Speculation: 33rd Overall

[Nuckles]

I could actually see someone like Fabbro or McAvoy falling to the 2nd round. Based on nothing but a gut feeling from reviewing fallers in past years. Not saying they should fall, just that it wouldn't surprise me (just like it wouldn't surprise me if they went 15-20).

Neither of them strike me as the type of guy who would fall out of the 1st round (especially since everyone wants potential top 4 d-men). The kind of guys I see falling out of the 1st are DeBrincat, Abramov, *maybe* Rubtsov.

 

[thefeebster]

A question to those of you that know the prospects and draft depth better than I:

Is 33 a spot where you might look to trade down? If you could move down a few spots and get another mid round pick, would that be something the Canucks should consider?

Obviously, if there's a player there that you really like, you take him, but if you've got a bunch of guys ranked roughly the same, would that be something to consider?

I think if the draft were a bit deeper, a trade down might be worth it. But with the talent drop off not far off from where we are, the "+" portion would have to be high for me to do the trade down.

But also, historically, trade downs don't often benefit the team trading down. So i'd feel comfortable staying where we are, seeing if there is a slider from the 1st round and, if not, just take the player you think is best here.

Neither of them strike me as the type of guy who would fall out of the 1st round (especially since everyone wants potential top 4 d-men). The kind of guys I see falling out of the 1st are DeBrincat, Abramov, *maybe* Rubtsov.

Yeah, while i wouldn't rule anything out, I would hesitate to say that Fabbro/McAvoy will fall out of the 1st. Fabbro has that last positive impression at the U18s. McAvoy is generally a top 15 player, rated 14th in Bob's lottery rankings. I think we can agree Bob's list is a good predictor of who will be taken in the 1st. Going back to 2004, a top 15 ranked player on his list has never fallen out of the 1st. So i'm not going to take the bet that McAvoy falls to the 2nd.

I agree i can see these 3 sliding out into the 2nd. I have a sneaky feeling Rubtsov will go lower than he probably should, with the "doping", lack of U18 exposure and the strong Russian factor.

I might add Asplund as a possibility as well.

 

[Bleach Clean]

I have a sneaky feeling Rubtsov will go lower than he probably should, with the "doping", lack of U18 exposure and the strong Russian factor.

I might add Asplund as a possibility as well.

Both are in the top 22 of my list. They are *must* drafts if they fall to #33. They don't belong there.

-----------------------

Wonder if we should do a consensus mock, as I have done in the past, to narrow down VAN's selection on day 2 of the draft?

 

[thefeebster]

Both are in the top 22 of my list. They are *must* drafts if they fall to #33. They don't belong there.

-----------------------

Wonder if we should do a consensus mock, as I have done in the past, to narrow down VAN's selection on day 2 of the draft?

Yeah, but where they get picked may not equate to where we think they belong. I consider them both in my top 25.

I thought there was a consensus mock poll ongoing already? It may have petered out tho.

 

[Bad News Benning]

Don't see anyone in the Top 15 falling outside the Top 20

I think fallers might include Gauthier (Late 1st), Debrincat (mid/late 2nd), Tage Thompson (mid/late 2nd), Benson (early-mid 2nd). I feel Stanley should fall out of the 1st round but won't because some team will obsess over his height and look past all his faults.

 

[clunk]

Debrincat with our 2nd would be a fantastic win.

 

[MarkMM]

From what I've read, there's a fall-off around 50, so I wouldn't trade down unless it was to move down just a few spots, there was a decent + coming back, and if it was because we were confident of getting a player we wanted at at the lower pick.

Unlikely for that to line up, so all in I'll, I'm happy with what we're likely to walk away with from our #5 and #33.

 

[DadBod]

Dear god, please avoid Debrincat.

 

[Andy Dufresne]

I could be wrong but I think Willie Mitchell - for example - had decent offensive numbers for a D before he was drafted.

Not only are you wrong, but Willie is exactly the kind of player who you can't judge based on point totals. I knew he was drafted late out of the Saskatchewan junior league but I wasn't sure what his numbers looked like so I looked it up:http://www.eliteprospects.com/player.php?player=8548 .

