HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Metropolitan Division > Carolina Hurricanes
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

All Things Charlotte Checkers

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
10-17-2010, 04:17 PM
  #51
tarheelhockey
Global Moderator
 
tarheelhockey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: The Triangle
Country: United States
Posts: 33,926
vCash: 500
The Checkers had a large color spread on the front page of the Charlotte Observer yesterday. Not sure if that's ever happened before.

tarheelhockey is offline  
Old
10-17-2010, 08:03 PM
  #52
dmonk
doughberle
 
dmonk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Raleigh, NC
Country: Azerbaijan
Posts: 7,982
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to dmonk
and another loss tonight.

Checkers lost 3-4 after leading 3-1.

Boychuk scored two, Samson is scoring pretty much a goal per game.

dmonk is offline  
Old
10-17-2010, 11:46 PM
  #53
halleJOKEL
strong as brickwall
 
halleJOKEL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: NC
Country: United States
Posts: 5,352
vCash: 500
You would think, with the guys they have down there, they'll go on a tear here at some point.

halleJOKEL is offline  
Old
10-17-2010, 11:48 PM
  #54
dmonk
doughberle
 
dmonk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Raleigh, NC
Country: Azerbaijan
Posts: 7,982
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to dmonk
Quote:
Originally Posted by inSTAALed View Post
You would think, with the guys they have down there, they'll go on a tear here at some point.
or perhaps, we just overvalue our prospects....

dmonk is offline  
Old
10-18-2010, 03:42 PM
  #55
NotOpie
HeDidn'tReallyDoThat
 
NotOpie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: North Carolina
Country: United States
Posts: 805
vCash: 500
Send a message via Yahoo to NotOpie
.....kinda makes ya wonder, doesn't it. Seems like D is a problem for both the big club and the "A" club. I wonder if it might also be something about the defensive capabilities of our forward corp.

NotOpie is offline  
Old
10-18-2010, 04:30 PM
  #56
tarheelhockey
Global Moderator
 
tarheelhockey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: The Triangle
Country: United States
Posts: 33,926
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by dmonk View Post
or perhaps, we just overvalue our prospects....
We should probably have seen that coming in the offseason prospect polls, when the consensus was we had about 10 future NHL'ers on the farm team.

tarheelhockey is offline  
Old
10-18-2010, 07:30 PM
  #57
vwg*
Scoring Not Allowed
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Krasnoyarsk
Country: Russian Federation
Posts: 19,957
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by tarheelhockey View Post
We should probably have seen that coming in the offseason prospect polls, when the consensus was we had about 10 future NHL'ers on the farm team.
Oh, really? Because people think we have a good set of prospects that means we automatically think most of them will be NHLers?

Do people even read posts anymore on here?

vwg* is offline  
Old
10-19-2010, 12:18 AM
  #58
tarheelhockey
Global Moderator
 
tarheelhockey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: The Triangle
Country: United States
Posts: 33,926
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Erik Stall View Post
Oh, really? Because people think we have a good set of prospects that means we automatically think most of them will be NHLers?

Do people even read posts anymore on here?
Seems to me the offseason semi-consensus was that we had so many NHL-caliber players in the system that they would need to fight tooth and nail to get out of Charlotte. Now, 4 games in, the story is we haven't got anybody in Charlotte who would make a difference over Harrison or Tlusty.

I don't know why you're getting personal about it, the shift in tone is obvious and kinda funny to watch.

tarheelhockey is offline  
Old
10-19-2010, 12:33 PM
  #59
NotOpie
HeDidn'tReallyDoThat
 
NotOpie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: North Carolina
Country: United States
Posts: 805
vCash: 500
Send a message via Yahoo to NotOpie
It's not talent. It's not skill. It's Chemistry....that will come.

NotOpie is offline  
Old
10-19-2010, 12:59 PM
  #60
Vagrant
The Czech Condor
 
Vagrant's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 20,183
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Vagrant
Quote:
Originally Posted by tarheelhockey View Post
We should probably have seen that coming in the offseason prospect polls, when the consensus was we had about 10 future NHL'ers on the farm team.
I still think we do have about 10 future NHL players on our farm team. In the sense that 10 guys or more will get 100-200 games at the NHL level in their career. The question is more about where they will be slotted than anything else. If a guy like Patrick Dwyer can make an NHL team after the rocky course his career has taken, then I have zero doubts that a guy like Blanchard, Dodge, Matsumoto, etc. can find a team that can use them in the bottom six.

