Vancouver Canucks Prospect Reports

[Canucksin2013]

A look at Vancouver Canucks prospects, Boeser, Juolevi, Demko, Dahlen, Goldobin, and Gaudette

 

http://lastwordonhockey.com/2017/07/28/tsp-vancouver-canucks-prospects/

[PlanB]

As with every other scouting/prospect analysis I'd like to know how many times the author saw each prospect play live - and the level of play/quality of opponent they were facing at the time.  Additionally, it helps to know the authors hockey qualifications that were the basis of these reports. Otherwise,  this just becomes a summary of what the author read from other reports. In this particular instance most Canucks fans who read this will probably like what they read since it's mostly all positive but one has to question the source. 

[73 Percent]

4 minutes ago, PlanB said:

As with every other scouting/prospect analysis I'd like to know how many times the author saw each prospect play live - and the level of play/quality of opponent they were facing at the time.  Additionally, it helps to know the authors hockey qualifications that were the basis of these reports. Otherwise,  this just becomes a summary of what the author read from other reports. In this particular instance most Canucks fans who read this will probably like what they read since it's mostly all positive but one has to question the source. 

The dahlen plays a parameter game is a head scratcher. 

[Fanuck]

5 minutes ago, PlanB said:

As with every other scouting/prospect analysis I'd like to know how many times the author saw each prospect play live - and the level of play/quality of opponent they were facing at the time.  Additionally, it helps to know the authors hockey qualifications that were the basis of these reports. Otherwise,  this just becomes a summary of what the author read from other reports. In this particular instance most Canucks fans who read this will probably like what they read since it's mostly all positive but one has to question the source. 

Under your criteria  (seeing players live), I'd estimate 80-90% (maybe even a higher percentage) of all summative reports such as this one are a collection of individual written/transcribed reports from varying sources put together by 'basement bloggers' so to speak for the single reason - nobody except professional scouts being paid by NHL teams have the ability to see all these guys play live - and even pro-scouts generally focus on one league and or one area  (like Western Canada,  Russia,  Sweden/Finland,  ect ).

 

 So you can virtually guarantee the said basement blogger in this case never saw the majority  (if any) of these prospects play live. Furthermore,  it's been proven many times in the past here that the basement bloggers themselves post these reports to generate website traffic for themselves. So yeah,  overall I'd agree with you PB,  questionable source. 

 

[Sygvard]

1 minute ago, Fanuck said:

Under your criteria  (seeing players live), I'd estimate 80-90% (maybe even a higher percentage) of all summative reports such as this one are a collection of individual written/transcribed reports from varying sources put together by 'basement bloggers' so to speak for the single reason - nobody except professional scouts being paid by NHL teams have the ability to see all these guys play live - and even pro-scouts generally focus on one league and or one area  (like Western Canada,  Russia,  Sweden/Finland,  ect ).

 

 So you can virtually guarantee the said basement blogger in this case never saw the majority  (if any) of these prospects play live. Furthermore,  it's been proven many times in the past here that the basement bloggers themselves post these reports to generate website traffic for themselves. So yeah,  overall I'd agree with you PB,  questionable source. 

 

I think you are totally right here, although I draw a bit of a different conclusion from it. The blogger definitely hasn't seen them play, but I don't think that collection reports necessarily make for a questionable source.  As you say, virtually NO-ONE ends up seeing a broad selection of prospects play. Individual scouts watch a high volume of games for a relatively narrow selection of players. Information is collected, then reported back and compiled into scouting reports. Most GM's haven't seen every drafted player play; they are relying on a collective report of their scouts, other GMs opinions, insiders, video, stat lines etc.

 

I don't think this one in particular is all that high quality. But I wouldn't shrug off analysis based on multiple source collection. We certainly can't demand that the writers attend  all the games from 4 or 5 different leagues around the world. Most of our favourite high quality insiders and analysts are really just collecting source info for their draft lists. 

 

 

[Nucker 67]

I have no issues with the article. He does mention the players' faults, but also gives them praise for what they do. It's fair I think. These players are still kids basically, and developing, of course they're going to need to work on some things. But there is a light at the end of the tunnel and I'm very optimistic with where this team is going. What I didn't get was at the end, where he says Virtanen is no longer considered a prospect because of games played. I'm assuming this is the writer's "rules". Would've been nice to give a shout out to Chatfield as well. He won the MC with Windsor (DiPietro in goal) and I think a great signing by Benning. Canucks are thin with R-shot Ds, and Chatfield was a nice added piece there. I also agree with the writer that the Canucks are still needing another top prospect on D, with Juolevi. Rasmus Dahlin? (we can dream)

[cyoung]

1 hour ago, 73 Percent said:

The dahlen plays a parameter game is a head scratcher. 

This lol