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

2021 NHL Entry Draft


Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Alflives said:

I think he goes end of round one.  What if trade Motte to a cap strapped contender for their first?  Then use that pick?

I know we all love Motte but he’s not fetching a 1st round pick.

  • Like 1
  • Hydration 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actually starting to believe vancouver will only do one trade this offseason to get a player (others maybe to move salary). I think vancouver might target dante Fabbro. Nashville are going to have a hard time with the expansion draft and may have to trade fabbro over losing him for nothing. 

 

Trade for fabbro

Buy out virtanen

Try and trade roussel

Beagle and ferland on ltir

Sign mark jankowski 

Sign gusev

Sign montour

Sign frederick gaudreau

 

Nothing super sexy but helps support our cast of players

 

Miller pettersson boeser

Pearson horvat hoglander

Gusev jankowski podkolzin

Motte gaudreau lind

 

Hughes Fabbro

Schmidt montour

Rathbone myers

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, DeNiro said:

I know we all love Motte but he’s not fetching a 1st round pick.

I think teams that are really good and need players who can be good in their bottom six, that are on good contracts (like Tampa, for example) will pay a lot in draft capital to secure a guy like Motte.  Motte is a proven layoff guy, who does well if forced up in the lineup, and is great on the PK.  

I do think if Motte was moved for a later first we’d have to take a contract back too.  A team like the LOSER LEAFS would like Motte, but we’d have to take Kerfoot.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, R3aL said:

Last time you buzzed about a small forward it was Ehlers I guess I will give you this one and drink the koolaid! 

 

I want him to purely off your passion aha.

 

He is 5 ft 8 realistically he will probably be available for our second round pick or close to it no? 

 

I hope you are wrong and the Kraken take Holtby though.

I see something really special in Stankoven. It's not every year a guy like that catches my eye. Like you said with Ehlers, I saw a little bit of Bure in him and a lot of skill and character. He hasn't exactly panned out that way, but he's a damn good player and one of the faces of their franchise.

 

The way Stankoven gets around the ice with his short quick strides allows him to be elusive, and his head for the game is already elite. Elite hockey sense for a lack of a less generic term. Very, very smart player. Opportunistic goal scorer, too, and an NHL-ready release. The only knock on him is his size. Needless to say, he's my favorite player in this year's draft!

 

I just fail to see any appeal Holtby would have to the Kraken. I grew up there near Seattle and Kent, and know a few people working in the sports media there. Used to be a big Sonics fan!

Anyhow, the general consensus is that the Canucks are really kind of lacking in tantalizing options aside from Lind and Gadjovich, with MacEwen being a solid size option. Holtby needed to be better and more consistent this year to be worth considering... 

 

Now, if the Canucks are able to make a trade or some kind of deal to ensure the Kraken take Holtby, that's another story. But it seems unlikely. 

  • Thanks 1
  • Hydration 2
  • Sedinery 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
On 6/4/2021 at 5:36 PM, janisahockeynut said:

When I took one of my coaching levels in Minor hockey, we had the BC U17 coach teach the class, he said, what so many pro people have said time and time again, you can't teach size, so when 2  or 3 people are ranked in the same tier, that is a factor that can separates them. In saying that, player agent Bobby Orr (yes that Bobby Orr) suggest that for a player to be elite, they must have at least 1 elite talent/skill, and also suggested when looking at talent.

 

When looking at the 4 players around where we pick..........McTavish, Johnson, Guenther, and Svechkov, it is really splitting hairs as to who is better, but one thing that stands out to me is size and team play. Of that, Johnson stands out as having less of those intangibles. More skill, but less of that. Svechkov on the other hand, gets ignored because he is Russian????? It is really a crap shoot when separating these four for me, but my ranking is probably in the right order for me, regardless of team need. (aka BPA)

Agree Jan, although I have slight concerns about the skating of McTavish, but may be wrong. I love size and a bit of bite to the game, but despite this, for me its Guenther then followed by Svechkov / McTavish... We need more than Podz with fire in the belly, but just feel Guenther is better than them. Not sure about Johnson... As stupid as it sounds, I actually wish, we could get a Russian player, who could be buddy with Podz... 

Edited by spook007
  • Hydration 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Warhippy said:

So.  Optimally Benning would/will need to find himself 2 additional early 2nd round picks

 

To get hemo-salami and stank-oven

 

Seems reasonable

 

:bigblush:

I mean they are probably both gone by the time those 2nds roll around but that doesn't mean you aren't right.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, hammertime said:

I mean they are probably both gone by the time those 2nds roll around but that doesn't mean you aren't right.

