HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Western Conference > Pacific Division > Vancouver Canucks
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

Prospect Thread - Part XI

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
08-31-2012, 02:59 PM
  #26
hockeyfan125
HFB Partner
 
hockeyfan125's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 20,019
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Luck 6 View Post
I'm not sure I like the Wheeler comparison listed in the article. Even in the article, two major flaws are listed with the comparison. If those flaws are already present, I don't see how Kassian projects to be anything like Wheeler at all. The comparison I would likely make as an on ice player is Shane Doan, I'd say that's his potential.
From what I have seen of Kassian, he is at his best when he is using his size and playmaking abilities combined with his size. Not really like Lucic. I'm not saying he becomes Wheeler, but they have similar attributes. Doan is another solid comparison, too.

And thanks for reading the site. I really enjoyed putting this list together. In particular, I am quite high on Patrick McNally. He sounds like a player - just needs to polish parts of his game up.

hockeyfan125 is offline  
Old
08-31-2012, 03:09 PM
  #27
RunYouOutOfTheRink
Registered User
 
RunYouOutOfTheRink's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: No Matter Which Rink
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,467
vCash: 50
Not a fan of Lack's profile either. It became way too personal. The article really didn't need the writers' " rankings philosophy", or "gritting our teeth at our #2 prospect" There was waaaay too much personal opinion, and it totally conflicted with the point of the article: giving props to the prospects that earned it. The Lack profile started out with the writers' negative opinion, then touched upon that throughout the article.

I actually agree with the writers' opinion of where Lack should have been ranked, but that wasn't the point. Consensus had spoken, and that opinion was completely trashed in the article... which was not the point of it in the first place.

RunYouOutOfTheRink is offline  
Old
08-31-2012, 05:50 PM
  #28
lindgren
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 1,352
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ProspectProphet View Post
Consensus had spoken, and that opinion was completely trashed in the article.
For "completely trashed," try substituting "disagreed with."

lindgren is offline  
Old
08-31-2012, 06:28 PM
  #29
overtherainbow
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 116
vCash: 500
The beef I have with the Eddie Lack article is that it's not really consistent with the other articles. Each article is about the prospect's development and why they are at their respective rankings.

The Eddie Lack one just felt like the writer had no intention of writing about that.

"Personally, I would have had Lack somewhere in the 5-to-7 range."

"Frankly, I have only had the opportunity to watch Eddie Lack twice since he came to North America."

"Ill take the impact skater over the goaltender every day of the week."

overtherainbow is offline  
Old
08-31-2012, 07:07 PM
  #30
Verviticus
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 8,221
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by lindgren View Post
If you or someone else had responded earlier to my request for evidence to support an opinion, rather than just ramping up the rhetoric, you wouldn't have had to deal with my sickeningly repetitive posts.
nobody wanted to give you a list of individual phrases and problems with it because they knew you would pick every word apart to continue to justify the article, as you literally just did. it's tiresome. i called you a troll because you talk like a parody of a debate forum poster - some arguments just arent worth winning

can we just drop it at this point please, everybody? im pretty sure he's the only person who isn't an author for the site that's come out and supported the article, everybody disagrees with him - move on. lets talk about kassian or wesley myron or something

Verviticus is offline  
Old
08-31-2012, 07:18 PM
  #31
lindgren
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 1,352
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Verviticus View Post
nobody wanted to give you a list of individual phrases and problems with it because they knew you would pick every word apart to continue to justify the article, as you literally just did. it's tiresome. i called you a troll because you talk like a parody of a debate forum poster - some arguments just arent worth winning

can we just drop it at this point please, everybody? im pretty sure he's the only person who isn't an author for the site that's come out and supported the article, everybody disagrees with him - move on. lets talk about kassian or wesley myron or something
Good try. Distort my argument and then say let's move on.

Note that I acknowledged merit in the argument of the poster who actually presented evidence. Note that I acknowledged the reasonableness of a poster who disagreed about the article but stated a rational case criticizing it. Acknowledge that you have no clue about what constitutes rational debate. Now let's move on.

lindgren is offline  
Old
08-31-2012, 07:59 PM
  #32
Electric Eye
Registered User
 
Electric Eye's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 20
vCash: 500
Moving on... Prospects on Wolves?

Big fan of the Canucks Army top-20 list, was especially great to see the quotes from coaches and scouts who have seen them play much more than the average fan. I believe first-hand info like this is the best way to form an opinion about a player like a McNally without having seen any more than a highlight reel or two.

Now that their top-20 list is done, as is the Canucks fan board list, the topic I think is most interesting prospect-wise is the Wolves roster. I dont know about the rest of you, but every time I saw another signing of a forward with #13 potential or potential #7 defensemen I cringed... My opinion is that we are quite overstocked with low-ceiling AHL stars and, especially if there is a lockout, its going to be the toughest year ever for Canucks AHL prospects to get significant ice time.

With so many, Im sure Ill make some accidental omissions here and positional errors, but I see the Wolves opening day roster looking something like this (assuming a lockout):

D. Weise J. Schroeder Z. Kassian
B. Sterling S. Pinizzotto D. Haydar
B. Sweatt T. Miller A. Gordon
G. Desbiens A. Friesen A. Volpatti

D. Joslin C. Tanev
P. Mullen K. Connauton
Y. Sauve M. Matheson

E. Lack
M. Climie

Im already somewhat upset with the lack of spots for legitimate prospects like Rodin and Mallet plus Connauton and Sauve would be getting reduced minutes with Joslin and Mullen in the picture. Imagine the 2nd AHL team we could put together:

Rodin Mallet Archibald
Davies Schneider Matson
Roussel Longpre Clackson
Tochkin Doell Anthony

Negrin Miskovic
Polasek Hunt
Andersson D. Friesen

Cannata
Corbeil-Theriault

We just used a pretty high pick on Mallet, but how does he possibly crack the Wolves top 6, or Rodin? Matson has no chance, Polasek is buried deep, etc. Plus, a lot of the guys on the second roster played a lot of minutes with Chicago last year, so Im not even convinced they wouldnt be ahead of some of the other AHL vets. I just cant wrap my head around the Wolves signing Davies, Longpre, Negrin, Miskovic, Hunt, etc to say nothing of the Canucks signing (the completely redundant) Desbiens, Joslin or Mullen.

I certainly understand the need to prepare the roster as if there wont be a lockout, In which case you can essentially expect the take the top forward and defence lines to be up with the Canucks. But, even then, there appears to be massive overkill in the depth department. Taking the top Fwd/D-lines from the 2nd team still leaves you with two AHL-quality lines and Cannata, who is quite a solid prospect as well.

It seems petty to complain about an abundance of depth, but when its a developmental league and guys who should be playing top six/top four minutes are getting pushed down by AHL-lifers left and right, I think its a problem.

I think its great Jensen and Grenier are heading to Europe and I wish we could send a few more of these guys over too, but I really think this is an issue that Gillis should look at long and hard if not for this year, then for next year when it comes time to decide on renewing with Chicago... Thoughts?

Electric Eye is offline  
Old
08-31-2012, 08:05 PM
  #33
Verviticus
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 8,221
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by lindgren View Post
Good try. Distort my argument and then say let's move on.

Note that I acknowledged merit in the argument of the poster who actually presented evidence. Note that I acknowledged the reasonableness of a poster who disagreed about the article but stated a rational case criticizing it. Acknowledge that you have no clue about what constitutes rational debate. Now let's move on.
i dont care what you think is reasonable, i'm telling you why nobody wanted to argue with you. it's because you are literally a parody of a debate nerd and you will obsessively overwhelm any valid argument with minor deconstructions, as you did to tiranis. accept, don't accept it, whatever

