aGENT Posted January 9, 2018 Share Posted January 9, 2018 2 minutes ago, rekker said: I like that combo. Come on JB. Throw it out there and see what sticks. I'd love a Demko / Luukonen tandem in net in 5'ish years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldnews Posted January 9, 2018 Share Posted January 9, 2018 1 hour ago, coastal.view said: the problem with this approach and with the canuck rebuild is that dmen take longer by 2 to 3 years to develop and just drafting new d prospects at this point means these d will be ready 5 years after the offensive prospect already drafted the focus on drafting d should already have happened (except for juolevi it did not really) the d core will need to be built/obtained from other sources then mostly the draft in my view If only the Canucks had had the idea of drafting defenseman earlier. If it takes 3 years to develop them.....they drafted 2 in ther first draft that have become NHL assets - and spent a top5 pick on another. They've only drafted 11 Din Benning's tenure. The franchise has added Juolevi and Tryamkin - in the draft (as well as 'longshots' - which most drafted D are - Brisebois. Rathbone, Candella and a half dozen others). Gudbranson and Pouliot - in trades Stecher (and Chatfield, McEneny) - young UFA signings....Biega, Holm, Sautner....Blujus recently... That's nearly an entire NHL blueline - when they already had Edler, Tanev, Hutton.... Not sure I can agree with your revision - it looks to me like adding D has been a fair part of the balance of the build -and it's not easy to acquire young defensemen, so I'd say they've done a pretty good job of that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aGENT Posted January 9, 2018 Share Posted January 9, 2018 1 hour ago, coastal.view said: the problem with this approach and with the canuck rebuild is that dmen take longer by 2 to 3 years to develop and just drafting new d prospects at this point means these d will be ready 5 years after the offensive prospect already drafted the focus on drafting d should already have happened (except for juolevi it did not really) the d core will need to be built/obtained from other sources then mostly the draft in my view if we hope to have a cohesive group of talented players all in their prime around the same time the new trend and worry is that offensive players now start diminishing when they get closer to 39 i am curious to see if duchene and toews can rebound or if they really are past their peaks already 7 minutes ago, oldnews said: The franchise has added Juolevi and Tryamkin - in the draft (as well as 'longshots' - which most drafted D are - Brisebois. Rathbone, Candella and a half dozen others). Gudbranson and Pouliot - in trades Stecher (and Chatfield, McEneny) - young UFA signings....Biega, Holm, Sautner....Blujus recently... That's nearly an entire NHL blueline - when they already had Edler, Tanev, Hutton.... Not sure I can agree with your revision - it looks to me like adding D has been a fair part of the balance of the build -and it's not easy to acquire young defensemen, so I'd say they've done a pretty good job of that. And on top of ON's point, we're looking quite likely to pick top 10 this year where there are a good number of highly rated D who could be ready closer to a 0-2 year time frame (Dahlin especially, should we be so lucky). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coastal.view Posted January 9, 2018 Share Posted January 9, 2018 1 minute ago, oldnews said: If only the Canucks had had the idea of drafting defenseman earlier. If it takes 3 years to develop them.....they drafted 2 in ther first draft that have become NHL assets - and spent a top5 pick on another. They've only drafted 11 Din Benning's tenure. The franchise has added Juolevi and Tryamkin - in the draft (as well as 'longshots' - which most drafted D are - Brisebois. Rathbone, Candella and a half dozen others). Gudbranson and Pouliot - in trades Stecher (and Chatfield) - young UFA signings. That's nearly an entire NHL blueline - when they already had Edler, Tanev, Hutton.... Not sure I can agree with your revision - it looks to me like adding D has been a fair part of the balance of the build -and it's not easy to acquire young defensemen, so I'd say they've done a pretty good job of that. really so the fact they invested quality draft picks on offense and have not done so on defense is satisfactory in your view tryamkin was not a high pick.. worked out better then hoped in terms of potential in the brief period he was on the team . but realized little of it and is gone,, how does the team get a lot of credit for someone who has left ? pouliot is a long shot and may still not work out gubranson is not a corner stone type and i'll bet he is gone this year stecher was a freebie .. but having at best a very average year,... he could end up being hutton2.0 the only investment here that i see by this team is juolevi the only valuable d piece added in the past number of years is tanev the rest are long shots overall at best this is a very weak defensive grouping and almost nothing of value in the pipeline we have a solid goalie in the pipeline (there is only 1 goalie position per game so that is not bad depth) we have oodles of developing offensive talent we have 1 quality dman in the pipeline (yet there are 6 positions.. 