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

2022 NHL Entry Draft


Recommended Posts

Anyone down to see some drama this offseason especially during the draft when PA could dangle Miller? We could receive a king’s ransom like pair of high picks such as 1st, 2nd and a prospect for instance. There can be a variety of trade offers that can be put together. Hopefully we can stockpile picks while we can with the high end players we could be putting out on the market

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, NucknAsia said:

Glad to have found the block function. It seems some like to continue to put words in people's mouths, then debate the words they put in people's mouths lol...anyways.. next point back to the draft...

 

Combine results here, interesting from an pure athletic standpoint. I haven't analyzed them but Lamoureux seems to stand out as a consistent name amongst the group so his athleticism is clearly top tier.


Given the winner of the vertical jump, I don't think any of these guys would have a future in basketball! :lol:

 

https://www.sportsnet.ca/nhl/article/2022-nhl-combine-results-top-10-prospects-at-each-drill/

Interesting to see how few top 10 picks did well. Lamoureux with the kung fu grip!

 

Big boi's in Pickering Bichsel  going 15+mins VO2MAX is impressive. Like to see Tryamkin do that!

 

Kemell and Beck got hops!

 

I think probably the most impressive performance Calle Odellius on the dreaded Wingate absolutely smoked the competition. 

 

The combine comes around every year and it's fun to look at the results but realistically it has very little to do with how good at hockey these kids are. Wright did 9 pullups Hughes did 19. When asked Slafkovski said he probably couldn't do 9.

 

official height's and weights for those interested. https://thehockeywriters.com/2022-nhl-combine-heights-weights/

 

 

Edited by hammertime
  • Cheers 1
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, hammertime said:

Interesting to see how few top 10 picks did well. Lamoureux with the kung fu grip!

 

Big boi's in Pickering Bichsel  going 15+mins VO2MAX is impressive. Like to see Tryamkin do that!

 

Kemell and Beck got hops!

 

I think probably the most impressive performance Calle Odellius on the dreaded Wingate absolutely smoked the competition. 

 

The combine comes around every year and it's fun to look at the results but realistically it has very little to do with how good at hockey these kids are. Wright did 9 pullups Hughes did 19. When asked Slafkovski said he probably couldn't do 9.

 

official height's and weights for those interested. https://thehockeywriters.com/2022-nhl-combine-heights-weights/

 

 

kung fu grip! hahah....:lol:

 

Ya its always interesting but I don't think teams put too much stock in this....i think it tells teams a few things

 

1. Is the kid really focused on fitness, which if so is a good sign

2. Is the kid really not focused on fitness, and is it an "issue"

3. Areas for the kid to improve

 

If a player is pretty good here and there, its simply ok, he needs to physically mature, and work out. 

 

If he's kicking 'a..' everywhere, well you know you will have a player who will be ready sooner...great

 

If a player is failing everywhere, well then you worry is he just physically immature or is it a signal of something worse...aka laziness....(which I'm guessing you don't see often with these kids given how serious they are now).

 

Interesting to look at the height and weight....

 

When I was 17 I was 5'11 164 lbs

When I was 21 I was 6'1.5 and 190 lbs (playing football)

 

Jack Sparkes!! 128th ranked 6'8.25 233 lbs!!

 

Right Shot Canadian DMan! Worth a flyer for sure!

 

I think alot of these 5/10 5/11 guys will end up being 6'0 and above

Edited by NucknAsia
  • Cheers 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, qwijibo said:

https://nhlentrydraft.com/mock-draft/
 

Fun little mock draft tool. Pick the team(s) you want to draft for. The program autodrafts for everyone else.  

That's pretty cool, I selected Mateychuk, but when faced with making the actual pick, it's not as easy as it seems. A few good players left on the board and trying to choose the right one. 

