, to put up a point per game in his second full season?
Maybe i shouldn't say dominate but i guess i consider a point per game for a young player dominating. Not sure if you call that dominating. But its showing you belong in the next level
Yes saying he would dominate IS bold! Knowing the history of our farm teams I'd say making that big of a ppg jump is hopeful.
You should mention that those recent stats are in a league full of teenagers & while playing on a stacked World Junior team.
Its the system & not having good defensive prospects.
I guess we could all just wait and see how it all plays out if there is an NHL season
Yes saying he would dominate IS bold! Knowing the history of our farm teams I'd say making that big of a ppg jump is hopeful.
You should mention that those recent stats are in a league full of teenagers & while playing on a stacked World Junior team.
Its the system & not having good defensive prospects.
I guess we could all just wait and see how it all plays out if there is an NHL season
Of course they were against teengers, he was a teenager. Why do you think players get drafted where they do? Because a player who excels in a league while younger typically does so at each level.
His pedigree shows that more than likely , he was going to dominate the ahl also. And he was right on track. You think Schroeder is/was? lol
If Schroeder ever gets near a point per game in the ahl, its because hes played in it for 5+ years.
And when was the last time we had a top 10 pick on our farm team who stayed on course?
And what are we waiting to see? All i was trying to say is that his stats are something that should worry people, not saying that writes him off completely but its a huge worry. Its just not typical for a player with his tools to make it in the nhl while putting up mediocre numbers in the ahl. But im cheering for him and it can happen
Last edited by pseudonymous01: 12-08-2012 at 11:38 PM.
Of course they were against teengers, he was a teenager. Why do you think players get drafted where they do? Because a player who excels in a league while younger typically does so at each level.
His pedigree shows that more than likely , he was going to dominate the ahl also. And he was right on track. You think Schroeder is/was? lol
If Schroeder ever gets near a point per game in the ahl, its because hes played in it for 5+ years.
And when was the last time we had a top 10 pick on our farm team who stayed on course?
And what are we waiting to see? All i was trying to say is that his stats are something that should worry people, not saying that writes him off completely but its a huge worry. Its just not typical for a player with his tools to make it in the nhl while putting up mediocre numbers in the ahl. But im cheering for him and it can happen
No duh! While OHL stats do show his progression just because he has done that in the past against teenagers doesn't mean that trend will continue in the pro game against grown men.
I'd have to disagree that he was on track to dominate the AHL & I never said I thought Schroeder was... don't put words in my mouth please..... I also think debating what might of happened is silly! lets base this off of ACTUAL facts/numbers.
You mean like his first stint in the AHL with the Moose?
We are waiting to see how he performs in the NHL. He could be taking the same route that Hodgson took & he could fail. We'll just have to wait and see
No duh! While OHL stats do show his progression just because he has done that in the past against teenagers doesn't mean that trend will continue in the pro game against grown men.
I'd have to disagree that he was on track to dominate the AHL & I never said I thought Schroeder was... don't put words in my mouth please..... I also think debating what might of happened is silly! lets base this off of ACTUAL facts/numbers.
You mean like his first stint in the AHL with the Moose?
We are waiting to see how he performs in the NHL. He could be taking the same route that Hodgson took & he could fail. We'll just have to wait and see
No that would be what we'd be waiting for if i suggested Schroeder wont make the NHL.
I never suggested that though. I suggested his current numbers/and growth rate (in offensive numbers) aren't up to par, given what he brings. If he doesn't crack 45-50pts, i'd be worried. Hardly does a player who is going to play in the nhl and rely on offense take 4 years to break that number.
And a player who gets drafted and has the pedigree hodgson does is expected by most to put up similar numbers at each league. More than often top 10 picks who are on pace, typically follow through.
I dont need to wait to see anything when it comes to players like hodgson. I dont need to wait and see how yakupov does either.
Some things common knowledge is enough for
Want to stick to actual numbers. Hodgson had more goals and more points in less games in his first full season before called up and has a MUCH better hockey resume/history of dominating. Top 10 pick worthy.
There ya go.
More facts?
Schroeder isn't in the NHL yet, why? his play and numbers show hes not yet there. Meanwhile Kassian and Hodgson who people compare to and say hes equal to when defending his play this season. Are both NHL players
But now im going in circles, which happens quickly on hfboards considering a new person comes in and responds.
