Alflives Posted February 11, 2019 Share Posted February 11, 2019 2 minutes ago, chilliwiggins said: They were 2014 if that's what you mean because Gillis drafted Horvat in 2013. Yes 4 years MAX, for the longer ripening fruit so to speak. Sooner with top picks for the most part, excuse used to be longer for D-men but that's not seemingly true anymore. Should we draft guys who are physically men at 18, or draft the boyish looking ones? I see a lot of baby faced guys in our prospects (and on our team) who need to physically mature. Maybe some of the guys making it sooner to the NHL are (elite like pettersson) or they became men physically at 18/19/20? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aGENT Posted February 11, 2019 Share Posted February 11, 2019 8 minutes ago, chilliwiggins said: They were 2014 if that's what you mean because Gillis drafted Horvat in 2013. Yes 4 years MAX, for the longer ripening fruit so to speak. Sooner with top picks for the most part, excuse used to be longer for D-men but that's not seemingly true anymore. Ya Boucher is a career AHL'er My point was we are only getting less than 2 players per draft, and my opinion is that since we have been a cellar dweller for a few the returns should be a little better. 2 players per year whether 4rth line plug at the NHL level or better than I would be happy with that. First, I agree with @tas post from yesterday that it's likely to be more than your 2 per draft (not even sure where you're getting that frankly). Second, as discussed above, all we can really judge, remotely thoroughly thus far, is the 2014 and 2015 drafts. 2014 has 4 guys currently playing in the NHL plus another who could be but is back home in Russia. 2015 has an NHL all star, a guy who's spent time here and will likely be on the team full time next year and a depth F and D who were both late picks but are trending to play in the show as well. Either way, two drafts is an awful small sample size to be making declarative statements... and both appear to be far more than '2 per draft'. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alflives Posted February 11, 2019 Share Posted February 11, 2019 3 minutes ago, chilliwiggins said: Best player available at the position you are drafting at not based on needs. Virtanen I believe was drafted going on how he man handled kids in junior, then when those kids caught up in size he struggled a bit. crap shoot I think that’s true in the top of round one, but later on I think we need to account for physical maturity. Like you say, some guys are bigger and stronger at 18 than their peers, but those baby faced peers can pass the early bloomers by age 22. It looks like Madden is on of the late blooming baby faces. He’s been really maturing over this year. I’m thinking he will become a top 10 player in his draft by age 22. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SID.IS.SID.ME.IS.ME Posted February 11, 2019 Share Posted February 11, 2019 (edited) 23 minutes ago, Alflives said: Should we draft guys who are physically men at 18, or draft the boyish looking ones? I see a lot of baby faced guys in our prospects (and on our team) who need to physically mature. Maybe some of the guys making it sooner to the NHL are (elite like pettersson) or they became men physically at 18/19/20? I don’t know how to say this without it sound creepy, so I’m just gonna say it in a really creepy way: I always go for the boyish looking ones. Seriously though, the benefit is that physically “young” prospects still have a category of upside that the “older” guys don’t have. They haven’t yet reached their “man strength,” and this is significant. Judd Bracket talked about it with Madden and how they knew that he had a lot of room to grow physically, and this was seen as a benefit. The other side of the coin is a guy like Evan Bouchard. That kid was already a “man” at 16, and at 19, he looks like he’s 30. Very little room for him to make significant physical gains at this point. Of course, anybody can improve through hard work in the gym, but Bouchard isn’t really going to grow any more or significantly change physically. So there’s less upside. Couple that with his weaknesses in skating and defensive zone play, and a juniors production rate that was based on him playing 30 minutes a game, with everything running through him, and you have a guy who will IMO be lucky if he can convert even 1/4 of his offence to the pros. I’m always a bit leery of “man amongst boys” types of prospects. They tend to look rather ordinary when they move up and become a “man amongst men” (we’re seeing some of this with Gadjovich right now). But a baby faced assassin who’s killing it while being smaller and weaker than most of his peers? I have a lot of time for those kids. Especially if they have a frame that can add a lot of muscle mass. And if they are still basically “boys” developmentally and haven’t yet matured into their “man strength.” So yeah, to close with another creepy statement: I like the skinny, peach fuzz kids. Edited February 11, 2019 by SID.IS.SID.ME.IS.ME 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SingleThorn Posted February 11, 2019 Share Posted February 11, 2019 Anyone with any Tyler Madden news ?............anyone...........anything ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aGENT Posted February 11, 2019 Share Posted February 11, 2019 8 minutes ago, chilliwiggins said: trending and playing are 2 different things. And the Russian is almost a lock to never play another game for the canucks if we are thinking of the same player. could he play YES, will he in our uniform? highly unlikely, my opinion is merely speculative trade fodder for a team that has success with Russians. We