Aquilini was livid that Canucks picked Juolevi over Tkachuk

[Ghostsof1915]

6 hours ago, iinatcc said:

Which most analysts tell you, that you never do in the 1st round.

 

Problem is BPA is not always the right choice either. Because not everyone agrees who's the best pick based on the players available.

Usually Defencemen, as long as they turn out decent usually can net you a pick and prospect later on.

Normally it's never a bad thing to draft a centre or a defenceman.

[PhillipBlunt]

I'd have been just as pissed knowing that mental defect didn't pick Sergachev or McAvoy. 

Edited May 24, 2023 by PhillipBlunt

[Kevin Biestra]

6 hours ago, Ghostsof1915 said:

Problem is BPA is not always the right choice either. Because not everyone agrees who's the best pick based on the players available.

Usually Defencemen, as long as they turn out decent usually can net you a pick and prospect later on.

Normally it's never a bad thing to draft a centre or a defenceman.

 

That is true but Tkachuk at #5 was about as close as I've seen to consensus at a spot past the top two or three and one of the biggest Scooby Doo "ruhhh???" reactions I've had when the GM walked up to the stage and picked someone else.

 

The only other pick that obvious past the top three that comes to mind is Mike Ricci at #4 in 1990...and that's just because there was uncertainty about whether he would come to the NHL at all and all of that and he still went next.

 

 

Edited May 24, 2023 by Kevin Biestra

[Caboose]

14 hours ago, Elias Pettersson said:

I'm sure he was happy when they drafted Petey and Hughes the following two years.  At the end of the day, we probably aren't getting Petey if Tkachuk is in the lineup in the 2016-2017 season...

Its not like Tkachuck isn't miles better than Pettersson anyway lol, I don't really understand this? One of them is golfing and the other is leading their team to the Stanley Cup Final. No one in their right mind would take Pettersson.

[Kevin Biestra]

2 minutes ago, Caboose said:

Its not like Tkachuck isn't miles better than Pettersson anyway lol, I don't really understand this? One of them is golfing and the other is leading their team to the Stanley Cup Final. No one in their right mind would take Pettersson.

 

Pettersson is great and I'm thrilled to have him but I would trade him for Tkachuk PLUS whoever we would have drafted in Petey's year.  Tkachuk is already achieving the best the Canucks ever have in their history and there is still a lot more to come.  Would we not call it a resounding success if Pettersson manages to get to one Cup final as a Canuck?  I would.

 

[CanuckFan1123]

This is a dumb article and a dumber time for the article. This is literally out as soon as Tkachuk is about to go to the SCF with the panthers. Where was this article last offseason or any time after Benning was fired. This is nothing more than clickbait to rile us up as the player we could have drafted is cup bound and Juolevi is in the minors. 
 

Aquilini 100% had to know who was on our draft board. He’s a very hands on owner and I’m sure if he felt Tkachuk was 100% the best pick at the time he would have ensured his GM made a different pick. You don’t walk into a top 5 draft pick and say “oh this is fine, I’ll let the GM draft a project dman over what could be a game changing forward.” Dumb article and frankly I don’t buy it. 

[NewbieCanuckFan]

25 minutes ago, Kevin Biestra said:

 

Pettersson is great and I'm thrilled to have him but I would trade him for Tkachuk PLUS whoever we would have drafted in Petey's year.  Tkachuk is already achieving the best the Canucks ever have in their history and there is still a lot more to come.  Would we not call it a resounding success if Pettersson manages to get to one Cup final as a Canuck?  I would.

 

To be fair, Marcel Dionne never got into a Cup Finals.  Some things are beyond the control of a single player (heh, probably one of the few times you ever saw any humility from Bobby Clarke when describing Marcel Dionne's failure to 'win the Cup').

[Ghostsof1915]

4 minutes ago, NewbieCanuckFan said:

To be fair, Marcel Dionne never got into a Cup Finals.  Some things are beyond the control of a single player (heh, probably one of the few times you ever saw any humility from Bobby Clarke when describing Marcel Dionne's failure to 'win the Cup').

