[Rumor] One of Chicagos big 4 D prospects is not off the table.

[189lb enforcers?]

52 minutes ago, Canuck Surfer said:

I am just musing over what will be transferrable into the NHL between the two?

 

Bouchard is nearly a year older than Boqvist. His size being a possibly transferrable skill for the NHL. Likely one could argue? He also protects the puck well, which will help on the PP, but less than if he were a forward.  Along with definitely transferrable skills of passing, vision and getting his shot through. Puck composure, knowing what to do, is amazing! Knock on Bouchard being a question. Will average, not weak, NHL athleticism limit some of the situations he could be developed to play in by a coach?

 

But he is not the athlete Boqvist is! Where speed and agility, power on his edges is off the charts, creativity with the puck close. Its also odd saying someone has a better shot than Bouchard, but he does. These physical weapons offer tremendous upside, particularly considering the age gap. There is a current discrepancy in defending. But it is easier to teach a great athlete how to defend. Because they will have the balance & agility to move with faster players. Than it is to teach a smart defensive player who does not have the speed, how to get fast enough to keep up. And a discrepancy in puck composure, intelligence with the puck. You can also, however, teach composure to someone who has that dynamic skill with the puck.

 

On a team that has the speed and skill of Chicago up front, I see a perfect fit for Boqvist. Who can allow him to be adventurous. Also mask any defensive deficiency or even use his speed for pressure? When in a different system, the way some teams ask people to defend would have been hard for Boqvist to execute. Might have been the perfect antidote for McDavid? The juice that stirred an entire ability to create tempo in attack. Where Bouchard will simply just be very useful. And aid Edmonton's PP.

 

I would still pick Boqvist.              

Awesome post.

Recall that I was the guy on these boards last year cheerleading for the team to select Boqvist with the first pick... because of everything you just mentioned. 

 

It’s clear that you already understand the kid’s game, so for others I will elaborate just a little more.

 

One thing that stands out to me about AB is that when he shoots the puck, he beats goalies clean. He is a sniper like nobody else in the game, which sounds like a tall-tale to say. 

 

He plays the game game pretty much like a slightly less motivated EP, but on defence. If you can imagine a head-up all-the-way Dman walking in from the point and cleanly beating goalies with incredible wrist shots like prime Bure or Alex Mogilny were able to do, then you have a clear image of what this kid can do from the point. 

 

He is the youngest top-end kid in his class. He has time to catch up to the early bloomers and work on the strength and timing aspects of his defensive game. Today though, he’s essentially an elite skill forward, playing defence and I am still as high on him as I ever was. I didn’t want Hughes or anyone else, I wanted this guy, and for exactly the reasons listed by Surfer. 

 

In the NHL though, I can see Bouchard as being a more capable defender with a similar, well kind of similar, offensive awareness, but with a better overall game and the size. It’s hard to ignore his incredible output in the playoffs, which almost double Boqvist’s. 

 

The Canucks have a smaller, faster, less sniper’er version of AB, in Hughes. They could then use a Bouchard to compliment the roster instead of another small, skill D, IMO. 

 

I’d gladly give up Demko and whatever it took took land Bouchard, but would do a happy dance if they got Boqvist instead/too. I absolutely love the kid’s shot and watch as much of his shifts on YouTube, etc. as I can. It’s really something to watch him shoot and ... swish. 

 

Anyways, great post, Surfer.

Got me all Hockey-happy. 

 

[Alflives]

4 minutes ago, 189lb enforcers? said:

Awesome post.

Recall that I was the guy on these boards last year cheerleading for the team to select Boqvist with the first pick... because of everything you just mentioned. 

 

It’s clear that you already understand the kid’s game, so for others I will elaborate just a little more.

 

One thing that stands out to me about AB is that when he shoots the puck, he beats goalies clean. He is a sniper like nobody else in the game, which sounds like a tall-tale to say. 

 

He plays the game game pretty much like a slightly less motivated EP, but on defence. If you can imagine a head-up all-the-way Dman walking in from the point and cleanly beating goalies with incredible wrist shots like prime Bure or Alex Mogilny were able to do, then you have a clear image of what this kid can do from the point. 

 

He is the youngest top-end kid in his class. He has time to catch up to the early bloomers and work on the strength and timing aspects of his defensive game. Today though, he’s essentially an elite skill forward, playing defence and I am still as high on him as I ever was. I didn’t want Hughes or anyone else, I wanted this guy, and for exactly the reasons listed by Surfer. 

 

In the NHL though, I can see Bouchard as being a more capable defender with a similar, well kind of similar, offensive awareness, but with a better overall game and the size. It’s hard to ignore his incredible output in the playoffs, which almost double Boqvist’s. 

 

The Canucks have a smaller, fast, less sniper’er version of AB in Hughes. They could then use a Bouchard to compliment the roster instead of another small, skill D, IMO. 

 

I’d gladly give up Demko and whatever it took took land Bouchard, but would do a happy dance if they got Boqvist too. I absolutely love the kid’s shot and watch as much as I canof his shifts on YouTube, etc. 

 

Anyways, great post, Surfer.

Got me all Hockey-happy. 

