If we got nolan patrick would the canucks be saved?

[canucklehead44]

2 minutes ago, McDavyCrockett said:

I think the notion that this draft is weak is being a little overdone....sure, there might not be a generational (Crosby, Ovechkin, McDavid) or elite (Stamkos, Kane, Tavares, Matthews) at the top, but there's no reason why Patrick won't shape up to be a legit 1st line C. A Mikko Koivu-type.

 

There is no one way to build an elite NHL team. 

Patrick and Horvat would make a great one-two punch up the middle. If Demko, Boeser, Tryamkin, and Juolevi can meet their potential, the team could have the pieces. 

Lets take a look at Scottie Bowman's 7 player profile:
 

1. #1 all star center
- Patrick

 

2. #2 all star center

- Horvat
 

3. Top power forward

- Boeser
 

4. Specialist/Utility Player/Agitator/Shutdown center

- Specialist (not sure) / Virtanen (agitator) / Gaunce (utility player) / Sutter (shutdown centre)
 

5. All star offensive d-man

- Juolevi 
 

6. Top shutdown d-man

- Tanev or Nikita Tryamkin 
 

7. All star goalie
- Demko 

Obviously a lot of "what ifs" and we would need a lot of these guys to hit their potential. But either way, this shows our biggest hole really is another top centre to replace Henrik Sedin (Horvat replaced Kesler, Sutter replaced Malhotra)

[Pears]

9 minutes ago, canucklehead44 said:

???? I never said that. I'd be stoked to get a MacKinnon level player, but he would not save the franchise. MacKinnon hasn't saved the Avs franchise, and his numbers have dropped since his rookie season. Four seasons into MacKinnon's career and the Avs are as bad as they have ever been. And they weren't even that horrible to begin win, quite up and down. 

Crosby and McDavid have saved their franchises. Tavares has helped the Islanders go from league joke to playoff contender and made some really medicore players like Matt Moulson a lot better. Stamkos - Tampa is a strange team, very up and down. 
 

That's what I interpreted. MacKinnon is still a franchise calibre player but for whatever reason Colorado has sucked since his first full season. 

[Alflives]

1 minute ago, Pears said:

That's what I interpreted. MacKinnon is still a franchise calibre player but for whatever reason Colorado has sucked since his first full season. 

That's because he's not a very good centre at the NHL level.  His understanding of defensive concepts a very immature.  I would love to see him on Bo's wing though.  He belongs on the wing.

[ilduce39]

the short answer is, "no"

 

but

 

it does feel like our team has the ability to take significant steps forward with a player like Hischier. Steps that others in our place in the standings probably wouldn't make.

 

To me, that speaks to the "foundation" of our new wave of players.  Yeah, Sutter/Bo/Baer/Granny and the D-core aren't flashy... but if we add some sizzle to that group it could pay the dividends that Colorado/Arizona/Dallas probably won't see.

[appleboy]

I would not be surprised to see Benning take another D man. It wouldn't be a bad choice just not the flashy one.

[Chris12345]

4 hours ago, westcoast said:

Might be a year to grab a defenseman and save the first line centre pick for next draft when we could be at the bottom.If the centre we draft is second tier this year then what? If next year we get a true number one where does this years pick play.

Yes. Bingo. I love you. Draft a dman again.....and again....and again. Unless there's a franchise center go for dman. You can get really good dman in almost any draft and you can get them as late as the third round. 

 

Then trade from a position of power vs weakness. Plus dman take longer to develop. Let your dmen develop and cherry pick your center at the right time. If you go the other way around you can miss your window.

[IBatch]

3 hours ago, westcoast said:

The top 10 picks of this draft are pretty subjective so BPA could be whatever you think it is.Was Juolevi BPA?

Best defenseman available at the draft... Recently voted the 15 the overall prospect on the planet the scouts still think highly of him ( Boesser was 26 BTW).   Obvouisly MT at this point would have been a better pick based on BPA but as an organizational need Juolevi takes the sting out of a bit.   Given its considerd the worst draft since the Sedins and Zetterberg if we get more than one roster player out if it we should be happy.   Personally I doubt NPatrick will be the best player .... And given it looks like we should be picking in the top five again hopefully we get a winner.

[Sedinyoureyesontheprize]

5 hours ago, MJDDawg said:

No, we pick the best player available. Drafting for need is part of the reason we're in this position. 

Like picking oj over mt? Or McCann over Pasternak ? Jv over ehlers/nylander? 

 

But then there's the oilers who picked the best fwd in every draft and have no  real defence  prospects? 

