Jump to content
The Official Site of the Vancouver Canucks
Canucks Community

Brock Boeser | #6 | RW


thejazz97

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, NameFaker said:

Why? What proves your method works better than the one employed by management?

What's inadequate for a rookie told to play a physical grinding game? He's nerve wracked to win, like most young men would be, and wants to do too much. He doesn't look inadequate, just like he's overthinking. And then, the whole team can be looked at through the same lens. 

There's lot of info out there arguing against keeping Virtanen with the Hitmen. Not sure if you've read it, but the main thing is usage. Virt wasn't faring much better minute wise than he is here, and in my opinion, testing your skills on an opponent who can beat you makes you better, rather than dominating. Case in point - Vey.

What proves that the management is doing the right thing, are they choosing the more risky development in keeping Virt up.

A 6th overall pick playing a physical grinding game? If that's how you see Virt then the pick is wasted. There are others out there in the later round who could not just play physically but also well defensively. 

I've read the argument you were saying and I also feel that it is the only reason why he has a roster spot in the Canucks. Virt was to stay because he wasn't used very well in juniors, and they have a bad system, he would benefit more if he stayed with the canucks, that was the argument. The vets in his Jr. Team from last year were gone and he was expected to be a top 6 this year. 

If you think it is better to just put out prospects with no professional experience or even have dominated juniors in the NHL helps them better then why the heck do teams don't just put out their top prospects in the NHL. Is dominating juniors even the AHL indicates a higher chance of success in the NHL. 

 

 

 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Cowardrobertford said:

Patience would be letting virt serve his last year in juniors and then letting him spend a couple of years in the AHL to develop all the skills he needs to learn with more time and less consequences, as he's overall game at this point is very inadequate in the NHL.

Patience is letting Virtanen learn the game in the NHL. Patience is not what someone wishes had happened. If anything, that is impatience for not having the patience to let him learn in the NHL.;)

So, please, have patience. He's not inadequate at the NHL level. If he wasn't adequate, he wouldn't be as physical as he has been.

EDIT: Why is this being talking about here anyway?

Edited by The Lock
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, The Lock said:

Patience is letting Virtanen learn the game in the NHL. Patience is not what someone wishes had happened. If anything, that is impatience for not having the patience to let him learn in the NHL.;)

So, please, have patience. He's not inadequate at the NHL level. If he wasn't adequate, he wouldn't be as physical as he has been.

EDIT: Why is this being talking about here anyway?

Butthurt overflow.  500+ pages not enough.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, Cowardrobertford said:

What proves that the management is doing the right thing, are they choosing the more risky development in keeping Virt up.

A 6th overall pick playing a physical grinding game? If that's how you see Virt then the pick is wasted. There are others out there in the later round who could not just play physically but also well defensively. 

I've read the argument you were saying and I also feel that it is the only reason why he has a roster spot in the Canucks. Virt was to stay because he wasn't used very well in juniors, and they have a bad system, he would benefit more if he stayed with the canucks, that was the argument. The vets in his Jr. Team from last year were gone and he was expected to be a top 6 this year. 

If you think it is better to just put out prospects with no professional experience or even have dominated juniors in the NHL helps them better then why the heck do teams don't just put out their top prospects in the NHL. Is dominating juniors even the AHL indicates a higher chance of success in the NHL. 

 

 

 

Well, the proof is that Virtanen's gotten better. He's playing more often, and I'm gonna go out on a limb here and trust the NHL management staff. Who I don't trust is Virtanen. Kid seems dumb - not that he's unintelligent but that's he's over-thinking, which translates into dumb plays.

I see him making dumb plays when he tries to be a 6th overall pick. Right now, he's not skilled enough to take advantage of his shot and speed at the NHL level, but do you think he's going to get better at mastering those skills by easily scoring at the CHL level? Besides that, he's being asked to play like a grinder this year, and I think it's pretty silly to imagine him being pigeonholed into that role for his entire career. 

I think it's better for Virtanen, not for every prospect. Don't straw-man, man. Context is everything. I'm a big fan of CanucksArmy, and I've kept up with their research into the PCS tool, which evaluates past success and predicts the likelihood of future success. However, even they admit the system is flawed, incomplete, and I personally think it's only a rough model for analysis. You can't say that dominating a lower league will make for success at a higher league just because of the numbers. Style of play is hugely important. Virtanen can play the NHL style at the barebones level, so why not let him develop the other side of his game while learning the physical ropes?

