Draft Lottery Winner

[Hockey Widow]

Linden on record saying this could be a good year for the Canucks to trade down and still get who they want.

Nah don't do it, it's not worth it to risk it.

I'd much rather them trade Edler or Tanev to acquire more picks.

It could also mean, that like the past two drafts, the player they like isn’t in anyone’s top ten. Well three drafts if yo include Virtanen.

[Tiger]

Oh fuck we pick 7th...

Pissed on by thr Hockey Gods again.... When will the curse be lifted

[Hockey Widow]

So Edmonton is said to be dangling their 1st round pick for a proven Dman. Wants, a minute eating defensive Dman. Hmmmm. Tanev???

[Blob Mckenzie]

Linden on record saying this could be a good year for the Canucks to trade down and still get who they want.

Nah don't do it, it's not worth it to risk it.

I'd much rather them trade Edler or Tanev to acquire more picks.

It could also mean, that like the past two drafts, the player they like isn’t in anyone’s top ten. Well three drafts if yo include Virtanen.

Petterson would have been in everyone’s top 10. Juolevi was probably in most teams top 10. Doesn’t excuse leaving Tkachuk for Calgary but he wasn’t a massive reach.

[Chef Boi RD]

Juolevi is still a good prospect, let’s see how he compares in a couple years once he’s established himself. D-men can take longer to development, this isn’t news. No Juolevi in the prostect pool, it’s a pretty putrid pool. Defence is one of the most valuable positions in hockey, wingers the least. We drafted two wingers in the first round prior to the Juolevi draft. Hadn’t drafted a D-man in the first round since Bourdon. You have to pay a premium for young quality D-men via trade - Hamonic, Reinhart, Larson, Hamilton, Gudbranson etc. Going into the draft a lot of the pundits, media and fans were OK with the idea of drafting a D-man due to rumours circling that the Canucks were high on a D-man. After the draft, while saying “would have liked Tkachuk”, but then said “OK with Juolevi, we need defence in the prospect pool”. Fast forward to the ‘long after the fact’ers’ - “whaaaaa Benning is an idiot for not drafting Tkachuk!”

Allow Juolevi the time to show what he can do in the NHL please. Not much to ask is it

[Blob Mckenzie]

I support Juolevi but it was the wrong pick. The defence pool has been a putrid mess since Edler and Bourdon came up. That’s 13 years of drafting going back to Dave Nonis. Three managers haven’t managed to stockpile good young d men. All three of these guys have pissed away 15-20 2nd and 3rd round draft picks on quick fixes like Linden Vey, Derek Roy, Erik Weinrich, Mikka Noronen, sweeteners in trades for Sutter and Gudbranson and a host of other crap.

Elmer has drafted ten d men in four years and a trash can in Mackenzie Stewart. Two of them look pretty decent except they pissed one off and he left and gave the other one away for Adam Clendenning. Juolevi is tracking slow but I believe he will be a top 4 guy. Pick another one this year if he is BPA and beg, borrow and steal to get the Russian back.

You go on and on about Kole Lind every day but look at who was picked right after him. Nick Hague ticks a lot of the boxes for me. Don’t trade for Baerschi and you could have Rasmus Andersson. Don’t piss away a pick for Gudbranson and Samuel Girard is there. Don’t trade a pick for Linden Vey and you could have had Brandon Montour.

For the thousandth time: keep all your picks and acquire more. More chances in the lottery equates to more prospects.

