2nd Best Dman in 2018 Draft

[mikeyman109]

21 hours ago, Eastcoast meets Westcoast said:

I agree.  Bouchard does lack the star power and dynamic attacking rushes of the guys like Hughes, Smith and Bomquist.  

 

He has put up surprisingly great offensive numbers for a draft eligible player which belies an ability to generate offence better than most other defenders in this draft. On par with everyone in the top ten. 

 

There are a lot of intangibles about Bouchard that make me like him more than others. For me it’s him or Bomquist.  It’s the ‘safeness’ of those intangibles that has me leaning towards Bouchard vs others.  

 

Bomqvist has got higher upside. But two concerns; one is can he transfer that success to the NHL?  Yes he has a similar style and such to EK. But EK is an rare example. Is Bomqvist and EK or nothing player in the NHL?  

 

Two, can he play defence?   This is less certain and there really no way to know until after he has been picked. This is a similar reason that EK wasn’t a top three pick, why Liljgren fell. This is a bigger problem for me.  

 

We are at a point where we can’t afford to miss a top pick on a defender if we don’t take a forward instead. 

 

JB has had some excellent picks at forward with B.B. and EP. it gives him forgiveness and latitude with the fans and the club. 

 

But we are so short at defence it is ridiculous.  Trymakin’s departure really &^@#ed up JB’s plan IMO. 

 

Now there is very little in any NHL ready prospects that any decent guy skipped the AHL and went directly to the NHL. 

 

With Hutton, Stecher and Trymakin they have all had rocky second years, on extra for Hutton. 

 

OJ will hopefully fair better, but can this team afford the risk on a Bomqvist or Hughes vs the Bouchards and Dobson’s, heck Bode Wilde and Th Smith can get tossed into the mix as well. 

 

Where I sit, the dynamic mic skating style is overblown in smaller players, especially defenders.  First smaller guys are generally quicker/shiftier and appear to be much faster than bigger long limbed guys in juniors. 

 

Larger, lankier guys always look slower unless they are freaks like Jake V when it comes to skating.  Still think we should Brent Burns Jake. 

 

Hughes does remind me of Brian Leetch or Phil Housley.  But so did others.  But those guys made it because they could also defend, and their clubs had tons of depth to allow their offence to take over. 

 

So unless we find a few more good d men, the smaller guys will need to play a way more complete game they have yet to show, or we are screened. 

 

Thats where Bouchard comes in for me. He has a lot of the less sexy attributes that bode well for his play without the puck. He needs more work, but he has the tools. 

 

Added to that, he put up insane numbers generating significant offence with good shooting, great passing and intelligence.  

 

 

Bouchard has the offence and the areas that he is lacking in involve training and coaching. IE fixable. 

 

 

Glad JB makes this pick and nit me. 

 

 

All in bold i agree with.Its the intelligence the kid plays with I love.

I love what Bode Wilde brings to the table as well. Dobson wouldn't upset me if he landed in our lap either. Another D man I like is Kevin Bahl. at 6'6 i like him in a Chara type role.We need Defense-men really really badly. No matter where we pick i think we will walk away with a great asset for the future. I am hoping its an Impact Defense man but JB will have to figure that out. It wouldn't upset me if we took D in  first round and second. We do need a Center as well. I think if a lot of the D are gone in the first round we may find a decent pick at C in the second.

[Alflives]

2 minutes ago, mikeyman109 said:

All in bold i agree with.Its the intelligence the kid plays with I love.

I love what Bode Wilde brings to the table as well. Dobson wouldn't upset me if he landed in our lap either. Another D man I like is Kevin Bahl. at 6'6 i like him in a Chara type role.We need Defense-men really really badly. No matter where we pick i think we will walk away with a great asset for the future. I am hoping its an Impact Defense man but JB will have to figure that out. It wouldn't upset me if we took D in  first round and second. We do need a Center as well. I think if a lot of the D are gone in the first round we may find a decent pick at C in the second.

Do more top centres or Dmen come out of round 2?

[mikeyman109]

5 minutes ago, Alflives said:

Do more top centres or Dmen come out of round 2?

I would draft a D in the first round any time i could.Especially in a year like this where there are so many great prospects. Centers will be there next year. Its a plethora of D this year

[Alflives]

Just now, mikeyman109 said:

I would draft a D in the first round any time i could.

This year it looks like there are several really good D in the top of the draft. 

[mikeyman109]

Just now, Alflives said:

This year it looks like there are several really good D in the top of the draft. 

Thats why i draft the D Alf. Next year will be like the year we took OJ, not many D to choose from.

[Isam]

49 minutes ago, Alflives said:

Do more top centres or Dmen come out of round 2?

More forwards come out of any round

[Isam]

2 hours ago, oldnews said:

yes, and I'm absolutely fine with that - I'm simply not of the opinion that they're the #2 D in the draft.

and if you consider them to go in the 8 or 9 spot, it sounds like you share that opinion.

