VegasCanuck Posted March 29, 2019 Share Posted March 29, 2019 Not worried about Lockwood going back for another year if he decides to, I think his development was stunted by injuries. He could probably use another year of growth. I like this kid, think he has potential, but because of injuries, I think he's going to be late making it to the game if he makes it. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cyoung Posted March 29, 2019 Share Posted March 29, 2019 3 hours ago, GoldenAlien said: It's not just his skating. In the OHL, Gadjovich was a near immovable net front presence, money beneath the hash marks, and a monster in the corners. Doesn't matter if he was scoring or not, everyone knows when Gadj was in the game. The same things can't be said about him now. It's not like he's so slow that he can't even get to the wall or the net before the puck's gone. There are plenty of bigger guys who aren't great skaters in the AHL and they still manage to be intimidating, but Gadj is just not. It doesn't mean he'll never get there, but it demonstrates how difficult it is to be hard to play against when your competition is a 28 year old, 220lb man instead of a 20 year old, 180lb kid. Virtanen destroyed people in the Dub. He was not destroying people in the AHL. And this is a top 10 pick who's an A+ skater and measures 6'1", 226lbs. Lockwood is 5'11", 180lbs. Motte plays a similarly chippy game, but he scored 56pts in 38GP at Michigan as a junior. He turned pro and he got 16pts in 43GP and -19 in his first AHL season. It's really hard to play in a league where people's livelihoods depend on their performance. Lockwood is an undersized forward who hasn't dominated the NCAA, why rush him into the pros if he's not done learning at the college level? I don't want to rush him, don't get me wrong. I just don't think he would struggle nearly as much as gadj, the speed is a huge part of the problem and one that Lockwood wouldn't have an issue. I think it would be a good idea to finish up his college career after his 4th year. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-Vintage Canuck- Posted March 30, 2019 Author Share Posted March 30, 2019 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SingleThorn Posted March 31, 2019 Share Posted March 31, 2019 HNIC ( Friedman ) reporting that Lockwood has informed the Canucks that he is doing his Senior year @ U of M.. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grape Posted March 31, 2019 Share Posted March 31, 2019 7 minutes ago, SingleThorn said: HNIC ( Friedman ) reporting that Lockwood has informed the Canucks that he is doing his Senior year @ U of M.. As expected. Also expected is the fanbase's perception of him going from "he's an underrated prospect" to "meh we didn't need him really." Let's not assume things too early and be petty. I think he'll still end up signing so let's judge later. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Great Canucks Posted March 31, 2019 Share Posted March 31, 2019 Sikura signed with his team after four years. Lockwood could, too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stawns Posted March 31, 2019 Share Posted March 31, 2019 Even if he doesn't, he's a longshot anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CupIsComing Posted March 31, 2019 Share Posted March 31, 2019 Bye Bye William Lockwood. I hope that the Canucks can at least get a draft pick for his rights before he walks away. Even if he is considering playing for the Canucks at the end of next year, the organization still has to trade his rights this year or risk losing an asset for nothing. 1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dpn1 Posted March 31, 2019 Share Posted March 31, 2019 Just because he plays his senior year doesn't mean he won't sign with us. University students seem to be more loyal to the team that drafts them. Just a personal observation. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stawns Posted March 31, 2019 Share Posted March 31, 2019 1 hour ago, CupIsComing said: Bye Bye William Lockwood. I hope that the Canucks can at least get a draft pick for his rights before he walks away. Even if he is considering playing for the Canucks at the end of next year, the organization still has to trade his rights this year or risk losing an asset for nothing. If they don't, it's not really a big loss. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CupIsComing Posted March 31, 2019 Share Posted March 31, 2019 49 minutes ago, stawns said: If they don't, it's not really a big loss. Maybe not a big loss in terms of the quality of the individual asset...but even a mid-round pick in return presents huge value to a rebuilding team (that doesn't have nearly enough picks) and shouldn't be discounted. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stawns Posted March 31, 2019 Share Posted March 31, 2019 1 minute ago, CupIsComing said: Maybe not a big loss in terms of the quality of the individual asset...but even a mid-round pick in return presents huge value to a rebuilding team (that doesn't have nearly enough picks) and shouldn't be discounted. A pick on the last cpl rounds makes little to no difference. Not saying they shouldn't consider it, just that losing him wouldn't impact the org in any significant way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grape Posted March 31, 2019 Share Posted March 31, 2019 (edited) 2 hours ago, CupIsComing said: Maybe not a big loss in terms of the quality of the individual asset...but even a mid-round pick in return presents huge value to a rebuilding team (that doesn't have nearly enough picks) and shouldn't be discounted. I mean I don't know how you're differentiating between Lockwood the individual asset being not high value, and then the mid-round pick being huge value, when Lockwood probably would get drafted higher than a mid round pick in a redraft. People seem to always value draft picks really high, and then the moment the draft pick turns into a player, the value isn't as high anymore. Edited March 31, 2019 by Grape 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Master 112 Posted March 31, 2019 Share Posted March 31, 2019 13 minutes ago, Grape said: I mean I don't know how you're differentiating between Lockwood the individual asset being not high value, and then the mid-round pick being huge value, when Lockwood probably would get drafted higher than a mid round pick in a redraft. People seem to always value draft picks really high, and then the moment the draft pick turns into a player, the value isn't as high anymore. 