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

The Defense of JB and co

Rate this topic


Arrow 1983
 Share

Recommended Posts

5 hours ago, Warhippy said:

Edler tanev, Hansen, Markstrom, Horvat and downturn sedins.

 

Vs

 

Duchene, O'Reilly, landeskog, MacKinnon, Rantanen, barrie

 

:ph34r:

Landeskog and Barrie were what 20/21 when Sakic took over? They were not top core players yet, they were developed into the core. Mackinnon and Rantanen had yet to be drafted (hint: both were drafted by Sakic so he didnt "inherit" them, he actually added them). Thats like saying Benning inherited EP and Hughes. 

 

Colorado essentially had O'Reilly, Duchene, Erik Johnson, and Semyon Varlamov. Landeskog and Barrie were still pretty young and just entering the core.

 

The Canucks had 2 Art Ross winners in the Sedins (who still played a few years and were still among the best players on the team), a previous 50 point dman in Edler, a budding defensive beast dman in Tanev, and a promising, up and coming potential top level goalie in Markstrom. They weren't completely barren when Jimbo took over. His mistake was not doing what Sakic did by upgrading on those core players through trading them while their value was highest. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Elias Pettersson said:

Brackett was also there for Virtanen and Juolevi.  You can’t cherry pick here.

 

Number of games played makes a huge difference. How else do you determine who’s draft picks are better?  That’s the most objective way to do it in my opinion. 

 

Benning has had his 5th round picks play 160 games.  Sakic 58 games.  Sakic’s 2nd round picks have played a total of 71 games.  Benning 136 games.  Not sure anyone who looks at these numbers objectively will say Sakic is a better drafter.  You are not being objective here. I am simply providing you with facts and numbers. 

 

Yes I would trade their core for ours too.  But Sakic wasn’t directly responsible for their two best players so that is not a fair statement to make to be totally honest. 

How many games they have played a few years into their careers can depend on alot of factors that cant be easily compared between teams though. Like one team might not need to rush players in at certain positions. It doesnt automatically make them worse prospects simply because they didnt get their opportunity sooner than someone else.  

 

Brackett being there as a scout and being there as director of amateur scouting are two different things. 

 

Bracket led the amateur scouting department for 4 drafts. 2016, 2017, 2018, and 2019

 

Juolevi was his first draft and right after he got promoted. Is widely considered a Benning overrule at the draft table by many around the NHL. It sounds like Juolevi was the guy Benning wanted. Maybe true, maybe not. But look at Brackett's other drafts and who wasstill on the board when Juolevi was picked and it does not fit his drafting style at all.

 

If you look at the drafts Brackett was responsible for - and the ones he was not - an awful lot of our graduated and upcoming prospects considered the best in our system were on his watch. 

 

 

Screenshot_20210607-005158_Chrome.jpg

Screenshot_20210607-005223_Chrome.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Honky Cat said:

Brackett was in the Canucks organization for 5 years before being promoted to DOS, what gems did he discover before Benning?

Benning implemented a system for the scouts to identify players in age draft back in 2014.

I liked Brackett, and he was a valued part of the staff, but the 'Brackett made all the good picks' is a poor one.

I never said he made all the good picks. I sinply said Benning didnt either. Being a scout and being director of amateur scouting are two different things. And you should check out whose region of scouting responsibility Boeser came from if you want an answer to what gems did Brackett find for Benning before taking over. 

 

We will soon see how much influence over the great drafting Benning actually has directly since he and Weisbrod are essentially overseeing it directly now. Last years draft didnt have top picks but was underwhelming with what was drafted. 

 

Look at Brackett's 4 drafts as director and tell me a huge portion of our prospect talent was not drafted on his watch, several of them from his region of expertise, which would suggest he was directly involved in picking them.

 

Edit:

 

Boeser

Gaudette

Madden

Lockwood

Rathbone

McDonough

 

Were all drafted from the specific scouting area Brackett specialized in prior to becoming head of scouting. 

 

One of those guys is a top line player. 3 are considered highly promising prospects. 2 were traded. 

 

All scouting departments are some degree of collaborative. To say Benning is 100% responsible for drafting success like he was personally making every good selection is just not reality.

Edited by wallstreetamigo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Elias Pettersson said:

Just for perspective, Benning has gotten more NHL games played from players from just his 2014 draft class alone than Sakic has gotten in his last 7 drafts COMBINED (2014-2020).  It’s not even close.

 

Without a gifted MacKinnon from a draft lottery win and Landeskog who was already on the team Sakic’s core isn’t as great as people think.  Byram was also received from a trade for Duchene who was drafted by the previous GM.  So Sakic had the luxury of trading a 3rd overall pick to get another core piece.  Benning has never had that luxury in his 7 years. 

 

Another thing to consider is Sakic took over in 2013.  3 1/2 years later his team finished dead last which allowed him to draft another core piece in Makar.  Even Benning’s Canucks were able to finish higher than Colorado that year and it was one of their worst years in franchise history.  The biggest difference after 2016 was the play of MacKinnon.  He turned into a franchise player in his 5th year.  That’s why I keep saying the Canucks are 2 years away from Colorado.  Because Petey will be in year 5 and Hughes year 4.  That will give us a better determination of where this team is headed. 

why are you using colorado's draft from 2014-2020 for comparision if u want to use 7 draft for comparison then it should be 2011-2017 when they finished with the rebuild.. even if they didn't get landeskog in 2011 if they end up with huberdeau zibanejad sheifele couturier it's not much of a downgrade. and who really cares how many games the 2014 draft players played.. 2 of them barely played on the canucks and 1 is on his way out of the canucks.. you say their core ain't great out side of mackinnon and landeskog.. well rantenen have more points than our 2014 + 2016 draft combined. 

 

say they didn't win the Mackinnon lottery and got the 2nd pick instead and ended up with Barkov again it's not a massive downgrade.. it's not like they won the lottery and jumped 10 places they sucked their way to the draft..

 

we keep saying colorado have sucked forever blah blah blah.. the colordao avalanche since they became the colorado avalanche only had 4 seasons total where they had more lost and win.. vancouver by comparison have 5 alone in the last 7 season

 

there's plenty of excuse for colorado's poor standing in 2016-2017.. they were decimated by injuries that year.. their starting goalie for like 2/3 of the season was pickard? and they had like how many defenseman injured? they had like 9 different defenseman with 30+ games.. they are near the top of the league that season for man game lost. 

 

even if Pettersson turns into a Mackinnon caliber player and Hughes improves on his defense vancouver will still be no where close to being a contender like Colorado in 2 years unless podz becomes a legit producing top 6 and we magically gain some top 4 defenseman via trades or free agency or we draft a gem and the Schmidt/myer contract don't turn into an anchor.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Schmautzie said:

Except you have to look at the opportunity cost of signing a backup goalie at $4.3 million per season. Spending that much on Holtby cost Benning the opportunity to sign Toffoli, who would have contributed more to the team than a backup goalie could.

Demko showed he was ready in those four games cause (imo) once he knows he is #1, he can focus on just playing and based on his amateur history he can do the job.  With hindsight, a cheaper backed up should had been signed (instead) cause Holtby has been regressing during his last years in Washington & JB overpayed for the intangibles again; I hope he gets pick in the ED.

Edited by ShawnAntoski
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, wai_lai416 said:

why are you using colorado's draft from 2014-2020 for comparision if u want to use 7 draft for comparison then it should be 2011-2017 when they finished with the rebuild.. even if they didn't get landeskog in 2011 if they end up with huberdeau zibanejad sheifele couturier it's not much of a downgrade. and who really cares how many games the 2014 draft players played.. 2 of them barely played on the canucks and 1 is on his way out of the canucks.. you say their core ain't great out side of mackinnon and landeskog.. well rantenen have more points than our 2014 + 2016 draft combined. 

I’m using 2014-2020 as a comparison because that is when Benning was hired. And Sakic was hired in 2013. Why would I use prior drafts when the comparison is Benning vs. Sakic?  
 

Also it doesn’t matter if those players from 2014 are still with the Canucks or not. The fact is Benning drafted them and that’s what matters when you are comparing drafting records. 
 

Rantanen was a great pick at 10. So was Boeser at 23 and Hoglander in the 2nd round. At the end of the day Benning has a much better overall record of drafting than Sakic and that is proven with facts. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, wallstreetamigo said:

How many games they have played a few years into their careers can depend on alot of factors that cant be easily compared between teams though. Like one team might not need to rush players in at certain positions. It doesnt automatically make them worse prospects simply because they didnt get their opportunity sooner than someone else.  

 

Brackett being there as a scout and being there as director of amateur scouting are two different things. 

