Jump to content
The Official Site of the Vancouver Canucks
Canucks Community

At Number 10 Who do we take?

Rate this topic


aqua59

Recommended Posts

11 minutes ago, aGENT said:

Yeah I'm still of the opinion that even if they have a D they like in the top 10 (besides Byram) that the likelihood of a forward they have ranked higher still being there at 10 is just too high for us to not likely end up with a forward.

 

That said, I'm fine with any of Boldy, Krebs, Zegras, Seider, Soderstrom etc... I'll even defer to Benning, Bracket and co on Broberg if they truly think he's the real deal (even though I feel he's more of a 15-20'ish pick).

 

Sure wouldn't hate adding a second first though if it meant we could have two of them... Take a forward with 10 OA and then add a 15'ish+/- pick and get the best D left standing of Seider, Soderstrom, Heinola, York, Broberg, Harley...

Absolutely.   Boldy, Zebras, Krebs, Turcotte...who knows maybe one of Cozens, Dach or Podz could slip down to us given after the top two plus Byram the talent is pretty even.   You can’t go wrong with BPA in a draft like this (Bennings list)...I’m sure their scouts are doing their homework just like the rest of the GMs and every team has a slightly different positional need, like how MTL and the NYR picked last year (pushing good talent down the draft, at least three guys which trickled some guys out of the first round and into the second including Woo).    I agree another second would really be nice...Tanev could do that for us, and then sign Myers as his replacement ?  

  • Cheers 2
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, IBatch said:

Absolutely.   Boldy, Zebras, Krebs, Turcotte...who knows maybe one of Cozens, Dach or Podz could slip down to us given after the top two plus Byram the talent is pretty even.   You can’t go wrong with BPA in a draft like this (Bennings list)...I’m sure their scouts are doing their homework just like the rest of the GMs and every team has a slightly different positional need, like how MTL and the NYR picked last year (pushing good talent down the draft, at least three guys which trickled some guys out of the first round and into the second including Woo).    I agree another second would really be nice...Tanev could do that for us, and then sign Myers as his replacement ?  

Yup, one of those 'top 5'ish' ranked F's could drop to us too like how Hughes fell in our lap last year. You just never know.

 

As for your earlier post, I doubt we'd move Horvat until his current contract is expiring. It's too good of a deal and will likely be key to us being competitive the next 3+ years. In that 4th year though...

 

I'd prefer we sign a short term Stralman (or similar) to replace Tanev and try to get Tryamkin back here this spring instead of spending +/- $7mx 7 on a middling Myers TBH. And then keep adding from draft (and trade - like seeing if we can't acquire Ceci on the cheap from OTT). 

  • Cheers 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think the Canucks have a guy yet, They may like some players but not enough to commit to them

 

Maybe after they do some interviews and understand the character of some of these guys they will but not yet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, aGENT said:

Yup, one of those 'top 5'ish' ranked F's could drop to us too like how Hughes fell in our lap last year. You just never know.

 

As for your earlier post, I doubt we'd move Horvat until his current contract is expiring. It's too good of a deal and will likely be key to us being competitive the next 3+ years. In that 4th year though...

 

I'd prefer we sign a short term Stralman (or similar) to replace Tanev and try to get Tryamkin back here this spring instead of spending +/- $7mx 7 on a middling Myers TBH. And then keep adding from draft (and trade - like seeing if we can't acquire Ceci on the cheap from OTT). 

I like the Stralman option more too, but if we did trade Tanev we’d definitely need a replacement.   I bring Horvat up as he’s the odd man out when it comes to possibly making a big trade with a core piece to fix our defense (right side).   His stock is high due to a good contract ... and replacing him through the draft is easier to do then drafting a defenseman this year.  I’d understand if they did it but hate it at the same time...

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, NUCKER67 said:

I think there could still be a few good D when we pick again at #40. Maybe we get Thomson or Korczak, maybe Heinola, Vlasic or Bjornfot are even still kicking around. Like Benning was saying, lots of D, but not much at the high end. So, why not wait until the 2nd to take a D? I`m now hoping for this. Who`s to say Harley will be better than Bjornfot in 5 years? Could be the other way around.  Maybe it`s risky taking a D at #10 this year. After Byram and maybe Soderstrom, it`s a gamble. Save it for the 2nd. 

