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

Canucks 2nd rounder 36th overall


Bobby_Lu1ngo

Recommended Posts

I have heard DeAngelo has attitude problems. So much so that one scout expected him to drop out of the first round. If we could snag him at 36 - I would be ecstatic. The guy's a first round talent, and has been projected in the 12-15 range by some.

agree...sounds like a perfect pick for Boston hey? late first round because of a mouth and attitude issues..lol...fits their squad perfectly

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Are you STAT SCOUTING?

What are you doing?

Really, his numbers are the reason you're going with Brett Pollock?

I watched him a couple times with Edmonton, and he's a good player but more of a third/fourth line hugger.

"I'm sorry but this is the guy we pick..." due to the numbers?

NEVER look at stats. What, is Ryan MacInnis a bad prospect? Oh he has BAAAAAAAAAAAAAAD numbers. Looks like he sucks, right?

Watch the player play, and THEN judge. Never stat judge, that is a very inaccurate way to scout and numbers tell you nothing (past what player jersey # they are on the ice) about the player.

Aways posts Ehlers sats

Link to comment
Share on other sites

agree...sounds like a perfect pick for Boston hey? late first round because of a mouth and attitude issues..lol...fits their squad perfectly

Sadly I look at the studs and best depth guys on teams like LA Anaheim San Jose Pitts Boston Philli and they ALL have guys with attitude issues.

If we can get De Angelo and utilize him properly he'd be a steal at 36 if he lives up to half his potential

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Glover is committed to going to U of Minnesota though.

We've had problems with the Gophers' development of our players before. That's a bit of a red flag.

this was schroeder's first real season and he broke his foot twice.

you may want to take a look at how the rest of the team performed as well before you label him a bust

wow

Link to comment
Share on other sites

this was schroeder's first real season and he broke his foot twice.

you may want to take a look at how the rest of the team performed as well before you label him a bust

wow

Excuse me? Did you have a problem reading what I wrote?

Where did I say anything about Schroeder being a bust? When people put words in my mouth it really pisses me off.

I said the Canucks have had problems with the development of their prospects in U of Minn before so they might not want to deal with that again. It's the reason they got Schroeder out of there asap. They didn't like the way White was handled and they didn't think being there was the best for Schroeder either.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Are you STAT SCOUTING?

What are you doing?

Really, his numbers are the reason you're going with Brett Pollock?

I watched him a couple times with Edmonton, and he's a good player but more of a third/fourth line hugger.

"I'm sorry but this is the guy we pick..." due to the numbers?

NEVER look at stats. What, is Ryan MacInnis a bad prospect? Oh he has BAAAAAAAAAAAAAAD numbers. Looks like he sucks, right?

Watch the player play, and THEN judge. Never stat judge, that is a very inaccurate way to scout and numbers tell you nothing (past what player jersey # they are on the ice) about the player.

So every player they pick needs to be sure fire first liner? Cant they build in other areas in the lineup every pick this yr is not going to be targeted for the first line i think teams do build in other areas he plays with some good players you dont put plugs with good players they put him with good players because he has something to offer!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Excuse me? Did you have a problem reading what I wrote?

Where did I say anything about Schroeder being a bust? When people put words in my mouth it really pisses me off.

I said the Canucks have had problems with the development of their prospects in U of Minn before so they might not want to deal with that again. It's the reason they got Schroeder out of there asap. They didn't like the way White was handled and they didn't think being there was the best for Schroeder either.

The U is about as solid as NCAA gets. I would advise the org to be as forward thinking as possible when it comes to players coming out of there. Looking at the percentages, we're due for a good player from the gophers :P
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Gophers are the number 1 collage team at putting player in the nhl in the last 5 years. I think schoeder (how ever you spell it) just needs time.

Playing 4th line minutes with-probably- a 70% foot when your an undersized player is a pretty big disadvantage.

edit: fixing my awful grammar

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jack Glover is listed at 38 currently and I've been interested in him for a little while. 2-way defenceman, 6'3", mobile and physical.

no problem with him, but I think we need more forwards this draft unless we find a steal, then think more about d in next couple drafts.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't know, from my handful of viewings of Glover, i've yet to be impressed. I've been more disappointed with aspects of his game. Someone brought up the word "pedestrian" and it fit like a glove (pardon my pun) in terms of what i've seen of Glover.

I've seen Glover ranked as high as a late 1st rounder and I simply don't see a 1st or early 2nd round calber player here. Seems to be a polarizing player; some people love him, but i also know a few who are unimpressed like me.

I like his size and skating. But he always leaves you wanting more and really doesn't use his frame to his advantage. Calling him physical is a misnomer; don't think i saw him throw the body more once (you want physical, look at his team-mate Ryan Collins, that guy is physical). Limited offensive capabilities; not that good of a passer (i can safely say Dougherty is a better passer). To me, Glover does not project as a guy who can play on your PP and hasn't shown the smarts to be a standout defensive D-man either. At least with Dougherty, you can see some flashes of skill. With Glover, not so much.

I'm not the biggest fan of Dougherty either, but if i had to choose between the two, it would be Dougherty.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't know, from my handful of viewings of Glover, i've yet to be impressed. I've been more disappointed with aspects of his game. Someone brought up the word "pedestrian" and it fit like a glove (pardon my pun) in terms of what i've seen of Glover.

I've seen Glover ranked as high as a late 1st rounder and I simply don't see a 1st or early 2nd round calber player here. Seems to be a polarizing player; some people love him, but i also know a few who are unimpressed like me.

I like his size and skating. But he always leaves you wanting more and really doesn't use his frame to his advantage. Calling him physical is a misnomer; don't think i saw him throw the body more once (you want physical, look at his team-mate Ryan Collins, that guy is physical). Limited offensive capabilities; not that good of a passer (i can safely say Dougherty is a better passer). To me, Glover does not project as a guy who can play on your PP and hasn't shown the smarts to be a standout defensive D-man either. At least with Dougherty, you can see some flashes of skill. With Glover, not so much.

I'm not the biggest fan of Dougherty either, but if i had to choose between the two, it would be Dougherty.

What would you say for Dougherty? To me he seems like a steady,smart type of guy who can chip in some offense. I like his credentials: HS state championship, USNTDP training, and about to get some quality ice time at the D factory that is Wisconsin

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...