Odds and Ends: Kyle Pettit, Columbus pick and Arizona compensatory pick

With the NHL Entry Draft rapidly approaching, loose ends are being tied up. Two of which have affected the Canucks.

The first one is obvious – the Columbus Blue Jackets are required to provide a 2nd round pick in 2016, 2017 or 2018 for hiring former Canucks coach John Tortorella. It was confirmed by Sportsnet Elliotte Friedman that Columbus would not be providing the Canucks with their 2016 2nd round pick:

It’s not surprising – Columbus should expect to be better at some point in the next two years, thus no point in giving up a high second round pick when there is a chance it could be lower in the coming years.

The less obvious one that affects the Canucks was confirmed today, as Arizona decided to not sign 2014 first round pick Connor Bleackley, who they acquired from Colorado in the Boedker trade at the trading deadline. 

Any unsigned first round pick who re-enters the draft, the team who holds their rights will receive a 2nd round pick in the following draft in the same slot as the first round pick. So since Bleackley was selected 23rd overall in the 2014 NHL Entry Draft, the Coyotes receive the 53rd pick as a compensatory pick.

What this means is that every pick after that drops down one slot – so the Canucks now posses the 64th, 140th overall (acquired from Florida in Erik Gudbranson deal), 154th overall, 184th overall and 194th overall (acquired from Carolina in Eddie Lack trade).

Lastly, unless there is a last minute contract before 5pm ET,  it appears the Canucks have not signed 2014 6th round pick Kyle Pettit. Pettit posted 21 points (10-11-21) in 58 games this past season. The Canucks selected the young pivot with hopes that his offensive game would develop to a level close to his defensive prowess in the OHL. Unfortunately it never happened, although he still was one of the best defensive forwards in the OHL, he was never able to round out his game. He will re-enter the draft and the Canucks will not receive a compensatory pick, as he was a 6th round selection.

  • Dirty30

    Thanks for the update.

    It is quite impressive that other than Petit and Stewart, every other draft selection Benning has made appears to be a legitimate prospect.

    Whatever shortcomings this management team has demonstrated, they seem to be doing well from the drafting/developing angle so far.

    And whether we call it a retool or rebuild, every good team from Pittsburgh to San Jose to even the 2011 Canucks acquired key assets via the entry draft whether they developed those players for themselves or for trade.

      • Ho Borvat

        Aside from the Dorsett extension, the majority of trades and contracts are perfectly logical when considering the mandate to win from ownership, the age of the core, the poor farm system, supply and demand and other external market factors.

        The goaltending position is a good example since it is the furthest along in the rebuild.

        When Benning was hired, two of the best goalies in the NHL had been traded within the last twelve months and the only two notable goalies in the organization were Lack and Markstrom.

        The same Lack and Markstrom that had were terrible down the stretch after the Luongo trade and had little to no track record of success at the NHL level.

        Benning made three moves that were roundly criticized by the CA staff and many commenters: selecting Demko over a skater, signing Miller and trading Lack.

        All three of those moves look good at this point.

        And most people ignore that the Miller signing not only allowed Markstrom to develop appropriately and stabilized the goalie position, it also allowed the Canucks to get back 2 draft picks for Lack who looks more and more like a generic backup goalie.

        The defense and forward group are further behind.

        But Benning deserves time considering where the team was when he took over.

        I would not be surprised if one year from now the succession plan of the defense looks markedly better with Gudbranson.

  • Dirty30

    I am a fan of the Gudbranson trade, too.

    Advance stats geeks can stuff their wowees and bing bongs or whatever goofy acronyms they use.

    The big concern when I look at the Canucks a few years down the road – it doesn’t seem like there are any star players that will emerge.

    Good players? Sure. But get-on-my-back, we-are going-to-win-a-playoff-series good? Nah, don’t see it.

    I know this argument has been booted around a lot, but you get those players by being lucky (Duncan Keith) or you stink it up and get top 3 picks.

    Owners don’t seem to want to accept the latter so you keep drafting lottery tickets to achieve the former

    • DeMxNz

      Some good posts today..so far!

      I think the Canucks may have a couple of guys that can carry the team in Boeser, Horvat and maybe Virtanen. Hopefully these are the guys that can endure a long playoff run and produce.

      The supporting cast is looking solid. I do agree we need more high end prospects but if these 3 turn out then we’re in great shape.

