Jump to content

Welcome to canucks.com Vancouver Canucks homepage

Photo
* * * - - 2 votes

[ARTICLE] Hockey Prospectus Top 100 Prospects (Includes 1 Canuck)


  • Please log in to reply
121 replies to this topic

#61 D-Bo7

D-Bo7

    Comets Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 441 posts
  • Joined: 18-December 11

Posted 20 September 2012 - 12:33 PM

Those are pretty much just the first two rounds of the last couple drafts rearranged to make it look like some thought was put into it.

Gaunce is a sleeper pick. Anyone who does some research on this guy will realize that. I'm still amazed that he dropped as low as he did.

Jensen is way too low on that list. Sure he's got some inconsistency, but what prospect doesn't? He's alot closer to playing in the NHL than some of those players IMO.

No one should expect Mallet to be on any top list. He was not drafted to be a top offensive player, he was drafted to be a role player. Because that is what this team needs more of. He may have a lower ceiling than alot of the other players, but I like his chances of making the NHL at some point.
  • 1

#62 elvis15

elvis15

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 21,121 posts
  • Joined: 27-February 07

Posted 20 September 2012 - 12:40 PM

Those are pretty much just the first two rounds of the last couple drafts rearranged to make it look like some thought was put into it.

Gaunce is a sleeper pick. Anyone who does some research on this guy will realize that. I'm still amazed that he dropped as low as he did.

Jensen is way too low on that list. Sure he's got some inconsistency, but what prospect doesn't? He's alot closer to playing in the NHL than some of those players IMO.

No one should expect Mallet to be on any top list. He was not drafted to be a top offensive player, he was drafted to be a role player. Because that is what this team needs more of. He may have a lower ceiling than alot of the other players, but I like his chances of making the NHL at some point.

I agree that we could use more quality depth, but we've been lacking for some time in sure-fire top end talent outside of our goalies. It might not take much to get a forward or defenceman that is, and we have some that could turn into that, but it'd be nice to have someone really exciting in our prospect pool.
  • 1

c3c9e9.pnganimalhousesig.jpg

Tanev is going to EDM. I can put my life savings down on it

 


#63 winacup

winacup

    Comets Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 241 posts
  • Joined: 14-July 12

Posted 20 September 2012 - 12:46 PM

We have arguably one of the worst prospect pools in the league.


yup. it will be a long long time until we get to play for lord stanley again.
  • 1
Posted Image

#64 elvis15

elvis15

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 21,121 posts
  • Joined: 27-February 07

Posted 20 September 2012 - 12:46 PM

If there are 100 prospects on this list, and 30 teams, shouldn't we have like, at least 3 on that list? I mean, that's just if we were keeping up with the average... Doesn't look too good on our part!

As was mentioned, we're not the only team with little or no prospects on that list. That's a byproduct of not having top picks for a number of years, as well as not getting a well above average return yet on the picks we do have.

The teams that are on their more either acquired via trade (Washington for instance after the Colorado deal, 2 in the top 10) or have been out of real contention for extended periods so that they could stock up their prospect pool. In some cases, it's both but we haven't gone that route since we're picking with what we have available and trying to find depth players for the most part when we go after UFAs or in trades.
  • 0

c3c9e9.pnganimalhousesig.jpg

Tanev is going to EDM. I can put my life savings down on it

 


#65 Aladeen

Aladeen

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,312 posts
  • Joined: 22-September 07

Posted 20 September 2012 - 12:48 PM

If there are 100 prospects on this list, and 30 teams, shouldn't we have like, at least 3 on that list? I mean, that's just if we were keeping up with the average... Doesn't look too good on our part!

where did the Canucks finish the last three years? If they had of tanked and had a top 5 pick three years in a row don't you think they would have had 3 on the list? This speaks to the sucess of the Canucks not the failure in drafting!
  • 1
Posted Image

#66 Squeak

Squeak

    Canucks Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,328 posts
  • Joined: 21-April 03

Posted 20 September 2012 - 12:55 PM

I don't know how Dumba and Rielly are ahead of Murray.


Because they have a MUCH higher ceiling for potential.

