2021 NHL Entry Draft

[Junkyard Dog]

31 minutes ago, Captain Canuck #12 said:

That's the spirit Junkyard!  Now we're pumped!!

[HighOnHockey]

10 hours ago, R3aL said:

My god your posts are detailed. Are you a scout of some sorts!

 

have you shared your top 10 board? Very curious to see that.

 

brandt Clarke is who I want most with what I know and your rankings of him just confirm this. 

Lol, nah, just an obsessed scouting hobbyist. I'm thinking of starting some kind of prospect highlight youtube account for next season.

 

I haven't done a list in a while, and it's changed quite a bit after U18s, as there were a few players I'd hardly seen all year until then. I'll be posting my final top 32 fairly soon. Still a few more players I need to get a look at.

[JustABandwagoner]

1 hour ago, Warhippy said:

This is the year the canucks will win the draft.  With so many variables the best player will of course come from the spot we were slated to select from  

 

This is of course on the backs fo the league FINALLY changing the rules on how often a team can pick first overall in consecutive years and with Newell, Baumgartner and Weisbrod back we'll be slated for a 1st overall next year and lose out to Buffalo who hasn't had a 1st overall pick in like...forever

 

If we are bad enuf.. I would dream to bottom out in 2022 season (not next szn, but the szn after). I would kill to have EITHER bedard OR Michkov 

[Rush17]

I really want to get involved in this conversation but I have the best draft lottery odds in 2 of my 3 fantasy leagues here on CDC lol. Don't really want to tip my hat of who i like yet  Other GM's are lurking in the shadows 

 

its painful not saying my 2 cents 

Edited May 21, 2021 by Rush17

[Outsiders]

If we got 9th or 10th would anyone trade the pick along with Lind and Eriksson for Reinhart? Is value there or you think Buffalo could do better?

[Nave]

Barring a draft lottery win, is there any chance William Eklund falls to us?

[KingRaj91]

46 minutes ago, Outsiders said:

If we got 9th or 10th would anyone trade the pick along with Lind and Eriksson for Reinhart? Is value there or you think Buffalo could do better?

I don't think so. As much as I'd love Reinhart on the team, we need solid prospects on ELC's for cap purposes. The top 10 of this draft looks good, I feel like if we need a player of Reinharts calibre, we can look at Free Agency in 2022 when a bunch of space clears up. Maybe not Reinharts calibre, but a player that can be a legit top 6 winger or a solid 3C would be perfect. 

[John_Guest]

14 hours ago, VancouverHabitant said:

Can you tell me more about him? Is he a fighter or hitter? What is he projected at right now? 

I'm not as into it as some. I only know what I hear. This is what I hear:

 

Zachary LHeureux

Ht/Wt: 5'11"/196 lbs
Position: C/LW
Team: Halifax (QMJHL)


 

Zachary L'Heureux's Player Profile

Cam Robinson - Dobber Prospects - : "Something of a Richard out there, L’Hereaux walks the line between hard play and needless aggression. He screams checking line type."

Mike G. Morreale - NHL.com - Jan. 23rd: "L'Heureux is a power forward who has been compared to Columbus Blue Jackets forward Max Domi. The 17-year-old can play physical and has great hands."

Craig Button - TSN - Dec. 15th: "Can play the game with skill, power and with an edge. Competes hard and makes life uncomfortable for opponents due to his willingness to find ways past obstacles."

Sam Cosentino - Sportsnet - Nov. 27th: "Plays bigger than his 5-foot-11, 196-pound size."

Corey Pronman - The Athletic - Oct. 8th: "He makes himself noticeable whenever he’s on the ice and creates so much about the hard areas. He’s an imperfect player, though. At 5-foot-11, he’s an average skater, and I don’t think he sees the game that well."

Scott Wheeler - The Athletic - Sept. 14th: "He’s heavy on the puck, he doesn’t pass up a chance to finish a hit, he gravitates toward scrums, and he can beat you with ingenuity and creativity with the puck, which gives him, in theory, all situations upside and the kind of versatility teams covet as a player who could potentially play up and down the lineup."

