-
Posts
11,946 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
98
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Blogs
Gallery
Everything posted by Rob_Zepp
-
I would say in upper half, yes.
-
One thing that seems readily apparent is that Pettersson has a fantastic effect on his linemates. His GF% WOWY chart, shown below, is just about as ideal as one could imagine: every single player he played with had significantly better on-ice results with him than away from him – including Dahlen.
-
Not sure it would be much of a fight. Nylander would be hard pressed to land a blow if Petersson turned sideways and Nylander would have a hard time punching from his turtle position on the ice.
- 116 replies
-
- 11
-
-
Easier than fancy numbers - simply try and name 30 other Dmen in this league who would be better as a top pairing Dman to an offence first Dman. Even just going flat out to 60. His isn't one of the "ten best" Dmen in the NHL but no question he is in the top 60.
-
Same size as Cliff Ronning?
-
Larger ice surface can make it seem that way. I have watched this league live many times and it is good hockey - top CHL team would perhaps make playoffs but most likely not. The scoring is not very high and the pace is frenetic - not much trapping or other defensive zone strategies but for some reason, even when shot totals are high, scores are not that high.
-
Thanks for a balanced response. I concur with all you say here. The metric used was a simple reminder as most think of development camp as "kids" and somehow that perspective gets lost with this "kid" given many of the vitriolic posts made (including fabricated personal attacks).
-
Good god, let it go. He is NOT A BUST. IF he never plays a consistent top six role in NHL, then he may be a disappointment and, yes, potentially a "bust" from a top 10 draft perspective but until he has had a chance to start shaving and have at least a few NHL seasons under his belt starting from his September (or next), give the kid a friggin' break. MANY top 10 picks do not play until draft year plus 2 to 4 and MANY don't hit their stride until they are 22 or 23 and even later. Yes he didn't come out of the gate, win a Calder and rack up 20 plus goals in his first two seasons post draft. However, declaring a kid a bust at this stage in his development is so unfair. Like other posts on this thread, I was on the fence about this pick and this player but have turned to make him a cause simply as some simply want all players to develop at their fantasy pace. Have you been a professional hockey prospect? Do you know that these kids are not robots and some simply take longer?
-
It means that Virtanen is still young - still young enough to be a prospect and younger than many raw prospects out of CHL etc. He was young for his draft year (post July) and could still have been playing junior hockey last season based solely upon age.
-
Fixed the article for accuracy.....
-
Before you bury this poor kid, the recently announced invite list of players for the Canuck Development Camp has 13 of those invitees being older than Virtanen. Perhaps that can put his age into perspective. Give him at least another season or two before you bury him - as stated many times, and ignored many times, he can skate so well for such a big guy and seemingly has taken the last year to learn how to be a professional hockey player - something that seems to take longer for power forward types - so while no one has a crystal ball, it is far beyond "no chance" that this kid becomes a legitimate top six NHL player.
-
Or first pairing on a CUP quality roster with someone who is very offensively minded. A Methot type so to speak. Look at the top pairing D in the past number of cup finals and there are certainly a few Tanev types in the first pairing where the other partner was more about offence.
-
Devil's advocate here. So much is learned in CHL that is valuable and different than AHL or any other brand of pro hockey. You also forget many of these players are completing Grade 12 or equivalent and living with billets who make sure they have food and such (thanks Katie and Bob!!!!). Some me may be ready for pro but most are not. I know most of you see these players as commodities but remember they are kids and having that time with guys own age is some great times and is not hurting development. I would instead prefer to see the draft age raised a year. Then after drafting pro can be an option versus a final junior year.
-
Especially the info gotten from imaginary friends.
-
Someone beat me to that but I know this guy! That is Wade Brookbank.
