The All-Purpose 6th Overall Discussion Thread PT IV (MOD Warning Post 554)
- Thread starter The Stig
- Start date
- Status
Nucker101
Foundational Poster
- Apr 2, 2013
- 21,162
- 16,639
Ehlers please. Still like his skill of speed/skill/IQ/competitiveness the best outside of the top 5.
I see the top 4 going:
1. Eklbad(FLA)
2. Reinhart(BUF)
3. Bennett(EDM)
4. Dal Colle(CGY)
Then hopefully the Isles pass on Draisaitl, but otherwise I'd go with Ehlers personally.
I see the top 4 going:
1. Eklbad(FLA)
2. Reinhart(BUF)
3. Bennett(EDM)
4. Dal Colle(CGY)
Then hopefully the Isles pass on Draisaitl, but otherwise I'd go with Ehlers personally.
LickTheEnvelope
Time to Retool... again...
My .02 on trading up from 6 is it's worth it only if Reinhart is the player available and that the prospect in addition to the pick is anyone but Horvat. A centre with the ability to score 65+ points consistently and the potential for a few PPG years is what this franchise needs. Those players are very difficult to find outside of the top 3-5 players in any given draft year and I don't see us being a poor enough team in the next few years to be in a position to draft that high. If the rumored return on a Kesler trade comes to fruition, say 10th OV + prospect + player or Teravainen + Shaw + Pick, then forward depth at the prospect level, particularly centres, should not be an issue and we could afford to part with a Shinkaruk or Jensen level prospect.
After that I would follow Pittsburgh's recent draft strategy of drafting a bunch of Dmen and hoping one of them hits like Maatta.
After that I would follow Pittsburgh's recent draft strategy of drafting a bunch of Dmen and hoping one of them hits like Maatta.
Bleach Clean
Registered User
- Aug 9, 2006
- 27,056
- 6,632
If somehow MDC does drop to 6th and VAN picks him, then I would push his development as a C instead of a LWer. He'll lose some of his offense for defense, but long-term, it makes sense for the franchise.
For examples of this, look no further than Linden. Was a RW, converted to C. Another is Giroux, who made the same switch. It may offer some hidden value in a pick like this.
For examples of this, look no further than Linden. Was a RW, converted to C. Another is Giroux, who made the same switch. It may offer some hidden value in a pick like this.
I would be ok with that. Replying to you, as I think in the last thread you were the last to comment about trading up 1 spot.
I would easily give up Hansen for a swap of picks, would like a small kicker coming back, but push comes to shove, I would still do it if it was the difference between MDC (almost put MDZ oops) and the next three, but I am way high on MDC.
Yeah this sounds like a good plan. MDC or Draisaitl would be a win with the 6th.
I agree this is something that could be explored as it would maximize MDC's utility to the Canucks. A MDC-Horvat-Gaunce line up is very strong if all 3 reach their anticipated ceilings. My understanding is that he played centre up until major junior so it shouldn't be a wholly new experience for him and he seems to posses the size, skating, and hockey IQ required for the position. With Laughton graduating to the NHL or AHL next season I could see Oshawa trying MDC in the middle anyway out of need. The Linden comparison is apt, except he actually switched from C in junior to RW in the NHL and then swung to and fro as needed. Still if MDC can move to C he can always return to the wing if lineups or match ups dictate. Simply increases his value further if he can demonstrate that level of versatility.
Barney Gumble
Registered User
- Jan 2, 2007
- 22,711
- 1
I dunno; think we might've been better off had we been able to get that center for Linden early on his career. Only put into that position because we had **** alternatives.
I think I would be comfortable giving up Hansen in that trade even w no kicker coming back. I think we've seen the peak of Hansen's game and at this point he seems to be more of a 'blocker' to giving ice time to younger kids like Jensen or Shinkaruk. He is a handy player but I wouldn't mind moving on and giving some other players a chance in his spot. If that also got us up to #5 then so much the better.
I don't think that is a change that Dal Colle could make. He is a pure winger that generates a lot of his offence by curling off the wall and using his fantastic shot to generate offense. If we were to draft Dal Colle one of my biggest worries going forward is that we don't have a young centre that would be capable of getting him the puck with frequency in the areas that would maximize Dal Colles talents.