 

Always have to pick the BPA unless you have a surplus of Fwds or dmen then you can address positional needs. Doing the opposite of this is this managements flaw. Too late to do anything now.

[Freeridebc]

9 hours ago, 48MPHSlapShot said:

This thread is dumb.

 

Unless you're a Crosby/McJesus/Matthews level player (which are normally few and far between), not one person can "save" a franchise.

 

Getting a player the level of Patrick would sure go a long ways towards completing our rebuild though.

You can argue that with out edmonton a supporting cast, 5 plus years of drafting the way they have, mcdavid may not be where he is now so fast.  He's amazing.  But they have high end talent all through their top 9 as well imo

[WeneedLumme]

2 hours ago, SID.IS.SID.ME.IS.ME said:

Patrick wouldn't "save" any team but a having a top-six built around Horvat and Patrick (or Hischier) would go a fair way toward resolving the focus on how this team could grow into a young, contending group.

 

We really need another potential 1C in the system. Doesn't have to be an elite/generational guy. Just good enough so that, with Horvat already in place, we have the young centres available to run with a 1A/1B setup in the top-six.

 

Then it's just a matter of getting a 1D (plus Demko becoming a legitimate starter) and the rest of the parts fall into place fairly easily.

 

I think we're pretty good already for having a prospect pool with good mid-range, complimentary players. But need to add a top level centre and defenseman.

 

It's possible we already have that 1D in the system. However, I see our top defensemen prospects as more #2 and top-4 level guys, plus a handful who might be good 4/5/6s or depth Ds.

1Ds are pretty hard to come by, though as you say, we may already have one in the system. I don't think it's absolutely crucial to have one however. Canucks were the best team in the league a half dozen years ago with no 1D, but several good 2 - 3 D's. The reason we don't have a cup yet wasn't the lack of a 1D, it was injuries.

[thrago]

5 hours ago, Boudrias said:

Your assessment is pretty realistic IMO. I have been hoping for a 3 - 4 year period for a competitive team only because Benning has revamped the d-core faster than I thought he could. That does not mean it is competitive now but the ingredients are there. In 4 years this group will be in the 26 - 30 year old spread which has to be positive.

 

The forward group is a challenge as it needs size, speed and skill. As you suggested it could easily take 3 more drafts. Best laid plans more often than not fail in the NHL. There are lots of examples. Many smart hockey people have their rosters never achieve a CUP or even serious contention. So many variables they do not control or anticipate.

Our D is much better for sure but think we are still missing that Noris caliber Defenseman although its too early to say for sure.  I'm maybe one of the few that believes its easier to fix your defense then it is to fix your forwards though.  Seems to me its much easier to find defensive gems outside the first round than it is to find high end offensive forwards. 

 

I've always believed that you should never pick a defenseman in the first round unless he is far superior to the next draft able forward they are just too unpredictable in there development and it seems to me that most of the best defensemen in the league where picked either late in the first round or later.  This makes it sound like I'm pointing my finger at the OJ pick but I'm not.  He may be and hopefully will be a top pairing defenseman I don't know enough about him to say.

 

I just hope Benning picks the most talented forward available in this draft as we have serious scoring concerns going forward. But your right Benning has done a great job so far with our defense and certainly made steps in the right direction with our forwards.  I certainly have much more optimism for our hockey club then I did at this time last year.

[Bruce Boudreau]

Hischuer would be fun. Can't teach speed and being able to think quickly.

[dura_mater]

13 hours ago, Mackcanuck said:

Horvat was projected late 1st round 10th to 14th and higher by most, Craig Button had him at 19th overall

 

http://www.mynhldraft.com/2013-nhl-draft-prospect-rankings

 

He was chosen 9th overall by us

 

 

This doesn't prove your point that he was projected as a 3rd liner, it just shows he went sooner than most expected.

 

13 hours ago, bloodycanuckleheads said:

Let's just put it in perspective...

 

The best we could ever hope for with a 1st overall pick - is the equivalent of a Sedin.  Most of the time you'll get a player who's worse, and occasionally you'll get a player who's better.  But, you hope for another Sedin.

 

Would the addition of one Sedin improve our team very much right now?  Nope.  Not in the slightest.  We'd still be one of the worst teams in the league.  We'd still have an AHL quality team (thanks Jim!).

 

Oh yeah, and we are about to lose TWO Sedins over the next couple of seasons as it is!  And, we almost surely aren't going to get anything of value for them.

 

So, if one new Sedin wouldn't help us, and we are about to lose 2 more, that means we need at least 3 new Sedins.  But, as we mentioned earlier, that doesn't even help us.  That just gets us the equivalent of adding one right now.  We need like 4 or 5 Nolan Patricks, not 1...

