HomeBrew

Nobody needs you to do them any favours so temper your valour. This internet forum is not going to magically create "pressure" for professional hockey players. If you think thats the case then you are obviously online too much and need to step back. Further, why don't you "let them play some pro hockey" before you decide their ultimate ceiling as a player - I hope you are not in a teaching role in any form as you would be the worst mentor. That was actually Edler's draft + 2 year, but it is definitely a valid point. Brisebois has not yet shown he has the offensive capabilities that Edler accomplished, but Edler did not have the leadership qualities that Brisebois has, so I think they will definitely turn out to be different types of players. With that said, some defensemen are able to translate their production straight across to the pro leagues as in they put up 40 points in CHL and then put up 30 points in the AHL, etc.

Only a whiner would say something like that.

So people thought highly of Cassels and saw he had potential to be a 2nd line shutdown centreman. They are, from what can gather now, wrong about that and he will more than likely not reach that level, or even reach the NHL. I still struggle with understanding your grudge against people projecting high potentials for prospects. People were wrong. People might be wrong again. So what? Were you a failed prospect yourself and never lived up to being the next Brad Marchand?

I agree with this as well. I think he is best served to allow to dominate the CHL next year and evolve his game to the next level. I think he needs to start to understand the game where he does more for himself rather than just making good plays to other people and he is less likely to develop this mentality jumping into NHL too soon in my opinion. Many high end defensemen in the NHL have gone this route and has served them well.

Nope. He won't be 20 and he hasn't played 4 seasons of junior that would make him qualify to play in the AHL. So it is either NHL or Juniors for him next year.

I can't really agree with this. The questions you pose are all in hindsight and does not particularly make them a bad pick either - it makes it a good pick that you were unable to sign. Hell, they could have taken a complete dud of a pick from the CHL and missed out on an elite NHL player from the USHL. There is no such thing as a "certain" thing when it comes to drafting and if it just 1% difference from league to league then thats minuscule in the larger game of chance in drafting. With that said we have had one 1st round College player not turn out for us in the past in R.J. Umberger, but I think that had to do more with the players character than it had anything to do with the league he was developed in. We then a couple years later picked Ryan Kesler in the first round and he turned out to be a gem for us. Hopefully, with the likes of Hutton, Stecher, Demko and soon to be signed Boeser and possibly Gaudette and Lockwood, our organization has developed a good rapport with the College route.

So you believe that no US College player should ever be signed in the first round? Regardless of the team picking or where they are picking? What do you think of Boeser? Demko? To me, there seems to be way more uncertainty with Russian players, so should Russian player never be picked in the 1st round either? You could just out right say that you prefer players from the CHL and thats fair enough if thats your preference.

Where are you coming up with this? He is committed to U of Minnesota for 2017-2018. There is always the question of when College players decide to turn pro whether it is after one, two or three years. For most prospects, they sign after draft year +2. Hayes decided not to sign with Blackhawks because the team did not offer much room for him on the roster.

I'm sure you could even do us a favour and sum it up in just one word: Sad!

http://www.tankathon.com/nhl I simulated it once and Boston ended up winning the first overall with a 2.7% chance of winning it... You never know what will happen. I would say that we continue to slide before the end of the season and end up with better odds. What will those increased odds do for us? Who knows, but as of now we are more likely to end up in the 6-8 range. The lottery sure helped out Winnipeg last year, maybe it does again, or maybe we get lucky. Even if we ended up 4th for the lottery, we would still have 89.7% chance of not getting the 1st overall and a 69.3% of not getting a top 3 pick.

Whoops! Yeah your right. I just quickly assumed because there were a lot of guys from last years draft playing in that tournament in 2016, but obviously it all depends on birth dates. Too bad though, it would of been good to seen him compete on the international level again.

I can see your point. The kid just wants to be a high school hero so I can't blame him! haha But your right in saying that his return to the USHL and into the spring at the U18's well show where he is truly at and whether or not he is worth the high pick. He should be able to improve upon his role and totals from later years tournament at the U18's. I do think the college route in general is a good path for the Canucks high picks though as there is less pressure for them to perform or make the team in the initial years if they are committed to a university already.

From what I can pick up on, it seems as though the other team is targeting Boeser at times having two players actively check him. He does seem to have good control and distribution of the puck while entering the oppositions zone. On the downside of things, he seems to have that minor leaguer float thing going on when he doesn't have the puck - hopefully he has more active feet and pace when he makes the jump otherwise he will definitely be starting out in the AHL.