 

But if I were at 5 for example, and Dahlen were the only D gone.....I'd be taking Boqvist.

Aside from his obvious game - I think there's something about him that is being generally underestimated - he'll still be 17 years old after the draft - is very young (with an August birthdate).

 

Keep an eye on Hughes on. Kid may not have the shot as boqvist but he thinks the game like leetch.

[ForsbergTheGreat]

10 hours ago, IBatch said:

Hmmm.  Chara. Once he's gone there won't be a detterrent left (ok maybe McQauid offers some of this too) and McAvoy, Krug (who's already seen his share of the infirmary) and wonderfully so Marchand won't have the biggest strongman in league history around to dish out vengeance. 

 

This is a problem most teams already face as guys know they can take runs at anyone and knock them out of a series without any real consequences (oh no, Kadris suspended for a game for taking X out of the playoffs etc.)

 

At least if the players are bigger they can absorb more punishment.  Ellis is just coming off a half season injury and barely up to par in NSH.  Krug and McAvoy missed significant time this year with big brother(s) there to tone things down.   

Tory krug has only missed 6 games this year.  Since joining the league he's missed a total of 15 games.  That's 15 games total, in a combined 6 seasons.  

 

Also If you're trying to insinuate that bigger players are less injury prone you can't be a canucks real fan. lol  I mean Edler is 6'3 and he's missed 60 games over the last 3 years. Tanev is 6'2 and he's missed over 80 games the last 3 years.  Gudbranson is 6'5 and he's missed 100 games over the last 3 seasons. Salo was 6'3 and he's couldn't seem to ever stay healthy.

 

Injuries aren't always the result of getting run over, most injuries in todays game are freak accidents.  Yes i think it helps having a big intimidating player but that i don't think that plays much of a role in mitigating injuries, Ducks, Winnipeg and St.Louis were the 3 of the top 5 biggest teams in the NHL this year and all were in the top 10 for man games lost.

 

When it comes to choosing player A over player B. size is one of the last things i'd look at.  What I really care about is hockey skillset.  If we want to focus on size, do it in the later rounds.

 

[IBatch]

1 hour ago, ForsbergTheGreat said:

Tory krug has only missed 6 games this year.  Since joining the league he's missed a total of 15 games.  That's 15 games total, in a combined 6 seasons.  

 

Also If you're trying to insinuate that bigger players are less injury prone you can't be a canucks real fan. lol  I mean Edler is 6'3 and he's missed 60 games over the last 3 years. Tanev is 6'2 and he's missed over 80 games the last 3 years.  Gudbranson is 6'5 and he's missed 100 games over the last 3 seasons. Salo was 6'3 and he's couldn't seem to ever stay healthy.

 

Injuries aren't always the result of getting run over, most injuries in todays game are freak accidents.  Yes i think it helps having a big intimidating player but that i don't think that plays much of a role in mitigating injuries, Ducks, Winnipeg and St.Louis were the 3 of the top 5 biggest teams in the NHL this year and all were in the top 10 for man games lost.

 

When it comes to choosing player A over player B. size is one of the last things i'd look at.  What I really care about is hockey skillset.  If we want to focus on size, do it in the later rounds.

 

Yes I'm aware of the injuries and that Guddy is big and Tanev average.  Salo was big too but he played half his game in the infirmary, and your namesake had a career shortened by how he played too.

 

Currently every team is faced with injury issues far and beyond what it was like in a much more pugilistic time in the 70-80s,  swat armour and no more code have the most to do with that, plus considering everything is about speed now the collisions plus armour don't help much.

 

If I could have a bigger bodied guy, generally they hold up better than average or small sized guys.  Overall, not just Guddy, Tanev, McAvoy and Krug.  

[189lb enforcers?]

‘Swat armour’

 

[Ghostsof1915]

Dahlin/Bouchard/Dobson. 

Then Adam Ginning round 2?

 

Adam Samuelsson for 2nd or 3rd round or so?

 

[Gaudette Celly]

8 hours ago, Isam said:

Both boqvist and hughes can play d, but they are probably gonna have to turn down the aggessive offensive instincts a bit. Less is more sometimes like how klingberg is doing in Dallas.

As can Smith -- not keeping him in the top-9 consideration?  Are the other 4 all ahead of him?

[Adarsh Sant]

3 hours ago, mikeyman109 said:

I would draft a D in the first round any time i could.Especially in a year like this where there are so many great prospects. Centers will be there next year. Its a plethora of D this year

Zadina/Svechnikov would be hard to pass up if we pick #2 or #3

[Alexandre]

5 hours ago, mikeyman109 said:

I would draft a D in the first round any time i could.Especially in a year like this where there are so many great prospects. Centers will be there next year. Its a plethora of D this year

The Nashville drafting model. It kind of makes sense. I like it. I always thought the opposite, but drafting D in the first round any time you could might be better. There is usually less D to pick from, they are harder to identify? and slower to develop. Draft them in the first round where they are more easily identifiable? and specially when you see one you like sounds like a better strategy.

