HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Western Conference > Pacific Division > Vancouver Canucks
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

Second Round Pick: Canucks Select Anton Rodin

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
06-28-2009, 05:18 PM
  #126
Outside99*
Sedins off Kas
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,347
vCash: 500
Reading all the posts, this sounds like another great pick to me. A lot better than Sauve last year, IMO.

Outside99* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-29-2009, 12:15 AM
  #127
Mr. Canucklehead
Mod Supervisor
The Modfather
 
Mr. Canucklehead's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Kitimat, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 25,528
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Outside99 View Post
Reading all the posts, this sounds like another great pick to me. A lot better than Sauve last year, IMO.
How so? Sauve was a highly regarded prospect who fell to us at 41(a lot of scouting services had him in the 1st round) and he definitely has the tools to be an good NHLer. I think Rodin's high end potential may be higher, but I think Sauve is probably a better bet to make the NHL in some capacity whereas Rodin might be a bit more boom or bust.

~Canucklehead~

Mr. Canucklehead is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
06-29-2009, 02:19 AM
  #128
Outside99*
Sedins off Kas
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,347
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. Canucklehead View Post
How so? Sauve was a highly regarded prospect who fell to us at 41(a lot of scouting services had him in the 1st round) and he definitely has the tools to be an good NHLer. I think Rodin's high end potential may be higher, but I think Sauve is probably a better bet to make the NHL in some capacity whereas Rodin might be a bit more boom or bust.

~Canucklehead~
There are very,very few Dmen from the Q that have been successful in the NHL that didnt put up points as Juniors. Sauve has 30pts in his 3rd season in the Q even though he has the "tools" and is bigger than his peers? Its not going to happen. You can't teach offensive skills, IMO. anyway, i may be wrong but i don't think so.

Rodin is a much better pick because he has the potential at least.

Outside99* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-29-2009, 09:13 AM
  #129
F A N
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 1,616
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Outside99 View Post
Reading all the posts, this sounds like another great pick to me. A lot better than Sauve last year, IMO.
Nah. Sauve was a decent pick last year. It's hard to say if Rodin is a better pick. Not many people have seen Rodin play. But an offensive forward always sound more exciting than a physical Dman.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. Canucklehead View Post
How so? Sauve was a highly regarded prospect who fell to us at 41(a lot of scouting services had him in the 1st round) and he definitely has the tools to be an good NHLer. I think Rodin's high end potential may be higher, but I think Sauve is probably a better bet to make the NHL in some capacity whereas Rodin might be a bit more boom or bust.

~Canucklehead~
Sauve was at one time a highly regarded prospect. However, a lot of scouting services did have him drafted AFTER the first round. Not sure what you were reading. But I agree that Sauve is probably a safer bet to make the NHL considering his size and skillset.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Outside99 View Post
There are very,very few Dmen from the Q that have been successful in the NHL that didnt put up points as Juniors. Sauve has 30pts in his 3rd season in the Q even though he has the "tools" and is bigger than his peers? Its not going to happen. You can't teach offensive skills, IMO. anyway, i may be wrong but i don't think so.

Rodin is a much better pick because he has the potential at least.
First of all, when Bourdon was drafted, many criticized the Canucks drafting Bourdon based on the fact that Dmen from the Q simply haven't done well in the NHL, although the belief was that times were changing.

Second of all, I think you are restricting "potential" to only offensive potential. Sauve is projected to be a physical stay at home Dman rather than an offensive Dman. He was once projected to be more capable offensively, but by draft time, the belief was he was going to be more of a defensive Dman. It's like Ohlund. He never reached his offensive potential, but Ohlund was most valuable when he was playing physical mistake-free shutdown defense.

F A N is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-29-2009, 01:20 PM
  #130
LostMyGlasses*
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Simon Fraser
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,430
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wolfie View Post
Nah. Sauve was a decent pick last year. It's hard to say if Rodin is a better pick. Not many people have seen Rodin play. But an offensive forward always sound more exciting than a physical Dman.
Everyone look over there! Bright shiny lights!

Everyone get attracted to the bright shiny lights!

LostMyGlasses* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-29-2009, 01:25 PM
  #131
NFITO
hockeyinsanity*****
 
NFITO's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 27,928
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by LostMyGlasses View Post
Everyone look over there! Bright shiny lights!

Everyone get attracted to the bright shiny lights!
and Canuck fans' response:

wow... we've never seen bright shiny lights before... wonder if it'll be better than those dim, dull lights that look so great because they are huge, but hardly any light comes from them ever... and they usually just burn out before they can start to shine over us!!

maybe we should consider the bright shiny lights for once


NFITO is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-29-2009, 01:29 PM
  #132
Jay Cee
P4G
 
Jay Cee's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Halifax
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,656
vCash: 500
I have no problem with this pick but I find it kind of funny that people are so vehemently supporting it though. I mean, imagine it is 2 drafts ago, Nonis picks someone in the 2nd round that is projected as a late round pick. I think people would probably still be complaining strongly.

