Most scouts seemingly compare him to Steen, which isn't a bad thing.
But, if we are drafting in the top 5 i sure as heck hope we aim a little higher than that.
- Whiskey-Tango

Nylander is the top prospect in hockey and his brother looks better to me. I'd take him at 6 for sure. He is more skilled than Steen, don't understand the comparison

Nylander is the top prospect in hockey and his brother looks better to me. I'd take him at 6 for sure. He is more skilled than Steen, don't understand the comparison
- CanuckDon

If the Canucks don't get top three I'd still go with Juolevi or Chychrun, they NEED to build a defensive core. Haven't built one in 45 years.

These adds are driving me nuts again, iPad flickers and automatically scrolls up or down, damn you EK
- LeftCoaster

Adblock.

If the Canucks don't get top three I'd still go with Juolevi or Chychrun, they NEED to build a defensive core. Haven't built one in 45 years.
- LeftCoaster

Absolutely.
I mean sh!t, we already missed out on the prospect of the century, why bother settle for the remaining scraps in the form of his brother

If the Canucks don't get top three I'd still go with Juolevi or Chychrun, they NEED to build a defensive core. Haven't built one in 45 years.
- LeftCoaster

I get the sentiment behind building the D core, but given the discrepancies between all scouts, mock drafts, reporters and talent assessors as to who the best one is, I am on board with getting a forward in the top 5. It isnt like an Ekblad or Seth Jones type talent is sitting there as the clear cut best defender, I get the feeling its similar to 2008, where there was Doughty, Bogosian, Pietroangelo, and Schenn picked in that order. All good defenders but 2 top calibre guys and 2 middle of the pack defenders, very risky

Absolutely.
I mean sh!t, we already missed out on the prospect of the century, why bother settle for the remaining scraps in the form of his brother
- Whiskey-Tango

It's not that I don't like those other kids, Tkachuk, Nylander, etc. It's that the team needs to build a defence.

Usually you build your defence before you do your forwards because of the delay in development, unless you get yourself an Ekblad.

http://www.pensionplanpup...-tkachuks-a-surefire-pick

Nylander is the top prospect in hockey and his brother looks better to me. I'd take him at 6 for sure. He is more skilled than Steen, don't understand the comparison
- CanuckDon

Williams draft ranking as "top prospect" instantly changes after the draft. Matthews/Laine/PJ all rank ahead of him.

It's not that I don't like those other kids, Tkachuk, Nylander, etc. It's that the team needs to build a defence.

Usually you build your defence before you do your forwards because of the delay in development, unless you get yourself an Ekblad.
- LeftCoaster

Agreed, but just as Whitelie alluded to above you, the 'top' defenders this year are inherently risky. If we get into the top 5 you gotta go with a forward where-as if we drop to 6 (i suppose the most likely/assured spot) then we grab the perceived best of the D class.

All told, its a great position to be in

Nylander is the top prospect in hockey and his brother looks better to me. I'd take him at 6 for sure. He is more skilled than Steen, don't understand the comparison
- CanuckDon

I believe its more the assumption that he's a great "complimentary" piece to an offensive line as opposed to possessing the capabilities of "driving" one.

Then again, no one will know for a half decade or so if that assessment is fair.

It's not that I don't like those other kids, Tkachuk, Nylander, etc. It's that the team needs to build a defence.

Usually you build your defence before you do your forwards because of the delay in development, unless you get yourself an Ekblad.
- LeftCoaster

I agree that the timing has to work well, but I think when youre drafting as high as the Canucks are, you cant afford to miss. Picking a #4 defenseman who may or may not be able to translate their offense to the NHL level with the 4th or 5th pick while the following teams pick up a top 6 forward is not a situation a rebuild/tooling team can afford. Draft and develop those 3-6 level defense from the 2nd and 3rd rounds, but get as many top talents as you can with the opportunities you get

Nylander is the top prospect in hockey and his brother looks better to me. I'd take him at 6 for sure. He is more skilled than Steen, don't understand the comparison
- CanuckDon

Just found a piece that essentially map's out Nylander's short comings:
http://thehockeywriters.c...ander-worthy-of-the-hype/

Some of the major concerns:

"So, if we disregard Nylander’s secondary assists, he finishes his season with just 55 points over 57 games, rather than 75".

"In over ten personal viewings of Nylander during the 2015-16 season, the ability of opposing players to either knock Nylander off of the puck, or pressure him into a bad decisions through the use of an impending check was not only noticeable, but also frequent.

It is the same lack of size which likely inhibits Nylander from whole-heartedly pursuing pucks in the corners and participating in puck battles. When he does, he is rather easily closed off from the puck or even knocked down"

"Further is Nylander’s choice of positioning and on-ice engagement.

In most cases, Nylander exists as a perimeter player, meaning he likes to stay wide or outside of the play in order to watch it develop. In doing so, Nylander’s line mates typically draw the majority of puck battles in hopes of securing the puck and feeding it to the skilled winger"

"As a result, Nylander doesn’t generate many offensive opportunities on his own, rather, he feeds off of the speed and skill of his linemates, who typically gain the zone before feeding the puck to Nylander".

Mason Raymond anyone?

Agreed, but just as Whitelie alluded to above you, the 'top' defenders this year are inherently risky. If we get into the top 5 you gotta go with a forward where-as if we drop to 6 (i suppose the most likely/assured spot) then we grab the perceived best of the D class.

