Guest Dasein Posted June 25, 2014 Share Posted June 25, 2014 Most people keep overlooking that Reinhart is almost a year older than some of these other prospects he was born in 1995. He is only 2 months older than Mackinnon so if you want to look at stats remove 2013-2014 from his resume and the compare him to Mackinnon. Mackinnon: 2012-2013 HALIFAX MOOSEHEADS-QMJHL 44 32 43 75 40 45 10 2 7 2012-2013 HALIFAX MOOSEHEADS-QMJHL 17 11 22 33 17 12 5 0 4 81 13.6 2012-2013 HALIFAX MOOSEHEADS-M-CUP 4 7 6 13 8 0 1 1 1 Reinhart: 2012-13 Kootenay Ice WHL 72 35 50 85 22 5 0 1 1 -8 4 The top being regular season and under it the playoff performances. Mackinnon first off only played 44 regular season games and put up 75 points. Reinhart played 72 games and put up 85 points. In the playoffs Mackinnon put up 33 points in 17 games and then 13 points in 4 games in the Memorial Cup. In 2011 Mackinnon put up 27 points in 17 games while Reinhart put up 2 points in 4 games in 2011 and 1 point 5 games in 2012-13 while being -8. If Reinhart was in last year draft he would be no where near the first overall position. While that is true, he still would have been top 5 because guys at #5 and #6 were both late-1994 prospects, and Reinhart has better numbers in comparison to Monahan in the CHL, and Monahan outperformed Lindholm in the NHL. Being #5 behind the top 4 of last year's draft doesn't mean he's not elite. It just means he doesn't have the potential to be a generational player like MacKinnon/Jones does. A cut below MacKinnon but a cut above Monahan is not a bad place to be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ilduce39 Posted June 25, 2014 Share Posted June 25, 2014 If I'm Benning I look at the Canucks crop of prospects and I say we need 2 (or 3) things - a 1st line C, a top-pairing D-man and a PMD (could potentially be the same guy.) If we can snag one of those two things in Reinhart (or Ekblad) - I say game on. Would still love to see him move Kesler for a package that includes a PMD as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Warhippy Posted June 25, 2014 Share Posted June 25, 2014 If I'm Benning I look at the Canucks crop of prospects and I say we need 2 (or 3) things - a 1st line C, a top-pairing D-man and a PMD (could potentially be the same guy.) If we can snag one of those two things in Reinhart (or Ekblad) - I say game on. Would still love to see him move Kesler for a package that includes a PMD as well. this. I'm thinking that Solid Kesler trade nets us what we need. A great Kesler trade nets us what we need plus the extra pieces to get that 1 st overall without giving up our top prospects Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bure to Mogilny Posted June 25, 2014 Share Posted June 25, 2014 @Bure to mogilny. sorry bro but they both have the same ceiling Jensen is however more likely to reach it. god people think shinkaruk is going to be a susperstar for some reason I don't get. he has shown nothing to prove what you people think. Shinkaruk is a natural goal scorer who we have not had in are system in a long time so im excited and hopfully jensen too dont get me wrong i was really impresed by him last year and looking forward to what he can do in a nother year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bure to Mogilny Posted June 25, 2014 Share Posted June 25, 2014 First off Reinhart is not considered an elite prospect. I think RNH is too fragile to be a impact player. That being said assuming we drafted Landeskog I could part with Shinkaruk but seeing as there is no Landeskog in this draft I would keep Shinkaruk. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peaches5 Posted June 25, 2014 Share Posted June 25, 2014 ^ 2 months is nothing..... That is exactly my point. Mackinnon had far better numbers than Reinhart at the same age. Imagine what Mackinnon would of done this year had he not been drafted last year. To compare Reinharts numbers this year to Mackinnons last year when they were virtually the same age is misleading. While that is true, he still would have been top 5 because guys at #5 and #6 were both late-1994 prospects, and Reinhart has better numbers in comparison to Monahan in the CHL, and Monahan outperformed Lindholm in the NHL. Being #5 behind the top 4 of last year's draft doesn't mean he's not elite. It just means he doesn't have the potential to be a generational player like MacKinnon/Jones does. A cut below MacKinnon but a cut above Monahan is not a bad place to be. There is no way he would of gone 1-4 or been included in that group of 4 so basically we are getting a 5+ pick. We don't even know if he was available at 9 if MG would of taken him over Horvat. Horvat had a much better playoffs which plays a huge role in your draft position and you don't know who the hell Feaster is drafting so its completely plausible that Reinhart could of fallen way down the draft. Look at the centres last year Domi, Shinkaruk, Horvat stat wise all pretty comparable to Reinhart yet people are drooling over Reinhart. Shinkaruk was rated the 6th best NA skater his draft position 8-15 right around where Reinhart would of been put in mock drafts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Dasein Posted June 25, 2014 Share Posted June 25, 2014 That is exactly my point. Mackinnon had far better numbers than Reinhart at the same age. Imagine what Mackinnon would of done this year had he not been drafted last