Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

...I'm kinda rooting for Tippett now :nana:

 

Of the players you listed, I'd be really surprised if Glass or Mittelstadt is actually there. Shocked in the case of Glass, really. Choice will probably be Liljegren, Tippett, or Valimaki. I think I take them in that order.

 

Not saying I'd take him at 8, but what do you think about Suzuki? I'm increasingly intrigued.

 

Suzuki seems like a level headed Josh Ho-Sang.  Eh.  I'd take Pettersson or Andersson over him.  I'd take him if we decided to move down into the teens.  

Posted

ummm there's a lot being discussed. So far they haven't really gotten to the draft part of it. Spent time talking Kane trade or Lehner. 

Well then you'd better get typing :D

Posted

Liljegren seems to be the name I keep seeing out of the top 3 D that may be available at 8.

 

Anyone have a strong opinion either way?  How close is he to NHL ready?  Are we seeing him (realistically) max out as a top 2 guy?  Top 4? 

Posted (edited)

Liljegren seems to be the name I keep seeing out of the top 3 D that may be available at 8.

 

Anyone have a strong opinion either way?  How close is he to NHL ready?  Are we seeing him (realistically) max out as a top 2 guy?  Top 4? 

Personally I like him more than Makar.  I feel that the questions about his hockey sense are overstated.  He has an NHL body, shot, and can run the PP.  He has as much upside as any of the defensemen.  Heiskanen is more ready "NOW" and is a safer two way player.  He could play day one.  Valimaki has the same style as Heiskanen but may be a step lower.   I order them: Heiskanen, Liljegren, Makar, Valimaki.  He missed half the season with mono and looked out of shape when he got back.  Think Chychrun slipping last season, but he looked fine all season as a rookie.

Edited by TheCerebral1
Posted

Liljegren seems to be the name I keep seeing out of the top 3 D that may be available at 8.

 

Anyone have a strong opinion either way?  How close is he to NHL ready?  Are we seeing him (realistically) max out as a top 2 guy?  Top 4? 

He's a top 2 or potentially a top 1 at max. He has another year in the SHL. I like him a lot. Could be in the NHL next year. Liljegren's problem is he got Mono and that screwed his season. 

https://canucksarmy.com/2017/06/14/nation-network-2017-prospect-profile-6-timothy-liljegren/

Posted

Personally I like him more than Makar. I feel that the questions about his hockey sense are overstated. He has an NHL body, shot, and can run the PP. He has as much upside as any of the defensemen. Heiskanen is more ready "NOW" and is a safer two way player. He could play day one. Valimaki has the same style as Heiskanen but may be a step lower. I order them: Heiskanen, Liljegren, Makar, Valimaki. He missed half the season with mono and looked out of shape when he got back. Think Chychrun slipping last season, but he looked fine all season as a rookie.

To be fair, it was pretty easy to look good on that Arizona team :p

Posted

 Botts just more or less confirmed that Peterson is not signing here once he hits FA.

 

edit: he just confirmed it.

Wonder what went wrong?  Does he just feel it's a more difficult path with Lehner/Ullmark here?  Organization do something to piss him off?

Posted

I have a strange feeling we might loose Samson today :(

The return better be really good and cost controlled if we are trading Samson. We never put him in his natural position his entire tenure as a Sabre.

Posted

Wonder what went wrong?  Does he just feel it's a more difficult path with Lehner/Ullmark here?  Organization do something to piss him off?

 

I think if a player has a choice to look around as a UFA you've gotta take it. To be in control of where you get to play? I really can't blame him  for exercising his options and think this loophole needs to be updated to somehow avoid this happening.

Posted (edited)

They should say that if a college player becomes a UFA (so doesn't sign with his draft team) he has to play his first pro year in the AHL. That would change some thinking. 

Edited by LGR4GM
Posted

I have a strange feeling we might loose Samson today :(

 

I lose my #$## and eat a sandwich if Sam gets traded. I can't imagine any realistic return for him where I'd be okay with losing him.

They should say that if a college player becomes a UFA he has to play his first pro year in the AHL. That would change some thinking. 

 

That's what I was thinking. Nothing to handcuff a player to the team long-term but they should be required to be a part of the organization for at least a year.

Posted

I lose my #$## and eat a sandwich if Sam gets traded. I can't imagine any realistic return for him where I'd be okay with losing him.

Ok I've never heard that expression before :w00t:

 

Lose your sure.  But eat a sandwich??

Posted

They should say that if a college player becomes a UFA (so doesn't sign with his draft team) he has to play his first pro year in the AHL. That would change some thinking.

 

Actually think that might work. hmmm like it.
Posted

It is basically playing by NCAA rules. You transfer, you sit a year. That is a little harsh so instead you transfer you have to play in the AHL for the year, no call ups or NHL playoffs for you. 

This topic is OLD. A NEW topic should be started unless there is a VERY SPECIFIC REASON to revive this one.

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...