ForsbergTheGreat
-
Posts
12,354 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
4
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Blogs
Gallery
Posts posted by ForsbergTheGreat
-
-
If you look at the team he built in Boston the teams isn’t just built on size. They are built on being a hard team to play against.
Every player (big or small) finishes their checks and plays with physical intensity. There is no easy win against them, you are going to have to earn each victory and you’ll be feeling it the next day. There is less focus on skill and more focus on a high pace, high intensity game. In my opinion that fits the mold of Virtanen and Ritchie not because of their size but because of their style of play.
But then if you look at Bennings top 10 draft pick history he's picked high end skill and stole the big strong physical play in selecting some gems in later rounds.
In my opinion there has to be that right mix. Canucks currently rely on pure skill to win a game. And when the team isn’t scoring we weren’t providing much of an effort and it made other teams have easy wins. We would lose 1-0, get out shot, out hit, and out worked, teams didn’t fear playing us as the first game in a back to back. Teams figured how to block out our offensive and force us to try and score dirty goals by driving to the net(something we rarely did).
Again, One pick doesn’t change the entire outlook on this team. If we are going to change our culture to be more of a big, fast, hardworking team then there will have to be a lot of movement. One of Hammer, Edler, Garrison will need to be moved and a top 4, hard hitting stay at home defencemen will have to be brought in. If we could move two of them and bring in a PMD as well that would be ideal.
We will also need to provide more of a fore-check in the top 6. We currently have Kelser that can fit that role, (Kassian as well if he can make that jump). A fast skating, goal scoring winger, who can also throw his weight around would be ideal. E.Kane would look good in the top 6, but possibly Virtanen/Ritchie can fit that role as well.
On the flip side, we have two extremely skilled twins in our line up. What happens when they slow down? Do we need to start preparing for that? We have 4 years to fill that hole so it’s not as pressing as some people think. When they do move on, we will have some open holes to fill but it doesn’t have to be completely filled through drafting. Rare case but MIN picked up a number 1 winger/center and number 1 D in that same UFA market. Trades also happen stars picked up a number 1 center in a trade with the Bruins last summer
This is assuming all players continue on their current path. We have in our system.
Shinkaruk ______ ______
Jensen Horvat Kassian
_____ Gaunce Cassels
**After all that. Assuming he none of the top 5 players fall I think he will draft skill. We don’t need a player to come in and make an impact right away. We still have the Sedin’s locked up for 4 more years. I may be bias but, Nylander is who he will pick. He has top end skill and can learn a lot about being a pro from two great leaders who also are from Sweden. He has the potential to become this team’s future top center, he might not be Captain material but we’ve stocked up heart and sole players with Gaunce, Horvat, and Cassels.
I would love to see a future line of
Jensen Nylander Kassian
-
1
-
-
Anyone coming to Chasing Summer this year?
-
-
The saddest part is he may actually believe the crap he's saying.
It's like trying to explain to a 3 year old that santa doesn't exist. No matter how much logic and evidence you give them, they just don't understand. I mean their are all those cartoons that say he's real
-
1
-
-
I've been long waiting to post this. Alas, the time has come.
Haha nice, I think I beat you to it on page 4 or something. But it did need a refresh.
-
1
-
-
If Draisaitl were to fall, that would be great.
I don't think his skating issues are a big deal. He's got a slower first few steps but that can be improved, once he gets going his full out speed is more than fine.
He could be a future #1C for us. With Horvat at #2. Getting him would be great, though my dream scenario is still Dal Colle falling to us.
Draisaitl won't, Treliving was just on calgary radio today basically stating that they have a list of top 4 guys they are wanting depending who falls to them, and that Draisaitl is in that list..
And they didn't see an issue with his skating, in fact they were comparing it to Jagr
-
That Price injury is fake.
Countless times is a goalie run into like that and with all the bloody padding there and knee flexibility with goaltenders in general, there's just no way that was a real injury. Just further rigging. Like how we lost Hamhuis to a ridiculous injury while he toppled over Lucic and so on. It's easier for Canadian teams to be shellacked by American O4 teams when they lose key players to unbelieveable injuries.
