2019 NHL Entry Draft in Vancouver, BC

[Noble 6]

 

 

[Kanukfanatic]

13 hours ago, flickyoursedin said:

The guy said he doesn’t draft Russians and in 2004 the draft went

Ovechkin, Malkin, Barker, Ladd

I was only asking if he’s so scared to draft Russians what would he have done in 2004. Does he pass on both Ovi and Malkin for the guys that went after them. Just trying to find out how crazy he is to pass up great talent because of nationality and fear.

You can claim it is nationality and fear.

 

Many GMs would claim it is nationality and smart hockey decisions.

[Smashian Kassian]

22 minutes ago, Kanukfanatic said:

You can claim it is nationality and fear.

 

Many GMs would claim it is nationality and smart hockey decisions.

Allowing Tarasenko & Kuznetsov to fall as far as they did in 2010 weren't smart hockey decisions. 

[Kanukfanatic]

1 minute ago, Smashian Kassian said:

Allowing Tarasenko & Kuznetsov to fall as far as they did in 2010 weren't smart hockey decisions. 

There are always exceptions. There are countless other times not picking a russian was a very smart hockey decision.

[86Viking]

8 minutes ago, Smashian Kassian said:

Allowing Tarasenko & Kuznetsov to fall as far as they did in 2010 weren't smart hockey decisions. 

There will be gems like those 2, but there a lot of busts like Yakupov, Nuke, Guryanov (not a bust yet but Barzal, Boeser, Connor were all available)

 

Forgot Filatov found him on a list of top busts...they also have Virtanen #8 on that list for what its worth, thought I would mention it get some conversation going in CDC have the Faithfuls crawl out from under a rock...

Edited April 21, 2019 by Canuckster86

[Smashian Kassian]

13 minutes ago, Kanukfanatic said:

There are always exceptions. There are countless other times not picking a russian was a very smart hockey decision.

Like when? When has the Russian factor caused a top Russian to fall & it ended up being good? 

 

2010 was around the height of the "russian factor". Yet because Alex Burmistrov played in Barrie he was deemed fine & taken high. (I think Canucks had him at #3). 

 

Teams have for the most part moved past it now. 

 

7 minutes ago, Canuckster86 said:

There will be gems like those 2, but there a lot of busts like Yakupov, Nuke, Guryanov (not a bust yet but Barzal, Boeser, Connor were all available)

Yakupov, Nuke & Guryanov were taken at or around where they were rated/projected. Were talking about the russian factor & players falling. 

 

Last year Kravstov & Deniseko went pretty high. Kravstov is looking like a great pick. I don't think the Russian factor is as much of a fear anymore.

 

Podkolzin said its his dream to play in the NHL. He could fall because he's a winger, similar to Zadina last year, but I don't think he'll be a huge faller due to the Russian factor.

 

Edited April 21, 2019 by Smashian Kassian

[Kanukfanatic]

 

9 minutes ago, Smashian Kassian said:

Like when? When has the Russian factor caused a top Russian to fall & it ended up being good? 

 

https://nationalpost.com/sports/hockey/nhl/is-there-a-stigma-attached-to-russian-nhl-prospects

 

[AlwaysACanuckFan]

Another pair of goals from Caufield 

 

 

[Smashian Kassian]

5 minutes ago, Kanukfanatic said:

 

https://nationalpost.com/sports/hockey/nhl/is-there-a-stigma-attached-to-russian-nhl-prospects

 

I guess Grigorenko. But that was still awhile ago. And in that draft there was a run of defenseman that also caused Forsberg to fall out of the top 10.

 

I could see Podkolzin fall out of the top 5, but I doubt he'll fall to #12 like Grigorenko did. Time will tell.  

[AlwaysACanuckFan]

 

 

[The Great 8]

Lavoie 3G 1Asst last night for Halifax. This guy is a big time playoff performer. 

[Maniwaki Canuck]

11 hours ago, flickyoursedin said:

 

Wouldn't mind this guy at all.  Pretty good vision and playmaking to go along with that shot.  Decent size and skating. 

[Odd.]

29 minutes ago, Kanukfanatic said:

 

https://nationalpost.com/sports/hockey/nhl/is-there-a-stigma-attached-to-russian-nhl-prospects

 

I'm curious, is there a reason why you think Podkolzin is going to be a problematic pick? Is it simply because he's Russian or are there reports that support your claim about him that he is problematic?

