52
Photo Credit: Terry Wilson/OHL Images

WWYDW: 7th Overall

Let’s cut to the chase. It’s the moment everyone has been waiting for.

Who would you draft at 7th overall?

Last week I asked: if you’re the Canucks, do you move up, move down, or stand pat?

detox:

If you are looking at drafting a forward, you stand pat or move up.

If you want a dman, unless you have the foa pick, you trade down.

bpa sounds nice but dmen are such a crap shoot.

Goon:

Buffalo’s not trading the #1 unless they get an obscene haul (Boeser, Petterson, the #7, potentially more).

I would love to see the Canucks move down – perhaps significantly – if it meant acquiring another 1st round pick. There will be several players available around #15 with the potential to be impact NHLers. If you could pick at 15 and 20, for example, rather than 7, I’d do that in a heartbeat given the depth of the 1st round this year. I can’t imagine Benning making a move like that, though – it’s too new-school for him, and he’s desperate to land an impact defenceman.

RT:

This is difficult to answer as it really depends where you are moving to and what is being offered in return. Without really knowing those particulars it is similar to going on a bind date, you find out when you meet if it was a good idea. With that said I wouldn’t be opposed to moving down for the right return depending on who was left on the board. If Wahlstrom is there I think you have to take him. If not and you can move back and still get a decent D man plus sweetener, do it.

TheRealPB:

I think the idea of surplus picks is fine for the later rounds but in the first round you go with the highest you have. I wouldn’t go for a higher slot because the cost is too much for a rebuilding franchise to bear. But dropping out of the top ten is a non-starter for me. I just don’t see evidence that this works as a strategy. In Horvat’s year, pretty much every pick from 1-9 yielded an excellent-to-solid NHLer. Picks 10-20 have a couple of good players (Mantha and Morrissey, maybe Wennberg) but really nothing like the quality of those top 9. 2014 is a similar kind of story; way more of a chance to hit a home run with the higher pick. I’d stand pat and see if anyone above us makes a weird pick. If Wahlstrom or Hughes falls to us we will be in heaven; but even if not, the drop-off between the 2nd and 3rd tiers and all beneath them is substantial.

Beefus:

The only team that I would trade down would be the Islanders if they were willing to trade their two first rounders for 7 overall. Two talented players will still be available at picks 11 and 12.

Even then I would do it only if the player they had their eye on (Dobson, Wahlstrom or whoever) had already been picked.

Seatoo:

Once you understand how much moving up would cost the Canucks its easy to dismiss it and to me, make the idea of trading down even more attractive. I would be happy to move down up to 5 spots or less as long as the Canucks could take Ty Smith out of Spokane. Add in a 2nd and a prospect or a 2nd + 3rd etc for trading down and I think it helps the Canucks rebuild along more than just the #7 pick.

ARTICLE BROUGHT TO YOU BY SPORTS EXCELLENCE

Founded in 1950, Sports Excellence Corporation represents over 150 family-owned independent hockey retailers across Canada and the United States. Our highly knowledgeable hockey specialists are available to assist all your equipment needs. Find your closest Sports Excellence retailer here!

  • Gino's 3rd Cousin

    Wahlstrom if he’s there. The prospect of Petterson, Boeser and Wahlstrom on the PP is too good. Otherwise Dobson, Bouchard, Boqvist…in that order based on availability.

    • Dirty30

      Wahlstrom looks intriguing and Boqvist looks potentially fragile so yes to the former and no to the latter.

      Doubt that Zadina would drop below #5 no matter how many fingers get crossed.

      Big question is whether GM’s stand pat or there is a flurry of trades for positioning and preferred player selection.

      Big hope is that JB swings a trade with TO and raids the Marlies like a Viking!

  • jaybird43

    A top ten pick is usually a good NHL’er – below that, results become a lot more variable. So, as Dirk22 says, trading down depends who’s available when it’s your pick at #7, what draft position you’re being offered, and who is still ‘left on the board”. Generally, “trading down” isn’t a good strategy, unless that includes an already defined prospect, roster player who’ll fill an immediate need, and so on.

  • Killer Marmot

    Zadina or Wahlstrom if they by some miracle they fall through.

    Otherwise Dobson. He is in some ways the safe pick among the top defensemen, but the maturity of his defense means he’s the best fit for the NHL.

  • truthseeker

    The recent series was excellent for giving me a better overview of the top picks, but I still see no convincing argument to change my position that Bouchard is the one they should gamble on. I believe the skating issues are over blown even with that good break down article. I believe even if those issues are a concern they can easily be corrected by coaching. And the rest of what he brings to the table is so much more impressive than any of the prospects that will be available to us at 7.

    Having said that, I’m much more sold on Dobson and Wahlstrom than I was before. If they made a choice of Hughes or Boqvist I’d be cautiously hopefully that all that “potential” and fancy skating CA is hedging it’s bets on would come true. I suppose the same applies to Tkachuk as well though CA wasn’t high on him which I agree with. Makes me nervous to hear the canucks are high on him. Hopefully they’re just using Tkachuk as distraction like they did with Glass.

