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

2018 NHL Entry Draft


Zfetch

Recommended Posts

42 minutes ago, aGENT said:

I like your Tanev to PHI proposal better. Keep our 1st and hopefully snag Boqvist if we're past the top 2, then take one of Wilde, Smith etc with the pick we got from PHI.

 

Them added to Juolevi and Sanheim gives our D prospects a SERIOUS boost. 

That, sir, would be AWESOME.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here is an absolutely mind blowing post impacting a common misconception about how easy it is to draft D in later rounds. It was posted by @mll, a great post in the last PGT. But I thought it was very interesting from the standpoint of the draft discussion. So brought it here.

 

MLL quotes that only 3 of 59 defenceman outside round one, in their draft plus 4 year (2014 draft) have played 40 NHL games so far this year. 

 

And here was my response;

Absolutely blows the theory D, particularly the conception you can always get a PK Subban or She Weber in the later rounds out of the water!

 

Conclusion? Draft BPA yes!  But draft in balanced proportion & ensure you are routinely picking D!  There not as many of them out there as many believe!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, aGENT said:

I like your Tanev to PHI proposal better. Keep our 1st and hopefully snag Boqvist if we're past the top 2, then take one of Wilde, Smith etc with the pick we got from PHI.

 

Them added to Juolevi and Sanheim gives our D prospects a SERIOUS boost. 

Ahem! :frantic:

2 hours ago, Rob_Zepp said:

That, sir, would be AWESOME.

Rob did propose a Philly deal for Sanheim!  

 

 

But in that thread I suggested we might have to top up, use Tanev to get the deal to a level it might take place?

 

B)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Since there's a big cohort of people who are arguing Boqvist vs Bouchard I thought I'd provide some color on some extra analysis I've been doing. 

 

My motivation for originally doing this was to see if Bouchards numbers were from generating a large amount of PP points and secondary assists. I was afraid that his production was inflated by these two factors. After compiling the stats up, here is what I got:

66 GP 25 G 62 A 87P - 1.32 PPG

Of those 87 points, 30 points are generated from the PP or 34%

He has 35 primary assists vs 27 secondary assists...which when added to his goal totals = 69% primary points

 

Overall this analysis alleviated concerns that he was generating too many PP points or secondary assists to inflate his totals. I think that 34% PP is pretty typical for a D man so I'm not too worried there. His primary points production also suggest that he is a key cog in generating the play that leads to a goal. However if there was one drawback it's that he plays 30 min per game which artificially increases his point production, a point I will get to later.

 

For Boqvist,

25 GP 14 G 10 A - 0.96 PPG 

Of those 24 points, only 6 are generated on the PP or 25%

He has 9 primary assists which when added to his goal totals = 96% primary points production!!!

 

The next factor is how to compare these two leagues? Both are U20 leagues so they are not playing against men so in that sense they are fairly comparable. The OHL scores approx. 7.58 goals per game while the J20 SuperElit scores about 6.27 goals per game. In other words the OHL scores about 1.21 goals per game more...

 

There are a few takeaways here. 

1. Bouchards PP totals are higher than Boqvist by a fair margin. This tells me that a lot of Boqvists production are in 5v5 situations and I definitely give a nod to that when analyzing my draft positions.

2, Ok this is ridiculous, I thought Bouchards primary points were pretty good and I was impressed when I first saw them. When I compiled Boqvists numbers however, it blew me away...96% primary points from a D man is pretty unheard of if you ask me. What it also tells me is that Boqvist has been unlucky in generating more secondary points production since the puck is no longer in his control, and if his teammates could finish he would naturally have more assists.

3. When factoring in the fact that the OHL scores 1.21 goals per game more, we can at least infer that if Boqvist were to play in the OHL he would score at a ppg rate of 1.21 which is fairly comparable to Bouchard who scores at a rate of 1.32 ppg but still not as much. Does this make Bouchard the better offensive D-man? Remember when I said that Bouchards average icetime can be close to 30 min? Boqvist is just a smidge over 20 min per game. Once again if we were to infer that you could generate points at the same rate per minute of ice time here is where Boqvist stands: 43 points in 25 games or 1.74 PPG in the OHL. That is elite offensive territory even for a forward in the OHL! The only comparable that I know of is Ryan Ellis who had 1.72 PPG but in his draft + 2 season.

