2023 NHL Entry Draft

[R3aL]

8 hours ago, HighOnHockey said:

All this talk of ASP and Willander, I think Theo Lindstein is getting a little lost in the mix here. He was a 52% corsi on an SHL team that had to play for relegation. Unlike Willander or ASP he played the full season in SHL. Played regular minutes and was among his team's ATOI leaders in the relegation matches. He also showed at the international tournaments throughout the year that he has a nose for creating offense with his shot from the blueline.

I guess you could bring up David Edstrom in a similar fashion.

 

i do like ASP and Willander over Theo and they do get a bump in asset value due to positional rarity .

 

i do like Willander offensive potential and skating > theo though 

[Wolfgang Durst]

11 hours ago, hammertime said:

 

 

Character and compete aren't what he's after.

Character is the decisive trait that separates winners and losers. Just look at last season's performance from this Canucks team. The players on the ice were outplayed on the ice because they didn't put in the necessary effort night in and night out. Most of the loses can be attributed to the lack of character of some players. Character is the decisive trait that determines how players deal with adversity: how they come back after injuries, how they respond when things don't go well on the ice, how they manage to get through scoring droughts. Character is the decisive for being a winner.

 

Director of NHL central scouting Dan Marr pointed out the importance of the "C's": character and consistency. Don Jackson who won a Stanley Cup with the Oilers being a teammate of Wayne Gretzky is arguably the most successful headcoach in Europe. He won several national championships with teams in Austria and Germany (Berlin & Munich). He won the national championship in Germany with Munich some weeks ago and decided to retire thereafter. Once asked about his recipe for sucess he told the media that he made character a priority when adding players to the team.

 

The importance of character can't be overstated. I really don't care about the Canucks because Allvin is as worse as Jim Benning as a General Manager. This team isn't going anywhere in the near future because of the personnel in the front office and their poor decision making. This franchise will be irrelevant for the next 10 years at least. I vividly recall Francesco Aqulliini's promise to the fanbase after Benning was fired: "We'll get it right". It's apparent that he hasn't gotten it right with the hiring of Bruce Boudreau, Patrick Allvin and Jim Rutherford. There's is nothing you can do about it. It is what it is.

 

 

[Alflives]

.

[hammertime]

6 hours ago, Wolfgang Durst said:

Character is the decisive trait that separates winners and losers. Just look at last season's performance from this Canucks team. The players on the ice were outplayed on the ice because they didn't put in the necessary effort night in and night out. Most of the loses can be attributed to the lack of character of some players. Character is the decisive trait that determines how players deal with adversity: how they come back after injuries, how they respond when things don't go well on the ice, how they manage to get through scoring droughts. Character is the decisive for being a winner.

 

Director of NHL central scouting Dan Marr pointed out the importance of the "C's": character and consistency. Don Jackson who won a Stanley Cup with the Oilers being a teammate of Wayne Gretzky is arguably the most successful headcoach in Europe. He won several national championships with teams in Austria and Germany (Berlin & Munich). He won the national championship in Germany with Munich some weeks ago and decided to retire thereafter. Once asked about his recipe for sucess he told the media that he made character a priority when adding players to the team.

 

The importance of character can't be overstated. I really don't care about the Canucks because Allvin is as worse as Jim Benning as a General Manager. This team isn't going anywhere in the near future because of the personnel in the front office and their poor decision making. This franchise will be irrelevant for the next 10 years at least. I vividly recall Francesco Aqulliini's promise to the fanbase after Benning was fired: "We'll get it right". It's apparent that he hasn't gotten it right with the hiring of Bruce Boudreau, Patrick Allvin and Jim Rutherford. There's is nothing you can do about it. It is what it is.

 

 

I'm a big Brindley fan. Just love the way he attacks the game 

Edited June 11, 2023 by hammertime

[Junkyard Dog]

BPA would hopefully be a forward with size/skill/speed/smarts or a solid/poise/multifaceted two-way RD that would mesh well with Hughes. 
 

 

[Off_The_Schneid!]

8 hours ago, Herberts Vasiljevs said:

Probably the most accurate mock I've seen to date: 

 

 

I agree, could definitely see the draft pan out this way. The only one I could see go differently is St.Louis rumoured pick of ASP but that wouldn’t affect the Canucks pick in Willander in this scenario. 
 

side note : if Arizona chooses Reinbacher would that be viewed as a bad pick ? 

[Gawdzukes]

8 hours ago, spook007 said:

I am normally of that conviction as well, but if the players you have on you list are more or less in a group together, and you look like you may get one in that group at 15 or 19, why not take the added pick?

In the post I responded to the scout thought one of Simashev, Willander or Danielson would be available at 19. 
if that was the case and our scouts have them around the same place, why not pick one of them. 
i agree, if you think there are a clear line, then you pick at 11. 
There is also the incentive of getting a bit of cap relief unless they have another plan?