Quote:
Originally Posted by Electric Eye View Post
It seems petty to complain about an abundance of depth, but when its a developmental league and guys who should be playing top six/top four minutes are getting pushed down by AHL-lifers left and right, I think its a problem.
my entirely uninformed opinion agrees with you - although im sure feebster will be in here shortly to tell me why i'm wrong (i hope so, at least). ahl rosters are such a mess to me because i really have no idea what the hell they do with all the spare parts, and this year seems even worse

i can say that ideally lack is our backup and cannata competes with climie for the ahl job. climie's fine but with our goaltending depth we really need the spot for players that are signed with the big club

Verviticus is offline  
Old
08-31-2012, 08:22 PM
  #34
lindgren
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 1,352
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Verviticus View Post
i dont care what you think is reasonable, i'm telling you why nobody wanted to argue with you. it's because you are literally a parody of a debate nerd and you will obsessively overwhelm any valid argument with minor deconstructions, as you did to tiranis. accept, don't accept it, whatever
How interesting that you don't care and yet keep replying.

I accepted the validity of DJOpus's post, and I accepted the validity of Tiranis's post, while disagreeing with it in part. You persist in making no sense.

lindgren is offline  
Old
08-31-2012, 09:01 PM
  #35
RunYouOutOfTheRink
Registered User
 
RunYouOutOfTheRink's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: No Matter Which Rink
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,467
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by lindgren View Post
For "completely trashed," try substituting "disagreed with."
Compared to the other prospect profiles, Completely trashed rings true.

RunYouOutOfTheRink is offline  
Old
08-31-2012, 09:07 PM
  #36
lindgren
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 1,352
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ProspectProphet View Post
Compared to the other prospect profiles, Completely trashed rings true.

The authors of the other profiles didn't express any disagreement with the ranking. The author of the Lack profile expressed his. Clearly, people didn't like that, which is fine, but there was no trashing going on. (I found the other profiles dull, for the most part, but that's obviously a minority opinion.)

lindgren is offline  
Old
08-31-2012, 09:36 PM
  #37
RunYouOutOfTheRink
Registered User
 
RunYouOutOfTheRink's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: No Matter Which Rink
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,467
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by lindgren View Post
The authors of the other profiles didn't express any disagreement with the ranking. The author of the Lack profile expressed his. Clearly, people didn't like that, which is fine, but there was no trashing going on. (I found the other profiles dull, for the most part, but that's obviously a minority opinion.)
agreed

RunYouOutOfTheRink is offline  
Old
08-31-2012, 10:36 PM
  #38
Cocoa Crisp
Registered User
 
Cocoa Crisp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: NYC
Country: Hong Kong
Posts: 2,787
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Electric Eye View Post
Big fan of the Canucks Army top-20 list, was especially great to see the quotes from coaches and scouts who have seen them play much more than the average fan. I believe first-hand info like this is the best way to form an opinion about a player like a McNally without having seen any more than a highlight reel or two.

Now that their top-20 list is done, as is the Canucks fan board list, the topic I think is most interesting prospect-wise is the Wolves roster. I dont know about the rest of you, but every time I saw another signing of a forward with #13 potential or potential #7 defensemen I cringed... My opinion is that we are quite overstocked with low-ceiling AHL stars and, especially if there is a lockout, its going to be the toughest year ever for Canucks AHL prospects to get significant ice time.
...
Excellent post. It's a very good point that bears discussing: is Chicago a good AHL partner for us and what are the contingencies if and when a lockout occurs. It's probably worth mentioning that the AHL will be even more congested than you're already suggesting: marginal NHLers will also be looking for work in the next-best North American league.

Cocoa Crisp is offline  
Old
08-31-2012, 10:41 PM
  #39
B-rock
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 2,118
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DJOpus View Post
I still remember thinking the same thing about Schroeder - yeah, he had a bad season in NCAA where he showed almost nothing, but he had a really good time in the AHL (15 points in 17 games, including 6 in 6 during the playoffs) so he's still going to tear it up as a pro...

I still have hope for Schroeder but he's not the dynamic offensive threat that we had hoped, and I doubt Jensen is either.
I think you're pretty bang on here.
If Jensen was half the prospect that a lot of people think he is, he should have been able to improve his year over year stats in the OHL. He scored about a point a game, which is good, but isn't indicative of the offensive force that some are projecting him as. He had a good start in the AHL and caught fire, but I think he's got a ways to go before he competes for a job on the 2nd line.

