Confirmed with Link: [VAN/TOR] Canucks acquire D Travis Dermott for 3rd in 2022 (WPG)

[Jyrki21]

10% chance of 0 value (falls apart immediately Brandon Prust style)

We really need to make "to prust" a verb meaning "to bust, after you've already been an NHL player".

 

[F A N]

Fair but they were cheap young fast guys. And they were actually on NHL rosters.

I'm thinking more of spending 5 years developing Brendan Gaunce and then parachuting in Tim Schaller in over him at double the price for worse results, or forcing guys like Pouliot and Vey and Granlund onto NHL rosters for years when they simply weren't NHL-calibre players.

Well it wasn't exactly years. Pouliot for 2, Vey 1 1/2. Granlund I thought was NHL-calibre but we're never going to agree.

We've also kind of done that as well under Gillis. We would pick up someone on waivers or trade for Dalpe at the eve of camp.

 

[Burke's Evil Spirit]

Honestly would be fine with a Rathbone - Dermott third pair next year.

I would be okay with that as long as Poolman and Schenn are below him on the depth chart, not above.

 

[God]

It’s the gift that keeps on giving

 

[bossram]

I'd like to see if Dermott can mesh well with Hughes, and then play Rathbone with Schenn. Imo Rathbone was targeted physically in the games he played this year, and I'd like to see him find his footing in the NHL while knowing that someone has his back.

I'd definitely give Hughes-Dermott a go. One of Dermott's strengths is neutral zone defense - he prevents opposing possession entries and forces dump-ins. If he's forcing a lot of dump-ins, Hughes is the perfect guy for the retrieval and breakout.

Dermott also has some good mobility, so maybe him and Hughes could re-create of poor man's version of Toews-Makar rush activation.

 

[me2]

Well it wasn't exactly years. Pouliot for 2, Vey 1 1/2. Granlund I thought was NHL-calibre but we're never going to agree.

We've also kind of done that as well under Gillis. We would pick up someone on waivers or trade for Dalpe at the eve of camp.

Gillis was patching potholes with these minor players. Benning was trying to patch sink holes with the same sort of players. Benning was out of his depth.

Granlund was the classic "good enough to play in the NHL" type player, where the NHL team was a tank team. A few years from draft he gets the prospect benefit of the doubt, fails to progress and gets moved to bad team. On the bad team he top 6, PP and get a few points. On good teams he's bumped down the to the bottom 6, disappears and is out of a job.

 

[F A N]

So I just read Drance and Dhaliwal's article in the Athletic. They say the Canucks view Dermott as a third pairing Dman. While I think Dermott is good in that role, if the Canucks aren't seeing some potential upside here I'm not sure if this is a good trade. A 3rd round pick for a guy you peg as a 3rd pairing Dman seems like an unnecessary trade. Makes the team better in the short term no doubt.

 

[Elitersson]

This is such flawed reasoning that gets frequently tossed around. The value of a draft pick isn't equal to its most likely outcome. If you trade a lottery ticket for an amount less than its cost, the fact that less than its cost is still more than the most likely result of its winnings doesn't justify that exchange.

You're correct, but statistically my statement is still true. Roughly 15% of 3rd round selections will be that good or better. A select few will be significantly better, yes, but my point was more for the people freaking out about it. It seems like a fair value trade to me.

 

[pitseleh]

So I just read Drance and Dhaliwal's article in the Athletic. They say the Canucks view Dermott as a third pairing Dman. While I think Dermott is good in that role, if the Canucks aren't seeing some potential upside here I'm not sure if this is a good trade. A 3rd round pick for a guy you peg as a 3rd pairing Dman seems like an unnecessary trade. Makes the team better in the short term no doubt.

They also say “the club is hopeful that they can make a top-four defender out of Dermott in time.”

 

[MS]

Gillis was patching potholes with these minor players. Benning was trying to patch sink holes with the same sort of players. Benning was out of his depth.

Granlund was the classic "good enough to play in the NHL" type player, where the NHL team was a tank team. A few years from draft he gets the prospect benefit of the doubt, fails to progress and gets moved to bad team. On the bad team he top 6, PP and get a few points. On good teams he's bumped down the to the bottom 6, disappears and is out of a job.

Granlund at age 26 took the Oilers 30 games to realize wasn’t an NHLer.

He was a small, slow, soft, lazy skill player who should never have been a regular NHL player.

 

[Burke's Evil Spirit]

Granlund at age 26 took the Oilers 30 games to realize wasn’t an NHLer.

