Well there wasn't all that much talk of McEneny on the Canucks Boards, which is where I was more often than here when McEneny signed.
Maybe there was more here, I just based that comment off what I saw on there though. There was a few people but alot of people just brushed it off.
Quote:
Originally Posted by thefeebster
Not sure where you get the idea that people brushed off his signing here. Most ppl here at least saw the upside in this signing and most were excited as we've been discussing him since development camp with a high likelihood he would be signed by an NHL team.
---------------
Don't know how you can put Sauve in a top 10 list with a straight face. Even when he was steadier last season, he didn't deserve to be in our top 10. The last thing I'd say sauve's game is, is simple this year. He over complicates things for himself when he should play a simple game and that's why he is struggling.
Another big ? On Grenier. Are you seeing things? This guy hasn't even played in North America this year, much less on the Wolves. Are you thinking about Archibald? In any case, Grenier does not belong as an honorable mention at all until he proves something, anything.
No McNally is a bit of a head scratcher too. Maybe Ben Hutton deserves some conversation too.
1. I don't think Sauve is struggling that badly, he just seems to be in Arniel's doghouse, he looked fine to me when he was actually playing, and he is a + player.
As for why I put him here, he is more developed than some of our other guys, and I see him as more likely to make the jump than most, maybe I could have put Mallet or Labate ahead but more of our other guys are kinda projects that most likely wont turn out IMO. Maybe I should have put Mallet ahead of him, but Mallet's upside is 3rd/4th liner, which is about the same as Sauves (3rd pair/depth D) so when you really think about it there upside is about the same, and Sauve has acomplidhed more thus-far.
2. Grenier does have size, and you say he hasn't done anything and you say "he isn't playing anywhere let alone with the Wolves" yet praise McNally, Grenier obviously hasn't played on the Wolves, we got him to go play in Europe so we don't have to sign him. Not sure why your complaining about that, at 6'5 with that skating ability, he is pretty intriguing. Atleast for us.
3. To be honest I forgot about McNally or else I probably would have up him in there.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Luck 6
I think many of us were excited with the signing, but that doesn't say much because we Canuck fans seem to get excited over any amount of potential we can extract from a prospect.
McEneny has the potential to be an NHLer, I won't comment further from there. I haven't seen a lot of him, afterall, but after losing a full year of development it's more likely that he'll bloom late. This is already quite conventional for defensemen, anyways.
Oh I was just talking about the Canuck board then, some people were happy/excited but alot just brushed it off.
He's pretty good, he has a good well rounded game, it's just tough to get a read on what he might become due to him missing last season, but I like the signing, I could see a 4/5 guy in him if he continues to develop.
@Wisp: IIRC he was asking for a one-way contract and MG didn't want to give it to him, hence he was traded to FLA. Still think he was worth a look though IMO.
Grenier, unfortunately, hasn't put up the numbers expected of him in the Austrian league, so it's hard to make a case for him being in the top 10. I'd definitely put McNally ahead of him. Him (Grenier) having size doesn't mean anything though if he doesn't use it. I'm not sure if he has a two-way game to speak of either...
Well im not quite as disappointed about Shirokov, as high on him as i was. He had a deal with him the team, if he didn't make it, he'd go back to russia. he didn't make it.
and he would have got more opportunity but i think his speed limited him big time. For a small, weak and slow player, its reaaal hard to make it in the nhl, no matter how much skill you have. defensively, he wouldn't even have been able to backcheck very well and probably woudl have continued to be a defensive liability.
the only player ive seen defeat those odds are wellwood
not sure shirokov would have
and he did look completely lost when he was tried in the nhl, it would have taken a long time to get him up to speed. i dont think they thought it was worth it. and he wasn't willing to stick it out in the AHL for another chance later on
Well im not quite as disappointed about Shirokov, as high on him as i was. He had a deal with him the team, if he didn't make it, he'd go back to russia. he didn't make it.
and he would have got more opportunity but i think his speed limited him big time. For a small, weak and slow player, its reaaal hard to make it in the nhl, no matter how much skill you have. defensively, he wouldn't even have been able to backcheck very well and probably woudl have continued to be a defensive liability.
the only player ive seen defeat those odds are wellwood
not sure shirokov would have
and he did look completely lost when he was tried in the nhl, it would have taken a long time to get him up to speed. i dont think they thought it was worth it. and he wasn't willing to stick it out in the AHL for another chance later on
Hard for the guy to get a chance when his coach benches him for not scoring in 1 period for the rest of the game. AV never gave the guy a chance.
1. I don't think Sauve is struggling that badly, he just seems to be in Arniel's doghouse, he looked fine to me when he was actually playing, and he is a + player.
As for why I put him here, he is more developed than some of our other guys, and I see him as more likely to make the jump than most, maybe I could have put Mallet or Labate ahead but more of our other guys are kinda projects that most likely wont turn out IMO. Maybe I should have put Mallet ahead of him, but Mallet's upside is 3rd/4th liner, which is about the same as Sauves (3rd pair/depth D) so when you really think about it there upside is about the same, and Sauve has acomplidhed more thus-far.
Fair enough.
But from watching him, I just don't see that potential for him. Last year, i said that he was close to ready to be with us perhaps a 7-8th D man capacity because there is little left for him to show and little room for improvement. With MacT, he played a steadier game. But this season, his play has regressed and is very inconsistent, dangerously so at times. He is looking very much like we thought a couple of years ago, a player with all the tools but no toolbox. He has the size, the skating, a physical dimension, but lacks the decision making required for him to take the next step. Gillis said Sauve would have to simplify his game this season, but honestly, he has done the complete opposite. Perhaps it is an injury that is causing this regression, but he needs to step it up massively to crack my top 10.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sergei Shirokov
2. Grenier does have size, and you say he hasn't done anything and you say "he isn't playing anywhere let alone with the Wolves" yet praise McNally, Grenier obviously hasn't played on the Wolves, we got him to go play in Europe so we don't have to sign him. Not sure why your complaining about that, at 6'5 with that skating ability, he is pretty intriguing. Atleast for us.
Refer to these quotes below...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bleach Clean
3. Never been enamoured with the Grenier pick.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sergei Shirokov
3. I definetly think this is a guy with all the tools, just has to bulk up and put it together (looks like he already has gotten alot strong BTW) after watching the Wolves game on SN, I noticed he really does have all the tools, I thought he had a good game, was great down low, great against the boards, he isn't outstanding in any particular area but is solid all round & I think he is definetly in the top 10.
This is why i asked if you are confused about this player. Based on the number sequences you are replying to, you imply you've seen Grenier play for the Wolves on Sportsnet, yet as i said earlier, he has not played in North America this year, so i am not sure how you saw him.
Are you referring to Archibald or are you referring to Grenier when he played with the Remparts?
My problem with Grenier stems from the people who have seen him regularly and their reports, such as Pyatt4God who watches Quebec. An enigmatic winger who is all potential right now with little substance in his game. Also, we all saw him in the Prospects Tourney and I remember he made some very stupid plays, both offensively and defensively (commented on it then as well). He played very poorly in those games. He rarely used his size, if at all, or skating for that matter. He was coasting.
Hard for the guy to get a chance when his coach benches him for not scoring in 1 period for the rest of the game. AV never gave the guy a chance.
Well it may appear that way but he was watching him from the ice level and with plenty of experience evaluating players. I think alot of his flaws were extremely evident and over an 82 game season, those flaws would have been exposed.
They treat all players the same, if youre not nhl ready, you send him down to the ahl. Earn your way back up.
He wasn't. I thought he looked lost. Had no idea where to go
I'm thinking that any or all of Polasek, Price, McNally, and Hutton could eventually wind up higher on the D depth chart than Sauve, along with Andersson and Tommernes as well.
By this I don't mean to say they all could have NHL careers, but a couple of them just might, which I don't think will happen for Sauve.
Edit: I omitted McEneny because I know almost nothing about him.
You guys are forgetting that for a player like Shirokov, it can be an absolutely crap shoot. Yes, he has tremendous skill. But he isn't physically imposing or even fast. Not only a team won't entrust him with Top 6 ice-time, he is not the kind of player that would want to play Bottom 6 minutes, even though NHL coaches would surely place him there for at least a season or two.
His alternative was to simply go to the KHL and tear the league up since it's ideal for his skill set and still get paid. That's what he did. It's a very similar situation to Omark.
Glad you noted Hutton, because i really feel he is flying under the radar in terms of our prospects. Although he is a not a true freshman, he is having a superb year in Hockey East and on such a terrible team. You will hear often just how poor Maine is this season, namely offensively due to losing 3 or their 4 top scorers. But in the same breath, you will often hear about the two bright spots in Shore and Hutton.
Hutton leads Maine in +/- with +2. The team is a collective -14.
Hutton has played in all games so far. He only has one minor penalty (interference). You know who else was praised for the ability to play without taking penalties? Tanev. Hutton hasn't been sheltered either. He's getting good minutes.
Hutton has 5 points in his last 8 games. He is 3rd in team scoring, despite being on the lowest scoring team in the nation. Yes, that means that entire NCAA. He is only 2 points away from taking the lead in scoring for Maine.
You want a guy to be excited about from our 2012 draft, Hutton has to be one of them. If they were naming the Hockey East's All Rookie Team and they we able to name 3 Dmen, a few people have said it would go: Matheson, Grzelcyk, Hutton. Just passing that along.
Glad you noted Hutton, because i really feel he is flying under the radar in terms of our prospects. Although he is a not a true freshman, he is having a superb year in Hockey East and on such a terrible team. You will hear often just how poor Maine is this season, namely offensively due to losing 3 or their 4 top scorers. But in the same breath, you will often hear about the two bright spots in Shore and Hutton.
Hutton leads Maine in +/- with +2. The team is a collective -14.
Hutton has played in all games so far. He only has one minor penalty (interference). You know who else was praised for the ability to play without taking penalties? Tanev. Hutton hasn't been sheltered either. He's getting good minutes.
Hutton has 5 points in his last 8 games. He is 3rd in team scoring, despite being on the lowest scoring team in the nation. Yes, that means that entire NCAA. He is only 2 points away from taking the lead in scoring for Maine.
You want a guy to be excited about from our 2012 draft, Hutton has to be one of them. If they were naming the Hockey East's All Rookie Team and they we able to name 3 Dmen, a few people have said it would go: Matheson, Grzelcyk, Hutton. Just passing that along.
I think a lot of our NCAA prospects fly under the radar due to the fact we don't get a lot of info on them. I know I appreciate your info on Hutton. Also those videos of McNally, Price sure help.
Glad you noted Hutton, because i really feel he is flying under the radar in terms of our prospects. Although he is a not a true freshman, he is having a superb year in Hockey East and on such a terrible team. You will hear often just how poor Maine is this season, namely offensively due to losing 3 or their 4 top scorers. But in the same breath, you will often hear about the two bright spots in Shore and Hutton.
Hutton leads Maine in +/- with +2. The team is a collective -14.
Hutton has played in all games so far. He only has one minor penalty (interference). You know who else was praised for the ability to play without taking penalties? Tanev. Hutton hasn't been sheltered either. He's getting good minutes.
Hutton has 5 points in his last 8 games. He is 3rd in team scoring, despite being on the lowest scoring team in the nation. Yes, that means that entire NCAA. He is only 2 points away from taking the lead in scoring for Maine.
You want a guy to be excited about from our 2012 draft, Hutton has to be one of them. If they were naming the Hockey East's All Rookie Team and they we able to name 3 Dmen, a few people have said it would go: Matheson, Grzelcyk, Hutton. Just passing that along.
Yes, I saw your post in the 2012 draft steals thread, on the main board, listing Hutton. Have you watched him many games? How does he look out there?
Also, info on Myron and Beattie would be appreciated. I remember seeing something a while back on NHL equivalencies and that Beattie favoured well. Could have been something related to possession metrics, not sure.
Yeah feebs, great stuff you got on Hutton. He is almost pulling a McNally as an ace freshman, except with a better plus / minus than McNally had for most of last year while on a much better team.
Speaking of supposedly ace freshmen, whatever has happened with Matt Beattie at Yale? His hockeydb stat line has a 9 for games played, a 4 for pims, but otherwise it looks like a cardiogram in a morgue. Wes Myron's is pretty flat as well, but at least there are two points after the 16 games played. Beattie was touted somewhat as a prime freshman recruit for Yale, whereas Myron and Hutton received little comment by comparison. If anyone can find out how his season is going, and whatever issues he may have to work on, I'd like to hear about it.
Edit: didn't see Bleach's post, but now I'm curious about the Beattie metrics thing . . . maybe the heart's still beating this season.
Yes, I saw your post in the 2012 draft steals thread, on the main board, listing Hutton. Have you watched him many games? How does he look out there?
Also, info on Myron and Beattie would be appreciated. I remember seeing something a while back on NHL equivalencies and that Beattie favoured well. Could have been something related to possession metrics, not sure.
Hutton: Watched one, listened to a handful. Played with Brice O'Connor when i watched (but has been paired with Mike Cornell at other times) and was used in all situations (1st PP+2nd PK). Smooth skater, good positioning, has good poise with the puck, can rush the puck at times, but also a good first pass. His shot isn't the strongest, but he gets them through. In the game i saw, he didn't throw any big hits. But when i listened to some, the commentator's made him sound very physical with some open ice hits. In any case, he is what i'd consider the new mold of Dmen prospects we have... smart, smooth skating, poised, two-way D.
If he were on one of the powerhouse/top teams (which Maine was last season), he'd be generating a ton more interest.
