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

Recommended Posts

25 minutes ago, NUCKER67 said:

So, if there's a choice between Lysell and Edvinsson?  I think I'd take the Dman. 

Ya I I'm on the fence but I feel Edvinsson probably has the highest cieling of any player in the draft. He's also a huge bust risk but I feel like the Canucks are probably the best opportunity for him to reach his potential. Honestly I wouldn't be upset with either pick. I think it is very likely that with either player they outperform their draft position @9

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

It’s going to be a forward or a D with our top pick. I feel like we’re set with Demko, DiPietro, Silovs between the pipes. Plus adding goaltenders can be addressed with late picks. If one of Hughes, Clarke, Edvinsson are available for D, we take it and run. With a forward, it seems to be all over the place. Guys such as Lysell, Johnson, McTavish, Guenther, Svechkov could all be available as well. I’m, however, not sold on anyone in regards to who we should select with our pick. It’s that kind of a draft. A kid like, say, Raty could end up being a top 5 player in the class and due to his mediocre play, he’s slotted to be a late 1st rounder. All I can ask our scouts and GM to do is to do their due diligence and select the player who will make the earliest impact in NHL. GCG!

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, R3aL said:

I’m leaning myself to Lysell.

 

i mean Johnson comes with:

 

- lower IQ

- lower foot speed / skating ability 

- no positional advantage as he projects better as a winger

- hometown distraction

 

if Gradin likes Lysell more things we go with scouchs boy Lysell.

 

but that’s a tough crop of guys to pick from for Chat board peeps like us to really no for sure.

 

hope we knock this pick out the park though.

We don't even need a homerun at 9.  Middle 6 forward or a 2nd pairing d-man would be more then good enough in two years when they're ready for the Show.  

  • Burr 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, VancouverHabitant said:

We don't even need a homerun at 9.  Middle 6 forward or a 2nd pairing d-man would be more then good enough in two years when they're ready for the Show.  

I would hope at 9th we’d get a legit top 6 forward or a solid top 4 D.  We are a few significant pieces away. 

  • Vintage 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, R3aL said:

I’m leaning myself to Lysell.

 

i mean Johnson comes with:

 

- lower IQ

- lower foot speed / skating ability 

- no positional advantage as he projects better as a winger

- hometown distraction

 

if Gradin likes Lysell more things we go with scouchs boy Lysell.

 

but that’s a tough crop of guys to pick from for Chat board peeps like us to really no for sure.

 

hope we knock this pick out the park though.

Wallestedt? 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Beary Sweet said:

It’s going to be a forward or a D with our top pick. I feel like we’re set with Demko, DiPietro, Silovs between the pipes. Plus adding goaltenders can be addressed with late picks. If one of Hughes, Clarke, Edvinsson are available for D, we take it and run. With a forward, it seems to be all over the place. Guys such as Lysell, Johnson, McTavish, Guenther, Svechkov could all be available as well. I’m, however, not sold on anyone in regards to who we should select with our pick. It’s that kind of a draft. A kid like, say, Raty could end up being a top 5 player in the class and due to his mediocre play, he’s slotted to be a late 1st rounder. All I can ask our scouts and GM to do is to do their due diligence and select the player who will make the earliest impact in NHL. GCG!

If BPA is Wallestedt, YOU PICK HIM. If he improves or gets hyped up, you can always flip him for some good stuff later on OR even flip demko. Who knows

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm really interested to see how this draft goes I feel like a lot of draft lists are getting the same information from the same sources. There are many guys ranked after 10 that could move way up. 

 

Lambos, Sillinger, Ceulemans, Raty, Svechkov, Lysell. 

  • Hydration 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, Junkyard Dog said:

I would hope at 9th we’d get a legit top 6 forward or a solid top 4 D.  We are a few significant pieces away. 

This is not looking like a deep draft.  Take a look at 2008 or 2010 drafts for some examples of what can happen around the 9th overall pick.  For example if we go +/- 3 picks on either side in those two years, you get 

 

2008  

6th: Nikita Filatov 

7th: Colin Wilson 

8th: Mikkel Boedker

9th: Joshua Bailey 

10th: Cody Hodgson 

11th: Kyle Beach

12th: Tyler Myers

 

 

2010  

6th: Brett Connolly 

7th: Jeff Skinner 

8th: Alexander Burmistrov

9th: Mikael Granlund

10th: Dylan McIlrath

11th: Jack Campbell

12th: Cam Fowler 

 

Just a little context for our 9th overall pick in a shallow draft. 

  • Like 1
  • Vintage 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, VancouverHabitant said:

This is not looking like a deep draft.  Take a look at 2008 or 2010 drafts for some examples of what can happen around the 9th overall pick.  For example if we go +/- 3 picks on either side in those two years, you get 

 

2008  

6th: Nikita Filatov 

7th: Colin Wilson 

8th: Mikkel Boedker

9th: Joshua Bailey 

10th: Cody Hodgson 

11th: Kyle Beach

12th: Tyler Myers

 

 

2010  

6th: Brett Connolly 

7th: Jeff Skinner 

8th: Alexander Burmistrov

9th: Mikael Granlund

10th: Dylan McIlrath

11th: Jack Campbell

12th: Cam Fowler 

 

Just a little context for our 9th overall pick in a shallow draft. 

