Welcome back to another edition of What Would You Do Wednesday! We at CanucksArmy continue to send our best wishes to you and yours, and we’re all looking forward to getting back to talking current hockey whenever possible.

Until then, let’s dive back into the speculative past with another historical hypothetical – constructing an all-time all-star squad for the Vancouver Canucks.

Here are the rules:

You’ve got to select one current or former Canuck at every position to fill out your all-time all-star roster.

Left Wing-Center-Right Wing

Defense-Defense (pick a left-hander and a right-hander for maximum specificity)


Consider each player to be at their peak performance AS A CANUCK. (This is to make sure no one picks that certain unmentionable individual again.)

If you feel like it, justify your selections in the comments.

And if you really want to, pick a coach to steer your squad to victory!

Again, this week we’re asking:

Who would you pick for your all-time Canucks all-star squad?


Last week, we asked:

What would you do if you could redo any draft pick in Canucks history?

Your responses are below!



Easy. Nicklas Lidström instead of Jason Herter. This would have given the Canucks the #1 defenseman that they needed through both the Naslund/Bertuzzi and Sedin/Sedin years.



The easiest draft would be drafting Sergachev instead of Olli. While I still believe Olli will be a good player that will help the Canucks in the future, Sergachev is a star.

Now the second question is, would the Canucks have been a position to get Quinn if they had Sergachev?

Also for kicks, since he is on the squad now, Tanner Pearson instead of Brendan Gaunce. Pearson might have made the post-2012 teams more watchable, but he wouldn’t have two Cups!



The times it would have mattered most would have been 1994 and 2011, when the Canucks came within a game of winning the Cup: one more key player could have made the difference. I think the obvious choice is Jagr instead of Nedved in 1990, but Karlsson instead of Hodgson in 2008 probably would have resulted in a Stanley Cup parade down Robson as well.



In 2009, Gillis and team took Schroeder, and they thought he was a gem because he already fell several spots.

Personally, in that draft I liked O’Reilly and Barrie. We could have had both of them.

The resulting injection of youth could have allowed the Canucks to remain competitive well past 2011.


Beer Can Boyd:

I was thinking about the year they took Bryan Allen 4th overall (1998), but when I went back and looked at that draft, it was quite possibly the worst draft class ever. So, I’ll go with the 1986 draft when the Canucks took Dan Woodley, and the Rangers took Brian Leetch two picks later. But really, the Canucks drafting record has been so abysmal overall, that there are a wealth of valid choices to make.


Killer Marmot:

2011 29th overall: Nikita Kucherov (544 points in 514 games) rather than Nicklas Jensen (6 points in 31 games).

The last five seasons would have been far more fun. Picking Luc Robitaille instead of Jim Agnew in the 8th round of the 1984 draft would also be high up on my list.


speering major:

I don’t really like the question, so I’ll answer it my own way. Obviously Jagr over Nedved makes sense. That said, I’m looking at realistic picks that would be on the team today. I’m not really as interested in drafting a player for a hypothetical cup run of the past

For me the obvious change would be to take Pastrnak over McCann. OJ might still be a useful player for years to come, even more valuable than McCann. Even if that’s not the case, Pastrnak is an elite player that will contend for Rocket Richard Trophies. There were a lot of good players behind OJ in that draft, but none of them were Pastrnak. What gets me is that JB came from Boston that year and that’s who chose him right behind Van. Frustrating.



Sittler instead of Tallon in 1970.



(Winner of the author’s weekly award for eloquence)

The obvious choice would be Jagr instead of Nedved in 1990. However, given that the Canucks did get a pretty good return for Nedved – Hedican and Brown – who helped them reach the finals in 1994, I would argue that drafting Tkachuk instead of Shawn Antoski would have been a greater net benefit to the team, since Antoski never did anything at the NHL level. Tkachuk could have helped transform the Canucks from a good team into a perennial contender in the early 90’s.

Just to rub even more salt into the wounds of Canuck fans, they could have taken also Doug Weight in the second round instead of Jiri Slegr. For all his talents as GM, Quinn was never great at drafting. The 1990 draft was especially awful. If Quinn had played his hand better, the team would have been a powerhouse for years.



Such a wealth of options it’s almost impossible to go wrong. Other posters have mentioned some of them, but here’s a couple more.

The absolutely egregious 2007 draft still causes me to slip into angry thoughts 13 years later. The Canucks selected Pat White in the 1st round when David Perron was there for the taking, then went on to take the long-forgotten Taylor Ellington in the early 2nd when, if they were really looking for a defenseman, P.K. Subban went a few picks later.

