I liked Collberg the best, even over Gaunce, because he has mad skills, and we seem to be adept at developing Swedes into star players.(Sedins, Edler, and Jensen[if he sorta counts] and Tommernes tearing up the SEL)
He also significantly outperformed Forsberg at the WJC.
Going from the Collbergs to the Gaunces is a change in draft philosophy. One that I'm warming up to as I see what happens in the playoffs year after year.
Pure skill doesn't work. In the playoffs, the smaller skilled guys get cancelled out. You have to be able to do something else. Something else that impacts the game. This is Gaunce. This is not Collberg.
I have been a vocal proponent of drafting skill first. Skill above everything. But this team has skill in abundance and it fails. So my opinion is slowly changing.
Bottom line, I think it best to build through players that are relevant all over the ice, and then supplement with skill. But you need that base first. That's Gaunce.
That's the danger - with the Rockets' track record of producing great defencemen, people put a premium on their D in the draft, and that'll mean some bad picks of guys who don't have what Weber, Myers, Gorges, et. al. had. In terms of Rockets precedents, the guy Severson reminds me of is Mike Card, who was a fringe first-round prospect going into his draft year, then tanked badly and wound up going in the 8th to Buffalo; he didn't get a second contract from the Sabres and apparently played in Italy last season. The size and skill level are pretty similar. If he doesn't have more drive than Card (which, granted, isn't a high standard), he won't have much of an NHL career.
Agreed with NJ, though. He's the kind of guy they make into serviceable, but unspectacular, NHL defencemen. It's a good fit for him.
Yes I understand your point about Kelowna.
So I take it that you would not have wanted Severson drafted with the 2nd rndr?
I liked Collberg the best, even over Gaunce, because he has mad skills, and we seem to be adept at developing Swedes into star players.(Sedins, Edler, and Jensen[if he sorta counts] and Tommernes tearing up the SEL)
He also significantly outperformed Forsberg at the WJC.
So I take it that you would not have wanted Severson drafted with the 2nd rndr?
He was the best defenceman available at that point, but it wouldn't have made much sense for us to take a D there unless a really obvious steal was available, like Thrower.
There sort of seperate, but their on pace to be much better than their draft positions suggested, right now I wouldn't say it's a stretch to say both will be impact players; Jensen is arguably the best player on his team his first season in a men's legue and for Tommernes being the 2nd last pick in the draft being amongst the top scoring defensemen, that's pretty amazing.
Going from the Collbergs to the Gaunces is a change in draft philosophy. One that I'm warming up to as I see what happens in the playoffs year after year.
Pure skill doesn't work. In the playoffs, the smaller skilled guys get cancelled out. You have to be able to do something else. Something else that impacts the game. This is Gaunce. This is not Collberg.
I have been a vocal proponent of drafting skill first. Skill above everything. But this team has skill in abundance and it fails. So my opinion is slowly changing.
Bottom line, I think it best to build through players that are relevant all over the ice, and then supplement with skill. But you need that base first. That's Gaunce.
Once we traded a player named Stojanov for a player called Naslund.
I agree it's important to have toughness in our lineup, but after trading Hodgson for Kassian, and having another future power forward in Jensen, as well as drafting based on size in all the later rounds as well, we could afford to add some skill to our prospect pool. We'll still need skilled players to score goals, I think we should find a nice balance, and not settle for a tough 2-3 C when we could get a potential 1st line winger.
I'm still very happy with Gaunce, I didn't expect either to be available, but I have the feeling a few years down the road we'll be kicking ourselves.
Pure skill doesn't work. In the playoffs, the smaller skilled guys get cancelled out. You have to be able to do something else. Something else that impacts the game. This is Gaunce. This is not Collberg.
this bit has a great deal of truth
Quote:
I have been a vocal proponent of drafting skill first. Skill above everything. But this team has skill in abundance and it fails. So my opinion is slowly changing.