 

Podkolzin is probably the 2nd most skilled player in the draft, there's a reason why he's consistently ranked top 3 in almost all draft rankings. I think you're overthinking a bit with this Russian stuff. 

 

https://dobberprospects.com/prospect-deep-dive-vasili-podkolzin/

 

This article is a well written article on Podkolzin that really deciphers what kind of a player he is. and I'm sure it'll help you sway you a bit. If Podkolzin somehow magically falls to 10th, forget Boldy, Zegras, Krebs, Newhook, etc. I'm taking Podkolzin. I don't expect him to drop though.

Edited April 21, 2019 by Odd.

[rr16]

4 hours ago, Wolfgang Durst said:

most likely he will become a anaheim duck at draft day:

Number 1- Matt Boldy (USA NTDP)

I’ve got a feeling that Matthew Boldy will be an Anaheim Duck at the 2019 NHL draft. A 6’2 185lb winger who checks almost all the boxes that Bob Murray looks for in his players. He’s responsible defensively, he’s a big-bodied guy who isn’t afraid to get into the dirty spots of the ice. He’s not selfish consistently looking for an open passing option but not overly afraid to shoot the puck.

Boldy also excels at screening the goaltender, blocking out the sun while also having a tendency to tip pucks. Boldy is a quick player who has a pretty graceful stride for a bigger body, I think Boldy will be a good NHL player but doesn’t exactly have the highest ceiling. He seems like the low-risk type player that Murray frequently takes, he may not set the world on fire, but he’ll at least try and at the very least might be able to make a few sparks.

Team Fit- 6/10- He’s not a center, he’s a winger, but he fits all the other intangibles that Murray frequently looks for.

Likelihood- 9/10- I think he’s the most likely option for the Ducks short of them winning a lottery spot. I think that he’s not a high-ceiling enough for some of the other teams to take him over the other options meaning he will likely be available anywhere in the 8-11th range that the Anaheim Ducks are likely to pick.

I am not as high on Matt Boldy compared to others in this thread but do like aspects of his game.

 

For starters, he is a smooth player with very good vision and a heavy shot. I also love his ability of getting lost and finding open ice in the offensive zone. He has a knack for this and it is one of the most underrated aspects of his game imo. Lastly, I love his release. he is a guy that doesn't need time to shoot. The puck is off his stick fast. 

 

However, the thing that concerns me the most about Boldy is the way he skates and his movement on the ice. I see a guy that is floating into the offensive zone far too often and a player that isn't moving his legs nearly enough. I see a guy that enters the offensive zone gliding, waiting for his line mates to get open rather than making something happen for his line linemates.  I also see a guy that is a little on the perimeter side, and didn't see many highlights of him scoring goals in the paint.

 

Overall, I think he is the definition of a skilled player.  However, I worry about his game 5 on 5 at the NHL level due to the reason outlined above. Just my two cents from the few clips and highlights I've seen. Currently, I have him outside the top 10 but definitely need to look at him a little closer and in depth. 

[flickyoursedin]

2 hours ago, Smashian Kassian said:

Im not sold on Brobergs offense.

 

Even that Hlinka video, hes trying to rush the puck in the last min of a tied game against Canada. He gets a nothing wrap round away giving up possession. 

 

Alot of the rushes look the same, great skating then get a nothing perimeter shot away.

 

I agree hes an excellent skater, but not sure hes a smart player offensively & that could hinder his upside. 

That’s my concerns as well. I don’t like the idea of spending a 10th overall pick on somebody who seems limited offensively. Soderstrom shows a lot more offensive creativity. Soderstrom>Broberg if we do go dman at 10th.

[Noble 6]

9 minutes ago, flickyoursedin said:

That’s my concerns as well. I don’t like the idea of spending a 10th overall pick on somebody who seems limited offensively. Soderstrom shows a lot more offensive creativity. Soderstrom>Broberg if we do go dman at 10th.

 

Heinola is better than both of them offensively right now. He's producing great numbers in Liiga. 

[The Great 8]

32 minutes ago, rr16 said:

I am not as high on Matt Boldy compared to others in this thread but do like aspects of his game.

 

For starters, he is a smooth player with very good vision and a heavy shot. I also love his ability of getting lost and finding open ice in the offensive zone. He has a knack for this and it is one of the most underrated aspects of his game imo. Lastly, I love his release. he is a guy that doesn't need time to shoot. The puck is off his stick fast. 

