5th Overall: CDC 2017 Draft Consensus

[messier's_elbow]

27 minutes ago, NUCKER67 said:

My opinion keeps changing as who the Canucks should take. Of course it would be nice to get Vilardi or Mittelstadt to add to our forward prospects, but what about D? I can't believe I'm saying this, but a Province writer had an interesting take on selecting a D with the 1st. The Canucks had the lowest scoring D in the league, we don't have a real PPQB on D. He mentioned Subban, but is he really going to be that guy? We've got Juolevi in the system, but he's not a high points player. He makes smart plays, just doesn't pot a lot of goals. Stecher could be that guy? Hutton? Both of them haven't exactly lit it up yet. Maybe we should keep our expectations low with regards to them producing like Doughty or Keith, etc. So, what if JB takes Liljegren or Makar 1st? I think JBs been scouting Liljegren quite a bit, so he could be on his short list. After last year, I wouldn't be surprised at all if they take a D at #5. Great Ds win championships. My guess is Subban, Ellis and Josi (NSH) win it this year.

I'd rather he didn't but it wouldn't surprise me. The only defenceman I'm interested in with our 5th is Heiskanen.

[EternalCanuckFan]

The idea of picking a defenseman at #5 has grown on me as well but my preference is still for a center.  Admittedly, I haven't watched video about this year's crop of a defensemen but there seem to be some decent centers available in the Canucks' wheelhouse.  If management ultimately decides that a defenseman is the Best Player Available, then so be it.

 

The other consideration is whether the Canucks are likely to be in the draft lottery again next season.  If so, are there defensemen who might be even better in that draft year?  Rasmus Dahlin is the obvious prize in 2018, at least right now.  If the Canucks are in a position to pick 3 top D for 3 consecutive years and each guy pans out, who knows?  Perhaps some of them can be traded into help at forward.

 

Whatever the case might be, the Canucks have holes to fill at C and at D.  My preference is to fill the holes at C but the benefits of a strong D have definitely been made evident these playoffs.  I'm just not convinced that it will be sufficient to turn around the fortunes of the Canucks since outside of Bo, they really only have Guadette coming up.  Cassels has a couple of pro seasons under his belt but unless he has a ridiculously amazing camp, I don't think he's banging on the door of the NHL.  Gaunce could play C but the team has focused on playing him on LW.

 

Nashville's play is the only reason why I think that there's an outside chance of success if the Canucks draft a strong D core.  They got by for years with guys like Mike Fisher (who is great, but he's not a top 6 center) and Mike Ribeiro and were a tough team.  It was really only after the addition of Johansen for Jones that the complexion of their team changed significantly however so no matter how strong a team's D is, you still need to be deep in talent up front.

 

I know Dave Pratt doesn't get much love but I did agree with him that if you're going to trade for a core player, you should trade for a forward since defensemen are much more expensive.  If there really is a strong potential #1 or #2 defenseman in this year's draft, then I'm fine with it.

[aGENT]

I want to take one of Mittel/Glass/Necas with our pick and move another player to get whoever falls of Lilj, Makar (or Vailmaki, Foote etc).

[Nucker 67]

7 minutes ago, messier's_elbow said:

I'd rather he didn't but it wouldn't surprise me. The only defenceman I'm interested in with our 5th is Heiskanen.

Yes, Heiskanen is ranked higher than Liljegren and Makar now (he seemed to climb the rankings late in the season), but he's also a LHD and the Canucks need RHD. After Tanev, we've got Gudbranson and Stecher, with Subban behind them. That's it.

 

Juolevi - Liljegren would be a nice 1st pairing.

[aGENT]

Since we're spit balling on getting a D and a C 

 

@theminister had an interesting proposal concept, while chatting with him yesterday too...

 

Quote

Tanev, CBJ 2nd for 3rd OA, Lehtonen/Niemi, Oleksiak

 

Edler for 15th OA, Callahan, Cirelli

 

Trade the 5th OA for 9-12th OA and a high 2nd (40-43)

 

Protect Guddy, Sbisa, Oleksiak and sign a UFA D for depth.

 

Select 3rd, 11th (?), 15th, 33rd, 42nd, 63rd.

 

Mittlestadt/Patrick, Liljegren/Makar, Yamamoto/Kostin/Vesalainen, Jokiharju, Luukkonen/Oettinger...

I'd be game for something along those lines. We'd get first pick of the C's available at 3 with a slim chance Patrick might even fall. Still likely nab one of the offensive D by moving back a touch (BUF?), a solid piece mid 1st and a few 2nds to round things out.

 

To be fair, neither TM and I think the Canucks would likely move both Tanev and Edler at this stage but something like the Tanev move and trading back from our 5th is certainly not out of the question...

[Nucker 67]

One thing with good D as well, they're worth gold. Look at Tanev. He's a solid RHD, not flashy, hardly scores, but gets the job done, blocks shots, etc. He was undrafted and now we're talking about possibly trading him for a 1st plus! If the Canucks decided to trade one of their D down the road, that would also fetch some good forwards.  

 

Then you look at a player like Sutter, who was drafted 11th overall. Tanev is worth a lot more than Sutter these days.

