-
Posts
16,834 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
23
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Blogs
Gallery
Everything posted by theminister
-
I don't find it funny at all. Thankfully we will get a good player regardless of who gets picked before us. The Flames need a prospect like Ritchie as much as any team. So do the Isles, actually.
-
I know a lot of you guys won't like this but I agree with Merci here. We don't often agree on a lot but we do on this point. Ritchie is a unique piece that can be made even better. I expect that there will be some upset people if the Canucks take him but after another year I imagine a lot of appraisals of him will change.
-
I'm sorry to disagree. I've seen Ritchie rag doll a man 3 years older than him of equal size. Kapanen may be wiry strong but he will never have the physical tools to do that. It's not to say he's weak, and he may be able to bench press a lot, but he'll lack the same leverage that a player like Ritchie has.
-
That's an older head shot. He's trimmed up a lot in the last year. He's losing the baby fat already and finally starting to look like a grown man instead of a man-child. Consider this offseason, prospects camp, another full year of junior, likely the WJC, and another offseason before we get a good look at his NHL playing shape. Here is a more recent photo for comparison. He looks more like a hockey player now.
-
Both.
-
Only if he beats out Hugh Jessiman and Kyle Beach for the roster spot.
-
What I expect will happen: 1. Ekblad 2. Reinhart 3. Bennett 4. Dal Colle 5. Draisaitl 6. Ritchie 7. Ehlers 8. Perlini 9. Nylander 10. Fleury 11. Virtanen 12. Kapanen What I think should happen: 1. Ekblad 2. Bennett 3. Reinhart 4. Draisaitl 5. Dal Colle 6. Nylander 7. Ritchie 8. Ehlers 9. Virtanen 10. Fleury 11. Perlini 12. Kapanen
-
I'd be equally shocked if Virtanen was drafted ahead of Ritchie by anyone.
-
I believe there is very little separation between 6 and 13 this year. I don't consider any of them weak picks. The only weakness in this draft, for my money, is the lack of talent after around #50 and the glut of smaller wingers with little options at the other positions. In my best guess, this is the reason the Canucks will take Ritchie at 6th if the big 5 are gone. If they want some size in this draft they better pick it early because it will be gone quickly.
-
IDK. I've read every top 15 prospect being talked down in this thread by a variety of people. The simple fact is they all do some things very well, IMHO. I'm not sure why people are so confident of their opinions when they have no reliable track record to back it up. I don't understand the point of liking one player at a spot but being dismissive of all others. That's crazy.
-
There is a lot of opinion being cited as fact based off of very little information in this thread. It's like listening to people debate the qualities of a classic novel when some haven't read it and others have just skimmed the Coles notes or have seen the movie.
-
So many absolute statements being made…. We are dealing in probabilities here, gentlemen. And not particularly high or reliable ones, either.
-
Donald Audette? No, I don't think he won many puck battles. Brunette wasn't exactly great at that aspect either. He was magic once he got it but he asn't the best forechecker. I fact, he usually had a rough time keeping up with the play.
-
Fat, apparently. He's convinced Ritchie is fat. If you listen carefully he will insult any player not named Virtanen for the 6th pick.
-
Opinions are like Duncan Keiths….
-
He's the player I like at 6th but, no, I don't expect the Canucks to take him over Ritchie. I think we'll hang onto the pick until it's our turn to draft. If the player we want is there we pick. If not we might trade down. I still wouldn't rule out us trading up yet. There will likely be a couple of roster moves by the new GM before the draft and we could go either way. A lot of decisions will be made in the next few weeks.
-
Nope. I have my preferences though. I was just agreeing with his point. It's absolutely correct.
-
Yup. The worst scouting numbers are from teams that miss their 1st round picks. The best are from those that make gravy from 2-7. Want this year to be a complete waste? Take a player who plays less than 400 games in the NHL. Some of the players we are talking about are going to be under that.
-
Not so. There are many ways of measuring it. Two step quickness is more important than straight ahead speed and is utilized more frequently in a game. The question I ask myself is, "Does the player get to where they need to be, in time?" If the answer is yes then there is no issue with speed. Another major factor is whether the player can make plays with or without the puck at speed. For both of these assessments, Ritchie and Virtanen are both fine. Neither of them lack the ability during game play. Ritchie does need to stay away from his minor penalties but he's also more involved in the total game than Virtanen who can be invisible on many shifts, very similar to how Shinkaruk was last year. One point I would put in Ritchie's favour, as far as PIMs are concerned, is that he draws more penalties than he takes. He's a major distraction all over the ice. Things are happening when he's playing. There is no such thing as a redundant prospect. that's ridiculous. There maybe redundancy in the NHL line-up but prospects reach the competition for jobs under different circumstances at different times. To suggest a farm system can have too much 'good' at any one quality is just silly. That's trying to out think what's in front of your eyes.
-
If I can't be in the playoffs then I'm going to share music. Mayer Hawthorne, gentlemen. http://youtu.be/mtcR4BBet3k
-
That can be fixed. Stupid can't.
-
It wasn't my intent to talk him down but he's not in that elite 1st line centre conversation, if he is. He's good but he's not a superstar. The Sedins could get 65 points next year and everyone would say they are 2nd liners….. so it's a matter of opinion. I was just trying to make the point that a top 6 can be made up in different ways. For all we know, Cassels could have the same career with the right line mates.
-
That's fine that is your opinion but it doesn't make Ritchie a bad prospect without skill. Ritchie certainly has first line potential if he has the right line mates. Is Krejci a true 1st line centre? Probably not.
-
Shinkaruk, Schroeder, Subban, Cassels. It's all relative. Why is being small and skilled better than big and skilled? That makes no sense. I have my own preference but I don't like it when people talk down other prospects inaccurately to boost the evaluation of another.
-
They have also had big, skilled guys. Which is basically the point.