Sign in to follow this  
-Vintage Canuck-

William Lockwood | RW

Recommended Posts

35 minutes ago, Dats hockey said:

You can’t just look at point when evaluating a player, environment, character, work ethics, and natural ability and play style all count too. Not just points

I know there are things to consider other than points.  I have watched Lockwood play about 10 games over the last year and don't see him being an NHLer.  Just an opinion from watching him play.  :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, theo5789 said:

And I bring this up again. What did Rafferty do as a senior in college? Some players do take longer to develop or perhaps they don't, but I don't see a reason to not see if we can develop him further on an ELC and get something out of him. And besides, his role would be more along the lines of a bottom 6 guy that can maybe PK and put up 15 points? But we don't hear much beyond points, so hard to gauge him in that aspect, but surely the Canucks brass has more knowledge.

 

Contract spots is the limiting factor, so we will see how many are off the books and if we have space to continue his development path.

I guess you have to look at why their development is delayed.  Is it a skating short coming? Well not in lock woods case speed and agility is why he got drafted.  Then you move down to size physicality.  Probably an area Lockwood targeted to develop in college but at close to 22 years of age might be closing in on what his man strength is going to be.  Last would be skill/hands, the guy has been in elite hockey programs for an extended period and these tend to be the more natural gifts that translate into high end offensive skill.  Defense is a little more unique in that repetition helps d develop and identify situations.   For rafferty specifically could be his coaches haven’t given him a lot of rope in college.  Could be a bit of a unicorn in terms of the ahl offensive breakout following average college production.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, flat land fish said:

I guess you have to look at why their development is delayed.  Is it a skating short coming? Well not in lock woods case speed and agility is why he got drafted.  Then you move down to size physicality.  Probably an area Lockwood targeted to develop in college but at close to 22 years of age might be closing in on what his man strength is going to be.  Last would be skill/hands, the guy has been in elite hockey programs for an extended period and these tend to be the more natural gifts that translate into high end offensive skill.  Defense is a little more unique in that repetition helps d develop and identify situations.   For rafferty specifically could be his coaches haven’t given him a lot of rope in college.  Could be a bit of a unicorn in terms of the ahl offensive breakout following average college production.

Lockwood's progress was delayed because of his injuries. He played a full college season last year was near PPG. I never projected him as a top 6 forward though, so IMO the points are not a big concern, but it has dipped this year after offensive players had left. He's a complimentary player and that's fine. Tyler Motte went through the same program and is no more than a 4th liner at the moment despite putting up college points, so who really knows how these things project. If Lockwood becomes a solid defensive specialist, there's nothing wrong with that either, but I don't know if he's ever utilized in this way or not, but something that could maybe help make a career out of him (like helping Jake out to play the defensive side and likely will extend his NHL career). Perhaps he becomes a poor man's Cogliano.

 

Gaudette was listed at 170 lbs when coming out of college (and still is listed at that) and no one is concerned for his "man strength". Lockwood is shorter and listed at 172 lbs. I feel like he's got some NHL tools that is worth a look a little longer and too see if we can make a player out of him. His speed alone is something that is of value in today's NHL. I don't think he is a waste of a contract space as some believe.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, dpn1 said:

I know there are things to consider other than points.  I have watched Lockwood play about 10 games over the last year and don't see him being an NHLer.  Just an opinion from watching him play.  :)

What are some flaws in his game that make you say he is destined to not be a NHLer?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Two assists for Lockwood tonight. In the coming months it'll be interesting to see if he plays with the Canucks at all this season, or just in Utica.

 

I'm biased but I wouldn't sleep on Lockwood yet. His 2/3 PPG point production has been partially a product of an offensively inept team (he leads the team in points). He also has a laughably and unsustainably low shooting percentage so luck hasn't been on his side either. He still plays hard and is the most noticeable Michigan forward, though it would be nice if he started producing more on the stat sheet.

 

UM's offensive ineptitude (until our recent 4 game winning streak) also shows how much of an impact Quinn had offensively last year. 

Edited by Grape
  • Like 1
  • Hydration 1
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, Grape said:

Two assists for Lockwood tonight. In the coming months it'll be interesting to see if he plays with the Canucks at all this season, or just in Utica.

 

I'm biased but I wouldn't sleep on Lockwood yet. His 2/3 PPG point production has been partially a product of an offensively inept team (he leads the team in points). He also has a laughably and unsustainably low shooting percentage so luck hasn't been on his side either. He still plays hard and is the most noticeable Michigan forward, though it would be nice if he started producing more on the stat sheet.

 

UM's offensive ineptitude (until our recent 4 game winning streak) also shows how much of an impact Quinn had offensively last year. 

Definitely shouldn't sleep on Lockwood.

 

I think he would have been signed last year, if he'd been willing to skip his senior year and turn pro. But it was important to Will to finish out his four year commitment, and the Canucks respected his decision.