I find it odd to say "we shouldn't draft a different type of player because we should always pick the best player available" in regard to a player who was way off the "charts" as far as central scouting was concerned.

Jay Cee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-29-2009, 01:32 PM
  #133
LostMyGlasses*
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Simon Fraser
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,430
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pyatt4God View Post
I have no problem with this pick but I find it kind of funny that people are so vehemently supporting it though. I mean, imagine it is 2 drafts ago, Nonis picks someone in the 2nd round that is projected as a late round pick. I think people would probably still be complaining strongly.

I find it odd to say "we shouldn't draft a different type of player because we should always pick the best player available" in regard to a player who was way off the "charts" as far as central scouting was concerned.
This is a good post. Its clear that Gillis' apparent confidence and self assured persona has really rubbed off on Canuck fans.

Most Canucks fans have alot of faith in Gillis.

LostMyGlasses* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-29-2009, 01:33 PM
  #134
pitseleh
Registered User
 
pitseleh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,747
vCash: 500
Rodin wasn't projected as a late round pick. Most scouting services figured he'd be gone by the third round and he was a riser due to great play down the stretch and in the playoffs.

pitseleh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-29-2009, 01:35 PM
  #135
LostMyGlasses*
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Simon Fraser
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,430
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by pitseleh View Post
Rodin wasn't projected as a late round pick. Most scouting services figured he'd be gone by the third round and he was a riser due to great play down the stretch and in the playoffs.
His argument is still quite valid.

LostMyGlasses* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-29-2009, 01:35 PM
  #136
Barney Gumble
Registered User
 
Barney Gumble's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 22,622
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pyatt4God View Post
I have no problem with this pick but I find it kind of funny that people are so vehemently supporting it though. I mean, imagine it is 2 drafts ago, Nonis picks someone in the 2nd round that is projected as a late round pick. I think people would probably still be complaining strongly.

I find it odd to say "we shouldn't draft a different type of player because we should always pick the best player available" in regard to a player who was way off the "charts" as far as central scouting was concerned.
What did "Central Scouting" have Anton Rodin ranked at?

Barney Gumble is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-29-2009, 01:36 PM
  #137
pitseleh
Registered User
 
pitseleh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,747
vCash: 500
Yeah, his argument is valid if you ignore that one of the premises is false.

The best example of a Rodin type pick is Nonis picking Edler, and everyone was on board with it at the time.

pitseleh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-29-2009, 01:42 PM
  #138
Jay Cee
P4G
 
Jay Cee's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Halifax
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,656
vCash: 500
I don't remember seeing what people said about Edler, but by the 3rd round THN's lists run out so people are running blind

I am mistaken about the late round pick part, but I still believe that this pick would have been seen as anything but "on the board" or "best player available" from their armchair.

EDIT: I mean, we are still carrying on arguments on 2nd round picks in years long past cause we slipped 10 or 15 places in THN rankings and ended up getting an inferior player.

Jay Cee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-29-2009, 01:42 PM
  #139
LostMyGlasses*
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Simon Fraser
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,430
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by pitseleh View Post
Yeah, his argument is valid if you ignore that one of the premises is false.

The best example of a Rodin type pick is Nonis picking Edler, and everyone was on board with it at the time.
Really?

Which premise is false? That this pick was "off the chart" and that it wasnt the best pick available, both of which are true.

Substitute Gillis' name for Nonis and there would be a riot on these boards over Nonis wasting another pick.

LostMyGlasses* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-29-2009, 01:45 PM
  #140
KDizzle
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Bay Area
Country: Japan
Posts: 8,411
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by LostMyGlasses View Post
Really?

Which premise is false? That this pick was "off the chart" and that it wasnt the best pick available, both of which are true.

Substitute Gillis' name for Nonis and there would be a riot on these boards over Nonis wasting another pick.
Given that this was a Gradin pick, I'm sure even with Nonis at the helm, people would have been pretty receptive to this pick. The only criticism being (and this applies to Gillis as well) that they could have traded down to nab him at a lower spot in the 2nd and picked up a late-rounder to boot.

KDizzle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-29-2009, 01:47 PM
  #141
LostMyGlasses*
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Simon Fraser
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,430
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by KDizzle View Post
Given that this was a Gradin pick, I'm sure even with Nonis at the helm, people would have been pretty receptive to this pick. The only criticism being (and this applies to Gillis as well) that they could have traded down to nab him at a lower spot in the 2nd and picked up a late-rounder to boot.
I agree, however I dont want to hear all this absolute BS about Gillis being so awesome because he chooses the BPA.