I can see your point about Mittelstadt, but that route of development is proving not to be a bad choice - example Johnny Gaudreau, Blake Wheeler, Kyle Okposo, Nick Schmaltz and few other recent first rounders out of the US development system. In the highlights below he dangles Urho Vaakanainen, who is slated to go first round this year as well, out of his pants. That could be taken as a measure CHL high end comparable defenders. What sells me is his change of pace more than anything. He has the fastest few steps that I've seen out of any of these prospects and he can do it even in mid stride as well. On top of the he has some slick hands and nice presence physically. I would happy with quiet a few prospects from this draft including those you mentioned, even though this is supposed to have "lower end" talent, but I just hope we take the right player at the right position. If Patrick, Hischier, and Liljegren are off the board when we pick and Mittelstadt is still available, I will be pretty upset if we don't take him honestly.

Less talk, more video. Boeser is #16.

From the source you provided: "Oxytocin receptors have been shown to be modified by a person's environment, for example, so life experiences presumably play a large role too, he says." If you want to get into a debate about social determinism, I am more than game to oblige.

I agree 100%. While it would be nice to have Liljegren to solidify our defensive core, Mittelstadt is going to be a hell of a hockey player and exactly the type of prospect that we need in our group. We will be pretty desperate to have a potential #1 center to groom to take over Henrik in short order and while Horvat is great at what he does, he would be perfect as a #2 center on a Stanley Cup contender. I am hoping that the chips fall where we do not have to make that tough decision though because the last thing I want again is a "shoulda drafted Liljegren!" whining for the next decade. Thus, ideally we pick Mittelstadt at 5 or 6.

I didn't say that you don't ever bring anything insightful worth discussing, I said that you have a tendency to sound like it isn't worth discussing because you do it everyday in a certain manner - ending up sounding more like a heckler. Your "insightful" comments come off as a statement of "facts" as you have declared yourself, and this day and age that often that ends up sounding like "alternative facts" in the form of Trump declarations. There is obviously more than one valid viewpoint and positioning your opinion above that our of GM, Coaches and the player themselves is really not trying to have an open discussion that allows for multiple views to be heard. Tone down the righteousness and I'm sure everyone would be more than happy to discuss whatever your want to say about Virtanen - positive or negative. On the topic of cheeseburgers, I think there was a lot of insighful discussion around cheeseburgers while Wellwood was still around so you never know. Maybe thats a comparison you would like to take on?

You get scolded because you sound like a heckler in the stands saying the same thing when you do it everyday, not someone bringing anything insightful worthy of discussing.

Source

Because all you said originally was "Can we not bring that up? Yeah thanks" but way to try to redeem yourself by editing your post and minusing my comment in retaliation. But so sorry if I hurt your ego - hope you don't lose sleep over it. Anyways, further towards my original post, there has only been 31 players ever in the history of the NHL to score 30 or more goals in their rookie season, so yeah its not a common thing to do to say the least and highly unlikely to happen in the future unless drafting a Matthews or Laine type player. Maybe if Boeser had a Henrik in his prime feeding him passes all season long, but we don't have a play maker currently to do that these days.

Fun Fact: The Vancouver Canucks drafted the highest goal scoring rookie of the last 10 years - Michael Grabner. He even beat players like Evgeni Malkin and John Tavares with 34 goals in his rookie year; and only surpassed by Crosby and Ovechkin in the last 20 years. What other Canucks rookie also scored 34 goals in his rookie year? Pavel Bure.

He hasn't scored at home yet, so we do not know for sure. Dan Murphy wondered about this question last year, but we are still waiting the true answer:

I would say Drew Doughty was more a head of the game than Pietrangelo and Subban and justified his #2 draft selection. Doughty led his team in points as a 16 year old with 74 points in 67 games. Pietrangelo and Subban did not really show junior domination until their draft+2 year where they both went beyond a ppg pace. This is a similar path I think we should put Juolevi on, similar to Pietrangelo where he got 9 games in the NHL and then sent down to dominate the juniors and develop his offensive game. Subban also did a full year in the AHL as well which would probably be smart for our development of Juolevi. I think we are too eager to see our picks produce in the NHL that we are currently rushing them to the detriment of their development - we should avoid this at all costs.