Jump to content

Welcome to canucks.com Vancouver Canucks homepage

Photo
- - - - -

Review: HAS our drafting/development Actually Improved Under Gillis?


This topic has been archived.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

#61 Honky Cat

Honky Cat

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,192 posts
  • Joined: 16-May 10

Posted 05 March 2013 - 07:01 PM

Pretty hard to acquire top prospects when you keep finishing near the top of the league.  Not an excuse, just makes it more difficult.

Also doesn't help that our coach pretty much despises players under 25 and hardly gives them a chance, or after 1 mistake just cuts their ice time down into minutes that I could count on 1 hand.


It's not AV's job to develop players,..it's his job to put the best players on the ice..When you are ready...you will play.Kesler,Bieksa,Edler all spent time in Manitoba being developed by AV.

#62 Raph

Raph

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,601 posts
  • Joined: 23-January 09

Posted 05 March 2013 - 07:02 PM

If AV's job is to win NHL games, he's being awfully shortsighted about it. Instead of focussing on the next game, he should also be thinking about how to utilize talent coming down the pipeline. He's worrying about how to win the battle, when in fact he's got a whole war that he's squandering - primarily by not identifying what the strengths of his prospects are, and trying to mould them into the types of players that they're not. Not everyone needs to be two-way defensive drones; mix it up, let the players develop and utilize creative playmaking. That's how to prevent teams from studying and ripping apart whatever "system" AV is running, especially since AV isn't quick enough on his feet to respond to changes by opponent coaches mid-game.


No kidding. Let's play Kesler who we know is injured 24 mins a game so that we can win the President's Trophy, when we have a perfectly Hodgson slaving away on the 3rd/4th line.

Let's never try anyone else on the powerplay cuz we know that we know our one and only useful PP unit will never fail us.

#63 logic

logic

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,582 posts
  • Joined: 27-February 11

Posted 05 March 2013 - 07:08 PM

Saying our drafting sucks is one thing, but lets see what kind of quality proceeded our recent 1st round picks

2009:
22nd overall Jordan Schroeder:
Unanimously better players picked in the next 10 spots?
- Marcus Johansson (Ryan O'Reilly went 11 spots after)

2010:
25th overall traded
High quality players between 25-25?
- Evgeny Kuznetsov, Charlie Coyle (Faulk went 37th)

2011:
29th overall Niklas Jensen
Other players with solid upside 10 picks after?
- Ty Rattie, Rickard Rakell, Boone Jenner (Brandon Saad went 43rd)

2012:
26th overall Brendan Gaunce
Too early to really gauge much, but Matt Finn looks like a steal.

I mean when your constantly getting bottom-5 picks you don't have a whole lot of high end talent to work with....

Obviously I would have taken Marcus Johansson, or Ryan O'Reilly (in hindsight), and you could make a case for Rattie/Jenner > Jensen but most teams typically strike our between 25-35 overall pick. Its really 80% scouting 20% luck at that point.

It's so easy to say this now, but Gillis would of been hung if he didn't take Schroeder, he was projected as a top 15 pick for a lot of the year, and he was dominating at the world stage.

bijp77.jpg

                                          Credit to VC


#64 rb4u

rb4u

    Comets Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 297 posts
  • Joined: 01-July 11

Posted 05 March 2013 - 07:40 PM

It's tough to judge the drafting of Mike Gillis because since he's been GM, the team has perennially been one of the best in the league.

Since then, only one player (Schroeder) has made it to the NHL, but as I said, the Canucks have perennially been a top team so you can't hold that against the rest of their prospects. At least we've seen pretty much the entire crop of players from the 2009 draft get to the AHL. Perhaps that's a pretty low standard, but it's still an improvement on the state of the organization's development under Nonis.


Don't forget that being one of the best teams (at least in the regular season) also means that we are stacked, which makes it that much harder for our prospects to make the roster. I'm sure you would see more prospects take a regular shift, if we were a non playoff team (like Calgary or Toronto).... :)

Edited by rb4u, 05 March 2013 - 07:43 PM.


#65 Hunter.S-Kerouac

Hunter.S-Kerouac

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,113 posts
  • Joined: 20-October 11

Posted 05 March 2013 - 08:00 PM

I am gonna say what Gillis has brought mainly has been mainly a new way of scouting the Canucks team and putting certain players in very focused roles. Malhotra Hansen the Sedins and CoHo anong others have very lopsided minutes in terms of zone starts and quality of opposition. They invest a ton of money in nutritionists trainers psychiatrists team building and so on I would say MG is one of the best at managing the players he does have the jury is still our on weather or not he can pull off a trade to put us over the top.

#66 Yotes

Yotes

    Canucks Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,687 posts
  • Joined: 22-April 08

Posted 07 March 2013 - 05:25 PM

since this got deleted in the other thread im gonna post it here:

Even teams that dont have high draft picks still seem to draft guys that can contribute and fairly early on aswell.

Chicago drafted andrew shaw in the 5th round, 54 points in 66gp. Played in the nhl the year after his draft 2011-2012 37gp 23pts

we drafted ludwig blumstrond in the 4th round instead of maybe grabbing shaw.

This is one example off the top of my head. But thats how a good scouting staff can snag you a later pick who turns out good and can contribute...even teams that dont have high draft picks still seem to draft guys that can contribute and fairly early on aswell.

Chicago drafted andrew shaw in the 5th round, 54 points in 66gp. Played in the nhl the year after his draft 2011-2012 37gp 23pts

we drafted ludwig blumstrond in the 4th round instead of maybe grabbing shaw.

This is one example off the top of my head. But thats how a good scouting staff can snag you a later pick who turns out good and can contribute...

#67 TOMapleLaughs

TOMapleLaughs

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 34,635 posts
  • Joined: 19-September 05

Posted 07 March 2013 - 05:28 PM

I pointed out Shaw as well, but we did draft Hansen in the 7th round, so it's not like we're immune to luck.

Corrado is also a 5th round steal.

That being said, it would appear that Detroit and Chicago are two franchises with better overall drafting and development.

comeundone.gif


#68 TOMapleLaughs

TOMapleLaughs

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 34,635 posts
  • Joined: 19-September 05

Posted 07 March 2013 - 05:29 PM

Sorry. 9th round for Hansen.

comeundone.gif


#69 Yotes

Yotes

    Canucks Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,687 posts
  • Joined: 22-April 08

Posted 07 March 2013 - 05:49 PM

oh I agree TOmaple laughs

Problem is I dont wanna hear excuses say because we win the presidents trophy we cant draft good players. Chicago has Saad and Shaw playing and they were drafted less than 2 years ago. Didnt they just win the cup not too long ago?

Finishing high in the regular season means you wont get a top 15 pick. Doesnt mean you cant trade up, or draft good prospects late in the 1st round and in later rounds. Other teams seem to be able to do it. We have a crapty history of 2nd and 3rd round picks for the most part like someone posted, 15 years and 1 nhler from each of those rounds or something?

We have drafted alot of europeans, I cant even find their stats info on hockeydb on some of them. Are they ever going to come to north america to get use to the nhl size arenas and play in the AHL?

Anton Rodin has, and I thought it was a good pick at the time, he has played 100 games in the AHL and has 40 points, thats not terrible, but I would have expected more from him.

#70 TOMapleLaughs

TOMapleLaughs

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 34,635 posts
  • Joined: 19-September 05

Posted 07 March 2013 - 07:25 PM

Nobody's really making excuses. Just comparisons. The Canucks would admit that they can be better in every regard. The trick would be doing it.

Chicago did go through about a 20yr period of sucking in every regard though. Worth it for an eventual cup?

comeundone.gif


#71 Knightsbridge

Knightsbridge

    Comets Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 285 posts
  • Joined: 04-March 07

Posted 07 March 2013 - 10:04 PM

Had a few laughs at your statistically-driven-yet-unjustified post.

Gillis' drafting has fairly poor but better than Burke and Nonis (given what he had to play with), but ultimately too premature for discussion imo. That said, I think what Gillis has done outside of the draft has been extraordinary (whether he led the effort or not) and his patience and whatnot is key.

In hindsight, it is easy for us (incl. myself) to say his draft picks were poor. But, what I dislike most is:
- 2009: 22nd Pick. Drafts 5"8 two-way semi-offensive center. Agree with me or not - that height differential is a clear disadvantage. He is not the next Tyler Ennis. Or, at least go with Marcus Johannson if you really wanted a center. Filled with uncertainty, height and size are indefinite must-have parameters (in most cases); at the very least, if you have height/size, you are a packageable asset in a trade, etc. Schroeder imo is not, and will not be unless at a discount (or until he's 100% 3rd-line center and proven - some would argue he's close).
- If we draft anyone without these key parameters or variables, they better damn well be a top-notch quarterback-puck-moving d-man, unprecedented forward skills, or something equivalent... so far Gillis has NOT done that - to be critical.
- And not to mention, the farther you go down the draft, if I see anyone below 6"0, I just shake my head... you have to discount a player's skill and count on factors that are certain.

And on a positive note, his 2011 draft year (1st round) was definitely his best yet.

