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

So - Who Should The Canucks Take At The Number 9 Spot?

Rate this topic


Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, Bertuzzipunch said:

I really hate how little we have for center depth in prospects. 

Hoping it is addressed this draft. I have a funny feeling we will take Fedor Svechkov at #9. Another Russian, sounds like he has great compete level and a solid defensive game who has recently shown more output offensively. Not a bad thing to add a fellow countryman for Podz to gel with and he plays C and seems to have a Bo Horvat esque all around game to a degree. 2 Bo Horvat type playing C's on the Canucks sounds like a great start to building a complete team

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/9/2021 at 3:01 PM, Bertuzzipunch said:

I really hate how little we have for center depth in prospects. 

I really like the two later round C picks the Canucks got in 2019.

 

The team has young top 6 centers - and a young group in general.

It's going to need at least one or two veteran centers in the mix for continued transition period.

 

Not easy to be successful when you're parachuting young centers into your bottom six - that tends to happen only with teams that aren't ready to win and/or are poorly built.

 

So I'm not sure I see it anywhere near as urgently as you do.  There's lots of time to draft and develop centers.

 

I think RHD is more of a priority.

Edited by oldnews
  • Hydration 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/9/2021 at 6:50 PM, Canuckster86 said:

Hoping it is addressed this draft. I have a funny feeling we will take Fedor Svechkov at #9. Another Russian, sounds like he has great compete level and a solid defensive game who has recently shown more output offensively. Not a bad thing to add a fellow countryman for Podz to gel with and he plays C and seems to have a Bo Horvat esque all around game to a degree. 2 Bo Horvat type playing C's on the Canucks sounds like a great start to building a complete team

My first choice for the Canucks at #9 would be Mason McTavish but I have a feeling he’ll be long gone by then. Svechkov is an intriguing prospect and Benning would have got a good look at him at the under-18s. Some scouts have compared him to Patrice Bergeron.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Convincing John said:

At this stage we have positional needs. 

It could be argued we have needs in every position.

 

BPA will get us a player we need.

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Schmautzie said:

My first choice for the Canucks at #9 would be Mason McTavish but I have a feeling he’ll be long gone by then. Svechkov is an intriguing prospect and Benning would have got a good look at him at the under-18s. Some scouts have compared him to Patrice Bergeron.

 

In that case, welcome to the Canucks Svechkov !

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, DeNiro said:

It could be argued we have needs in every position.

 

BPA will get us a player we need.

We do not need another LHD, I’m sorry, everything else is a higher priority including another good Goalie prospect. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, Convincing John said:

We do not need another LHD, I’m sorry, everything else is a higher priority including another good Goalie prospect. 

If Hughes is there you take him.

  • Like 1
  • Huggy Bear 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, DeNiro said:

If Hughes is there you take him.

Sounds like that Edvinson kid (although highly unlikely he's there at 9) is a given we would take too.  Really, we take the best player on Benning's list.  Not the goalie though.  Unless we have a great deal to move him, or  to move Dipietro.  

Link to post
Share on other sites

Another player likely a 2nd round pick to keep your eyes on Evan Nause

 

Evan Nause- 2021 NHL Draft Prospect Profile (thehockeywriters.com)

 

 

Quote

38 | Evan Nause | LD | Québec (QMJHL) | 6-2 | 186lbs

Brayden Olafson: Although Evan Nause falls into what may be considered the third tier of defensemen in the 2021 draft class, the Remparts blueliner checks a plethora of boxes when it comes to finding a projectable NHLer. While he doesn’t necessarily possess a signature characteristic, Nause does many things well and few things poorly. As a practiced powerplay quarterback, Nause directs play in the offensive zone and elsewhere with an exceptional level of poise and comfort, even at 5-on-5. From the offensive blueline, his passes are crisp, and his shots are always thoughtful. He rarely panics under pressure and will occasionally mix in an elusive cut or deke in order to buy himself time to set up a secure breakout. In addition to his undeniable ability with the puck, Nause is also an intelligent defender, beginning at the opposing blueline where his pinch/hold decision-making helps to make the most of every possession, without sacrificing reliable defense.

 

Edited by Fred65
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Convincing John said:

We do not need another LHD, I’m sorry, everything else is a higher priority including another good Goalie prospect. 

