Warhippy Posted January 31, 2018 Share Posted January 31, 2018 Just now, ForsbergTheGreat said: Draft top 4 in order Dahlin, Svech, Zadina, Tkachuk, If we draft a forward, Offer sheet Dumba in July That would be so mean. They've literally no cap space. Like at all. We'll have roughly $30 million Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Isam Posted January 31, 2018 Share Posted January 31, 2018 11 minutes ago, Warhippy said: In order in in 1st overall or top 10 Dahlin Tkachuk Zadina Bouchard If 10-15 Veleno Dobson Kotkaniemi if 15-20 Kupari Merkley What we REALLY need is a couple of secondary picks. One in the first 14-25 and one in the 2nd 37-45 We could possibly see one or both but who knows. I want all the prospects Ten to fifteen range rather go with farabee then veleno. Higher offensive upside, but being undervalued. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aGENT Posted January 31, 2018 Share Posted January 31, 2018 39 minutes ago, ForsbergTheGreat said: Draft top 4 in order Dahlin, Svech, Zadina, Tkachuk, If we draft a forward, Offer sheet Dumba in July I think you can throw Boqvist somewhere in the top 5 there. I'm not entirely sure where yet. Likely 3-5. And that's where it becomes interesting to me. In that 3, 4 or 5 slot things get interesting and this 'BPA is a forward' some of you are pushing is not the gospel it's being made out to be. And once you get past 5 (where we could very well end up picking) there are a couple more D that we could make a case for over fowards (Dobson, Bouchard etc). Either way, here's hoping we win the 1st overall we're overdue for and make it a non issue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flickyoursedin Posted January 31, 2018 Share Posted January 31, 2018 1 hour ago, Warhippy said: In order in in 1st overall or top 10 Dahlin Tkachuk Zadina Bouchard If 10-15 Veleno Dobson Kotkaniemi if 15-20 Kupari Merkley What we REALLY need is a couple of secondary picks. One in the first 14-25 and one in the 2nd 37-45 We could possibly see one or both but who knows. I want all the prospects Only way to get another 1rst rounder is to trade Tanev....sooooo make it happen Benning! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
riske1 Posted January 31, 2018 Share Posted January 31, 2018 2 hours ago, Warhippy said: In order in in 1st overall or top 10 Dahlin Tkachuk Zadina Bouchard If 10-15 Veleno Dobson Kotkaniemi if 15-20 Kupari Merkley What we REALLY need is a couple of secondary picks. One in the first 14-25 and one in the 2nd 37-45 We could possibly see one or both but who knows. I want all the prospects I concur with your top four selections. It would be awesome to grab another first-round pick or an early second. I like The mobility and toughness that Bahl could bring. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derp... Posted January 31, 2018 Share Posted January 31, 2018 Canucks will likely have the 8th best odds going into the draft if they are a .500 team for the last 32 games. At 8th overall (or 1,2,3) we should be looking at 1 of the following Dahlin Svechnikov Zadina Tkachuk Boqvist Hughes Whalstrom Bouchard Dobson (If someone jumps up from behind the Canucks into the top 3) Any of the above would be solid, but the top 8 definitely have that highend upside appeal to me. If we end up with the 2nd or 3rd pick I think we have to take one of the wingers available there, either that or trade down to a spot where we think we can get the D we like best. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sean Monahan Posted January 31, 2018 Share Posted January 31, 2018 4 hours ago, Warhippy said: In order in in 1st overall or top 10 Dahlin Tkachuk Zadina Bouchard No Svechnikov? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ForsbergTheGreat Posted January 31, 2018 Share Posted January 31, 2018 8 hours ago, Warhippy said: That would be so mean. They've literally no cap space. Like at all. We'll have roughly $30 million Haha yep. It’s pays to have cap space, it might backfire on us when are top youth come up for a raise though. How about this. Resign guddy, at TD, trade tanev & and small plus to TO for their 1st and liljegren. Then at the draft if we don’t win the lotto and end selecting a forward, trade that TO first + stecher + granlund for dumba. That’s slightly more value than they would get from us offersheeting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Noble 6 Posted January 31, 2018 Share Posted January 31, 2018 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SID.IS.SID.ME.IS.ME Posted January 31, 2018 Share Posted January 31, 2018 Jeremy Davis just released the most recent consolidated industry rankings for the 2018 draft (a master list based on 10 different services): https://canucksarmy.com/2018/01/31/2018-nhl-draft-consolidated-industry-rankings-for-january-2018/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gaudette Celly Posted January 31, 2018 Share Posted January 31, 2018 Bouchard and Dobson the biggest risers, from the 20s into the teens. Rankings are quite varied between them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canuck Surfer Posted January 31, 2018 Share Posted January 31, 2018 21 hours ago, ForsbergTheGreat said: If it’s equal and your scouts arent set on who’s best player then sure take a team need. But if your 8 of your 10 scouts say the forward is BPA. You listen to your scouts. Yeah, of course! 