CanucksCorner.com Forums

Ah....leverGPT could have told you that Corn.

donlever wrote: ↑Tue May 19, 2026 12:26 pm Ah....leverGPT could have told you that Corn.

Can you do all of my marketing plans, too?

Cornuck wrote: ↑Tue May 19, 2026 11:35 am
Malhotra is the best center in the draft, has size, two-way value, playoff production, and fills the Canucks’ biggest positional need. If the Canucks are rebuilding, a center is a more foundational piece than another winger.

While all that's true, I think that drafting by positional need this early in a re-build would be insane.

They can't afford to whiff on what will probably prove to have been one of their best draft opportunities so far in franchise history. I say draft for highest floor, and I suspect that for the Canucks, that would be Verhoeff.

That said, I can too easily image the draft instructions coming out of the ownership suite. I think that the Littles Eagles are inclined to draft by marketing potential, and it will be hard to talk them out of Malhotra. I think that Malhotra is unlikely to be a bust, i.e., I am almost certain that barring catastrophic injury, he will be an NHLer, but I am not convinced that his floor is 1st line centre.

Viggo Björck has looked really good at the world championships, playing on a line with Raymond and Stenberg.
Craig Buttons (TSN) now has him in fourth place:

1. Gavin McKenna
2. Ivar Stenberg
3. Carson Carels
4. Viggo Björck
5. Chase Reid

Still hoping Stenberg is there at 3. A funny comparison I heard yesterday was between Stenberg and McKenna, Stenberg would play the more "Canadian" style while McKenna would be more of a Swedish type of winger (skill from the outside, a little shy to go to the dirty areas)

Avoiding the whole Malhotra triangle wouldn't be the worst thing for a team that seems to find the drama

Per wrote: ↑Thu May 21, 2026 2:42 am Viggo Björck has looked really good at the world championships, playing on a line with Raymond and Stenberg.
Craig Buttons (TSN) now has him in fourth place:

1. Gavin McKenna
2. Ivar Stenberg
3. Carson Carels
4. Viggo Björck
5. Chase Reid

I agree with Button’s top three for BPA, but lots of people have Carels going much lower, maybe dropping outside the top ten, which seems crazy to me.
Viggo Björck is going to be a star, but I don’t think a 5’9 winger/centre is the right pick for the Canucks that high in the draft.
The Canucks probably have Malhotra higher.
The Canucks likely won’t draft Ried, an American defensemen who is a tier down from Hughes.
They’ll go with trying to develop Buium, and draft DuPont next year

The Canucks top five are probably:

1. Gavin McKenna
2. Ivar Stenberg
3. Caleb Malhotra
4. Carson Carels
5. Keaton Verhoeff

Four out of the five are Westren Canadian, so they’ll end up with the Swede

I'd just say, I hope they've learned the lesson on drafting American-born players in the top 10.

BPA always beyond that.

But if scouts are divided. Size. Size. Size.

I'm assuming Toronto will take McKenna. No doubt in my mind there.

SJ might draft for need, and take a defenseman - but they also have been savvy drafters so far, and understand that a BPA gets you a better trade chip too - and Stenberg will get you a package of players to fill holes, earlier (should they need to build out depth). Everyone else will be playing elsewhere (Junior/NCAA/Overseas etc.) next year most likely, and be of lesser trade value once drafted.

I'm assuming with McKenna and Stenberg then off the list for those reasons - we are left with BPA being a defenseman. Not sure we could go wrong with Verhoff, Smits or Carels. Hopefully our scouts get lucky and grab the right one. No idea who that would be.

Just say no to drafting for position this early in a rebuild. It makes no sense. Van will be drafting in the top 1-5 for the next 2-3 years, and the top 10-15 for the next 4-6 years at least. There will be plenty of opportunity to grab a few centerman as BPA in those drafts. And likely better off getting the defensemen earlier anyway, as they typically take longer to develop fully. By the time they are ready, 22-24 years old, that 19-20 year old centerman will be ready to go as well.

