The only other undrafted underage junior we've signed in recent years is Kellen Tochkin .... and that obviously turned out very poorly.
The potential upside is getting a guy who might have been a 2nd-3rd round pick (had he stayed healthy) for free. If he's the player you hope, and your scouts get it right, it's a worthwhile risk.
If not, you end up in the Tochkin situation where you're stuck with a contact anchor for 3 years that prevents you from signing a better player. And with such limited viewing, that's a definite possibility.
But who are these players that you can track for longer before you sign them? Most of the CHL players that don't get signed at 18 and later become good players get snapped up in the draft. You can comb the college ranks but it's not as though Gillis has avoided this.
The only reason the team needs open slots is to make signings like McEneny. The only players the Canucks haven't been able to acquire through the years because they've used up their contract slots are the boom/bust, long shot, free prospects.
Answer to first paragraph: Then draft them. At least you get to track these players enough to warrant a pick for them. After that, supplement with college FAs.
Pitseleh, you don't know the opportunity cost. You say that these are the players intended to be signed with these slots regardless, but do you know this? No. How do you know that getting the Schneiders and the Tochkins hasn't cost the Canucks other better opportunities?
Last edited by Bleach Clean: 09-14-2012 at 03:09 AM.
As you touch on later, where would we be if you were Gillis' adviser in the summer of 2010?
"An older European backup goalie?? He's never even been a starter?? No no, don't sign him - he had ONE good playoffs! way too small of a sample."
"A college defenseman who wasn't even drafted? Passed over 3 times? Of course you shouldn't sign him, he hasn't even played a single full season in college. Listen, Mike, we need these contract slots in case we find someone we want to sign!"
So every one's a hit right? No misses? Got any quips about Tochkin and Stefan Schneider? Yeah, didn't think so.
Also note, both Tanev and Lack were signed at an older age = more time to view and assess their progress. This McEneny situation is not exactly that.
Last edited by Bleach Clean: 09-14-2012 at 03:25 AM.
Answer to first paragraph: Then draft them. At least you get to track these players enough to warrant a pick for them. After that, supplement with college FAs.
Pitseleh, you don't know the opportunity cost. You say that these are the players intended to be signed with these slots regardless, but do you know this? No. How do you know that getting the Schneiders and the Tochkins hasn't cost the Canucks other better opportunities. This can turn out to exactly that.
And it has cost us before (Matt Fraser, anyone?), but you have to think that with each signing - or even a scouts' recommendation that we don't know about - MG is 'refining' the process and determining who amongst his amateur scouts he can depend on reliably. At least that's what I hope. You want to know that our scouting department is under scrutiny - as it should be.
But it seems to me that we're now starting to target players who have a combination of qualities that will allow them to have success + decent potential (Mallet), instead of just guys who are skilled but don't have anything else (Tochkin), or grinders with no offensive upside at all (Schneider).
So every one's a hit right? No misses? Got any quips about Tochkin and Stefan Schneider? Yeah, didn't think so.
Also not, both Tanev and Lack were signed at an older age = more time to view and assess their progress. This McEneny situation is not exactly that.
The best hitters in baseball in the world miss the ball 70% of the time. They fail constantly. This doesn't mean they shouldn't keep swinging... especially because once in a while they hit a homerun.
The best hitters in baseball in the world miss the ball 70% of the time. They fail constantly. This doesn't mean they shouldn't keep swinging... especially because once in a while they hit a homerun.
About what I expected: platitudes. At least Pitseleh is actually bringing a reasoned argument to the table. But do carry on.
Anyways, MS has re-iterated my trepidation on this type of selection. Nothing more needs to be said. Made my point. Hope it works out. Still a Canuck fan.
So every one's a hit right? No misses? Got any quips about Tochkin and Stefan Schneider? Yeah, didn't think so.
Also note, both Tanev and Lack were signed at an older age = more time to view and assess their progress. This McEneny situation is not exactly that.
So do you know how long Gillis and Co have been tracking the kid? Obviously they believe he is worth a contract slot and that if they didn't sign him he would be drafted next year.
The number of contracts limit is being given too much respect. At the end of this season (and if the CBA stays the same) the Canucks at this time have 24 expiring contracts. 11 are on the big team and the rest get evaluated and management decides whether to fish or cut bait... Every year is like that. It isn't a life time commitment.
So every one's a hit right? No misses? Got any quips about Tochkin and Stefan Schneider? Yeah, didn't think so.
Also note, both Tanev and Lack were signed at an older age = more time to view and assess their progress. This McEneny situation is not exactly that.
Do you take Tochkin and Schneider if you're also getting Tanev and Lack?