The good news is that it's looks like #9 or #12 are the best spots to pick as those seem to be the best of the bunch in either group.

  • Hydration 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, I love all you CDCers, but I am fed up with all this..............

 

It is not about what I want, but what we need!

 

We "Need" a RHD prospect, and I do not care where or how we get him

 

- move up and get Clarke

- down and get Ceulemans

- trade for Braden Schneider

- move someone for a late 1st and pray

 

I do no care, but for gods sake, go get a RHD prospect that has some offensive up side :picard:

 

You just can not keep on saying next year.............which seems to be what I keep on reading

  • Vintage 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, janisahockeynut said:

Ok, I love all you CDCers, but I am fed up with all this..............

 

It is not about what I want, but what we need!

 

We "Need" a RHD prospect, and I do not care where or how we get him

 

- move up and get Clarke

- down and get Ceulemans

- trade for Braden Schneider

- move someone for a late 1st and pray

 

I do no care, but for gods sake, go get a RHD prospect that has some offensive up side :picard:

 

You just can not keep on saying next year.............which seems to be what I keep on reading

We don’t need an RHD with offensive upside, just a solid RHD will do, we have offensive upside players in Hughes, Rathbone, Schmitt.

 

if the RHD projection is a tanev like player you take them 

  • Hydration 1
  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, UKNuck96 said:

We don’t need an RHD with offensive upside, just a solid RHD will do, we have offensive upside players in Hughes, Rathbone, Schmitt.

 

if the RHD projection is a tanev like player you take them 

Yes and no.............I may have over stated the "offensive upside' part of it, but the point is to get a young prospect that can play big minutes, he should not be exclusively Hughes, or Rathbones, but be able to control a pairing.......meaning that he is above in talent. and not a 27 or 28 year old bandade.

 

If you watch the playoffs, these defensemen are big, strong, quick and aggressive, we need some one like that that can grow with the team....that is what the draft is for, to get and to build, from scratch.........

Link to post
Share on other sites

I’m fine with making the RHD prospects/players defensive D as our left side looks set with PMD already. David Savard this offseason and a defensive beast prospect who will smother and punish the opponents is what I really want. I could see Carlo coming here in a package as well as Ceranek(TB) or one of Phillys RHD. Hamilton would be a pipe dream same with Jones. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, DeNiro said:

Very dynamic line for sure.

 

The question would be is it too soft? 
 

Im all for building a skilled roster but as all the teams who are having success are showing you need a balance.
 

Maybe that means McTavish or Guenther are the better pick for us now.

It does not matter if your team always has the puck.  

 

And the opposition can not get a sniff. 

 

9 hours ago, DeNiro said:

Size does still matter in the playoffs though.

I would take Marchesseault, or Cam Atkinson, Arvidsson all day any day instead of a lot of big guys. They each win battles consistently; just like Hoglander.

 

Kucherov is 5'11'' 180 lbs.   Gretzky same, but 6'.  

 

 

 

 

 

Measure the hockey player, skills. Scouting is about observable skills, physical ability. Measure his VO2 max, his heart, who wins battles, who is flying around the ice at the end of shifts. And pick them before big guys sulking wind & coughing up pucks out of puff. A big guy who can keep up, and play?   Will probably go top 5...

 

I take the athlete before size if that is the only differentiator.  People don't talk about missing out on Nick Richie anymore. They do talk about Ehlers. Some Nylander.

  • Like 2
  • Hydration 1
  • Vintage 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, janisahockeynut said:

I do no care, but for gods sake, go get a RHD prospect that has some offensive up side :picard:

 

We already have one in the system - Brogan Rafferty ...... but apparently he pissed in Green's swimming pool, or something.   Best thing for his career would be for Benning not to qualify him, and for Seattle to sign him.

Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, Googlie said:

We already have one in the system - Brogan Rafferty ...... but apparently he pissed in Green's swimming pool, or something.   Best thing for his career would be for Benning not to qualify him, and for Seattle to sign him.

I think he is a UFA G6 this year so he can pick and choose from those interested in him, where he wants to play.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Googlie said:

We already have one in the system - Brogan Rafferty ...... but apparently he pissed in Green's swimming pool, or something.   Best thing for his career would be for Benning not to qualify him, and for Seattle to sign him.

I may have miss-spoke somewhat, in my description "Offensive upside"

 

But IMO, todays Dmen, who are effective, are 2 way Dmen, who can play both D and O, and are big enough to protect the net. 

 

I am not so much against drafting a forward with our 1st, but maybe drafting at least one, big Dman who has bite with offensive upside, maybe even 2

 

Just go out and get them. Benning seems to wait and see who falls to him, but I would prefer he go out and be aggressive and move things to get one..

 

I may not be articulating this too well...............????

 

 

  • Like 1
  • Hydration 1
Link to post
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...