We may not need one now, but you never know down the line with injuries. Or perhaps we have an abundance and there's a team in need of LHD that can fill a positional need. You'll get a better valued return that way and you'll be acquiring likely a known quantity versus an unknown prospect. Whoever we draft isn't going to step in immediately next season or likely even the season after, so you always go for the BPA regardless of position.

 

“I’m just happy we didn’t lose any spots. There are nine guys we really like and I’m happy about that. And we’ll take the best player regardless of position.”

 

That's a direct quote from Benning, so if we are lucky to have a positional need player that crosses path as the BPA on our list, then success. Otherwise, don't expect us to pick based on a positional need.

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

Sounds like that Edvinson kid (although highly unlikely he's there at 9) is a given we would take too.  Really, we take the best player on Benning's list.  Not the goalie though.  Unless we have a great deal to move him, or  to move Dipietro.  

what if McTavish is gone by 9 though? now that we have Clark signed for 5 years and him having a bigger role in development across the whole organization, I wonder if that isn't the BPA move to make if a top C and RHD aren't there for us. 

 

The 2nd round is where were are most likely going to get a RHD as well. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Nuxfanabroad said:

Is that an illness, or the fast lane on life's hwy?! Age & stress has rendered the memory foggy...

The fast lane is HOV, so the former I think.

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/9/2021 at 5:53 PM, appleboy said:

I hear everyone thinking that we need to make a trade to fix our back end. I would try to resign Edler and Hamonic to two year deals . Maybe make a deal with Edler for one year at a time for around 2 mil. Let him finish his career here.

However they need to play OJ and Rathbone.  A lot.

What needs to be fixed is the bottom six .

 

Keep the picks and draft some good players .

If a blueline needs 'fixing' one trade is not going to accomplish that anyway.  But I agree - that this one does not - it simply has a primary need in a future partner for Hughes.  Does that have to be resolved by dealing the 9th overall?  Not necessarily.

 

I like the options that they have.

The only option I'd rule out is spending a king's ransome to acquire a RHD big ticket in their prime = no thanks - that for me is a resounding no.

 

The only way I deal that pick is if it brings back the right young RHD (ie a Foote).

If not - and the right RHD is not the bpa at 9 -  take the bpa.  If that happens to be a center, great.

There's also the option of a trade down - potentially banking another late 1st or 2nd - where they might get one of the high-2nd-tier RHD - and possibly another one later in the round or 2nd....

 

They could still potentially also improve their right side in the short term - at reasonable cost in assets.  I look at a guy like Mayfied - a '2nd tier' top 4 - under-rated for the most part to this point - unfortunately 'on the radar' now - but still would probably not cost in the range of the typical big tickets people name.

 

I think Mayfield is a player the NYI protect.  I hear/read some projections that Seattle could take a Matt Martin even if Mayfield is exposed (a pipe dream imo)....but I also think it's a relative no-brainer to expose Leddy over Mayfield for various reasons.  These two guys play together - imo Mayfield is the better defenseman - younger, with a far better contract....Mayfield is also the 'foundation' D on that pairing - my feeling is that he'd be an upgrade for us as Hughes' partner.  If a deal like that does not prove to be possible - they can always fall back on the placeholder options you propose - but Hamonic would not be my gameplan heading into the summer - unless we're talking as a guy to compete for a depth spot.

 

The bottom six does not need to be 'fixed' either.   It needs to deal with the fact that Sutter is expiring - whether to re-up or replace him - and it needs to deal with the possibility that Beagle will not be healthy.  Otherwise - it's a group with good young winger options, a few placeholder veterans expiring to clear cap....

The question with the bottom six is if it's time to 'reorient' it?  I don't believe it is, yet.  First - the top 6 remains quite young - and second, the left side of the blueline will likely also be very young - in addition to a fair amount of young bottom six candidates (and the possibility that another young forward like Podkolzin pushes his way onto the roster).  I'm not sure they're quite ready for what people seem to perceive as a #proper bottom six, more geared to secondary scoring.  I think they're going to continue to need, at the very least, experienced centers in their bottom six - possibly a "two way" center at 3C, but certainly a hard minutes guy on the 4th line (if not the 3rd)....  I don't see 'fixing' the bottom six in the works anymore than the blueline - with the exception of letting the Erikssons, Roussels - veteran wingers expire, without the need to reallocate those resources to wingers.

 

But I like the options they have with that 9th overall - the only one I'd reject out of hand is dealing it for a post-ELC/RFA RHD in their prime.

 

 

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...
×
×
  • Create New...