Let's Be Patient, eh?

[Nuxfanabroad]

4 minutes ago, Johnny Shotgun said:

Patience since 1970 and waiting.  These fag$ better get it done soon.

Well, the planet is almost 2,000,000,000 yrs old..5 decades ain't much.

[Johnny Shotgun]

7 minutes ago, Nuxfanabroad said:

Well, the planet is almost 2,000,000,000 yrs old..5 decades ain't much.

Team is a joke...nanoseconds of failure.

 

[Johnny Shotgun]

What comes first the big one or a cup? In geological time smart money sez a quake.  Most of this club is too fragile to even set a choker.

[HockeydownUnder]

2 hours ago, Johnny Shotgun said:

What comes first the big one or a cup? In geological time smart money sez a quake.  Most of this club is too fragile to even set a choker.

The team has had two game 7's. If you are so sick of waiting why don't you root for the Maple Leafs instead you old fart

[Baggins]

On 2017-08-03 at 10:33 PM, Hairy Kneel said:

When we had little or no prospect depth there was a lean towards giving them kids a roster spot. Now that we have depth on D and multiple forwards to sort through leaving kids down to develp more seems the better option. Besides we're not a playoff team per se. We are still transitioning away from depending on the twins so much. 

I trust Coach Green to help JB orchestrate the right moves in this regard.

One thing that still irks me is that 1st rounders (high potential blue chip prospects) can't go to Utica when they are obviously ready to learn against men in a pro setting.

The CHL should let those players move up if they're ready for that jump.

And who gets to decide that? Every drafted player would likely be in the AHL if it's up to the drafting GM.

[Hairy Kneel]

3 hours ago, Baggins said:

And who gets to decide that? Every drafted player would likely be in the AHL if it's up to the drafting GM.

"There have been five players to receive the CHL's exceptional player status, three of which are currently playing in the NHL: John Tavares, Aaron Ekblad and Connor McDavid. All three had immediate success in juniors, became eventual #1 overall picks and have enjoyed great success in the NHL. Is there a reason why the two players since, Sean Day and Joe Veleno, have not experienced the same success?"

 

Something LIKE this, but on a lesser scale for star first rounders who will develop BETTER playing against older players.  Who have nothing left to prove in junior.

 

"Definition of “Exceptional” It is agreed that the term “exceptional” is meant to be those athletes who may come along only once in a generation. To be an exceptional athlete one must possess not only hockey skills that are so superior to players his own age, but would also be superior to players two and three years older than his age. To provide some clarity, an exceptional player at age 14, given the opportunity, would compete for a position on Hockey Canada’s Team Atlantic Under 17 Regional Male team or with Hockey Nova Scotia’s Canada Winter Games Male Under 17 team in years when the Canada Games are held. In addition to hockey skills, the exceptional athlete must also possess physical maturity, psychological maturity, social maturity, and education ability which match his superior hockey skills. The player must be well rounded in all aspects of his development."

 

ie a similar construct to the exceptional players category but to a lesser extent.  That the players interest is taken into consideration moreso than the CHL coffers. 

[NHL97OneTimer]

Given that teams don't have the ability to directly train their draft picks right away within their own system full time, it would seem better if the NHL draft occurred one year later (i.e. so that the players are AHL eligible right away).  Either that or drop the AHL age restriction and let the drafted players enter the AHL right away if they're ready.

[Baggins]

14 hours ago, Hairy Kneel said:

"There have been five players to receive the CHL's exceptional player status, three of which are currently playing in the NHL: John Tavares, Aaron Ekblad and Connor McDavid. All three had immediate success in juniors, became eventual #1 overall picks and have enjoyed great success in the NHL. Is there a reason why the two players since, Sean Day and Joe Veleno, have not experienced the same success?"

 

Something LIKE this, but on a lesser scale for star first rounders who will develop BETTER playing against older players.  Who have nothing left to prove in junior.

 

"Definition of “Exceptional” It is agreed that the term “exceptional” is meant to be those athletes who may come along only once in a generation. To be an exceptional athlete one must possess not only hockey skills that are so superior to players his own age, but would also be superior to players two and three years older than his age. To provide some clarity, an exceptional player at age 14, given the opportunity, would compete for a position on Hockey Canada’s Team Atlantic Under 17 Regional Male team or with Hockey Nova Scotia’s Canada Winter Games Male Under 17 team in years when the Canada Games are held. In addition to hockey skills, the exceptional athlete must also possess physical maturity, psychological maturity, social maturity, and education ability which match his superior hockey skills. The player must be well rounded in all aspects of his development."

