HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Western Conference > Pacific Division > Vancouver Canucks
Notices

Prospect Thread XIII

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
12-21-2012, 03:20 PM
  #551
racerjoe
Registered User
 
racerjoe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 1,795
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Drop the Sopel View Post
Your memory isn't fading. This player didn't look like a 'stud' in the making at all IMO.

The only question I have is, how many Stanley cups did this 1 pick cost us? Henrik, Kopitar, Kesler...
Quote:
Originally Posted by me2 View Post
I don't recall him ever looking like a stud, or ever being better than Kopitar. My memories may be faded but they seem to invoke a lot of chasing people behind the net and getting out of position. I'm not saying he didn't have potential, he just needed more seasoning, but he hadn't show stud level play yet.
Its debatable IMO he played one year of pro hockey, where he scored close to .5 ppg in 40 games in the AHL, and was called up to the canucks for 27 games.

He was also the leading defenceman scorer in the WJC, and gained a first allstar team nod.

That looks pretty solid to me, not many dmen make the jump to the NHL in their first year, especially not on playoff teams.

racerjoe is offline  
Old
12-21-2012, 03:30 PM
  #552
Scottrockztheworld*
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,301
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by racerjoe View Post
Its debatable IMO he played one year of pro hockey, where he scored close to .5 ppg in 40 games in the AHL, and was called up to the canucks for 27 games.

He was also the leading defenceman scorer in the WJC, and gained a first allstar team nod.

That looks pretty solid to me, not many dmen make the jump to the NHL in their first year, especially not on playoff teams.
And we weren't that year.

Scottrockztheworld* is offline  
Old
12-21-2012, 04:16 PM
  #553
jigsaw99
#fireAV
 
jigsaw99's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 3,545
vCash: 500
the consensus is that we are below average. no need to compare with worse teams than us since if you do that it automatically means we are bad. The last player we drafted that we are able to keep on the roster is Mason Raymond.

jigsaw99 is offline  
Old
12-21-2012, 04:18 PM
  #554
Bleach Clean
Registered User
 
Bleach Clean's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 13,923
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Drop the Sopel View Post
Your memory isn't fading. This player didn't look like a 'stud' in the making at all IMO.

The only question I have is, how many Stanley cups did this 1 pick cost us? Henrik, Kopitar, Kesler...


Had to be at least one.



That one pick changed the course of this franchise IMO. Kopitar would have definitely saved Nonis's job. He would have given the Canucks that 2nd line scoring C needed when Kesler quite hadn't translated his offense. Thereby alleviating the need for Nonis to gun after Richards and miss... which subsequently cost him his position. It's all related.



That one gaffe, especially when guys like Bobby Mac figured we take Kopitar, looks monumentally bad now that we have seen what LA has become. Not to mention everyone fearing the post-Sedin apocalypse would have been quelled by the thought of Kopitar taking over in their stead. It could not have been a bigger mistake IMO.

Bleach Clean is online now  
Old
12-21-2012, 04:22 PM
  #555
jigsaw99
#fireAV
 
jigsaw99's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 3,545
vCash: 500
About the Bourdon and Kopitar thingy.. i know it sucks... but everyone wanted to us to draft Kopitar/Staal that year and we decided to off the board. And it stinks to see that they turn out to be All-Star players over the years. Kinda like how everyone was calling to draft Perron two years after. I know it is very different because Bourdon is actually a good player that should be a 1st round pick while White was like projected 3 round pick garbage. The same staff of scouts that drafts White and Ellington is still making picks for us.

jigsaw99 is offline  
Old
12-21-2012, 04:32 PM
  #556
Bleach Clean
Registered User
 
Bleach Clean's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 13,923
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by jigsaw99 View Post
About the Bourdon and Kopitar thingy.. i know it sucks... but everyone wanted to us to draft Kopitar/Staal that year and we decided to off the board. And it stinks to see that they turn out to be All-Star players over the years. Kinda like how everyone was calling to draft Perron two years after. I know it is very different because Bourdon is actually a good player that should be a 1st round pick while White was like projected 3 round pick garbage. The same staff of scouts that drafts White and Ellington is still making picks for us.


I think the Kopitar draft is as much on Nonis as it is on the staff. We've seen Gillis overrule his staff, like in 2008 Hodgson vs. Beach, when he sees the better player. It really comes down to your GM being a talent evaluator. Gillis has the eye for talent from his agent days. If he didn't find it, it negatively impacted his paycheck. Nonis didn't have that and you could tell.



Most times, if your GM is a good judge of talent, you don't make big mistakes in the 1st round. So far, I have liked every one of Gillis's 1st round picks - yes, even Schroeder.

