Rumor: Friedman: Vancouver is a "stealth team" in the hunt for Noah Hanifin
- Thread starter F A N
- Start date
y2kcanucks
Le Sex God
It would be between Hanifin and Hamonic. Doing the deal right now I would target Hanifin over Hamonic given their ages. Reinhart obviously is last.
Question for you: If Mike Gillis were offering the 7th round pick for Noah Hanifin, would you be okay with it?
Next question: If Jim Benning were looking to trade Noah Hanifin for the 7th round pick, would you be okay with it?
geebaan
7th round busted
- Oct 27, 2012
- 10,335
- 9,004
If this gets answered I would be amazingly suprised.
ChefBoiRD
Registered User
- Feb 26, 2018
- 593
- 249
I've already stated that I would be non too pleased if we gave up a 7th for Hanafin. But let me ask you this, what if Benning did give up the 7th for Hanafin and Hanafin ends up better than the prospects Benning "would" have selected with the 7th pick? Hanafin is what 21 years old? I can see the temptation.
Foundational Player
Benning the Incompetent
What did Gillis do to you in a former life? Get over it man, he is no longer in the NHL........its ok, just let it go.
We all agree Keith Ballard was a horrendous acquisition but who cares its no longer relevant.
Your boy Benning has been on the job for 4 years now, its his team, his vision, his design.
I believe the team has 2 full time players remaining from the Gillis regime. Tanev and Edler.
Couple of Gillis prospects are now playing in the NHL, Horvat, Gaunce, Markstrom, Beiga and Archibald.
But overall this is the team Jim Benning built and its not very good.
Acquiring Hanafin would address the teams need for help on the backend but I fear the cost will not justify trading a first round pick or a package that includes young players/prospects.
Keep the pick. Take the Cheveldayoff approach and accumulate a ton of high end prospects, no short term fixes!!!
geebaan
7th round busted
- Oct 27, 2012
- 10,335
- 9,004
then its still the wrong thought process for a supposed "rebuilding team". Its Brian Burke on the Leafs, and look how that train wreck turned out.
ChefBoiRD
Registered User
- Feb 26, 2018
- 593
- 249
"then it's still the wrong thought process"?
I'm trying to compute this without much success - Hanafin is 21 years old. If he ends up better than what was available at the 7th pick, it's still the wrong move??? I gotta say geebaan, I just cannot be on your side with your viewpoint on this.
geebaan
7th round busted
- Oct 27, 2012
- 10,335
- 9,004
so targeting Phil Kessel, and giving up the futures necessary to do it, was the right moves for the Leafs yea?
y2kcanucks
Le Sex God
Hanifin projects as a number 4 defenseman. Players like Hughes, Bouchard, and Dobson could all be better than that. At the very least you would expect them to match what Hanifin has done. Only difference is Hanifin has already burned through his ELC while you would still have Hughes/Bouchard/Dobson on a cheap contract for 3 years, on a clock that likely doesn't even begin for another year.
And going beyond that: it's likely Benning would be asked to add to the 7th overall pick to get Hanifin. The amount of assets required to pull this deal off doesn't make sense for what's supposed to be a rebuilding team.
ChefBoiRD
Registered User
- Feb 26, 2018
- 593
- 249
I do agree with this, especially when you consider the assets given up for defencemen like Adam Larson, Hamonic, Reinhart, Hamilton, Gudbranson, Zadorov, Seth Jones, Sergachev.
geebaan
7th round busted
- Oct 27, 2012
- 10,335
- 9,004
nowhereman
Registered User
This is the team Jim Benning had to build in a few years because he was left with zero prospect depth, coming off one of the worst stretches of drafting in professional sports, and a bunch of aging veterans with NTCs who were in the twilight of their career. What did you expect Benning to do, in under 4 years, outside of signing plugs to fill the holes throughout a very average line-up? Gillis' successes seem to overshadow the fact that his regime failed to set-up the Canucks for the future in almost any way, outside of trading Schneider for Horvat.
Benning hasn't exactly been that successful (yet) in rebuilding this team but the guy hasn't had much to work with. The Canucks were a mess when he arrived.
ChefBoiRD
Registered User
- Feb 26, 2018
- 593
- 249
see, its not impossible to find some common ground
I do believe that it's very difficult to land quality defenceman, this is nothing new, hence their market premiums. This is the basic gyst of of why I defend the Juolevi pick. You always build from goaltending (Demko, DiPietro), defence (Juolevi), centres (Horvat, Pettersson, Gaudette) out. Wingers are the least valuable, not to mention we had just drafted to wingers in the first round of the two prior drafts to Juolevi's - Virtanen and Boeser.
I am quite confident that the complaints about the Juolevi pick will subside over time as he becomes a seasoned NHL player.
y2kcanucks
Le Sex God
And once again you will be proven wrong. Tkachuk/Keller was the right pick at the time. You draft BPA, not for need. And even if they drafted for need the right pick would have been Sergachev. McAvoy is the better defenseman but he was too far down that unless you're going to trade down for him, taking him at 5 would have been a stretch.
ChefBoiRD
Registered User
- Feb 26, 2018
- 593
- 249
I think you might be a tad early with the judgement on Juolevi's wherewithal at the NHL level. We have yet to see him play a game. This is where you and I part ways, or one of the ways.
Thank you for pointing out that the McAvoy missed opportunity should in no way be used against the decision Benning's Team made at 5, he was a stretch at 5. This is the first time I've seen some objectivity from you y2k. Yes you are wound up tighter than an 8 day clock when it comes to Benning, but it's nice to see you ease off the angry gas pedal every two moons or so.
VancouverJagger
Not trying to fit in
Ahhhh yes............another prime example of how a Benning Basher distorts things to suit their narrative. On one hand chastising Benning for not taking the BPA (and consensus pick Tkachuk) but on the other hand saying the right pick would have been Segachev - which is strange because he wasn't ranked above Juolevi............
It must be nice to have the benefit of having hindsight and right about EVERY single decision..........from what is this magical land you come from?
#letsnotletthetruthinterferewithournarrativeshallwe
y2kcanucks
Le Sex God
I was very objective in that long post I made in the management thread that you just blatantly ignored.
y2kcanucks
Le Sex God
Except Sergachev was ranked ahead of Juolevi on many lists, and it was reported that Edmonton was set to take Sergachev at 4 until Puljujarvi fell in their laps.
Not the benefit of hindsight at all when I had the foresight to say this the day of the draft. But keep playing that card.
VancouverJagger
Not trying to fit in
Oh I see............so now Sergachev was also the BPA and consensus pick whom Benning should have picked? (Well him or Tkachuk) Sorry hard to keep up with this many twists to the story.........
y2kcanucks
Le Sex God
We're getting off topic, but I would suggest actually re-reading what I wrote. That might help.
ChefBoiRD
Registered User
- Feb 26, 2018
- 593
- 249
blatantly? If memory serves me correctly I recall reading some of it, if not all. I don't remember much of what you said, and please do not take this as me having the lack of respect towards you and this post of yours, it's just that my retention for this kind of stuff here is not the greatest as I have more pertinent issues not relating to this forum that requires a significant amount of retaining in my brain.
He had to trade away an entire drafts' worth of picks and was unable to acquire a single top-4 dman?
He had refuse a future oriented return for Kesler?
He had to completely botch 2 of 3 top 6 draft picks?
He had to trade away a young former 1st and a 33rd (and 4th) to acquire one of the least effective defenders in the league?
He had to trade away a better player and better draft pick to acquire (and subsequently overpay) Sutter?
He had to target low-upside 22/23 year olds and pay valuable picks for them?
He had to sign a veteran goalie to a bloated contract who then performed like a goalie with half the salary?
Actually Juolevi was generally regarded as the best D man in the draft. This was summarized by Bob McKenzie right before the draft. As a matter of fact, McKenzie had lumped Juolevi in a tier with players like Tkachuk and Dubois:
https://www.tsn.ca/matthews-goes-wire-to-wire-as-tsn-s-top-prospect-1.511597
"For example, the first layer beyond the Big Three is a four-man grouping that includes three different types of wingers — Tkachuk, who is strong from the top of the circles down; Dubois, who has a strong 200-foot game; and Nylander, whose skill and hockey sense are considered elite — and the one defenceman Juolevi, who's viewed as the best all-around blueliner in the draft.
[..]
Outside of Juolevi, who had nine of 10 votes as a top-10 prospect, consensus wasn't easy to come by on the defencemen. Five of 10 scouts viewed Sergachev as a top-10 prospect; four of 10 had Bean in their top 10; three of 10 had Chychrun in their top 10; two of 10 had McAvoy in the top 10"
Look at that..."Outside of Juolevi...consnensus wasnt easy to come by on the defencemen" - worth repeating eh?
Of course you might be arrogant enough to assume that you are more qualified to make these assessments than McKenzie (and to be honest I dont care about any armchair style predictions you made prior to the draft, anyone that can type can take a good guess..kinda like predicting a score), but Bob's assessment of the situation indicates to me that (at the very least) the perception of who was the better D man at the time was far from cut and dry as you try and present it to be in order to bash Benning. In the end I'll take Bob's word regarding this matter over yours every day of the week, I hope you understand.
Last edited:
McKenzie also notes that his list is based on interviews with 10 scouts and that his rankings are just a prediction of where players are going to be picked:
Unlike many of the fine scouting services out there, which attempt to evaluate which prospects will turn out to be the best players in the NHL over the next five years, TSN's rankings are more a narrow prediction or forecast of when on draft day a prospect is most likely to be chosen.
TSN's top 80 is determined on the basis of a survey of 10 NHL scouts to get a consensus ranking. From our end, it's a highly objective exercise in numerically plotting the highly subjective views of the NHL scouts surveyed.
McKenzie's list does what it is supposed to do well: it does a good job at predicting where players will be taken. But it's not the gospel when it comes to rankings - its just another data point compared to the other lists that get pumped out by scouting services. It's certainly not McKenzie's "assessment" of the situation.
Unlike many of the fine scouting services out there, which attempt to evaluate which prospects will turn out to be the best players in the NHL over the next five years, TSN's rankings are more a narrow prediction or forecast of when on draft day a prospect is most likely to be chosen.
TSN's top 80 is determined on the basis of a survey of 10 NHL scouts to get a consensus ranking. From our end, it's a highly objective exercise in numerically plotting the highly subjective views of the NHL scouts surveyed.
McKenzie's list does what it is supposed to do well: it does a good job at predicting where players will be taken. But it's not the gospel when it comes to rankings - its just another data point compared to the other lists that get pumped out by scouting services. It's certainly not McKenzie's "assessment" of the situation.
Its not his assessment of the situation? LOL. Surveying scouts, and talking to other authorities around the league, and then predicting where the players rank is not an assessment? This place is highly amusing sometimes.
Anyhow, at the very least McKenzie's survey shows us that a) Sergachev was not an obvious choice ahead of Juolevi b) multiple pros that get paid to assess these situations had Juolevi in the conversation with guys like Tkachuck and Dubois and considered him the best D man in the draft.
