Jim Benning to speak to the media Thursday prior to draft

[JM_]

2 minutes ago, IBatch said:

McTavish was ranked 9 by THN in their recent draft preview, they use the average of 10 nhl scouts.   ISS who's only job is to rank him has him at 5.  McKenzie at 4...not sure all 15 are created equally but i'm a fan and like him more then Johnson.   McTavish range is low too from this article...seems to be safer that way (maybe that means less upside?).   Edvinsson is like this years Broberg - some have him as high as 2 (THN) others way way down the list.   Plus he's a LHD so no thanks but with JB it's impossible to know who he likes...maybe it's Lucias lol.   And the CDC will freak out. 

McTavish at 9 just feels like the point where BPA and need combine for us. But I do think he may go higher. Bob is still the draft guru so thats why I'd have a deal ready. 

 

 

[JM_]

1 minute ago, IBatch said:

Trading down so a team gets his guy isn't cheap.    For sure we could do that deal because even CHI is uncertain if they want to keep him and Jones knocks them down a spot.   No Keith but you can be sure they are happy about that too.   We could get their second for that deal for example...

so take Roussel give us a 2nd to move up? I like that too. 

[IBatch]

Just now, Jimmy McGill said:

McTavish at 9 just feels like the point where BPA and need combine for us. But I do think he may go higher. Bob is still the draft guru so thats why I'd have a deal ready. 

 

 

For sure he could be gone.   What the heck would we do if it's Guenther/Edvinsson?   Edvinsson is ranked as high as 2 ... by an NHL average of ten scouts!  (THN).   And the Sedins are now involved and we've just probably lost Edler.    Hope we don't do it.  If it's Eklund/LHughes hope we pick Eklund.   And i would rather have McTavish.   Being capable of playing one or two years earlier matters - plus he's super ugly and has rad hair. 

[IBatch]

6 minutes ago, Jimmy McGill said:

so take Roussel give us a 2nd to move up? I like that too. 

I like that too but meant moving 3 spots is worth a second.   Not sure it's worth that and a second but if that's what needs to happen for CHI to get Jones they'd pull the trigger 

 

Edit: In a way we are in the catbirds seat.   Everyone before has to be very careful of who they pick and likely has a similar list.    We are there waiting to pounce on at least one off board player - giving us two guys to choose from.   Possibly even three.   It's happened most drafts the last five or six years - sometimes it even been us pushing better players down the line 

 

For example, Bouchard who was supposed to be picked around or before where we were went 10th.   EDM didn't even have a sweater ready for him with his name on it.  Script wasn't followed. 

Edited July 23, 2021 by IBatch

[Canucks Curse]

Just now, IBatch said:

For sure he could be gone.   What the heck would we do if it's Guenther/Edvinsson?   Edvinsson is ranked as high as 2 ... by an NHL average of ten scouts!  (THN).   And the Sedins are now involved and we've just probably lost Edler.    Hope we don't do it.  If it's Eklund/LHughes hope we pick Eklund.   And i would rather have McTavish.   Being capable of playing one or two years earlier matters - plus he's super ugly and has rad hair. 

trade the pick for Pavel buchnevich  Russian best for Podzy and sick top line forward

 

 

JT Petey Boess

Hogs Bo Pavel

Pearson Dickie Podzy

 

 

[johngould21]

8 minutes ago, Jimmy McGill said:

McTavish at 9 just feels like the point where BPA and need combine for us. But I do think he may go higher. Bob is still the draft guru so thats why I'd have a deal ready. 

 

 

I'm sure there are many deals in place, with every scenario worked out, and 5 minutes to do them. Let's hope zoom doesn't crash!

[IBatch]

34 minutes ago, Jimmy McGill said:

McTavish at 9 just feels like the point where BPA and need combine for us. But I do think he may go higher. Bob is still the draft guru so thats why I'd have a deal ready. 

 

 

Also I think JB will have a deal ready decent odds anyways.   And it won't go anything like we are anticipating.   And a bunch of us will be looking up whomever we do actually pick ... lol that was me anyways with OJ.. wasn't in my radar - same with EP to a certain degree.   Knew about them, but didn't see us actually picking either with who was left.  He was a fool to pick OJ.   But EP sure made up for it.   QHs too really.  Bouchard or Dobson looked more rounded.    Won't be at all surprised if Bouchard takes over their PP now that Barrie is all but gone after having his stats go next level...  That's one of Bouchard's biggest strengths.   Keith won't be running it that's for sure.  

