2023 NHL Entry Draft

[Nucker 67]

5 minutes ago, eeeeergh said:

Benson doesn’t go in the top 18?

If Benson goes to TOR, I'll probably throw a tantrum 

[eeeeergh]

2 minutes ago, NUCKER67 said:

If Benson goes to TOR, I'll probably throw a tantrum 

If we pass on Benson I’ll probably go full Heffy and start calling everyone criminals 

[spook007]

14 hours ago, Gawdzukes said:

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. 

I get, what you are saying, and I quite sure, i said that was going to happen as well. However, our scouts had Lekkerimaki 7th on last years list, and I don't think many had that..

In the group around Lekkerimaki there were several players, that I would have said, read people say, they would take ahead of Lekkerimaki? Players like Bichsel, Ostlund, kemell, Miroshnischenko (or however its spelt), Ohgren, Pickering etc. 

in this instance you'd think a swap to drop 3-4 places while adding a 2nd wouldn't be the worst idea in history. Or maybe getting rid of a contract at the same time / or both...

The scouts will make a list, but even on that list there will be places, where they just like everyone else will be saying the difference is so minute, that it wouldn't be the end of the world to drop down the list, if the return was worth it. 

 

We all say our prospect pool is empty, and I have heard nothing but page after page about the d talent likely available in the 2nd round, so before we clear our decks and goes for a 'can't miss talent', we better be damn sure its such a sure fire talent, cause some how we need to be smart regarding the cap both now and later as well. 
 

As for the first 4...

if Bedard, Fantalli, Calsson and either Smith or Michov doesn't go in the top 4 positions I'll east my old hat... just to make sure either of the last two in the top 6... and I'll send a picture should I have to do so... (provided I can chew it ). 
 

And finally it is that close with a lot of the players... a few weeks ago, Stawns said he would not draft a defender ain the top 11, and the latest he said was 3 out of 4 he expect to pick at 11 were D men.... so it must be very very close... just saying 
 

 

Edited June 12, 2023 by spook007

[Gawdzukes]

29 minutes ago, VancouverHabitant said:

Did anyone post players' measurements from the combine? 

https://www.sportsnet.ca/nhl/article/2023-nhl-combine-results-top-10-prospects-in-every-drill/

[Gawdzukes]

30 minutes ago, eeeeergh said:

Benson doesn’t go in the top 18?

 

Dang it. I thought I might be missing someone.

 

1. Bedard

2. Fantili

3. Carlsson

4. Smith

5. Reinbacher

6. Michkov

7. Leonard

8. Dvorsky

9. Moore

10. ASP

11. Benson

12. Perrault

13. Sale

14. Wood

15. Simashev 

16. Willander

17. Danielson

18. Barlow

 

Thanks (forgot your boy ), so I replaced Yager with Benson and moved Barlow to 18. So we would be left with our choice of Yager or Honzek, Stenberg, Musty, Heidt, or something like that. I personally like Yager a lot and find he's got mitts like Wood ... he's way smaller and has numerous red flags though. I don't know that many would consider it a strong pick.

 

Anyways would people be happy with Honzek/Yager, and an early to mid second instead of the 8 guys listed 11-18, or quite possibly one or two from the top 10. I know I'd rather keep 11.

 

 

Edited June 11, 2023 by Gawdzukes

[R3aL]

50 minutes ago, John McClane said:

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. 
 

 

 

 

I’ve been pro moving down in this draft I just didn’t think the value made sense in your exercise that’s all. 

[spook007]

1 hour 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.

You kind of make my argument for me here... you don't have Benson, Musty or Richie there, first 2 players at least expected to go around 11ish... I'd argue that that group from 8-9 onwards are very, very close, with different positions and strengths but all with upside, and nobody knows, who will be the real stars between them in 5 years time. 
 

I still believe though, that come draft day they will pick at 11, and the player they'll pick is the highest they've got left on their board, just like they did with Lekkerimaki last year. 

[R3aL]

20 minutes ago, eeeeergh said:

If we pass on Benson I’ll probably go full Heffy and start calling everyone criminals 

He’s the toughest player for me at 11 to make a decision on.

