Papayas
-
Posts
1,438 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Blogs
Gallery
Posts posted by Papayas
-
-
No, sadly it doesn't.
Fess up CL. How underwater are you on your Bitcoins?
Give it up. Bitcoin can drop to 1 dollar Tmr and CL will still tell you it's a good sign because it started at 1 cent a couple years ago
-
I think Virtanen was a terrible pick given that he's out for 6 months which will hinder his development. You don't pick someone at #6 under that circumstance, along with the fact that he was given a 3/5 IQ (aka he's dumb).
wow....
...
i try to type something but i will be breaking the forum rule if i do..so..
ya...sure pal
-
1
-
-
Just shows his abilities. There's a reason a lot of scouts doubt that his skills will translate to the nhl
you mean the same scouts who ranked him in the 6th spot ahead of the other prospects that you would like?
-
So disappointed. Virtanen can. Skate and hit and shoot. All is great except he can't think the game and can't pass. 26 assists? So frustrating. Future 3rd liner
a winger who didn't stack his assists in the junior? how dare he??
didn't he play through the season with injury too? that's some pretty good stats for someone who play with injury
-
great pick for the nucks
-
1
-
-
enter the Hunter Fan club who would scream this is fake or how Florida doesn't need a prospect
-
That’s where you are mistaken, You do have to compare how strong drafts are. Do you think flames would trade Monahan who they drafted at number 6 for even Reinhart this year? Not a chance. Does Dallas trade Nichushkin for this year’s 10th overall? Good luck with that. Does we trade Shinkaruk for this year’s 24th which is projected to be Vrana or Schmaltz? Do we ever consider trading Kesler for just a 23th overall in any draft? Get my point, comparing Shinkaruk only as a 24th overall doesn’t work as you have to compare the depth and strength of each draft. Like I said if last year’s Shinkaruk was in this year’s draft he would be top ten. He’s better if not on par with both Ehlers/Nylander and they both are slated to go top 10, therefor he would be top 10 this year.
A strong draft or not, drafts are a crapshoot. Look at the re draft of 2004. http://www.nhl.com/ice/news.htm?id=722892 Outside the forsures (Malkin and Ovi) the amount of reordering is crazy.
Reinhart is not a Malkin or Ovi. There are no forsure superstars in this year’s draft. It’s why 1 of the 3 top players could go number 1 and likely 1 of those 3 players will fall to number 4. Only way Reinhart goes number 1 is if Vancouver is picking, therefore that tells me he’s not the sure thing everyone thinks he is.
This year isn’t like previous years. A player drafted 6th overall has a good chance of being the best or second best pick in the draft. There’s not a real huge upside in terms of potential between the 4th (where Reinhart will likely fall) and the 6th. Comparing Reinhart to Ehlers/Nylander the only difference between them is the fact that he is from NA and the others are not, that and the size factor. If Ehlers/Nylander were Canadian and both played their entire years here they would be ranked right beside Reinhart.
Every year players prove to be more than the position they were drafted at
2005
- Picks 72 and 11 would now be considered top 3 picks
2006
- The player drafted 22nd overall is the second best pick in the draft.
2007
- the player draft 43rd overall is the second best player in the draft
2008
- Picks 15 and 22 would now be considered top 5 picks
There is risk in hoping a player like Reinhart turns out to be a superstar, just like there is risk in hoping Shinkaruk or our 6th turns out to be a 30-40 goal scorers. You can say odds and stat’s say is less of a risk by getting Reinhart but think of the risk it would have on Bennings name. Trading for Reinhart would be a bold move. A move that could turn out very bad, whereas not trading these picks and relying on our scouting and developing is a far safer move. If Benning trades hunter and the 6th plus more and they become stars while Reinhart becomes nothing more than a second liner, that would be a major blemish on the Benning name. If he doesn’t make that move no one thinks any less of him.
Anyways I’m of the impression canucks weren’t really attempting to get the 1st overall. Ticket sales don’t look too promising and Canucks needed to get some buzz and excitement. Linden said he’s going to show season ticket holders at the draft there commitment to making this team better. So they offer the Panthers an offer they know will get rejected as it has none of the needs Panthers were asking for and then come out and say “We tried but doesn’t look like it will happen”. Marketing ploy, to build trust in new management,
you are using hindsight when you talk about the drafting position tho.. Of course the Flames won't trade Monahan for Reinhart after Monahan performing, but do you actually think they would actually draft Monahan over Reinart if they are in the same drafting year?? Seriously are you saying Monahan could be the first overall pick this year if he's a year younger?
The same thing can go with the rest of your examples.. you can't use hindsight to compare two draft years. That goes to your whole thread basically.... No, no one will draft Datsyuk with their top 5 pick in his draft year, but according to your logic Datsyuk's year must be REALLY deep because he was drafted in the fifth round.
is the 171th pick in 1998 equal to the first overall pick this year?
-
1
-
THANK-YOU for others saying this. DeNiro and the others who are all over sending Shinkaruk and other prospects and picks to get the #1 just don't get it -- that is NOT what Florida wants! It's rather embarrassing watching people take FAKE RUMOURS planted by bored writers and run with them. It's beyond me why this has to be explained when it's so obvious, and even further when they don't seem to understand and persist. Please Friday, hurry up and get us out of this face-palming misery, lol.
