Speculation: KOTR's Fan Base Mock Draft(Your team is on the clock #23)

[Icebreakers]

Kylington better have KILLED the interview, cause Benning always talking about how he wants to draft "character" players over and over again.

 

[dwarf]

Jake Debrusk with that mock.

 

[jigsaw99]

Kylington

 

[vancityluongo]

Jakub Zboril. Probably Jeremy Bracco second.

Kylington sounds like this years Yann Sauve. Please no.

 

[BenningHurtsMySoul]

Zboril pretty easily. Surprised he's still on there.

 

[WonderTwinsUnite]

I'd go Bracco. Last guy on the board left with top line upside. At 5'10.25", he'll be plenty big enough to play by the time he hits the show, and he's got phenomenal vision in avoiding hits.

 

[Red]

Filip Chlapik for me.

 

[me2]

Zboril

 

[donut]

Either Zboril or Harkins for me -- probably go with Zboril in the end.

 

[Wush]

Zboril

 

[Askel]

Zboril

 

[604]

Jakub Zboril

Although I hate the idea of drafting dmen from the Q.

 

[DanCloutiers5hole]

Zboril

 

[DCantheDDad]

Zboril

Quality pick at 23, I think.

 

[LAKings88]

Vancouver selects Jakub Zboril. Thanks for participating everyone. Picked a little early.

 

[gsharpe]

I'm on the Juulsen train. He's the next Sandheim. On the up and getting good fast. Big defensive d man that is putting points and has a great shot.

Plus can we please start taking whl defensemen? How many times do we need to get burned by Q guys?

That said I'd be happy with Zboril at 23. But we should draft either of those in this draft. No forwards unless it's Merkley or some other fallen with first line upside.

 

[sting101]

Zboril????

Would rather Dunn, Sprong, Harkins, Kylington, Larsson, Carlo, Chlapik even Spencer.

You blew it. Guy has not one special quality....yuk

 

[Nuckles]

Zboril????

Would rather Dunn, Sprong, Harkins, Kylington, Larsson, Carlo, Chlapik even Spencer.

You blew it. Guy has not one special quality....yuk

That is your opinion, but obviously many people disagree with you. 100 times out of 100 I'd take Zboril over any of the guys you listed. Zboril may not be amazing at one thing, but he's good at many things. There isn't really a weakness to his game, he can be used in all situations.

 

[Nucker101]

That is your opinion, but obviously many people disagree with you. 100 times out of 100 I'd take Zboril over any of the guys you listed. Zboril may not be amazing at one thing, but he's good at many things. There isn't really a weakness to his game, he can be used in all situations.

Yeah, it's far from a bad pick but obviously there's going to be a decent % of the fanbase that will prefer someone else no matter who is selected at #23. Personally, I think he's fair value as a late 1st rounder.

 

[The Jesus*]

That is your opinion, but obviously many people disagree with you. 100 times out of 100 I'd take Zboril over any of the guys you listed. Zboril may not be amazing at one thing, but he's good at many things. There isn't really a weakness to his game, he can be used in all situations.

Scary thing about that is unless he learns to excel at something, or has phenomenal hockey IQ, then there is a very strong chance he ends up as a bottom-mid pairing guy at best.

We have to start taking some risks. I'm not saying Kylington is in the same universe as Karlsson, but everyone thought he was a terrible and risky pick too. He was criticized for his hockey IQ, poor defense, one dimensional game, lackluster draft year stats, etc.

We need top end talent, and we're not going to get that making these kinds of picks.

 

[Trelane]

Zboril????

Would rather Dunn, Sprong, Harkins, Kylington, Larsson, Carlo, Chlapik even Spencer.

You blew it. Guy has not one special quality....yuk

True enough about the no special quality but he is a safer D pick than Dunn, Kylington and Carlo. Could do a lot worse than "Kaberle with an edge" at 23, and Nucks almost always have. Need bodies at this point in the rebuild.

Sprong I like but don't think JB feels the same and there ought to be a speck of realism even with mocks. Harkins just doesn't bring it enough for me. Chlapik is OK but we've oodles of 3rd line centres with top 6 pretensions in the system. The others would be reaching big time.

