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

2021 NHL Entry Draft


Noble 6

Recommended Posts

10 minutes ago, 204CanucksFan said:

I love how poor of an understanding of statistics you die hard 'have to lose every game' team tank people have.

U do know that if we win tonite, we fall 3 spots in the draft. I also realized theres really no point in me arguing with people cheering for moral wins cuz no matter what we say, ur just gonna cheer for wins. And same can be said vice versa 

Edited by DontMessMe
  • Like 1
  • Cheers 1
  • RoughGame 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, DontMessMe said:

Yea.. Cuz this team cannot tank properly and people want absolutely stupid moral victories... 

I absolutely love the idea of picking as high as possible in the upcoming draft. Whether that is the result of a fortunate lottery outcome or just the natural consequence of a poor year on the ice, getting one of the best selections in any draft is high on my list of exciting/promising off season eventualities.

 

I understand the concept of the tank. I really do. I understand the level of hope that generates talk of the tank. And I’m sure I’ve witnessed a “tank” or two in my time. What I’m wondering about is the seeming ease at which many members of this forum seem to think a tank can be deployed. I’m wondering how much manipulation of a roster is needed for a successful tank. I’m wondering what the coaches/managers/owners say to the players before games to ensure the probability of a successful tank. I’m wondering how much involvement of the opposing team is necessary to ensure a successful tank. Seems like a lot of moving parts to me.

 

I suppose if I’m hoping for a tank for the next three games, I’m praying that the Flames don’t have similar ideas.

Edited by zimmy
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, zimmy said:

I absolutely love the idea of picking as high as possible in the upcoming draft. Whether that is the result of a fortunate lottery outcome or just the natural consequence of a poor year on the ice, getting one of the best selections in any draft is high on my list of exciting/promising off season eventualities.

 

I understand the concept of the tank. I really do. I understand the level of hope that generates talk of the tank. And I’m sure I’ve witnessed a “tank” or two in my time. What I’m wondering about is the seeming ease at which many members of this forum seem to think a tank can be deployed. I wondering how much manipulation of a roster is needed for a successful tank. I’m wondering what the coaches/managers/owners say to the players before games to ensure the probability of a successful tank. I’m wondering how much involvement of the opposing team is necessary to ensure a successful tank. Seems like a lot of moving parts to me.

 

I suppose if I’m hoping for a tank for the next three games, that the Flames don’t have similar ideas.

If Im going to be honest, players will always play to win tbh. As a fan, all I can do is cheer for them to lose for the best pick possible. Its a way of expressing my own feelings :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, DontMessMe said:

U do know that if we win tonite, we fall 3 spots in the draft

Yes I do realize that. Do you realize that if you end up in the bottom 6 you are far more likely to fall in the draft where as in the 7 -12 spots you are actually more likely to move up with the current lottery format.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, 204CanucksFan said:

Yes I do realize that. Do you realize that if you end up in the bottom 6 you are far more likely to fall in the draft where as in the 7 -12 spots you are actually more likely to move up with the current lottery format.

Odds are you will stay where you are. I rather pick 6th/7th overall compared to 11th overall. I think thats a no brainer. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Chip Kelly said:

Would be shocked and amazed if the Canucks end up picking any higher than 8th after the lottery. 

 

With that being said the most realistic options potentially  still available look like Johnson,Lysell or Lucius.

 

Don't see the top 4 d prospects lasting very long even with Hughes coming off a season ending injury.

 

Beniers,Eklund, and Guenther should all go before the Canucks pick.

 

 

That hopefully then at minimum leaves the Canucks with a nice consolation prize just inside the top 10 picking between Kent Johnson and Fabian Lysell imo with Lucius injury history pushing him to the side.

 

In this scenario who are you taking and why?

 

I am personally leaning Johnson due to the heavy production having seen him have sucess on a very good Michigan team. He showcases his vision,  creativity and overall playmaker like skills. 

 

Lysell has more speed and a more mature well rounded game arguably despite not having much production just yet.

 

Size wise both are undersized. Johnson is taller with a little time to gain some strength at Michigan for another year.

 

The fact he is playing against 20 plus year olds and having success is a positive sign despite not having blazing speed or size. Shows he has great Hockey IQ that he can slow the game down and change speeds.

