2021 NHL Entry Draft

[JM_]

9 minutes ago, NUCKER67 said:

Seems there's a lot that needs to happen this off season:

 

Petey and Hughes' contracts

Expansion Draft

Buyouts

UFAs

Trades

the Draft

 

Canucks need help in a few areas. I think the Top 6 is adequate with a healthy Pettersson, and maybe Podkolzin impresses and earns a spot. But the Bottom 6 is pretty poor. Eriksson, Roussel, Virtanen, Beagle, Ferland - all need to be gone, somehow.

 

Hawryluk, Vesey, Edler, Sutter, Hamonic, Baertschi, Michaelis, Boyd all have contracts that expired. Which ones does Benning bring back? 

 

The D is pretty bad too. Will Benning re-sign Edler and Hamonic? And if so, does that mean Juolevi and possibly Rathbone don't get a regular spot? Will Schmidt still be in a Canucks uniform on opening night?  I would prefer they re-sign Hamonic and add another (UFA) defensive Dman with size. Canucks need to be tougher to play against.

 

Lots to do, and all is quiet.  

Quiet for us as fans, but I bet there's a lot going on behind the scenes. Everyone has to wait for Seattle. That week between the ED and draft should be pretty darn interesting. 

 

[86Viking]

2 hours ago, janisahockeynut said:

Just a qestion, but if we offered our 2021-9th + 2022-2nd to Detroit, do you think Detroit takes the deal?

easily I think, I would move us down a few spots to get another 2nd round pick

[Off_The_Schneid!]

There’s a good Cam robinson interview on YouTube with Canuck Clay 

 

goes into detail on his on his top ten 

 

has Mctavish 2nd

 

high on Eklund 

 

Isnt a fan of Edvinsson 

 

Thinks Johnson could be the most skilled player in the draft 

 

Thinks that if Hughes doesn’t go to New Jersey he could be available at our pick 

 

Would take Johnson if Edvinsson Johnson and Hughes were all left on the board 

 

Thinks that Walstedt should be a top ten pick but has his doubts that he’ll go that high

Edited June 19, 2021 by Off_The_Schneid!

[Bertuzzipunch]

1 hour ago, Warhippy said:

 

We...we can do better right?

 

I mean...right?

 

I hope

To me getting a player we can slot right in that is only 24 is the right thing to do even if it’s expensive like a top 10 pick. Is it better waiting for that player in 3-4 years or one now that can join miller and horvat while both are still in their prime years or ready when both are in their 30s? If cernak is untouchable at least we tried if you ask me but hes worth it imo.

[HighOnHockey]

9 minutes ago, Jimmy McGill said:

our best bet might be trading for Foote, if he's not moved to Seattle to help Tampa clear cap which he probably will be. 

Can't say I know a ton about the player, but doubt I'd be willing to give up 9th overall for him. Or is he better than I realize?

 

53 minutes ago, Jimmy McGill said:

sure but how much of that is our coaching decisions? we're happy to let a lot of shots through. How much of that was Miller trying to do things himself? there's a lot of unpack in that negative number.

 

All I know is the kid is an elite skater, and he's 'lil. His defensive ceiling is going to centre around him out-skating guys, not being a bull in a China shop. So given the path forward is also his main skill, I think he's got a good chance to at least be average defensively. 

 

But you're correct, we do need some kind of stop-gap partner for him. Even if we get a great, and big, RHD in the 2nd round its going to take at least 2 seasons to get the guy here and he'll be rookie. 

 

 

 

The interesting thing is, if you just look at the Vollman charts, you would think he's being under-utilized. He's heavily sheltered and is a strong positive corsi player. If he can get it out of the zone quickly, which he often does, he's fine. But if he has to spend any amount of time in his zone defending, he's in trouble. If you pair him with a pure stay-at-home shutdown defenseman, then you have to worry about teams attacking Hughes' side of the ice, and if it's not a guy who can move the puck well, they could end up spending more time in zone and could make matters worse. I think it would be better to try to find someone who can defend decently, but who can get up and down the ice with him, who can skate and defend through the neutral zone to prevent zone entries in the first place, and can also move the puck so Hughes has to spend as little time in his own zone as possible.

[J-Dizzle]

1 hour ago, janisahockeynut said:

Sorry buddy, but Hughes defensive game is terrible, which makes him a liability at even strength. a true #1 or #2, can handle even strength play with out costing his team too much.

 

When you  look at his even strength play, and PP play, he still comes out as a minus player, so he needs to be sheltered in someway.............basically what I am saying is if you played Hughes 60 minutes a game, we would loose every game, because he is a negitive player.if it gets better, great, but not if its sheltered minutes to get better.

 

He is young and there is time to improve...time will tell!

This post pretty much could have described almost every player on our back end last year. 

[JM_]

1 minute ago, HighOnHockey said:

Can't say I know a ton about the player, but doubt I'd be willing to give up 9th overall for him. Or is he better than I realize?

