Vancouver Canucks: Always draft the best player available

This is the simplest and most important rule to follow at the NHL draft table. So many teams ignore this rule, including general manager Jim Benning. You are going to find out why that’s a problem that holds the team back.

The NHL draft is a critical time for every team in the league. Once the Stanley Cup is awarded, teams must focus on building towards the future of their respective franchises. Those that made the playoffs want to add to stay competitive while those that missed decide between rebuilding and competing.

Some foolish teams think they can do both at the same time. The Vancouver Canucks are one of those teams. However, this is not a piece about the rebuild; instead, we will focus on the approach to the draft. An unwritten rule when it comes to drafting is to pick the best player available (BPA). It’s a relatively easy rule to follow, yet so many General Managers make the same mistake and neglect this rule.

How do you determine the best player available? Let’s start with what you don’t do. Under no circumstances should a team select a player based on positional/organizational need. It is a fool’s errand to constantly plug all prospects into a future lineup for a couple of reasons.

First, it is beyond arrogant to assume that more than half of your draft picks will succeed. Additionally, you can’t delude yourself into thinking that the prospects that do make it will maximize their potential. Secondly, a GM must understand that the point of the draft is to load up on talent.

Selecting a player with a high probability of making the NHL, but will likely end up as a fourth line player does little to establish a highly skilled core. Teams need to acquire talent everywhere on their roster. They can always trade for what they need once there are rich with talent.

Personally, I believe a player should be assessed on hockey sense, skill and speed (with the first being the highest priority). Any concern over intangibles can be discussed after those three.

Important considerations

Before we begin, I want to disclose that I will be focusing on Jake Virtanen and Olli Juolevi. I want to stress that these players are not bad. The criticism is not going to be levied directly on them. It will be thrust upon the GM that left better players on the table when these picks were made.

This piece is specifically about the methodology and not the individual player. In case you were not aware, the GM is responsible for picks made in the first round. Most managers don’t show up on the second day of the draft, but general manager Jim Benning is an exception.

With that in mind, you need to understand that there is not enough time for Benning to scout every player that the Canucks could select. He is far too busy with his GM duties, that at best, he can carefully look at players in the first round.

The behind the scenes videos on the Canucks YouTube channel may portray Benning as the guy making all decisions, but pay closer attention. John Weisbrod and his Director of Amateur Scouting, Judd Brackett, give Benning most of the input on the second day of the draft.

I want the focus to stay with the first round for both brevity and to put the focus on Benning. Scouts are the hardest working people in the organization and get little credit for the best picks, but face the brunt of criticism for the worst ones. Some managers absorb that criticism like Mike Gillis, while others seem to be infallible to the fans for whatever reason (like Jim Benning).  I believe the best GM’s use their scouts to the best of their ability and respect their input and accept responsibility. Let’s look at the two largest cases of Jim Benning’s failure to pick the BPA at the draft.

2016—Olli Juolevi (selected 5th overall)

Here’s another draft pick that has polarized fans across Canucks Nation. Once again, I want to clarify that I think Olli Juolevi is a good prospect who likely become a good NHL player. At his absolute best, he could play on a level near Dan Hamhuis or Chris Tanev, both players who were number two defencemen. He won’t be aggressive, but I think he will be a quietly impressive player.

I understand why the Canucks wanted Juolevi. The team’s defence was terrible and had nothing in the pipeline at that point. Vancouver had not picked a defenceman in the first round for 11 years and maybe this was the time to do it. Juolevi, in a vacuum, is a good and reliable player.

However, the elephant in the room is his draft position and the players that Benning passed on to pick for positional need. During the 2015-16 season, I watched every game played by the London Knights. I got to watch Matthew Tkachuk and Olli Juolevi play every game. I watched them at the World Juniors and at the Memorial Cup.

Both players are very good, but Tkachuk was better. He could score goals, he would be ready for the NHL quickly and most of all, he could make plays. His “terrible” skating was grossly overblown. He wasn’t fast, but he would not lag behind in the NHL.

