William Lockwood | RW

[theo5789]

15 minutes ago, Borvat said:

I just don't see the upside on Lockwood.  Maybe the Lockwood drafted in 2016 since then he has not been producing much. He has changed his game due to his injuries so comparing him to Motte and Roussel in 2020 may not be accurate.  If he is bottom 6 bound I don't like the odds especially with the depth the Canucks now have in the system through the subsequent drafts and would pursue other players.  To each their own.

I'm not sure what the expectations are for production, but he's been amongst the team leaders in points in every college year. He may not be the driver of offense, but has shown to be a good complimentary player. Much like Motte was. So it's no surprise his offense goes up and down with the team.

 

The change in his play is to be more controlled. It has nothing to do with him being less aggressive. His speed is still there to forecheck and match up defensively. He seems to have a good head on his shoulders to work hard. If the expectation for him was to become a top 6 player, then I would feel differently, but I don't think that it's a major concern with his production so far which is far from terrible.

[Borvat]

4 minutes ago, theo5789 said:

I'm not sure what the expectations are for production, but he's been amongst the team leaders in points in every college year. He may not be the driver of offense, but has shown to be a good complimentary player. Much like Motte was. So it's no surprise his offense goes up and down with the team.

 

The change in his play is to be more controlled. It has nothing to do with him being less aggressive. His speed is still there to forecheck and match up defensively. He seems to have a good head on his shoulders to work hard. If the expectation for him was to become a top 6 player, then I would feel differently, but I don't think that it's a major concern with his production so far which is far from terrible.

You have just described a ton of NCAA players some of which I pointed out.  Just because we used a third round pick in 2016 doesn't mean they have to double down and offer him a contract - especially if there are other players available that have produced more, don't have the injury history, are bigger plus have all or most of those other qualities. 

 

I don't dislike Lockwood as a player.  I am not sold and would pursue other options first.  If they sign him I hope he does well.  

[EP Phone Home]

I’m still hoping Mr. Lockwood will be a fixture in our organization. Would be great to have two players that come out of our 2016 draft class. Funny how it wasn’t a little while ago that some posters thought that draft year was a write off.

[theo5789]

15 minutes ago, Borvat said:

You have just described a ton of NCAA players some of which I pointed out.  Just because we used a third round pick in 2016 doesn't mean they have to double down and offer him a contract - especially if there are other players available that have produced more, don't have the injury history, are bigger plus have all or most of those other qualities. 

 

I don't dislike Lockwood as a player.  I am not sold and would pursue other options first.  If they sign him I hope he does well.  

But that's why I said that he's really no different than a college FA signing. Difference is that we saw potential at a young age as opposed to some maybe late bloomers that have also gotten by with their size. I'm not saying that we sign him because we used a pick (although there is some investment there already) but the fact that the team clearly had seen something that they liked and surely that hasn't changed beyond a couple of injuries, but we have looked past injuries and players continue to progress. He's been healthy this year (knock on wood).

 

There's certainly no guarantee that he makes the NHL, not any of the other college FAs, but he has stated that his goal is to sign for the team that drafted him, so he seems to want to be here.

[Borvat]

59 minutes ago, theo5789 said:

But that's why I said that he's really no different than a college FA signing. Difference is that we saw potential at a young age as opposed to some maybe late bloomers that have also gotten by with their size. I'm not saying that we sign him because we used a pick (although there is some investment there already) but the fact that the team clearly had seen something that they liked and surely that hasn't changed beyond a couple of injuries, but we have looked past injuries and players continue to progress. He's been healthy this year (knock on wood).

 

There's certainly no guarantee that he makes the NHL, not any of the other college FAs, but he has stated that his goal is to sign for the team that drafted him, so he seems to want to be here.

Like I said.  If he signs good for him.  I don't sign him just because he wants to be here. There are other options and I would pursue some of those first.  His lack of production, size, current number of quality Canucks prospects/picks in the pipeline, other NCAA FA's, players like Justin Bailey, players like Justin Bailey that are too be found, can't play center, his injuries......  He is just not high on my list.  I can see he has a real fan in you and good on you for supporting him.  I hope he does well. 

Edited January 21, 2020 by Borvat

[Ray_Cathode]

On 1/20/2020 at 12:34 AM, kenhodgejr said:

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. 

Yeah, there are all kinds of players needed at a pro level. Not everybody will be a first or second line scorer at pro, there is also a need for checkers, defensive specialists, and energy players, especially if they have some scoring ability, like Motte, say, all the better. At some point, we will have to cycle players like Beagle, Schaller (perhaps sooner rather than later), Sutter, Ferland, Roussel, etc. with less expensive tole players developed within our own system.  Some will show that they can move up the lineup - Kesler and Burrows, or become specialists like Hansen and Grabner come to mind.  Having them in our own development system means that they are much less expensive in cap terms, and later become available to spring replacement picks from other teams (that is how we got Dorsett, Vey, etc.) but we gave up the picks to get them. A few will move up your lineup and become key pieces - Kesler, Burrows, etc.

