(Rumour) Canucks Blackhawks at the draft

[Elias Pettersson]

17 minutes ago, smithers joe said:

we have no cap space for anyone until PA can move cap. i thought he was someone that could play 3c  for us?

If we make this Chicago trade then we would have the cap space to add Barbashev, which is the whole point of clearing cap.  He's not really a 3C Joe, he's better on the wing.  I would play him with Miller and Boeser.  Barbashev would be a huge upgrade on Phil DiGiuseppe...

[Elias Pettersson]

16 minutes ago, HKSR said:

2011 - 11OA = Duncan Siemens, 19OA = Oscar Klefbom ... 19OA wins

2012 - 11OA = Filip Forsberg, 19OA = Andrei Vasilevskiy... pretty close, but I give the edge to Vasilevskiy ... 19OA wins

2013 - 11OA = Samuel Morin, 19OA = Kerby Rychel... tie.  Both suck.

2014 - 11OA = Kevin Fiala, 19OA = Tony Deangelo... 11OA wins

2015 - 11OA = Lawson Crouse, 19OA = Evgeny Svechnikov... 11OA wins

2016 - 11OA = Logan Brown, 19OA = Kiefer Bellows... tie

2017 - 11OA = Gabriel Vilardi, 19OA = Josh Norris... 19OA wins

2018 - 11OA = Oliver Wahlstrom, 19OA = Jay O'Brien... 11OA wins

 

Just stopping there cuz we can't tell how the more recent prospects are gonna turn out.

So that's 3 wins for 11OA, 3 wins for 19OA, and a couple ties.

 

Pretty equal IMO.

 

PS - in 2015, 35th OA turned out to be Sebastian Aho...

 

EDIT:  I also took a quick peak at 2008, 2009, and 2010, and I'd say 19OA wins in all 3 of those years.

 

The NHL draft lottery chart shows the 19OA + the 35OA picks to be a higher value than the 11OA pick.  This data clearly proves that, especially looking at the 2015 and 2016 drafts.  You missed the 2016 draft where Jordan Kyrou was taken at 35OA.

 

So, if you add the 35OA pick then you have wins for 19OA in 2015 and 2016 as well.  So, it's 5 wins for 19OA and 3 wins for 11OA...

Edited May 24, 2023 by Elias Pettersson

[aGENT]

5 hours ago, eeeeergh said:

the cost would be losing picks. not worth it - banking cap space for tdl only makes sense if we're trying to compete and want to shove a bunch of good players into our lineup at the deadline, which we shouldnt be doing for at least 2 years anyway. 

Tell that to management...

[Guest]

52 minutes ago, Herberts Vasiljevs said:

Just how negative do people think Garland's value is?... News in Nucks Nation is slow these days. Don't ingest it, people. Jesus.

Yeah it makes no sense.  

 

He should fetch a 2nd round pick on a good day, 3rd pick on a bad day. 

[eeeeergh]

13 minutes ago, aGENT said:

Tell that to management...

i dont see them being that stupid though

nothing theyve done tells me this group would pull something like that

 

even in the dickinson cap dump that cost a 2nd rounder, they got stillman (yikes) and then managed to turn stillman into Bloom who was a 3rd rounder and still looks like he belonged as a 3rd round pick

 

this group is very stingy with their resources

 

one might point to giving up the 1st for hronek but

 

i look at it more like they turned horvat + a 2nd into hronek, raty, beauvillier + a 4th

 

which as lateral trades go is a great one

[Angry Goose]

55 minutes ago, wildwood12 said:

Trading our 11 th pick to Chicago is a repeat of the fleecing Jim Benning got from Arizona in OEL trade.

Arizona is still laughing.

I was OK w trading back before the CHI idea came up if it meant gaining an extra pick.

 

I could see guys like Danielson & Wallinder  being available.  If the Canucks scouting staff have them rated high, moving down would be a great way to add more assets.  

[JeremyCuddles]

1 hour ago, VancouverHabitant said:

Yeah I would only do this deal once it's time for our pick.  

 

Imagine if any one of Benson, Michkov, Dvorsky, or Reinbacher are still available?!? 

 

Quality over quantity for me. 

Michkov is not dropping to 11. I just can't see it. If he is I am sprinting to the podium to select him. Guy is a 1st overall pick in any other draft. If it weren't for his KHL contract nobody would question him as a top 4 guy. The idea he drops out of the top 10 sounds absolutely insane to me. Benson is an interesting name, undersized winger. I dunno. Tired of drafting. Our team is riddled with them. I won't cry if we do take him. Very good upside. But I'd rather just trade down and grab more assets if we can't take Dvorsky or Reinbacher.

