2016 Draft Thread | 7
- Thread starter mrmyheadhurts
- Start date
- Status
I'd be a bit disappointed with Juolevi before either Tkachuk or Dubois.
If Arizona is at 2, you take that and run. At 3 it is closer, but you still have to do it. At 4 it becomes more of an open question, I think.
D0ctorCool
Registered User
That's a pretty big admission to make. Seems like you can damn near flesh out the Canucks draft board. Do you guys know of any other GM's who reveal this much info pre-draft?
Soups On
Registered User
- Apr 27, 2012
- 4,058
- 2,533
Easily. Laine + Strome >>> Matthews + nothing. 7th overall + Strome for Matthews? I'd have to think long and hard about that.
Shareefruck
Registered User
Easily, even if we were picking 3rd.
Essentially two franchise forwards for the price of one.
TheBleedingEdge
Registered User
- Feb 13, 2012
- 381
- 0
It takes away any leverage he may have in trades, he does this all the time.
This trade deadline bothers me, because of the Lack situation where it seems like he was baited by the Sharks GM about having a 2nd round pick for Lack. Bait and switched at the last second for the Sharks 3rd and then Benning has to resort for Carolinas third + seventh this year. This year he should have known better to seal the deal earlier.
Lesson not learned, again he waits too long to get anything done and comes out empty handed.
Trades scare me just as much, their pro scouting is HORRIBLE, at least he can draft very well IMO. It is our only bright spot.
PS. One trade for Baertschi does not absolve the management team.
Horrorshow
Registered User
- Jun 1, 2009
- 1,180
- 35
hahahahaha.
Corroborating this (and everything else they've said this year) with BMac's report from earlier this week, I'd speculate they have Tkachuk ranked at 4 and Juolevi at 5 on their list. It's a bit disappointing that we haven't really heard a peep about Dubois being on the Canucks radar, but that could also be because our local media has probably never heard of the kid.
Personally, I really like Juolevi, so I'd be just fine with him if we end up picking at 5/6. I know a lot of people would find it hard to swallow passing a forward with Dubois' potential for a "safe" defender, but it could be a lot worse. As "unexciting" as that pick would be, I see the wisdom in accumulating strong prospects who play a translatable pro game, especially in an area that is an organizational weakness.
But let's just hope that point is moot at we pick in the top 3.
GetFocht
Indestructible
- Jun 11, 2013
- 9,077
- 4,373
This sounds like how everyone was so sure that Benning would pick Brandon Carlo. I'm sure Juolevi is their top rate defence man but probably not at 6th, and highly doubt is in their top 5.
Benning is a good drafter, I fully trust him in this department to make the right choice
Benning is a good drafter, I fully trust him in this department to make the right choice
thefeebster
Registered User
I wouldn't rule him out at 33, since he has the Russian factor (rather strongly, according to the main forums, I think I read he wants to remain in Russia for his whole development and dreams of playing for a KHL team). And the Melodonium scandal probably didn't help his draft stock either.
I liked him at the WJAC though, a good two way centerman who showed net drive and hands in tight. I didn't find him lanky, he looked thicker than his 174lb listing.
Probably less hype than he deserves, but a risky player due to the Russian factor. I'd much prefer those that come to NA to develop like a Provorov for instance.
ginner classic
Dammit Jim!
So the Canucks' ranking is likely:
Matthews
Laine
Puljujarvi
Tkachuk
Juolevi
Dubois
Sergachev
And then the following are relatively ranked
Bean (Have a D not named Chychrun at 3 behind Juolevi and Sergachev)
Chychrun (not in the top 3, but likely 4)
So I'd say the smart move is to trade down with Montreal (9 or 10) assuming we are most likely to pick at 5 and neither team will likely win a lottery pick. Montreal gets Dubois we get a D (likely Bean)
I'd go after Juulsen and be happy with Bean and Juulsen instead of just Juolevi.
Matthews
Laine
Puljujarvi
Tkachuk
Juolevi
Dubois
Sergachev
And then the following are relatively ranked
Bean (Have a D not named Chychrun at 3 behind Juolevi and Sergachev)
Chychrun (not in the top 3, but likely 4)
So I'd say the smart move is to trade down with Montreal (9 or 10) assuming we are most likely to pick at 5 and neither team will likely win a lottery pick. Montreal gets Dubois we get a D (likely Bean)
I'd go after Juulsen and be happy with Bean and Juulsen instead of just Juolevi.
God he's painful to listen to.
And yeah, pretty obvious they have a defender at #5 overall. And Matthews at #1.
Never seen anyone give away this much.
No idea why you would say any of this. If they end up at #5 or #6, he pretty much just gave up all the leverage he had to trade down to a team looking to trade up for Tkachuk or Dubois.
Easy to see why he gets bent over so badly in negotiations.
WhiteCurse
Registered User
After the big 3, I want Tkachuk. Love his skill set, it fits in well with are other young guys. We have no one like him. Ive said it once before people love BB around hear and i get it but Tkachuk has looked way better when they are on the same team. Horvat and Tkachuk look like they should be great on aline togeather
Nona Di Giuseppe
Registered User
The market for D-men this year and will always be big.
No one cares a rental is going to re-sign with his old team -- He's a rental. That's why a rental's value is what it is already.
Benning ****ed it up. Majorly.
Any return for a player you're not going to re-sign is better than what Benning did.
Take into fact he bombed Vrbata's value, he messed up all over the place.
In every draft it's been proven that after the 2nd round, it's a crap shoot. Every 3rd, 4th, 5th + rounder increases your odds of getting an NHL player and should be accumulated at mass in a losing season. It's shooting blindfolded so each pick is an extra bullet.
I think TO's picks are going to bring them a stomping return.
Last edited:
If it's 2nd/3rd overall + Strome. All day.
But Dubois/Tkachuk + Strome? Not sure...Matthews will likely be better than both...
Horrorshow
Registered User
- Jun 1, 2009
- 1,180
- 35
Not really. The idea of picking Carlo was always a joke because #intangibles or something. Juolevi is a legit prospect. Some may disagree with his rankings, but it's not the same thing at all.
Chairman Maouth
Retired Staff
This thread is the '2016 Draft Thread | 7' and it will stay that way. Take the off topic stuff out of here and to the appropriate place please.
Nucky
Foundational Poster
- Apr 2, 2013
- 22,613
- 19,334
No problem with picking Juolevi either. But I prefer Dubois personally as BPA. If we pick 5th or 6th then I'll totally be on board with Juolevi since I'd expect Dubois gone at 4 most likely.
Inflated? Sure
A product of? No chance
You can't stick a plug with skilled players and get nearly 2PPG in your draft year.
Tkachuk is a good player. 107 pts in 57 games good? Probably not. But he'd still be a top 5 candidate if he had 85 pts in 57 games based on his size and skill set. Or even 75, which is all Nylander had.
Playing with elite players =/= terrible player.
NoShowWilly
Registered User
Nucky
Foundational Poster
- Apr 2, 2013
- 22,613
- 19,334
That's far from a guaranteed top line, only Horvat has played in the pros and even anointing him as a legit future #1center is optimistic.
NoShowWilly
Registered User
then add over 1g/1a pace in the playoffs against the best teams in the league. this is not a dane fox overage situation.
Numba9
Registered User
- Status
