2016 Draft Thread | 7

[Bleach Clean]

I guess I'll put this here:

1. Laine
2. Matthews
------
3. Puljujärvi
------
4. Dubois
5. Tkachuk
6. Nylander
------
7. Bean
8. Brown
9. Jost
10. Chychrun
------
11. Keller
12. Juolevi
13. Sergachev
14. Fabbro
15. Jones
16.McLeod
------

Nice list. It's interesting to see when list veers or 'breaks' to include different prospects. This provides some insight as to what the poster was thinking about when making it. So a few questions on the differences in your list:


1. Laine over Matthews is popping up in lists. Not as outlandish as once thought. I wouldn't take him #1, but I can understand the rationale in banking on pure talent (Laine).

2. What do you think Pulju becomes long-term? I've heard a 1C projection thrown out there. I'm not a fan in that I find him very difficult to project.

3. Bean as the best Dman: Do you see him becoming a #1D? If so, why?

4. I like the risk taken with projecting Brown into the top10. There's a lot to work with there, even if I do think he has heavy feet and is very inconsistent. Better offensive upside than Jost?

 

[Horse McHindu]

Pierre Luc Dubois seems like exactly the type of guy that Benning would draft

Pierre Luc Dubois seems like exactly the type of guy that Benning would draft:

http://www.draftsite.com/nhl/player/pierre-luc-dubois/23450/

-Strong on the cycle
-Terrific competitor
-Competes well in all 3 zones
-Great vision and a real nice set of hands and is dedicated at improvement in every phase.
-He is a high character individual whose star is beginning to shine brighter as the year goes on. One of the safest picks on the board.

I don't know about you guys, but I'm not having the greatest luck with the NHL Tankathon simulator. I usually end up selecting at #5........meaning, that we'd (I?) would be looking at Dubois or Son of Keith.

If we do fall under this predicament, I think we should look at Dubois.

Dubois may not end up being a true #1 franchise center, but perhaps him and Horvat could end up being similar to Bergeron/krejicki, in that, both guys are 'very very good' Top 6 centers', one of which being close to franchise level.

With Dubois and Horvat being a 1-2 punch, we'd have two very gritty and tenacious centers with excellent two-way ability.

 

[Quark]

Pierre Luc Dubois seems like exactly the type of guy that Benning would draft:

http://www.draftsite.com/nhl/player/pierre-luc-dubois/23450/

-Strong on the cycle
-Terrific competitor
-Competes well in all 3 zones
-Great vision and a real nice set of hands and is dedicated at improvement in every phase.
-He is a high character individual whose star is beginning to shine brighter as the year goes on. One of the safest picks on the board.

I don't know about you guys, but I'm not having the greatest luck with the NHL Tankathon simulator. I usually end up selecting at #5........meaning, that we'd (I?) would be looking at Dubois or Son of Keith.

If we do fall under this predicament, I think we should look at Dubois.

Dubois may not end up being a true #1 franchise center, but perhaps him and Horvat could end up being similar to Bergeron/krejicki, in that, both guys are 'very very good' Top 6 centers', one of which being close to franchise level.

With Dubois and Horvat being a 1-2 punch, we'd have two very gritty and tenacious centers with excellent two-way ability.

I feel like you always gotta take the centre when they are close in skill, having the 1-2 punch of Dubois/Horvat down the middle in the future sets us up a lot more then adding a really skilled winger does.

 

[Horse McHindu]

I feel like you always gotta take the centre when they are close in skill, having the 1-2 punch of Dubois/Horvat down the middle in the future sets us up a lot more then adding a really skilled winger does.

Agreed completely.

If we're looking at #5 and Dubois is still available, I hope Benning selects him. There might be a temptation on Benning's part to draft by position at #5, or even trade away the pick due to the Big 3 no longer being available, but the more I watch/study Dubois, the more I like what I see, and the more I like the idea of him and Horvat being our 1-2 pivots. In terms of tenacity, two-way games, and grit, a duo of Dubois-Horvat could become similar to Bergeron-Krejicki. You add Sutter into that mix at #3, and you now have some pretty solid depth down the middle.

If McCann elevates his game, you can also move Dubois back to his natural LW position, or even have McCann play LW.

