2017 NHL Draft | Pt. X

[StIllmatic]

Yet neither of Brown or Nattinen were worth moving to the Wing to make room for projected NHL Top-6/Top-Line Center, Vilardi? That seems...fishy.

Looking at Vilardi's game, i don't think it's hard to see why he was the one that made sense to shift to the wing. It suits his game, maximizing his strengths and minimizing his weaknesses.

It's like Jamie Benn. He has played some Center, and he can do it in a pinch. But he's clearly better as a winger. Doesn't make him a garbage player by any stretch...it just makes him a Winger.

I think it's more the case that Villardi was far more versatile than either of those two centers. As a coach, player development takes a backseat to winning, especially on a contendor like Windsor. Thus it makes more sense to move Vilardi out to the wing.

 

[Huggy]

Well, you wanted Shinkaruk picked over Horvat and Ritchie picked over Ehlers.

If you can show me where Pastrnak would have been your pick then I'll give you that one, but cherry-picking the guys who ended up the best is a bit of a reach.

Wrong

If only a perfect human/android could make every perfect selection acquiring a team of 22 year old 70 point players than it proves the fact Benning is the most dumb GM of all time.

therefore

Benning = Pineapple

 

[iFan]

Benning has been pretty honest with us, if he's saying he's not looking to move Tanev I truely believe that. Hearing him talk about the importance of keeping Tanev to mentor the other young D man is something I believe he's being honest about. Tanev won't be moved, we won't move up, possibly trade down and I'm confident that unless Glass or Makar is there at 5th, we'll either trade down to draft Necas or Pettersson or just take one of them at 5th.

 

[Rotting Corpse*]

Because Benning? Or because you would not do so yourself?

Because Benning.

 

[biturbo19]

I don't know why one would have a bias against Vilardi, but when one willfully ignores information it is very telling. Especially when one makes it clear based on their statements that they aren't too knowledgeable about a player, it's probably not a bad idea to do some research or at least take the opinion of those who have.

I'm willing to have a genuine discussion about the prospect, but when you ignore the facts to continue with your incorrect narrative of him, the discussion pretty much ends there.

Again, you're still accusing me here of not having watched or done research on the prospect in question. Which isn't true. Nor is it constructive. Stop doing that.



That Vilardi has played center in the past and a statement that they intend to move him back to the middle next year isn't conclusive evidence for me that he's going to project with certainty as an NHL Center.

The Gabe Vilardi who played center didn't do so at a high enough level of execution to be considered as a Top-5 pick in this draft. Which is completely understandable, considering it was not even his draft year and he's already one of the youngest in this draft as it is. But the Gabe Vilardi play i've seen since he has taken that big step forward, that has been at a high enough level to potentially merit a Top-5/10 selection in this draft...was this year. And in everything i've seen, he's taken that step as a Winger.

Hence, combined with his style of play and strengths and weaknesses, my assessment based on watching the player and "researching" them, is that i don't confidently see him projecting as an NHL Center. It has nothing to do with not being familiar with the player, and everything to do with being familiar with the player and having a different read on him than you.


It can still be a plenty subjective, debatable thing, even when players are further along and actually in the NHL. Just look at guys like Drouin or Galchenyuk in MTL and varied opinions on whether or not they're an NHL center. Or the "good" Granlund in Minnesota, who took off this year...as a Winger. Or the aforementioned Jamie Benn who has been tried as a Center, but ultimately i think most agree he's better as a winger. It's not always clear cut even in established NHLers, much less in prospects who haven't played a professional game in their life.

Disagreement doesn't have to be a personal affront, some sort of irrational bias due to ignorance, or an insidious plot to undermine some hockey player for completely incomprehensible reasons. Sometimes it's just a benign, different opinion. Which is what i thought we were here to discuss.

 

[rune74]

Why on earth would it be some sort of "bias" against Vilardi? What possible reason would people have to make those comment other than because that's their honest personal assessment of him?

The reality is, our opinions don't mean squat. Despite what you may believe, our little discussions here aren't going to decide who they ultimately select in the draft.


So what possible angle is there to an irrational bias against a particular prospect? What is there to gain by "knocking down" a prospect irrationally? It's a discussion about the prospect, and opinions about what he projects as at the NHL level. Not an irrational bias because people haven't watched him. It's discussion for discussions sake, there are no stakes here.

Why can't we just have a genuine discussion about the prospect, without getting accusatory and suggesting any opinion differing from your own is an "irrational bias" and must be the product of "not watching the player"?

Were you honestly asking him that? After all these years. We obviously end up in one of two camps with either black or white as a choice no shades of grey.

 

[Saturated Fats]

Again, you're still accusing me here of not having watched or done research on the prospect in question. Which isn't true. Nor is it constructive. Stop doing that.

...

Disagreement doesn't have to be a personal affront, some sort of irrational bias due to ignorance, or an insidious plot to undermine some hockey player for completely incomprehensible reasons. Sometimes it's just a benign, different opinion. Which is what i thought we were here to discuss.

