Jump to content
The Official Site of the Vancouver Canucks
Canucks Community

2018 NHL Entry Draft


Zfetch

Recommended Posts

Rasmus Dahlin interviewed on Canucks Central at Noon today. Sat asked him about Elias Pettersson: “He can do things other people can’t do… pass him the puck and you will get an assist.”   Last question was how would he feel about being drafted by the Canucks and playing on the same team as Elias: “that would be sick” -  I listened to it twice on the podcast and his tone was genuinely enthusiastic. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Kenny Powers said:

Rasmus Dahlin interviewed on Canucks Central at Noon today. Sat asked him about Elias Pettersson: “He can do things other people can’t do… pass him the puck and you will get an assist.”   Last question was how would he feel about being drafted by the Canucks and playing on the same team as Elias: “that would be sick” -  I listened to it twice on the podcast and his tone was genuinely enthusiastic. 

I love it when guys are fans of each other! :towel:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think people are getting, for a lack of a better word, "blinded" by Bouchard's size and assuming that automatically makes him better in his own zone and/or more NHL ready. Being 6'2 and 192 lbs doesn't automatically make you better in your own end than someone who is 5'11 and 175 lbs. The only thing it definitively gives you an advantage in is clearing the crease, but if we're drafting someone solely for that purpose in the top 5/10, the management and scouting groups should be fired. Everyone knows Bouchard's weakness is his skating/explosiveness, but there's also a lack of intensity defensively as well. How will a bigger, slower, passive defenseman be able to play effective defense in his own end, especially with the NHL trending towards speed? By yelling at faster, more agile forwards that he's 3 inches taller than them as they skate around him?

 

For all the people using the goal Staal scored on us while Stetcher was defending him as a reason for wanting to draft a big defenseman, why aren't you talking about the fact that Minnesota has one of the highest scoring blue lines with two small defensemen (one smaller than Stetcher) in Spurgeon (5'9, 168 lbs) and Dumba (6'0, 185 lbs)? Why is their defense considered so much better than ours if they have TWO players that have no hope of physically matching Getzlaf/Kopitar/Thornton/etc. down low as opposed to us having just one in Stetcher? Why don't we talk about the fact that the powerplay that Staal scored on was run by the smallest player on the ice in Spurgeon and heck, the primary assist went to a 5'10, 185 lbs Mikeal Granlund. Staal has been on fire and is a good player, but I don't think someone like Maroon (who we could sign for like 2-3 million per at any time) would have too much trouble in a similar position.

 

I'm not saying we should fill up our defense with 6 players less than 6' and 200 lbs; I'm saying that size should not be as important a factor as a lot of people seem to think. Bouchard will have his problems defensively. So will Boqvist and Hughes. Bouchard's problem will likely be dealing with quicker, more agile forwards who can drive wide and evade him in tight spaces. Boqvist and Hughes will likely have trouble when someone with an extra 20 lbs plants themselves in front of the net or protects the puck. One deficiency isn't better than the other. If we can have a balanced defense core where a "Bouchard" plays with a quicker defense partner while a "Boqvist" or a "Hughes" plays with a bigger, stronger partner then that would be ideal. 

 

For the record, I have Bouchard at 6th on my list and think he'll be a pretty good player. I just think some people's line of thought on the subject are skewed. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Warhippy said:

To be fair, your quoting a guy who was drafted late in the 1st who is 5'9'' AND was draft eligible almost as a 19 year old. Boqvist is projected to be a top 5 pick so his skill level will inevitably allow him to overcome any size issues, and he is still 17 at the draft so still time to grow. Also since everyone likes to bring the size equation into the game you all overlook a giant elephant in the room...for every 'smaller' 1st round draft pick that doesn't succeed in the NHL there are probably 3+ bigger guys that don't succeed. Everyone is so adamant on getting a big guy yet when it comes to the NHL they either can't keep up with the pace or they end up being a bottom 6 player. I can understand if you want to play it safe and have a bottom 6 player floor but selecting a Boqvist, who by all accounts has the skill level to overcome any glaring weaknesses, will typically give you a greater chance of scoring a home run.