      Benning hasn’t been perfect but he is worlds better than that idiot Gillis. Even the morons praising his ‘capology’ and contract savvy have to realize how harshly no trade clauses can impact a franchise – it really can’t be any clearer. Idiot Gillis left the team a big mess and there is no overnight fix.

      • Dirty30

        “Benning hasn’t been perfect but he is worlds better than that idiot Gillis. Even the morons praising his ‘capology’ and contract savvy have to realize how harshly no trade clauses can impact a franchise – it really can’t be any clearer. Idiot Gillis left the team a big mess and there is no overnight fix.”

        There is nothing more satisfying than when the lowest hanging fruit commenters start riffing off of me…

  • Ho Borvat

    I was both surprised and dissappointed at the recession that Kyle Petit had this year so maybe that is a good thing they aren’t making a push to sign him – that opens up one more contract spot (can’t win ’em all). I do see what Benning is doing and I don’t think anyone is trying to snow the fans here – they seem to be definitely trying to re-tool on the fly, not a full on re-build here. Especially when you are dealing 2nd round picks and legit prospects for “here and now” players. (Love the Gudbranson deal by the way). Whether or not the direction is coming from Benning or ownership is something that will never be revealed. There was an article in the Province yesterday where they mentioned that Mccann was the only person in the room that Pedan didn’t get along with and I’ve heard other minor rumblings about his attitude and “unpopularity”. If there’s substantial truth to that then it’s ironic that Benning traded a problem child for a draft pick that turned into another problem child. By training camp in September, all the additional changes that Benning makes over the next few months (assuming there are a fair amount of changes to come) , it should be clear if he gets an “A” or a “C-“ for the work he’s done between April and September.

    • DeMxNz

      I think the Gudbrandson trade can be a decent one without having to disparage McCann. I always find the post-trade whispers to be suspicious at best. McCann was also from all accounts very good friends with Demko (who went out of his way to say so after signing with us). It’s more ironic that he modeled his game after Kesler if I remember his post-draft remarks.

      I don’t wish ill on any player that leaves here. Really happy to see Bonino doing well and wish Lack wasn’t getting hosed in the situation in Carolina the way he did. It’s a business and sometimes players move on or are moved on and I don’t think we have to make them into heroes or villains in either event.

  • DeMxNz

    This UFA season has 1st line stars as will the ones to come at lets not forget this year 5th pick.I am sure there will be more stars hitting UFA in seasons to come.

    • Dirty30

      Yes, scoring 29 points in 63 games during the regular season and really taking off on the scoresheet after the Hagelin trade and having Kessel playing on the wing on the third line luckily has had no effect on Bonino.

      I love the line and I also like Bonino a great deal. But I think we might be overestimating his value due to some other factors…

      • Dirty30

        Another way to view your comment is that it basically says the Canucks did not have the talent to fully realize Bonino’s talent.

        One could argue further that rather than chasing plodders like Prust and Dorsett, and signing foundational players like Sutter, our GM may have put his ‘talent’ for spotting talent to use building around Bonino rather than the plodders.

        • Ho Borvat

          You’re comparing Prust, Dorsett and Sutter to Hagelin and Kessel? Hagelin cost the Ducks Etem, a sixth and a swap of 2nd rounders and it cost the Penguins Perron and Clendening, while Kessel was worth a 1st a 3rd (in this draft) and two excellent prospects in Kapanen and Harrington. Dorsett was a 3rd and Prust a 5th and a project. Not really quite the equivalent.

          As I said I like Bonino. And I’m really glad he’s doing well. Would he be doing as well here? Maybe, though it’s hard to see him as a 2nd line center. If not for the injury Sutter should have sheltered Horvat more; as it stands I would imagine that 2nd line will give much more protection to a Baertschi-Horvat-Virtanen third line this year.

          • Dirty30

            Not making that comparison.

            Stated that Benning had the option of building something different if he had recognized Bonino’s potential — because isn’t that Benning’s putative ‘potential’? To recognize talent?

            Could swing a counter-factual here and wonder if the Pens would be where they are had they kept Sutter.

            It’s obvious that Kessel and Hagelin are better with Bonino and vice-versa but are the Canucks better with Sutter, Granlund, Dorsett etc?

            Bit of irony that the Pens are giving the Sharks so much grief with their speed (wasn’t that a knock on Bonino — he was ‘slow’?) and yet Benning is building on a foundation of plodders.

            Baertschi, Etem, Horvat, Vrtanen and Hansen all have good speed — Hopefully they can do something with it.