It's of little concern though. Plenty of Canadian teams this year are without playoffs anyway. They'll be rescued by having good picks in upcoming drafts... Which are also rigged to suit southern teams. D'oh!
Your theory just hit a major snag.
Why fake an injury if the games are scripted? Why not just have Price play good but come out short in the end. An injury serves no purposed in a pre determined outcome. It would bring out more exciting games/ better ratings if price was still in the net forcing the series to seven games.
If the players are in on it, then why do the refs have to make bad calls? They shouldn't have to, as players acting the game out decides the outcome not bad calls.
GAME, SET, AND MATCH...
-
Its a made up concern. He did not make the primafaca case that Ehlers numbers were any worse than the other draft hopefulls nor did he even prove his cherry picked thin slice was even cause for concern as opposed to anyone else.
He just states that took some data, then used straight conjecture to frame it as a concern. proclaims it a problem without proving how it is a problem from historical data to compare how other high end draft picks failed or succeeded with those same stats.
The fact you just 'decide' its a legitimate point without any context at all is disappointing. You realize this is the same guy who took time to look up how many posts each member had on this thread? His brain told him its a worthwhile exercise. He never did it with any other thread of course so it probably wasnt much of an 'objective' task.
He is also the guy who stated 5 days ago he knew Kyle Beach was no good and at the time wouldnt have taken him until the third round. Every single scout and mock draft had him anywhere from 10 to 24. He thinks we are all a bunch of suckers and will believe anything.
Now he expects you to believe that Ehlers has 'concerns' .......because he cherry picked information he dug out and then proclaimed so using straight conjecture to analyse it with no other prospect examples to compare it to. He thinks we are idiots and will believe anything.
Your right ehlers is flawless.....
Minister made some good points based on facts, surronding questions others have. If you want to disregard go for it. You cherry picked just as many stats to support Ehlers.
Any time someone brings up a weak point in Ehlers game you lose your mind. You do realize Smashian is an Ehlers supporter. If Ehlers didn't have any weak area's (which you argue your life on), or question marks around his game he'd be ranked 1st overall. Not in the third tier of prospects.
-
2
-
-
Ehlers plays the Kessel role on the PP, he's always on that one side either higher or lower depending on whats going on with the puck, its hockey sense, getting himself open to get goals, thats why you see in his highlights some goals are wrists shots from the point on the PP, or some lower down for the backdoor play.
Anyways I would argue Ehlers doesn't just bring offense, I mean yeah thats what he is drafted for to be an offensive player, but you bring up Virtanen, and I would say he's being drafted for his goal scoring, yeah he has a physical element that could make him a 4th line guy, but I would say Ehlers could also be a very useful penalty killer, since he has the willingness to play a two-way game, he will grow in that area, and with his speed could be a responsible two-way player, say for whatever reason he doesn't hit high potential, he could be a Carl Hagelin type with a bit better offensive skill, which IMO is a much better style comparison than Raymond.
If your comparing both players:
Ehlers brings offence, vision and speed. His ideal fit would be to be that PP guy similarly to Kessel. Could he be molded into a defensive player? sure but same could be said with Virtanen as well. He could bring the top 6 some excitement with his hands and speed.
Virtanen brings goal scoring, physical play, and speed, He can be a top unit PP guy but that’s not really his ideal spot. He is a more versatile player, similar to E.Kane. He provides the top 6 with high energy, with his physical play and goal scoring.
Both players are important pieces to a top 6, it just comes down to how to Linden see this team and what player he thinks will be able to elevate their game to the next level. Does he want a high scoring, high excitement team or does he want a high scoring team that’s tough to play against and makes you earn every win.
What piece does he think this team needs moving forward? Cases can be made with all the prospects in our pick range.
-
Dude, what are you talking about? Forsberg always had the foot issues, Kariya was not in his goal scoring prime and Arnott was never really an elite player. The Sedins have won Art Ross and were consistent goal scorers before Torts arrived. Kesler is a Selke winner and can still contribute, he had 25 or so goals this year. Burrows has had an unfortunate year with all the injuries. Trotz has made the playoffs multiple times with a team that has half the Canucks budget. I believe that he can make something happen if he is given a decent roster unlike Tortorella.