So...Buffalo's 2nd and a late 1st....maybe Tampa?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, hammertime said:

Are you seriously upset about 6th round pick Atrym Manukian 

 

 

They all agreed on the Manukyan pick for the record.

 

 

He will never make the nhl for us, later on I would take flyers on guys who play physical that may lack a bit of foot speed as we know from experience players can improve that greatly. Or draft more D or C's over a midget winger

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Canuckster86 said:

He will never make the nhl for us, later on I would take flyers on guys who play physical that may lack a bit of foot speed as we know from experience players can improve that greatly. Or draft more D or C's over a midget winger

So will 90% of the other guys we draft in the 6th. I like the idea that they drafted the guy with more $#!T'$ given per 60.

 

Also to be fair JB loves meat n potatoes It's not like they haven't drafted those guys. Manukyan is more of an exception than the rule.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
4 hours ago, hammertime said:

Sieder was also supposed to go end of round 1. 

 

Hindsight is 20/20 foresight is everything all I'm saying is what we all saw with our own eyes Heimosalmi was just plain better than Brand Clarke at the U18's and he didn't have Bedard, Wright, etc to feed. I'm not saying it's a home run can't miss Heimosalmi 1st overall. Infact I still have Clarke at #1 on my draft board I am saying take notice do your homework this kid is going to make you look stupid in 2 years when you're still trying to find a RHD through overpaying in trade because you drafted a flashy winger instead of the RHD you knew you needed.  

 

I was looking at my old mock drafts the other night, and I had Seider going 13. Not bragging this time, I really have no idea why; I'd hardly seen him play. I must have heard something from a reliable source.

 

But I think this is actually making your point for you. For those who have their ear to the ground, "supposed to" can mean something very different than it does for most. I completely agree with you anyway, I keep thinking back to that list a couple months ago that had Heimosalmi either 14 or 16. Somebody was way ahead of the curve there, and I wish I could remember where that list came from. I suspect Heimosalmi will end up going mid first. Maybe not 15, but perhaps more like late teens or early 20s.

 

On the other hand, I don't agree about how much better he was than Clarke at U18s. He won the award, so sure, I'll concede he was "objectively" better, but I certainly don't think it was to the extent you are making it out to be. Clarke had a fantastic tournament. I think the quality of teammates argument goes both ways - since Clarke was sharing the puck more, he didn't have to be relied on as heavily in transition as Heimosalmi was for Finland. I thought Clarke showed immense maturity and leadership in the way he controlled play from the back end, but without trying to do too much himself, if that makes sense - like the breakout would generally run through him, but he was distributing and finding opportunities to set up teammates to make plays.

Edited by HighOnHockey
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, HighOnHockey said:

On the other hand, I don't agree about how much better he was than Clarke at U18s. He won the award, so sure, I'll concede he was "objectively" better, but I certainly don't think it was to the extent you are making it out to be. Clarke had a fantastic tournament. I think the quality of teammates argument goes both ways - since Clarke was sharing the puck more, he didn't have to be relied on as heavily in transition as Heimosalmi was for Finland. I thought Clarke showed immense maturity and leadership in the way he controlled play from the back end, but without trying to do too much himself, if that makes sense - like the breakout would generally run through him, but he was distributing and finding opportunities to set up teammates to make plays.

That's fair and like I said in my previous post I still have Brandt ahead of course I do. I appreciated the maturity of his game. However in terms of contribution  to the success and failure of his team I did feel that Heimosalmi had the greatest impact on the flow of the game. 

 

Regardless it doesn't matter I'm probably still taking McTavish/Svechkov/Eklund/Beniers/Lysell/Wallstedt/Clarke if given the chance. But if JB  stuck his neck out and grabbed AH I could find alot of reasons to like it.  

  • Hydration 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, HighOnHockey said:

 

I was looking at my old mock drafts the other night, and I had Seider going 13. Not bragging this time, I really have no idea why; I'd hardly seen him play. I must have heard something from a reliable source.

 

But I think this is actually making your point for you. For those who have their ear to the ground, "supposed to" can mean something very different than it does for most. I completely agree with you anyway, I keep thinking back to that list a couple months ago that had Heimosalmi either 14 or 16. Somebody was way ahead of the curve there, and I wish I could remember where that list came from. I suspect Heimosalmi will end up going mid first. Maybe not 15, but perhaps more like late teens or early 20s.

 

On the other hand, I don't agree about how much better he was than Clarke at U18s. He won the award, so sure, I'll concede he was "objectively" better, but I certainly don't think it was to the extent you are making it out to be. Clarke had a fantastic tournament. I think the quality of teammates argument goes both ways - since Clarke was sharing the puck more, he didn't have to be relied on as heavily in transition as Heimosalmi was for Finland. I thought Clarke showed immense maturity and leadership in the way he controlled play from the back end, but without trying to do too much himself, if that makes sense - like the breakout would generally run through him, but he was distributing and finding opportunities to set up teammates to make plays.

This list has him at #16. It is fairly unconventional compared to other lists though. 

That being said,  ours and other teams GMs lists might be all over the map this draft just like were seeing from different outlets. That is probably good for us as it gives Benning a better chance to get someone in his top tier. Pretty exciting stuff!

 

 

https://hockeyprospect.com/2021-nhl-draft-rankings/

 

1 Power Owen Michigan NCAA 6'06" 214 LD
2 Edvinsson Simon Vasteras Allsvenskan 6'04" 198 LD
3 Beniers Matthew Michigan NCAA 6'01" 174 C/LW
4 Johnson Kent Michigan NCAA 6'00" 166 LW/C
5 Guenther Dylan Edmonton WHL 6'00" 166 RW
6 Eklund William Djurgardens IF SHL 5'10" 176 LW
7 Cossa Sebastian Edmonton WHL 6'04" 212 G
8 McTavish Mason Peterborough OHL 6'00" 198 LW
9 Hughes Luke USNTDP U-18 NTDP 6'02" 176 LD
10 Sillinger Cole Sioux Falls USHL 6'00" 190 C
11 Coronato Matt Chicago USHL 5'10" 180 LW
12 Clarke Brandt Barrie OHL 6'01' 180 RD
13 Lucius Chaz USNTDP U-18 NTDP 6'00" 172 C/RW
14 Wallstedt Jesper Lulea HF SHL 6'03" 209 G
15 Mailloux Logan London OHL 6'03" 212 RD
16 Heimosalmi Aleksi Assat U20 SM-sarja 5'11" 170 RD
17 Knies Matthew Tri City USHL 6'03" 205 C/LW
18 Olausson Oskar Sodertalje Allsvenskan 6'01" 177 LW
19 Lysell Fabian Luela HF SHL 5'10" 172 RW
20 Othmann Brennan Flint OHL 5'11" 170 LW
21 Dean Zachary Gatineau QMJHL 6'00" 176 LW
22 Robertsson Simon Skelletftea SHL 6'00" 190 RW
23 Buium Shai Sioux City USHL 6'04" 205 LD
24 Lambos Carson Winnipeg WHL 6'00" 200 LD
25 Stromgren William Modo AIK Allsvenskan 6'03" 175 LW
26 Bolduc Zachary Rimouski QMJHL 6'01" 175 LW
27 Johnson Brent Sioux Falls USHL 5'11" 165 RD
28 Boucher Tyler USNTDP U-18 NTDP 6'01" 200 LW
29 Ceulemans Corson Brooks AJHL 6'02" 192 RD
30 Svechkov Fyodor Lada Togliatti VHL 6'00" 187 C/LW
31 Chayka Daniil CSKA Moskva KHL 6'02" 187 LD
32 Grushnikov Artyom Hamilton OHL 6'02" 174

LD

 

 

 

 

  • Thanks 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, S N Y P E R S 7 said:

I see something really special in Stankoven. It's not every year a guy like that catches my eye. Like you said with Ehlers, I saw a little bit of Bure in him and a lot of skill and character. He hasn't exactly panned out that way, but he's a damn good player and one of the faces of their franchise.

 

The way Stankoven gets around the ice with his short quick strides allows him to be elusive, and his head for the game is already elite. Elite hockey sense for a lack of a less generic term. Very, very smart player. Opportunistic goal scorer, too, and an NHL-ready release. The only knock on him is his size. Needless to say, he's my favorite player in this year's draft!

 

I just fail to see any appeal Holtby would have to the Kraken. I grew up there near Seattle and Kent, and know a few people working in the sports media there. Used to be a big Sonics fan!

Anyhow, the general consensus is that the Canucks are really kind of lacking in tantalizing options aside from Lind and Gadjovich, with MacEwen being a solid size option. Holtby needed to be better and more consistent this year to be worth considering... 

 

Now, if the Canucks are able to make a trade or some kind of deal to ensure the Kraken take Holtby, that's another story. But it seems unlikely. 

Stankoven on a goal streak / heater would be lots of fun!

 

well I think you nailed ehlers tbh he would have been a great pick for us.

 

i remember I was huge on Nick Ritchie and Nylander wasn’t so keen on ehlers but I was wrong.

 

 

ya Holtby would just be a dream it seems now. Lind seems to be the most desirable. Be nice if we could protect him. to Try and force them taking someone with salary implications .
 

Well I look forward to seeing how stankoven turns out and where he goes in the draft! Thanks for sharing mate 

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...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...