Of course I could be wrong, but that's just my thoughts on it at this point.

B-rock is offline  
Old
09-01-2012, 03:10 AM
  #40
Askel
Registered User
 
Askel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Malm/Vancouver
Posts: 1,314
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Electric Eye View Post
Big fan of the Canucks Army top-20 list, was especially great to see the quotes from coaches and scouts who have seen them play much more than the average fan. I believe first-hand info like this is the best way to form an opinion about a player like a McNally without having seen any more than a highlight reel or two.

Now that their top-20 list is done, as is the Canucks fan board list, the topic I think is most interesting prospect-wise is the Wolves roster. I don’t know about the rest of you, but every time I saw another signing of a forward with #13 potential or potential #7 defensemen I cringed... My opinion is that we are quite overstocked with low-ceiling AHL “stars” and, especially if there is a lockout, it’s going to be the toughest year ever for Canucks AHL prospects to get significant ice time.

With so many, I’m sure I’ll make some accidental omissions here and positional errors, but I see the Wolves opening day roster looking something like this (assuming a lockout):

D. Weise – J. Schroeder – Z. Kassian
B. Sterling – S. Pinizzotto – D. Haydar
B. Sweatt – T. Miller – A. Gordon
G. Desbiens – A. Friesen – A. Volpatti

D. Joslin – C. Tanev
P. Mullen – K. Connauton
Y. Sauve – M. Matheson

E. Lack
M. Climie

I’m already somewhat upset with the lack of spots for legitimate prospects like Rodin and Mallet plus Connauton and Sauve would be getting reduced minutes with Joslin and Mullen in the picture. Imagine the 2nd AHL team we could put together:

Rodin – Mallet – Archibald
Davies – Schneider – Matson
Roussel – Longpre – Clackson
Tochkin – Doell – Anthony

Negrin – Miskovic
Polasek – Hunt
Andersson – D. Friesen

Cannata
Corbeil-Theriault

We just used a pretty high pick on Mallet, but how does he possibly crack the Wolves top 6, or Rodin? Matson has no chance, Polasek is buried deep, etc. Plus, a lot of the guys on the second roster played a lot of minutes with Chicago last year, so I’m not even convinced they wouldn’t be ahead of some of the other AHL vets. I just can’t wrap my head around the Wolves signing Davies, Longpre, Negrin, Miskovic, Hunt, etc to say nothing of the Canucks signing (the completely redundant) Desbiens, Joslin or Mullen.

I certainly understand the need to prepare the roster as if there won’t be a lockout, In which case you can essentially expect the take the top forward and defence lines to be up with the Canucks. But, even then, there appears to be massive overkill in the depth department. Taking the top Fwd/D-lines from the 2nd team still leaves you with two AHL-quality lines and Cannata, who is quite a solid prospect as well.

It seems petty to complain about an abundance of depth, but when it’s a developmental league and guys who should be playing top six/top four minutes are getting pushed down by AHL-lifers left and right, I think it’s a problem.

I think it’s great Jensen and Grenier are heading to Europe and I wish we could send a few more of these guys over too, but I really think this is an issue that Gillis should look at long and hard – if not for this year, then for next year when it comes time to decide on renewing with Chicago... Thoughts?
I dont remember how many veterans (players with over 320 proffessional games) you can dress for every game, but not as many as you have in the first line-up. Anyone know ?


Last edited by Askel: 09-01-2012 at 03:16 AM.
Askel is offline  
Old
09-01-2012, 07:19 PM
  #41
14s incisor
FOS COrp CEO
 
14s incisor's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Republic of VI
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,327
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by B-rock View Post
I think you're pretty bang on here.
If Jensen was half the prospect that a lot of people think he is, he should have been able to improve his year over year stats in the OHL. He scored about a point a game, which is good, but isn't indicative of the offensive force that some are projecting him as. He had a good start in the AHL and caught fire, but I think he's got a ways to go before he competes for a job on the 2nd line.