Not to jump in and sort of off topic, but Forsberg with one foot was still a top ten player.
That 2001-02 year always stood out. He didn't play a single regular season game because he was injuried, came back for game one playoffs and put up 27 points in 20 games to lead playoffs that year. What a talent
-
This list is taken from HF boards. Its a generally agreed consensus of the top 12 , bunched into tiers .
Ekblad
Reinhart
Bennett
Draisaitl
Dal Colle
Nylander
Ritchie
Ehlers
Kapanen
Virtanen
Fleury
Fabbri
Perlini
McCann
Tuch
Seems fairly accurate to me as of May 20th 2014
I wonder who trevor has his eye on. Is he hoping a top 5 drops and then picks that player. I would love to somehow see canucks scouting list.
My personal opinion hasn't changed much
Top five is someone falls then
If we want to go with high end skill Nylander is my guy.
If we want a more rounded player Virtanen seems like a sold pick aswell
-
1
-
-
You are trying to talk to a guy who has been told this 5 times already. You are wasting your time. He just makes up whatever he wants to believe.
This idea of being 'heavy' on the puck actually means 'strong' on the puck. Ehlers is very difficult to knock off the puck. His center of gravity is excellent. He is also one of the best forecheckers in the QMJHL and part of it is because he wants the puck and you can see it whenever he plays.
So I take it this 'heavy' on the puck must be some way where Ehlers would not be eligible due to the size advantage for Ritchie. Its a novel way to create a concrete negative that he thinks cannot be questioned.
If you want to spend your time correcting myths and then re correcting myths and then furthermore correct them some more then be my guest. At some point you may want to stop and ask yourself if these guys have an honest objection or are just using excuses to perpetually argue.
You just can't admit Ehlers has a flaw can you?
If Ehlers and Weber go into the corner and have a physical battle for the puck who wins?
Ehlers and Chara are having a battle in front of the net for shot position, who wins?
It's not necessarily a flaw anyways, Kane would also loose in those battles, it's just not the type of game they play. And if we pick a player like Ritchie that shows us that Linden wanted a player who can win those battles.
It's not even about size, it's about who plays a heavier games. Size and weight just make it easier to play that way but not a necessity . Marchand 5'9 Cooke 5'11, same size or smaller than Ehlers but play way heavier games. If you want to argue that be my guest you wont find many people who will agree with you on that.
On top of that, the NHL is full of stronger comp. then in the Q. Sure he might not get knocked off the puck against some 20 year old who isn't done developing, but compare that to a much faster 220lbs(+) 30 year old defenceman. It doesn't mean he wont go into the corners, just means he's going to have a lot harder time winning those battles compared to a big PWF. But again it's not really a flaw just not the type of game he brings to the table.
We have a team full of players who can't win those puck battles in the corner and in front of the net. We rarely have anyone score those garbage goals from the puck battles in front. Bert was amazing at that when he was in Van. Sedins are good in the corner but only when they have control of the puck not at retrieving the puck. Thats why Burr used to be the glue, hopefully he can bounce back. We have Kesler and Kassian, Booth, thats about it. In our prospect pool we have Horvat that could fit into that role.
I want Nylander, I can see the case why Linden would draft a player like Ritchie or Virtanen. They are different types of players. Your not going to see me try to convince other people that Nylander would be as effective as those two in that aspect of the game.
Rather than try to convince everyone that Ehlers is this top end all around player. Tops in every aspect of the game, that is strong on the puck and will win all these physical battles just stick to his actual strengths. He's fast, has hands and has decent vision.
-
How about 7 years?
