HFBoards

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

Prospect Thread - Part X

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
04-09-2012, 11:00 PM
  #51
arsmaster
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 16,226
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by vanuck View Post
Laleggia was eligible to be drafted last year? Dammit...
and the year before.

arsmaster is offline  
Old
04-09-2012, 11:51 PM
  #52
denkiteki
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 2,157
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by windflare View Post
Sigh... now we have to compete at the draft for him. Ugh.
Pretty sure he isn't part of the draft anymore. We probably would be contenders/favorites to sign him as a UFA if MG is interested.

denkiteki is offline  
Old
04-09-2012, 11:55 PM
  #53
Verviticus
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 4,746
vCash: 695
as someone pointed out to me, he's probably going to want to continue with college/not sign

Verviticus is offline  
Old
04-10-2012, 12:11 AM
  #54
thefeebster
Registered User
 
thefeebster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Vancouver, BC
Posts: 5,506
vCash: 500
Laleggia is still eligible to be drafted. Its his final year, same year as Tanner Pearson.

I don't think he'll sign either, he should remain in College for at least 2 more years. But its important to secure his rights if you want him (I do), a draft pick isn't too much to give up, especially a mid-late one.

thefeebster is offline  
Old
04-10-2012, 12:27 AM
  #55
arsmaster
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 16,226
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by thefeebster View Post
Laleggia is still eligible to be drafted. Its his final year, same year as Tanner Pearson.

I don't think he'll sign either, he should remain in College for at least 2 more years. But its important to secure his rights if you want him (I do), a draft pick isn't too much to give up, especially a mid-late one.
Well the rookie of the year awards in the NCAA are not keeping him off the radar for long.

It'll be tough to get him not having a 3rd or 4th. Would be semi-annoyed if they drafted him with a 2nd, after they didn't draft him last year late. He was obviously scouted, having been brought to prospects camp later in the summer.

arsmaster is offline  
Old
04-10-2012, 12:37 AM
  #56
thefeebster
Registered User
 
thefeebster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Vancouver, BC
Posts: 5,506
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by arsmaster View Post
Well the rookie of the year awards in the NCAA are not keeping him off the radar for long.
I would be willing to expend a late 2nd, but the last time I mentioned this, it was met with a lot of resistance. It might be considered a reach, but sometimes you like a player and want to get him, you will have to take those reaches to get him. I think this might be one of those cases. Who knows where he ends up going. Would definitely be helpful if we had some more mid round picks.

thefeebster is offline  
Old
04-10-2012, 12:58 AM
  #57
denkiteki
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 2,157
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by thefeebster View Post
Laleggia is still eligible to be drafted. Its his final year, same year as Tanner Pearson.

I don't think he'll sign either, he should remain in College for at least 2 more years. But its important to secure his rights if you want him (I do), a draft pick isn't too much to give up, especially a mid-late one.
Looks like you're right, he's a '92, thought he was a '91.

Wouldn't mind spending a 3rd or 5th on him but not our 2nd (unless we get multiple picks before the draft). He has some upside but at the sametime isn't a position we really need when he's ready. In 5 years (assuming we extend Elder), there's virtually no chance he'll be dressed for 80 games given Hamhuis, Elder, MAG/Kcon/Sauve all play the left side. Not to mention our depth (relative timeline of when he's ready) on D is much higher than forwards.

denkiteki is offline  
Old
04-10-2012, 01:00 AM
  #58
Big Naissak
4 8 15 16 23 42
 
Big Naissak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Edmonton, Canucks.
Country: Scotland
Posts: 1,094
vCash: 500
Send a message via Skype™ to Big Naissak
Not sure if posted before but check out Alex Friesens great opening goal from game #2, Great defensive play and acceleration, good sidestep/deke and great wrist shot

http://www.ontariohockeyleague.com/v...10eb6aadaa9a3c

Big Naissak is offline  
Old
04-10-2012, 01:42 AM
  #59
Canuckee
Registered User
 
Canuckee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,307
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by denkiteki View Post
Looks like you're right, he's a '92, thought he was a '91.

Wouldn't mind spending a 3rd or 5th on him but not our 2nd (unless we get multiple picks before the draft). He has some upside but at the sametime isn't a position we really need when he's ready. In 5 years (assuming we extend Elder), there's virtually no chance he'll be dressed for 80 games given Hamhuis, Elder, MAG/Kcon/Sauve all play the left side. Not to mention our depth (relative timeline of when he's ready) on D is much higher than forwards.
A lot of things can change over time and you should not draft based on position too much because even though the team now doesn't need defensemen, in three years it can change. Who knows maybe Edler doesn't resign or Hamhuis/Bieksa have a career ending injury? ( I would die)

Also I wouldn't bet too much on MAG, Kcon, and Sauve. They are all long shots at this point to become steady NHL defensemen. Gragnani is almost there if he tightens up his defensive coverage. Had a terrible last two games.

Canuckee is offline  
Old
04-10-2012, 01:49 AM
  #60
metric
Registered User
 
metric's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,519
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by arsmaster View Post
Well the rookie of the year awards in the NCAA are not keeping him off the radar for long.