 

Boqvist has elite physical skills, but there are questions about his hockey Q.  

We need guys who have elite physical skills, but who are also hockey smart.  

[189lb enforcers?]

1 minute ago, Alflives said:

Boqvist has elite physical skills, but there are questions about his hockey Q.  

We need guys who have elite physical skills, but who are also hockey smart.  

Agreed, as usual, Alf. 

I don’t really see that in the #10 range at this draft, which kind of sucks.

 

However, what the eff do I know, and trust Brackett to dredge up another beauty sleeper pick. 

 

The Canucks absolutely need some desire and Tkachuk-ness injected into its core, especially on D, where we wish we could draft the next Rob Blake or even a Shannahan. 

[Canuck Surfer]

6 minutes ago, Alflives said:

Boqvist has elite physical skills, but there are questions about his hockey Q.  

We need guys who have elite physical skills, but who are also hockey smart.  

Yes it would be better if he had Hughes or Bouchards composure with the puck.

 

You can be hockey smart, but blown past, left behind by a guy as fast as Boqvist. And the guy dangles like nobodies business. This is not Jake who does not know what to do with the puck. Cannot handle the puck. And someone either comes and takes it off him. Or he drifts to the corner after going wide and gives up the puck. Boqvist stops on a dime, and still has control. Still has the puck, and can get away from the next guy as well. There is time for him to learn what to do with it.   

[Alflives]

11 minutes ago, 189lb enforcers? said:

Agreed, as usual, Alf. 

I don’t really see that in the #10 range at this draft, which kind of sucks.

 

However, what the eff do I know, and trust Brackett to dredge up another beauty sleeper pick. 

 

The Canucks absolutely need some desire and Tkachuk-ness injected into its core, especially on D, where we wish we could draft the next Rob Blake or even a Shannahan. 

Does this Podkolzin kid have some nasty in his game?  

If Boqvist is available (I doubt it though) I wonder what JB would give up for him?  

[Dats hockey]

15 minutes ago, Alflives said:

Does this Podkolzin kid have some nasty in his game?  

If Boqvist is available (I doubt it though) I wonder what JB would give up for him?  

I’m convinced Chicago is picking Byram with the pick that team has to much talent up front to go for a forward beside their d core is going to be filthy in a couple years all they need to hope for is if Kane and Toew still have another couple year in them

[oldnews]

3 hours ago, 189lb enforcers? said:

Agreed, as usual, Alf. 

I don’t really see that in the #10 range at this draft, which kind of sucks.

 

However, what the eff do I know, and trust Brackett to dredge up another beauty sleeper pick. 

 

The Canucks absolutely need some desire and Tkachuk-ness injected into its core, especially on D, where we wish we could draft the next Rob Blake or even a Shannahan. 

I dunno - I think Soderstrom matches up fairly well / comparably - and possibly has a bit more edge / slightly better fit considering this team already drafted Hughes.  Slightly older than Boqvist's draft age, but 44 SHL games as an 18 yr old.....I don't know if he's as 'electric' as Boqvist, but overall I think personally I might lean towards Soderstrom of the two if I had the choice

[hammertime]

Jokiharju would be my target. I'm not sure what it would take but he has had chemistry with Juolevi in the past and I feel the 2 of them united might be able to take each other to a level they might not attain individually. 

 

Edler Hughes

Juolevi Jokiharju

Hutton Stetcher/Woo

 

Looks like a new era puck moving D corps to me, I would pay up for Joker. 

[JeremyCuddles]

4 hours ago, hammertime said:

Jokiharju would be my target. I'm not sure what it would take but he has had chemistry with Juolevi in the past and I feel the 2 of them united might be able to take each other to a level they might not attain individually. 

 

Edler Hughes

Juolevi Jokiharju

Hutton Stetcher/Woo

 

Looks like a new era puck moving D corps to me, I would pay up for Joker. 

What do you think it'd take to snag him in a trade, if you had to venture a guess. Of their D prospects I feel he'd be the most cost effective one. If we can snag him for like Virtanen and a pick (2nd/3rd, likely next summer's draft) that could be huge for our D core going forward. Especially if we go with Krebs, Boldy, or another forward with our 1st rounder this summer. Although at this point, I don't think anyone outside of Vancouver is banking on Virtanen's potential anymore. So he might not be an enticing enough piece even with a 2nd rounder thrown in.

[theo5789]

18 hours ago, N7Nucks said:

What do you think it'd take to snag him in a trade, if you had to venture a guess. Of their D prospects I feel he'd be the most cost effective one. If we can snag him for like Virtanen and a pick (2nd/3rd, likely next summer's draft) that could be huge for our D core going forward. Especially if we go with Krebs, Boldy, or another forward with our 1st rounder this summer. Although at this point, I don't think anyone outside of Vancouver is banking on Virtanen's potential anymore. So he might not be an enticing enough piece even with a 2nd rounder thrown in.

Actually it seems more like most inside Vancouver are not banking on his potential anymore. A 22 year old player that is 6'1 226lbs with his speed in today's game will surely intrigue teams. I'm sure this feeling is similar to when we dealt Neely (not comparing the players in case you're wondering).