

But alot believe JB is convinced that Liljegren (ppqb) is his top choice.

That wouldn't be a bad thing since we have Juolevi as well.

Add that to the fact we just lost Tryamkin, about to trade Tanev and let 2 D prospects go free. 

 

IMO....I think Benning's list goes like this...

Mittlestadt 

Liljegren 

Glass

 

Mine is.....and ppl can quote me after the draft on this;

Glass

Makar

Mittlestadt 

[Camel Toe Drag]

45 minutes ago, Canucks Curse said:

Tkachuk was arguably more of an organizational need (tough top 6 forward) than Juolevi. JB picks who he thinks is BPA

, likely this draft the BPA will be a C which fills and organizational need

Tkachuk's are a dime a dozen on the FA. How many top 2 d-men usually get traded or hit FA? 

 

I rest my case. 

[missioncanucksfan]

Makar is my top choice D due to the fact that, like Stecher, he continually works his butt off to get where is.

Depending which site you go to, he is listed at 5'11 180 lbs and surely/hopefully he squeezes another inch and gains 10 lbs with 2-3yrs of college.

He seems to have heart, class and integrity and will surely sign with Canucks when he feels he is ready to sign and not bolt after his senior year. I was happy we got Boeser but it sucks we toasted a year of his elc just to suit his fancy and I worry about so many other college guys going the same route.

Perhaps Heiskanen gets all the ink from U18 due to the fact Makar wasn't there? Hopefully he gets to play WJC.

[missioncanucksfan]

Would anyone complain if with the #33 pick, Benning went out and selected Oettenger? 

Another top G in the system?

[ForsbergTheGreat]

5 minutes ago, missioncanucksfan said:

Makar is my top choice D due to the fact that, like Stecher, he continually works his butt off to get where is.

Depending which site you go to, he is listed at 5'11 180 lbs and surely/hopefully he squeezes another inch and gains 10 lbs with 2-3yrs of college.

He seems to have heart, class and integrity and will surely sign with Canucks when he feels he is ready to sign and not bolt after his senior year. I was happy we got Boeser but it sucks we toasted a year of his elc just to suit his fancy and I worry about so many other college guys going the same route.

Perhaps Heiskanen gets all the ink from U18 due to the fact Makar wasn't there? Hopefully he gets to play WJC.

Top D choice I'd go with Liljegren, he's a the ideal player in todays NHL, he's a quick/smooth skater and is able to rush the puck with such ease.  He has some area's that need to be worked (like making the smart/safe plays) but if he can figure it out he's a lock for a top pairing D.  he's a play driver, having a player like him eliminates the need for that stupid drop pass on the PP.

 

6 minutes ago, missioncanucksfan said:

Would anyone complain if with the #33 pick, Benning went out and selected Oettenger? 

Another top G in the system?

I would.  Too many other options will likely still be on the board, 

[aGENT]

21 minutes ago, missioncanucksfan said:

Would anyone complain if with the #33 pick, Benning went out and selected Oettenger? 

Another top G in the system?

There's some D's and F's I'd probably prefer but I wouldn't be terribly upset.

 

Here's hoping he's around for our late 2nd...or we can nab some more picks.

Edited May 8, 2017 by J.R.

[Podz92]

15 minutes ago, missioncanucksfan said:

Would anyone complain if with the #33 pick, Benning went out and selected Oettenger? 

Another top G in the system?

I would...too many other good prospects will likely still be available at 33. Guys like Nikita Popugaev, Shane Bowers, Henri Jokiharju and Ryan Poehling are much more intriguing for me...