SID.IS.SID.ME.IS.ME

So much to like about Gaudette. Picked up right where he left off last year and has only improved on his production. And he brings a high scoring rate while also playing a hardworking, defensively sound, two-way game and also a good amount of grit, energy, and edge. High compete level and work rate. And that shot volume. This isn't some soft, floater type who's putting up points but doing nothing much else on the ice. Put together the production with all the "intangibles" and you have a guy who projects very well to make a successful pro transition and eventually develop into an NHL level player.

Yeah, Stecher's compete level and passion for the game are off the charts. He never gives up on a play. Even when he loses an edge, he's stick handling while falling, and several times he's made good plays while going to ice. And when he has an open look, he expects to score, and is visibly pissed off when the puck doesn't go in. But he doesn't let it get him down. He shakes off any frustration and disappointment and is right back to being the Energizer Bunny/sparkplug type on his next shift. He holds himself to such a high standard but is also really quick to move on from mistakes. The kid plays with the perfect mix of intensity and positivity, and it rubs off on his teammates (and the fans watching).

Thanks for this. I like reading Pronman's take on players. Don't always agree with him, and he has some biases toward/against certain player types (as we all do), but he's a good resource and often offers a bit of an alternative view (from the rest of the scouting herd). And nice to learn that he's so accessible. He's probably right on Raddysh. Definitely AHL next season. Maybe not NHL ELC material yet. Although if Raddysh manages to maintain his production over the rest of 2016-17, I could see a few teams being interested in getting a deal done.

Nice to see Juolevi heating up. Point per game average past eight GP (and 2.4 shots per game during that stretch, up from his 1.8 shots per game average this season). On a side note, Darren Raddysh looks like an interesting option for an undrafted free agent signing. He's a 20 year old in his 5th season, so overager caution applies (when looking at production and role), but he leads OHL defensemen in points/GP (1.35) and 2nd in overall D scoring (23 points in 17 GP). And he posted 40 and 48 points the previous two seasons. Averaging over 3 shots per game in 2016-17. This from a the guy generally valued for his two-way ability and who was voted top defensive defensemen and 2nd best shotblocker in the West in last season's OHL coaches poll.

Honestly, there's no way to know how much or how little attention JB personally pays to analytics without actually talking to the man off the record on the subject (which is something none of us will likely ever get to do). What we do know is that Benning admits they are a tool. One of many. But probably not the first one he reaches for in his toolbox. He has referenced analytics sporadically (and usually subtly) in the occasional interview. I've heard him talk about zone entries, possession stats, and even some weird stat the Canucks seem to keep regarding the frequency their Ds are able to dispossess opponents of the puck in the defensive zone (possibly some proprietary stat). But while he seems at least open to using stats, he also doesn't always seem to have the best knowledge of how some of them work or how they tie together. On some occasions, he's spoken about stats in ways that suggest he don't really have great knowledge of their value or applicability. Then again, it's hard to really know anything about his real knowledge based on what he says in the press. I can remember him talking about defensemen being good because they have few giveaways. This was, IIRC, in response to a question regarding defensemen possession rates. It's pretty well known that turnover stats are, for the most part, pretty useless in assessing Ds. In fact, most team's best defensemen (and the best ones in the league) have the highest giveaway totals, simply by virtue of how often they handle the puck. Possession stats, however, can be a pretty good indicator of play quality (when used correctly anyway). Whatever the case, what we do know is that the Canucks still run an analytics department (headed by Jonathan Wall) and that both Benning and Linden have mentioned that they regularly receive data prepared by that department. How much they value that data is anyone's guess. But I suspect they use it much more than most people think. We also know that the Canucks had an exclusive deal with Stathletes (Arizona GM John Chayka's company) until 2015 (when the contract expired and Chayka, and likely much of his intellectual property, was scooped up by the Coyotes). And if Benning thought data collection and fancy stats were useless, he'd likely have gotten out of that deal rather than continue to pay for information he didn't value. I doubt it would have been tough to break the deal. Several teams would likely be lined up to take over (and probably pay Stathletes even more than what Vancouver was paying). Also, while it's tough to say whether or not Benning makes much use of analytics personally, I do believe that many people within the organization are using stats to inform their decisions. Particularly in the scouting department, where the Canucks have targeted several players (especially late round picks and prospect invites/free agent signings) who matched up favourably with the new school stats based scouting methods (like prospect success probability models such as PCS, pGPS, and DEV). I've posted on this topic before so I'm probably repeating a lot of stuff from my earlier posts (a couple of which went into more detail) but regardless of how much value Benning places on analytics, it's fairly clear that he uses them. That said, it's also clear that he values his "eye test" more than the numbers. And that's not a bad thing. Both tools are imperfect. But the "eye test" is still the best tool in the box (so long as the set of eyes is a good one). Stats would have told the Canucks to pass on draft picks like Gaudette and Lockwood (bringing this back, finally, to the thread topic). Those picks looked like bad bets according to the stats models. But they certainly show that somebody, whether it's Benning or the scouts, has a real good set of eyes.

