im with nucker on this one

you don't pass on hughes just because he won't be a top pair shutdown guy

different consideration when it comes to boqvist however due to higher risk factors
- BobBot

Agreed. Although, anybody that says Dobson or Bouchard definitely can’t be a number 1 are ****** in the ****

I really find this idea that because Dobson is a "safe pick", that automatically means his ceiling is lowered. That is not the case at all in my opinion. What makes him a safe pick is his play in his own end and his skating. He still oozes top pairing though. He can QB a PP, is good in the offensive end 5 on 5 and has a variety of shots to use at his disposal. He already has NHL size. Somehow in this crazy world, these attributes have worked negatively in his assessments because he's safe lock to be a top 6. This idea you cant hit a home run without more risk is silly. Trade down then.... there are lots of really high risk high reward picks as you move down....lollolollollo

People are so caught up in labels.

Like Top pairing. It appears people don't think you can have a player that is good at both ends of the ice to be a top pairing. You need lights out offense. I think Dobson likely loses less of his offensive production in the NHL than some of the other highly offensive small or slow top 10 ranked dmen. Who cares if it's safe.

People here have been complaining about the pathetic point totals from our defense for years and now all of a sudden we're too good for a guy who can potentially put up big points but won't play 25 mins a night
- Nucker101

Who's worth more a top pairing 25 minutes a night defender or a undersize 2nd pairing 50 point D man?

People here have been complaining about the pathetic point totals from our defense for years and now all of a sudden we're too good for a guy who can potentially put up big points but won't play 25 mins a night
- Nucker101

Or maybe some of us like the player that can potentially put up decent points and be an all-situations type.

Should we call him in?
- VANTEL

yes, ottawa needs a new owner / GM

Or maybe some of us like the player that can potentially put up decent points and be an all-situations type.
- Reubenkincade

I would love that too

Who's worth more a top pairing 25 minutes a night defender or a undersize 2nd pairing 50 point D man?
- manvanfan

the 25 mins a night defender. Which one projects to be which in this draft?

I guess here's where we disagree. I guess there's a lot of lazy or just flat out stubborn taller dmen out there who refuse to defend....

Looks like they use "defensive awareness" as a judgement too. Interesting. Can awareness be taught? Someone tell Virtanen and David Booth!


To put it into simpler terms. I view Bouchard and Hughes both as offensive players who will be limited defensively. I simply prefer the player who is flat out better in my eyes.
- Nucker101

Some players are going to have more awareness then others. Same as, some are better at face-off's then others. Awareness can certainly be taught the same as defence. May not be as good as a natural but certainly capable of learning it. Josh Morrissey was an all out offence D in junior. Now he's a shutdown defender in the NHL.

Some players are going to have more awareness then others. Same as some are better at face-off's then others. Awareness can certainly be taught the same as defence. May not be as good as a natural but certainly capable of learning it. Josh Morrissey was an all out offence D in junior. Now he's a shutdown defender in the NHL.
- manvanfan

Defense and hockey sense/awareness can be taught.


*moves Ryan Merkley to #4 on draft board*

Amazing how some speculative talk by Friedman turns into rumours. The usual people are 100% sold on things not even reported as "I'm hearing" but rather "I wouldnt be surprised" but still it takes on the life of rumour and people start talking about how confident they are about the pick being shopped hard because where there is smoke there is fire. Funny thing, there was no smoke. Just talk about hypothetical smoke... not even a hypothetical fire lol.... air time just gets wasted on bullpoop.
- boonerbuck

exactly.....and which gets turned into hysteria here

the 25 mins a night defender. Which one projects to be which in this draft?
- Nucker101

Dahlin, Dobson, Bouchard. Possibly K. Miller, Bode Wilde. I don't really know but they at least have a chance.

Dahlin, Dobson, Bouchard. Possibly K. Miller, Bode Wilde. I don't really know but they at least have a chance.
- manvanfan

So all should be ranked ahead of Hughes then.

Defense and hockey sense/awareness can be taught.


*moves Ryan Merkley to #4 on draft board*
- Nucker101

Sorry my apologies.

I'll reiterate. You have to know what defence is to be taught it.

So all should be ranked ahead of Hughes then.
- Nucker101

Why?

Sorry my apologies.

I'll reiterate. You have to know what defence is to be taught it.
- manvanfan

I'll get someone to teach him what is defense then teach him how to play it.

Why?
- manvanfan

More upside.

Same with Kotkaniemi. #1 C should be ranked ahead of a potential #1 W. Svechnikov should slide down a bit, after the potential #1 D's and #1's C's.

I would love that too
- Nucker101

I am sure most of us do.
I like the way Hughes skates and can handle the puck, I don't like his defensive ability though, as he appeared to be a puckwatcher.
Several of those types are available later in 1st and into the 2nd round.
Players like Merkley, Tychonik Bernard-Docker etc, are all similar types available later on in the draft.
Just my opinion.

nobody here "knows" anything for sure about any of the top prospects' futures. Neither does a scout or GM. We're all just guessing.
- Nucker101

That’s exactly what I’ve been saying for weeks

So all should be ranked ahead of Hughes then.
- Nucker101

Nope. He's ranked higher than safe picks.

Dahlin, Dobson, Bouchard. Possibly K. Miller, Bode Wilde. I don't really know but they at least have a chance.
- manvanfan

Canucks D need a PPQB , a Sniper , a protector , a reliable stay at home , a minute muncher. You won't find that all in one player at least not in this draft.

More upside.

Same with Kotkaniemi. #1 C should be ranked ahead of a potential #1 W. Svechnikov should slide down a bit, after the potential #1 D's and #1's C's.
- Nucker101

You are being pretty irrational now.

That’s exactly what I’ve been saying for weeks
- CanuckDon

Yeah, so we're having some fun in here arguing over our own guesses vs other people's guesses. Just like scouts do. The weather is poopty so why not?

Canucks D need a PPQB , a Sniper , a protector , a reliable stay at home , a minute muncher. You won't find that all in one player at least not in this draft.
- VANTEL

Not unless you are drafting Dahlin.

You are being pretty irrational now.
- manvanfan

Why? Would you rather have a #1 C or a #1 W?

Canucks D need a PPQB , a Sniper , a protector , a reliable stay at home , a minute muncher. You won't find that all in one player at least not in this draft.
- VANTEL

Which is exactly why you should just rank the players based on who you think will be the best NHL'er. Not trying to put lipstick on a pig and hoping the pig's face gets prettier.