 

Edit - I found myself avoiding taking a winger (Miroshnichenko, Lekkerimaki, etc)  Drafted for position...and BPA

Edited by NUCKER67
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Could there still be a deal in the works for a Top 5, to try and get one of the RDs?  It would be very expensive, but top notch RDs don't grow on trees and the Canucks desperately need one for he next 10-15 years. Not big on trading the world for Slafkovsky, but Jiricek or Nemec would be great. 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, NucknAsia said:

Glad to have found the block function. It seems some like to continue to put words in people's mouths, then debate the words they put in people's mouths lol...anyways.. next point back to the draft...

 

Combine results here, interesting from an pure athletic standpoint. I haven't analyzed them but Lamoureux seems to stand out as a consistent name amongst the group so his athleticism is clearly top tier.


Given the winner of the vertical jump, I don't think any of these guys would have a future in basketball! :lol:

 

https://www.sportsnet.ca/nhl/article/2022-nhl-combine-results-top-10-prospects-at-each-drill/

This was my exact thought waking up this morning...there's 4-5 clear cut first round RHD's available...we MUST get a stud RHD in this draft, it will be a foundational piece for growth beyond (no more patchwork D corps, enough is enough). So I have always contended there will be 2 tiers of RHD at this draft:

Nemec and Jiricek are sure hit tier 1 (top 5) prospects...I can't think of another draft ever that had two highly touted RHD's in it.

Lamoureux and Luneau are the next level and will be awesome Top4 Dmen.

 

In order to pick Nemec or Jiricek we would need to move an asset to obtain the #2 pick...and there will be a ton of competition for that trade so the price may go sky-high. In order to maximize our assets and return this draft, what if instead of guaranteeing ourselves either Nemec or Jiricek at 2O/A, we keep our own #15 and pick Lamoureux? I know he's a big guy, but his athleticism on display at the combine maybe jumps him up a level (pun intended)? With him at #15 it leaves whatever asset we were going to move to acquire #2 (to get a top tier RHD) available to move for an additional piece...2 for the price of 1, and 1 of those pieces enters the roster on a tasty ELC for 3 years...might be some better asset management.

 

And there will be no rush to move that #15 RHD pick onto the top pairing with QH since we still have Schenn for one more year and those 2 looked really good together out there. Pair up the new rookie RHD with OEL for some veteran mentorship, move him up to QH the following year.

 

This leaves the following assets that can be moved:

JT = 2 of these 3: high pick, A prospect, top6 roster player (my preference would be an A prospect and a Top6 forward).

Boeser = similar to JT with the following exception: we need a 3C, so my preference for BB would be a high 2nd, a 3C and a reclamation project.

Myers = mid 2nd round

 

So we will have turned 4 assets (JT, BB, Myers and the 15 O/A) into the following:

A top4 RHD

A top6 forward

A 3rd line C

An A prospect

2 2nd round picks

A reclamation type player for development (I'm still high on Kravtsov, warts and all).

 

Not a bad haul for a day's work.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, NUCKER67 said:

That's pretty cool, I selected Mateychuk, but when faced with making the actual pick, it's not as easy as it seems. A few good players left on the board and trying to choose the right one. 

 

Edit - I found myself avoiding taking a winger (Miroshnichenko, Lekkerimaki, etc)  Drafted for position...and BPA

I went Miro- I think he's going to be the steal of the draft if he falls below top 10

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, ABNuck said:

This was my exact thought waking up this morning...there's 4-5 clear cut first round RHD's available...we MUST get a stud RHD in this draft, it will be a foundational piece for growth beyond (no more patchwork D corps, enough is enough). So I have always contended there will be 2 tiers of RHD at this draft:

Nemec and Jiricek are sure hit tier 1 (top 5) prospects...I can't think of another draft ever that had two highly touted RHD's in it.

Lamoureux and Luneau are the next level and will be awesome Top4 Dmen.

 

In order to pick Nemec or Jiricek we would need to move an asset to obtain the #2 pick...and there will be a ton of competition for that trade so the price may go sky-high. In order to maximize our assets and return this draft, what if instead of guaranteeing ourselves either Nemec or Jiricek at 2O/A, we keep our own #15 and pick Lamoureux? I know he's a big guy, but his athleticism on display at the combine maybe jumps him up a level (pun intended)? With him at #15 it leaves whatever asset we were going to move to acquire #2 (to get a top tier RHD) available to move for an additional piece...2 for the price of 1, and 1 of those pieces enters the roster on a tasty ELC for 3 years...might be some better asset management.