2007 FINAL ISS RANKINGS: JUNE
1 Kane, Patrick RW 11/19/1988 L 5.09.5 160 London OHL
2 vanRiemsdyk, James LW 5/4/1989 L 6.03 200 USA Under-18 NTDP
3 Turris, Kyle C 8/14/1989 R 6.00.5 170 Burnaby BCHL
4 Cherepanov, Alexei RW 1/15/1989 L 6.00 183 Omsk RusE
5 Voracek, Jakub RW 8/15/1989 L 6.01.5 187 Halifax QMJHL
6 Alzner, Karl LD 9/24/1988 L 6.02 206 Calgary WHL
7 Gagner, Sam C 8/10/1989 R 5.11 191 London OHL
8. Mayorov, Maxim LW 3/26/1989 L 6.02 187 Leninogorsk RusS
9 Ellerby, Keaton LD 11/5/1988 L 6.04.5 186 Kamloops WHL
10 Backlund, Mikael C 3/17/1989 L 6.00 194 Vasteras SweAl
11 Esposito, Angelo C 2/20/1989 L 6.01 180 Quebec QMJHL
12 Gillies, Colto C 2/12/1989 L 6.03.5 189 Saskatoon WHL
13 Couture, Logan C 3/28/1989 L 6.00.5 195 Ottawa OHL
14 Petrecki, Nicholas LD 7/11/1989 L 6.03 213 Omaha USHL
15 Perron, David RW 5/28/1988 R 5.11.5 180 Lewiston QMJHL
16 Hamill, Zach C 9/23/1988 R 5.10.5 180 Everett WHL
17 Hickey, Thomas LD 2/8/1989 L 5.11 182 Seattle WHL
18 Eller, Lars LW 5/8/1989 L 6.00 198 V. Frolunda SweJE
19 McDonagh, Ryan LD 6/13/1989 L 6.01 200 Cretin-Derham USHSW
20 Blum, Jon RD 1/30/1989 R 6.00.5 160 Vancouver WHL
21 MacLean, Brett LW 12/24/198 R 6.01.5 196 Oshawa OHL
22 O'Brien, Jim C 1/29/1989 R 6.02 184 Minnesota WCHA
23 White, Pat C 1/20/1989 R 6.00.5 186 Grand Rapids USHSW
24 MacMillan, Logan 7/5/1989 L 6.01 172 Halifax QMJHL
25 Moller, Oscar RW 1/22/1989 R 5.11 179 Chilliwack WHL
26 Repik, Michal RW 12/31/1988 R 5.10.5 180 Vancouver WHL
27 Shattenkirk, Kevin RD 1/29/1989 R 5.11 193 USA Under-18 NTDP
28 Plante, Alex RD 5/9/1989 R 6.03.5 225 Calgary WHL
29 Cross, Tommy LD 9/12/1989 L6.03 195 Westminster USHSE
30 Sutter, Brandon c 2/14/1989 R 6.03 170 Red Deer WHL
Imagine how good NYR's would be with Cherepanov on their roster. That kid was going to be a star
-
Im dreading the day when draft day comes cause whoever we select, all the fanboys for that player will be harping endlessly over their new found interest.
And somehow still blame Gillis over our selected pick
-
My point is every player has flaws even NHL player. Theres no point of trying to convince everyone that he has this overal rounded game and is tops on all categories. Not many NHL players are solid in all around games. infact like maybe only 3 or 4 players. Kane is highly skilled but he’s not known for his strong defensive and PK game. So there is no point comparing Kane to Lucic as they provide different benefits to their respective teams. There’s no point for people to try and say Ritchie’s is a better player than Ehlers (and vice versa) as they play two different types of games. There overall on a rating would be almost identical just each player had a few more/less attributes in other areas.
Ehlers may be average size but he doesn’t play a heavy game and is soft on the puck. That not necessarily a bad knock, just acknowledging that’s not his type of game. Kane isn’t either. If both go on an one on one battle with Chara they are likely going to lose that battle where a big heavy player like Ritchie might win. Ehlers might get a lot more break ways and score odd man rushes that Ritchie on the other end.
It all comes down to what type of player team feels it needs, the big power forward, a speedy forward, a smooth visionary, or the all rounded player. We want a balanced team, eventually one of each. Not a roster full of the same type of player. aka EDM
-
Because we were looking back 10 years. The lock out is a pretty cut and dry period where a lot of discussion on a whole range of topics since then. Its not the end all be all. Its just the last 10 year look back. We have been quite clear on it for about 30 pages or so.
You just forgot ? You just NOW clued into that?
Let me get this straight. You figured Sidney Crosby was the FIRST guy in QMHJL in 2005? First in history to get 100 points in his draft year? Thats impossible. You cant possibly be that stoned.
