-
Posts
2,620 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Blogs
Gallery
Everything posted by guntrix
-
Because you have to look at the context of Tkachuk's stats and game style in order to bring him back down to earth (something that I think is totally justifiable given what you'll see below). At first glance, MT's 107 points look thrilling. However, once one realizes that almost half of that are secondary assists, one begins to wonder who he played with (or carried him for that matter). Yes, as I've said a thousand times before, playing with Marner and Dvorak (two of the best prospects in junior hockey) does matter considering how much he leeched off those two. Second, MT thrived in the O by being the nuisance in the crease. While this may fly against petite OHL defenders, the guy suffers from 'little kid physique' and, imo, will get pushed around by NHL defenders even when he inevitably gains weight. For the first time in a while, I gained a little more trust in JB for not going with the obvious pick in MT. Much like myself, he must have seen something in the otherwise very appealing 107 point London Knights forward that made him think, "hmm, maybe this guy's transition to the NHL won't be as smooth as everyone thinks it'll be." How many times have we seen someone light up junior only to underwhelm in the NHL? Sometimes it's not just about points; sometimes it's also about context and how they're getting those points. If it were only about who's racking up the most points, drafting would be computerized and there would be no need for scouts. So yeah, I'll take Boeser over Tkachuk any day. And this is coming from someone who's usually not as optimistic as everybody else on these boards.
-
I feel that Brock is dangerous anywhere in the offensive zone, as shown by his goals. He likes to move around and pass/snipe the puck, depending on what's the better choice. Tkachuk is more of a wait near the crease kind of player which obviously works in junior but I don't think his little kid build will get him anywhere close to those numbers in the NHL. I can already see him getting pushed around by NHL-sized defenders.
-
I think you're doing Boeser a disservice comparing him to Tkachuk.
-
lol go right ahead. If we're critics, you're as homer as it gets bud. lmao.
-
Again with putting words in people's mouths. No one said he wasn't going to improve beyond his current level. You can only improve so much though. Saying that he's gonna be the next Corey Perry (like a poster on here just said) is wishful thinking at best. People constantly like to use the Sedins as examples for why not being productive in the earlier years can be dismissed. What they had going for them was clear hockey IQ, despite getting pushed around quite a bit. JV is the opposite. Dude has all the physical tools but has the hockey IQ of a timbit hockey player. He may gain a few smarts but I doubt he'l improve tenfold in that regard.
-
So your justification in the event that he turns out to be a third liner is that he'd hopefully be an active participant in a team that rolls 4 lines? And to think that we passed up on Ehlers and Nylander for this .
-
The guy has to work on adding accuracy to his shot. I don't care what anyone else says, if he can't get his shot to go even remotely close to where he wants it, it's not NHL caliber (no matter how hard he can shoot it).
-
The thing with Bo is that he's extremely streaky. I swear, I've never seen a player so streaky in my life. He'll look completely unstoppable for a string of games and then he'll hit a long slump. My hope with Bo is that he finds consistency. He'd be quite a player if he does.
-
Since it hasn't been posted on here yet: Great to see. I just hope that JB is more knowledgable than he sounds because I literally feel like I'm losing brain cells hearing him speak.
-
I think that when it comes to junior hockey, London is up there with the best. Bringing OJ up when he's not ready to make the jump could actually be counterproductive. when you have a guy playing in a team that's known for producing good NHLers, you don't mess with it. At least I wouldn't.
-
He plays for the Knights. It's definitely not the same scenario. He's in good hands.
-
He was slated to go at 6 but some had him at 5. Hardly going against the grain.
-
Not trying to discredit Juo's effort in the WJC but he was on the ice A LOT with Puljujarvi and Laine. You should watch the shift-by-shift videos, most of his points consisted of passing it to either of those two and letting them work their magic.
-
Now the question is: let him develop with the Knights (who have a very good track record for players) or send him to the AHL (which I believe is possible for Olli?).
-
Oh and Edmonton didn't "screw us over." let's stop blaming them, they took the logical choice at #4. Columbus screwed us by picking PLD at 3.
-
I'm guessing you're referring to Tkachuk? The kid relies on crease play to get the majority of his points and he simply doesn't have the size to be a top six forward in that role in the NHL. He's gonna underwhelm with the Flames, you can quote me on it. And who were the other offensive pieces available? A high risk Sergachev? Keller? Nylander? Logan freaking Brown? The only guy I wish we would have gotten was Jost but even then, we did fine with this pick.
-
Benign tumours are worse than they sound (probably because of the word tumour). Had one too but it was just mildly uncomfortable at worst. He'll have his surgery and recover swiftly just like most other minor injuries.
-
Idk, I guess it depends on who you ask.
-
I'm usually always hating on Benning but I can't fault him for this pick. I'm just really glad he didn't pick Tkachuk. Juolevi is calm and thrives with his decision-making. The guy hasn't even filled out his frame. Not a bad pick.
-
I quite like the logo actually.
-
This is pure speculation. All drafts look promising when they roll around but none ever amount to the 2003 one.
-
Someone who will be happy to see him bring success to the Canucks but acknowledges that he may not have been the best pick at 6. Oh, the irony.
-
It was an obvious estimation but you'll obviously delve into the specifics once you realize that it's the JV supporters who in fact do this the majority of the time. As I said, it's been pointed out before. It screams insecurity more than anything.
-
It's funny because if you go back through this thread, 90% of the time it's the Jake supporters who feel the need to bring up Ehlers and Nylander. This was ALSO discussed at some point in time. Speaking about BS.
-
I've been pretty vocal whenever JV supporters feel the need to bring in Nylander and Ehlers into the discussion in order to feel better about our draft pick.