4 of which could use upgrading presently) i maybe need to borrow your rose coloured glasses Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coastal.view Posted January 9, 2018 Share Posted January 9, 2018 1 minute ago, aGENT said: And on top of ON's point, we're looking quite likely to pick top 10 this year where there are a good number of highly rated D who could be ready closer to a 0-2 year time frame (Dahlin especially, should we be so lucky). really? joulevi is a top 5 pick and will take 3 years to make this team... maybe more then 3 years but you think somehow this draft where we might not even have a top 5 pick is going to put young talent on our blueline in 0 - 2 years? based on what?? hopes and serious wishing on your part? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldnews Posted January 9, 2018 Share Posted January 9, 2018 5 minutes ago, coastal.view said: really so the fact they invested quality draft picks on offense and have not done so on defense is satisfactory in your view that's a loose paraphrase that is factually inaccurate - and doesn't represent what I said. non-starter if you're actually intending a discussion Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aGENT Posted January 9, 2018 Share Posted January 9, 2018 8 minutes ago, coastal.view said: really? joulevi is a top 5 pick and will take 3 years to make this team... maybe more then 3 years but you think somehow this draft where we might not even have a top 5 pick is going to put young talent on our blueline in 0 - 2 years? based on what?? hopes and serious wishing on your part? Juolevi was always 2-4 years. I knew that when we drafted him. Based on Dahlin looking like a generational D who could likely step in this year or next. Or guys like Dobson or Wilde who are more physically mature who could possibly be ready in 1-2 years. I think you need to re-read my post. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coastal.view Posted January 9, 2018 Share Posted January 9, 2018 2 minutes ago, oldnews said: that's a loose paraphrase that is factually inaccurate - and doesn't represent what I said. non-starter if you're actually intending a discussion my initial point was drafting heavily on dmen in this draft is a timing error in terms of development/rebuild this team is weak on d and is weak on d depth in the d pipeline shoring that up by relying on the 2018 draft crop is a bit odd you responded you do not like my paraphrasing of your response paraphrase if for me then i'm curious what i missed Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JeremyCuddles Posted January 9, 2018 Share Posted January 9, 2018 3 minutes ago, coastal.view said: really? joulevi is a top 5 pick and will take 3 years to make this team... maybe more then 3 years but you think somehow this draft where we might not even have a top 5 pick is going to put young talent on our blueline in 0 - 2 years? based on what?? hopes and serious wishing on your part? There are quite a few young defencemen that make the NHL quicker than 3-5 years. McAvoy and Sergachev were drafted in 2016 and are pretty significant pieces to their teams, Chychrun is pushing 100 games already. Ristolainen is on his 4th full NHL season, he is 23. Provorov, Werenski, and Hanifin all have more than 100 NHL games, drafted 2015. Hanifin has 200+ games. Players are becoming NHL ready much younger than ever before, including d-men. Who's to say if any of the D-men available in the top 10 this year are NHL ready as soon as the next 1-2 years, always possible. The draft is built on hopes and wishing. That's really the fun part of the draft, and the disappointing part if your guy doesn't make it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coastal.view Posted January 9, 2018 Share Posted January 9, 2018 Just now, N7Nucks said: There are quite a few young defencemen that make the NHL quicker than 3-5 years. McAvoy and Sergachev were drafted in 2016 and are pretty significant pieces to their teams, Chychrun is pushing 100 games already. Ristolainen is on his 4th full NHL season, he is 23. Provorov, Werenski, and Hanifin all have more than 100 NHL games, drafted 2015. Hanifin has 200+ games. Players are becoming NHL ready much younger than ever before, including d-men. Who's to say if any of the D-men available in the top 10 this year are NHL ready as soon as the next 1-2 years, always possible. The draft is built on hopes and wishing. That's really the fun part of the draft, and the disappointing part if your guy doesn't make it. i'm not going to you are a moving target i see you clearly said 0 - 2 years in your post now you are amending that to 1 -2 next you'll say 1 - 3 or whatever you realize is more realistic i'm done Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coastal.view Posted January 9, 2018 Share Posted January 9, 2018 2 minutes ago, N7Nucks said: There are quite a few young defencemen that make the NHL quicker than 3-5 years. McAvoy and Sergachev were drafted in 2016 and are pretty significant pieces to their teams, Chychrun is pushing 100 games already. Ristolainen is on his 4th full