Sign in to follow this  
Tomato Pajamas

Tyler Madden | C

Recommended Posts

31 minutes ago, Fred65 said:

Basic addition every one can do … I think the NCAA have developed the following players for Vcr. Hutton, Stecher, Boeser, Tanev and Gaudette. That according to my math is 5 players …. Utica not so much. Or so it seems to me

Gaudette Virtanen , Goldobin, Demko, Markstrom, Baertschi have all spent time in Utica developing, and that's not including players there who have yet to play but will eventually. I'm not suggesting one is way better than the other but I am suggesting one isn't way better than the other.  There is also age and eligibility factors .  Most 18-19 year olds will clearly be better off in the NCAA or CHL compared to the AHL after which we have been fortunate enough to have some players ready fo the NHL .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, BlastPast said:

Gaudette Virtanen , Goldobin, Demko, Markstrom, Baertschi have all spent time in Utica developing, and that's not including players there who have yet to play but will eventually. I'm not suggesting one is way better than the other but I am suggesting one isn't way better than the other.  There is also age and eligibility factors .  Most 18-19 year olds will clearly be better off in the NCAA or CHL compared to the AHL after which we have been fortunate enough to have some players ready fo the NHL .

Come on man they had a cup of coffee ( apart from Markstrom and frankly goalies have guaranteed starts and coaches assigned dirctly for them ) Certainly Virtanen spent a season but when he arrived back in Vcr he was no different than when he went ot Utica, his numbers were poor and his first year back in Vcr was very poor too, it was only this year he's shown any ability, forget his time in Utica his development stalled down there, in short I don't see Utica in the Virtanen development. As to Juolevi he's very much a  wait and see, we can't speculate or dream.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, BlastPast said:

Gaudette Virtanen , Goldobin, Demko, Markstrom, Baertschi have all spent time in Utica developing, and that's not including players there who have yet to play but will eventually. I'm not suggesting one is way better than the other but I am suggesting one isn't way better than the other.  There is also age and eligibility factors .  Most 18-19 year olds will clearly be better off in the NCAA or CHL compared to the AHL after which we have been fortunate enough to have some players ready fo the NHL .

I don't really think your examples are all that great. I get trying to form an argument but you've literally created nothing here with a solid foundation.

 

Gaudette was in the NCAA before Utica. How is that even supposed to be a point in your favour when Gaudette's clearly spent years more time in the NCAA than in Utica, part of which is even on the Canucks themselves.

 

Virtanen was rushed. Went to Utica for a year and just now in his 4th year is playing well. Not to mention he was kind of drafted much earlier than Gaudette, or even Boeser for that matter (as much as I am against bringing up that point).

 

Goldobin's spent most of his development with the Sharks or on the Canucks. He's spent very little time in Utica. He had 2 full seasons with the San Jose farm team. Only 33 games in Utica. Not enough to be considered a lot of "development in Utica" in perspective.

 

Demko, again, was in the NCAA before Utica. Not exactly a point in anyone's favour and silly to bring it up if you're trying to provide an argument.

 

Markstrom was in Florida for a lot of his development. 34 games played with the Comets. That 1/4th the games he played with Florida's farm team.

 

Baertschi was in Calgary for a lot of his development. Is 15 games with the Comets supposed to make Utica seem great? Why is he even mentioned in this?

 

Literally. All of your examples can be easily rebutted.

 

I'm not going to argue for and against either. I'm just more pointing out your examples pretty much say nothing, if anything actually put JameB in favour. Your examples are not exactly what I would consider to be something that tells me Utica's "as good if not better" than the NCAA. They kind of do the opposite for me outside looking into this discussion/

Edited by The Lock

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The initial point I disagreed with was that the NCAA was '"much" better for development than Utica .  You with me so far ?  He named several players that did indeed develop in the NCAA .  OK ?  The fact they developed (entirely or in part) in the NCAA is really irrelevant because you can't say they wouldn't have in Utica.  Now if you had a list of quality prospects that went to Utica and whose development suffered as a result that would help your case.  Granted, some of the players I mentioned didn't do a lot of time in Utica but the fact remains that when they arrived there they weren't full time NHLers and now they are (or at least well on their way) so you can't make the case that Utica disturbed their progress.  Virtanen was rushed ? That's another debate and again, irrelevant because he absolutely did considerable time there and seemingly benefited.  Markstrom spent a whole season there .  Demko more than that.  Gaudette on that same path.   Unless of course as soon as a player spends one minute in the NCAA all progress after that is credited to their respective school. Is that what you are suggesting? When Goldobin arrived to this team he was not an everyday NHL player and now he is ( albeit inconsistent) .  He thrived during his somewhat brief stint in Utica and came out the other side an NHL player. Baertschi: same story. 