4. It's been strangely quiet on the Boqvist updates but just thought everyone should know that he currently has 5 points in 2 playoff games. 3 goals and 2 assists.

 

I just want to highlight that I'm not saying he would generate that level of production because a lot of this is inferred but it gives us a general comparable. Also I wasn't able to find Bouchards official average icetime...it was inferred from multiple sources that he gets 30 min per game quite a bit. I suspect his average is somewhere between 25 min - 30 min which would lower Boqvist ppg a slight amount but not by much.

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Canuck Surfer said:

Here is an absolutely mind blowing post impacting a common misconception about how easy it is to draft D in later rounds. It was posted by @mll, a great post in the last PGT. But I thought it was very interesting from the standpoint of the draft discussion. So brought it here.

 

MLL quotes that only 3 of 59 defenceman outside round one, in their draft plus 4 year (2014 draft) have played 40 NHL games so far this year. 

 

And here was my response;

Absolutely blows the theory D, particularly the conception you can always get a PK Subban or She Weber in the later rounds out of the water!

 

Conclusion? Draft BPA yes!  But draft in balanced proportion & ensure you are routinely picking D!  There not as many of them out there as many believe!!!

I actually did an analysis on this and only 2-3% of drafted players past the 1st round end up being star defensemen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, Canuck Surfer said:

Here is an absolutely mind blowing post impacting a common misconception about how easy it is to draft D in later rounds. It was posted by @mll, a great post in the last PGT. But I thought it was very interesting from the standpoint of the draft discussion. So brought it here.

 

MLL quotes that only 3 of 59 defenceman outside round one, in their draft plus 4 year (2014 draft) have played 40 NHL games so far this year. 

 

Conclusion? Draft BPA yes!  But draft in balanced proportion & ensure you are routinely picking D!  There not as many of them out there as many believe!!!

That's kind of a weird year to use as it was extremely weak for D.  In the first round only one D has played over 100 games.  That was the 1st overall pick Ekblad, closest to him is DeAngelo who has 71 games.  

 

Fleury went 7th overall and the two players taken directly after him were Nylanders and Ehlers

Honka went 14th overall and Larkin when directly after him.

DeAngelo went Nick Schmaltz and Robby Fabbri went directly after him

 

Compare the 2010 year for example,

In the first round only 3/7 D have played over 100 NHL games.

In the second round of that year, 6/8 D have played over 100 NHL games.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, TGokou said:

A compilation of the 5 points Boqvist had in his last two playoff games.

As long as Boqvist isn't deadset on keeping #16 (I assume that's him), should be a no brainer for #4 pick (can't pass up on Svechnikov or Zadina).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, mikeyman109 said:

you keep saying Boqvist is the guy , I dont agree, He is too young at this point too small and has not played enough games for me to agree with you. I have a bigger sample size playing the current game on the same size ice putting up better points per game. That's the rub for me . i agree we need the top 1-2 d. we just don't agree on who it is.

I ignore what Forsberg is saying because he constantly mis quotes what i have said to prove his point.

 

Fair enough if you ignore him for being misquoted.  But keep in mind you're kind of doing the same to me as I've never once said take Boqvist specifically, I want them to take the best d man; regardless of size.  If the scouts are ranking Boqvist ahead of Bouchard etc then clearly the professionals don't see his size as being an issue.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Smashian Kassian said:

If it comes down to Tkachuk and Boqvist/Bouchard, do we pass on another Tkachuk? Are the 2nd class of defenseman in this draft worth passing on a Tkachuk or Zadina? You gotta think they would like to add a D and they haven't been able to add any picks to get one elsewhere.

If we're picking top-5 I don't see us taking Tkachuk.  The top-3 are pretty much set, then there's just too much to like with the RHS Boqvist/Bouchard to pass up, especially considering our team needs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, AlwaysACanuckFan said:

 

^ Here is a perfect illustration why scouting should be based on fundamentals & skills. 

 

The difference is the exhilarating speed and agility with which Hischier plies his trade.  I like Zadina btw. Who is effective, slick, creative, dogged, clever. But guys simply cannot guard Nico with his speed!  He was and should be still the more exciting prospect. 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Warhippy said:

If we are drafting 4-5 and both Calgary and the Islanders miss the playoffs i would absolutely be calling Snow about his 2 picks....or his highest 1st and first rights to talk to tavares

I understand this sentiment.