My heart is obviously set on the Top 3, but Dubois could be one helluva consolation prize at #5.

 

[clunk]

Love Dubois. If we're out of the top 3 and he's still on the board, you take him imo. Prototypical 'Benning guy' for sure. As much as we need high end elite talent like Matthews, I do think some aspects of Dubois' game are bordering on elite, and he could turn into a 1C for sure.

Let's not forget about McCann, though. He could very well be a 2C or 1C. I think having a team full of guys that can play a great two way game and also put up points is good, but you're always going to need some snipers... Would be very nice having two top 10 picks in this draft, but that isn't realistic. If we added Dubois and Nylander, for example... There's no way we don't have a future top 6 completed with Horvat, Boeser, Dubois, McCann, Virtanen, Nylander, Baertschi, Rodin, and Gaunce in the mix.

We need top end elite desperately, but we could I think get away with having a lot of "very good players" rather than one or two 'elite'... Though I'd like to watch some superstars in Vancouver. The whole prospect of our future team is pretty exciting, honestly.. I just hope we can add a top 3 talent.. That would be incredible, and we'd be able to slot them right in to our top 6 without worry... Though #4 or #5 is not the end of the world.

 

[Bgav]

Mathews/Laine
Puj
Dubois
Chyk
Nylander/Tkachuk

 

[Horse McHindu]

Love Dubois. If we're out of the top 3 and he's still on the board, you take him imo. Prototypical 'Benning guy' for sure. As much as we need high end elite talent like Matthews, I do think some aspects of Dubois' game are bordering on elite, and he could turn into a 1C for sure.

Completely agree. I especially agree with your last statement. There's something about Dubois that is very 'Bergeron-esque' in my opinion.

Let's not forget about McCann, though. He could very well be a 2C or 1C. I think having a team full of guys that can play a great two way game and also put up points is good, but you're always going to need some snipers... Would be very nice having two top 10 picks in this draft, but that isn't realistic. If we added Dubois and Nylander, for example... There's no way we don't have a future top 6 completed with Horvat, Boeser, Dubois, McCann, Virtanen, Nylander, Baertschi, Rodin, and Gaunce in the mix.

Completely agree once again. Keep in mind that Dubois is actually a natural LW'er and so if McCann elevated his game, you could always shift Dubois to wing.

We need top end elite desperately, but we could I think get away with having a lot of "very good players" rather than one or two 'elite'... Though I'd like to watch some superstars in Vancouver. The whole prospect of our future team is pretty exciting, honestly.. I just hope we can add a top 3 talent.. That would be incredible, and we'd be able to slot them right in to our top 6 without worry... Though #4 or #5 is not the end of the world.

Agreed once again. I know Benning has a boatloat of detractors on here for some of the "questionable" trades and signings he's made (not 'questionable' to me as I've been a huge Benning fan since Day 1), but no one can deny some of the picks he's made through the draft.

Demko and Boeser, flat out, look like studs.

 

[Horse McHindu]

Mathews/Laine
Puj
Dubois
Chyk
Nylander/Tkachuk

I've said it before and I'll say it again.

If the Canucks have some lottery luck (i.e. the exact opposite of my experience on Tankathon where I continuously end up at #5), and we end up drafting Laine or Puljiujarvi, then I think the Canucks should do everything under the sun to sign Stamkos. Period. Offer him the Toews deal....maybe even more.

Stamkos and one of Laine/Puljiujarvi anchoring the top line, the twins pivoting the 2nd, and Horvat and Sutter manning the 3rd would be formidable. The freed up cap space from Miller and Burrows can be used to bring in a 'stud' D-man to complement Edler, Tanev, and Hutton.

(Laine/???)-Stamkos-(Puljiujarvi/???)
Sedin-Sedin-Hansen
Baertschi-Horvat-Sutter
Virtanen-McCann-Boeser

Hutton-(stud RHD.....money from Miller/Burrows invested here)
Edler-Tanev
Pedan-Tryamkin

Markstrom
Demko/VeteranBackUp

 

[clunk]

Completely agree. I especially agree with your last statement. There's something about Dubois that is very 'Bergeron-esque' in my opinion.