Shows how much respect other NHL'ers had playing against Dionne.

[Ghostsof1915]

14 minutes ago, CanuckFan1123 said:

This is a dumb article and a dumber time for the article. This is literally out as soon as Tkachuk is about to go to the SCF with the panthers. Where was this article last offseason or any time after Benning was fired. This is nothing more than clickbait to rile us up as the player we could have drafted is cup bound and Juolevi is in the minors. 
 

Aquilini 100% had to know who was on our draft board. He’s a very hands on owner and I’m sure if he felt Tkachuk was 100% the best pick at the time he would have ensured his GM made a different pick. You don’t walk into a top 5 draft pick and say “oh this is fine, I’ll let the GM draft a project dman over what could be a game changing forward.” Dumb article and frankly I don’t buy it. 

Because he's a meddling owner and doesn't want any of the meddling kids (Aka GM's) making bad choices right? Yeah sounds like spin doctoring.

[Mando27]

Aqua trying to deflect the blame from the team he built.

[Warhippy]

Why are we even talking about this?

 

We SHOULD be talking about the real crime of the organization.

 

Nedved over Jagr.

 

EVERYONE knew.  I remember.  EVERYONE knew that jagr was money in the bank.  Jagr was the pick.  But there  was "fears" and he wasn't chosen because Nedved was safer

 

But people still wanna sit here and moan that Tkachuk was the better pick over Juolevi and somehow some way Franky Aqua was not being informed at the moment of the pick.  We know better.

 

Let's move on shall we, lest I bring up the Neely fiasco, Linden over Roenick/Selanne/Brind'amour, or...dare I mention it; drafting Herter and his whole 1 point over Lidstrom and Federov in 89.  What could have been.

 

Aint hindsight great?  Isn't it?  guys?  Hey guys?

[Ghostsof1915]

7 minutes ago, Warhippy said:

Why are we even talking about this?

 

We SHOULD be talking about the real crime of the organization.

 

Nedved over Jagr.

 

EVERYONE knew.  I remember.  EVERYONE knew that jagr was money in the bank.  Jagr was the pick.  But there  was "fears" and he wasn't chosen because Nedved was safer

 

But people still wanna sit here and moan that Tkachuk was the better pick over Juolevi and somehow some way Franky Aqua was not being informed at the moment of the pick.  We know better.

 

Let's move on shall we, lest I bring up the Neely fiasco, Linden over Roenick/Selanne/Brind'amour, or...dare I mention it; drafting Herter and his whole 1 point over Lidstrom and Federov in 89.  What could have been.

 

Aint hindsight great?  Isn't it?  guys?  Hey guys?

Before I saw Jagr play. I was not a fan of Nedved. Yeah he did great in the WHL. He was always, how do you say it? Aloof? Didn't seem to be much of a team guy. I would have been happy with Sydor to be honest let alone Jagr. No one talks about we passed on Tkachuk or Brodeur 1990 for Shawn Antoski. As much as I revere Pat Quinn. He could have set this team up for a dynasty. Well he got Gino and Slegr at least. It seems so long ago we had 12 rounds in the draft.

Edited May 24, 2023 by Ghostsof1915

[RU SERIOUS]

3 minutes ago, Ghostsof1915 said:

Before I saw Jagr play. I was not a fan of Nedved. Yeah he did great in the WHL. He was always, how do you say it? Aloof? Didn't seem to be much of a team guy. I would have been happy with Sydor to be honest let alone Jagr. No one talks about we passed on Tkachuk or Brodeur 1990 for Shawn Antoski.

or the many others we passed on.........  Enough said!

[NewbieCanuckFan]

8 minutes ago, Warhippy said:

Why are we even talking about this?

 

We SHOULD be talking about the real crime of the organization.

 

Nedved over Jagr.

 

EVERYONE knew.  I remember.  EVERYONE knew that jagr was money in the bank.  Jagr was the pick.  But there  was "fears" and he wasn't chosen because Nedved was safer

 

But people still wanna sit here and moan that Tkachuk was the better pick over Juolevi and somehow some way Franky Aqua was not being informed at the moment of the pick.  We know better.

