Hawk eagle = hockey goal

  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

63 Neutral

About Hawk eagle = hockey goal

  • Rank
    Aces Prospect
  1. Top prospect pools 2016 - where are they now?

    I think you're right in that the Canucks are a bit farther off than most of these teams and may take a bit longer to make the playoffs. However, if you look at Toronto, their foundation was pretty bad before suddenly making a jump from dead last straight into the playoffs. And it had a lot to do with Matthews, Marner, Nylander and also Zaitsev coming in in the same season and playing big time roles. I'm not saying the same will happen for the Canucks, (in fact I would be surprised if it did happen this year) but that these jumps can happen with the right combination of players coming in at the right time. I would also argue that even with most of the cores being there before 2016: Columbus does not make playoffs last season without Dubois and Werenski, Philadelphia doesn't make it without Proverov, Sanheim and Konecny, and Toronto doesn't make it without Matthews, Marner and Nylander. You're right in saying that these guys are generally not the main reason that their teams are in the playoffs but they can be what puts a team over the top. Young players can make a big difference in the NHL today and they can sometimes make it very early. For instance, Marner, Barzal and Keller (who all show up here) each led their respective teams in points this past year.
  2. Top prospect pools 2016 - where are they now?

    With Vancouver considered to have one of the best prospect pools in the NHL (recently ranked 4th from dobberprospects), I decided to look back at teams that ranked highly in terms of prospect pools from a few years back and how they have come along since. I found an article by thehockeywriters from the summer of 2016: https://thehockeywriters.com/nhl-prospect-pools-the-complete-ranking/ so this is what I'll refer to. Below are the top 10 ranked teams from the article, their place in the standings the year before the rankings then each year afterwards and any prospects from the list that have made an impact for the team in the past 2 years. 10. Boston Bruins 2015-16 point total: 93pts (missed playoffs) 2016-17 point total: 95pts (made playoffs, lost 1st rd) 2017-18 point total: 112pts (made playoffs, lost 2nd rd) Prospects on team as of 2017-18: Jake DeBrusk, Brandon Carlo, Charlie McAvoy 9. New Jersey Devils 2015-16 point total: 84pts (missed playoffs) 2016-17 point total: 70pts (missed playoffs) 2017-18 point total: 97pts (made playoffs, lost 1st rd) Prospects in NHL as of 2017-18: Miles Wood, Pavel Zacha, *Jesper Bratt * - Was a Devil's prospect at the time of the article but wasn't listed 8. Calgary Flames 2015-16 point total: 77pts (missed playoffs) 2016-17 point total: 94pts (made playoffs, lost 1st rd) 2017-18 point total: 84pts (missed playoffs) Prospects in NHL as of 2017-18: Matthew Tkachuk, Mark Jankowski 7. New York Islanders 2015-16 point total: 100pts (made playoffs, lost 2nd rd) 2016-17 point total: 94pts (missed playoffs) 2017-18 point total: 80pts (missed playoffs) Prospects in NHL as of 2017-18: Mathew Barzal, Anthony Beauvillier, Josh Ho-sang, Ryan Pulock, Adam Pelech 6. Carolina Hurricanes 2015-16 point total: 86pts (missed playoffs) 2016-17 point total: 87pts (missed playoffs) 2017-18 point total: 83pts (missed playoffs) Prospects in NHL as of 2017-18: Sebastian Aho, Haydn Fleury, Phil Di Giuseppe, Brock McGinn, 5. Philadelphia Flyers 2015-16 point total: 96pts (made playoffs, lost 1st rd) 2016-17 point total: 88pts (missed playoffs) 2017-18 point total: 98pts (made playoffs, lost 1st rd) Prospects in NHL as of 2017-18: Travis Konecny, Ivan Provorov, Oskar Lindblom, Travis Sanheim, Robert Hagg, Taylor Leier, Jordan Weal, 4. Columbus Blue Jackets 2015-16 point total: 