He was a small, slow, soft, lazy skill player who should never have been a regular NHL player.

Tons of examples like these under the Jim Benning era Canucks.

Linden Vey gets 116 games as a Canuck, moves to the Flames, who realize he sucks after 4 games.

Tim Schaller gets 98 games with the Canucks, moves to the Kings, plays 2 more games before he's cashiered out of the league.

Derrick Pouliout - 133 games as an NHL regular before they move on from him...he's played 4 games in 4 seasons since.

Just could not scout worth a damn.

 

[Shareefruck]

You're correct, but statistically my statement is still true. Roughly 15% of 3rd round selections will be that good or better. A select few will be significantly better, yes, but my point was more for the people freaking out about it. It seems like a fair value trade to me.

The statement/premise is true, and the conclusion may also be true, but the conclusion does not validly follow from that premise (as demonstrated more clearly by Melvin's posts). That is the only thing I'm pointing out.

 

[arttk]

So I just read Drance and Dhaliwal's article in the Athletic. They say the Canucks view Dermott as a third pairing Dman. While I think Dermott is good in that role, if the Canucks aren't seeing some potential upside here I'm not sure if this is a good trade. A 3rd round pick for a guy you peg as a 3rd pairing Dman seems like an unnecessary trade. Makes the team better in the short term no doubt.

I think they want to inject speed into every part of the team.

Tons of examples like these under the Jim Benning era Canucks.

Linden Vey gets 116 games as a Canuck, moves to the Flames, who realize he sucks after 4 games.

Tim Schaller gets 98 games with the Canucks, moves to the Kings, plays 2 more games before he's cashiered out of the league.

Derrick Pouliout - 133 games as an NHL regular before they move on from him...he's played 4 games in 4 seasons since.

Just could not scout worth a damn.

Don’t you just miss them tripledowning on horrible scouting decisions and shoving them down our throats.

 

[me2]

You're correct, but statistically my statement is still true. Roughly 15% of 3rd round selections will be that good or better. A select few will be significantly better, yes, but my point was more for the people freaking out about it. It seems like a fair value trade to me.

For the Canucks the question is "is Dermott a 3rd round pick better then what they could get for free in the offseason plus a 3rd round prospect?" "It's Dermott better then what a 3rd could get you in the offseason?".

 

[Melvin]

Tons of examples like these under the Jim Benning era Canucks.

Linden Vey gets 116 games as a Canuck, moves to the Flames, who realize he sucks after 4 games.

Tim Schaller gets 98 games with the Canucks, moves to the Kings, plays 2 more games before he's cashiered out of the league.

Derrick Pouliout - 133 games as an NHL regular before they move on from him...he's played 4 games in 4 seasons since.

Just could not scout worth a damn.

Matt Bartkowski - *80* of 82 games his one season here, hasn’t played that many in seven seasons since.

I’m all for giving guys an extended look, but you don’t need more than a dozen or so games to see that someone isn’t an NHLer in most cases.

 

[F A N]

Tons of examples like these under the Jim Benning era Canucks.

Linden Vey gets 116 games as a Canuck, moves to the Flames, who realize he sucks after 4 games.

Tim Schaller gets 98 games with the Canucks, moves to the Kings, plays 2 more games before he's cashiered out of the league.

Derrick Pouliout - 133 games as an NHL regular before they move on from him...he's played 4 games in 4 seasons since.

Just could not scout worth a damn.

Gaunce soon left for Sweden after getting 117 games here.

Players get a certain amount of time to establish themselves. Schaller was a different case of course. He wasn't a young guy but a UFA bust.

 

[Reverend Mayhem]

Granlund at age 26 took the Oilers 30 games to realize wasn’t an NHLer.

He was a small, slow, soft, lazy skill player who should never have been a regular NHL player.

Even when he was scoring with the Sedins, you could see it. To address a post below this, I think that there's something to the credence of you do have to try a player out to watch them fail, but as an advertised scout you would expect more out of the investments we made.

 

[Spectrefire]

Tons of examples like these under the Jim Benning era Canucks.

Linden Vey gets 116 games as a Canuck, moves to the Flames, who realize he sucks after 4 games.

Tim Schaller gets 98 games with the Canucks, moves to the Kings, plays 2 more games before he's cashiered out of the league.

Derrick Pouliout - 133 games as an NHL regular before they move on from him...he's played 4 games in 4 seasons since.

Just could not scout worth a damn.