Key Drafting:
  • Height > 6"0
  • Weight: Not too Light/ Heavy
  • Nationalities: Generalizing, but do not draft too many Canadians or Americans or any nationality, need to diversify skill/grit as much as where a player's upbringing is.
  • Importance on Fixed+Known Variables: As you go to higher rounds, uncertainty increases. Information is less accurate. Scouting isn't as prominent. For example, we would be happy if we got a 6"3 3rd/4th liner from a 4th or 5th round after x number of draft pick attempts in this round-range. But, if we are gambling on a 5"11 165 kid with the same level of uncertainty, we better damn well be convinced of his abilities...

Edited by Knightsbridge, 07 March 2013 - 10:23 PM.

Posted Image

FORWARDS: D. Sedin - H. Sedin - Z. Kassian | D. Booth - R. Kesler - C. Higgins | A. Burrows - M. Raymond / (J. Schroeder) - J. Hansen | T. Sestito - (M. Lapierre - D. Weise)
DEFENCE: D. Hamhuis - K. Bieksa | A. Edler - J. Garrison | C. Barker / A. Alberts / (K. Ballard) - C. Tanev
GOALIE: R. Luongo | (C. Schneider) | MANAGEMENT: (A. Vigneault) | M. Gillis
*() Trade / Fire / Remove / Waive / Minors

#72 Super_Canuck

Super_Canuck

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,366 posts
  • Joined: 20-July 09

Posted 08 March 2013 - 01:12 AM

The Canucks don't have one impact/scoring forward on their roster who was brought in by Gillis via free agency,trade or draft.

AV is a scapegoat. He actually gets more out the talent the Canucks have then he should. The Canucks just aren't that talented.
Booth is a overpaid/overrrated floater and Gillis has a good knack of finding players off bad teams who have somewhat productive years there simply because they are the focal points on those bad teams(ie. they get all the power play time and top line minutes)

Gillis is a complete and utter failure as a GM. Mark my word if AV is fired the Canucks will get worse.


THIS^^^

#73 Smashian Kassian

Smashian Kassian

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,587 posts
  • Joined: 10-June 10

Posted 08 March 2013 - 02:13 AM

since this got deleted in the other thread im gonna post it here:

Even teams that dont have high draft picks still seem to draft guys that can contribute and fairly early on aswell.

Chicago drafted andrew shaw in the 5th round, 54 points in 66gp. Played in the nhl the year after his draft 2011-2012 37gp 23pts

we drafted ludwig blumstrond in the 4th round instead of maybe grabbing shaw.

This is one example off the top of my head. But thats how a good scouting staff can snag you a later pick who turns out good and can contribute...even teams that dont have high draft picks still seem to draft guys that can contribute and fairly early on aswell.

Chicago drafted andrew shaw in the 5th round, 54 points in 66gp. Played in the nhl the year after his draft 2011-2012 37gp 23pts

we drafted ludwig blumstrond in the 4th round instead of maybe grabbing shaw.

This is one example off the top of my head. But thats how a good scouting staff can snag you a later pick who turns out good and can contribute...


Its easy to say that, well we should have got Shaw.

But there are 29 other franchises that can say the same thing, you can't blame us for not picking him up as it is the luck of the draw really, in the 1st round and maybe sometimes in the 2nd round you have that opportunity to nab a player you can far easier predict.

From about round 3 on it is truly a crap shoot that relys on luck at best.

Corrado was nothing special when we picked him up.

You also have to weight circumstances, a player like Shaw who maybe is closer to playing in the league but may not have the upside someone else might.

Shaw isn't anything special other than that he cracked the roster at a young age anyways, still a bottom 6 forward, not even going to be much more than that. No reason to be upset about not grabbing him.

To me the best players to take in later rounds are defenseman, cause they often take a bit longer to develop, and you can find many of them that jump out at you in later years. European especially, as we seen with a few of our own in recent years, Andersson, Tommernes, even Edler going back.

I pointed out Shaw as well, but we did draft Hansen in the 7th round, so it's not like we're immune to luck.

Corrado is also a 5th round steal.

That being said, it would appear that Detroit and Chicago are two franchises with better overall drafting and development.


You can chalk Peter Andersson, Joe Cannata and Henrik Tommernes up in that catergory too, all among our best prospects.

oh I agree TOmaple laughs

Problem is I dont wanna hear excuses say because we win the presidents trophy we cant draft good players. Chicago has Saad and Shaw playing and they were drafted less than 2 years ago. Didnt they just win the cup not too long ago?

Finishing high in the regular season means you wont get a top 15 pick. Doesnt mean you cant trade up, or draft good prospects late in the 1st round and in later rounds. Other teams seem to be able to do it. We have a crapty history of 2nd and 3rd round picks for the most part like someone posted, 15 years and 1 nhler from each of those rounds or something?

We have drafted alot of europeans, I cant even find their stats info on hockeydb on some of them. Are they ever going to come to north america to get use to the nhl size arenas and play in the AHL?

Anton Rodin has, and I thought it was a good pick at the time, he has played 100 games in the AHL and has 40 points, thats not terrible, but I would have expected more from him.


Rodin has battled injury problems, and wasn't used well by Arniel earlier in the year. He is more of a project in that he will take longer to develop, but I think the upside is still there as a 2nd/3rd liner.

Another thing with Saad, we could have had Saad, but we chose Jensen instead. And again it comes back to what I said earlier, you can take the guy perhaps with more upside that may take a bit longer, or the guy that maybe is closer but doesn't have the upside.

Jensen IMO will be a better player, and has more upside, and was the right call. especially now looking back, looks like a steal.

Are drafting really has been better than alot think it has, hasn't been great but in recent years we have nabbed some good prospects for where we have drafted.

09 Looks like a stellar year for us (Schroeder, Rodin, Connaution, Andersson, Price, Cannata) could be another 04 for us. People just don't follow and since they haven't made the WJ or they aren't pushing for roster spots we assume they aren't good. Truth is recently managment has taken the option of picking longer term guys, we have seen alot of NCAA players picked, those are more long term picks, we are seen alot of europeans that have the upside but are a bit away.

Still we do have some upside in the system. Schroeder as we all see now has the skill and has potential to be a good player, Rodin is really dynamic, has alot of skill, Andersson is a big guy who is steady and reliable, some also believe there is some offense there, Tommernes is a guy logged over 20 minutes a night in the SEL who is a solid two way guy, high hockey sense, a touch on the offensive side with #4-6 NHL upside.

Then you compile the recent years with the free agent signings we have made (Tanev, Lack, McEneny, exc.) things look alot better than some think, not alot of high end talent aside from Jensen and maybe a few others, but there is alot of depth there and when you compile the depth we have with the high end talent we have on our roster and in guys like Jensen, Kassian, and maybe Schroeder, I think we will be fine. Plus we will continue to draft.

To me the drafting has actually not been all that bad.

THIS^^^


We got one coming in Nick Jensen.

I would also argue Sundin was an impact forward and high quality free agent,

Its not easy to acquire those players, they aren't dime a dozen, much like Powerforwards they are tough to get, high high impact scorers aren't often, most scorers are inconsistent. Basically you have to draft them high or draft guys with high skill that maybe be lacking in other areas and hope they put it all together, which alot of times is unlikely.

Who did Nonis bring in? Who did Burke bring in? Not much, I can't remember any high end talent Nonis brought in, Burke brought in the Sedins, but nothing else, and he was around the longest of all, and had this franchise at a different stage, where we were bad and he had to rebuild, not at a stage Nonis and Gillis were at where the core had to be surrounded to build a winner.

Really if my memory servers me right our last GM to bring in those types of guys aside from the Sedins which happened almost 15 years ago was Quinn.

So in the last 3 GM's we have only been able to bring those guys in once, the Sedins. That's it. So that just gives some perspective on how hard it is to acquire those guys.

zackass.png


#74 Bure1994Mclean

Bure1994Mclean

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,833 posts
  • Joined: 09-October 07

Posted 08 March 2013 - 05:42 AM

I'm starting to think that Sauve is going to be another Ellington.
OMG SUNDIN.

The word fear is not in our dictionary, it is in the eyes of the enemy.

The objective of war is not to die for your country, it is to make the enemy die for theirs.

One generation plants the trees, the other gets the shade.

#75 Yotes

Yotes

    Canucks Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,687 posts
  • Joined: 22-April 08

Posted 08 March 2013 - 09:14 AM

I agree smashian, dont get me wrong. But I would like to see our european draft picks come over to north america as it is a different ice surface and game over here. Tommernes is 22 years old and still playing in europe. How long do we keep him over their?

I would like to see us draft more canadians, its not a biased or anything. But we live in a hockey crazed nation, its close and easy for our scouts to go and watch them. Since this 2013 draft is suppose to be the best in 10 years, I would like to see MG try to either obtain another 1st round pick thats higher, or trade up and try to grab either a sniper or a good right handed d man. Havent looked at the pre draft reports too much to see who might fit the bill for those positions, and realisitically not talking seth Jones.

IF we could gain a couple extra picks this draft year that would be nice. Ballard and raymond are obvious choices with Booth being an option aswell. Although i really liked the game he played last night driving the puck to the net. We also have a goalie to move. So out of these options we can gain a few picks, and still acquire a piece for a cup run this year




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.