- Popular Post
ashlynnbrookefan
-
Posts
284 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Blogs
Gallery
Posts posted by ashlynnbrookefan
-
-
12 minutes ago, Rollieo Del Fuego said:
Hunter wouldn't know a talented player if he ate one.....Lind takes the puck away from the other team...so he doesn't have to play D.,...
Hunter wouldn't know a talented player, but you would? Haha. Your opinion couldn't mean less on the subject of hockey or anything hockey related.
-
2 minutes ago, Rollieo Del Fuego said:
I said "at this point in time" ...here is the copy paste of what you quoted:
...I pick Lind over Glass ...at this point in time....10 times out of 10....
Right, so knowing what you do now, if you were Jim Benning and able to re draft while adding that 6th pick you'd take Lind over Glass. If that's truly the case I don't know how much weight your opinion holds while talking about prospects
-
52 minutes ago, Rollieo Del Fuego said:
....I thought I was Jesus....
Lind is every bit as good as Glass ...but it is apples to oranges as it is Winger vs. Center....guess what...we need a LW just like Lind...\
Given that....I pick Lind over Glass ...at this point in time....10 times out of 10....
Lind is smarter than Glass, I can see that already...in a years time the difference's will become more apparent....Glass is good at retrieving loose pucks....Lind is good at creating those loose pucks by hard "smart" checking and then he is capable of hanging on to the puck longer than Glass can by using his smarts.
The brain is a powerful thing ...those that can use it at speed ...will thrive...that is what we are starting to collect here....smart, fast player's
So if you were Jim Benning and somehow added the number 6 pick to go along with Petterson you would draft Lind over Glass in that spot?
-
2 minutes ago, Eastcoast meets Westcoast said:
When you factor draft position, how much Lind factors into his teams offence vs Glass, then he is doing better.
The biggest difference, Lind was snagged at 33 and even if it was equal across the board between him and Glass, Lind wins.
Lind is either playing equally well as compared to a top ten pick or Glass is only doing as well as a second rounder.
Lind has alot of PP points and Glass gets a ton of his points 5on5. I just think it's too soon to say Lind is equal to Glass nevermind better. Good pick at 33 though.
-
4
-
-
1 hour ago, Eastcoast meets Westcoast said:
Gonna chime in here.
First off Dipietro is an absolute lock to make TC. Best Canadian goalie by far. Only a injury could
prevent that.
Gadjovich is not a lock but is a contender. EP is by far better than Glass, good pick by JB and Lind has shown to be ahead of Glass since the draft which has to be considered a win when you factor in drafting positions. If Lind doesn’t make the TC team then there is something smelly in Hockey Canada. I certainly hope politics doesn’t factor into the selection. Lind atm should be a lock and has outperformed Glass.
IMO the more we see the picks from last year play, the more it becomes apparent that JB stole the draft from under everyone’s noses last year.
Would have loved for JB to have landed Foote somehow but one can dream.
EmW
PS, you can’t erase your known history of disputing almost every pick JB has made. Pretending now to be reasonable when you weren’t in the past is weak. Show some meat and potatoes and take the hits you have earned and move on. Most of us would likely respect you for it and read your posts with an open mind.
Lind looks like he was a great pick at 33 but I don't think you can say he's outperformed Glass, they're not the same in terms of style so Glass almost matching Linds point production while playing better D has to make him the better current prospect. Dipietro looks like an absolute lock to make the squad and a good pick by JB and assuming Gadjovic has a roster spot is a little ambitious, he will challenge for one but is certainly not a lock. Regardless it looks like JB had a damn good draft, even though we're still way too early to really judge it
-
3
-
-
I was never a fan of the Virtanen pick at 6, that's not his fault I just had my heart set on Ehlers. His first few years post being drafted I was beyond disappointed with him, I'm sure I was comparing him to a couple other guys in his class which isn't how to judge a prospects ability or potential, but it was also what seemed to me to be his lack of caring and preparation that angered me. I feel much differently about him as a player after a small sample size this season, I don't know if I ever think he truly taps into the offensive potential that is obviously there, but if he brings the energy, love and passion he has so far this season than I see a long career for him with our favorite organization. He's taking huge strides in the right direction.
