Ellington and Rahimi are 2 defensive defensemen taken early on in the draft that haven't developed well whatsoever.
The only success the team has had drafting defensemen is by taking guys with some offensive punch - Bieksa and Edler.
Looking at the drafting history of the Canucks how many stay at home dmen have developed into impact players at the NHL level? Admittedly the club seems to take a fair bit more forwards than blueliners but their success rate with defensemen in general has been pretty abysmal, especially defensive ones.
Defensive defensemen can be very valuable players. I just don't know if they're 'safe' picks just because they play a safe, conservative style on the ice. Looking through the history of Canuck draft picks, it's hard to disagree with that.
Ellington and Rahimi are 2 defensive defensemen taken early on in the draft that haven't developed well whatsoever.
The only success the team has had drafting defensemen is by taking guys with some offensive punch - Bieksa and Edler.
Looking at the drafting history of the Canucks how many stay at home dmen have developed into impact players at the NHL level? Admittedly the club seems to take a fair bit more forwards than blueliners but their success rate with defensemen in general has been pretty abysmal, especially defensive ones.
Defensive defensemen can be very valuable players. I just don't know if they're 'safe' picks just because they play a safe, conservative style on the ice. Looking through the history of Canuck draft picks, it's hard to disagree with that.
To be fair, even as defensive defensemen, both Ellington and Rahimi were off the board picks IIRC. (Ellington for certain, I'm pretty sure Rahimi was relatively unknown). But even then, there was buzz about Rahimi being a possible captain for the Swedish WJC team(he ended up playing, but only as a bit player).
Ellington and Rahimi are 2 defensive defensemen taken early on in the draft that haven't developed well whatsoever.
The only success the team has had drafting defensemen is by taking guys with some offensive punch - Bieksa and Edler.
Looking at the drafting history of the Canucks how many stay at home dmen have developed into impact players at the NHL level? Admittedly the club seems to take a fair bit more forwards than blueliners but their success rate with defensemen in general has been pretty abysmal, especially defensive ones.
Defensive defensemen can be very valuable players. I just don't know if they're 'safe' picks just because they play a safe, conservative style on the ice. Looking through the history of Canuck draft picks, it's hard to disagree with that.
Yea, I agree the picks we've made in the past were brutal. Doesn't mean we shouldn't try or improve in the future.
You're the first to complain about the Canucks drafting history, but you'll use this poor history to argue why we shouldn't draft defensive defencemen?
If our drafting is so admittedly bad, why would you use the poor drafting past as an example of how the future could trend with a new GM at the reigns?
IMO if Gillis is half the drafting GM all of you make him out to be, I wouldn't be worried in the slightest of his choice, if he chooses the defensive dman route.
Sorry, but the only thing your post articulated is that you know little about Schenn. He hits, plays hard, is already decent in his own zone, and has a very good shot. I think he can be a 10 goal-30 point guy easy in his prime, while being a premier shut down defenceman.
Schenn is not one dimensional. Thats laughable.
Who?
What are his other dimensions? Hitting and playing hard are part of being a shutdown d man.
He's never racked up more than 29 points at any time in his career (his highest in the NHL is his 17 last year in his second year). His highest goal total was 7 goals in his last year in junior. Granted this means very little for forecasting, but it's better than basing it off nothing but pure guessing. So sure, he might get up to that 30 point level and consistently stay there through his career... hell he might even exceed it. Then again, the Leafs might attract some top offensive talent on the back line in future, and his point total will fall.
To me, as a defensemen... you can either be a complete D man (having an offensive and defensive game), an offensive specialist or a shutdown man. All other little things (being gritty, fighting, hitting, good stick, passing, shooting etc. fall into these categories in my mind). And in my opinion, the Leafs drafted him because they saw him as a long-term shutdown guy.
Nothing wrong with being a premiere shutdown guy. I'd kill to have Schenn on my team. I still think he's not the type of player you draft with a first round pick (or maybe you use a 25-30 spot pick on him...)
The hockey news assessment :
Quote:
ASSETS: Has excellent shutdown ability and leadership qualities. Takes the man with aplomb and has enough mobility to recover when beat.
FLAWS: Doesn't have great offensive instincts, which will limit his ability to rack up points at the National Hockey League level.
CAREER POTENTIAL: Potential shutdown defenseman.
HF Assessment:
Quote:
Talent Analysis
Schenn plays a strong and physical defense. Touted as a shut-down defenseman, Schenn is generally underrated offensively, an aspect of his skill set that is likely to materialize as he matures in professional hockey.
Future
He has the potential to become a shut down defender at the NHL level.
What are his other dimensions? Hitting and playing hard are part of being a shutdown d man.
No, it is not. There are many "shutdown" or defensive dmen in the NHL that do not hit or play physical.