If we decided to hold off on McEneny until the draft, we're taking a whole different gamble on him. If he has a solid season, we'll be looking at spending a mid-round pick on him, or higher if we really don't want to miss him. Why not take him now, when you know you can get him (and after you've seen him at prospects camp) and without spending a pick?
Pitseleh, you don't know the opportunity cost. You say that these are the players intended to be signed with these slots regardless, but do you know this? No. How do you know that getting the Schneiders and the Tochkins hasn't cost the Canucks other better opportunities?
I'm not defending the Tochkin or Schneider signings. Tochkin was signed after he wasn't good enough to be drafted and Schneider was signed after doing absolutely nothing of significance.
Those are very different than this signing, which is a player that after his 16 year old season many were pegging as a top 2-3 round pick who went undrafted because of injury. Those players had shown they probably weren't good enough. McEneny hasn't. He was tracking well up until that point.
The reason I feel relatively comfortable saying the Canucks haven't missed out anything because of contract slots is that they keep making signings like Desbiens. If contract slots were preventing them from signing actual prospects that they've seen develop, I'm willing to give the management group the benefit of the doubt that they're not stupid enough to forgo those opportunities to sign fringe pros.
Those are very different than this signing, which is a player that after his 16 year old season many were pegging as a top 2-3 round pick who went undrafted because of injury. Those players had shown they probably weren't good enough. McEneny hasn't. He was tracking well up until that point.
A K-Ranger STH for over 30 years here and I've seen plenty of 1st round draft come and go from the Rangers and McEneny is just as good as any of them and would have been one last year and definatly this up coming draft
IMHO McEneny will be a top 3 d-man in the NHL with 45+/- points per.
A K-Ranger STH for over 30 years here and I've seen plenty of 1st round draft come and go from the Rangers and McEneny is just as good as any of them and would have been one last year and definatly this up coming draft
IMHO McEneny will be a top 3 d-man in the NHL with 45+/- points per.
A K-Ranger STH for over 30 years here and I've seen plenty of 1st round draft come and go from the Rangers and McEneny is just as good as any of them and would have been one last year and definatly this up coming draft
IMHO McEneny will be a top 3 d-man in the NHL with 45+/- points per.
Hmmmmm. I'm liking this signing. Do you know what kind of minutes he'll get this year. First or second pairing?
Hmmmmm. I'm liking this signing. Do you know what kind of minutes he'll get this year. First or second pairing?
He probably will get second pairing but that's due to the fact the Kitchener has Ryan Murphy who'll be in the first pairing with a defensive minded partner.
McEneny style wouldn't suit playing with Murphy nor vice versa.
I'm not defending the Tochkin or Schneider signings. Tochkin was signed after he wasn't good enough to be drafted and Schneider was signed after doing absolutely nothing of significance.
Those are very different than this signing, which is a player that after his 16 year old season many were pegging as a top 2-3 round pick who went undrafted because of injury. Those players had shown they probably weren't good enough. McEneny hasn't. He was tracking well up until that point.
The reason I feel relatively comfortable saying the Canucks haven't missed out anything because of contract slots is that they keep making signings like Desbiens. If contract slots were preventing them from signing actual prospects that they've seen develop, I'm willing to give the management group the benefit of the doubt that they're not stupid enough to forgo those opportunities to sign fringe pros.
I think the same. This guys upside is very big compared to some of the others wildcards we've signed while his downside is an unknown.
I think the same. This guys upside is very big compared to some of the others wildcards we've signed while his downside is an unknown.
more important his name looks like McEnemy
Even though i know its wrong, this is what i hear in my head when i read his name.
This signing definitely a calculated risk with his limited exposure and injury, but i like this one. Was certainly the most intriguing invite to our main camp, he was the youngest there IIRC. He sounds promising with his rumoured hockey IQ and two way play. His frame has a lot of room to fill out too.
One thing i really like is that the Rangers have a big following, good news updates and great highlight packages, so he will be one that will definitely be getting some videos this year. Also, i've been saying we need to trust our OHL scouts some more and have more of a presence there, so this is good.
By all reports this preseason, he has been very good and "hasn't missed a beat".
I was just about to post that link then I remember I followed it from here.
Wonder were this guy fits on our prospects list. Sounds like he could be top 10 if he was healthy and hyped, OTOH he missed so much and is so unknown he could be unranked. I await mid-season re-rankings.
Thanks for the link Feebs. I've seen him listed on the right side in some of those lineups. Wonder if he can actually play there comfortably.
Also this:
Quote:
- Evan McEneny looks like he hasn't missed a beat - despite missing almost all of last season - and looks primed to be one of the team's most reliable blueliners this season.