Lets just wait and see how long it takes the undersized, mediocre scoring perimeter player to make the nhl. Im hoping he does but hoping its not next year because personally, i'd rather give arnott a shot and dont believe schroeder is ready
This is the oddest debate, since when is the person saying a soft undersized 40 point ahler in his 3rd year in the ahl such a sure bet and since when are we happy with that kind of production? maybe this teams lack of real talent is making people really reach and hope for these C rated prospects. (borderline b)
I guess i like the optimism
You'd think there owuld be people jumping on the fact that people are hyping this player up. Then again, the people who have the less optimistic view is usually looked at like the bad guy.
Last edited by pseudonymous01: 12-09-2012 at 12:19 AM.
, to put up a point per game in his second full season?
Maybe i shouldn't say dominate but i guess i consider a point per game for a young player dominating. Not sure if you call that dominating. But its showing you belong in the next level
Schroeder has never been an offensive force. I am sorry, he wont magically turn into one. And my prediction was FAR from bold.
No that would be what we'd be waiting for if i suggested Schroeder wont make the NHL.
I never suggested that though.
And a player who gets drafted and has the pedigree hodgson does is expected by most to put up similar numbers at each league. More than often top 10 picks who are on pace, typically follow through.
I dont need to wait to see anything. I dont need to wait and see how yakupov does either.
Some things common knowledge is enough for
Want to stick to actual numbers. Hodgson had more goals and more points in less games and has a MUCH better resume. Top 10 pick worthy.
There ya go.
More facts?
Schroeder isn't in the NHL yet, why? his play and numbers show hes not yet there. Meanwhile Kassian and Hodgson who people compare to and say hes equal to when defending his play this season. Are both NHL players
Thats cause Hodgson has a better shot, is more of a goal scorer while Schroeder is more of a set up man. The fact that JS has more goals then assists this year shows not only that he isn't playing with high enough skill to bury his passes but that he is putting up an effort to shoot more often.
Don't see what his resume has to do with his ability to put up points. Not saying he is a bust but there are busts who have strong junior resumes!
A lock out? Hell knowing how much his family butts in maybe the Hodgson's were complaining about their son not playing in the NHL?
A lot of people agreed Schroeder had a much better training camp then Schroeder but for some reason Hodgson made the team.
Hodgson in Canucks system: 52 games, 30 pts
Schroeder in Canucks system: 168 games, 93 pts
CH: .57 ppg
JS: .55 ppg
Thats what both did in our system on our AHL farm team(s)
I'm saying this system doesn't reflect the prospects full potential.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lundface
2008-09 U. of Minnesota WCHA 35 13 32 45 29
He has never been an offensive force yet he leads America in All time WJC scoring.
Last edited by Scottrockztheworld*: 12-09-2012 at 12:25 AM.
Hodgson in Canucks system: 52 games, 30 pts
Schroeder in Canucks system: 168 games, 93 pts
hahaha yeah hodgson wouldn't have increased his ppg rate playing in another 110 games in the ahl
haha and whoa watch out. One year he had over a point per game (only 13 goals) and regressed the following year
actually if anything ,that further proves my point that schroeders has had a history of not growing and hodgson has.
thats it, bedtime. schroeder is an offensive dynamo and will even get much better at the ahl level, watch out, next year he'll be lighting up the league
hodgson wouldn't have increased his ppg rate by a significant amount after putting up 17 goals in a short season and dominating every league and being a top 10 pick.
schroeder is exactly where we want him, doing as well as all the other undersized forwards going into the nhl who maintained lengthy nhl careers
his numbers are on par with hodgsons first year and kassians slumping first 20 games. hes fine!
Last edited by pseudonymous01: 12-09-2012 at 12:29 AM.
Schroeder isn't in the NHL yet, why? his play and numbers show hes not yet there.
Disingenuous, as well. Schroeder was a year younger, giving Hodgson a year on him in development. There was no opportunity for Schroerder to get looks until Hodgson was gone. Now Schroerder has a lockout in his face.
The fact that the Canucks even traded Hodgson showed faith in what they had in Schroeder as well.
If we're going to pick out selective stats and make half assed arguments, here's mine:
Hodgson has 1 goal in 9 games, Schroeder has 7 goals in 21 games so clearly Schroeder > Hodgson. The End.
Yep all my stats were half assed. The full resume of schroeder and the full resume of hodgson. Totally selective.
If anyone was selective, it was him on using one single season of decent numbers, i used their full careers. But im sure it was aimed at me considering i disagree with your opinion?
Yep all my stats were half assed. The full resume of schroeder and the full resume of hodgson. Totally selective.
If anyone was selective, it was him on using one single season of decent numbers, i used their full careers. But im sure it was aimed at me considering i disagree with your opinion?
Schroeder is a playmaker who can't get assists with the Wolves. He had the 3rd most career assists in WJC history, but has 28 goals and 28 assists during the last two seasons.
