Prospect Info: Matthew Tkachuk or PL Dubois ~ Round 4: Thread closes after selection (CHECK OP)

[MikeK]

Benning is interested in subban.

Benning told TSN he is in talks to acquire p.k subban. http://montreal.ctvnews.ca/vancouver-canucks-express-interest-in-pk-subban-1.2959196

Thoughts ?

I think we should trade for Malkin

 

[Orca Smash]

Lets just hope tomorrow he does not do anything stupid. Can we have one important event where we just walk away satisfied without doing something off the board or trade more prospects to make playoffs.


We have the 5th pick and 5 players the majority of us would be happy with.

 

[BenningHurtsMySoul]

Why would the Habs trade him here instead of Edmonton? Their pick is higher and they have a **** load more young assets to part with.

 

[CanaFan]

Benning is interested in subban.

Benning told TSN he is in talks to acquire p.k subban. http://montreal.ctvnews.ca/vancouver-canucks-express-interest-in-pk-subban-1.2959196

Thoughts ?

And I am in talks to date Megan Fox. At least I have been talking about it ...

 

[just22]

I just hope Edmonton doesn't trade the pick. Very likely to pick Tkachuk if they keep 4th. I think Chiarelli mentioned that's there's a greater than 50% chance they keep it.

 

[banme*]

Mostly agree.

I think having good hockey iq helps because of the added responsibilities of the role. Being a good skater helps cover the full 200 feet of ice. And being bigger helps in those defensive match ups which are often more physical than what a winger needs to do.

Other than that it really comes down to the player and their willingness to embrace the role and learn the nuances. PLD can do all those things if he chooses to commit to it IMO.

Ya there are definitely things that make playing centre easier. In my experience, at the end of the day it hinges on willingness to be the guy that has heavy defensive responsibility instead of blowing the zone early. If you want to be the goal-scoring hero that is flying down the wing looking for a stretch pass (which is totally ok, just play wing) then it's going to be hard to commit to learning the position, but Dubois doesn't strike me as that kind of person.

 

[The Drop]

Lol hilarious how so many fans of other teams are floored by Bennings comments lol. We've never seen a guy as dumb and open about his intentions as Benning

 

[MikeK]

Why would the Habs trade him here instead of Edmonton? Their pick is higher and they have a **** load more young assets to part with.

Agreed. Van has nothing MTL would want compared to what EDM has to offer. If anything,Van would be used as leverage.

 

[BenningHurtsMySoul]

Lol hilarious how so many fans of other teams are floored by Bennings comments lol. We've never seen a guy as dumb and open about his intentions as Benning

He should be managing a Burger King.

Then again, he'd probably start giving his customers free food if they asked nicely.

 

[y2kcanucks]

And I am in talks to date Megan Fox. At least I have been talking about it ...

I keep calling her too. Where there's smoke there's fire....

 

[Trelane]

I agree they should definately trade with Arizona in that scenario but 2 spots alone won't get the 20 pick. Unless they are all over Tkachuk because he was born there. A nice consolation prize for not getting Matthews that they can market.

It's the same offer that was allegedly made to the Oilers. Seems like they want Tkachuk as badly as Habs want PLD. Assuming Benning truly thinks Juolevi > Tkachuk, which most of us disagree with but any GM would be a fool to make decisions according fanbase desires, than unique opportunity exists to get that extra asset. Ari can't just call Benning's bluff cuz they know Burkie will be all over Tkachuk. Moving up 2 instead of 3 slots ought to make no difference if they get their homeboy. For us, or rather JB, there is minimal risk Flames take Juolevi given their depth on D in both pro and prospect ranks. My guess is they would go with Nylander or Brown.

Loosing PLD would suck but part of me wants the Oilers to make that deal and blow their brains out with Subban. Dude is a more dynamic prime Bieksa with a better slapper, but he is overpaid big time, inconsistent in his own zone, carries locker room baggage and not a favorite among coaches. Between him, McJesus and Hall there would be little cash left for the Oil to spend on other quality players. Best of all, unlike Chicago or Pittsburgh they would do their spending before winning anything.

