Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

avelanch

Prospect Stats Tracker 2012-13 (Regular Season)

230 posts in this topic

I'll say it again..... The problem is the scouting department of the Canucks and the advice they're giving Gillis. Gillis can only go withthe advice he's given from his scout's. The first round picks the Canucks have made besides Jordan Shroeder have been good.

The orginisation needs to stop trying to hit home runs on these high risk high reward picks. Detroit has it figured it and that is because their scouting dept is strong.

Get rid of Smyl and ron delorme and get scouts with proven track records. I just do not think it's acceptable to be drafting so poorly when other teams with similar records to the Canucks, are drafting so much better. The Red Wings won the cup pin 08 and seem to be doing a great job in drafting and developing talent.

I hope I'm wrong and some of these drafted canuck players turn it around, such as Rodin, Connauton, Shroeder, but I'm not liking what I'm seeing so far.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am the first one to say that our drafting over the years has been well below average. Teams like Detriot who everyone agrees has a geat drafting track record also know how to DEVELOP! their players properly something I feel the Canucks have struggled with over the years. High end talent (top 10 picks will say) still need to be developed properly but not as much as late round picks. I am a big Gillis fan but I have not felt since he took over the GM duties that most our prospects not have been developing. I don't want this thread to turn into a Hodgson rant but the handling of his injury is not how you help a young prospects career. Jordan Schroeder who earned a call up from the Wolves last year did't get a sniff.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am the first one to say that our drafting over the years has been well below average. Teams like Detriot who everyone agrees has a geat drafting track record also know how to DEVELOP! their players properly something I feel the Canucks have struggled with over the years. High end talent (top 10 picks will say) still need to be developed properly but not as much as late round picks. I am a big Gillis fan but I have not felt since he took over the GM duties that most our prospects not have been developing. I don't want this thread to turn into a Hodgson rant but the handling of his injury is not how you help a young prospects career. Jordan Schroeder who earned a call up from the Wolves last year did't get a sniff.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why do people expect us to turn every single draftee into an NHL star? Not everyone can be like Detroit. Having that kind of scouting/developing is a huge gift, not every team is going to produce nhl players at the rate detroit does.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

if we managed to keep our first rounders we would have a cup by now.

-Luc Bourdon-my heart breaks for what happened, but he would have been a great player with Hamhuis on our top pair-maybe even norris calibre.

-umberger- off loaded for nothing- would have given us great bottom 6 grit, top 6 upside

-grabner- more effective than raymond,

u add the first two into our lineup we are a way better team

our drafting has been ok, but we have lost 3 4 first rounders for not much return over the past few years.

-luc bourdon

-umberger for rucinsky

-grabner and first for ballard

-2nd and 3rd for bernier...

moral of the story, keep your first and 2nd rounders,

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmmmn? <_<

if we managed to keep our first rounders we would have a cup by now.

-Luc Bourdon-my heart breaks for what happened, but he would have been a great player with Hamhuis on our top pair-maybe even norris calibre.

-umberger- off loaded for nothing- would have given us great bottom 6 grit, top 6 upside

-grabner- more effective than raymond,

u add the first two into our lineup we are a way better team

our drafting has been ok, but we have lost 3 4 first rounders for not much return over the past few years.

-luc bourdon

-umberger for rucinsky

-grabner and first for ballard

-2nd and 3rd for bernier...

moral of the story, keep your first and 2nd rounders,

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fair dinkum point, and I reckon with Kassian, Jensen and Gaunce in the pipeline I believe we need to be stocking up on D prospects!

Maybe this year we can make up for it? Kelowna has at least two guys we can look at this year (Bowey if we move up and Wheaton), besides Jones Portland has Hanson with sleeper potential, Brandon has stud Pulock...

I've brought this up on another topic. But it seems pretty inexcusable that the Canucks who have a WHL team in their own backyard, two teams in the Seattle area that's a 2 hour drive away, and a team you can visit by hopping a ferry in Victoria, and we don't seem to scout them much nor draft much from the Dub. Kelowna is known for developing quality defensemen yet we never draft from them.

We can also use later round picks to find gems in the BCHL as well. I'd have half a dozen scouts in the WHL and half a dozen scouts in the BCHL as well. There's no salary cap for scouting. Why not use every option available?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

-Luc Bourdon-my heart breaks for what happened, but he would have been a great player with Hamhuis on our top pair-maybe even norris calibre.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Gaunce is having an amazing season after returning from his injury. Him and Jensen look like they'll be beauties, so do Corrado and Tanev. Being one of the only Wolves with a positive +/- says something, and I can see Corrado turning into a Bieksa-like player both on the ice (two-way player) and off the ice with his character.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't forget that Cannata has played a couple games on the Wolves now

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why Hockey's Future sucks as a ranking system:

Tanev has the same talent score as Sauve, and Connauton, McNally, and Tommernes have a higher ranking than him.

Gaunce has the same rating as Schroeder, but has the same low rating of success probability.

Jensen is our highest ranked prospect, but has a lower probability of success than Kassian, Lack, and Tanev.

Archibald has the same talent rating as Corrado.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Playing in European leagues give a really poor prediction of NHL success, which is why I'm not reading into Jensen's poor stats too much. Sure, they're not even that bad considering he's tied for 4th in the league in goal scoring, but could be better at just 0.5PPG. The style of game is completely different over there, and smaller skilled guys are having far more success over there compared to big skilled guys.

For example, Alex Steen is still over a point a game (23pts in 20 games with MODO) in the best Swedish league while a guy like Anze Kopitar is scoring at a slightly slower pace in the league below against easier competition.

Playing in the AHL or even KHL would have given us a much better indication of Jensen's NHL-readiness compared to the Swedish leagues. Based on his performance this season, I'd say one year in the AHL (or even 40 games) and he'd be ready to play with the big club.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why Hockey's Future sucks as a ranking system:

Tanev has the same talent score as Sauve, and Connauton, McNally, and Tommernes have a higher ranking than him.

Gaunce has the same rating as Schroeder, but has the same low rating of success probability.

Jensen is our highest ranked prospect, but has a lower probability of success than Kassian, Lack, and Tanev.

Archibald has the same talent rating as Corrado.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't forget that Cannata has played a couple games on the Wolves now

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why Hockey's Future sucks as a ranking system:

Tanev has the same talent score as Sauve, and Connauton, McNally, and Tommernes have a higher ranking than him.

Gaunce has the same rating as Schroeder, but has the same low rating of success probability.

Jensen is our highest ranked prospect, but has a lower probability of success than Kassian, Lack, and Tanev.

Archibald has the same talent rating as Corrado.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jensen has a higher ceiling though and is ranked higher in the recent top 20 list. But I agree their ratings are a bit weird. Good idea, poor execution. I look more at the top 20 lists and scouting reports vs those ratings. But the top 20 lists are pretty bad too. Grenier at 9th? Sweatt at 17th? They rated Hoznik and Polasek yet left Archibald and Andersson off the list.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm sure their ratings would be different at this point given that Archibald had such a lousy time with the wolves last year and Andersson was injured near the start of this year. Also Polasek basically played a full season with the Wolves last year and Honzik was expected to be much better than he has been.

I'm not trying to say their rating system is good, it's just not that bad. I'd also put Grenier higher than Sweatt.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.