2 pts in 16 games in SJHL playoffs before NJ took him in the 8th round. What i'm actually curious about is who was NJ's western regional scout at that time? That guy not only realized that this kid was worth a pick, but also convinced Lou Lamoriello to use a late pick on him. Yeah. it was an 8th, back when there 9 rounds, but that scout ****ing nailed it. Clearly, a scout who knew potential when he saw it (no matter what the stats said).

 

[Rotting Corpse*]

Not only are you wrong, but Willie is exactly the kind of player who you can't judge based on point totals. I knew he was drafted late out of the Saskatchewan junior league but I wasn't sure what his numbers looked like so I looked it up:http://www.eliteprospects.com/player.php?player=8548 .

2 pts in 16 games in SJHL playoffs before NJ took him in the 8th round. What i'm actually curious about is who was NJ's western regional scout at that time? That guy not only realized that this kid was worth a pick, but also convinced Lou Lamoriello to use a late pick on him. Yeah. it was an 8th, back when there 9 rounds, but that scout ****ing nailed it. Clearly, a scout who knew potential when he saw it (no matter what the stats said).

Not that it changes your point but those numbers don't appear to be accurate.

He had 14 points in 43 games according to the team website.

 

[biturbo19]

Like him more than Dunn, Dineen is much smarter defensively IMO, less flashy and not as good of a skater as Dunn. I see Dunn as a boom-bust/more of a one-dimensional defender, compared to Dineen.

Carrier was a steal where he went. I see him more comparable to Dineen in terms of play.

Makes sense.

I don't see the same silky smooth defensive play and ability to mitigate size disadvantage with positioning and stickwork from Dineen (hence not being quite as high on him) - but on the whole, i'd agree that he's probably closer to Carrier than Dunn, in the type of player at least. Dunn has that extra dynamic offensive quality going for him, but has a different set of defensive issues than Dineen, in that Dunn can be fairly erratic and over-aggressive at times. Whereas Dineen for me, it's more the passiveness, timing and application of pressure, and the 1-on-1 battles in general that i'm not as sold on. For me, on the total package overall, i'd still take both of them over Dineen though, in a hypothetical same-draft-year scenario.

Clague will not be there. Was really good in the last three months. Everyone is looking for D and the depth drops off at 22. Hart and Clague are first rounders.

Yeah. It doesn't seem that likely that Clague slides into the 2nd round, but it wouldn't be too farfetched either. Strong late surge could well push him back up boards, but he is still another smallish defenceman who kind of struggled to establish a niche and live up to potential for much of the year. Could easily see him sliding either way, up or down.

A question to those of you that know the prospects and draft depth better than I:

Is 33 a spot where you might look to trade down? If you could move down a few spots and get another mid round pick, would that be something the Canucks should consider?

Obviously, if there's a player there that you really like, you take him, but if you've got a bunch of guys ranked roughly the same, would that be something to consider?

I wouldn't be looking to move back from 33. imo, that's really into the meat of a value range in this draft. For me, there's ~20 real "first round talents"...then a bit of a dead spot where i've got a few mini-groups of more "high 2nd round types" that i like to the early-30s or so. But prospects which feel more like "value" in the high-2nd who are inevitably going to be going in the late-1st.

Which, with some others from outside my preferred group inevitably going in that range...33 puts us in a spot where for my list at least, pretty much certain i'm going to get one of those guys. And probably still a decent number to choose from, which is desirable. Moving back more than a few spots and it'd really be rolling the dice more than i'd want to on getting one of my top targets there - more than i'd really want to do, unless the price to move up is absurdly uncharacteristically high for some bizarre reason.

