Jump to content

Welcome to canucks.com Vancouver Canucks homepage

Photo
* * * - - 11 votes

Raymond? Do We Really Want Him?


This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
663 replies to this topic

#151 Millerdraft

Millerdraft

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,509 posts
  • Joined: 02-March 04

Posted 12 February 2012 - 03:41 PM

Booth vs Calgary (clock times of shift not noted): https://docs.google....5iTEYzMWc#gid=0

Raymond vs CGY (clock times of shift not noted): https://docs.google....V1OXZsQ1E#gid=0

This doesn't include OT when not a lot happened (imho). You could probably give Raymond some defensive points and Booth a +1 pass reception for corralling that lob pass at the end but I didn't bother. Oh and I can't remember if that Raymond set up for Edler was in the 3rd or OT but if it was OT give Raymond an extra +1 offensive positioning, +1 passing & +1 scoring chance, otherwise I've tallied it as a 3rd period play.

Oh yeah, I couldn't tally hits/blocked shots because I was doing it on the fly but I got most of the other stuff and I only noted def/off positioning as a plus or a minus if it impacted the play (otherwise being in proper position is simply expected). I'll be interested to see how close I get to Bodee's.

Kassian.... Taylor Pyatt 3.0

Lies. He's more of a Steve Bernier. Hopefully his talent level goes up so he can become like a Taylor Pyatt.


#152 RUPERTKBD

RUPERTKBD

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 21,492 posts
  • Joined: 23-July 04

Posted 12 February 2012 - 03:57 PM

Booth vs Calgary (clock times of shift not noted): https://docs.google....5iTEYzMWc#gid=0

Raymond vs CGY (clock times of shift not noted): https://docs.google....V1OXZsQ1E#gid=0

This doesn't include OT when not a lot happened (imho). You could probably give Raymond some defensive points and Booth a +1 pass reception for corralling that lob pass at the end but I didn't bother. Oh and I can't remember if that Raymond set up for Edler was in the 3rd or OT but if it was OT give Raymond an extra +1 offensive positioning, +1 passing & +1 scoring chance, otherwise I've tallied it as a 3rd period play.

Oh yeah, I couldn't tally hits/blocked shots because I was doing it on the fly but I got most of the other stuff and I only noted def/off positioning as a plus or a minus if it impacted the play (otherwise being in proper position is simply expected). I'll be interested to see how close I get to Bodee's.

It was in OT.

I suppose we have to consider that there was more room out there, which definitely favors a speedy, shifty player like Raymond, but it was a very nice set-up and only a heads-up defensive play by the flame on the back check kept the game alive for Calgary.

Overall, I thought he played pretty well (even though he didn't find the net) and judging by the amount he played in OT, so did the coaching staff.

Anyone else notice that he went for the exact same shot (5-hole) in the shootout that worked against the Avs? I don't know if Kipper saw the film and was waiting for it, but if so, I'd have to say he was waiting for Burr to go deke, backhand....

BTW: Really getting tired of these posts on the shootout.....
Orland Kurtenbach and Dennis Kearns had just been torched 8-1 by the Habs, but they still took time to come out to meet us, some fellow BC boys who were playing hockey in Montreal. THAT"S what being a Canuck is!

#153 SergioMomesso

SergioMomesso

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,209 posts
  • Joined: 09-October 09

Posted 12 February 2012 - 09:28 PM

the whole "Give him time!" argument is complete garbage. the guy is not exactly a young prospect anymore and he has hit his ceiling.

raymond is a waste of space and i cant wait until we get rid of him


+1
jersey collection.jpg
 

 


#154 hackamore

hackamore

    K-Wing Regular

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 35 posts
  • Joined: 28-March 10

Posted 12 February 2012 - 09:56 PM

+1


-1

#155 CanucksJay

CanucksJay

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,490 posts
  • Joined: 19-January 12

Posted 13 February 2012 - 12:30 AM

Here is my analysis of the game. The times I have posted is the time that was left in the period. I didnt initially write the times for the 1st few shifts but decided to write it in so that it was easier for everyone to follow
There was WAY too much info to follow the guidelines.
I felt like my assessment was fair

First Period

Raymond

1)Chips puck out of zone past Jay Bo (1st shift)
2) Comes up with puck off face off, takes shot (2nd shift)
Next face off, Bouma wins puck battle and Flames rush up ice
Decent job on pressure on defensive zone to get puck out despite skating past the puck which was kept in at blue line
3)Great backcheck and good defensive help followed by great rush and a nice shot 12:10
4) Good job going to the net on the 2-1 8:55
5)Decent play defensivly 7:40
6)PK Good job following Brodie at the point 4:20

Booth

1) Beats d-man down and take aggressive shot from bad angle (1st shift)
2)Bad pass off Backlund across ice, goes to the net afterwards (2nd shift)
3)Nice hit on Gio aloong the boards in the offensive zone (3rd shift)
4)13:22 Good forecheck pressure to get the puck turned overand then goes to the front of the net
12:49 Good challenege along boards at blue line to help get puck out
5)Rushes outside on Jay Bo but realizes cant beat him and button hooks. Poor chip in which Flames control easily. Booth follows up by hitting the d-man 11:23
6)Unnoticable shift
7) Couldnt get puck out of zone, good defensive play at 2:47 in front of net. Inability to get puck out eventually leads to Flames goal

1st Period Analysis

Raymond's defensive play was good and he had a good scoring chance by skating to the middle of the ice with speed, nice release
Booth was pretty unnoticeable. Played the body more but his inability to get the puck out resulted in the lone goal. I don't know how much of the goal was his fault but I'm pretty sure if I had my Raymond hate goggles on and Raymond did what Booth did, I'd be tough on him so to be fair, I will say Booth should have won posession of the puck against the pinching d-man and either reversed it or chipped the puck out.