 

However, the thing that concerns me the most about Boldy is the way he skates and his movement on the ice. I see a guy that is floating into the offensive zone far too often and a player that isn't moving his legs nearly enough. I see a guy that enters the offensive zone gliding, waiting for his line mates to get open rather than making something happen for his line linemates.  I also see a guy that is a little on the perimeter side, and didn't see many highlights of him scoring goals in the paint.

 

Overall, I think he is the definition of a skilled player.  However, I worry about his game 5 on 5 at the NHL level due to the reason outlined above. Just my two cents from the few clips and highlights I've seen. Currently, I have him outside the top 10 but definitely need to look at him a little closer and in depth. 

Yeah I said earlier as well I don’t think all of his game is going to translate to the NHL. There are players with more skill than him in the top 10 and players with more size and drive to the net. I’m not sold on him even though he has had a good tournament. 

 

Also after seeing what happened to gaudreau this playoff I’m saying no to caufield just based on his size. He could be a great regular season 100pt guy if he reaches his ceiling but I think he’s gonna struggle in the playoffs. No to both of these. 

[theo5789]

1 hour ago, Smashian Kassian said:

Allowing Tarasenko & Kuznetsov to fall as far as they did in 2010 weren't smart hockey decisions. 

If I remember correctly, Kuznetsov had to be convinced to make the jump. Having Ovechkin on the team made this easier (and possible at all?).

 

I'm not sure about Tarasenko, but I will say that St Louis won that 1st round with two major hits. Almost every other player in that 2010 1st round has been moved on from their original drafted team.

[theo5789]

25 minutes ago, The Great 8 said:

Yeah I said earlier as well I don’t think all of his game is going to translate to the NHL. There are players with more skill than him in the top 10 and players with more size and drive to the net. I’m not sold on him even though he has had a good tournament. 

 

Also after seeing what happened to gaudreau this playoff I’m saying no to caufield just based on his size. He could be a great regular season 100pt guy if he reaches his ceiling but I think he’s gonna struggle in the playoffs. No to both of these. 

This is an interesting take on Caulfield. How many would pass on a 100 point regular season player? For example, I feel like players like Virtanen may come up bigger in the playoffs with his size and speed, but he's not the big time regular season point producer type. I imagine based on the comments over the years here that many would take the Caulfield over Virtanen types.

 

I think right now we are in a greater need for the elite offensive player (or top end dmen) that if Caulfield can become a 100 point type player, we cannot pass up on him. We need someone like him to take us to the playoffs first and hopefully we have the guys that can step up if guys like Caulfield get shutdown. Size isn't the issue to me, but whether he can actually translate his game to the NHL level. It's a very risky pick that could pay off or be a complete bust as he likely won't be able to provide too much beyond pure offense.

[Kanukfanatic]

2 hours ago, Odd. said:

I'm curious, is there a reason why you think Podkolzin is going to be a problematic pick? Is it simply because he's Russian or are there reports that support your claim about him that he is problematic?

 

Podkolzin is probably the 2nd most skilled player in the draft, there's a reason why he's consistently ranked top 3 in almost all draft rankings. I think you're overthinking a bit with this Russian stuff. 

 

https://dobberprospects.com/prospect-deep-dive-vasili-podkolzin/

 

This article is a well written article on Podkolzin that really deciphers what kind of a player he is. and I'm sure it'll help you sway you a bit. If Podkolzin somehow magically falls to 10th, forget Boldy, Zegras, Krebs, Newhook, etc. I'm taking Podkolzin. I don't expect him to drop though.

I have not once said Podkolzin won't be a good player or a very good player.

 

I just don't like russian picks because of some of them not coming to North America to play. Like a couple others have said, this is a very important pick for the Canucks and I prefer they don't pick a russian (that isn't already over here playing junior). However, if JB does his homework (and I trust in him that he will) and for some reason Podkolzin dropped to 10 and JB picked him then so be it.

 

As you say we may end up with a very solid player. I have no idea if GMs are afraid enough about russians that he will drop that much but we do know in reality some GMs are a bit shy about picking russians. 

 

PS: that was a good article. Thanks. I found this line very interesting:

 

His tools make him look like a top five pick, and his production in international tournaments has matched that. But his production in the Russian leagues looks more suitable for a top 20 pick.

 

Edited April 21, 2019 by Kanukfanatic