Vancanwincup Posted May 12, 2014 Share Posted May 12, 2014 Not sure if you're trolling or just really daft Did I upset you with Tuch being just as good as Ritchie? Be careful using the word "daft" you are pretty close to being the prefect meaning for the word. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
asian player Posted May 12, 2014 Share Posted May 12, 2014 Did I upset you with Tuch being just as good as Ritchie? Be careful using the word "daft" you are pretty close to being the prefect meaning for the word. You've made it too clear that you've never watched Ritchie play and you have no idea how scouting works. You should probably watch some more junior hockey instead of stroking to Ehlers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westcoasting Posted May 12, 2014 Share Posted May 12, 2014 I could definitely see Burke taking Ritchie with his pick ahead of us. The draft never unfolds as central scouting has the picks laid out, there are always surprises. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vancanwincup Posted May 12, 2014 Share Posted May 12, 2014 You've made it too clear that you've never watched Ritchie play and you have no idea how scouting works. You should probably watch some more junior hockey instead of stroking to Ehlers How many games have you seen live of both? One, two .. none? Please explain how does a scout do his/her job. Would love to hear how you see a scout doing their job? Cause you know every player the Scouts pick in the top ten always turn out to develop just the way they were ranked. No one player below the top ten out performs the top ranked players. Tuch is pretty close to Ritchie in every way, Ritchie might have a slight advantage now but in 5 years from now we will see. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JeremyCuddles Posted May 12, 2014 Share Posted May 12, 2014 IQ can be worked on for sure. But the odds are if players have low hockey IQ at age 18, they're not going to gain elite hockey IQ by the time they're 23. Being equipped with excellent hockey IQ early on gives a player a better chance at taking their game to the next level. It means they're smart enough to know their weaknesses, so they can either work on their skills, or adapt their games accordingly. Players who can't do that fast enough usually never take the necessary steps to reach their potential. If you get drafted at 18 and don't have at least NHL level IQ at 23 - 5 years of development, your draft team has really bad player development. Kassian isn't exactly smart yet he's in the NHL. Could be said Edler is brain dead defensively, yet in the NHL. You don't need Crosby/Sedin level IQ to be in the NHL. And with players like the Sedins on your team, learning is easy. Look what they did to Burrows the undrafted ECHL(?) kid. Pretty huge transformation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
youngdad Posted May 12, 2014 Share Posted May 12, 2014 Fine. Just anyone but Princess Nylander. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TimberWolf Posted May 12, 2014 Share Posted May 12, 2014 Not every big pick turns into Pyatt and not every little pick turns into Bure The biggest thing that some of you should try to avoid is hating a player because he isn't what you wanted us to draft. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
asian player Posted May 12, 2014 Share Posted May 12, 2014 How many games have you seen live of both? One, two .. none? Please explain how does a scout do his/her job. Would love to hear how you see a scout doing their job? Cause you know every player the Scouts pick in the top ten always turn out to develop just the way they were ranked. No one player below the top ten out performs the top ranked players. Tuch is pretty close to Ritchie in every way, Ritchie might have a slight advantage now but in 5 years from now we will see. Instead of taking personal shots at me, you should probably watch some games and notice parts of Ritchie's game that you claim to know so much about. How is Tuch close to Ritchie? Because he's big? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sedintwinpowersactivate Posted May 12, 2014 Share Posted May 12, 2014 I'd be happy with Ritchie or Ehlers. I think Ehlers is going to be an offensive star, but it's harder to find size with skill in the NHL. Especially since the Canucks are in the very large and physical Pacific Division. Ehlers is smaller but plays bigger than he is and has ridiculous skills... over 100 points as a rookie in the Q is impressive. I can only imagine what his stats will be next year. Do you think the Bruins would be as good without a guy like Krejci? Not everyone on the team needs to be a giant. However Ritchie's skills will not only be with scoring goals, but body checking, winning puck battles and standing up for his teammates. I have nothing negative to say about either guy and I hope the Canucks scouting staff makes the right choice. I believe it's between those two! My first post and thoughts on the draft! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vancanwincup Posted May 12, 2014 Share Posted May 12, 2014 Instead of taking personal shots at me, you should probably watch some games and notice parts of Ritchie's game that you claim to know so much about. How is Tuch close to Ritchie? Because he's big? Combination of skill, maturity, hockey IQ, hands, speed, patience, and size makes the Boston College-bound prospect one of the most complete players in this year's draft class. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Razors_Edge Posted May 12, 2014 Share Posted May 12, 2014 Nick Ritchie vs Hunter Smith (2/6/14) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Merci Posted May 12, 2014 Author Share Posted May 12, 2014 I'd be happy with Ritchie or Ehlers. I think Ehlers is going to be an offensive star, but it's harder to find size with skill in the NHL. Especially since the Canucks are in the very large and physical Pacific Division. Ehlers is smaller but plays bigger than he is and has ridiculous skills... over 100 points as a rookie in the Q is impressive. I can only imagine what his stats will be next year. Do you think the Bruins would be as good without a guy like Krejci? Not everyone on the team needs to be a giant. However Ritchie's skills will not only be with scoring goals, but body checking, winning puck battles and standing up for his teammates. I have nothing negative to say about either guy and I hope the Canucks scouting staff makes the right choice. I believe it's between those two! My first post and thoughts on the draft! Cant argue with