Prospect Info: Cole Candella 140th overall

PetterssonSimp

Registered User
Dec 12, 2008
7,374
917
Offensive defenceman is an absolute need moving forward with this retool/rebuild on the fly. Hopefully he has a full healthy season coming up, a possible to good to not trade for by a Junior contender if that's where he's projected back too? As I won't try to pretend I know anything of much past the 100th overall pick.
Can someone post his player profile and some write up if possible?
 

xtra

Registered User
May 19, 2002
8,323
4,765
Vancouver
Visit site
See, here's a pick that people don't hate so its not like we hate everything he does. I would have gone a different direction but hey its a fine pick.
 

PM

Glass not 1/2 full
Apr 8, 2014
9,869
1,664
See, here's a pick that people don't hate so its not like we hate everything he does. I would have gone a different direction but hey its a fine pick.

Yeah this is the one pick I have absolutely no problems with. Everything else.. bleh.
 

thefeebster

Registered User
Mar 13, 2009
7,185
1,651
Vancouver
I would say this is the best value pick we had in this draft. Though i am not a huge fan of Candella, he does a lot of things well, but nothing too great. Jack of all trades two-way defender, but master of none. I don't really have an issue with his hockey sense in the limited amount of times i watched him, but its just tough projecting him as to what he will settle into.

I would hope we send out an invite to his team-mate, Ben Gleason, great skater and more offensively driven.
 

CanaFan

Registered User
Feb 19, 2010
19,887
5,849
BC
I really like this pick, I think one of him or Brisebois will become a top 4 defensman for us.

These are the kinds of bets I don't mind making because players like this are so unfinished that in 3 or 4 years you might have a Bieksa or Hutton on your hands.

It's the forward picks that I can't stand because if you aren't a scorer at 17 there's very little chance you become one at 21. And I don't see the value in drafting bottom 6 forwards when there are suitable replacements available on waivers and UFA every year.

Draft scorers high.

Draft defense everywhere else.

Fill in bottom 6 with the ones that don't pan out, waivers, UFA, and cheap trades.
 

alternate

Win the week!
Jun 9, 2006
8,219
3,166
victoria
These are the kinds of bets I don't mind making because players like this are so unfinished that in 3 or 4 years you might have a Bieksa or Hutton on your hands.

It's the forward picks that I can't stand because if you aren't a scorer at 17 there's very little chance you become one at 21. And I don't see the value in drafting bottom 6 forwards when there are suitable replacements available on waivers and UFA every year.

Draft scorers high.

Draft defense everywhere else.

Fill in bottom 6 with the ones that don't pan out, waivers, UFA, and cheap trades.


So you are firmly against going best player available then? Interesting take....
 

CanaFan

Registered User
Feb 19, 2010
19,887
5,849
BC
So you are firmly against going best player available then? Interesting take....

Firmly? No.

But how do you compare if Juolevi or Tkachuk is BPA?

If one projects as a top line F and one as a top 2-3 D, what is BPA? Both project near the top of their position in which case I would prioritize the scoring forward because you aren't going to find one in the 3rd or 4th round.

Now if the D is a clear cut higher than any forward then yes, BPA applies and you take the D. But in close situations I would look to positional scarcity as a tie breaker.

In later rounds I rarely like forwards unless they are skilled guys with a deficiency (size, skating). Too many guys with no real chance to be anything but bottom 6 filler. In those rounds I think D are better bets to turn into something good.

Again more of a broad rule that I like to see applied after obvious cases of BPA.
 

M2Beezy

Objective and Neutral Hockey Commentator
Sponsor
May 25, 2014
45,784
31,099
Very good pick Jimbo nice gem find again
 

Nucker101

Foundational Poster
Apr 2, 2013
21,174
16,653
I'll admit I have no idea who he was, but if Brock and Feebster like the pick then so do I.
 

me2

Go ahead foot
Jun 28, 2002
37,903
5,595
Make my day.
I like it. Gambling on injury depleted season at this point of the draft to get a higher rated player cheap isn't a bad thing. I wish we added his partner too.
 
Last edited:

Skirbs1011

Registered User
May 18, 2015
1,498
54
Seems like a solid selection.

Everything I have read basically agrees that if he played the full season he could have been a 3rd rnd pick.

Throw him in with Subban, Brisebois, Stetcher, Neil and Olson and hopefully a few of them pan out to be everyday NHL Dmen.
 

VanJack

Registered User
Jul 11, 2014
21,376
14,642
Going out on a limb here but I'm confident he will be a NHL top 4 dman.

Wow!....that's a big limb alright....can't help thinking about the last time the Canucks landed a d-man from the OHL who'd "have gone a lot higher in the draft if he hadn't been injured"...name of Evan McEneny ring a bell?..so far buried in the ECHL...frankly I think draftees like Olson or Brisbois might still have a higher ceiling....but that's the wonderful thing about the draft...as they say, "hope floats".
 

BenningHurtsMySoul

Unfair Huggy Bear
Mar 18, 2008
25,290
10,974
Port Coquitlam, BC
20 points in 37 games as a draft eligible dman is pretty good production. Especially savvy to get him in the 5th round.

Unfortunately the rest of our picks besides Juolevi were crap.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad