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

DJ Kreuzberg

  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Posts posted by DJ Kreuzberg

  1. 4 hours ago, Eastcoast meets Westcoast said:

    Isam, again with the inaccuracy, man....Sigh. why don’t you actually just google the guy and read.  


    If you actually know what your facts are, you can be condescending


    But if your facts aren’t actually facts and you try to correct other people, well it makes you look bad. Especially when you say things like ‘Again, man...’ like you are exhausted pointing out others mistakes.  


    It comes across as very condescending, I don’t like it and if you do want to talk to others that way, at least know what your talking about first. 


    Wahlstrom is only playing winger this season cause the next generational player, Jack Hughes, is now on that line playing center.


    Wahlstrom has played Center as of last season with the USNDTP and can play center, just like many other centres, he can also play wing. 


    Its not rocket science and all

    it takes a bit of reading beyond the last couple of months to figure out.


    Just as a test I googled Wahlstrom and picked the first site, not even a half

    page down Elite Prospects has him as a ‘C/RW’.


    So unless you are claiming that they and every other site/scout is also wrong about what goddam position he can play, stop nitpicking and either comment on the content of a post rather than trying to single out some irrelevant point out of context. 



    And I say, ‘Have a good day, sir.’ 




    This is not true. He was moved to wing last season 2016-2017 (late fall 2016) when he was with the U17 team. Hughes was not even with the NTDP at the time, he was still with the Malboros. With the U17s, Wahlstrom's center was mainly Wise, who is not a generational player. 


    Then in Feb 2017, Wahlstrom was moved to the U18 team and was consistently changed to wing, with Norris and Barrett as his centers, again not generational players. 


    Then to begin this season from Sept-Dec 2017, Wahlstrom was again started on wing, with Gruden as his centerman. He remained his Center until Hughes was promoted to the U18 team on Dec 30, 2017. Only from that point onwards is Hughes even a factor. 


    I should also point out that before Hughes was promoted to the U18 team, they were desperate for centermen because Wise was injured. Instead of moving Wahlstrom back to center, they played with only 3 Cs. 


    Be careful of positional listings on EP and hockeydb when they are listed as C/LW or C/RW. They are usually long holdovers from when they were younger. 


    2 hours ago, Solinar said:

    Who's been the 2nd line center on his team if he's been playing wing with Hughes?  I'm not too familiar with the players beyond the ones being scouted for this years draft, but my question would be this, is he a better center than that guy? 

    The 2nd line center was Gruden for a few months. He is pretty terrible, maybe a 3rd round guy at best. He is all heart, but has very limited skill. Then when Wise recovered from his injury late in the season, he became the 2C. 



    • Upvote 2
  2. 3 minutes ago, Pure961089 said:

    I’m only going by what Wahlstrom said in an interview on sn 650.  He said he’s onlly been playing on the wing this year.  Before this year he was a centre 

    Maybe he is mis-remembering. Because I saw him with my own eyes at wing with the U18 team and at the 2017 U18 tourney, where he did not play C even a single game. 


    Plus, the NTDP also posts lines every game. (I don't know why this forum is so selective on which tweets expand and some don't :angry:) Here are some:

    U18 Team

     U17 Team


    And some more going back to 2016 of him on the wing: 






    • Upvote 1
  3. 7 minutes ago, Pure961089 said:

    I was talking about Jack Hughes who took over as top centre.  Many think he’s generational.  Although I’ll admit that word has been used liberally the last few years.  Austin Matthews is not generational. 

    You said "But one year he plays wing because he been asked to make way for a generational talent who they have as their center, fair enough."


    However, he was not moved to RW because of Hughes. He was moved last season 2016-2017, before Hughes was even in the picture, before this season. Wahlstrom was keep on the wing this season 2017-2018, even with Gruden as their C from Sept to Dec 2017. He was not asked to make way for a generational talent. He was moved to wing much before Hughes was even promoted to the U18 team. 


    No where in my post am i even arguing Jack Hughes ability. 

  4. 1 minute ago, Alflives said:

    He’s a shoot first player, isn’t he?  Does he lack the quickness to be a good defender from center?

    Definitely shoot first. But he displays some sneaky play-making ability, with short passes. I don't think he lacks the quickness per se, but perhaps the assertiveness to be a good defender from center. 


    • Upvote 1
  5. 13 hours ago, Pure961089 said:

    It’s funny, Wahlstrom has been a stick handling wizard since he was 9, has put up big numbers his whole life playing center.  But one year he plays wing because he been asked to make way for a generational talent who they have as their center, fair enough.  A year passes and of a sudden he can’t play center anymore?  Did he forget? I think people see his shot and it reminds them so much of Boeser that they can vision him playing centre. As if there’s some unwritten rule that says you can’t have a great shot and play center.  

    He started playing wing when he moved to the U18 NTDP team last season 2016-2017. 


    Hughes did not move up to the U18 team until Dec 30 2017, FYI. Before that time, Wahlstrom's and Farabee's center was Gruden, who is far from a generational talent. In fact, the NTDP was desperate for centermen because Wise was also injured. The team decided to play with 3 centermen, instead of moving Wahlstrom back to center. Something to think about, don't you think? Their coach didn't seem to think Wahlstrom should play center, decided to play down a center. Playing down a winger is much easier than playing down a centermen. 

  6. 45 minutes ago, Brobidus said:

    Who are Tkachuks linemates this season? Has he played center at all this year? 

    Tkachuk has not played center this year or the previous year. He is a pure winger. 


    His linemates were mainly Jordan Greenway at C and Drew Melanson on the RW. 

  7. 1 hour ago, NUCKER67 said:

    Merkley was ranked higher earlier on, but dropped. Maybe because of his defensive game? He's got really good offensive skills and skates well, good vision etc. He could be a steal if developed properly over the next couple of years, working on his defensive game. I'd certainly take a chance with a late 1st rounder.  As it is now, Merkley is ranked at #26 (according to mynhldraft.com), which is where TOR currently sits. Damn them if they snag Merkley after a year ago snagging Liljegren.


    to TOR: Tanev

    to VAN: TOR's 1st (2018) and a prospect

    A major reason is on and off ice issues. Supposedly, he has had big issues with team-mates as well as his coach. 


    This is on top of the defensive issues. He gives up on plays too easily when things do not go his way. 



    1 hour ago, Canucks Curse said:

    Merk is the hunter shinkaruk and the Jordan Schroeder of this draft, although a D man

    I think those might be poor examples and I'm not quite sure what kind of example you are going for, broad  (highly talented but with issues) or situational (highly ranked but falling). Shinkaruk & Schroeder were branded as poor combine interviews due to arrogance, which contributed to their falls.


    Merkley's situation is more comparable to Ho-Sang or Anthony DeAngelo. Top 10 talent, but major problems with teammates, coaching staffs, and more. 


    IMO, stay far away from guys like this. 

    • Upvote 2
  8. Question is if he'd be good enough. He looks like a total wildcard on defense and times and his shot is erratic at best. But at least dude's big.

    Wildcard on defense? That is simply not what i saw. He was very steady and played it very safe. Tryamkin is not a wildcard on defense... Subban is a wildcard on defense.

  9. Those prospects with "top 6" potential in the late rounds are also highly unlikely to pan out, or in hockeyfuture rating system, probably a 7.0D or 6.5D type of player. Most likely their games are filled with significant holes that are unlikely to be rectified in JB's eyes. With Pettit, it is possible that although his ceiling isn't high, he may very likely to fulfil or even exceed his potential (e.g. 6.0B or 5.5B). JB clearly wants 4th liners who can play reliably for 10min without costing the team.

    Seriously, how often do you see those kind of reliable, discipline, large, defensively aware, can kill penalty and win key face-off type of 3rd/4th line center sitting around for your picking? However, every year there are some top 6 players FA switching teams. Usually defensive specialists cost less and thus are more likely to be locked up by their original teams, instead of hitting the free agent market that easily.

    I agree and said as much in my previous post (#81) if you chose to read it. These low upside picks are no sure bet, just like high upside picks. But i know which i would rather have. Pettit is no safer bet than any other player, simply because his upside is lower. He too has significant holes in his game, just like high upside picks do. From my viewings, he is an okay skater, but not a great one. For a big man, he is not a physical player. He does not hit as much as you like. He is simply a tall man who is good positionally and has good awareness defensively. His decisions with the puck in the offensive zone... are not the best, rushed i would say is the best word. He is in the same mold as Stefan Schneider and Kellan Lain. Big but not physical men who play an honest defensive game. We got both for free. If Pettit was a free agent signing, okay. But to expend a pick, I don't agree.

    Dear lord guys... He's a 6th round pick, get over it.

    It's very likely that he may never pan out, as someone mentioned before 95% of 6th and 7th rounders never do (which includes the 5'9, 5'8 home run picks that everyone suggested). So take a deep breath, and just relax, we have a defensive specialist in the system, lets just let him develop and then we can see where his game is in a few years.

    To the bolded: As we all know, we are going through a rebuilding/retooling phase. Every asset counts. Well it counts anytime really. I personally value each and every pick quite highly.

    Not everyone is suggesting short offensive players. But take a look at players like Axel Holmstrom who excelled at the U18s, Edgars Kulda who simply took over games at the Memorial cup. Both 6'0", both put up good numbers. Ondrej Kase as well played very well at the WJC, also good size at 6'0". Also have heard some great things about Pierre Engvall who is 6'2" and great late bloomer.

    No one is freaking out, so i don't know why you are suggesting people to take a deep breath and relax. I think this has been a fairly level headed discussion here.

    Now that Pettit is in the system, of course i wish for him to prosper and take a big step next season . But that doesn't mean i can't disagree with the pick and the philosophy behind it.

  10. Actually a minus 72 means your not very reliable defensively no matter how you put it. You can try to throw away the fact that +\- is a useless stat but it does have its uses. I would say the difference between a +20 and plus 10 is not that much but -72 is pretty telling. Furthermore when a player ONLY has 10 points and has a plus rating that tells me he is very effective defensively

    I suggest reading about the +/- stat before using it in an discussion. It is a highly controversial stats among not only fans, but NHL teams and execs as well. I believe Burke used the term "Horse s@#$" to describe this stat. So lets be honest here, I am not the only one trying to throw away this stat, its merits are highly in question. In fact several studies have been made into looking into the margin of error, it ranges from 30% to as high as 40%. There are simply too many factors that influence this stat for it to be an accurate measure of defensive ability.

    Connor Brown went from -72, a league worst that year, but still managed to put up 53 points, got drafted funny enough #156, same as Pettit. Two years later he is +44, the CHL's leading scorer and the OHL's most outstanding player. This is a high upside pick, that is tracking well. This is the kind of player we ought to be targeting with our late round picks.

    So if 3c and 4c isnt a big role change then it really doesnt matter what position malhotra played

    I guess if you want to focus on a marginal aspect of my post then, okay. It doesn't matter what "position" Malhotra played. But a few on here imply there will be a big bump statistically due to Erie's graduations. Sure i can see a slight bump, but I would not expect a major increase.

  11. Kyle Petit is NOT a bad pick.

    You mentioned Nolan when he was drafted but he was already an overager by 2 years. He scored 27 points the year he was eligible to be drafted. This is obviously still more than Petit but Nolan was also -20 in his draft eligible year while Petit was a plus 3 while only scoring 10 points. What does that tell you about how effective a player Petit is at preventing goals? Furthermore, in his 3 seasons with the Kings, Nolan has only contributed 6 goals 4 assists as career highs. Do you guys really think that those points will really matter 'that' much in a full NHL season if Petit scores only half that amount because he's 'not as skilled'? Furthermore, like someone has already said, he will increase his point totals next year due to graduation of many of the Otters top players. Thankfully, if he does play in the NHL, it will not be because of his point production but how effective he is at preventing goals. If Petit can play a gritty role on the team while preventing goals then he has served his purpose as a fourth line player. Any points from there on are just icing on the cake.

    To the above bolded: That's your opinion and its highly subjective.

    I believe this was a poor pick.

    Where was i arguing that Pettit was a poor defensive player and since when is +/- a stat that is credible? In fact, its a highly debated and controversial stat. Connor Brown was once -72 in one season. Does that mean he is a poor defensive player? Nope. Too many factors influence +/-.

    Points are not everything and there are exceptions. But the rule is that even 4th line players/defensive D men still score at lower levels. Plain and simple. Look at Darren Archibald, he was a good point producer in the OHL and he was also a very strong defensive player when i watched him. He was continually used on the PK by Niagara and Barrie. But even he struggles at the NHL level.