I can agree with that assessment. He does look similar to how Bergeron plays from the games and highlights I've seen of him. 200 foot game, can drive the net with authority, and has high IQ for the game. We'd have two Bergeron types in Dubois and Horvat... Would be nice, haha. Though I think Bergeron is a better skater than both.

Completely agree once again. Keep in mind that Dubois is actually a natural LW'er and so if McCann elevated his game, you could always shift Dubois to wing.

True that. Just depends on how either of them develop and their body types etc at the end of it... one might have a bigger frame than the other and be more suited to wing by the time they're 22/23 for example. You never know. Either could work on LW.

Agreed once again. I know Benning has a boatloat of detractors on here for some of the "questionable" trades and signings he's made (not 'questionable' to me as I've been a huge Benning fan since Day 1), but no one can deny some of the picks he's made through the draft.

Demko and Boeser, flat out, look like studs.

I'm not a very big Benning fan at all, and not a fan of a lot of his moves, but so far, his drafting is looking pretty decent. Was not impressed with Virtanen over Nylander and Ehlers when we desperately needed elite skill, but I like the McCann, Boeser, Tryamkin and Demko picks a lot... Still remains to be seen if they're going to be high quality NHLers though.

Honestly, I don't mind the guy as a person, and I think he's got some knowledge in that brain of his, and hopefully he just picks BPA and doesn't let Weisbrod influence his decision at all with his first. If he does that, he'll be fine this draft in my mind.

Anyways, we all want the same thing: A contender in Vancouver again, and hopefully Benning can put one together... But some of his blunders haven't instilled a lot of faith in the majority of the fanbase... It's up to him to redeem himself.

 

[Shareefruck]

Pierre Luc Dubois seems like exactly the type of guy that Benning would draft:

http://www.draftsite.com/nhl/player/pierre-luc-dubois/23450/

-Strong on the cycle
-Terrific competitor
-Competes well in all 3 zones
-Great vision and a real nice set of hands and is dedicated at improvement in every phase.
-He is a high character individual whose star is beginning to shine brighter as the year goes on. One of the safest picks on the board.

I don't know about you guys, but I'm not having the greatest luck with the NHL Tankathon simulator. I usually end up selecting at #5........meaning, that we'd (I?) would be looking at Dubois or Son of Keith.

If we do fall under this predicament, I think we should look at Dubois.

Dubois may not end up being a true #1 franchise center, but perhaps him and Horvat could end up being similar to Bergeron/krejicki, in that, both guys are 'very very good' Top 6 centers', one of which being close to franchise level.

With Dubois and Horvat being a 1-2 punch, we'd have two very gritty and tenacious centers with excellent two-way ability.

This whole narrative that Boston didn't have a legitimate number 1 center when they won the cup is absolutely ridiculous IMO. If anything, they had two legitimate number one centers. Bergeron is one of the absolute best players in the league and is franchise-level.

 

[Shareefruck]

I've said it before and I'll say it again.

If the Canucks have some lottery luck (i.e. the exact opposite of my experience on Tankathon where I continuously end up at #5), and we end up drafting Laine or Puljiujarvi, then I think the Canucks should do everything under the sun to sign Stamkos. Period. Offer him the Toews deal....maybe even more.

Stamkos and one of Laine/Puljiujarvi anchoring the top line, the twins pivoting the 2nd, and Horvat and Sutter manning the 3rd would be formidable. The freed up cap space from Miller and Burrows can be used to bring in a 'stud' D-man to complement Edler, Tanev, and Hutton.

(Laine/???)-Stamkos-(Puljiujarvi/???)
Sedin-Sedin-Hansen
Baertschi-Horvat-Sutter
Virtanen-McCann-Boeser

Hutton-(stud RHD.....money from Miller/Burrows invested here)
Edler-Tanev
Pedan-Tryamkin

Markstrom
Demko/VeteranBackUp

A stud d-man isn't easy to find even if you have all the cap space in the world. I doubt you could reasonably swing Stamkos in addition to magically finding a stud d-man without trading anyone significant.

I think the closest thing to a "compete now" scenario that's within the realm of possibility is landing Matthews, signing a guy like Lucic and trading for a guy like Hamonic. I'm not sure the latter two are very wise, though.

 

[Kickassguy]

Interesting. (The Sat in question is Satiar Shah, 1040 producer.)