I understand there are certain minimum kind of offensive numbers people want from high picks. That's understandable, but i'd be real careful about evaluating one players situation from anothers based solely on stats. Look what happened to Juulsen's numbers in Everett this year. ****** offensive team-mates and his numbers nose dived. I saw him live twice and he was better than his draft year. Same thing applies to Hajek in Saskatoon imo, he's a far more complete player than his numbers would indicate. It's not neccesarily a bad thing when a defenceman on a bad team tries to help his team by playing conservatively instead of looking to pad his stats. From what I saw, Hajek was Saskatoon's best defenceman (certainly at the end of the year when they had already dealt Wheaton and Martin). From what I can remember of Ellington, he was never his teams best defenceman (draft year) and he certainly didn't jump out at you in a way that made you remember he was in the game. The word dynamic may be a scouting cliché, and i'm not a scout, but Hajek looked like Saskatoon's best player when I saw them.

Sorry for the long post, but the entire stats vs understanding why a player may have those numbers analysis kind of chaps my ass at times.

Well said.

Showing at least some degree of production at lower levels is important, but it all has to be taken in context.

With guys like Hajek and Niemelainen, i don't think you're ever likely to get a significant point producer out of them at the next level. But they're not just useless lumps out there by any means. They can move the puck, but not being the most individually dynamic and offensive-minded risk-taking defencemen in the draft, both of them playing on teams that simply don't score very much...really hurts their numbers. They're both however, still the top or top-2 producing defencemen for their team...which is an important note. They're not horribly lagging behind other blueliners on their same team...which can be a major red flag.

 

[biturbo19]

Yeah there's always guys that fall from the consensus. Harkins, Chlapik, Sprong, Roy, Carlo, Dunn, Kylington from last draft off the top of my head

There are always "fallers" from the consensus, yes...but i think you've gotta look at reasons why guys might fall.

All of those guys listed had significant concerns with at least one of a)skating deficiency, b)size deficiency, or c)attitude concerns, or d)hockey IQ or offensive upside questions.

What are the significant concerns with McAvoy that could trigger a slide? I'm not seeing many. With Fabbro, there's level of competition - but like Jost, i think a lot of those concerns were assuaged with a strong U18s performance.

And you also have to look at these as guys who weren't generally ranked in consensus Top-15ish area like say...McAvoy especially, and Fabbro to an extent. A guy sliding a bit is one thing...but if there's one thing Bob's list is great for, it's predicting who is going to go roughly where, especially with top-15ish ranked players - who just extremely rarely fall out of the 1st round.

Neither of them strike me as the type of guy who would fall out of the 1st round (especially since everyone wants potential top 4 d-men). The kind of guys I see falling out of the 1st are DeBrincat, Abramov, *maybe* Rubtsov.

Yeah. These are the types to me, who have more realistic potential to "fall" out of the 1st round. Guys with clear flags on them that every year, scare some teams off at the draft.

It's the draft, and wonky things can happen...but banking on a ~Top-15 type player "falling" to 33 is really just setting up for disappointment. And frankly, when players do slide like crazy, it's not exactly a sound strategy to go scooping them up just because "The Consensus" ranks them higher.

 

[clunk]

Dear god, please avoid Debrincat.

Why? He's a good high risk high reward type guy. I'd rather roll the dice on a Debrincat than play it safe.

 

[Yossarian54]

It's the draft, and wonky things can happen...but banking on a ~Top-15 type player "falling" to 33 is really just setting up for disappointment. And frankly, when players do slide like crazy, it's not exactly a sound strategy to go scooping them up just because "The Consensus" ranks them higher.

I seem to recall a really good post on the prospects board a year or so ago where some guy went through the last ~7 drafts and looked at all the risers/fallers with respect to the consensus... If I remember correctly it was pretty stark that the 'risers' were nearly always significantly better than the 'fallers'. Can't remember what the criteria for each category was, maybe a >10 pick change?

 

[DadBod]

Why? He's a good high risk high reward type guy. I'd rather roll the dice on a Debrincat than play it safe.

I'm sorry but a player his size most likely won't make it. Sure there's chance he does but for ever Johnny Hockey there's 10,000 players his size that don't. I don't want to fantasize about a player smaller than your average American woman, I'd rather build a team to compete in the West. With our 33rd there will be safer and more suitable options available.