 

Defense wins championships. The bedrock of defense are defensemen (plus strong two-way centers and a good goalie). Sure the Penguins have won cups using a different model but how do replicate having both a generational and franchise level center? I don't think you can, with the draft lottery in place.

[mikeyman109]

14 hours ago, Adarsh Sant said:

Zadina/Svechnikov would be hard to pass up if we pick #2 or #3

I agree but with the D really hurting i would look to address this first as D take longer to develop. I could understand making the case for the two forwards but there are some very good D in this draft. if you ever were going to pass on the forwards this might be the year.

12 hours ago, Alexandre said:

The Nashville drafting model. It kind of makes sense. I like it. I always thought the opposite, but drafting D in the first round any time you could might be better. There is usually less D to pick from, they are harder to identify? and slower to develop. Draft them in the first round where they are more easily identifiable? and specially when you see one you like sounds like a better strategy.

 

Defense wins championships. The bedrock of defense are defensemen (plus strong two-way centers and a good goalie). Sure the Penguins have won cups using a different model but how do replicate having both a generational and franchise level center? I don't think you can, with the draft lottery in place.

I think this is the way to build from the net out. We have  our future goaltender, now we need our FUTURE D men. People need to stop thinking that this rebuild will be over next season. Our tire fire of a D needs a rebuild as well as the forwards.

[Adarsh Sant]

1 hour ago, mikeyman109 said:

I agree but with the D really hurting i would look to address this first as D take longer to develop. I could understand making the case for the two forwards but there are some very good D in this draft. if you ever were going to pass on the forwards this might be the year.

 

We should draft BPA. If that is a D man then so be it.

[Rob_Zepp]

34 minutes ago, Adarsh Sant said:

We should draft BPA. If that is a D man then so be it.

I hear this constantly and it is annoying.   BPA is only logical if ALL other things are equal.   It is like setting up a free-for-all fighting tournament, if you took the BPA from the goalies (say Tae Kwon Do) and dmen (say boxers) and then say forwards (MMA) and tried to compare them it would be a mess.   There can be some differences in there nuance wise depending upon organizational needs that make the need for a boxer over the MMA type, for example.

 

Of course, in my example the MMA/Boxers would destroy the TKD dude early and then depending upon size, it would be a toss up.   So, don't draft a goalie with your first pick, but your BPA Dman and BPA Forward cannot be so readily compared even if "experts" like to imply they can be but those experts have never been in a street fight.

[Ghostsof1915]

On 2018-04-20 at 5:15 AM, Eastcoast meets Westcoast said:

Agree.

 

A lot of posters on the CDC fail to recognize that Bouchard had the best single season of all the defenders in the 2018 draft. 

 

His accomplishment is better than many realize and he did this on a depleted team that he also captained.  

 

This guy played in all situations and logged the most minutes of any defence man in the OHL. 

 

So let’s recap.

 Canadian kid,

team captian,

remains healthy even though he would have been the top target on his club,

plays in all situations,

has a huge ‘Willie Mitchell’ sized reach,

great vision and able to beat players with his pass vs skating around them,

great mobility,

already has NHL size, great shot that finds then net, 

Great skating

Plays with poise, calm with the puck.  

 

Now there are a lot of d men availble and ranked at the top of the draft, but the only knock I have read from a scout on Bouchard was that he lacked intensity or something to that effect. That he got beat a few times that he shouldn’t have. 

 

I believe that this can be viewed two ways:

 

One, Bouchard is a lazy player based on an eye test.

 

Two, that Bouchard was worked like a rented mule and got tired near the end of the season. 

 

I have a hard time believing that a OHL team captian, leading his team in points and leads the OHL in minutes played somehow lacks motivation. 

 

Oppinions are like ‘blank’ but I think that too many are missing this out kid.  I hope he falls to where NYI picks and we can send Tanev over for their picl

and snag him. 

 

EmW

You had me at Willie Mitchell.

[Ghostsof1915]

36 minutes ago, Rob_Zepp said:

I hear this constantly and it is annoying.   BPA is only logical if ALL other things are equal.   It is like setting up a free-for-all fighting tournament, if you took the BPA from the goalies (say Tae Kwon Do) and dmen (say boxers) and then say forwards (MMA) and tried to compare them it would be a mess.   There can be some differences in there nuance wise depending upon organizational needs that make the need for a boxer over the MMA type, for example.

 

Of course, in my example the MMA/Boxers would destroy the TKD dude early and then depending upon size, it would be a toss up.   So, don't draft a goalie with your first pick, but your BPA Dman and BPA Forward cannot be so readily compared even if "experts" like to imply they can be but those experts have never been in a street fight.

Bet on the Jeet Kune Do dude. 

[Rob_Zepp]

38 minutes ago, Ghostsof1915 said:

Bet on the Jeet Kune Do dude. 

LOL.   I recall as a kid in boxing some TKD kids came in and tried, boy were they in trouble in a hurry.