76pts (missed playoffs) 2016-17 point total: 108pts (made playoffs, lost 1st rd) 2017-18 point total: 97pts (made playoffs, lost 1st rd) Prospects in NHL as of 2017-18: Pierre-Luc Dubois, Zach Werenski, Sonny Milano, Oliver Bjorkstrand, Josh Anderson 3. Toronto Maple Leafs 2015-16 point total: 69pts (missed playoffs) 2016-17 point total: 95pts (made playoffs, lost 1st rd) 2017-18 point total: 105pts (made playoffs, lost 1st rd) Prospects in NHL as of 2017-18: Austin Matthews, Mitch Marner, Travis Dermott, William Nylander, Kasperi Kapanen, Connor Brown, Connor Carrick, Nikita Zaitsev 2. Arizona Coyotes 2015-16 point total: 78pts (missed playoffs) 2016-17 point total: 70pts (missed playoffs) 2017-18 point total: 70pts (missed playoffs) Prospects in NHL as of 2017-18: Clayton Keller, Jakob Chychrun, Dylan Strome, Christian Fischer, Brendan Pirlini, Christian Dvorak 1. Winnipeg Jets 2015-16 point total: 78pts (missed playoffs) 2016-17 point total: 87pts (missed playoffs) 2017-18 point total: 114pts (made playoffs, lost 3rd rd) Prospects in NHL as of 2017-18: Patrick Laine, Kyle Connor, Jack Roslovic, Marko Dano, Nicolas Petan, Josh Morrissey, Some extra stats: Number of teams making playoffs in 2015-16: 2 Number of teams making playoffs in 2016-17: 4 Number of teams making playoffs in 2017-18: 5 Average points change from 2015-16 to 2016-17: 5.1 pts Average points change from 2016-17 to 2017-18: 5.2 pts Average points change from 2015-16 to 2017-18: 10.3 pts Biggest changers were Toronto and Winnipeg who both increased a total of 36 points over the past 2 seasons. Discussion: So from this, you can see that having a solid prospect pool does not guarantee success in the short-term as teams like Arizona and the Islanders both got worse over these years even while getting some significant help from some prospects like Barzal, Beauvillier, Keller, Chychrun, etc. but there is certainly potential if you get some big impacts from prospects (along with making other good moves of course). Toronto and Winnipeg are the best examples of teams that have taken off in the past couple years and it is thanks in large part to some of their young players. Matthews, Marner and Nylander have had huge impacts for Toronto while Laine, Connor and Morrissey have had done the same for Winnipeg. There was an average increase in points among this group of 10.3 which suggests that on average teams with better prospect pools will improve even within just 1-2 years. and where only 2 of these teams made the playoffs in 2015-16, 5 made it 2 years later with Winnipeg even going as far as the conference finals. Another thing to note is that the teams in the top 5 seem to have had bigger changes than those 6-11 going from 1 playoff team in 15-16 to 4 this past season with Toronto and Columbus making it each of the past 2 years. As a Canucks fan, this makes me optimistic about the near future of the team and hopefully the wait to get back into the playoffs is short. Losing 3 of the team's top 5 scorers from the past season in the Sedins and Vanek probably puts Vancouver in a different position than a lot of these teams so it's a bit harder to judge when they may make it however, but if 4 of the top 5 ranked teams from 2 years ago made the playoffs this past year, who knows. Let me know what you think, does this help to increase your optimism about the near future for the Canucks?
  3. [Discussion] 2nd line centre

    I think Sutter will be the second line center in terms of minutes but not necessarily in terms of offense. Then Pettersson could play on a line centered by Gagner/Gaudette/Granlund which would get more o-zone starts and provide more offense but get fewer minutes. Perhaps something like: Roussel - Sutter - Eriksson -> match-up line Gagner - Gaudette - Pettersson -> offensive line
  4. The problem with our outlook on our team