2 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grape Posted March 31, 2019 Share Posted March 31, 2019 I've said it before, but fans tend to think in the position of their favourite team and disregard the other team. That's why (Raymond - Ballard - 1st round pick ) was such a popular proposal back in the day - all of those assets had low value to us so obviously the value would add up and get us a high valued superstar right? But when you consider the other team, taking Raymond, Ballard, and a 1st would be laughable. Same thing here, obviously the popular idea is "We have to trade Lockwood for a mid round pick because he'll have no incentive to sign and can freely choose his team DUHHH" Well if you take the other team into perspective, why would they give up a mid round pick for someone who would be in exactly the same position after the trade - free to choose a team as he'd like. I don't think Lockwood really has any trade value on the market for that reason, so might as well try to sign him. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Noble 6 Posted March 31, 2019 Share Posted March 31, 2019 (edited) 1 hour ago, Grape said: I've said it before, but fans tend to think in the position of their favourite team and disregard the other team. That's why (Raymond - Ballard - 1st round pick ) was such a popular proposal back in the day - all of those assets had low value to us so obviously the value would add up and get us a high valued superstar right? But when you consider the other team, taking Raymond, Ballard, and a 1st would be laughable. Same thing here, obviously the popular idea is "We have to trade Lockwood for a mid round pick because he'll have no incentive to sign and can freely choose his team DUHHH" Well if you take the other team into perspective, why would they give up a mid round pick for someone who would be in exactly the same position after the trade - free to choose a team as he'd like. I don't think Lockwood really has any trade value on the market for that reason, so might as well try to sign him. Buffalo traded a 3rd rounder to Nashville for an extra month-ish of negotiation time. Fox was a key piece in the Hanifin/Hamilton trade. Lockwood isn't on the same level as either of those two, but some sort of pick should be manageable. Wasn't one of Benning's preferences to add players with a couple years of development rather than straight pick? Wouldn't there be other GMs who believe that as well? Edited March 31, 2019 by Horvat is a Boss Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ilduce39 Posted April 1, 2019 Share Posted April 1, 2019 3 hours ago, Grape said: I mean I don't know how you're differentiating between Lockwood the individual asset being not high value, and then the mid-round pick being huge value, when Lockwood probably would get drafted higher than a mid round pick in a redraft. People seem to always value draft picks really high, and then the moment the draft pick turns into a player, the value isn't as high anymore. So true... I only really follow the Canucks though so I wonder if that’s a league-wide thing or just something brought on in this market due to our rebuild neurosis. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cyoung Posted April 1, 2019 Share Posted April 1, 2019 11 hours ago, CupIsComing said: Bye Bye William Lockwood. I hope that the Canucks can at least get a draft pick for his rights before he walks away. Even if he is considering playing for the Canucks at the end of next year, the organization still has to trade his rights this year or risk losing an asset for nothing. Ugh ....no. Even if he possibly walks, it's not worth moving. If he walks, he walks. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrJockitch Posted April 1, 2019 Share Posted April 1, 2019 Most of the times, such as with Fox there has been some hints that he wasn't interested in signing with a club. There has never been any of that with Lockwood. Former teammate in Quinn will be staring on the club next year. Has been to development camp, when college guys don't need to and have to pay their own way for the most part. Signing at end of next college season has its benefits as well, year burned off ELC and that much closer to UFA. Not the end of the world. Especially for a player who had significant injuries early in his career. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post GoldenAlien Posted April 1, 2019 Popular Post Share Posted April 1, 2019 Quote Benning confirmed that forward Will Lockwood, a 2016 third-round draft choice, will return to Michigan for a fourth NCAA season. The 20-year-old Bloomfield, Mich. native had contemplated turning pro after 31 points (16-15) in 36 games this season. He was limited to just 16 games in 2017-18 because of midseason shoulder surgery. “He feels with the surgery that he wants to get the shoulder stronger and have another good year, get his degree and then turn pro and hopefully we get him signed,” said Benning, knowing Lockwood would become an unrestricted free agent if the fourth-year Wolverine doesn’t sign by Aug. 15, 2020. “He played on the top line and with his skills set, is made for today’s game and has courage to to take pucks to the net.” 1 1 4 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