 

sorry didn't mean to suggest the 9th oa for Foote, that would be bad. Maybe a player who doesn't need protection, Lockwood maybe? 

 

1 minute ago, HighOnHockey said:

 

The interesting thing is, if you just look at the Vollman charts, you would think he's being under-utilized. He's heavily sheltered and is a strong positive corsi player. If he can get it out of the zone quickly, which he often does, he's fine. But if he has to spend any amount of time in his zone defending, he's in trouble. If you pair him with a pure stay-at-home shutdown defenseman, then you have to worry about teams attacking Hughes' side of the ice, and if it's not a guy who can move the puck well, they could end up spending more time in zone and could make matters worse. I think it would be better to try to find someone who can defend decently, but who can get up and down the ice with him, who can skate and defend through the neutral zone to prevent zone entries in the first place, and can also move the puck so Hughes has to spend as little time in his own zone as possible.

that makes sense. So one of the bigger, but slow footed guys some people have been suggesting maybe isn't the best idea. 

[4petesake]

24 minutes ago, HighOnHockey said:

Can't say I know a ton about the player, but doubt I'd be willing to give up 9th overall for him. Or is he better than I realize?

 

The interesting thing is, if you just look at the Vollman charts, you would think he's being under-utilized. He's heavily sheltered and is a strong positive corsi player. If he can get it out of the zone quickly, which he often does, he's fine. But if he has to spend any amount of time in his zone defending, he's in trouble. If you pair him with a pure stay-at-home shutdown defenseman, then you have to worry about teams attacking Hughes' side of the ice, and if it's not a guy who can move the puck well, they could end up spending more time in zone and could make matters worse. I think it would be better to try to find someone who can defend decently, but who can get up and down the ice with him, who can skate and defend through the neutral zone to prevent zone entries in the first place, and can also move the puck so Hughes has to spend as little time in his own zone as possible.

I think this is where the addition of Shaw has potential to make a huge difference. As he says it’s not just the d’men, it’s also on the forwards to be responsible and be in position to support and receive passes from the d. I think with better systems in place for leaving the zone Quinn is going to change the perceptions about his defensive game. He’s got great skills with his stick and defends pretty well when he’s in position and the team is not constantly losing the puck on zone exits. I see Hughes and others making big strides next year.

[wildwood12]

Assets aren’t worth very much to our GM. We gave up a second round pick and a prospect for Toffoli and then he didn’t sign him.
So we can do that again this year, trade our 9 OA pick and then don’t sign the player. LOL

[flickyoursedin]

2 hours ago, Wolfgang Durst said:

Don't need to become top line players to help the Canucks in their current situation. Drafting either Mac Tavish or Dylan Guenther would be huge for the Canucks because I see  both of them becoming goal scoring wingers on the 2nd line. That's exactly what Canucks need: more goal scoring wingers in the top 6 to finally kick Pearson out of the top 6. He doesn't belong there.

 

My personal opinion is that both will be gone when Canucks pick at 9. Best thing Benning could do is to find either a young top 4 D-Man with term or a young goal scoring winger for the top 6 and try to get such players using the 9oa.

I like both Guenther and McTavish so either guy would be a good pick but I don’t see them pushing Pearson down because they’ll be a year or two away. However we already have that guy coming in next year in Podkolzin. I think the Pearson contract we’ll all think looks bad while in the first year of it both Hoglander and Podkolzin look better pushing Pearson down to an overplayed 3rd liner.

[flickyoursedin]

6 minutes ago, wildwood12 said:

Assets aren’t worth very much to our GM. We gave up a second round pick and a prospect for Toffoli and then he didn’t sign him.
So we can do that again this year, trade our 9 OA pick and then don’t sign the player. LOL

Yeah that was bad asset management. Should have signed Toffoli and tried to trade Pearson for futures to make room. Management has done a great job drafting lately but that doesn’t mean you should be giving away good prospects and picks for 17 games of a guy. Cycle in our top prospects while trading out the vets for more picks and prospects. Or couple these guys together for somebody with term or a sign and trade guy. 

[smithers joe]

i could live with a defense of;

graves...schmidt

hughes...hamonic

rathbone...myers

juolevi...chatfield.

our 2nd round pick and lockwood.

i don't know how we fit him into our cap but would make our D better.

[hammertime]

I really like the idea of Mason's shot with Podkolzin's play making and their respective in your face style. 

 

I mean if I look at the draft from a need standpoint. And toss out all of the "would be nice to have" guys.  

 

1 Clarke Top 4 RHD all round

2 Beniers 200" C with speed and skill

3 Mctavish Physical secondary scoring defensively responsible C

4 Edvinsson Big physical elite skating gun slinger D

5 Sillinger High IQ secondary scoring C that can be used in all game situations. 

6 Lysell Energetic puck hound RW with high end speed and skill. 

 

I think its very likely that we get one of these guys that would mesh so well with our group. That being said Eklund, Luke, Johnson, Guenther, Wallstedt, Power would be nice to have. So I think no matter what we are getting a very good player at 9 so I'm pretty happy.