They'd love to have Reinhart and Ekblad too, but that is NOT what they need. Again, they have very clearly stated why the pick is up for trade -- to get PROVEN NHL players.
Before you project a strawman upon people, at least try to understand their position. That is, unless you enjoy so openly embarrassing yourself.
A philosophy professor would have a field day here -- could bring his class in on a field trip and have them identify and count all the logical fallacies. "Use both sides of paper if necessary."
lol now you are trying to convince yourself that it's not what Florida wants?
on one hand you think we are overpaying for the first overall pick, but on the other hand you think Florida doesn't like overpayment?
the reports says it was hunter 6th AND an unname roster player.. I am pretty sure that player is NHL ready.
you guys are being hilarious now..This really feels like fantasy hockey now..
-
1-We'd both be trading within the division. We'd have to play against Tanev + our 6th. Kind of cancels each other out...
2-Then we take Draisaitl or Bennett.
3-If Florida retains 1st, they're all but guaranteed to take Ekblad IMO. If Edmonton has our 6th they could end up with Tanev AND Fleury.
1. you really think Tanev and a 6th would cancel out the threat of playing against Ekblad, Reinhart or Bennet? Seriously you know what i hate? people who want to take advantage of someone, but actually managed to convince themselves they are being fair. FFS we are talking about a defenseman who has 8 goals in 156 games.
2. see #1.
3. Guarantee? did that come from those professionals in TSN? Look at how many teams actually choose a defenseman with a 1 first overall pick, and look at how many of them actually pan out to be the best player in the draft... The odds aren't that great.
stop thinking about the third overall pick, the odds that could happen is less than us getting a first overall.... Jesus how easy are fans in vancouver to be manipulate by the media? Suddenly everyone is talking about getting the third overall out of no where.
-
I believe at that price the 3rd overall can be had from Edm for a lot less
no?
I stated the reason before:
1) That would make it an inner division trade and the Edmonton will want a lot more from us than another team to ensure we don't become a problem later.
2) you may not be able to land Reinhart with a 3d
3) Edmonton probably has no reason to trade down from 3rd. They need a defenseman and if anything goes, they will try to get Ekblad with their 3rd judging by how often top defense prospect drop in draft.
In a perfect world if the Edmonton HAS to trade with the canucks the draft pick will be a lot cheaper.. but in the real world no one is pointing a gun on their head to force them to do that.
-
Seems to be lost on quite a few around here. I don't know if Tanev (or Hansen) + the 6th is "enough" though, there's the hitch. So either we add more (what though?) or it has to be more of an impact guy (Burrows/Higgins?).
I wonder if Tallon would do Tanev + Hansen and our 6th (with the 1st + coming back as now we're overpaying)? Otherwise I suppose we have to see what's possibly coming back from the Kesler deal and maybe it's that "roster player" plus our 6th (Sharp?)?
Regardless I don't see Shinkaruk as part of the deal regardless of how anybody values him or Reinhart. He's not what Tallon wants.
I actually think Florida would love to have Hunter on their team. What they need now is marketing and exciting hockey and Hunter fits their needs. Playing in Florida allows him to do what he wants as a speedy goal scorer instead force to play a two way game in order to win. He's the perfect marketing machine for Florida.
no one will trade their first overall pick for Tanev Hansen and a 6th. I forgot how many times i say this already but you cant just offer spare parts to get something you want.
I understand that some people dont agree that it is worth it to include hunter and a 6th in part of the deal to land a first overall, and I am fine with that opinion... but IF you want the first overall pick, this would be the price range that Tallon is looking for in real life..
What i hate to see is that some people on cdc clearly wants the pick, but they try to convince others that the first overall pick would suck (not you)
-
^ how is he not elite? he put up a better ppg then mackinnon while being a two way forward.
you seriously want to reply to peaches5?
watch out for your heart rate man
-
We'll see what he thinks after watching yet another coach fail at getting him to play anywhere remotely close to acceptable defense.
you mean there was someone on our team who actually preformed with our last coach?
-
Keith avoid hits because of his anticipation, positioning and agility. Avoiding hits is is smart, an attribute. Not a negative.
you mean a defenseman isn't suppose to hit anything he sees?? no way! *shock face*
-
How do we know that Reinhart is that player. Everyone saw with their own eyes how exciting Shinkaruk looked. For me there were echoes of Pat Kane.
How do we know what HS's ceiling could be under Willie D?
because:
1. you can tell how good he is from watching him play?
2. I trust our new gm who was a pretty good scout.. Apparently he sees something in Reinhart that makes him want to move up.
We dont know how well he can perform under willie D, but hell this could be say to every single player and prospects.
Do i want to trade up for Reinhart at the cost of Hunter? Personally i am fine with both but i can see the upside of trading up for Reinhart. From the look of it he will MOST LIKELY turn into a franchise player.
-
duncan keith had the same number of goals in 15 more games while averaging 3:54 per game on the power play compared to tanev's 0:13.
holy shit are you comparing Tanve to Duncan Keith because they have the same amount of goal?
