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

Adam Gaudette | #96 | C


Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Watermelons said:

Some quotes from Gaudette in an article from today.

 

 

 

 

 

Wouldn't worry too much about him not signing here. Full link to the article here. http://dailyhive.com/vancouver/canucks-prospect-adam-gaudette-2017

Hard to be paranoid after reading that article. Sounds excited to be a Canuck prospect and join the team aftet one more year.

 

Go with Gaud!

  • Upvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Wasn't it Jimmy Vesey that said not to worry because he would sign with the Preds, then bailed?

 

Some prospects say things like this just to save face; I really hope Gaudette isn't one of them, especially after seeing those Tweets from a while back. 

Edited by CaNuCkSLoUiE23
Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎3‎/‎14‎/‎2017 at 9:33 AM, stawns said:

Agreed, each team should have 1-2 players with exceptional status.......or the NHLPA could quit being dicks about a 19 year old draft format.  That's a better solution, imo.

You let 1 - 2 'exceptional player status' exemptions for each NHL franchise and you take potentially 31 - 62 junior age players from the CHL. That would be a real threat to junior hockey in Canada. It 'might' work out for the exempted players but the overall quality of play within the CHL would suffer. Quality down = attendance down = failed junior franchises. The CHL provides a development structure that benefits all junior hockey players. Cherry picking the system is a long term killer of Canadian hockey.

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Boudrias said:

You let 1 - 2 'exceptional player status' exemptions for each NHL franchise and you take potentially 31 - 62 junior age players from the CHL. That would be a real threat to junior hockey in Canada. It 'might' work out for the exempted players but the overall quality of play within the CHL would suffer. Quality down = attendance down = failed junior franchises. The CHL provides a development structure that benefits all junior hockey players. Cherry picking the system is a long term killer of Canadian hockey.

A lot of those players are already getting cherry picked to play in the NHL in sheltered roles when they fall in that 'grey area' of being too good for the CHL, not ready for the NHL, too young to play in the AHL. 

 

Clearly there'd needs to be limits and likely some system of compensation worked out but I think there's reason to believe changes could (and should) be made.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, J.R. said:

A lot of those players are already getting cherry picked to play in the NHL in sheltered roles when they fall in that 'grey area' of being too good for the CHL, not ready for the NHL, too young to play in the AHL. 

 

Clearly there'd needs to be limits and likely some system of compensation worked out but I think there's reason to believe changes could (and should) be made.

True enough that the NHL teams can take underagers onto their rosters just as Virtanen and McCann were last year. I see efforts to allow under agers into the AHL whether 1 or 2 per team as a thin edge of the wedge. There is a very clear reason why Canadian hockey is superior and I suggest that is the CHL. The bedrock of hockey in NA is not the NHL and most certainly not the AHL. It is the Canadian minor hockey system with the CHL at the top. The benefits of CHL hockey filter all the way back to PeeWee hockey.  

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, J.R. said:

A lot of those players are already getting cherry picked to play in the NHL in sheltered roles when they fall in that 'grey area' of being too good for the CHL, not ready for the NHL, too young to play in the AHL. 

 

Clearly there'd needs to be limits and likely some system of compensation worked out but I think there's reason to believe changes could (and should) be made.

exactly right, they weren't sending jake back to Calgary under any circumstance.  The only result is that jake is now a year behind Nylander in his development.  It puts the CHL kids at an unfair disadvantage.  I'm fine with leaving them in the CHL until they're 20, but then that needs to be applied across the board, for all players.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Boudrias said:

True enough that the NHL teams can take underagers onto their rosters just as Virtanen and McCann were last year. I see efforts to allow under agers into the AHL whether 1 or 2 per team as a thin edge of the wedge. There is a very clear reason why Canadian hockey is superior and I suggest that is the CHL. The bedrock of hockey in NA is not the NHL and most certainly not the AHL. It is the Canadian minor hockey system with the CHL at the top. The benefits of CHL hockey filter all the way back to PeeWee hockey.  

I think that since they put that agreement into practice, they have shot themselves in the foot and the CHL is starting to suffer.  It is, now, the harder path to get to the pro ranks and kids are starting to make other choices for their paths to pro.......like Jr A then NCAA and even Europe (Mathews).  I'm betting we see Juolevi play in the Finnish league next year, rather than back in London because he has far surpassed the level of competition he gets in Jr.  The bottom line is, it has to be the same field for every player, regardless of where they play.  

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, CaNuCkSLoUiE23 said:

Wasn't it Jimmy Vesey that said not to worry because he would sign with the Preds, then bailed?

 

Some prospects say things like this just to save face; I really hope Gaudette isn't one of them, especially after seeing those Tweets from a while back. 

I'm not worried. Vesey's statements were never public the way Gaudette's have been, Vesey's statements that he would sign came from the Predators organization, not him, if I'm not mistaken. So there's no way to be certain (at least unless somebody has an article link quoting Vesey saying he'd sign in Nashville) that those "comments" were not from an organization trying to save face for a player they should've traded instead of pinning their hopes that he'd sign.

 

And like what's been said before, Gaudette is only finishing his 2nd year of college hockey. He still has two years to go. Chances are, he'll sign after next year. He needs to add some weight and Linden was even quoting as saying last month that he expected Gaudette would return for his third year. My gut says the Canucks likely encouraged Gaudette to return to Northeastern for one more year -- where Gaudette will likely take a big leadership role with the team (since guys like Aston-Reese & John Stevens are moving to the pros) and probably will be in the Hobey Baker conversations next year too.

