Deets Posted June 15, 2021 Share Posted June 15, 2021 3 hours ago, stawns said: agree completely. It's nothing against Hughes, but that's not what the Canucks need Who says you need to keep all the players you draft? The reason GM's talk about best player available is because there are rarely any guarantees in drafting prospects so take the player most likely to succeed. If the best player available is another quick skilled DMan so be it. Lets say there's a scenario where we have Hughes, Rathbone and Hughes all living up to their potential as top offensive dmen. Do you not think it would be a great position for the Canucks? Could Benning not pick the best 2 and trade the other for something else? Do you think the Avalanche are dumb because they drafted Bowen Byram even though they already have Girard and Makar? There are many ways to fill all your positional needs. Drafting may be the cheapest, but also carries the most risk. I say take the best player available and don't lose out on a Nylander or Ehlers just because you "need" a Virtanen. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stawns Posted June 15, 2021 Share Posted June 15, 2021 1 minute ago, Deets said: Who says you need to keep all the players you draft? The reason GM's talk about best player available is because there are rarely any guarantees in drafting prospects so take the player most likely to succeed. If the best player available is another quick skilled DMan so be it. Lets say there's a scenario where we have Hughes, Rathbone and Hughes all living up to their potential as top offensive dmen. Do you not think it would be a great position for the Canucks? Could Benning not pick the best 2 and trade the other for something else? Do you think the Avalanche are dumb because they drafted Bowen Byram even though they already have Girard and Makar? There are many ways to fill all your positional needs. Drafting may be the cheapest, but also carries the most risk. I say take the best player available and don't lose out on a Nylander or Ehlers just because you "need" a Virtanen. Because they're coming into their window on a year or two and whoever they draft this year won't be developed well enough to get the value needed. They're better off drafting to fill a need at #9 than BPA. They need young players who can fill a spot in two years. What if they draft BPA and he busts? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alflives Posted June 15, 2021 Share Posted June 15, 2021 2 minutes ago, stawns said: Because they're coming into their window on a year or two and whoever they draft this year won't be developed well enough to get the value needed. They're better off drafting to fill a need at #9 than BPA. They need young players who can fill a spot in two years. What if they draft BPA and he busts? top 10 picks should always be the bpa on the team's list. Then, even if the player is redundant and doesn't fill a team's need, their trade value (when needed) can be used to fill that need. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deets Posted June 15, 2021 Share Posted June 15, 2021 12 minutes ago, stawns said: Because they're coming into their window on a year or two and whoever they draft this year won't be developed well enough to get the value needed. They're better off drafting to fill a need at #9 than BPA. They need young players who can fill a spot in two years. What if they draft BPA and he busts? You're scenario only considering this years draft pick as the one being traded. What if Rathbone gains value over the next few years and is traded when we need young players who can fill a spot in two years? This is how you extend your teams compete window by having younger cheaper players constantly replacing your roster. The Blackhawks did this for years. All draft picks have a potential to be a bust, which is why you pick BPA to minimize that risk. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Patel Bure Posted June 15, 2021 Author Share Posted June 15, 2021 (edited) Somewhat related to this topic.....loosely. Taking the upcoming 2021 draft into account, here is the ‘elite’ Stanley Cup contending team that I hope we’ll have in 22-23. Miller-Pettersson-Boeser Hoglander-Horvat-Guenther Pearson-Granlund-Podkolzin Motte-Lind-MacEwen Lindholm-Schmidt Hughes-Larsson Rathbone-Myers Demko Dipietro Edited June 16, 2021 by Patel Bure 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alflives Posted June 15, 2021 Share Posted June 15, 2021 14 minutes ago, Deets said: You're scenario only considering this years draft pick as the one being traded. What if Rathbone gains value over the next few years and is traded when we need young players who can fill a spot in two years? This is how you extend your teams compete window by having younger cheaper players constantly replacing your roster. The Blackhawks did this for years. All draft picks have a potential to be a bust, which is why you pick BPA to minimize that risk. And to maximize future trade value. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hairy Kneel Posted June 15, 2021 Share Posted June 15, 2021 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 . I think Eddie will take one year at 1M. He's always got a job here after he retires. A European scout perhaps. He understands our cap. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeNiro Posted June 15, 2021 Share Posted June 15, 2021 Just now, Hairy Kneel said: I think Eddie will take one year at 1M. He's always got a job here after he retires. A European scout perhaps. He understands our cap. It’s not about the money so much as it is about the roster spot and how Green will deploy him. The second a rookie struggles Green will be pushing Edler right back into the top 4. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EddieVedder Posted June 16, 2021 Share Posted June 16, 2021 10 hours ago, Where's Wellwood said: 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 Gudbranson did use his size. Hughes Nor Rathbone would even try bodying Petro. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aznmonk Posted June 16, 2021 Share Posted June 16, 2021 Next BPA. Since we signed ian clark for 5 years lets produce world class goalies. Then one day we can trade him away for a 1st overall pick Cossa (6-foot-6, 210 pounds) was 17-1-1 with a 1.57 goals-against average, .941 save percentage 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EddieVedder Posted June 16, 2021 Share Posted June 16, 2021 If McTavish is there, we need to grab him. As weak as we are on defense, the more i think about it, we need to strengthen the middle. After Bo and Petey, we dont have much. McTavish is going to be a beast of a player. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gawdzukes Posted June 16, 2021 Share Posted June 16, 2021 6 hours ago, Alflives said: top 10 picks should always be the bpa on the team's list. Then, even if the player is redundant and doesn't fill a team's need, their trade value (when needed) can be used to fill that need. Can it really? I've never really seen it that much. You pretty much lose value as soon as you trade a young player unless it's a one for one swap, which doesn't happen often. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShawnAntoski Posted June 16, 2021 Share Posted June 16, 2021 (edited) 4 hours ago, DeNiro said: It’s not about the money so much as it is about the roster spot and how Green will deploy him. The second a rookie struggles Green will be pushing Edler right back into the top 4. Yeah, an older no shot, no pushback and slow warrior. Edited June 16, 2021 by ShawnAntoski Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stawns Posted June 16, 2021 Share Posted June 16, 2021 7 hours ago, Deets said: You're scenario only considering this years draft pick as the one being traded. What if Rathbone gains value over the next few years and is traded when we need young players who can fill a spot in two years? This is how you extend your teams compete window by having younger cheaper players constantly replacing your roster. The Blackhawks did this for years. All draft picks have a potential to be a bust, which is why you pick BPA to minimize that risk. Fair point Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stawns Posted June 16, 2021 Share Posted June 16, 2021 7 hours ago, Deets said: You're scenario only considering this years draft pick as the one being traded. What if Rathbone gains value over the next few years and is traded when we need young players who can fill a spot in two years? This is how you extend your teams compete window by having younger cheaper players constantly replacing your roster. The Blackhawks did this for years. All draft picks have a potential to be a bust, which is why you pick BPA to minimize that risk. With a top 10 pick, I'd almost always draft for need and almost always a fwd unless a Quinn Hughes drops into your lap. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arrow 1983 Posted June 16, 2021 Share Posted June 16, 2021 (edited) On 6/2/2021 at 5:49 PM, Devron44 said: McTavish’s goal to assist ratio bothers me for a centermen. Can he even pass the puck. Reminds me of Sutter. What did he go, pretty high in the draft didn’t he so agree don't like that at all I saw that and said why hasn't anyone put him on wing Edited June 16, 2021 by Arrow 1983 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bertuzzipunch Posted June 16, 2021 Share Posted June 16, 2021 4 minutes ago, Arrow 1983 said: so agree don't like that at all I saw that and said why hasn't anyone put him on wing He does play wing at times. If we draft him we need him to be a center. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arrow 1983 Posted June 16, 2021 Share Posted June 16, 2021 On 6/2/2021 at 5:12 PM, Patel Bure said: So - Who Should The Canucks Take At The Number 9 Spot? Although I’ll have to plead ignorance with the prospects for the most part in this draft, two realistic choices for me are Kent Johnson (C/LW) and Carson Lambos (LD). Two things that jump out at me for both guys is their strong skating abilities, excellent two way play, and intelligence. In Johnson’s case, he also has a lot of offensive flair and creativity and can drive a line possession wise. He’s been compared to Mikael Granlund stylistically. I’m also of the belief that Carson Lambos would be projected to go much higher had he been 6’3 210 instead of 6’0 200 lbs. But the guy is a good skater, smart, makes a good first pass, transitions well, and has a hard shot. His biggest skill however, is his ability to handle forecheck pressure. If the Canucks are looking for a long term Edler replacement, then this could be our guy. On the flip side, I’m not so sure if I’m sold on Mason McTavish. I’m not sold on his skating or his ability to play physical consistently, which is supposed to be his bread and butter. What are your thoughts? My pick is Cole Sillinger or Chaz Lucius we have a chance at both of them and they both have late birthdays both in May which means they played most of their draft years as 17 year olds. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arrow 1983 Posted June 16, 2021 Share Posted June 16, 2021 1 minute ago, Bertuzzipunch said: He does play wing at times. If we draft him we need him to be a center. I am saying he isn't a center More goals than assists mean he shots more than he passes sounds like a winger to me Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeNiro Posted June 16, 2021 Share Posted June 16, 2021 All this debate about who we should pick and I bet Benning trades the pick… 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now