BM24 Posted June 25, 2011 Share Posted June 25, 2011 He was over a PPG in the playoffs last year with the Remparts. 15 Games Played - 8G, 8A - 16 PTS He also had a good regular season with the Remparts when he joined half way through, and played 31 games while recording 24 pts. His size is what'll get him a bottom 9 role when he's ready to step in, IMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dr.naughtypants Posted June 26, 2011 Share Posted June 26, 2011 I don't know anything about the kid, at all But that's never stopped me before. lol Being 6.5', he might have taken awhile to get used to his body. Things like co-ordination, hand-eye and just not tripping over your own feet can be hard when someone gets that tall. Man-Child By the way he has found his game, he probably is just finding his comfort level and becoming a man. Beast in the making. As for the French Canadian nonsense, unlike Burrows, this monster would have bitten those fingers right off. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canvoucer Vanuck Posted June 28, 2011 Share Posted June 28, 2011 Can it Garth, I dislike French-Canadian players like this... This guy is going to be our new Marc-Andre Bernier (see 2003 draft), mark my words. Anyway, the Canucks might send him back to juniors for an overage season... they probably want to work with him and get his development in order. The team feels that he's got talent but hasn't had a whole lot of coaching, so maybe it'd be good for him if he plays one more year with a team where he'll be getting lots of ice time. Lets him grow as a player and get into a rhythm offensively. Can't help but be intrigued by that combination of size, speed and skill. Don't know if he plays nasty or not as he has low PIMS, or is just very disciplined, but if he develops a mean streak that would be sick. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chickenman92 Posted July 3, 2011 Share Posted July 3, 2011 I will be posting a blog on him soon so Canucks fans can get to know him better. after talking to him via email he seems like a real good kid with strong values who was a bit of a late bloomer. I think Canucks fans will be plenty happy with. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wolfgang puck Posted July 4, 2011 Share Posted July 4, 2011 cool...look forward to it as he's a bit of wildcard who had very little exposure in the Q. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Twin 3 Posted July 4, 2011 Share Posted July 4, 2011 beast Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bAsRa17 Posted July 4, 2011 Share Posted July 4, 2011 This guy with Archiblad and Schroder. The smaller Schroder gets two big bodies. I want to see that lineup in the AHL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canvoucer Vanuck Posted July 4, 2011 Share Posted July 4, 2011 Hope he dominates the Q next year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Millerdraft Posted July 5, 2011 Share Posted July 5, 2011 This guy with Archiblad and Schroder. The smaller Schroder gets two big bodies. I want to see that lineup in the AHL When I first saw Grenier's age I thought much the same but Schroeder also needs a veteran AHLer to help him figure out his own pro game, nevermind assist two AHL rookies with theirs. We signed Mark Mancari for a reason and I think that reason is to help Schroeder. Archibald-Schroeder-Mancari would give him a similar combination that he had with Colin Wilson and James VanRiemsdyk but with the AHL's best player* on right wing. "We think we have got the two best American League players and they are going to compete for a spot on our team," Gillis said. Read more: http://www.vancouversun.com/sports/Long+term+deals+much+Gillis/5040044/story.html#ixzz1RBbF6EVe If Mancari doesn't make the team, which seems to be the most likely scenario when you consider he barely made a Buffalo squad in comparison to the defending Western Conference Champion Canucks, it's off to Chicago to help develop our young offensive players like Schroeder. As for Grenier, he'd best return to the Q under Roy's tutelage for more seasoning. Powerforwards take a long time to develop so it's better if he gets top-line minutes in the Q than 4th line minutes in the A. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
avelanch Posted July 5, 2011 Share Posted July 5, 2011 When I first saw Grenier's age I thought much the same but Schroeder also needs a veteran AHLer to help him figure out his own pro game, nevermind assist two AHL rookies with theirs. We signed Mark Mancari for a reason and I think that reason is to help Schroeder. Archibald-Schroeder-Mancari would give him a similar combination that he had with Colin Wilson and James VanRiemsdyk but with the AHL's best player* on right wing. If Mancari doesn't make the team, which seems to be the most likely scenario when you consider he barely made a Buffalo squad in comparison to the defending Western Conference Champion Canucks, it's off to Chicago to help develop our young offensive players like Schroeder. As for Grenier, he'd best return to the Q under Roy's tutelage for more seasoning. Powerforwards take a long time to develop so it's better if he gets top-line minutes in the Q than 4th line minutes in the A. He's 20 years old on Sept 5th, 6'5" and north of 200 lbs... he has nothing to gain playing against the kids of the QMJHL. His size alone makes that league too easy for him. He qualifies to play in the AHL and that's exactly what he should do; it'll help him develop more and will give him more of a challenge. Even the ECHL would help him more than the QMJHL. The CHL as an overager is ok for later round draft picks lacking size or undrafted players, but for someone of his size, it's more of a hindrance to his development. he needs to get used to playing against larger/faster/stronger