don't, we have success with Swedes Whether they play for us or we trade them and they play elsewhere doesn't really matter. We drafted 5 NHL capable players in 2014 (the only year with a long enough time frame to actually make the declarative statements your attempting). Four of whom are actually in the NHL, they're not 'trending'. The next year we have an all star and a guy who has played in the NHL this year, would be here likely if we didn't have so much forward depth and will for sure be here next year and in the future. So over those two drafts we have at minimum 6 NHL players or 3 per draft with another who could be here if he didn't love Russia so much and another couple late picks who are trending very well to play in the NHL as well. That average probably gets raised to 3.5-4 per draft over the next couple years as those guys come on board. Your 'two per draft' is out to lunch. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aGENT Posted February 11, 2019 Share Posted February 11, 2019 10 minutes ago, SingleThorn said: Anyone with any Tyler Madden news ?............anyone...........anything ! This just in. He's good. 2 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JM_ Posted February 11, 2019 Share Posted February 11, 2019 33 minutes ago, aGENT said: This just in. He's good. I wonder where he ultimately fits in? he's tiny but maybe he could wreak possession havok on a checking line with his speed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aGENT Posted February 11, 2019 Share Posted February 11, 2019 3 minutes ago, Jimmy McGill said: I wonder where he ultimately fits in? he's tiny but maybe he could wreak possession havok on a checking line with his speed. Madden, Gaudette, Virtanen future 3rd line? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JM_ Posted February 11, 2019 Share Posted February 11, 2019 6 minutes ago, aGENT said: Madden, Gaudette, Virtanen future 3rd line? I like that idea, a lot actually, particularly if Roussel and Beagle are still on the team when that happens. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aGENT Posted February 11, 2019 Share Posted February 11, 2019 4 minutes ago, Jimmy McGill said: I like that idea, a lot actually, particularly if Roussel and Beagle are still on the team when that happens. That line would (potentially) be hell to play against. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gttxc Posted February 11, 2019 Share Posted February 11, 2019 Looks like his game today is on TSN 2 at 430 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dpn1 Posted February 11, 2019 Share Posted February 11, 2019 17 minutes ago, gttxc said: Looks like his game today is on TSN 2 at 430 Shouldn't Aces Regular be Kalamazoo Regular. Just saying. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Noble 6 Posted February 11, 2019 Share Posted February 11, 2019 Man: Virtanen Boy: Pettersson Man: Matthews Boy: Mittlestadt It's not cut and dry as to what type of player you should pick physically, but skill and IQ win out most of the time in the end. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WonderTwinPowers Posted February 12, 2019 Share Posted February 12, 2019 6 hours ago, aGENT said: Whether they play for us or we trade them and they play elsewhere doesn't really matter. We drafted 5 NHL capable players in 2014 (the only year with a long enough time frame to actually make the declarative statements your attempting). Four of whom are actually in the NHL, they're not 'trending'. The next year we have an all star and a guy who has played in the NHL this year, would be here likely if we didn't have so much forward depth and will for sure be here next year and in the future. So over those two drafts we have at minimum 6 NHL players or 3 per draft with another who could be here if he didn't love Russia so much and another couple late picks who are trending very well to play in the NHL as well. That average probably gets raised to 3.5-4 per draft over the next couple years as those guys come on board. Your 'two per draft' is out to lunch. Here's hoping this finally sinks in, I can't keep buying you beers like this 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redhdlois Posted February 12, 2019 Share Posted February 12, 2019 Let's go Huskies !!! Love college hockey it's so exciting to watch ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SID.IS.SID.ME.IS.ME Posted February 12, 2019 Share Posted February 12, 2019 11 minutes ago, redhdlois said: Let's go Huskies !!! Love college hockey it's so exciting to watch ! On TSN2 for anybody who wants to watch. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-Vintage Canuck- Posted February 12, 2019 Share Posted February 12, 2019 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Podz92 Posted February 12, 2019 Share Posted February 12, 2019 7 minutes ago, -Vintage Canuck- said: Not so sure moves like that are going to fly at the NHL level. Then again most people didn't think EP40 would translate to the NHL so quickly. Not saying Madden is EP.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canuckledraggin Posted February 12, 2019 Share Posted February 12, 2019 29 minutes ago, JamesBlondage said: Not so sure moves like that are going to fly at the NHL level. Then again most people didn't think EP40 would translate to the NHL so quickly. Not saying Madden is EP.... Of course they will. It's not some magicians trick where this kid could only do this in the NCAA. This kid is a rookie. He keeps embarrasing Seniors. Guess what's going to happen when it takes a year or less in the AHL for this kid. You could only have a negative opinion of him if you never watched him play. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now