JelloPuddingPop wrote: ↑Fri May 22, 2026 7:57 am I'd just say, I hope they've learned the lesson on drafting American-born players in the top 10.

Lesson being that you might only get 6 years of the best defenseman in franchise history, a player whose presence solved “secondary scoring,” at 25+ minutes a night without a downgrade in play (meaning the 5-6 slots were less important), and made a pretty mediocre group look pretty good when they weren’t in the middle of drama, and then turns into a first round pick, 2 first round prospects (one of whom was a consensus top 4 defense prospect in the world), and a former #9 pick who is still on the upswing of his career?

Yes, better avoid drafting that guy.

UWSaint wrote: ↑Fri May 22, 2026 8:35 am

JelloPuddingPop wrote: ↑Fri May 22, 2026 7:57 am I'd just say, I hope they've learned the lesson on drafting American-born players in the top 10.

Lesson being that you might only get 6 years of the best defenseman in franchise history, a player whose presence solved “secondary scoring,” at 25+ minutes a night without a downgrade in play (meaning the 5-6 slots were less important), and made a pretty mediocre group look pretty good when they weren’t in the middle of drama, and then turns into a first round pick, 2 first round prospects (one of whom was a consensus top 4 defense prospect in the world), and a former #9 pick who is still on the upswing of his career?

Yes, better avoid drafting that guy.

Also the guy who was the captain during all the locker room drama that tore this team apart. Just sayin'

UWSaint wrote: ↑Fri May 22, 2026 8:35 am

JelloPuddingPop wrote: ↑Fri May 22, 2026 7:57 am I'd just say, I hope they've learned the lesson on drafting American-born players in the top 10.

Lesson being that you might only get 6 years of the best defenseman in franchise history, a player whose presence solved “secondary scoring,” at 25+ minutes a night without a downgrade in play (meaning the 5-6 slots were less important), and made a pretty mediocre group look pretty good when they weren’t in the middle of drama, and then turns into a first round pick, 2 first round prospects (one of whom was a consensus top 4 defense prospect in the world), and a former #9 pick who is still on the upswing of his career?

Yes, better avoid drafting that guy.

The same guy that presided over the implosion of the core of which he was captain and then sent the team into a rebuild because he couldn’t wait to get out of the land of the Snow Mexicans.

Yeah, better avoid drafting a guy like that. Given a saw-off between the scouts, draft the one least likely to bail on his team for his home country.

Not as much into re-litigating Hughes as you, but as his example would indicate, American top prospects carry a flight risk.

JelloPuddingPop wrote: ↑Fri May 22, 2026 8:53 am Also the guy who was the captain during all the locker room drama that tore this team apart. Just sayin'

Quinn failed as captain. Agreed. Best defenseman in franchise history, not the best captain. Whether that was due to a really crappy hand, whether he’d have a subpar captain no matter the hand, whether he dealt the hand, we don’t know. We only know he was in a situation where there were multiple failures, and he wasn’t the locker room unicorn who had the ability to sort a situation that management, the coaching staff, and the players themselves could not sort.

Not sure his nationality had anything to do with that. Maybe a proven leader(tm) like Mess was required.

It also bears mentioning that the suboptimal locker room and team attitude goes back before Hughes was captain, before the interregnum, and back to Horvat’s captaincy. The problem was different (at least what gossipers gossiped about, country clubby), but no less a drag on the team operating on all cylinders.


And as it relates to this thread, I don’t think “leadership” should be very high on the soft factors that can break ties among talent. To be fair, lack of work ethic and rubbing teammates and coaches the wrong way—anti-leadership (and anti-followership) would be a soft factor that might be determinative, but speculation on whether an 18 year old might wear a “c” someday?