 

But what ails the Isles is they are horrible defensively.  Particularly since De Haan went down. And it would not appear he is coming back either. With Boychuck further to expire shortly?  Not sure which thuds sooner, his age or contract...  With or without Tavares their first need is a D! 

 

They can build their forward core around Barzal. 

 

Do they take your cue, draft two?  Or try and jump forward...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Canuck Surfer said:

^ Here is a perfect illustration why scouting should be based on fundamentals & skills. 

 

The difference is the exhilarating speed and agility with which Hischier plies his trade.  I like Zadina btw. Who is effective, slick, creative, dogged, clever. But guys simply cannot guard Nico with his speed!  He was and should be still the more exciting prospect. 

 

 

 

 

Just trying to be clear here, are you saying that those stats don't mean much because it doesn't show the full aspect of either of their games (eg speed, etc)?

 

I would suggest that Zadina producing more 5v5 points per game makes him the tougher player to handle since there is more time and space on the PP. Hischier is a speed demon, but I think Zadina has good speed and more power to his game. Not saying one is better than the other just yet, but Zadina would be fighting for number 1 overall last year whereas he's considered only top 3 this year (lower for some people which I have no idea why).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, aGENT said:

I'm honestly flabbergasted it's even a discussion for some on here. 

Boqvists shot is narly. I was a fan of what Bouchards done but the lack of compete certainly is a concern. You want your offensive d guy to drive play.

 

Maybe in his defence he's bored with the CHL but that's not really an excuse. I really like Noah Dobson too.  If any of these D are top pairing offensive drivers I'm ok with passing on a high end forward. I probably shouldn't be... Because imo we only have 2 in Pettersson and Boeser but that d core is rough.

 

If we draft a forward I suspect we go hard after John Carlsson.  If we nab a d maybe Benning takes a shot with Evander. Believe Boqvists is committed to the SHL next season.. can anyone confirm and whether or not that's a bond that can be broken?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If it wasn't the Rasmus draft with a potential generational D I have a feeling Boqvists would be #1 D prospect. This draft kind of hides him with the Tkchauk pedigree, early hype of scevsiktov, and the brilliance of Zadina at the WJC and top prospects game.

 

Then we got Quinton Hughes out performing Makar in the NCAA destroying that league and Bouchard who has 3 assists at the top prospects game who reportedly isn't engaged and is giving prime o zone opprotunities and 2 minutes of PP time.

 

I'm glad Jim is in charge. Character and compete are 2 important factors for Jim.  I can see him passing on Bouchard if he's not convinced he can be consistent and focused. I can see Bouchard playing in the NHL sooner rather than later.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, Sedintwinpowersactivate said:

For me the top 3 are set.

 

1) Dahlin

2) Svechnikov

3) Zadina

 

In that order.

 

I would lean Boqvist's way with #4, but anybody could make the argument for Bouchard,  Tkachuk and Hughes at #4.

 

Personally I like those three defenceman ahead of Tkachuk and I see us picking a defenceman unless we win the #2 or #3 spot in the lottery.  I really like Tkachuk as well.  He would be #7 on my board as his game checks a lot of boxes.

 

4) Boqvist

5) Hughes

6) Bouchard

7) Tkachuk

8) Wahlstrom

9) Dobson

10) Farabee

 

I just love the dynamic qualities of Boqvist and Hughes as well as the High compete level and IQ of Bouchard.  

 

If we bottom out we have a 48% chance we pick top 3, so we are likely picking 4th.  Boqvist would be a great consolation prize. 

 

PS... I gotta agree with Forsberg... 5'11" is not small.  In fact I like Hughes so much that 5'9" doesn't bother me either.  Dynamic elite skill is what is important.

 

I believe Jim has them ranked:

 

1) Rasmus Dahlin

2) Phillip Zadina

3) Adam Boqvist

4) Evan Bouchard

5) A  Svechnikov

 

6) Dobson

7) Walstrom

 

Maybe I'm hyping Boqvist to high.  Brady T seems more of a character guy then Mathew T. What would CDC say if Jim took Walstrom in the top 5? Lol watch it be the pick of the draft.

 

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...