    So yeah, Bouchard for me. Pretty much over every single player not named Dahlin…(though your write up on the Russian winger going number 2 was very convincing…but he’s not falling to us so it doesn’t matter.)

    • Giant-Nation

      First forward I Pick is Wahlstrom 2nd would be Brady. (Zadina Svechnikov not available) first D I would pick is Hughes – Boq – Dobson – those first two d picks are risky I’m swinging for the fences. Jim has been saying it all along “were going to get a real good player” lol…he uses real good a lot, but the fact is that after the 2 spot you will have Zadina Brady Wahlstrom Hughes Boquivist Dobson Bouchard – no one nows who will be the best – they ALL look REAL GOOD, will be interesting to see in 3-4 years who got the right guy.

    • Puck Viking

      Hopefully Bouchard or Dobson will be there.

      The question is.. what do you do if the draft plays out with Dahlin, svech, zadina, hughes, bouchard, dobson all gone..??

      Boqvist, Wahlstrom, tkachuk or Kotnainemi?

  • Ser Jaime Lannister

    Canucks are going to get a great prospect at 7! I hope Canucks are able to grab Dobson > Bouchard, but wouldnt be upset with Boqvist/Wahlstrom/Veleno/Hughes.

    D is such a glaring weakness fingers crossed they choose D prospects with their first 3 picks. Cant wait for Friday/Saturday!

  • Ragnarok Ouroboros

    I would not consider Adam Boqvist because of his concussion history, and Tkachuk’s stats are fine but not as good as other available players.
    In order of availability at 7th, I would choose :
    Zadina > Hughes > Wahlstrom > Kotkienemi > Dobson > Bouchard > Tkachuk
    If Zadina by some miracle fell to the Canucks, I would be so happy.
    Benning is only 1 for 3 on his first round picks so far, so I hope he doesn’t blow this one.

  • Zadina, Wahlstrom, Dobson, Hughes, Boqvist, Bouchard. I have Zadina and Wahlstrom rated higher because they are projected to be 1st line 30+ goal scoring wingers but otherwise, I’d want to draft a defenceman. We’re guaranteed a shot at at least 2 of these players at #7. If Benning can draft any of these 4 defenceman, I’d be happy. I’d be crushed if Benning drafted Tkachuk.

  • jaybird43

    There’s only two players often mentioned in the top 10 that I’d be disappointed if the Canucks drafted, and that’s Boqvist (concussion history already) and Tkachuk (seriously over-rated and also for the way the NHL is moving to speed etc)

    • jaybird43

      I like Dobson a lot, but would go Hughes first, but wouldn’t be crushed if the Canucks decided in your order. I agree Bouchard is last amongst that group …

  • DB1282

    Just read the final draft lists, other than Dalin and Svechnikov lots of different opinions on who goes where, Draft day should be a lot of fun, I’ll be happy if Dobson,Wahlstrom or Bouchard are still there, curious though Canucks got slammed for not taking Tkachuk two years ago this time nobody seems to want the bigger version.

    • Rodeobill

      I also hope they don’t make draft day decisions on “not-buyer’s” remorse. If they think Brady is their guy and the best player available based on scouting and analysis, I would be ok with that, but I’m afraid they make this choice from the former consideration.

  • Defenceman Factory

    Draft Noah Dobson.

    Assuming Olli Joulevi develops as anticipated in 3 years you have a top pair that is defensively sound, great skaters, 12 and half feet tall weighing over 400 lbs.

    The Canucks might still lack that dynamic offensive defenceman but that top pair will put up a lot of points. Both will put up more points than any current Dman. With very strong goal scoring forwards goal differential will be much more important than getting a lot of goals from the Dmen.

  • Rodeobill

    Players that scare me:
    Boquist with his injuries (I worry less than others about his defense and productivity as he is super young and talented)
    Tkachuk that he is inflated due to hype re: family, etc. Perhaps his low ceiling (maybe has high floor too, but c’mon this is top 10)
    Kotaniemi due to his projection by some as a 2nd liner and late meteoric rise.
    From my all-knowing armchair I would draft Zadina, Hughes, Wahlstrom, then either of Dobson or Bouchard.

    Also, can we do a “who is on your wishlist at 37” next week?

  • Gino über alles

    I’m happy for their list to look like this:

    1. Dahlin
    2. Svechnikov
    3. Zadina
    4. Tkachuk
    5. Dobson
    6. Bouchard
    7. Wahlstrom

    Either way you look at it, we’re getting a really solid prospect. I’m looking forward to Friday and even more so to Saturday as whomever is there at 37 and 68 should be solid choices as well.

  • Sandpaper

    Dobson would be a fantastic pick. We would finally have a true #1 type in the system, a player that eats minutes and is an all-situations defenseman.
    Stay far away from Hughes and very far away from Boqvist.