Brayden Olafsson - Dobber Prospects - Sept. 12th: "L’Heureux is a dynamic power forward who has the ability to generate opportunities as a result of his combined creativity and physical presence. He leverages a surprisingly strong lower body and low center of gravity to overpower his bigger opponents when necessary."

http://www.mynhldraft.com/2021-nhl-draft/player-profiles/Zachary-LHeureux

Craig Button has him at 18

https://www.tsn.ca/blueliner-owen-power-tops-mckenzie-s-first-2021-draft-ranking-1.1561354

Like I said, just a 'Dark Horse' candidate.

[Isam]

5 hours ago, DontMessMe said:

If we are bad enuf.. I would dream to bottom out in 2022 season (not next szn, but the szn after). I would kill to have EITHER bedard OR Michkov 

Next years draft isnt bad either. Wright, savoie, or Lambert will be pretty good gets too. Maybe not quite generational, but franchise altering talents nonetheless. 

[HighOnHockey]

3 hours ago, Isam said:

Next years draft isnt bad either. Wright, savoie, or Lambert will be pretty good gets too. Maybe not quite generational, but franchise altering talents nonetheless. 

Yep, 2022 looks absolutely stacked to me. Personally, I think Miroshnichenko is a clear number two right now, a tier above Lambert and Savoie. Of course it's still a year away so who knows, but Miro is a monster. Don't get me wrong, I love Lambert and I've seen flashes of brilliance from Savoie, but somewhat lost in all the hype of Bedard, Wright and Michkov at the U18s was that Russia's top line was led by two 2022-eligibles.Svechkov was the two-way center but the younger two were the offensive drivers. Yurov is a late birthday, but if he was eligible for this year's draft, he would have very seriously challenged for first overall. And Miroshnichenko is that blend of power and elite skill that every team is dying for. Nemec, Luneau, Salomonsson and Gleb Trikozov could all potentially challenge for spots in the top five too, and all look to be in the same tier as the top four or five players in this year's class.

[hammertime]

7 hours ago, Nave said:

Barring a draft lottery win, is there any chance William Eklund falls to us?

I mean it's possible. highly doubtful. 

 

Imo if we stay at 9. There are only 2 "tier 1" players I feel there is a chance of falling to us where BPA becomes overriding Fabian Lysell and Jesper Wallstedt. 

 

If none of Clarke, Luke, Beniers, Eklund, Wallstedt, Lysell make it to 9 we need to look at organizational need. 

 

Champions are built down the middle with 2 way C's. I cannot stress enough being tough to play against. Mctavish, Svechkov, fit our needs more than the others. 

[Gollumpus]

Assuming there isn't a Hail Mary in the Canucks' (near) future. and that the hoped for d-man options aren't available when the Canucks pick, I'm looking for Lambos, with Ceulemans as a fall back position. Arguably Ceulmans could be worth taking a longer look at as he is a right side d-man (IIRC).

 

I'd consider trading down but it would be a gamble. There's a lot of other teams which are probably looking for d-man prospects, so likely won't be there should the Canucks trade down too far.

 

                                                       regards,  G.

 

*** My post is speaking only to the need for a d-man. I do fully agree with the post above which suggests McTavish for consideration. ^^^

Edited May 21, 2021 by Gollumpus

[ShawnAntoski]

18 hours ago, DontMessMe said:

If we are bad enuf.. I would dream to bottom out in 2022 season (not next szn, but the szn after). I would kill to have EITHER bedard OR Michkov 

The owners and management will not allow the Canucks to truly bottom out cause the fan base (or just a majority of the season ticket holders) will not allow them to do it cause of the stigma: that tanking accepts a losing culture - these reasons are perhaps the reason why Aquaman & JB continues to transact the way the do.  The Canucks will never do a proper rebuild by bottoming out cause the owners know there is no appetite for it in this market & morale victories from these meaningless games are more important than potentially drafting a top 3 player (for long term success) ie: those three points points from the Flakes series dropped us from 5th worst to #9 (and with it the lesser chance of winning the lottery).  Other teams (like the California teams) are already transitioning there rosters by accepting that bottoming out is just part of the competitive cycle a team goes through; whereas we are continually in the mid to upper bottom feeders range when drafting - hopefully, JB continues his draft mojo, some teams goes off board and the lottery finally falls our way (?).   
 

Someone posted that since 2015 the Canucks have had the worst record in the league but yet JB has never drafted higher than fifth - Canuck luck (?) and late season winning streak in a losing season.  