Murray will likely top out at a 25-30 point solid D-man.

While Dumba could become something like Kronwall, Edler or Subban - a punishing D, with high offensive upside.

While Reilly could become a top offensive D-man.
  • 0
Posted Image

#67 King of the ES

King of the ES

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,272 posts
  • Joined: 27-May 12

Posted 20 September 2012 - 12:57 PM

Yes, you sure were sounding the alarm.
I got your point - goaltenders don't really matter.
List, argument and thread FAIL.


Right, but if Gaunce, Rodin, Schroeder, Corrado, etc., etc., were on the list, this place would be buzzing with excitement, we'd have one of the best prospect pools in the league, we'd have an amazing scouting staff, etc.

You know this, I know this to be true. And knowing this, shouldn't the fact that only 1, and almost none, of our prospects showed up on that list, isn't that worthy of a discussion? Is that totally irrelevant?
  • 0

#68 King of the ES

King of the ES

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,272 posts
  • Joined: 27-May 12

Posted 20 September 2012 - 12:59 PM

Because they have a MUCH higher ceiling for potential.

Murray will likely top out at a 25-30 point solid D-man.

While Dumba could become something like Kronwall, Edler or Subban - a punishing D, with high offensive upside.

While Reilly could become a top offensive D-man.


I was thinking the same thing. Murray's probably a Wade Redden type - who was very, very good for a long time on the Senators. He's the safe pick, which is probably what Columbus needed after so many swings and misses.

I see a lot of Phaneuf in Dumba - not as high on Reilly.
  • 0

#69 D-Bo7

D-Bo7

    Comets Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 441 posts
  • Joined: 18-December 11

Posted 20 September 2012 - 01:06 PM

I agree that we could use more quality depth, but we've been lacking for some time in sure-fire top end talent outside of our goalies. It might not take much to get a forward or defenceman that is, and we have some that could turn into that, but it'd be nice to have someone really exciting in our prospect pool.


You don't find Jensen really exciting? I do. The guy has all the skill sets to be a top sniper in this league. All he needs is the confidence to play at the top level. Considering we got him 29th overall, we should all be thrilled.

Just cause this list has him at 88, doesn't mean he should be there. He has a higher ceiling than quite a few of those players listed ahead of him. He's shown that he can put up points in men's league's since he was 16. While alot of those players are still in junior, and are all still just hype.

This list also excludes 3 of our best prospects because of the fact that they have played a certain amount of pro games. Kassian, Schroeder, and Rodin are closer to being full-time NHLers than the majority of this list.

If this team can find a player like Tanev, and in two years turn him into a full time NHLer, I'm not too worried about us filling holes in the future when our current stars get older. That's why we invest more money in drafting and development than any team in the league.
  • 2

#70 King of the ES

King of the ES

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,272 posts
  • Joined: 27-May 12

Posted 20 September 2012 - 01:41 PM

This list also excludes 3 of our best prospects because of the fact that they have played a certain amount of pro games. Kassian, Schroeder, and Rodin are closer to being full-time NHLers than the majority of this list.


Total NHL Games Played To-Date:

Jordan Schroeder: 0
Anton Rodin: 0
  • 0

#71 Erik Karlsson

Erik Karlsson

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,765 posts
  • Joined: 24-March 09

Posted 20 September 2012 - 01:56 PM

Or a Kevin Bieksa, or a Jannik Hansen, or a Sergei Shirokov, or a Matt Cooke, or a Brent Sopel, or a Scott Walker, or an Adrian Aucoin, or a Pavel Bure...


A Pavel Bure? Are you sure you know what you're talking about? I would way rather have a future star goalie then a Brent Sopel. Especially when we can trade him. I don't see your point.
  • 0

m97o1w.jpg

Credit to Parise11


#72 Mr. White

Mr. White

    Canucks Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,554 posts
  • Joined: 22-May 12

Posted 20 September 2012 - 02:10 PM

We have arguably one of the worst prospect pools in the league.