Edited July 23, 2021 by IBatch

[Cat Man]

27 minutes ago, Jimmy McGill said:

I think if Hughes and McTavish are there for us you grab them up. But if not, why not move down a bit to grease the wheels for CHI to get Jones and we benefit with a big scary dman? I'd want Rousell added to that deal too. 

 

I'm asking for a lot, but there seems to be a bright line this draft with the top 9 so we'd be trading down a tier so that should come with some benefit. 

Till now holding the pick was all I wanted. This move feels like a win.

 

Three spots down we still get a good player.

Zadorov in Vancouver with the group to meet and greet the Pod's (wife).

Rousell's 3 mil should cover Z'ds salary?

Why does Chicago do this to gain three spots and just swap equal salary? Making roster room for Jones?

 

 

 

Edited July 23, 2021 by Cat Man

[IBatch]

3 minutes ago, Cat Man said:

Till now holding the pick was all I wanted. This move feels like a win.

 

Three spots down we still get a good player.

Zadorov in Vancouver with the group to meet and greet the Pod's (wife).

Rousell's 3 mil should cover Z'ds salary?

Why does Chicago do this only to gain three spots and just swap equal salary though?

 

 

 

Because they (CHI) would then trade our 9th to push negotiations forward to satisfy CLB for Jones (whole idea is around helping that deal which is already in the works, move forward really) in return we get CHI's second and dump AR, or dump AR and gain Zadorov ... make sense?  Ideally all three but that's really pushing it.  

 

So far they are close but haven't found middle ground...  CLB (wants Dach or Debricant as their centerpiece... Clarke, McTavish.m, LHughes are pretty sexy right) could then end up picking as high as 6th as far as consensus players are, given for sure there will be at least one off board pick, two quite possibly and low odds it's three.     Make sense?    Thing we have to consider is are we willing to pass on guys like McTavish, L Hughes and Clarke to make this work.   Very rough call.   

[johngould21]

22 minutes ago, IBatch said:

Also I think JB will have a deal ready decent odds anyways.   And it won't go anything like we are anticipating.   And a bunch of us will be looking up whomever we do actually pick ... lol that was me anyways with OJ.. wasn't in my radar - same with EP to a certain degree.   Knew about them, but didn't see us actually picking either with who was left.  He was a fool to pick OJ.   But EP sure made up for it.   QHs too really.  Bouchard or Dobson looked more rounded.    Won't be at all surprised if he takes over their PP now that Barrie is all but gone after having his stats go next level...  That's one of Bouchard's biggest strengths.   Keith won't be running it that's for sure.  

The Coilers better hope he's ready, that D looks dreadful, and Smith for two more years in goal, eeeeeeeeesh! 97 is going to be gone when his NMC ends.

[MikeyD]

I think the people pooping on Edvinsson are ignoring his defensive attributes. He's honestly what this team needs, a big boy who is active away from the puck willing to play man to man hockey and clear the sight lines of the goalie. The only way he becomes a bad pick is if he's a liability with turnovers. He's got the same chance to become a liability moving the puck as he does as becoming a 40 point d-man in the NHL. The kid still has upside offensively, it's just his decision making and his pass accuracy that needs work and as a defender it's easier than a forward to make decisions offensively because they have safer options with the puck typically (things like chipping pucks out of zones as opposed to needing to hit tape to tape passes or have well-timed movement around the boards like say a winger would need) so it's easier to iron out. The kid plays with his head up, just needs to learn his limitations. 

Defensively though he plays with a head on a swivel, has a great active stick, ties up his opponent often (a really good thing to look for) and uses his size pretty effectively. You can make the argument that kind of player maybe shouldn't go as high in the draft and you can possibly find some of those defensive capabilities lower in the draft, but his potential offensively still sets him apart from most of the competition at his age and projects him higher. 

[Cat Man]

16 minutes ago, IBatch said:

Because they (CHI) would then trade our 9th to push negotiations forward to satisfy CLB for Jones (whole idea is around helping that deal which is already in the works, move forward really) in return we get CHI's second and dump AR, or dump AR and gain Zadorov ... make sense?  Ideally all three but that's really pushing it.  

