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

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Alflives said:

I’d be okay with Lysell.  His game is compared to Mitch Marner.  200 foot guy who is smart and responsible.  Can PK.  Drives offence when he does have the puck.  

So a soft player who can't score in the playoffs...yikes! Don't want that for our top pick personally

  • Haha 2
  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Canuckster86 said:

So a soft player who can't score in the playoffs...yikes! Don't want that for our top pick personally

When I put one on the tee like that, I’m just waiting for someone to whack it out of the park.  That’s a Grand Slam Moon 

Shot!  :lol:

#lovetohatetheleafs

  • Haha 2
  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Canuckster86 said:

QH and JR are LHD, especially considering our coach I highly doubt he gives a young "kid" big minutes on the right side as a left shot D. Our RHD is pathetic from the start of the tenure of the Canucks GM till now, it needs to be addressed in a serious way...Big trade for a young RHD already in the NHL or near ready or draft a few of them this draft. Get away from the Lambos/Hughes/Edvinsson ideas, we have 0 need for LHD this draft with a high pick in the early rounds, later rounds sure why not its a crab shoot

What’s a “crab shoot”?  Is that like a turkey shoot?  

I think we got to take the BPA.  If that’s Hughes or Edvinson (which it would be if either of those two are available at our pick) then we take them.  Develop the player and trade for positional need from out of our left D group.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, Alflives said:

What’s a “crab shoot”?  Is that like a turkey shoot?  

I think we got to take the BPA.  If that’s Hughes or Edvinson (which it would be if either of those two are available at our pick) then we take them.  Develop the player and trade for positional need from out of our left D group.  

Hi Alf

I have heard that s many times..........meaning develop the player and then trade for the need, and I get it

 

But we have been discussing needing a RHD for years, and yet, what team will give up that.....think about it! Most teams are in the exact same situation......

 

Every team wants an over payment.............

 

IMO, you go out and draft for skill, and trade for complimentary pieces

 

Or you catch him in UFA, and pay through the nose

 

To clarify..........draft your RHD if you need him, and move up if you have to....that is how you get him.

 

 

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

Hi Alf

I have heard that s many times..........meaning develop the player and then trade for the need, and I get it

 

But we have been discussing needing a RHD for years, and yet, what team will give up that.....think about it! Most teams are in the exact same situation......

 

Every team wants an over payment.............

 

IMO, you go out and draft for skill, and trade for complimentary pieces

 

Or you catch him in UFA, and pay through the nose

 

To clarify..........draft your RHD if you need him, and move up if you have to....that is how you get him.

 

 

I don’t disagree, but also think Benning should (will) have his prospects in groups.  At nine there will be several players left from the group he expects to be available around that number.  If there’s a RSD in that group, then I agree with you, and Benning should select him over any LSD in that same group.  But I don’t think Benning should go to the next group on his list and take a  RSD from it over a LSD from his higher group.  

I think Benning will have Ceilemans is his group around that number nine pick.  And I think, unless a player from Benning’s top group falls to nine (Hughes, Clarke, McTavish, Eklund for example) that we will pick Ceulemans.  

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

I don’t disagree, but also think Benning should (will) have his prospects in groups.  At nine there will be several players left from the group he expects to be available around that number.  If there’s a RSD in that group, then I agree with you, and Benning should select him over any LSD in that same group.  But I don’t think Benning should go to the next group on his list and take a  RSD from it over a LSD from his higher group.  

I think Benning will have Ceilemans is his group around that number nine pick.  And I think, unless a player from Benning’s top group falls to nine (Hughes, Clarke, McTavish, Eklund for example) that we will pick Ceulemans.  

Agree

 

I am to the point where I ask.....;what pick do you get for 2021-1st (9th OA) + Schmidt, who I think has good standing. If I am Benning and Clarke falls past 3rd OA pick, I ask myself if I can get him. I think the top 3 will cost too much. (I like Schmidt, but that prospect is gold.) I also do not have a problem picking Ceulemans, but I have problems with where he is ranked.......12 to 20.........I mean, who the frick knows?

 

I would go heavy on RHD........I would take them in this order............