 

Edited June 19, 2021 by hammertime

[Nucker 67]

1 hour ago, Off_The_Schneid! said:

There’s a good Cam robinson interview on YouTube with Canuck Clay 

 

goes into detail on his on his top ten 

 

has Mctavish 2nd

 

high on Eklund 

 

Isnt a fan of Edvinsson 

 

Thinks Johnson could be the most skilled player in the draft 

 

Thinks that if Hughes doesn’t go to New Jersey he could be available at our pick 

 

Would take Johnson if Edvinsson Johnson and Hughes were all left on the board 

 

Thinks that Walstedt should be a top ten pick but has his doubts that he’ll go that high

That was very interesting

 

Cam's comparables were most surprising to me, and makes me wonder if this Draft class will amount to much lol Well, except for a few of them. 

 

Power - Parayko or Pietrangelo

Beniers - Larkin

McTavish - Dubois

Clarke - Theodore

Guenther - Toffoli

Eklund - he didn't have a comparable

Hughes - Rathbone

Johnson - Baertschi

Edvinsson - Ristolainen

 

Cam also mentioned Wallstedt, and said something interesting how he could be in the NHL in 2 years, whereas it's taken Demko 7 years to get to this point. This Wallstedt kid is elite and I wonder if he's actually VAN"s best bet for the #9. Would be a great trading piece if they decide to. 

 

 

[flickyoursedin]

45 minutes ago, hammertime said:

I really like the idea of Mason's shot with Podkolzin's play making and their respective in your face style. 

 

I mean if I look at the draft from a need standpoint. And toss out all of the "would be nice to have" guys.  

 

1 Clarke Top 4 RHD all round

2 Beniers 200" C with speed and skill

3 Mctavish Physical secondary scoring defensively responsible C

4 Edvinsson Big physical elite skating gun slinger D

5 Sillinger High IQ secondary scoring C that can be used in all game situations. 

6 Lysell Puck hound RW with high end speed and skill. 

 

I think its very likely that we get one of these guys that would mesh so well with our group. That being said Eklund, Luke, Johnson, Guenther, Wallstedt, Power would be nice to have. So I think no matter what we are getting a very good player at 9 so I'm pretty happy.

 

Unless Benning wants to be aggressive in the trade front. I could see him entertaining the idea of trading this pick if the top 4 dmen are gone.

[Alflives]

Who are the guys most likely to be left for us at 9?

Power is no chance.

Beniers is no chance.

But after that, couldn’t any of these guys fall?

Edvinson, Clark, Eklund, McTavish, Hughes?  I’d be happy if we got any of these guys. 

If all those guys are gone, and we are left with Johnson or Gunther I’d hope GMJB trades the pick.  

 

[JustABandwagoner]

7 hours ago, Nucksownyou said:

Get out of here with your garbage takes.

No I'll give u even more so called garbage takes 

[JustABandwagoner]

58 minutes ago, hammertime said:

I really like the idea of Mason's shot with Podkolzin's play making and their respective in your face style. 

 

I mean if I look at the draft from a need standpoint. And toss out all of the "would be nice to have" guys.  

 

1 Clarke Top 4 RHD all round

2 Beniers 200" C with speed and skill

3 Mctavish Physical secondary scoring defensively responsible C

4 Edvinsson Big physical elite skating gun slinger D

5 Sillinger High IQ secondary scoring C that can be used in all game situations. 

6 Lysell Puck hound RW with high end speed and skill. 

 

I think its very likely that we get one of these guys that would mesh so well with our group. That being said Eklund, Luke, Johnson, Guenther, Wallstedt, Power would be nice to have. So I think no matter what we are getting a very good player at 9 so I'm pretty happy.

 

I feel if Wallestedt is at 9, and if Hughes, Clarke, Edvinsson is gone, you take Wallestedt . High key would hate to see Wallestedt drafted by Calgary at 12 

[JustABandwagoner]

5 minutes ago, Alflives said:

Who are the guys most likely to be left for us at 9?

Power is no chance.

Beniers is no chance.

But after that, couldn’t any of these guys fall?

Edvinson, Clark, Eklund, McTavish, Hughes?  I’d be happy if we got any of these guys. 

If all those guys are gone, and we are left with Johnson or Gunther I’d hope GMJB trades the pick.  

 

McTavish might be at 9. But I rather have Wallestedt. Gimme that FRANCHISE goalie and lets have another goalie controversy 

[hammertime]

9 minutes ago, flickyoursedin said:

Unless Benning wants to be aggressive in the trade front. I could see him entertaining the idea of trading this pick if the top 4 dmen are gone.

Depends on who is there. If Eklund or Mctavish are there you have to make that pick.