 

And there will be no rush to move that #15 RHD pick onto the top pairing with QH since we still have Schenn for one more year and those 2 looked really good together out there. Pair up the new rookie RHD with OEL for some veteran mentorship, move him up to QH the following year.

 

This leaves the following assets that can be moved:

JT = 2 of these 3: high pick, A prospect, top6 roster player (my preference would be an A prospect and a Top6 forward).

Boeser = similar to JT with the following exception: we need a 3C, so my preference for BB would be a high 2nd, a 3C and a reclamation project.

Myers = mid 2nd round

 

So we will have turned 4 assets (JT, BB, Myers and the 15 O/A) into the following:

A top4 RHD

A top6 forward

A 3rd line C

An A prospect

2 2nd round picks

A reclamation type player for development (I'm still high on Kravtsov, warts and all).

 

Not a bad haul for a day's work.

My only concern of drafting Lamoreux at 15 is it seems to be a bit of a reach. He's still a project and at 15 you want less risk. What I would want in the best of worlds, is if we're moving a player, whether it be Miller, Garland, Boeser, is that we get another first rounder to select a RD in the first round after 15. Ie if Mironshenko is available at 15 I think you have to take him, or any player who has more elite upside.

 

Like Lamoerux but 15 his still a very high pick when you consider ALL the players out there....there 'should be' 15 players in the draft who have elite upside, and you can't waste it on meat and potatoes imho. Leave those picks for the 2nd/3rd round or if you have another first. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, NucknAsia said:

My only concern of drafting Lamoreux at 15 is it seems to be a bit of a reach. He's still a project and at 15 you want less risk. What I would want in the best of worlds, is if we're moving a player, whether it be Miller, Garland, Boeser, is that we get another first rounder to select a RD in the first round after 15. Ie if Mironshenko is available at 15 I think you have to take him, or any player who has more elite upside.

 

Like Lamoerux but 15 his still a very high pick when you consider ALL the players out there....there 'should be' 15 players in the draft who have elite upside, and you can't waste it on meat and potatoes imho. Leave those picks for the 2nd/3rd round or if you have another first. 

I would have agreed BEFORE these results, hence my post. I think at the Combine Big Mav may have upped his draft value. Overall (Central) he's ranked #20 in the NA player list. Others have combined lists to create an overall draft order, but that is subjective and dependent upon team's needs (like we need a top4 RHD). Interestingly, Bob Mac has Chesley (at 18) ranked higher than both Mav (28) and Luneau (21)...I also like Chesley but I think we need Lamoureux's player type as a better compliment to QH.

But having said that, does anyone know if QH and Chesley ever crossed paths together? Or is the age difference too great for that opportunity (not 100% sure how the USDP works down there, how widespread the age categories are and if they grant exceptional player status for younger players to play with older ones). Regardless, although Chesley seems to have risen as the #3 RHD available (again, according to some), if we're going to pick by positional need (RHD) then let's pick the RHD that makes the most sense, best fit in the future with QH..and IMHO that's Maveric (plus his movie is doing really well at the box office :P)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, ABNuck said:

I would have agreed BEFORE these results, hence my post. I think at the Combine Big Mav may have upped his draft value. Overall (Central) he's ranked #20 in the NA player list. Others have combined lists to create an overall draft order, but that is subjective and dependent upon team's needs (like we need a top4 RHD). Interestingly, Bob Mac has Chesley (at 18) ranked higher than both Mav (28) and Luneau (21)...I also like Chesley but I think we need Lamoureux's player type as a better compliment to QH.