Then how about 2005? They chose well in taking Luc Bourdon with the 10th overall pick, but seeing as we’re imagining things differently, how would the future have looked if they’d decided upon big center-iceman Anze Kopitar, who went one pick later. Fate was not kind.



Claude Lemieux instead of Cam Neely in ‘83



I think your site will crash trying to answer this one. Sandlak at 4th overall in 1985 stands out as a real bust, as Jere Gillis did at 4th in 1977’s draft. It’s easy to look back and see all the guys they missed out on – but probably because this franchise has rarely had any kind of game plan, proper player mix, and a history of bad drafting that sees no Stanley Cup for the Canucks. Personally, though, skipping past Tkachuk for Juolevi seems very painful now.



I went with the goal of something that could improve the 2010/11 squad and seemed like a reasonable draft jump for a player. In the 2006 draft, the Canucks picked Grabner at 14. Eight picks later at 22, the Flyers take a man by the name of Claude Giroux. Giroux breaks into the league with a half season in ’08/’09, and a full year the next season. In 2010/11, he breaks out with 76 point in 82 games. S,o he would be added to a team with centre depth of Sedin-Kesler-Giroux, and be another weapon on the #1 PP. Also, he would be on his entry-level deal for the Cup run. This reminds me of the Penguins team with Crosby-Malkin-Staal depth at centre. Does this make them prevail against the Bruins? Maybe or maybe not. But it also creates the possibility of a few more kicks at the can as he becomes a consistent point-per-game player. That, and he could still be on the team now. His last two seasons were 102 and 85 points respectively in his 11th and 12th seasons.


I am Ted:

Wow. So. Many. Options. Jagr over Nedved has to be near the tops. However, there are many more that are nearly the same level. Keith Tkachuk and Matt Tkachuk, Al MacInnis over Garth on and so on and…

Mind you, most teams are in a similar boat. Drafting is a crap shoot. The worst era for drafting might have to be the Gillis regime. Mainly due to length of tenure and how many players they drafted that became NHLers (3). Sad.



That’s easy Jagr over Nedved. Nothing else needs to be said.



Nicklas Lidstrom for Jason Herter. No brainer.


Fitty Trent:

The 2007 Draft was the only year the Vancouver Canucks never had a player reach the NHL for any team. They selected Patrick White with the 25th overall pick – meanwhile, local boy Jamie Benn went 129th overall in the 5th Round to Dallas.


North Van Halen:

Honestly, with the draft record of this franchise it’d be easier to list the draft picks I’d keep: Petey, Quinn, Bure, Brock, Trevor, the Sedins, Ohlund, Stan, Fraser, Neely, and Edler.

Other than these (with a couple I’ve missed) and the few that have yet to play out, you can find a player for almost every one of the 350 or so picks. Asking what draft pick I’d like to do over in Canuck history is impossible. The drafting for this team has been so bad so long, the possibilities are almost endless.



What about drafting Teemu Selanne in 1988? Think about back-to-back rookie of the years. A 60-goal scorer on both of the top two lines. Can you imagine the matchup nightmare that would be, considering just how well those Quinn teams defended? Who knows how far the Canucks would go with both Bure and Selanne?


Mark from Squampton:

I would re-do a pick that would provide the biggest impact on the 2010/2011 team. I have a few options but I am sure there are more and likely better ones than I am coming up with. Options 2, 3 and 4 could still be contributors – albeit expensive ones.

  1. Draft Lucic instead of Grabner. That would have had potentially made VCR stronger in the final and Boston weaker. They would have held up better to the heavy game with Lucic.
  2. Claude Giroux instead of Grabner. He could have helped provide some secondary scoring in the playoffs and taken some of the load off Kesler. While Malhotra was out in the playoffs, Kesler took almost all d-zone draws on top of his regular shift.
  3. Anze Kopitar instead of Luc Bourdon. I feel a bit heartless suggesting this one, but Kopitar would have been an amazing addition to that team. Bourdon’s death was tragic because a young life was lost and it goes beyond hockey. From a pure hockey standpoint though Bourdon was progressing but he would have to hit a pretty high bar to be a better player than Kopitar.
  4. Erik Karlsson instead of Cody Hodgson. Karlsson was only in his second NHL season that year, but it’s Erik Karlsson.



If it didn’t affect the present team roster, it’s pretty obvious that picking Juolevi was a big mistake. Lots of choices over him. I’ll start with Sergachev or McAvoy, but there a dozen others as well.