Bleach Clean is online now  
Old
12-21-2012, 04:35 PM
  #557
jigsaw99
#fireAV
 
jigsaw99's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 3,545
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bleach Clean View Post
I think the Kopitar draft is as much on Nonis as it is on the staff. We've seen Gillis overrule his staff, like in 2008 Hodgson vs. Beach, when he sees the better player. It really comes down to your GM being a talent evaluator. Gillis has the eye for talent from his agent days. If he didn't find it, it negatively impacted his paycheck. Nonis didn't have that and you could tell.



Most times, if your GM is a good judge of talent, you don't make big mistakes in the 1st round. So far, I have liked every one of Gillis's 1st round picks - yes, even Schroeder.
Me too since he drafts what TSN and central scouting tells him to draft lol but beyond the 1st round is another story.

jigsaw99 is offline  
Old
12-21-2012, 06:24 PM
  #558
vanuck
Griffiths Way Goons
 
vanuck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Country: Hong Kong
Posts: 9,229
vCash: 250
I'm just curious to know what he thinks of his Dub scouting...

vanuck is online now  
Old
12-21-2012, 07:48 PM
  #559
TwoHeadedBoy
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 39
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by arsmaster View Post
I'm tired of looking back 14 years to make our drafting seem average.

Start your analysis after the Sedin's and it looks considerably worse, agreed?

We can talk about this discrepancy of picks, and while it's a factor it doesn't carry that much weight.

Look at the AHL roster of The Wolves and Admirals, for the most part Nashville's affiliate is almost ALL predator drafted players. And not players drafted 10-14 years ago, mostly within the last half dozen years.

They have more picks but they are at least finding more players that are ahl caliber than we are.

I don't think it's fair to say we're average and base it on the Sedin's. Look at us after 2003 and we're hella bad.

*edit* by quick glance nashville's ahl affiliate has over 15 predator drafted players on their roster.

The wolves has about 6 draftees and a bunch of hit and signings (for every lack/Tanev there's a Schneider/Sweatt.

Good first post though, definitely helps add context to the discussion.
I respectfully disagree. Nashville has only been a bit better after 2003 (with much better picks).

VAN after 2003: Schneider, Edler, Hansen, Brown, Raymond, Grabner, Hodgson, Tanev
NAS after 2003: Santorelli, Rinne, Franson, Josi, Hornqvist, Spaling, Wilson, Lindback, Ellis, Bourque, Smith, Blum

(I realize now I forgot Blum in my initial list)

EDIT: Of course you probably meant after 2004, in which case you'd be right

I think you’re wrong about the Admirals and Wolves. If we consider a prospect a player who is 22 or under, is signed with the parent club, and has played 10+ games in the AHL (is that a fair criteria?):
Wolves - 9 players
Admirals - 9 players

And between 2008-2010 when most of these players should have been drafted:

First rounders: NAS - 4, VAN - 2
Second rounders: NAS - 3, VAN - 2
Third rounders: NAS - 3, VAN - 1


Last edited by TwoHeadedBoy: 12-21-2012 at 08:10 PM.
TwoHeadedBoy is offline  
Old
12-21-2012, 07:55 PM
  #560
Reverend Mayhem
1 for you, 19 for me
 
Reverend Mayhem's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Port Coquitlam, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,988
vCash: 940
Send a message via Skype™ to Reverend Mayhem
How the hell did we not pick Brendan Gallagher?

Reverend Mayhem is online now  
Old
12-21-2012, 07:57 PM
  #561
TwoHeadedBoy
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 39
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DJOpus View Post
I think people underestimate the difference in drafting position early in the draft. Usually the difference between picking 1st overall and 2nd overall is huge with the difference getting smaller and smaller as you move down the draft...honestly I don't think the difference between 7th and say 10th is usually that big a deal as the players in that range are usually very comparable.

Over the time span here, the Canucks picked in the top 5, 3 times (Sedin, Sedin, Allen) and Nashville only picked top 5, 1 time (Legwand). The Sedins are basically the only thing that make the Canucks drafting look respectable.

Nashville in general IMO hasn't done that well in the draft - Weber in the 2nd round makes up for a lot of not that great picks - Weber was their 4th pick in that draft which tells you that they weren't that sure he was going to be a great player.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I think its good to compare the teams against who they were supposed to pick, especially early where there is a consensus:

