MoneypuckOverlord Posted May 13, 2014 Share Posted May 13, 2014 Ehlers scored 49 goals and 104 points in his rookie year in NA. He played on a second line without Drouin . He played PP with Drouin and ended up getting 70% of his points without Drouin. Only 5 other players have scored 100 plus points in their draft year in the Q since the lockout . Crosby, Derrick Brassard, Claude Girouix , Johnathan Huberdeau and Johnathan Drouin. So if you want a player who most likey will turn out just like these players (minus crosby) then it stands to reason you pick Ehlers. For the life of me, if someone could honestly give me a real argument to take Ritchie over that , I would. But there is no reason. The 1st thread of that new ritchie thread, pretty much explains why we should be drafting him with the 6 th pick. It explains it very clearly. You quickly high jacked it by mentioning ehlers again, fail you also had the guts to put crosbys name,he was destined for stardom no matter what league he played for. Brassard has yet to even prove he's a second line player huburdeu is 6'2 winger that was able to contend to be a 1st pick droin clearly showed he was able to lead a team without Nathan, meanwhile ehlers is barely mentioned to be a 6th pick let meanwhile hubudeau and droin were gunning to be a top pick niot even close. lol giroux is a Canadian centerman. Btw drouin and huberdeau has proven nothing at the nhl level...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MoneypuckOverlord Posted May 13, 2014 Share Posted May 13, 2014 Anybody have any idea how big Joe Sakic was when he was drafted.?..He went 15th OA...Anybody have any idea how big Joe Sakic was when he was drafted.?..He went 15th OA... Sure as heck wasn't 162 lbs. I don't recall anyone this lite ever drafted in the top ten of any nhl entry draft Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smashian Kassian Posted May 13, 2014 Share Posted May 13, 2014 Sure as heck wasn't 162 lbs. I don't recall anyone this lite ever drafted in the top ten of any nhl entry draft Ehlers isn't 162 either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Southpop45 Posted May 13, 2014 Share Posted May 13, 2014 Dale Tallon wants him enough to consider trading down to get him, that says a lot (Ehlers) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Honky Cat Posted May 13, 2014 Share Posted May 13, 2014 Ehlers isn't 162 either. According to Wikipedia..he's 176lbs.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Honky Cat Posted May 13, 2014 Share Posted May 13, 2014 Crosby was 180lbs when he was drafted..so really..? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
73 Percent Posted May 13, 2014 Share Posted May 13, 2014 According to Wikipedia..he's 176lbs..Wikipedia... thats a valid source. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
granpappy Posted May 13, 2014 Share Posted May 13, 2014 ehlers will be a BUST not because he small vegetarian and made living off drouin not because he play the perimiter and hide behind the big man, not because he fraidy cat and don't have a bark, not because he not grow no-more and skate through opposing player legs, not because he don't fight and let his momma do that for him, not because he play again boys not men, not because he don't stand behind team mate except when they not looking, not because he only play 1 yr n. america instead of 15yr, not because don cherry don't like him more than boobyorr, not because he play no defence better than lars lindgren, not because no championship with him on team. the reason because he not CANADIAN Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tas Posted May 13, 2014 Share Posted May 13, 2014 ehlers will be a BUST not because he small vegetarian and made living off drouin not because he play the perimiter and hide behind the big man, not because he fraidy cat and don't have a bark, not because he not grow no-more and skate through opposing player legs, not because he don't fight and let his momma do that for him, not because he play again boys not men, not because he don't stand behind team mate except when they not looking, not because he only play 1 yr n. america instead of 15yr, not because don cherry don't like him more than boobyorr, not because he play no defence better than lars lindgren, not because no championship with him on team. the reason because he not CANADIAN judging by your grasp of english, neither are you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zombieksa Posted May 13, 2014 Share Posted May 13, 2014 ehlers will be a BUST not because he small vegetarian and made living off drouin not because he play the perimiter and hide behind the big man, not because he fraidy cat and don't have a bark, not because he not grow no-more and skate through opposing player legs, not because he don't fight and let his momma do that for him, not because he play again boys not men, not because he don't stand behind team mate except when they not looking, not because he only play 1 yr n. america instead of 15yr, not because don cherry don't like him more than boobyorr, not because he play no defence better than lars lindgren, not because no championship with him on team. the reason because he not CANADIAN So.... you don't like Hank and Dank then? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RealCanuckBoss Posted May 13, 2014 Share Posted May 13, 2014 bottom line canucks aint getting ekblad unless florida is stupid enough to make a trade. only thing I can see happening is 6th pick prospect; probably someone like gaunce and a top 6 d from our end. but someone like ekblad only comes every couple years and florida is not given that up as there team is already rebuilding and looking good. ekblad #wheres he goinnnnnn #next doughty There are a lot of scouts who say Ekblad most likely tops out as a no. 2 d man. I would imagine Dale Tallon still has nightmares about taking Cam Barker third overall in Chicago.Ya that's true about the cam barker pick but I don't see how barker Is a comparison at all to ekblad since ekblad a defensive going into a class of his own, there's only been a couple first overall projected defensive men one if them being jovanovski who already plays for the panthers and not to mention Seth Jones was close to being projected over makinnon but this being said your can't look back at the past mistakes lot players can be hit n a miss but I don't see how anyone should turn down ekblad his play is real and he's got mad potential Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
