Salmonberries Posted July 15, 2017 Share Posted July 15, 2017 On 7/12/2017 at 5:42 AM, drummerboy said: Yeah. It totally is hindsight. First of all, Saad might have been BPA to some scouts, but a lot had Jensen going higher than he did. It is a crapshoot. Especially later in the round. No it's not. A lot of people hated that pick then. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RoyalCityRelic Posted July 18, 2017 Share Posted July 18, 2017 Nicklas Jensen - 32 goals in Hartford on a last place team. Second leading goal scorer in AHL. How many did Virtanen get down in Utica? Or any other Canuck prospect? Canucks made a huge mistake by not playing him top six for half a season like most #1's receive. Look at the prospects this year up with big club who got to play more games than Jensen ever got with virtually no points. Never really got treated like a #1. Injuries didn't help. Change in mgmt created a "not drafted by me" situation. They trade him and he blossoms. He could have made Rangers this year but he would have been relegated to 4th line minutes. He will get top 6 minutes in a strong league KHL came AHL and then come back stronger to Rangers in potentially top 6 role ( see Zuccarrello). Good luck to Nicklas Jensen! We never gave you a real look. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D-Money Posted July 18, 2017 Share Posted July 18, 2017 2 hours ago, RoyalCityRelic said: Nicklas Jensen - 32 goals in Hartford on a last place team. Second leading goal scorer in AHL. How many did Virtanen get down in Utica? Or any other Canuck prospect? Canucks made a huge mistake by not playing him top six for half a season like most #1's receive. Look at the prospects this year up with big club who got to play more games than Jensen ever got with virtually no points. Never really got treated like a #1. Injuries didn't help. Change in mgmt created a "not drafted by me" situation. They trade him and he blossoms. He could have made Rangers this year but he would have been relegated to 4th line minutes. He will get top 6 minutes in a strong league KHL came AHL and then come back stronger to Rangers in potentially top 6 role ( see Zuccarrello). Good luck to Nicklas Jensen! We never gave you a real look. Scoring lots of goals as a 24 year-old in the AHL is not necessarily an indicator of who is a real NHL player. Canucks were screaming for legitimate depth the past few seasons, and glady handed over Jensen and a pick for another former 1st who scored lots of AHL goals, but hasn't been able to cut it in the bigs, even on a terrible Vancouver team. Jensen was available for nothing but a contract, and all 31 teams passed on him. There were lots of other similar guys who were available as free agents. For instance, Kenny Agostino and Brad Hunt absolutely demolished the AHL last season (Agostino won the scoring title by 15 points, despite spending time called up to the Blues). Neither were qualified by their teams. They both found teams willing to give them another shot with a contract. Jensen did not. What does that tell you? I, for one, am pleased with the new direction of not clinging to old mistakes. These fringe AHL stars are available all the time. Teams scout them, and generally have a good idea if their skills will translate. If there was any legitimate odds that they were top-6 players, teams would line up to sign them. For instance, Benning's crew could tell Shinkaruk's AHL performances weren't sustainable against superior competition, and flipped him for Granlund - one of the best deals he's made so far. The same scouting staff freely gave up Jensen, and another team found him underwhelming. Why bother? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Screw Posted July 18, 2017 Share Posted July 18, 2017 3 hours ago, RoyalCityRelic said: Nicklas Jensen - 32 goals in Hartford on a last place team. Second leading goal scorer in AHL. How many did Virtanen get down in Utica? Or any other Canuck prospect? Canucks made a huge mistake by not playing him top six for half a season like most #1's receive. Look at the prospects this year up with big club who got to play more games than Jensen ever got with virtually no points. Never really got treated like a #1. Injuries didn't help. Change in mgmt created a "not drafted by me" situation. They trade him and he blossoms. He could have made Rangers this year but he would have been relegated to 4th line minutes. He will get top 6 minutes in a strong league KHL came AHL and then come back stronger to Rangers in potentially top 6 role ( see Zuccarrello). Good luck to Nicklas Jensen! We never gave you a real look. AHL fodder. I wouldn't call being unable to crack a NHL lineup blossoming. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keenan's Moustache Posted July 18, 2017 Share Posted July 18, 2017 . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keenan's Moustache Posted July 18, 2017 Share Posted July 18, 2017 On 7/14/2017 at 5:55 PM, terrible.dee said: There is such a thing as too much "earn it" Because what "Earn it" actually means is ditch your own creativity and religiously follow the coaches overly defensive system which is designed to make him look good and keep his job, not to showcase your talent.....you know? The thing that got you drafted? Jensen needed to be brought up here put on one of the first two lines and told "You are a top six NHL player...period" I'm positive we would have seen 20 g, not saying we would have wanted to keep him but he could have been traded for a greater return. An NHL legend who I can't remember recently spoke out against all the "development" going on in the AHL (Development = trapping) He was a Montreal player......damn can't remember who, anyways he said the number #1 job in development is to get the kids to BELIVE they are stars! If you tell someone they aren't ready, they aren't good enough, they don't trap well en....you get the point, eventually, they are going to believe they can't play. I'll amend this post when I find out who it was....but I think Jessen could have been a....damn, what's that fast guy we drafted's name? Plays for TO? Did you mean Michael Grabner? And I want to say the Montreal Canadien may have been Guy Lafleur, IIRC Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RoyalCityRelic Posted July 18, 2017 Share Posted July 18, 2017 3 hours