But having said that, does anyone know if QH and Chesley ever crossed paths together? Or is the age difference too great for that opportunity (not 100% sure how the USDP works down there, how widespread the age categories are and if they grant exceptional player status for younger players to play with older ones). Regardless, although Chesley seems to have risen as the #3 RHD available (again, according to some), if we're going to pick by positional need (RHD) then let's pick the RHD that makes the most sense, best fit in the future with QH..and IMHO that's Maveric (plus his movie is doing really well at the box office :P)

I don't put too much stock in the combine personally. Its a great measure of fitness, strength etc, but I don't think it should move the needle for players in terms of ranking. Fitness and strength, if bad, can be improved. If strong, great means you likely have a chance (physically) to compete sooner than someone who needs time to gain strength...but at the end of the day, hockey to me is about skill, hockey iq, compete etc...From Lamoreux's ranking and the scouting reports I've read on him, I agree he would be a good pairing for Quinn, but I believe there's too much other talent we'd be passing on with elite upside. Take the elite upside, and the more of that you have, the more ability to you have make other moves to backfill other positions. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

47 minutes ago, NucknAsia said:

I don't put too much stock in the combine personally. Its a great measure of fitness, strength etc, but I don't think it should move the needle for players in terms of ranking. Fitness and strength, if bad, can be improved. If strong, great means you likely have a chance (physically) to compete sooner than someone who needs time to gain strength...but at the end of the day, hockey to me is about skill, hockey iq, compete etc...From Lamoreux's ranking and the scouting reports I've read on him, I agree he would be a good pairing for Quinn, but I believe there's too much other talent we'd be passing on with elite upside. Take the elite upside, and the more of that you have, the more ability to you have make other moves to backfill other positions. 

I agree, being a measure of fitness. If a prospects jumps half an inch higher than another prospect, doesn't mean he'll be a better pick. I think it's all about the eye test, seeing these players play in competition. Can kind of tell who has the IQ, who skates better than others, who has the elite shot, etc. Don't know much about Lamoureaux yet, but I suspect because of these fitness tests, he jumps into the 1st Round. 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, NucknAsia said:

I don't put too much stock in the combine personally. Its a great measure of fitness, strength etc, but I don't think it should move the needle for players in terms of ranking. Fitness and strength, if bad, can be improved. If strong, great means you likely have a chance (physically) to compete sooner than someone who needs time to gain strength...but at the end of the day, hockey to me is about skill, hockey iq, compete etc...From Lamoreux's ranking and the scouting reports I've read on him, I agree he would be a good pairing for Quinn, but I believe there's too much other talent we'd be passing on with elite upside. Take the elite upside, and the more of that you have, the more ability to you have make other moves to backfill other positions. 

Natural athleticism and work ethic are two things you can usually take away from something like the combine. The upper body drills are less important than the lower body and cardio drills though. The measurements, weights, and body fat % is also helpful in estimating their frames at the NHL level.   

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15
FC RANK 14
vancouver-canucks.svg
GEEKIE CONOR
C
WINNIPEG ICE
WHL
6'3”
172 lbs
CAN.svg
 
79
FC RANK 68
vancouver-canucks.svg
WARREN NOAH
D
GATINEAU OLYMPIQUES
QMJHL
6'5”
214 lbs
CAN.svg
 
111
FC RANK 999
vancouver-canucks.svg
RINZEL SAM
D
CHASKA HIGH
USHS-MN
6'4”
181 lbs
USA.svg
 
143
FC RANK 999
vancouver-canucks.svg
LUND CAMERON
RW
GREEN BAY GAMBLERS
USHL
6'2”
181 lbs
USA.svg
 
175
FC RANK 999
vancouver-canucks.svg
YAKUPOV RAUL
C
NEFTEKHIMIK NIZHNEKAMSK
KHL
6'1”
168 lbs
RUS.svg
 
207
FC RANK 999
vancouver-canucks.svg
MORAVEC DAVID
D
BK MLADA BOLESLAV
CZECHIA
6'0”
179 lbs
CZE.svg
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Really too bad the Canucks didn't have an extra 1st or even a 2nd. Stockpiling as many as they could at last year's TDL would've been nice, but I guess they had to see if that roster could get into the playoffs. Hoping they can get another 1st or 2nd at the Draft. 

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
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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