 

Another point I want to bring up that is so commonly brought up is that they fear a player like Boqvist won't be able to contain the bigger NHL forwards. Yes that could be true, as a 'smaller' defenseman you would have to have an active stick and box them out. Players like Getzlaf, Staal etc are gonna get their chances no matter what. Point is, can you transition quickly to make those bigger players pay? Big players = slow so you transition quickly, and hopefully get a scoring chance going the other way. You may give up more chances but you will definitely get more chances too. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Odd. said:

I see a lot of Alex Pietrangelo in Bouchard. His skating if worked upon won't be an issue at all. The fact that he soured up in points after London got rid of all of their talent and that he has almost 90pts as a defenseman is just absurd for a player who hasnt even been drafted yet. 

 

I too had some doubts about Bouchard at first but he's quickly changed my mind. His numbers are absurd, I actually can't remember a defenseman putting up that many numbers in their draft year. 84pts people... 84. Don't know if his season is finished or not but if it isn't then 90pts isn't out of reach at all.

4 more games 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, TGokou said:

To be fair, your quoting a guy who was drafted late in the 1st who is 5'9'' AND was draft eligible almost as a 19 year old. Boqvist is projected to be a top 5 pick so his skill level will inevitably allow him to overcome any size issues, and he is still 17 at the draft so still time to grow. Also since everyone likes to bring the size equation into the game you all overlook a giant elephant in the room...for every 'smaller' 1st round draft pick that doesn't succeed in the NHL there are probably 3+ bigger guys that don't succeed. Everyone is so adamant on getting a big guy yet when it comes to the NHL they either can't keep up with the pace or they end up being a bottom 6 player. I can understand if you want to play it safe and have a bottom 6 player floor but selecting a Boqvist, who by all accounts has the skill level to overcome any glaring weaknesses, will typically give you a greater chance of scoring a home run.

 

Another point I want to bring up that is so commonly brought up is that they fear a player like Boqvist won't be able to contain the bigger NHL forwards. Yes that could be true, as a 'smaller' defenseman you would have to have an active stick and box them out. Players like Getzlaf, Staal etc are gonna get their chances no matter what. Point is, can you transition quickly to make those bigger players pay? Big players = slow so you transition quickly, and hopefully get a scoring chance going the other way. You may give up more chances but you will definitely get more chances too. 

I was actually speaking of Hughes in that link as a comparable.

 

But to be honest I think Hughes would be a safer pick than Boqvist.  Comparable skating comparable size but we KNOW Hughes can play on the smaller surfaces.  Boqvist though with his penchant for back off at the blueline and his extra 20 feet of ice to make his moves would be penned in far far quicker on a NA ice surface and see a lot of his passes broken up, his fancy skating would be shadowed by pure world class NHL defenders and centers; who let's be honest.  Are a step above the AHL almost to a person

 

Skating is the only thing separating Hughes and Boqvist from Bouchard for me.  but those people claiming that "they can grow" are the same people claiming Bouchard can't improve his skating.  Which baffles me.  You can improve skating far easier than you can grow 3 inches and 20 pounds

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Horvat is a Boss said:

I think people are getting, for a lack of a better word, "blinded" by Bouchard's size and assuming that automatically makes him better in his own zone and/or more NHL ready. Being 6'2 and 192 lbs doesn't automatically make you better in your own end than someone who is 5'11 and 175 lbs. The only thing it definitively gives you an advantage in is clearing the crease, but if we're drafting someone solely for that purpose in the top 5/10, the management and scouting groups should be fired. Everyone knows Bouchard's weakness is his skating/explosiveness, but there's also a lack of intensity defensively as well. How will a bigger, slower, passive defenseman be able to play effective defense in his own end, especially with the NHL trending towards speed? By yelling at faster, more agile forwards that he's 3 inches taller than them as they skate around him?