Edited May 21, 2021 by ShawnAntoski

[appleboy]

6 hours ago, John_Guest said:

I'm not as into it as some. I only know what I hear. This is what I hear:

 

Zachary LHeureux

Ht/Wt: 5'11"/196 lbs
Position: C/LW
Team: Halifax (QMJHL)


 

Zachary L'Heureux's Player Profile

Cam Robinson - Dobber Prospects - : "Something of a Richard out there, L’Hereaux walks the line between hard play and needless aggression. He screams checking line type."

Mike G. Morreale - NHL.com - Jan. 23rd: "L'Heureux is a power forward who has been compared to Columbus Blue Jackets forward Max Domi. The 17-year-old can play physical and has great hands."

Craig Button - TSN - Dec. 15th: "Can play the game with skill, power and with an edge. Competes hard and makes life uncomfortable for opponents due to his willingness to find ways past obstacles."

Sam Cosentino - Sportsnet - Nov. 27th: "Plays bigger than his 5-foot-11, 196-pound size."

Corey Pronman - The Athletic - Oct. 8th: "He makes himself noticeable whenever he’s on the ice and creates so much about the hard areas. He’s an imperfect player, though. At 5-foot-11, he’s an average skater, and I don’t think he sees the game that well."

Scott Wheeler - The Athletic - Sept. 14th: "He’s heavy on the puck, he doesn’t pass up a chance to finish a hit, he gravitates toward scrums, and he can beat you with ingenuity and creativity with the puck, which gives him, in theory, all situations upside and the kind of versatility teams covet as a player who could potentially play up and down the lineup."

Brayden Olafsson - Dobber Prospects - Sept. 12th: "L’Heureux is a dynamic power forward who has the ability to generate opportunities as a result of his combined creativity and physical presence. He leverages a surprisingly strong lower body and low center of gravity to overpower his bigger opponents when necessary."

http://www.mynhldraft.com/2021-nhl-draft/player-profiles/Zachary-LHeureux

Craig Button has him at 18

https://www.tsn.ca/blueliner-owen-power-tops-mckenzie-s-first-2021-draft-ranking-1.1561354

Like I said, just a 'Dark Horse' candidate.

I have been watching as much video of L'heureux and Mctavish as I can find. I am not sure L'heureux is quick enough.  The scouts say that Mctavish is not slow but not quick. In the video that I have seen there doesn't seem to be any issue with speed. He has a real nice stride and looks very stable on his feet. Good edge work and mobility. I doubt he will have any trouble picking up a stride or two for the big leagues.

 

Good accurate shot and nice hands in tight. He is 6'2"  207lb.  The more I read and watch the more I like . If not at center then at wing. Plays both end of the ice. 

Edited May 21, 2021 by appleboy

[J.I.A.H.N]

I think the next 2 years are the most important 2 years, in terms of draft

 

As we are getting close to having our "Young team" core full.

 

My 3 thoughts are

 

#1. Will Schmidt and Myers really have any contribution to our playoff years?

 

#2. I think where we sit, we should consider positional need to some degree

 

#3. What are our positional needs?

 

My answer to question 3 is, RHD, RHD, RHD. I look at our young LHD and see a solid group of 3 LHD, who should be around for a long time. (8 to 10 years) and I see absolutely no one other than Woo, who "may" be in that grouping.

 

IMO, and I love McTavish and Svechkov, but we should be drafting Clarke or Ceulemans with our 1st, depending on the deal Benning can swing, and one of Morrow, Mailloux or Schmidt with our 2nd. It seems positional, but if we move up for Clarke he is as good as anyone at the top of the board and Ceulemans bounces around 13 to 16 on most boards and I think will move up a couple of spots in everyone's final boards (rankings). His numbers at the U18 underlines his ability to play with the best of his class and his points and plus minus were equal to Clarke's.

 

As for Morrow, Mailloux and Schmidt....both Morrow and Mailloux have been around the 26 to 37 OA rankings. I think Benning could get there. My points and thoughts are, we move that little bit to fill our positional needs and not reach for a player. It will cost, but worth it OA.