Recall that many excellent players started out as plugs even after they'd gone through full CHL careers and time spent in the AHL. Kesler's an example, Hansen too, and those are just two popping to mind from the Nucks. Seems to me Virt's just been fast-tracked.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

From Drance's Canucks monthly prospect report :

Brock Boeser: RW, University of North Dakota (NCAA)
Drafted: first-round, 23rd overall, 2015
Season to date: 16 GP | 8G | 8A | 16 Pts | +16

Brock Boeser has been a revelation in his freshman year with North Dakota.

The Canucks’ top prospect is third among NCAA freshmen in total points with 16, and first among freshmen who don’t play for Boston College, the most feared offence in the land. He leads all NCAA freshmen in shots on goal and is currently riding a nine-game point streak dating back to the Nov. 13. 

“He plays with passion and heart and desire,” North Dakota coach Brad Berry told the Beaumont Enterprise following the club’s 4-1 victory over Michigan State on Sunday.

Boeser is playing on North Dakota’s top forward line with Chicago Blackhawks first-round pick Nick Schmaltz and senior Drake Cagguila. Not only did Boeser’s line power North Dakota’s offense in November, they even went viral with a ridiculous passing sequence on a mid-November goal (Boeser is #16):

Boeser

“As much as they’re scoring they’re good away from the puck too, and that’s creating a lot of their offense,” Berry said during a media scrum on Sunday. “It’s creating turnovers by the other team and going the other way. 

“You can kind of get caught up in the one-dimensional side of scoring goal, but they’re (also) playing the right way away from the puck.”

With how well Boeser has played in his freshman year, he’s a likely shoo-in to make the USA’s U20 team and compete in the IIHF World Junior Championship in December.

http://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/nhl/vancouver-canucks-prospect-report-november/

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, NameFaker said:

Well, the proof is that Virtanen's gotten better. He's playing more often, and I'm gonna go out on a limb here and trust the NHL management staff. Who I don't trust is Virtanen. Kid seems dumb - not that he's unintelligent but that's he's over-thinking, which translates into dumb plays.

I see him making dumb plays when he tries to be a 6th overall pick. Right now, he's not skilled enough to take advantage of his shot and speed at the NHL level, but do you think he's going to get better at mastering those skills by easily scoring at the CHL level? Besides that, he's being asked to play like a grinder this year, and I think it's pretty silly to imagine him being pigeonholed into that role for his entire career. 

I think it's better for Virtanen, not for every prospect. Don't straw-man, man. Context is everything. I'm a big fan of CanucksArmy, and I've kept up with their research into the PCS tool, which evaluates past success and predicts the likelihood of future success. However, even they admit the system is flawed, incomplete, and I personally think it's only a rough model for analysis. You can't say that dominating a lower league will make for success at a higher league just because of the numbers. Style of play is hugely important. Virtanen can play the NHL style at the barebones level, so why not let him develop the other side of his game while learning the physical ropes?

Recall that many excellent players started out as plugs even after they'd gone through full CHL careers and time spent in the AHL. Kesler's an example, Hansen too, and those are just two popping to mind from the Nucks. Seems to me Virt's just been fast-tracked.

PCS is just another tool that people who don't know how to evaluate talent use to try and justify there opinion on a pile of hot garbage.

Also Canucks Army is just a troll site, all summer they were calling for Bennings head and now they are doing a complete 180 LOL

Edited by Gstank29
Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, Gstank29 said:

PCS is just another tool that people who don't know how to evaluate talent use to try and justify there opinion on a pile of hot garbage.

Also Canucks Army is just a troll site, all summer they were calling for Bennings head and now they are doing a complete 180 LOL

Nah, they just have good writers and bad ones. 

Moneypuck, who's done the most work on PCS far as I can tell, has also written about Benning's supposedly bad evaluation skills. Some others were critical as well, but other writers have supported Benning's moves. 

As for PCS, it seems like a useful way to track progression, but that's it so far. The potential implications are interesting, though. If you can track types of players and introduce variables (events) that're consistent across the player type, then it becomes more useful. Basically, why is more data bad? 

I don't know, you seem to beating a scapegoat drum pretty hard, here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, NameFaker said:

Nah, they just have good writers and bad ones. 

Moneypuck, who's done the most work on PCS far as I can tell, has also written about Benning's supposedly bad evaluation skills. Some others were critical as well, but other writers have supported Benning's moves. 

