Toews Posted November 20, 2014 Share Posted November 20, 2014 same difference. Did you really say that King Joffrey and some wench from Harry Potter are the same? Credibility lost instantly. All hail His Grace, Joffrey of Houses Baratheon and Lannister. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
avelanch Posted November 20, 2014 Author Share Posted November 20, 2014 king sandwich.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiger-Hearted Posted November 20, 2014 Share Posted November 20, 2014 (edited) I'm a little worried about him to be honest, not exactly dominating right now. He has the raw tools but there is no gaurentee he can put them all together. While nylander is leading the SHL in points per game at the age of 18 and looking to be a bonafide superstar in the making. I know virtanen is coming off surgery but has to find a way to get going or he might not even be on the world junior team. Let's stop worrying about what Nylander does. If he becomes the Leafs' next Darryl Sitler, so be it. We have two potential 1C's in McCann and Cassels and either one of those guys have potential to click with a player like JV. If only McCann didn't have mono to begin with, then the Nylander talk would be out of the picture. Edited November 20, 2014 by Tiger-Hearted 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FireGillis Posted November 20, 2014 Share Posted November 20, 2014 Nylander's game would get crushed in the west. Just like johnny hockey is getting crushed in the west or patrick kane? Skill wins out in the end and nylander has a ton of it. I know people want to try to ignore nylander, but he's going to be forever linked to virtanen now. How many of you guys complained about the canucks awful drafting in the past and hated on gillis picks, ron delorme, etc and then pronounced benning as god for his picks this year? It's fair game to criticize this pick if nylander ends up a star and virtanen a bust. I really hope virtanen pans out cause wasting such a high pick would be devastating to our rebuild. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
carlweezer Posted November 20, 2014 Share Posted November 20, 2014 Jake is the real deal! reminds me a lot of Corey Perry! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boxiebrown Posted November 21, 2014 Share Posted November 21, 2014 Congrats you found one diminutive LA prospect taken in the 7th round in 2014 out of the 10 players they selected in that draft - all others were 6'0" or taller. 2014 LA draft picks (1/10 under 6'0"): http://www.nhl.com/ice/draftsearch.htm?year=2014&team=LAK&position=&round= 2013 LA draft picks (0/7 under 6'0"): http://www.nhl.com/ice/draftsearch.htm?year=2013&team=LAK&position=&round= 2012 LA draft picks (1/6 under 6'0"): http://www.nhl.com/ice/draftsearch.htm?year=2012&team=LAK&position=&round= 2011 LA draft picks (0/6 under 6'0"): http://www.nhl.com/ice/draftsearch.htm?year=2011&team=LAK&position=&round= 2010 LA draft picks (1/5 under 6'0"): http://www.nhl.com/ice/draftsearch.htm?year=2010&team=LAK&position=&round= 2009 LA draft picks (2/10 under 6'0"): http://www.nhl.com/ice/draftsearch.htm?year=2009&team=LAK&position=&round= 2008 LA draft picks (4/9 under 6'0"): http://www.nhl.com/ice/draftsearch.htm?year=2008&team=LAK&position=&round= 2007 LA draft picks (4/10 under 6'0"): http://www.nhl.com/ice/draftsearch.htm?year=2007&team=LAK&position=&round= In the last 5 years, they've drafted a total of 3 players under 6'0" out of 34 selections, or 5 out of 44 in the last 6 years. In that span, Jordan Weal was the earliest taken at 70th overall (3rd round) - the rest were taken in the 5th, 6th or 7th round - also known as the crap shoot. The last time LA took a 1st rounder under 6'0" was in 2007 - Thomas Hickey. LA takes size into consideration in picks that matter. The only player under 6'0" on their recent championship roster was Mike Richards. Don't give that "LA's strategy is based on offensive production and skill" crap because they definitely take size into consideration. They might take a flyer on a small guy with the 7th round pick (and their 9th of 10 selections) in a draft, but they're not taking anybody with that size in draft picks that matter. I didn't say they stay away from big players. Obviously, if you can find a big player who's also skilled, you go for it. Look at LA's draft picks again. Virtually all of them produced at an excellent level (relative to their draft slot) before they were drafted. It's also really disingenuous to pretend that they picked guys like Pearson, Toffoli, or Vey because they're "big." Not too mention that LA has drafted a ton of average sized, skilled puck moving defencemen in the last few years (McKeown, Miller, Ebert, Leslie.) The point is that LA doesn't fetishize size and "toughness" to the exclusion of skill. Unless you think that every player at 6'0 or 6'1 counts as picking size over skill. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boxiebrown Posted November 21, 2014 Share Posted November 21, 2014 Size plays a HUGE role in why LA is a possession beast. Obviously size isn't everything but if you don't think it's a significant factor you're out to lunch. Yes, and I said in my post, "some of their players use size" to possess the puck. Of course they do. My point is that there are many ways to be an effective hockey player, and if we write off every player below 6'0, we're missing out on a ton of useful players. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canorth Posted November 21, 2014 Share Posted November 21, 2014 (edited) Just like johnny hockey is getting crushed in the west or patrick kane? Skill wins out in the end and nylander has a ton of it. I know people want to try to ignore nylander, but he's going to be forever linked to virtanen now. How many of you guys complained about the canucks awful drafting in the past and hated on gillis picks, ron delorme, etc and then pronounced benning as god for his picks this year? It's fair game to criticize this pick if nylander ends up a star and virtanen a bust. I really hope virtanen pans out cause wasting such a high pick would be devastating to our rebuild. Only in your mind. This is not a thing. Edited November 21, 2014 by Canorth 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
guntrix Posted November 21, 2014 Share Posted November 21, 2014 Sounds like you are describing JV to me. NHL ready shot and hits like a truck. Which of those three does he not have? He's got skill, everyone needs to have some degree of skill to get drafted. I just don't think he has the skill to be a consistent top six player (or rather, the player CDC's hoping he's gonna become). 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
guntrix Posted November 21, 2014 Share Posted November 21, 2014 LA has 6 players under 200 lbs. Vancouver has 14. Size is definitely a factor. And you don't think that they're better because, you know, they simply have better players? Crazy idea, I know. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
73 Percent Posted November 21, 2014 Share Posted November 21, 2014 And you don't think that they're better because, you know, they simply have better players? Crazy idea, I know.nah. Thats unpossible Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Dasein Posted November 21, 2014 Share Posted November 21, 2014 I didn't say they stay away from big players. Obviously, if you can find a big player who's also skilled, you go for it. Look at LA's draft picks again. Virtually all of them produced at an excellent level (relative to their draft slot) before they were drafted. It's also really disingenuous to pretend that they picked guys like Pearson, Toffoli, or Vey because they're "big." Not too mention that LA has drafted a ton of average sized, skilled puck moving defencemen in the last few years (McKeown, Miller, Ebert, Leslie.) The point is that LA doesn't fetishize size and "toughness" to the exclusion of skill. Unless you think that every player at 6'0 or 6'1 counts as picking size over skill. I agree somewhat with that point, but I had an issue with the underlined statement below and the poor example you used to try and prove your point. The funny thing is that even LA doesn't actually believe in this size obsession. They draft based on offensive production and puck skills, and if they player is also big, it's a bonus. For example, they drafted 5'9 Spencer Watson in the 7th round, who scored a PPG in junior. Meanwhile, we were drafting "big" dudes who are marginal CHL players. I wonder which strategy will work out better? Neither player are likely to ever make the NHL, and you used an extreme case that is way outside the norm to try to prove your point when almost every player, as I pointed out, have decent to big size. Let me just show how ridiculous your example of Spencer Watson is. Let's say that I was trying to say is that virtually all draft picks of LA are 6'0" or larger, and that the biggest thing that LA looks for in drafting a player is size (I don't think that - but I am going extreme like you - saying skill over size for LA). I could just point out that Kyle Clifford, a 2009 2nd round pick, had 28 points in 60 games before being drafted, but was 6'2" with 100+ penalty minutes in the OHL. They definitely took size and grit over skill, so they must be looking at only size right? That's essentially what you're doing with the Spencer Watson example - grabbing an outlier from the norm to try to make it seem as if your point is true. My point is, LA obviously does look at skill, but they definitely also look at size. LA will take guys that are skilled usually only when they also have decent size, and they will almost never take a risk with an undersized player in the first 3 rounds (with Thomas Hickey being the last 1st round pick under 6'0", and Jordan Weal the only one since as a 3rd round pick). That may not be size fetishism, but LA definitely does not deviate from "their 6'0" and higher" drafting trend very often in draft picks that matter (2 total in the last 8 years). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Salmonberries Posted November 21, 2014 Share Posted November 21, 2014 LA drafts big players. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GMJB Posted November 21, 2014 Share Posted November 21, 2014 And you don't think that they're better because, you know, they simply have better players? Crazy idea, I know. Could it simply be both? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gaudette Celly Posted November 21, 2014 Share Posted November 21, 2014 Just like johnny hockey is getting crushed in the west or patrick kane? Skill wins out in the end and nylander has a ton of it. I know people want to try to ignore nylander, but he's going to be forever linked to virtanen now. How many of you guys complained about the canucks awful drafting in the past and hated on gillis picks, ron delorme, etc and then pronounced benning as god for his picks this year? It's fair game to criticize this pick if nylander ends up a star and virtanen a bust. I really hope virtanen pans out cause wasting such a high pick would be devastating to our rebuild. Only by trolls who simply can't get over not having him. He's not a Canuck, deal with it. Toronto has a team, and they'll take any fans -- even fickle ones. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post LaBamba Posted November 21, 2014 Popular Post Share Posted November 21, 2014 Jim And Trev sat down and drew up a Vancouver Canuck blueprint. Jake fits the blueprint, Nylander does not. A team needs an identity. The best examples of teams with identity are the Redwings, and Devils during their 2 decade playoff runs. There are players that are just Devils and Redwings. Those 2 teams have a long history of players that either leave their teams and suck someplace else, or suck someplace then thrive as Wings or Devils. Look into it it's mind blowing. The Kings and Bruins are also building identities. Sometimes you gotta just draw up a plan and go with it. 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Herberts Vasiljevs Posted November 21, 2014 Share Posted November 21, 2014 Jim And Trev sat down and drew up a Vancouver Canuck blueprint. Jake fits the blueprint, Nylander does not. A team needs an identity. The best examples of teams with identity are the Redwings, and Devils during their 2 decade playoff runs. There are players that are just Devils and Redwings. Those 2 teams have a long history of players that either leave their teams and suck someplace else, or suck someplace then thrive as Wings or Devils. Look into it it's mind blowing. The Kings and Bruins are also building identities. Sometimes you gotta just draw up a plan and go with it. +1 Way to break things down! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aGENT Posted November 21, 2014 Share Posted November 21, 2014 The point is that LA doesn't fetishize size and "toughness" to the exclusion of skill. Unless you think that every player at 6'0 or 6'1 counts as picking size over skill. So Virtanen has an "exclusion of skill"? Ok then chief Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeNiro Posted November 21, 2014 Share Posted November 21, 2014 So Virtanen has an "exclusion of skill"? Ok then chief Amazing that some people don't seem to understand that Virtanen is actually quite skilled. He's not just some goon that runs around trying to take peoples heads off. He's a terrific skater who players a powerforward game and owns a cannon for a shot. If there was a skill versus toughness scale, Virtanen would fall somewhere in the middle of Nylander and Ritchie. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aGENT Posted November 21, 2014 Share Posted November 21, 2014 (edited) Amazing that some people don't seem to understand that Virtanen is actually quite skilled. He's not just some goon that runs around trying to take peoples heads off. He's a terrific skater who players a powerforward game and owns a cannon for a shot. If there was a skill versus toughness scale, Virtanen would fall somewhere in the middle of Nylander and Ritchie. That's what I don't get about this whole Nylander vs Virtanen "argument". Sure Nylander is more skilled, I don't think anyone's arguing that. But Virtanen isn't without skill which is what it really sounds like a lot of these guys are "arguing". Using an EA sports level of quantifying ( ) sure, in his prime Nylander may turn out to be say a 92 for skill to Virtanen's say 88 but that's hardly a night and day scenario and Virt has a hell of a lot of other attributes that theoretically should more than make up the difference. THAT's why we drafted him. Because he's still very (albeit less) talented but he's far, FAR less one dimensional. Edited November 21, 2014 by J.R. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now