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

Canuck Surfer

Members
  • Posts

    22,994
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    2

Everything posted by Canuck Surfer

  1. Its true, but also a crapshoot. The most physically gifted guys still go in the first round. Then its an issue of can they handle it? 10 years ago the Duncan Keith's were still being left to the 2knd round, because, yeah, there is still a % chance they will not make it. Forwards have to apply more pressure as the game gets faster in the NHL.To an extent the player just has to get faster. But you can scout athleticism and reasonably pick, also knowing today's training techniques, who will probably be able to apply that pressure, gain that speed. Defenceman are under more pressure. Their speed will also pick up with training. Its harder to pick who will have the mental composure to deal with that duress as play ramps up? Some guys just have it. But its a percentage game. Give or take just under 25% of 2knd rounders play 100 games of NHL. Well over 50% in the first round. Among the guys who have already demonstrated the most. 15 or 20%, or less in the 3rd round. The ones who develop or have that composure will outlast a bigger, faster guy taken in the first round. Can you risk only having a D man to incorporate into your system once every 4 or 5 years? So teams stopped leaving the Doughty or Karlsson, Werenski & Jones type physically gifted guys for later rounds, worrying they might not make it, about 10 years ago. Also, do you want to risk having Chris Tanev be your best D man? Who scores almost no goals & has no physical presence. To mitigate risk & get better talent you have to pick D men consistently when a good one is on the board. In all rounds.
  2. At RHD they have only Gudas. Who is somewhere between meh? And bleh... Then several otherwise decent to very good LHD who still struggle on their off side. Bit of a tire fire actually when you watch them. Some blame the coach. There are lots of guys who can scream up to retrieve a puck, on the boards, on their forehand, and make a good pass with their head up to most of the ice open on their strong side. Then struggle to make that same pass when they have to get there a step earlier, so they can do half pivot with their hips to take the puck on the backhand. Withstand a hit now a step closer & coming from behind. With their back to the open ice, not a full field of view. So they chip it and have to fight waves of pressure to get it up ice. Where at each stage more mistakes can happen than a clean pass to open ice. Many also blamed the goaltending. Which was not great. But their goalie was routinely hung out to dry by a scattered D and this was a good part of the blame. And yes they are stacked in D prospects as well. But among them, only Myers is a RHD. Meanwhile yes, Demko is probably rated higher than any of their G prospects. But if so, just. Stolarz is at least close. Probably more NHL ready. Lyon was a serious rival to Demko in the NCAA. And Carter Hart is flat out an excellent prospect. Perhaps Demko is better? But they are stacked & very deep in goalie prospects. I'm not a fan of trading Tanev. But you would have better luck offering him, than Demko, IMO.
  3. See below. We have Horvat who plays near 220 lbs. Sutter is not small. Gaunce is a big boy. If we need size up front, it's on the wing (in a big way)? Gaudette is 6'1''. What we need at pivot is someone with wicked speed, agility & puck skills. The most obvious guys then appear to be Necas & Mittlestead? But that again is based on need. If you go BPA Vilardi, Glass & Heskainen remain, heavily, in the debate.
  4. This thread always makes feel good! Here's something modestly newer. Somewhat similar?
  5. LOL, that Rock N Roll Nurse? She said boy, hold out your arm! Stick out your tongue? I got some pills, boy. I'mm gonna give you one! She went to my head... She gave my pills for my toes. So they didn't ache? She gave me some pills for my love. But a little too late.
  6. @riffraff got me on a blues kick. Here is a couple goodies...