any of that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MoneypuckOverlord Posted May 12, 2014 Share Posted May 12, 2014 I wouldnt consider Beach and Colborne to be over 10 years ago. There are others. The guys he compared him to are also over 10 years ago (Getzfaf , Nash) and the other was a late second round pick who flourished in a very well constructed Bruins system . Even that was 9 years ago. I think folks want an honest debate. Not cherry picked info and hype. I think Ritchie is a great prospect. I take Ehlers over him for reasons long since talked out in the Ehlers thread. I dont begrudge anyone who takes him. He is big, has a wicked shot . I still say he cant play at 230. If he can play at 220 or 215 he will be able to do a lot more on the ice. Double Standard. Canucks fans have been comparing Ehlers too Pavel Bure, It's extremely unfair your now saying cherry picked info. If you look at the Who should we draft with the number 6 thread, not one Ritchie supporter compared him to anyone, except for Milan Lucic, mean While the Ehlers thread, he's been compared too... Pavel bure Markus Naslund Nathan Mackkinon Jonathan Drouin. You throw a hissy fit, once Getzlaf's name and Nash's name gets thrown into the equation? bull shit. I'm going start comparing Ehlers too Derrek Brassard. btw.... he had no intentions comparing to Ehlers.... it's you that brought in the Ehlers debate in your stupid response. What OP did was more or less inform people how good Ritchie is... and that he's not more of a goon, I'm not even sure why you Taylor Pyatt is put into the equation, they don't even play the same way. epic fail. Nikita Alexeev Hugh Jessiman Eric Fehr Anthony Stewart Drew Stafford Ryan O'Marra Martin Hanzal Chris Stewart Greg Nemisz Kris Beech Taylor Pyatt Denis Shvidki Scott Kelman Mark Bell Mike Rupp Jeff Heerema Eric Chouinard Matt Zultek Ty Jones Dainius Zubrus Chad Kilger Steve Kelly Jason Bonsignore Ethan Moreau Wayne Primeau Chris Dingman Jason Botterill Chris Wells ....... wow.......none of those playesr were 235 at draft day. Denis Shvidki was no more then 6'0 tall at draft day Wayne Primeau was not even a top 5 pick! Taylor Pyatt is one of the more successful players out of the 1999 entry draft Drew Stafford is no more then 210 pounds Kris Beech is a 6'2 200 lb center man at the fully matured body.. your just pulling names out of your ass. Better than half did! The point is there have been many players his size who put similar or a lot better numbers, even Chris Dingman. none of those guys were 6'3 and 230 lbs at the draft day. Stop pulling names out of your ass. Eric Fehr was 6'2 200 lbs at most at draft day. Nikita Alexeev was never power foward player. He was just a tall Russian with decent skill set. He was 6'5 200 lbs. Hugh Jessiman was drafted by new York because he was Born In New york. He has no business being drafted that high. Eric Fehr was an 18th pick. He was not 6'3 235 lbs at draft day, he's not even close to that number right now 10 years later. Anthony Stewart was not drafted with a top 6 pick. Drew Stafford has a Ryan Kesler stature... what the hell stop pulling names out of nowhere for sure he was nowhere near 6'2 210 lb at draft day let alone 6'3 235! He was asking for player that were 6'3 and at least 235 at draft day. what the hell are you doing? stop wasting people's time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
messier's_elbow Posted May 12, 2014 Share Posted May 12, 2014 He knows where the scoring areas are and has a great shot as well. Seems like the perfect linemate for Kassian, no? How many times has Kass set up Booth or Richardson with them not being able to finish the play off? Ive been on the Ritchie bandwagon for a few months now. Ritchie Horvat Kassian would be a great line in the future I think. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bure_Pavel Posted May 12, 2014 Share Posted May 12, 2014 Really hope the canucks pull the trigger on this guy, if he continues to develop like his brother has after being drafted, he could be a game changer. Rare breed of skill, size, and quick feet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Razors_Edge Posted May 12, 2014 Share Posted May 12, 2014 Ive been on the Ritchie bandwagon for a few months now. Ritchie Horvat Kassian would be a great line in the future I think. You said it Bro no more us being pushed around in the playoffs, we would be feared!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
messier's_elbow Posted May 12, 2014 Share Posted May 12, 2014 His numbers and the numbers of others don't mean jack. It's not the numbers that got him to be ranked so high. He has tools far better than any of those guys that you listed. He is a 230 lbs power forward with the best shot in the draft, and he has very good vision. Unlike the other power forwards, he did not get the points from bullying kids, he got them from the tools he has. Yeah but logic goes out the window a lot on cdc. If you watch a lot of hockey and can evaluate talent you can see Ritchie isnt just a goon or a 3rd or 4th liner. Hes got NHL size and skill. Lethal wrist shot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Razors_Edge Posted May 12, 2014 Share Posted May 12, 2014 Yeah but logic goes out the window a lot on cdc. If you watch a lot of hockey and can evaluate talent you can see Ritchie isnt just a goon or a 3rd or 4th liner. Hes got NHL size and skill. Lethal wrist shot. Yes he is the complete package and the most probable player to go from the draft straight into the NHL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
guntrix Posted May 12, 2014 Share Posted May 12, 2014 I really hope we don't take Ritchie... Enough with the size over everything idea. The skilled game we used to play got us to a Stanley cup final game 7, I don't think that's too bad. It was nice of the OP to cherry pick players to compare but as other posters above have said, he's actually more comparable to Pyatt and Bernier. Ritchie simply does not have the skills Getzlaf and Perry do or the brute toughness Lucic does. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Razors_Edge Posted May 12, 2014 Share Posted May 12, 2014 I have been a Canuck fan since 1970 and have seen it all. Pavel Bure has been our best player ever even Wayne Gretsky said he would have done almost anything to have a chance to play with him! My second favorite is Todd Bertuzzi. When he drove to the net there was no stopping him. Welcome Kassian and hopefully Ritchie a couple of players like that and hockey world look out Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.