Pre-Game Talk: 2019 NHL Draft, Pt. V: Got your ticket? (Mod note in pinned post)

Status
Not open for further replies.

Bettman Returnz

Why so serious?
Jul 28, 2003
4,788
2,675
BC
Visit site
Why do you think that’s who Bennings wants? They haven’t been linked to him at all
Have read he has stated “there’s a few D we really like and if they’re still there @ 10 we would pick them.” Hoping that means byram and broberg. But believe Söderström has come up in a few mocks and rumours too.
 

DonnyNucker

Registered User
Mar 28, 2017
4,002
2,896
Have read he has stated “there’s a few D we really like and if they’re still there @ 10 we would pick them.” Hoping that means byram and broberg. But believe Söderström has come up in a few mocks and rumours too.
Only thing I heard on Soderstrom was from Kuzma...and it seems to be speculation and not anything he heard. He doesn’t seem to be on their radar. It’s pretty clear that their top target is Zegras, followed by some order of Newhook, Krebs and Boldy. Not sure about Broberg
 

DonnyNucker

Registered User
Mar 28, 2017
4,002
2,896
Did you read the word "if"? You're remarkably quick to defend Benning at every turn, even for a hypothetical.
How am I defending benning? They haven’t been linked to Soderstrom at all. I may as well post “ would people Be pissed if Benning selected Vlasic ?”
 

Bettman Returnz

Why so serious?
Jul 28, 2003
4,788
2,675
BC
Visit site
For that record I wouldn’t trade Söderström at pick 10. So hoping whatever I heard/read was more speculation and really not much fact to it. Zegras, Boldy, Newhook makes more sense. You trade down if it’s Söderström you’re keying in on.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DonnyNucker

racerjoe

Registered User
Jun 3, 2012
12,192
5,892
Vancouver
I really like Soderstrom, a lot. But I would be pretty upset if we took him at 10. Less upset than if we had picked Broberg though.
 

WonderTwinsUnite

Registered User
May 28, 2007
4,850
273
BC
May I ask why you would be upset with Soderstrom at 10?

I'll answer, if that's alright. To me, he doesn't seem like with any standout skill, and combined with mediocre physical tools, I don't feel he offers the most upside.

I think Soderstrom settles in as a solid second pairing guy down the line - a 30-35 point guy you can put out against teams.

Unless the defender has some high-end offensive attributes, I don't like taking them in the first round - too much development left to do.

Forwards are easier to project, I feel, and in this draft in particular, there are a few forwards in our range who offer significantly more upside than Soderstrom - Zegras, Boldy, Newhook, and Caufield in particular.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Superlative Soup

Horse McHindu

They call me Horse.....
Jun 21, 2014
9,668
2,650
Beijing
I'll answer, if that's alright. To me, he doesn't seem like with any standout skill, and combined with mediocre physical tools, I don't feel he offers the most upside.

I think Soderstrom settles in as a solid second pairing guy down the line - a 30-35 point guy you can put out against teams.

Unless the defender has some high-end offensive attributes, I don't like taking them in the first round - too much development left to do.

Forwards are easier to project, I feel, and in this draft in particular, there are a few forwards in our range who offer significantly more upside than Soderstrom - Zegras, Boldy, Newhook, and Caufield in particular.

Thanks!
 

sting101

Registered User
Feb 8, 2012
15,940
14,849
Broberg is going to become another Bartkowski... book it.

And given the choice between Soderstrom and Seider, I’d take Seider.

But I think we can do better taking whichever of the post-Dach level of forwards is still available at 10. Except Caulfield... I’d rather some other took that gamble.
Seider loks more raw than Broberg from what i've seen. What makes you say this with such certainty
 

alternate

Win the week!
Jun 9, 2006
8,209
3,143
victoria
I always get a chuckle around the draft when posters that spend all year worrying about analytics and quantitative data start complaining about abstract concepts like "draft value" and "reaching." Completely meaningless terms.

I don't want to trade up, unless it's for peanuts. Don't think it will be though. Don't care who we draft, just hope they become a key piece of the core for the next dozen plus years. Next couple weeks will really determine whether Benning is taking this team in the right direction, or if it's time to move on.
 

racerjoe

Registered User
Jun 3, 2012
12,192
5,892
Vancouver
May I ask why you would be upset with Soderstrom at 10?

Yes you may....

Wait did you want me?







I just think there is better talent available. Soderstrom to me is what Joulevi was advertised as. A solid 2/3 closer to 3. I think there are forwards in this draft that can be worth a lot more if you develop them more.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RIP Botchford

Lindgren

Registered User
Jun 30, 2005
6,030
3,956
J.D. Burke
@JDylanBurke

I'm hearing from a source that the #Canucks are actively trying to move up in the Draft. Most likely destination in their crosshairs is the Detroit Red Wings pick at No. 6 overall.

Benning vs Yzerman :help:

This frightens me. I can see Benning giving up a significant asset to move up to 6 and then drafting a player he could have reasonably expected to be available at 10.
 

Hockeyphysio

Registered User
Jul 2, 2018
604
519
Didnt Benning like 2 weeks ago say it wouldnt be worth it to move up? Now all of sudden it changes again? He just doesnt seem to have any concrete plan, a dog chasing his tail
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad