baumerman77 Posted April 16, 2014 Share Posted April 16, 2014 Going out of our way to get teammates of our junior prospects or former junior prospects is just dumb. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Warhippy Posted April 16, 2014 Share Posted April 16, 2014 Hard to imagine Linden sells this as his plan to F.Aq. Lol fun to imagine, but not fun to imagine a year worse then this one again and how the fans/ticketholders would react I don't imagine that Sakic in training tried to sell the same vision to ownership but hey, look what happened. Smooth trades the last two years would have kept Colorado a bubble team. Instead they made questionable trades and netted themselves some awesome players and boom. IN all honestly Linden could very well be looking to purge the core. As a new President/GM combo they;d have a 1 year grace period, be saving FAQ a ton of cash by shipping out vets with big contracts and knowing his mentality as a player/manager and NHLPA union jockey He'd use that cap space to sign a young potential stud like Niskanen and then stockpile picks/prospects and start tailoring the team under his preference with a new GM and possibly good ol Patty Quinns tutelage. Nobody WANTS to be the head of a terrible team. but Linden is a bad medicine hurts now but makes us better long term kinda guy. And hard to say that losing any number of Kesler, Edler, Hansen, Hamhuis, Burrows, Booth, Bieksa and replacing them with AHL call ups and rookies makes us better, especially with Torts as coach with his demanding style of play. In all honesty I called this years results back in September and I am making that bold prediction again right now. We will most likely NOT even be a bubble team next year and we will be a better team moving forward because of it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Warhippy Posted April 16, 2014 Share Posted April 16, 2014 Going out of our way to get teammates of our junior prospects or former junior prospects is just dumb. Based on what? How is it going out of our way? If we draft Dal Colle, we have Cassels already. If we draft Ritchie, Cornel is available with our 2nd round pick. If we suck next year and get MacDavid, we already have Gaunce and Fox.... Not wanting to keep players with high ceilings and successful chemistry together through their careers is just dumb...imagine us having been able to draft Hodgson AND Duchene. Or...maybe going out of our way to get H and D Sedin was just....dumb Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thad Posted April 16, 2014 Share Posted April 16, 2014 This thread is hilarious. The only way to settle it is to have a prospect-off. A 3 day challenge between Ritchie and Virtanen featuring Wipeout like obstacle courses, survivor like problem solving challenges and the finale of an intense Redbull Crashed Ice downhill course. May the best teenage hockey player win! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baumerman77 Posted April 16, 2014 Share Posted April 16, 2014 Based on what? How is it going out of our way? If we draft Dal Colle, we have Cassels already. If we draft Ritchie, Cornel is available with our 2nd round pick. If we suck next year and get MacDavid, we already have Gaunce and Fox.... Not wanting to keep players with high ceilings and successful chemistry together through their careers is just dumb...imagine us having been able to draft Hodgson AND Duchene. Or...maybe going out of our way to get H and D Sedin was just....dumb Well first off Dal Colle is going to go top 4 so we would have to trade to get him. If we draft Ritchie at 6th do you want Cornel as the second round pick because he is the best player or because he is on the same team as Ritchie? Junior chemistry doesn't mean a whole lot. The reason those players do so well in Junior is because they are both very skilled players, not because of their chemistry. Do you think Dunchene and Hodgson would put up better point totals if they played together? Do you think MacKinnon would play better with Drouin than any other player in the NHL. Not only that but you seem to have this assumption that just because two guys play together they have chemistry. Gaunce played on the same team as Fox for what? 50 games? Big deal. Who's to say that they couldn't be more productive apart. It makes no sense to try and build our team around junior player's teammates. I can't believe I have to type this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elvis15 Posted April 16, 2014 Share Posted April 16, 2014 ... Again...to me Kesler is already gone. If rumours were true that it was the dressing room that took his A away then that speaks volumes. Having a freshened, united room is alot better that a room with an elephant in it and I dont care WHAT skills he has. ... I haven't heard that rumour at all, in fact my understand was it was Torts who decided there should only be two alternate captains instead of four that rotate for home and away games. If you have a source on that I'd be interested to see it. ... Granted. Not to mention Burrows. But natural wingers are still preferred. It's easier to control the puck. Jensen looks like he'll be more successful in the NHL on his off wing, and there are any number of other examples as well. This is particularly true for shooters, as it gives them a better angle to the net off the rush and with one timers. This thread is hilarious. The only way to settle it is to have a prospect-off. A 3 day challenge between Ritchie and Virtanen featuring Wipeout like obstacle courses, survivor like problem solving challenges and the finale of an intense Redbull Crashed Ice downhill course. May the best teenage hockey player win! One question: where can I get tickets? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Junkyard Dog Posted April 16, 2014 Share Posted April 16, 2014 Well first off Dal Colle is going to go top 4 so we would have to trade to get him. If we draft Ritchie at 6th do you want Cornel as the second round pick because he is the best player or because he is on the same team as Ritchie? Junior chemistry doesn't mean a whole lot. The reason those players do so well in Junior is because they are both very skilled players, not because of their chemistry. Do you think Dunchene and Hodgson would put up better point totals if they played together? Do you think MacKinnon would play better with Drouin than any other player in the NHL. Not only that but you seem to have this assumption that just because two guys play together they have chemistry. Gaunce played on the same team as Fox for what? 50 games? Big deal. Who's to say that they couldn't be more productive apart. It makes no sense to try and build our team around junior player's teammates. I can't believe I have to type this. It's more of building a team. Junior teammates playing under the same organization grow up together, become good friends, create bonds.. It's not about chemistry, more so about building a team and creating a core group within our prospects. That is important at that age. It will be easier to make the jump to the AHL or NHL knowing your friend is/could as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Merci Posted April 16, 2014 Share Posted April 16, 2014 Mc david has nothing to do with the future of this team. We just need to stock up onas many prospects as we possibly can Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baumerman77 Posted April 16, 2014 Share Posted April 16, 2014 It's more of building a team. Junior teammates playing under the same organization grow up together, become good friends, create bonds.. It's not about chemistry, more so about building a team and creating a core group within our prospects. That is important at that age. It will be easier to make the jump to the AHL or NHL knowing your friend is/could as well. I agree that there needs to be a youth movement. All I am saying is lets not go out of our way drafting teammates. Let's draft the best players available. Most of these top prospects all know each other from playing in big tournaments anyway. Like the Gaunce/Fox point from my understanding they don't even regularly play on the same line. They have only played on the same team since December -- I've had a longer relationship with a stick of deodorant. Let's just not get too carried away with this junior teammates thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TOMapleLaughs Posted April 16, 2014 Share Posted April 16, 2014 It's more of building a team. Junior teammates playing under the same organization grow up together, become good friends, create bonds.. It's not about chemistry, more so about building a team and creating a core group within our prospects. That is important at that age. It will be easier to make the jump to the AHL or NHL knowing your friend is/could as well.If it happens as a coincidence, fine. But don't make it a strategy. You'd pass up on better players that way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Junkyard Dog Posted April 16, 2014 Share Posted April 16, 2014 I agree that there needs to be a youth movement. All I am saying is lets not go out of our way drafting teammates. Let's draft the best players available. Most of these top prospects all know each other from playing in big tournaments anyway. Like the Gaunce/Fox point from my understanding they don't even regularly play on the same line. They have only played on the same team since December -- I've had a longer relationship with a stick of deodorant. Let's just not get too carried away with this junior teammates thing. If it happens as a coincidence, fine. But don't make it a strategy. You'd pass up on better players that way. If the prospect is good and in our range and on the same team then I don't see why we shouldn't. If that's isn't the case then draft BPA. Example. We trade up to 3rd and have a chance to draft Bennett or MDC. who would you pick? Tough decision for me considering the playoffs MDC's having. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Warhippy Posted April 16, 2014 Share Posted April 16, 2014 Well first off Dal Colle is going to go top 4 so we would have to trade to get him. If we draft Ritchie at 6th do you want Cornel as the second round pick because he is the best player or because he is on the same team as Ritchie? Junior chemistry doesn't mean a whole lot. The reason those players do so well in Junior is because they are both very skilled players, not because of their chemistry. Do you think Dunchene and Hodgson would put up better point totals if they played together? Do you think MacKinnon would play better with Drouin than any other player in the NHL. Not only that but you seem to have this assumption that just because two guys play together they have chemistry. Gaunce played on the same team as Fox for what? 50 games? Big deal. Who's to say that they couldn't be more productive apart. It makes no sense to try and build our team around junior player's teammates. I can't believe I have to type this. So......you don't want skilled players that have pre-existing chemistry and work really well together in both regular season AND playoffs? I can't believe I am reading this Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Warhippy Posted April 16, 2014 Share Posted April 16, 2014 I agree that there needs to be a youth movement. All I am saying is lets not go out of our way drafting teammates. Let's draft the best players available. Most of these top prospects all know each other from playing in big tournaments anyway. Like the Gaunce/Fox point from my understanding they don't even regularly play on the same line. They have only played on the same team since December -- I've had a longer relationship with a stick of deodorant. Let's just not get too carried away with this junior teammates thing. Again. Remind me how if Dal Colle falls to us, drafting him to play with Cassels is a bad thing or us going out fo our way. remind me again how if we draft Ritchie, and Cornel who is ranked in the mid 30's is us going out of our way? You're trying to make it sound as if we are making a Calgary style move and drafting a 7th rounder with our 2nd round pick. Quit trying to make something out of nothing. And I will add how many teams out there would have given their GM's left gonad to draft some of their junior line and team mates with their first round picks? There are literally dozens of examples over the last decade where it would have more than worked out for the teams involved. The most glaring of course being Mackinnon and Drouin. The last major team to go out of their way to get two line mates together was the Canucks with the Sedins and how did that work out again? Again, you're making it sound as though we are going off the board by suggesting we draft Cornel with our 2nd round pick. And it is glaringly obvious you've no idea about his skill set or where basically every scout has him pegged for the year Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baumerman77 Posted April 16, 2014 Share Posted April 16, 2014 So......you don't want skilled players that have pre-existing chemistry and work really well together in both regular season AND playoffs? I can't believe I am reading this No I would love to have McDavid etc. The point is we should draft the best player we shouldn't draft a lesser player just because they had some chemistry in junior. Once again you are attributing their success to the chemistry component and overlooking the much more likely explanation that they were/are very skilled players playing on a junior team together. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baumerman77 Posted April 16, 2014 Share Posted April 16, 2014 Again. Remind me how if Dal Colle falls to us, drafting him to play with Cassels is a bad thing or us going out fo our way. remind me again how if we draft Ritchie, and Cornel who is ranked in the mid 30's is us going out of our way? You're trying to make it sound as if we are making a Calgary style move and drafting a 7th rounder with our 2nd round pick. Quit trying to make something out of nothing. And I will add how many teams out there would have given their GM's left gonad to draft some of their junior line and team mates with their first round picks? There are literally dozens of examples over the last decade where it would have more than worked out for the teams involved. The most glaring of course being Mackinnon and Drouin. The last major team to go out of their way to get two line mates together was the Canucks with the Sedins and how did that work out again? Again, you're making it sound as though we are going off the board by suggesting we draft Cornel with our 2nd round pick. And it is glaringly obvious you've no idea about his skill set or where basically every scout has him pegged for the year I would draft Dal Colle 6th because I think he has a ton of skill I could really care less if he has a relationship/chemistry with Cassels (it would be considered a bonus if anything). I think I have made it pretty clear that I believe we should just draft the best players available. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Warhippy Posted April 16, 2014 Share Posted April 16, 2014 No I would love to have McDavid etc. The point is we should draft the best player we shouldn't draft a lesser player just because they had some chemistry in junior. Once again you are attributing their success to the chemistry component and overlooking the much more likely explanation that they were/are very skilled players playing on a junior team together. No actually I am not. every proposal in regards to junior players I have suggested is more than feasible in its own right. Etem is a solid blue chip forward prospect. It just so happens that he has outstanding chemistry with one of our top forward prospects in Shinkaruk. Gaunce and Fox have worked incredibly well together since Gaunce's trade to Eerie and we are fortuitous to have them together, adding team mate MacDavid next year (if we win that lottery) is not us going out of our way and would only make the transition from junior to farm that much easier for all of them Drafting Ritchie at 6th overall and Cornel (ranked 38th last I saw) is not us going out of our way as both palyers have great skill sets and again work incredibly well together. Keeping them together also again eases the transition from junior to farm to NHL. So again, stop making something out of nothing, I enjoy the idea of keeping these kids together for obvious reasons. we are not taxing ourselves as a team by drafting (or in etems case trading for) these kids as they all have skills that make them stand out alone as much as they do in a line together. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baumerman77 Posted April 16, 2014 Share Posted April 16, 2014 No actually I am not. every proposal in regards to junior players I have suggested is more than feasible in its own right. Etem is a solid blue chip forward prospect. It just so happens that he has outstanding chemistry with one of our top forward prospects in Shinkaruk. Gaunce and Fox have worked incredibly well together since Gaunce's trade to Eerie and we are fortuitous to have them together, adding team mate MacDavid next year (if we win that lottery) is not us going out of our way and would only make the transition from junior to farm that much easier for all of them Drafting Ritchie at 6th overall and Cornel (ranked 38th last I saw) is not us going out of our way as both palyers have great skill sets and again work incredibly well together. Keeping them together also again eases the transition from junior to farm to NHL. So again, stop making something out of nothing, I enjoy the idea of keeping these kids together for obvious reasons. we are not taxing ourselves as a team by drafting (or in etems case trading for) these kids as they all have skills that make them stand out alone as much as they do in a line together. Ok you think it is a good strategy I don't. Agreed to disagree? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smashian Kassian Posted April 16, 2014 Share Posted April 16, 2014 For those against picking Nick Ritchie. Would you want Blake Wheeler on your team? Ritchie is Blake Wheeler with more speed and offensive upside. For those against Jake Virtanen. Would you want to take a risk at a Corey Perry or a healthy pre concussion David Booth? Not Booth now, but pre concussion 30+ goals David Booth Perlini? Come on. Whoever we take has to have all the skills to succeed and sadly size will be one of those as well as organizational need. RW/C Ritchie, Perlini, Virtanen. All would be great picks but could step in within a season or two Nylander, Kapanen and Ehlers. All great picks as well but would need a shade more seasoning and personal growth before entering the league. In all honesty our needs are so varied we cannot go wrong picking any of those 6 players or Dal Colle or Draisatl, or any of them. The draft will have people in favour of and against who we choose but only time will tell. I don't see those comparison's at all. Ritchie is more of a sniper, Wheeler is a playmaker and I doubt Ritchie becomes as good. Thats not a knock on Ritchie, but Wheelers is a hell of a player, you could maybe say Ritchie has comparable upside with a different style, but to say he has higher upside, I just don't see it. Then Virtanen doesn't have the playmaking/hockey IQ of Corey Perry or the two-way game, David Booth I agree on. And I don't see how Kapanen will need personal growth, if anything Ritchie & Virtanen will need more personal growth than Kapanen. If it was up to me, Kapanen, Ehlers or Ritchie. This is pretty much it. But if that 'personal growth' for those lightweights doesn't happen, they are complete busts. Much bigger risk involved. Do you even know much about Kasperi Kapanen? Another myth. Any more bs you'd like to shed some light on for this prospect? Thats one of the fair criticisms of Virtanen actually. Straight ahead speed is the only thing that Virtanen beats Ritchie in, and it isn't a huge difference. Ritchie has good two-step quickness and can get where he needs to be every time. Ritchie has him beat, or tied, in every other category including shot, physicality, creativeness, passing, and defensive awareness. Exactly what I was thinking, Ritchie is even better in the areas that you would consider Virtanen's greatest strengths aside from straight ahead speed. I respectfully disagree, as Virtanen is noticeably much faster, has a better shot, and is just as physical and defensively aware. Just not as good a playmaker, granted, but not enough to be a dealbreaker. Besides, are the Canucks going all power now? Or going with a faster tempo? Because I think Linden said the latter. If we pick Ritchie i'm totally fine. I've been more impressed with Virtanen though. We need to bring in more speed without paying Evander Kane cash. Granted. Not to mention Burrows. But natural wingers are still preferred. It's easier to control the puck. Basically every report I've seen has Ritchie's shot as the best in the draft, even watching his play & seeing highlights its a laser beam, he's got a cannon in terms of shooting power which sets his shot apart from Virtanen's and others IMO, aswell as exceptional accuracy. Thats definitely his biggest strength, I don't see Virtanen's as better. Virtanen also won't be able to bull through guys in the NHL like he does in Junior. So physicality advantage goes to Ritchie since he has more size & can be physical. He's a better playmaker, better hockey IQ, better in the offensive zone, overall a better player. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TOMapleLaughs Posted April 16, 2014 Share Posted April 16, 2014 I don't see those comparison's at all. Ritchie is more of a sniper, Wheeler is a playmaker and I doubt Ritchie becomes as good. Thats not a knock on Ritchie, but Wheelers is a hell of a player, you could maybe say Ritchie has comparable upside with a different style, but to say he has higher upside, I just don't see it. Then Virtanen doesn't have the playmaking/hockey IQ of Corey Perry or the two-way game, David Booth I agree on. And I don't see how Kapanen will need personal growth, if anything Ritchie & Virtanen will need more personal growth than Kapanen. If it was up to me, Kapanen, Ehlers or Ritchie. Do you even know much about Kasperi Kapanen? Thats one of the fair criticisms of Virtanen actually. Exactly what I was thinking, Ritchie is even better in the areas that you would consider Virtanen's greatest strengths aside from straight ahead speed. Basically every report I've seen has Ritchie's shot as the best in the draft, even watching his play & seeing highlights its a laser beam, he's got a cannon in terms of shooting power which sets his shot apart from Virtanen's and others IMO, aswell as exceptional accuracy. Thats definitely his biggest strength, I don't see Virtanen's as better. Virtanen also won't be able to bull through guys in the NHL like he does in Junior. So physicality advantage goes to Ritchie since he has more size & can be physical. He's a better playmaker, better hockey IQ, better in the offensive zone, overall a better player. I know enough to figure out that we're wasting a 6th pick if we're selecting Kapanen with it. So many better options, including one of the top-5 that may fall. Jeez. Virtanen's shot is rated A or A-. It's not bad. If Ritchie's is better, hey, well GET him because he's what, Brett Hull? I don't see it. Anyway, i'm fine with either pick, but i'd go with Virtanen because he's quite noticeably faster. That's where I see some major potential being realized. Through the speed, combined with the size and toughness. Perhaps stop hating Virtanen, as he'll be a good-great player in the NHL. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SpennyCanuck Posted April 16, 2014 Share Posted April 16, 2014 I want Richie at #6 but I fear Burke will take him and we will not have a chance.Really, if Burke does this, and another team chooses outside the big five, it is only good news for us.Ok, here's the dream #6 pick: Reinhart.How? Like this:Some team picks Nylander because they think he is as good as some here on CDC say he is.Some team picks Ehlers for the same reason.Burke takes Richie for his toughness with skill.NYI take a goalie like Ville Husso or Thatcher Demko because Snow used to be a goalie and NYI management are a bunch of fruit-cakes.Ekblad goes to the other top five team.We get to pick from Reinhart, Bennett, Draisaitl, Dal Colle.Canucks were more likely to win the 2014 Draft Lottery than that to happen.BUT HEY, one can dream! I would love to have Reinhart, Bennett, Draisaitl or Dal Colle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.