1998 - both drafted who they were supposed to (Allen / Legwand).
1999 - both did as well as they would have if they drafted who they were supposed to (Sedin + Sedin / Finley) - NSH were suppposed to pick Lundmark/Beech/Pyatt)
2000 - Nashville got who they were supposed to while Vancouver reached and missed (Smith / Hartnell) - VAN were supposed to pick Boyes/Ott/Sutherby
2001 - Both teams got who they were supposed to (Umberger / Hamhuis)
2002 - Nashville got who they were supposed to while VAN traded their pick (nobody / Upshall)
2003 - Both teams got who they were supposed to (Kesler / Suter)
2004 - Nashville drafted who they were supposed to, Vancouver reached and it worked out ok (Schneider / Radulov) - Van supposed to pick Green given needs and draft lists
2005 - Nashville drafted who they were supposed to, Vancouver reached and it didn't work out (Bourdon / Parent)
2006 - Nashville traded their pick, Vancouver reached and ended up ok to bad (Grabner / no one) - Vancouver was supposed to pick either Stewart/Berglund/Latendresse
2007 - Nashville drafted who they were supposed to while Vancouver reached and lost big (White / Blum) - Van was supposed to draft Perron while Nashville had either Blum/Backlund at their draft spot
2008 - Nashville and Vancouver both drafted who they were supposed to (Wilson / Hodgson)
2009 - Both teams drafted guys they were supposed to...neither has worked out yet (Schroeder / Ellis)
2010, 2011, and 2012 - Too early to tell

Basically Nashville always picks who they are supposed to while Vancouver does a little more "scouting" and have picks away from the norm in the 1st round.

Nashville literally has no reaches in the first round (maybe Finley over Beech/Pyatt/Lundmark and Blum over Backlund) and whereas Vancouver has:
-Smith over Ott/Boyes/Sutherby
-Schneider over Green
-Bourdon over Kopitar
-Grabner over Stewart/Berglund/Latendresse

I'd say in general when Vancouver "reaches" for a pick that is a little off the board they do not do well while Nashville simply does not really reach at all.
Really good post. I like the head to head first round comparison.

However, I do think it's a little unfair to mention how Van has had more top 5 picks while ignoring the fact Nashville has drafted 6th overall twice and 7th overall twice.

TwoHeadedBoy is offline  
Old
12-21-2012, 07:58 PM
  #562
timw33
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Victoria
Country: Canada
Posts: 13,599
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Reverend Mayhem View Post
How the hell did we not pick Brendan Gallagher?
He had a bad practice when Delorme saw him.

timw33 is online now  
Old
12-21-2012, 08:03 PM
  #563
JanBulisPiggyBack
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 326
vCash: 500
Gallagher is a great young player, definetly dangerous offensively, but how safe of a pick was he, is he another boom or bust player

I have only seen him playing against the royals and he was clearly the best player on the ice, but potentially a schroeder-esq player

JanBulisPiggyBack is offline  
Old
12-21-2012, 08:09 PM
  #564
timw33
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Victoria
Country: Canada
Posts: 13,599
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JanBulisPiggyBack View Post
Gallagher is a great young player, definetly dangerous offensively, but how safe of a pick was he, is he another boom or bust player

I have only seen him playing against the royals and he was clearly the best player on the ice, but potentially a schroeder-esq player
If we had gone with WHL players that draft (within 2-4 spots after out picks—excluding the McNally pick), we'd end up with:

Patrick McNally
Brendan Gallagher
Mark Stone
Brendan Ranford

timw33 is online now  
Old
12-21-2012, 08:12 PM
  #565
BerSTUzzi
Registered User
 
BerSTUzzi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 1,676
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by timw33 View Post
If we had gone with WHL players that draft (within 2-4 spots after out picks—excluding the McNally pick), we'd end up with:

Patrick McNally
Brendan Gallagher
Mark Stone
Brendan Ranford
Ranford is ****....he may produce but he's another one of those junior players that do not have a NHL game. He's so god damn lazy and a terrible skater...end rant

BerSTUzzi is offline  
Old
12-21-2012, 09:54 PM
  #566
timw33
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Victoria
Country: Canada
Posts: 13,599
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BerSTUzzi View Post
Ranford is ****....he may produce but he's another one of those junior players that do not have a NHL game. He's so god damn lazy and a terrible skater...end rant
Better prospect than Sawyer Hannay is all I will say.

timw33 is online now  
Old
12-21-2012, 11:09 PM
  #567
PG Canuck
Global Moderator
 
PG Canuck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Prince George, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 19,279
vCash: 507
Quote:
Originally Posted by Reverend Mayhem View Post
How the hell did we not pick Brendan Gallagher?
He played in the WHL. Nuff said.

PG Canuck is offline  
Old
12-22-2012, 12:15 AM
  #568
jigsaw99
#fireAV
 
jigsaw99's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 3,545
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JanBulisPiggyBack View Post
Gallagher is a great young player, definetly dangerous offensively, but how safe of a pick was he, is he another boom or bust player

I have only seen him playing against the royals and he was clearly the best player on the ice, but potentially a schroeder-esq player
You mean we could of got Schroeder like player in the 5th round??