That leads me to think that the Wolves have something to do with his pedestrian offensive stats. He's not the type of amazing prospect that can transcend his team, but I think he'd be a much more effective player on some other teams.
Hodgson is a b*tch. He was an early bloomer who dominated the ohl. I don't see him doing it in the NHL. I see him being an injury prone 60 point guy that will hurt his team defensively.
Of course they were against teengers, he was a teenager. Why do you think players get drafted where they do? Because a player who excels in a league while younger typically does so at each level.
His pedigree shows that more than likely , he was going to dominate the ahl also. And he was right on track. You think Schroeder is/was? lol
If Schroeder ever gets near a point per game in the ahl, its because hes played in it for 5+ years.
And when was the last time we had a top 10 pick on our farm team who stayed on course?
And what are we waiting to see? All i was trying to say is that his stats are something that should worry people, not saying that writes him off completely but its a huge worry. Its just not typical for a player with his tools to make it in the nhl while putting up mediocre numbers in the ahl. But im cheering for him and it can happen
So you are trying to say that the all time american points leader has never dominated at any level?
You also know putting up huge numbers in college hockey is much harder than doing the same in the CHL right? Cause you are playing against grown men. The guys in College generally are 2-4 years older.
You are trying to tell me the last few years when we have been trying to get JS to become a better defensive prospect (by all accounts he has). You are trying to tell me there is no corlation between players coming into our system and putting upless points and JS also putting up less points...
I am confused as to you opinion for these reasons and many more.
So you are trying to say that the all time american points leader has never dominated at any level?
You also know putting up huge numbers in college hockey is much harder than doing the same in the CHL right? Cause you are playing against grown men. The guys in College generally are 2-4 years older.
You are trying to tell me the last few years when we have been trying to get JS to become a better defensive prospect (by all accounts he has). You are trying to tell me there is no corlation between players coming into our system and putting upless points and JS also putting up less points...
I am confused as to you opinion for these reasons and many more.
Im not going to sit here and debate this more, you guys want proof of everything and somethings can't be proven. In my mind , its obvious who the better player was and who was quicker to become nhl compatible and that was hodgson. You think thats wrong. I guess the canucks management, moose coach, scouts, and the many gms around the league who would have chosen hodgson well before schroeder were wrong.
In my mind, hodgson would have went on to increase his point totals by a significant amount. I think he would have been a point per game player the next year. And its not surprising to see him over a point per game this year in the ahl. when he went down with an injury, foligno stopped producing
You guys can argue all you want but this comes down to opinion and ive watched almost all the wolves games this year and hes hardly an improved offensive player this year. Hes the exact same offensive player IMO, hes rounded out some other areas but to be a player in the nhl at his size and style takes alot more than passable numbers in his third year. And i dont even think next year he'll be much improved either. But hey, if you want to cling onto the hope that if he was on another team , he owuld be lighting it up. go ahead.
agree to disagree.
his point totals are something that shouldn't be ignored. thats the only point ive been trying to make. its funny that nobody else thinks hes nhl ready and hes even being benched but the fans think any criticism i give him is nonsense
schroeder is not as good as hodgson or he'd be in the nhl. hodgson is basically pegged as a teams #1-#2 center and they gave up a power forward prospect who people drool over to get him. he might be one day (unlikely though) but doesn't change the fact his numbers are not where they should be and a good part of that has to do with him and maybe a little due to his team but trying to steer all blame away from him is crazy
how about we go through the enormous list of 5'9 players and look at the numbers they put up previous to the nhl? And then tell me his numbers should be completely ignored and its not going to be an uphill battle for him
Last edited by pseudonymous01: 12-09-2012 at 05:35 PM.
Im not going to sit here and debate this more, you guys want proof of everything and somethings can't be proven. In my mind , its obvious who the better player was and who was quicker to become nhl compatible and that was hodgson. You think thats wrong. I guess the canucks management, moose coach, scouts, and the many gms around the league who would have chosen hodgson well before schroeder were wrong.
In my mind, hodgson would have went on to increase his point totals by a significant amount. I think he would have been a point per game player the next year. And its not surprising to see him over a point per game this year in the ahl. when he went down with an injury, foligno stopped producing
You guys can argue all you want but this comes down to opinion and ive watched almost all the wolves games this year and hes hardly an improved offensive player this year. Hes the exact same offensive player IMO, hes rounded out some other areas but to be a player in the nhl at his size and style takes alot more than passable numbers in his third year. And i dont even think next year he'll be much improved either. But hey, if you want to cling onto the hope that if he was on another team , he owuld be lighting it up. go ahead.
agree to disagree.
his point totals are something that shouldn't be ignored. thats the only point ive been trying to make. its funny that nobody else thinks hes nhl ready and hes even being benched but the fans think any criticism i give him is nonsense
Yeah because he is in a different system!