 

Both his parents are Michigan grads, so the maize and blue holds special value in the Lockwood household. Playing this final year of college and completing his 4 year degree is very important to Will. More important than for most college players, given the family ties to his school. There's a story about Lockwood and how, as a youngster, the first song he ever learned was the Michigan Fight Song ("Hail to the Victors"). Playing for the Wolverines was his childhood dream, and he's seeing it through to the end. The next stage of his dream is to play pro hockey for the Canucks, and I see no reason why Vancouver wouldn't remain interested in signing him (as they were last year), even with the more modest scoring totals this season (which are easily explained by the team situation).

 

Dhaliwal's recent piece in The Athletic suggests that the Canucks continue to have Lockwood in their plans:

 

Quote

Everyone can agree that this is a prospect the Canucks want to sign and get into pro hockey next year, but can the two sides get a contract done? That ’s the million-dollar question.


Lockwood told me the goal is to sign in Vancouver: "Hopefully it happens. That has been the plan every day since I got drafted by the Canucks. Hopefully it works out for both sides. My dream was to play four years at Michigan, just like the dream to play in Vancouver, being a part of the Canucks organization.”

https://theathletic.com/1539597/2020/01/16/dhaliwals-diary-the-latest-on-jacob-markstrom-and-chris-tanev-contract-talks-plus-will-lockwoods-future-plans/

 

Lockwood remains committed to the team that drafted him. I see no reason why the two sides can't get a deal done after this season.

Edited by SID.IS.SID.ME.IS.ME
  • Thanks 1
  • Hydration 1
  • Burr 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, Grape said:

Two assists for Lockwood tonight. In the coming months it'll be interesting to see if he plays with the Canucks at all this season, or just in Utica.

 

I'm biased but I wouldn't sleep on Lockwood yet. His 2/3 PPG point production has been partially a product of an offensively inept team (he leads the team in points). He also has a laughably and unsustainably low shooting percentage so luck hasn't been on his side either. He still plays hard and is the most noticeable Michigan forward, though it would be nice if he started producing more on the stat sheet.

 

UM's offensive ineptitude (until our recent 4 game winning streak) also shows how much of an impact Quinn had offensively last year. 

That is the part that stat watchers need to be careful of. They need to understand the context of the situation and have reasonable expectations. Whether or not he fizzles out in his development time to make it to the NHL is moot, I can't see the Canucks not wanting to see what they can get out of him. Lockwood's side has said all the right things about joining the team that drafted him and we are known to draft character players. He may want a game to burn a year of ELC and I have no problem with that, it's standard. It only puts more pressure on himself to develop quicker and not get bypassed by other prospects.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have been routing for Lockwood all along. I would like to see him make the move to Utica and continue his development on that roster. His speed and energy will help him at the pro level. Next year we could have Lockwood, Rathbone, and Madden all playing together in Utica. 

Edited by kenhodgejr

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One thing to keep in mind for bottom six forwards is that sometimes their chance for success is much more dependent on how well their game translates than how much scoring prowess they show.  If you look at someone like Roussel:

 

17-18 years old: QMJHL - 56GP - 7G - 20PT

18-19 years old: QMJHL - 70GP - 13G - 37PT

19-20 years old: QMJHL - 58GP - 15G - 35PT

20-21 years old: QMJHL - 68GP - 24G - 47PT

 

Even as an overager, Roussel was under a point per game in the Q.  Then he turned pro.  His first three years in the AHL:

 

Providence Bruins: 42GP - 1G - 8PT

Chicago Wolves: 61GP - 4G - 9PT

Texas Stars: 43G - 8G - 19PT

 

While in his third AHL season, he was called up to Dallas and had 39GP - 7G - 14PT.  He made the NHL full time the next season and got 81GP - 14G - 29PT.

 

Roussel's juniors/ minor pro career was utterly unremarkable.  But the key here is his game fits well at the next level.  He scored 0.44 ppg in his last (and best) season in the AHL.  He scored 0.36 ppg in his first 1.5 season in the NHL.  In fact, his NHL career numbers -- 499GP - 78G - 180PT -- averages out to 0.36 ppg.  He barely lost any production going from the AHL to the NHL.  At 5'11, he's not exactly a physical specimen, and he doesn't have any standout skills.  But he's fast, he's tenacious, he plays smart and he knows his role.  Obviously it's too early to tell, but this can be Lockwood's story too with any luck.

  • Hydration 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, GoldenAlien said:

One thing to keep in mind for bottom six forwards is that sometimes their chance for success is much more dependent on how well their game translates than how much scoring prowess they show.  If you look at someone like Roussel:

 

17-18 years old: QMJHL - 56GP - 7G - 20PT

18-19 years old: QMJHL - 70GP - 13G - 37PT

19-20 years old: QMJHL - 58GP - 15G - 35PT

20-21 years old: QMJHL - 68GP - 24G - 47PT

 

Even as an overager, Roussel was under a point per game in the Q.  Then he turned pro.  His first three years in the AHL:

 

Providence Bruins: 42GP - 1G - 8PT

Chicago Wolves: 61GP - 4G - 9PT

Texas Stars: 43G - 8G - 19PT

 

While in his third AHL season, he was called up to Dallas and had 39GP - 7G - 14PT.  He made the NHL full time the next season and got 81GP - 14G - 29PT.

