manvanfan
Vancouver Canucks |
|
|
Location: MB Joined: 01.21.2012
|
|
|
Nighthawk
Vancouver Canucks |
|
Location: Canuckville, BC Joined: 01.09.2015
|
|
|
If Reinbacher is available I'd draft him. That's it for D at 11 overall.
I would move down though. I still like Oliver Bonk late in the 1st. - golfingsince
Ignore his knee injury & take the risk? |
|
Nighthawk
Vancouver Canucks |
|
Location: Canuckville, BC Joined: 01.09.2015
|
|
|
Well as it is compared to the forward class of 2015. Where does a #3 D go in that class? - manvanfan
I’ll give him a #4 D but #3 is pushing it til he proves it. I like him but don’t like knee injuries til more is known. Look at OEL & what a knee injury did to him. D need mobility to turn & push in any direction to be at their best. |
|
manvanfan
Vancouver Canucks |
|
|
Location: MB Joined: 01.21.2012
|
|
|
If Reinbacher is available I'd draft him. That's it for D at 11 overall.
I would move down though. I still like Oliver Bonk late in the 1st. - golfingsince
I've seen reports from scouts say they wouldn't take a D before 12 in this draft.
Drance did mention Simashev at 11th. |
|
manvanfan
Vancouver Canucks |
|
|
Location: MB Joined: 01.21.2012
|
|
|
I’ll give a#4 D but #3 is pushing it til he proves it. I like him but don’t like knee injuries til more is known. Look at OEL & what a knee injury did to him. D need mobility to turn & push in any direction to be at their best. - Nighthawk
Who is he? I didn't say someone I said a defender that could turn into a good #3 defender. |
|
Nighthawk
Vancouver Canucks |
|
Location: Canuckville, BC Joined: 01.09.2015
|
|
|
Who is he? I didn't say someone I said a defender that could turn into a good #3 defender. - manvanfan
Reinbacher my bad. A #3 D for me is Hronek. If we had a stud LHD #1 it would push Hughes to #3. If he’d sign I’d go for UFA RHD Pesce in 2024. |
|
Nighthawk
Vancouver Canucks |
|
Location: Canuckville, BC Joined: 01.09.2015
|
|
|
I've seen reports from scouts say they wouldn't take a D before 12 in this draft.
Drance did mention Simashev at 11th. - manvanfan
That’s my take as well only being cuz I don’t see any top 2D in this draft. That said D are difficult to project & I’m sure I could be proven wrong. I like Reinbacher & would be ok if he fell. For reason he has a high floor but still leery on his injury. ASP though only 5’11” might be the big surprise being young & if he could up his defensive game a great amount. Too bad we need size & mobility more so. Simashev I keep coming back to cuz something about him tells me whoever takes him will be more than happy. Be very comfortable if we can trade down & pick him especially if the trade addresses other needs or issues. Also him & Reinbacher could step into a line up sooner than later. |
|
Nighthawk
Vancouver Canucks |
|
Location: Canuckville, BC Joined: 01.09.2015
|
|
|
Wtf do I know anyways. Still mulling over many prospects & pure speculation on my part. All I know is this is an important pick or if traded even more important on getting it right. Home run is needed. |
|
manvanfan
Vancouver Canucks |
|
|
Location: MB Joined: 01.21.2012
|
|
|
Reinbacher my bad. A #3 D for me is Hronek. If we had a stud LHD #1 it would push Hughes to #3. If he’d sign I’d go for UFA RHD Pesce in 2024. - Nighthawk
Getting a #1 D doesn't make Hughes somehow worse
The conversation is about talent level, not where you play on a team. OEL is not a #3 defender because he plays 3rd most minutes, he was a #7/8 D last year.
If Hughes is a #2 D, Hronek is a #3. The question is in this draft, where would you draft a player with the same talent level as Hronek.
The 2015 draft class some have compared the forward groups together.
in points order of that class for this exercise we will call these the top 20 best forwards from that 2015 draft.
How many of these forwards would you take ahead of "Hronek" (meaning a #3 defender)?
McDavid
Marner
Rantanen
Aho
Eichel
Connor
Barzal
Konecny
Meier
Boeser
Hintz
Zacha
D. Strome
Kaprizov
Beauvillier
Debrusk
Eriksson Ek
Garland
Roslovic
Cirelli |
|
|
|
That's like Woo saying he should have been called up by now. - manvanfan
Woo’s stats don’t really compare.