Edge: Raymond

2nd Period

Raymond

1)18:22 Raymond forechecks but cant come up with puck (skates by it instead of staying with it) which leads to counter rush up ice
2)Good shot at 17:50 with traffic in front of the net
3)12:45 Good Stick in neutral zone on PK
4)11:40 Good pressure on dman to turn puck over and get the puck out
11:20 Good backcheck on Kotstopolous
1:30 Good shift, skated with speed, made poor pass that was fortunate not to be intercepted

Booth

1)19:50 Good job playing the body
2)16:35 Falls to ice and misses chance to get puck out of the zone leading to pressure in the d-zone
3 16:17. Good job controlling pass of the skates, button hook and nice pass to Daniel
15:45 Loses puck battle to Gio
15:35 Bad pass broken up by Backlund
9:40 Good pass to Duco in the slot while being triple team along the boards setting up a great scoring chance
6:36 Skates past prime shooting area and takes poor shot from bad angle on PP
5:00 Nice pass to the point followed by aggressively going for rebound hacking at Kipper
4:43 Nice forcheck on Gio allowing Canucks to keep puck in followed by good board battle with Gio behind the net where Booth protects puck and comes to the faceoff circle. He then goes to front of the net to create screen

2nd Period Analysis

Raymond gets bumped up to Booth line but so far while Raymond has been solid defensively and had the 1 good rush, Booth has been more physical and been more of a net presence being noticeable on the ice.

Edge: Booth


3rd Period

Raymond

16:19 Poor icing by Raymond. I think he tried to spring Booth but was way off
16:10 Draws penalty (dive but we'll take it)
12:02 Raymond comes in fast on the forecheck but bails by not initiating contact and trying to jump out of the way while trying to step around Butler on the forecheck
11:56 Goes to front of the net freeing up space for booth's rebound goal
10:56 Great work along end boards outbattling 2 Flames and stalling while linemates are changing. Eventually Hodgson comes in to take the puck
1:15 Nice forcheck on Jay Bo, good working protecting puck in the offensive zone. Circles and takes shot that gets blocked but Bitz almost puts it in.

Booth

6:38 Nice tip pass to Kesler
13:50 nice forecheck
11:58 Nice hit along the side boards and frees up puck to the point and then goes to the side of the net for rebound goal. Nice hands and quick release on rebound
3:35 Loses battle with Iggy, eventually gets puck out and then makes nice pass to Hansen to create scoring chance
0:35 North South with good speed, pass a bit off the mark to bieksa but still creates a good chance, eventually makes way to front of the net and causes panic leading to turnover to Hamhuis at the point

3rd Period Analysis

Raymond loses spot on 2nd line while AV juggles to find scoring. Puts Hansen in to replace Raymond but this could be to even out scoring as Raymond's looked pretty good tonight as well.
Booth continues to get stronger as the game goes on and mix of physical play and net presence scores him a goal.

Edge: Booth

OT

Raymond

3:38 Great pass attempt to Edler in OT
1:00 Great final shift in OT

Booth

0:03 Great job to take the lob from Edler to break in at end of the game.

OT Analysis

While Booth had virtually no playing time, Raymond looked great in OT with the open ice. Used his great speed to create offensive chances and made a great play to Edler which was broken up on a good defensive play by Cammi.

Overall analysis:

Both players had a good game.
I felt that Raymond was solid defensively more consistently than Booth. Raymond seemed to have more jump in the 1st as well as the OT when the ice was wide open.
Booth was definitely more physical and played more in the tougher areas of the ice (along the baords and in front of the net)

I can't give Booth too much of an advantage on his goal because the location of the ice where Booth scored the goal wasn't really in a tough area. Booth was fortunate on the bounce and roles could easily have been reversed with Raymond shooting the puck and Booth occupying the space in front of the net (like Raymond did) but who knows if Raymond would have had the quick hands to get the rebound and hit the net with it.

I was happy with the play of both players and I don't think either one clearly outplayed the other.

While Raymond was solid defensively, aside from that rush in the 1st period and the OT, he was non existent in the offensive zone.

Booth on the other hand was harder on the forecheck more consistently and went to the front of the net more to hack away at rebounds etc.

If you look at that in terms of salary, I would have to say the you got more bang for your buck with Raymond than Booth but in the end, Booth did pot the tying goal and was more of a presence offensively.

I'm not really sure why we decided to compare the 2 players because I think they bring different elements of the game.

Raymond had a game that would be considered an "A" for a 3rd liner but if he was top 6, his offensive production was not enough to warrant 2nd line time (which might be why AV demoted him)

I dont think he brings enough offense to be a 2nd liner but he plays the 3rd line rold quite sufficiently. He doesnt lay the body but he seems to get the job done defensively.
Are we good with that going into the playoffs?

A solid 3rd line defensive player who has the ability to chip in occasionally with a goal or 2?

My thoughts still remain the same. If MG can hold a gun to his head and make him sign a long term deal at the deadline at a bargain price (like he did to Burrows) I think we keep him.

However, if we get a solid offer in a trade for him (bonafide top 6 winger) or a top 4 d-man and May Ray has no intentions on taking a long term cheap contract, we trade him.

Edited by CanucksJay, 13 February 2012 - 12:56 AM.


#156 CanucksJay

CanucksJay

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,490 posts
  • Joined: 19-January 12

Posted 13 February 2012 - 01:12 AM

Booth vs Calgary (clock times of shift not noted): https://docs.google....5iTEYzMWc#gid=0

Raymond vs CGY (clock times of shift not noted): https://docs.google....V1OXZsQ1E#gid=0

This doesn't include OT when not a lot happened (imho). You could probably give Raymond some defensive points and Booth a +1 pass reception for corralling that lob pass at the end but I didn't bother. Oh and I can't remember if that Raymond set up for Edler was in the 3rd or OT but if it was OT give Raymond an extra +1 offensive positioning, +1 passing & +1 scoring chance, otherwise I've tallied it as a 3rd period play.

Oh yeah, I couldn't tally hits/blocked shots because I was doing it on the fly but I got most of the other stuff and I only noted def/off positioning as a plus or a minus if it impacted the play (otherwise being in proper position is simply expected). I'll be interested to see how close I get to Bodee's.


Thanks for taking the time to log everything that you saw.

We saw a bit differently on the forechecks as I gave Booth the edge there but we see quite similarily on the categories of defensive positioning, dirty areas, and passing.

It seems to me that your assessment has Booth taking the statistical advantage in the offensive areas of the game while Raymond wins in the defensive categories. I think that's pretty similar to my take on their games as well.

Maybe thats why Booth is the 2nd liner and Raymond is now a 3rd liner.

I think my main qualm with Raymond was that while he was on 2nd line, he wasn't helping the line produce chances and I thought that they could get better production from someone else like Higgins and Booth. I think it does speak volumes about his lack of offensive abilities if he is still on 3rd line while Higgins is injured and we have Hansen playing above Raymond.

However this could be just AV wanting to balance out the lines rather than Raymond's poor play offensively. However I do have to admit that I like Raymond on 3rd line much better than 2nd. This then raises another point. Is Raymond worth trading if we could get an upgrade in top 6 or top 4 d-men? If a trade like that was offered, another GM is essentially saying, he sees Raymond as a 2nd line winger and is giving us a return value for another top 6 winger when "we" actually only see him as a 3rd liner. For MG, if Raymond is going to play 3rd line, then this trade is a win for the Canucks because this then allows us to move Higgins down to 3rd to replace Raymond and get more scoring Help for Kesler and Booth

The answer should be yes

Edited by CanucksJay, 13 February 2012 - 01:24 AM.


#157 CanucksJay

CanucksJay

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,490 posts
  • Joined: 19-January 12

Posted 13 February 2012 - 01:15 AM

It was in OT.

I suppose we have to consider that there was more room out there, which definitely favors a speedy, shifty player like Raymond, but it was a very nice set-up and only a heads-up defensive play by the flame on the back check kept the game alive for Calgary.

Overall, I thought he played pretty well (even though he didn't find the net) and judging by the amount he played in OT, so did the coaching staff.


Raymond did have a good game. His playing time in OT was a combination of good/reliable defensive play throughout the game plus the speed advantage of the 3 on 3 in OT.
I think Booth on the other hand while being more effective offensively throughout the game got maybe half a shift in OT because of his weaker defensive play which might have been exposed in OT

#158 GODSRAGE

GODSRAGE

    Comets Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 175 posts
  • Joined: 12-June 08

Posted 13 February 2012 - 01:18 AM

Raymond is worth trading for a top 4 dman or even a grittier 3rd liner to compliment Hodgson and Hansen. Correct me if I'm wrong, I think his contract is up this year? Could see him not playing as a Canuck next year.

#159 CanucksJay

CanucksJay

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,490 posts
  • Joined: 19-January 12

Posted 13 February 2012 - 01:26 AM

Raymond is worth trading for a top 4 dman or even a grittier 3rd liner to compliment Hodgson and Hansen. Correct me if I'm wrong, I think his contract is up this year? Could see him not playing as a Canuck next year.


I completly agree with you but if it\s for a 3rd liner, its gotta be a pretty damn good 3rd liner.

Edited by CanucksJay, 13 February 2012 - 01:26 AM.


#160 Raph

Raph

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,606 posts
  • Joined: 23-January 09

Posted 13 February 2012 - 11:19 AM

I don't understand why AV has been using him in the shootout for the last 3 years, the guy is pretty bad at it for a "skill" player.

#161 CanucksJay

CanucksJay

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,490 posts
  • Joined: 19-January 12

Posted 13 February 2012 - 11:28 AM

I don't understand why AV has been using him in the shootout for the last 3 years, the guy is pretty bad at it for a "skill" player.


I think his career percentage on shoot out is pretty decent. He was scoring the spinorama goals for a bit there but I would prefer Coho as our 3rd shooter.

#162 The Brahma Bull

The Brahma Bull

    Canucks All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 17,224 posts
  • Joined: 17-March 08

Posted 13 February 2012 - 11:31 AM

I think his career percentage on shoot out is pretty decent. He was scoring the spinorama goals for a bit there but I would prefer Coho as our 3rd shooter.