What are you smoking?  We don't have to replace two Sedins and certainly not 2 Sedins in their prime.  Not to mention our young guys, as they develop, will take over the Sedins role - Boeser, Horvat, Goldobin, Dahlen etc etc all have a shot (albeit it a long shot for some) to take over that role.
 

13 hours ago, westcoast said:

Might be a year to grab a defenseman and save the first line centre pick for next draft when we could be at the bottom.If the centre we draft is second tier this year then what? If next year we get a true number one where does this years pick play.

I agree.  Especially considering Dmen take longer to develop.

[thad]

Save us from finding another centre with high end potential. Maybe he's good, maybe he's not but id be friggin jacked to have him with this solid young core we're building. Having a guy like Bo Horvat as your caption and guy you have to get better than if you want to be a true number one, would push Patrick to be one hell of a hockey player. Look at it from all angles. This would be a good fit for him. He might not be an individual team savor but playing with a guy like Bo could make him become one. 

[SID.IS.SID.ME.IS.ME]

9 hours ago, WeneedLumme said:

1Ds are pretty hard to come by, though as you say, we may already have one in the system. I don't think it's absolutely crucial to have one however. Canucks were the best team in the league a half dozen years ago with no 1D, but several good 2 - 3 D's. The reason we don't have a cup yet wasn't the lack of a 1D, it was injuries.

You're correct that 1Ds are very tough to acquire and not necessarily essential to building a winner. Same can be said for elite 1Cs. You can build a contending team with a top six that's centred around a couple 1A/1B types, a good mix of wingers, and a defense made up of a couple 2Ds and some very good 3/4 types.

 

But if I'm building an idealized version of a future team, I would try to lock down two key players, an elite 1C and a franchise defenseman (just like every NHL club hopes to). Plus a top level starting goalie (and maybe Demko is that guy). If you have those pieces (and they're acquired at a young age), the rest of the team-building exercise becomes so much easier.

 

My hope is we manage to snag one of the best centres in this year's draft (and he develops to meet or exceed the projections/expectations), and then draft some absolute phenom of a Dman next year (and there look to be a few good candidates for 2018). Adding those pieces to what we already have in the system, plus several more gems unearthed from the middle and later rounds, and this team quickly starts tracking as a dangerous young contending group IMO. 

 

We can still get there without those elite players, but snagging them over the next two drafts would certainly accelerate the rebuild and create a very clear, and short, path toward becoming a legitimate Stanley Cup contender.

 

First things first will be securing a potential impact player with this year's first rounder. And hopefully seeing good development from our existing top prospects. If that all goes to plan, we may very well be only a piece or two away from having a new core in place that will start to turn this team's fortunes around in very short order.

 

Easier said than done, but I feel like this team is "due" for some luck at the draft (as far as the lottery and also getting winning results from any future top-10 picks). So hopefully those elite (or near elite) additions will be coming very soon.  

[teepain]

I think it would be the great start , would he make the team in year 1 

[HorvatToBaertschi]

22 hours ago, Aircool said:

I think you can make the case for either Patrick or Hischier, obviously they are both good players. We could be a bit more like LA, with a team that just suffocates you if we had Patrick, or we could be really well balanced and beat in different ways on different nights. I think we know which one Vancouver fans would prefer, we've become accustomed to exciting hockey, and the lack of that is the biggest gripe our fanbase has at the moment.

 

I don't think we should go all out for one of these centers this year though. The reason I say that is because I don't think we are 1 center away from having a cup contending core, which is essentially the question being asked in this thread. Would I love either of those players? Yup. While it's far too early to say, I think it's possible to get players of this quality in future drafts, and I think if we miss out on them in the lottery, they aren't necessarily worth the premium you'd pay to get them. That being said, if we do end up in position to take one of those players, I think we should look at acquiring another Top-5/Top-10 pick... I think this team is definitely short a defensive prospect for the long term, maybe even two D-prospects short. Which is the key reason why I wouldn't trade up for them, I think if we miss out we should just take the best defenseman available, trading down for more assets if appropriate.

 

Also, I take exception to Baertschi and Granlund being classified as a 20 goal scorer with decent defense. He has 32 points (career-high and that's not impressive), less than 20 goals his season (and has never scored 20 goals), and I don't think even the most optimistic Canucks fan would praise his defense. Not saying he is bad, but it's not a notable part of his game. Granlund is good defensively, I take no issue with that, but he still only has 19 goals, and again 32 points. These are players having career years who have yet to pass 20 goals, and we have no proof that they could even repeat this level of play (32 points), forget improve. So to say that these are players who "give us consistent 20 goal scoring and decent defense" is about as far from the truth as you could realistically be... I mean you can't be a consistent 20-goal scorer while having never scored 20 goals in your career... 