 

ie a similar construct to the exceptional players category but to a lesser extent.  That the players interest is taken into consideration moreso than the CHL coffers. 

Now you're just into a gray area though. Generational is fairly simple to determine. The simple solution would be all 1st round picks at 19 instead of 20. No gray area.

[Hairy Kneel]

11 minutes ago, Baggins said:

Now you're just into a gray area though. Generational is fairly simple to determine. The simple solution would be all 1st round picks at 19 instead of 20. No gray area.

What isn't clear?

[Baggins]

1 minute ago, Hairy Kneel said:

What isn't clear?

Well all those bold parts in your post are rather subjective. Really there's "star" junior players taken in the 2nd round. Where is the line? As I said, generational is pretty easy to pick out. From there it's pretty subjective. Subjective = gray area. Which is why there's a black and white line set at 20 years old. Like I said  perhaps first round picks should be reduced to 19. Then of course there will be those arguing that a player was taken 32nd and has nothing left to learn in junior. To me there needs to be a black and white line. Subjective just leads to controversy.

 

Btw, I believe you can always learn more and improve at any level. That's where desire and work ethic comes in. I hate it when people say "he has nothing left to learn there". There's always room for improvement. Whether it's skating, passing, defensive play, or fitness. At 18 there's a lot of room for improvement.

[Hairy Kneel]

7 hours ago, Baggins said:

Well all those bold parts in your post are rather subjective. Really there's "star" junior players taken in the 2nd round. Where is the line? As I said, generational is pretty easy to pick out. From there it's pretty subjective. Subjective = gray area. Which is why there's a black and white line set at 20 years old. Like I said  perhaps first round picks should be reduced to 19. Then of course there will be those arguing that a player was taken 32nd and has nothing left to learn in junior. To me there needs to be a black and white line. Subjective just leads to controversy.

 

Btw, I believe you can always learn more and improve at any level. That's where desire and work ethic comes in. I hate it when people say "he has nothing left to learn there". There's always room for improvement. Whether it's skating, passing, defensive play, or fitness. At 18 there's a lot of room for improvement.

If it'sa black and white line I would delineate it at just first rounders only. As first rounders, many of them are the closest to being able to start in the NHL right away. I'm not say to force them up to the AHL but to allow them to have that opportunity if it enhances their chances at being called up in the first year. Calling a kid up from the CHL doesn't ever seem like a good idea when they're sent back.

[Hairy Kneel]

7 hours ago, Baggins said:

Well all those bold parts in your post are rather subjective. Really there's "star" junior players taken in the 2nd round. Where is the line? As I said, generational is pretty easy to pick out. From there it's pretty subjective. Subjective = gray area. Which is why there's a black and white line set at 20 years old. Like I said  perhaps first round picks should be reduced to 19. Then of course there will be those arguing that a player was taken 32nd and has nothing left to learn in junior. To me there needs to be a black and white line. Subjective just leads to controversy.

 

Btw, I believe you can always learn more and improve at any level. That's where desire and work ethic comes in. I hate it when people say "he has nothing left to learn there". There's always room for improvement. Whether it's skating, passing, defensive play, or fitness. At 18 there's a lot of room for improvement.

If it'sa black and white line I would delineate it at just first rounders only. As first rounders, many of them are the closest to being able to start in the NHL right away. I'm not say to force them up to the AHL but to allow them to have that opportunity if it enhances their chances at being called up in the first year. Calling a kid up from the CHL doesn't ever seem like a good idea when they're sent back.

[Alflives]

2 minutes ago, Hairy Kneel said:

If it'sa black and white line I would delineate it at just first rounders only. As first rounders, many of them are the closest to being able to start in the NHL right away. I'm not say to force them up to the AHL but to allow them to have that opportunity if it enhances their chances at being called up in the first year. Calling a kid up from the CHL doesn't ever seem like a good idea when they're sent back.

Didn't that happen with .Draisatl?  I think he played 40 or so games with the Oilers, then they sent him back to Kelowna.

[Hairy Kneel]

Not sure about Draisatl....do not recall

[lmm]

17 minutes ago, Hairy Kneel said:

Not sure about Draisatl....do not recall

Draisaitl was sent down after 37 games, I think there is another threshhold (after the 9 games) that kicks in at 40, but I am not sure about that one, (you have no clue, jaja and neither do I).

But it begs the question, if Draisaitl was sent down after 37 games in his rookie year and is now a star, is that the better option than "managing Jake n Jarod's schedule"  since their progress has been stalled.

 

If we can agree that the CHL is the best league for developing Jr players, why is there ssuch a rush to weaken that league?

What would it mean to the many players trying to develope in the CHL if the top 40-60 players ended up in the AHL?

also that is 40-60 AHL jobs lost. At best I would think it improves the ECHL.

If the NHL is to be fiddling with young players, I think it would be more beneficial to change the 4year college free agancy loophole  to 5 years.

[mll]

2 minutes ago, lmm said:

Draisaitl was sent down after 37 games, I think there is another threshhold (after the 9 games) that kicks in at 40, but I am not sure about that one, (you have no clue, jaja and neither do I).

But it begs the question, if Draisaitl was sent down after 37 games in his rookie year and is now a star, is that the better option than "managing Jake n Jarod's schedule"  since their progress has been stalled.

 

If we can agree that the CHL is the best league for developing Jr players, why is there ssuch a rush to weaken that league?

What would it mean to the many players trying to develope in the CHL if the top 40-60 players ended up in the AHL?

also that is 40-60 AHL jobs lost. At best I would think it improves the ECHL.

If the NHL is to be fiddling with young players, I think it would be more beneficial to change the 4year college free agancy loophole  to 5 years.

It's because of free agency.  UFA is the earliest between age 27 and 7 accrued seasons.  An accrued season is 40 games on the roster so they sent him down before that mark to not lose a RFA year.

[Old school nuck]

On 03/08/2017 at 8:23 PM, 6string said:

A lot of fear mongering because of one Tony Gallagher, who seldom gets anything right other than being a top notch *itch.

 

Where was all the concern about Defenseman Stecher being rushed or injured as we all raved about him last year.

 

Start: College Vs. Juniors debate!

Troy had three full seasons on the Penticton Vees and the three full seasons on the u of North Dakoda plus he started on the comets so he was not rushed or was a teenager. 

Boeser had two full seasons of College hockey to prepare him. 

JV and JM had one season of seasoning before they were tossed in the fire. 

I like the two seasons before your ready but of course some are NHL ready after the draft like Matthews, McDavid but we don't have any of those types of players in our pool right now. 

[TheGuardian_]

Canucks could have sent Horvat back to junior, but Benning decided to burn a year of RFA for Horvat.

Draisaitl went back to junior for 37 games and played only 6 games in the AHL.

Stecher played only 4 games in the AHL.

Tryamkin spent none, I mention him here only in the context that on this team and the new NHL, players spending extended periods in the AHL don't seem to be top line/or the better players on their teams.

 

Patience is a virtue when things are going well, Detroit could be patient for a long time as they were doing very well so they are not the "model" necessarily to follow and lately they are just like other teams, see Larkin.

 

How long is virtuous for Canuck fans, this is year 4 and the talk/indication is not about next year or the year after, it is 4 or 5 more years.

[Nucker 67]

I think they're about halfway. Benning has re-stocked the prospect shelves, and now those players are developing. Next draft we'll get a few more real good players I'm sure. BUT, if the Sedins are top line players this season I'll just have to shake my head. They need Bo's line to take over top spot, put Boeser on his line and let them go. Within 2-3 years they should have Juolevi, Demko, Dahlen, Pettersson, Gaudette, Lind, Gadjovich, etc. on the team (I'm hoping) and by 2022 should be a force.

[Toews]

2 hours ago, lmm said:

If we can agree that the CHL is the best league for developing Jr players, why is there ssuch a rush to weaken that league?

What would it mean to the many players trying to develope in the CHL if the top 40-60 players ended up in the AHL?

also that is 40-60 AHL jobs lost. At best I would think it improves the ECHL.

If the NHL is to be fiddling with young players, I think it would be more beneficial to change the 4year college free agancy loophole  to 5 years.

In terms of competition there is no league that is better in the world than the CHL for junior players. Most top prospects in Europe have to play among men if they want a step up in competition. This is the reason why so many top European prospects come over to the CHL (eg Juolevi) rather than playing at home. They want to play against better competition without having to play against men who are far more developed physically. An extra year in junior would not have hurt Jake at all, he would have the opportunity to play with a decent Hitmen team which was also hosting the Memorial Cup.

 

We have the best talent development system in the world, we also have more depth of talent than any country in the world. Team Canada's B team would still be the favorite to win the Olympics, and the credit for this depth is our superior developmental system. People that want to sacrifice that just so that a couple of guys can play in the AHL are just being shortsighted.