 

So far they are close but haven't found middle ground...  CLB (wants Dach or Debricant as their centerpiece... Clarke, McTavish.m, LHughes are pretty sexy right) could then end up picking as high as 6th as far as consensus players are, given for sure there will be at least one off board pick, two quite possibly and low odds it's three.     Make sense?    Thing we have to consider is are we willing to pass on guys like McTavish, L Hughes and Clarke to make this work.   Very rough call.   

 

Makes sense yes. 

[awalk]

"This shouldn’t need to be said, but teams that have only made the playoffs once in the last six seasons should try to avoid not having a first-round pick in back-to-back years."

[spook007]

2 hours ago, Jimmy McGill said:

actually I'd be fine with swapping picks with CHI and taking Svechkov today if It meant bringing in Zadorov and clearing some cap. I wonder if CHI would move up to 9 for Zadorov and taking Roussel?

Nice thinking Jimmy... Would be an excellent set up if possible... I would do that deal instantly...

[pharmalaw]

i'm gonna predict that the Canucks go off-the-board and draft Fabian Lysell. It's an opportunity to swing for the fences and grab a player who has potential to be a star and otherwise wouldn't be available. There's no point in getting a bottom-6 forward or 4/5/6 d-man with your top-10 pick (that's what trade and free-agency are for). 

 

Fabian Lysell has one of the highest ceilings in this draft.

 

 

[IBatch]

1 hour ago, Jimmy McGill said:

McTavish at 9 just feels like the point where BPA and need combine for us. But I do think he may go higher. Bob is still the draft guru so thats why I'd have a deal ready. 

 

 

I really think your onto something here Jimmy.   It would help all included and hurt the right amount.   I don't mind losing LHughes ... McTavish would sting somewhat, Clarke would really be tough to pass on.   But Sillinger and the Russian make a lot of sense too.  If we could gain a second and AR is gone do it for sure.   Just one of those two would be a tough call.   I'd take the second.   I'm 100% ok with waiting another year.  Oh and Zadorov of course... we could do some buyouts and get something done before the off-season is up to cram them all in. 

Edited July 23, 2021 by IBatch

[IBatch]

24 minutes ago, pharmalaw said:

i'm gonna predict that the Canucks go off-the-board and draft Fabian Lysell. It's an opportunity to swing for the fences and grab a player who has potential to be a star and otherwise wouldn't be available. There's no point in getting a bottom-6 forward or 4/5/6 d-man with your top-10 pick (that's what trade and free-agency are for). 

 

Fabian Lysell has one of the highest ceilings in this draft.

 

 

Make sure to remind us all you said this...because well it's JB and rarely does he follow any script. 

[IBatch]

1 hour ago, MikeyD said:

I think the people pooping on Edvinsson are ignoring his defensive attributes. He's honestly what this team needs, a big boy who is active away from the puck willing to play man to man hockey and clear the sight lines of the goalie. The only way he becomes a bad pick is if he's a liability with turnovers. He's got the same chance to become a liability moving the puck as he does as becoming a 40 point d-man in the NHL. The kid still has upside offensively, it's just his decision making and his pass accuracy that needs work and as a defender it's easier than a forward to make decisions offensively because they have safer options with the puck typically (things like chipping pucks out of zones as opposed to needing to hit tape to tape passes or have well-timed movement around the boards like say a winger would need) so it's easier to iron out. The kid plays with his head up, just needs to learn his limitations. 

Defensively though he plays with a head on a swivel, has a great active stick, ties up his opponent often (a really good thing to look for) and uses his size pretty effectively. You can make the argument that kind of player maybe shouldn't go as high in the draft and you can possibly find some of those defensive capabilities lower in the draft, but his potential offensively still sets him apart from most of the competition at his age and projects him higher. 

I'd be sad if we took him.  Yet another LHD.   Yes a few lists have him ranked high so who knows.  For sure not a sexy pick even if he's available.    

[IBatch]

1 hour ago, johngould21 said:

The Coilers better hope he's ready, that D looks dreadful, and Smith for two more years in goal, eeeeeeeeesh! 97 is going to be gone when his NMC ends.

Bouchard was buried last season and did not bad.  I still am not sure we picked the right guy in QHs.   Guess we will find out won't we? 

[aGENT]

14 minutes ago, IBatch said:

Bouchard was buried last season and did not bad.  I still am not sure we picked the right guy in QHs.   Guess we will find out won't we? 

Even if we passed on Hughes (which is silly IMO), Boqvist, Dobson, Smith or Miller would still have been better D picks than Bouchard (or Farabee at F)