 

Let's move on shall we, lest I bring up the Neely fiasco, Linden over Roenick/Selanne/Brind'amour, or...dare I mention it; drafting Herter and his whole 1 point over Lidstrom and Federov in 89.  What could have been.

 

Aint hindsight great?  Isn't it?  guys?  Hey guys?

Damn....Detroit were hitting pretty much everything out of the park that draft year.  4 out of their first 6 picks played over 1000 games at the NHL (each heh).  And it's not like they have multiple 1st round selections (or really high picks).  And one of their first 6 picks that didn't play 1000 NHL games still ended up with over 600 NHL games under his belt.  Konstantinov was likely a 'hope & a prayer' selection in the 11th round to be fair.

[NewbieCanuckFan]

7 minutes ago, Ghostsof1915 said:

Before I saw Jagr play. I was not a fan of Nedved. Yeah he did great in the WHL. He was always, how do you say it? Aloof? Didn't seem to be much of a team guy. I would have been happy with Sydor to be honest let alone Jagr. No one talks about we passed on Tkachuk or Brodeur 1990 for Shawn Antoski.

I'll play the 'devils advocate' a bit....the WHL isn't/hasn't been a league for creampuffs by & large.  I think that must've had some influence on the selection.  That and the one didn't know when players on the other side of the Iron Curtain (recently fallen *then*) when actually be available if ever.

[Warhippy]

6 minutes ago, Ghostsof1915 said:

Before I saw Jagr play. I was not a fan of Nedved. Yeah he did great in the WHL. He was always, how do you say it? Aloof? Didn't seem to be much of a team guy. I would have been happy with Sydor to be honest let alone Jagr. No one talks about we passed on Tkachuk or Brodeur 1990 for Shawn Antoski. As much as I revere Pat Quinn. He could have set this team up for a dynasty. Well he got Gino and Slegr at least. It seems so long ago we had 12 rounds in the draft.

I am old enough to remember sitting with other people as teenagers talking about 88/89 and 90 and what should have could have been.  People moaning about Tkachuk still are not old enough to remember how bad the ball was dropped in the past numerous times.  The canucks had been scouting Bure as early as 1989 and were apparently going to take him no matter what including creating the story that he was not going to come to the NA markets drafting russians or players from the federation and Europe made a TON of sense but never happened.

 

They could have had Jagr but instead opted for the safer nedved.  didn't want fedorov or Lidstrom, Tkachuk and Brodeur (that one stung because we needed a goalie badly and everyone kept mentioning him) so ya, it was literally 5 or 6 straight years of blown opportunities and missed draft picks from about 1986 through 1993. 

 

When you look at all the misses (no disrespect to Linden) over that stretch it's insane how good of a team we could have had through the 90s.  Easily rivalling the Wings as the best over a decade

 

But people wanna moan about Tkachuk and Juolevi

[RU SERIOUS]

7 hours ago, Rubik said:

wasn't you who said in the Devils - Hurricanes thread that you can't win with minions (Jack Hughes, Hischier, Bratt, Mercer) in the playoffs? Pettersson's regular season numbers are always gonna be nice and all, but who knows if he'll be able to replicate his bubble performance. While Tkatchuk has just proven that he's built for playoff hockey.

Very bang on - what you said about being built for playoffs.   That is the primary difference between the two.  K-Chuck is built for a grinding "Take No Prisoners" Stanley Cup Playoff Hockey on small N.A. ice , while EP40 is built for a low contact, no fighting friendly Olympic Tourney on a Euro sized Mega-Rink where he can skate away from contact and heated arguments. 

 

 Big difference !

Edited May 24, 2023 by RU SERIOUS

[Warhippy]

8 minutes ago, NewbieCanuckFan said:

Damn....Detroit were hitting pretty much everything out of the park that draft year.  4 out of their first 6 picks played over 1000 games at the NHL (each heh).  And it's not like they have multiple 1st round selections (or really high picks).  And one of their first 6 picks that didn't play 1000 NHL games still ended up with over 600 NHL games under his belt.  Konstantinov was likely a 'hope & a prayer' selection in the 11th round to be fair.

