Canucks with #6 overall

[Meds]

And it's not ridiculous to subscribe to Cherry's logic. The stats speak for themselves. Teams that are led by European players generally don't have the same level of success in the playoffs. I'm not just talking about the captain of the team.

Yeah I dunno about that. Don't Malkin and Zetterberg have Conn Smythe's? Obviously Chara is a major catalyst for the Bruins success. Anze Kopitar is leading the playoffs in scoring, and led the playoffs in scroing in 2012. David Krejci led the playoffs in scoring last season, and led the playoffs in scoring the year the Bruins beat the Canucks, beating (another Euro) Henrik Sedin by 1 point. A north American hasn't led the playoffs in scoring since 09/10 (Briere).

Given that North Americans make up 75% of NHL players, doesn't it seem reasonable that they would also have a greater share of impact players?

I think you missed my point Island, I'm not talking about leader. I'm talking about leaders. And not just scoring leaders.

[Island Nucklehead]

I think you missed my point Island, I'm not talking about leader. I'm talking about leaders. And not just scoring leaders.

Okay, and given that 7.5/10 players in the NHL come from North America, how many do you think would be on each team? How many of those would be impact players?

I think having a view of players based on where they come from is a bit simplistic in this day and age. Players from Europe are exposed to North American hockey much earlier, and play against eachother much more often in international tournaments than in the past.

Criticizing players based on skill, size, skating, character etc. etc. is how we need to approach taking prospects. Don't take Nylander or Ehlers because you feel they are too small or play on the perimeter too much or whatever, just because they are European is a poor method of predicting future success. One exception would be the Russians, because of the KHL-NHL friction, and even then you need to consider the talent.

That list you made could apply to any team in the league, it's just the reality of numbers. The Edmonton Oilers are full of Canadian players. Joensu, Yakupov, Belov, Larsson, Marincin and Fasth are their Euro players. They are a roster full of small players from North America and not an ounce of leadership amongst them. The San Jose Sharks have a leadership group that has NEVER gotten anything done in the playoffs, despite being "led" by a core of North American all-stars and Olympians (Thornton, Marleau,Couture, Pavelski, Boyle, Burns, Vlasic etc).

[Thomas K-thair]

I am really hoping to see Dal Colle fall in this draft. It all depends on NYI if they pick Ehlers or Nylander which is certainly a possibility . I could see Brian Burke lobbying hard for Nick Ritchie as well. If there are no fallers i would take Ritchie or Virtanen. I see the Coilers taking Draisatl if Ekblad goes 1st.

[Island Nucklehead]

I am really hoping to see Dal Colle fall in this draft. It all depends on NYI if they pick Ehlers or Nylander which is certainly a possibility . I could see Brian Burke lobbying hard for Nick Ritchie as well. If there are no fallers i would take Ritchie or Virtanen. I see the Coilers taking Draisatl if Ekblad goes 1st.

Yep.

The other thing for the Canucks to consider is how fast we can get these kids in to the NHL. Let me be Harper (clear): I'm not advocating rushing anybody. But someone like Nylander or Ehlers could take 3-4 years to physically develop for the NHL game. That might be too late for our time-frame, where there is a very fine window with which to work with the Sedins and our current D corps.

In an ideal world, a guy like Virtanen (or Dal Colle if he drops) are ready in 1-2 years, and can pick up the slack (along with Horvat, Jensen, maybe Shinkaruk) from the aging Sedins while our D isn't too grey.

[Meds]

I think you missed my point Island, I'm not talking about leader. I'm talking about leaders. And not just scoring leaders.

Okay, and given that 7.5/10 players in the NHL come from North America, how many do you think would be on each team? How many of those would be impact players?

I think having a view of players based on where they come from is a bit simplistic in this day and age. Players from Europe are exposed to North American hockey much earlier, and play against eachother much more often in international tournaments than in the past.

Criticizing players based on skill, size, skating, character etc. etc. is how we need to approach taking prospects. Don't take Nylander or Ehlers because you feel they are too small or play on the perimeter too much or whatever, just because they are European is a poor method of predicting future success. One exception would be the Russians, because of the KHL-NHL friction, and even then you need to consider the talent.