Yeah, I tried making a post months ago where I highlighted all the actual quotes from Boeser on the matter (which have consistently suggested he expects to sign next year and that he is committed to starting his professional career with Vancouver). Maybe it calmed things down for a few days. Unfortunately, it really doesn't matter how strong the actual evidence is or how consistent Boeser has been over the entire history of his statements regarding his intentions. Until he's here and under contract, there are going to be people saying "what if he holds out?" And there will always be "some guy" saying they heard Brock hates Vancouver and/or Canada and that he feels strongly enough to sacrifice millions in earnings just to avoid playing here. Maybe Brock is the biggest troll? Maybe he has a plan to do his damnedest to trick all his teammates into signing with the Canucks. And then he's going to get the last laugh when all his buddies are stuck playing in Canada and he holds out, delays his career and paycheque two years, and signs with the Wild. Yeah, that sounds likely. I can't be bothered anymore. People can think what they want.

He definitely tried to convince Caggiula:

I think this is possibly the most impressive thing about Lockwood's start to the season. It's exceedingly rare in college hockey for a freshman player to get first line opportunities and play in all situations (5v5, PP, PK). For Berenson to see enough in Lockwood to trust him in such a role is a very positive sign. And, of course, the scoring numbers Lockwood is posting don't hurt.

Crazy stats line for Burr tonight. At 5v5: 16 Corsi events for, only one against. 94.12 CF%. Good things are gonna happen when your team is firing 16 shot attempts when you're on the ice and the opponents only get one shot off. 2 assists +2 and should've had his goal stand after the challenge review.

Tied with Jost with 10 points in 9 GP. And 3 of Lockwood's 6 goals are game winners. Agree with @DeNiro that it's too early to say Lockwood was worthy of a 1st. Maybe a 2nd. But if he keeps his pace over the rest of this season, then it'd probably be fair to call him a first round level talent. Certainly looking like a great pick at #64 however (and probably has done enough already to guarantee that he will never be referred to as "a reach" ever again).

Gaudette sounds like he'd really like to stay with Northeastern long enough to win another major tournament/title (Northeastern was the NCAA Hockey East Champion last season) or even have a run at a national championship (where Boeser and UND eliminated Gaudette and Northeastern last season on their way to the title). And he's talked about this year's Beanpot (Boston area tournament between Boston College, Boston U, Harvard, and Northeastern) being especially important to him. He's a local kid (Braintree is within the greater Boston area) so there's a great deal of motivation for him. But if Northeastern manages to bring home some hardware this year, and with a Gaudette playing a key role in their success, I could definitely see him feeling like he's accomplished enough of his college goals to be ready to sign and take the next step as a professional. If not, he might want to give it another year, which certainly wouldn't hurt his development (although every year he gets closer to that free agency window creates some anxiety from the Canucks perspective).

"Farm Report" prospect feature on Gaudette starting on Team 1040 radio. Expecting it'll be pretty basic stuff but I'll update if they provide anything noteworthy. EDIT: Actually they've got Adam on for an interview so worth listening. Summary: Mentioned how he's gotten a lot bigger and stronger since last year and more confident. Still a young guy on a team with several upperclassmen (which makes his performance and contributions more impressive IMO). Currently plays 2nd line. Talked about other Canucks prospects in NCAA (Boeser and Lockwood) and how well they're doing. Said he knows Brock pretty well and talks to him from time to time. Didn't bite on questions about the future and joining Canucks. Said the usual stuff about being focused on this season and helping his team win. Not thinking about pro yet.

So 10 points in 12 GP now. 0.83 points/GP. 18th among OHL defensemen in points/GP and 27th in points. Not bad. Hopefully he'll climb the ladder as the season progresses and finish above a point per game and in the top-10 OHL defensemen in total scoring and scoring rate. Of course, points totals aren't the "end all and be all" for a player like Juolevi. His contributions don't always show up on the scoresheet (at least in terms of points that get credited to him--and he gets lots of "3rd assists" on team goals). I suspect that if the OHL kept advanced stats, we'd see a fairly significant positive on-ice effect on possession and scoring chances.

Very true. We have a nice crop of top college kids already in the system so there's some familiarity. And our roster has holes (and will have more as veteran contracts expire). Plus we've shown a fair amount of willingness to run competitive training camps and let guys play their way onto the roster. Signing graduating college free agents makes tons of sense for this team. They are so much better prepared than most junior kids. And the top level guys (like Vesey and Stecher this year) have shown how relatively seemless the transition can be for guys with several years of development in the college ranks and who are starting pro in their early 20s. It's a great option for transitioning quickly to a more youthful lineup and making up ground on our past drafting deficiencies.