 

 

   I wasn't suggesting  Utica was some kind of excellence academy but that I disagreed that NCAA was "way" better.   I mentioned some players that did do time in Utica(to varying degrees) and didn't seem to suffer for it.  The fact they did time elsewhere before is a pretty moot point.  

 

Hopefully that clears things up for you as far as understanding my perspective.

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Honestly NCAA seems to have been better for our players looking at the way Comet play and sit young guys repeatly makes me think they’re a franchise more interested in winning now and not developing the young guns.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Dats hockey said:

Honestly NCAA seems to have been better for our players looking at the way Comet play and sit young guys repeatly makes me think they’re a franchise more interested in winning now and not developing the young guns.

McEwan, Brisbois, Sautner, Jasek, Gaudette, Gaunce, Dahlen, Demko, and lately Lind, all seem to be developing nicely, as was Juolevi - while he was healthy.  So I have no idea what you are basing your theory on.  McEneny was developing very well down there too until a serious injury sidetracked his development- but, with a plus 6 and four points in his last seven games, he seems to be back on track, too.  That leaves you Gadjovich and Palmu to complain about, and Palmu seems a little immature if his complaints about the coaching are correctly reported.  Virtanen was sent down to Utica because he showed up to the Canucks vastly out of shape - he was in serious need of some tough love, and got it.  As a result, he is a much better NHL player.  Teaching fitness and conditioing- as well as defensive play are common lessons taught in the minors.  Jake came back from his experience much better able to play - and he has no complaint about his treatment in Utica, quite the contrary.

  • Hydration 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It'd be interesting to see him sign but I wouldn't be opposed to him staying put either, he's clearly got a good thing going down there and should have plenty of time to hit the gym and develop physically. We'll see where he's at closer to the end of his season but I'm not sure he's ready for the AHL yet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Ray_Cathode said:

McEwan, Brisbois, Sautner, Jasek, Gaudette, Gaunce, Dahlen, Demko, and lately Lind, all seem to be developing nicely, as was Juolevi - while he was healthy.  So I have no idea what you are basing your theory on.  McEneny was developing very well down there too until a serious injury sidetracked his development- but, with a plus 6 and four points in his last seven games, he seems to be back on track, too.  That leaves you Gadjovich and Palmu to complain about, and Palmu seems a little immature if his complaints about the coaching are correctly reported.  Virtanen was sent down to Utica because he showed up to the Canucks vastly out of shape - he was in serious need of some tough love, and got it.  As a result, he is a much better NHL player.  Teaching fitness and conditioing- as well as defensive play are common lessons taught in the minors.  Jake came back from his experience much better able to play - and he has no complaint about his treatment in Utica, quite the contrary.

Not really in the mood to point out the obvious, NHL Success.... also why are you mention players who have had NCAA careers?

 

Also a lot of those players mentioned above hasn’t even played a full season with Utica.

Edited by Dats hockey

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Idk man people keep saying that our prospects were developed in the NCAA and not in Utica but the reality is they were developed in multiple leagues throughout their careers. there are very few players who play in the AHL in the D+1 or D+2 years. And player development goes well beyond players in Utica. Ryan Johnson stays in contact with the prospects in every league, communicating with them and their plans for them, their work out regimes, what they want them to work on, etc. I mean, the Canucks just invited Jett woo out to Vancouver and have him meet the team! That’s a huge part of development!

 

Most players in the CHL can’t go to the AHL until their D+3 year unless they were born in between September 15th and December 31st (like Lind and Gadjovich). Even then, they have to be good enough to turn pro, or they will still spend their D+2 year in the CHL (like brassard).

 

For NCAA players, those kids usually have made the choice to go that route before they are even drafted. Going to the NCAA means you get a education of some sort (2 year diploma or 4 year degree if you stick with it) and if your parents have saved in an RESP or something you can access that money. Plus, it’s ibviously great development (lots of gym and practice time for college players). So it’s normal for NCAA players to play a couple years in college. 

 

European players are interesting. Someone like joulevi, who is from Finland, still has to abide by the CHL agreement and couldn’t play in the AHL last season so he had to be loaned to play in Liiga. If not for the agreeement, it’s very likely he would have been in Utica last season as well. For players like pettersson, dahlen,  etc. who played their junior years in Europe, I think you really have to appreciate that these are young kids, mostly teenagers or maybe 20 Yr olds, moving to the other side of the world where they speak a different language and have different customs. Expecting them to come to the AHL immidiatly after being drafted is overestimating the impact of moving to a new country. Yeah some kids come over earlier to play in the CHL (joulevi, palmu for example) but not all kids can do it right away.

