Father Ryan

  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

205 Good

About Father Ryan

  • Rank
    Comets Regular

Recent Profile Visitors

805 profile views
  1. Bouchard vs. Dobson - The Athletic's in-depth analysis

    Of the four being mentioned this late, my take is Bouchard as the pick. He's pretty much everything we need in a top 4 Dman. Notice I didn't say top pairing, guaranteed...that honor belongs to Dahlin, and maybe Hughes (big maybe...size limiting factor). But I could see him developing into that role, and honestly, who do we have that has a higher potential right now? No one...with all due respect to OJ. After Bouchard, given what we have, I'd go with Kotnaniemi, then Dobson, then Tkachuk, then maybe Boqvist; I could see Veleno that high also. The main reason I'm putting Tkachuk down that far is 1) if there is anything we may have decently stocked, it's wingers...and 2) for someone so highly ranked, he did not score that much last year; I would have expected closer to a 20 goal year out of him, for a top 10 winger. I don't doubt he's going to make the NHL...I just see our needs not having him as high as the other four.
  2. Juolevi or 2018 pick

    Why do we have to choose? I'd rather have both. I guess, since the question is there, the #7 pick likely has more potential, but really...until about 5 years or so after they start playing, it's all a guessing game. And oh, about OJ's back. That is a fairly minor procedure; the incision will be about 1" long (at the longest) and the prognosis on that kind of surgery is almost always excellent. That he has an injury, honestly no big surprise. One, it's the Canucks! Two, it's hockey, not curling. That it's a minor injury, great! (PS...I'm in the medical field, professionally. This is not just a guess)
  3. Rethinking our LH Defense (Discussion)

    Good post, very reasonable suggestions, @janisahockeynut. I'd definitely look at Moore and Cole (in that order); I don't think either one would break the bank. MDZ I've been all for trading, Poulliott I could see moving.
  4. From this list, I'd say we have the player with the most potential (Petersson) and I don't think we have the worst (Juolevi>Dal Colle). Overall, I think it's been a success.
  5. I could see Grabner working with Gagner. A playmaking center, matched with a goal scorer. Both on 4th line, get Grabner extra work on the PK. I could see this, no more than a 2 year deal though.
  6. I think having the farm team in an environment like Utica is much better than, say, Abbotsford. They get a chance to get a lot of practice time, as travel between games is not very far. The atmosphere at the games is phenomenal for its support of the players. Utica doesn't really have that much else to offer its citizens in the way of professional, or semi-professional, sports, other than the Comets. They get to find out on a smaller scale, what it is like to be a professional athlete. As far as having very few players move up from there, who really has shone there AND shown anything here? Its a short list: Markstrom, Gaunce, Archibald, Virtanen and Goldobin. Of those, we drafted only Gaunce and Archie. So its not like our drafting, prior to the last couple of years, has done that much to enhance the club. We've seen plenty of guys get to Vancouver that didn't pan out: Grenier, Labate, Boucher (I know its not over yet, but I can hear the "fat lady" humming) come to mind. So I don't think that the distance between here and there has a whole lot to do with it. Maybe if (and when) the western half of the NHL gets all their farm teams out west, it will be a good time to move our farm closer to home. Maybe Abbotsford, maybe Kelowna, maybe Spokane. One place I don't want them is in the old Pacific Coliseum. Keep them away from the cannibalistic press in Vancouver, at least until they are on the 'Nucks!
  7. We all know that we have only 6 picks. We need more. Getting them at the draft can be costly. However, I've got three moves to suggest. 1) MDZ to Boston for a 3rd round pick. MDZ is a known quantity; he can and will hit, he can and will provide some offense, and also he isn't great in his own end (consistently). Boston could afford to shelter him in their 2nd/3rd pairing, thereby limiting the risk while taking advantage of his offensive talents. We get a 3rd; a little ammunition to move around some (maybe) 2) Trade with Chicago; a cap dump. We take on Hossa's salary, in exchange for a 3rd and a 4th. I'd like their 2nd, but as high as they are drafting, I wouldn't give it up either. So far, 3 added picks - 2 3rd's and a 4th (which we didn't have due to the Poulliott trade) The big trade. To NYI - Nilsson (his value really isn't going to get any higher than right now); Marcus Granlund (inexpensive, good defensively which NYI desperately needs); our 2nd round pick this year, and Gudbranson. With both Tanev and Edler not going anywhere (at least until the TDL in 2019), we just don't have any big names on D that NYI would want, so that we keep the draft pick. At 6th overall in the 2nd round, it is pretty close to being a 1st. My thinking here is: start with the 2nd; Guddy improves that 2nd to a late first (call it about 24th overall); Nilsson improves it to about #15; Granlund makes up the difference (I think Granlund alone would fetch a high 3rd/very low 2nd). If not enough, I would readily add Brisebois or Chatfield. That's about the only way I can see us putting together a package good enough to pry one of NYI's two 1st round picks away from them. Essentially, trying to turn our 2nd into a 1st. If successful, then...Dobson and Veleno?!
  8. Olli Juolevi | D

