Riggs Posted February 13, 2015 Share Posted February 13, 2015 6' 190 The chances of Vey actually being 190 are the same as Tanev being 220. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canucklehead73 Posted February 13, 2015 Share Posted February 13, 2015 Not bad, not great, room for improvement. Looks to have good instincts and reads the play well. Decent shot and his passing is above average. If he keeps improving he could manage a second line role but his flaws leave you wondering where he fits in a lineup... But has not really been hurting the team. Weak on the draw for a center... too small to play wing? Not a really fast skater... Where does he play? Looks to be lacking in strength and overall conditioning. Easy to take off the puck and looks like he might pass out after a shift. For his size he REALLY needs to work on his leg strength and faceoff acumen to make it imho. Time will tell. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wallstreetamigo Posted February 13, 2015 Share Posted February 13, 2015 I would say that he is not really underrated, to respond to the OP. Based on the comments I am seeing here many see Vey for what he is, both strengths and weaknesses along with his future potential. I think he is rated pretty fairly to maybe a bit overrated actually. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aGENT Posted February 13, 2015 Share Posted February 13, 2015 I see it more as he was a casualty of the Kes trade because we were forced to eat cap in Sbisa. If we add Sbisa's salary and Vey's to the cap cushion we had to start the season we could have easily fit J Gar. Who I should mention has 3 more points than Edler right now. It is what it is but I still feel it was a mistake to ask him to waive. Garrison is also playing on a FAR more offensive team in a FAR more offensive division. Edler's partner is the black hole of offense, Tanev. And Sbisa's only over paid by ~$500K-$1m and has a skill set we otherwise lack on our D. Garrison was a redundant, poor man's Edler. Both Sbisa and Vey are also younger players yet to reach their prime. Garrison is 30. There's a bigger (and more long term) picture you're missing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Dasein Posted February 15, 2015 Share Posted February 15, 2015 I really like his ability to turn on a dime to create separation and room for himself to make plays Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Junkyard Dog Posted February 15, 2015 Share Posted February 15, 2015 Garrison is also playing on a FAR more offensive team in a FAR more offensive division. Edler's partner is the black hole of offense, Tanev. And Sbisa's only over paid by ~$500K-$1m and has a skill set we otherwise lack on our D. Garrison was a redundant, poor man's Edler. Both Sbisa and Vey are also younger players yet to reach their prime. Garrison is 30. There's a bigger (and more long term) picture you're missing. Tanev isn't a black hole offensively. He has actually shown some upside the last two seasons. Only problem I have is he tends to be a pass-first type of offensively a bit too much. He isn't incredibly creative but he makes smart decisions in the offensive zone. Has 20-30 point potential definitely. He's a lot better than the majority of our defense to say the least Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
panelguy Posted February 15, 2015 Share Posted February 15, 2015 He looked good last game . Scored a Goal and saved a for sure goal against. He has to learn not to hang onto the puck so long, he's getting caught . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nino Posted February 15, 2015 Share Posted February 15, 2015 He has to learn not to hang onto the puck so long, he's getting caught . I thought he played a great game, controlled the puck well and made great passes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gaudette Celly Posted February 15, 2015 Share Posted February 15, 2015 He's starting to make more time for himself. Frustrating though, that most Canucks simply do not go to the net. Watch the Sedins even -- they have the puck behind the net or on the half-wall, but can't make a play because there's no-one in the slot, so they throw it back behind the net. The fourth line are about the only ones who do it consistently. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nino Posted February 15, 2015 Share Posted February 15, 2015 He's starting to make more time for himself. Frustrating though, that most Canucks simply do not go to the net. Watch the Sedins even -- they have the puck behind the net or on the half-wall, but can't make a play because there's no-one in the slot, so they throw it back behind the net. The fourth line are about the only ones who do it consistently. The twins need a active D with them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gaudette Celly Posted February 15, 2015 Share Posted February 15, 2015 The twins need a active D with them. Definitely. They send it back to the point, but the D have no clue what to do so they look around then pass it across to their partner, who then either passes it back, throws it behind the net, or tries to wrist it towards the goal only to have it blocked and turned over. Clendening is at least showing some potential, both in knowing what to do with it and joining in/trailing the rush. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
unknown33429 Posted February 15, 2015 Share Posted February 15, 2015 Vey is a turnover machine who easily leads all forward in turnovers per 60 minutes (more than 5). By comparison Henrik would be about 1.3 or so per 60. I would put too much emphasis on his +/- since he plays extremely sheltered minutes offensive minded minutes. His underlying numbers are simply bad. He is a terrible passer, he is not a great forechecker, has only ok speed. He does have a nice shot, but should not be playing C on any line, aweful in circle, and should be playing wing. I like Vey, and I think he has the potential, but he is not underrated , he is pretty much what most people with common sense think he is...a pretty 1 dimensional rookie who could develop. But he shouldnt be getting ice time ahead of Kassian Where dd you get that stat from? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eddie Ikea Lack Posted February 15, 2015 Share Posted February 15, 2015 I haven't been a Vey fan. Had always thought he was a bit weak on the puck and along the boards, causing a lot of turnovers. Willie must be doing something right cause Vey has improved leaps and bounds, even from before the All Star break. Still not there yet but I can see signs of hope. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aGENT Posted February 15, 2015 Share Posted February 15, 2015 Tanev isn't a black hole offensively. He has actually shown some upside the last two seasons. Only problem I have is he tends to be a pass-first type of offensively a bit too much. He isn't incredibly creative but he makes smart decisions in the offensive zone. Has 20-30 point potential definitely. He's a lot better than the majority of our defense to say the least ROFL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tyhee Posted February 15, 2015 Share Posted February 15, 2015 stats are different now since but, taking vey as an example http://www.nhl.com/ice/playerstats.htm?fetchKey=20152VANSASALL&sort=avgEvenStrengthTOIPerGame&viewName=timeOnIce http://www.nhl.com/ice/playerstats.htm?fetchKey=20152VANSASALL&sort=evenStrengthPoints&viewName=points nhl.com for TOI/gm 5on5 and pts 5on5. 11mins 22 secs TOI ES/GP = 11.367mins TOI ES/GP 13 PTS ES in 49 games 13 PTS / 49GP / 11.367 MIN x 60 MIN = 1.40 PTS ES/60mins seems the main difference is the site has incorrect stats. it says vey has only 11 ES pts, and when divided into his ES TOI it makes their cited 1.2 PTS ES/60. i'm assuming NHL.com has the correct stats. Thanks. That seems to work, though I found it easier to use the column for ESTOI and convert that to units of 60 minutes, then divide the points by that. It works the same, of course. Since all 3 of the players you mentioned have increased their scoring rates recently I decided to re-calculate as of this morning. It doesn't affect the point of your post but I found it interesting. As of this morning, the three players you'd mentioned are now sitting as follows in ES pts/60 Higgins 2.05 Horvat 2.11 Vey 1.55 Vey has by a small margin pulled ahead of Dorsett (1.53) in ES pts/60. Of course, Dorsett's scoring is a secondary asset to his energy and physical play, which isn't the case for Vey. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snucks Posted February 15, 2015 Share Posted February 15, 2015 few pp opportunities? he's been on the top unit all year. he's the softest player on a soft team. he's the worst defensively on the team. he's the worst fwd in points/60 5 on 5 - 1.37. for comparison, horvat is 1.91 and higgins is 1.74. he's 23, and has been playing pro for 3 seasons, so the 'he's a rookie' thing doesn't have as much weight. id just call that low rated, not underrated. The coach likes this guy though. I don't get it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fred65 Posted February 15, 2015 Share Posted February 15, 2015 The twins need a active D with them. Of course as does any potential attack. For the most part an attack is three against three and rarely does get many chnaces the Ace up your sleeve is the D that jumps in and out numbers the defense. It has to be careful obviously done at the wrong time and you have a 3 on 2 heading the other way. The other problem the Sedins have carried for yeasr now is Vcr remains a 1 line attacking team...they have no genuine 2nd line to draw attention. One of the best skill Vey bring is his possession time. He holds it, has a good hockey IQ and trys to make a skilled play. At this time of all the prospects he is the only one that has that ability or skill....we better hope he has success because frankly as we sit now he is likely the only prospect that might turn into a genuine skilled centre. He's still young and it's basically his first year in the league. He was in the press box early because his compete level was AHL level. He's correcting that and I don't doubt will be better in the future. Just like some one mentioned Dorsetts pugnacity as a un document skill so to is Vey's puck control and possesion. Shame we don't have a couple of finishers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nuck nit Posted February 16, 2015 Share Posted February 16, 2015 Top ten in rookie scoring amongst forwards. I see Bo is in the top 20 now,as well. I like the stat that states he has scored more points than 19 other Vancouver Canucks in his rookie season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nuck nit Posted February 16, 2015 Share Posted February 16, 2015 Definitely. They send it back to the point, but the D have no clue what to do so they look around then pass it across to their partner, who then either passes it back, throws it behind the net, or tries to wrist it towards the goal only to have it blocked and turned over. Clendening is at least showing some potential, both in knowing what to do with it and joining in/trailing the rush. And that is why one of the top four without a full NTC should be trade bait. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HowYaDrouin Posted February 16, 2015 Share Posted February 16, 2015 Vey is a turnover machine who easily leads all forward in turnovers per 60 minutes (more than 5). By comparison Henrik would be about 1.3 or so per 60. I would put too much emphasis on his +/- since he plays extremely sheltered minutes offensive minded minutes. His underlying numbers are simply bad. He is a terrible passer, he is not a great forechecker, has only ok speed. He does have a nice shot, but should not be playing C on any line, aweful in circle, and should be playing wing. I like Vey, and I think he has the potential, but he is not underrated , he is pretty much what most people with common sense think he is...a pretty 1 dimensional rookie who could develop. But he shouldnt be getting ice time ahead of Kassian I would love for you to show me the website in which you developed that stat; Because the one I found has him at a (-3) turnovers on the season (turnovers/takeaways) which would put him at -0.26 turnovers/60. Which for comparison is 12th on the team, ahead of notable players such as Zack Kassian and Daniel Sedin, as well as all of our D men. He's also 10th in CorsiRel, so while his advanced stats aren't top of the team, they're no where near "simply bad". The rest of your argument is just inept and full of errors. He's not a terrible passer, i'd argue he's one of our highest skill players and is actual quite a good passer. He may not be the best in the circle, but the only centre who wins more faceoffs than he loses is Bo. So our entire team is terrible at faceoffs. He's also not a 1-dimensional forward, he can pass, shoot, is great at creating space for his line by driving in hard and then stopping up and making a pass over to one of his linemates. He's also improved by leaps and bounds when it comes to play in his own end, and saved a for sure goal against Chicago with his good backcheck. I know it's quite weird to see a rookie on our team actually doing well (on pace for 33 points, which last year would have put him at 11th in rookie scoring) but instead of ******* on him, why don't you support him and be happy that he's having a good rookie season? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.