The canucks can't do a "Hall type trade" because they don't have a player like Adam Larsson to give away. That trade wasn't about luck.

The luongo trade or the Bertuzzi trade are lucky deals.
- bloatedmosquito

Luck? U sure make it up as u go.

Yes he did but which came first, the unsustainable pressure or the destructive behavior?
- bloatedmosquito

Agree in full.
That said, hopefully we can get lucky ala MTL with Galchenyuk
- Whiskey-Tango

A Barkov......

I'm not sure what the deal with the Swiss is, but Hirshier is very interesting. Lilgren will likely make Sweden.
- neem55

Pretty sure Lillegren got passed over for Darling, a player eligible in 2018.

Which is why there's no point in worrying about getting that top pick. Why bother when there's no gamebreaker, I liken it to when Edmonton decided to "Fail for Nail" and look how that worked out for them. Why not just stay the course, be mediocre just for this year and then IF next season is like this, that's when you try and be as bad as you can be because the draft class is much better plus the Sedins will be coming off the books and you could convince LE that he'd be better off with another team.
- DariusKnight

Because picking in the top-5 of each round of this draft is very important. NHL draft's are getting stronger, prospects better coached. This is not a weak draft class. A very good in each round is insured by finishing low. Mediocre makes for mediocre pick positions. Last year's pick we traded was 35th overall, that is very high and thus was worth much more in a trade.

So you want to pick someone 1OA (provided we win the lotto of course) who isn't a gamebreaker and who while projected to be a 1C isn't going to be that much more talented then Bo? Do we need another Horvat? That's why I say, stay the course THIS YEAR and then NEXT YEAR when the draft class is projected to have 1 or 2 gamebreakers in the top 3 you can go for the bottom. You'll also have most of the core on either their final year of their contracts (Sedins) and will be able to more easily convince players like Edler, LE and Sutter that they'd be better off elsewhere and get assets for them and then try to stuff the lotto box.

I don't want another Linden or Nedved and that's who I see we'd get this year, if the draft class is that weak, where we pick this year doesn't matter and we might as well stay the course.
- DariusKnight

I don't think the draft is that bad...there are some high end players and likely a couple 1 C's. It likely appears worse than it is due to a very unfortunate amount of injuries to some of the more talented prospects.

Edit. Nico and Patrick are definitely much higher end prospects than Horvat ever was.

So you want to pick someone 1OA (provided we win the lotto of course) who isn't a gamebreaker and who while projected to be a 1C isn't going to be that much more talented then Bo? Do we need another Horvat? That's why I say, stay the course THIS YEAR and then NEXT YEAR when the draft class is projected to have 1 or 2 gamebreakers in the top 3 you can go for the bottom. You'll also have most of the core on either their final year of their contracts (Sedins) and will be able to more easily convince players like Edler, LE and Sutter that they'd be better off elsewhere and get assets for them and then try to stuff the lotto box.

I don't want another Linden or Nedved and that's who I see we'd get this year, if the draft class is that weak, where we pick this year doesn't matter and we might as well stay the course.
- DariusKnight

I'm not so sure this draft class is as weak as you make it out to be. Different opinions out there. Manvanfan thinks Nolan Patrick is a cross between Crosby and Joe Thornton. Jesus christ, that would look good in a canuck jersey.

Because picking in the top-5 of each round of this draft is very important. NHL draft's are getting stronger, prospects better coached. This is not a weak draft class. A very good in each round is insured by finishing low. Mediocre makes for mediocre pick positions. Last year's pick we traded was 35th overall, that is very high and thus was worth much more in a trade.
- neem55

But not a gamebreaker, do we really need another Horvat or Eriksson or Sutter for that matter? If the goal is to eventually be competitive and our team lacks that gamebreaker to drive play, then this is not the draft to get it. Therefore "Trollin' for Nolan" or whoever is consensus 1OA makes no sense, just like Edm's "Fail for Nail" ultimately was a failure.