 

[y2kcanucks]

It's the same offer that was allegedly made to the Oilers. Seems like they want Tkachuk as badly as Habs want PLD. Assuming Benning truly thinks Juolevi > Tkachuk, which most of us disagree with but any GM would be a fool to make decisions according fanbase desires, than unique opportunity exists to get that extra assets. Ari can't just call Benning's bluff cuz they know Burkie will be all over Tkachuk. Moving up 2 instead of 3 slots ought to make no difference if they get their homeboy. For us, or rather JB, there is minimal risk Flames take Juolevi given their depth on D in both pro and prospect ranks. My guess is they would go with Nylander or Brown.

Loosing PLD would suck but part of me wants the Oilers to make that deal and blow their brains out with Subban. Dude is a more dynamic prime Bieksa with a better slapper. He is overpaid big time, inconsistent in his own zone, carries locker room baggage and not a favorite among coaches. Between him, McJesus and Hall there would be little cash left for the Oil to spend on other quality players. Best of all, unlike Chicago or Pittsburgh they would do their spending before winning anything.

In this case I trust the fanbase over the idiots who are destroying this franchise.

 

[Sharpshooter]

If we pick Joulevi, I'll be about as pissed as I was with Virtanen in 2014. Tkachuk seems like he has the potential to be a Top 5 winger in the league at some stage. I don't believe Joulevi has that kind of talent. If Benning were smart, he would pick the BPA at 5 and that would be Tkachuk if Dubois is off the board.

Who would you have picked ahead of JV?

I would. Especially if Benning isn't smart enough to trade down and takes him at 5 .

Because top drafted dmen is something not to build around, particularly when the Nucks are gonna be in and around this spot at next year's draft, most likely? What's wrong with building from the backend again?

Benning is interested in subban.

Benning told TSN he is in talks to acquire p.k subban. http://montreal.ctvnews.ca/vancouver-canucks-express-interest-in-pk-subban-1.2959196

Thoughts ?

You know nuthing Jon Snow.

 

[Sharpshooter]

In this case I trust the fanbase over the idiots who are destroying this franchise.

Your unbiasedness is not showing.

 

[y2kcanucks]

Your unbiasedness is not showing.

I have no bias. I've formulated my opinion based on the results.

 

[racerjoe]

At 6 or later I'd be fine with Juolevi. Like him better than any of the other forwards and all the D. But Dubois/Tkachuk are a tier above and I hate the idea of passing on that for a likely Dan Hamhuis type Dman. Is that a very good player? Sure, but I think Tkachuk (and Dubois) could be a cut above even that. Also for a team with a core D of Tanev, Hutton, Gud, and Tryamkin the last thing I think we need is another "good at everything, great at nothing" D. I'd almost rather trade for a more offensive type like Sergachev or Bean based on what we have in our system already (or more what we *dont* have).

I like a few forwards more still. I feel they have longer odds to hit their top potential, but if they do I think they are worth more. Where I feel Joulevi should be a safe bet to be at least a 3D, and a good shot at being a 2D, but won't be a 1D.

Also you guys can have Megan Fox, I want a khaleesi and will take Emilia Clarke.

 

[Raistlin]

Since Chia announced to the world this morning that there is no #1D this draft, it means he is courting offers away from Calgary, who believes that they may have a chance to get Tkachuk at #6. Chia's basically saying edm will take a forward if he doesn't trade this. Which means there are no concrete offers to edm as of this morning.

In that scenario, we end up with Dubois.

If a trade materialize, Dubois is gone 100%, either from CBJ or the new #4 picker. Puljujarvi is not getting to us, unless they have an irrational hard on for Tkachuk.

We end up with Juolevi

we may have a 5% chance at Pulju in that scenario.

Odds are as of right now, Dubois 60%, Juolevi 35% Puljujarvi 5%

Since we are the canucks....expect the worse to unfurl....