Hodgson's points were below expectations when he played for our farm team, he is producing when he is playing on Buffalo's farm team.
Kassian's points were nearly PPG when he played for Buffalo's farm team & this year on Vancouver's he isn't producing to that PPG rate.
Shouldn't that tell you that Van's farm team & their system is low scoring while Buffalo's is more of a high offensive team.
I wasn't "fighting you" on who is a better player, I'm just "fighting you" on the fact that our farm teams haven't really produced a high scoring prospect.
Hodgson's points were below expectations when he played for our farm team, he is producing when he is playing on Buffalo's farm team.
Kassian's points were nearly PPG when he played for Buffalo's farm team & this year on Vancouver's he isn't producing to that PPG rate.
Shouldn't that tell you that Van's farm team & their system is low scoring while Buffalo's is more of a high offensive team.
I'm not "fighting you" on who is a better player, I'm just "fighting you" on the fact that our farm teams haven't really produced a high scoring prospect.
Our farm team hasn't produced a high scoring prospect because we never have high scoring prospects besides Hodgson and Hodgson got 50 games before the nhl. he was caleld up to the nhl because his skill was obvious. All these people thinking he deserves the next level would have probably also told you his point totals would have improved greatly in the following year. Despite you thinking this team caps peoples production. lol
We have a few old/unmotivated players on the first line which is making us lose and suddenly prospects on all lines can't reach certain numbers because of the team.
its hard to debate something when you can just blame the entire system.
if we acquired top 10 picks in the draft, those players would almost definitely be putting up numbers, despite what you think is a system that makes everybody suck
our team just lacks pure point producers, somethign that schroeder should be given his style and size
I don't even know why this argument is continuing. Schroeder is actually near the top of the ES scoring charts (ignoring the freakish 1st line of the Barons, he's Top 10 as far as I can tell). The trouble has been the PP and that's the case for the whole team. So if we're going to criticize him and blame him for something it should be that he's not good enough of a PP player not that he sucks overall or some such other bizarre statement.
FWIW, he was given an assist on the GWG last night after further review. Also hit a post and Sweatt hit another post from his excellent pass.
I don't even know why this argument is continuing. Schroeder is actually near the top of the ES scoring charts (ignoring the freakish 1st line of the Barons). The trouble has been the PP and that's the case for the whole team. So if we're going to criticize him and blame him for something it should be that he's not good enough of a PP player not that he sucks overall or some such other bizarre statement.
Have you seen Ennis play? Have you seen all the undersized players who dont play a gritty game play? Have you seen kariya or sullivan or any of the players in the league?
how long of a list can you get me of players who had steady nhl careers who dont play gritty, dont hit and play his style and his size and dont absolutely dominate the early leagues (and almost immediately)? who can't beat guys one on one, who dont stickhandle better than anyone else by a mile
im actually curious, you might be able to provem e wrong but im trying to think of some right now and the list is extremely short, almost non existent
how many of those skilled guys find themselves dominating the ahl and never reaching the nhl due to size. alot. hell the wolves is made up of 5'9 guys who had size working against them and ended up having careers in the ahl. werent weak 5'9 guys either
gilman just stated that these players need to turn aroudn their seasons ASAP, but hey, nothing to worry about . he was just benched, nothing to worry about. its the system
Have you seen Ennis play? Have you seen all the undersized players who dont play a gritty game play? Have you seen kariya or sullivan or any of the players in the league?
how long of a list can you get me of players who had steady nhl careers who dont play gritty, dont hit and play his style and his size and dont absolutely dominate the early leagues (and almost immediately)? who can't beat guys one on one, who dont stickhandle better than anyone else by a mile
But your qualification for dominate is strange. You will only accept dominating at both ES and PP. I've already provided a link that showed that as far as translating NHL output to the AHL, ES goal production is the most accurate stat.
Schroeder's current ES output should be considered dominating, afterall ignoring the Oilers players (Eberle, Hall, RNH, Schultz) he's in the Top 10 for ES scoring.
So from that we can either take the pessimistic view that he sucks on the PP or the optimistic one that he's just unlucky to be playing on a team that has had the worst PP in the league for 3 years running. After all, Hodgson couldn't do much with that PP either.
Your problem is that your proofs are circular and you ignore anything that is presented contrary to your opinion, no matter how solidly it's backed up.
