Jonathan Lekkerimäki | RW

[Coconuts]

On topic though, I'd argue Lekkerimaki is an example of why folks shouldn't be so keen on management to trade their 1st's going forward 

 

They've done a good job selecting both him and Willander, we need more of that, not less

[Warhippy]

1 hour ago, Coconuts said:

On topic though, I'd argue Lekkerimaki is an example of why folks shouldn't be so keen on management to trade their 1st's going forward 

 

They've done a good job selecting both him and Willander, we need more of that, not less

Let's not forget Dylan Guenther.  Or our 2nd round picks lost in perpetuity seemingly forever

[Coconuts]

9 minutes ago, Warhippy said:

Let's not forget Dylan Guenther.  Or our 2nd round picks lost in perpetuity seemingly forever

 

That will forever be a gripe of mine until we change the narrative 

 

I'll admit I was a bit skeptical of Rutherford and Allvin at the beginning but they've generally made good moves thus far, I'd like to see them emulate the Dallas Stars more when it comes to draft picks though

 

I wish we had an organizational philosophy that better emphasized drafting, keeping picks, and development 

 

Drafting and development are things Dallas has prioritized seemingly forever, it's why there are where they are now, it's why they're such a good team 

 

Just as they appeared to be fading with Benn and Seguin they hit gold with Hintz, Robertson, Heiskanen, and Otter. Now they're seeing further success with guys like Johnston (23OA, 2021), Harley (18OA, 2019), Stankoven (47OA, 2021)

 

You can throw Grushnikov (48OA, 2021) in there too as he was a good enough prospect to help them reel in Tanev from Calgary

 

They never really bottomed out the way we did but they just keep managing to find players

 

I'll go back to 2000, nice round number, and take a look at how they've handled their top two picks 

 

The 2003, 2007, 2008, and 2023 drafts are the only drafts they haven't picked a player in the first round since 2000

 

The 2001, 2006, 2016, 2019, and 2020 drafts are the only drafts they haven't picked a player in the second round since 2000

 

Many of those years they have multiple 2nd round picks

[MatchesMalone]

2 hours ago, Coconuts said:

On topic though, I'd argue Lekkerimaki is an example of why folks shouldn't be so keen on management to trade their 1st's going forward 

 

They've done a good job selecting both him and Willander, we need more of that, not less

 

Too broad a claim though  Huge difference in value between a top 10 pick and 25. But yeah the Ekman-Larsson trade was legendarily bad.

[Coconuts]

8 minutes ago, MatchesMalone said:

 

Too broad a claim though  Huge difference in value between a top 10 pick and 25. But yeah the Ekman-Larsson trade was legendarily bad.

 

There's a difference when it comes to draft slot, absolutely, but you've gotta have picks in order to take flyers on guys 

 

We got Kes at 23, sometimes it works out 

 

Top two rounds give you the best shots at getting NHL'ers, best way to find top six players, starting tenders, and top four D is to draft and develop them 

[Diamonds]

9 hours ago, Coconuts said:

 

That will forever be a gripe of mine until we change the narrative 

 

I'll admit I was a bit skeptical of Rutherford and Allvin at the beginning but they've generally made good moves thus far, I'd like to see them emulate the Dallas Stars more when it comes to draft picks though

 

I wish we had an organizational philosophy that better emphasized drafting, keeping picks, and development 

 

Drafting and development are things Dallas has prioritized seemingly forever, it's why there are where they are now, it's why they're such a good team 

 

Just as they appeared to be fading with Benn and Seguin they hit gold with Hintz, Robertson, Heiskanen, and Otter. Now they're seeing further success with guys like Johnston (23OA, 2021), Harley (18OA, 2019), Stankoven (47OA, 2021)

 

You can throw Grushnikov (48OA, 2021) in there too as he was a good enough prospect to help them reel in Tanev from Calgary

 

They never really bottomed out the way we did but they just keep managing to find players

 