Pretty sure Lillegren got passed over for Darling, a player eligible in 2018.
- Reubenkincade

Ya, Lillegren didn't even make the preliminary camp roster

Luck? U sure make it up as u go.
- Nighthawk

Sorry? I don't understand your angle.

I know your keyboard only has 15 keys but please do enlighten.

A Barkov......
- Nighthawk

Barkov and Galchenyuk were both top-5 picks, generally unknown players before they were drafted. These are classic examples of why tanking for a top-5 pick is ideal for rebuilding teams.

canucks management (and many Canucks fans) problem is a denial that we need to be/are a rebuilding team. Linden and JB keep saying that they aren't doing this and it will ultimately just take us longer to get back to being competitive again. I really thought our nose dive last year would have woke them up, apparently we need to be mediocre another year first.

In the meantime, I will take solace in the fact that WD and the Sedin's have done an excellent job grooming Bo who looks extremely poised this year after a really tough year last season.

Ya, Lillegren didn't even make the preliminary camp roster
- Whiskey-Tango

He's been injured the entire season, to be fair.

But not a gamebreaker, do we really need another Horvat or Eriksson or Sutter for that matter? If the goal is to eventually be competitive and our team lacks that gamebreaker to drive play, then this is not the draft to get it. Therefore "Trollin' for Nolan" or whoever is consensus 1OA makes no sense, just like Edm's "Fail for Nail" ultimately was a failure.
- DariusKnight

For a quick comparison, Nolan had 102 points in his D-1 season while Horvat had 61. Nolan Patrick is also bigger and more well rounded. They both played on strong teams.

Barkov and Galchenyuk were both top-5 picks, generally unknown players before they were drafted. These are classic examples of why tanking for a top-5 pick is ideal for rebuilding teams.

canucks management (and many Canucks fans) problem is a denial that we need to be/are a rebuilding team. Linden and JB keep saying that they aren't doing this and it will ultimately just take us longer to get back to being competitive again. I really thought our nose dive last year would have woke them up, apparently we need to be mediocre another year first.

In the meantime, I will take solace in the fact that WD and the Sedin's have done an excellent job grooming Bo who looks extremely poised this year after a really tough year last season.
- neem55

This is what you are seeing?

But not a gamebreaker, do we really need another Horvat or Eriksson or Sutter for that matter? If the goal is to eventually be competitive and our team lacks that gamebreaker to drive play, then this is not the draft to get it. Therefore "Trollin' for Nolan" or whoever is consensus 1OA makes no sense, just like Edm's "Fail for Nail" ultimately was a failure.
- DariusKnight

Sure, "No scoring for Nolan" does not guarantee anything, but there's absolutely no rule against tanking for consecutive years.

In fact, i believe that approach might have even been used before

I'm not so sure this draft class is as weak as you make it ut to be. Different opinions out there. Manvanfan thinks Nolan Patrick is a cross between Crosby and Joe Thornton. Jesus christ, that would look good in a canuck jersey.
- bloatedmosquito

He's also injured and in some lists is dropping because of it, and unless Manvanfan is a scout, I tend to take what he says with a grain of salt. He might very well be right, but I tend to look at comparisons like that with skepticism. I mean really, a cross between Crosby who is a generational scorer and Joe Thornton? I've looked at a lot of scouting reports and no one says he's even close to that sort of talent. At best they described him as a Matt Duchene or Anze Kopitar type center which admittedly is more than what we have now.

I'm just saying that trying to go rock bottom this year isn't the time when you can't guarantee that you are going to definitely be 30th overall and get the very best odds for 1OA and if you do happen to win it, that you're not guaranteed someone who can be as good as Tavares or Matthews or McDavid or Stamkos. I freely admit if we do manage to get there that we'll get a 1C, but it'll be a Tier 2 1C that won't be a star.

For a quick comparison, Nolan had 102 points in his D-1 season while Horvat had 61. Nolan Patrick is also bigger and more well rounded. They both played on strong teams.
- CanuckDon

I think I'm going to let you take this one. I agree with you, that Patrick kid is projected to be better than Horvat. Either Darius is overvaluing Horvat or undervaluing Patrick.