Right now we have excellent development going on in Utica - Green, and now Cull are doing or have done, and are doing great jobs at player development. There are numerous players pushing for graduation to the big team - MacEwen, Glaovac, Jasek, Bailey, Lind, Rafferty, Juolevi, Dipietro, Sautner, and Brisebois all come to mind. Next year those ranks may be reinforced in Utica with Rathbone, Lockwood, Madden, Woo, Fosch, and Hoglander.  Eliot and Gadjovich will continue their development. In addition, guys like Boucher, Baertschi and Goldobin rebuild their game - Boucher and Goldobin are now penalty killers in Utica and do a more than credible job - it gives them a chance at a new role in the NHL - Baertschi gets to establish that he can move past his injuries... or not  - it is what a fully developed farm system is supposed to look like. Tryamkin, Podkolzin. Hoglander, Klassen, Costmar and others are developing in Europe.

[theo5789]

1 hour ago, Borvat said:

Like I said.  If he signs good for him.  I don't sign him just because he wants to be here. There are other options and I would pursue some of those first.  His lack of production, size, current number of quality Canucks prospects/picks in the pipeline, other NCAA FA's, players like Justin Bailey, players like Justin Bailey that are too be found, can't play center, his injuries......  He is just not high on my list.  I can see he has a real fan in you and good on you for supporting him.  I hope he does well. 

I wouldn't sign him only because he wants to be here. That's only part of the reason I would still sign him. It's not that I'm strictly a fan of his, I just feel there is still value. We don't only look for top 6 offensive production, but if we did, Lockwood's career has been around 0.6 PPG which aren't horrible numbers. There is also more "production" to his game beyond simply points and he doesn't have the luxury of size to get him through, so he does it by hard work. He doesn't play a soft game by any means for his size (eg Motte) and I don't know a lot about those other college FAs beyond their stat line on hockeydb, but I'd be willing to bet that Lockwood is probably faster than most on that list. Someone like Rafferty didn't have amazing stats when we signed him and he has been impressive so far in an unexpected way. So production and size aren't of the greatest concern for me.

 

There is a case of other quality picks that we would like to give a chance here as well, but I just feel Lockwood fits in this group as well. He hasn't blossomed like a Gaudette or Madden, but that doesn't mean there isn't some development work that could be done to make a player out of him still.

 

Not being a center is not really a knock as that's simply the case for any winger. We converted Jasek from wing to center and it has looked okay and he's even centering the top offensive line of late. Who knows what could be done with Lockwood in this case.

 

The injury issue could be in the past as like I've said before that he's been healthy all year so far. Has it changed his game? Maybe, but like I said, it's not like he's become a soft player suddenly, he's just needing to learn to play with more control. He's still amongst the leaders on his team in terms of offensive production, so he's at least still one of the best players on his team and is a captain which shows good character and leadership, which are attributes that are valued highly to the Canucks and at times valued more highly than skill alone.

 

I guess we just have a different view in the concerns for the players. It will be interesting to see if he does get signed or not. We currently have 3 contract spots, one for Tryamkin hopefully, maybe Rathbone and I can see Lockwood with the other, but certainly if the team views another prospect higher then they go with them. We could create more spots through trades or if Lockwood is really committed to us, he could sign an AHL contract for this year and see where he fits next year when we have spots opening up.

[SID.IS.SID.ME.IS.ME]

A little late but here’s a good highlight vid of Lockwood’s game winning goal from game one of the two game split versus top rivals Ohio State over the weekend:

 

 

[Grape]

On 1/21/2020 at 12:15 PM, theo5789 said:

I'm not sure what the expectations are for production, but he's been amongst the team leaders in points in every college year. He may not be the driver of offense, but has shown to be a good complimentary player. Much like Motte was. So it's no surprise his offense goes up and down with the team.

 

The change in his play is to be more controlled. It has nothing to do with him being less aggressive. His speed is still there to forecheck and match up defensively. He seems to have a good head on his shoulders to work hard. If the expectation for him was to become a top 6 player, then I would feel differently, but I don't think that it's a major concern with his production so far which is far from terrible.

I would actually say Lockwood is (one of) the driver's of the UM offense. He's much much speed and skill oriented than people on here give him credit for, and having watched both Motte and Lockwood at UM, they're not really that much alike.

 

Motte was what you described as a "complementary player," even in college. His point production is a product of having NHL guys like Larkin, Connor, Hyman, Copp, Werenski, Compher etc... to play with. That's at least 6 NHL'ers, where as this year's UM team has, in my opinion, two guys in York and Beecher (maybe not even Beecher).

 

Basically what I'm saying is that I'm pretty sure Lockwood possesses more skill than both Motte and Roussel did in their junior/collegiate careers (not that I've seen Roussel play in junior). Whereas the latter two have styles that might stereotypically label them as fourth liners, Lockwood has a modern third liner skillset: fast and skilled enough to drive a college/junior offense, while also playing hard enough to be a bottom 6 guy.