That list you made could apply to any team in the league, it's just the reality of numbers. The Edmonton Oilers are full of Canadian players. Joensu, Yakupov, Belov, Larsson, Marincin and Fasth are their Euro players. They are a roster full of small players from North America and not an ounce of leadership amongst them. The San Jose Sharks have a leadership group that has NEVER gotten anything done in the playoffs, despite being "led" by a core of North American all-stars and Olympians (Thornton, Marleau,Couture, Pavelski, Boyle, Burns, Vlasic etc).

I considered the percentage of players from Europe versus North America, I still think the results and numbers do the talking here.

29/30 teams fail in the playoffs every year, the team that matters is the one that doesn't.

It comes down to a willingness, or ability, to battle through the permitted obstruction that the NHL playoffs brings with it. There are certainly North American players who fall into this category. But can you name any European players who seem to float during the regular season and then turn into playoff beasts? Off hand I can't.

[Island Nucklehead]

It comes down to a willingness, or ability, to battle through the permitted obstruction that the NHL playoffs brings with it. There are certainly North American players who fall into this category. But can you name any European players who seem to float during the regular season and then turn into playoff beasts? Off hand I can't.

What you are saying is that playoff hockey requires size, toughness, grit etc. I agree with you, but there are plenty of North American players that aren't suited for NHL playoff hockey.

It seems to me that there are usually 5-6 Europeans on any given NHL roster, and 1-3 "core" players would be European. That's kind of what the numbers indicate. The problem for the Canucks has never been their European content, it's been the lack of a supporting cast (of any nationality). Take 2011 for example, both the Bruins and Canucks had 4 players in the top-10 in scoring (Sedin 2nd, Sedin 4th, Kesler 7th, Burrows 9th vs Krejci 1st, Bergeron 5th, Marchand 6th, Ryder 10th). From there you had to drop to 27th to find Ehrhoff, while Boston had Horton (11th), Recchi (18th), Kelly (23rd), Lucic (24th) and Peverly (26th).

Is a guy like Patrick Kane, who might as well be European for the style and size he brings to the game, more important than a guy like Zdeno Chara, who is as physically imposing as any North American hockey player currently playing? Can you honestly say it matters where Gabriel Landeskog is from?

If Nylander was 6'2 205, he would be going 1st overall. Physical attributes and talent are immensely more important than nationality.

[ClamRussel]

players who seem to float during the regular season and then turn into playoff beasts?

Perfect description of Bickell, where was he in the regular season?

[dbr]

Why the fuck do you want guys who are invisible in the regular season, Mëds?

As for playoff contributors, how about Franzen and Holmstrom? How about the big bad Bruins smallish Euro first line centre David Krejci (higher PPG in the playoffs than the regular season in both recent B's runs)? Kopitar? Hossa?

For gritty defensemen who thrive in the playoffs how about (aside from Chara) Kronwall? Seidenberg? Nick Hjalmarsson's not going to intimidate anyone but has been a key part of the closest thing to a dynasty we've seen in the last decade..

Let me ask you this.. if you were picking 10th overall in 2005, without the benefit of hindsight.. who would you have selected? Hell what if you were picking 3rd-9th for that matter? Lots of GMs using a watered down version of your logic are kicking themselves today for it..

I'm not even trying to push Ehlers or Nylander as our potential pick but are you going to pass on Draisatl if he falls? What if the Canucks had another pick at around 15 and could take one of Scherbak, Barbashev or a handful of significantly worse prospects born on this continent?

[Lancer]

I'm not even trying to push Ehlers or Nylander as our potential pick but are you going to pass on Draisatl if he falls?

I would.

Not because he's a Euro or anything, but looking at his game and gathering what the scouts have said I don't have confidence that he can elevate his game to the faster pro-level and will end up back in Germany or Sweden rather than waste away in the minors. If he doesn't play in the top 6, I don't see him being able to fill any other role. There are safer and, arguably, better options at #6. Let someone else put a lottery ticket on him.

[dbr]

I'm not even trying to push Ehlers or Nylander as our potential pick but are you going to pass on Draisatl if he falls?

I would.

Not because he's a Euro or anything, but looking at his game and gathering what the scouts have said I don't have confidence that he can elevate his game to the faster pro-level and will end up back in Germany or Sweden rather than waste away in the minors. If he doesn't play in the top 6, I don't see him being able to fill any other role. There are safer and, arguably, better options at #6. Let someone else put a lottery ticket on him.