Of course I could be wrong, but that's just my thoughts on it at this point.
I think you need to take into account that something was clearly amiss in Oshawa this year. Most of their main players took a step back in point totals. As well, Jensen himself obviously took issue with how things were going there, as illustrated by his move to the SEL rather than returning.

14s incisor is offline  
Old
09-01-2012, 08:09 PM
  #42
Hansen 36
BASED JIM BENNING
 
Hansen 36's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Nanaimo, B.C.
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,525
vCash: 420
Heads up on Blomstrand. He's tied for lead amongst all rookies in goal scoring for European Trophy play with 3 goals in 5 games. He's playing on Djurgarden's first line with Dustin Johner and Pontus Aberg. Sounds like he's got a good shot too.


Edit: I just checked his stats on their webpage, and holy hell, he's grown a bit since the draft! 6'2 218lbs!


Last edited by Hansen 36: 09-01-2012 at 08:16 PM.
Hansen 36 is offline  
Old
09-01-2012, 10:54 PM
  #43
701
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Vancouver & OK Falls
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,150
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hansen 36 View Post
Heads up on Blomstrand. He's tied for lead amongst all rookies in goal scoring for European Trophy play with 3 goals in 5 games. He's playing on Djurgarden's first line with Dustin Johner and Pontus Aberg. Sounds like he's got a good shot too.


Edit: I just checked his stats on their webpage, and holy hell, he's grown a bit since the draft! 6'2 218lbs!
Weight and height stats are notoriously inaccurate . . . but if all of what we've heard this week is true regarding Kassian and Blomstrand, the latter is almost exactly the same weight as the slimmed-down Kassian ("217") while being one inch shorter. He's a tank! A very quick-skating tank at that, who forechecks really well and likes to hit (what they said when he was drafted).

This guy with hands and a shot could be very useful on the Canucks.

701 is offline  
Old
09-01-2012, 11:36 PM
  #44
Hansen 36
BASED JIM BENNING
 
Hansen 36's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Nanaimo, B.C.
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,525
vCash: 420
Quote:
Originally Posted by 701 View Post
Weight and height stats are notoriously inaccurate . . . but if all of what we've heard this week is true regarding Kassian and Blomstrand, the latter is almost exactly the same weight as the slimmed-down Kassian ("217") while being one inch shorter. He's a tank! A very quick-skating tank at that, who forechecks really well and likes to hit (what they said when he was drafted).

This guy with hands and a shot could be very useful on the Canucks.
I would take it with a grain of salt, but on the active roster it has him listed as 188cm and 99kg so he's up there.
http://www.difhockey.se/jspelare.php?id=3740

Also, in mild disbelief I did a bit of a background search, and found his fb page, and there's a picture of him on the beach, and he's a built/beefy torso guy. Yeah I went there, I was curious


And yeah, I'm liking his odds of making the Canucks as a role player even more now, the 2011 draft is my favourite in some time.


Last edited by Hansen 36: 09-01-2012 at 11:41 PM.
Hansen 36 is offline  
Old
09-02-2012, 09:28 AM
  #45
vanuck
#Gaunce4GM
 
vanuck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 13,225
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Askel View Post
I dont remember how many veterans (players with over 320 proffessional games) you can dress for every game, but not as many as you have in the first line-up. Anyone know ?
IIRC, it's 4 veterans or something like that.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Electric Eye View Post
Big fan of the Canucks Army top-20 list, was especially great to see the quotes from coaches and scouts who have seen them play much more than the average fan. I believe first-hand info like this is the best way to form an opinion about a player like a McNally without having seen any more than a highlight reel or two.

Now that their top-20 list is done, as is the Canucks fan board list, the topic I think is most interesting prospect-wise is the Wolves roster. I dont know about the rest of you, but every time I saw another signing of a forward with #13 potential or potential #7 defensemen I cringed... My opinion is that we are quite overstocked with low-ceiling AHL stars and, especially if there is a lockout, its going to be the toughest year ever for Canucks AHL prospects to get significant ice time.