ago, D-Money said: Scoring lots of goals as a 24 year-old in the AHL is not necessarily an indicator of who is a real NHL player. Canucks were screaming for legitimate depth the past few seasons, and glady handed over Jensen and a pick for another former 1st who scored lots of AHL goals, but hasn't been able to cut it in the bigs, even on a terrible Vancouver team. Jensen was available for nothing but a contract, and all 31 teams passed on him. There were lots of other similar guys who were available as free agents. For instance, Kenny Agostino and Brad Hunt absolutely demolished the AHL last season (Agostino won the scoring title by 15 points, despite spending time called up to the Blues). Neither were qualified by their teams. They both found teams willing to give them another shot with a contract. Jensen did not. What does that tell you? I, for one, am pleased with the new direction of not clinging to old mistakes. These fringe AHL stars are available all the time. Teams scout them, and generally have a good idea if their skills will translate. If there was any legitimate odds that they were top-6 players, teams would line up to sign them. For instance, Benning's crew could tell Shinkaruk's AHL performances weren't sustainable against superior competition, and flipped him for Granlund - one of the best deals he's made so far. The same scouting staff freely gave up Jensen, and another team found him underwhelming. Why bother? Have to agree with you on both Hunt and Agostina. They are both high quality players who have not played enough to really find their niche up there. And they were able to secure other contracts. Certainly know it's a tough world out there. Then, there are a bunch of no names non-performers like Curtis Lazar and many, many others who get significant games and full seasons to prove themselves and develop. Jensen did not get that serious, long chance in Vancouver or New York as they placed him on 4th line in defensive role. That's the way it crumbles sometimes but I saw way more potential with big league shot, skating and eye for net compared to many others. As you said, there are many, many who get left behind. RoyalCityRelic Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grape Posted July 18, 2017 Share Posted July 18, 2017 Picking Saad over Jensen is not hindsight, it would've been consensus; people saying Jensen dropped a lot further then expected but so did Saad. Just like Nylander/Ehlers/Ritchie over Virtanen is not hindsight. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NewbieCanuckFan Posted July 18, 2017 Share Posted July 18, 2017 On 7/14/2017 at 0:19 PM, erkayloomeh said: But there's a reason why coaches don't give guys like that more opportunity and guys like Hansen and burrows do get more opportunity. It's called work. Jensen lacked it. A bit of that and a bit of it's alot harder making a playoff team vs a lottery pick team. Players like Hansen & Burrows can overcome that. Fringe/depth players often can't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NewbieCanuckFan Posted July 18, 2017 Share Posted July 18, 2017 On 7/12/2017 at 10:39 AM, Pears said: Man looking back at it Gillis was horrible at drafting. From 2009-2012 we have a whopping 3 players from those drafts... True, but some of those drafted prospects were dealt away. Schroeder just signed a contract (his ELC expired) with a playoff team (Blue Jackets). Yeah likely just a fringe/depth player (was a "black ace" for another playoff team Wild this past season) but still a NHLer. Plus he was drafted 22nd overall (not a high pick) Connauton (2009 draft class as well - 3rd round) is a fringe/depth NHLer on a lottery pick team (Arizona). Gillis threw him away along with a 2nd round pick for an AWFUL rental (Roy). 2010 - no picks in the first three rounds. That does make it difficult to draft a NHL (granted, self-inflicted wound given that it was Gillis that dealt those picks away). 2011 - a big 'swing & a miss"....Course the 1st round pick we had that year was 29th overall. 2012 - Gaunce & Hutton. Not great but not that bad (depending on how Gaunce turns out - though he too was a fairly late pick - 26th overall). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldnews Posted July 19, 2017 Share Posted July 19, 2017 Whatever happened to that Baggins sig - Crybaby.com. In a nutshell. People here still whining 7 years later that Gillis didn't have the gift of fortune-telling, didn't produce a Kucherov with pick 29... Should have taken Granlund! Er, well at least Benning fixed that one - and passing on Goldbobin. Personally I'd kill to have Jenner, but there are few things as lacking in credibility as hindsighting drafts eons later. Anyhow, Jensen has some great tools - can flat out skate (pretty much atop most scouts checklist) and he has a high end ability to finish. 17 goals in the SEL as a teenager - better than Dank managed.... 32 goals in the A may be a bit too late though at 24 - for whatever reason, teams tend to close the window on guys around that point - and the Rags weren't exactly an easy roster to crack either. Seems reasonable enough - that he wants to play at the highest pro level he can and left for the K over another year in the A. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
agent007 Posted July 19, 2017 Share Posted July 19, 2017 On 2017-07-12 at 11:21 AM, Quantum said: Yep... And we have Granlund from that draft too! Hindsight is 20/20 but it does highlight just how bad Mike Gillis was at drafting. Am I the only one that thinks drafting is maybe 50% of the equation? The other half is a combination of franchise development, opportunity, timing, and chemistry amongst team mates and coaching staff. There are so many factors that go in to the success of prospects. Not just the choice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nuxfanabroad Posted July 19, 2017 Share Posted July 19, 2017 3 minutes ago, agent007 said: Am I the only one that thinks drafting is maybe 50% of the equation? The other half is a combination of franchise development, opportunity, timing, and chemistry amongst team mates and coaching staff. There are so many factors that go in to the success of prospects. Not just the choice. Fanboys don't like matters this complex, but absolutely worthwhile point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.