This bit I don't. Who are our skill players - Daniel and Henrik. I don't think we have one more player that could be called a true skill player. If anything we don't have enough top 6 skill. We need skill upgrades at 3C and top 6 winger.
Prospects wise we have some that might make a case as skill players, but they are offset by similar numbers of 2-way players with size.
Quote:
Bottom line, I think it best to build through players that are relevant all over the ice, and then supplement with skill. But you need that base first. That's Gaunce.
Gaunce certainly fills a hole - big 2-way 3C with more upside.
Pure skill doesn't work. In the playoffs, the smaller skilled guys get cancelled out. You have to be able to do something else. Something else that impacts the game. This is Gaunce. This is not Collberg.
Pure skill doesn't work. In the playoffs, the smaller skilled guys get cancelled out. You have to be able to do something else. Something else that impacts the game. This is Gaunce. This is not Collberg.
Once we traded a player named Stojanov for a player called Naslund.
I agree it's important to have toughness in our lineup, but after trading Hodgson for Kassian, and having another future power forward in Jensen, as well as drafting based on size in all the later rounds as well, we could afford to add some skill to our prospect pool. We'll still need skilled players to score goals, I think we should find a nice balance, and not settle for a tough 2-3 C when we could get a potential 1st line winger.
I'm still very happy with Gaunce, I didn't expect either to be available, but I have the feeling a few years down the road we'll be kicking ourselves.
I agree with the part about balance. Teams need both. But if you are missing both, build the base first. That includes size, 2way play, and board work. If you don't have that first, your skill is going to have nothing to stand on. Nothing to work off of.
Probability of reaching a ceiling is also very important. You said the decision is between a 2-3 C vs a 1st line W. That's too simplified. You have to factor in the probability of each pick reaching that ceiling as well. Collberg has far more developing to do before he reaches the pros. Gaunce could play right now. So it's not a straight across comparison.
Gillis also isn't forgoing skill for size either. Gaunce is underrated skill-wise. But I definitely see a shift to get better combinations of size+skill, instead of just pure skill. It's why they picked Jensen over Rattie. That's another reason I think they devalued Collberg and Aberg in their ranking.
Honestly can't say anything bad about the Gaunce pick. I really like it. Dansk would have been cool, but right now just isn't a fit, and the only time I really look at and care about the position of player being drafted, is if they are a goalie
This bit I don't. Who are our skill players - Daniel and Henrik. I don't think we have one more player that could be called a true skill player. If anything we don't have enough top 6 skill. We need skill upgrades at 3C and top 6 winger.
Well it's not as apparent because they aren't purely skilled like the twins. Kesler is still skilled. He also has the rounded game to fall back on. Burrows, Raymond, Hansen and Booth have skill, to varying degrees. But they also do other things. With the Sedins, they are so reliant on their skill that they stand out amongst the pack, but I wouldn't say they're the only skilled players on the team.
All that said, my comment was more a reference to the recent iterations of the Canucks, not just last year. Players like Demitra, Sundin, Wellwood and Samuelsson have been here, and the Canucks' skill advantage was even more apparent then. Yet the playoff results never matched the hype.
should always add more skill. i would say our team was better than boston if everybody stayed healthy. by adding more skill through out the lineup would counter act the grinding teams that are out there now. unless we change the whole team and have a Getzlaf and Perry instead of Dank and Hank. this change MG is making is the incorrect one imo. now we're playing catch up with all the other teams that have been stocking big gritty players for years, and to play the same game as boston, la of the world, we need big tough skilled 1st line players, and that's not our game. what's the point of having tough 3rd and 4th line when we can't be better or match those teams. it's like a game of rock paper scissor. if other team is rock, we go paper, we can try to be a bigger rock, but it's a lot tougher when they already have the biggest rock out there.
should always add more skill. i would say our team was better than boston if everybody stayed healthy. by adding more skill through out the lineup would counter act the grinding teams that are out there now. unless we change the whole team and have a Getzlaf and Perry instead of Dank and Hank. this change MG is making is the incorrect one imo. now we're playing catch up with all the other teams that have been stocking big gritty players for years, and to play the same game as boston, la of the world, we need big tough skilled 1st line players, and that's not our game. what's the point of having tough 3rd and 4th line when we can't be better or match those teams. it's like a game of rock paper scissor. if other team is rock, we go paper, we can try to be a bigger rock, but it's a lot tougher when they already have the biggest rock out there.