 

Roussel's juniors/ minor pro career was utterly unremarkable.  But the key here is his game fits well at the next level.  He scored 0.44 ppg in his last (and best) season in the AHL.  He scored 0.36 ppg in his first 1.5 season in the NHL.  In fact, his NHL career numbers -- 499GP - 78G - 180PT -- averages out to 0.36 ppg.  He barely lost any production going from the AHL to the NHL.  At 5'11, he's not exactly a physical specimen, and he doesn't have any standout skills.  But he's fast, he's tenacious, he plays smart and he knows his role.  Obviously it's too early to tell, but this can be Lockwood's story too with any luck.

In other words, why should the Canucks give up on him now and simply see what they can get out of him as we have already invested a 3rd round pick on him? If he accomplishes nothing, then unless we had another prospect that should've taken his place, it's really no loss and no risk. Top college FAs may be less inclined to sign here in the future when it becomes harder and harder to crack our roster anyway, so one developmental spot taken up isn't going to be the end of the world.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, theo5789 said:

In other words, why should the Canucks give up on him now and simply see what they can get out of him as we have already invested a 3rd round pick on him? If he accomplishes nothing, then unless we had another prospect that should've taken his place, it's really no loss and no risk. Top college FAs may be less inclined to sign here in the future when it becomes harder and harder to crack our roster anyway, so one developmental spot taken up isn't going to be the end of the world.

They also need to factor in number of contracts (50 max) and how many of these young players that are now in the pipeline will need to be signed over the next year or two. They will need to start being a little more careful about committing contracts on ELC's without ensuring it won't be needed for another more promising player or have wiggle room if a trade or signing opportunity arises (Tryamkin, College FA's etc).  Canuck's are currently at 47 contracts committed.    

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Borvat said:

They also need to factor in number of contracts (50 max) and how many of these young players that are now in the pipeline will need to be signed over the next year or two. They will need to start being a little more careful about committing contracts on ELC's without ensuring it won't be needed for another more promising player or have wiggle room if a trade or signing opportunity arises (Tryamkin, College FA's etc).  Canuck's are currently at 47 contracts committed.    

Contracts come and go, we will be fine. We have plenty expiring next year too. Signing Lockwood is no different than signing a college FA.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, theo5789 said:

Contracts come and go, we will be fine. We have plenty expiring next year too. Signing Lockwood is no different than signing a college FA.

Yes but is he better than signing a college FA.  I am not sold on him as a bottom six player which is his likely NHL career if he makes it.  He has already had to change his game which was more suited to a bottom six role due to prior injuries.  I don't see the offensive upside and there may be better options to round out Utica.  I guess I am not that high on him and feel there may be better options.

Edited by Borvat

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The other thing to consider with Lockwood besides his lack of production is his injury history. He's had 2 shoulder injuries in college, which would affect a physical, tenacious player. 

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Borvat said:

Yes but is he better than signing a college FA.  I am not sold on him as a bottom six player which is his likely NHL career if he makes it.  He has already had to change his game which was more suited to a bottom six role due to prior injuries.  I don't see the offensive upside and there may be better options to round out Utica.  I guess I am not that high on him and feel there may be better options.

Have anyone in mind?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, theo5789 said:

Have anyone in mind?

Mitchell Chaffee - RW

Josh Dunne - Center

Ludwig Stenlund - Center

Alex Limoges - Center

 

To name a few there are more.  Lot's of D as well.  As I said I am not that high on Lockwood.  Injuries and lack of production.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Borvat said:

Mitchell Chaffee - RW

Josh Dunne - Center

Ludwig Stenlund - Center

Alex Limoges - Center

 

To name a few there are more.  Lot's of D as well.  As I said I am not that high on Lockwood.  Injuries and lack of production.  

Have to consider there is competition to sign these guys as well. We don't simply have the pick of the litter. Lockwood was drafted by us and has said his goal is to sign with us and appreciates the fact that we didn't force him to sign so he could finish his degree. Safe to say if we want to sign him, it likely won't take long. Also have to consider if players want to sign here seeing the competition ahead of them.

 

With that said, there's no reason why we couldn't sign Lockwood and look into 1 or 2 more FAs. We are at 47 contracts now, but there certainly could be deals made to free up spots and we need to make some moves soon anyway as our roster is getting log jammed. Lockwood could go the AHL contract route before signing next year when there is even more space to fit him in.

 

Looking up those names and Chaffee looks promising, but the rest don't seem that interesting to me aside from them being centers. Lockwood over his 4 year college career thus far is producing decent numbers for a "bottom 6" player (and still is amongst the leaders of his team currently in points). He is currently a captain of his team and could play an effective PK/defensive role with some spark of offense (similar to Motte) with his speed and tenacity. I understand the injury concern, but OJ had suffered a couple of knee injuries, but he's looking pretty decent so far in his return. Jake suffered a shoulder injury and has developed into what he is today.

 

I don't know what to expect from Lockwood in the future, but the team saw something in him to use a 3rd round pick (and been on his national team radar throughout his young career) and likely sees potential to be able to develop him further. The post earlier shows that top end numbers aren't necessarily needed to make a career in the NHL (Roussel who is a bottom 6 type player). I think he's worth a longer look to see what he can do in our system.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.