    I get your point that a strong prospect pool does not equal success and I agree that there is a lot of belief from fans that when the Canucks get new draft picks or sign new players that the team is suddenly in a much better position than before even though every other team also gets new draft picks or free agents. This is also true among a lot of other teams' fans though too. And the fact is, rebuilds do take time even for good organizations: Pittsburgh didn't make the playoffs for 5 years in the mid 2000s, Chicago made the playoffs once in 10 seasons from 1998 to 2008, St. Louis missed 5 of 6 seasons from 2006 to 2011 before becoming competitive again, and Tampa Bay missed 5 of 6 seasons from 2008 to 2013. I think the whole idea of a 3-5 year rebuild is more myth than fact, Pittburgh took 5 years but drafted 1 or 2 in four straight drafts. Most teams take longer. The Canucks have now missed the playoffs 3 straight seasons and 4 of 5. Considering where they're at with their prospect pool and how long some other teams have taken to rebuild, my prediction is that they are still in or around the bottom 5 next year, get close to the playoffs the following year and then make it in 3 years time and continue to make it for several years becoming a competitive team. At that point, Horvat would be entering the prime of his career and guys like Boeser, Pettersson, Gaudette, Juolevi, Demko and Hughes would have had at least a couple years in the NHL to outgrow the growing pains. Who knows though, this is a wild prediction, maybe they make it next year, if Colorado could make it after a 48 point season anything is possible. It could take longer too, we still don't know how well these guys will play in the NHL after all. In the mean time, I'll enjoy watching the young players play, the youth movement is certainly exciting. One last thing that I did want to add is that clearly the Canucks prospect pool is getting better at a much faster rate than that of other teams. They rose from 17th to 7th in 1 year according to thehockeywriters.com rankings and now dobberprospects has them at 4th in a separate ranking. And one thing that a deep prospect pool usually helps with is staying competitive over time, teams led by a few superstars often have the biggest sudden drops in the standings. https://thehockeywriters.com/nhl-best-farm-systems-2017-ranking/
  5. Recent draft history: Burke, Nonis, Gillis and Benning eras

    Thanks for the article, I find it interesting that Tampa Bay was the one team that fell below Vancouver. Seems like they coasted off the guys they got in the late 90s like Lecavalier and Richards for a while before dropping to the bottom of the league in the late 2000's. They've picked it up recently though and totally killed it at the 2011 draft: Namestnikov 26OA, Kucherov 58OA, Nesterov 148OA, Palat 208OA and Matthew Peca 201OA. To your point about weighing the draft success against the GMs average picks, I did this to some extent with the adjusted averages which show that in the Gillis era, it would have been expected that the Canucks would have drafted about 8.74 players who have played 100GP as of now over 6 years of drafting. Meanwhile Benning with better picks would be expected to eventually get about 8.52 players from his first 4 drafts to meet the average. The way I calculated this is not perfect though so as I grouped first rounders into 4 groups (top 5, 6-10, 11-20 and 21-end of first round (usually 30)) and I grouped 2nd rounders into first half of second round and back half of second round. And then each round afterward was just grouped as the entire round. This means that guys like Juolevi and Pettersson would be grouped with Mcdavid and Matthews while Virtanen drafted one pick later would be grouped with guys 6-10 and players drafted 11th would be expected to make it as often as players picked 20th. So, clearly it's not the best system but I think it gives a decent idea of how many players an average team would turn out given the selections of picks that management had over a certain time period. You mentioned a 32nd and 64th pick; a 32nd pick would be grouped in the front half of round 2 while a 64th pick would be grouped usually in the 3rd round or sometimes the back half of round 2, so they're in different groups. At some point, I might revisit this to make it more accurate and probably set a higher bar for games played. Anyways, if anyone is wondering about the odds of a players selected in these groups playing 100+ NHL games, I've complied the data from 1998 to 2011: Top 5: 98.6% - only player to not make it was Pavel Brendl drafted 4th OA after the Sedins in 1999 (he played 78 games) 6-10: 82.6% 11-20: 67.1% 21-30: 62.8% First half of 2nd Rd: 38.1% Back half of 2nd Rd: 32.9% 3rd Rd: 27.1% 4th Rd: 18.6% 5th Rd: 14% 6th Rd: 15.2% 7th Rd: 12% *8th Rd: 11.7% *9th Rd: 10.2% *1998-2004 only
  6. Recent draft history: Burke, Nonis, Gillis and Benning eras