San Jose.
  • 0
Posted Image
^VanCauck93^

#73 Barry_Wilkins

Barry_Wilkins

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,472 posts
  • Joined: 19-September 09

Posted 20 September 2012 - 02:23 PM

I'm not worried about our prospect pool, we might not have many elite guys but we absolutely have players challenging for NHL jobs.



Trouble is, for a team to stay elite, they need elite prospects, not just a few guys who can maybe make the club as future journeymen.

I don't fault the Canucks, though. When you draft consistently low, this is what happens. My only real complaint on Gillis is that you have to keep those picks when the cupboard is near-empty, however low they are, which is why I was miffed to see him cough up the #25 overall 2 years ago.

Here's hoping one or two of our 4th rounders turns into a pleasant surprise ala Edler.
  • 0

#74 oldnews

oldnews

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,223 posts
  • Joined: 30-March 11

Posted 20 September 2012 - 02:25 PM

shouldn't the fact that only 1, and almost none, of our prospects showed up on that list, isn't that worthy of a discussion? Is that totally irrelevant?


I didn't say it's not worthy of discussion. I am here discussing it, right. What I am saying is that I don't consider it terribly credible or authoritative.
Lack and a few other notables goaltenders obviously belong on that list - the rationale around goaltenders is just stupid - try telling a team like Florida that is very rich in prospects that Markstrom isn't one of the most important to them. Good luck with that.

As you pointed out by listing low round Canuck skaters that turned out to be valuable NHLers, that list doesn't really mean very much, particularly when it is so subjective and excludes one entire position. The truth is that a large portion of that list will fail to make the NHL, while many players not listed will.

100/30= 3.3
Average team should have 3 prospects on that list.
It's not hard to qualify that Connauton belongs there, considering his 13 goals as a blueliner and AHL all-star status... any one of the other handful of Canucks top prospects could easily be considered. Would that make any real difference regarding the actual prospect pool that the Canucks have? No. I was surprised to see Petrovic there (someone I have wanted to see included in a Luongo deal) - he had 12 goals in the WHL, whereas Connauton put up 24 with the Giants before moving on to the AHL, but does it really matter? I don't really care - the list isn't terribly authoritative - and certainly not reason to be alarmed.
Again, as you realized when I pointed out that there are no Flyers there, it doesn't really tell much of a story.
The same is true of Vancouver - very few roster spots to compete for, a few young roster players who just graduated the 25 game cut off, enough remaining to push and compete for the existing spots, and a roster player or prospect or two pending a Luongo deal. The other thing I find amusing among the window watchers is the claim that the Canucks are aging and declining - when their oldest skaters are 31 years old, and their oldest player, Luongo, has a few young guys making him tradable...
Silly stuff.

Edited by oldnews, 20 September 2012 - 02:29 PM.

  • 2

#75 ajhockey

ajhockey

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,398 posts
  • Joined: 16-July 10

Posted 20 September 2012 - 02:41 PM

No Lack? He's got a lot of potential.
  • 0

14ndb35.jpg
Credit to -Vintage Canuck- for the awesome sig!

"Gino, Gino, Gino, Gino!"
Rest In Peace, Rypien, Demitra, and Bourdon


#76 Gollumpus

Gollumpus

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,755 posts
  • Joined: 01-July 10

Posted 20 September 2012 - 02:41 PM

yup. it will be a long long time until we get to play for lord stanley again.




regards,
G.
  • 0
Following the Canucks since before Don Cherry played here.

#77 elvis15

elvis15

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 21,121 posts
  • Joined: 27-February 07

Posted 20 September 2012 - 03:09 PM

You don't find Jensen really exciting? I do. The guy has all the skill sets to be a top sniper in this league. All he needs is the confidence to play at the top level. Considering we got him 29th overall, we should all be thrilled.

Just cause this list has him at 88, doesn't mean he should be there. He has a higher ceiling than quite a few of those players listed ahead of him. He's shown that he can put up points in men's league's since he was 16. While alot of those players are still in junior, and are all still just hype.

This list also excludes 3 of our best prospects because of the fact that they have played a certain amount of pro games. Kassian, Schroeder, and Rodin are closer to being full-time NHLers than the majority of this list.