    I'm with you on this one. I just wonder who gets traded to make room for Juolevi. If we go with exactly the same people as last year, who does OJ beat out to make the team? I believe OJ will become a good to very good (but not great) Dman; paired with Tanev I think is the way to go. I also think @Ihatetomatoes has it right, it may take half the season before OJ starts "getting it".
  9. Benning and Linden quotes on Draft Prospects

    Be that as it may. Yes, good-great season and I have watched the kid rocket up the rankings. Call it a philosophical difference of opinion. I would prefer drafting D, all things being equal. I do value your opinion, believe me. You...and several others who offer well thought out posts.
  10. Benning and Linden quotes on Draft Prospects

    Yes, he would be there also. But would that be a reach? I was thinking more along the lines of not only who would be available at #7, but also who would be considered to go that high. Kotkaniemi, I was thinking would be perfect for the #11 or #12 pick that NYI has, if we could put a package together for one of those picks. Also, if all of those guys are available at the same time, and are more or less considered to be on par with each other (ie BPA), then Benning can also consider positional needs. No, we do not have great depth at center...at least top 6 depth. If we draft Kotkaniemi, he will likely not be NHL ready until the 19-20 season (a stretch) or more likely the 20-21 season. By then, Pettersson should be playing top line center, and Gaudette just might be able to play that high also. I feel we have more need to work on our upper-end D with the #7 than with a potential top 6 center. We have Horvat as a top 6 now, and Pettersson in a couple of years. But top 2 D? We don't really have that now, not firmly. Both Edler and Tanev are borderline top pairing, and only on an average to less than average team. The jury is out on Juolevi, but unless he really comes on, he is also not a top pairing D. Hence my thinking of positional need to at least address a top pairing Dman.
  11. Benning and Linden quotes on Draft Prospects

    Carolina has a fair number of younger D men, so they are not exactly starved in that department. I could easily see them extracting something to drop to 4-6 and still pick up Zadina; he was a former teammate to a current 'Cane, and they played well together. The only forwards I could see being around at out pick are Wahlstrom and Tchachuk. I could see Wahlstrom dropping a little more, as he has already declared he is going to college next year; that would rule out someone getting him for an immediate fix. I think it will go: Dahlin Trade out by Carolina, some takes Boqvist Svechnikov Hughes Trade (to Carolina) now Zadina goes Bouchard or Tchachuk leaving us with Dobson, Tchachuk, Wahlstrom or Bouchard to choose from. Not exactly a poor choice with any one of them, just not sure I'd like to be the person to make the pick. You know it will be second guessed for the next 5 years (minimum), unless the one we pick is brilliant and the others suck.
  12. If Bahl falls that far, sounds good. It may not be much of a fall; I've seen a few mock drafts where he is taken one spot in front of us by Detroit. Wouldn't take much for him to go one more spot down.
  13. I've been talking about Cole for awhile. Trading MDZ would not hurt us in the slightest. Juolevi gets a year in Utica. That leaves an L side opening for Cole. Call it 2.5M x 2yr for him. Pateryn, I hadn't thought of, but actually makes more sense than Cole, given our current depth. For him, call it 1.5-2M x 3yr.
  14. Canucks: Baer, Petersson, Dahlen, and one of either Leipsig or Goldobin Comets: Gadjovich, Motte and Boucher Trade: Granlund, Gaunce and one of either Leipsig or Goldobin Release: Molino
  15. 94 & 2011 SCF Run

    The 2011 loss, you could see it coming. By game 6, we had a M.A.S.H unit next to the rink, and Thomas wasn't letting anything in. The '94 loss was more memorable to me, and more heart wrenching. Had I owed a gun then, I likely would've shot my TV, hoping the bullet would end up somewhere in Messier's anatomy.