Not everybody is going to get to 500 NHL games. It's very rare, actually. I think a good benchmark for a player to say he's an NHL player is about the 100-200 mark.

Also, noticed a post again on CC about Boychuk and Daniels mentioned that he was working well both with and without the puck and the work ethic was there. You could kind of infer from the way he said it that it was a somewhat difficult thing for Zach to really generate consistently. JD encouraged him to keep at it.

Vagrant is online now  
Old
10-19-2010, 01:17 PM
  #61
tarheelhockey
Global Moderator
 
tarheelhockey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: The Triangle
Country: United States
Posts: 33,926
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vagrant View Post
I still think we do have about 10 future NHL players on our farm team. In the sense that 10 guys or more will get 100-200 games at the NHL level in their career. The question is more about where they will be slotted than anything else. If a guy like Patrick Dwyer can make an NHL team after the rocky course his career has taken, then I have zero doubts that a guy like Blanchard, Dodge, Matsumoto, etc. can find a team that can use them in the bottom six.

Not everybody is going to get to 500 NHL games. It's very rare, actually. I think a good benchmark for a player to say he's an NHL player is about the 100-200 mark.
You might very well be right about that, I just don't think it's something to hang our hat on. 100-200 games, you're talking about guys like Bayda and Boulerice. Half a dozen guys like that gives you an ordinary AHL team, not a good NHL team.

tarheelhockey is offline  
Old
10-19-2010, 01:24 PM
  #62
Vagrant
The Czech Condor
 
Vagrant's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 20,183
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Vagrant
Quote:
Originally Posted by tarheelhockey View Post
You might very well be right about that, I just don't think it's something to hang our hat on. 100-200 games, you're talking about guys like Bayda and Boulerice. Half a dozen guys like that gives you an ordinary AHL team, not a good NHL team.
I totally understand your point there, but I was just more going over the semantics involved in what constituted an NHL player and how that definition could resonate differently with a different poster. I think that some of the guys you could have seen saying that we had a ton of future NHL players in the pipeline could have been simply referencing the fact that we had a lot of depth that could turn into depth at the NHL level eventually.

I think Dalpe, Samson, Boychuk, Blanchard, Matsumoto, Sanguinetti, Skinner, Bowman, McBain, etc. will all have chances to be NHL regular players in the future.... it's just hard when you have so many of those fringe guys in your system to get everybody the look they deserve.

Vagrant is online now  
Old
10-19-2010, 01:42 PM
  #63
tarheelhockey
Global Moderator
 
tarheelhockey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: The Triangle
Country: United States
Posts: 33,926
vCash: 500
I guess my concern is that we seem to have a lot of depth (agree that we have numerous guys who wouldn't be a disaster in a depth role) but being in a rebuilding stage we also need some of those 500-gamers as well.

We're really lucky to have picked up McBain and Sutter prior to the rebuild, and of course to have Staal and Ward as young centerpieces. That's like beginning a race with a running start. Skinner is obviously looking like a huge addition so far. But I have the same concern now I had in the summer, which is that the young-talent level drops off pretty steeply after those guys. Unless someone really steps it up soon, we're going to end up having to acquire core players from outside the system in a year or two... and that's a risky way to go.

tarheelhockey is offline  
Old
10-19-2010, 02:10 PM
  #64
Boom Boom Anton
Registered User
 
Boom Boom Anton's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 10,893
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by tarheelhockey View Post
I guess my concern is that we seem to have a lot of depth (agree that we have numerous guys who wouldn't be a disaster in a depth role) but being in a rebuilding stage we also need some of those 500-gamers as well.

We're really lucky to have picked up McBain and Sutter prior to the rebuild, and of course to have Staal and Ward as young centerpieces. That's like beginning a race with a running start. Skinner is obviously looking like a huge addition so far. But I have the same concern now I had in the summer, which is that the young-talent level drops off pretty steeply after those guys. Unless someone really steps it up soon, we're going to end up having to acquire core players from outside the system in a year or two... and that's a risky way to go.
It might not be that the talent drops that steeply for some of the guys, it might just be that they need longer to develop (Bowman, Boychuk, Dalpe, Dumoulin, and some of the guys drafted this season).

Not everyone will be NHL ready at 18 like Skinner "appears" to be. Not everyone has the hockey sense at an early age like Sutter does. Some of these guys may just need more time to develop and get strong enough.

Boom Boom Anton is offline  
Old
10-19-2010, 02:18 PM
  #65
tarheelhockey
Global Moderator
 
tarheelhockey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: The Triangle
Country: United States
Posts: 33,926
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ncpuckhog View Post
It might not be that the talent drops that steeply for some of the guys, it might just be that they need longer to develop (Bowman, Boychuk, Dalpe, Dumoulin, and some of the guys drafted this season).

Not everyone will be NHL ready at 18 like Skinner "appears" to be. Not everyone has the hockey sense at an early age like Sutter does. Some of these guys may just need more time to develop and get strong enough.
Personally, I don't see any of the above other than maybe Dalpe developing into an impact NHL'er. I don't want to throw Boychuk under the bus, but it's not often you see a prospect's career stall and then pick up later... he's had a lot of time to get used to the pros and I honestly think this is his last season to be considered a top prospect. Bowman and Dumoulin just seem like depth players at best to me.

Not to get into a big prospect evaluation argument, I just don't see as much potential in this group as some others do. Hopefully I'm just a poor scout.

tarheelhockey is offline  
Old
10-19-2010, 02:21 PM
  #66
dmonk
doughberle
 
dmonk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Raleigh, NC
Country: Azerbaijan
Posts: 7,982
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to dmonk
Yes... we have few guys that will take time to develop and some of them more than fringe NHL playerы...

I believe guys like Dalpe, Nash and Boychuk are going to be good foot soldiers in NHL, that should be able to play 2-3rd line duties.

what we lack is top NHL talent. We have Skinner and that's it. We don't have prospects in our farm who we can safely say will become 1st line forward, and we surely don't have that top pairing defensive stud.

dmonk is offline  
Old
10-19-2010, 02:24 PM
  #67
Boom Boom Anton
Registered User
 
Boom Boom Anton's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 10,893
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by tarheelhockey View Post
Personally, I don't see any of the above other than maybe Dalpe developing into an impact NHL'er. I don't want to throw Boychuk under the bus, but it's not often you see a prospect's career stall and then pick up later... he's had a lot of time to get used to the pros and I honestly think this is his last season to be considered a top prospect. Bowman and Dumoulin just seem like depth players at best to me.

Not to get into a big prospect evaluation argument, I just don't see as much potential in this group as some others do. Hopefully I'm just a poor scout.
I agree Dalpe has the best chance of the forwards. I'm not ready to give up on Boychuk yet, I think he needs to gain confidence but I'm also not confident he can make it. Nash and Bowman..I agree..probably 3rd line type players it they pan out.

Re: Dumoulin, I disagree whole heartedly. I think this kid has the potential to be a very solid defenseman..not just a depth player.

It is way too soon to comment on guys drafted this past season.

Boom Boom Anton is offline  
Old
10-19-2010, 02:31 PM
  #68
Boom Boom Anton
Registered User
 
Boom Boom Anton's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 10,893
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by dmonk View Post
Yes... we have few guys that will take time to develop and some of them more than fringe NHL playerы...

I believe guys like Dalpe, Nash and Boychuk are going to be good foot soldiers in NHL, that should be able to play 2-3rd line duties.

what we lack is top NHL talent. We have Skinner and that's it. We don't have prospects in our farm who we can safely say will become 1st line forward, and we surely don't have that top pairing defensive stud.
Well..that comes from a few things.

Other than Staal, the Drafts were pretty bad when we had high picks:

2004: we had a #3 in a draft that was absolutely terrible beyond the top 2 (Andrew Ladd). Very few impact players available.
2005: we had a #3 pick we traded (Jack Johnson) for Gleason. After Johnson though..the 1st round of the draft only yielded maybe 1 or 2 "impact" players anyhow.

After that, the Canes weren't drafting in a spot to get many "impact" players per se until this year when we were in the top 7.

I think those 2 things prevented us from getting an impact player (as well as maybe JR's drafting style of picking the "safe" pick).

The point is we went from a few years ago having basically NO prospects to a situation where we have some very good prospects who are making the jump (Sutter, Skinner, McBain) and some decent but not sure fire prospects. There has been a lot of progress made, but unless we are in the bottom 5 in the league for a few years straight..or we get lucky with a late round pick, we won't have a bunch of top end prospects. You have to be bad for a number of years to get that.

Boom Boom Anton is offline  
Old
10-19-2010, 02:31 PM
  #69
Vagrant
The Czech Condor
 
Vagrant's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 20,183
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Vagrant
Quote:
Originally Posted by dmonk View Post
Yes... we have few guys that will take time to develop and some of them more than fringe NHL playerы...

I believe guys like Dalpe, Nash and Boychuk are going to be good foot soldiers in NHL, that should be able to play 2-3rd line duties.

what we lack is top NHL talent. We have Skinner and that's it. We don't have prospects in our farm who we can safely say will become 1st line forward, and we surely don't have that top pairing defensive stud.
It's odd, but those top pairing defensive studs tend to come out of nowhere. I mean, we don't have any generational talents back there obviously but I wouldn't be so quick to rule out the possibility of one of our guys morphing into a top pairing defender considering the sheer quantity of guys we have invested Top 90 picks into for that very purpose. I can't see all of Dumoulin, Faulk, Biega, McBain, and Alt all being 5-6 types any more than I can see them all being 3-4 types. Virtually every strong defensive prospect has had questions about his game and over time, those myths were either dispelled or realized.

I mean, if we look at guys today that we consider to be top pairing defenders that weren't Top 15 picks, the flaws that people saw there were obvious. Talent evaluations at 18 years old for defenders is just a ballpark game. If he skates, if he's big, if he's willing to learn.... why not? If he's small, he's smart, and he's a good skater.... why not?

A ton of these guys flame out and never amount to anything. Every now and again though.... you get that guy. I think predicting defenders is even worse than doing the same with goaltenders.

Vagrant is online now  
Old
10-19-2010, 02:52 PM
  #70
tarheelhockey
Global Moderator
 
tarheelhockey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: The Triangle
Country: United States
Posts: 33,926
vCash: 500
I do think it's a good sign that JR picked up two defensemen in the 2nd round this year. Of course most of us were rooting for him to grab one of the fallers at 7th overall, but that move is turning out well so far. The second round usually produces at least one top defenseman (Subban, McBain, Weber, Keith) so if we take enough shots there eventually we'll land one.

tarheelhockey is offline  
Old
10-19-2010, 03:29 PM
  #71
dmonk
doughberle
 
dmonk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Raleigh, NC
Country: Azerbaijan
Posts: 7,982
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to dmonk
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vagrant View Post
I mean, if we look at guys today that we consider to be top pairing defenders that weren't Top 15 picks, the flaws that people saw there were obvious. Talent evaluations at 18 years old for defenders is just a ballpark game. If he skates, if he's big, if he's willing to learn.... why not? If he's small, he's smart, and he's a good skater.... why not?

A ton of these guys flame out and never amount to anything. Every now and again though.... you get that guy. I think predicting defenders is even worse than doing the same with goaltenders.
Very true... and good examples are Babchuk and Valabic whowere picked very high in 1st round and haven't met expectations on NHL level. At the same time you got above mentioned guys who do much better....

it's hit or miss and you've got to have enough prospects for a better chance to win that lottery.

dmonk is offline  
Old
10-19-2010, 05:59 PM
  #72
geehaad
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Raleigh, NC
Posts: 3,002
vCash: 500
Couple of mostly-meaningless points here:
  • Andrew Ladd was drafted at pick #4 in 2004 (Cam Barker was #3)
  • Anton Babchuk was drafted at pick #21 in 2002 (so I'm debating that he is considered a "very high" first round pick)

geehaad is offline  
Old
10-19-2010, 07:48 PM
  #73
Boom Boom Anton
Registered User
 
Boom Boom Anton's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 10,893
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by geehaad View Post
Couple of mostly-meaningless points here:
  • Andrew Ladd was drafted at pick #4 in 2004 (Cam Barker was #3)
  • Anton Babchuk was drafted at pick #21 in 2002 (so I'm debating that he is considered a "very high" first round pick)
True..that shows it really depends on the draft year. The year Ladd was drafted, there were very few impact type players after the top 2.

The year Staal was drafted...there were impact players throughout the whole first round.

Boom Boom Anton is offline  
Old
10-19-2010, 07:54 PM
  #74
impeach estaalo
Registered User
 
impeach estaalo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 10,903
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ncpuckhog View Post
True..that shows it really depends on the draft year. The year Ladd was drafted, there were very few impact type players after the top 2.

The year Staal was drafted...there were impact players throughout the whole first round.
The best player in Ladd's draft was picked 60th overall.

The Carolina Hurricanes had the 59th pick but traded it to move up to #4.

Things will never be the same.

impeach estaalo is offline  
Old
10-19-2010, 07:57 PM
  #75
Gotta Catch Em Staal
The Red Scare of '14
 
Gotta Catch Em Staal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 7,178
vCash: 500
Quote:
The best player in that draft was picked 60th overall.
You mistyped 127th.

__________________
-Jonathan
Gotta Catch Em Staal is offline  
Closed Thread

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:41 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. ©2014 All Rights Reserved.