All purpose draft-gripe thread
- Thread starter Vankiller Whale
- Start date
Canucks LB
My Favourite, Gone too soon, RIP Luc, We miss you
- Oct 12, 2008
- 78,724
- 33,579
Is anybody at least happy to know that we are picking "shoot" first type prospects with our 1st rounders in the past few years?.
Virtanen
McCann
Boaser
All have extremely strong shots, and no doubt that shooting is their biggest attributes.
We need to stockpile more 1sts, and draft more shooters, and eventually a playmaker or two.
Virtanen
McCann
Boaser
All have extremely strong shots, and no doubt that shooting is their biggest attributes.
We need to stockpile more 1sts, and draft more shooters, and eventually a playmaker or two.
Vankiller Whale
Fire Benning
Not really. It's nice to have natural finishers...Patrick White and Cody Hodgson were both shooters.
I like Boeser, McCann and Virtanen, but you also need guys to get the puck to finishers.
Bleach Clean
Registered User
- Aug 9, 2006
- 27,473
- 7,177
There was an article posted (by Verv) that suggests that primary assists and goals translate in the same way.
Playmakers do provide that QB ability on the half wall of a PP. The more players one has that can do this, the better. DET maximizes this type of advantage by having a deadly PP, with many creative types. Each capable of confusing a PK.
Novak would have been a good compliment to Boeser in this regard...
Speaking of which, this isn't a 'gripe' but I wanted Novak and Carrier over Desbiens and Zhukenov. Needless to say, I am watching NSH closely from here on out.
Thought I would pick up on this from the locked all-purpose Benning thread...FacePalmBenning said:
It seems to me the Canucks' first-rounders have been largely fine, and that the rest of the draft (and not having enough picks) has been their weak point.
Since the turn of the century, you have Umberger (NHL regular), Kesler (NHL all-star), Schneider (elite goalie), Bourdon (would have been an NHL regular at least), Grabner (NHL regular and justifiable pick if underwhelming), White (terrible), Hodgson (consensus pick and NHL regular), Schroeder (consensus pick who may still carve out a career), Jensen (likely bust), Gaunce (TBD, but consensus pick), Horvat (looks great), Shinkaruk (TBD), Virtanen (TBD) and McCann (TBD).
Take out the really recent guys where we don't know yet, and everything other than White is a reasonable pick. I'm sure there are a number of teams who have done worse. There is a much greater argument for first-round chokes in the Quinn days (but they were better in later rounds then). The later rounds and the failure to unearth Keiths, Webers and Subbans after the first round is the real killer for the Canucks.
Nucker101
Foundational Poster
- Apr 2, 2013
- 21,921
- 17,978
I hope Tryamkin turns out to be something because Brayden Point had numbers that arguably made him 1st round worthy and he went later in the same round. People will talk about TB's great scouting and development, but that was just a flat out no-brainer pick and I'm really not sure how he fell that far even if he is undersized.
I think Smith fell just outside the 15 year period mentioned.
Still if you include him, the Canucks don't have too many utter busts in the first round.
Smith and White are the two big busts from the last 15 years.
Schroeder appears to be a weak pick based on results.
Jensen may bust, but at the same time the majority of the players taken near him are still question marks.
I'd put Smith, White and Schroeder as the 1st rounders since 2000 that have been in the bottom quartile or so of picks in their range. So not too bad, probably somewhat average for 1st round picks at least.
Canucks LB
My Favourite, Gone too soon, RIP Luc, We miss you
- Oct 12, 2008
- 78,724
- 33,579
VanillaCoke
Registered User
- Oct 30, 2013
- 26,237
- 12,930
Intangibos
High-End Intangibos
I wanted Ehlers > Nylander >>>>>> Virtanen >>>> Richie
Ehlers and Nylander were marginal, I flip flopped a fair bit but wanted Ehlers maybe a little bit more as I was worried Nylander was more likely to bust if his game didn't translate to the smaller ice surface. I wanted Virtanen over Richie just because of Richie's concussion history, that's some spooky ****.