          • Dirty30

            I didn’t love the acquisition of Dorsett and certainly not Prust, even if the latter was a result of a desire to jettison Kassian. I don’t particularly like giving up draft picks either. But I also think you’re lumping in a bunch of very different kinds of players together as if all of their recent acquisitions (whether via trade or draft) are the same.

            They’ve gone bigger in some cases but by no means all the time (Vey, Baertschi, and Zhukenov are all smaller players); the mandate seems to be to get younger, faster and bigger. At the end of the day the goal has to be to build a new core. If I look back to the Tortorella era, the only thing that maniac was right about was the fact that the team was indeed “stale”. What core player(s) did we have under the age of 25? Kassian, Tanev and Markstrom, two of whom were pretty unproven. The other players under the age of 25 had been pretty unimpressive (Schroeder, Jensen, Archibald, Corrado, Stanton, Weber, etc) and have all bounced around the minors with us or others since then.

            It seems pretty impressive to me that within 3 years you have an entirely new core built around Horvat, Virtanen, Markstrom, Baertschi, Hutton, Gudbrandson and Tanev, with the Sedins and Edler still leading the way and the complementary players (Hansen, Sutter, Burrows, Miller) fitting in where they need to. Would Bonino make a difference in terms of that transitional group? Maybe — but he’s no more a player to build around than is Sutter. I don’t pay any heed to all that language about Sutter being “foundational”. Or at least if we’re going to pay that kind of thing so much attention then we should at least believe the words of Florida players and coaches less than a month ago talking about Gudbrandson describing him as someone who was going to be a special player in the league for many years and a potential captain.

            One last time — Bonino’s a good guy and a good story. But he wasn’t about to make the difference here.

  • Ho Borvat

    @Sean:

    You forgot one: there’s nothing logical about the Sbisa extension. I don’t think the Sutter extension was very logical either, but I guess it’s hard to tell right now. (Interesting that both Sutter and Gudbranson are players that are in a grey area, where it’s hard to be conclusive using statistical analysis.)

    I agree that it’s probably the ownership’s fault that Benning is trying to do impossible, and rebuild while being competitive. This is causing the hurry up behavior whose effect we will only be sure of in a couple of years.

    • Dirty30

      Take a look at the extension Coburn just received at age 31 and fantasize about the contract Russell is going to get.

      Sbisa is undoubtedly tradable in this market.

      There are simply not enough legitimate top 4 defenseman to go around and it inflates the market for physical 3rd pairing options like Sbisa.

      I mentioned the other day that what I would like to see is Hamhuis resigned for 2 years (if he is amenable to such a contract, of course) and Sbisa traded for a draft pick.

      Benning had 7 picks in 2014 and 2015.

      He is likely on the hunt to add picks prior to the June draft.

  • Dirty30

    @PB:

    “Horvat, Virtanen, Markstrom, Baertschi, Hutton, Gudbrandson and Tanev”

    Horvat, Markstrom, Tanev, and Hutton are all Gillis acquisitions. Lest we forget. We’ll see what can of role Guds plays.

    On Sutter, we don’t have to go by the GM’s word. Benning gave Sutter a 5 year contract extension at 4-plus million before Sutter had even played a single game in a Canucks uni!! You don’t do that unless you think the player is part of the core.

    • Dirty30

      Is that you Mike?

      Horvat and Markstrom are consolation prizes for Gillis blunders lest we forget…

      Tanev & Hutton – both legit successes – are pathetic in 6 years as general manager.

      Particularly since whatever level of “skill” it took to acquire Tanev & Hutton likely had more to do with maligned Canucks scouts than a general manager with zero ability to scout…

      The Gillis apologists are the blindest rubes on this board.

      There is nothing stopping you from using the critical thinking component of the brain from time to time…

  • Dirty30

    @Sean:

    My answer was to PB, if you care to read carefully. I’m no Gillis apologist, but I am very skeptical of Bennin.

    I see now that you simply can’t stand a different opinion. I thought you were smarter, my mistake.

  • LTFan

    The Gillis – Benning discussion. Regarding Gillis, IMO it was not a very well thought out decision by the Aquilini’s to hire someone who had absolutely no experience being in charge of a hockey franchie. Gillis acted like more of an agent in signing players to NT contracts. Benning has come in trying to deal with these contracts and rebuild the team. He has experience in being part of the management group in Boston for a number of years. He has a good record in drafting players that can actually play in the NHL. I can only see good things for this franchise but it is going to take several years to achieve it. We are on the way now and the Canucks will be much better going forward.