Edited February 7, 2020 by Grape

[VegasCanuck]

2 hours ago, Grape said:

I would actually say Lockwood is (one of) the driver's of the UM offense. He's much much speed and skill oriented than people on here give him credit for, and having watched both Motte and Lockwood at UM, they're not really that much alike.

 

Motte was what you described as a "complementary player," even in college. His point production is a product of having NHL guys like Larkin, Connor, Hyman, Copp, Werenski, Compher etc... to play with. That's at least 6 NHL'ers, where as this year's UM team has, in my opinion, two guys in York and Beecher (maybe not even Beecher).

 

Basically what I'm saying is that I'm pretty sure Lockwood possesses more skill than both Motte and Roussel did in their junior/collegiate careers (not that I've seen Roussel play in junior). Whereas the latter two have styles that might stereotypically label them as fourth liners, Lockwood has a modern third liner skillset: fast and skilled enough to drive a college/junior offense, while also playing hard enough to be a bottom 6 guy.

I agree completely. I just hope that he finds the durability to be a good bottom 6 guy for us. Love his compete level, but really concerned about how many injuries he's sustained against younger competition. It makes me worry about how he will survive against much bigger NHL defense.

[theo5789]

3 hours ago, Grape said:

I would actually say Lockwood is (one of) the driver's of the UM offense. He's much much speed and skill oriented than people on here give him credit for, and having watched both Motte and Lockwood at UM, they're not really that much alike.

 

Motte was what you described as a "complementary player," even in college. His point production is a product of having NHL guys like Larkin, Connor, Hyman, Copp, Werenski, Compher etc... to play with. That's at least 6 NHL'ers, where as this year's UM team has, in my opinion, two guys in York and Beecher (maybe not even Beecher).

 

Basically what I'm saying is that I'm pretty sure Lockwood possesses more skill than both Motte and Roussel did in their junior/collegiate careers (not that I've seen Roussel play in junior). Whereas the latter two have styles that might stereotypically label them as fourth liners, Lockwood has a modern third liner skillset: fast and skilled enough to drive a college/junior offense, while also playing hard enough to be a bottom 6 guy.

I'm only suggesting that he's a complimentary player because it appears his offensive production was higher when he had better teammates (Marody and Hughes) and as demonstrated, there's a drop off in the lineup and his numbers drop too. He's more of the driver of the offense now, but more likely out of necessity. I'm not saying he plays exactly like Motte, but rather simply he's more complimentary than the driver. With that said, this isn't a knock at all (FTR, I'm very high on Motte). Motte is a motor on his line and Lockwood could be similar in that sense with his speed and tenacity.

 

I'm one of the ones that thinks he should be signed while others have written him off already.

[Grape]

Lockwood has picked up his statistical play recently, earning Big Ten first star of the week honors. 

 

After starting 0-7 in the Big Ten, Michigan now controls their own destiny with four games left to win the conference title. This would be a big achievement for Lockwood who has captained the squad into a second half resurgence (we haven't won the Big Ten in awhile).

[Guest]

On 2/7/2020 at 11:24 AM, theo5789 said:

I'm one of the ones that thinks he should be signed while others have written him off already.

I've written him off because of his injuries.  He's stated that he has to change the way he plays.  

I hope I'm proven wrong and who knows, maybe with Madden out, he squeaks out a contract spot with us. 

[Grape]

4 hours ago, VancouverHabitant said:

I've written him off because of his injuries.  He's stated that he has to change the way he plays.  

I hope I'm proven wrong and who knows, maybe with Madden out, he squeaks out a contract spot with us. 

I think the plan was always to give him a contract and that's never changed. There was just a smaller and smaller chance he would have an impact with the injuries building up.

[theo5789]

14 hours ago, VancouverHabitant said:

I've written him off because of his injuries.  He's stated that he has to change the way he plays.  

I hope I'm proven wrong and who knows, maybe with Madden out, he squeaks out a contract spot with us. 

Changing the way he plays doesn't have to be a negative connotation. He's always seemed like a hard working driven player, so he will find a new way to be effective while playing less recklessly and avoid injuries. He's doing alright health wise lately (knock on wood) and he's continuing to contribute towards his team's success of late as a leader. His speed and tenacity doesn't go away, he just needs to learn to control it near the boards. It's not an overhaul to his game.

 

[Derp...]

I've kind of seen him as a Roussel type player. Brings sand paper, speed, and some skill.

[SID.IS.SID.ME.IS.ME]

Lockwood with an assist tonight in Michigan’s 3-0 win over Michigan State in Game One of the Big Ten Quarterfinals:

Also had a big block in the game that likely saved a goal.

[Canucks Curse]

oh yeah, forgot about this guy

 

[Captain Canuck #12]

2 hours ago, Canucks Curse said:

oh yeah, forgot about this guy

 

Still having Lockwood is our consolation prize for losing Madden.  Hopefully he makes us forget all about that!

[vannuck59]

Madden as well as Lockwood are great collage players but I see little room for them coming up .Probably why Madden was moved.  Gaudette  and Horvat will slot down as more skilled guys are developed . Beagle will be gone before his contract is up. We have more centers in the pipe line coming .