year. To compare Reinharts numbers this year to Mackinnons last year when they were virtually the same age is misleading. There is no way he would of gone 1-4 or been included in that group of 4 so basically we are getting a 5+ pick. We don't even know if he was available at 9 if MG would of taken him over Horvat. Horvat had a much better playoffs which plays a huge role in your draft position and you don't know who the hell Feaster is drafting so its completely plausible that Reinhart could of fallen way down the draft. Look at the centres last year Domi, Shinkaruk, Horvat stat wise all pretty comparable to Reinhart yet people are drooling over Reinhart. Shinkaruk was rated the 6th best NA skater his draft position 8-15 right around where Reinhart would of been put in mock drafts. Don't be so sure. Both FLA picked Barkov at #2 because of positional needs, and both Lindholm and Monahan outperformed him in the NHL, with Monahan doing better than Lindholm. Reinhart has outperformed Monahan in their respective draft years, so it could might have been the case that FLA takes Reinhart at #2. MacKinnon, Drouin and Jones were clearly better than Reinhart, but Barkov and Reinhart are a coin flip, with Lindholm and Monahan below them. Domi and Shinkaruk don't play the complete game that Reinhart does defensively, and Reinhart had better production on top of having that complete game. Bo plays the complete game, but lacks the offensive talent that Reinhart has. Heck, Monahan is better than Bo, how do you suppose Bo is comparable to Reinhart when he's not even as good as Monahan... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Craig Ferguson Posted June 25, 2014 Share Posted June 25, 2014 I trust GMJB, Shinker wasn't a top 10 pick, this is essentially trading the 6th overall and 24th overall pick (from last year) for the 1st overall, seeing it as that, would you still do that deal? I would. Shinkaruk is as unproven in the NHL as those two other picks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Warhippy Posted June 25, 2014 Share Posted June 25, 2014 I trust GMJB, Shinker wasn't a top 10 pick, this is essentially trading the 6th overall and 24th overall pick (from last year) for the 1st overall, seeing it as that, would you still do that deal? I would. Shinkaruk is as unproven in the NHL as those two other picks. as unproven as Reinhardt? Shink has some beauty goals in the pre season to his name at least Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Dasein Posted June 25, 2014 Share Posted June 25, 2014 as unproven as Reinhardt? Shink has some beauty goals in the pre season to his name at least I can't believe you're hanging your hat on two pre-season goals. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nergish Posted June 25, 2014 Share Posted June 25, 2014 Some of these posts are starting to get cringeworthy. Most of you guys are playing a numbers game here: junior stats, scouting rankings, comparing to previous drafts, etc. That's not how this works. Reinhart notched 100+ points in the WHL. Like the NHL, the magic number it takes to be leading scorer (or to be considered among the elite) changes from year to year. Shink put up similar numbers, and I'm excited by what he can bring (I don't want him part of the package, as I want Sam and Hunter to play together). But the stats are only a blip on the radar of what Sam Reinhart brings to his team. The guy is a playmaking phenom who controls the puck and pace of the game, has incredible vision, and makes smart plays. The fact that we're even in a position to get this player should be making all of you salivate, especially if you call yourselves Canucks fans. This is considered a 'weak draft' because there's no consensus number 1 and because the later rounds start to get incredibly thin. But how many of you have actually watched Sam Reinhart play? He isn't flashy, doesn't make a spectacle of himself, and doesn't race around the rink - but if you watch him play even one shift, you'll see him being responsible in all quadrants of the ice. He is the under-the-radar kind of elite player that has allowed himself to slip through the cracks, and I for one would be ecstatic if Benning stole this guy from Tallon. Tallon has a glut of young offensive dynamos and is only going to pass on Sam for that reason. We aren't in the same position, and we need to go all in for a player of this caliber. But thankfully, because the media has spun this as a 'weak draft' we might actually be UNDERPAYING for the services this kid will provide. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tangerines Posted June 25, 2014 Share Posted June 25, 2014 If we got TT back in a deal for Kesler I wouldn't be so upset about losing Shinkaruk. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