EDIT: Listened to the game tonight. Sounded like he was on the 2nd PP tonight. Commentators said he had a nice stick check stopping a chance against. Had a few keep ins on the PP and was on the ice for the final minute protecting the 2-1 lead.
Wes Myron is supposedly playing well, but i've only read GDTs for BU games. He has been used mainly as 3C. He is playing aggressively and a gritty game, they say. While their coach praises the 3rd line for the hard work on every shift, he did say he expects more of the 3rd line offensively and named Myron. From posters, he gets and generates a lot of chances, but lacks finish. I think one said they'd be a rich man if they got a dollar for each chance Myron nearly missed.
He has had a glut of rotating wingers, but he has remained consistently their 3C. However, big change tonight. He's been moved to the 1st line LW. I think its to fill a injury to Wade Megan. Good on him though! They could have chosen Kurker who is a natural winger, but they chose Myron instead.
Matt Beattie: I've seen 3 games and he's been scratched ever since. Reason is unknown.
I like the skills he has. He moves well for a big guy, has some nice hands in close, seems to read the game well actually (in the sense that he doesn't look lost out there), and has a penchant for an aggressive forecheck and physical game. In the games i watched, it looked like he almost tried to throw a hit every shift. But i really liked his work ethic on the ice, went hard after pucks and rarely took a shift off. But offensively, he left something to be desired. He was mainly used on the 3rd line LW, made some nice passing plays. In the 3rd game he was used on the PP, but did not generate much there. Looked okay, but would like to see a bit more here. Rarely shoots.
Last edited by thefeebster: 01-04-2013 at 08:32 PM.
Reason: An update
Feebster looks like as soon as we called Kujawinski MIA this year he's scored 5 goals in 3 games. I watched Mantha play and wow when he decides to play he's very talented (that shot is unreal) but boy does he float at times.
Hutton: Watched one, listened to a handful. Played with Brice O'Connor when i watched (but has been paired with Mike Cornell at other times) and was used in all situations (1st PP+2nd PK). Smooth skater, good positioning, has good poise with the puck, can rush the puck at times, but also a good first pass. His shot isn't the strongest, but he gets them through. In the game i saw, he didn't throw any big hits. But when i listened to some, the commentator's made him sound very physical with some open ice hits. In any case, he is what i'd consider the new mold of Dmen prospects we have... smart, smooth skating, poised, two-way D.
If he were on one of the powerhouse/top teams (which Maine was last season), he'd be generating a ton more interest.
Wes Myron is supposedly playing well, but i've only read GDTs for BU games. He has been used mainly as 3C. He is playing aggressively and a gritty game, they say. While their coach praises the 3rd line for the hard work on every shift, he did say he expects more of the 3rd line offensively and named Myron. From posters, he gets and generates a lot of chances, but lacks finish. I think one said they'd be a rich man if they got a dollar for each chance Myron nearly missed.
He has had a glut of rotating wingers, but he has remained consistently their 3C. However, big change tonight. He's been moved to the 1st line LW. I think its to fill a injury to Wade Megan. Good on him though! They could have chosen Kurker who is a natural winger, but they chose Myron instead.
Matt Beattie: I've seen 3 games and he's been scratched ever since. Reason is unknown.
I like the skills he has. He moves well for a big guy, has some nice hands in close, seems to read the game well actually (in the sense that he doesn't look lost out there), and has a penchant for an aggressive forecheck and physical game. In the games i watched, it looked like he almost tried to throw a hit every shift. But i really liked his work ethic on the ice, went hard after pucks and rarely took a shift off. But offensively, he left something to be desired. He was mainly used on the 3rd line LW, made some nice passing plays. In the 3rd game he was used on the PP, but did not generate much there. Looked okay, but would like to see a bit more here. Rarely shoots.
"Myron I expected more points out of as well. But is seems Parker likes what he sees in him, which is a good sign for the future."
---------------
"A player who looked much better on the eyes (speed, skill, size) than he did on the scoresheet. Unfortunately that's how I view Myron right now." (Comparing Myron to a former BU player who wore the same number as a freshman.)
----------------
So the fan reviews are mixed, but he has some good tools, and the coach seems to like him.
Feebster looks like as soon as we called Kujawinski MIA this year he's scored 5 goals in 3 games. I watched Mantha play and wow when he decides to play he's very talented (that shot is unreal) but boy does he float at times.
This always seems to happen! Rip a player, they do well. Perhaps Watson and Bennett going to the U17s is a blessing in disguise for Kingston. Gave more of an opportunity to Kujawinski and perhaps sparking another monster 2nd half from him?
Don't watch much Q, to be honest. But what you all have said about Mantha, it scares me.