I’d offer Rathbone straight up for him. |
|
manvanfan
Vancouver Canucks |
|
|
Location: MB Joined: 01.21.2012
|
|
|
Woo’s stats don’t really compare. - Shuswap Wap
No but of the Moose games I watched, not all that many the past couple years, he was very meh for a player, not someone who jumped off the page that he should have a NHL shot. |
|
golfingsince
|
|
|
Location: This message is Marwood approved! Joined: 11.30.2011
|
|
|
I've seen reports from scouts say they wouldn't take a D before 12 in this draft.
Drance did mention Simashev at 11th. - manvanfan
Well I mean if you're picking at 11 and the top D is rated 12 I'd say that's a good fit no? |
|
|
|
No but of the Moose games I watched, not all that many the past couple years, he was very meh for a player, not someone who jumped off the page that he should have a NHL shot. - manvanfan
Fair enough |
|
VanHockeyGuy
|
|
|
Location: “Who are we to think we’re anybody?” - Tocchet. Penticton, BC Joined: 04.26.2012
|
|
|
Woo’s stats don’t really compare.
I’d offer Rathbone straight up for him. - Shuswap Wap
Canucks future D core.
|
|
manvanfan
Vancouver Canucks |
|
|
Location: MB Joined: 01.21.2012
|
|
|
Scott Wheeler
I think it’s worth pointing out that the three finalists for the Norris Trophy this year are 6-feet, 5-foot-11 and 5-foot-11.
Sandin Pellikka’s not going to get to that level. But there are *a lot* of impactful D his size in the NHL and his merits as an early pick are real.
In his draft year in Swedish Junior league he outscored Karlsson and Adam Boqvist. He also outscored them in u18s as well.
I think anyone that worries he becomes Nils Lundkvist or Timothy Liljgren, he doubled their junior production.
Yes, whether most want to admit it or not, production is still a pretty good predictor of future success. |
|
Marwood
|
|
|
Location: Cumberland, BC Joined: 03.18.2010
|
|
|
Duh on need. Drance is so stupid lol
As for drafting 1 remains to be seen. I’m not sold this D class is worth taking one at 11oa. - Nighthawk
Says the guy who posts links to Canucks Army on a daily basis. |
|
manvanfan
Vancouver Canucks |
|
|
Location: MB Joined: 01.21.2012
|
|
|
Well I mean if you're picking at 11 and the top D is rated 12 I'd say that's a good fit no? - golfingsince
It would be better also to trade down and instead of picking up just 1 top 4 D possibly 2 top 4 D... |
|
LeftCoaster
|
|
|
Location: Valley Of The Sun Joined: 07.03.2009
|
|
|
Says the guy who posts links to Canucks Army on a daily basis. - Marwood
|
|
VanHockeyGuy
|
|
|
Location: “Who are we to think we’re anybody?” - Tocchet. Penticton, BC Joined: 04.26.2012
|
|
|
Says the guy who posts links to Canucks Army on a daily basis. - Marwood
Hot Trash.
|
|
manvanfan
Vancouver Canucks |
|
|
Location: MB Joined: 01.21.2012
|
|
|
Says the guy who posts links to Canucks Army on a daily basis. - Marwood
Are you disputing that Drance isn't stupid? |
|
Marwood
|
|
|
Location: Cumberland, BC Joined: 03.18.2010
|
|
|
Are you disputing that Drance isn't stupid? - manvanfan
No. |
|
golfingsince
|
|
|
Location: This message is Marwood approved! Joined: 11.30.2011
|
|
|
Are you disputing that Drance isn't stupid? - manvanfan
Are you disputing the irony? |
|
manvanfan
Vancouver Canucks |
|
|
Location: MB Joined: 01.21.2012
|
|
|
Are you disputing the irony? - golfingsince
You and I don't think the same. |
|
golfingsince
|
|
|
Location: This message is Marwood approved! Joined: 11.30.2011
|
|
|
You and I don't think the same. - manvanfan
It wasn't a shot at you, Drance's roots are with CA. |
|
manvanfan
Vancouver Canucks |
|
|
Location: MB Joined: 01.21.2012
|
|
|
It wasn't a shot at you, Drance's roots are with CA. - golfingsince
I got that yeah.
Drance is an idiot and Canucks army is terrible but neither take is actually Nighty's.
P.s.
Are you watching your boy Bonk play right now? |
|
Page: Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70, 71, 72, 73, 74, 75 Next |