 

It's also a smart financial decision for Gaudette to wait a year because he'll be in his twenty year old year meaning he'll only need to sign a two year entry deal (instead of the three he'd sign this year). Meaning, if he signs an ELC next year and plays an NHL game next season, he'll burn a year, taking that entry deal down to 1 year meaning he'd get a bigger contract extension faster depending on whether or not his first NHL season is a success. It's the same path that Boeser looks to be going down too this year.

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I wouldn't worry about Gaudmode not signing, with our weak roster it's a lot easier for him and others to come in and get a chance to showcase what they can do.  I am sure Stetcher relayed this message to him.  As far as bringing up the Vesey/Nashville situation, maybe Nashville handled the situation wrong?  Hardball is not always the best route to take on negotiations.  Maybe Benning and Co. are a lot more up front and honest with our NCAA prospects than other GM's, which allows them to feel like they're already part of the team.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Boudrias said:

You let 1 - 2 'exceptional player status' exemptions for each NHL franchise and you take potentially 31 - 62 junior age players from the CHL. That would be a real threat to junior hockey in Canada. It 'might' work out for the exempted players but the overall quality of play within the CHL would suffer. Quality down = attendance down = failed junior franchises. The CHL provides a development structure that benefits all junior hockey players. Cherry picking the system is a long term killer of Canadian hockey.

I'd actually be fine with that. and I don't see it as much of a threat as you do.  The league has a lot of good players in it, more players than they can develop efficiently.  Moving out those players allows growth from younger players that might have not been giving the opportunity had a more experience vet been on the roster. I think a higher turn over rate would allow more players to be develop and actually result in producing more NHL talent. 

 

A friend of mine is in actually in charge of player Development and Recruitment in the WHL. I'd be curious to what his thoughts are, next time I see him I'll bring it up. 

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, CaNuCkSLoUiE23 said:

Wasn't it Jimmy Vesey that said not to worry because he would sign with the Preds, then bailed?

 

Some prospects say things like this just to save face; I really hope Gaudette isn't one of them, especially after seeing those Tweets from a while back. 

Those tweets are much ado about nothing.

I despise the Maple Leafs.  If they drafted me and offered me a contract they would be my favourite team in the league.

What he said as a young teen and hockey fan almost certainly holds no bearing as how he feels currently as a potential professional hockey player.

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, stawns said:

I think that since they put that agreement into practice, they have shot themselves in the foot and the CHL is starting to suffer.  It is, now, the harder path to get to the pro ranks and kids are starting to make other choices for their paths to pro.......like Jr A then NCAA and even Europe (Mathews).  I'm betting we see Juolevi play in the Finnish league next year, rather than back in London because he has far surpassed the level of competition he gets in Jr.  The bottom line is, it has to be the same field for every player, regardless of where they play.  

It is the scale of what you are suggesting that worries me more than anything. That said I do not see a mass exodus of CHL players to Jr.A or Europe. My concern over Euroland is the play there is not NA style hockey. It might be a fit for Joulevi but it hurt Jensen's development IMHO. Jensen was considered 'to good' for the OHL so went home to Europe.

 

To early to tell whether Mathews starts a movement, I doubt it. Frankly, strong WJC teams out of Europe could impact player movement as much as anything. The disaster of the Finnish team this past tourney was hardly that. I certainly do not want Joulevi in the KHL.

 

Sorry, just do not see it. The idea of allowing the top 10% of CHL players being allowed to in essence skim the system to benefit that group is 'shooting' yourself in the foot. A question to ask is whether the 3rd, 4th & 5th Round picks that Jim Benning feasts on still exist if the overall quality of CHL play drops. I think not.    

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Boudrias said:

It is the scale of what you are suggesting that worries me more than anything. That said I do not see a mass exodus of CHL players to Jr.A or Europe. My concern over Euroland is the play there is not NA style hockey. It might be a fit for Joulevi but it hurt Jensen's development IMHO. Jensen was considered 'to good' for the OHL so went home to Europe.

 

To early to tell whether Mathews starts a movement, I doubt it. Frankly, strong WJC teams out of Europe could impact player movement as much as anything. The disaster of the Finnish team this past tourney was hardly that. I certainly do not want Joulevi in the KHL.

 

Sorry, just do not see it. The idea of allowing the top 10% of CHL players being allowed to in essence skim the system to benefit that group is 'shooting' yourself in the foot. A question to ask is whether the 3rd, 4th & 5th Round picks that Jim Benning feasts on still exist if the overall quality of CHL play drops. I think not.    

like I said, I have no issue with that, but it should be a 20 year old minimum, across the board, not just for CHL kids.  It puts them at a real disadvantage.

 

Truly, though, making the draft a 19 year old draft is the best way to solve the problem, imo.

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 1 month later...
  • 3 weeks later...

I cannot wait to see this kid in action. I think as the year goes on he'll be my new favourite prospect. He's already a steal with where we got him and he's already showing signs of elite skill. Oh ya... and he's a centre. Let's have another big year AG!

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Camel Toe Drag said:

I cannot wait to see this kid in action. I think as the year goes on he'll be my new favourite prospect. He's already a steal with where we got him and he's already showing signs of elite skill. Oh ya... and he's a centre. Let's have another big year AG!

 

Hockey East puts a bunch of their games online. If you really want to watch Adam, go on their website next season and they will usual have links to their games

  • Upvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...