Ehlers and Nylander were marginal, I flip flopped a fair bit but wanted Ehlers maybe a little bit more as I was worried Nylander was more likely to bust if his game didn't translate to the smaller ice surface. I wanted Virtanen over Richie just because of Richie's concussion history, that's some spooky ****.
WTG
December 5th
Nylander >>> Ehlers
Ehlers isn't even the best player on his team IMO.
When I watched the Halifax Meier's was the guy driving the offense.
Ehlers isn't even the best player on his team IMO.
When I watched the Halifax Meier's was the guy driving the offense.
well yeah. nylanders basically done nothing but kick ass from day one after his draft. ehlers has still been way better than virtanen though
see when someone says they want virtanen over ehlers its like, ok, the obsessive need for a big physical player from vancouver is suboptimal but i guess i can empathize. but prioritizing him over nylander who is just on a completely different level is indefensible imo
WTG
December 5th
Yeah both Ehlers and Nylander are a step above Virtanen at this point.
Still plenty of time for Virtanen to make a case for himself. But as of right now there is no denying that Nylander and Ehlers would have been a better pick.
Said it at the time of the drafts.
Virtanen is not a good pick at 6. (Trade up/down or pick Nylander)
McCann is an ok pick at 24, but I preferred others. (Kempe, Barbashev etc)
Boeser is a great pick at 23. (Will be a key player for the canucks moving forward)
Virtanen is not a good pick at 6. (Trade up/down or pick Nylander)
McCann is an ok pick at 24, but I preferred others. (Kempe, Barbashev etc)
Boeser is a great pick at 23. (Will be a key player for the canucks moving forward)
Nylander has completely pulled away from the rest of the pack in that 6-10 region. He is looking like he could end up one of the best players from the entire draft.
Long ways to go, and yeah it's early. But watch Nylander play and then watch Virtanen play. Absolutely abhorrent draft pick we made. Damn Derpanen.
Patience is in pretty short supply here...
Pretty tough to say which player is going to end up better at this point.
Few probably would have picked Kreider over MPS two years post-draft.
Three years post-draft, Ryan Johansen would probably have been considered quite disappointing.
Pretty tough to say which player is going to end up better at this point.
Few probably would have picked Kreider over MPS two years post-draft.
Three years post-draft, Ryan Johansen would probably have been considered quite disappointing.
biturbo19
Registered User
- Jul 13, 2010
- 27,240
- 12,385
The draft is a marathon, not a sprint.
And the fundamental question with the Virtanen pick is still always going to be...
Can you find small skilled dipsy-doodlers later in the draft? - I think the answer is yes...if you're good/lucky.
Can you find 6'1" 215lb physically intimidating players with legitimate top-6 goal-scoring ability later in the draft? - I think the answer is no...unless you're beyond insanely lucky.
Have to look at the "upside" and ask yourself:
Are you more likely to find a small slick stickhandler skill player later in the draft? Or are you more likely to find a Heavy Duty wrecking ball top-6 goal-scorer later in the draft?
Small skilled players are consistently undervalued in the draft...but for something of a reason. And that is the scarcity of big physical guys who can produce offense. That's why you choose a Virtanen over a guy who produces more Junior points.
You can find guys like say...Brayden Point well outside that top-10 picks, who have immense skill and point producing ability. 5'11 small or 5'9" small, does it matter that much if they're really that skilled? They're all "small". But these guys are out there. Guys who fundamentally, play a very similar "skilled point producer" game to a Nylander or Ehlers. Finding a player with the physicality and raw tools of Virtanen with the legitimate goal-scoring ability he displayed, is very very difficult outside those top picks.
I think that's a concession you have to make with that Virtanen pick, and it's something that i think has been clear from the start. Virtanen is not an Ehlers or a Nylander...he was selected ahead of them for the uniqueness of his skillset. Big, fast, physical goal-scorers are hard to come by...so you take gambles on them in the draft. That's where you find them.
Comes down to someone like Chris Kreider...Took a while to develop and he's still only a 21-25-46pts type player, but you think there's even the slightest of chances they let him get away? That's the sort of player that really impacts the Rangers top-6 wherever he plays...despite probably being the "least skilled" member of their top-6.