Quote:
He's never racked up more than 29 points at any time in his career (his highest in the NHL is his 17 last year in his second year). His highest goal total was 7 goals in his last year in junior. Granted this means very little for forecasting, but it's better than basing it off nothing but pure guessing. So sure, he might get up to that 30 point level and consistently stay there through his career... hell he might even exceed it. Then again, the Leafs might attract some top offensive talent on the back line in future, and his point total will fall.
17 points playing while playing no PP time is great for a sophomore who struggled early in the season. I don't see any problems with him hitting 10 goals and getting some more assists as his PP time increases, and his TOI increases overall.
A 30 point defensive shut down first pairing dmen are what get it done in the playoffs.
The leafs have premier offensive talent on the blue line. Phanuef can shoot the puck, Kaberle is an ideal puck mover, and Gunnarsson looks to be ready to step into a top 4 offensive role. I wouldn't be surprised to see Schenn's shot utilized on the second unit PP this upcoming season.
Yea, I agree the picks we've made in the past were brutal. Doesn't mean we shouldn't try or improve in the future.
You're the first to complain about the Canucks drafting history, but you'll use this poor history to argue why we shouldn't draft defensive defencemen?
If our drafting is so admittedly bad, why would you use the poor drafting past as an example of how the future could trend with a new GM at the reigns?
IMO if Gillis is half the drafting GM all of you make him out to be, I wouldn't be worried in the slightest of his choice, if he chooses the defensive dman route.
The Canucks drafting hasn't been that bad over the last 5 or 6 years(excluding 2007) besides a couple atrocious picks here and there. I was pointing out that drafting a player that plays a safe game doesn't translate to it being a safe pick - if you disagree with the premise of that point why not dispute it using facts or examples as to why?
What draft picks have turned out well in recent history - what's the pattern there? Well, let's take a quick look...
Mason Raymond, Ryan Kesler, Michael Grabner, Alex Edler, Jannik Hansen are the 5 guys to crack the roster in the past 7 drafts and what do they all have in common? They're all good to elite skaters that have good to great skillsets.
Now take a look at the draft day busts-
Patrick White, Taylor Ellington, Daniel Rahimi, Marc-Andre Bernier etc. All poor skaters, mostly with limited skillsets.
The only success the team has had at the draft table in the last 6-7 years pre-Mike Gillis has been with players who skate well and have a fair level of skill to go with it. How many defensive defensemen have the Canucks drafted in the last 7 or 8 years do you see even translating their game to the AHL level? I sure don't see any. Maybe not that 'safe' after all.
You don't need to convince me a defensive defenseman can be a valuable member of a team - I'm a huge fan of Willie Mitchell's game. I just don't know if the risk/reward more often than not makes selecting a one dimensional defensive player a smart pick, especially early on in the draft.
The leafs have premier offensive talent on the blue line. Phanuef can shoot the puck, Kaberle is an ideal puck mover, and Gunnarsson looks to be ready to step into a top 4 offensive role. I wouldn't be surprised to see Schenn's shot utilized on the second unit PP this upcoming season.
The Canucks drafting hasn't been that bad over the last 5 or 6 years(excluding 2007) besides a couple atrocious picks here and there. I was pointing out that drafting a player that plays a safe game doesn't translate to it being a safe pick - if you disagree with the premise of that point why not dispute it using facts or examples as to why?
What draft picks have turned out well in recent history - what's the pattern there? Well, let's take a quick look...
Mason Raymond, Ryan Kesler, Michael Grabner, Alex Edler, Jannik Hansen are the 5 guys to crack the roster in the past 7 drafts and what do they all have in common? They're all good to elite skaters that have good to great skillsets.
Now take a look at the draft day busts-
Patrick White, Taylor Ellington, Daniel Rahimi, Marc-Andre Bernier etc. All poor skaters, mostly with limited skillsets.
The only success the team has had at the draft table in the last 6-7 years pre-Mike Gillis has been with players who skate well and have a fair level of skill to go with it. How many defensive defensemen have the Canucks drafted in the last 7 or 8 years do you see even translating their game to the AHL level? I sure don't see any. Maybe not that 'safe' after all.
You don't need to convince me a defensive defenseman can be a valuable member of a team - I'm a huge fan of Willie Mitchell's game. I just don't know if the risk/reward more often than not makes selecting a one dimensional defensive player a smart pick, especially early on in the draft.
I thought Patrick White's strength was his skating?
You don't need to convince me a defensive defenseman can be a valuable member of a team - I'm a huge fan of Willie Mitchell's game. I just don't know if the risk/reward more often than not makes selecting a one dimensional defensive player a smart pick, especially early on in the draft.