 

[huntison]

Since Chia announced to the world this morning that there is no #1D this draft, it means he is courting offers away from Calgary, who believes that they may have a chance to get Tkachuk at #6. Chia's basically saying edm will take a forward if he doesn't trade this. Which means there are no concrete offers to edm as of this morning.

In that scenario, we end up with Dubois.

If a trade materialize, Dubois is gone 100%, either from CBJ or the new #4 picker. Puljujarvi is not getting to us, unless they have an irrational hard on for Tkachuk.

We end up with Juolevi

we may have a 5% chance at Pulju in that scenario.

Odds are as of right now, Dubois 60%, Juolevi 35% Puljujarvi 5%

Since we are the canucks....expect the worse to unfurl....

But 0% chance of Tkachuk??

 

[JA]

If Montreal and Edmonton settle on a deal, Pierre-Luc Dubois will be unavailable at the fifth overall position. The rumor of Subban potentially going to Edmonton has added a new layer to the drama. That said, if Edmonton can't trade the fourth overall pick to anyone else, Montreal might see an opportunity to talk to Vancouver about the fifth overall pick. Of course, Peter Chiarelli could also try to force Montreal to make the trade by saying that they would take Dubois if a trade is not made; Marc Bergevin would have to call their bluff. I don't think the Canadiens want Dubois badly enough to make a trade they aren't comfortable with.

If Columbus really does not want Puljujarvi, they might bargain with Vancouver. The fact that a team might now take Dubois fourth overall, though, makes this a risky move for Columbus. If they want Logan Brown rather than Dubois, however, they would surely be content at fifth, but then they would be fine trading even lower than fifth and so a deal with Vancouver would seem less sensible. A deal with Calgary or Arizona would make more sense.

The worst case scenario would be Matthew Tkachuk at the fifth overall position. I don't think Jim Benning has Olli Juolevi ranked fifth overall based on the interviews that he has done. My first preference would be Jesse Puljujarvi third overall; if not, then Pierre-Luc Dubois fifth overall. Matthew Tkachuk would be my third choice for the Canucks with their first round pick.

 

[CanaFan]

If Montreal and Edmonton settle on a deal, Pierre-Luc Dubois will be unavailable at the fifth overall position. The rumor of Subban potentially going to Edmonton has added a new layer to the drama. That said, if Edmonton can't trade the fourth overall pick to anyone else, Montreal might see an opportunity to talk to Vancouver about the fifth overall pick.

We don't have the assets to pry Subban out of Mtl. It was reported that Mtl asked Edm for #4 + Draisaitl for Subban alone (i.e. no #9 coming back) and I don't believe Mtl would lower their demands on an asset as big as PK. And we simply can't touch an offer like that. Our equivalent would be #5 + Horvat + Tanev and that would gut this team for the next half decade.

It's Edm or bust for a Subban deal and right now I'd bet heavily on bust tbh.

 

[Raistlin]

But 0% chance of Tkachuk??

I don't think so under the conditions stated. If sekeras and everyone in Buffalo is saying that Benning prefers Juolevi over Tkachuk, and Chia says there are no #1D this draft, then no one will pick Juo ahead of Benning, hence 0% chance of Tkachuk

 

[JA]

I don't think so under the conditions stated. If sekeras and everyone in Buffalo is saying that Benning prefers Juolevi over Tkachuk, and Chia says there are no #1D this draft, then no one will pick Juo ahead of Benning, hence 0% chance of Tkachuk

Benning himself said after the Canucks lost the Draft Lottery that he sees the top defencemen in this draft as top-pairing, #2 defencemen, but not as true #1 defencemen. This interview took place on May 2, 2016.

5:55 of the audio clip:

https://soundcloud.com/tsn-radio-vancouver/jim-benning-i-wont-lie-i-was-disappointed

Bro Jake: "Is there a #1 defenceman out there?"