I am out. Sorry, i just hit my limit of replying to stupid post per day.
-
4
-
-
6 goals in 64 games without pp time, skates and moves the puck very well, 6'2" and almost certainly over 190 lbs by training camp, and far and away the teams best defensive defenceman at the age of 24.
tanev needs to be a cornerstone of this teams future. i'd be very surprised and disappointed if he gets moved.
6 goals in 64 games and he's the cornerstone of this team's future? are you joking?
he's a good player, but damn you are making him sound like the next Shea Weber who you can build a team on....
-
1
-
-
No. Try Tanev, Gaunce, and 6th overall. They need a big center who's close to NHL ready, they would get one defenseman and draft another. Fills all their needs. Pretty much perfect. Either way, any one of those 3 guys are on my radar. If we can get either of them, we take it.
and you would actually take this deal if you are Edmonton? Really? Seriously?
you are just making up reasons to convince yourself that Edmonton would want that ridiciulous offer. If anything they would want to trade up for Ekblad, NOT trade down for Tanve and a 6th which would probably turn into a defenseman who is ranked 9th in the North America pool.
-
1
-
-
Then why not trade for #3 and not lose Hunter instead? From the sounds of things, Reinhart, Bennett, and Draisaitl are basically a coin flip
because our GM obviously see something in Reinhart? would totally lose the point to trade up if you can't end up with Reinhart.
Besides, the 3rd overall pick will turn out to be more expensive than trading for a first because of inter-division trade. O what you actually think we can actually get a 3rd from the oiler without giving up one of our blue chipped prospect??
Think people, think! You actually think Edmonton want to trade down for Ballard raymond and a 6th?
-
we need our 6th, next years draft is deeper id rather a first there although a 1st and 6th would be nice this year as well
do you have any idea, like any idea, how much would next year's first overall draft would cost?
people are talking like other teams actually work for us and will give us their first overall for junks.
-
not against this trade... it actually make sense...
You got to give up talent to get talent... Hunter may turn into an exciting player in the future, but the team need a someone like Reinhart to lead the team when the Sedins era is over.
Once Reinhart merge into the team, we will forget how tough it was to lose Hunter..
-
My feelings on Reinhart is that he'll be good, but not that good. ie. Kinda like the Nuge, a bit better perhaps, but nothing to plan a parade about. Kinda saw this in world juniors, actually. He wasn't a big difference-maker in that tournament. He has a good hockey mind, sure, but the physical skills aren't quite up to speed to consider him NHL elite. Kinda knew this heading into the draft, which is a pretty weak one.
These thoughts were concurred by a father of one of Reinhart's junior teammates, who I just talked to regarding the rumour about the Canucks trading up for Reinhart:
"Reinhart might be the most-overrated player i've ever seen. (Me, eyebrows raised: Wow, really?) Ya, he's good and all, very smart, but I don't see him taking these points to the NHL. Now, he migh be a freakish 'huh?' scorer like the next Mike Bossy or something like that, but the reason Bossy comes up is in that case is because of how rare it is for that to happen.
No I don't want the Canucks to sell the farm for him. It's a weak draft class. If it was next years' class, then yeah go for it. Or at least pick the safer guy, like Ekblad. Reinhart's a bit small."
He thinks and I think the Canucks should just stay pat and draft the BPA this year. Then tank next year like it's been suggested over and over again.
Face it: Nobody expects a cup from this group. Quit killing our teams' future by not planning for more than a month/year ahead. Next years' draft contains some winning-capable franchise talent. Take steps to acquire it. Thanks.
1. Wow you got everything reverse man.. A team SHOULD hold onto their high draft pick in a deep draft because it means you will get some pretty good players even without the first overall.
a weak draft year means the pool isn't as deep, it doesn't mean teh first overall will be weak.
2. just because someone said something over and over again, it doesn't mean they are saying the right thing. Saying "tank next year for draft pick" is something only a brain dead person can do. In case if you can't understand why I will break it down for you:
a) a GM, or litreally any staffs on the team, dont get pay for tanking the team. You think anyone would want to damage their reputation on purpose ? Hell this is vancouver, all it take is a 5 game losing streak and we will see people shouting fire the gm and coach.
b)We are NOT Montreal, Edmonton or Toronto. Most people here only follows the team because they are winning. Tanking for another season would create a big loss in profit that could take a couple years to earn back. No sane owner would agree to tank millions of dollars a year so they can earn back the money in the next few years.
-
No, 1st overall isn't always better. Good job cherry picking stats. There have been busts and first overall too.
there had been bust with those first overall picks, but the chance that happen is next to non.
Throughout the history of the NHL there was only a handful of first overall picks that were busts. 99% of the time the first/second overall WILL turn into franchise players.
he wasn't cherry picking stats since most of the time the first overall pick IS the best player in first round... or you want to give us some example?
-
anyone know if there is any AI mod out there that would improve pathing for dead thrall?
i started a summoner and really like using dead thrall, but the pathing is just retarded most of the time.... any mod that would actually make their ai more like the dremora lord?
Jake Virtanen | #18 | RW
in Alumni
Posted
err what?