-
4
-
-
22 minutes ago, J.R. said:
Kane isn't without skill FWIW.
Neither is Virtanen for that matter, even if he hasn't shown it particularly well yet at the pro level (and I do feel very much he's a complimentary player, not as much a play driver).
Based on adding Kane and what we have now something like:
Kane, Pettersson, Boeser
Dahlen/Goldobin, Horvat, Virtanen
Gadjovich, Gaudette, Lind/Lockwood
McEwan, Gaunce, Molino
...would be a great mix of size, speed and skill, scoring and 2 way ability. Now clearly things between now and 3+ years when that lineup might be remotely possible will change but that hardly looks as dire as some would have you believe and has plenty of 'good hockey players'
And it's only bound to get better than that as we add more and the cream rises.
I just think the whole toughness thing is overrated. Kane isn't just physical but also skilled, I agree with that completely. If you could have him or Kucherov or another pure offensive guy that's more on the softer side generally, on the same contact, I'm always going with the more offensively dynamic player. I love our prospect cupboard now too but you can't pencil all those guys in like they'll all be NHLers, some guys aren't gonna develop like hoped and others will beat expectations. The future sure looks bright though
-
1
-
-
6 hours ago, J.R. said:
Agreed. Hopefully we can add Kane to that mix next summer as well.
Kane, Virtanen and Gadjovich sprinkled throughout the lineup and I doubt we'll have too many people complaining about a 'soft' lineup
I agree that adding Kane to the other 2 we have in the system would bring an abundance of physical presence, but who really cares about that? Don Cherry does for sure, and some hockey fans with an old and out of date perspective of the game for sure. But in reality, who cares if your team is soft, hard or whatever term you want to label them. The game is about winning, I don't care if we are winning with a team full of literal midgets, and I mean no disrespect in using that term. And I have no issue with your post, I respect your thought process on it! I just feel like some fans grasp at straws with Jake. Like, sure he doesn't produce but at least he's not a sissy!! I don't care how tough you are, I want good hockey players. Also in no way am I saying you do this with Jake, just thought your post was the perfect place to butt in.
-
18 hours ago, Hortankin said:
Stalking people is weird, wrong, and highly illegal.. don't be a hippacrit
I don't think Lucic is afraid of anyone, certainly not anyone in the NHL. Guddy is a physical presence but he doesn't scare any tough guys in the league, as no one should.
-
1 minute ago, Rush17 said:
I 100% agree with you. I'm glad we can actively engaged with other passionate fans of our team in this form of disucssion. I think its important we really question our statements when we are so heavily scrutinizing young players. i would just hate to see jakes career derailed due to the scrutiny he faces. controversy is good for hardening a player. but there is a line between controversy and plain old pooping on someones head. im not accusing you or anyone else of that. but we do see it from time to time. even though it often starts as a joke or troll.
thanks for your thoughts and the additional info on Tkachuk. i honestly am to often focused on Vancouver so intensely i often miss the rest of the story.
Yeah I don't think the public scrutiny does any good for the kid, I just get why some people are upset and don't think they're totally wrong vocalizing it. It's not Jakes fault he was picked, I'm not mad at him for that, the only thing I'm upset with Jake on was his maturity level and fitness which tie together for me. If he really has broken through like many think than that's great, and I will gladly eat crow. This is an exciting time to be a Canuck fan though, regardless of where you stand on Jake, we have many intriguing prospects in the pipeline for probably the first time.
-
1
-
-
2 minutes ago, Rush17 said:
Yeah its hard to qualify the development and contribution of rookies with different skillsets for sure. I'm not sure Tkachuk deployment situation last year in calgary. but I do recall jakes. Jake largely got bottom 6 minutes and was asked to focus entirely on his defensive side of game so he wouldnt be a liability.
i didnt pay close attention to Tkachuk this past season but i do recall seeing him playing with some of Calgary's better players on several occusations. im not sure how often or if he got pp or any extra special treatment.
all i know is jake had to earn his spot by being good defensively. and a side from jakes decent first season numbers in a primary bottom 6 defensive role he excelled in the defensive game based off of advanced stats. (corsi). which happened to be another strong suite this season.
i read somewhere im unsure of its accuracy but it said somewhere that when jake was on the ice utica had 3 shots on goal for every 2 against. that shows a pretty quantifiable number even if his offensive stats didn't blow anyone way. which as i previously mentioned wasn't the focus of his play this season (according to coaching/management - who seemed very happy with his progress this season).