With so many, Im sure Ill make some accidental omissions here and positional errors, but I see the Wolves opening day roster looking something like this (assuming a lockout):

D. Weise J. Schroeder Z. Kassian
B. Sterling S. Pinizzotto D. Haydar
B. Sweatt T. Miller A. Gordon
G. Desbiens A. Friesen A. Volpatti

D. Joslin C. Tanev
P. Mullen K. Connauton
Y. Sauve M. Matheson

E. Lack
M. Climie

Im already somewhat upset with the lack of spots for legitimate prospects like Rodin and Mallet plus Connauton and Sauve would be getting reduced minutes with Joslin and Mullen in the picture. Imagine the 2nd AHL team we could put together:

Rodin Mallet Archibald
Davies Schneider Matson
Roussel Longpre Clackson
Tochkin Doell Anthony

Negrin Miskovic
Polasek Hunt
Andersson D. Friesen

Cannata
Corbeil-Theriault

We just used a pretty high pick on Mallet, but how does he possibly crack the Wolves top 6, or Rodin? Matson has no chance, Polasek is buried deep, etc. Plus, a lot of the guys on the second roster played a lot of minutes with Chicago last year, so Im not even convinced they wouldnt be ahead of some of the other AHL vets. I just cant wrap my head around the Wolves signing Davies, Longpre, Negrin, Miskovic, Hunt, etc to say nothing of the Canucks signing (the completely redundant) Desbiens, Joslin or Mullen.

I certainly understand the need to prepare the roster as if there wont be a lockout, In which case you can essentially expect the take the top forward and defence lines to be up with the Canucks. But, even then, there appears to be massive overkill in the depth department. Taking the top Fwd/D-lines from the 2nd team still leaves you with two AHL-quality lines and Cannata, who is quite a solid prospect as well.

It seems petty to complain about an abundance of depth, but when its a developmental league and guys who should be playing top six/top four minutes are getting pushed down by AHL-lifers left and right, I think its a problem.

I think its great Jensen and Grenier are heading to Europe and I wish we could send a few more of these guys over too, but I really think this is an issue that Gillis should look at long and hard if not for this year, then for next year when it comes time to decide on renewing with Chicago... Thoughts?
Good post, and I agree. If I had the chance, I'd want the first roster to lean more towards prospects, but overall in order to succeed it ideally would have a balance of youth and experience. Not taking the AHL veteran limit into account (because I'm confused as to who qualifies and who doesn't) I would want to see this:

Sterling - Schroeder - Kassian
Rodin - Doell - Gordon
Miller - Longpre - Davies
Sweatt - Mallet - Desbiens

Connauton - Tanev
Joslin - Mullen
Sauve - Matheson

Lack
Climie

Even if there is a lockout, I don't think there are enough players to fill two entirely AHL-quality rosters, but still. At least the rest would probably get lots of ice time in the ECHL. Would they ever expand the roster size to include, say, 2 more D-men in times like these? Five-man units might be fun.

vanuck is offline  
Old
09-02-2012, 02:29 PM
  #46
shortshorts
The OG Kesler Hater
 
shortshorts's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Country: Canada
Posts: 11,853
vCash: 457
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hansen 36 View Post
I would take it with a grain of salt, but on the active roster it has him listed as 188cm and 99kg so he's up there.
http://www.difhockey.se/jspelare.php?id=3740

Also, in mild disbelief I did a bit of a background search, and found his fb page, and there's a picture of him on the beach, and he's a built/beefy torso guy. Yeah I went there, I was curious


And yeah, I'm liking his odds of making the Canucks as a role player even more now, the 2011 draft is my favourite in some time.
He has the best name I've ever seen.

Ludwig Rolf Tage Blomstrand

shortshorts is offline  
Old
09-02-2012, 03:48 PM
  #47
Electric Eye
Registered User
 
Electric Eye's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 20
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by vanuck View Post
IIRC, it's 4 veterans or something like that.