Fair enough and you've mentioned that before. I'm not going to guarantee Draisatl is a future star or anything but with the assets he does have, if he can put everything together (and find another gear to play in) he could be one of the best players in the draft.

But I mean I'm not trying to change your mind, like you said your problem is with what you see on the ice and not with the fact that he's Leon Draisatl and not Len Draper or whatever.

[Meds]

Why the fuck do you want guys who are invisible in the regular season, Mëds?

Yeah, that's what I said dbr.....

As for playoff contributors, how about Franzen and Holmstrom? How about the big bad Bruins smallish Euro first line centre David Krejci (higher PPG in the playoffs than the regular season in both recent B's runs)? Kopitar? Hossa?

For gritty defensemen who thrive in the playoffs how about (aside from Chara) Kronwall? Seidenberg? Nick Hjalmarsson's not going to intimidate anyone but has been a key part of the closest thing to a dynasty we've seen in the last decade...

I didn't list the players from Detroit, as I said, that was a very European team. Kronwall certainly fits the bill. Hjalmarrson's numbers and play are average. I don't really notice him out there. I named Kopitar, Hossa, and Krejci, as players who are exceptions and key contributors. But look at their supporting casts. Kopitar and Krejci both have bruising teammates, guys who clear space and keep defenders attention.....Kopitar doesn't need the muscle though, he's got power and size of his own. Franzen and Holmstrom, again, on Detroit and I didn't list them, just acknowledged the high percentage of European's on that team, the former is a very streaky player though, it seems like he's either producing at a goal per game pace or not doing much of anything.....still, when he's in beast mode he is a huge factor.

Let me ask you this.. if you were picking 10th overall in 2005, without the benefit of hindsight.. who would you have selected? Hell what if you were picking 3rd-9th for that matter? Lots of GMs using a watered down version of your logic are kicking themselves today for it..

Considering the roster that we had at the time, I think I would still have taken Luc Bourdon. I know what the argument is, everyone wishing we had taken Kopitar, but frankly I think if Bourdon hadn't had a tragic accident, we might be seeing a guy in his mid-twenties who had turned into exactly what we were hoping he would become. For the Canucks I think asking that question is just foolish because we never got to see what it was that we had drafted, it was as if we had never even had a first round pick in 2005.

I'm not even trying to push Ehlers or Nylander as our potential pick but are you going to pass on Draisatl if he falls? What if the Canucks had another pick at around 15 and could take one of Scherbak, Barbashev or a handful of significantly worse prospects born on this continent?

If Draisatl falls, yes I think you still take Dal Colle or Nick Ritchie if he's available. The knock on Draisatl is that he might not take that next step.....big body, loads of talent, but he might no thrive in the NHL's faster pace. I'm only going by what I've read, I can't say that I have even seen so much as a highlight reel of the kid.

[dbr]

Why the fuck do you want guys who are invisible in the regular season, Mëds?

Yeah, that's what I said dbr.....

I dunno, you said this as though it's a desireable trait:

But can you name any European players who seem to float during the regular season and then turn into playoff beasts?

As for playoff contributors, how about Franzen and Holmstrom? How about the big bad Bruins smallish Euro first line centre David Krejci (higher PPG in the playoffs than the regular season in both recent B's runs)? Kopitar? Hossa?

For gritty defensemen who thrive in the playoffs how about (aside from Chara) Kronwall? Seidenberg? Nick Hjalmarsson's not going to intimidate anyone but has been a key part of the closest thing to a dynasty we've seen in the last decade...

I didn't list the players from Detroit, as I said, that was a very European team. Kronwall certainly fits the bill. Hjalmarrson's numbers and play are average. I don't really notice him out there. I named Kopitar, Hossa, and Krejci, as players who are exceptions and key contributors. But look at their supporting casts. Kopitar and Krejci both have bruising teammates, guys who clear space and keep defenders attention.....Kopitar doesn't need the muscle though, he's got power and size of his own. Franzen and Holmstrom, again, on Detroit and I didn't list them, just acknowledged the high percentage of European's on that team, the former is a very streaky player though, it seems like he's either producing at a goal per game pace or not doing much of anything.....still, when he's in beast mode he is a huge factor.

