that is completely your interpretation. If you think Gaudette and Forsling are the norm for their draft position, than you are wrong. They are the exception, not the rule. Far worse players were chosen before them is all I am saying.
- Codes1087

For sure, but why they were drafted is what should be the norm for the Canucks with every pick. Neither were drafted because they can fight or because they're good at killing penalties but suck offensively, both were thought to have good upside when drafted(Forsling a PMD, Gaudette a 3LC, two valuable commodities in the NHL).

For sure, but why they were drafted is what should be the norm for the Canucks with every pick. Neither were drafted because they can fight or because they're good at killing penalties but suck offensively, both were thought to have good upside when drafted(Forsling a PMD, Gaudette a 3LC, two valuable commodities in the NHL).
- Nucker101

your goal is to have every single pick that you make, be an NHL impactful regular, but the historical data and stats don't lie, that the later round picks have a very very small chance of making the NHL. While Gaudette and Forsling and Hansen are players that stand out in particular as late round picks who have made an impact (to some degree), there is reason why no one remembers our previous 5th to 7th round picks in the last 10 drafts lol.

that is completely your interpretation. If you think Gaudette and Forsling are the norm for their draft position, than you are wrong. They are the exception, not the rule. Far worse players were chosen before them is all I am saying.
- Codes1087

Where do you get that I think that's the norm? It was a preference. It's what I would do.

You basically just called him Nuck4U
- Nucker101

your goal is to have every single pick that you make, be an NHL impactful regular, but the historical data and stats don't lie, that the later round picks have a very very small chance of making the NHL. While Gaudette and Forsling and Hansen are players that stand out in particular as late round picks who have made an impact (to some degree), there is reason why no one remembers our previous 5th to 7th round picks in the last 10 drafts lol.
- Codes1087

You don't need to explain other peoples own thoughts to them.

The blog is now up, trying to read between the lines on the group that's headed to L.A. for game action tomorrow and musing on the rumours about where Goldobin, Rodin and Holm could fit into the Canucks lineup:

http://www.hockeybuzz.com...-LA-on-Saturday/194/87399

your goal is to have every single pick that you make, be an NHL impactful regular, but the historical data and stats don't lie, that the later round picks have a very very small chance of making the NHL. While Gaudette and Forsling and Hansen are players that stand out in particular as late round picks who have made an impact (to some degree), there is reason why no one remembers our previous 5th to 7th round picks in the last 10 drafts lol.
- Codes1087

I realize that, my point was that we should always be drafting Palmu/Gaudette/Forsling type of prospects(they don't have to all pan out), instead of guys like Pettit/Stewart. I just want to see upside drafted and actual skill, even if the players don't pan out at least the team drafted decent prospects and didn't waste the draft picks. Eventually you will find a Hansen if you stick with that process. The more lottery tickets you scratch, the higher the odds of winning a thousand bucks one day.

I think we can all agree on that. I think fans should be more upset when the team throws away late round picks on guys who have little to no upside or throw in mid/late round picks in random trades that won't help the team in the long run anyway.

You don't need to explain other peoples own thoughts to them.
- manvanfan

you're being a bit sensitive. The whole point of a hockey blog website is to discuss your opinions and have other people offer insight on theirs on a particular subject. loosen up

If you draft a player in his +1 draft with picks in your top 5 rounds, it seems dumb to me. Not that I think those players would stand out THAT much in their draft +1 year to be taken in the top 5 rounds, but your focus should definitely be draft eligible kids. What you do with your late late picks is completely dependent on organizational depth and need.
- Codes1087

Tryamkin was passed over twice... then Benning drafted him in the 2rd round. Was that a mistake? Is he a bad player because he returned to Russia? No, it was a solid pick, even though he was an over age player in the top three rounds.

I realize that, my point was that we should always be drafting Palmu/Gaudette/Forsling type of prospects(they don't have to all pan out), instead of guys like Pettit/Stewart. I just want to see upside drafted and actual skill, even if the players don't pan out at least the team drafted decent prospects and didn't waste the draft picks. Eventually you will find a Hansen if you stick with that process. The more lottery tickets you scratch, the higher the odds of winning a thousand bucks one day.