I prefer coho as our first shooter! :D


#163 CanucksJay

CanucksJay

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,490 posts
  • Joined: 19-January 12

Posted 13 February 2012 - 11:39 AM

Something I've already commented on. When Raymond came back the opposition wasn't playing him that hard the first few games. It seemed to me his first three to five games or so players didn't want to be the guy that ended his career. Since taking some hits he's getting the real world NHL treatment and reality has sunk in. It doesn't change the fact that when he came back he would be physically behind everybody on the team. As playing goes on there would naturally be a drop before improvement. I took off the first five games where Raymond appeared to be getting played soft by the other team. I stand by my numbers and took an even amount of games (20) as a sampling. Did you come up with 18 (a rather odd nuimber) because it makes Cody look better? How many of Cody's points came from the PP without Raymond? Hodgson has been getting PP time that Hansen and Raymond haven't. So you can't just look at the point total alone. You also have to consider ice time. Hodgson gets more offensive time while Raymond gets more defensive time.


I don't know how much I agree with this comment.
I don't think guys "ease up" just because a player came back from injury. The game's so fast out there you have to react on instinct. It's not like they are going to slam on the breaks when they see Raymond along the boards and just stick check when they would normally play the body.

I was amazed when Raymond came back and was flying down the wing and cutting to the net with the d-man at his hip. I thought he showed a lot of courage doing that at such high speeds despite coming back from injury.

I cannot see into Raymond's mind but I'm pretty sure he wasn't thinking "hey I can cut to the net now because guys arent going to lay me out into the end boards"


Yes I took the 18 games because stats were slightly skewed to favour me. (lol I'll admit it).
But in the end, last 18 games is still last 18 games.
If anything, this should support your argument more because I'm taking the more recent games into account than the previous ones and that should be when Raymond's conditioning is better.

If anything, your dismissal of the 1st 8-10 games to state that guys were easing up on him actually favours my argument because now when he is in game shape and guys are playing him harder, he isnt nearly as effective.

Edited by CanucksJay, 13 February 2012 - 11:42 AM.


#164 CanucksJay

CanucksJay

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,490 posts
  • Joined: 19-January 12

Posted 13 February 2012 - 11:41 AM

I prefer coho as our first shooter! :D


true.

My list would be

Coho
Burrows
Kesler
Edler

am I missing someone good?

#165 Raph

Raph

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,606 posts
  • Joined: 23-January 09

Posted 13 February 2012 - 11:45 AM

I think his career percentage on shoot out is pretty decent. He was scoring the spinorama goals for a bit there but I would prefer Coho as our 3rd shooter.


28.6% career percentage isn't exactly a number that screams "PUT ME IN THERE COACH!".


true.

My list would be

Coho
Burrows
Kesler
Edler

am I missing someone good?


Lapierre is a 3/7 in his career, I would give him the benefit of the doubt until his percentage starts dropping.

Edited by Raph, 13 February 2012 - 11:47 AM.


#166 Baggins

Baggins

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,177 posts
  • Joined: 30-July 03

Posted 13 February 2012 - 11:50 AM

I don't understand why AV has been using him in the shootout for the last 3 years, the guy is pretty bad at it for a "skill" player.


Only four players have scored in the SO this season:

Burrows 4/7
Edler 2/4
Hodgson 2/6
Raymond 2/7

5 players with 0 including Kesler who is 0/4.


Last season Raymond was 2/6. Kesler was 2/8. Nobody had more than 2 SO goals last year. Burrows was 2/2.

Burrows is our best SO performer. He's 7/10 since the 09/10 season. Raymond and Kesler are both 5/17 in that time. Kesler was better than Raymond in 09/10 but Raymond has been better since the 10/11 season (or since he's sucked according to many here). I guess Kesler is even worse for a skill guy. Daniel is 1/6 since 10/11.

MentalMidgetSig.jpg


#167 CanucksJay

CanucksJay

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,490 posts
  • Joined: 19-January 12

Posted 13 February 2012 - 11:51 AM

28.6% career percentage isn't exactly a number that screams "PUT ME IN THERE COACH!".




Lapierre is a 3/7 in his career, I would give him the benefit of the doubt until his percentage starts dropping.


Stats are always good.
Where did you find the shoot out percentages?

By the way 28.6 on the Canucks would seem like its pretty good lol

I was just doing it from my brain.

Where does Raymond rank on the tea min terms of shoot out percentage?

Edited by CanucksJay, 13 February 2012 - 11:55 AM.


#168 CanucksJay

CanucksJay

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,490 posts
  • Joined: 19-January 12

Posted 13 February 2012 - 11:54 AM

Only four players have scored in the SO this season:

Burrows 4/7
Edler 2/4
Hodgson 2/6
Raymond 2/7

5 players with 0 including Kesler who is 0/4.


Last season Raymond was 2/6. Kesler was 2/8. Nobody had more than 2 SO goals last year. Burrows was 2/2.

Burrows is our best SO performer. He's 7/10 since the 09/10 season. Raymond and Kesler are both 5/17 in that time. Kesler was better than Raymond in 09/10 but Raymond has been better since the 10/11 season (or since he's sucked according to many here). I guess Kesler is even worse for a skill guy. Daniel is 1/6 since 10/11.


While your stats are helpful, I think we all know that skill does not exactly translate to a great shoot out or Danny and Hank would be 1-2 in shootouts so the 2nd half of your post really doesn't add much to the conversation

#169 Raph

Raph

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,606 posts
  • Joined: 23-January 09

Posted 13 February 2012 - 12:05 PM

Stats are always good.
Where did you find the shoot out percentages?

By the way 28.6 on the Canucks would seem like its pretty good lol

I was just doing it from my brain.