granpappy Posted May 13, 2014 Share Posted May 13, 2014 So.... you don't like Hank and Dank then? those swedes is the big boys and look after everyone not ehlers, his is a skinny pipsqueak, it will go into the mop bucket Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gstank29 Posted May 13, 2014 Share Posted May 13, 2014 I have seen some hyperbole and lies in my day but this one is pretty tough to read. You compare a 6ft 176 pound players who is faster than Mac Kinnon and just scored 49 goals and 104 points in his first and only year in north america to pint sized Gallagher and Schroeder who are 5ft 8 ? Neither are anywhere near as skilled nor as fast either. Gallagher got 81 points in his draft year. According to you its close enough to 104 . That makes them the same player. Thats like comparing Virtranen to Dale Weise. Weise is 5ft 11 and 190 so thats almost the same as Virtanen right? Why draft a thug whose IQ is south of 90 when you can pick him up in the 3rd or 4th round . (Am I doing it right? ) I hear ya though. Why not draft a big swinging dick in the top ten and save the pint sized pencil dicked girlie men for later on. Sounds legit. Ehers has to overcome death defying odds to end up like Giroux ? A guy who is smaller and slower at 26 than Ehlers is right now at barely 18? Sounds legit. The common theme with you guys is always the same. When confronted by Ehlers you all realize that on paper he is the best draft choice ............so you proceed to knock Ehlers down using hyperbole, spin, and outright lies in an attempt to frame a scenario where your choice looks better. Stop trying to 'frame' Ehlers with guys way below his paygrade in size and skill. Its worn thin quite a long time ago I think at this point you guys need to leave the bs behind . If you have an honest to goodness argument in favor of your guy, just make it. Never mind the negative hyperbole. ok we get it you like ehler, please stop bring up the same point every time we mention him it's getting old and your justing repeating your self . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
messier's_elbow Posted May 13, 2014 Share Posted May 13, 2014 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 . Ill acknowledge it and come back with we have almost the same player in Shinkaruk at the same position. So unless they are planning to trade Hunter it makes no sense in reality. Ritchie or Virtanen make way more sense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ihatetomatoes Posted May 13, 2014 Share Posted May 13, 2014 Lp Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TOMapleLaughs Posted May 13, 2014 Share Posted May 13, 2014 As of 10 days ago Ehlers was 5ft11.75 and 176 pounds. He is no longer 'undersized' http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nikolaj_EhlersWikifrackin'pedia now? Why don't you just call somebody in Halifax again? Lol! The reason we're hung up on size is because he's undersized, and we have tried enough of those kinda guys already. Schroeder. Rodin. Shinkaruk. Raymond. Not sure why some Canucks fans have the blinders on for this issue, but all of those guys are currently broken. This should be a cause for concern. Besides, Ehlers isn't all that remarkably skilled. If he was he'd be in the 'top 5' and then he'd fall due to his size. For us to pick Ehlers we'd have to go WAY early to select a mid-first skilled guy who'd fall due to his size. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baumerman77 Posted May 13, 2014 Share Posted May 13, 2014 I guess we will find out the strength and weight issues come the combine. One thing to keep in mind is that guys like Ehlers and Nylander will be stuffing their faces the week before because they know how important the weigh-in is. Conversely bigger guys like Ritchie will be dieting. So whatever the number may be, I would assume the next week the lighter guys would be walking around weighing 5 pounds less and the bigger guys 5 pounds more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ForsbergTheGreat Posted May 13, 2014 Share Posted May 13, 2014 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TOMapleLaughs Posted May 13, 2014 Share Posted May 13, 2014 Giroux walked into a sweet situation in Philly, who play his kinda style and who even traded Richards and Carter away to make room. I like Giroux, but i think i'd rather have Richards and Carter. Anyway, Ehlers not cracking the top-5 in this draft is a concern if he's an all-skill guy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elvis15 Posted May 13, 2014 Share Posted May 13, 2014 bottom line canucks aint getting ekblad unless florida is stupid enough to make a trade. only thing I can see happening is 6th pick prospect; probably someone like gaunce and a top 6 d from our end. but someone like ekblad only comes every couple years and florida is not given that up as there team is already rebuilding and looking good. ekblad #wheres he goinnnnnn #next doughty Ya that's true about the cam barker pick but I don't see how barker Is a comparison at all to ekblad since ekblad a defensive going into a class of his own, there's only been a couple first overall projected defensive men one if them being jovanovski who already plays for the panthers and not to mention Seth Jones was close to being projected over makinnon but this being said your can't look back at the past mistakes lot players can be hit n a miss but I don't see how anyone should turn down ekblad his play is real and he's got mad potential If you want people to take you seriously, you'll have to work on sounding less like someone's 10 year old that got on the computer. Next to no capitalization, the last paragraph was all one big run on sentence, hashtags in a forum post (not that you evven did those correctly), etc. EDIT: and just read granpappy's posts as well, he's in the same boat but sitting far, far away at the other end if his name has any truth. Ekblad is very good, but I'd hesitate to say he'll be better than Jones last year, or anyone else that'll be available at the top of this "couple of years" range. Even "mad potential" is a stretch for me. Wikifrackin'pedia now? Why don't you just call somebody in Halifax again? Lol! The reason we're hung up on size is because he's undersized, and we have tried enough of those kinda guys already. Schroeder. Rodin. Shinkaruk. Raymond. Not sure why some Canucks fans have the blinders on for this issue, but all of those guys are currently broken. This should be a cause for concern. Besides, Ehlers isn't all that remarkably skilled. If he was he'd be in the 'top 5' and then he'd fall due to his size. For us to pick Ehlers we'd have to go WAY early to select a mid-first skilled guy who'd fall due to his size. But then there's Naslund, Morrison and other players we've had that have had success. Gretzky comes to mind as an undersized player as well. Clearly they're all different, but to discount a player purely based on his size is a little shortsighted. I know that's not the only argument you've made on the subject, but you and absent are going to go round and round on this one if you can't acknowledge he does have a high level of skill. Whether that's enough for him to succeed in the NHL or if it makes him worthy of a top 5/6 pick is another story, same with Nylander, and same with the opposite effect to bigger players like Ritchie and Virtanen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.