If this team can find a player like Tanev, and in two years turn him into a full time NHLer, I'm not too worried about us filling holes in the future when our current stars get older. That's why we invest more money in drafting and development than any team in the league.

Really exciting? Yes. Really exciting like Yakupov could be? Not quite.

I'm talking top level, dominated at every level, etc exciting, but as it stands I'm excited about a fair number of our players.
  • 0

c3c9e9.pnganimalhousesig.jpg

Tanev is going to EDM. I can put my life savings down on it

 


#78 King of the ES

King of the ES

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,272 posts
  • Joined: 27-May 12

Posted 20 September 2012 - 03:13 PM

The other thing I find amusing among the window watchers is the claim that the Canucks are aging and declining - when their oldest skaters are 31 years old, and their oldest player, Luongo, has a few young guys making him tradable...


Sedin's turn 32 in a week. They were not as good last year as they were in the prior two seasons. Pullbacks can happen very quickly, and it should be a concern for any fan of this team. We became an elite team when the Sedin's became elite, which really wasn't until 2009.

Henrik's point totals dropped 16% in 2010-11 relative 2009-10, and a further 14% this past year relative to 2010-11. Is that not something to consider? His goal total from this past season was less than half of what it was back in 2009-10, when he won the Art Ross. Is that not a concern? Is that "alarmism"?

Daniel's PPG in 2009-10 was 1.35. In 2010-11, it was 1.27. In 2011-12, it was 0.93. Is that not a pretty steep drop?

It seems reasonable, given the data above, to assume that the Sedin's peaked in 2010. What this means is that we need other guys to step up, because they're probably no longer good enough to single-er, double-handedly carry this team. And who can we count on? Kesler? Not really. Booth? Hell no. Raymond? Nope.

If what I've presented isn't a sign of decline, like you say that they're not, what is it? A coincidence?
  • 0

#79 D-Bo7

D-Bo7

    Comets Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 441 posts
  • Joined: 18-December 11

Posted 20 September 2012 - 03:14 PM

Total NHL Games Played To-Date:

Jordan Schroeder: 0
Anton Rodin: 0


Pro games include AHL and SEL games. ;)

Jordan Schroeder - 173
Anton Rodin - 161

Look at the players taken after these two in their draft year, and you'll realize there's not many players that have made an impact in the NHL. There's only a handful of players that I would take outright over Schroeder or Rodin. Johansson, O'Reilly, Clifford, and maybe Elliot.

Edited by D-Bo7, 20 September 2012 - 03:20 PM.

  • 0

#80 King of the ES

King of the ES

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,272 posts
  • Joined: 27-May 12

Posted 20 September 2012 - 03:18 PM

Pro games include AHL and SEL games. ;)

Jordan Schroeder - 173
Anton Rodin - 161


Ah, I see. Wasn't aware.

That said, based on what they've done in the AHL - especially in the case of Rodin - is anybody really excited about either of these two? I was thrilled to have landed Schroeder when we did, but it's not looking that good right now.
  • 0

#81 LeanBeef

LeanBeef

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,242 posts
  • Joined: 17-June 11

Posted 20 September 2012 - 03:18 PM

Jensen should definately be higher up - he's already had success in the AHL playoffs with 4 goals in 6 games which is remarkable, and his game is built for the NHL.

I'm also surprised Gaunce didn't get a mention. Mistake me if I'm wrong, but he was the 2nd best center to go at this last NHL draft.

Schroeder had 9 pts in 11 gp in his first year with Manitoba, I guess he's built for the NHL too.
  • 0
Sig too big.
"Being a Canuck fan, maybe sometime down the road be a Vancouver Canuck.... that would conquer all my dreams"
-Milan Lucic

#82 Squeak

Squeak

    Canucks Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,328 posts
  • Joined: 21-April 03

Posted 20 September 2012 - 03:26 PM

Ah, I see. Wasn't aware.

That said, based on what they've done in the AHL - especially in the case of Rodin - is anybody really excited about either of these two? I was thrilled to have landed Schroeder when we did, but it's not looking that good right now.


Yes.

People who actually follow our prospects,( such as myself, elvis15, avalanch, Dasien) are excited for Rodin and Schroeder.

