stawns Posted September 19, 2014 Share Posted September 19, 2014 Yeah, that was my big takeaway as well (as you can see from my earlier post). His positioning is just at such a high level and it really showed during the tournament. There were so many times when we'd turnover the puck with a couple of our guys looking like they were gonna get caught and I'd get that anxious sinking feeling (you know the one if you're a longtime Canucks fan) that the other team was about to hurt us on an odd man rush. But then I'd see big #50 out there in perfect position to slow things down through the neutral zone, often solely negating the opposition counterattack, and giving his mates enough time to recover and get back into the play on D. Sometimes it almost looked like Gaunce was playing a completely different game from his linemates (in a good way). You saw so many guys who were busy but not really getting much done. Too much running around. Too much chasing. And just so scrambley and unstructured. Peewee type stuff. Too many guys skating miles but never really following the play and pretty much always a second behind and never really catching up. Gaunce often stood out to me as a guy who's just playing at a higher level. Not in terms of flash but smarts. His awareness and positioning really looked NHL-grade to my eyes. He just strikes me as a guy with a really high-end hockey IQ. I'm very interested to see how he does at main camp--once he's playing with guys who can actually "think" the game at the same level. pretty much what you just said, yup Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elvis15 Posted September 19, 2014 Share Posted September 19, 2014 No, it's a 2 part screw job. Upload them to Facebook, hi res to compressed facebook size, then copied here and viola. Fairly large file sizes too. Meh, i've the full albums on my page and some gems from the Calgary game I got a few of Gaunce but have yet to download them from my camera. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Warhippy Posted September 19, 2014 Share Posted September 19, 2014 I got a few of Gaunce but have yet to download them from my camera. Here's what I got from the weekend https://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=a.295401550646641.1073741854.218916221628508&type=3 https://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=a.294845174035612.1073741853.218916221628508&type=3 https://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=a.294414230745373.1073741852.218916221628508&type=3 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canucklehead44 Posted September 19, 2014 Share Posted September 19, 2014 Gaunce is a physical specimen with a good shot, solid playmaking skills, a high level of hockey IQ at both ends of the ice, along with other intangibles (faceoffs etc). Apparently he dominated the combine when it came to testing (ranked 1st in 12 different tests). "He’s one of those classic Canadian born, OHL trained two-way centres. Brendan’s well-rounded skillset projects him anywhere between 6th and 12th on draft day". Still can't believe we got him 26th. His OHL stats weren't mind boggling, but Ryan O'Reilly was pretty much scouted the same as Gaunce but without the size http://www.matchsticksandgasoline.com/2009/6/18/913777/scouting-the-09-draft-ryan-oreilly. O'Reilly never even hit 20 goals or 70 points in junior yet scored 28 in the NHL as a 23 year old. To say Gaunce is going to be a fourth liner is very pre-mature, he could still end up a first line player. I think it is likely he fits more of a third line role but at that token I think he is at the very least a slam dunk bottom 6 guy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Dasein Posted September 19, 2014 Share Posted September 19, 2014 Gaunce is a physical specimen with a good shot, solid playmaking skills, a high level of hockey IQ at both ends of the ice, along with other intangibles (faceoffs etc). Apparently he dominated the combine when it came to testing (ranked 1st in 12 different tests). "He’s one of those classic Canadian born, OHL trained two-way centres. Brendan’s well-rounded skillset projects him anywhere between 6th and 12th on draft day". Still can't believe we got him 26th. His OHL stats weren't mind boggling, but Ryan O'Reilly was pretty much scouted the same as Gaunce but without the size http://www.matchsticksandgasoline.com/2009/6/18/913777/scouting-the-09-draft-ryan-oreilly. O'Reilly never even hit 20 goals or 70 points in junior yet scored 28 in the NHL as a 23 year old. To say Gaunce is going to be a fourth liner is very pre-mature, he could still end up a first line player. I think it is likely he fits more of a third line role but at that token I think he is at the very least a slam dunk bottom 6 guy. Dominating the combine doesn't mean anything two full years after. All it means is that Gaunce at age 18 was one of the most physically dominant prospects in the draft, which meant that he had a chance at making the NHL early due to his physical stature. Unfortunately, he hasn't for two years. If you did the combine again with the 2012 draftees now that all of them are 20 and the late bloomers almost fully developed, Gaunce's physical superiority at age 18 against 2012 draftees is probably a moot point at age 20, although he is still probably above average in that category since he had a good early start. Ryan O'Reilly never hit 20 goals or 70 points in junior because he never played after his draft year. He made the NHL as an 18 year old - had he been sent back, it's reasonable to think that someone with O'Reilly's production in the NHL would have been fairly dominant in the OHL in his draft+1 and +2 years. There's practically zero chance Gaunce ends up a 1st liner in the NHL. Just because O'Reilly is knocking on the door doesn't mean Gaunce will because Gaunce never made it as a 18 year old and his production at age 20 in the OHL wasn't all that impressive. He'll be a good solid bottom 6 as you say, but his upside is not near O'Reilly's. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
