Jump to content
The Official Site of the Vancouver Canucks
Enter Search Term. Use arrows to navigate between autocomplete results. If no results appear, use Enter to do a full site search.
Forum Closure ×
Canucks Community
Forum Closure

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

Rate this topic

Patel Bure

By Patel Bure
in Canucks Talk

 Share

Recommended Posts

Jayinblack Canucks Rookie

Jayinblack

Posted
Posted
33 minutes ago, oldnews said:

 

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? 

Resolving 3C is definitely a high priority for next season.   Right after RD.

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Jayinblack Canucks Rookie

Jayinblack

Posted
Posted (edited)
28 minutes ago, NUCKER67 said:

Centre Depth

 

Pettersson

Horvat

Focht

 

and that's pretty much it, VAN needs help here

Miller and Graovac would be there ahead of Focht (i'm assuming Graovac re-signs)

Edited by Jayinblack
  • Vintage 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
appleboy Canucks First-Line

appleboy

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, oldnews said:

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.

 

 

A piece here and a piece there. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
BlastPast Canucks Prospect

BlastPast

Posted
Posted

Oh yes, it's the time of year when a certain kind of person develops very strong opinions of players they have watched for 4 minutes on youtube. That being said, I watched a 4 minute video of Alexander Kisakov on youtube and was impressed. Maybe an option for the 40th pick; reminded me a bit of Johnny Gaudreau.  For the 9th my guess is one of McTavish, Guenther, or trade - but who the hell knows.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Patel Bure Canucks Second-Line

Patel Bure

Posted
  • Author
Posted
32 minutes ago, RU SERIOUS said:

A: Number 9.     

 

.....any other questions?

You want the player we select at the number 9 spot to be wearing #9 on his jersey?   I guess we could always convince Paul Kariya to come out of retirement.  

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Nuxfanabroad Canucks Hall-of-Famer

Nuxfanabroad

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, BlastPast said:

Oh yes, it's the time of year when a certain kind of person develops very strong opinions of players they have watched for 4 minutes on youtube. That being said, I watched a 4 minute video of Alexander Kisakov on youtube and was impressed. Maybe an option for the 40th pick; reminded me a bit of Johnny Gaudreau.  For the 9th my guess is one of McTavish, Guenther, or trade - but who the hell knows.

& a player like Kisakov sounds like one who'd always accept a sweetheart-deal!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
EddieVedder Canucks First-Line

EddieVedder

Posted
Posted
On 6/9/2021 at 11:03 AM, Alflives said:

Keep Schmidt (move him to left side)  sign Hamonic, and add Dumba.  Then our right side D is really good, and so is our left.  

Hamonics a no brainer signing. 

Schmidt can go.  We can find better pieces with less of a cap hit. 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
SilentSam Canucks All-Star

SilentSam

Posted
Posted
On 6/2/2021 at 7:09 PM, Puckster said:

Personally, I would call Buffalo and see what it takes to pry the #1 pick and get a big elite Dman. After that call, we see if we can afford it.

I am tired of watching us draft the 7 dwarfs.

Loved watching O.P. Play for Canada recently..

NHL ready.   
Looking at what Buffalo needs,  perhaps Dipetro + the 9 spot starts a conversation,. 

Using one of Hughes or Rathbone,. perhaps we keep the 9 spot as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
MeanSeanBean Canucks First-Line

MeanSeanBean

Posted
Posted
On 6/11/2021 at 6:58 PM, appleboy said:

Lambos or McTavish. 

 

Or both. 

 

Lambos is probably the best defensive D man in the draft. 

McTavish could complete our center position.  

Wonder if Benning has the means to make move for another late 1st. I think Lambos is a huge reach for a top 10 spot.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Patel Bure Canucks Second-Line

Patel Bure

Posted
  • Author
Posted
On 6/11/2021 at 6:58 PM, appleboy said:

Lambos or McTavish. 

 

Or both. 

 

Lambos is probably the best defensive D man in the draft. 

McTavish could complete our center position.  

Can’t remember if I officially changed my thoughts on here, but I’m no longer high on Kent Johnson.  I wouldn’t be upset if we got him but there’s definite risk in taking him.

 

Guenther, Lambos, and McTavish are my top three choices, relative to our realistic #9 options.   Am also a huge fan of Owen Power but he’ll be long gone.    

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Where's Wellwood Canucks First-Line

Where's Wellwood

Posted
Posted
On 6/11/2021 at 3:34 PM, EddieVedder said:

No thanks.  Dont need anymore soft D on this team.  

I know he's not big (even though he's the biggest of the Hughes Brothers) but does he play soft?

 

Gudbranson was big but didn't use his size.

Romanov is smaller but he bodied Petriangelo 

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
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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