 

[PM]

We are in a tough spot, we need top-line talent on both defense and offense but we also need top-4 defenders and middle-6 forwards as well. We need basically everything other than goaltending. The problem with going for a homerun with our only top-100 pick is that if it busts completely we walk away from this year with diddly squat. Real fun for a so called "re-tooling" year. I want to swing for the fences as much as anyone but you need more picks to take those chances and we've traded a handful to bridge an imaginary "age gap" that I have never heard of anywhere in the world of hockey before Benning came along.

We need everything (but goaltending), don't even have our standard amount of picks, much less extras. Our best trade chip last year only got us a late first with regards to futures and we have nothing else on our roster that will bring as much back in a trade as Kesler apart from young guys (Horvat, Tanev) that we should absolutely not trade. The only guys who will bring back decent assets (2nds +) are probably Hamhuis and Vrbata and if we trade them we basically throw in the towel for the season which ownership is against. We could possibly trade other young but less important guys like Lack and Kassian but the value we get back will be a net loss considering what they can provide to us currently as well as in the future.

We are in a tough spot, further compounded by the dead cap weight in Miller, Sbisa, Dorsett who are talking up a ridiculous chunk of change for what they provide. Throw in 1-2-3-4 Willie and our abysmal scouting and you have a recipe for a dark age of Canucks history that could resemble what we looked like in the early 80's.

 

[Dr Awesome]

I'm on the Juulsen train. He's the next Sandheim. On the up and getting good fast. Big defensive d man that is putting points and has a great shot.

Plus can we please start taking whl defensemen? How many times do we need to get burned by Q guys?

That said I'd be happy with Zboril at 23. But we should draft either of those in this draft. No forwards unless it's Merkley or some other fallen with first line upside.

I am hoping some how we are able to get early second and are able to add Juulsen if still available. Not banking on it but the thought is nice.

 

[Nuckles]

Scary thing about that is unless he learns to excel at something, or has phenomenal hockey IQ, then there is a very strong chance he ends up as a bottom-mid pairing guy at best.

We have to start taking some risks. I'm not saying Kylington is in the same universe as Karlsson, but everyone thought he was a terrible and risky pick too. He was criticized for his hockey IQ, poor defense, one dimensional game, lackluster draft year stats, etc.

We need top end talent, and we're not going to get that making these kinds of picks.

Why does someone who is good in multiple facets of the game have a lower chance of succeeding than someone who excels in one or two areas of the game and struggles in multiple other areas?

You're making it sound like he's just mediocre and nothing special. He absolutely has all the tools to become a top 4 NHL d-man, and I think he's a safer pick to become that than guys like Roy, Chabot, and all the others. He has good IQ and skating ability. He had a higher PPG than teammate Thomas Chabot in the regular season and playoffs. He was also used in a shutdown role at times. He is undisciplined at times but he has some feistiness in him. He's a competitive guy.

To me he looks like a potential 30+ point top 4 d-man who plays in all situations. His high-end potential is a #2 guy, but he's more likely to be a 2nd pairing guy.

 

[The Jesus*]

Why does someone who is good in multiple facets of the game have a lower chance of succeeding than someone who excels in one or two areas of the game and struggles in multiple other areas?

You're making it sound like he's just mediocre and nothing special. He absolutely has all the tools to become a top 4 NHL d-man, and I think he's a safer pick to become that than guys like Roy, Chabot, and all the others. He has good IQ and skating ability. He had a higher PPG than teammate Thomas Chabot in the regular season and playoffs. He was also used in a shutdown role at times. He is undisciplined at times but he has some feistiness in him. He's a competitive guy.

To me he looks like a potential 30+ point top 4 d-man who plays in all situations. His high-end potential is a #2 guy, but he's more likely to be a 2nd pairing guy.

Im not saying being good at many things means he has less of a chance to become a top line/pairing guy, just that being great at nothing usually means middle pairing potential.

I'm not gonna pretend to act like I know a lot about him, I don't. But from what I've read, highlights I've seen, and what's been said on this site about him, nothing screams top pairing potential to me.