21 hours ago, ForsbergTheGreat said: I think we can get good d later. As in trading, FA signings and as well as drafting in other years. You don’t NEED a top 10 pick to build a D core Yes you can. But as you slip, even past the 5th or 6th pick... The guy you are drafting stops being the absolute world class athlete that could compete in many sports at a top level. The McKinnon who beats the Gold medal speed skater in a speed skating race... Or if they are that calibre, have yet to display top level skills, have holes in their game, or come no longer owning a track record of great results. In short, the odds get increasingly, and compounding lower. Especially if you are looking for a franchise leading D man. We've been drafting D in the 2knd round, more often the 3rd, 5th and 6th round using that formula for 47 years. The magic in that formula has, well, not been magic for us like it was for Duncan Keith, Subban, etc. Not even once? There are also only one, or two teams that consistently have been able to pick good D in later rounds. As much as good D later are an occurrence, it is not a statistical certainty. Its the opposite, the lower you go, the more holes in the profile. Even if someone pulls a rabbit out of a hat. You can get good D by focussing on excellent fundamentals of scouting? Example > we drafted Alex Edler, by memory, in the third round. Big, NHL mobility, a nice shot, decent results and puck skills at his draft age. GREAT pick! Projected by the era's CDC equivalent minions of being the next Norris candidate a year or so into his career. But, even if his skills were good? He NEVER owned the world class speed, agility, puck dexterity and ability to beat opponents 1 on 1. His ceiling was always going to be a valuable defender, never a great one. Since Duncan Keith, with his athletic skills (no fantastic history of dominating performances), slipped to late in the second round > Erik Karlsson slipped only to 15th overall. Since Erik Karlsson, with his athletic & puck skills (no fantastic results...) slipped to 15th overall > Heskainen slipped to top 5? 21 hours ago, ForsbergTheGreat said: But in no way would I pass on a guy like zadina because this team is low on d depth As much as I am D enthusiastic I agree. I am going to evaluate Boqvist? At this point I don't have him ahead though. But at number 7? Number 11... There are quite a few candidates to be an Edler. Maybe better? I am not convinced there is a surefire Werenski or Provorov. 22 hours ago, aGENT said: And therein lies the problem with the BPA argument. It's highly subjective, highly different from team to team and doesn't account for the fact that past the top 3 in most drafts it becomes increasingly difficult to single out one, individual player as an obvious 'BPA'. There's literally no such thing most of the time. Most of the time you'll see 4-6 roughly equal players in a 'tier' who are separated more by their personality, leadership, position, size, speed etc than any actual level of skill or potential. Sure promotes internet forum discussion though.... It should not be so subjective. Scouting should be based on observable, measureable attributes. Nathan McKinnon could probably have been an NHL running back. Hell a linebacker with the right Juice? Hodgson could not! Two guys are dominating at their level, one guy is clearly the better athlete? Yep, BPA! Patrick Kane's dexterity, un guardable or hit-able agility, balance, slick skills? BPA. Ovi's speed, power, shot... BPA! The subjective part starts coming with athletes like Evan Bouchard. Where do they fit? Has NHL size, mobility, game smarts, a track record of constantly being effective... But I don't see him dazzling and leaving defenders in a heap with slick moves. Blowing past people on the rush? Or having guys ducking to avoid his overpowering shot. The good scouts spot a Boeser who actually has some of that dexterity and balance to avoid defenders. Even if he does not have defence breaking speed. A cannon of a shot. Its still not completely subjective. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canuck Surfer Posted January 31, 2018 Share Posted January 31, 2018 19 hours ago, R.Dahlin26 said: And it wouldn't just be one line, we could have 3 strong lines like Toronto and kill teams offensively. Pittsburgh pulled that off with a crap D core one year. And Matthews may (?) = Malkin... Not sure Nylander = Crosby! Most, even the nitwits who love Toronto in the centre of the universe, believe Toronto will not win with their current D core. And they have a guy picked top 5, one who I think Burke claimed he would have picked 1st overall in Morgan Rielly... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canuck Surfer Posted January 31, 2018 Share Posted January 31, 2018 20 hours ago, ilduce39 said: Well, I’d explore moving the pick to trade down and pick a D or even move it outright for a high ceiling young D man. The problem with trading down, say from #4 or #6, is who will pay you what its worth including a 9th or 11th pick? More likely you get a good roster player, perhaps a mid pick and 17th? I suspect we might be lucky if Body Wilde or Noah Dobson were still around? And they bucked fate and developed into top pairing elite D as McAvoy did... My real guess is that we could trade down no lower than 12th to still get that calibre of D with any certainty? Will 12th be available in a trade down??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theo5789 Posted January 31, 2018 Share Posted January 31, 2018 9 hours ago, ForsbergTheGreat said: Haha yep. It’s pays to have cap space, it might backfire on us when are top youth come up for a raise though. How about this. Resign guddy, at TD, trade tanev & and small plus to TO for their 1st and liljegren. Then at the draft if we don’t win the lotto and end selecting a forward, trade that TO first + stecher + granlund for dumba. That’s slightly more value than they would get from us offersheeting. If that played out, I think I rather keep the TO 1st (Kotkaniemi, Olofsson, Bokk, etc range). Boeser, I believe, lives with Stetcher and I'm sure they are good friends and Stetcher does alright for a smaller dman (basically a Yannick Weber type role). Granlund should be a bargain utility player which is great for teams that should have good depth when it comes to paying big bucks for the top guys. With Liljegren added, plus possibly another dman for our first 1st rounder and maybe even another with the second 1st rounder, this route would probably be better than acquiring a guy that will probably try to get 5 million or so on his next contract. Maybe it's just me, I don't really like the way Dumba plays also, which probably factors into why I wouldn't really make this deal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aGENT Posted January 31, 2018 Share Posted January 31, 2018 1 hour ago, Canuck Surfer said: It should not be so subjective. Scouting should be based on observable, measureable attributes. I was referring to when you have say 4-6 guys all as roughly comparable as BPA level. Which frequently happens in the draft, especially the father you get from 1st overall. They all have roughly equal 'player/draft value' but one guy is a bit faster but another guy has a better shot but another guy will be ready sooner but another guy plays a position we have a deficit of quality prospects in etc, etc. But people argue for pages that a guy ranked 8th went 6th etc 'and they didn't take BPA!' It's subjective nonsense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canuck Surfer Posted January 31, 2018 Share Posted January 31, 2018 1 minute ago, aGENT said: I was referring to when you have say 4-6 guys all as roughly comparable as BPA level. Which frequently happens in the draft, especially the father you get from 1st overall. They all have roughly equal 'player/draft value' but one guy is a bit faster but another guy has a better shot but another guy will be ready sooner but another guy plays a position we have a deficit of quality prospects in etc, etc. But people argue for pages that a guy ranked 8th went 6th etc 'and they didn't take BPA!' It's subjective nonsense. Subjective to you perhaps. (and me...) Maybe not to a Benning, who can pick dominant skills from the group. Hopefully anyway! Yeah many, especially with the benefit of hindsight, argue we skipped on so & so who was BPA! I would have picked Nicolas Hague where we picked Lind. Barked that he was both the D we needed & BPA. But Lind looks pretty good right now! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aGENT Posted February 1, 2018 Share Posted February 1, 2018 3 minutes ago, Canuck Surfer said: Subjective to you perhaps. (and me...) Maybe not to a Benning, who can pick dominant skills from the group. Hopefully anyway! Yeah many, especially with the benefit of hindsight, argue we skipped on so & so who was BPA! I would have picked Nicolas Hague where we picked Lind. Barked that he was both the D we needed & BPA. But Lind looks pretty good right now! Well exactly I think very few on this board would qualify as a pro scout or be able to reliably predict an '8th' ranked player over a '6th' ranked one with consistently positive results. But that is literally the case with players in most draft years. Last year's draft was an especially good example. I had Necas around 6th or 7th IIRC and Pettersson right after him (7th or 8th). Now both those guys are having pretty darn good years and arguably better ones than many guys ranked ahead of them. And I frequently espoused that 3-10'ish in that draft could go in literally ANY order (as they were roughly on par as 'BPA' IMO). Was I 'wrong' to have Necas rated so high? Doesn't appear so. But it could certainly be argued with hindsight I should have had Pettersson higher. As far as I'm concerned, anyone declaring some absolute, orderly, linear and infallible BPA list is full of excrement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ForsbergTheGreat Posted February 1, 2018 Share Posted February 1, 2018 1 hour ago, Canuck Surfer said: Yeah, of course! Yes you can. But as you slip, even past the 5th or 6th pick... The guy you are drafting stops being the absolute world class athlete that could compete in many sports at a top level. .....In short, the odds get increasingly, and compounding lower. Especially if you are looking for a franchise leading D man. I'm not deny that the odds get lower, what i'm saying is that realistically players picks at 5 and 6 don't go on to be franchise players. The drop off is after 2nd overall. Top 5 and 6 is really pushing it. The last 3rd overall to become a world class athlete is Toews, (12 years ago) The last 4th overall to become a world class athlete is Pietrangelo (10 years ago), maybe jones can reach that level. But 2 players in the last 10 years. The last 5th overall to become a world class athlete was Price (13 years ago) maybe reilly can reach that level but again 2 players in the last 13 years. The last 6th overall to become a world class athlete was OEL (9 years ago) I could go on but I think you get the point. That's why most drafts have that player vs player. McDavid & Eichel. Mathews & Laine Taylor & Tyler Tavares & Hedman Stamkos & Doughty Ovi & Malkin Not every top 2 pick becomes world class but the drop off starts at 3rd overall, but the point is if you're expecting the player at 3-6 (especially a D) to be a world class player, you better no a really good prayer because the odds are not in your favour. 1 hour ago, Canuck Surfer said: We've been drafting D in the 2knd round, more often the 3rd, 5th and 6th round using that formula for 47 years. The magic in that formula has, well, not been magic for us like it was for Duncan Keith, Subban, etc. Not even once? In the last 20 years canucks have drafted a total of 4 D in the 2nd round. Compare that to the Blackhawks who in the last 20 years have drafted 12 D in the second round. There's a reason we haven't found any D gems in the second round, we trade our picks away. And add to that we never had JB as the scouting GM. But we did find Edler in the 3rd round. Bieska in the 5th round. JB since being the GM has found Forsling, Tryamkin, and Brisebois looks like an NHLer, again all without selecting a D in the 2nd round. 1 hour ago, Canuck Surfer said: There are also only one, or two teams that consistently have been able to pick good D in later rounds. As much as good D later are an occurrence, it is not a statistical certainty. Its the opposite, the lower you go, the more holes in the profile. Even if someone pulls a rabbit out of a hat. You can get good D by focussing on excellent fundamentals of scouting? I understand how drafting works, but that the point is regarding around getting a franchise D. outside the top 2 picks, the odds are extremely unlikely, which is why it's not smart to pass BPA. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ForsbergTheGreat Posted February 1, 2018 Share Posted February 1, 2018 1 hour ago, theo5789 said: If that played out, I think I rather keep the TO 1st (Kotkaniemi, Olofsson, Bokk, etc range). Boeser, I believe, lives with Stetcher and I'm sure they are good friends and Stetcher does alright for a smaller dman (basically a Yannick Weber type role). Granlund should be a bargain utility player which is great for teams that should have good depth when it comes to paying big bucks for the top guys. With Liljegren added, plus possibly another dman for our first 1st rounder and maybe even another with the second 1st rounder, this route would probably be better than acquiring a guy that will probably try to get 5 million or so on his next contract. Maybe it's just me, I don't really like the way Dumba plays also, which probably factors into why I wouldn't really make this deal. The problem with keeping Stecher is if you add Liljegren, Stecher becomes redundant. Dumba is a 23 year old RHD who's on pace for a 40 point season and plays 23 minutes per game. He's not big (6'0" 185lb), but he plays with an edge and is only going to continue to get better. Next year we'd have a D core of: Edler Dumba MDZ Gudbranson Hutton Lilejegren Juolevi Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.