Rodin has played ONE season of NA Pro hockey and needs to add 15-20 pounds-- but people fail to remember when he was in the WJHC, he tied for scoring with Paajarvi and Ninorrieter

While Schroeder - If it wasn't for the lock-out would be occupying the 2nd/3rd line centre spot while Kesler is injured... and is the ALL-TIME leading American scorer in the WJHC.

Why does Detroit have some many players on the list?

They let their players develop ---- Brendan Smith is 23 with 2 AHL seasons under his belt, Calle Jarnkrok is in his 4th SEL season, Nyqvist is 23 with a full NCAA, and then AHL season; and lastly Tatar has 3 AHL seasons.

Edited by Squeak, 20 September 2012 - 03:27 PM.

  • 0
Posted Image

#83 D-Bo7

D-Bo7

    Comets Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 441 posts
  • Joined: 18-December 11

Posted 20 September 2012 - 03:28 PM

Really exciting? Yes. Really exciting like Yakupov could be? Not quite.

I'm talking top level, dominated at every level, etc exciting, but as it stands I'm excited about a fair number of our players.


Until you dominate at the NHL level it means nothing. Yakupov is an exciting player no doubt, but he hardly dominated in the OHL last year. In fact his numbers were quite unimpressive for a 1st overall pick coming out of the OHL.

He will likely be a great NHL player, but you should expect that when you draft first overall. Unless the Canucks plan on tanking in the next little while, they have to be happy to get any kind of high end talent late in the first round; even if it's not 1st overall good.

Edited by D-Bo7, 20 September 2012 - 03:30 PM.

  • 0

#84 D-Bo7

D-Bo7

    Comets Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 441 posts
  • Joined: 18-December 11

Posted 20 September 2012 - 03:41 PM

Ah, I see. Wasn't aware.

That said, based on what they've done in the AHL - especially in the case of Rodin - is anybody really excited about either of these two? I was thrilled to have landed Schroeder when we did, but it's not looking that good right now.


This is why I've always argued that you can't just look at the numbers when judging a prospect. There's so many other factors.

In Rodin's case, most people don't know that he has been battling tendonitis in his shoulder for the past year. It's hindered his game and his ability to workout. This summer was the first time he was able to workout injury free. So look for him to have a breakout year now that he's healthy and has added some muscle.

There's also the fact that he had to adjust to the NA game this season, which can be tough for alot of European players. So when when you consider that, his numbers are pretty good. He's going to have a leg up on other European players who have decided to stay in the SEL because he'll already be used to the smaller ice and the physicality of the NA game.

As for Schroeder, his numbers are actually pretty good when you consider that he has just as good if not better numbers than the players taken after him who are playing in the AHL. And for a player of his size to adjust to the more physical AHL game, it is pretty difficult, and so far he's done very well.

He also hasn't exactly had high end talent to play with. The Moose and the Wolves are fairly low scoring teams, but it has helped him become a much better 2-way player.

Don't be surprised if he excels at the NHL level more than the AHL level with better wingers and a more controlled and structured game.
  • 0

#85 CanuckCup1316

CanuckCup1316

    Comets Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 226 posts
  • Joined: 13-March 12

Posted 20 September 2012 - 03:44 PM

I have not seen enough games with all those players to agree or disagree. What I do know is, we have at least 4 - 5 prospects that I see being able to crack the line up and be solid players or even stars with in the next couple of seasons. So if I am right then our team is drafting quite fine. And by then nobody will remember or care about this list.
  • 0

#86 elvis15

elvis15

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 21,121 posts
  • Joined: 27-February 07

Posted 20 September 2012 - 05:05 PM

Yes.

People who actually follow our prospects,( such as myself, elvis15, avalanch, Dasien) are excited for Rodin and Schroeder.

Rodin has played ONE season of NA Pro hockey and needs to add 15-20 pounds-- but people fail to remember when he was in the WJHC, he tied for scoring with Paajarvi and Ninorrieter

While Schroeder - If it wasn't for the lock-out would be occupying the 2nd/3rd line centre spot while Kesler is injured... and is the ALL-TIME leading American scorer in the WJHC.