    Agreed, time will tell with the current prospects. This thread is probably better for looking back at the previous draft eras but I'm definitely optimistic about the future with what Linden, Benning and co. have done.
  7. Recent draft history: Burke, Nonis, Gillis and Benning eras

    Very true, my feeling on 100 games is that it shows that the player has at least lasted a couple of seasons in the league with a decent number of games. It is a low benchmark though and was chosen partly because its a nice round number to work with and provides some sort of objective measure. You almost have to look at each player individually to really get a good measure of success for their position which as you mentioned becomes highly subjective.
  8. Hey guys, first time poster here, (btw, this is a really long post) It's pretty well known that the Canucks struggled at the draft for a while prior to Jim Benning coming in, but I was curious about how the Canucks recent history measures up against the rest of the league so I crunched some numbers looking at the Burke, Nonis, Gillis and Benning eras of drafting. I chose to simply count how many players who were drafted, ended up playing at least 100 games in the NHL and how this stacked up against league averages for each GM's era. Obviously this does not tell the whole story as it doesn't indicate much about quality of player or how long they played in the NHL so I've discussed the quality a bit and other interesting findings throughout. What I've done below is listed all players that have played 100+ NHL games drafted by each GM (or players that may still get there for recent years) and their draft position and stats to date. Then looked at the league average number of players drafted in the time period and formulated an adjusted league average which takes into account where the Canucks drafted in each draft and how many picks they had relative to other teams. Burke Era (1998 - 2003 drafts) Players with 100+ NHL games: - Bryan Allen: 1998 1st Rd, 4th OA (721GP - 29G - 107A - 136Pts) - Artem Chubarov: 1998 2nd Rd, 31st OA (228GP - 25G - 33A - 58Pts) - Jarkko Ruutu: 1998 3rd Rd, 68th OA (652GP - 58G - 84A - 142Pts) - Daniel Sedin: 1999 1st Rd, 2nd OA (1306GP - 393G - 648A - 1041Pts) - Henrik Sedin: 1999 1st Rd, 3rd OA (1330GP - 240G - 830A - 1070Pts) - R.J. Umberger: 2001 1st Rd, 16th OA (779GP - 180G - 212A - 392Pts) - Kevin Bieksa: 2001 5th Rd, 151st OA (808GP - 63G - 215A - 278Pts) - Ryan Kesler: 2003 1st Rd, 23rd OA (941GP - 253G - 312A - 565Pts) Canucks picks during era: - 6 1st rounders (2, 3, 4, 16, 23, 23) - 4 2nds, 8 3rds, 5 4ths, 7 5ths, 3 6ths, 7 7ths, 8 8ths, 6 9ths - 54 total picks, 8 players with 100+ GP League average during period: - 13.80 players with 100+ GP Adjusted for Canucks picks - 13.11 players with 100+ GP Discussion: Based on the adjusted average, Burke was short about 5 players from what an average team would do with the Canucks picks. He did however find some very good players in the Sedins, Kesler, Bieksa and Umberger. Bryan Allen and Jarkko Ruutu also had fairly solid and lengthy careers. Still, missing on as many picks as he did did not bode well for the Cunucks in the long term. It's interesting that the GM that made some of the best draft floor moves in Canucks history to get the Sedins actually shows up fairly poor overall at least in terms of quantity of picks to play 100+ NHL games. Nonis Era (2004-2007 drafts) Players with 100+ NHL games: - Cory Schneider: 2004 1st Rd, 26th OA (370GP - 161W - 0.920Sv% - 2.36GAA) - Alex Edler: 2004 3rd Rd, 91st OA (758GP - 84G - 250A - 334Pts) - Mike Brown: 2004 5th Rd, 159th OA (407GP - 19G - 17A - 36Pts) - Jannik Hansen: 2004 9th Rd, 287th OA (626GP - 109G - 147A - 256Pts) - Mason Raymond: 2005 2nd Rd, 51st