 

[Shareefruck]

The higher we pick, the lesser the chance of Benning going off the board.

 

[polarbearcub]

Interesting. (The Sat in question is Satiar Shah, 1040 producer.)

I could see the canucks taking juolevi at 6

 

[fancouver]

Dubois as a consolation prize would be pretty epic.

xxxx -Dubois - Boeser
Baertschi - Horvat - xxxx

If that happens and we don't trade away McCann, I definitely see him moving to left wing.

 

[just22]

Interesting. (The Sat in question is Satiar Shah, 1040 producer.)

5th will be interesting, with the choice likely being Dubois or Tkachuk, but I think if we're 6th it will certainly be a defenceman.

 

[WetcoastOrca]

The higher we pick, the lesser the chance of Benning going off the board.

I'm not really sure that there is an off the board choice at 6th. Even 5th is all over the map right now.

 

[ahmon]

Frankly, I don't see Dubois as a C at all.

He doesn't really distribute the puck that well. Doesn't have tunnel vision but I don't project him to be a high end playmaker.

Instead his bread and butter is to bring the puck to the net from the boards. IE he plays like a "power" forward.

Big, long reach, strong, hard shot. Skates very well for someone his size. IMO his upside is that of a power winger.

I think that is why Button said he could see a team taking Logan Brown at #4.

Logan Brown doesn't have Dubois intensity or shot - worse mobility too, but he has IMO better vision/passing. Brown is more of your traditional puck distributing C.

A 6'6 C who can pass might be pretty tempting even though he is less polished.

Personally I think Dubois is in the same tier as the Tkachuk, Keller, Jost, Brown group.

 

[Kickassguy]

I'm not really sure that there is an off the board choice at 6th. Even 5th is all over the map right now.

McKenzie is pretty firm in his conviction that the top 6 in this draft are entrenched as forwards.

Matthews, Laine, Puljujarvi, Dubois, Tkachuk, and Nylander.

 

[banme*]

Interesting. (The Sat in question is Satiar Shah, 1040 producer.)

Interesting if true, wonder what the rationale is. I could see the "tools but no toolbox" argument, except that I get a stronger impression of that from Sergachev, and Luca Sbisa is in our top 6.

 

[fancouver]

Interesting if true, wonder what the rationale is. I could see the "tools but no toolbox" argument, except that I get a stronger impression of that from Sergachev, and Luca Sbisa is in our top 6.

I really don't think the Canucks should draft a defenceman in the first round. We can't go lower than 6th and there are some really good forwards available.

Laine, Matthews, Puljujarvi, Dubois, Tkachuk, Nylander are going to be 1st line or elite second line talent.

Right now, we have Boeser who looks like a 1st line talent, but Virtanen is looking more like a top 9 option and McCann really needs to work on his overall game in the AHL. So after Boeser, we need another blue chip forward.

 

[Cupless44]

I could see the canucks taking juolevi at 6

All the more reason we need to stay in top 4

 

[Cupless44]

I really don't think the Canucks should draft a defenceman in the first round. We can't go lower than 6th and there are some really good forwards available.

Laine, Matthews, Puljujarvi, Dubois, Tkachuk, Nylander are going to be 1st line or elite second line talent.

Right now, we have Boeser who looks like a 1st line talent, but Virtanen is looking more like a top 9 option and McCann really needs to work on his overall game in the AHL. So after Boeser, we need another blue chip forward.

The top 5 forwards are better than any defenceman in this draft. Benning is not in a position with this roster where he can ignore BPA with a high draft pick.

 

[polarbearcub]

The top 5 forwards are better than any defenceman in this draft. Benning is not in a position with this roster where he can ignore BPA with a high draft pick.

Agreed. We were the lowest scoring team in the league.. With the emergence of Hutton and potential of tryamkin , we need offense producers.

 

[docbenton]

Re: Laine vs. Matthews, I've thought Laine was better for a while now, the only question was how much better. I'm fairly certain now that he's better by enough of a margin to take him over Matthews even though he's a winger. Incredible combination of skill, size, speed and competitiveness. Could be the best player in the league even with McDavid, who simply doesn't have his physical powers. He is just humongous.

Matthews is still #2 over Puljujarvi though.