I think we can all agree on that. I think fans should be more upset when the team throws away late round picks on guys who have little to no upside or throw in mid/late round picks in random trades that won't help the team in the long run anyway.
- Nucker101

I 100% agree with you, what I am trying to say though is that we have absolutely no way of knowing if Palmu or Gaudette are better picks than say Stewart or Brassard or Pettit until a season or two after their draft. Hindsight is 20/20. Your hope is that all your picks have a significant impact on your organizations future. Palmu has 3 Liga games under his belt, we have no sample size to say that his pick is in any way better than picking Stewart or Forsling as this point.

Yeah, I'm 100% for drafting overage prospects if they actual have some nice upside. Mallet and Grenier from what I remember, were thought to be solid 3rd line players as their potential, and their downside was obviously career minor leaguers. To me, those picks start to make sense in the 5th, 6th and 7th rounds, not the 2nd and 3rd rounds. I'd rather swing for higher upside and more skill at that point. Severson was thought of to have 2nd pairing dman upside and his defensive game had some question marks, but the skill was definitely there and he just needed to round out his game and be more consistent.

Palmu in the 6th I'm on board with. Soy in the 7th round, I would have been pleased with had the Canucks taken him as well.
- Nucker101

Like i just said. Ty as a 3 round over age player was a Solid pick... so you are now proven to be 100 percent wrong.
All credibility you may have accrued is now forsaken and you're relegated to Scooby status. 🤥

I 100% agree with you, what I am trying to say though is that we have absolutely no way of knowing if Palmu or Gaudette are better picks than say Stewart or Brassard or Pettit until a season or two after their draft. Hindsight is 20/20. Your hope is that all your picks have a significant impact on your organizations future. Palmu has 3 Liga games under his belt, we have no sample size to say that his pick is in any way better than picking Stewart or Forsling as this point.
- Codes1087

But the process and logic behind the pick is 100% better. Go look at any draft data study done, the guys in the CHL who put up more points have the higher odds of becoming NHL players. Palmu is 100% a smarter pick than Stewart even if both of them never make the NHL.

It gets more cloudy when drafting Euro(and lesser North American league) players since there's different factors in play there so those picks are more scout-based since every situation is really unique.

Like i just said. Ty as a 3 round over age player was a Solid pick... so you are now proven to be 100 percent wrong.
All credibility you may have accrued is now forsaken and you're relegated to Scooby status. 🤥
- Pres.cup

Btw he was drafted in the 7th round, so I guess you're #fakenews

The process is 100% better. Go look at any draft data study done, the guys in the CHL who put up more points have the higher odds of becoming NHL players. Palmu is 100% a smarter pick than Stewart even if both of them never make the NHL.

It gets more cloudy when drafting Euro(and lesser North American league) players since there's different factors in play there so those picks are more scout-based since every situation is really unique.
- Nucker101

oh I 100% agree with you, that JB drafting with the mindset of players who have more productive statistical seasons in their draft year have a much higher chance at becoming impactful players than say players with "grit/soul/etc". That is why I love the "speed and skill" mindset JB and company had while drafting this year. I have never been more pumped about a Canucks draft than our previous one.

I for one remember Ben Hutton as a 5th round pick.

I for one remember Ben Hutton as a 5th round pick.
- golfingsince

and I don't think he was ever drafted for his "Meat and Potato's" hockey style of play

and I don't think he was ever drafted for his "Meat and Potato's" hockey style of play
- Codes1087

No he wasn't.

They should be drafting for skill every time.

No he wasn't.

They should be drafting for skill every time.
- golfingsince

100% agree. Even with drafting Jonah Gadvovich, he was known to be a super strong player who can play in the crease and hit, but his goal totals were 3rd highest in the league last year. Speed + Skill, but if you can add a bit of grit and toughness, that is always welcome

Maybe his brother should give him some pointers and teach him how to play defense... you'd think he'd learn from him at least...
- kaptaan

hes not so great at D either

hes not so great at D either
- SMBDragon

I don't think you saw him play in Nashville then, he was way more well rounded this year.