I'd say Lockwood looks better than "decent" given his age and where he was drafted (and the modest expectations people had for him). Most of the freshmen ahead of him in scoring are either starting college at 19 or 20 or were drafted considerably higher. As for the free agents, I'm pretty sure they'll be on top of it. Our college scouting is pretty good. And there are several FAs in next year's class that have the potential to step directly into an NHL lineup and make a contribution (as we've seen with Stecher). I'd expect JB to be pretty active and hopefully land one or two of the better college free agents available next year (as he did this year). Of course, competition between teams trying to sign the best of the bunch will be pretty fierce. And some teams may have a bit of an inside track due to development camp invitations (for example, Vecchione has been to Boston's camp the past two years, and Foo went to Calgary's and San Jose's previously). Outside those top-5 scorers you mentioned, I liked Aston-Reese as a potential FA signing this past summer and his start this season (13 points in 9 GP) hasn't changed my mind about possibly taking a run at him next summer.

It might have been me (although plenty of others have said similar things). I referred to Juolevi around 20 pages back as a "master of the 3rd assist" and talked about how he's "very quick to advance the puck up ice and get the offense going. "He puts his forwards (and D partner) in position to succeed. It's not always obvious but I think if you roll back tape on his shifts, you'll more often than not find him making a critical play that started most of the team scoring chances." Could that be the post you're thinking of?

I think the preseason showed us Rödin's finishing ability and his knack for finding space and open looks. But he didn't have any power or explosiveness in his legs and probably the injury was holding back his ability to drive play with his skating. Hopefully once he's truly 100%, we'll see a more dynamic player and not just a guy who can snipe goals but is overly reliant on his teammates to create possession and chances.

@DeNiro: Yeah, I wasn't really serious about them all turning pro that soon. Just having some fun with the fact that we have a complete line of college kids that are all having great starts this season.

Why not all three of the college kids go pro next year? Lockwood-Gaudette-Boeser Of course Brock probably goes straight to the NHL but that'd a fun line to watch if somehow they all played a season with Utica.

Yeah, he definitely shouldn't have fallen that far. Unlike many others, I really had a hard time putting much separation in my rankings of the top-3 Ds in the draft. And given JC's physical maturity and skating, it's not all together surprising he's been able to make the jump early. He was arguably the most "NHL ready" of the bunch IMO. But I do agree that we drafted the best player available. Juolevi's mental game sets him apart from the others. His upside is extremely high. He just needs some time to develop physically (which we knew when we selected him). So no buyer's remorse. We picked the best D in the draft. And when we look at these guys around five years from now, I think that picture will be much clearer.

Not too concerned about Jasek's Extraliga numbers given the limited minutes he's getting at that level. And Jasek appears to be putting up decent numbers this season in WSM Liga (1-Liga or Czech second tier) play. At least I think that's where he's played the games while loaned to HC Frydek-Mistek this year? It's always confusing figuring out where he's playing from English language websites like Elite Prospects. They have Extraliga listed as Czech, WSM Liga (or 1-Liga) as Czech2, and 2-Liga as Czech3. At least that's how it seems to work. Honestly I'm not even sure half the time where he's been playing when I look at his stats. But he seems to be listed on the WSM Liga roster with 3 assists in 5 GP (which is better than zero points in 2 GP he had at that level last season). Still very early days so we'll have to see where he plays most of this season, what kind of opportunities he gets, and how well he performs. Hopefully he can at least finish the season with a regular spot (and decent minutes) on Trinec's Extraliga team.

Nice vision on that pass by Zach Aston-Reese on Gaudette's goal. Aston-Reese was on my wish list for potential college free agent signings this past year. He went unsigned and returned to Northeastern for his senior year. He's had a very productive start to the season (3G, 3A, 17 SOG, 4 GP) and been a force on the power play (5 PP PTS). Only concern on his stats line is that he's a team low -4 but I wouldn't put too much stock in that (and he led the team at +19 last season). Here's a profile from last season (listing top free agents): http://www.sbncollegehockey.com/2015/10/19/9566647/top-nhl-free-agent-prospects-in-hockey-east-sophomores-juniors-dan-renouf-hampus-gustafsson

No doubt. Now at 27 SOG for the season (4 GP) and leads the nation at 6.75 SOG/GP.

Agree with most others that Stecher is probably better served in Utica's top-4 than in a 7/8 role in Vancouver's press box. Not saying our opening night top-8 D is the group I'd have chosen. But I can definitely understand the reasoning behind it. Larsen might not have always looked impressive but he did enough to earn a trial run starting the season with the Canucks. Preseason games aren't really representative enough to make tough roster decisions. The real games will provide much clearer data on whether or not Larsen can be the player we hope he can be this season. If he succeeds, great. If not, Stecher is waiting to take that spot. And one bonus of all those games with Edler-Stecher is that we have a good option now if Tanev gets hurt. Edler isn't the easiest player to partner but Stecher showed instant chemistry with him and seemed to bring out the best aspects of Edler's game (and vice versa).

Heady stuff. Even though Michigan is turning over their roster after several key departures, it's still rare to see a freshman player (that wasn't a high draft pick) earn a first line role to start the season. Many observers suggested drafting Lockwood at #64 (when he was ranked in the 100s) was a reach. Maybe Benning knew something they didn't?