 

I see the concerns, but I’m also a huge fan 

 

it will be a tough choice 

[Fred65]

When it comes to who we pick it looks like there's no real bad pick. However the canucks do need to badly bring some quality to the defence IMO. It's been a thorn in their side for a long time. We have more forwards than we need. But I'd concentrate on a good D'man. I think a player like ASP could make our current forwards more productive and certainly cut down on goals against. Too often our current D look like a fire drill in their own end, add to that some forwards who don't help defensively and you end up with Canucks today. This is not a draft where you go for the sexiest of the guy who has eye catching stats in junior. This a draft about building a more complate team IMO

Edited June 11, 2023 by Fred65

[Herberts Vasiljevs]

1 hour 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 of Willander at 11, but if that's the pick, then so be it.

More or less the most accurate to my predictions, maybe other than the Canucks pick; and I ultimately think Moore ends up going higher. 

[King Heffy]

4 minutes ago, Fred65 said:

When it comes to who we pick it looks like there's no real bad pick. However the canucks do need to badly bring some quality to the defence IMO. It's been a thorn in their side for a long time. We have more forwards than we need. But I'd concentrate on a good D'man. I think a player like ASP could make our current forwards more productive and certainly cut down on goals against. Too often our current D look like a fire drill in their own end, add to that some forwards who don't help defensively and you end up with Canucks today. This is not a draft where you go for the sexiest of the guy who has eye catching stats in junior. This a draft about building a more complate team IMO

So drafting a defensive liability will cut down on goals against?  Draft a defenceman who can actually play defence instead of ASP, who has been compared to Barrie and should be on the DND list.

Edited June 11, 2023 by King Heffy

[Herberts Vasiljevs]

3 minutes ago, Fred65 said:

When it comes to who we pick it looks like there's no real bad pick. However the canucks do need to badly bring some quality to the defence IMO. It's been a thorn in their side for a long time. We have more forwards than we need. But I'd concentrate on a good D'man. I think a player like ASP could make our current forwards more productive and certainly cut down on goals against. Too often our current D look like a fire drill in their own end, add to that some forwards who don't help defensively and you end up with Canucks today. This is not a draft where you go for the sexiest of the guy who has eye catching stats in junior. This a draft about building a more complate team IMO

I really want Sandin- Pelikka. He has very high offensive upside and has an underrated two-way game. Great low centre gravity too

 

3 minutes ago, King Heffy said:

So drafting a defensive liability will cut down on goals against?  Draft a defenceman who can actually play defence instead of ASP, who has been compared to Barrie and should be on the DND list.

No he hasn't been compared to Barrie...

[Gawdzukes]

30 minutes ago, spook007 said:

You kind of make my argument for me here... you don't have Benson, Musty or Richie there, first 2 players at least expected to go around 11ish... I'd argue that that group from 8-9 onwards are very, very close, with different positions and strengths but all with upside, and nobody knows, who will be the real stars between them in 5 years time. 
 

I still believe though, that come draft day they will pick at 11, and the player they'll pick is the highest they've got left on their board, just like they did with Lekkerimaki last year. 

Yeah I see what your saying (You like more players than I do). Musty is only at 11 in one draft though ... all the others he's low teens or 20's I think. I think Richie is down there too (not on my list at all). Since I've been going through the prospects I do find those 8-9 guys all intriguing like I said. However, my viewpoint differs as I think there are only 6-7 that clearly separate themselves so I'd not like stepping down a tier or two (draft fail). For me it's always like a trade. Go for the best player over quantity.

 

Leonard

Moore

Danielson (Tier above)

 

Reinbacher

Benson

Wood

Sale

 

are all guys I personally wouldn't risk missing on for anyone else. Certainly not Musty or Ritchie. I would be disappointed with them. If there were 3 or 4 more players I liked in that tier I'd agree with that move.

 

Totally get your point though. If our scouts have them like you do then yeah why not. We sure could use another top prospect. I wouldn't be as mad as when I watched the Juolevi draft on PVR. I threw my remote at the tv. I actually probably wouldn't be mad at all, just a little apprehensive and really hopeful.

 

I'd be way more receptive to say dropping to #15 as that's the drop off for me.

Edited June 11, 2023 by Gawdzukes

[Fred65]

1 minute ago, King Heffy said:

So drafting a defensive liability will cut down on goals against?  Draft a defenceman who can actually play defence instead of ASP, who should be on the DND list.

We don't get another Hughes but he's the nearest D'man to him. As Craig Button said at the WJC wake me up if he ever makes a mistake. His introduction to the SEL was to replace a top 6 man,  in stepped ASP and ended up with, as I'm told  ended up as the D'man with the most TOI. Coaches want to win, that say a lot to me These are fact and indeed he played the most TOI of any  D'man in the WJC

[King Heffy]

8 minutes ago, Herberts Vasiljevs said:

I really want Sandin- Pelikka. He has very high offensive upside and has an underrated two-way game. Great low centre gravity too

 

No he hasn't been compared to Barrie...

https://lastwordonsports.com/hockey/2023/04/20/axel-sandin-pellikka-scouting-report/

[Fred65]

8 minutes ago, Gawdzukes said:

Yeah I see what your saying (You like more players than I do). Musty is only at 11 in one draft though ... all the others he's low teens or 20's I think. I think Richie is down there too (not on my list at all). Since I've been going through the prospects I do find those 8-9 guys all intriguing like I said. However, my viewpoint differs as I think there are only 6-7 that clearly separate themselves so I'd not like stepping down a tier or two (draft fail). For me it's always like a trade. Go for the best player over quantity.

 

Leonard

Moore

Danielson

Reinbacher

Benson

Wood

Sale

 

are all guys I personally wouldn't risk missing on for anyone else. Certainly not Musty or Ritchie. I would be disappointed with them. If there were 3 or 4 more players I liked in that tier I'd agree with that move.

 

Totally get your point though. If our scouts have them like you do then yeah why not. We sure could use another top prospect. I wouldn't be as mad as when I watched the Juolevi draft on PVR. I threw my remote at the tv. I actually probably wouldn't be mad at all, just a little apprehensive and really hopeful.

Yeah if there was ever a perfect display of incompetance then Juolevi was it. I used to watch the guy and think what am I missing ?  after a couple of games it became obvious he couldn't pivot to the left and for a LHD that's a crucial need 

[Warhippy]

On 6/10/2023 at 8:30 AM, Off_The_Schneid! said:

 

Here's the issue with this.

 

Gilbert Brule.

 

In the lead up to the 2005 draft, Brule was being compared to Crosby and people were debating if his skill put them in the same class and whether or not Brule should go 2nd in the draft.  Obviously it didn't happen as through the latter half of the year others picked it up and Brule actually never really grew any larger and had a mediocre combine.

 

Benson reminds me so much of Brule, Schroeder etc.  All that skill but.....just something missing.

[Gawdzukes]

18 minutes ago, Fred65 said:

We don't get another Hughes but he's the nearest D'man to him. As Craig Button said at the WJC wake me up if he ever makes a mistake. His introduction to the SEL was to replace a top 6 man,  in stepped ASP and ended up with, as I'm told  ended up as the D'man with the most TOI. Coaches want to win, that say a lot to me These are fact and indeed he played the most TOI of any  D'man in the WJC

So Button was sleeping during the games. Aha his rankings make perfect sense now.  

 

Just joking.

[Gawdzukes]

11 minutes ago, Fred65 said:

Yeah if there was ever a perfect display of incompetance then Juolevi was it. I used to watch the guy and think what am I missing ?  after a couple of games it became obvious he couldn't pivot to the left and for a LHD that's a crucial need 

Yeah me too! The thing that got me was his net front presence. At that point I was really starting to notice how the best defenders never really left the front of the net open as eventually any play ends up there anyway. Lots of times it's just best to hold your ground. I knew Juolevi was fairly good offensively so I went to watch game tape from the London Knights. My goodness. I couldn't believe how many times he'd just skate away from his man and force his partner to cover up or just go aimlessly skating around in the dzone without a care or responsibility in the world. I've seen most Bantaam players with more awareness.

[Fred65]

14 minutes ago, Warhippy said:

Here's the issue with this.

 

Gilbert Brule.

 

In the lead up to the 2005 draft, Brule was being compared to Crosby and people were debating if his skill put them in the same class and whether or not Brule should go 2nd in the draft.  Obviously it didn't happen as through the latter half of the year others picked it up and Brule actually never really grew any larger and had a mediocre combine.

 

Benson reminds me so much of Brule, Schroeder etc.  All that skill but.....just something missing.

Brule was a perfect example of impatience. They put him and basically his childs body direct into the NHL. He had his ribs crushed in hsi first season... Ouch