What I want to know is why do I have to keep explaining ,and re explaining all these facts to you guys. At some point you sound like guys who dont even care anymore what the discussion is. You just want to continue to argue. Argue over anything.
This forum and this topic is not about you hiding behind a computer using a fake name trying to 'prove some else wrong' and get into never ending arguments.
You are wasting your time. You have wasted mine for the last time.
No i’m just continuing to point out how dumb you look cherry picking stats that have no relevance to how good a players nhl career will be, yet you continue to through this crap out like it means something. keep on throwing out the good old “100point in draft year” Who cares. You have no other argument than that. Even mock draft don't agree with your assumptions but you continue to defend your stance.
You are probably one of the worst posters on this forum and once you make your mind up about something you won't even open the door a crack to see what's on the outside.
No one is try to say Ehlers sucks. All people are doing is weighing the pro's and con's on each prospect with “relevant” stats and information. Not manipulated information to make someone look better. This isn't the Ehlers thread.
And the part about using a fake name, it's called a user name, If your parents named you "absent canuck" I can see there are more issues for you, then this forum. Lots of people on this forumn know my actual name. I'm sorry a computer is the means to communicate, should we meet in person and have this discussion over coffee... Get over yourself....
-
3
-
-
I think you might be looking at the wrong stats bud. We are talking about post lock out. As in 2005 and beyond. A whole pile of folks put up 100 points in the
" His most productive junior season came in his draft year, 2002–03, when he scored 49 goals and 101 points, ninth in league scoring. "
Why does post lock out matter? It wasn't like the Q had a lockout. Now your cherry picking and manipulating numbers to make a person look better. I can say the same type of thing and say no Dane has never put up more than 25 goals in a year before, Therefore he’s in a weak group of company and it’s not looking good for him.
Your putting way too much emphasis on this 100 points in his draft year. Scouts obviously don’t think that highly of it as most mock drafts have him ranked between 6-13th and not in the top 5.
Mackinnon didn’t make that important 100 point club and was taken 1st overall. It just shows that Mack had way more to his game and that it’s not just about points. If Ehlers was flawless, he would be ranked 1st overall and not past 6th.
-
1
-
-
Ehlers is on a slightly higher level than Shinkaruk as a prospect imo. If we draft Ehlers he'll arguably become our top prospect. Does it matter where we pick a player? The end result is all that matters. How we develop the potential is all that's important. We finally have the means to develop players properly with Utica.
On a side note I was watching old MacKinnon clips and wow was he a dominant force. His 1 on 1 moves were filthy, undressed defenders every game. What I do see in common between Mack and Ehlers is not only the speed, and some of the skills, but how they play the game is very similar. Both relentless and so hungry to receive the puck and win battles. Their compete levels are very similar. Skills wise though MacKinnon was a little more dynamic and could do more by himself, but they're skill set is still very similar.
Mack was a clear cut #1 or 2 pick throughout his entire draft year (an extremely strong draft year). Ehlers doesn't even get mentioned in to be in the top 5 in a weaker draft year. Ehlers has flaws, he's not a strong on the puck as Mack, he's not as good at predicting the play or reading his opponent. If Ehlers was as good as everyone hypes him up to be he would be the clear cut number 1. Mackinnon plays a way heavier game even though they may have been the same size.
Honestly people would get a better read on the draft this year if people could openly admit each players flaws (even the ones they want the canucks to pick)
-
Agreed that 'playing against men' overseas is a factor, but Nylander's U18 tourney shown that he can also vanish against his bigger, stronger 17yr old peers. Not sure if he's all that better a prospect than Ehlers, who I have outside the top-10. There's a reason why Nylander is not part of the top-5 either. Both undersized guys are defensive non-factors who shy away from physical play, and their skill is good, but not quite up there with the best. Both will require years of getting them to figure out how to play without the puck.
Good point about addressing team needs. We have Shinkaruk and Schroeder for the time being and that's probably enough small skilled guys without elite upside.