 

Bracket led the amateur scouting department for 4 drafts. 2016, 2017, 2018, and 2019

 

Juolevi was his first draft and right after he got promoted. Is widely considered a Benning overrule at the draft table by many around the NHL. It sounds like Juolevi was the guy Benning wanted. Maybe true, maybe not. But look at Brackett's other drafts and who wasstill on the board when Juolevi was picked and it does not fit his drafting style at all.

 

If you look at the drafts Brackett was responsible for - and the ones he was not - an awful lot of our graduated and upcoming prospects considered the best in our system were on his watch. 

Brackett was named head of amateur scouting on August 4, 2015.  So it wasn't right before the 2016 draft.  "Widely considered a Benning overrule" is not actually factual information, it is based on sources and speculation.  So if Brackett wasn't in charge of the 2014 or 2105 drafts as you say then he wasn't responsible for drafting Thatcher Demko and Brock Boeser, who were and are considered steals at their draft position and both are a huge part of our core moving forward.

 

Saying Brackett was totally in charge of the drafts from 2016-2019 and trying to minimize Benning's involvement is quite the play to try and make it like Sakic is a much better drafter than Benning.  But at least you are now admitting that the Canucks picks from 2016-2019 are actually better than the picks from the Avalanche.  That is a start.  I wonder if Sakic has a head of amateur scouting?  Wouldn't he be in charge of the drafts as well?  Maybe Sakic also has no influence in Colorado's drafting.  Something to consider.

  • Like 1
  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, Elias Pettersson said:

Brackett was named head of amateur scouting on August 4, 2015.  So it wasn't right before the 2016 draft.  "Widely considered a Benning overrule" is not actually factual information, it is based on sources and speculation.  So if Brackett wasn't in charge of the 2014 or 2105 drafts as you say then he wasn't responsible for drafting Thatcher Demko and Brock Boeser, who were and are considered steals at their draft position and both are a huge part of our core moving forward.

 

Saying Brackett was totally in charge of the drafts from 2016-2019 and trying to minimize Benning's involvement is quite the play to try and make it like Sakic is a much better drafter than Benning.  But at least you are now admitting that the Canucks picks from 2016-2019 are actually better than the picks from the Avalanche.  That is a start.  I wonder if Sakic has a head of amateur scouting?  Wouldn't he be in charge of the drafts as well?  Maybe Sakic also has no influence in Colorado's drafting.  Something to consider.

Unlike you, I have said BOTH GM's have been good with their draft records during their tenures. I am not the one trying to forward any narrative that one has been significantly better than the other. 

 

Juolevi and Virtanen were both widely - and credibly - reported as having been Benning-specific picks. I know that tarnishes his god like drafting status to some since both can only be described as complete misses at 5th and 6th OA. Two very high spots that were basically "gifted" to the Canucks.

 

Both Boeser and Demko were drafted from the US system which, if you want to double check, was Brackett's area of scouting responsibility prior to taking over as head of amateur scouting. So I am pretty sure he would have had significant input on recommending both. 

 

Boeser was not considered a steal where he was drafted. He was in the realm of BPA at that pick. Goalies are often not as easy to slot in where teams take them as its far more often for organizational need rather than just BPA. But Demko was also drafted about where he was expected to be. 

 

I am not minimizing Benning's involvement. I am dispelling the notion that Benning deserves sole credit for the team drafting record when the picks have been good but none of the responsibility when picks have been bad. He deserves sone of both really. So does Sakic for that matter. 

 

Now that Benning and Weisbrod have effectively taken over micro management of the amateur scouting department we will soon get a much better idea how much of the successful drafting has been because of them. Hopefully you are right and Brackett had nothing to do with the successful picks. 

 

My point in comparing the two GM's is that while both have been good at drafting, Sakic has also been very good at free agent signings, trades, cap management, and identity building. My assessment of Benning on those four areas would be: garbage, below average at best, garbage, and garbage.

  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, wallstreetamigo said:

Unlike you, I have said BOTH GM's have been good with their draft records during their tenures. I am not the one trying to forward any narrative that one has been significantly better than the other. 

 

Juolevi and Virtanen were both widely - and credibly - reported as having been Benning-specific picks. I know that tarnishes his god like drafting status to some since both can only be described as complete misses at 5th and 6th OA. Two very high spots that were basically "gifted" to the Canucks.

 

Both Boeser and Demko were drafted from the US system which, if you want to double check, was Brackett's area of scouting responsibility prior to taking over as head of amateur scouting. So I am pretty sure he would have had significant input on recommending both. 