Let's get civil, friendly discussion back into this thread. Jeez.

 

[m9]

Wrong

If only a perfect human/android could make every perfect selection acquiring a team of 22 year old 70 point players than it proves the fact Benning is the most dumb GM of all time.

therefore

Benning = Pineapple

While the last part of that statement is still probably true, I don't expect perfection at the draft.

 

[Nucker101]

Put some respek on Pineapple's name.

It's a great summer fruit, works well in desserts/smoothies/juices, Spongebob lives in one and it looks badass.

 

[Jack Burton]

Still waiting to hear what you'd bet on Pettersson not playing 25 NHL games.

Lololo seriously!

How about a avatar bet? I have a nice " I vanilla pudding players " for ya.

Is there a time limit on this bet? I'll give you D+2 years to get 25 NHL games in and if he doesn't then I win.

You down?

 

[Alan Jackson]

Depending on who's sitting there at 5, would it be a good idea to slide down a few spots and get another pick or two?

And then potentially trade back up late in the 1st round if there's a player there you like?

It sounds to me like the Canucks are considering both these scenarios.

 

[Rotting Corpse*]

Lololo seriously!

How about a avatar bet? I have a nice " I vanilla pudding players " for ya.

Is there a time limit on this bet? I'll give you D+2 years to get 25 NHL games in and if he doesn't then I win.

You down?

I have avatars disabled but okay.

 

[m9]

Put some respek on Pineapple's name.

It's a great summer fruit, works well in desserts/smoothies/juices, Spongebob lives in one and it looks badass.

Pineapple is my favorite fruit, but I don't trust it to draft for me.

Also don't trust it on pizza. Too slimy.

 

[y2kcanucks]

Again, you're still accusing me here of not having watched or done research on the prospect in question. Which isn't true. Nor is it constructive. Stop doing that.



That Vilardi has played center in the past and a statement that they intend to move him back to the middle next year isn't conclusive evidence for me that he's going to project with certainty as an NHL Center.

The Gabe Vilardi who played center didn't do so at a high enough level of execution to be considered as a Top-5 pick in this draft. Which is completely understandable, considering it was not even his draft year and he's already one of the youngest in this draft as it is. But the Gabe Vilardi play i've seen since he has taken that big step forward, that has been at a high enough level to potentially merit a Top-5/10 selection in this draft...was this year. And in everything i've seen, he's taken that step as a Winger.

Hence, combined with his style of play and strengths and weaknesses, my assessment based on watching the player and "researching" them, is that i don't confidently see him projecting as an NHL Center. It has nothing to do with not being familiar with the player, and everything to do with being familiar with the player and having a different read on him than you.


It can still be a plenty subjective, debatable thing, even when players are further along and actually in the NHL. Just look at guys like Drouin or Galchenyuk in MTL and varied opinions on whether or not they're an NHL center. Or the "good" Granlund in Minnesota, who took off this year...as a Winger. Or the aforementioned Jamie Benn who has been tried as a Center, but ultimately i think most agree he's better as a winger. It's not always clear cut even in established NHLers, much less in prospects who haven't played a professional game in their life.

Disagreement doesn't have to be a personal affront, some sort of irrational bias due to ignorance, or an insidious plot to undermine some hockey player for completely incomprehensible reasons. Sometimes it's just a benign, different opinion. Which is what i thought we were here to discuss.

That's good to see you finally admit that considering you stated this just last night:

As to Vilardi playing Center...how much has he actually played the position? I haven't seen it.

The Gabe Vilardi who played C in his Draft -1 season was good enough to be ranked 6th by Bob McKenzie in his pre-season draft rankings. That's before he did anything this year. So once again you're wrong. He was a highly ranked prospect coming into this season, and he's increased his stock with his play.

Most scouts project him as a C, so you're going against the grain on that. If he didn't get shifted to the wing this year there would be absolutely no discussion about him being a wing over a C.

And as I've explained to you, disagreement based on opinion is fine, that's a difference in opinion. But disagreement due to willfully ignoring facts is considered ignorance.

 

[Josepho]

Lololo seriously!

How about a avatar bet? I have a nice " I vanilla pudding players " for ya.

Is there a time limit on this bet? I'll give you D+2 years to get 25 NHL games in and if he doesn't then I win.

You down?

that isn't even that much time

 

[biturbo19]

I think it's more the case that Villardi was for more versatile than either of those two centers. As a coach, player development takes a backseat to winning, especially on a contendor like Windsor. Thus it makes more sense to move Vilardi out to the wing.

That's certainly part of it. But i think there's quite a bit of crossover in this case between "versatility", and as an extension of that...actually getting more out of Vilardi as a winger. He seems very natural as a winger. It suits his game imo, allowing him to do more of what he does best. Forechecking and working the puck down low.

Winning does take the forefront. Part of that is in getting the most out of the players you have though. Which in this case, included Vilardi playing on the Wing. The reasoning for that seems perfectly clear and sound to me. But for me, that also carries implications for Vilardi as a prospect.

 

[jeromemorrow]

So much bickering in here. Can't we all get a long?