73 Percent Posted September 19, 2014 Share Posted September 19, 2014 Dominating the combine doesn't mean anything two full years after. All it means is that Gaunce at age 18 was one of the most physically dominant prospects in the draft, which meant that he had a chance at making the NHL early due to his physical stature. Unfortunately, he hasn't for two years. If you did the combine again with the 2012 draftees now that all of them are 20 and the late bloomers almost fully developed, Gaunce's physical superiority at age 18 against 2012 draftees is probably a moot point at age 20, although he is still probably above average in that category since he had a good early start. Ryan O'Reilly never hit 20 goals or 70 points in junior because he never played after his draft year. He made the NHL as an 18 year old - had he been sent back, it's reasonable to think that someone with O'Reilly's production in the NHL would have been fairly dominant in the OHL in his draft+1 and +2 years. There's practically zero chance Gaunce ends up a 1st liner in the NHL. Just because O'Reilly is knocking on the door doesn't mean Gaunce will because Gaunce never made it as a 18 year old and his production at age 20 in the OHL wasn't all that impressive. He'll be a good solid bottom 6 as you say, but his upside is not near O'Reilly's.+1. Plus a million if I could. This is how you set realistic expectations without "trashing" a prospect. I agree with everything you said here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
newgm Posted September 20, 2014 Share Posted September 20, 2014 Dominating the combine doesn't mean anything two full years after. All it means is that Gaunce at age 18 was one of the most physically dominant prospects in the draft, which meant that he had a chance at making the NHL early due to his physical stature. Unfortunately, he hasn't for two years. If you did the combine again with the 2012 draftees now that all of them are 20 and the late bloomers almost fully developed, Gaunce's physical superiority at age 18 against 2012 draftees is probably a moot point at age 20, although he is still probably above average in that category since he had a good early start. Ryan O'Reilly never hit 20 goals or 70 points in junior because he never played after his draft year. He made the NHL as an 18 year old - had he been sent back, it's reasonable to think that someone with O'Reilly's production in the NHL would have been fairly dominant in the OHL in his draft+1 and +2 years. There's practically zero chance Gaunce ends up a 1st liner in the NHL. Just because O'Reilly is knocking on the door doesn't mean Gaunce will because Gaunce never made it as a 18 year old and his production at age 20 in the OHL wasn't all that impressive. He'll be a good solid bottom 6 as you say, but his upside is not near O'Reilly's.Though technically correct, characterizing O'Reilly making the "NHL" as an 18 year old in contrast to Gaunce, is a bit of an oversimplification when trying to compare O'Reilly making the Lowly Colorado Av's to Gaunce not making the contending Canucks as an 18 year old without considering their perspective teams.Until last year, the Avalanche were serious bottom dwellers similar to the Oilers and played Mat Ducheneas an 18 year old in 2009, Landeskog as an 18 year old in 2011. It's likely that these players includingO'reilly would have been sent back to junior just like Gaunce was, if they'd been drafted by a contending team.Gaunce was drafted the year after the Canucks 2011 SC Final run and missed training camp in 2012 becauseof the NHL lockout. The Canucks were still considered a veteran contending team going into 2012, so it'snot surprising he was sent back to junior. Only the odd potential superstar like Mckinnon has a chance to make a contending team as an 18 year old as opposed to last place teams that are desperate for talent.In the long run, the extra time will only make Gaunce a better player. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wshdrvvn Posted September 20, 2014 Share Posted September 20, 2014 ^^^ MacKinnon and Landeskog were definitely ready as 18 YOs I'd say. Duchene and O'Reilly probably could have gone back to juniors. But it's just like you said, the Avs were not a deep team for several years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canucklehead44 Posted September 20, 2014 Share Posted September 20, 2014 Dominating the combine doesn't mean anything two full years after. All it means is that Gaunce at age 18 was one of the most physically dominant prospects in the draft, which meant that he had a chance at making the NHL early due to his physical stature. Unfortunately, he hasn't for two years. If you did the combine again with the 2012 draftees now that all of them are 20 and the late bloomers almost fully developed, Gaunce's physical superiority at age 18 against 2012 draftees is probably a moot point at age 20, although he is still probably above average in that category since he