-
Nothing wrong at all. You misunderstand entirely. I am just curious, are you only happy if you always win? You find people with optimism to be annoying? I agree, Cassels is likely only going to shut down McDavid if they are both in the same room and Cassels is nearest the light switch. However, so what? Your comments seem so personal that if the Canuck players and management are not living up to your expectations and, as such, are not worthy of anything but constant criticism. I am sincerely curious, how can any of that be fun for you? To have no hope and to only enjoy things if you win, isn't that setting yourself up for a whole pile of constant disappointment? A realist would say - team just went through a long spell of winning (and almost winning it all) and now are in a trough to try and get back there. That is both true and realistic. Few teams over the past 10 years or so have had the same amount of success as Vancouver so good thing you are not a fan of those teams. Imagine if your followed the Oilers - the past ten years would have been a living nightmare I suspect. Anyway, keep on doing what you do but it isn't I don't want to hear what you want to say, I am simply saying I feel sorry for your seeming inability to see anything remotely positive even during a lull period after a long stretch of being a strong team.
-
I don't look through any sort of glasses. I like a few teams more than others and am a realist that teams go through peaks and valleys. Sometimes the valley part is the most exciting as you get to see more competition from prospects etc. I can enjoy the entire ride. I have played for champions and teams that missed playoffs and took something positive from both - sure it is more fun to win than lose but you can only know that if you lose once in a while. The Canuck franchise was perennial 100 plus points for a long while there and now they are not - it happens. Next wave ride to the top could be better, or not, but I think it will be fun to watch.
-
While that is only partially true I have to ask, I have seen roughly 500 of your posts now and not once seen anything remotely positive about the Canucks organization and certainly about any of its prospects. I know I have probably missed those but I am also certain that you seem to have nothing but negative things to say at every possible opportunity. Do you support this team? Do you take pleasure in finding something wrong with everything they do? Have you ever tried to look at the balance of what they are trying to do with what the other 30 teams are doing and take some perspective from that? Do you ever consider that these young men who are working their behinds off for their careers and your entertainment could actually use your support? There are about ten of you (posters) that just seem to be constantly and exceedingly negative. I am just curious why.
-
Still waiting for your list of the 60 Dmen better at playing D.........
-
Haiku?
-
Will make this simple for you, IT IS A FACT THAT THERE ARE NOT 61 DMEN IN NHL WHO ARE SUPERIOR TO CHRISTOPHER TANEV. It is also a fact that you are fun to debate with!
-
Naming the 61 Dmen better (2 from each team not from Van plus one from Van) would help your position but it wouldn't change my opinion as I have already done that exercise and think he would easily slide into a top pairing on more than 1/2 the teams in the league including the most recent repeat SC champ Penguins.
-
Will agree to disagree. There are, by definition, 31 top pairing D in the NHL and Chris Tanev could be part of 25+ of those. Go ahead and name 62 Dmen that are better than him in that role if that amuses you but to imply that he is below that level is not aligned with how i see the facts. Again, agree to disagree.
-
Everyone should stop the obsessing on his weight. He will fill out but may never be a massive dude. So what? All types of players can thrive in NHL. A certain dude named Gretzky was too small at 6' 160 lbs at 18 when he can to NHL from WHA where he also played against men at 17 - seemed to work out ok for him. Pettersson is no where near a shadow of Gretz for anyone wanting to imply I am claiming that - don't be obtuse - but saying that IF you have that level of skill that this kid seems to have, don't obsess that he isn't built like your second rounders. For every Crosby body-type there are examples of slighter players who can be effective if they have the will and drive. That will be the test with this kid - and the fact he has been playing against older competition for several seasons prior to his draft eligible year points optimism in the right direction.
-
I don't think that is fair. He is more likely to be a top pairing guy on almost any team but partnered with a high end Letang or Keith type to balance their proclivity for abandoning the Dzone. I don't think he is worth the many things CDC heaped on him during trade fantasy but I do think he is a stud in the right role and that could easily include being a top pairing guy on almost any team in the league assuming the other guy was not exclusively right side.