    Again, he is moving up from 4C to 3C with the graduations. Is that a major role change?

    Pettit is no sure bet. And neither is a high upside pick. But if i'm putting my money on it, i'll take the high upside pick.

  12. I humbly disagree. A good 4th liner with size, reach, discipline, win FO, and can PK is difficult to get. Since Malhotra gone, we have yet to find a replacement for him. With the core gone, Pettit will see bigger roles and possibly develop the other areas of his game. We have enough prospect that are suppose to develop into top 6, it is good to have a GM who knows your team need other role players to be successful.

    I disagree. And Malhotra was our 3C, not 4C.

    4th line players are replacement players at every level. Much easier to get than a top 6 player; cheaper through transactions and through FA.

    It is absolutely baffling to see someone say "We have enough prospects that are supposed to develop into top 6". You can never have enough of these players. And we certainly do not have enough prospects with top 6 upside. Not all of the guys we have will reach their potential and become NHL players, in fact the majority will not be regular NHL players.

    The core gone, maybe, but he's still behind some great centermen. Pettit is still behind McDavid and Strome. He's likely moving up from 4C to 3C. That's not a major role change.

  13. Go to 2:35, Nikita is number 88, shows he is a pretty decent skater, extremely small sample size, only thing I could find, anyone else has vid on the kid pls share

    And I doubt benning would mis speak but is he right, is he 6 7.5 265 lbs or 6 7 230, because thats a big difference lol either way kid must eat like a horse

    I am working on a video for his play during the WJC, maybe Tuesday night?


    I have watched a couple of games so far, here's my takeaway:

    I never thought someone could make Zadorov look like rather small. But Tryamkin does. I don't believe he is 265, if so, i do wonder where weight has gone. He is not scrawny like Chara or Zadorov, but he isn't a really thick man like Big Buff is either. The 240lb listing seems much more accurate based on what i've seen.

    He moves fairly well for his size. Average accelerating, straight line speed is actually good. Mobility is good, but there are some times when i notice some balance issues. He'll have to work on that. Tranisitons and backwards skating is good for his size.

    He is a defensive D man, but saw some time on the 2nd PP as the point man and trigger man. Not a PP QB at all, not that its surprising. He has very good positioning and is always the guy who is hanging back to cover his partner. What i liked about Tryamkin is how he was always the first guy to the puck to gain body position and once he has that body position, he is hard to move and he boxes out very well. He actively uses his stick, and with that size/reach he is fairly effective.

    His first pass... is not that great. On numerous occasions, he has made a hard pass out of the zone, missing its target and has led to icing.

    He is not what i would call a physical defender. As i said, he uses his body well in terms of positioning and boxing out. But not a guy going for hits. I don't see this "mean" people are talking about.

    I am indifferent/somewhat optimistic on this pick. I can see what they like about this guy, have to wait and see how he develops and whether or not he comes over.

    • Upvote 2
  14. Do you think the Kings regret the fact that Nolan, Lewis, King, and Clifford only developed into bottom 6 players?

    Probably not. There's something to be said for really good fourth line players. To draft and develop them in your system, and teach them exactly how you want them to play goes a long way. This strategy is much better than signing overpriced fourth liners in free agency.

    The reality is, there' alot more Jordan Nolan's in the 6th and 7th round than there are Palat's or Johnson's. Trying to hit a home run with this pick every year will always end in disappointment.

    What a hyperbole. And swing of the fences, low upside picks like Hannay always pan out and end in satisfaction, do they? Nice to know.

    All of those guys put up pts in their draft season. Putting aside the eye test that i have on Pettit, and looking at stats here, each of those players outscored Pettit 3 or 4 times over.

    Lewis is a 1st round pick. He scored 75 points in 56 games.

    Clifford is a 2nd round pick who scored 28 points in 60 games.

    King is a 4th round pick who scored 44 points in 62 games.

    That's 3 guys who were taken in the top half of the draft. The only player comparable is:

    Nolan who was a 7th round pick but also scored 43 points in 64 games. That is 4.3x more than Pettit.

    4th line players, NHL replacement level players score at lower levels. Weise was an excellent scorer at lower levels. Even just about all defensive D men score at lower levels.

    Overpriced 4th liners? They make 1.5-1.8M tops for a high level 4th liner. That's easily manageable with the cap going up each year.