[messier's_elbow]

21 minutes ago, NUCKER67 said:

Yes, Heiskanen is ranked higher than Liljegren and Makar now (he seemed to climb the rankings late in the season), but he's also a LHD and the Canucks need RHD. After Tanev, we've got Gudbranson and Stecher, with Subban behind them. That's it.

 

Juolevi - Liljegren would be a nice 1st pairing.

Tanev is 27, Guddy is 25, Stetcher is 23. Do we really need a right D that bad? A pp qb would be nice but I'm sure Juolevi and Heiskanen could fill that role. In my opinion we need a big, skilled centre more then anything. 

[Kanuck_Krazy]

1. Cale Makar (Do yourself a favour and look at his highlight reel from this past season.  Kid's unreal.  You want a home run with this pick not a safe bet.)

2. Casey Mittelstadt (Quoted by many as never taking a shift off.  A skilled player that works hard.  Hard work beats skill unless skill works hard.)

3. Cody Glass (Mark Scheifele lite, could do worse.)

[Nancouver]

Praying vilardi falls to us and jb can make a trade for another top 15 and pick foote. I can't believe more people aren't on the vilardi train.

[erkayloomeh]

On 5/8/2017 at 6:23 AM, iinatcc said:

From the four Centers (or Center / Winger hybrid) these are the apprent comparissons

 

Vilardi - Marian Hossa

Glass - Patrice Bergeron 

Mittelstadt - Tyler Seguin

Rasmussen - Ryan Getzlaf 

 

So let's assume all turn out as advertised who do you pick? 

Glass

[Nucker 67]

Canucks need:

 

a big, top 6C = Vilardi

a skilled top 6W = Glass

a PPQB RHD = Makar

 

Not sure what they need more though

[aGENT]

4 minutes ago, NUCKER67 said:

Canucks need:

 

a big, top 6C = Vilardi

a skilled top 6W = Glass

a PPQB RHD = Makar

 

Not sure what they need more though

Think you got those backwards IMO. 

[Nucker 67]

Just now, J.R. said:

Think you got those backwards IMO. 

Actually, I believe they're both able to play C and W, versatile. I'd be happy with either one.

[cyoung]

3 hours ago, J.R. said:

Think you got those backwards IMO. 

Nah, Vilardi and Glass are both natural C but capable of playing wing if necessary which is very valuable in today's nhl. 

[Butters Stoch]

On 5/10/2017 at 5:20 AM, NUCKER67 said:

Yes, Heiskanen is ranked higher than Liljegren and Makar now (he seemed to climb the rankings late in the season), but he's also a LHD and the Canucks need RHD. After Tanev, we've got Gudbranson and Stecher, with Subban behind them. That's it.

 

Juolevi - Liljegren would be a nice 1st pairing.

Passing up on a potentially better player just because we currently need a RHD more than a LHD would be a terrible mistake. Our prospect realistically isn't going to start contributing to the team for another year or 2 when our team might have some different needs. We need to start drafting the prospect who's most likely to pan out (BPA) rather than positional needs or else this rebuild is going to take ages with our mispicks.

[Camel Toe Drag]

6 hours ago, cyoung said:

Nah, Vilardi and Glass are both natural C but capable of playing wing if necessary which is very valuable in today's nhl. 

I think @J.R.  means Vilardi is more so the player who projects as a wing. Glass is the more pure C out of the 2 and has the bigger tool box to do so at the NHL level. 

[aGENT]

6 hours ago, cyoung said:

Nah, Vilardi and Glass are both natural C but capable of playing wing if necessary which is very valuable in today's nhl. 

Yeah, I'm just saying Vilardi seems like he'd move over to wing more so if you're going to do that to either guy. His board play would work well there. Glass is more of a play maker which is more useful at C IMO. 

[Tiger-Hearted]

On 09/05/2017 at 2:26 PM, Kanuck_Krazy said:

1. Cale Makar (Do yourself a favour and look at his highlight reel from this past season.  Kid's unreal.  You want a home run with this pick not a safe bet.)

Makar is getting a lot of hype right now. Yes, he has great power play offensive ability but I don't want a Jordan Subban 2.0 controversy. Ie. Too small and lacks defensive ability. Not that I fault Subban but the way the organization has treated him, I would not want repeat drama with Makar.

[cyoung]

5 hours ago, J.R. said:

Yeah, I'm just saying Vilardi seems like he'd move over to wing more so if you're going to do that to either guy. His board play would work well there. Glass is more of a play maker which is more useful at C IMO. 

OK ya I get that. I love the versatility, would give us more options if necessary. He will be windsors number 1C if brown moves on (seems likely). Be nice to see what he can do with a full season in that spot. 

[Fanuck]

1 hour ago, Tiger-Hearted said:

Makar is getting a lot of hype right now. Yes, he has great power play offensive ability but I don't want a Jordan Subban 2.0 controversy. Ie. Too small and lacks defensive ability. Not that I fault Subban but the way the organization has treated him, I would not want repeat drama with Makar.

How 'bout we put our rose coloured glasses on (yes I know, hard to do when the NHL screws you two years running) and say we draft Makar and he pans out into a Ryan Ellis 2.0 - would that interest you?