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

[Proposal] Canucks & Sens


Recommended Posts

Another trading down pitch. I don't see Torts' Jackets beating TBay 4 games(would LOVE to be wrong there!)..so assuming the Sens' 1st(from Duchene) will be #19OA.

 

Ottawa has pretty good incentive to move up(top-10) after gifting their high pick to Avs.

 

Van: Granlund, #10 OA pick

 

OTT: Abramov, #19 & #32 OA picks

 

Sorry I don't know enough about 2019 prospects to venture names, but I do trust JB/Brackett to nab treasures with the # 19, 32 & 40 slots. Abramov is a chance with another smallish sniper, although he could be swapped for almost any of OTT's sizeable stash of mid-range fwd prospects.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Nuxfanabroad said:

 

Ottawa has pretty good incentive to move up(top-10) after gifting their high pick to Avs.

 

We're hosting so we have as good incentive as any NOT to move down unless offered some sort of massive overpayment by another GM which is unlikely for #10 in a mediocre draft (depth-wise), so I don't see this, sorry. 

 

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Fanuck said:

We're hosting so we have as good incentive as any NOT to move down unless offered some sort of massive overpayment by another GM which is unlikely for #10 in a mediocre draft (depth-wise), so I don't see this, sorry. 

 

You're probably right, but I can think of three reasons(off the top) that these two teams could structure a similar deal.

 

- Pressure on Ottawa to cover for that painful 1st giveaway(thus, they might overpay to move up)

- Since they're last overall, day 2 their pick is top of the order. Would be a nice touch, at home

- They have quite a surplus of decent prospects, due to strong drafting, & recently dealing off such a pack of vets

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Fanuck said:

We're hosting so we have as good incentive as any NOT to move down unless offered some sort of massive overpayment by another GM which is unlikely for #10 in a mediocre draft (depth-wise), so I don't see this, sorry. 

 

:huh:

 

What? The 2019 draft thus far has been regarded as a deep draft. There are lots of players that will be taken later on that could turn out to be very good NHL players. 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Ossi Vaananen said:

Outside of the top 3 (some iteration of Hughes, Kakko, Byram) there's basically 6-7 USNTDP prospects that are legit picks. It really doesn't matter if you're 4-10. We're getting a solid player.

I'm glad to hear this, as I haven't spent time analyzing prospects for the last number of yrs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Fanuck said:

We're hosting so we have as good incentive as any NOT to move down unless offered some sort of massive overpayment by another GM which is unlikely for #10 in a mediocre draft (depth-wise), so I don't see this, sorry. 

 

You're absolutely right on us not trading down unless someone over pays, but on the draft depth, what I've been hearing is this is pretty deep up to 15 - 20 range. Supposed to be pretty good skill level this year in the first round overall.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Ossi Vaananen said:

Outside of the top 3 (some iteration of Hughes, Kakko, Byram) there's basically 6-7 USNTDP prospects that are legit picks. It really doesn't matter if you're 4-10. We're getting a solid player.

My fear is that out of those 6-7 USNTDP prospects, we will see 5 years down the line that only Hughes was a play driver that deserved to be ranked so high, and the rest were just putting up numbers on a stacked USNTDP team that's been playing inferior competition. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, VegasCanuck said:

You're absolutely right on us not trading down unless someone over pays, but on the draft depth, what I've been hearing is this is pretty deep up to 15 - 20 range. Supposed to be pretty good skill level this year in the first round overall.

I'm not saying the draft is going to be total weaksauce,  and of course it'll take a decade or more in hindsight to sort it out,  but I don't see the potential like these drafts:

 

https://fansided.com/2018/07/03/10-most-loaded-draft-classes-in-nhl-history-bourque-messier/

 

https://bleacherreport.com/articles/1224210-nhl-draft-top-10-classes-of-the-last-generation#slide1

 

Its a cliché these days especially on CDC,  but I don't think this draft has the potential to have multiple 'generational' players in like some historic drafts but then that's my own view as to what makes part of a deep, strong draft.  Others might say a deep,  strong draft means 'x' number of players who make a career in the NHL and that's fine by me. 

 

I'm happy to be proven wrong and have this draft hold multiple 'impactful' career NHL'ers (or better yet generational players) and we get one at 10 though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't remember the stats exactly, but players drafted after 20th overall chances of playing more than 100 games in the NHL drop significantly.  I think in the early 2nd round it drop to less than 10%.  

 

Therefore, the only reason to move from 10 to 19, is if Benning think he found a gem that he really likes and is ranked outside the top 20.  Usually, there is a significant drop in talent after the top 10, so I see no reason to drop 9 spot only to add an early 2nd.  

 

Usually, the cost of moving 3-4 spots in the 20-31 range is a 2nd rounder.  Therefore, if we are moving 9 spots back, I want way more than a 2nd and Abramov.  I'd want at least 2 top 25 picks.  Still i'd rather pick quality at 10 than quantity.

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, timberz21 said:

I don't remember the stats exactly, but players drafted after 20th overall chances of playing more than 100 games in the NHL drop significantly.  I think in the early 2nd round it drop to less than 10%.  

 

Therefore, the only reason to move from 10 to 19, is if Benning think he found a gem that he really likes and is ranked outside the top 20.  Usually, there is a significant drop in talent after the top 10, so I see no reason to drop 9 spot only to add an early 2nd.  

 

Usually, the cost of moving 3-4 spots in the 20-31 range is a 2nd rounder.  Therefore, if we are moving 9 spots back, I want way more than a 2nd and Abramov.  I'd want at least 2 top 25 picks.  Still i'd rather pick quality at 10 than quantity.

We have reached a point where we don't have a big need for 3rd/ 4th line forwards or 3rd pairing d-men. We definitely need quality over quantity ! Keep #10 !

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • -SN- changed the title to [Proposal] Canucks & Sens
  • 1 month later...
On 4/11/2019 at 11:23 AM, Nuxfanabroad said:

You're probably right, but I can think of three reasons(off the top) that these two teams could structure a similar deal.

 

- Pressure on Ottawa to cover for that painful 1st giveaway(thus, they might overpay to move up)

- Since they're last overall, day 2 their pick is top of the order. Would be a nice touch, at home

- They have quite a surplus of decent prospects, due to strong drafting, & recently dealing off such a pack of vets

Bumping this, as I keep seeing a version of this trade in new proposals. Old hat folks!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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