Post-Game Talk: Canucks to select 5th Overall in 2016 Draft (MOD WARNING - POST 868)

[CanaFan]

"... if we pick, y'know, 5 or 6, then, y'know, we'll look to take that defenseman"

Straight from the horse's mouth.
http://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/nhl/benning-feels-top-three-can-franchise-players/
(@2:54)

The key being they'll "look to take", not "take". It means they'll consider it, not that it's a done deal.

 

[LovemyNucks]

I voted Dubois knowing he won't be available at 5. The Score had a news piece stating that the 4th OA pick is 'very much in play'.

The Oilers need defensive help as much as we do. In fact they need it more than we do. It just makes too much sense for Edmonton to trade down a few spots to pick up a young stud defender and draft one as well at 7th-9th.

If Dubois wasn't available at 5th that's exactly what I would want the Canucks to do but I'm sure Edmonton will beat us to the punch.

There will be no shortage of teams that would jump up in that range to take Dubois. If Edmonton are willing to overlook Skinner's concussion issues I could see a package a + or ++ going back.

Tkachuk isn't a bad consolation prize I suppose...

 

[The Drop]

i'm guessing he has PLD ranked at 4

 

[Jack Tripper]

The key being they'll "look to take", not "take". It means they'll consider it, not that it's a done deal.

i agree that quote is up for interpretation, but i read it as leading a bit stronger towards taking the d-man than perhaps you have

 

[KDizzle]

The key being they'll "look to take", not "take". It means they'll consider it, not that it's a done deal.

Sure, but I posted it as a direct response to the assertion that Benning has never even hinted at taking a defenseman. Clearly that statement isn't true.

 

[CanaFan]

Sure, but I posted it as a direct response to the assertion that Benning has never even hinted at taking a defenseman. Clearly that statement isn't true.

Fair. He has certainly discussed it and no doubt there is at least one D (we assume Juolevi) who is in their consideration set at 5. No argument there.

 

[CanaFan]

i agree that quote is up for interpretation, but i read it as leading a bit stronger towards taking the d-man than perhaps you have

I honestly read it as we are two months out from the draft, both Juolevi and Tkachuk are still playing, the combine and player interviews are yet to be done so there are several players on the Canucks "short list" right now.

One is certainly Dubois. Another is clearly a D (probably Juolevi). I also have to assume Tkachuk is there too, based on where he is ranked as well as Benning's past praise for him ("best player in the draft from face off dots in").

I just don't really take these comments as big indicators of where Benning's leaning because they are two months away from having to even know who they are going to pick. The only one that has been quite clear and definitive (so far) has been the Sportsnet interview where he clearly states that a "top line forward" is their priority over a "top pair D". So if Benning see's Tkachuk as a "top line forward" as many (not all) do, then I have trouble seeing them take a D at 5, even if they would "look to take" one.

 

[DCantheDDad]

I'm very intrigued by what Edmonton will do before the draft. If they end up keeping the pick I am not convinced they take PLD. I do believe they will probably trade that pick though. One teensy silver lining of falling to fifth is that we will have lots to talk about and debate for the next two months...

 

[Billy Kvcmu]

I'm very intrigued by what Edmonton will do before the draft. If they end up keeping the pick I am not convinced they take PLD. I do believe they will probably trade that pick though. One teensy silver lining of falling to fifth is that we will have lots to whine about and being panic for the next two months...

Fixed

 

[JanBulisPiggyBack]

After several days of been sour and disappointed about our slip to 5th and not getting one of the top three I am beginning to take a new approach to this draft.

There are no quick fixes.

The canucks are not going to become a cup contender by being fortunate in a draft lottery, winning teams manage their cap, trades, assets and coaching through culture and excellent management. The canucks currently are lacking in all those areas. We need bigger changes than adding the creme de la creme in 2016.

Toronto's drive towards success started a while back with the house cleaning and hiring of Shanahan. Edmonton stockpiles high end draft picks and hope for the best.......I'd rather be in Toronto's position than Edmontons

Vancouver should be able to take whoever is available at 5 and run with it, adding to what is becoming a pretty decent future. The frustrations of dropping 2 shouldn't overshadow the prospect of adding a top line winger or centre or potential number 2 D-man. This is still an important draft

 

[TruGr1t]

"... if we pick, y'know, 5 or 6, then, y'know, we'll look to take that defenseman"

Straight from the horse's mouth.
http://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/nhl/benning-feels-top-three-can-franchise-players/
(@2:54)

Jeeze, I hate to criticize someone for how they talk and/or present themselves, but I'd feel a heck of a lot more confident if Benning had even the slightest amount of polish in terms of his public persona and speaking skills. Seriously, just send the guy to Toastmasters or something.

