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

baumerman77

Members
  • Posts

    2,221
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by baumerman77

  1. I hate to be that guy but... "alot" is not a word. It's "a lot" - two words. Come on guys.
  2. I agree. Draisaitl and Dal Colle should be removed from the poll.
  3. Because there are better players available. One's that have played more games and have been scouted more. Kapanen's offense is a not good enough for a 6th pick by the majority of GMs.
  4. There is NO way the Canucks will draft Kapanen at 6th. You better hope we get another draft pick or you'll be cheering for him on another team.
  5. Touche. Some people like Euros because of my aforementioned reason.
  6. Some people like Euros because they look at central scouting and say "we could draft a 6-8 NA skater or we could draft a 1-3 Euro skater". Some people think because players are at the top of the one list they must be better than the player a few spots down the other list. Sad but true.
  7. Good interview with Virtanen http://www.hockeysfuture.com/articles/106845/2014-u18-video-jake-virtanen-and-matt-barzal-canada/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=2014-u18-video-jake-virtanen-and-matt-barzal-canada
  8. Yes this was my point. But I think a lot of people think that Ehlers or Nylander are a coin toss (50-50) whether they will make they will make the top 6 but I think the odds are closer to 20-80. I agree with Virtanen and Ritchie assessment, assuming that the top 5 go as projected. I like Virtanen better than Ritchie as of right now but I am still on the fence. I am looking forward to the draft combine.
  9. I know this has been posted before but Scott Cullen estimates that only approximately 1/3 of 6th over picks become top 6 forwards. I see a lot of people want the Canucks to take high risk/ high reward prospects like Ehlers and Nylander. Based on Cullen's numbers it could be estimated that high risk/reward prospects like Ehlers and Nylander will have a 20-25% of being a top 6 forward. Conversely a safe pick may be estimated at having a 40-45% of being a top 6 forward. I know a lot of people are optimistic about our prospects but I think these numbers which I believe are fairly accurate may lead some to re-think whether they want the Canucks to gamble on a high risk high reward prospect. http://www.tsn.ca/blogs/scott_cullen/?id=398986
  10. One scouts assessment of Ritchie near the start of the year: “Conditioning is a question. He’s too heavy. His skating would be better if he wasn’t dragging around that amount of weight. And if he was in better shape, he might not be taking shifts off, which he does. Health is a question, too. He missed a lot of games last year with a bum shoulder. That’s a concern, especially with the game he plays.” There is no doubt he will have to lose weight to play in the NHL. One's condition needs to be a lot better than in the OHL. Also there is a risk of drafting a player who has already had two injures (head/shoulder). Although he has the frame to play in the NHL there is little doubt that he would be back in the OHL next year to improve on his conditioning among other things. I am really looking forward to the draft combine I think it will affect Ritchie's draft position; if he doesn't do well on the strength tests and has a poor body-fat percentage, I think his large frame (weight) goes from being a positive to a negative.
  11. A lot has been made about best case scenario of this draft pick (upside of any given prospect). How does everyone think has the highest floor (if they bust in NHL how far do they fall)? Ryan Kennedy of The Hockey News said earlier this week on the Team 1040 that Virtanen has the "lowest floor" of anyone outside the top 5 (Ekblad, Bennett, Reinhart, Draisailt, Dal Colle). He said that the guy could be a solid 3rd or 4th liner if his offense doesn't pan out. Although I like Virtanen's upside I am not sure about this assessment. Conversely a guy like Ritchie is said to have diverse skill-set that will help him even if his offense doesn't work out; notably his physical play. But I have also heard that although he hits very hard, he doesn't hit as often as some scouts think he should. Similarly, his toughness has been compared to Lucic. If fights are any measure of toughness (debatable) it is interesting to note that Ritchie had 4 fighting majors this yeas (as did Virtanen) whereas Lucic in his draft year had 23 fighting majors. What does everyone think? I don't necessarily mean who do you think is the safest pick (which I would define as the least likely to bust) but rather I mean if one does "bust" does their "floor" still allow them to play in the NHL?
  12. No he is too old. He was in the tourney last year. He got 1 goal and 6 assists in 5 games.
  13. Game 2 for Canada at the U18 Worlds. They beat Germany 5-2. Notables: Virtanen: 2 Assists McCann: 1 Goal Perlini: 1 Assist
  14. Some can, maybe 1 in 100 but I wouldn't bet my drafting strategy on it. Small skilled players are the exception to the rule. People point to guys like St. Louis and Ennis but they forget to mention the hundreds of prospects that failed.
  15. I understand your point but I don't think contagious confidence can help Subban overcome his size.
  16. There were 6 Defensemen (out of 303) who played in the NHL under 5'10" (Subban's height) in the regular season. They averaged 35 games played and 12 points. It's going to be an uphill battle for Subban.
  17. Although I do agree that there are some great skilled small forwards from a drafting standing point I do not think it is a good strategy unless the skill and talent is immense and by that I mean a player that will be picked 1 or 2. If you look at the NHL this year out of the 886 players that played in the regular season only 192 were under 6 feet. If look at players under 5'11" that number drops down to 86 out of 886 (of which only 7 got over 50 points). This is why smaller players drop in the draft. If they cannot utilize their skill at the NHL level they cannot play in the NHL. Whereas if you have size and you cannot utilize your skill at the NHL level you may still be able to contribute in other ways.
  18. For everyone interested in the age issue between Virtanen and Ritchie here is a breakdown of their productions as 17 year olds: Virtanen: GP 71, G 45, A, 26, P 71, GPG .634, APG .366, PPG 1.0 Ritchie: GP 53, G 26, A 24, P 50 GPG .490, APG .453, PPG .943
  19. The one common criticism I hear about Virtanen is that: (1) he doesn't use his teammates enough and (2) he doesn't have a (relatively) high Hockey IQ. I am not too worried about these criticisms as they are common for a shoot first offensive winger. It is almost by the structure of the position itself that he has a lower hockey IQ and that he doesn't use his teammates enough. Why doesn't he use his teammates? He likes to shoot, he knows he can get himself in shooting position, and he knows he is good at it. This is common in junior with a talented winger. The guy knows that he can facilitate a scoring opportunity himself more often than relying on a less skilled teammate. This won't be a problem at the next level because he will be playing with guys that have more skill and that can play-make a lot better than his junior teammates. Relatively low hockey IQ. This is somewhat tied to the first point about using teammates (he shot instead of passing to a teammate). What do scouts mean by hockey IQ? Essentially it means the ability to see the ice, anticipate plays, and implement an optimal response to any given anticipation both offensively and defensively. By design this is criterion favours centermen because they are the ones with more defensive responsibility and the ones who care the puck through the neutral zone and are suppose to facilitate offense. I would say that when scouts say he has a lower hockey IQ it isn't his ability to see the ice or anticipate the play but rather his decision not to implement the optimal response. My hypothesis why he does not do this: (1) in the defensive zone it is probably because he is thinking offense and (2) as my aforementioned point alluded to he doesn't trust less skilled linemates to get the job done. I don't see either of these claimed weaknesses to be a problem at the NHL level. These weakness can be overcome by playing with better players and a little more direction from coaches.
  20. Once you make a comparison of a prospect with an NHLer you unconsciously reframe the way you think about such a prospect. Case-in-point: Virtanen. By saying he plays like Dustin Brown now you limit him to Brown attributes (strengths and weakness). I think it is really dangerous way of thinking about prospects. People like to say Scout X said Player Y plays like NHLer Z. Scouts only make the player comparison for public consumption so that you can get the general idea of the player. They however do not say such things to GMs (other scouts, hockey ops, etc). If anyone is so inclined to look into the academic literature on said topic a good starting place is to look up: reporting bias.
  21. So then try to trade Emerson and the 10th pick to Winnipeg for Kane? They might bite on it, if they are that down on Kane.
  22. What's the purposed trade here? Kesler for 1st (Ott) and Emerson?
  23. Good stuff: Leon Draisaitl, Prince Albert (WHL), C/LW, 6'1", 208, 64 games, 38-67-105 +7 Strengths: Outstanding playmaker with good vision and soft hands. Hockey IQ very high. Weaknesses: Struggled during WJC, skating could improve, not physical and could use size better. I could see Draisaitl falling to 6th or 7th. I would still take Virtanen over him.
  24. I wouldn't exactly call 10 goals for Sestito a lot.
×
×
  • Create New...