 

This is the case around the league. Players usually don’t start in the AHL until they are 20-21 years old. So complaining that the players are being developed in the NCAA or in the CHL and not in Utica is stupid. The AHL is a pro hockey league, probably the 3rd or 4th best league in the world. Playing in the AHL is not for learning how to play hockey but for learning how to play as a pro. 

 

Could Utica develop player better? Probably. 

 

But arguing that Demko, Goldobin, baertschi, virtanen, markstrom, and gaudette weren’t developed in Utica because they played in other leagues first or they only played 1 season or half a season in the AHL is stupid. The AHL’s existence is based entirely around players like that. 

 

Very few players play 3-4 years in the AHL and then turn into successful NHL players. It is much more common to spend 2 or fewer there. 

  • Hydration 1
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The question remains is development in Utica a plus. If we say most players have only a short stay in the AHL then I guess you have to ask is it worth having a farm team for any thing other than park a few ( so I'm told with little hope ) to fill in for injuries. Having a cup of coffee in Utica does little to add value, it seems. I would think the majority of players show thier best between 17-21. If they haven't shown high skill level by that point chnaces are they won't. Few NCAA players graduate from 4 years of hockey and move into the NHL ( of the hundreds playing NCAA maybe 5-9 FA play NHL after graduation/year)  How many players 22 or older mover from Utica to the NHL. Does spending 2-3 years in the AHL offer a good route to the NHL ? I tend to believe some teams do manage their farm teams better but even then it's a limited return. Maybe the answer is larger NHL rosters, agreements with EU leagues. But frankly we have a large roster of player in the AHL with little likelihood of success. As we speak it strikes me that the AHL is for the most part a myth

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Fred65 said:

Come on man they had a cup of coffee ( apart from Markstrom and frankly goalies have guaranteed starts and coaches assigned dirctly for them ) Certainly Virtanen spent a season but when he arrived back in Vcr he was no different than when he went ot Utica, his numbers were poor and his first year back in Vcr was very poor too, it was only this year he's shown any ability, forget his time in Utica his development stalled down there, in short I don't see Utica in the Virtanen development. As to Juolevi he's very much a  wait and see, we can't speculate or dream.

Wow.   If you don't think Virtanen's year in Utica assisted his development I don't think there are many on this board I have ever disagreed more with about a given player/topic.   Further, your general approach to understanding player development is so far removed from what I consider to be reality.   Again, wow.

 

There are far more NHL players than there are not who benefited from playing professional hockey prior to their NHL careers getting full traction and the AHL has consistently been the number one league for that step to take place.    Your small and biased sample size is so far at odds with the history of the Canucks specifically and the NHL in general - the AHL, and in this case Utica (and Manitoba previously for the past two), played and continues to play a massive role for developing players for Vancouver.

  • Hydration 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, Rob_Zepp said:

Wow.   If you don't think Virtanen's year in Utica assisted his development I don't think there are many on this board I have ever disagreed more with about a given player/topic.   Further, your general approach to understanding player development is so far removed from what I consider to be reality.   Again, wow.

 

There are far more NHL players than there are not who benefited from playing professional hockey prior to their NHL careers getting full traction and the AHL has consistently been the number one league for that step to take place.    Your small and biased sample size is so far at odds with the history of the Canucks specifically and the NHL in general - the AHL, and in this case Utica (and Manitoba previously for the past two), played and continues to play a massive role for developing players for Vancouver.

You're wasting your time dude.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Rob_Zepp

Rob; what in your opinion is a realistic time line for Tyler to make the NHL and do you think he will spend time in the AHL first given what we are seeing out of him so far?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Rob_Zepp said:

Wow.   If you don't think Virtanen's year in Utica assisted his development I don't think there are many on this board I have ever disagreed more with about a given player/topic.   Further, your general approach to understanding player development is so far removed from what I consider to be reality.   Again, wow.

 

There are far more NHL players than there are not who benefited from playing professional hockey prior to their NHL careers getting full traction and the AHL has consistently been the number one league for that step to take place.    Your small and biased sample size is so far at odds with the history of the Canucks specifically and the NHL in general - the AHL, and in this case Utica (and Manitoba previously for the past two), played and continues to play a massive role for developing players for Vancouver.