This wasn't the BPA, and it was a high draft pick.

LostMyGlasses* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-29-2009, 01:56 PM
  #142
Blane Youngblood
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 3,469
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by LostMyGlasses View Post
Really?

Which premise is false? That this pick was "off the chart" and that it wasnt the best pick available, both of which are true.

Substitute Gillis' name for Nonis and there would be a riot on these boards over Nonis wasting another pick.
Agreed the pick was off the chart. Disagree with it wasn't the best pick available. Personally I wanted Ryan Howse, but for me to say my opinion is better then Gradin's would be pretty audacious.

Were you upset when the Canucks picked Elder because he wasn't rated in the 3rd round? Sometimes, the team just knows better then we (and the standard scouting services) do.

If the team f-ed it up, then we can get mad, but for now, we don't know who the BPA was (and we won't for a while).

Blane Youngblood is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-29-2009, 01:57 PM
  #143
NFITO
hockeyinsanity*****
 
NFITO's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 27,928
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by pitseleh View Post
Yeah, his argument is valid if you ignore that one of the premises is false.

The best example of a Rodin type pick is Nonis picking Edler, and everyone was on board with it at the time.
IIRC, Edler wasn't even ranked in CSS or any other draft ranking... his stock rose just before the draft because of teams scouting him (and the whole Detroit/his coach situation)... but at the time of the draft, I don't think he was even ranked on any top 100+ lists at all?? could be wrong there.

Rodin was definitely ranked... he was the #15 European player on CSS (he was the 12th European skater to be drafted). McKeen ranked him at 65 (he was picked at 53).

Is that really such an "off-the-board" pick? if the Canucks didn't pick him at 53, his actually ranking would have had him taken in the next few picks among a lot of scouting lists out there...

Edler was definitely off the board... Rodin, he was basically taken a few spots before he was expected to go, which isn't all that unusual for most players in any draft when you get to the 2nd+ rounds... and especially in this draft that was said to be deep and all over the place after the first 10-15 picks, it's really not at all an off the board pick to take him at 53.

The Canucks are obviously high on him... and if they wanted him, then he likely wouldn't have lasted to the 3rd round, given his ranking was already higher on most lists, while he was considered a prospect who's stock rocketed up in the last few months leading to the draft.

NFITO is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-29-2009, 01:58 PM
  #144
pitseleh
Registered User
 
pitseleh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,747
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pyatt4God View Post
I don't remember seeing what people said about Edler, but by the 3rd round THN's lists run out so people are running blind

I am mistaken about the late round pick part, but I still believe that this pick would have been seen as anything but "on the board" or "best player available" from their armchair.

EDIT: I mean, we are still carrying on arguments on 2nd round picks in years long past cause we slipped 10 or 15 places in THN rankings and ended up getting an inferior player.
That usually only happened in the first round when guys like Perron and Kopitar fell to the Canucks.

Obviously when he takes a guy who's a low upside player projected to go late 3rd/4th round with a high second round pick, he'll get crucified. But in '06 he could have taken probably 20 players with the Canucks early second and most people would have been content, even though it was the theoretical 'BPA' according to the prospect rankings. There wasn't some unanimity in crucifying him for not taking the BPA according to the rankings.

Quote:
Originally Posted by LostMyGlasses View Post
Really?

Which premise is false? That this pick was "off the chart" and that it wasnt the best pick available, both of which are true.
It wasn't off the chart. Off the chart is when you take a guy well before where he's expected to go not a couple of spots higher. This isn't taking the 40th ranked European when there are a bunch of guys between 10 and 15 available. This was taking the 15th ranked European according to CSB when all of the players available are between 10 and 15.

No, it wasn't the best pick available. But outside of the first round, Nonis wasn't criticized for not taking the BPA, he was criticized for taking huge reaches on (low upside) players at times. There's a huge difference.

You'd have a point if the Canucks took Stefan Elliot or Ryan O'Reilly in the first round over Schroeder and everyone was happy about it. It's not the same in this case.

pitseleh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-29-2009, 02:00 PM
  #145
pitseleh
Registered User
 
pitseleh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,747
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by LostMyGlasses View Post
I agree, however I dont want to hear all this absolute BS about Gillis being so awesome because he chooses the BPA.

This wasn't the BPA, and it was a high draft pick.
No one is saying necessarily that he took the BPA. Only time will tell.

People are happy because they took a player with upside who was projected to go in that range.

pitseleh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-29-2009, 02:00 PM
  #146
LostMyGlasses*
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Simon Fraser
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,430
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by jin View Post
Agreed the pick was off the chart. Disagree with it wasn't the best pick available. Personally I wanted Ryan Howse, but for me to say my opinion is better then Gradin's would be pretty audacious.