I hear what you're saying Spook but I just see so many problems with this approach. If your scouts can't differentiate talent between 11 and 19 you've got serious problems and they should all be fired on the spot for starters. Then on top of that say you have 4 players you like it's almost guaranteed they will all go (everyone else sees the same thing) and you'll be left drafting a player you are on the fence and don't really care about. I've done so many NFL fantasy drafts and I've learned to avoid this pitfall, it almost always blows up in your face. Don't assume, or hope so and so may fall. They most likely won't!

 

Of course this is all done on the premise you're getting a later pick as well. Well you don't know who is going to be available there either. So ... what is the benefit here ... just another random low chance pick? Unless there are 8 brothers who are exactly identical I wouldn't take the chance. While you "may" get a guy you like, you also "probably" won't. That's how I approach it anyway ... I don't like leaving things out of my control to chance because it doesn't always work out. It's hard enough to get a player to hit let alone playing games and reducing your chances on at least getting one. Too much of a greedy move that can backfire imo.

 

I have to refer to @stawns who has repeatedly stated how important it is for us to hit on this pick. I agree whole heartedly. Now is not the time to be playing games. Take an elite top line talent and be satisfied with that. 

[TheQuietQuitter]

8 hours ago, Herberts Vasiljevs said:

Probably the most accurate mock I've seen to date: 

 

 

I am wondering what your basis of comparison is for how accurate this mock draft is?  Accurate to your own predictions?

 

Not a fan of Willander at 11, but if that's the pick, then so be it.

Edited June 11, 2023 by TheQuietQuitter

[stawns]

45 minutes ago, Off_The_Schneid! said:

I agree, could definitely see the draft pan out this way. The only one I could see go differently is St.Louis rumoured pick of ASP but that wouldn’t affect the Canucks pick in Willander in this scenario. 
 

side note : if Arizona chooses Reinbacher would that be viewed as a bad pick ? 

If ASP, Moore, simashev and Willander are there, I hope it's Moore.  They desperately need a highly skilled C in the system, more so than D.  If they do go with D, I hope they'd go with ASP because he's got, by far, the highest ceiling, imo.

[Gawdzukes]

@spook007 What if you get

 

1. Bedard

2. Fantili

3. Carlsson

4. Smith

5. Reinbacher

6. Michkov

7. Leonard

8. Dvorsky

9. Moore

10. ASP

11. Barlow

12. Perrault

13. Sale

14. Wood

15. Simashev 

16. Willander

17. Danielson

18. Yager

 

Then you've turned Danielson, Wood, Sale, Perrault, Simashev or Willander into Honzek, or maybe Yager and Minnetian. I think Honzek looks interesting but he could easily end up a 3rd line checker too. It's quite the dice roll for a team that has no margin for error. Who knows though as we often see 19 ends up as good as 11 but now we're back to the potato picks! 

 

I'll give you this that still doesn't look too too bad and it would be nice to grab both a D and a forward. I just don't like gambling with the future. I know for us folks so many of these players look intriguing but I would really hope our scouts can separate the difference.

Edited June 11, 2023 by Gawdzukes

[stawns]

1 minute ago, TheQuietQuitter said:

I am wondering what your basis of comparison is for how accurate this mock draft is?  Accurate to your own predictions?

 

Not a fan if Willander at 11, but if that's the pick, then so be it.

Me either, especially in that mock draft where there are players with higher ceilings than him.

 

If they did, I would trust they see something I don't in his game.......I'd be disappointed, but would be fine with it in the end 

[stawns]

Just now, Gawdzukes said:

@spook007 What if you get

 

1. Bedard

2. Fantili

3. Carlsson

4. Smith

5. Reinbacher

6. Michkov

7. Leonard

8. Dvorsky

9. Moore

10. ASP

11. Barlow

12. Perrault

13. Sale

14. Wood

15. Simashev 

16. Willander

17. Danielson

18. Yager

 

Then you've turned Danielson, Wood, Sale, Perrault, Simashev or Willander into Honzek, or maybe Yager and Minnetian. I think Honzek looks interesting but he could easily end up a 3rd line checker too. It's quite the dice roll for a team that has no margin for error. Who knows though as we often see 19 ends up as good as 11 but now we're back to the potato picks! 

 

I'll give you this though that still doesn't look too too bad and it would be nice to grab both a D and a forward. I just don't like gambling with the future. I know for us folks so many of these players look intriguing but I would really hope our scouts can separate the difference.

I don't see any scenario where DR goes #5, but I also don't think he's a top 10 pick in this draft either.

[TheQuietQuitter]

2 minutes ago, stawns said:

Me either, especially in that mock draft where there are players with higher ceilings than him.

 

If they did, I would trust they see something I don't in his game.......I'd be disappointed, but would be fine with it in the end 

Ya its nothing against Willander as a prospect. 

There's so many variables at play, I just hope the decision they make with the 11th OA ends up being the right one a decade from now... if I'm still around by then.

[Gawdzukes]

1 minute ago, stawns said:

I don't see any scenario where DR goes #5, but I also don't think he's a top 10 pick in this draft either.