 

Also to both you and @khay. The power winger you are wishing for, his name is Brock Boeser... I mean there are players with more power... but I think you forgot the most important forward prospect we have :).

So granlund is having a career year in his first fulll year? Shocking. ...  

I mean saying 2 players under 24 are having career years is just so foolish......

They haven't even hit their prime yet.

[70seven]

14 hours ago, appleboy said:

I would not be surprised to see Benning take another D man. It wouldn't be a bad choice just not the flashy one.

I agree.   I like juolevi, but I also see him as a future Tanev with 30-40 point prowess, which holds great potential....

 

but if they can find that true ppqb which they will have a few great options in this upcoming draft, I think that they really secure the back end of this club for the next generation.  

 

As as much as they need a playmaking top 6 C, having a stamp on the entire back end with what looks like an all star calibre goalie on route, it's the best way to rebuild any club.  CBJ being a great example.

 

I can't see any scenario that this team finishes well next season, and will have yet another chance at a centre, while I think it's important that they get the young dmen developing asap.  

 

In 1-2 years there should be a culmination of prospect forwards ready to push for roster spots.  So imo there's no rush to getting that centre immediately, unless they can grab a top 2 pick. 

 

Bottom line for me is drafting top dmen in back to back years gives the Canucks more potential than they've ever had at that position, and that is key to building a new core/foundation.  Lots to like about some of the kids they've got already, but no one is screaming 1st pair offensive force, and no one I'd call a triggerman outside subban who's still a gamble as a top 6 NHL dman, and since there's no real stud forwards this year, probably a good draft to focus on solidifying other positions at the top end.

[Aircool]

3 hours ago, HorvatToBaertschi said:

So granlund is having a career year in his first fulll year? Shocking. ...  

I mean saying 2 players under 24 are having career years is just so foolish......

They haven't even hit their prime yet.

You obviously don't know what a career year is... It's evident in the way you are talking about it. This isn't to say that they will peak at this production, but it is the best they've ever done. Granlund has played 170 games in the NHL, that's plenty enough to say that this is an improvement over anything he has done prior. I'm not saying these players don't have potential, they do, and this is redundant but I will emphasize I NEVER SAID OTHERWISE. But for someone to use the words "consistent 20 goal scorer" with 2 players that have as of yet NEVER actually had a 20 goal season, which was the point of the portion of my post you are taking issue with, well it's just factually incorrect.

 

 

In 2011-2012, people talked about Jannik Hansen in the way people are now talking about Baertschi and Granlund. People thought, here's this player who is elite on the forecheck and he was on pace for a 20 goal season... He never got his 20 goals that season, and you know what.. He never did get them until he played full-time on the Sedins wing... And his forecheck fell off the face of the earth. There was a time where seemingly several times a game, Jannik Hansen would catch a defenseman in a corner and take the puck from him... Just like Valeri Nischushkin, players don't always deliver upon their breakout years in terms of further breakthroughs.. Sometimes players step back, and sometimes step forward again and sometimes don't. So to call two players who haven't even once scored 20 goals, "consistent 20 goal scorers" is certainly worthy of correction and if you were incapable of determining the point of that post... Well I'll probably end up blocking you because what is the point in arguing with people who argue poorly and for the sake of it.

[vanforever]

On 3/19/2017 at 3:23 AM, khay said:

What about Boeser and Gaudette??  thes guys are gamers

 

On 3/19/2017 at 3:23 AM, khay said:

Good points. And I prefer Hischier over Patrick mainly because he brings dynamic offensive skills and overlaps less with Horvat. Hischier-Horvat-Sutter-Gaunce does sound pretty good.

 

Dahlen, Goldobin, Granlund, Baertschi have the making of quality top 6 wingers that can score 20+ goals but I would spread them across 3 lines because as you said, we lack physicality on the top 6. We might really be able to get some good quality wingers on all 3 lines: Goldobin and Dahlen with high offensive upsides, Baertschi and Granlund with playmaking abilities and both are pretty responsible defensively, and Virtanen with size and speed as well as Eriksson (don't forget about him) who basically does a lot of things well, passing, defence, transitioning, net presence, collecting garbage goals etc etc.

 

Baertschi-Horvat-Goldobin

Dahlen-Hischier-Virtanen

Granlund-Sutter-Eriksson

 

Something like this might save the team. I would like one more power winger depending on how the fourth line gets built.