It'll be tough to get him not having a 3rd or 4th. Would be semi-annoyed if they drafted him with a 2nd, after they didn't draft him last year late. He was obviously scouted, having been brought to prospects camp later in the summer.
I think acquiring a third and/or fourth round pick should be easy enough. Assuming Schneider gets traded to Tampa (they're just too perfect a trade partner) he should easily get a first and third (and perhaps a prospect). Tampa has three guaranteed second-round picks with a possible fourth. I'm sure they'll be fine adding another pick to get Cory. All hypothetical of course.

And then we have Raymond who, unless he has a spectacular playoff run, I can't see being with the team next year should easily get a third-round pick, if not second, in return. He's been really poor the last two years but he's still a bonafide NHL player. That's no guarantee with third or fourth-round picks.

metric is offline  
Old
04-10-2012, 02:00 AM
  #61
SignThornton
BEAST MODE
 
SignThornton's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: St. Catharines, Ont.
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,888
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to SignThornton Send a message via MSN to SignThornton Send a message via Yahoo to SignThornton
Quote:
Originally Posted by Grags2Kass View Post
Not sure if posted before but check out Alex Friesens great opening goal from game #2, Great defensive play and acceleration, good sidestep/deke and great wrist shot

http://www.ontariohockeyleague.com/v...10eb6aadaa9a3c
Don't mind me being nosy. Alex has be great in the PO's so far(that goal was one of his finest). He'll give you 100% every night in all zones. Sure gonna miss him in a Dogs sweater next year.


SignThornton is offline  
Old
04-10-2012, 02:07 AM
  #62
metric
Registered User
 
metric's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,519
vCash: 500
Haven't been able to pay much attention to prospects unfortunately, too busy, and just noticed 15 points in 8 playoff games for Friesen. 4 more points than Strome. Third so far in OHL playoffs.

Edit: Checking out some Friesen vids on Youtube. He's going to be a fan favourite.


Last edited by metric: 04-10-2012 at 02:18 AM.
metric is offline  
Old
04-10-2012, 02:32 AM
  #63
windflare
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Vancouver, B.C.
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,244
vCash: 500
Laleggia will be gone for sure by the 3rd, most likely by the 2nd. Sigh.

windflare is offline  
Old
04-10-2012, 04:08 AM
  #64
701
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Vancouver & OK Falls
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,809
vCash: 500
Also clogging up the left side in the future will be Pat McNally. He scored .82 ppg vs. LaLeggia's .88 ppg, both as freshman rookies in the NCAA. Gillis may have figured, before their freshman seasons, that the two were similar in talent, but since McNally was 4 inches taller (6'2" vs. 5'10") his size would be more projectable to the NHL.

Now, after their first NCAA seasons, Gillis may or may not have changed his mind, based on stats and scouting. A skilled offensive guy of 5'10" is probably going to have a tougher time clearing the front of the net than a guy of 6'2" who can skate, pass, and score almost as well.

701 is offline  
Old
04-10-2012, 10:36 AM
  #65
arsmaster
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 16,226
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by metric View Post
I think acquiring a third and/or fourth round pick should be easy enough. Assuming Schneider gets traded to Tampa (they're just too perfect a trade partner) he should easily get a first and third (and perhaps a prospect). Tampa has three guaranteed second-round picks with a possible fourth. I'm sure they'll be fine adding another pick to get Cory. All hypothetical of course.

And then we have Raymond who, unless he has a spectacular playoff run, I can't see being with the team next year should easily get a third-round pick, if not second, in return. He's been really poor the last two years but he's still a bonafide NHL player. That's no guarantee with third or fourth-round picks.
Shouldn't be an issue.

Getting picks wont be that big a deal.
Quote:
Originally Posted by windflare View Post
Laleggia will be gone for sure by the 3rd, most likely by the 2nd. Sigh.
It's too bad, nobody would have complained using a pick on him last year....
Quote:
Originally Posted by 701 View Post
Also clogging up the left side in the future will be Pat McNally. He scored .82 ppg vs. LaLeggia's .88 ppg, both as freshman rookies in the NCAA. Gillis may have figured, before their freshman seasons, that the two were similar in talent, but since McNally was 4 inches taller (6'2" vs. 5'10") his size would be more projectable to the NHL.

Now, after their first NCAA seasons, Gillis may or may not have changed his mind, based on stats and scouting. A skilled offensive guy of 5'10" is probably going to have a tougher time clearing the front of the net than a guy of 6'2" who can skate, pass, and score almost as well.
I don't think the Left side thing is a big issue, no prospects are guaranteed to make. You just got to keep flooding the pipeline with players you think have a chance.

The more skill the better, look at a team like Colorado, they've got tonnes of smallish, slick skating puck movers in their system, and they've been able to keep pushing their NHL blue line for jobs and playing time, and were able to move Shattenkirk for a much bigger blue liner (say what you want about Erik Johnson, he was a former 1st overall).

Being able to constantly make decisions from a position of strength is what this organization needs to keep doing.

Just like the Ehrhoff decision, letting him leave because we have Tanev etc....

I'd like Laleggia in the 3rd a lot more than the 2nd.

arsmaster is offline  
Old
04-10-2012, 05:04 PM
  #66
Jevo
Registered User
 
Jevo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Country: Denmark
Posts: 2,440
vCash: 500
The Danish national hockey team coach has said that Nicklas Jensen won't be in consideration for this years WC team, after he got sent to the AHL. There won't be time to evaluated him at camp before the tournament. But from his words it seems like he was a strong candidate for a spot on the team had he been available in the pre-tournament camp.

Source (in Danish): http://tv2sport.dk/landstraener-afsk...-talent-til-vm

Jevo is online now  
Old
04-11-2012, 01:39 AM
  #67
synobyte
Canucks Cultist
 
synobyte's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: 100 mile house
Country: Canada
Posts: 470
vCash: 500
Jensen got his first Ahl goal today

synobyte is offline  
Old
04-11-2012, 05:01 AM
  #68
LiquidSnake
Agent of Chaos...
 
LiquidSnake's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Vancouver, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 26,699
vCash: 883
is Alex Friesen signed by the Canucks?

LiquidSnake is offline  
Old
04-11-2012, 05:17 AM
  #69
Jevo
Registered User
 
Jevo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Country: Denmark
Posts: 2,440
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by LiquidSnake View Post
is Alex Friesen signed by the Canucks?
According to capgeek he's not signed. But I would guess he gets signed when his season with Niagara is finished.

Jevo is online now  
Old
04-13-2012, 08:39 AM
  #70
Shaun871
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: St Catharines
Country: Canada
Posts: 23
vCash: 500
Friesen had an assist in Niagara's sweep completing 3-1 win over Brampton.

Not having him signed is looking good as it seems like he is playing to earn a contract. He is currently tied for 3rd in playoff scoring with 6 goals and 11 assists in 10 games (exact same stats as Strome, same points as Saad). Catenacci and Rieder of Kitchener are 1-2.

It appears as though Niagara will take on Mark Scheifele and the Barrie Colts as they are up 3-1 on Ottawa, a slight upset (#3 over #2)

Shaun871 is offline  
Old
04-13-2012, 09:43 AM
  #71
The Big Foot
Registered User
 
The Big Foot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Country: Bhutan
Posts: 2,596
vCash: 500
Why not give Matson a deal and try to cut ties with a guy like Stefan Schneider? Matson seems to have some intangibles (captain of Gophers). I guess this try out contract or whatever it's called is a great opportunity to see what we've got.

The Big Foot is offline  
Old
04-13-2012, 10:17 AM
  #72
arsmaster
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 16,226
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Big Foot View Post
Why not give Matson a deal and try to cut ties with a guy like Stefan Schneider? Matson seems to have some intangibles (captain of Gophers). I guess this try out contract or whatever it's called is a great opportunity to see what we've got.
I wish we would have offered Matt Fraser a deal when we had him in camp.

36 goals as a first year AHLer...

It was contracts like Stefan Schneiders, Taylor Ellington's, Prab Rai' etc, that are keeping us from actually signing players with NHL potential.

Matson looks decent so far, I hope our contract situation doesn't impede us from signing good prospects in the future.

arsmaster is offline  
Old
04-13-2012, 10:21 AM
  #73
Tiranis
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Toronto, ON
Country: Czech_ Republic
Posts: 20,955
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by arsmaster View Post
I wish we would have offered Matt Fraser a deal when we had him in camp.

36 goals as a first year AHLer...

It was contracts like Stefan Schneiders, Taylor Ellington's, Prab Rai' etc, that are keeping us from actually signing players with NHL potential.

Matson looks decent so far, I hope our contract situation doesn't impede us from signing good prospects in the future.
You can't hit a homerun with every signing. Canucks are doing pretty good considering they added Tanev and Lack for free. Are there teams with better free agent records over the past 3 years? (Serious question, I haven't checked...)


Last edited by Tiranis: 04-13-2012 at 10:26 AM.
Tiranis is offline  
Old
04-13-2012, 11:10 AM
  #74
pitseleh
Registered User
 
pitseleh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,632
vCash: 500
I don't know if this is true, but it seems the Canucks are also slightly hamstrung because they sign guys to NHL deals to play on the farm. Doesn't seem like other teams do it to the same extent.

That said, some of the signings (Ellington, Schneider) were pretty indefensible at the time and in hindsight.

pitseleh is offline  
Old
04-13-2012, 11:14 AM
  #75
arsmaster
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 16,226
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tiranis View Post
You can't hit a homerun with every signing. Canucks are doing pretty good considering they added Tanev and Lack for free. Are there teams with better free agent records over the past 3 years? (Serious question, I haven't checked...)
You can't, but the players that are being brought in to prospects camp (Fraser, Laleggia, Houser, even Zanetti) have gone on to really establish themselves this year.

Laleggia and Houser are both back in the draft, but we could have had both (Laleggia is a different case, we would have had to draft him, but Houser and Fraser could have been free prospects).

Just imagine right now that Fraser, Laleggia and Houser were all Canucks property right now. The prospect pool would look that much better, and we wouldn't have such a jaded outlook on our scouting department.

arsmaster is offline  
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 06:17 AM.

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.