Concur that the proposed 6th and Horvat for 3rd is complete asset mismanagement.
The separation between top 5 and Ritchie/Nylander/Ehlers is nothing like between last year's top 4 and the next group. The play of Monahan should make everyone cautious. Anyone drafting 5-8 this year could end up with the best player in the draft, which simply could not be said last year with the presence of MacKinnon and Jones.
Also not getting the continued preoccupation with the Bruins in the context of a thread entitled "The All-Purposed 6th Overall Discussion." Apart from Hamilton, who had no impact on Bruin success prior to now, the entire core of that team is made up non 1st round picks. Save Iginla, even the guys they trade for are later picks. The art of nailing your 2nd rounders seems more fitted to that other draft thread on here. Unless folks mean to draft top five scorers and promptly trade them.
It's all about hedging. Get the best players most likely to make the show, at every point in the draft, with an eye on their perceived standing in the draft market. Which very roughly goes something like:
Scorers with size > scoring D with size > big (legit) PWF >
avg. sized scorers > avg. sized scoring D >
small sized scorers > good goalies (all sizes) > small but high scoring D >
all other skaters > all other goalies
Horvat is a blue chipper but whose scoring potential in unknown. Same for Gaunce. He wouldn't be the first guys to barely get PPG in junior and manage close to PPG or some respectable totals in the show. This team doesn't exactly have a stellar history with their 1st rounders. Considering we're outright brutal with the rest of our picks I'm thinking we'll be better off keeping all our 1st selections, and, if anything, add to their number.
The separation between top 5 and Ritchie/Nylander/Ehlers is nothing like between last year's top 4 and the next group. The play of Monahan should make everyone cautious. Anyone drafting 5-8 this year could end up with the best player in the draft, which simply could not be said last year with the presence of MacKinnon and Jones.
Also not getting the continued preoccupation with the Bruins in the context of a thread entitled "The All-Purposed 6th Overall Discussion." Apart from Hamilton, who had no impact on Bruin success prior to now, the entire core of that team is made up non 1st round picks. Save Iginla, even the guys they trade for are later picks. The art of nailing your 2nd rounders seems more fitted to that other draft thread on here. Unless folks mean to draft top five scorers and promptly trade them.
It's all about hedging. Get the best players most likely to make the show, at every point in the draft, with an eye on their perceived standing in the draft market. Which very roughly goes something like:
Scorers with size > scoring D with size > big (legit) PWF >
avg. sized scorers > avg. sized scoring D >
small sized scorers > good goalies (all sizes) > small but high scoring D >
all other skaters > all other goalies
Horvat is a blue chipper but whose scoring potential in unknown. Same for Gaunce. He wouldn't be the first guys to barely get PPG in junior and manage close to PPG or some respectable totals in the show. This team doesn't exactly have a stellar history with their 1st rounders. Considering we're outright brutal with the rest of our picks I'm thinking we'll be better off keeping all our 1st selections, and, if anything, add to their number.
I would say that there is a top 3 (Ekblad, Reinhart and Bennett) and that then there is a slight dropoff from 4-7. After that, there is an even slighter drop off until you leave the teens, where basically the picks become boom or bust types.
This is pretty much an average draft and this is usually how it plays out regardless.
As for who the Canucks should draft IMO, my opinion hasn't changed at all. I think Nick Ritchie is practically NHL ready, he hits like a train and he has the hands to score at the next level. The only issue is his injury history.
But if he works out to be the kind of player that some feel he may become, many teams who are picking in that top 3 are going to be wishing one day that they could turn back the clock.
Bitz and Bites
Registered User
I'd also be fine with throwing in Hansen to move up a spot or two if MDC is still available at that point.I'm not sure if Burke will deal with the 'Nucks (doubt it,but he might be if he thinks a trade is lopsided enough in his favor) or if the NYI have a need for Hansen,but it's feasible.I could see either of them asking for Tanev,which I would'nt do,although Stanton could be traded and replaced via free agency.
I see a large drop between the top 5 and the next tier of Ehlers,Nylander,and Ritchie so we would definitely have to give to get but I think some short term pain could be worth the long term gain.
Diamonddog01
Diamond in the rough
You don't think Bennett has this ceiling as well?