Where does Raymond rank on the tea min terms of shoot out percentage?


http://www.nhl.com/i...terCareerTotals

6/21 career. That's a large enough sample size to show that he is not a good choice for the shootout. You can get that percentage by throwing darts blind folded. Raymond should not be a default shootout choice like when we had Wellwood and Demitra.

And Kesler is even worse at shootouts at 9/34. Burrows is our clear #1 choice to participate in every shootout. I would give Hodgson a chance to show his stuff until we can get a decent sample size from him.

Edited by Raph, 13 February 2012 - 12:07 PM.


#170 Hugh Chardon

Hugh Chardon

    Comets Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 203 posts
  • Joined: 21-December 09

Posted 13 February 2012 - 12:07 PM

We don't need him...he's a boy playing a man's game.

#171 Baggins

Baggins

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,177 posts
  • Joined: 30-July 03

Posted 13 February 2012 - 12:08 PM

I don't know how much I agree with this comment.
I don't think guys "ease up" just because a player came back from injury. The game's so fast out there you have to react on instinct. It's not like they are going to slam on the breaks when they see Raymond along the boards and just stick check when they would normally play the body.

I was amazed when Raymond came back and was flying down the wing and cutting to the net with the d-man at his hip. I thought he showed a lot of courage doing that at such high speeds despite coming back from injury.

I cannot see into Raymond's mind but I'm pretty sure he wasn't thinking "hey I can cut to the net now because guys arent going to lay me out into the end boards"


Yes I took the 18 games because stats were slightly skewed to favour me. (lol I'll admit it).
But in the end, last 18 games is still last 18 games.
If anything, this should support your argument more because I'm taking the more recent games into account than the previous ones and that should be when Raymond's conditioning is better.

If anything, your dismissal of the 1st 8-10 games to state that guys were easing up on him actually favours my argument because now when he is in game shape and guys are playing him harder, he isnt nearly as effective.


You obviously have a different definition of "a few" games from me. And yes I stand by my statement that he was played soft those first few games. Two or three games to be more specific.

I took 20 games as it omitted those first five that included the games he was played soft. I chose 20 games prior to going through the score sheets. So there was no preconceived stacking in favor of my argument. But again, including PP points for Cody where Raymond isn't getting PP time is also stacking the deck. Which I accounted for. Over that 20 games period Raymond and Hodgson had the same number of even strength points. And Raymond had a higher number of first assists. In the end the last 20 games are the last 20 games. See, two can play that game.

As far as cutting to the net, he takes what he's given. He doesn't have the size to bull through a big defenseman. Which is to say he needs to be a little ahead of him to cut to the net. If he isn't he uses his speed to go around the net or puts on the brakes. He's not a power forward so don't expect him to play like one.

MentalMidgetSig.jpg


#172 Baggins

Baggins

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,177 posts
  • Joined: 30-July 03

Posted 13 February 2012 - 12:13 PM

While your stats are helpful, I think we all know that skill does not exactly translate to a great shoot out or Danny and Hank would be 1-2 in shootouts so the 2nd half of your post really doesn't add much to the conversation


It was quite applicable to the posted I was responding to.....

I don't understand why AV has been using him in the shootout for the last 3 years, the guy is pretty bad at it for a "skill" player.


MentalMidgetSig.jpg


#173 CanucksJay

CanucksJay

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,490 posts
  • Joined: 19-January 12

Posted 13 February 2012 - 12:31 PM

You obviously have a different definition of "a few" games from me. And yes I stand by my statement that he was played soft those first few games. Two or three games to be more specific.

I took 20 games as it omitted those first five that included the games he was played soft. I chose 20 games prior to going through the score sheets. So there was no preconceived stacking in favor of my argument. But again, including PP points for Cody where Raymond isn't getting PP time is also stacking the deck. Which I accounted for. Over that 20 games period Raymond and Hodgson had the same number of even strength points. And Raymond had a higher number of first assists. In the end the last 20 games are the last 20 games. See, two can play that game.

As far as cutting to the net, he takes what he's given. He doesn't have the size to bull through a big defenseman. Which is to say he needs to be a little ahead of him to cut to the net. If he isn't he uses his speed to go around the net or puts on the brakes. He's not a power forward so don't expect him to play like one.


I've been a long time lurker and usually agree with your views.

However with Raymond, I see it differently

I think we'll find out pretty soon that Coho is a better player than Raymond. I think many on the board already see it that way. If you think they are neck and neck right now, this will be a non issue in 1-2 years. Raymond has already hit his ceiling where as Coho is just getting started.

I'm not asking him to bull THROUGH the d-man like a Bertuzzi. I'm asking him to continue to accelerate and go around the outside.
I've felt on many occasions that as Raymond is accelerating and the d-man's hips are turning, if Raymond just gave it an extra second to keep his legs going, he would have the d-man on his back hip where he can cut to the net but, it looks like before that happens, Raymond chicken out and decideds to stop accelerating. Raymond doesn't possess the killer edge when his speed is actually a huge advantage on a rush.

So watching Raymond closely recently has helped me cement my belief that he will be a career 3rd line winger capable of 40 pts.
If we continue to pay him 2.5 throughout his UFA years, I'm ok with that.

However I also think its foolish if we have an opportunity to upgrade and get a top 6 forward or a top 4 d-man and don't trade Raymond knowing that he is a 3rd liner capable of 40 pts.

Why wouldn't we trade him if we knew we could get better production from someone else?

I've asked Rupert many times what he feels is Raymond's prjected output so I'll ask you.

In the next 3-5 years, is Raymond going to be a 3rd liner or a 2nd liner on this team and what is his projected point total?