 

For all the people using the goal Staal scored on us while Stetcher was defending him as a reason for wanting to draft a big defenseman, why aren't you talking about the fact that Minnesota has one of the highest scoring blue lines with two small defensemen (one smaller than Stetcher) in Spurgeon (5'9, 168 lbs) and Dumba (6'0, 185 lbs)? Why is their defense considered so much better than ours if they have TWO players that have no hope of physically matching Getzlaf/Kopitar/Thornton/etc. down low as opposed to us having just one in Stetcher? Why don't we talk about the fact that the powerplay that Staal scored on was run by the smallest player on the ice in Spurgeon and heck, the primary assist went to a 5'10, 185 lbs Mikeal Granlund. Staal has been on fire and is a good player, but I don't think someone like Maroon (who we could sign for like 2-3 million per at any time) would have too much trouble in a similar position.

 

I'm not saying we should fill up our defense with 6 players less than 6' and 200 lbs; I'm saying that size should not be as important a factor as a lot of people seem to think. Bouchard will have his problems defensively. So will Boqvist and Hughes. Bouchard's problem will likely be dealing with quicker, more agile forwards who can drive wide and evade him in tight spaces. Boqvist and Hughes will likely have trouble when someone with an extra 20 lbs plants themselves in front of the net or protects the puck. One deficiency isn't better than the other. If we can have a balanced defense core where a "Bouchard" plays with a quicker defense partner while a "Boqvist" or a "Hughes" plays with a bigger, stronger partner then that would be ideal. 

 

For the record, I have Bouchard at 6th on my list and think he'll be a pretty good player. I just think some people's line of thought on the subject are skewed. 

So what your saying is draft Boqvist and bring back Tryamkin?

 

Tryamkin-Boqvist

Juolevi-Stetcher

Miller-Chatfield

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, RetroCanuck said:

So what your saying is draft Boqvist and bring back Tryamkin?

 

Tryamkin-Boqvist

Juolevi-Stetcher

Miller-Chatfield

 

I'm saying draft one of Boqvist/Hughes/Bouchard with our pick, make a deal with the Islanders involving Tanev and their 2 1sts and take another one of Boqvist/Bouchard/Hughes, then use the latest of our 2 1sts in a package with our 2nd and a prospect to move up again and grab the remaining one of Boqvist/Hughes/Bouchard:

 

Hughes - Bouchard

Tryamkin - Boqvist

Juolevi - Tanev

 

If Benning doesn't pull that off he should be fired. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Horvat is a Boss said:

 

I'm saying draft one of Boqvist/Hughes/Bouchard with our pick, make a deal with the Islanders involving Tanev and their 2 1sts and take another one of Boqvist/Bouchard/Hughes, then use the latest of our 2 1sts in a package with our 2nd and a prospect to move up again and grab the remaining one of Boqvist/Hughes/Bouchard:

 

Hughes - Bouchard

Tryamkin - Boqvist

Juolevi - Tanev

 

If Benning doesn't pull that off he should be fired. 

So we get 2 firsts for Tanev but keep Tanev? Your proposal sounds a little crazy but those are the funnest ones lol

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Canuck Surfer said:

I argued, here on CDC, in 2010/11 and the summer of 2011 after our SCF run, that we still needed an elite skating D man. When many were proclaiming Edler to be the first Canuck Norris winner to be...

 

It does not make Edler a bad D man at all? He's been a great pick for us. But it was still fair citing that he is mobile and a good skater. Yet not an elite one? It did eliminate him from being a true top level defenceman. But we picked him in the 3rd round. Bouchard is being considered in the top 10.

 

And I have argued in the last few weeks here in this thread that lack of elite skating could make Bouchard's ceiling something just above Edlers. He appears to be more composed and better with the puck than Edler did at draft age. But I believe it will also limit Bouchard in the end.

 

I believe Bouchard will be a safe pick, and an effective player. Too much good stuff going on. Just not an elite one. And maybe you have to look at players with elite speed and puck skills when you have the chance.