I also read that the other day too. That's a great post btw. Tkachuk was absolutely in a better position in the lineup with more opportunities but he definitely forced Calgarys hand in that decision, Jake could have done the same here. I'm not trying to argue against everything you say, I respect your posts and like that you put thought into them, I'm just finding the other side of the conversation. In the end I think we both want the same thing with all Canuck prospects.
-
1
-
-
2 minutes ago, Rush17 said:
A segment of the fan base being upset about his development. I guess i understand it if your just looking at the numbers. But when you hear Travis Green his ahl coach now. (now nhl coach) publically rave about jakes development this season it's hard to ignore.
Managment and Willie wanted jake to go down and focus on all the little aspects of his game. they told him the points are not what matter its about playing the game the right way. when he goes down to utica and completely remakes his game and gets glowing reviews by his coach.. i have a hard time not liking what i see.
the kid is only 20 years old. next to no power forward enters the league as a teenager and instantly puts up Nylanders numbers. expecting that and comparing his numbers to nylanders is obsurd. Jake is an entirely different type of player who brings an entirely different skillset to his respective team.
nylander was an arrogant kid and im honestly glad he's not on our team. he is going to make toronto pay through their nose on his next contract extension.
While I wanted Nylander and Ehlers over Jake I don't make those comparisons because like you said, they're completely different players. You can compare him to a guy like Matt Tkachuk though who looked a lot better than Jake has so far. But I agree with you, he's young. This year is big for him though. If he's stagnant in his progression this year I think it kills his stock with our organization.
-
20 minutes ago, Diamonds said:
No one is personally attacking Jake. We have every right as fans to be disappointed with a players development, that doesn't mean that we are saying that they are a bad person and we are also allowed to be wrong.
Jake is a 6th overall pick, not a 6th round pick. I don't think anyone is saying he should already be an NHL superstar and if not then he's a bust. But what he has shown so far is disappointing. Yes, there are plenty of players who don't make the NHL until their mid 20's, but they also usually show more than Jake has in their draft+3 seasons, especially top 10 picks.
In fact, Jake has the lowest AHL ppg out of all top 10 picks since 2003 (who are forwards) in their draft+3/20-year-old seasons. The closest comparable is probably Zach Hamill who still put up 26 pts in 65 games (compared to Jake's 19 in 65). Even players like Alexandre Picard, Scott Glennie, and Nikita Filatov, who are pretty much consensus busts, fared better at the same age. I can accept the argument for Burmistrov being a comparable as well. And since you brought up Zack Kassian, he put up 26 pts in 30 games in the AHL in his draft+3 season.
Jake becoming a top six forward in the NHL at this point in time would not be the norm, but the exception. Yes he is only 20 and there is plenty of time for him to prove himself, but history is not in his favor. As a Canucks fan I have every hope that he will beat the odds and become a successful 2nd line NHL player for us but it is certainly not my expectation.
This coming season will probably be very telling in terms of his projection. Hopefully we some nice improvement over last season.
This post is gold. Do I fully believe in Jake? No. But I want nothing but the best for him and hope I'm wrong. Anyone that says it's stupid to call him a busy should realize it's just as stupid to assume he isn't. Calling him a bust is certainly premature, but post being drafted he's certainly closer to being a disappointment than anything else. People with blind faith in Jake are insane. Hopefully this year everything comes together. If he's a guy that takes until 23 or 24 to develop into what was hoped from him then I guarantee he reaches that potential with another organization. You don't take a guy 6th overall and wait on him for 7 years. Projects shouldn't be drafted close to that high. Let's all just see what this coming season has and we will have an even better understanding of where he's at in his developmental curve. Though I'm not your biggest fan, go Jake go, prove me and whoever else that doesn't have faith in you wrong, please.
