Proposal: 2015 1st Round Pick. Forward or D-Man?

[denkiteki]

A lot of things would change what we pick... most of that depends on the 2014 season. For us to get 10th overall pick, that likely means we missed the playoff so we might be sellers @ the deadline. Moves then would completely alter what we need @ the draft.

On top of that, to have a top pick, odds are something went wrong during the season (or multiple things). On paper right now, that's likely forward but if it could be D too. Also again depending on deadline moves, if we move a few Ds, then the need increases.

All things equal, assuming we pick tomorrow (say it was 2014 draft and this was the day before the draft without knowing the players), then i would say D. Simple reason, the last few drafts we have picked a forward. Actually the last Dman we took in the first round was Luc Bourdon (RIP) and that also happens to be 10th overall. Kinda makes the number 10 a running trend if that happens... We have a few decent D prospect but nothing that screams top pairing prospect. On top of that, we have a few decent forward prospect that have top 6 upside already.

 

[Shareefruck]

You have listed two of the factors with your questions, among others. I'm also much more confident in the trade value of a 2/3 centre, than I am a mid-pairing Dman.

Another Horvat would be sublime. I'm a believer in that solid 200 ft C archtype. It's extremely important because I think the middle6 talent is really what separates teams in the cap era. Strength there can allow a GM to do so much more elsewhere, IMO. So the Dman would have to offer more by comparison, for me to reconsider.

True. We seem to be pretty good at cobbling together a pretty solid D-core via low picks and UFA signings, whereas it seems virtually impossible to build your center depth that way.

I agree with the general sentiment that a #1 is usually what puts a team over the top, but it seems like a luxury to me, a #1/above average 2C seems to be a prerequisite to even get your foot in the game, to me.

On the other hand, if Horvat, Gaunce, and McCann all turn out as well as I think they can and become a nice looking 3 centers to build around, I'd still be hesitant to draft another similar caliber center.

 

[arsmaster*]

Why are people posting things like #1C or #1D.....that's a pretty insane projection, especially if it means what I think you guys want it to mean.

I imagine the people talking #1C are meaning like a top 10C in the entire league, is that right?

I'd like to see them continue with a 2way push, but I think at this point we're probably in the position where we can finally afford to take a few swings for the high end.....a game breaker.

I don't care what position that player is, but I don't think we'd go wrong picking a forward, and unless it's clear cut the dman projects better, I think with the first pick that's probably the best course of action; especially because you can always go for defensman later in the draft, and it looks like there should be some gems into the middle rounds.

 

[Canadian Canuck]

If that player projects to be an offensive dominant #1 center, I'd take him.

 

[bossram]

As others said, all things equal take a forward. Less development risk and closer to NHL. Also easier to find quality d-men later than forwards.

I wouldn't take another Horvat/McCann quality player though. We have too many safe forwards. We need some skill in the pipeline.

 

[me2]

Why are people posting things like #1C or #1D.....that's a pretty insane projection, especially if it means what I think you guys want it to mean.

I imagine the people talking #1C are meaning like a top 10C in the entire league, is that right?

It would be nice if they turned out to be a top 10 centre in the league but I assume they are just talking about taking a guy with the offensive upside to properly run a 1st line/pp.

I'd like to see them continue with a 2way push, but I think at this point we're probably in the position where we can finally afford to take a few swings for the high end.....a game breaker.

That goes with aiming for a guy who could be a 1C.

 

[BobbyJazzLegs]

1C - projects better than Horvat
1D - projects better than Hamhuis

?

 

[biturbo19]

Every time i look at this draft, i see this collection of skilled centers and can't help but think one of them is likely to be "BPA" where we end up picking. And i'd be very okay with grabbing one of them. Whether that's one of the "top-10" sort of guys, or one of the ones projected to fall somewhere in the "middle of the first round" range, there looks to be a nice depth of guys who project well as Centers in this draft (especially at the top). Especially compared to last year which seemed weak on true Centers.

Hard to ever have too many good young center prospects.

 

[Serac]

BPA

Though quite honestly
I'd love if we were able to snag a Barzal or Konecny, but I seriously doubt we'd be able to pick them up
Even though we do need a few more D prospects

 

[IntangiBo]

Is it too early to complain about whoever we pick? We should have picked that other guy.

 

[arsmaster*]

It would be nice if they turned out to be a top 10 centre in the league but I assume they are just talking about taking a guy with the offensive upside to properly run a 1st line/pp.



That goes with aiming for a guy who could be a 1C.

I mean, a guy like Mike Ribeiro could be considered a 1C.

I mean, guys like Getzlaf didn't project as 1C's....so much needs to happen.

I believe people just want scoring forwards, preferably centers....same as me, but I'm not going to put position, especially forward vs wingers in the way of that. For example if the choice was between Dylan Strome and Mitchell Marner, I think I'd be willing to take the winger in this scenario because of the compete level and ability to elevate his linemates....even from the wing.

 

[biturbo19]

I mean, a guy like Mike Ribeiro could be considered a 1C.

I mean, guys like Getzlaf didn't project as 1C's....so much needs to happen.

I believe people just want scoring forwards, preferably centers....same as me, but I'm not going to put position, especially forward vs wingers in the way of that. For example if the choice was between Dylan Strome and Mitchell Marner, I think I'd be willing to take the winger in this scenario because of the compete level and ability to elevate his linemates....even from the wing.

This is all very true. "Projecting" prospects is always a bit of a crapshoot.

Even there, you list Strome and Marner...implying one is likely a winger...but which?

 

[arsmaster*]

This is all very true. "Projecting" prospects is always a bit of a crapshoot.

Even there, you list Strome and Marner...implying one is likely a winger...but which?

Strome is your prototypical sizeable Center prospect. Marner had played C, but also can dominate off the wing.

Both players have played on a line previously. Excellent chemistry, although marner seems to be one those types who can create chemistry with anyone.

 

[Virtanen2Horvat]

Scratch the defense. I think we should go for Pavel Zacha.

Shinkaruk - Zacha - Virtanen
McCann - Horvat - Kassian
Guance - Bonino - Jensen
Matthias - Cassels - Dorsett

Then next year I would aim for a defenseman or maybe even the 2nd round this year.

Future:

Edler - Tanev
Sbisa - Corrado
Stanton - Tryamkin

I hope Tryamkin becomes a sick player, maybe he will pass Corrado.

 

[The Iron Goalie]

I see it this way. If we suck again, and finish with a top 10 pick I'don't want one of the top C's unless Hanifin is there. Then Oliver Kylington if no C/Hanifin.

If we are a competitive team, but miss the playoffs in the 10-14 range...I'd want bpa ie a faller like say Strome, or Connor.

And if we make the playoffs I'd take a swing at a guy like Franzen/Svechnikov/Merkley/Anderson. Regardless we should get a good to great prospect.

 

[Bitz and Bites]

I'd like to see them continue with a 2way push, but I think at this point we're probably in the position where we can finally afford to take a few swings for the high end.....a game breaker.

I don't care what position that player is, but I don't think we'd go wrong picking a forward, and unless it's clear cut the dman projects better, I think with the first pick that's probably the best course of action; especially because you can always go for defensman later in the draft, and it looks like there should be some gems into the middle rounds.

A high end offensive game breaker is exactly what we'll need to put us back on the map again.
Shinkaruk,Virtanen and McCann all have that potential but are far from a slam dunk at this point so someone who looks more like a sure thing would be fantastic.
Also,with WD and his fast paced system coming in,we need to draft skilled players that will be a good fit for that on forward and D.I think Corrado,Hutton,Subban,Forsling,and even McNally (if he gets back on track) all have potential to work well in that kind of system but our F prospects that would be a good fit are pretty thin.

 

[ginner classic]

Long term we still need:


1C
1RW
1D
2D
4RW


Virtanen---?---?-----
Shinkaruk-Horvat--Kassian
Gaunce--McCann--Jensen
Fox-----Cassels-----??


?-------?
Edler Tanev
Hutton Corrado
Sbisa
Stanton


Lack
Demko


Elite Center or top pairing D. Either are fine. We need two more solid drafts to fix this.


Trading some or all of Richardson (WSH), Higgins (PIT/TOR/BOS/WSH), Burrows (MTL), Hansen (PIT/WPG/BOS), Matthias (TOR/WSH) and Bieksa (ANA/FLA/TOR) at the deadline might free up some draft picks in 2nd-7th rounds. For the rest, we just need to tank.

 

[Trelane]

Long term we still need:

1C
1RW
1D
2D
4RW

Virtanen---?---?-----
Shinkaruk-Horvat--Kassian
Gaunce--McCann--Jensen
Fox-----Cassels-----??

?-------?
Edler Tanev
Hutton Corrado
Sbisa
Stanton

Lack
Demko

Elite Center or top pairing D. Either are fine. We need two more solid drafts to fix this.

Trading some or all of Richardson (WSH), Higgins (PIT/TOR/BOS/WSH), Burrows (MTL), Hansen (PIT/WPG/BOS), Matthias (TOR/WSH) and Bieksa (ANA/FLA/TOR) at the deadline might free up some draft picks in 2nd-7th rounds. For the rest, we just need to tank.

That's all fine--volume of 1st and 2nd round picks is where it is at--but there is no need to assign lines and positions to freshly drafted players. At this point they are just percentages/odds of becoming NHLers.

For our 6 recent first rounders the odds, by virtue of their draft position, are a little over 30% per (maybe 35% for Virtanen & Horvat) that they become top 6 players. (2*35)+(4*30) yields close to 200 or 2 top 6 forwards as the most likely outcome. So penciling in 3 is already charitable but well within reach. So is 4, but then so is 1 or even 0.

Long term needs will be perpetually changing: Could just be that only centres, already drafted, meet/exceed our expectations and all our wingers bust, or vice-versa, so no need to worry about specifics like 1C or 1RW.

All I ask is management continue to draft forwards in the 1st and D men only from 2nd onward, statistically giving themselves best chance of producing the max number of NHLers. What they eventually turn into in terms of top 6/4 is beyond anyone's control. Also, no goalies for at least the next 3 years.

 

[ginner classic]

That's all fine--volume of 1st and 2nd round picks is where it is at--but there is no need to assign lines and positions to freshly drafted players. At this point they are just percentages/odds of becoming NHLers.

For our 6 recent first rounders the odds, by virtue of their draft position, are a little over 30% per (maybe 35% for Virtanen & Horvat) that they become top 6 players. (2*35)+(4*30) yields close to 200 or 2 top 6 forwards as the most likely outcome. So penciling in 3 is already charitable but well within reach. So is 4, but then so is 1 or even 0.

Long term needs will be perpetually changing: Could just be that only centres, already drafted, meet/exceed our expectations and all our wingers bust, or vice-versa, so no need to worry about specifics like 1C or 1RW.

All I ask is management continue to draft forwards in the 1st and D men only from 2nd onward, statistically giving themselves best chance of producing the max number of NHLers. What they eventually turn into in terms of top 6/4 is beyond anyone's control. Also, no goalies for at least the next 3 years.

Its a projection. We lack elite or star calibre players. I don't see any D in our system that can threaten a top pairing job.

On your second point......i flat out disagree. We took Schroeder Gaunce Hansen as first rounders. We also took Ohlund and traded for Jovo. Top pairing are more frequently found in the first round. Im sick of mid to late firat round forwards with third line potential. We need D. Good D.

 

[kilgore]

BPA. If it is even I tend toward a forward, have good prospects at Centre but wings are thin

 

[Iceberg Slim]

Its a projection. We lack elite or star calibre players. I don't see any D in our system that can threaten a top pairing job.

On your second point......i flat out disagree. We took Schroeder Gaunce Hansen as first rounders. We also took Ohlund and traded for Jovo. Top pairing are more frequently found in the first round. Im sick of mid to late firat round forwards with third line potential. We need D. Good D.

I think Hutton has an outside chance. Everyone knows about his offense, but he also made considerable strides defensively in 2013-14.

The Hutton-O'Connor pairing was generally matched-up against the opposition's best players and handled some big minutes at 5v5. Hutton also was a minutes leader on the PK and he was #1 in blocked shots for Maine.

Here's coach Red Gendron on Hutton's underrated defensive game:

“He’s got a great stick, and he’s got a great feel for the game. Obviously, he can skate,†Gendron said. “But there have been moments this year, on the penalty kill and other defensive situations, he’s been incredible. Basically, most nights he and Brice O’Connor play against the other team’s best players.â€

Obviously, he's going to need to continue on a pretty steep development curve, even after last season's considerable strides, before he'd really track as a potential 1/2 D. But I think the upside is there, in terms of pure "ceiling" anyway.

It's going to be interesting to see how much he continues to improve and where he eventually tops out.

And I suppose a similar argument might even be made for Tryamkin (although he'd be a very different model compared to Hutton), in terms of him not yet having established a hard "ceiling" on his potential and there being an "outside chance" of him becoming something really special (if everything went right).

But these are clearly longshots (to "threaten a top pairing job") and I'd certainly agree that the Canucks currently lack blue-chip elite types of D prospects with anything close to #1D (or even 1st pairing) projections. And in terms of long-term success and building a strong prospect pool, it's never a good idea to be relying on longshots paying out and needing prospects who drastically exceed expectations in order to fill those top slots (future #1D, #1C, etc) on the organization's depth chart.

 

[Serac]

Virtanen---?---?-----
Shinkaruk-Horvat--Kassian
Gaunce--McCann--Jensen
Fox-----Cassels-----??


?-------?
Edler Tanev
Hutton Corrado
Sbisa
Stanton


Lack
Demko

Just on a side note
I wouldn't mind seeing a Virtanen, Horvat, Kassian line in the near future


Still think if we're near the high end of the draft, we take a forward, even if it's a centre where we're clogged up
If we're near the back, or even the middle, I wouldn't mind us taking a swing on a highly touted but maybe questionable D (see, TB and DeAngelo)

 

[ddawg1950]

Is it too early to complain about whoever we pick? We should have picked that other guy.

Perfectly distilling HF Canucks.

 

[F A N]

BPA, but all else being equal... it depends... I am leaning towards saying defenseman. The Canucks could really use a stud defensive prospect now and allow him to grow. But right now, the 2015 first round seems to be forwards heavy.

Despite Gillis' blunders, he did a good job of replenishing his defensive corps. He let Ohlund go and acquired Ehrhoff. He let Mitchell go and signed Hamhuis. He let Salo go and signed Garrison. He was never able to replace Ehrhoff but Tanev looks like he's a legitimate top 4 defenseman. He even replaced the bottom 6 with young guys like Stanton. Gillis seems to have had always kept an eye on the age of his defense. And his UFA acquisitions certainly allowed him to keep drafting forwards in the first round and stock the cupboards.

How will Benning fair? If Edler can bounce back, Tanev's game continues to grow, and Sbisa blossoms into a top 4 caliber defensemen, then I think the Canucks would be in great shape defensively. But ya since defensemen do take time to develop, it's probably a good idea to draft one now.

 

[deckercky]

1.) Center
2.) Defenceman
3.) Winger