As long as we get either glass or vilardi I'm gonna be zooplankton happy

Yeah same.. i'll be happy with Glass or Vilardi .

Still this feeling of:
1) Sbisa and Tryamkin gone +
2) the lack of sure things on defence in this year's draft pool +
3) the success of Nashville this past playoffs
=
makes me lean towards trading down (if we see some team willing to fork out picks or assets for Glass/Vilardi) 1 to 3 spots to draft Miro + accumulate an extra 2nd rd pick for forwards...

Good defenceman are extremely hard to find... and Miro's got like Pietrangelo comparables.. also, coupled with the fact that Edler has been playing so mediocre for the last two years offensively, we need to get as many premium defensive prospects as we can... it's a big dropoff after Juolevi.. and an even bigger dropoff after Brisebois..

If we draft a C, it just seems so short-sighted and "Canuck-like" especially with so much $$ that we've invested into this position with so little production ... coupled with the impending big $$ re-signing of Horvat... Gaudette and maybe Dahlen are supposed to shore that side up that C spot in the short term prospects-wise with those ELCs.... add in JAD or even trade up to the mid-1st for Robert Thomas is feasible.. we're sort of fine at C.. it's not great but still good
*Canuck-like as in oh we drafted a real good C.. and then a year later, hey we need more depth in D...

Our team has no elite talent... therefore, we got to beat teams with sound defence and elite breakout.. just like NSH has been doing for the last 10 years which is now beginning to pay off.

 

[Rotting Corpse*]

that isn't even that much time

Nor is he willing to put any stake to it.

I really wish people would make such bold, conclusive predictions when they're not willing to back it up with any actual stake.

 

[StIllmatic]

Yeah, just draft the guy who ended up the best player every time. Pretty realistic.

While Y2K went too far by including Pastrnak in that lineup, HFBoards could without a doubt have picked a better team in the first round than Benning has. If memory serves correct, we would have chosen Nylander over Virtanen, arguably Barbeshev over McCann (although at this point it's a lot harder to find any consensus), Boeser or Konecny in 2015 (JB did great here and most fans were content with this selection), and Tkachuk over Juolevi.

A theoretical forward lineup would include the likes of Horvat, Tkachuk, Nylander, Boeser/Konecny, and from this draft, Vilardi. Not to mention having Baertschi and McCann/Barbeshev (horrible trade at the time and still).

Giving a theoretical lineup along the lines of:

Tkachuk - Horvat - Boeser
Nylander - Vilardi - Dahlin

 

[Jack Burton]

I have avatars disabled but okay.

Well your just going to have to turn them on. Loser has to sport the avatar for 1 full season as soon as the bet is either won or lost.

Ok?

 

[Rotting Corpse*]

Well your just going to have to turn them on. Loser has to sport the avatar for 1 full season as soon as the bet is either won or lost.

Ok?

Sure.

 

[Josepho]

Well your just going to have to turn them on. Loser has to sport the avatar for 1 full season as soon as the bet is either won or lost.

Ok?

yeah that'll show him

 

[StIllmatic]

That's certainly part of it. But i think there's quite a bit of crossover in this case between "versatility", and as an extension of that...actually getting more out of Vilardi as a winger. He seems very natural as a winger. It suits his game imo, allowing him to do more of what he does best. Forechecking and working the puck down low.

Winning does take the forefront. Part of that is in getting the most out of the players you have though. Which in this case, included Vilardi playing on the Wing. The reasoning for that seems perfectly clear and sound to me. But for me, that also carries implications for Vilardi as a prospect.

Considering his coach mentioned that he plans on using Vilardi at center next year, I think it was more of the fact that he is just more versatile than the other two and using him at the wing simply let him get the most out of those other players and the team. Like you said, however, you could argue it both ways.

 

[StIllmatic]

While it still doesn't seem like Benning likes Vilardi as much as others due to his skating, this is a good sign that he views him as a potential center.

 

[m9]

While Y2K went too far by including Pastrnak in that lineup, HFBoards could without a doubt have picked a better team in the first round than Benning has. If memory serves correct, we would have chosen Nylander over Virtanen, arguably Barbeshev over McCann (although at this point it's a lot harder to find any consensus), Boeser or Konecny in 2015 (JB did great here and most fans were content with this selection), and Tkachuk over Juolevi.

A theoretical forward lineup would include the likes of Horvat, Tkachuk, Nylander, Boeser/Konecny, and from this draft, Vilardi. Not to mention having Baertschi and McCann/Barbeshev (horrible trade at the time and still).

Giving a theoretical lineup along the lines of:

Tkachuk - Horvat - Boeser
Nylander - Vilardi - Dahlin

Yes, fair enough. I took it as what his own projected team would be as I didn't see any mention that it was a board consensus.

I would also say that BEFORE the pick I'm not sure if Horvat was the consensus choice. Often people talk themselves into the team's pick after, so I don't think it's genuinely who they would have picked. If a poll prior to the pick said Horvat, fair enough.. but I'd be surprised.