When you look at how Detroit drafted from 1986 through 1994 and the fact they kept their players it's kind of insane how stacked they were based off of their in house.  In the same time, the only hits we really cast off were Peca and Walker.

[Kevin Biestra]

43 minutes ago, CanuckFan1123 said:

This is a dumb article and a dumber time for the article. This is literally out as soon as Tkachuk is about to go to the SCF with the panthers. Where was this article last offseason or any time after Benning was fired. This is nothing more than clickbait to rile us up as the player we could have drafted is cup bound and Juolevi is in the minors. 
 

Aquilini 100% had to know who was on our draft board. He’s a very hands on owner and I’m sure if he felt Tkachuk was 100% the best pick at the time he would have ensured his GM made a different pick. You don’t walk into a top 5 draft pick and say “oh this is fine, I’ll let the GM draft a project dman over what could be a game changing forward.” Dumb article and frankly I don’t buy it. 

 

Aquilini may have been hands on in terms of general strategy but micromanaging actual draft picks would be some of the most intrusive stuff I have ever heard of from an owner in terms of hockey operations.  I think the only way you are going to see the GM fired the next day or the team owner running onto the stage and grabbing the microphone away is if the GM walks up and doesn't pick Mario Lemieux, Connor McDavid, Sidney Crosby etc.

 

And Matt Tkachuk is obviously more topical right now than he ever has been...and maybe ever will be.  Guy has turned into Mr. Overtime in the playoffs the likes of which we have rarely seen before.

[Kevin Biestra]

2 hours ago, Warhippy said:

I am old enough to remember sitting with other people as teenagers talking about 88/89 and 90 and what should have could have been.  People moaning about Tkachuk still are not old enough to remember how bad the ball was dropped in the past numerous times.  The canucks had been scouting Bure as early as 1989 and were apparently going to take him no matter what including creating the story that he was not going to come to the NA markets drafting russians or players from the federation and Europe made a TON of sense but never happened.

 

They could have had Jagr but instead opted for the safer nedved.  didn't want fedorov or Lidstrom, Tkachuk and Brodeur (that one stung because we needed a goalie badly and everyone kept mentioning him) so ya, it was literally 5 or 6 straight years of blown opportunities and missed draft picks from about 1986 through 1993. 

 

When you look at all the misses (no disrespect to Linden) over that stretch it's insane how good of a team we could have had through the 90s.  Easily rivalling the Wings as the best over a decade

 

But people wanna moan about Tkachuk and Juolevi

 

The Canucks dropped the ball badly at the draft at various points in the 80s and 90s...but I don't think those were significant cases of it happening.

 

The first four picks in 1990 - Nolan, Nedved, Primeau and Ricci - were basically a pick 'em.  Any one of them could have gone first to fourth and when Ricci was left at fourth he was the obvious choice.  Jagr was a bit of a wild card as his willingness to play ball like a normal draft pick was in question.  If I remember right Jagr was considered a sort of a separate animal from "orthodox" draft picks and the first four were considered sure things with no risk at all.  And it was pretty funny when all three of the top picks had some of the worst rookie years I've ever seen...all 10 to 20 points for the season if I remember right.  But they all developed into players worthy of their draft positions in the long run.

 

The Canucks also weren't in dire need of a goalie in 1990 at all.  Kirk McLean was literally one year removed from being a Vezina finalist, and would be a Vezina finalist again in two years or so.

 

Although to be fair to your claim they could have used an up and coming top NHL starter in the system for the years after McLean.  They did have McLean and Troy Gamble in 1990 / 1991 and that was a duo that should have had them set for the foreseeable future.  Gamble was looking really good until his concussion problems, good enough that he briefly unseated McLean as the starter in 1991.

 

 

Edited May 24, 2023 by Kevin Biestra