So I mean, there are lots of guys who are European and contributing to playoff successes. Given they are a minority in the league, pointing to a handful every year hardly makes them exceptional.. or rather, a couple of Europeans contributing to a Stanley Cup championship (when there are just a handful per team, on average) is hardly more exceptional than having a small handful of North Americans contribute to a championship team every year.

And we're talking about the last few years I might add, this discussion is taking place within the context of the 2014 draft where we're taking a player that hopefully contributes to a contending team half a decade from now.

Look at the last six cup winners, none of them shied away from drafting European players, whatever you want to say about how rare the exceptions are every single one has at least a couple of them and furthermore most had other Europeans as well - look at the Blackhawks for example with half their D being Euros, or the Kings with a kid like Voynov stepping up and enabling them to trade JJ for Jeff Carter, where is their Cup if they don't have a player like that coming up?.

The Canucks are going to be in tough to build a contender that can compete once the current core is all but gone, and turning up their nose at a huge group of prospects and players while doing so is only going to make it harder. It's not to say they don't need size and toughness but your Don Cherry-esque insistence that only comes from players born in certain countries (oh except this guy, and that guy, and that guy, and..) while completely ignoring all the North American sissies around the league is just.. yeah. Tough to take seriously.

Let me ask you this.. if you were picking 10th overall in 2005, without the benefit of hindsight.. who would you have selected? Hell what if you were picking 3rd-9th for that matter? Lots of GMs using a watered down version of your logic are kicking themselves today for it..

Considering the roster that we had at the time, I think I would still have taken Luc Bourdon. I know what the argument is, everyone wishing we had taken Kopitar, but frankly I think if Bourdon hadn't had a tragic accident, we might be seeing a guy in his mid-twenties who had turned into exactly what we were hoping he would become. For the Canucks I think asking that question is just foolish because we never got to see what it was that we had drafted, it was as if we had never even had a first round pick in 2005.

When Bourdon died Kopitar had already racked up 52 G and 138 P in 154 NHL games played. Maybe he doesn't do that with the Canucks but given his performances since it is pretty obvious that Kopitar is a premiere player in this league and while I liked Bourdon and had high hopes for him expecting him to escape the shadow of the player we passed on was simply not reasonable.

Maybe you would have picked Bourdon anyways but that selection made us a worse team than the alternative - taking the better player who was born in some European backwater, played Swedish junior and possessed all the qualities you're talking about being important.

I'm not even trying to push Ehlers or Nylander as our potential pick but are you going to pass on Draisatl if he falls? What if the Canucks had another pick at around 15 and could take one of Scherbak, Barbashev or a handful of significantly worse prospects born on this continent?

If Draisatl falls, yes I think you still take Dal Colle or Nick Ritchie if he's available. The knock on Draisatl is that he might not take that next step.....big body, loads of talent, but he might no thrive in the NHL's faster pace. I'm only going by what I've read, I can't say that I have even seen so much as a highlight reel of the kid.

Well fair enough, I guess Draisatl has some big question marks on this board despite being regarded as a slam dunk top five pick nearly everywhere else. How about Barbashev and Scherbak then?

[Canuck-One]

With our first if we can't get Reinhart then please take Virtanen or Richie. Those three have top six written all over them. Bennet meh maybe but the rest you can keep. No more soft and easy to play against PLEASE!!

[herb]

In the first round I think you have to take the best player available. I don't like when teams pick by position.

Draisatl has been consistently ranked in the top 5. He's a big, smart, skilled center. You can never have too many of those. I would be ecstatic if we got him.

That being said, Dal Colle and Virtanen would be good picks as well. Virtanen's shot is a thing of beauty.

[ukcanuck]

Thanks DBR, you saved me from having to be nice to Mëds in explaining how wrong he is.
Personally I don't care where I guy comes from or what kind of person he is either.

What this team needs is size skill toughness meanness and dedicatio. Not too concerned about what order those traits come in and I'd prefer a Centre or a Dman.

He can come in any colour or ethnicity too for all care. It ain't a beauty pageant and I don't gotta sit next to him church.

As for me ol mate Mëds, drafting by country is just stupid.