Keep in mind I do understand his point total will differ depending on what line he's on and how much ice time he gets (although Coho seems to be doing pretty solid with whichever linemates he has and makes the most of his icetime)

As for the 1st assist vs 2nd assist argument, one could say that Coho posses GREAT vision and hockey intelligence and its usually his initial pass that opens up the seams to create a scoring chance for guys like Raymond to pick up the 1st assist.

Edited by CanucksJay, 13 February 2012 - 12:35 PM.


#174 CanucksJay

CanucksJay

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,490 posts
  • Joined: 19-January 12

Posted 13 February 2012 - 12:37 PM

It was quite applicable to the posted I was responding to.....


Point taken.

#175 Bodee

Bodee

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,257 posts
  • Joined: 26-May 11

Posted 13 February 2012 - 01:01 PM

I've been a long time lurker and usually agree with your views.

However with Raymond, I see it differently

I think we'll find out pretty soon that Coho is a better player than Raymond. I think many on the board already see it that way. If you think they are neck and neck right now, this will be a non issue in 1-2 years. Raymond has already hit his ceiling where as Coho is just getting started.

I'm not asking him to bull THROUGH the d-man like a Bertuzzi. I'm asking him to continue to accelerate and go around the outside.
I've felt on many occasions that as Raymond is accelerating and the d-man's hips are turning, if Raymond just gave it an extra second to keep his legs going, he would have the d-man on his back hip where he can cut to the net but, it looks like before that happens, Raymond chicken out and decideds to stop accelerating. Raymond doesn't possess the killer edge when his speed is actually a huge advantage on a rush.

So watching Raymond closely recently has helped me cement my belief that he will be a career 3rd line winger capable of 40 pts.
If we continue to pay him 2.5 throughout his UFA years, I'm ok with that.

However I also think its foolish if we have an opportunity to upgrade and get a top 6 forward or a top 4 d-man and don't trade Raymond knowing that he is a 3rd liner capable of 40 pts.

Why wouldn't we trade him if we knew we could get better production from someone else?

I've asked Rupert many times what he feels is Raymond's prjected output so I'll ask you.

In the next 3-5 years, is Raymond going to be a 3rd liner or a 2nd liner on this team and what is his projected point total?

Keep in mind I do understand his point total will differ depending on what line he's on and how much ice time he gets (although Coho seems to be doing pretty solid with whichever linemates he has and makes the most of his icetime)

As for the 1st assist vs 2nd assist argument, one could say that Coho posses GREAT vision and hockey intelligence and its usually his initial pass that opens up the seams to create a scoring chance for guys like Raymond to pick up the 1st assist.


As a fan of Raymond, and as someone who started this technical/scouting appraisal thing off (I am on my 3rd viewing of the game and struggling to format my evaluation.......have reached end of 1st period) I have to agree with your conclusions and Miller's.

He is not aggressive enough in attack for the 2nd line and his best talents are really in defensive forechecking and breakaway attack. (that is present in nearly all his games and was certainly there the other evening)

For that reason combined with his ability to chip in with goals, he is an asset to be valued but on our 3rd line.
He is an asset, not only because of what I have said above but his speed tends to catch opposition teams out. Because of this it is handy to have his talents on call for the 2nd in an emergency. It should not be forgotten that even a 2nd line needs defence.

In summing up I still feel it would be hard to pick up a player of his abilities and an aggressive scoring game for a similar salary but if he was packaged with a pick or another player for a genuine 2nd line threat I don't think I could complain.

One last thing, I wonder if the organisation or Mason himself has ever considered increasing his muscle bulk. I think Coho did something similar to good effect and I think another 5/6 lbs of muscle might lift Raymond's game and allow him to compete on better terms.
Kevin.jpg

#176 Bodee

Bodee

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,257 posts
  • Joined: 26-May 11

Posted 13 February 2012 - 01:06 PM

We don't need him...he's a boy playing a man's game.


Honestly sir, a comment like that destroys any credence your posts will EVER have on these boards.
Kevin.jpg

#177 CanucksJay

CanucksJay

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,490 posts
  • Joined: 19-January 12

Posted 13 February 2012 - 01:24 PM

As a fan of Raymond, and as someone who started this technical/scouting appraisal thing off (I am on my 3rd viewing of the game and struggling to format my evaluation.......have reached end of 1st period) I have to agree with your conclusions and Miller's.

He is not aggressive enough in attack for the 2nd line and his best talents are really in defensive forechecking and breakaway attack. (that is present in nearly all his games and was certainly there the other evening)

For that reason combined with his ability to chip in with goals, he is an asset to be valued but on our 3rd line.
He is an asset, not only because of what I have said above but his speed tends to catch opposition teams out. Because of this it is handy to have his talents on call for the 2nd in an emergency. It should not be forgotten that even a 2nd line needs defence.

In summing up I still feel it would be hard to pick up a player of his abilities and an aggressive scoring game for a similar salary but if he was packaged with a pick or another player for a genuine 2nd line threat I don't think I could complain.

One last thing, I wonder if the organisation or Mason himself has ever considered increasing his muscle bulk. I think Coho did something similar to good effect and I think another 5/6 lbs of muscle might lift Raymond's game and allow him to compete on better terms.


It's funny you mention Raymond bulking up. I think he can still put on another 10 lbs and still be just as fast.

