The Vancouver Canucks must make a decision on these draft picks

The trade deadline may be the primary focus in February, but the Vancouver Canucks need to keep an eye on an important date in June. Jim Benning (or whoever the GM is) must decide which picks will remain in the system.

The end of this season could not arrive any sooner. Another lost season leaves Vancouver Canucks fans hopeful for the top pick pick in the draft. Maybe this is the year where the Canucks beat the odds. The Draft is what we are looking forward to the most at this point.

However, let’s not rush all the way to the Draft just yet. It is very early to discuss this, but the Canucks should keep June 1 in the back of their heads. What’s so important about this date? The Canucks must choose between signing some of their 2016 draft picks or parting ways with them.

Before we begin, let’s just quickly review the rules about NHL teams retaining the rights on their draft picks. This means the team has a window of time where they can offer a contract to a drafted player. Depending on that player’s situation, they can sign elsewhere or must re-enter the draft.

All of this information about the rules are in Article 8 of the NHL Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA). Players committed to the NCAA have their rights expire on August 15, four years after their draft. Rights to players drafted from everywhere else in North America last for two years and expire on June 1. European drafted rights also expire on June 1, but teams retain these players for four years.

You are certainly welcome to read the CBA, but I’m here to do it so you don’t have to! Let’s analyze this draft class and see who should remain with the organization.

Vancouver Canucks 2016 Draft Class

Olli Juolevi (1st round, 5th overall) and Will Lockwood (3rd round, 64th overall)

The first two selections are the easiest. Olli Juolevi already has an Entry Level Contract with the Canucks. As an aside, his contract will likely slide this year, meaning the first year of the contract won’t begin until next season. It’s one of the nicer subtleties of having cost-controlled assets.

Will Lockwood is only in his second year at Michigan. The Canucks won’t have to worry about his rights for another two years.

Verdict: N/A

Cole Candella (5th round, 140th overall)

This pick always stuck out to me at the time of the draft. The analytics supported the argument to select Cole Candella and the Canucks took a chance. His selection was a sound decision despite Candella missing half of his season with an injury.

In his draft year, he had 20 points in 37 games. One year later, Candella played 65 games, producing 20 points again. After the season, Hamilton traded Candella to the Sudbury Wolves. Today, he has 28 points in 51 games and Sudbury sits near the bottom of the OHL standings. To add further insult to injury, Hamilton is in first place of the Eastern Conference.

So, should the Canucks sign him? Absolutely not. He’s not very productive and from my viewings at the prospect camps this summer, it did not seem like he does anything exceptionally well. I’m not the biggest fan of skating, but his shot seems okay. He is an unremarkable player and I don’t think he justifies a contract slot.

Verdict: Part ways

Jakob Stukel (6th round, 154th overall)

The local kid from Surrey. As one of my friends put it, “Stukel is a poor man’s Jake Virtanen.” Well, he was not entirely wrong. Jacob Stukel is very fast; his speed is something to behold. But, that’s it. He doesn’t have Virtanen’s size or his shot. And I feel his skills are lacking in comparison to what we have in the prospect pool.

2016 was a shallow year in the draft. Several 19-year-old players were selected and Stukel was one of them. His draft year totals were somewhat promising, since he had 60 points in 69 games. The problem lies with his progression: he has made little of it.

Granted, he plays for the struggling Calgary Hitmen. Honestly, I don’t think that matters. His production has plateaued and as an overager (who will be 21 in March), he is not separating himself from the younger players in the WHL. This is another pick that I would not sign.

Verdict: Part ways

Rodrigo Abols (7th round, 184th overall)

There was so much that went wrong with this pick. First, Rodrigo Abols was 20 years old when the Canucks drafted him. No one was going to pick him this late in the seventh round.

The Canucks could have easily waited it out and presented him with an AHL contract when he became a free agent. I understand the Canucks wanted to reward him for being a part of their prospect camp the year before, but there was a way to acquire him without using a draft pick.

More from The Canuck Way

Second, his production in every league he has played in is mediocre at best. When he was drafted, Abols had 49 points in 62 WHL games. His team could not make room for him, so the Canucks had to scramble and find a team in the QMJHL who could take on Abols for his overage year.

Despite being 21 years old, he produced under a point-per-game (PPG) pace. This year, he wasn’t ready to play in the AHL, so he opted to play in SHL. He had one assist in 26 games while playing for a team on the verge of relegation. Abols was loaned to the Allsvenskan, where he has seven points in 11 games.

Third, the Canucks missed out on a public relations victory. The coverage around this time was not very uplifting. Jim Benning was already facing warranted criticism for leaving better talent on the table for positional need.

Instead of picking Abols, the team had two opportunities to draft Ty Ronning. Even if Ronning would never play an NHL game, selecting the son of a former Canuck would be what everyone talked about that week. It distracts people from the Juolevi pick and provides a local media buzz that shines well on the Canucks.

Alternatively, you had fans and media questioning why Ty Ronning was not selected. He is two years younger than Abols and was far more productive in the WHL. Ronning is currently the same age that Abols was in 2016. He has scored 47 goals this year, which is almost the same number of points that Abols had at the end of that season. Abols should not get a contract.

Verdict: Part ways

Brett McKenzie (7th round, 194th overall)

Out of the four players discussed today, Brett McKenzie has the best chance at earning a contract. I thought he was a decent two-way centre with some potential at the time of the draft. McKenzie was another 19-year-old selected by the Canucks that year.

The knock on his game is skating. I always wondered how bad it could be and got a first hand look at UBC when he attended prospect camp. McKenzie’s skating is as bad as it sounds. He is a slow skater, much slower than Jonah Gadjovich or even Bo Horvat when he was 18.

His skating has improved very little and with the way the NHL is evolving, slow skaters are being left behind. I question some of his decision making in the offensive zone. Sometimes it seems like he’s trying to do too much on his own. It will be an uphill battle to make an AHL team.

McKenzie’s production started out well in his first post-draft season, but his 1.23 PPG quickly faded to 1.0 by the end of year. Injuries have sidetracked his season this year, but I’m not sure the recent trade to Owen Sound will do much in padding his stats. Personally, I wouldn’t sign Brett McKenzie to a contract.

Verdict: Part ways

Next: Canucks have 5 prospects in Craig Button's top 50

Woof. Four picks with expiring rights and it’s likely for the best to part ways with all of them. The Canucks may sign one or two of these players, but it doesn’t change what has already been said. This is why myself and several others advocate for stockpiling picks. Rebuilding teams should not have six draft picks. By having several more picks, it gives your scouting team a better chance in finding an NHL player. When you have few picks, the misses tend to sting a lot more.

Home / Prospects