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

aGENT

Members
  • Posts

    52,033
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    68

Everything posted by aGENT

  1. The entire team is struggling. What little AHL top 6 talent they have, has largely been pilfered by us. Virtanen actually had a stretch shortly after he was sent down where he had 7 points in 6 games or something but otherwise like the rest of the team has struggled. I also very much believe that they're presently in the 'break him down to build him back up' phase. Green has him working on basics, learning to keep his feet moving, push the pace and attack rather than coasting and the associated work in the gym, practice, video etc to do that. The panic in here is ridiculous and silly IMO.
  2. Actually, yes they do and yes, it is a good thing. He was taller and almost the same weight as Tanev is now as one of the youngest 18 year old players in the draft. He'll probably be +/- 210lbs in his prime. All it says is that management wasn't worried about or hoping for him to make the team in the next couple years.
  3. It wouldn't really give you quality information. Would you narrow it down to just D? What about their size? A guy picked 5th that's 205lbs at 18 probably makes the NHL sooner than a guy who's 180lbs at 18. Team situation? Is it a team with space for them in the lineup or a team with a fully stocked D? By the time you narrow it down to realistic comparables with all the context, you're likely looking at too small of a sample size to glean anything meaningful from. It would likely also have to go too far back to give you anything current/useful. Does a guy picked at 5th in the 80's tell you anything meaningful about a 2016 5th pick?
  4. It's also far from a closed case.
  5. That would be the 'coasting' I was referring to. He needs to learn to push and attack instead of the coasting he could get away with in junior. He's not alone there. A LOT of kids have that issue coming out of junior. And that's why he's presently in Utica and not in Vancouver. I wasn't so much referring to Hansen's 2 way game, I doubt Virtanen gets to Hansen's elite level of 2 way/defensive play but as his ability to attack and push improves, so will his 2 way play. That's not changing the way he plays, it's becoming an NHL'er.
  6. Ferraro compared him to Hansen FWIW. And yes, he does largely play similarly. He just needs to learn how to do it at this level and get his conditioning at an NHL level so that he can be constantly tenacious rather than coasting.
  7. I could really care less if Nylander scores 20 more points in their prime or what line he plays on. If Virtanen can put up 40+ points while playing like a bigger, meaner Hansen, I'd still take him.
  8. A solid 2nd line player is pretty good for a 6th pick FWIW. And I doubt we see that for at least 2+ years given PWF's don't tend to reach their ceilings until their mid 20's. If he's putting up 30 points in two years, you call that a win. I only see him as a 40+point, fast, physical pain in the arse to play against in his prime. Two years from now he won't likely be close to that, let alone putting up 30 goals. And that wouldn't remotely make him a bust. At 6 or otherwise.
  9. 18/19 in Vancouver. Possibly some time in Utica that year but likely Vancouver. People forget he was one of the youngest players in his draft. He needs time to add bulk and strength. His skill is not in question. And D frequently take until they're 22+. Really it's usually only top 3 guys like Doughty, Ekblad etc who step right in at 18/19 years old. Or occasionally the odd 'surprise'. The only 'concern' I have with OJ is giving him time to get stronger.
  10. I think your math is s bit off there chief.
  11. Lots of our prospects are doing well...
  12. Clearly we should be concerned with the surgery effecting his shot
  13. I was pretty happy about that myself. If Virtanen turns in to a bigger Hansen....WIN!!!
  14. I think he's at least until the 18/19 season as well. Even then, it's ok if he spends some time in Utica that year as well. Even if we trade a D this summer (say Tanev), there isn't particularly room for him even if he is physically 'ready' (which IMO is doubtful). Edler, Stetcher Hutton, Gudbranson Sbisa, Tryamkin Let the kid incubate and get bigger.
  15. I didn't get to see much of his/FIN's play at the WJC but I'm guessing that it's because they didn't tend to have the lead much. While OJ certainly does help drive the play forward/possession and has some offensive skill, he's less offensively 'dynamic' vs some of FIN's other D. So, largely I'd assume, because they were chasing the vast majority of the tournament and trying to create offense. If they had a more talented forward group, you would likely have seen a more even distribution of ice time between him and the more offensive D and if they had the benefit of leads, he likely would have had even more.
  16. Would a Utica stint hurt him long term? Probably not. But I'd be surprised if he doesn't make the Canucks out of camp/spends VERY little time in Utica. He could have probably made the team this year let alone with another year experience and another summer of training under his belt. At best, he maybe gets some playoff games in Utica (if they manage to make them) IMO.
  17. Alf wouldn't be allowed to do much then
  18. Probably a good thing (for Canada) he couldn't play for USA
  19. Even then will be a bit premature. OJ will likely be a sophomore and likely still in a depth role at that point. 4 and 5 years and we start to get a clearer picture. 8-10 years and it should be more definitive
  20. One more would certainly be nice. Where they're picked doesn't really matter. What kind of NHL D they become, does. But we do also have Tryamkin (who could very well become the #1D we've always wanted) along with Stetcher, Hutton and Gudbranson which you mentioned (and Sbisa/Tanev, which you didn't). Then there's decent looking (though more likely bottom 4 projecting) guys like Brisebois, Subban and Neill etc which could surprise. Plus there's always trades, UFA's etc. So we're presently 'ok' with some guys with upside (but also risk). Another high end guy would be great, though may not be 'necessary'. If we don't pick another, high end D with our first, I hope Benning goes after a (likely high risk/reward) offensive D with our high 2nd. Good thing there's still a few years left in the rebuild
  21. On a worse/less offensive team in which he's been tasked to play a larger defensive role on. A lot of people seem to underrate him.
  22. I think OJ is a better (long term) player. Risk is about =.
×
×
  • Create New...