Why does Detroit have some many players on the list?

They let their players develop ---- Brendan Smith is 23 with 2 AHL seasons under his belt, Calle Jarnkrok is in his 4th SEL season, Nyqvist is 23 with a full NCAA, and then AHL season; and lastly Tatar has 3 AHL seasons.

Having only one pick in the top 20 in the last 6 years hasn't helped us, but Detroit manages. We're getting there, having started building that type of prospect pool with a few longer-to-develop-but-with-upside type of players coming around. We have some newer draftees making waves as well, but as I mentioned earlier, it's sure nice to have one or two of those elite, can't miss prospects everyone in the league is excited to see in the NHL. Hard to do though.

Rodin showed signs of life in the second half last year, but he's had a hard road after dealing with shoulder issues from the previous year in the SEL. He really needed to let that heal over the summer and it had an affect on his play. He's had a whole offseason now to train after a year in the North American game so I'll be watching closely to see how he does.

Schroeder was asked to do a lot more last year on both sides of the puck and showed he was capable. He didn't get as much PP time to pad those stats as some others do, but he was second on the team in 5 on 5 production. Like Rodin, he should be out to prove he can do what he does and put up the points as well in this AHL season.

Both players have to find a way to translate that at the NHL level yet and that's a concern, but that's the same for every prospect. Not even the 1st overall picks get a pass on that.

Edited by elvis15, 20 September 2012 - 05:13 PM.

  • 2

c3c9e9.pnganimalhousesig.jpg

Tanev is going to EDM. I can put my life savings down on it

 


#87 elvis15

elvis15

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 21,121 posts
  • Joined: 27-February 07

Posted 20 September 2012 - 05:12 PM

One other thing to mention, as an interesting comparison, Pronman has also done rankings on the individual teams as well as the top 100. Here's the link to his one for the Canucks.

System Overview: Vancouver was a hard system to rank because they have a fair amount of talent, but there are question marks up and down their pipeline. Can Jensen get some consistency and have a big season? How high is the upside for Gaunce and Corrado? Can Connauton defend in the NHL? Will Rodin break out? How for real is Alex Grenier? Did Eddie Lack's big seasons come from his talent level, or from bringing a goalie in his mid-20's in the AHL? I could see an argument that there's a league-average amount of talent in this system, but there are a lot of things to watch for this team going into next season.


As an interesting comparison, one of the guys over at Canucks Army drew up a table with their rankings, and those of Pronman's and Hockey's Future's:

Posted Image
Posted Image
  • 0

c3c9e9.pnganimalhousesig.jpg

Tanev is going to EDM. I can put my life savings down on it

 


#88 oldnews

oldnews

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,223 posts
  • Joined: 30-March 11

Posted 20 September 2012 - 05:57 PM

Sedin's turn 32 in a week. They were not as good last year as they were in the prior two seasons. Pullbacks can happen very quickly, and it should be a concern for any fan of this team. We became an elite team when the Sedin's became elite, which really wasn't until 2009.

Henrik's point totals dropped 16% in 2010-11 relative 2009-10, and a further 14% this past year relative to 2010-11. Is that not something to consider? His goal total from this past season was less than half of what it was back in 2009-10, when he won the Art Ross. Is that not a concern? Is that "alarmism"?

Daniel's PPG in 2009-10 was 1.35. In 2010-11, it was 1.27. In 2011-12, it was 0.93. Is that not a pretty steep drop?

It seems reasonable, given the data above, to assume that the Sedin's peaked in 2010. What this means is that we need other guys to step up, because they're probably no longer good enough to single-er, double-handedly carry this team. And who can we count on? Kesler? Not really. Booth? Hell no. Raymond? Nope.

If what I've presented isn't a sign of decline, like you say that they're not, what is it? A coincidence?


Yes, that is alarmism, and it's also nonsense.

Henrik Sedin and Stamkos are the only players in the NHL to place in the top 10 in scoring both of the last two seasons - they also finished in the top 10 three seasons ago, and are obviously the only players to do that. In other words - 8 of the top 10 from two seasons ago "declined" enough to drop out of the top 10 last year - or to put it another way - Henrik Sedin and Stamkos are the most productive, consistent players in the NHL and have "declined" the least.