I'm not going to deny that Nylander's defensive game needs some work and that he does shy's away from the physical game. He has flaws, I can admit this unlike some Ehler supporters. I just see an unreal amount of skill in him and that's what excites me. He has great vision and is extremely smooth when he controls the puck. I see a lot of Backstrom in his game. But it really depends on what this team feels we need.
I also like virtanen a lot. He brings a lot more overall game. He hit's, he's fast, he's got a good shot.
I think we can all agree that outside the top 5 it's down to Ritchie, Virtanen, Nylander, Ehlers, and some could even put in Kapanen. We should be happy with who ever this team picks as all kids have great potential.
-
3
-
-
Bernier had over 100pts in the qmjhl in his draft year. Pierre-Marc bouchard had 140pts in the Q in his draft year and never really amounted to that much (couple 60pt seasons). So what Ehlers also put up 100pts.
Judging a player solely in the quantity of points he put up in Junior to prove he will be a guaranteed success in the NHL is flawed.
Looking at everything that player does and relating it to whether it will translate to the NHL is better than posting statistics. Not saying Ehlers is a bad pick at 6 but stating that he put up 100pts isn't a worthy argument for justifying the pick.
Amen, If it was so crutial than Drouin should have been drafted ahead of Mackinnon last year
-
They are lying about Ehlers to make their prospects seem better. Golden rule; if you cant make your prospect look good enough compared to the other prospects, then rip apart the others to drag them down so your guy looks better.
This is one of the rare posts where someone has the gall to put forth an objective point without using hyperbole or subjective bias. Good for you. +1
It is true we have Shinkaruk. They are very similar players. Agreed. Ehlers is taller and is faster, but it could be argued that Shinkaruk has has a better shot and is a pure goal scorer.
I dont believe you pass a prospect up just because you already have another scoring winger as a prospect. If you honestly have apples to apples a better the same level prospect at center or a defenseman, it would be a compelling argument to take the center first, then the defender and then winger.
In this case our choice is to take .............another winger. According to the same logic we already have Ritchie in the form of Kassian.
Virtanen would be a kind of hybrid between Ehlers and Ritchie. So using that line of logic we already have Shinkaruk and Kassian but we have no Virtanen.
So if Virtanen is the same quality of prospect as Ehlers, then take Virtanen. But he isnt. He has the speed, and shot that Ehlers does. He even has more size than Ehlers does and is 6 months younger. However, to be fair he does not have the skills or hockey IQ that Ehlers has. Ehlers scored more goals in fewer games and got a whopping 33 more points in fewer games.
So instead we could choose neither. We could pick William Nylander. This kid is a center / winger. If he is as good as everyone says he is, He will be a bigger version of Claude Girouix. Unfortunately Nylander has never played the North American game and it becomes a risk as his game revolves around maneuvering in open ice..
These are all thing that I am sure the Canucks are pondering. I appreciate the OP making an unbiased point and laying off the hyperbole and other useless insults.
Ehlers is not a clear cut better prospect than the other players (Ritchie, Viratnen, Nylander) If he was, people wouldn't be talking about picking a player outside the top 5 it would be picking a player outside the top 6. In fact very few mock drafts have Ehlers at number 6. Therefore it's safe to say no prospect is a cut above everyone else. And in this case if we already have someone similar in our system who is arguably better why draft that same skillset and there is no difinate BPA, then pick one on the possible 4 that fits team future needs. EDM has disregarded their team needs when it came to drafting and it’s resulting in building a one dimensional team.. not a winning team.
Nylander hasn't player in NA, which is true, but he is playing against men. This should give him a head start to producing in the NHL compared to Ehlers. It's a less risk because his smaller frame (game style) has already shown it can handle playing against a bigger stronger competition where Ehlers will still need to prove that.
-
And instead of acknowledging it , you still try to pretend it doesnt exist or means nothing because its not convenient to the narrative you want to put forth. So we are going to keep writing it .
It obviously doesn’t mean as much as you think it does. It meant so much that Claude Giroux was still selected 22nd and was so high the Philly’s radar that they forgot his name. They must have been just too pumped about getting a player that cracked that 100points in the Q in his draft year. Did Giroux turn out to be a steal, yes but he’s junior accomplishment only landed him being drafted 22nd. His NHL level development has got him to the level where he is today. Brassard isn’t someone to be bragging about. And as mention huberdeau and Drouin are yet to be stars in the league, they haven’t proved anything so they shouldn’t even be in the list. So your left with Crosby.