Yeah me either, I just copy pasted the top 9 from an earlier poster to save time and show Spook my worries about trading down.  I am familiar with your stance on drafting D's in the first round. I know he's not your favorite but I really like the way he plays. Then again I'm a little starved for anyone who can competently play defence from the RD. He may end up pretty vanilla though I agree. I was initially pretty wary of ASP due to size concerns but the combine confirms he's actually pretty big at 5'11 180. In this case I'm on your side and would rather draft the higher ceiling. I'm not entirely sold on his defending skills though ... I'm sure the scouts have been more in depth than myself though.

[Nucker 67]

9 hours ago, Herberts Vasiljevs said:

Probably the most accurate mock I've seen to date: 

 

 

Interesting take. Canucks taking Willander with these players still on the board:

 

Danielson

Wood

ASP

Moore

Barlow

Sale

Yager

Simashev

 

Willy better be fricken good. 

[John McClane]

20 hours ago, R3aL said:

@John McClane

 

you gave me a rough game emoji but find me one trade comparable the value isn’t there for Nashville. I mean if they offered it sign me up!  
 

 

I did give you that. Not because I disagree with the opinion you gave. But because you missed the point of the post. I was merely posting an exercise to gage how much people on here valued the #11 pick. 

Im not sure how the post was miss understood or misleading. I did Not ask, would the Canucks do this trade? I did Not ask if Nashville would do this trade? Nashville was the only team I noticed that had 2 first round picks after #11. I guess I should have gone with Team X instead of using Nashville.

 

Hopefully if I decided to make another similar post in the future I can fix my mistakes, and make thinks more simple. I really didn’t expect to cause this level of misunderstanding. 
 

I do agree with you that if this was an actual trade proposal, it is probably a little rich. 
For me, I value the #11 pick as pretty flexible. If a player that I could only dream of falling out of the top 10 actually fell to #11, it would be so hard for me to try to decide pick it or trade it. If an offer like 2 later first for #11 got offered.  
 

The Canucks could really use more picks, but this player was not expected to be available.

 

What if the player that falls was the consensus #6 pick?

 

On your top 10 list, you have this player ranked #6 as well. But team X had him valued at the #5 overall pick.  
 

I think it’s possible a team could make a strong move, if the value was high enough for them. 
 

 

[stawns]

9 minutes ago, Gawdzukes said:

Yeah me either, I just copy pasted the top 9 from an earlier poster to save time and show Spook my worries about trading down.  I am familiar with your stance on drafting D's in the first round. I know he's not your favorite but I really like the way he plays. Then again I'm a little starved for anyone who can competently play defence from the RD. He may end up pretty vanilla though I agree. I was initially pretty wary of ASP due to size concerns but the combine confirms he's actually pretty big at 5'11 180. In this case I'm on your side and would rather draft the higher ceiling. I'm not entirely sold on his defending skills though ... I'm sure the scouts have been more in depth than myself though.

In the top 10, for sure .......unless you're gifted a Quinn Hughes.  And though I think they need to get a C at #11, I'd be ok with ASP, Simashev or Reinbacher at #11.

[Guest]

21 minutes ago, Gawdzukes said:

Yeah me either, I just copy pasted the top 9 from an earlier poster to save time and show Spook my worries about trading down.  I am familiar with your stance on drafting D's in the first round. I know he's not your favorite but I really like the way he plays. Then again I'm a little starved for anyone who can competently play defence from the RD. He may end up pretty vanilla though I agree. I was initially pretty wary of ASP due to size concerns but the combine confirms he's actually pretty big at 5'11 180. In this case I'm on your side and would rather draft the higher ceiling. I'm not entirely sold on his defending skills though ... I'm sure the scouts have been more in depth than myself though.

Did anyone post players' measurements from the combine? 

[eeeeergh]

41 minutes ago, Gawdzukes said:

@spook007 What if you get

 

1. Bedard

2. Fantili

3. Carlsson

4. Smith

5. Reinbacher

6. Michkov

7. Leonard

8. Dvorsky

9. Moore

10. ASP

11. Barlow

12. Perrault

13. Sale

14. Wood

15. Simashev 

16. Willander

17. Danielson

18. Yager

 

Then you've turned Danielson, Wood, Sale, Perrault, Simashev or Willander into Honzek, or maybe Yager and Minnetian. I think Honzek looks interesting but he could easily end up a 3rd line checker too. It's quite the dice roll for a team that has no margin for error. Who knows though as we often see 19 ends up as good as 11 but now we're back to the potato picks! 

 

I'll give you this that still doesn't look too too bad and it would be nice to grab both a D and a forward. I just don't like gambling with the future. I know for us folks so many of these players look intriguing but I would really hope our scouts can separate the difference.

Benson doesn’t go in the top 18?

[Alflives]

15 minutes ago, VancouverHabitant said:

Did anyone post players' measurements from the combine? 

Yup. A few pages back there’s a list.