L. Stanley Posted June 25, 2014 Share Posted June 25, 2014 If we got TT back in a deal for Kesler I wouldn't be so upset about losing Shinkaruk. I would actutally give of TT instead of shinkarurk what do you think? Shinker was a cpatain, good canadian kid, grity for his size Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Warhippy Posted June 25, 2014 Share Posted June 25, 2014 I can't believe you're hanging your hat on two pre-season goals. I cannot believe you're discounting them. He is already more proven at the NHL level than Reinhart is yet for whatever reason...he is an "unproven prospect" worth giving it up for an obviously sure fire future HoF player in Reinhart right? The mentality of this forum is some days steps about comatose drunk Why is OUR prospects unproven/worthless yet a pick representing a player with a similar ceiling to Draisatl or Nylander is worth one of our top prospects one of our best young D men AND our top pick in almost 15 years... Seriously CDC wake the hell up. I reiterate. All season long "we need more scoring" "we need a sniper" "we need Shinkaruk hope he heals soon" Now it's we need to trade him, he's unproven, we don't need him... Unlike some here I have watched this exact process play out since the early 80's to NO good end. Reinhart has done less, proven less than ANY of our current prospects...yet is worth them. On the same hand other teams prospects are worth far more than our best prospects our best pick AND our best player.... Some of you seriously need to wake the hell up Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tangerines Posted June 25, 2014 Share Posted June 25, 2014 Not sure if this was posted yet: Jeff Angus @anguscertified 1m Quote: The Canucks are going to do everything in their power to trade for the Florida pick. Don't see them moving Chris Tanev, though. {C}He's the a fitness coach for the Canucks and does some articles too. Maybe nothing, maybe something. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nergish Posted June 25, 2014 Share Posted June 25, 2014 I cannot believe you're discounting them. He is already more proven at the NHL level than Reinhart is yet for whatever reason...he is an "unproven prospect" worth giving it up for an obviously sure fire future HoF player in Reinhart right? The mentality of this forum is some days steps about comatose drunk Why is OUR prospects unproven/worthless yet a pick representing a player with a similar ceiling to Draisatl or Nylander is worth one of our top prospects one of our best young D men AND our top pick in almost 15 years... Seriously CDC wake the hell up. I reiterate. All season long "we need more scoring" "we need a sniper" "we need Shinkaruk hope he heals soon" Now it's we need to trade him, he's unproven, we don't need him... Unlike some here I have watched this exact process play out since the early 80's to NO good end. Reinhart has done less, proven less than ANY of our current prospects...yet is worth them. On the same hand other teams prospects are worth far more than our best prospects our best pick AND our best player.... Some of you seriously need to wake the hell up Just for the record, I don't think many (or any) posters are suggesting Shink + Tanev + 6th, that's just ludicrous. But you are truly a blind homer if you think Hunter Shinkaruk is on the same level as Sam Reinhart in terms of overall ability, leadership, and intangibles. You think Sam Reinhart can't score a couple pre-season goals? Give YOUR head a shake. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shinkaruk98 Posted June 25, 2014 Share Posted June 25, 2014 Not sure if this was posted yet: Jeff Angus @anguscertified 1m Quote: The Canucks are going to do everything in their power to trade for the Florida pick. Don't see them moving Chris Tanev, though. {C}He's the a fitness coach for the Canucks and does some articles too. Maybe nothing, maybe something. Well I have no clue what they think they can trade if they wont give up Tanev. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sweathog Posted June 25, 2014 Share Posted June 25, 2014 Well I have no clue what they think they can trade if they wont give up Tanev. Mabye Garrison or Burrows agreed to waive? I think Tallon wants at least one veteran in the deal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Warhippy Posted June 25, 2014 Share Posted June 25, 2014 Just for the record, I don't think many (or any) posters are suggesting Shink + Tanev + 6th, that's just ludicrous. But you are truly a blind homer if you think Hunter Shinkaruk is on the same level as Sam Reinhart in terms of overall ability, leadership, and intangibles. You think Sam Reinhart can't score a couple pre-season goals? Give YOUR head a shake. Did I SAY they were on the same level? Don't put words in my mouth I said that he's more proven at the NHL level with his few pre season games nothing more. These people keep claiming that he's just a prospect and could bust or boom equally. Yet they claim Reinhart is a surefire cannot miss player. I said Draistal and Nylander have comparable ceilings, not Shinkaruk And if you look, yes people ARE indeed saying that it is a good deal and to do it. The same people who don't seem to understand once Shinkaruk is gone our next best LW prospect is....Archibald. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goblix Posted June 25, 2014 Share Posted June 25, 2014 Did I SAY they were on the same level? Don't put words in my mouth I said that he's more proven at the NHL level with his few pre season games nothing more. These people keep claiming that he's just a prospect and could bust or boom equally. Yet they claim Reinhart is a surefire cannot miss player. I said Draistal and Nylander have comparable ceilings, not Shinkaruk And if you look, yes people ARE indeed saying that it is a good deal and to do it. The same people who don't seem to understand once Shinkaruk is gone our next best LW prospect is....Archibald. That could change via the Kesler trade. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.