Jim: "I don't know if there's a true #1 defenceman, 'cause if you look through the league right now, there's maybe eight or ten #1 defencemen in the whole league, so I think this defence group this year, they're first pairing guys, where they could be a good #2, but with a #1 defenceman, we're talking about a guy with size, strength, a guy that can run a powerplay, can match up against another team's top lines, and I don't know if there's a true #1 defenceman in this year's draft."

Pratt: "So, with that being said, then the feeling then would be to go with someone like a Matthew Tkachuk or a Pierre-Luc Dubois. Does that sound more realistic?"

Jim: "I think that sounds more realistic to me."





Additionally, every time Benning refers to there being a defenceman near the top of his list, he always refers to the group as the "Top Six," i.e., "there are five forwards and a defenceman in our top six."

In this interview on May 27, 2016, he says the following:

4:57 of the interview:

Millard: "This is an area, though, where you're drafting fifth overall. Can you replace McCann with that pick?"

Jim: "I feel we can. I feel there's the top three players in the draft, then the next two forwards, and we have a defenceman rated up in that group, but I believe the next two forwards are first-line players, and the defenceman's gonna be, if he's not a top pairing guy, he's for sure gonna be a second-pairing guy, but picking at five, I believe we're gonna get a first-line forward there."

 

[Raistlin]

Benning himself said after the Canucks lost the Draft Lottery that he sees the top defencemen in this draft as top-pairing, #2 defencemen, but not as true #1 defencemen. This interview took place on May 2, 2016.

5:55 of the audio clip:

https://soundcloud.com/tsn-radio-vancouver/jim-benning-i-wont-lie-i-was-disappointed

Bro Jake: "Is there a #1 defenceman out there?"

Jim: "I don't know if there's a true #1 defenceman, 'cause if you look through the league right now, there's maybe eight or ten #1 defencemen in the whole league, so I think this defence group this year, they're first pairing guys, where they could be a good #2, but with a #1 defenceman, we're talking about a guy with size, strength, a guy that can run a powerplay, can match up against another team's top lines, and I don't know if there's a true #1 defenceman in this year's draft."

Pratt: "So, with that being said, then the feeling then would be to go with someone like a Matthew Tkachuk or a Pierre-Luc Dubois. Does that sound more realistic?"

Jim: "I think that sounds more realistic to me."

Dude, every fibre of me wants that to be the case. I really wish he didn't have a change of heart between then and now. Simple Jim is easy to be blinded by the organisational need of a bluechip Dman.

 

[Cupless44]

Who would you have picked ahead of JV?




Because top drafted dmen is something not to build around, particularly when the Nucks are gonna be in and around this spot at next year's draft, most likely? What's wrong with building from the backend again?



You know nuthing Jon Snow.

Because you have to take BPA when you are in the top 5 for the first time in 16 years and have needs everywhere and no scoring or first line succession plan. The forwards are simply better in this draft. There is no true #1 defenceman.

 

[JA]

Dude, every fibre of me wants that to be the case. I really wish he didn't have a change of heart between then and now. Simple Jim is easy to be blinded by the organisational need of a bluechip Dman.

If Jim truly believes that the defenceman is a "possible first-pairing, #2 defenceman but a guaranteed second-pairing defenceman," why would he prefer that player over two players he believes are first-line forwards? I don't buy it. The first person he listens to when he evaluates amateur talent is himself.

Defencemen also take longer to develop than forwards. If he wants to see his player join the Canucks' lineup soon, he'll take a forward. He already addressed the need on defence by trading away his forward prospect.

May 27, 2016.

Millard: "This is an area, though, where you're drafting fifth overall. Can you replace McCann with that pick?"

Jim: "I feel we can. I feel there's the top three players in the draft, then the next two forwards, and we have a defenceman rated up in that group, but I believe the next two forwards are first-line players, and the defenceman's gonna be, if he's not a top pairing guy, he's for sure gonna be a second-pairing guy, but picking at five, I believe we're gonna get a first-line forward there."