opponents as soon as possible to get his progression underway. If he doesn't get top 9 min in the AHL, then he'd be better off in the ECHL getting top 6 min; but the CHL would be a bad call in every situation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Millerdraft Posted July 5, 2011 Share Posted July 5, 2011 If he doesn't get top 9 min in the AHL, then he'd be better off in the ECHL getting top 6 min; but the CHL would be a bad call in every situation. Yeah, I guess that's true. His size advantage over boys will create poor habits, I suppose. My only concern is throwing him into the AHL right away and destroying any offensive confidence he gained in the very small amount of time he spent in the Q and it's not as if he was completely dominating that league with only 9g in 31gp (17g in 46gp including the playoffs) which is like a 24g pace over 80 games (29g pace over 80 if you include playoffs). My fear is not dissimilar to what happened with Shane Doan when he had two dominating seasons in Kamloops, skipped the AHL due to age, was prematurely rushed into the NHL and then lost all confidence as he floundered around for four seasons in a 4th line role. Somehow he found a way to climb out of the abyss of ruined confidence. On the other hand, in Grenier's case, he's only had 45gp in the Q but maybe it would be best to just start him out in the ECHL as a top-six and if he dominates the first ten games or so with the numbers to show for it, bump him up a level and put him in a top-9 role in Chicago? I don't know but this guy appears to have HUGE potential yet the danger is that if it isn't developed properly it could be smashed rather quickly, no? Maybe it's just my own preference to play it safe in terms of development. After all, many a sniper have said the key to success is confidence and I'm hesitant to risk that critical aspect so early on. Put him in a good position to have personal success in order to breed more confidence and then give him a new challenge. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
avelanch Posted July 5, 2011 Share Posted July 5, 2011 Yeah, I guess that's true. His size advantage over boys will create poor habits, I suppose. My only concern is throwing him into the AHL right away and destroying any offensive confidence he gained in the very small amount of time he spent in the Q and it's not as if he was completely dominating that league with only 9g in 31gp (17g in 46gp including the playoffs) which is like a 24g pace over 80 games (29g pace over 80 if you include playoffs). My fear is not dissimilar to what happened with Shane Doan when he had two dominating seasons in Kamloops, skipped the AHL due to age, was prematurely rushed into the NHL and then lost all confidence as he floundered around for four seasons in a 4th line role. Somehow he found a way to climb out of the abyss of ruined confidence. On the other hand, in Grenier's case, he's only had 45gp in the Q but maybe it would be best to just start him out in the ECHL as a top-six and if he dominates the first ten games or so with the numbers to show for it, bump him up a level and put him in a top-9 role in Chicago? I don't know but this guy appears to have HUGE potential yet the danger is that if it isn't developed properly it could be smashed rather quickly, no? Maybe it's just my own preference to play it safe in terms of development. After all, many a sniper have said the key to success is confidence and I'm hesitant to risk that critical aspect so early on. Put him in a good position to have personal success in order to breed more confidence and then give him a new challenge. I guess that's just where we differ. I'm of the school of though that without a challenge the talent goes undeveloped. It true that he still has stuff to learn and challenges (from the offensive side of things) in the QMJHL, but the fact that he towers over everyone and is easily stronger than most would be a hindrance to him, moreso than the confidence would offset. The biggest problem with Power forwards (and why they take the longest to develop of any forward) is that they need to get used to no longer being able to just out muscle everyone like they did in the CHL/University. Throwing him into the AHL/ECHL would speed up this portion of his development. the top line of the ECHL would clearly be better than the 4th of the AHL, but I'd like to see him as a 3rd liner in Chicago if at all possible, but then again, I'd like to see how he does in the prospect's tourney/pre-season before making any official call on where he should go (if he fails miserably, then off to Roy he goes). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canvoucer Vanuck Posted July 5, 2011 Share Posted July 5, 2011 I'm sort of leaning toward Millerdraft's side on this one actually, as he hasn't even played all that much in the Q and would hate for him to lose any sort of confidence. Maybe he hasn't even had the opportunity to establish any bad habits of relying purely on his size to get by due to the fact that he played only 45 games in junior - he's just so new to that level of play. And yes, he wasn't completely dominant, having just over a point per game in the playoffs. But it might also be a good option for him to play in the ECHL though with 1st line minutes, but the Mooseheads apparently are banking on him getting sent back as they acquired him at the QMJHL draft. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