 

[dave babych returns]

Honestly.. there's a good chance the Canucks are at the top of the order in three or four years after the Sedins leave.

These years could be our Ruutu/Keith/Crawford/Byfuglien etc years (or our Okposo/Bailey years or our Brown/Kopitar years) moreso than our Kane/Toews (or Tavares or Doughty) years.

 

[sting101]

What a sham...i mean shame.

Missed opportunity at a couple franchise players....cant say im surprised....if we were last we would have dropped to 3 or 4.

Dubois Tkachuk Either one is a nice piece....prefer Dubois because of his versatility and skating but either is good....not a huge fan of the D at 5.

 

[sting101]

Jeeze, I hate to criticize someone for how they talk and/or present themselves, but I'd feel a heck of a lot more confident if Benning had even the slightest amount of polish in terms of his public persona and speaking skills. Seriously, just send the guy to Toastmasters or something.

Yes i agree.

His Y'knows are absolutely maddening. And hes the worst poker player ive ever experienced in charge of a billion dollar franchise. I like his honesty as a fan...but for the love of god man....have some tact.

 

[Hollywood Burrows]

Honestly.. there's a good chance the Canucks are at the top of the order in three or four years after the Sedins leave.

These years could be our Ruutu/Keith/Crawford/Byfuglien etc years (or our Okposo/Bailey years or our Brown/Kopitar years) moreso than our Kane/Toews (or Tavares or Doughty) years.

We are 100% going to be competing for the top pick next season, I don't see any other likely scenario.

 

[Ryp37]

We are 100% going to be competing for the top pick next season, I don't see any other likely scenario.

No kidding, people saying otherwise are lying to themselves. This D ain't fixing itsself overnight and it's even worse if no Hamhuis. Whatever improvements the young guy make, assuming they do, won't just automatically propel the team up the standings.

 

[dave babych returns]

No kidding, people saying otherwise are lying to themselves. This D ain't fixing itsself overnight and it's even worse if no Hamhuis. Whatever improvements the young guy make, assuming they do, won't just automatically propel the team up the standings.

But but but we might stay healthy all year and finish in the top 20!

 

[DCantheDDad]

Fixed

You know, potato pot-ohdearlordwearesoscrewednocupsforever-ato

 

[CanaFan]

"So does [drafting] PLD or Tkachuk sound more realistic to you?"

"Ya, that seems more realistic to me"

Benning confirms he'll take Tkachuk at 5

Edit: in all seriousness I don't put any stock in these interviews, but it swings both ways. That "we'll look at taking a D at 5 or 6" quote isn't written in stone either. Benning seems to respond to just about any question in the positive even if it conflicts with later quotes.

 

[ForeverDrought]

One thing about Jim, you can't knock him for not being honest.

I know it's not always favorable for us, but I respect that about him.

 

[Kickassguy]

Benning (bless his heart) is being unbelievably forthcoming on 1040 again. Views Tkachuk as a potential #1 LW, doesn't see a "true" #1 d-man in the draft. Says it's a safe bet that the Canucks would most likely lean toward one of Dubois or Tkachuk.

Sounds good to me.

 

[fancouver]

Benning (bless his heart) is being unbelievably forthcoming on 1040 again. Views Tkachuk as a potential #1 LW, doesn't see a "true" #1 d-man in the draft. Says it's a safe bet that the Canucks would most likely lean toward one of Dubois or Tkachuk.

Sounds good to me.

This sounds really good.

I really want one of Dubois or Tkachuk. Either will play on the 1st line in 2-3 years. Just need to figure out who the third piece of the puzzle will be.

 

[fancouver]

If it's a team that may screw up the draft, it'll likely be Edmonton.

Let's be honest guys, they took Hall over Seguin....

 

[clay]

This is probably the easiest pick in the draft after the top 3. Dubois or Tkachuk, whoever falls.

 

[Toxic0n]

Vancouver should be able to take whoever is available at 5 and run with it, adding to what is becoming a pretty decent future. The frustrations of dropping 2 shouldn't overshadow the prospect of adding a top line winger or centre or potential number 2 D-man. This is still an important draft

I'm sorry, I can't accept a "potential #2 D-man" after a painful year of watching the product on the ice. We had a team full of #2 D-men in 2011 and still didn't win the cup. Either a 1st line forward or a true #1 D is what I need. Benning's elite drafting skills need to pay off here.