Good post, and I agree. If I had the chance, I'd want the first roster to lean more towards prospects, but overall in order to succeed it ideally would have a balance of youth and experience. Not taking the AHL veteran limit into account (because I'm confused as to who qualifies and who doesn't) I would want to see this:

Sterling - Schroeder - Kassian
Rodin - Doell - Gordon
Miller - Longpre - Davies
Sweatt - Mallet - Desbiens

Connauton - Tanev
Joslin - Mullen
Sauve - Matheson

Lack
Climie

Even if there is a lockout, I don't think there are enough players to fill two entirely AHL-quality rosters, but still. At least the rest would probably get lots of ice time in the ECHL. Would they ever expand the roster size to include, say, 2 more D-men in times like these? Five-man units might be fun.
Thanks vanuck! And yes, absolutely agree that not only is it better for the Canucks to have the Wolves lean more toward youth than my #1 lineup, it would also be better for the Wolves themselves.

Think your d-pairings and goaltending is pretty spot on, but no chance that Haydar isn't in the lineup as he's one of their all-time leading scorers (and likely their captain this year). Additionally, Volpatti, Weise and Pinizzotto all have 2-way contracts with the Nucks so if they aren't with us, hard to imagine they aren't in the lineup as well.

I believe the veteran limit (>260 pro games) is 5 players, but a team can also have an exemption of one player who has played more than 260 pro games, but less than 320 pro games.

Without doing the full legwork, I believe the likely veterans would be (in order of likelihood of being in lineup):
1) Haydar
2) Sterling
3) Joslin
4) Desbiens
5) Gordon
6) Matheson
7) Doell

(Possibly Weise too... I don't believe Pinizzotto, Volpatti, Mullen, Miller or Davies are quite there yet)

Thinking the best solution would be to loan one or two of these veterans (Desbiens and Gordon?) to other AHL teams or Europe if possible... If we can squeeze Rodin, Mallet and A. Friesen into the lineup with at least 10mins/game I'd be happy. Would ideally like to see Archibald, Matson, Polasek and Cannata all at least get a look as well.

Electric Eye is offline  
Old
09-02-2012, 06:29 PM
  #48
Socratic Method Man
Weise's Lost Lunch
 
Socratic Method Man's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,675
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Electric Eye View Post

Thinking the best solution would be to loan one or two of these veterans (Desbiens and Gordon?) to other AHL teams or Europe if possible... If we can squeeze Rodin, Mallet and A. Friesen into the lineup with at least 10mins/game I'd be happy. Would ideally like to see Archibald, Matson, Polasek and Cannata all at least get a look as well.
Ah! Gillis's master plan is coming together. Destroy some other NHL team's farm system by loaning our sh***y talent to them.


Also, I thought Haydar was planning on playing somewhere in Europe this upcoming season?

Socratic Method Man is offline  
Old
09-02-2012, 06:36 PM
  #49
Electric Eye
Registered User
 
Electric Eye's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 20
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Socratic Method Man View Post
Ah! Gillis's master plan is coming together. Destroy some other NHL team's farm system by loaning our sh***y talent to them.


Also, I thought Haydar was planning on playing somewhere in Europe this upcoming season?
Ha! Maybe we can help plunge Abbotsford further towards mediocrity so that we can take over there next year?

Regarding Haydar, definitely re-signed with the Wolves: http://www.insidehalton.com/sports/a...h-ahl-s-wolves

Anyone know the rules on loaning players like Desbiens/Gordon to Europe?

Electric Eye is offline  
Old
09-02-2012, 06:41 PM
  #50
Socratic Method Man
Weise's Lost Lunch
 
Socratic Method Man's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,675
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Electric Eye View Post
Regarding Haydar, definitely re-signed with the Wolves: http://www.insidehalton.com/sports/a...h-ahl-s-wolves
That makes me happy! He's the perfect leader to have around the young guys.

Yes please to Abbotsford - God I hope that works out for us next year. Face the facts calgary: the lower mainland hates the Flames!

Socratic Method Man 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 11:47 AM.

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

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2015 All Rights Reserved.