I'll go back to 2000, nice round number, and take a look at how they've handled their top two picks 

 

The 2003, 2007, 2008, and 2023 drafts are the only drafts they haven't picked a player in the first round since 2000

 

The 2001, 2006, 2016, 2019, and 2020 drafts are the only drafts they haven't picked a player in the second round since 2000

 

Many of those years they have multiple 2nd round picks

One thing that's really interesting about them trading 1st and 2nd rounders is not only that they haven't traded a lot of them but that they never traded both a 1st and a 2nd in the same year. They always kept one of them since 2000. In contrast it feels like every time the Canucks trade their 1st they also trade their 2nd. This year we might not draft until the 4th round.

[Coconuts]

6 hours ago, Diamonds said:

One thing that's really interesting about them trading 1st and 2nd rounders is not only that they haven't traded a lot of them but that they never traded both a 1st and a 2nd in the same year. They always kept one of them since 2000. In contrast it feels like every time the Canucks trade their 1st they also trade their 2nd. This year we might not draft until the 4th round.

 

Yeaaaah, it drives me batty, I feel like I've been railing on regarding second round picks for like four or five years now, if not longer 

 

I hate how past management groups have thrown them around, I'd much rather we use them 

 

Picks aren't guarantees, but they're the best way to acquire top talent and cost effective players 

 

Not even just Benning era management, it goes back further, I'm really hoping this management group is more conservative with their top picks going forward 

 

Hronek was a good get, Lindholm leaves something to be desired, I'd rather us not always be trying to fish with our picks 

 

I'd rather be like Dallas and Carolina, generally stingy when it comes to moving out top assets 

[Sativika]

14 hours ago, Coconuts said:

 

There's a difference when it comes to draft slot, absolutely, but you've gotta have picks in order to take flyers on guys 

 

We got Kes at 23, sometimes it works out 

 

Top two rounds give you the best shots at getting NHL'ers, best way to find top six players, starting tenders, and top four D is to draft and develop them 

 

We got Flow at 23 as well in 2015. Sometimes it works out twice!

[MatchesMalone]

15 hours ago, Coconuts said:

 

There's a difference when it comes to draft slot, absolutely, but you've gotta have picks in order to take flyers on guys 

 

We got Kes at 23, sometimes it works out 

 

Top two rounds give you the best shots at getting NHL'ers, best way to find top six players, starting tenders, and top four D is to draft and develop them 

 

35 minutes ago, Sativika said:

 

We got Flow at 23 as well in 2015. Sometimes it works out twice!

 

Ok well obviously yes, you can find great players anywhere in any draft, but you guys gave two of the worst possible examples, as 2003 and 2015 are considered to be perhaps the two strongest drafts of the millennium, and 2003 is in the conversation for the best of all time.

 

I guess in a way they're great examples to highlight another relevant point: draft strength. Drafts can vary wildly from one year to the next and it is important to take this into consideration when deciding whether to trade picks. I always look at the example of one of my all-time favorite GMs, Bryan Murray. With Anaheim in 2003 he acquired an extra first round pick and drafted Ryan Getzlaf and Corey Perry in the first round. Worth noting that this wasn't just a matter of retrospect - it was very obvious to anyone who followed the draft that it was going to be a freak-show of a class.

 

Then when Murray was with Ottawa in 2011, it was well-known all year that it was going to be a relatively shallow draft class, but circumstances dictated it to be a selling year for the Sens and he ended up with three first round picks, which were used to select Mika Zibanejad, Matt Puempel and Stefan Noesen.

Edited March 19 by MatchesMalone

[Rip The Mesh]

 

[Coconuts]

2 hours ago, MatchesMalone said:

 

 

Ok well obviously yes, you can find great players anywhere in any draft, but you guys gave two of the worst possible examples, as 2003 and 2015 are considered to be perhaps the two strongest drafts of the millennium, and 2003 is in the conversation for the best of all time.

