Pre-Game Talk: 2019 NHL Draft, Pt. V: Got your ticket? (Mod note in pinned post)

[DonnyNucker]

So assuming the following 7 players would be high on the Canucks list but just not being talked about because they won't be there at 10:

Hughes
Kakko
Byram
Dach
Turcotte
Cozens


Adding these 2 players (Zegras + Krebs), that is 9 players in total that, presumably, Vancouver would "like". I also have to hope that Boldy and Newhook are high on their list as well, given feedback we've heard recently. That makes 11 players that we *should* like, of which at LEAST 2 must be available at 10 for us.

If the above is true (and it may not be), then we shouldn't need to look at a D.

Your math is a little off...otherwise I agree!

 

[Addison Rae]

Shout out to @ChilliBilly for hooking me up with a ticket for face value! I really wanted to go to the draft, but when tickets started hitting around $200 as a student I didn't think I could be able to.

I'm so happy right now, man I love this community

 

[CanaFan]

Your math is a little off...otherwise I agree!

Whoops, thought there were 7 guys in my "locks" list. Guess it's just 6.

 

[Nuckler]

The 2nd round looks good for us. Kolyachonok+Korczak would be great options. I also like Afanasyev.

Even the 3rd round, Puistola i like. And Dorofeyev is a bit lower than expected, but i do have concerns with his pacing and softness. However, at that point, everyone has warts, i take that gamble on his skill.

If Warren can slip 10 more spots to 102, i'd call that a great draft. Then pick up Fensore/Aaltonen late round, ooo boy.

Perfect draft for me for the first 4 rounds would be boldy/zegras/newhook and maybe Harley if we traded back a bit

at 40 puistola/norlinder/Thomson, and at 70 I'd go for Huglen/fensore/Aaltonen,

finally if I could find a way to move up with our 4th rounder to pick another one of the third round choices maybe using one of our 3 6th rounders that would be money in the bank.

Really like fensore even in the third, has the right traits for a small guy to make it. Great skater, good puck skills, and high hockey iq. If your small you gotta check those boxes off if your gonna try and make it, he's also a younger 2019 pick so maybe a chance of a late growth spurt.

Pretty much prioritizes skating, skill and iq and size is a bonus if there's a guy there like that. I think it's dumb to target a physical tough guy in the draft those are the pieces that are cheap in free agency to add to your skill and round it out. It costs way more to bring in a high level skill guy

 

[Orca Smash]

I dont see the high end talent with krebs, really hoping for a miracle in zegras, if not him then caufield, and I would take boldy over krebs easily as well.

 

[F A N]

I totally forgot to talk about Poldkozin when I was posting my list. I like him but I see him as more of a 2nd line/3rd line tweener unless he can improve his skating.

I dont see the high end talent with krebs, really hoping for a miracle in zegras, if not him then caufield, and I would take boldy over krebs easily as well.

Horvat didn't possess high end talent either. I'm pretty high on Krebs and think his offensive potential is bit underrated by most

 

[thefeebster]

Really like fensore even in the third, has the right traits for a small guy to make it. Great skater, good puck skills, and high hockey iq. If your small you gotta check those boxes off if your gonna try and make it, he's also a younger 2019 pick so maybe a chance of a late growth spurt.

Pretty much prioritizes skating, skill and iq and size is a bonus if there's a guy there like that. I think it's dumb to target a physical tough guy in the draft those are the pieces that are cheap in free agency to add to your skill and round it out. It costs way more to bring in a high level skill guy

I was going based on Bob's list, but i do really like Fensore. Compare him to a guy like Perunovich, who got a lot of attention last season after being passed over, i think 4th or later is great value for Fensore. He measured taller than his listing at the combine, and his brother according to Eliteprospects is 6'0". He's not a ripped/developed kid either, so i think there is some room for growth. He's extremely young for this draft. I actually thought his defense stood out at the U18s. He was a regular PKer and battles rather fearlessly. Going to a good school. Definitely the type of risks to take in the later rounds; as discussed a lot last year, the majority of the small&skilled defenders in the NHL were picked late.

 

[Orca Smash]

I totally forgot to talk about Poldkozin when I was posting my list. I like him but I see him as more of a 2nd line/3rd line tweener unless he can improve his skating.



Horvat didn't possess high end talent either. I'm pretty high on Krebs and think his offensive potential is bit underrated by most

Horvat had a very unique game, he was a bull that also showed excellent skill but some narrative had him as a 3rd line center or 2nd line center if he hit his ceiling because of his defensive game focus, I actually watched some horvat footage last year in his draft year and I could still see something special or unique in Bo's game how he drove play and could also play a high skill game with domi as well. Its such a huge jump from Jr to the nhl you really need to see something when judging these kids and I dont see anything special watching krebs. Horvat also did something extremely rare and improve his skating and speed dramatically that allowed him to hit his offensive ceiling (not something you want to bank on). And he is still a 2nd line Center on a good team. At 10 in this draft I still think we can find a top line player if the chips fall right.

