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

Ray_Cathode

Members
  • Posts

    4,438
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Ray_Cathode

  1. "He's shown some improvement" Wow. Talk about understatement almost equivalent to an outright misrepresentation of what Lind has done this year. Last year he was 51gm 5g 12a 17 pts, this year he is 43gm 12g 25a 37pt. and is tied for 9th in league scoring - he is 21. Only Batherson and Norris among players 21 and younger are ahead of him in league scoring. Now Batherson is a real find - a fourth rounder, but Norris is a first round pick - 19th overall.
  2. Here is an article from just after the draft, it contains a lot of contradictory observations so I don't know how much stock to put in it. Seeing Costmar's production this year would argue that the negative reports are most likely over-stated. But anyway, here goes: https://www.vancourier.com/pass-it-to-bulis/the-canucks-made-the-right-kind-of-gamble-picking-arvid-costmar-in-the-7th-round-1.23871186
  3. Yeah, there are all kinds of players needed at a pro level. Not everybody will be a first or second line scorer at pro, there is also a need for checkers, defensive specialists, and energy players, especially if they have some scoring ability, like Motte, say, all the better. At some point, we will have to cycle players like Beagle, Schaller (perhaps sooner rather than later), Sutter, Ferland, Roussel, etc. with less expensive tole players developed within our own system. Some will show that they can move up the lineup - Kesler and Burrows, or become specialists like Hansen and Grabner come to mind. Having them in our own development system means that they are much less expensive in cap terms, and later become available to spring replacement picks from other teams (that is how we got Dorsett, Vey, etc.) but we gave up the picks to get them. A few will move up your lineup and become key pieces - Kesler, Burrows, etc. Right now we have excellent development going on in Utica - Green, and now Cull are doing or have done, and are doing great jobs at player development. There are numerous players pushing for graduation to the big team - MacEwen, Glaovac, Jasek, Bailey, Lind, Rafferty, Juolevi, Dipietro, Sautner, and Brisebois all come to mind. Next year those ranks may be reinforced in Utica with Rathbone, Lockwood, Madden, Woo, Fosch, and Hoglander. Eliot and Gadjovich will continue their development. In addition, guys like Boucher, Baertschi and Goldobin rebuild their game - Boucher and Goldobin are now penalty killers in Utica and do a more than credible job - it gives them a chance at a new role in the NHL - Baertschi gets to establish that he can move past his injuries... or not - it is what a fully developed farm system is supposed to look like. Tryamkin, Podkolzin. Hoglander, Klassen, Costmar and others are developing in Europe.
  4. You may laugh at the value of +/-, however, taken contextually, it is relevant to Edler’s value. He earned that stat playing at even strength against the best players that other teams could bring against us.
  5. I think there is going to be a fascinating competition this fall in Vancouver. We will lose a player in the expansion - that might be a defenceman. There are a couple of guys looking for new contracts; Tanev and Stetcher, I believe - Vancouver could possibly walk from one or both depending on the demands. Vancouver may desire an upgrade on Fantenburg. Vancouver did not grant a guaranteed contract to Edler, which, I understand, might imply that they may not protect him - relying on his age and wage to protect their continued possession of his rights. But it is possible that Seattle could still take him - depending on their needs, and requirement to meet the cap floor. On the other hand are some very interesting prospects: Rafferty, Juolevi, Tryamkin, Rathbone, and even possibly, Woo. I won’t address the virtues of Rafferty and Juolevi. Rathbone has a reputation as a very sound defensive defenceman who is a point a game player. He is a fine skater, who has a rocket of a shot and makes great outlets and long passes. His production is not too far off Makar’s second year production, nor the second year production of Quinn Hughes (point a game) in college. His size is pretty much identical with Makar at 5’11 190. Stetcher and Tanev made the NHL directly out of college, so why not Rathbone who is more heralded than they? Like Stetcher and Tanev, he brings, to all accounts, a strong defensive game while adding great offensive characteristics. He has the kind of character that you find in Boeser - a young man of strong loyalty and integrity, that used a year of his development to serve a purpose that he valued more: https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/canucks-2017-draft-pick-jack-rathbone-autistic-brother
  6. I am a big fan of Rathbone's ever since his first summer camp, but I agree, I see the only way he gets into the Vancouver lineup this year is because of injury or a player being seriously off his game - but then he would have to find his way past Rafferty and Juolevi, and maybe even Tryamkin - that will be a tough assignment.
  7. This anticipates a topic that I wanted to bring up regarding our schedule. We have been relatively healthy during December and incurred plenty of injuries during November. This is not unexpected from looking at our schedule. During November we were away for most of the month and played sixteen games during that period - December saw only 13 games many of which were at home. November also saw three times four games in six nights (the first four in six started in October). This concentration of games and extensive travel leads to weariness and greater injury risk. During the Burke era, he argued to the league about the lack of consideration by the schedule makers in this regard - not without reason. There had been a historical record of Canuck teams dying in January - a tradition of hitting a January wall. November was a test for us, but nothing like the wall we will hit in March where we play sixteen games - fortunately, the majority of those games are at home, but occur at the end of a long season and during the most rugged part of the schedule as teams fight for playoff position. This is a time that should test our depth. Here is where we may see recruits from Utica getting a shot - I’m thinking MacEwen, Glaovac, Bailey, Rafferty, Juolevi, and maybe DiPietro here. Reinforcements from Europe, say Tryamkin, or college, say Rathbone, Madden, or Lockwood are possibles. I’m thinking Woo will probably be involved in playoffs. There is a small possibility of seeing Hoglander, but I think he will be more likely to make his push in the fall. Still, it’s great that there are prospects to be excited about, and possible relief for players with nagging injuries leading up to the playoffs that we have a pretty good chance of being involved in. Anybody else have thoughts on this conjecture?
  8. I hope so, my two remaining concerns are his health (which has a huge effect on his fitness) and his quickness (top end speed doesn’t matter so much for a defenceman) compared to his first three step quickness (which controls his ability to re-position and close opponents down). His strong virtues are his smarts, his offensive reads, great transition and passing. He seems to be strong enough - had an unusual great hit last night. Maybe that is a harbinger of things to come with being healthy. He sure has the frame to be a strong guy at 6’3” and about 200 pounds - he could probably take another fifteen pounds if it doesn’t affect his mobility. An Edlerish sized D with great smarts and passing sure wouldn’t hurt the Canucks long term prospects - especially if he added in a bit of physicality.
  9. I hope not, I don’t think that would be fair. Since he came back from his last injury he has been more physical, but that is not generally his style - mostly he had been playing a European style of closing on you and limiting your options, but since coming back he has been faster in closing and appears generally more mobile. Now, he does not have the swift, fluid skating of Rafferty - but he does have great vision and quick thinking - especially on attack, and he is reading plays better. He is much more like the guy we saw playing in the world juniors and in the Finnish top pro league. Definitely have my fingers crossed that he can finish this season’s n healthy, then have a great off-season of training- love to see him make the Canucks next year. It would also be interesting to see how paired with Rafferty for a few games still this season - having a few games with our smartest D men in Utica playing together might be illuminating.
  10. Utica now with five players in the top 20 scorers - Boucher, Rafferty, Goldobin, Lind, and Bailey - with Baertschi just outside the top 20. Boucher the league’s top point getter. Rafferty the league’s leading defenceman point scorer.
  11. Very unselfish play by Lind with the goalie pulled on a two on one with Bailey - Lind had an easy shot himself, dished to Bailey for the hat trick - third hat trick in four games for Bailey. Amazing.
  12. We also had the option to do neither deal, it was time to rebuild, picking up old farts with big contracts is not how you accomplish that. Lucic and Eriksson are both cases in point.
  13. Hey, I really like Hughes but I’m not putting him up on the list of elites just yet. Teams are still scouting him, and he hasn’t gone through the meat grinder consisting of the last twenty or so games of the season and the playoffs.
  14. Hey, Sid, haven’t seen your comments for a while, hope all is well?
  15. Bailey with the brace so far tonight - eight goals in his last four games with more than a period to go. This guy is on a scary run.
  16. I believe that puts Rathbone back to a point a game.
  17. Oops, misread the stats, you are correct.
  18. Well that really sucks, but it will give us the chance to see more of Eliot, another very interesting young defender - and it will also mean we will likely see more of Youlevi on the PP - another thing to which I’m looking forward.
  19. Yeah, it means that at even strength Hughes is on the ice for more goals against than goals for - at this point in his career. Now Hughes has the excuse that he is a rookie often out against the best players that other teams can ice. Another one of the factors considered by most people in evaluating +/- is deployment, I.e. who the player is out against. +/- does not measure special teams contributions, which includes PP - an area where both Hughes and Pouliot make significant contributions. But Pouliot does not have the excuse of inexperience, instead he just sucks at even strength as we found out in Vancouver - even though we tried to protect him by keeping him away from the best players on other teams - again, the factor of deployment. To take any statistic and take it to be meaningful outside of context is a mistake; to dismiss statistics by only regarding them outside of context is also a mistake. Even strength goals for and against considered contextually is meaningful.
  20. Generational number one D maybe (Lidstrom). Not many of them - Bourque, Potvin, Orr, Pronger.
  21. He was 30 years old, the age at which most players lose their hands. A look at the precipitous drop off of production from the Sedins as they hit 31 is instructive. Forwards that maintain high offensive production past 30 are rare. Yes, you can dig up examples, but that does not argue against it being unusual. And the Sedins, to all accounts, were fitness addicted - not something of which Eriksson has been accused. He was given a six year contract. Don’t get me wrong, he is still a smart player, even a useful player, he is just not a six million dollar player.
  22. Watching Lind in the AHL a lot, and he competes hard, really annoying to play against and very productive this year 10g 23a 33pt in 40 games. Lind also takes a ton of faceoffs for Utica and is pretty strong on the draw. With the shortage of centres that Utica has, I would not be surprised to see him get some time in that role - kind of like how they have developed Jasek and MacEwen. It’s a useful thing for those players that the coaches have done this - really gives the player additional opportunity for ice time in the show.
  23. He’s a solid D, and could give more offence than he does, but that is not the role carved out for him and probably not the role he would get should he get another NHL shot. Very sound defensively, good but not great skater, and decent size. It is not out of the way to see him as a number 6 or 7 in the NHL. When Fantenburg was sent down to Utica one got to compare them, not a ton of difference, more a difference of emphasis. Fantenburg made for a strong AHLer, but then so does Brisebois.
  24. Well, looking at Ovechkin, last year he was a plus player and Washington was 3rd overall in the east, this year he is a big minus and Washington is out of the playoffs - so one could justifiably say that his +/- reflects his inferior play this year. Average age of NHL rookies is 23.1 years. So, Rafferty will just be a year late. https://www.minnesotahockey.org/news_article/show/1022364
×
×
  • Create New...