On top of that by hitting a hundred points you assume that means he for sure the real deal. Well Mackinnon didn’t hit the 100 points in his draft year yet he was considered a top 2 pick throughout his entire year. Ehlers has hit that and his name can’t even crack the top 5. Obviously the scouts don’t see as much meaning in that stat as you do.
-
No one has a crystal ball, for all we know the guy taken with the last pick in the 7th round might become the best player.
All we can do is look at players now, what they have shown, project how there game will translate, exc. And try to project who has the highest upside. Who has the lowest, exc.
You bring up Jamie Benn as a guy who obviously became bigger than he was projected to be, and it happens, but for every Jamie Benn there are probably 20 other big guys who bust.
I think Ritchie is a very good prospect myself, he's my 2nd favorite at our pick. So I'm not trying to knock him, I'm just saying its all projection from what we know now. And everyone who follows the prospects does it.
You’ve got is wrong, I don’t even like Ritchie, All I am saying is that it is dumb to predict a players ceiling. Be it Ritchie, Ehlers, Virtanen, or some guy drafting in the later rounds named Datsyuk. Making a case that “this player” has a higher ceiling than another is just plain dumb, you don’t know the players ceiling, I don’t know, even the player himself doesn’t know.
You take a prospects current skills and you evaluate to see if those skills have room to grow and transition into the NHL. Currently no prospect current skillset could come into the NHL and dominate, there are no Crosby’s in this draft. They all still need to grow. People say Ritchie has an NHL ready shot, we will see if that translates when he has less time to get open and less time to get that shot off. People say Ehlers has quick hands and fast speed, lets see if that translates when the competition is faster, stronger and much more positionally sound. Maybe they can take these skills to the next level where they will need to be at the NHL level, maybe they can’t. Point is I’m not going to predict that their current junior (18year old) skillset is going to cap out somewhere.
It’s not just Benn who has became bigger than he was predicted, how about even from our own squad, most of our team is compiled of these so call overachievers. Burrows, Edler, Garrison, Kesler, Bieska, and who would have predicted at 18 that Eddie Lack someday would replace Luongo as an NHL starter. No one predicted their outcomes in fact most predicted Kesler to be a 3rd liner who’s career high would be 20 goals. How stupid do those prediction look now?
-
3
-
-
I think the guy is trying to say (me that is) is that Nux dont draft this high very often. The draft has no real clear cut #1 , and at #6 we could get a guy who ends up being the best player in the draft. The odds of it are less than average but it could happen as opposed to take 2 guys who will at least be 3rd or 4th line grinders (Virt Ritchie) at worst but neither will be superstars.
Not very hard to figure out what the guy was saying.
Enough of that garbage. How do you know they won't become elite superstars? You know how they will continue to develop? You know that they can't elevate their game even more with NHL mentoring. I bet you had Jamie Benn pegged as a first line, olympian?
None of these players can step into this league next year and dominate, none of them. They still have to improve there skill set and bring a whole lot more to their games. Ehlers put up 100 points in the Q, does that mean he will continue to develop and bring more to his game at the NHL level? It sure doesn't mean he's going to put up 100 points in the NHL. Not at all, NHL games don't consist of 15-5 or 11-0 wins like they do in junior. For all we know he could have already peaked in talent while others are still developing and getting better. We've seen one year of him and your already predicting this kid to be a superstar. Burrows had a bad year this year. Should we also predict the rest of his career based on what happened last season?
Saying players with never becomes super stars is a extremely stupid comment.
How many times has hockeyfuture looked dumb for saying what a players top end potential is.
You constantly say Ehlers supporters don't need to put down other prospect, but yet that's all you do.
So, to quote yourself...... keep on hating...hater
-
3
-
Who will Benning draft?
in Canucks Talk
Posted · Edited by ForsbergTheGreat
If Gretzky can be traded then so could Malkin...or crosby
Kesler, 6th overal, 2015 first overal, Hammuis