[Chef Boi RD]

You didn’t have to go beyond Juolevi there bub. Ya I do the woulda, coulda, shoulda too. Sure yeah always lots of players available after the fact, that will never change. Be happy Benning has had 1 more pick over the alotted amount in his 4 years of drafting. He was trying to keep the team competitive during the Sedin years, do I agree with them all? No. But I understand the situation - teams current contracts, fickle fan base, owners mandate. You’d have to be dense to think it’s that cut n dry “acquire picks only” while transitioning out the old and in the young. Every team that is “apparently” suppose to be rebuilding make win now trades - Arizona flipping a first to New York for Stepan”

The D has been neglected Big time since Nonis - Edler and Bourdon. Juolevi will be a valued addition in a important position that the team badly lacks in. In due time picking Juolevi over Tkachuk will not be as bad the pick the impatient ones “you” deem it to be

[Blob Mckenzie]

Elmer has had 28 picks in 4 drafts. One was a gift for Columbus hiring John Tortorella. I’m saying it shouldn’t be hat hard to flesh out the deadwood and get to 9/10 picks a year. And for fuck sakes stop tossing 2nd and 3rd rounders away. More picks is more prospects.

[Chef Boi RD]

Curious, regarding Hague, Bub, why didn’t he get any invites to team canada’s WJC selection camps?

[Chef Boi RD]

Elmer has had 28 picks in 4 drafts. One was a gift for Columbus hiring John Tortorella. I’m saying it shouldn’t be hat hard to flesh out the deadwood and get to 9/10 picks a year. And for fuck sakes stop tossing 2nd and 3rd rounders away. More picks is more prospects.

Yeah we know full well, your aggrevances regarding picks. Maybe follow that up with the flip side

- picks for Lack
- Baertschi for a 2nd (still waiting on Andersson)
- Granlund for Shinkaruk
- Dahlen for Burrows
- Goldobin for Hansen
- Dorsett for a 3rd
- 2nd for Bieksa
- Bonino, Clendenning, 3rd (all 3 no longer Penguin property) for Sutter and Lockwood (still Canuck property)
- signing Chatfield, McKewen, Sautner
- Motte for Vanek
- Leipsic for Holm

I agree I don’t like the Vey trade. Not a fan of McCann, A tweener centre. Gudbranson fills a need, still young, signed to a decent extension. Don’t like giving up the 2nd but overpayment for young D-men is the norm. Didn’t like giving up Forsling at the time but him spending the rest of the season in the minors when the Blackhawks D is putrid beyond Keith and Seabrook raises eyebrows

Benning has done more good than bad. Kind of how it rolls for GMs, see Treliving, see Chiarelli you weigh the good vs the bad. I really could careless about UFAs no asset is lost with UFA signings and we are not a team at the moment that needs to be concerned about the cap

[Blob Mckenzie]

The good and bad has swung closer to 50-50 for Elmer hence how I give him a 5/10 score or a C-.

The Sutter trade wasn’t or isn’t good. Motte is a chunk of used toilet paper. You’re trying to pawn that off as a good move lol.

Granlund is a 4th line player. Great he’s better than Shinkaruk. Not a significant move at all.

[Ronning's Ghost]

It could also mean, that like the past two drafts, the player they like isn’t in anyone’s top ten. Well three drafts if yo include Virtanen.

There are a group of six or seven real good players after the clear cut top 2. They are still going to get a nice player at 7. Just depends on what the teams in front of them do.

Less wailing and gnashing of teeth than I expected. Maybe as Canucks fans, you're just used to taking it on the chin, or maybe there's lots of reasoning along the lines above.

I'd like to entertain the Dahlin fantasy just a bit longer. What do you think it would take to trade up to first overall, and would you be willing to part with those assets ?

[Cousin Strawberry]

I'd like to entertain the Dahlin fantasy just a bit longer. What do you think it would take to trade up to first overall, and would you be willing to part with those assets ?

Boeser straight up would have to be about all we can offer that might get them considering and even that would probably be short of getting it done

[Blob Mckenzie]

First overall would cost Boeser + the 7th. Horvat is of no use to Buffalo with Eichel, Reinhart and O’reilly all capable of playing centre. I’m still not sure if Buffalo does that. I would though.

[Strangelove]

Elmer has had 28 picks in 4 drafts... I’m saying it shouldn’t be hat hard to flesh out the deadwood and get to 9/10 picks a year.

Has there ever been a team that averaged 9.5 picks over 4 years in a 7-round NHL draft you pick-happy son of a bitch?

The Sutter trade wasn’t or isn’t good.

Wrong.