 

Boeser was not considered a steal where he was drafted. He was in the realm of BPA at that pick. Goalies are often not as easy to slot in where teams take them as its far more often for organizational need rather than just BPA. But Demko was also drafted about where he was expected to be. 

 

I am not minimizing Benning's involvement. I am dispelling the notion that Benning deserves sole credit for the team drafting record when the picks have been good but none of the responsibility when picks have been bad. He deserves sone of both really. So does Sakic for that matter. 

 

Now that Benning and Weisbrod have effectively taken over micro management of the amateur scouting department we will soon get a much better idea how much of the successful drafting has been because of them. Hopefully you are right and Brackett had nothing to do with the successful picks. 

 

My point in comparing the two GM's is that while both have been good at drafting, Sakic has also been very good at free agent signings, trades, cap management, and identity building. My assessment of Benning on those four areas would be: garbage, below average at best, garbage, and garbage.

I never actually said Sakic was a bad drafter, I was saying that Benning's record of drafting over the last 7 years is much better than Sakic's.  Rantanen was a great pick at 10, Newhook at 16 also a very good pick. Outside of the first round however there is nothing much to show so far for Sakic and the Avalanche over the past 7 years.  Benning however has several later picks that are already in the lineup in Hoglander, Demko and now Rathbone.  All look to be studs in the making.

 

Benning dropped the ball on Virtanen and Juolevi.  There is no dispute on that.  No one is perfect.  But he has made up for it with other picks and looks to have found some beauties outside of the first round.  Sakic not so much.  Rantanen is really his only slam dunk pick so far outside of the top 5 picks.  MacKinnon was a gift to him.  

 

Sakic has done a far better job than Benning in terms of trades and free agency.  I have already conceded that.  That's why Benning is on the hot seat right now, because of what he has done in the free agency front and also with most trades.  He has made a couple of very good trades, but has shown inconsistency in that department.  Hopefully he fixes his shortcomings and has a great 2021 summer.  We will see.

 

At the end of the day I am sure every GM has help in picking the players being drafted.  That's why every team has a scouting department. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, wallstreetamigo said:

Now that Benning and Weisbrod have effectively taken over micro management of the amateur scouting department we will soon get a much better idea how much of the successful drafting has been because of them. Hopefully you are right and Brackett had nothing to do with the successful picks. 

Fwiw, Weisbrod has a load of connections in college hockey (overlapping Bracket's so called area of strength), is close friends with the Hughes family and IIRC was one of the main guys pushing for Rathbone and I believe guys like McDonagh etc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, aGENT said:

Fwiw, Weisbrod has a load of connections in college hockey (overlapping Bracket's so called area of strength), is close friends with the Hughes family and IIRC was one of the main guys pushing for Rathbone and I believe guys like McDonagh etc.

"So called"

 

I think that says it all. So now Weisbrod was the mastermind behind all the picks made by Brackett from Brackett's region? 

 

Weisbrod doesnt exactly have a glowing record of amateur draft success. Plus, that Ryan O'Reilly offer sheet orchestrated by him and Feaster should have been warning enough how prepared he actually is when making decisions. 

 

Being friends with the Hughes family isnt a skill. And it will make exactly zero difference in the business and contract decisions regarding Hughes. Unless you are suggesting Hughes will sign for much less because of it. He won't. Thats not how it actually works.

Edited by wallstreetamigo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, wallstreetamigo said:

"So called"

 

I think that says it all. So now Weisbrod was the mastermind behind all the picks made by Brackett from Brackett's region? 

 

Weisbrod doesnt exactly have a glowing record of amateur draft success. Plus, that Ryan O'Reilly offer sheet orchestrated by him and Feaster should have been warning enough how prepared he actually is when making decisions. 

 

Being friends with the Hughes family isnt a skill. And it will make exactly zero difference in the business and contract decisions regarding Hughes. Unless you are suggesting Hughes will sign for much less because of it. He won't. Thats not how it actually works.

Hey, I'm just reflecting your obvious bias back at you :P

 

Mastermind? No, that's your usual hyperbolic nonsense. But he is exceedingly well connected in Eastern college hockey, including yes, being close friends with the Hughes family, NCAA coaches etc. Probably one of many reasons they felt comfortable letting Bracket, with his overlapping regional expertise go on to greener pastures.