NHL season, he is 23. Provorov, Werenski, and Hanifin all have more than 100 NHL games, drafted 2015. Hanifin has 200+ games. Players are becoming NHL ready much younger than ever before, including d-men. Who's to say if any of the D-men available in the top 10 this year are NHL ready as soon as the next 1-2 years, always possible. The draft is built on hopes and wishing. That's really the fun part of the draft, and the disappointing part if your guy doesn't make it. 100% agree with you but then you'll have to agree those are less common and to rebuild a d based on those uncommon outcomes makes the rebuild based more on hopes and luck that the choices pan out faster then the usual development cycle and relies a lot less on planning Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JeremyCuddles Posted January 9, 2018 Share Posted January 9, 2018 12 minutes ago, coastal.view said: i'm not going to you are a moving target i see you clearly said 0 - 2 years in your post now you are amending that to 1 -2 next you'll say 1 - 3 or whatever you realize is more realistic i'm done I never made the initial post that you are referencing, that was another guy. I am just a humble 3rd man in. Lol. Drafting a d-man immediately ready is a bit hopeful I agree. But it is possible. You make it seem like all d-men are 3+ years away. First round d-men have been seen to be ready a bit sooner. That was the point I was making. Didn't mean to upset you kind sir. I referenced a good handful of d-men that were ready in that 0-2 year time frame. That was only the last 2 drafts too. Chychrun was on Arizona's roster first year and he wasn't even a top 10 pick. Could argue their D core is god awful I suppose. But ours is hardly worth bragging about either. Edit: Looks like we got a few of our messages mixed up. I don't think this one was meant for me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldnews Posted January 9, 2018 Share Posted January 9, 2018 28 minutes ago, coastal.view said: so the fact they invested quality draft picks on offense and have not done so on defense is satisfactory in your opinion 25 minutes ago, coastal.view said: joulevi is a top 5 pick 18 minutes ago, coastal.view said: paraphrase if for me then i'm curious what i missed Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldnews Posted January 9, 2018 Share Posted January 9, 2018 32 minutes ago, coastal.view said: i maybe need to borrow your rose coloured glasses maybe you just need some plain glasses Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boudrias Posted January 9, 2018 Share Posted January 9, 2018 I doubt Hutton is going anywhere. I doubt Gudbranson can be resigned on terms that make sense. That will leave a huge physical void which means Edler stays as well. Hutton at 210 pounds makes more sense along with the fact that he is only a 3rd year NHLer. If there was any choice in the matter I would move Tanev for the value he returns. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billabong Posted January 9, 2018 Share Posted January 9, 2018 To nyi: hutton, granlund to van: pulock Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rekker Posted January 9, 2018 Share Posted January 9, 2018 1 minute ago, billabong said: To nyi: hutton, granlund to van: pulock Pulok is exactly the type of young D we need. Any package of Hutton, Guds, Granny, Gaunce, Dowd, whatever. I want this kid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ForsbergTheGreat Posted January 9, 2018 Share Posted January 9, 2018 3 minutes ago, billabong said: To nyi: hutton, granlund to van: pulock Islanders need help on the right side. They also need someone that can help them improve in the d zone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monty Posted January 9, 2018 Share Posted January 9, 2018 6 minutes ago, billabong said: To nyi: hutton, granlund to van: pulock Pulock has his flaws, most notably his defensive play. I really like the kid, and the Isles have invested highly in his development over the past 4 years. Right now, New York isn’t quite sure what they have in Pulock, aside from a offensively minded player. That said, that offer won’t hold interest to them. But I’m wrong pretty often, so don’t listen to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldnews Posted January 9, 2018 Share Posted January 9, 2018 13 minutes ago, rekker said: Pulok is exactly the type of young D we need. Any package of Hutton, Guds, Granny, Gaunce, Dowd, whatever. I want this kid. He's had an attractive toolbox for a while now, but he hasn't been very good - and has struggled to earn minutes. He's in the lineup now because of injuries to guys like Boychuk and DeHaan - but still - bottom pairing minutes. Was beaten by Scott Mayfield for a top 6 spot out of camp, and Mayfield has only built on the gap. Pulock is 'only 23' - so clearly he's no bust at this stage - but he also doesn't hold the value he once had, and pedigree fades over time. You don't get a Gudbranson for a Pulock at this stage - Pulock is closer in value to Hutton than Gudbranson - and neither Hutton - nor Granlund (who I also would not deal for Pulock) really fill a need for the Islanders. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.