2021 NHL Entry Draft

[Junkyard Dog]

15 minutes ago, Dats hockey said:

If you want to take it that way. Did I need to specify that was towards the Canucks and Hockey on a forum where we normally talk about Canucks?

No I was just trying to understand that sort of sentiment,  where you're coming from and what lead to the insult if you indeed tried to.

 

So did you? 

 

Usually with insults there has to be merit and reasoning behind it but I couldn't find any given the context of the situation. If you indeed tried to make an insulting remark what lead to it? What did I say that caused you to say something along those lines? I couldn't find anything personally, especially considering that you made that remark while quoting me and HighOnHockey coming to an understanding after a complete misunderstanding of each other. What about that lead you to say that?

[Dats hockey]

14 minutes ago, Junkyard Dog said:

No I was just trying to understand that sort of sentiment,  where you're coming from and what lead to the insult if you indeed tried to.

 

So did you? 

 

Usually with insults there has to be merit and reasoning behind it but I couldn't find any given the context of the situation. If you indeed tried to make an insulting remark what lead to it? What did I say that caused you to say something along those lines? I couldn't find anything personally, especially considering that you made that remark while quoting me and HighOnHockey coming to an understanding after a complete misunderstanding of each other. What about that lead you to say that?

I think you read to much into this one. Just state I don’t want my team to have losing mentality. But you and some other people seem to want them to throw games. But ima leave it at that.

[HighOnHockey]

1 hour ago, Googlie said:

Interesting piece on Clarke by one of the Seattle fan sites.  Comparing him to Makar ...

 

 

Great stuff. Thanks for posting. Brandt Clarke is first on my list and it isn't even close. That combination of size, skating agility, and hockey IQ is just too much to pass up. As the guy in the video says, he needs to learn to play the body more consistently, as it isn't his first nature, but I see no reason he won't get there. Yes he's still slim, and needs time to bulk up, but Drew Doughty isn't exactly a brick $&!#house either, and he can be a wrecking ball. Same goes for Clarke, I've seen him throw some big hits at younger levels; his body just needs time to catch up. He has elements of both Doughty and Makar. Doughty was actually who I was comparing him to early on, but he has that shifty, deceptive element to his skating that is the hallmark of the post-Corsi Era defenseman, like Makar and Heiskanen.

 

The two players I've seen called the smartest player in the class are Clarke and Eklund. And that's about the size of it - hard to argue against either one of them. But for me the top three is rounded out by Cole Sillinger. Doesn't have the offensive smarts the way those other two do. But he's got a little bit of that Stone/Datsyuk thing, where he just thinks three steps ahead and knows where to be before the puck gets there to disrupt and force turnovers.

[Junkyard Dog]

Just now, Dats hockey said:

I think you read to much into this one. Just state I don’t want my team to have losing mentality. But you and some other people seem to want them to throw games. But ima leave it at that.

I never did state that actually. Never did state any sort of significant opinion in that regard.

 

Like I said HighonHockey already made these assumptions of my opinion and I had to clarify that for him. I myself even took fault for him being misunderstood towards me due to my vagueness when stating the facts I made in response to you. I even stated my opinions in the end with him which doesn't align with what you're saying. You quoted us coming to that sort understanding so I am curious of why you'd continue to make those sort of assumptions? The evidence is there for yourself to see in order to not make that false pretense of my opinion.

 

But I guess you didn't read enough into this one.

[Guest]

8 minutes ago, HighOnHockey said:

Great stuff. Thanks for posting. Brandt Clarke is first on my list and it isn't even close. That combination of size, skating agility, and hockey IQ is just too much to pass up. As the guy in the video says, he needs to learn to play the body more consistently, as it isn't his first nature, but I see no reason he won't get there. Yes he's still slim, and needs time to bulk up, but Drew Doughty isn't exactly a brick $&!#house either, and he can be a wrecking ball. Same goes for Clarke, I've seen him throw some big hits at younger levels; his body just needs time to catch up. He has elements of both Doughty and Makar. Doughty was actually who I was comparing him to early on, but he has that shifty, deceptive element to his skating that is the hallmark of the post-Corsi Era defenseman, like Makar and Heiskanen.