Certainly seems like it will be the scenario. There isn't much I can add to your analysis as I agree with everything you say. The only thing I will admit is I have seen very little of Lucius, so I need go do more digging on him. Lysell seems to have a Hoglander style of game to me, which I really love, but I would take the potential upside of Johnson myself.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, DontMessMe said:

If Im going to be honest, players will always play to win tbh. As a fan, all I can do is cheer for them to lose for the best pick possible. Its a way of expressing my own feelings :)

Lots of tank talk in these parts tends to treat tanking as a viable strategy that if not deployed, casts a negative light on management. There are many reasons to take issue with this management team. Not successfully “tanking” simply can’t be one of them in my mind.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, HighOnHockey said:

 

Ummmm. I'm not sure what to make of any of this. First you seem to imply that Edvinsson has a strong defensive game. Edvinsson's defensive game is clearly the worst of any of the the top defensemen in this draft (Hughes, Clarke, Power, Edvinsson, Lambos, Ceuleman).

 

But then you compare Edvinsson to Ristolainen, an assessment that there actually seems to be a lot of wisdom behind. Big, strong, physical, great skater, highly skilled offensively, and notoriously horrendous defensively. It really is a great comparison, and I can't believe I hadn't though of it before.

 

I'm just not sure what to make of the other part, where you say Hughes doesn't have a strong defensive game like Edvinsson. Perhaps I misundertood, and you meant "Hughes, like Edvinsson, doesn't have a strong defensive game." But I disagree. From what I've seen I actually quite like Hughes defensive game, certainly much better than Edvinsson's. 

From what I've seen of Edvinsson, he's better defensively than you think. Does either defender have a noticeably better defensive game? Now that I think about it, probably not. I haven't seen a lot of either player but they're probably about even. I think we need to focus on getting a defensive defenseman to play with Hughes. This might sound nuts, but Corson Ceulemans who is a player outside the top 15 would be a great fit for the Hughes pairing. He's also a righty. With that being said, he also makes Woo redundant and I think Woo can be a solid middle-pairing guy. 

 

Circling back to Edvinsson, I've read scouting reports that seem to imply that he can improve. That's what I meant when I said his defensive game is better when what I should've said is that Edvinsson has more potential to be more of a defensive guy than Luke. I've read great things about his wingspan. A stronger comparison than Ristolainen would probably be Dion Phaneuf, who was a fine player for years. Also, we already have a strong offensive defender in Quinn and two decent ones in Myers and Schmidt. In additionally, we've got Juolevi who I think is a strong defensive #3 or #4 guy. We bring in Edvinsson/Hughes/Clarke, our D is a lot better than people think. Than look at next year, there's like 6 or 7  centers in the top 20. We get another C, all of a sudden we've got four solid options down the middle for the top six (2022 1st, Pettersson, Miller and Horvat) and we're off the races.

 

This team will turn around. 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Isam said:

Of course alf, but your analysis reaks of y2kcanucks 

EWW...

 

If ever there was a person you'd love to meet offline and just smack upside the head that's the name it would be.  Literally the largest single most egregiously obnoxious hypocrite in the online hockey world

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Chip Kelly said:

Would be shocked and amazed if the Canucks end up picking any higher than 8th after the lottery. 

 

With that being said the most realistic options potentially  still available look like Johnson,Lysell or Lucius.

 

Don't see the top 4 d prospects lasting very long even with Hughes coming off a season ending injury.

 

Beniers,Eklund, and Guenther should all go before the Canucks pick.

 

 

That hopefully then at minimum leaves the Canucks with a nice consolation prize just inside the top 10 picking between Kent Johnson and Fabian Lysell imo with Lucius injury history pushing him to the side.

 

In this scenario who are you taking and why?

 

I am personally leaning Johnson due to the heavy production having seen him have sucess on a very good Michigan team. He showcases his vision,  creativity and overall playmaker like skills. 

 

Lysell has more speed and a more mature well rounded game arguably despite not having much production just yet.

 

Size wise both are undersized. Johnson is taller with a little time to gain some strength at Michigan for another year.

 

The fact he is playing against 20 plus year olds and having success is a positive sign despite not having blazing speed or size. Shows he has great Hockey IQ that he can slow the game down and change speeds.