This article of Raymond really makes me want to cheer for him. He's always been the underdog and my hope has always been that he'll come through at the NHL level. But you know what? I'd say a long career as a 3rd line utility player (moneyball) IS a successful career in which he overcame the odds.

http://forum.canucks...nd-round-steal/

Who is Mason Raymond?
Friday, 05.08.2005 / 12:00 AM / News - Vancouver Canucks:
By: Kevin Kinghorn; 08/05/05

Less than three years ago, Mason Raymond appeared to have as much chance of making the NHL as your average beer leaguer. He was small for his age (under 5-foot-4), and although he could skate, Raymond hadn't stood out enough in midget hockey to attract the interest of any WHL teams, let alone any pro scouts. In fact, the Cochrane, Alberta native nearly gave up hockey entirely and focused on his other passion - archery.

"To tell you the truth, I wasn't too sure about hockey coming out of midget," says Raymond, an avid hunter and an accomplished marksman. "I was always the smallest kid and I never got recognized. All my buddies were getting drafted and I had serious second thoughts."

Thankfully for the Canucks, Raymond shelved the plans of slinging arrows competitively and signed on with the Camrose Kodiaks of the Alberta Junior Hockey League with an eye for earning a scholarship down south.

And then he grew.

"I was a late bloomer I guess," says Raymond, who now carries close to 175-pounds on a solid 6-foot frame. "And I guess I just started to believe in myself and figured out what I could do with hockey."

Born in 1985, Raymond was eligible for the 2004 draft, but opted out. He wasn't getting much attention, and gambled on having a big enough season with the Kodiaks to generate interest despite being an over-ager.

It paid off. Raymond scored 41 goals and 42 assists in 55 games with the Kodiaks this past season. He led his team all the way to the junior 'A' national championships where they lost in the final to the Weyburn Red Wings.

That playoff performance, especially a tough series against the Surrey Eagles that saw Raymond become the prime target of some aggressive physical play, opened the eyes of Canuck scouts.

"I think I showed a lot of people that I could play," says Raymond. "And that no matter what the opposition dished out, I could fight through it. I got hit into the boards and got cut for ten stitches, but I got right back out there. I think I showed a lot of determination and guts."

And that was the big question mark with Raymond. He's always been a slight kid playing a finesse game; not exactly a scout's dream. But Raymond's got shammy-soft hand and the legs of Gaetan Boucher. The question was: could he get big enough and did he have enough heart?

The Canucks feel the answer is 'yes' on both counts. That's why they think Raymond was a steal in the second round with the 51st overall pick.

"We feel he's able to play," says Ron Delorme, Chief Scout of the Vancouver Canucks. "So many people I've talked to have told me what a good player they think [Raymond] is. Kevin Lowe just told me the other day what a good pick he thinks Raymond is."

"He has very good speed and he sees options so quickly. He handles the puck extremely well while he's in motion and he's always dangerous because he can change direction in tight spaces so quickly. And his thinking complements everything else so well."

Delorme says Raymond could have easily gone in the the first round, but being a 19 year-old, other teams likely felt they could wait until the third round and still get a crack. The Canucks weren't willing to gamble.

"We had considered moving up to late in the first round to get at him," says Delorme, "that's how high we are on him."

Raymond's coach in Camrose, Boris Rybalka, agrees. He feels Raymond's an elite talent, and he's not alone. Raymond had 26 different NHL teams interview him prior to the draft August 30th.

"What the Canucks will see when he does eventually play for them, is a highly skilled player with amazing speed. He's got high end pro speed, even this year in junior. If you look at a guy who has played in a Canuck uniform, I'd say he's got that Pavel Bure high end type of speed."

But the real asset, according to Rybalka, is his football-sized heart.

"The reason the Canucks took him in the second round I think is because of his phenomenal attitude. When we played Surrey in the Doyle cup last season, they saw what Mason Raymond can do."

"Everyone knows Mason has skill, can score and can turn on a dime, but he also has the heart and the character. He took quite a beating physically in that series and got up and kept coming back. I think that's what sold [the Canucks] on Mason - they saw what a competitor he is."

According to his father Terry, Mason gets a lot of that from his upbringing. Raymond grew up on a farm 30 minutes West of Calgary, though at times Cochrane can seem much further than that.

"The life that Mason's always been accustomed to is: you work hard and you play hard," explains Terry. "That's the way we live. We keep cattle out here. You have go out and you work hard and enjoy the lifestyle."

"Mason's a big hunter. He appreciates getting out into the outdoors. City life's chaotic. It's different. It's not our cup of tea."

Growing up outside the blur of city life has given Raymond a bit of a different perspective on things.

"Mason doesn't bounce off the walls," says Terry, "he's a focused kid."

"If you give him a work project to do he gets it done. And he gets it done better than anyone would have expected because he strives for perfection."

"Mason's that one of those kids that says 'Oh, I'm going to start working out', he just goes and does it. That's the kind of person he is."

On draft day Raymond watched the first ten picks just to see his friend, Devin Setoguchi, go eighth overall to San Jose. He then threw a tape in the VCR then hit Windermere Lake to do some wake boarding. It's not that the draft wasn't exciting for him, it's just that there's no point getting all worked up over something you can't control. As his Dad Terry put it: "It was a beautiful and you can't sit inside watching television all day."

Mind you, when he did get the call from a close friend telling him he went in the second round to Vancouver, Raymond was ecstatic.

"I said are you kidding me. I ran back like crazy to check it out and sure enough It was true. From then on it's been pretty neat."

"I went on the website of the Canucks, and to see your name on there is like a dream come true. I mean I never thought I'd ever go on an NHL website and see my name. It's been a crazy couple of days."

