JM_ Posted May 11, 2018 Share Posted May 11, 2018 17 minutes ago, stawns said: he's jumped up into top 5 convos since a dominant u18 tourney where he led Finland to gold ah ok. Last listing I saw was hockey news about a week ago with him up to 13 but thats the highest i'd seen him so far. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flickyoursedin Posted May 11, 2018 Share Posted May 11, 2018 4 minutes ago, Jimmy McGill said: that would be nice for us I really like Kotkaniemi but I think Benning is hunting for a dman. He’s said BPA but unless somebody from the top 3 fall you can make a case for any of the dmen we’ve been debating as being the BPA. So in saying that if Kotkaniemi was there at our pick I think Benning would pass on him anyway and pick whichever dman was left at our pick. So it’d almost be nicer if Kotkaniemi did go high so that hopefully Bennings guy makes it to our pick. That guy is Boqvist you heard it here first lol! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
70seven Posted May 11, 2018 Share Posted May 11, 2018 33 minutes ago, Canuck Surfer said: Like Hamonic, has Tanev requested a trade near home??? And is Tanev going to command what he did... Lol. No and no. One can dream though! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alflives Posted May 11, 2018 Share Posted May 11, 2018 48 minutes ago, flickyoursedin said: It’s hard for me to want to do that. I get the appeal and having those picks would be great. I’ve just become a huge fan of the top 10 players in my mind and I’m sure my top 10 isn’t how it’s gonna go but if it does I’d be very sad missing out on all my pet cats. I’d be crushed if we did that and Dahlin, Svech, Zadina, Boqvist, Hughes, Wahlstrom, Kotkaniemi, Bouchard, Tkachuk and Dobson were all gone. Would be even worse if either Boqvist or Hughes woulda been there for us at 7. I tend to agree with you; it's way better to draft one potentially elite player, than drafting two mediocre guys. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nucker 67 Posted May 11, 2018 Share Posted May 11, 2018 Canucks need better D! Quick, trade our best one! (Tanev) lol But seriously, Benning was saying they'll take the BPA at #7, and that it might not be a D. He feels they could draft good D in later rounds. So, this begs the question: are there any of Benning's D picks that could turn out to be gamers and eventually be on the team? Some possible players: Chatfield (undrafted) - I think he makes it Sautner (undrafted) McEneny (undrafted) Brisebois (3rd) - I think he makes it Rathbone (4th) Gunnarsson (5th) Brassard (7th) I would only take the forward if it's Tkachuk or Wahlstrom Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RonMexico Posted May 11, 2018 Share Posted May 11, 2018 2 minutes ago, Alflives said: I tend to agree with you; it's way better to draft one potentially elite player, than drafting two mediocre guys. Except identifying elite potential outside of 1-2 players every draft is next to impossible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alflives Posted May 11, 2018 Share Posted May 11, 2018 2 minutes ago, RonMexico said: Except identifying elite potential outside of 1-2 players every draft is next to impossible. Heck, unless it's Crosby maybe the top pick isn't a guarantee either? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stawns Posted May 11, 2018 Share Posted May 11, 2018 1 hour ago, flickyoursedin said: I really like Kotkaniemi but I think Benning is hunting for a dman. He’s said BPA but unless somebody from the top 3 fall you can make a case for any of the dmen we’ve been debating as being the BPA. So in saying that if Kotkaniemi was there at our pick I think Benning would pass on him anyway and pick whichever dman was left at our pick. So it’d almost be nicer if Kotkaniemi did go high so that hopefully Bennings guy makes it to our pick. That guy is Boqvist you heard it here first lol! I think a true offensively gifted cman who can go up against the big cmen in the league is just as needed as a dman. Either way, he can't go wrong at #7, imo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flickyoursedin Posted May 11, 2018 Share Posted May 11, 2018 8 minutes ago, NUCKER67 said: Canucks need better D! Quick, trade our best one! (Tanev) lol But seriously, Benning was saying they'll take the BPA at #7, and that it might not be a D. He feels they could draft good D in later rounds. So, this begs the question: are there any of Benning's D picks that could turn out to be gamers and eventually be on the team? Some possible players: Chatfield (undrafted) - I think he makes it Sautner (undrafted) McEneny (undrafted) Brisebois (3rd) - I think he makes it Rathbone (4th) Gunnarsson (5th) Brassard (7th) I would only take the forward if it's Tkachuk or Wahlstrom Like I said from 4-10 the players are so close that no matter what dman is left that we’ve all been clamouring over whether it be Boqvist, Hughes, Bouchard or Dobson you could make a case for any one of them as being BPA over the forwards. I think sometimes when you’re in a position where you have to say things to media you might have to send out a smoke screen so you’re not showing you’re hand to 30 teams you’re competing against. I mean they can see our prospect pool and tell our biggest weakness. However maybe Benning saying he’s definitely looking BPA regardless of position it deters a team a couple spots behind us to jump up in front of us and take a dman. Canucks should trade Tanev. He is our best dman but we’re wasting his prime years during our rebuild. He’ll be 33 with like 15 new injuries compiled onto his body by the time we’re competing again. McDonagh was NYR’s best dman. Rebuilds are tough but you gotta get a premium on your older players before their value is gone so you can speed the process up. Heck if Tanev is a free agent down the road when we are competing maybe bring him back but man let’s rebuild like everybody else and get a premium on our players. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nucker 67 Posted May 11, 2018 Share Posted May 11, 2018 ^ Flick, you make good points. Tanev could possibly fetch us a 1st, which is better than having him injured on the Canucks roster. I'm sure there would be teams willing to make a deal. But not having him would leave a big hole too. Maybe Gudbranson or Stecher could fill in adequately enough? Drafting a player like Bouchard (right shot) would help, as he could probably make the team in a year. Boqvist would take several years I think. It will be very interesting to see how it all plays out, which players will be taken by the teams ahead of the Canucks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stawns Posted May 11, 2018 Share Posted May 11, 2018 29 minutes ago, flickyoursedin said: Like I said from 4-10 the players are so close that no matter what dman is left that we’ve all been clamouring over whether it be Boqvist, Hughes, Bouchard or Dobson you could make a case for any one of them as being BPA over the forwards. I think sometimes when you’re in a position where you have to say things to media you might have to send out a smoke screen so you’re not showing you’re hand to 30 teams you’re competing against. I mean they can see our prospect pool and tell our biggest weakness. However maybe Benning saying he’s definitely looking BPA regardless of position it deters a team a couple spots behind us to jump up in front of us and take a dman. Canucks should trade Tanev. He is our best dman but we’re wasting his prime years during our rebuild. He’ll be 33 with like 15 new injuries compiled onto his body by the time we’re competing again. McDonagh was NYR’s best dman. Rebuilds are tough but you gotta get a premium on your older players before their value is gone so you can speed the process up. Heck if Tanev is a free agent down the road when we are competing maybe bring him back but man let’s rebuild like everybody else and get a premium on our players. I've been saying they should trade Tanev for 2 seasons.........because of is value, but also because he's an injury magnet Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flickyoursedin Posted May 11, 2018 Share Posted May 11, 2018 43 minutes ago, NUCKER67 said: ^ Flick, you make good points. Tanev could possibly fetch us a 1st, which is better than having him injured on the Canucks roster. I'm sure there would be teams willing to make a deal. But not having him would leave a big hole too. Maybe Gudbranson or Stecher could fill in adequately enough? Drafting a player like Bouchard (right shot) would help, as he could probably make the team in a year. Boqvist would take several years I think. It will be very interesting to see how it all plays out, which players will be taken by the teams ahead of the Canucks. You gotta factor having the picks and prospects now is better than having Tanev (value declining) while we’re finishing bottom 5 with him in the lineup anyway. Tanev won’t be as effective or probably even on the team anyway when we rise from the ashes. However those picks and prospects could be huge assets into helping our turnaround and completing a solid playoff team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nucker 67 Posted May 11, 2018 Share Posted May 11, 2018 ^ that's another good point. Edler, Del Zotto, Tanev, Hutton (and maybe more) probably won't be on the team once the Canucks start their surge and be a playoff team again. I think the Canucks should draft a D with the 1st. I know, Wahlstrom and Tkachuk, maybe Kotkaniemi - be tough to pass any one of those guys up. But with the D prospects they