While I recognize the dire need for forwards a lot hinges are what Kesler wants. If he wants to stay, and we somehow miraculously move up into the top 3 (maybe with Edler?) I think I would prefer to take Ekblad. RHD that would complement the core nicely, this guy has franchise defenceman written all over him.
Not as enthused about moving MDC (would be ecstatic if he somehow fell) to a centre.
So much hinges on what happens with Edler & Kes.
skyo
Benning Squad
Horvat + 1st will never be a package deal, maybe Shink+1st to move up as we already have Bur/Jensen/Kass on the right with Hansen most likely being dealt to make room for Jensen and create even more cap space.
But if we stay at 6th, Nylander seems to be making noise already at 17, but it just seems that package of skill and size in Ritchie will be just too enticing to pass up for Linden and probable Benning at the helm, even if Benning can't partake in the draft.
2014 being a mediocre draft and this team at 6th overall is probably the best chance this team will ever have at moving up in the top 5 though, ever since the year we got the Sedins.
But if we stay at 6th, Nylander seems to be making noise already at 17, but it just seems that package of skill and size in Ritchie will be just too enticing to pass up for Linden and probable Benning at the helm, even if Benning can't partake in the draft.
2014 being a mediocre draft and this team at 6th overall is probably the best chance this team will ever have at moving up in the top 5 though, ever since the year we got the Sedins.
Dealing Shinkaruk would be a tragic mistake for this franchise to make. This kid has proven through his play with men at the Penticton camp and his pre-season last year that he is not far away at all with being able to play with men and could actually thrive as a top 6 winger.
I honestly don't see enough of a drop-off from the top 5 to the rest of the draft to move significant assets to try to move up. This year's draft just doesn't offer the kind of guaranteed star power that last year's draft held. Next year is a different matter.
FWIW, Calgary and Islander fans are considering Nylander at 4 and 5.
The kid is clearly skilled and was in top 3 contention before the season.
I wouldn't mind taking him at 6.
Sedin - Sedin - Burrows
Nylander - Kesler - Kassian
Is a pretty good top 6.
The kid is clearly skilled and was in top 3 contention before the season.
I wouldn't mind taking him at 6.
Sedin - Sedin - Burrows
Nylander - Kesler - Kassian
Is a pretty good top 6.
ChilliBilly
Registered User
Agreed. Think we got a steal in Shinkaruk, and just like schroeder,there is no way we will get the value of his actual potential in a trade. we have had a ton of Nylander Ehlers type projects that never panned out. Heck there is an argument to be made that Schroeder had top tier potential, but just hasn't panned out.(I am still in favor of giving him a couple of more years unless someone gives us a steal for him).
I am solidly on the Ritchie band wagon, though I would love for us to get a shot at Virtanen because I really wish we would draft some BC players once in while. I would gladly trade Kes and a utility vet for package that included a decent prospect and 7 -11 over all draft pick, and of course a solid player in the 29 -31 year old range to help us progress competently through the next 2 -3 years.
Curious about Dal Colle - his even strength production would worry me if I were drafting him, but he's also lauded for his two-way play. For those who have seen him play, how strong is he defensively? Any chance he has a Patrick Sharp/Marian Hossa like trajectory if he hits his top end offensive projection, or are his defensive chops not quite up to that level?
Many scouts say he plays offensively like Getzlaf. I think you're putting an artificial ceiling on Dal Colle that just doesn't make sense.
He's good with the puck on his stick, can curl and create for others.
I don't understand where this idea that MDC is a limited player who requires others for offense comes from.
He's the #2 player on my board and if I felt he needed others for offense he wouldn't be.
Bleach Clean
Registered User
- Aug 9, 2006
- 27,056
- 6,632
16 of his 95 points were on the PP. Even strength production looks good to me. To contrast, Bennett had 10 PPPs of his 91 total points.
skyo
Benning Squad
Yeah never know he could be one of the top scorers out of all these draft picks in this draft, as he has some of the best skill overall, it's too bad he's in Sweden as it's a bit harder to judge his play compared to others.
But the U18's performance of William Nylander is opening up the eyes of many of the HFscouts.
When we look back at this 2014 draft in 5-10 years I doubt we will find many star players ripping it up in the league compared to 2013, 2015 draftee's.
Wonder if we can just tack on a 3rd and/or Hansen to our #6 to get #5.
- Status