 

Be nice to get Boldy and Thomson with the first 2 picks, as an example. That`s like two 1st rounders IMO

Take Soderstrom and run.  The league seems to be trending to more mobile, high IQ, puck-moving D men.  A right handed that meets all 3 of these criteria = Win

  • Like 1
  • Cheers 2
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/9/2019 at 7:16 PM, ItalianCanuck1 said:

Not sold about Soderstrom pick.

It seems to be a "need" pick and maybe at 10th that's not what I want.

 

I get your point, I simply think that with our scouting we can find something good at 40th or in the later rounds..

 

At 10th, I want the BPA.

 Normally i'd agree but if it's the BPA at positional team need which is both D and forward for us so it works either way especially since we have both our picks for 1-2 round and it all depends contracts signed and cap issues so that plays into it if we want a nhl ready player there's another thing plus development on current prospects. So a lot plays into it and that's why Mr. B gets a paycheck to make the decision and his _ss on the line and he's made more good than bad considering the train wreck of a "seasonal" team without much of a farm as we traded away more of our picks and a core that was tired and contractually locked in but finally we're almost out of the woods (2-3) years from contender so that's miles away from getting an early bounce even when we did make the post season.  

I just hope benning stays with safe bets so the "moving forward" keeps going... no f ups now would be nice, for a change, in the entire history of this franchise with no cup there's always been something so it's been painful watching for 40 years but if benning can pull off a team like the boston team minus the rat.. lol

Hope he pulls it off here and we'd be golden but finding a Chara might be a tad difficult but he might try make something out of Tryamkin yet... 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, BlastPast said:

I like Krebs but I will defer to the expertise of Judd "Don't call me Judd Parentheses " Brackett and his staff.

Whenever I hear someone bring up trading Horvat it's like someone sticking knives in my ears.  

It's with guys like him and Krebs teams win cups.  

Ide give my vote to Krebs as well. 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, sonoman said:

Take Soderstrom and run.  The league seems to be trending to more mobile, high IQ, puck-moving D men.  A right handed that meets all 3 of these criteria = Win

We get Soderstrom and I'll be happy. 

  • Cheers 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/28/2019 at 9:13 PM, iceman64 said:

 Normally i'd agree but if it's the BPA at positional team need which is both D and forward for us so it works either way especially since we have both our picks for 1-2 round and it all depends contracts signed and cap issues so that plays into it if we want a nhl ready player there's another thing plus development on current prospects. So a lot plays into it and that's why Mr. B gets a paycheck to make the decision and his _ss on the line and he's made more good than bad considering the train wreck of a "seasonal" team without much of a farm as we traded away more of our picks and a core that was tired and contractually locked in but finally we're almost out of the woods (2-3) years from contender so that's miles away from getting an early bounce even when we did make the post season.  

I just hope benning stays with safe bets so the "moving forward" keeps going... no f ups now would be nice, for a change, in the entire history of this franchise with no cup there's always been something so it's been painful watching for 40 years but if benning can pull off a team like the boston team minus the rat.. lol

Hope he pulls it off here and we'd be golden but finding a Chara might be a tad difficult but he might try make something out of Tryamkin yet... 

No Boston model please.  They aren’t the be all end all.  We didn’t salivate and discuss over the bags of riches that was the 94 NYR, and they were the leagues best for a few by then...can’t we just make our own team and get over them already.  They only beat us because Thomas stood on his head.  A lot of teams won cups based on exactly that.  This year Rask is doing it. 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/27/2019 at 8:21 PM, NUCKER67 said:

Benning: “Defencemen are deep this year, maybe not at the high end, but once you get halfway through the first round, there’s a lot that we like. If that guy is there at No. 10 we’ll be taking him.” #Canucks

 

It sounds like they like a mid-round Dman with the #10. Maybe it`s Harley? Maybe it`s Broberg or Seider? Well, if they go with a D, at least that pick will improve the backend for years to come. Add him to Hughes, Juolevi and Woo and it`s looking good.    

Would not be surprised if Cam York is in the conversation as well. ISS has him at No. 10 too. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, rekker said:

The Hawks need a goalie. I say we offer our tenth and Demko for the Hawks third overall. Byram is exactly what we need. 

I like the philosophy of that deal.  However, I'd want Jack Hughes more than Byram.  Is there any way Hughes could fall to three?  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Alflives said:

I like the philosophy of that deal.  However, I'd want Jack Hughes more than Byram.  Is there any way Hughes could fall to three?  

Sure. And I can start dating a Dallas Cowboy cheerleader, lol. There's a chance. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...