Finding small skilled guys...you can win there by finding these guys later in the draft if you're good and/or lucky. Finding big fast physical power fowards who can score goals? That's a hard skillset to hide in Jrs, extremely rarely do you see those guys drafted outside the first round or two...So you go in on that unique skillset early. Try to win later with skill. That's smart.
And the fundamental question with the Virtanen pick is still always going to be...
Can you find small skilled dipsy-doodlers later in the draft? - I think the answer is yes...if you're good/lucky.
Can you find 6'1" 215lb physically intimidating players with legitimate top-6 goal-scoring ability later in the draft? - I think the answer is no...unless you're beyond insanely lucky.
Have to look at the "upside" and ask yourself:
Are you more likely to find a small slick stickhandler skill player later in the draft? Or are you more likely to find a Heavy Duty wrecking ball top-6 goal-scorer later in the draft?
Small skilled players are consistently undervalued in the draft...but for something of a reason. And that is the scarcity of big physical guys who can produce offense. That's why you choose a Virtanen over a guy who produces more Junior points.
You can find guys like say...Brayden Point well outside that top-10 picks, who have immense skill and point producing ability. 5'11 small or 5'9" small, does it matter that much if they're really that skilled? They're all "small". But these guys are out there. Guys who fundamentally, play a very similar "skilled point producer" game to a Nylander or Ehlers. Finding a player with the physicality and raw tools of Virtanen with the legitimate goal-scoring ability he displayed, is very very difficult outside those top picks.
I think that's a concession you have to make with that Virtanen pick, and it's something that i think has been clear from the start. Virtanen is not an Ehlers or a Nylander...he was selected ahead of them for the uniqueness of his skillset. Big, fast, physical goal-scorers are hard to come by...so you take gambles on them in the draft. That's where you find them.
Comes down to someone like Chris Kreider...Took a while to develop and he's still only a 21-25-46pts type player, but you think there's even the slightest of chances they let him get away? That's the sort of player that really impacts the Rangers top-6 wherever he plays...despite probably being the "least skilled" member of their top-6.
Finding small skilled guys...you can win there by finding these guys later in the draft if you're good and/or lucky. Finding big fast physical power fowards who can score goals? That's a hard skillset to hide in Jrs, extremely rarely do you see those guys drafted outside the first round or two...So you go in on that unique skillset early. Try to win later with skill. That's smart.
What upside? People keep talking about this upside? Where does this fanciful idea of offensive upside come from? Because from what I've seen, it exists only in your imagination. You have an idea of a player, and that isn't what Virtanen is.
Since being drafted he struggled against teenagers. Scored half as many goals. Went basically pointless in 10 AHL games. And has been downright bad in his first taste of NHL hockey.
Compare that to Nylander. Who after being drafted went and put up PPG in a men's league. Then went into the AHL and was the best PPG producer on the team. Then came into camp, and has blown away expectations. Looking head and shoulders above his competition in the prospects game. And contributing and looking dangerous in pre-season.
See, one of these prospects you can look at and say "Ok, this kid has some serious offensive upside." One of these players looks like a 6th overall pick.
The other? Where is the upside? What reason do you have to believe he has any upside at all? Because he scored a bunch of goals against kids when he was 17?
I dont get this optimism with Virtanen. It's wholly blind, and predicated on nothing more than hopes and dreams. He has sucked since being drafted. No point mincing words. A disappointment. Nobody would take him at 6 in a re-draft.
biturbo19
Registered User
- Jul 13, 2010
- 27,240
- 12,385
I wanna be! I really do! But it's so hard when Nylander is lighting the lamp
Nylander is displaying excellent progress so far, but he hasn't even played a single NHL game yet... Plus, some players seem to peak really early (such as Sam Gagner, perhaps Jeff Skinner). Hence why you can't come to definitive conclusions until probably 5+ years out.
One year out, nobody would have traded Gagner for Couture.
Gagner put up 49 points in the NHL. Couture put up 58 points and 21 goals against teenagers (albeit in an injury plagued season).