And with the high hopes the Canucks have for Raymond, it's only going to get crazier.

Raymond is committed to playing college hockey next year with Minnesota Duluth where he'll get plenty of time and attention in the weight room. If he continues to develop physically, and hone the skills showed last year in Camrose, the Canucks may just have the steal of the 2005 draft.

#178 Raph

Raph

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,606 posts
  • Joined: 23-January 09

Posted 13 February 2012 - 02:35 PM

The Canucks have put a lot of investment into developing Raymond. It makes it hard to bench him or trade him now. Just like it was hard to get rid of Bernier (cuz we gave up 2 picks for him).

#179 Baggins

Baggins

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,177 posts
  • Joined: 30-July 03

Posted 13 February 2012 - 03:35 PM

I've been a long time lurker and usually agree with your views.

However with Raymond, I see it differently

I think we'll find out pretty soon that Coho is a better player than Raymond. I think many on the board already see it that way. If you think they are neck and neck right now, this will be a non issue in 1-2 years. Raymond has already hit his ceiling where as Coho is just getting started.

I'm not asking him to bull THROUGH the d-man like a Bertuzzi. I'm asking him to continue to accelerate and go around the outside.
I've felt on many occasions that as Raymond is accelerating and the d-man's hips are turning, if Raymond just gave it an extra second to keep his legs going, he would have the d-man on his back hip where he can cut to the net but, it looks like before that happens, Raymond chicken out and decideds to stop accelerating. Raymond doesn't possess the killer edge when his speed is actually a huge advantage on a rush.

So watching Raymond closely recently has helped me cement my belief that he will be a career 3rd line winger capable of 40 pts.
If we continue to pay him 2.5 throughout his UFA years, I'm ok with that.

However I also think its foolish if we have an opportunity to upgrade and get a top 6 forward or a top 4 d-man and don't trade Raymond knowing that he is a 3rd liner capable of 40 pts.

Why wouldn't we trade him if we knew we could get better production from someone else?

I've asked Rupert many times what he feels is Raymond's prjected output so I'll ask you.

In the next 3-5 years, is Raymond going to be a 3rd liner or a 2nd liner on this team and what is his projected point total?

Keep in mind I do understand his point total will differ depending on what line he's on and how much ice time he gets (although Coho seems to be doing pretty solid with whichever linemates he has and makes the most of his icetime)

As for the 1st assist vs 2nd assist argument, one could say that Coho posses GREAT vision and hockey intelligence and its usually his initial pass that opens up the seams to create a scoring chance for guys like Raymond to pick up the 1st assist.


We'll just have to agree to disagree on this one. I believe Raymond is a capable second line winger. Considering the league average for a second line winger last year was 45 points if Raymond can get 40 on the third line with minimal PP time it would qualify him as a second line winger. Many of the people here have unrealistic expectations. I already posted his numbers from last season in comparison to the previous season and they bear out what I've been saying all along. He's no where near as bad as most here seem to think.

Your Hodgson scenario of Raymonds 1st assists doesn't pan out. Only one had Hodgson as the second assist and two were in fact setting Hodgson up for goals.

I don't get into predictions. They're pointless. Who here predicted Burrows to score 30 goals? Most here saw him as a waste of a roster spot his first full season. Did anybody here predict Kesler to be a 40 goal scorer? Nope. The majority saw him as a career 20-25 goal scorer. Did anybody foresee the Sedins as 100 point players? Nope. Just a couple of years ago most saw them as second line players at best and if they wanted more than $4m let them walk. Predicting what a player may become is crystal ball territory and I don't have one. But I can recognize skills. I saw them in Burrows, Kesler and the Sedins. Hodgson has them too. Just as Raymond has skills. How far they'll take them is anybodys guess.

As I said in my post about that 20 game span, Raymond had the same number of even strength points as Hodgson. The big difference in their production came from Cody playing 2nd PP unit center. Which is to say Raymond has been just as productive from the 3rd line. Given their histories and ages Hodgson certainly has the better potential. But does it matter who will be the better player when they're not competing for the same spot?

I've said it before and I'll say it again, I have no problem with Raymond being traded for an upgrade. What I do have a problem with is his being made out to be less than what he is. If he were a UFA this summer I'd be surprised if he didn't get offers in the $3.5 to $4.5m range. Last summer 40-45 point UFA's were getting $4 to $4.5m. Consider his speed, defensive play, he can PK and PP and as an added bonus play PP point. As a result he will have that kind of value on the open market.

MentalMidgetSig.jpg


#180 Hugh Chardon

Hugh Chardon

    Comets Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 203 posts
  • Joined: 21-December 09

Posted 13 February 2012 - 04:12 PM

Honestly sir, a comment like that destroys any credence your posts will EVER have on these boards.


I can use capitals too....BLOW ME.




Canucks.com is the official Web site of The Vancouver Canucks. The Vancouver Canucks and Canucks.com are trademarks of The Vancouver Canucks Limited Partnership.  NHL and the word mark and image of the Stanley Cup are registered trademarks and the NHL Shield and NHL Conference logos are trademarks of the National Hockey League. All NHL logos and marks and NHL team logos and marks as well as all other proprietary materials depicted herein are the property of the NHL and the respective NHL teams and may not be reproduced without the prior written consent of NHL Enterprises, L.P.  Copyright © 2009 The Vancouver Canucks Limited Partnership and the National Hockey League.  All Rights Reserved.