 

I'm not suggesting anything of the sort. I leave the straw man construction to you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, wallstreetamigo said:

Unlike you, I have said BOTH GM's have been good with their draft records during their tenures. I am not the one trying to forward any narrative that one has been significantly better than the other. 

 

Juolevi and Virtanen were both widely - and credibly - reported as having been Benning-specific picks. I know that tarnishes his god like drafting status to some since both can only be described as complete misses at 5th and 6th OA. Two very high spots that were basically "gifted" to the Canucks.

 

Both Boeser and Demko were drafted from the US system which, if you want to double check, was Brackett's area of scouting responsibility prior to taking over as head of amateur scouting. So I am pretty sure he would have had significant input on recommending both. 

 

Boeser was not considered a steal where he was drafted. He was in the realm of BPA at that pick. Goalies are often not as easy to slot in where teams take them as its far more often for organizational need rather than just BPA. But Demko was also drafted about where he was expected to be. 

 

I am not minimizing Benning's involvement. I am dispelling the notion that Benning deserves sole credit for the team drafting record when the picks have been good but none of the responsibility when picks have been bad. He deserves sone of both really. So does Sakic for that matter. 

 

Now that Benning and Weisbrod have effectively taken over micro management of the amateur scouting department we will soon get a much better idea how much of the successful drafting has been because of them. Hopefully you are right and Brackett had nothing to do with the successful picks. 

 

My point in comparing the two GM's is that while both have been good at drafting, Sakic has also been very good at free agent signings, trades, cap management, and identity building. My assessment of Benning on those four areas would be: garbage, below average at best, garbage, and garbage.

According to Elliott Friedman :

Looking back at the 2015 draft, most teams concede the Canucks rated Boeser higher than anyone else. Regional scout Ted Hampson and current director of player development Ryan Johnson pushed hardest. Hampson handles Minnesota — where Boeser is from — and Johnson went to NCAA North Dakota, Boeser’s college choice. I’m not sure Vancouver was worried anyone would take him earlier than 23rd, but the Wild made them a bit nervous because it was his home state. This has turned out to be a huge steal for them.

 

  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

3 hours ago, Honky Cat said:

According to Elliott Friedman :

Looking back at the 2015 draft, most teams concede the Canucks rated Boeser higher than anyone else. Regional scout Ted Hampson and current director of player development Ryan Johnson pushed hardest. Hampson handles Minnesota — where Boeser is from — and Johnson went to NCAA North Dakota, Boeser’s college choice. I’m not sure Vancouver was worried anyone would take him earlier than 23rd, but the Wild made them a bit nervous because it was his home state. This has turned out to be a huge steal for them.

 

Craig Button had Boeser ranked #9 that year.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Elias Pettersson said:

I’m using 2014-2020 as a comparison because that is when Benning was hired. And Sakic was hired in 2013. Why would I use prior drafts when the comparison is Benning vs. Sakic?  
 

Also it doesn’t matter if those players from 2014 are still with the Canucks or not. The fact is Benning drafted them and that’s what matters when you are comparing drafting records. 
 

Rantanen was a great pick at 10. So was Boeser at 23 and Hoglander in the 2nd round. At the end of the day Benning has a much better overall record of drafting than Sakic and that is proven with facts. 

i disagree if we are to compare then it should really be 2014-2017 don't think it's fair to judge sakic on drafting when his team is competitive/contending... might as well compare a bottom feeding teams draft with a playoff teams draft and say see? the bottom feeder is so much better at drafting... Also vancouver during 2014-2017 drafted much higher than colorado on average and had 1 extra 1st rounder too..  vancouver drafted 6 24 23 5 5 vs colorado 23 10 10 4 and also higher on avg in the following rounds.. let's just for argument sake we just gonna take the star players from both their draft.. vancouver got boeser and pettersson out of 5 1st rounder.. colorado got rantenen makar out of 4 1st rounder.. 50% rate is higher than 40% rate.. i rather be drafting stars that will be on ELC and bridges than drafting a bunch of depth players that u can get off free agency or other teams waiver..  also it does matter if those 2014 players are with the canucks or played for the canucks or not.. coz forsling and McCann were given up on almost right away and traded for spare parts.. he drafted them and he gave up on them right away saying oh maybe they weren't what i thought they were gonna be.. we traded a promising 3c ++ for a mega pylon that was unnecessary and again the forsling trade is also unnecessary... regardless Colorado got 2 core pieces out of those 4 draft.. vancouver got 3 core pieces out of those 4 draft and a bunch of spare parts that all were traded for bits and pieces that we got 0 mileage out of.. not even a pick or prospect.. and the other hurt the team with his off ice issue and we ended up retaining him rather than 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, wai_lai416 said:

i disagree if we are to compare then it should really be 2014-2017 don't think it's fair to judge sakic on drafting when his team is competitive/contending... might as well compare a bottom feeding teams draft with a playoff teams draft and say see? the bottom feeder is so much better at drafting... Also vancouver during 2014-2017 drafted much higher than colorado on average and had 1 extra 1st rounder too..  vancouver drafted 6 24 23 5 5 vs colorado 23 10 10 4 and also higher on avg in the following rounds.. let's just for argument sake we just gonna take the star players from both their draft.. vancouver got boeser and pettersson out of 5 1st rounder.. colorado got rantenen makar out of 4 1st rounder.. 50% rate is higher than 40% rate.. i rather be drafting stars that will be on ELC and bridges than drafting a bunch of depth players that u can get off free agency or other teams waiver..  also it does matter if those 2014 players are with the canucks or played for the canucks or not.. coz forsling and McCann were given up on almost right away and traded for spare parts.. he drafted them and he gave up on them right away saying oh maybe they weren't what i thought they were gonna be.. we traded a promising 3c ++ for a mega pylon that was unnecessary and again the forsling trade is also unnecessary... regardless Colorado got 2 core pieces out of those 4 draft.. vancouver got 3 core pieces out of those 4 draft and a bunch of spare parts that all were traded for bits and pieces that we got 0 mileage out of.. not even a pick or prospect.. and the other hurt the team with his off ice issue and we ended up retaining him rather than 

Name two players on the current Colorado roster who were drafted by Sakic after the first round between 2014-2017?  I know of one.  Can you name another?  

 

Benning has 2 studs in Demko and Rathbone and another from 2019 in Hoglander.  He also has 3 up and coming players in Lind, Gadjovich and DiPietro.

 

It's not even close.  I'm done with this discussion...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, Elias Pettersson said:

Name two players on the current Colorado roster who were drafted by Sakic after the first round between 2014-2017?  I know of one.  Can you name another?  

 

Benning has 2 studs in Demko and Rathbone and another from 2019 in Hoglander.  He also has 3 up and coming players in Lind, Gadjovich and DiPietro.

 

It's not even close.  I'm done with this discussion...

He can't.

 

I already brought the receipts a page back.  

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Elias Pettersson said:

Name two players on the current Colorado roster who were drafted by Sakic after the first round between 2014-2017?  I know of one.  Can you name another?  

 

Benning has 2 studs in Demko and Rathbone and another from 2019 in Hoglander.  He also has 3 up and coming players in Lind, Gadjovich and DiPietro.

 

It's not even close.  I'm done with this discussion...

lol other than demko and hoglander everyone else is a question mark.. you might as well throw every single canucks prospect in there and call them up and coming stud and call other teams prospect bust coz you pay attention or even watch them?

 

before the season started colorado ranks 6th in prospect pool vancouver ranks 11th  but all of vancouver players are up and coming players and all of colorado's are straight trash ya i'm done arguing with you believe what u want we are the next colorado avalanche in 2 years and we'll be a cup contender by then.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Elias Pettersson said:

Name two players on the current Colorado roster who were drafted by Sakic after the first round between 2014-2017?  I know of one.  Can you name another?  

 

Benning has 2 studs in Demko and Rathbone and another from 2019 in Hoglander.  He also has 3 up and coming players in Lind, Gadjovich and DiPietro.

 

It's not even close.  I'm done with this discussion...

I wouldn't call  any of those 3 STUDS.   Demko had an average season - at best, Rathbone is unproven (like all of our AHL rookies) and hogs is certainly good - but not a Stud.   I think all the young draftees you mentioned and others have a long road to travel to prove themselves and I don't see any of them being Studs or Stars like Petterson or Boeser were. 

Most of them will likely never find a regular spot on the team or at best, become 3rd/4th liners, 3rd pairing D's or B U goalie.   I hope I'm wrong but according to neary all the pro scouts that's the reality of what we have in the cupboard not the propaganda coming out of JB's mouth or fantasy on twitter.  Not to mention draft seasons like last year, where there will NOT even be one player  making the team from that 2020 draft year, which was a 100% BUST thanks to JB !  (That's something this team can Ill afford and which our next GM will hopefully never repeat.)

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
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...
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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