Tim Schaller was a weird one. He was legitimate good in Boston, and then immediately fell apart in Vancouver. That seems to be a trend with anything coming over from Boston come to think of it...

 

[Bougieman]

Tim Schaller was a weird one. He was legitimate good in Boston, and then immediately fell apart in Vancouver. That seems to be a trend with anything coming over from Boston come to think of it...

Including Benning. God, 12 years after that game 7 loss to the Bruins in the finals, and we're ONLY NOW getting out from under the lingering manifestations of that game. We only ever brought in all this Bruins trash because ownership thought "If you can't beat em, join em!"

 

[MarkusNaslund19]

Non-1st picks are *very seldom* providing excess value on years 1-2 of their ELC even if they hit. These guys tend to have a couple years split AHL/NHL and then maybe hit in the last year of that ELC.

Like, from the entire 2017 and 2018 drafts there is 1 guy (Jason Robertson) who provided real excess value in year 2 of his ELC. Nobody did it in year 1. A couple more (Batherson, Sharangovich, Durzi) have broken out in year 3 ... and were then up for big renewals. 2016 you do have Debrincat and Fox ... although Fox was an odd case who didn't actually help the team that drafted him. 2019 isn't looking promising either - Hoglander is probably the best value.

It's talked up as a thing, but it very seldom happens. The guys powering big value on ELCs are your top picks. A 3rd round pick providing star value for multiple years on an ELC is a unicorn.

Plus there are always bonuses so when a Pettersson or Hughes hits on their ELC it isn't actually 'league minimum'. Those ended up being around $2 million in the end IIRC?

Like, yeah it *can* be a thing. But it's such a rare thing and the opportunity cost is so small that it wouldn't really overly factor into my decision making.

This is a good point. Further, people sort of seem to treat draft picks like they're lottery tickets that happen to win or lose.

Teams scout players. If there's someone in the 3rd round whom we have confidence in, it won't be hard to trade up for a pick in that round.

When you can take a chance on a toolsy players who has been phased out of a win-now team, who is making 1.5 million per year, you do it. The fact that his analytics look solid (zone entries and zone entry preventions) is another perk.

Seriously, you are crowing from the rooftops if your third round pick turns into Dermott when he is 25.

Yes, everyone always points out Brayden Point, but do you know why? Because he is exceedingly rare.

 

[HelloCookie]

It’s the gift that keeps on giving

 

[AppleHoneySauce]

I feel like Dermott and Rathbone could make a good line nickname. Maybe some sort of medical condition.

 

[SeawaterOnIce]

Tim Schaller was a weird one. He was legitimate good in Boston, and then immediately fell apart in Vancouver. That seems to be a trend with anything coming over from Boston come to think of it...

Spooner, Schaller, Heinan, R. Nash, Nordstrom (he was actually fairly decent in the 2019 playoffs)

Boston had the foundation and coaches to extract the best from their depth guys. They were often released/traded once they either commanded too much salary or once it was realized that the guys underlying numbers stunk.

Our GM's were like "oooo, this guy got 30 pts 2.5 years ago!!! he might have untapped potential!"

 

[Tomatoes11]

This is a good point. Further, people sort of seem to treat draft picks like they're lottery tickets that happen to win or lose.

Teams scout players. If there's someone in the 3rd round whom we have confidence in, it won't be hard to trade up for a pick in that round.

When you can take a chance on a toolsy players who has been phased out of a win-now team, who is making 1.5 million per year, you do it. The fact that his analytics look solid (zone entries and zone entry preventions) is another perk.

Seriously, you are crowing from the rooftops if your third round pick turns into Dermott when he is 25.

Yes, everyone always points out Brayden Point, but do you know why? Because he is exceedingly rare.

That’s the thing. We don’t need a Dermott though in any way shape or form. So the best thing to do in our case is collect enough 3rds so our marginal chances at a point is less marginal. Like it our not, Stanley Cup champions are fluky in a sense.

 

[VanJack]

It's impossible not to think about where the Canucks would be today if they hadn't jettisoned so many second and third round draft picks for players who just never panned out. The list of failures from Sutter to Gudbranson, Tofoli, Pedan, Baertschi, OEL and Garland, would fill a team's prospect pool twice over.

For a GM who built his reputation on being a 'drafter and evaluator' of young talent, Benning squandered more draft picks for 'nothing players' than any GM in Canuck history.

I hope Travis Dermott works out for Allvin and the Canucks, at the cost of a third rounder. But the Canucks track record of trading draft picks for existing position players is beyond dismal.