OA (546GP - 115G - 136A - 251Pts) - Michael Grabner: 2006 1st Rd, 14th OA (553GP - 158G - 91A - 249Pts) Canucks picks during era: - 4 1st rounders (10*, 14, 25, 26) - 2 2nds, 2 3rds, 2 4ths, 4 5ths, 5 6ths, 3 7ths, 1 8ths, 1 9ths - 24 total picks, 6 players with 100+ GP League average during period: - 8.23 players with 100+ GP Adjusted for Canucks picks - 5.32* players with 100+ GP *Didn't include Luc Bourdon in any calculations as unfortunately we can't say if he would have made it or not Discussion: What's interesting here is that Nonis had fewer picks than those initially allotted to the Canucks at every draft so despite drafting 6 players over the 4 years compared to the overall league average of just over 8, the adjusted average actually shows that he beat the average by almost one player. He also didn't have a lot of high picks other than the Luc Bourdon and Michael Grabner picks and these weren't really that high at 10 and 14. Another note is that 4 of the 6 players to play 100+ Games came from the 2004 draft which is clearly one of the best drafts in recent memory. The other drafts weren't very good with only 2 players over 3 years though. Gillis Era (2008-2013 drafts) Players with 100+ NHL games: - Cody Hodgson: 2008 1st Rd, 10th OA (328GP - 64G - 78A - 142Pts) - Jordan Schroeder: 2009 1st Rd, 22nd OA (165GP - 18G - 24A - 42Pts) - Kevin Connauton: 2009 3rd Rd, 83 OA (260GP - 26G - 42A - 68Pts) - Brendan Gaunce: 2012 1st Rd, 26th OA (144GP - 5G - 7A - 12Pts) - Ben Hutton: 2012 5th Rd, 147th OA (207GP - 6G - 44A - 50Pts) - Bo Horvat: 2013 1st Rd, 9th OA (295GP - 71G - 90A - 161Pts) Others possible: - Frankie Corrado: 2011 5th Rd, 150th OA (76GP - 3G - 5A - 8Pts) Canucks picks during era: - 6 1st rounders (9, 10, 22, 24, 26, 29) - 3 2nds, 4 3rds, 5 4ths, 6 5ths, 7 6ths, 6 7ths - 37 total picks, 6 players with 100+ GP League average during period: - 10.97 players with 100+ GP Adjusted for Canucks picks - 8.74 players with 100+ GP Discussion: So, honestly, this era looks pretty bad overall. They were almost 3 players short of the adjusted average, 5 short of overall average and where Burke and Nonis found a decent number of high quality players at least, Gillis failed for the most part. Only Horvat looks like a real stud from the Gillis era. Looking back at this, I feel like this draft era could be a big reason why the Canucks have struggled a lot in recent years, when you have 5 draft years from 2008 to 2012 and don't have much to show for it, it really hurts the current team. At least he picked Horvat... What do you guys think? Did the Gillis draft era really hamper the current Canucks? Benning Era (2014-2017 drafts) Players with 100+ NHL games: - Jake Virtanen: 2014 1st Rd, 6th OA (140GP - 17G - 17A - 34Pts) - Jared McCann: 2014 1st Rd, 24th OA (166GP - 19G - 34A - 53Pts) Very likely possibilities: - Thatcher Demko: 2014 2nd Rd, 36th OA (1GP - 1W - 0.867Sv% - 3.93GAA) - Gustav Forsling: 2014 5th Rd, 126th OA (79GP - 5G - 13A - 18Pts) - Brock Boeser: 2015 1st Rd, 23rd OA (71GP - 33G - 27A - 60Pts) - Adam Gaudette: 2015 5th Rd, 149th OA (5GP - 0G - 0A - 0Pts) - Olli Juolevi: 2016 1st Rd, 5th OA (0GP) - Elias Pettersson: 2017 1st Rd, 5th OA (0GP) - Quinn Hughes: 2018 1st Rd, 7th OA (0GP) Others possible: - Nikita Tryamkin: 2014 3rd Rd, 66th OA (79GP - 3G - 8A - 11Pts) - Guillaume Brisebois: 2015 3rd Rd, 66th OA (0GP) - Lucas Jasek: 2015 6th Rd, 174th OA (0GP) - Will Lockwood: 2016 3rd Rd, 64th OA (0GP) - Kole Lind: 2017 2nd Rd, 33rd OA (0GP) - Jonah Gadjovich: 2017 2nd Rd, 55th OA (0GP) - Michael Dipietro: 2017 3rd Rd, 64th OA (0GP) - Jack Rathbone: 2017 4th Rd, 95th OA (0GP) - Kristopher Gunnarsson: 2017 5th Rd, 135th OA (0GP) - Petrus Palmu: 2017 6th Rd, 181st OA (0GP) - Matt Brassard: 2017 7th Rd, 188th OA (0GP) - Jett Woo: 2018 2nd Rd, 37th OA (0GP) - Tyler Madden: 2018 3rd Rd, 68th OA (0GP) - Toni Utunen: 2018 5th Rd, 130th OA (0GP) - Artem Manukyan: 2018 6th Rd, 186th OA (0GP) - Matthew Thiesen: 2018 7th Rd, 192nd OA (0GP) Canucks picks during era: - 6 1st rounders (5, 5, 6, 7, 23, 24) - 4 2nds, 5 3rds, 2 4ths, 6 5ths, 5 6ths, 6 7ths - 34 total picks, 2 players with 100+ GP League average during period: - 1.33 players with 100+ GP Adjusted for Canucks picks - 1.93 players with 100+ GP Adjusted expectations for Canucks picks (based on historical data)** - 8.52 players with 100+ GP (Before 2018 Draft) - 10.47 players with 100+ GP (Including 2018 Draft) **I used the 2005 to 2009 draft years for this data - because these were the first 5 years after the NHL went to 7 rounds and they're far enough back that most players who will end up playing 100+ games already would have. I didn't use the years before this as there were often a bunch of extra picks given away for various reasons so often the second round would have around 35 or so picks and then the 3rd would start later and subsequent rounds would also start later and later. Discussion: It's probably a little early to look at the numbers from this era. So far Virtanen and McCann have played 100 Games but that's it. Overall, 40 players have played 100+ NHL games who were drafted from 2014 onwards so Benning's slightly ahead of the league average and adjusted average for that matter. What I would rather discuss here is how many players could make the NHL and have solid impacts. The adjusted expectations based on historical data. is 8.52 players for the picks that Benning had. 2 have already made it, 2 others (Forsling and Boeser) are well on their way and I put 4 others (Demko, Gaudette, Juolevi and Pettesson) as very likley candidates to make the NHL and play 100+ games since they all have legitimate shots to make the team out of camp next year. Of the others, some are more likley to make it; I like the chances of Kole Lind for instance and there's a pretty decent chance Tryamkin comes back. If I had to guess, I'd say about 4 of the others make it, not sure who and that's a wild guess, it could very well be more or less than that. I don't think it's unreasonable to think that 10 to 14 players drafted in a 4 year period could have a solid impact in the NHL and I would be quite surprised if at least 9 players don't make it, meaning that Benning should beat the average even for his high draft picks. If 14 make it, that would be half of his picks which would be pretty incredible considering generally only about a quarter of picks make this impact from a given draft year. I would also say that the players that he has drafted appear so far to be quite high quality too. Most notable in group are Boeser and Pettersson but Demko, Juolevi, Gaudette, Virtanen, McCann etc. could be really solid, maybe even excellent players too. What do you guys think, how many of the Benning era draft picks make it? What do you think about the quality of picks? Who did the best job of drafting? Who did the worst? Edit: Added in 2018 draft picks. Figured Quinn Hughes is very likely to make it, the others went into others possible category. Adjusted numbers which now show that the average team would get 10.47 players with 100+ games given the picks Benning has had during his 5 years of drafting (again using historical data as mentioned above). I still think he is on course to beat that average with several of those players being good quality NHLers. I would change the 100 GP to 200 GP as several posters have mentioned this would be a better benchmark. At this point, however, that would involve recounting everything which is a lot of work and I don't know if it would add enough to make it worthwhile.