have now, only Juolevi could become a #1-2. Canucks need more than that to compete with the big boys. Tryamkin returning would be a huge boost. Maybe Chatfield develops into a tenacious, fast puck hound. I think Pouliot is going to continue to improve. He made some great plays last year. Maybe Brisebois makes the team? The Canucks have quite a few forwards who will be competing for a top 6 spot, but only so many spots. Trades will need to be made. Maybe Benning can trade a couple of our forwards for a solid Dman? I'd hate to trade picks though. I don't know how this will all play out, but I hope the Canucks can improve the D somehow. I trust Horvat, Boeser, Pettersson and Dahlen will score lots of goals, but who's going to prevent goals against? Markstrom needs help. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Herberts Vasiljevs Posted May 11, 2018 Share Posted May 11, 2018 3 minutes ago, NUCKER67 said: ^ that's another good point. Edler, Del Zotto, Tanev, Hutton (and maybe more) probably won't be on the team once the Canucks start their surge and be a playoff team again. I think the Canucks should draft a D with the 1st. I know, Wahlstrom and Tkachuk, maybe Kotkaniemi - be tough to pass any one of those guys up. But with the D prospects they have now, only Juolevi could become a #1-2. Canucks need more than that to compete with the big boys. Tryamkin returning would be a huge boost. Maybe Chatfield develops into a tenacious, fast puck hound. I think Pouliot is going to continue to improve. He made some great plays last year. Maybe Brisebois makes the team? The Canucks have quite a few forwards who will be competing for a top 6 spot, but only so many spots. Trades will need to be made. Maybe Benning can trade a couple of our forwards for a solid Dman? I'd hate to trade picks though. I don't know how this will all play out, but I hope the Canucks can improve the D somehow. I trust Horvat, Boeser, Pettersson and Dahlen will score lots of goals, but who's going to prevent goals against? Markstrom needs help. Mark my words, Brisebois will be a Canuck one day. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alflives Posted May 11, 2018 Share Posted May 11, 2018 Just now, Herberts Vasiljevs said: Mark my words, Briesbois will be a Canuck one day. Absolutely. He's a very smart and smooth skating player, who has size. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nucker 67 Posted May 11, 2018 Share Posted May 11, 2018 Juolevi - Bouchard Tryamkin - Stecher Brisbois - Gudbranson Pouliot Chatfield This would be pretty good. Not sure if Bouchard will still be around at #7 though. If not him, maybe Dobson? If they are targeting Dobson, I hope they trade down. I think he'll still be around at #10. Boqvist could be a fun prospect to watch develop, what he could become one day. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alflives Posted May 11, 2018 Share Posted May 11, 2018 9 minutes ago, NUCKER67 said: Juolevi - Bouchard Tryamkin - Stecher Brisbois - Gudbranson Pouliot Chatfield This would be pretty good. Not sure if Bouchard will still be around at #7 though. If not him, maybe Dobson? If they are targeting Dobson, I hope they trade down. I think he'll still be around at #10. Boqvist could be a fun prospect to watch develop, what he could become one day. I think Boquist could be like Pettersson, and tear up the SHL next season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nucker 67 Posted May 11, 2018 Share Posted May 11, 2018 2 minutes ago, Alflives said: I think Boquist could be like Pettersson, and tear up the SHL next season. Wouldn't that be something. Boqvist to Pettersson for the next 15 years Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RetroCanuck Posted May 11, 2018 Share Posted May 11, 2018 35 minutes ago, NUCKER67 said: Juolevi - Bouchard Tryamkin - Stecher Brisbois - Gudbranson Pouliot Chatfield This would be pretty good. Not sure if Bouchard will still be around at #7 though. If not him, maybe Dobson? If they are targeting Dobson, I hope they trade down. I think he'll still be around at #10. Boqvist could be a fun prospect to watch develop, what he could become one day. Heres hoping Tryamkin comes back. Hopefully get another D like Miller with our second as well. Could easily see Chatfield taking Guddys spot as well. Juolevi-Dobson Tryamkin-Stecher Brisebois-Chatfield Miller Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Warhippy Posted May 11, 2018 Share Posted May 11, 2018 Knowing Montreal wants centers so badly, one has to wonder if the Habs don't work something out with the Islanders. If Kotkaneimi is there at 11 if the Habs don't move whoever they picked at 3 to the Isles for 11 and 12 and pick Kotkaneimi and Veleno. 2 Centers 1 a hometown boy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.