He's been injured the entire season, to be fair.
- neem55

ahhh well, i suppose that doesn't help

There is no consistency now playing the system they are and it makes the players look worse. (At least by showing of skill in OT) So change it up and develop a different identity. It's at least more entertaining and can't be any worse in wins then they are getting now.

As for depth it needs improvement. It seems to be more of a factor for championship showings like finishing tops in the league or going for the Cup. The draft will help improve high end impact players and later rounds add to depth for the club that runs into injuries. Also maybe a free agent signing like a Panarin or Veasey find. Plus, a lucky Hall type trade may get them there too.
- Nuck4U

No offense, but you have brought up the system play at least 3 times in past 24 hours and at least 20 times since you joined 2 months ago. Pretty sure most get you don't like it or WD, take the advice you were given the other day, move on and try some new material if no one responds drop it.
Please don't PM me.

But not a gamebreaker, do we really need another Horvat or Eriksson or Sutter for that matter? If the goal is to eventually be competitive and our team lacks that gamebreaker to drive play, then this is not the draft to get it. Therefore "Trollin' for Nolan" or whoever is consensus 1OA makes no sense, just like Edm's "Fail for Nail" ultimately was a failure.
- DariusKnight

I don't understand, Galcheyuk was unknown before that draft. Are you saying Galcheyuk is not a desirable player? Murray? Rielly? Other players in the top-5 of that draft were good. 3/5 are legit top line players and you're using that as an example because edmonton chose the wrong player? Not to mention they also picked 3 other #1 picks that have worked out extremely well for them. Gamebreakers come out of the top-5 more than any other position in the draft, certainly more than 10-30 pick range that being 'mediocre' would get us.

This is what you are seeing?

- CanuckDon

I don't see management embracing that they have a bottom 5 lineup and need to trade what little assets they have, which is what my post indicated. Don't just cherry pick one sentence and expect me to defend it when I've already layed it out.

No offense, but you have brought up the system play at least 3 times in past 24 hours and at least 20 times since you joined 2 months ago. Pretty sure most get you don't like it or WD, take the advice you were given the other day, move on and try some new material if no one responds drop it.
Please don't PM me.
- Reubenkincade

I don't understand, Galcheyuk was unknown before that draft. Are you saying Galcheyuk is not a desirable player? Murray? Rielly? Other players in the top-5 of that draft were good. 3/5 are legit top line players and you're using that as an example because edmonton chose the wrong player? Not to mention they also picked 3 other #1 picks that have worked out extremely well for them. Gamebreakers come out of the top-5 more than any other position in the draft, certainly more than 10-30 pick range that being 'mediocre' would get us.
- neem55

So because other teams got lucky, or developed Galchenyuk, Reilly and Murray in that year that instantly makes all top 5 picks desirable? Yes, the likelihood of getting a gamebreaker is higher, but it's not assured... Jaden Schwartz wasn't a top 5 pick, neither was Kyle Turris or Johnny Gaudreau for that matter. Heck Kopitar, Pavelski and Getzlaf weren't top 5 picks in their draft years. All of whom are pretty good for their teams.

Look, if we end up there, fine, that's hockey and that's the hand you're dealt. I just do not want to see the team dumping players for potential assets and bottoming out in a year where there's no surefire saviour at the top of the draft. Last year I would have been super happy had things shaken out differently and we either kept the 3OA or moved up, this draft I'm not as impressed.

I don't see management embracing that they have a bottom 5 lineup and need to trade what little assets they have, which is what my post indicated. Don't just cherry pick one sentence and expect me to defend it when I've already layed it out.


- neem55

What should they say in the media? Our team stinks and we are embracing a tank? They would be ridiculed and fired pretty quick. I am sure they will try and unload vets once we are eliminated. They certainly tried last and failed miserably. It's a challenge, our vets are terrible

Nico is on the list for the Swiss but I think he will still be injured. Very few draft eligible guys though.
- belcherbd

I don't see anything about him being injured.