 

I guess in a way they're great examples to highlight another relevant point: draft strength. Drafts can vary wildly from one year to the next and it is important to take this into consideration when deciding whether to trade picks. I always look at the example of one of my all-time favorite GMs, Bryan Murray. With Anaheim in 2003 he acquired an extra first round pick and drafted Ryan Getzlaf and Corey Perry in the first round. Worth noting that this wasn't just a matter of retrospect - it was very obvious to anyone who followed the draft that it was going to be a freak-show of a class.

 

Then when Murray was with Ottawa in 2011, it was well-known all year that it was going to be a relatively shallow draft class, but circumstances dictated it to be a selling year for the Sens and he ended up with three first round picks, which were used to select Mika Zibanejad, Matt Puempel and Stefan Noesen.

 

Yeah, there were strong drafts, no doubt. You're right, all drafts are not equal, but I remain bullish on keeping picks more often than not. 

 

We look to be on a competitive upswing, finally, I just hope that management finds a way to balance retaining some of their top picks with trying to go for it going forward. Other teams, teams who've been trying to contend longer than we have, have found a way to compete while holding on to their top picks, I hope we do as well. 

[stawns]

18 hours ago, Warhippy said:

Let's not forget Dylan Guenther.  Or our 2nd round picks lost in perpetuity seemingly forever

I'd like to think that pick would have been someone other than Dylan Guenther, I'm not a fan.  That said,it turned out to be a decent trade for Van

[Warhippy]

2 hours ago, stawns said:

I'd like to think that pick would have been someone other than Dylan Guenther, I'm not a fan.  That said,it turned out to be a decent trade for Van

the only good thing to come from that trade is garland and people still want to trade him.  Otherwise we're on the hook for millions in dead cap for the next 7-8 years and gave up a top 10+ pick to do it

[flat land fish]

2 hours ago, Coconuts said:

 

Yeah, there were strong drafts, no doubt. You're right, all drafts are not equal, but I remain bullish on keeping picks more often than not. 

 

We look to be on a competitive upswing, finally, I just hope that management finds a way to balance retaining some of their top picks with trying to go for it going forward. Other teams, teams who've been trying to contend longer than we have, have found a way to compete while holding on to their top picks, I hope we do as well. 

I thought they showed significant restraint not trading top prospects at the deadline.  We also have some guys at the ahl level that will filter onto the roster soon.  

[Coconuts]

16 minutes ago, flat land fish said:

I thought they showed significant restraint not trading top prospects at the deadline.  We also have some guys at the ahl level that will filter onto the roster soon.  

 

Yes, and I'm hoping to see more of it. 

 

But we've still traded out a couple 1sts and only one of those trades looks all that good. I haven't been impressed by Lindholm, I'm hoping management is more cautious when making large deals involving high picks in the future. 

 

And we will, but we'll need to continue replenishing our prospect pool with higher end talents as well. Podz could be more than a bottom six forward, maybe Raty. Lekkerimaki and Willander are our legitimate blue chip guys though.

 

Pettersson, Hughes, Demko, Miller, Boeser, none of em are getting any younger. Gotta balance trying to build a contender with building up that next wave.

 

 

[D.B Cooper]

3 hours ago, stawns said:

I'd like to think that pick would have been someone other than Dylan Guenther, I'm not a fan.  That said,it turned out to be a decent trade for Van

Did I read this correctly?   
The OEL trade turned out decent for Van?

[MatchesMalone]

48 minutes ago, Warhippy said:

the only good thing to come from that trade is garland and people still want to trade him.  Otherwise we're on the hook for millions in dead cap for the next 7-8 years and gave up a top 10+ pick to do it

 

Yeah 4.77 million in '26 and '27. That trade was atrocious. If Guenther lives up to his potential it could be historically bad.

Edited March 19 by MatchesMalone

[stawns]

1 hour ago, D.B Cooper said:

Did I read this correctly?   
The OEL trade turned out decent for Van?