I’m very limited on my knowledge of the draft eligibles this year, but I feel like Lysell isn’t being talked about enough. I’ve liked what I’ve seen. Thought the size scares me a bit. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Sean Monahan said:

From the little bit I’ve seen of Edvinsson I’d say he’d absolutely skate circles around Dion. 

Edvinsson is definitely faster but Phaneuf was drafted around the same spot Edvinsson will be, they have similar offensive acumen, they're around the same size I thought it was a good comparison 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, morrissex95 said:

Edvinsson is definitely faster but Phaneuf was drafted around the same spot Edvinsson will be, they have similar offensive acumen, they're around the same size I thought it was a good comparison 

Edvinsson’s puck skills and skating are far superior IMO. Phaneuf had a bomb of a shot whereas Edvinsson’s shot leaves something to be desired. 
 

Phaneuf definitely put up numbers in his younger years, I just think he did it a very different way than Edvinsson maybe will. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Sean Monahan said:

Edvinsson’s puck skills and skating are far superior IMO. Phaneuf had a bomb of a shot whereas Edvinsson’s shot leaves something to be desired. 
 

Phaneuf definitely put up numbers in his younger years, I just think he did it a very different way than Edvinsson maybe will. 

That remains to be seen. I think Edvinsson is at least a #2, so is Hughes, we get these two guys going they'll eat a bunch of minutes. Either way, we'll need a replacement for Edler and Juolevi might not cut it. 

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Evidsson reminds me of maybe a slightly better Lindell. Definitely a player you win with. I'm just not sure on his offensive upside. There are days I think he could be the next Hedman other days he reminds me of Lindell. I've watched all of the YouTube content of i could find on evidsson. He definitely has upside I just don't know if that upside is likely to be reached. This is where I wish there were more interviews so I could get a sense of his personality.

Edited by Rush17
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, morrissex95 said:

From what I've seen of Edvinsson, he's better defensively than you think. Does either defender have a noticeably better defensive game? Now that I think about it, probably not. I haven't seen a lot of either player but they're probably about even. I think we need to focus on getting a defensive defenseman to play with Hughes. This might sound nuts, but Corson Ceulemans who is a player outside the top 15 would be a great fit for the Hughes pairing. He's also a righty. With that being said, he also makes Woo redundant and I think Woo can be a solid middle-pairing guy. 

 

Circling back to Edvinsson, I've read scouting reports that seem to imply that he can improve. That's what I meant when I said his defensive game is better when what I should've said is that Edvinsson has more potential to be more of a defensive guy than Luke. I've read great things about his wingspan. A stronger comparison than Ristolainen would probably be Dion Phaneuf, who was a fine player for years. Also, we already have a strong offensive defender in Quinn and two decent ones in Myers and Schmidt. In additionally, we've got Juolevi who I think is a strong defensive #3 or #4 guy. We bring in Edvinsson/Hughes/Clarke, our D is a lot better than people think. Than look at next year, there's like 6 or 7  centers in the top 20. We get another C, all of a sudden we've got four solid options down the middle for the top six (2022 1st, Pettersson, Miller and Horvat) and we're off the races.

 

This team will turn around. 

I have seen quite a bit of both of them (upwards of ten viewings on Edvinsson at various different levels, and five or six for Hughes), and I do understand the appeal of Edvinsson - the size, the strength, the skating, the hands - the pieces seem to all be there for an elite all-around defenseman, but I just can't remember seeing a defenseman ranked this high who looks so lost in his own zone. I'm not a good enough scout to pinpoint the exact root cause of the issue and how fixable it is, I just know what I see, and I'd be terrified to pick the kid in the top five; even top ten I'd be very hesitant. Apparently I'm not completely alone in this, as he was ranked #2 on Bob McKenzie's initial scout survey, but apparently four of the scouts surveyed had him outside their top ten.

 

Hughes I actually think is outstanding defensively. As with Clarke, his 360 degree skating ability allows him to control his gaps very well, and he has an active stick and makes good reads. Where Hughes runs into trouble is his decision making with the puck in his own zone under pressure. Give him a half a second and a couple of feet and he'll find a way to bob and weave out of danger, but anything less than that and he throws it away every time.

 

I need to go back and watch some more footage of Ceulemans, but my current sense is that he probably is a top 15 pick. Maybe even top ten.