 

Clarke

Ceulemans

Morrow

Heimosalmi

Mailloux

Schmidt

Bar

 

All are 6ft 2inches or better, except Heimosalmi, who would go higher if bigger

  • Vintage 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I could see Ceulemans go early, being the 2nd best RD in the Draft

 

Canucks could always take the forward at #9 (McTavish, Lucius, etc), and then Scott Morrow or Roman Schmidt (both RDs) with the #41? 

  • Hydration 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, NUCKER67 said:

I could see Ceulemans go early, being the 2nd best RD in the Draft

 

Canucks could always take the forward at #9 (McTavish, Lucius, etc), and then Scott Morrow or Roman Schmidt (both RDs) with the #41? 

Love to get Morrow at 41.  I just don’t see him getting there.  Ceulemans would be a stretch for any team to take him top 10, but your point about him being the second best RSD available is a good one.  

Could we trade Schmidt to a team at the end of round one 25-30 and switch our 41 pick with them?

 

Schmidt + 41 to get (25-30) 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Forward with the #9 and D with the #41?  or reverse?

 

#9 - (C/LW) Eklund, (C) McTavish, (C/LW) Svechkov

#41 - (RD) Scott Morrow, (RD) Roman Schmidt

 

or

 

#9 - (LD) Edvinsson, (LD) Hughes, (RD) Ceulemans

#41 - (C) Zach Dean, (C) Wyatt Johnson

 

I'm picking the first one.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, NUCKER67 said:

Forward with the #9 and D with the #41?  or reverse?

 

#9 - (C/LW) Eklund, (C) McTavish, (C/LW) Svechkov

#41 - (RD) Scott Morrow, (RD) Roman Schmidt

 

or

 

#9 - (LD) Edvinsson, (LD) Hughes, (RD) Ceulemans

#41 - (C) Zach Dean, (C) Wyatt Johnson

 

I'm picking the first one.

Love the first one.  I think svechkov will be the best pick out of this draft for centers.  Also love the the d choices... Hopefully one of those two are available for our 2nd round.

Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, Alflives said:

Love to get Morrow at 41.  I just don’t see him getting there.  Ceulemans would be a stretch for any team to take him top 10, but your point about him being the second best RSD available is a good one.  

Could we trade Schmidt to a team at the end of round one 25-30 and switch our 41 pick with them?

 

Schmidt + 41 to get (25-30) 

I would do it, not sure if those team would. who knows 

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, drummerboy said:

Quinn is better on the left, and I just don’t see Woo panning out.  I really hope I’m wrong, I just see him as a 6-7 tops.  
Persson I doubt goes anywhere.  
 

I guess there isn’t much better on the left.  
IMO our D group is too small and weak as a whole. 

Not sure why you have reached that conclusion on Jett Woo.

 

He likely will see NHL time this season as a deep NHL replacement and unless traded will be a fixture on this team in the years to come. 

 

He has played one..... yes just one .... professional season and showed impressive growth and maturity. He has the smarts to continue to improve. His game is different from other prospects like Rathbone and may take a couple more years to be ready but I am positive he will be a long time Canuck.

 

Some want prospects to make the jump in their draft +1 or 2 seasons but that is not really a normal course of development for an average NHL defender. Many defenders are well into their early 20's before they start to become regulars.

 

 

Back to the draft before someone gets upset that I'm not talking about the draft....... I take the BPA that is not a goalie in the first round....

Edited by GarthButcher5
  • Thanks 1
  • Hydration 2
  • Vintage 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
57 minutes ago, Alflives said:

Love to get Morrow at 41.  I just don’t see him getting there.  Ceulemans would be a stretch for any team to take him top 10, but your point about him being the second best RSD available is a good one.  

Could we trade Schmidt to a team at the end of round one 25-30 and switch our 41 pick with them?

 

Schmidt + 41 to get (25-30) 

Detroit has a 2nd 1st rounder but depends if they draft a G with  the #6 or trade down and still take a G. NJ or Columbus also have late round 1st picks at there disposal

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

Love to get Morrow at 41.  I just don’t see him getting there.  Ceulemans would be a stretch for any team to take him top 10, but your point about him being the second best RSD available is a good one.  

Could we trade Schmidt to a team at the end of round one 25-30 and switch our 41 pick with them?

 

Schmidt + 41 to get (25-30) 

Come on Alf….Are you serious?

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...