  7. Goldobin has a slashing style. Cutting to the net looking for feeds. With the skills to bury a quick lethal shot. I like that he is active to get open? And he is dangerous when he gets it. That doesn't mean he should be sitting, with his stick on the ice, just outside a puck battle on the boards. Waiting for someone else to pop the puck out. Or if he doesn't get the feed on that cut to the net, that he can't stop, wreak some havoc in front of the net. Occupy a D. Which creates lanes for other players? And might get him some tip in's. Or rebounds? He's also lethal on the break. But we would get more breakouts if he would get into passing lanes to steal pucks. Instead of goal sucking behind defenders. In fact, pull a burrows or Hansen. And get after D with possession in our zone. Create pressure which causes turnovers. Make your own breakouts! Blocking shots also causes pucks to pop out for odd man rushes. Goldobin is too passive defensively, does not work to get the puck is my observation. Nylander and Gaudreau are also poor comparisons. They can dangle, and hang on to the puck under pressure at completely another level. Beat guys who challenge them, make them look silly. Which takes grit in its own way. But its more than I have seen of Goldy. Goldobin should model himself after Tanner Pearson, Gallagher in Montreal, Zuccarello or Tofoli. He can be exactly that type of player. They have his type of speed and skill too. But are more dangerous, only dangerous because they put in that higher battle level. Thats what we need!
  8. Boy, you're lots of fun at a party? Yes, yes, yes, guys have proven a better pick than Jake. It is still too early to write him off. Or proving your conviction by creating a Raymond, Ballard and a first proposal to solve all...
  9. Fair enough. I have been a proponent of European pro leagues over CHL for several years when not eligible for AHL. As a developmental step draft plus one year, they are better competition.
  10. I think we are more likely to look for a big winger, a Patrick Maroon clone, than we are a 3C. Sutter is a more than adequate 3c, thank you! Gaunce, Chaput, maybe Gaudette (prefer him in college), Shore? I think we are fine at 4C as well. At least for a rebuilding club. We are missing big physical players up front. With only Jake as a partial answer if he's ready. Nothing else in the tank. Thats where we still have to plug holes! If we splurge up front, we splurge on size! Just my opinion... The exception, getting back on track, might be if we had Nolan Patrick as 3C next year!
  11. People forget OJ springing Laine, Tkachuk, Puljujarvi or marner for breakout passes. Then joining the rush. Lidstrom was a smooth skating Swede. Commanded the defensive zone adroitly closing any angle with his reach and positioning. Without huge dangle, still commanded the offensive zone with his inteligence, crisp passing & an opportunistic shot. Thats a lot like OJ. Juolevi can still be a number one. Allthough I am not inferring as good as Lidstrom. Just a stylistic comparison.
  12. Patrick was virtually the best player in the WHL, in his draft minus two year. Not sure another year there is going to help anyone. The only question is whether he will be healthy... If he does not get most of the summer to train. It won't be better to elevate him against bigger, stronger guys. What is the current status?
  13. Isn't Juolevi, if he does not make the Canucks, still obligated to the CHL if he stays in N America? If the choice is London or the SEL, I'm voting SEL, hands down!
  14. And that boy on the right is still 213 lbs. He will be more than a beast when he learns to also, stay lean but, put muscle on top of his natural frame!
  15. Goin back a lil bit? Clapton, Page & Beck; does it get any better?
  16. You are starting to draw that dangerous assumption again. That Tanev will command what Larssen did on the trade market?
  17. Look, last year we started the season with Bartkowski, a UFA signing at 26 with zero career goals. And Weber. Clearly we had no options whatsoever to bring up young D. Or we would have? And it had been 10 years since we invested a first in a D man. 15 I think if you subtract that Bourdon tragically died in a motorcycle accident. You can only ignore categories so long before it bites you in the bum. This year our forward group smacks of such desperation. See Megna, Jason, Jack Skille, Cahput et al. And our D is further ahead having brought in Guddy, Tryamkin, Juolevi, Brisbois & Stecher. So I am on board with drafting a forward. But even if you assume Stecher becomes a Duncan Keith because they had similar rookie numbers? 21 points is still a poor number to lead the team. And he would need more production around him even if he scored 50. I won't be disappointed if we pick a D. BPA now that we are not starved in any one position... But also to make a point. Hutton had over 20 points last year as a rookie. Its not an automatic that he or Stecher will become an all star either...
  18. I understand the sentiment. Personally, I'm as excited as all get up we have some rookie D that look exciting. But our top scoring D, rookie or otherwise, has 21 points. There is every reason to still be looking to load talent on our blue line?
  19. @DeNiro posted it, but fine by me. Be appropriate / awesome for one of the really good prospects supporters to grab it!
×
×
  • Create New...