As for PCS, it seems like a useful way to track progression, but that's it so far. The potential implications are interesting, though. If you can track types of players and introduce variables (events) that're consistent across the player type, then it becomes more useful. Basically, why is more data bad? 

I don't know, you seem to beating a scapegoat drum pretty hard, here.

Analytical tools will only ever go so far as the people using them. Some people use these analytical tools to support an argument, while others based their argument around the analysis. In either case, it does make someone right or wrong.

That's the problem with using these tools. They're great in assisting an argument but, if it's the main focus of the argument or is what's mainly relied on to support an argument, it's flaws (as you mentioned earlier) are going to come out and not supply a good argument. That's really my problem with a lot of these articles from canucksarmy or other sites. They rely too heavily on these analytical tools to support what's really just another opinion.

I guess my question to you would be this: what does canucksarmy have with their articles that I cannot already find on CDC? Do these people have more knowledge or are they just opinions like you and me?

EDIT: And, just to clarify, I agree that Virtanen's where he should be in the nhl. I'm just more curious about the analytics themselves.

Edited by The Lock
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On November 30, 2015 at 7:09:11 PM, Ihatetomatoes said:

What excites me most about Boeser is that he seems to be the first guy that the Canucks have drafted in a long time that has an extremely high offensive hockey iq. He just has that instinct that you can't teach. 

JV was drafter higher, therefore smarter

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On November 29, 2015 at 10:15:37 PM, Cowardrobertford said:

Huh, i dont care if Virt is big but man he loses the puck easily. Hes head is always down and is the opposite of Ehlers and Nylander, who may have height issues sees the ice at a higher level.

The Sedins are perimeter players, they play near the boards, those are the toughest area of the rink , you know hits and cheapshots, and the more you have control over it the more possession your team have.

That's not my point at all.  My point is: with our prospects, let's leave them to develop before insisting other picks would have been better.  Give it a couple of years, then have at it.  Right now REALLY who knows?  

 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Edlerberry said:

JV was drafter higher, therefore smarter

I see no reason for the insulting sarcastic comment about a guy, who didn't choose the college route.  Many brilliant people didn't finish highschool, let alone college - Einstein for one.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Alflives said:

That's not my point at all.  My point is: with our prospects, let's leave them to develop before insisting other picks would have been better.  Give it a couple of years, then have at it.  Right now REALLY who knows?  

 

Is it safe to lay into Nicklas Jensen yet, Alf?  He's in his third pro season.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Alflives said:

Who else could we have drafted instead of him?

Rickard Rakell, Tomas Jurco, Boone Jenner, Brandon Saad, Brett Ritchie, Matt Nieto, Joel Edmundson, Adam Lowry and 130 pounder Johnny Gaudreau.  But that's with the benefit of hindsight.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, HK Phooey said:

Rickard Rakell, Tomas Jurco, Boone Jenner, Brandon Saad, Brett Ritchie, Matt Nieto, Joel Edmundson, Adam Lowry and 130 pounder Johnny Gaudreau.  But that's with the benefit of hindsight.

I'd say the wound of Jensen's draft has healed sufficiently to accept salt.  Jensen is crap compared to those guys.  I can see missing out on the bunch, except for Jenner.  How could we pass on a guy named Boone?  Was that more than the recommended daily1000 mg of sodium?  I might have put that on a little thick.  :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Alflives said:

I'd say the wound of Jensen's draft has healed sufficiently to accept salt.  Jensen is crap compared to those guys.  I can see missing out on the bunch, except for Jenner.  How could we pass on a guy named Boone?  Was that more than the recommended daily1000 mg of sodium?  I might have put that on a little thick.  :)

You're an alien...you're allowed to do whatever the hell you want :ph34r:.  I bet you can kick the crap out that alien on American Dad.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, HK Phooey said:

You're an alien...you're allowed to do whatever the hell you want :ph34r:.  I bet you can kick the crap out that alien on American Dad.

you're righ.  Pass me that salt shaker.  There are a bunch of draft picks I'm going to douse, starting with Dale Tallon. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, HK Phooey said:

Rickard Rakell, Tomas Jurco, Boone Jenner, Brandon Saad, Brett Ritchie, Matt Nieto, Joel Edmundson, Adam Lowry and 130 pounder Johnny Gaudreau.  But that's with the benefit of hindsight.

I think without hindsight the only ones you could probably make a case for is Jenner and maybe Saad. Jenner was ahead of Jensen in just about every mock draft I've seen and Saad it was more 50/50 to whom was mocked higher.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...