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, HighOnHockey said:

I have seen quite a bit of both of them (upwards of ten viewings on Edvinsson at various different levels, and five or six for Hughes), and I do understand the appeal of Edvinsson - the size, the strength, the skating, the hands - the pieces seem to all be there for an elite all-around defenseman, but I just can't remember seeing a defenseman ranked this high who looks so lost in his own zone. I'm not a good enough scout to pinpoint the exact root cause of the issue and how fixable it is, I just know what I see, and I'd be terrified to pick the kid in the top five; even top ten I'd be very hesitant. Apparently I'm not completely alone in this, as he was ranked #2 on Bob McKenzie's initial scout survey, but apparently four of the scouts surveyed had him outside their top ten.

 

Hughes I actually think is outstanding defensively. As with Clarke, his 360 degree skating ability allows him to control his gaps very well, and he has an active stick and makes good reads. Where Hughes runs into trouble is his decision making with the puck in his own zone under pressure. Give him a half a second and a couple of feet and he'll find a way to bob and weave out of danger, but anything less than that and he throws it away every time.

 

I need to go back and watch some more footage of Ceulemans, but my current sense is that he probably is a top 15 pick. Maybe even top ten.

If we pick around 7-12, I think Ceulemans could be a great off-the-board pick. I can't pinpoint a good comparable but the intangibles that Gudbranson was supposed to bring here are evident with this guy. He's better than Gudbranson offensively by a lot. He's not as big as Gudbranson but he skates better and he hits like a truck. He plays for the same program that Makar came up through. If we can get some better help upfront later in the draft, maybe bring in some more picks it might make sense to take Ceulemans with our 1st and look for a good forward in the second round. We could also pick a center like Johnson in round 1 and nap an RD like Logan Mailloux (6'3 216lbs) or Scott Morrow (6'2 190lbs) or another LD in Svozil or Hreschuk in round 2. Nothing but options for management with this draft. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, morrissex95 said:

From what I've seen of Edvinsson, he's better defensively than you think. Does either defender have a noticeably better defensive game? Now that I think about it, probably not. I haven't seen a lot of either player but they're probably about even. I think we need to focus on getting a defensive defenseman to play with Hughes. This might sound nuts, but Corson Ceulemans who is a player outside the top 15 would be a great fit for the Hughes pairing. He's also a righty. With that being said, he also makes Woo redundant and I think Woo can be a solid middle-pairing guy. 

 

Circling back to Edvinsson, I've read scouting reports that seem to imply that he can improve. That's what I meant when I said his defensive game is better when what I should've said is that Edvinsson has more potential to be more of a defensive guy than Luke. I've read great things about his wingspan. A stronger comparison than Ristolainen would probably be Dion Phaneuf, who was a fine player for years. Also, we already have a strong offensive defender in Quinn and two decent ones in Myers and Schmidt. In additionally, we've got Juolevi who I think is a strong defensive #3 or #4 guy. We bring in Edvinsson/Hughes/Clarke, our D is a lot better than people think. Than look at next year, there's like 6 or 7  centers in the top 20. We get another C, all of a sudden we've got four solid options down the middle for the top six (2022 1st, Pettersson, Miller and Horvat) and we're off the races.

 

This team will turn around. 

I think the Canucks could use more stay at home d type clear the crease and throw hits and block shots type defensive first d men.

 

Watching the playoffs this is the time of year those steady defensive guys who play with some bite have so much more value than in the typical 82 game regular season where you can't play max intensity most nights.

 

I am talking about guys like Brayden McNabb or Brendan Dillon.

 

On the right side you have David Savard and Radko Gudas types.

 

Big bodied guys who skate well for their size to be effective when body checking.

 

I think you brought up Jett Woo, who would do well to make a career as a reliable third pair d man like Gudas has who can lay the body thanks to his thick stocky frame and solid mobility.

 

He could fill in the top 4 for spells due to injury as well.

 

Ceulemans could be a nice pick for a team outside the top 10 but not sold as the Canucks being the team to take the huge swing.

 

The Canucks may be able to get some value if they can draft Logan Mailloux in round 2 who is built and plays like a young Luke Schenn.

 

He would add the hard body presence the d core needs moving forward.

 

Hughes and Rathbone as the two l smallest quick pick movers could use some size and bite to help balance their respective d pairings in the future.

 

Woo and Mailloux could be 2 guys who could help in the next few years.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...