A team that lacked goal scoring since 2012 needed someone blessed with a lot of skill and high hockey sense. Juolevi had greater hockey sense, but Matthew Tkachuk is a more skillful and dominant player, especially below the hashmarks. He is going to score many goals for a long time in this league and it is part of the reason why I thought he was better than Juolevi.

Don’t forget about Keller

Tkachuk was the best player available at the time to me, but I see I have made a mistake with overlooking Clayton Keller. Playing in the U.S. Development Program, Keller’s draft year was the second-best season in the history of that program. Who was ahead of Keller? Auston Matthews in his 17-year-old season.

Keller oozes skill from every pore and his vision on the ice is some of the best I have seen. The one knock against him was his size. At 5-foot-10 and under 170 lbs, he was put in the same boat as Ehlers and Nylander. Once again, the NHL is learning what happens when you favour size over skill. How many more Johnny Gaudreau’s, Alex DeBrincat’s and Brayden Point’s will it take to dispel people from that notion.

Hockey sense, skill and speed are the most important attributes of hockey player in the modern NHL. Things like size, physical play and tenacity are just benefits. You don’t draft someone for their intangibles, you pick the most skilled players that are available.

Keller started off very strong, leading the rookie scoring race this season, before Brock Boeser and Mathew Barzal took over. Despite the slowing pace, I can see Keller being the best out of himself, Tkachuk and Juolevi.

This is yet another good example of why you don’t pick for position. Both forwards offered a lot of skill and goal-scoring that this team desperately needed. Sacrificing better players to address an organization need has deprived the team of yet another top six forward.

Takeaways from this

If this topic is depressing you, it should. This franchise has had opportunities to really bolster their lineup in the first round of the last four drafts and decided to eschew the BPA rule. Wouldn’t it be nice to have two more top six forwards in place of bad players? I’m not saying we would suddenly be a playoff team, but at least Brock Boeser could have some more support and not always be relied upon for offence.

Picking Jake Virtanen caused a ripple effect where Benning thought his prospects were ready or at the very least on the way, when they were not. He gave his scouts few picks to work with thanks to his strange attempt at “bridging the age-gap” and “accelerating development.”

Jim Benning didn’t even pick the best defenceman from the 2016 draft. Mikhail Sergachev and Charlie McAvoy are taking much larger strides in the NHL, and will be better than Juolevi. Adam Fox has played immensely well in the NCAA and I recommend you watch him at the World Juniors to see his skill on display. Juolevi will have mountains to climb to live up to his lofty draft position and that’s not fair to him. It is Benning’s fault to put him in a position like this, where the picks are few and the expectations are so high.

If Benning was so dead-set on a player, I truly wonder why he did not trade down. With a fifth or sixth overall pick, you could acquire another second-round pick and get the player you wanted. That would have helped add to the prospect pool.

There’s no doubt in my mind that the BPA was selected in the cases of Jared McCann, Brock Boeser and Elias Pettersson. Too bad McCann is succeeding with another team. It’s just odd why this was not followed in 2014 and 2016.

Trading for need instead of drafting for it

The reason I advocate picking the BPA is to collect an abundance of talent. You can always use this abundance to trade for something you don’t have. For example, the Nashville Predators boast one of the strongest defensive corps in the league, but always lacked that scoring touch to be a contender. They swapped Seth Jones for Ryan Johansen, who was instrumental in their cup run last year before his injury.

The Tampa Bay Lightning have done so well at the draft that they could afford to move Jonathan Drouin for Mikhail Sergachev. How was this possible? They had Brayden Point ready to take on Drouin’s role and he has flourished. That’s the kind of prospect depth teams should be striving for. It’s not just about the quality of prospects you possess, it is the quantity.

Next: Canucks Resolutions for 2018

The team that moves futures is willing to make that sacrifice because their team is competitive. Bad teams sacrifice their future for short-term gain and tend to fail. Just look at the Canucks since 2015. If a team is patient enough to collect picks, they want to make sure to not waste them. To do that, teams need to ALWAYS pick the best player available.