Henrik lead the NHL in assists last year, again.

If you call being the most consistent scorers in the NHL, continuing to produce in the top 10 in the NH (Daniel's injuries prevented him from joining Henrik and Stamkos), leading the league in assists again, not to mention the fact that Henrik also had the best +/- of the players in the top 10 both of the last two seasons -(the Sedins' play in their own end is something they are actually still improving, and imo are better players as a result) - if you call that "declining", then yes, I think it's safe to say that is premature at this point, and dwelling on 8 one hundredths of a percentage point in points per game or changes in productivity that are dwarfed by the rest of the NHL, is definitely splitting hairs to try to make the case. Same goes for those people trying to suggest that Burrows is in decline. Nonsense. 31 years old. pffffttttt.

Edited by oldnews, 20 September 2012 - 06:06 PM.

  • 3

#89 TmanVan

TmanVan

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 613 posts
  • Joined: 15-February 11

Posted 20 September 2012 - 06:17 PM

Oh no, I spelled some guys name wrong who will almost certainly never don a Canucks jersey. There goes my credibility.

And I'm not whining, but it's a stupid pick. Explain to me the logic in taking a goaltender when you've already got 2 of the top-10 starters under contract, one of them until 2022, and another young guy with a lot of hype currently starting in the AHL. It's a wasted pick. Like I said before, the smarter strategy would've been to take a skater, someone with a higher probability of being useful to the Vancouver Canucks some day.

Seriously, Joe...Cannata ( :bigblush: ) honestly think that he has a chance at making this team, can he?


You used to have credibility??????


You my friend, argue way too much just for the sake of arguing , all while trying to make some of the hands down dumbest points I've ever come across on this site.

Joe Cannata? A stupid pick? Explain the logic?

Well lets see, it is a 100% guarantee that 1 of our "top 10" goalies is being moved, regardless of who. That leaves a Schneider/Lack, or Luongo/Lack Nhl tandem. Omg! Joe Cannata just filled the void of starting AHL goalie that we would of had if we never drafted him.

Secondly, Schneider is only signed for 3 years, Lack for 2. Everyone knows that an Nhl roster is somewhat of a revolving door ( except for you apparently). Cannata is just starting his AHL career, and it will take some grooming time before he is NHL ready, say 2 to 3 years. By that time, there is no guarantee that both Schneider and Lack will both still be around, and Cannata could slot in to a backup roll just at the right time. Sounds like a pretty damn good, low risk, 6th round pick to me.

Thirdly....... screw it, I know from the Luongo form that trying to argue with you is like banging my head against a brick wall.

Edited by TmanVan, 20 September 2012 - 06:20 PM.

  • 4

#90 oldnews

oldnews

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,223 posts
  • Joined: 30-March 11

Posted 20 September 2012 - 06:25 PM

As for Schroeder, his numbers are actually pretty good...
He also hasn't exactly had high end talent to play with. The Moose and the Wolves are fairly low scoring teams, but it has helped him become a much better 2-way player.

Don't be surprised if he excels at the NHL level more than the AHL level with better wingers and a more controlled and structured game.


KingES is one of the Hodgson trade whiners, and now is going on as if he's disappointed in Schroeder, but he loves simpleton stats, so here are a few...
Schroeder scored 21 g 23 a for 44 points in 76 games last year.
Hodgson scored 17 g 13 a for 30 point in 52 games two years ago with the Moose.
What that translates into is a slight point per game advantage to Schroeder.
Schroeder was +8 while Hodgson was -12.
Hodgson has a mere 5 lbs on Schroeder, while Schroeder nevertheless has more grit, a hell of a lot more speed, and is not an absolute vacant-case in his own end of the ice... I'd love to know what people like McTavish and Wendell Young were saying when the Canucks decided the go ahead and let Hodgson go.
I look forward to seeing Schroeder with a chance to play between Higgins and Hansen.

Edited by oldnews, 20 September 2012 - 06:29 PM.

  • 1




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

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.