 

[Nuckles]

I'm sorry but a player his size most likely won't make it. Sure there's chance he does but for ever Johnny Hockey there's 10,000 players his size that don't. I don't want to fantasize about a player smaller than your average American woman, I'd rather build a team to compete in the West. With our 33rd there will be safer and more suitable options available.

I wouldn't completely rule him out, more and more highly skilled undersized players are making their way to the NHL. Yes there's Gaudreau, but there's also guys like Tyler Johnson, Shayne Gostisbehere, Sven Andrighetto, etc.

With that said I don't think it matters all that much, I think Benning and co. are going target a d-man with our 2nd round pick.

 

[banme*]

I wouldn't completely rule him out, more and more highly skilled undersized players are making their way to the NHL. Yes there's Gaudreau, but there's also guys like Tyler Johnson, Shayne Gostisbehere, Sven Andrighetto, etc.

With that said I don't think it matters all that much, I think Benning and co. are going target a d-man with our 2nd round pick.

He'd be what, the 2nd smallest player in the league (behind Ennis, who led his team in scoring by over 20 points in his draft year)? Long odds, wouldn't risk that with a high 2nd.

 

[Nuckles]

He'd be what, the 2nd smallest player in the league (behind Ennis, who led his team in scoring by over 20 points in his draft year)? Long odds, wouldn't risk that with a high 2nd.

The size difference between guys who are 5'6"/150lbs and 5'9"/175lbs won't make too much of a difference in the NHL since those guys tend to rely on skill and skating rather than using their bodies.

 

[Hit the post]

I think Benning and co. are going target a d-man with our 2nd round pick.

Heh, they couldn't get anything but a 4th liner for Shinkaruk; I have little faith in Jethro's abilities to deal a 2nd for a d-man....well unless he's the one getting rid of a d-man for a 2nd.

 

[DadBod]

The percentage of small players are so slim it's almost zero. Sure you can name 5 small players currently in the league but that would make up what percentage? I'm tired of having small players on my team, especially in the West. take a look at this years playoffs and the recent cup winners...You need size to compete. I don't have a problem spending later picks on players like this but you NEED to produce players in the first couple of rounds.

 

[Nuckles]

Heh, they couldn't get anything but a 4th liner for Shinkaruk; I have little faith in Jethro's abilities to deal a 2nd for a d-man....well unless he's the one getting rid of a d-man for a 2nd.

I meant draft a d-man with the 2nd round pick, not trade it. But I guess they could still trade it.

This past season they kept mentioning how we needed defensive prospects and for most of the year we thought they'd be going after a d-man with our 1st based on their comments (until they said they'd go BPA with the 1st).

 

[Nuckles]

The percentage of small players are so slim it's almost zero. Sure you can name 5 small players currently in the league but that would make up what percentage? I'm tired of having small players on my team, especially in the West. take a look at this years playoffs and the recent cup winners...You need size to compete. I don't have a problem spending later picks on players like this but you NEED to produce players in the first couple of rounds.

That's the type of mindset that caused us to pass on Ehlers and Nylander in 2014. You also don't need size to produce in the playoffs, a guy like Robby Fabbri has 14 points in 18 games as a 20 year old.

 

[Josepho]

My main problem with Debrincat isn't just that he's small. It's the combination of being small and not a good enough skater to overcome that size issue, along with having issues keeping his head up.

 

[Nuckles]

My main problem with Debrincat isn't just that he's small. It's the combination of being small and not a good enough skater to overcome that size issue, along with having issues keeping his head up.

And those are reasonable concerns. My problem is when people say "He's small? There's no way he can an NHLer."

 

[DadBod]

That's the type of mindset that caused us to pass on Ehlers and Nylander in 2014. You also don't need size to produce in the playoffs, a guy like Robby Fabbri has 14 points in 18 games as a 20 year old.

I don't think they passed on those two because of "this mindset", I believe JV being a hometown kid played a major role. Never the less theres a big size difference between Debrincat and Ehlers/Nylander.


In fact, JB hasn't been shy about acquiring small players at all and hows that worked out so far?