The difference between him (krebs) and zegras in skill level to me is huge. Like I say every year we will see how this plays out and who is right or wrong.

 

[TruGr1t]

I'd be a little miffed if we took Krebs if somebody falls (i.e. Zegras, Cozens, Dach, Boldy). The only guy I think might be at risk there is Boldy, but hopefully Brackett knows the U.S. program well enough.

My suspicion is they'd take Broberg if he were there.

 

[Horse McHindu]

Seider is the only d-man I would be content with at 10. Don’t care for Broberg or Soderstrom there.

Why not Soderstrom or Broberg? What is it about those guys that you don’t like? What is it about Seider that you like?

 

[Horse McHindu]

What a weird quote.

"There are a lot of defensemen that we like. If that guy is there at 10 we'll be taking him."


So are there a LOT of defensemen they like enough to take at 10, or is there just ONE guy? I can't de-code the guy's lack of articulateness enough to tell what his actual intentions are.

“There are lots of defensemen that we like. If one of those defensemen is there at 10’ we’ll take him.”

 

[clay]

Why not Soderstrom or Broberg? What is it about those guys that you don’t like? What is it about Seider that you like?

I like Seider’s size, skating, hockey IQ, defensive awareness. Think he could develop into a special player. Don’t like Broberg’s IQ and don’t think Soderstrom has enough standout skills to be picked at 10.

 

[Horse McHindu]

According to Kuzma Zegras/Krebs are top on their wish list, but this is the same guy that said they would run to the podium to select Vilardi in 2017 and Dobson in 2018 if they were available.

Also, find it strange he has never mentioned Newhook once in his articles despite being brought in for extended interviews.

With respect to Dobson last year, it was under the assumption that Quinn Hughes would be long gone by then.

 

[Horse McHindu]

I like Seider’s size, skating, hockey IQ, defensive awareness. Think he could develop into a special player. Don’t like Broberg’s IQ and don’t think Soderstrom has enough standout skills to be picked at 10.

Cool cool.

I’m wondering if it would be worth it on Benning’s end to trade down and grab some extra assets? If Seider is the guy that Benning wants, but they see him being available a little lower, then it might be worth the calculated risk.

Like I said - if I haven’t followed the draft much this year, but all of the guys that I like will be long gone by the time we get to 10 (Hughes, Kakko, Byram, Boldy). I liked Poldkozin a lot a few days ago but now I’m kind of in two minds.

I’m not really a fan of the other “smallish forwards” that are available because my mind is just too obsessed with getting a RHD in the worst way possible.

 

[CanaFan]

“There are lots of defensemen that we like. If one of those defensemen is there at 10’ we’ll take him.”

Which is scary because there are not “lots of defensemen” who would be BPA at #10.

 

[CanaFan]

I like Seider’s size, skating, hockey IQ, defensive awareness. Think he could develop into a special player. Don’t like Broberg’s IQ and don’t think Soderstrom has enough standout skills to be picked at 10.

Agree. Broberg’s standout skill is too one-dimensional for me - drop your head and skate it up the ice fast. Beyond that one highly-visual trait, he doesn’t have any other stand out skills to be worth taking at 10 other than being tall. He’s a defense version of Valerie Nichushkin.

Soderstrom is much safer and probably will be a decent NHLer, but he has neither the size (6’) nor offensive inclinations to excite me at such a high pick. Just a safe, reliable 2nd pair D but lacking enough size or physicality to make him highly enticing. Seider checks more boxes than Soderstrom while being a similarly safe pick.

 

[Lindgren]

Cool cool.

I’m wondering if it would be worth it on Benning’s end to trade down and grab some extra assets? If Seider is the guy that Benning wants, but they see him being available a little lower, then it might be worth the calculated risk.

Like I said - if I haven’t followed the draft much this year, but all of the guys that I like will be long gone by the time we get to 10 (Hughes, Kakko, Byram, Boldy). I liked Poldkozin a lot a few days ago but now I’m kind of in two minds.

I’m not really a fan of the other “smallish forwards” that are available because my mind is just too obsessed with getting a RHD in the worst way possible.

That's the same way that Benning has been obsessed.

Okay, low hanging fruit ... I'm sorry.

 

[Mr Plow]

I'd be a little miffed if we took Krebs if somebody falls (i.e. Zegras, Cozens, Dach, Boldy). The only guy I think might be at risk there is Boldy, but hopefully Brackett knows the U.S. program well enough.

My suspicion is they'd take Broberg if he were there.

Doesn't Brackett have some sort of connection to Boldy?

 

[VictorLustig]

Agree. Broberg’s standout skill is too one-dimensional for me - drop your head and skate it up the ice fast. Beyond that one highly-visual trait, he doesn’t have any other stand out skills to be worth taking at 10 other than being tall. He’s a defense version of Valerie Nichushkin.

Soderstrom is much safer and probably will be a decent NHLer, but he has neither the size (6’) nor offensive inclinations to excite me at such a high pick. Just a safe, reliable 2nd pair D but lacking enough size or physicality to make him highly enticing. Seider checks more boxes than Soderstrom while being a similarly safe pick.

Söderström most certainly has high end tools. This "just reliable, safe player", I really wonder where that comes from, he certainly would not be ranked top 15 if that was the case (and it's not). You could easily say the same thing about Lidström, just a safe reliable D-man who lacks size, physicality and is a mediocre skater. Thing is IQ stands way above all of those things for a defenseman. Not saying Söderström will become Lidström but he is a smarter player than Seider and a much smarter player than Broberg.

 

[Bleach Clean]

So assuming the following 7 players would be high on the Canucks list but just not being talked about because they won't be there at 10:

Hughes
Kakko
Byram
Dach
Turcotte
Cozens


Adding these 2 players (Zegras + Krebs), that is 9 players in total that, presumably, Vancouver would "like". I also have to hope that Boldy and Newhook are high on their list as well, given feedback we've heard recently. That makes 11 players that we *should* like, of which at LEAST 2 must be available at 10 for us.

If the above is true (and it may not be), then we shouldn't need to look at a D.

That would be 6 in the first list and 4 additions = 10 players, not 11 players.

Generally, I agree, a Dman target seems unnecessary. There's enough talent available that one will not be required.

Assume Zegras + Boldy are gone and 1 variable pick not named is chosen, like Podkolzin. At the very least, this leaves Newhook and Krebs to choose from. They'll get 1 of the guys they've isolated in interviews.

 

[Bleach Clean]

Söderström most certainly has high end tools. This "just reliable, safe player", I really wonder where that comes from, he certainly would not be ranked top 15 if that was the case (and it's not). You could easily say the same thing about Lidström, just a safe reliable D-man who lacks size, physicality and is a mediocre skater. Thing is IQ stands way above all of those things for a defenseman. Not saying Söderström will become Lidström but he is a smarter player than Seider and a much smarter player than Broberg.

I too think Soderstrom is being underrated. Just one of those things where buzz words and phrases follow a player, despite their accuracy.

A forward should be the top pick at 10. However, the 3 Dmen I would consider there would be: Harley, York and Soderstrom.

 

[BeardyCanuck03]

I too think Soderstrom is being underrated. Just one of those things where buzz words and phrases follow a player, despite their accuracy.

A forward should be the top pick at 10. However, the 3 Dmen I would consider there would be: Harley, York and Soderstrom.

Most of the public scouting have slotted that 2nd tier of dmen as good 2nd pair dmen if everything goes right and they hit their ceilings. While the forwards available at 10 are considered to have more first line potential.

Soderstrom doesn't have any real stand out qualities, and just plays a smart dependable game. Nothing about his game necessarily will "excite" you. It's easy to be overlooked and underrated with that.

In terms of building a blueline, if you have an offensive dman like Hughes, and an aggressive dman like Woo, adding a quiet dependable dman like Soderstrom isn't a bad idea. If they like Soderstrom, they should be able to trade down to 12-14 to get him or Seider.

 

[ChilliBilly]

Most of the public scouting have slotted that 2nd tier of dmen as good 2nd pair dmen if everything goes right and they hit their ceilings. While the forwards available at 10 are considered to have more first line potential.

Soderstrom doesn't have any real stand out qualities, and just plays a smart dependable game. Nothing about his game necessarily will "excite" you. It's easy to be overlooked and underrated with that.

In terms of building a blueline, if you have an offensive dman like Hughes, and an aggressive dman like Woo, adding a quiet dependable dman like Soderstrom isn't a bad idea. If they like Soderstrom, they should be able to trade down to 12-14 to get him or Seider.

IF Tryamkin comes back, I think our need will be top 6 wingers. I want to draft a forward. Lots of decent players available. A decent one should fall to us ....

 

[DFAC]

No to trading down, Canucks need to pick an elite forward at 10.

 

[CanaFan]

I too think Soderstrom is being underrated. Just one of those things where buzz words and phrases follow a player, despite their accuracy.

A forward should be the top pick at 10. However, the 3 Dmen I would consider there would be: Harley, York and Soderstrom.

I don’t think he’s being underrated in general. Given the profile of players in our area, he’s a notch below primarily because it’s unclear if he will develop an offensive game or continue to project as a primarily defensive player who is slightly undersized. He’s a probable NHLer but the ultimate upside isn’t as high IMO as the other players in this part of the draft. Seider, on the hand, provides all that Soderstrom does but with the physical package to be more effective playing it.