logo
CanucksArmy has no direct affiliation to the Vancouver Canucks, Canucks Sports & Entertainment, NHL, or NHLPA
Canucks Army Roundtable: With the 5th overall pick….
alt
Matthew Henderson
Jun 10, 2016, 20:00 EDTUpdated:
Comments
After filling in last week for JD, I’ve officially taken over the roundtable. Frankly, I’ve always wanted a table and for it to be round is just a bonus. Let’s move on.
Darren Dreger of TSN caused quite a stir over the past 24 hours with this remarks that the Canucks could potentially move the 5th overall pick. 
and some clarification.
Obviously, it’s a hotly contested topic in Canuckland and we decided to ask our writers for their input on the situation. They did not disappoint.

Cat Silverman

Realistically, the Canucks could move the fifth overall pick- but why would they? The big thing we hear about in terms of Jim Benning is his ability to scout potential in draft-eligible players; giving him a fifth overall pick seems like a great way to use the one attribute of his that both stats pundits and numbers haters alike seem to agree on. This team finished third from last this past year; they want to start winning as soon as possible, but they have to be somewhat realistic about how their season ended and where they are in terms of hitting the postseason again. Some of the players available at fifth overall seem like top tier prospects; to move the piece would be a terrible idea.
If they want to, though, I’m sure they could get something done. Players like Pierre-Luc Dubois and Matthew Tkachuk are worth moving up for if a team realizes Benning is in absolute “win now” mode; it would take someone good and immediately useful, but it could happen.

Dylan Kirkby

I could see the Canucks packaging the 5th to move up for the 3rd or 4th. It wasn’t too long ago that Puljujärvi was considered close to Laine – he would be a phenomenal addition to the prospect pool. Unfortunately, with Benning’s track record and the rumored ownership intervention, it also seems all too realistic that the 5th gets moved in a win now deal that serves only to deprive the Canucks of another top pick next year.

Ryan Biech

Realistically, I can only see the Canucks moving the 5th pick to move back a couple of spots to acquire more picks or young players. It would make sense to try and accumulate more assets, while staying in the top 10.
Players like Logan Brown, Clayton Keller and Tyson Jost will be there in the latter half of the top 10, and if the price to move back makes sense, then they should at the very least consider it. It would obviously need to be a very good offer to make the move, but it’s possible.
With that said, I think it’s all just posturing by teams – they want to make sure all avenues are open for discussion and don’t want to miss out on talks because the other team thought ‘oh, they will never move that pick’
The rumours and speculation are one thing but actually make the deal is a whole different beast.

JD Burke

Well, for starters, I don’t the Canucks should even entertain the thought of trading the pick. It’s not just the player that they can land with that pick, but the fact that they will have secured seven years of cost controlled service therein. There’s massive value in that, especially in the salary cap era of hockey.
Now, if they were to deal the pick, though, I would entertain the thought of knocking on Colorado’s door for either Matt Duchene or Tyson Barrie — both players appear close to, or already on the outs from the Avalanche. I’m sure we’ll hear a few more names in play, but based on what we know now, those are the two players I would keep tabs on.

Always90Four

There are plenty of realistic situations and because Jim Benning is pretty much an enigma, that kind of scares me. It’s not a 3rd or 4th pick but as a package that maybe mortgages the future, I could see Jimbo gunning for a top 3, Drouin, or maybe something crazier.
The Canucks have been known to make draft day a splash and depending on what their ACTUAL progression plan is, they might just pull off a shocker again.
Keeping with this specific question, Laine or Drouin would be my bet. I’m a terrible trader so I realistically would be Jim Benning and give up the wrong pieces.

Jackson McDonald

When the Canucks dropped out of the top three, they lost the chance to draft a player that could come into their lineup and have an immediate impact. While there will certainly be incredible players available in the fifth slot, I think you could argue that they could get a player of very similar quality even if they move down a few spots.  What they need to understand is that if they’re trading that pick, it needs to be for something that is going to contribute to the long-term health of their franchise. It can’t just be for immediate help.
Assuming the team feels as I do, that only leaves a few realistic options:
1) They trade down to another spot in the top 15, in an effort to recoup additional picks, either from a team with two first-round selections, or for multiple picks in the later rounds. 
2) They trade the pick for a low first-round selection, and a roster player. Possibly a young player with a lot of upside that hasn’t quite put it together
3) The pick is packaged in a multi-asset deal for an elite young player and possibly some additional depth pieces or picks. This is the option that’s the most difficult to predict. JD mentioned Tyson Barrie and Matt Duchene, those are realistically the types of players you’re looking at in this situation.
Moving down isn’t wholly unpalatable to me, because I respect Benning’s scouting ability enough to believe him if he thinks a player available later in the draft has the potential to be a top-line player. What scares me is that Benning’s record in trades has been spotty, to say the least. If it were up to me I’d keep the #5 pick and try to recoup second and third-round picks through some other means.

Matthew Henderson

I agree with Ryan and Jackson. Most people agree the Canucks could definitely strive to improve on the blueline in this draft, and if that means trading the 5th for a later top-15 pick, while acquiring another pick in the process, I think it’s worth it. Also, on the forward front, if the Canucks really like Logan Brown (as is being reported), it would be a bit of a reach to take him at 5. If they could move back and grab him at 9 or 10 while also picking up additional assets, it would be a win-win for everyone involved.
Regardless, I don’t see them moving the pick and hopefully they take a hard look at who should go at 5 before basing their decision off the height of a centreman.

Breaking News