-
2
-
-
5 minutes ago, Rob_Zepp said:
Great post. I agree that in no way, shape, form does having a different opinion make anyone a "troll". A "troll" is someone who purposely posts things to rile up the general population of a board and loves it when some take their bait - hence the term. Your posts are thought out and your perspective on this player understandable. You are not making claims of seeing him in 7-11 with belly over jeans eating nachos (yup, that was in one post), you are not posting relentlessly about an entirely different style of player as a compare as if Virtanen can change into a small, waterbug type forward to make up for it, you are not posting about "knowing someone who knows someone who say.....fill in nasty rumour here" and similar. Finally, you are not transparently a fan of another franchise here to find a topic, any topic, that annoys those keen on this franchise.
I have stated many times, I was "meh" about this draft pick and was totally on the fence about him until I saw some of the mean-spirited posts and then the massive amount of relentless trolling. Not posts like yours at all, the actual troll posts and there are about 5 to 10 posters (well, 5 to 10 "handles" that may well be only 1 or 2 lonely souls) who seemingly dislike being challenged let alone exposed for trolling yet they are do damn obvious. Now I just pull for the poor kid, perhaps full more than is logical, but so badly want to see the sophomoric smirks on the troll's faces be wiped away by the napkins used to mop up their crow dinners. Wishful thinking? Sure but it is entertaining.
Anyway, I sure don't think you are a troll. You have a valid opinion and you offer reasons for your conclusion. People can choose to agree or disagree with you - that is fun of CDC.
Hope that makes sense.
It absolutely does. And as much as I'm not sold on him as a player I'm stoked to see him in camp this year, because the potential is obviously there for him to be a productive NHLer.
-
1
-
-
8 hours ago, Rush17 said:
i feel ya. they may just be trolls though. I hope jake comes back and makes a good impression. Linden and Jim seemed a little frustrated by jakes immaturity last season when he called out willie.
i think jake will surprise many. tempering expectation is always a good thing. i look forward to jake getting his opportunity. i think he will shine with the opportunity. my biggest question is what can he do offensively with his speed. he clearly has confidence in his defensive game but i would like to see what he can do in other areas of the game.
i read one poster mention that he or she was frustrated by jakes drop in physical play. but for those who haven't listened to all the canucks media content. it seemed managment/coaching wanted him to focus on other aspects of his game. as he seemed to constantly be looking for big game changing hits and missing some of the subtles of the game. i think once he gets down the other aspects of the game he will likely re-incorporate the physical elements to his game. he just has to make thosr impact hits at the right time without drawing penalties.
Why do they have to be trolls? Can't just be upset fans with the way the pick has gone so far? So many people in this thread call people that aren't happy or don't think he will turn out as trolls, which is ridiculous. 73 percent says all the time that Jakes young so we can't get on him and in the same post will say McCann is a bust haha. I hope Jake turns into what was hoped from many on draft day. Do I think that will happen? No. Does that make me a troll? No. I want nothing more than the Canucks to win a cup, and hopefully with Virtanen being a contributor on that squad but I wouldn't bet on it. It would be foolish with what we know and we've seen. Anyone pro Jake that gets angry and defensive at anyone who's disappointed/mad/upset at Jake is foolish. If you're anti Jake then there's no reason to get defensive about someone being pro Jake. No ones opinion on this board means anything in Virtanens reality so we will just have to wait and see who's right. Hopefully it's not me.
-
3
-
-
1 minute ago, debluvscanucks said:
But it leaves me wondering....if I CHOSE to follow something I'd become jaded over, isn't that my deal? You can only slam the team for so long before it becomes of matter of personal responsibility for our own happiness.
I love this team...it hasn't been perfect but I do this for enjoyment. The day it stops being enjoyable is the day to ... pack it in? Find something different to do?
I'm stoked for the draft...it's hockey related stuff. In the off season, I eat it up and it's all something to look forward to. To go in with a defeatest attitude just doesn't make sense to me.
I call it the Eeyore syndrome.
When you're a realist and a Canucks fan it's easy to be jaded. You don't pick who and what you love, unfortunately I love the Canucks and hockey, just because they've been inept for as long as they have doesn't mean I'm going to stop watching or pick a new team, that's not how it works. Hopefully they can win a cup at some point but with my favorite sport teams I'm used to being disappointed and absolutely not expecting it to happen haha
-
Just now, smithers joe said:
sounds like you should become a scout, we'ld never lose out on a draft pick again.