    • Upvote 2
  15. How many times do you think our scouts saw this guy play, probably a lot more than any of us. Oh and they saw him playing in the same games as many of the great Erie players.

    Don't hate on him just because there were more traditional picks available. He might not ever wow us, but he's as good a gamble for a fourth line role as most other players, maybe more so.

    Yes it sucks not getting Tyler Johnson's, and Andre Palats, but we need 4 line depth in prospects too. We can gamble on guys when we already have that.

    It ultimately comes down to how you value your picks and your direction in the draft. Selecting a guy who may top out as a 4th line player or may not even be an AHL player is not something i'd aim for. A 4th line player is a replacement player at the NHL level. 4 days from today, there are a slew available for free on the market where we do not have to expend a pick and several years of resources to develop. It is simply nonsensical to me.

    We do not have the Johnson's or Palat's. We should always be gambling this late in the draft to find the Johnson's and Palat's of the draft class, not 4th line depth prospects.


    When watching Erie this year as we've got a few prospects on there, Pettit did not really stand out to me on their 4th line. He is a solid forechecker, smart defensively, but really lacks a physical edge to his game and lacks offensive tools here.

  16. It's because he won't be playing behind Gaunce, Brown, and Fox, plus he'll be a year older and have the chance to be part of the Canucks prospect camp. Strome never even played for the Otters.

    Dylan Strome... Ryan's brother. He will likely be 2C behind McDavid next season, likely top 15 pick next draft.

    I see Pettit maybe lining up as the 3C.

  17. I have Ehlers above Dal Colle, Ehlers has more offensive skill and doesn't play with Drouin, Dal Colle plays on a line with 2 draftees in Cassels and Laughton. Dal Colle is a great player but Ehlers is individually a better hockey player.

    At even strength, MDC only played with Cassels and Laughton for a brief period of time, a month and half. MDC spent most of his time with Smith and Sterk, or Latour and Cassels. In fact, he had more success and chemistry with Sterk and Cassels than he did with Laughton.

    I think anyone who actively watched MDC would say he made those around him much better instead of leaching off of them.

    IMO, MDC is a better hockey player than Ehlers.

  18. see him getting taken in the late first, don't see how he drops to 36 honestly

    Goalies for the most part are always an uncertainty in the draft; partly due to a riskier development path and seasoned NHL goaltenders nowadays don't carry a terribly high value.

    I can see him at 36 and i can see him taken in the top 20. In any case, i think he has the mentality and pedigree to become a very solid starter.

  19. If that is the case I think I pass on Pastrnak. Yes he has talent but these injuries are very iffy and there are so many other good players to draft, why take a risk?

    I think the risk lies in the the uncertainty of how the injury has affected his play. Can he return to pre-injury form? The U18s are a small sample so something the scouts will have to assess and see if the injury is still lingering.

    Reading the hockey news addition and it said it was a back injury. Partly due to the fact why he was not as good as peopel were expecting in the U18's tourney.

    Pastrnak plays a very reckless style of game much like Taylor Hall. Where he just goes all out but ends up hurting himself in the process because he is playing that style of game where he will do just about anything to get the puck on his stick. He isn't the biggest player either at 6 ft and only 168lbs, he isn't the most sturdiest of players.

    His skill you can't deny and if at the draft he falls to our plate in the second round, you can't pass up on it. However you will have to try and teach him to play a game that won't make him self destruct himself in the process.

    All i've seen confirmed is an upper body injury. Yes, the injury may have affected his play in the U18s. Which as discussed above is the risk teams will have to assess - how much did the injury affect his play there and will it affect his play in the future. Rodin who was also reckless at times, suffered injuries that seemed to really hinder his play in NA; the similarities to me are not lost.

    I think at #36, he makes a very good case to be picked. First round talent. I was just pointing out why he may have slipped on a few rankings and pointing out some other issues with his game.

  20. Very interesting. I am not too sure about the accuracy of his size. Eliteprospects says he is 6'4" 205 and it says his twin brother is 5'10" 174 that seems kind of funny if true.

    The 6'4" 205lbs for Sanheim is correct, as far as I am concerned.

    Sanheim participated at the U18s and under iihf, they have to take measurements prior to the tournament. That measurement matches what the iihf released.

  • Create New...