It’s one of the things that irritates me in the talk about Caleb Malhotra. If he’s a chip off the old block, it will be perfect for the culture Canucks want to build. First, if Manny’s also hired, is the culture you want to build nepotism? Again, not that both aren’t in their respective positions on merit, but culture is created by perceptions, whether keen or conspiratorial, whether born out of the best within us or the worst. Second, we shouldn’t assume that the sons of well off professional athletes will take on dispositions of their pro parents. We all know people (hopefully) with good parents who modeled that. But we also all know rich kids who are spoiled brats, but whose dad made a bag through hard work and being likeable. Third, if Caleb is like his dad that means is going to be a bottom 6 defensive center who is a disappointment as a top 10 pick (and whose value is best on a matured team like the Sedin era Canucks, not as a core player but in a support role — and a guy that you don’t have to get in the draft). I don’t have a perfect memory, but from what I recall, scouting reports in Manny weren’t all that different that those on Caleb, era adjusted.

None of this is to say he will turn out like the old man in personality or play. Maybe he gets the personality and not play and be this Rod Brind’Amour player who is a leader, who is intelligent, who is a hard worker, and who has plus plus capability on both sides of the ice.

Lancer wrote: ↑Fri May 22, 2026 8:57 am Not as much into re-litigating Hughes as you, but as his example would indicate, American top prospects carry a flight risk.

All players who are on shitty teams with shitty management, with tough personalities, and a revolving door of coaches are flight risks. He could have been born and raised in Vancouver and wanted out.

And it isn’t relitigating Hughes to litigate the question “should the fact Hughes wanted out and was an American affect who the Canucks draft?” — which might take the form of avoid Reid (because he’s American (but played in the OHL…) or avoid all non Canadians.

I tried to answer that question simply — a guy who leaves a returns in a trade what Hughes returned and along the way gave the club 6.5 years, and years 1, 3, 4, 5, and 6 at an unbelievably high level, well that’s a hell of a value from a #9 overall draft pick who was the BPA.

A douche bag is a douche bag regardless of what country they are born in.

Just pick players who they think have the maturity that will relate well on a team and as they get older. UW (and others) is right, any player on a dysfunctional team will want out. Now there is something about taxes etc. but that is not something that can be controlled by any NHL, certain areas will always have a benefit. It is up to the Canucks to provide a team atmosphere that over rides that part.

UWSaint wrote: ↑Fri May 22, 2026 9:30 am UW's Post

I agree with you that he wasn't the only problem, Management/Ownership first. The guys who had the issues, second. Leadership in the room distant third. For sure.

He is a hell of a defensemen. No question. One of the league's very best.

Since joining the Wild, I have seen in various interviews how much more he loves it in the U.S. than he did in Canada. I'm sure playing for an Org. that is run well, and is a contender has a massive influence on that, and getting away from a dumpster fire etc. But he has also mentioned how nice it is to be back "home" and how important it was to play for the U.S. in the Olympics. This guy bleeds Red, White and Blue.

Nothing wrong with that. It is just an outlook that clubs should take into consideration when drafting players. Will they stay longer term, or cut out trades to other Canadian cities, which would lower their trade value. It goes both ways as well, as well as places like Winnipeg, who likely ask that question or similar during interviews. Who would draft a guy, who wouldn't sign?

I suppose I should have clarified my don't draft Americans in the top 10, I should have said, if there is not an hugely obvious choice in terms of talent, such as in the 2026 draft, I'd rather not draft that American (Reid/Lawrence) over a Canadian (Verhoff, Carels) or Euro player (Stenburg/Smits).

We do need to look at the current state of the world. It isn't changing in the next 5-10 years, when the competitive window opens. Maybe this wasn't an issue previously, or might not be in decade. But it is now.

The dam has broken, starting with Gaudreau, then Tkachuk, now Hughes, and soon the other Tkachuk & Mathews.

As well, personally. I'd rather cheer for a good Canadian kid anyway.

I still think we end up with Stenberg or McKenna.