had a good early start. Ryan O'Reilly never hit 20 goals or 70 points in junior because he never played after his draft year. He made the NHL as an 18 year old - had he been sent back, it's reasonable to think that someone with O'Reilly's production in the NHL would have been fairly dominant in the OHL in his draft+1 and +2 years. There's practically zero chance Gaunce ends up a 1st liner in the NHL. Just because O'Reilly is knocking on the door doesn't mean Gaunce will because Gaunce never made it as a 18 year old and his production at age 20 in the OHL wasn't all that impressive. He'll be a good solid bottom 6 as you say, but his upside is not near O'Reilly's. I agree, newgm makes a great point as well. Most players don't really stick around a 30 point zone their entire career. I am very doubtful Gaunce becomes a 1st line player, but he could be a Chris Higgins type who can bounce up to the 2nd line from time to time. I was making more of a point to Gaunce's well rounded game and commitment. He has the size, skill, and ethic. I predict he will end up with a Kyle Brodziak sort of career. Good for 30 points, might hit the 20 goal / 40 point mark a couple times. Gaunce is the same size as Brodziak and plays a similar game, almost identical scouting reports: Assets: Is a sound defensive player with some offensive production. Can play either center or wing and gives an honest effort every shift. Sets a very good example in terms of work ethic. Flaws: Is a little lacking in the skating department, which limits his ability to play a scoring role at the highest level. Doesn't always use his size effectively enough, too. Career Potential: Versatile complementary forward. If Brodziak is his likely potential, I would put Greg Nemisz at the low end, Ryan O'Reilly at the ceiling. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
newgm Posted September 20, 2014 Share Posted September 20, 2014 I agree, newgm makes a great point as well. Most players don't really stick around a 30 point zone their entire career. I am very doubtful Gaunce becomes a 1st line player, but he could be a Chris Higgins type who can bounce up to the 2nd line from time to time. I was making more of a point to Gaunce's well rounded game and commitment. He has the size, skill, and ethic. I predict he will end up with a Kyle Brodziak sort of career. Good for 30 points, might hit the 20 goal / 40 point mark a couple times. Gaunce is the same size as Brodziak and plays a similar game, almost identical scouting reports: Assets: Is a sound defensive player with some offensive production. Can play either center or wing and gives an honest effort every shift. Sets a very good example in terms of work ethic. Flaws: Is a little lacking in the skating department, which limits his ability to play a scoring role at the highest level. Doesn't always use his size effectively enough, too. Career Potential: Versatile complementary forward. If Brodziak is his likely potential, I would put Greg Nemisz at the low end, Ryan O'Reilly at the ceiling.Fair assessment, Gaunce should be at least a very serviceable player, if he makes it. When you look at Ryan O'Reilly or Ryan Getzlaf's junior stats, you wouldn't have predicted the players they've become. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hockeywoot Posted September 21, 2014 Share Posted September 21, 2014 (edited) Underrated around here. May require seasoning, but I'd surprised if he didn't carve out an NHL career.He doesn't have pure offensive skillset to be a top 6 player, but his IQ would be above the typical bottom 6ers.I think he'll top out as a solid 3C (some stints at 2C) with leadership abilities.In terms of value (not playing style), I compare to a Laich or a Stoll. Edited September 21, 2014 by hockeywoot Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoshuaGuy Posted September 22, 2014 Share Posted September 22, 2014 Underrated around here. May require seasoning, but I'd surprised if he didn't carve out an NHL career. He doesn't have pure offensive skillset to be a top 6 player, but his IQ would be above the typical bottom 6ers. I think he'll top out as a solid 3C (some stints at 2C) with leadership abilities. In terms of value (not playing style), I compare to a Laich or a Stoll. I would be ecstatic if he turns out as good as Stoll. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigbadcanucks Posted September 22, 2014 Share Posted September 22, 2014 Yeah, that was my big takeaway as well (as you can see from my earlier post). His positioning is just at such a high level and it really showed during the tournament. There were so many times when we'd turnover the puck with a couple of our guys looking like they were gonna get caught and I'd get that anxious sinking feeling (you know the one if you're a longtime Canucks fan) that the other team was about to hurt us on an odd man rush. But then I'd see big #50 out there in perfect position to slow things down through the neutral zone, often solely negating the opposition counterattack, and giving his mates enough time to recover and get back into the play on D. Sometimes it almost looked like Gaunce was playing a completely different game from his linemates (in a good way). You saw so many guys who were busy but not really getting much done. Too much running around. Too much chasing. And just so scrambley and unstructured. Peewee type stuff. Too many guys skating miles but never really following the play and pretty much always a second behind and never really catching up. Gaunce often stood out to me as a guy who's just playing at a higher level. Not in terms of flash but smarts. His awareness and positioning really looked NHL-grade to my eyes. He just strikes me as a guy with a really high-end hockey IQ. I'm very interested to see how he does at main camp--once he's playing with guys who can actually "think" the game at the same level. Agree with your analysis on Gaunce...he's a guy who will be able to give you 20+ minutes because he's such an efficient player and he'll be as fresh in the first minute of the game as he is in the 60th minute of the game because of it. Gaunce is faster/quicker than I remember him to be. The kid is a man-child and looks like a leader in the making. Just wish he had a mean streak in him. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canucks1219 Posted September 22, 2014 Share Posted September 22, 2014 Agree with your analysis on Gaunce...he's a guy who will be able to give you 20+ minutes because he's such an efficient player and he'll be as fresh in the first minute of the game as he is in the 60th minute of the game because of it. Gaunce is faster/quicker than I remember him to be. The kid is a man-child and looks like a leader in the making. Just wish he had a mean streak in him. Gaunce getting 1st-line minutes? Those are some pretty high expectations. Or are you simply saying he can give you 20 minutes if needed? I saw the same sentiment during the prospects tournament with regards to Gaunce and Horvat. I get why people want some edge to these guys... But I personally think that the even-keeled personalities are what helps them play their games. We have guys like Virtanen, Kassian, Fox, McCann, Cassels, and even Shinkaruk who are all capable of providing a bit of nastiness here and there. I think it helps to have calm guys like Gaunce and Horvat around these players to keep the team from losing it completely. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigbadcanucks Posted September 22, 2014 Share Posted September 22, 2014 Gaunce getting 1st-line minutes? Those are some pretty high expectations. Or are you simply saying he can give you 20 minutes if needed? I saw the same sentiment during the prospects tournament with regards to Gaunce and Horvat. I get why people want some edge to these guys... But I personally think that the even-keeled personalities are what helps them play their games. We have guys like Virtanen, Kassian, Fox, McCann, Cassels, and even Shinkaruk who are all capable of providing a bit of nastiness here and there. I think it helps to have calm guys like Gaunce and Horvat around these players to keep the team from losing it completely. Thanks for clarifying...it would be the latter. You have a good point about Horvat and Gaunce having a calm about them. And I suppose that's part of what makes up the leadership qualities about the two of them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canucklehead44 Posted September 23, 2014 Share Posted September 23, 2014 Andrew Ladd scored 19 goals, 45 points after his draft year (a 30 point drop). He turned out alright. Brandon Dubinsky is another player with ho-hum junior stats who turned into a solid top 6 player. Jordan Staal, Brandon Sutter, even Jarret Stoll (huge drop in final junior season) have all had solid careers as well without lighting junior on fire. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
timberz21 Posted September 23, 2014 Share Posted September 23, 2014 Andrew Ladd scored 19 goals, 45 points after his draft year (a 30 point drop). He turned out alright. Brandon Dubinsky is another player with ho-hum junior stats who turned into a solid top 6 player. Jordan Staal, Brandon Sutter, even Jarret Stoll (huge drop in final junior season) have all had solid careers as well without lighting junior on fire. I believe in Gaunce... But I could give you 100 examples who turned out busts, you picked up the exceptions with your examples. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canucklehead44 Posted September 23, 2014 Share Posted September 23, 2014 No doubt you can, the one thing he has in common with those players is the fact he is a big, two-way player. If gaunce was a 190lbs offensive winger who wasn't putting up numbers I would be far more worried Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
timberz21 Posted September 23, 2014 Share Posted September 23, 2014 No doubt you can, the one thing he has in common with those players is the fact he is a big, two-way player. If gaunce was a 190lbs offensive winger who wasn't putting up numbers I would be far more worried true but those guys are known for their nasty style of play, not Gaunce, he's more of a Taylor Pyatt type of player when it comes to physicality. I'd compare him more to a Malhotra type of player,positionally sound, great understanding of the games, uses his body to defend while not being physical (hitting). If he's anything close to Malhotra i'd be really happy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hockeywoot Posted September 24, 2014 Share Posted September 24, 2014 true but those guys are known for their nasty style of play, not Gaunce, he's more of a Taylor Pyatt type of player when it comes to physicality. I'd compare him more to a Malhotra type of player,positionally sound, great understanding of the games, uses his body to defend while not being physical (hitting). If he's anything close to Malhotra i'd be really happy.Brandon Sutter? Nasty style of play? 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