Jump to content
The Official Site of the Vancouver Canucks
Canucks Community


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

733 Esteemed

About TGokou

  • Rank
    Comets Star

Recent Profile Visitors

3,016 profile views
  1. He basically alluded to the birthdate being a pretty big factor in his selections.
  2. Yawn. Just because a search doesn't have a name in it doesn't mean I'm not talking about that person. Most of my posts are quoting someone else. Here is the Caufield pick. 2019 NHL Entry Draft in Vancouver, BC in Prospects / In the System Posted June 8, 2019 Same here. Everyone likes to make excuses for why he won't get be a good player. Ie. Skating, size, playoffs etc. His elite talent will shine through regardless of his 'short'comings. I expect his floor to be 25 goals and potentially upwards of 40 goals in his prime as his upsi
  3. Congrats and great pick with NIO. I remember you putting it out there that you bought it. Do/did you have stop losses on any of those? Did you ride CCIV on the way down?
  4. I am normally quite risk averse when it comes to speculative names. I've been blown up a few times when I was much younger so I have an aversion to speculative names even though they've had tremendous runs (think Marijuana stocks, crypto etc). Thought I would jump in this year just because I could afford to but it immediately bit me in the butt (back in January-Feburary). If it were not for those speculative losses I'd probably be just under 20% returns across my entire portfolio since February. Instead I'll have to settle for beating the market by a few % lol.
  5. Yes I was very stoked as I thought it was a great pick that you shoot for the fence based on potential.
  6. Because his sample size is so small you have a valid point. I prefer to discount his production. Do I think he is a 2ppg player? Probably not and he did play on a very good team which may have inflated his totals. However, even if he were rated around 1.5-1.6 ppg that would still be a top 3-7 pick most seasons.
  7. How are my rankings cherry picked? These were the people I had ranked prior to the draft and if you want to search the previous draft history threads you'll see I pounded the table on most of these guys. Nothing to hide here. As I already explained in my post I mainly scout based on stat analytics and this years draft hasn't really provided me with much to work with. Most of the projected high draft picks are in the NCAA (older draft players) with the rest mostly in leagues across seas. That's why I don't really have a projected ranking of each player. I have a few players I'd like to have but
  8. I apply this theory to both forwards and defensemen. I have just noticed a more consistent trend within defensemen. I typically bias drafting a forward with the high 1st round pick because I find there is a higher bust/2nd pairing potential with defenseman. With a late round 1st or 2nd round pick I typically bias towards drafting defensemen as there are many top pairing defensemen drafted in that range based on history. This is where I find it benefits if you skew towards the late birthdays as you can find gems in this area that were bypassed in the 1st round because they haven't yet shown the
  9. For sure this is one of the main reasons why late birthdays have a disadvantage against their early birthday peers. I would be particularly wary of drafting a big player that has a early birthday as that means they have the size discrepancy and the age difference working for them which will be less prevalent going forward. Usually these players are drafted in the top 10 as they've proven more but I always find it more on the risky size unless the discrepancy between the players are so large it cant be overcome by just the early-late birthday.
  10. Yes you are correct. In that case I could make some relevance for him going slightly higher than where they were drafted. That's why I had him going from 7-12 range. Of course there will always be other factors which I have not considered and that's where scouting would come in. My line of thinking can only place their potential based on their statistics. Most players don't deviate very far from there. However its the intangibles such as heart, internal motivation and commitment to fitness etc. that will really set a player apart. Does Johnson have more of this than say Tyson Jost or an Alex N
  11. I've had this theory since probably 2015. Take a look at the top defensemen of the last 20 years. Yes there are gonna be some great defensemen born in the "low" potential category. Quick analysis suggests Quinn Hughes and Cale Makar. However if you also look at where these defensemen were drafted you'll notice majority of them were top 10 picks. Vast majority of the good defensemen outside of the top 10 are born in the late birthday "high potential" category. It's not really a theory anymore. Recent scouting analytics seem to suggest scouts are paying more attention to this as they tend to pu
  12. Sure you could say he's a year younger. I say he's closer to a year older. Fact remains that those born in September - January of their draft year tend to have a lower upside potential compared to their draft eligible peers drafted April - August. This is particularly pronounced with top pairing defensemen in the NHL for whatever reason. If you don't believe me pull a random assortment of the best defensemen in the league and I guarantee you a high probability will be from those birth month I highlighted. I find this indicator less reliable for forwards but still applies.
  13. Not making a case for Kent Johnson as a comparable stylistic wise but based on previous players who have gone through the BCHL system such as Kyle Turris, Tyson Jost and Alex Newhook and their very comparable D+1 NCAA seasons I can see Kent Johnson going anywhere from 7-11. Since Johnson is practically a year older than most of these comparables his draft season is most comparable with the aforementioned D+1 where most of them were either ppg or slightly over ppg. Personally I see an upside cap of anywhere between .4-.8 ppg which would equate to 30pt-60 pt per season. Mind you this is a small
  14. I think this thread has died because of all the crazy speculative plays that have blown up over the course of the last few months. Time to talk bout normal names that I think have great potential. I really like BABA and it's my number one holding right now, I believe we are looking at a double in the next couple years if not more. It's going to always have political overhang on the stock but it's just too damn cheap to ignore from a valuation stand point considering it's growth.
  15. Big difference in talent. Also Wallstedt apparently has the technical side already down which is where I believe most goalies need time to improve. If anything it means that Wallstedt will be NHL ready a lot sooner than most goalies.
  • Create New...