The team isn't going rock, it's going sandpaper. I'd say more big bodies in our lineup makes it harder for other teams and opens up room for the Sedins.
You have to realize that refs are calling games differently then even a few years ago and as a result it's taken a lot of the skill advantage out of the playoffs. Ever since that Chicago/Philly final the NHL has let more and more go in the playoffs to the point where the most skilled teams are lucky to make the conference semi's. It's sad because after 06-07 the league looked like it was actually making steps in the right direction. There was some really good hockey played between 2007-2010 but it has slowly creeped back towards trap/clutch and grab hockey. Since the NHL has lots of free time on it's hands maybe they should find real solutions that will allow skill to thrive.
The team isn't going rock, it's going sandpaper. I'd say more big bodies in our lineup makes it harder for other teams and opens up room for the Sedins.
You have to realize that refs are calling games differently then even a few years ago and as a result it's taken a lot of the skill advantage out of the playoffs. Ever since that Chicago/Philly final the NHL has let more and more go in the playoffs to the point where the most skilled teams are lucky to make the conference semi's. It's sad because after 06-07 the league looked like it was actually making steps in the right direction. There was some really good hockey played between 2007-2010 but it has slowly creeped back towards trap/clutch and grab hockey. Since the NHL has lots of free time on it's hands maybe they should find real solutions that will allow skill to thrive.
i doubt sandpaper will make more room for the sedines than a skilled dangler or sniper. just saying we shouldn't copy the trend, we should set it. when the team have skills through the forward lines and able to roll the lines and outmatch other team's forwards we do pretty well. i think it's the only way to go with our core group. changing formula when we already have a successful team could be costly.
yes they were calling it differently last season, and it was tough to watch. but who knows, they might switch it back after the lockout. then go in another direction? like i said, need to set trends rather than chase it. oh and i really do hope they find a solution to this clutch trap type of hockey.
back then i wasn't too familiar with gaunce, but after doing some research he seems like a safe pick which is always good for the late first round. however at the time i really wanted us to draft henrik samuelsson. dalton thrower too since he's a vancouver kid
Only other player I wanted was Samuelsson. The kid oozed what was missing from our top 2 lines.
But I was also amazed how Gaunce sat there still when we went to pick, and was jumping up and down at the pick. I like the kids size and skill set. I believe him to be our new Ryan Kesler once Kesler moves up the line up permantly when Hank and Dan move back to Sweden.
I also like the fact he was a huge bright spot on a weak team, while showing leadership and scoring ability while also being heavily relied upon by the coaching staff. If the Bulldogs are still a weak team come playoff time, I hope one of the upper echelon teams pick him up for some playoff time.
I wanted Ludvig Bystrom really bad pre-draft, kid's a great prospect with lots of potential. Although after watching the draft go in the unpredictable order that it did I was stoked to have the options of players like Gaunce and Collberg available that I'm more than happy with our selection. Too bad we didn't get Bystrom in the 2nd though.
Some good posts in this thread. I too think that we still could use more skill throughout the lineup, and that the team outside of the Sedins aren't quite as skilled as it seems. Especially guys like Raymond, Hansen, Higgins, Booth - they do have another aspect to their game that they can fall back on if they're not scoring, which is always good, but they're not guys with great shots, puck-handling ability or playmaking vision. Plus that group is lacking size too.
Which is why I see the merits of drafting big guys who have a measure of skill as well as a two-way game. I just think we'll need to complement them in future with some really talented players so we can strike that coveted balance of skill, size and toughness that works well in the playoffs.