You’re talking about the absolute ceiling here.  
 

How about the floor and the most likely outcome?  
 

[R3aL]

On 6/17/2021 at 1:41 AM, N4ZZY said:

The &^@#. Pettersson at 18?? 

 

He was close ahah

[HighOnHockey]

2 hours ago, VancouverHabitant said:

You’re talking about the absolute ceiling here.  
 

How about the floor and the most likely outcome?  
 

This is an important point, but personally I have very few concerns. Early on I made the comparisons to Doughty as a ceiling and Josh Morrissey as a backup plan, but that was after my first handful of viewings and was a rough approximation. He wasn't playing much of his high-flying style there; joined the rush occasionally, but he was very reserved compared to what we know him as now. Even with Barrie, as a 16 year old defenseman he tended to play it relatively safe. The first time I saw him with Nove Zamky, again, he looked like a good two-way defenseman as he tried to gain his coach's trust. At that time the high point of his game for me was his play out of the hotzone, as he was so maneuverable and always looked so calm and confident, but he was more likely to make the first pass than skate it up himself.

 

But at some point, somewhere around the ten game mark over there, he really started to find his confidence as he was able to earn 20+ minutes a game in a pro league, and then I started to see this element to his game that I'd never quite seen before. It was just flashes at first, only when it was needed, but then it became a regular occurrence and his team started to rely on him heavily to transition the puck. Then back at U18s, you could still see that confidence in the way he carried the puck, but Canada didn't need to lean on him like Zamky did, but you could still see he was quarterbacking the transition, everything would run through him and he was setting up teammates to make plays. As someone who'd already seen him almost ten times before U18s, it was really cool to see everything come together like that. As soon as he got a hold of the puck, the opponents' offensive zone possession might as well have been considered over; it was out of the zone every time.

 

Anyway, all that to say, those who think he's a pure high-flying rover are missing a big piece of the picture. He took on that role out of his team's need for it, and he grew into it impeccably. True, he needs some work on his defensive zone coverage, but with his hockey IQ I see no reason he won't figure it out. The mistakes he makes are really normal for an elite defenseman his age, mostly over-committing and running around a little too much. In my opinion he's the best defenseman (of the ones I've watched closely) in the draft at defending against the transition. But as good as he is in that regard, as the guy in that video explains, he will be even better when he learns to focus on playing the body more; again, a very common mistake for young defensemen, even well into the NHL.

 

The three biggest reasons for major gaps between prospects' ceilings and floors are questions about hockey IQ, size, and work ethic. We know for certain that the first two aren't issues for Clarke, and everything I've seen from him on ice and in interviews points toward "stellar" work ethic. I know there are some folks who think he could fall as far as 7 or 8, and I'd be really curious to hear what the reasons are for that. Obviously I must be missing something, because as I said, he's number one with a bullet for me. The race for number two is where things get interesting, and in my opinion it is neck and neck between the safe pick in Owen Power and William Eklund's upside. But as far as I can tell, Brandt Clarke is the best of both worlds.

[flickyoursedin]

5 hours ago, Dats hockey said:

That’s the video that made me dive deep into Lysell mans work ethic and confidence is next level

He feels a lot like Nils Hoglander to me!

[JustABandwagoner]

6 hours ago, flickyoursedin said:

I wonder if there could be a deal to be made with Detroit where we swap picks. Yzerman seems to like acquiring more picks and prospects. If he likes multiple guys and likes the value. Maybe he likes 6th for 9th ++ and the Canucks could get one of the dmen or Eklund (Zetterberg comps Center prospect)

It would cost u a 2nd 

[flickyoursedin]

39 minutes ago, DontMessMe said:

It would cost u a 2nd 

It probably would. I think I’d do it if Clarke, Hughes or Eklund were there at 6.