All told, its a great position to be in
- Whiskey-Tango

I believe Benning has scouted Tkachuk and Pierre-Luc Dubois extensively, if we don't get a top three look for him to draft one of those kids.

I believe Benning has scouted Tkachuk and Pierre-Luc Dubois extensively, if we don't get a top three look for him to draft one of those kids.
- LeftCoaster

I would love the first pick, but really I am excited about this draft as a whole. The fact Benning flies around as much as he does and watches as many games as he does gives me a lot more confidence in his drafting abilities. In his radio interview yesterday saying he was confident they would get a good player with their first pick, I actually believed him. Previous GM's have said it, but I always figured it was a crapshoot with them

If the Canucks don't get top three I'd still go with Juolevi or Chychrun, they NEED to build a defensive core. Haven't built one in 45 years.
- LeftCoaster

I'd argue the Canucks need first line scoring more than D. Sedin -60pts. Daniel 55. Horvat-40

That's pathetic. Our D will be passable next year, are scoring will not be. I agree with Benning and Vantel, forward unless we fall to 6

I get the sentiment behind building the D core, but given the discrepancies between all scouts, mock drafts, reporters and talent assessors as to who the best one is, I am on board with getting a forward in the top 5. It isnt like an Ekblad or Seth Jones type talent is sitting there as the clear cut best defender, I get the feeling its similar to 2008, where there was Doughty, Bogosian, Pietroangelo, and Schenn picked in that order. All good defenders but 2 top calibre guys and 2 middle of the pack defenders, very risky
- WhiteLie

It's not that I don't like those other kids, Tkachuk, Nylander, etc. It's that the team needs to build a defence.

Usually you build your defence before you do your forwards because of the delay in development, unless you get yourself an Ekblad.
- LeftCoaster

We have a high second and third round pick. Benning will find a future top four there

Just found a piece that essentially map's out Nylander's short comings:
http://thehockeywriters.c...ander-worthy-of-the-hype/

Some of the major concerns:

"So, if we disregard Nylander’s secondary assists, he finishes his season with just 55 points over 57 games, rather than 75".

"In over ten personal viewings of Nylander during the 2015-16 season, the ability of opposing players to either knock Nylander off of the puck, or pressure him into a bad decisions through the use of an impending check was not only noticeable, but also frequent.

It is the same lack of size which likely inhibits Nylander from whole-heartedly pursuing pucks in the corners and participating in puck battles. When he does, he is rather easily closed off from the puck or even knocked down"

"Further is Nylander’s choice of positioning and on-ice engagement.

In most cases, Nylander exists as a perimeter player, meaning he likes to stay wide or outside of the play in order to watch it develop. In doing so, Nylander’s line mates typically draw the majority of puck battles in hopes of securing the puck and feeding it to the skilled winger"

"As a result, Nylander doesn’t generate many offensive opportunities on his own, rather, he feeds off of the speed and skill of his linemates, who typically gain the zone before feeding the puck to Nylander".

Mason Raymond anyone?
- Whiskey-Tango

Lol...that's the most negative thing I've ever read on the kid! To be clear, I'd take Dubois and Tkachuk before him. Still thinkhe is a great prospect

I would love the first pick, but really I am excited about this draft as a whole. The fact Benning flies around as much as he does and watches as many games as he does gives me a lot more confidence in his drafting abilities. In his radio interview yesterday saying he was confident they would get a good player with their first pick, I actually believed him. Previous GM's have said it, but I always figured it was a crapshoot with them
- WhiteLie

What do you have against Patrick White?

I would love the first pick, but really I am excited about this draft as a whole. The fact Benning flies around as much as he does and watches as many games as he does gives me a lot more confidence in his drafting abilities. In his radio interview yesterday saying he was confident they would get a good player with their first pick, I actually believed him. Previous GM's have said it, but I always figured it was a crapshoot with them
- WhiteLie

I think Brian Burke did a really good thing in drafting.

I think Brian Burke did a really good thing in drafting.
- SRam19

Canucks have never had a great drafter for a GM, Burke was just ok.

Canucks have never had a great drafter for a GM, Burke was just ok.
- LeftCoaster

His work to get the Sedin's were pure magic.
He did well in the Kesler Draft.

Apart from that.... meh, average

I get the sentiment behind building the D core, but given the discrepancies between all scouts, mock drafts, reporters and talent assessors as to who the best one is, I am on board with getting a forward in the top 5. It isnt like an Ekblad or Seth Jones type talent is sitting there as the clear cut best defender, I get the feeling its similar to 2008, where there was Doughty, Bogosian, Pietroangelo, and Schenn picked in that order. All good defenders but 2 top calibre guys and 2 middle of the pack defenders, very risky
- WhiteLie

This years D for the Draft are good not great.

His work to get the Sedin's were pure magic.
He did well in the Kesler Draft.

Apart from that.... meh, average
- Codes1087

He was great getting the second pick for Hank, having said that, he was the GM for five years, between 98/99 to 03/04.

He selected 54 times in those five years, Bryan Allen, Ruutu, Hank, Dany, Umberger & Kesler were the only players to play 300 games or more. The only other pick to make 100 games was Artem Chubarov.

This years D for the Draft are good not great.
- VANTEL

Exactly. You don't pass up a superior player just because we have weak D. Every team should take BPA unless you are the Oilers