I never said I'd be a great scout, that's why I'm not paid very nicely to do it, like the people are that you claim hold no responsibility when it comes to drafting. For the record I'd go with Glass, would have taken Ehlers and Tkachuk too so maybe I really should get the job?
-
4
-
-
Just now, smithers joe said:
so, your saying if we draft glass this year and he turns out to be a bust, it's benning and the scouts fault, that they didn't have the foresight to know this.?
I'm saying if we draft Glass and he turns out to be a busy it absolutely is on management and scouting, they wouldn't have done a good enough job. Especially if someone taken within a few spots of him turns out to be a stud. It would absolutely amplify it as it should
-
1
-
-
1 minute ago, Alflives said:
To get both Twins Burke had to take a huge risk and trade away Brian McCabe, who was a young, tough, and talented Dman. We need JB to 'gut up' and make the Tanev move.
Couldn't agree more. Doesn't have to be to Dallas either. A mid round first and a prospect will be plenty for me and just what this team needs moving forward
-
2
-
-
1 minute ago, smithers joe said:
doug wickenheiser was an excellent junior player. montreal had a choice but chose doug because he was that big power forward and centerman they coveted. he never became that player. it is easy to look back in hindsight and say they should have taken denis savard but to say teams should know exactly how a player is going to turn out in 4 years is not always evident in foresight. that is when it becomes a crap shoot.
Of course not everyone has a crystal ball but a mistake like that should be put on management and scouting. The year we got the sedins the rest of those top 10 picks are pretty awful for the most part. At least one year tilted in our favor haha.
-
1 minute ago, smithers joe said:
i for one believed that hodgeson was going to be a beast after the memorial cup, but he turned out just be a whinny kid that couldn't play that level in the nhl.
there have been many juniors that have looked like world beaters when they were drafted but never reached a level of play that could dominate in the nhl. every team has those players those players in their systems. i believe deb is right in her assessment.
I thought Hodgson would be a stud too. But he had a ton of issues with coaches, his dad was too involved. If management did a good job of scouting and dissecting the player beforehand maybe they realize he has potential issues and avoid that player
-
2 minutes ago, J-Dizzle said:
Every GM inherits something. Gillis took what he was 'handed' and ran with it. He did an incredible job subsidizing the Sedin's and Kesler.
Yeah I'll give you that he did a decent job keeping the team he was given together but that's the easiest part of the job, finding and getting the talent isn't nearly as easy. I don't think he deserves props and have no issue with the shots that are thrown his way.
-
1
-
-
3 minutes ago, J-Dizzle said:
That, a trip to the finals and a couple presidents trophies. I still don't understand the hate for Gillis amongst Canucks fans.
Gillis didn't build that team, he was handed it.
-
1
-
-
1 minute ago, debluvscanucks said:
I didn't say the process is a crapshoot ("you do your research, compile information...").
How a player pans out is a crapshoot. Who can predict slumps, injury, not having chemistry or being in synch with other teammates, etc.?
"If the player doesn't have potential to grow"....well, as prospects, I'd hope they all do. At that age, it's probably expected that they will "grow" and aren't an "as is" deal.
It's not a guessing game as to who you pick....but, after that, it most certainly is.
Now, you do get these "generational" players who come along and they're the best bet. But they're few and far between. Everything else is putting your hope into someone and hope they pan out.
So after you pick a player it's all a guessing game? That's absurd. Does everyone turn out like you'd hope? Absolutely not but to call it a guessing game isn't right. If players don't reach their potential for the reasons you listed then it was poor scouting and drafting. There's a reason they put so much money and effort into scouting, and it's not so they can play the guessing game, it's so they can make the best pick of their ability, part of that is projecting where that player will be when fully mature. It's certainly not a crapshoot at any stage at that level, you make educated moves with the hope your information and scouting is on point
-
1
-
Quinn Hughes | #43 | D
in Current Roster
Posted
I haven't read through the first 41 pages and I'm sure everyone has said it but regardless, Hughes is the perfect player for this organization!! An absolute home run of a pick. He takes so much pressure off Juolevi and gives this team potential game changers at each position for the first time. Finally a little Canuck luck.