I’m by no means a Virtanen hater, but that being said him being in Utica under Travis green special advisement was good for him, but with that also being said their isn’t much success coming out of Utica. (By success I mean NHL success)

 

Sure their still a few case that are still to be determined but I’m not liking the direction in Utica. (IMO)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Dats hockey said:

I’m by no means a Virtanen hater, but that being said him being in Utica under Travis green special advisement was good for him, but with that also being said their isn’t much success coming out of Utica. (By success I mean NHL success)

 

Sure their still a few case that are still to be determined but I’m not liking the direction in Utica. (IMO)

You seem to only equate "success" to goals and points.    In reality, there is so much more to the NHL than those parameters and for every two or three players that drive those stats on a team, you need a whole pile more to play key roles inclusive of the role that Jake is increasingly playing very well for Vancouver.    If you do not care to notice or appreciate that role and the part the Utica year played in him learning that role, that is fine but doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

  • Hydration 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Rob_Zepp said:

You seem to only equate "success" to goals and points.    In reality, there is so much more to the NHL than those parameters and for every two or three players that drive those stats on a team, you need a whole pile more to play key roles inclusive of the role that Jake is increasingly playing very well for Vancouver.    If you do not care to notice or appreciate that role and the part the Utica year played in him learning that role, that is fine but doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

Ok but think of it like this Utica hasn’t developed us anything special, Virtanen has to work on conditioning IQ and Compete there.

 

Some failures they have had though, Archie despite his offensive side disappearing in the NHL his physical side would to, Gaunce his offensive side became not existent in the NHL hunter shinkuarik( can’t remember how to spell his name) have 1 good half season in Utica but was a straight failure all together, how long was pedan down there so we even talk about this? List go on and on. I’m just saying Utica hasn’t had much success with much and sure I do think Virt is some ways is a success he’s a very inconsistent 2nd line winger but a good 3rd line winger with still room to go but he was a 6th overall pick he was picked there because he should have already had some of these things right?

 

Edit: long story short do you think Utica is doing a goos job developing our guys? 

Edited by Dats hockey

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Dats hockey said:

I’m by no means a Virtanen hater, but that being said him being in Utica under Travis green special advisement was good for him, but with that also being said their isn’t much success coming out of Utica. (By success I mean NHL success)

 

Sure their still a few case that are still to be determined but I’m not liking the direction in Utica. (IMO)

-Most players who are going to be closer to 'instant' NHL successes go straight to the NHL (Horvat, Boeser, Pettersson etc) bypassing Utica altogether. They're rare and generally, high picks. That is not the 'normal' development path of most players.

 

(*Horvat did play a few conditioning stint games in Utica).

 

-We're only starting to see the initial cresting waive of later drafted (largely 2nd round +) prospects entering Utica (Gaudette, Dahlen, Lind, Jasek etc).  Way too small of a period of time and sample size of players too make any declarations on how effective their time is or isn't in Utica. You'd probably need another 3'ish years to make any reasonably accurate assessment of how well Utica developed these players.

 

-The few early prospects of the small sample size of applicable players who have shown a higher likelihood of becoming NHL'ers but also needing development time, have all been well served by time in Utica thus far (Demko, Virtanen, Brisebois...).

 

-Assuming their should be 'mores success coming out of Utica' at this point completely ignores how long we've actually been rebuilding, how bare the cupboards were when we started, the quality of players in those cupboards at that time and that it generally takes 2+ years for most prospects to play out of Junior/college/Europe after being drafted to even arrive in Utica.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, aGENT said:

-Most players who are going to be closer to 'instant' NHL successes go straight to the NHL (Horvat, Boeser, Pettersson etc) bypassing Utica altogether. They're rare and generally, high picks. That is not the 'normal' development path of most players.

 

(*Horvat did play a few conditioning stint games in Utica).

 

-We're only starting to see the initial cresting waive of later drafted (largely 2nd round +) prospects entering Utica (Gaudette, Dahlen, Lind, Jasek etc).  Way too small of a period of time and sample size of players too make any declarations on how effective their time is or isn't in Utica. You'd probably need another 3'ish years to make any reasonably accurate assessment of how well Utica developed these players.

 

-The few early prospects of the small sample size of applicable players who have shown a higher likelihood of becoming NHL'ers but also needing development time, have all been well served by time in Utica thus far (Demko, Virtanen, Brisebois...).

 

-Assuming their should be 'mores success coming out of Utica' at this point completely ignores how long we've actually been rebuilding, how bare the cupboards were when we started, the quality of players in those cupboards at that time and that it generally takes 2+ years for most prospects to play out of Junior/college/Europe after being drafted to even arrive in Utica.

We’ll have to wait and see but I’ve watch a good chunk of game and the way to team runs they don’t seem to want people to improve on the offensive side of the game.

 

they let the vets run wild while all the young guys sit or play on line with less offensive upside.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.