And to support your point Willie Mitchell was drafted in the eighth round (199th over-all) by NJD in 1996. In the first round that draft in the top ten picks, these Dmen were selected:
Code:
1 Chris Phillips Defence Canada Ottawa Senators Prince Albert Raiders (WHL)
2 Andrei Zyuzin Defence Russia San Jose Sharks Salavat Yulaev Ufa (Russia)
5 Ric Jackman Defence Canada Dallas Stars Sault Ste. Marie Greyhounds (OHL)
8 Johnathan Aitken Defence Canada Boston Bruins Medicine Hat Tigers (WHL)
9 Ruslan Salei Defence Belarus Mighty Ducks of Anaheim Las Vegas Thunder (IHL)
10 Lance Ward Defence Canada New Jersey Devils Red Deer Rebels (WHL)
I think schenn can become another adam foote like player.
hitting is not everything, schenn needs to continue to improve his defensive awareness.
the jury is still out if he can be a top notch shutdown dman 'with' with a physical presence, or simply a glorified 2nd tier defensive dman that likes to hit.
You don't need to convince me a defensive defenseman can be a valuable member of a team - I'm a huge fan of Willie Mitchell's game. I just don't know if the risk/reward more often than not makes selecting a one dimensional defensive player a smart pick, especially early on in the draft.
Willie Mitchell is a bit of a bad example as he *was* known for being decent offensively *before* he was drafted.
A 30 point defensive shut down first pairing dmen are what get it done in the playoffs.
I'm not sure why some people cling to this notion.
Tiny, one dimensional forwards with no defensive presence or physical play 'get it done in the playoffs' - Daniel Briere.
There isn't one style of play over another you can say 'gets it done in the playoffs'. You're just perpetuating a myth if you think a defensive defenseman that puts up 30 points is going to be more valuable come playoff time than a Duncan Keith or Scott Niedermayer type - it's just flat out wrong.
If defensive defensemen are as valuable as two-way guys why aren't the best stay at home dmen in the world ever earning more than $4mil a season? Obviously g.m.'s around the league don't see them as anywhere near as valuable as a Dan Boyle or Duncan Keith to team success - if they did, the demand would go up and drive price with it.
I'm not sure why some people cling to this notion.
Tiny, one dimensional forwards with no defensive presence or physical play 'get it done in the playoffs' - Daniel Briere.
There isn't one style of play over another you can say 'gets it done in the playoffs'. You're just perpetuating a myth if you think a defensive defenseman that puts up 30 points is going to be more valuable come playoff time than a Duncan Keith or Scott Niedermayer type - it's just flat out wrong.
If defensive defensemen are as valuable as two-way guys why aren't the best stay at home dmen in the world ever earning more than $4mil a season? Obviously g.m.'s around the league don't see them as anywhere near as valuable as a Dan Boyle or Duncan Keith to team success - if they did, the demand would go up and drive price with it.
Its funny you guys are still debating about physicality/skill.
You would like duncan keith, and a 30 pt defensive dman that LMG likes would be brent seabrook.
so you guys are basically debating over keith/seabrook. Although 99% of the people will pick keith, both players are needed for their team's success.
so you guys are basically debating over keith/seabrook. Although 99% of the people will pick keith, both players are needed for their team's success.
I would take Keith over Seabrook without thinking twice - not even close IMO.
If defensive defenseman were in fact 'safe' picks I could see the merit in selecting them with any regularity. Unless I see some numbers that corroborate that players that play a safe game are in fact safe picks I won't change my opinion. There's certainly nothing in the Canucks drafting history to suggest such a pattern exists - but I'm always open to new information...
Except Lost My Glasses is arguing for Schenn. I'm curious if he actually thinks Schenn will ever have the impact of Seabrook.
Compare their numbers in similar years. And why in God's name are we comparing Schenn to Seabrook? Where did this comparison begin? I certainly never made it.
My argument is that Luke Schenn isn't one dimensional, he is good defensively and has a good shot. That would be two dimensions.
I thought Patrick White's strength was his skating?
It was, but don't let facts get in the way of a good argument:
Quote:
Talent Analysis
White's a creative playmaker who can give a team a lot of confidence. He skates very well and can handle the puck very well in and out of traffic. His biggest strength lies within his all-around game.
I think schenn can become another adam foote like player.
hitting is not everything, schenn needs to continue to improve his defensive awareness.
the jury is still out if he can be a top notch shutdown dman 'with' with a physical presence, or simply a glorified 2nd tier defensive dman that likes to hit.
Adam Foote was a great skater until he aged, as evidenced by his impressive play at multiple tournaments played on IIHF sized ice. Also in his junior days he was also a very good offensive player as well.
Generally a player who is dominant defensively with good skating and hockey sense at the junior level will be able to use those advantages to help pitch in some offense as well.
It was, but don't let facts get in the way of a good argument:
Not sure where you got that scouting report because it's a terrible assessment of Patrick White. He's not a playmaker and his footspeed and strength were the 2 area's he needed to improve upon if he was ever to play in the NHL. He had no first step quickness to speak of. His shot was his greatest attribute.