 

 

Great honest insight, +1

 

I too think that Bouchard will be a "safe" pick and project to be a top-pairing minute-munching defenseman who can contribute in all three zones and drive offense from the blueline (as you said, like Edler but with higher offensive potential). Bouchard'a limiting factor is his skating. Other aspects such as his defensive game can be developed and optimized through coaching and systems. 

 

I would like us to go for the home-run pick and draft someone with an elite skillset and justifiably higher potential ceiling. Adam Boqvist is just that guy and the type of defenseman our franchise has never had. Elite skater, puck handler, passer, and has a great shot. Excellent offensive instincts. Superstar potential.

 

I personally prefer Boqvist for that superstar potential but understand those wanting Bouchard. Despite not having that elite skating or elite offensive instincts and ability he just consistently manufactures offense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, Horvat is a Boss said:

 

I'm saying draft one of Boqvist/Hughes/Bouchard with our pick, make a deal with the Islanders involving Tanev and their 2 1sts and take another one of Boqvist/Bouchard/Hughes, then use the latest of our 2 1sts in a package with our 2nd and a prospect to move up again and grab the remaining one of Boqvist/Hughes/Bouchard:

 

Hughes - Bouchard

Tryamkin - Boqvist

Juolevi - Tanev

 

If Benning doesn't pull that off he should be fired. 

This is one of the funniest things I've seen on these boards EVER XD

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, CANUCK-EXPRESS said:

I mean I'm no expert, its just my personal preference.

Tkachuk has a lot of red flags.

 

his offensive  production / numbers are not top 5 worthy this year.

 

if his name was Brady Doe I don't think he would even be in the top 10 conversation.

 

i think people are being seduced by his name and the impact matthew has made in Calgary early in his career.

 

tkachuk plays reminds me of Virtanen in the sense he has the physical tools but looks to lack the iq and vision that his brother has. Matthew generates offence and makes players around him better, by making smart hockey plays while playing with edge/physicality.  

 

Maybe Brady will develop his game and turn out to be a great player. But right now I think his ceiling is a 60 point player if playing with 2 elite line mates, where he would play a similiar style to Landeskog.

 

When looking at other players:

 

Dahlin - No explanation needed

 

Svechnikov - Guys an animal, total package of a winger that can score from anywhere and instantly makes his linemates better

 

Zadina - what a beut, he's shown up at every stage and opportunity possible, tearing the qmjhl up, blasts shots similar to laine, plus his character and work ethic is suppose to be pro class

 

boqvist - never watched him, but from everything I've read he's held in extremely high regard, very young for this draft class and is producing great numbers

bouchard - an offensive and defensive horse carrying a terrible team in every way possible, not worried about his birthdate as in previous years he looked great and even outplayed juolevi, has winning pedigree and a glowing recommendation from dale hunter

 

wahlstrom - this guys a wizard with the puck, has a wicked shot, knows how to play with great players and makes others around him better. He also has size, im  a big fan and wouldn't hesitate taking him over tkachuk 

hughes - this guy plays defence like its  a video game, spectacular but scares me due to style and size. I'd still take him over tkachuk probably though 

 

ty smith - I would take him over tkachuk as well - he is very very impressive, and his coaches say his work ethic is at a pro level. He's putting up ridiculous numbers and his playing style looks like it will transfer well to the NHL

 

Maybe I'm dramatic - I'll be the first to say Matthew I wasn't so sure about, but not that I didn't think he would be good I just wanted Sergachev more then him. And his secondary point production while playing with great line mates concerned me. 

 

If the Canucks passed on Matthew for juolevi we can be sure they will pass on Brady for one of the guys above in my opinion as each of those dmen look to have higher ceilings then juolevi did at the time of the draft and Matthew was clearly a higher end forward going in then Brady.

 

of course this is just my opinion - could be brutally wrong we shall see how things shake down and how these kids develop

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...