Quote:
Originally Posted by BerSTUzzi View Post
Ranford is ****....he may produce but he's another one of those junior players that do not have a NHL game. He's so god damn lazy and a terrible skater...end rant
Still not bad for the 2nd last player drafted that year and much better than Hannay

jigsaw99 is offline  
Old
12-22-2012, 11:32 PM
  #569
thefeebster
Registered User
 
thefeebster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Vancouver, BC
Posts: 5,040
vCash: 500


Finished this just now... i tried to put in some more defensive plays to avoid another debate! Don't blame me if this one is more boring!

Scouting Report

-Very good skater, strong on edges with a smooth stride. Can accelerate well and has good top end speed.
-Likes to use skating ability to carry the ice up the ice.
-Makes a good first pass, not great like Tanev, but above average.
-Calm under pressure when moving the puck, tends to find outlet pass quickly, but one one occasion, did not find anyone, decided to rush the puck up ice after PK shift.
-Defensively, he is solid. In the games watched, only one goal against was really ugly and attributable to him. He gave the puck away up the ice by going up the middle rather than up the wall. Another GA was because he appeared confused on what to do on a 2-on-1. Did not take the passing lane away.
-He makes smart decisions with the puck usually, shows fight in front of the net for positioning, and along the boards for the puck. Willing to engage in contact, but rarely uses body to punish opponents. I redact what i said about him not being much more physical than Tanev. The more games i watched, the more i noticed Price is more willing to throw his body around and plays a grittier game.
-Good PKer who reads the situation well 5 on 4 and 5 on 3. Was used always on the first PK and on 5 on 3 situations. Is everywhere on the ice. In front of the net and is at times the high "forward" guarding the points.
-PP: looks good disributing the puck, can walk the line and has fast footwork to do so, has a nice wrister, did not utilize slap shot very often here on the PP. Good passing vision. Question whether he will be able to QB PP at the next level. Good 2nd PP unit kind of guy.

thefeebster is online now  
Old
12-23-2012, 01:51 AM
  #570
Callhee
Embrace the hate.
 
Callhee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 630
vCash: 500
Great video feebster! Price looks pretty good, a very dynamic force for his team, hard to judge with a highlight package but he looks adequately physical, much more so than I expected. Seems like a well rounded player with potential, excited to see him next year with the wolves.

Now if only our offensive scouting was as good as our defensive scouting.

Callhee is offline  
Old
12-23-2012, 03:46 AM
  #571
orcatown
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 7,524
vCash: 500
I've seen Price weight listed at 175 but he sure looked bigger in that video.

Also I've seen Price's development compared to Bieksa. Maybe wishful thinking but there are some similarities.

orcatown is offline  
Old
12-23-2012, 04:00 AM
  #572
Wilch
Unregistered User
 
Wilch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Under your bed
Country: Taiwan
Posts: 6,403
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by orcatown View Post
I've seen Price weight listed at 175 but he sure looked bigger in that video.

Also I've seen Price's development compared to Bieksa. Maybe wishful thinking but there are some similarities.
Glad I'm not the only who seems the similarity.

Doesn't seem have a slapshot and goes to the wrister/snapper quite a bit too.

Wilch is online now  
Old
12-23-2012, 10:08 AM
  #573
Nuck This
Registered User
 
Nuck This's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Vancouver
Country: Iran
Posts: 2,744
vCash: 500
To be honest I'd rather have Schroeder. I honestly think he's going to turn some heads once he's in the NHL. Some players play to their levels. A lot of athletes do and it doesn't matter what sport. He has high end skill and hockey sense. You can't really find a flaw other than his size.

Nuck This is offline  
Old
12-23-2012, 10:09 AM
  #574
Nuck This
Registered User
 
Nuck This's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Vancouver
Country: Iran
Posts: 2,744
vCash: 500
Price seems to have quite the presence out there. Nice vision.

Nuck This is offline  
Old
12-23-2012, 12:33 PM
  #575
thefeebster
Registered User
 
thefeebster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Vancouver, BC
Posts: 5,040
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by orcatown View Post
I've seen Price weight listed at 175 but he sure looked bigger in that video.

Also I've seen Price's development compared to Bieksa. Maybe wishful thinking but there are some similarities.
Don't know why i didn't see that staring at me in the face! Even situationally, both Ontario boys who go off to the NCAA (Not to well established teams), drafted in the later rounds, RHS and play the right side, similar listed size at the draft. Even their point production is alarmingly similar, almost identical.

I didn't watch Bieksa in the NCAA, but i heard he was a mean SOB... Don't think Price can be considered that but he plays a gritty game, similar to the Bieksa we know now. Price's slap shots tend to get blocked often because he usually skates into them and rarely uses it standing still, his wristers are generally better at getting through. I agree, that's Bieksa-like.

I'd definitely say he is not 175 anymore. He looks thicker than Tanev that's for sure. Eliteprospects has his weight updated at 190. I think that's closer to accurate.

thefeebster is online now  
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 06:25 PM.

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.