I'm guessing even if he has an unreal season next year, it still would be no. There is so much political weight to a player being taken in the first round to make these teams, good/bad season doesn't matter. Team Canada's D competition will be Pulock/Morrissey/Ceci/Koekkoek/Dumba/Finn/Reinhart/Thrower/Nurse/Severson/Pelech
Yeah, i'd agree. There were just too many good Dmen taken last draft who are pretty much all eligible (Minus Ceci b/c he was a late '93 thus not eligible). I don't see a chance, unless he finishes this year on fire and continues into next season, earns an invite to the Subway series and then maybe the selection camp. But we've seen that great play may mean nothing in the end.
But i'd put more money on Gaunce than McEneny right now. Gaunce was supposed to go to the Subway Series if he didn't injure his shoulder and has history with team Canada. Should get his foot in the door. Of course this depends again on the goof who ends up picking this team. If he wants to build a team correctly, Gaunce has got to be in the conversation for the bottom two lines as a defensive forward, plus he can play LW and C, and he plays on the big ice for half of the year.
EDIT: Going to leave this here...
Quote:
Andy Johnson @AndyJohnsonB5Q
Joseph LaBate looks like he's worked himself out of his early season slump. Working hard, creating scoring chances, getting shots, finishing
He's got a goal tonight.
Last edited by thefeebster: 01-04-2013 at 11:27 PM.
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.
Why thank you, good sir!
Unfortunately this is very true, during the USA/Canada game I commented to my buddy, "That Gaudreau kid is pretty good, he has a very bright future ahead of him, never seen a twelve year old play like this in the WJC's" a second after I finished saying that he scored.
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.
7th rounder is able to accomplish this... but Kassian can't even do this.
Last edited by Socratic Method Man: 01-05-2013 at 03:20 AM.
all of these attributes are mostly justified through their performance already, though. by the time these kids are 18 their IQ and a bunch of their physical tools have already manifested their effects through how well they've done in juniors to date.
there's nothing to suggest that an athlete with high end physical tools can't outskill/work his lack of smarts in the same way that people expect the opposite, and in fact there are plenty of examples in all sports of exactly that. the only reason people think one way or another is because it's far easier for us to empathize with someone who is a thinker over a doer because none of us are athletically talented on the same level as them
gillis should ultimately be targetting whoever, to his criteria, he thinks is going to be able to create the most positive change in the nhl. if they do it through scoring, defence or hitting or goaltending or whatever it doesn't really matter. the only argument i could see for aiming for specifics are
A: it seems forwards are much easier to pick in the earlier rounds as they are usually closest to peak ability (and thus further in their development) at a young age
B: picking small and hoping that they hit a growth spurt is literally the only characteristic growth of "you cant teach x" ultimately being acquired after draft. this is obviously unreliable and often when people gain a lot of height they turn into uncoordinated husks
I think it depends on those physical tools to begin with. Sure, a big guy with speed could at least have a better chance of finding a spot on a 4th line somewhere - even if they had no hockey sense - but if that's all we're drafting then I'd be worried. Such a player might have an extremely limited ceiling. Of course, there are never absolutes when it comes to how these things might turn out, but you always want well-rounded guys with multiple aspects to their game who still have that one good "standout" element that might translate to the pros. I still think we should keep IQ as the biggest priority, while looking for the combination that's best, whether that's IQ + size, IQ + skill, or IQ + speed. Or the "best" combo of 3 or 4 traits in total. It'll all depend on how the Canucks weight the different attributes for draftees.
@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...
I didn't put him in my top 10, I put him as an honourable mention due to his size and skating ability, I haven't follow him in the austrian league so maybe he is doing terrible and then I would agree I shouldn't have put him there but I was really intrigued by the pick when we picked him to that's why I put him there.
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.
Fair enough, I and agree.
Quote:
Originally Posted by thefeebster
Refer to these quotes below...
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.
My mistake, I was actually talking about Rodin. The one before I only addressed Sauve then the next one was Rodin but I shouldn't ahve put a number beside it, then after seeing I have 4 numbers I didn't re-read it and completely forgot about Grenier.
Sorry it was late and I was tired, my mistake. That SN quote of mine was about Rodin, forget everything in relation to Grenier aside from the brief in my initial honourable mention section.
I just made a comment above, to another poster but I will reiterate here, I haven't seen him play in the austrian league, so if he is doing terrible then maybe I shouldn't have put him there, I just remember being really intrigued with him when we got him because of his size, skating ability and he seemed to have a well rounded game from reports I read and things, I could be off on him, I've been following more our prospects on the Wolves, then somre of our other top prospects, guys like Grenier and most of our collage guys I haven't really been following honestly, that's probably why I forgot about McNally and didn't have anything to say about Hutton.
And regarding Corrado, hes like Tanev but with more strength and a shot
One has a grossly underwhelming one and the other has a much above average shot, can't he shoot near 100mph, i thought i saw somebody post
Quote:
Originally Posted by thefeebster
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.
Thanks for the updates on Hutton, nice to see he is doing well, I remember being kind of intrigued and optimisic when I looked into him after we picked him, but he has been on the back burner for me every since, actually I think he might have fallen off the stove entirely.
Not a Canuck prospect, but one who should help a Canucks prospect...Belleville has just acquired Tyler Graovac from Ottawa.
Reading the OHL trade speculation board, it seems Belleville is thought to be "going" for it, and speculation is that they will acquire Khoklachev from Windsor once he returns after the WJC.
They might as well just trade for Corrado too, to make it easier for us.
Not a Canuck prospect, but one who should help a Canucks prospect...Belleville has just acquired Tyler Graovac from Ottawa.
Reading the OHL trade speculation board, it seems Belleville is thought to be "going" for it, and speculation is that they will acquire Khoklachev from Windsor once he returns after the WJC.
They might as well just trade for Corrado too, to make it easier for us.
How great would that be! I'd be streaming so many of their games.
A poster in the Wolves thread mentioned a Corrado rumor:
Quote:
Rumour has it that Corrado going to the west to a contender, possibly OS.
How great would that be! I'd be streaming so many of their games.
A poster in the Wolves thread mentioned a Corrado rumor:
The two top available defensman are Corrado and Cody Ceci.
Both right hand shots, but Corrado is a better two way player.
Brock Otten, suggested Barrie as a potential landing spot for Corrado, I've also read rumours of London, as well as Owen Sound (London most certainly doesn't need him, with Maata, Zadorov, Harrington, carrying the load with solid players as depth, but it would be nice to see a Canuck prospect in the memorial cup).
The two top available defensman are Corrado and Cody Ceci.
Both right hand shots, but Corrado is a better two way player.
Brock Otten, suggested Barrie as a potential landing spot for Corrado, I've also read rumours of London, as well as Owen Sound (London most certainly doesn't need him, with Maata, Zadorov, Harrington, carrying the load with solid players as depth, but it would be nice to see a Canuck prospect in the memorial cup).
I feel like you can almost certainly cross London off that list. DU Dakota Mermis decommited and signed with the Knights last week or so. Talk about the rich getting richer. But their D is stacked.
I can also see Plymouth having some interest. They are a solid group but they need a #1D that can take them further.
My top preference would still be Barrie or OS. These are the two teams that has the highest chance at competing with London and i think both teams offer an greater role to Corrado than London does. Both should go far in the OHL playoffs and give London a run for their money. Hopefully he will get a chance to win the championship and move on to the Memorial Cup. It'd be a perfect way to cap off his OHL career.
the talk of McEnemy mixed me up for some reason.