Were you upset when the Canucks picked Elder because he wasn't rated in the 3rd round? Sometimes, the team just knows better then we (and the standard scouting services) do.

If the team f-ed it up, then we can get mad, but for now, we don't know who the BPA was (and we won't for a while).
I agree that if Gradin thinks this player is special, then we should probably draft him, or even draft him farther ahead of where he is ranked.

However, if that was the case, then its not based on "best pick available" but rather the intimate knowledge of your scouts.

I've heard countless posters on this board praise Gillis for taking the BPA in the last two drafts. This simply isn't the case in this pick.

Not making a value judgment on the player, keep in mind.

LostMyGlasses* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-29-2009, 02:01 PM
  #147
Jay Cee
P4G
 
Jay Cee's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Halifax
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,656
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by jin View Post
Agreed the pick was off the chart. Disagree with it wasn't the best pick available. Personally I wanted Ryan Howse, but for me to say my opinion is better then Gradin's would be pretty audacious.

Were you upset when the Canucks picked Elder because he wasn't rated in the 3rd round? Sometimes, the team just knows better then we (and the standard scouting services) do.

If the team f-ed it up, then we can get mad, but for now, we don't know who the BPA was (and we won't for a while).
That was my original point though. People say audacious things all the time.

I know us fans like to talk like we know what we're talking about in regards to scouting and what not, but we really don't. We never see these guys play, most of us have never played even a high level of hockey or have been in the business of a high level. We are presented with rankings from various sources, and make judgments based solely on that. I believe management, scouts and drafting should be based on results. That's why I said I have no problem with the pick, because I haven't been an NHL scout for 5-15-20 years and I have never seen the guy play.

Jay Cee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-29-2009, 03:17 PM
  #148
Free Kassian
Registered User
 
Free Kassian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Surrey, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 21,195
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by LostMyGlasses View Post
I've heard countless posters on this board praise Gillis for taking the BPA in the last two drafts. This simply isn't the case in this pick.
Don't you get it? Nobody knows whether or not Rodin was the best player available at #53 and we won't know for a long time. What is plainly obvious is that the desire for a 'name' player seems to be clouding your judgment of the selection.

Who, taken between #53 and #83 - the next Vancouver pick - would you rather have than Rodin? Outside of possibly Orlov and Tatar who are still major unknowns at this point, there isn't anyone 'better' at this stage of their development.

Would you prefer a big, slow, dumb d-man like Taylor Doherty, who looks like the second coming of Ian Forbes, or possibly Brayden McNabb, who skates in quicksand?

Free Kassian is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-29-2009, 07:39 PM
  #149
thefeebster
Registered User
 
thefeebster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Vancouver, BC
Posts: 5,733
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by LostMyGlasses View Post
I've heard countless posters on this board praise Gillis for taking the BPA in the last two drafts. This simply isn't the case in this pick.
I've been following this draft for quite some time and i must say i was shocked at how off the board many teams drafted. After the 1st round, there was rarely any consistency of drafting on the board. But to say Rodin is "off the charts" is just plain lack of knowledge.

Connauton would be considered off the charts since he was chosen about 120 spots higher than he was ranked. Rodin was slated to go in the early 3rd round at the VERY LEAST. Whats the harm in getting a guy they liked and have been following for a good amount of the year 10 spots earlier?? He would have been gone by the 3rd round pick.

Also, each team has their own BPA list. Gillis himself said Rodin was a first round talent, according to their ranking system. Teams don't just follow the CSS rankings when making decisions and i think it would be foolish to expect that they do. The Canucks pay money to scouters for a reason.

thefeebster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-29-2009, 08:35 PM
  #150
Andy Dufresne
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Country: Kazakhstan
Posts: 1,621
vCash: 700
Quote:
Originally Posted by LostMyGlasses View Post
I agree that if Gradin thinks this player is special, then we should probably draft him, or even draft him farther ahead of where he is ranked.

However, if that was the case, then its not based on "best pick available" but rather the intimate knowledge of your scouts.

I've heard countless posters on this board praise Gillis for taking the BPA in the last two drafts. This simply isn't the case in this pick.

Not making a value judgment on the player, keep in mind.
I think you're a little off on the entire concept of best player available. The opposite of BPA is drafting "for need".

Example- The Canucks need some power forwards in their system so they reach for Mattias Lindstrom with the #53. or they "need" offensive defenceman so they take Tyson Barrie with the #53.

Drafting BPA is always going to be based on your own scouts list- that's why you're paying them. If a team was just going to draft the next guy on the Central Scouting list they wouldn't bother hiring scouts.

Andy Dufresne is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

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 10:11 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2015 All Rights Reserved.