avelanch Posted July 5, 2011 Share Posted July 5, 2011 I'm sort of leaning toward Millerdraft's side on this one actually, as he hasn't even played all that much in the Q and would hate for him to lose any sort of confidence. Maybe he hasn't even had the opportunity to establish any bad habits of relying purely on his size to get by due to the fact that he played only 45 games in junior - he's just so new to that level of play. And yes, he wasn't completely dominant, having just over a point per game in the playoffs. But it might also be a good option for him to play in the ECHL though with 1st line minutes, but the Mooseheads apparently are banking on him getting sent back as they acquired him at the QMJHL draft. what the mooseheads are banking on has no impact/influence on the Canucks decision of where to send him after training camp though. that's their fault/problem if he doesn't rejoin them. I'm sure the Giants were hoping/banking on Connauton being sent back to them too (like many CDC board members were). If "Greener" hasn't had a chance to pick up bad habits yet, why send him back to a situation where he runs a high risk of picking them up just so we can try to break him of them a year later? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canvoucer Vanuck Posted July 5, 2011 Share Posted July 5, 2011 what the mooseheads are banking on has no impact/influence on the Canucks decision of where to send him after training camp though. that's their fault/problem if he doesn't rejoin them. I'm sure the Giants were hoping/banking on Connauton being sent back to them too (like many CDC board members were). If "Greener" hasn't had a chance to pick up bad habits yet, why send him back to a situation where he runs a high risk of picking them up just so we can try to break him of them a year later? I personally haven't seen him play, but if I use the highlight compilation of Grenier his goals all seem to be scored by skill and positioning alone, rather than powering through guys to the front of the net and knocking people over. I know those are just highlights. However I thought power forwards were supposed to be able to do that, so he might as well get practice doing that against easier competition, and establish a base level, if that's not part of his game already? He also seems to be a pretty disciplined player, and if he doesn't play a particularly nasty or physical game then maybe it would be better for him to focus on scoring with his skill first anyway? Again the one thing I'm worried about here is his confidence, probably having just found it in the Q. But who are we to judge when nobody's seen him play anyway? How he does at camp in September will determine if he's ready to face the pros, playing against men while being effective. Honestly though are there any comparables to his case? Must be really rare for a someone to emerge like he did so late, at such size too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
one night Posted July 5, 2011 Share Posted July 5, 2011 what the mooseheads are banking on has no impact/influence on the Canucks decision of where to send him after training camp though. that's their fault/problem if he doesn't rejoin them. I'm sure the Giants were hoping/banking on Connauton being sent back to them too (like many CDC board members were). If "Greener" hasn't had a chance to pick up bad habits yet, why send him back to a situation where he runs a high risk of picking them up just so we can try to break him of them a year later? The only problem I have with this, who is the Coach in the ECHL that is coaching him? If it anyone like AV, the kid is better off in the Q. This scenerio goes the same for the AHL as we have no Coach in place. There are Coaches out there that are teachers of the game and there are Coaches out there that are win at all costs no matter what kids are ruined by that process. I think before we should place this kid we should wait and see whom the coach is going to be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Dasein Posted July 6, 2011 Share Posted July 6, 2011 The only problem I have with this, who is the Coach in the ECHL that is coaching him? If it anyone like AV, the kid is better off in the Q. This scenerio goes the same for the AHL as we have no Coach in place. There are Coaches out there that are teachers of the game and there are Coaches out there that are win at all costs no matter what kids are ruined by that process. I think before we should place this kid we should wait and see whom the coach is going to be. OMG you're right. We never should have trusted AV to develop the likes of Kesler, Bieksa, Edler, Raymond, Burrows and Hansen. These guys are ruined for life... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
لني Posted July 6, 2011 Share Posted July 6, 2011 The only problem I have with this, who is the Coach in the ECHL that is coaching him? If it anyone like AV, the kid is better off in the Q. This scenerio goes the same for the AHL as we have no Coach in place. There are Coaches out there that are teachers of the game and there are Coaches out there that are win at all costs no matter what kids are ruined by that process. I think before we should place this kid we should wait and see whom the coach is going to be. Good to see the AV hate has the ability to cross over into any topic/thread. Maybe I can read up on the AV debate in the "Should Canada be in Libya" thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
one night Posted July 6, 2011 Share Posted July 6, 2011 Good to see the AV hate has the ability to cross over into any topic/thread. Maybe I can read up on the AV debate in the "Should Canada be in Libya" thread. This no hate AV, if you see his coaching differently, state your oppinion and debate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
one night Posted July 6, 2011 Share Posted July 6, 2011 OMG you're right. We never should have trusted AV to develop the likes of Kesler, Bieksa, Edler, Raymond, Burrows and Hansen. These guys are ruined for life... OMG your stupid, he was down in Winnipeg when he had those players. What has he developed since he has come up to the NHL? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.