 

I don't mind it.  Garland is a pretty important part of this team and OEL is playing well, even if it's not in Van.  They got rid of some bad contracts on top of it.  

 

The biggest problem with that trade is that they then hired a defensively incompetent coach.  If you look at the draft, there isn't many players around DG who have done much.  Theres a couple further down the board who have exceeded their draft spot, but it's unlikely anyone goes that far off board where the Canucks picked.

 

Bottom line is they to get winning and that was a very reasonable price to pay for two very good players and the dumping of some bad contracts.  Again, hamstrung by a terrible coaching hire

[stawns]

2 hours ago, Warhippy said:

the only good thing to come from that trade is garland and people still want to trade him.  Otherwise we're on the hook for millions in dead cap for the next 7-8 years and gave up a top 10+ pick to do it

 

Well, oel is playing pretty well in Fla.  Had they been patient, he'd probably be playing well in van and the trade would look pretty good 

 

BB has to be one of the biggest disasters in Canucks history

[Rip The Mesh]

 

[D.B Cooper]

1 hour ago, stawns said:

 

I don't mind it.  Garland is a pretty important part of this team and OEL is playing well, even if it's not in Van.  They got rid of some bad contracts on top of it.  

 

The biggest problem with that trade is that they then hired a defensively incompetent coach.  If you look at the draft, there isn't many players around DG who have done much.  Theres a couple further down the board who have exceeded their draft spot, but it's unlikely anyone goes that far off board where the Canucks picked.

 

Bottom line is they to get winning and that was a very reasonable price to pay for two very good players and the dumping of some bad contracts.  Again, hamstrung by a terrible coaching hire

 

1 hour ago, stawns said:

 

Well, oel is playing pretty well in Fla.  Had they been patient, he'd probably be playing well in van and the trade would look pretty good 

 

BB has to be one of the biggest disasters in Canucks history

There is zero part of that trade that is good. 
Sure, we got a 3rd liner, but other than that, it’s disastrous.  
You are the only person I’ve ever seen say they like the trade.   
 

Also, who cares if he is doing ok on another team?    Hahahah. 

[flickyoursedin]

3 hours ago, MatchesMalone said:

 

Yeah 4.77 million in '26 and '27. That trade was atrocious. If Guenther lives up to his potential it could be historically bad.

Even if Guenther busts just the cap implications on the OEL contract it’s atrocious. Might have to let a player like Zadorov walk because that money he’s looking for is going to the buyout. It stops us from adding a good player to the roster! 

[stawns]

1 hour ago, D.B Cooper said:

 

There is zero part of that trade that is good. 
Sure, we got a 3rd liner, but other than that, it’s disastrous.  
You are the only person I’ve ever seen say they like the trade.   
 

Also, who cares if he is doing ok on another team?    Hahahah. 

 

You just can't be objective and not look at it in any other context than hindsight.  It's ok though, some people just don't have that kind of ability

[D.B Cooper]

9 minutes ago, stawns said:

 

You just can't be objective and not look at it in any other context than hindsight.  It's ok though, some people just don't have that kind of ability

I’m looking at it for what it is.  
We spent a high 1st to get rid of a few contracts that were going to expire in a year. 
We got saddled with a dman that was overpaid and on a decline.  
Garland, cool.  He is a good 3rd liner.  
 

If I’m adding hindsight, we now have 7 years of wasted cap space. 

It sucked the day of, and it’s insanely bad now. 
Any other spin to try to make it look positive is just lying to yourself.  

[stawns]

5 minutes ago, D.B Cooper said:

I’m looking at it for what it is.  
We spent a high 1st to get rid of a few contracts that were going to expire in a year. 
We got saddled with a dman that was overpaid and on a decline.  
Garland, cool.  He is a good 3rd liner.  
 

If I’m adding hindsight, we now have 7 years of wasted cap space. 

It sucked the day of, and it’s insanely bad now. 
Any other spin to try to make it look positive is just lying to yourself.  

 

It's all good, objectivity just isn't your thing