[JustABandwagoner]

1 minute ago, flickyoursedin said:

It probably would. I think I’d do it if Clarke, Hughes or Eklund were there at 6.

It would cost u nothing if we tanked properly instead of moral wins like fans were cheering for smfh.... 

[HighOnHockey]

37 minutes ago, DontMessMe said:

It would cost u nothing if we tanked properly instead of moral wins like fans were cheering for smfh.... 

Go to bed.

Edited June 19, 2021 by HighOnHockey

[JustABandwagoner]

10 minutes ago, HighOnHockey said:

Go to bed.

no

[J.I.A.H.N]

For me, its Clarke or 9th

 

So, if we can trade up and get Clarke, I do it, within reason

 

Otherwise as HighOnHockey has stated, there are plenty of good options at 9 OA

 

But looking at the 2nd and 3rd rounds there are some nice Dmen there too, it is just trying to pick the right one that is difficult

[Bertuzzipunch]

4 minutes ago, janisahockeynut said:

For me, its Clarke or 9th

 

So, if we can trade up and get Clarke, I do it, within reason

 

Otherwise as HighOnHockey has stated, there are plenty of good options at 9 OA

 

But looking at the 2nd and 3rd rounds there are some nice Dmen there too, it is just trying to pick the right one that is difficult

Cernak for 9OA

[J.I.A.H.N]

38 minutes ago, Bertuzzipunch said:

Cernak for 9OA

I don't know Bert

 

Let's pose a question or 2

 

What if in 2 years, Rathbone is a solid Number 2, who is as good on defense is he is on offense

 

What does that mean?

 

What if Quinn never really gets his defensive game together..........Right now he is a PP specialist, albeit an elite one, that is neither a #1 or #2

 

To me, I feel we are not there yet and because of that, picking a very good RHD is important if given the chance

 

Maybe we don't get him, but to me there is alot of questions still not answered

 

and I do not want to see Jim jump the gun.

 

I say, lets keep the pick, or move up, and then in the summer, lets look at what we have and how long we have to wait........

 

Then let's make a move if we have to.

 

Let's remember that the JT MIller trade was a 2019 - 3rd, and a conditional 2020 - 1st, that would slide to 2021, if we did not make the playoffs.

 

IMO, that is what I would like to see

[Bertuzzipunch]

43 minutes ago, janisahockeynut said:

I don't know Bert

 

Let's pose a question or 2

 

What if in 2 years, Rathbone is a solid Number 2, who is as good on defense is he is on offense

 

What does that mean?

 

What if Quinn never really gets his defensive game together..........Right now he is a PP specialist, albeit an elite one, that is neither a #1 or #2

 

To me, I feel we are not there yet and because of that, picking a very good RHD is important if given the chance

 

Maybe we don't get him, but to me there is alot of questions still not answered

 

and I do not want to see Jim jump the gun.

 

I say, lets keep the pick, or move up, and then in the summer, lets look at what we have and how long we have to wait........

 

Then let's make a move if we have to.

 

Let's remember that the JT MIller trade was a 2019 - 3rd, and a conditional 2020 - 1st, that would slide to 2021, if we did not make the playoffs.

 

IMO, that is what I would like to see

Its almost like you’re making it out that im impatient or sumtin.

 

[Nuxfanabroad]

Someone's gotta gamble a high pick on Wallstedt. Watching the show Price is putting on, will sway some GM to risk a high selection.

[granpappy]

i cant remember jb's exact quote but he talked about liking 9 players for this draft. depending on his criteria, if he was talking about those he deemed not likely to be picked, say top 6, he could have a number of 'liked' prospects available to him when he takes the cyber podium.

 

hypothetically, if there were 4 players still available at our pick, i wonder what he could receive for moving down 4 spots and still being guaranteed of getting one of his targets.

 

another second would be nice

 

 

[Nucksownyou]

7 hours ago, DontMessMe said:

It would cost u nothing if we tanked properly instead of moral wins like fans were cheering for smfh.... 

Yeah, because it was our fault the team had some pride and won some games. Get out of here with your garbage takes.