 

 

Edited May 21, 2021 by janisahockeynut

[204CanucksFan]

32 minutes ago, ShawnAntoski said:

The owners and management will not allow the Canucks to truly bottom out cause the (perhaps the vocal few) fan base will not allow them to do it cause of the stigma: that tanking accepts a losing culture - these reasons are perhaps the reason why Aquaman & JB continues to transact the way the do.  The Canucks will never do a proper rebuild by bottoming out cause the owners know there is no appetite for it in this market & morale victories from these meaningless games are more important than potentially drafting a top 3 player, for example: those three points points from the Flakes series dropped us from 4th worst to #9 ( with it the lesser chance of winning the lottery).  I her teams (like the California teams) are already transitioning there rosters by accepting that bottoming out is just part of the competitive cycle a team goes through; whereas we continually mid to upper bottom feeders when drafting - hopefully, JB continues his draft mojo, some teams goes off board and the lottery finally falls our way (?).   
 

Someone posted that since 2015 the Canucks have had the worst record in the league but yet JB has never drafted higher than fifth - Canuck luck (?) and late season winning streak in a losing season.  

The problem is that the lottery is literally designed to punish the teams that finish at the bottom of the standings. Take a look at Buffalo's lottery odds for this season, they were the worst team in the league this year and all they get for it is a 1/6 chance of drafting 1st overall, which means they have 5/6 chance of falling back at least one spot with a nearly 70% chance they fall back 2 spots. 

 

At least they modified the rules going forward so that now only the top 2 positions are decided by the lottery. When Vancouver was in full on bottom out mode we would always end up losing the lottery and falling back because that where we were statistically most likely to end up. In 2016 we fell from 3rd to 5th because with the old rules that's where 3rd worst was most likely to pick with a 37.8% chance, in 2017 we fell from 2nd to 5th, again because that was statistically what we had the best odds of doing and in 2018 we fell from 6th to 7th again due to the statistics of the lottery format.

 

Even look at if we had lost all 3 games against Calgary, we would have had the 5th best odds due to Seattle getting the 3rd place slot automatically. In that slot we only get 3% better chance of winning 1st overall than our current position but we would be over 30% more likely to fall back in the draft again.

 

As I mentioned in an earlier post about the lottery, in the last 5 draft lotteries, teams that finish in the bottom 5 have won 8 out of the 15 available slots and teams that finish 7th or higher have won 6 of 15. 

[appleboy]

6 minutes ago, janisahockeynut said:

I think the next 2 years are the most important 2 years, in terms of draft

 

As we are getting close to having our "Young team" core full.

 

My 3 thoughts are

 

#1. Will Schmidt and Myers really have any contribution to our playoff years?

 

#2. I think where we sit, we should consider positional need to some degree

 

#3. What are our positional needs?

 

My answer to question 3 is, RHD, RHD, RHD. I look at our young LHD and see a solid group of 3 LHD, who should be around for a long time. (8 to 10 years) and I see absolutely no one other than Woo, who "may" be in that grouping.

 

IMO, and I love McTavish and Svechkov, but we should be drafting Clarke or Ceulemans with our 1st, depending on the deal Benning can swing, and one of Morrow, Mailloux or Schmidt with our 2nd. It seems positional, but if we move up for Clarke he is as good as anyone at the top of the board and Ceulemans bounces around 13 to 16 on most boards and I think will move up a couple of spots in everyone's final boards (rankings). His numbers at the U18 underlines his ability to play with the best of his class and his points and plus minus were equal to Clarke's.

 

As for Morrow, Mailloux and Schmidt....both Morrow and Mailloux have been around the 26 to 37 OA rankings. I think Benning could get there. My points and Thoughts is, we move that little bit to fill our positional needs and not reach for a player. It will cost, but worth it OA.

This draft is considered weak but there is also chatter that because of the lack of ice time for some of the players there will be some real steals. McTavish is one who could be a steal. Trying to turn our second into a mid to late round 1st might be worth a reasonable cost.

[J.I.A.H.N]

1 minute ago, appleboy said:

This draft is considered weak but there is also chatter that because of the lack of ice time for some of the players there will be some real steals. McTavish is one who could be a steal. Trying to turn our second into a mid to late round 1st might be worth a reasonable cost.

I really like McTavish, but we are in need of getting some high end RHD into the system much more.

[appleboy]

1 minute ago, janisahockeynut said:

I really like McTavish, but we are in need of getting some high end RHD into the system much more.

McTavish could go high but may be there in the second half of the first. This could be a year that the cost of moving up may not be unreasonable. Two first would be nice. 

[appleboy]

Maybe we finally win the lottery and trade that for extra picks.