[Provost]

5 hours ago, coryberg said:

Neither of them will play this season. Not going to waste assets on that.

Can you provide your citation as evidence for that?  

 

All current reports are that they haven’t retired or even ruled out next season.  Just the possibility of them coming back during the season handcuffs us in terms of offseason moves as knowing they would be on the roster.
How about Poolman’s extra year?

[Warhippy]

21 minutes ago, eeeeergh said:

i dont see them being that stupid though

nothing theyve done tells me this group would pull something like that

 

even in the dickinson cap dump that cost a 2nd rounder, they got stillman (yikes) and then managed to turn stillman into Bloom who was a 3rd rounder and still looks like he belonged as a 3rd round pick

 

this group is very stingy with their resources

 

one might point to giving up the 1st for hronek but

 

i look at it more like they turned horvat + a 2nd into hronek, raty, beauvillier + a 4th

 

which as lateral trades go is a great one

Didn't this management group trade for Gudbranson though? 

 

[Provost]

6 hours ago, SID.IS.SID.ME.IS.ME said:

Yeah, if the cap dump is toward that end of the spectrum, I’d be open to the trade.

 

Not so much if it’s Garland plus our first for 19oa and a 2nd (which is what another source suggested).

 

But hopefully all the talk about Garland needing a sweetener to move is just talk and nothing more. I hate the idea of any Garland trade that requires us to add.

 

Getting off of one of our truly bad contracts, however, would be worth moving down (and picking up a 2nd rounder).

 

Still could draft a very good prospect at 19th overall. And at that position, it would be easier to justify taking a bigger swing at one of the higher risk/reward types. Especially with a 2nd round pick added to the haul.

I agree… Garland’s lack of value is strictly due to a flat cap world where most teams don’t have money and need to prioritize higher value positions at centre and defence.  That flat cap will be ending after next season or even this summer if the expected agreement to raise the cap by an extra few million happens.

 

If we pay a premium to Chicago to get rid of Garland, they will likely be able to flip him in a year for an actual positive return.

 

He is still a very useful player and not really overpaid compared to UFAs who will be signing.   Boeser is in a similar boat, if you can move him for basically no return… fine to that.  Don’t add a sweetener to move him, that boat sailed and doesn’t make sense in the coming market conditions of a ton of extra cap space around the league.

 

That will especially be the case of Arizona relocates and becomes a high revenue team vs. a drag on league revenue.  The cap could jump remarkably high suddenly and cause cap inflation.

 

[BigTramFan]

This is not the draft to drop from 11OA to 19OA or worse.

 

We need to realise that the 2023 is projected to be an excellent draft at the top end of the draft (i.e. the first 15 picks). After that, the quality drops to similar levels of previous drafts. Here is a projection illustrating this:

 

 

 

 

These guys are projecting that picking at 11OA in 2023 is similar to picking at 6OA or 7OA from recent drafts. 

 

However, once you get out to 19OA, the 2023 draft class is rated very similarly to 2022 and 2021 draft cohorts.

[Guest]

11 minutes ago, BigTramFan said:

This is not the draft to drop from 11OA to 19OA or worse.

 

We need to realise that the 2023 is projected to be an excellent draft at the top end of the draft (i.e. the first 15 picks). After that, the quality drops to similar levels of previous drafts. Here is a projection illustrating this:

 

 

 

 

These guys are projecting that picking at 11OA in 2023 is similar to picking at 6OA or 7OA from recent drafts. 

 

However, once you get out to 19OA, the 2023 draft class is rated very similarly to 2022 and 2021 draft cohorts.

Thank you for this! 

 

I was trying to explain before that a 2nd round pick in this draft isn't worth more then a 2nd in a different draft class. 

 

The value is at the very top of this draft class compared to the rest. Pretty much 6 through 13 has the biggest surplus value. 

[HKSR]

20 minutes ago, BigTramFan said:

This is not the draft to drop from 11OA to 19OA or worse.

 

We need to realise that the 2023 is projected to be an excellent draft at the top end of the draft (i.e. the first 15 picks). After that, the quality drops to similar levels of previous drafts. Here is a projection illustrating this:

 

 

 

 

These guys are projecting that picking at 11OA in 2023 is similar to picking at 6OA or 7OA from recent drafts. 

 

However, once you get out to 19OA, the 2023 draft class is rated very similarly to 2022 and 2021 draft cohorts.

Just curious how they determined this?

 

For example, 2021 is showing a HUGE drop off from 1OA to 2OA.  Owen Power to Matty Beniers?  Really?  That's not that big of a drop off IMO.

Likewise, 2022 is showing a MASSIVE drop off from 5OA to 6OA.  5OA was Cutter Gauthier.  6OA was David Jiricek

[BigTramFan]

26 minutes ago, HKSR said:

Just curious how they determined this?

 

For example, 2021 is showing a HUGE drop off from 1OA to 2OA.  Owen Power to Matty Beniers?  Really?  That's not that big of a drop off IMO.

Likewise, 2022 is showing a MASSIVE drop off from 5OA to 6OA.  5OA was Cutter Gauthier.  6OA was David Jiricek

My understanding is that their Expected Prospect Values are based on a combination of the odds the player makes the NHL and the odds the player becomes a “Star” in the NHL [players who are projected to hit the 82.5th percentile or above in Wins Above Replacement (WAR)]. I am not advocating this assessment and I fully understand that assessments of draft prospects is a guessing game that teams do their best to win.

 

I assume the 2021 draft projections he is comparing to were made prior to the 2021 draft and were not re-calculated 2 years later, since 2-years of hindsight means it would no longer be a fair comparison between 2021 projections and 2023 projections of prospect values.

 

Read more here if you want to:

How Strong is the 2023 NHL Draft Class? - by Chace McCallum (substack.com)

[kodos]

9 hours ago, Crabcakes said:

Scott Powers is a writer for the Athletic based out of Chicago.  If that's what an "insider" is.  Chicago's version of Drance.  Surely he's trying hard to drum up some interest in the team he covers as it is very quiet until the draft 

Scott Powers is easily the most connected Blackhawks beat writer.

[JeremyCuddles]

2 hours ago, BigTramFan said:

This is not the draft to drop from 11OA to 19OA or worse.

 

We need to realise that the 2023 is projected to be an excellent draft at the top end of the draft (i.e. the first 15 picks). After that, the quality drops to similar levels of previous drafts. Here is a projection illustrating this:

 

 

 

 

These guys are projecting that picking at 11OA in 2023 is similar to picking at 6OA or 7OA from recent drafts. 

 

However, once you get out to 19OA, the 2023 draft class is rated very similarly to 2022 and 2021 draft cohorts.

2014 was supposed to be a bad draft too. It looks like one of the better ones in recent memory. I am not saying this'll be a great draft. But at the end of the day we're judging 17 and 18 year old kids as if we know their absolute futures. I am not gonna base my entire decision on trading down based on someone's crystal ball. 

 

With that said, there are some really interesting names at 11. We're kind of in a spot where we're hoping other teams make ballsy picks. Who is available at 11 means more to me than some random graph trying to predict the future.

[King Heffy]

3 hours ago, Coconuts said:

I'm just not keen on longer term dead cap, cap going up or not. But yeah, a buyout is a poison pill with that contract any way you spin it. I'd sooner try to keep him and see if he can be more serviceable with a better structured team and back end. 

Any GM who even considers a buyout with that much dead cap is unfit for any job in hockey ops and needs to be fired on the spot.  I want Rutherford and Allvin gone, but the long-term damage they would do with a move that stupid is too high of a price even if it drives them out of town.

[Jaimito]

 

 

 

[stawns]

4 hours ago, D-Money said:

I’m still in favour of an OEL buyout - and this is coming from someone who appreciated his game in the first year here.
 

But I think he’s easily replaceable with the cap savings we’d get for the first 4 years (minimum $2.83M), and the extra savings in the first 2 years give us a lot of wiggle room. As for the last 4 years (with the $2.42M penalty) the cap is going up a lot, so those will be much easier to plan for and absorb.

He is not easily replaceable, nor will it be a cheap replacement 

[Junkyard Dog]

I don’t mind trading down if we can dump Boeser and get a 2nd/or equivalent prospect on top of 19th. 
 

Chicago has a pretty nice prospect pool and they got Colton Dach who’s a big C playing in the WHL, going to the memorial Cup. Brother of Kirby Dach. Not their best prospect but a quality one who’s a former 2nd round pick in 2021 and is closer in development than anyone we’d draft with the supposed 2nd. 
 

Boeser would free up the most cap besides OEL and Myers is gone in a year so it would help us moving forward. 

Edited May 25, 2023 by Junkyard Dog