Elias Pettersson | #40 | C

[MattJVD]

Looking like a young Henrik Sedin.

[aGENT]

2 hours ago, 48MPHSlapShot said:

That is unless we sign a veteran to fill his spot when he's already NHL ready coughboesercough

Boeser didn't 'have' a spot and no one is stopping him from taking one.

[Comet Fan 0727]

2 hours ago, 48MPHSlapShot said:

That is unless we sign a veteran to fill his spot when he's already NHL ready coughboesercough

9 NHL games equal NHL ready?  

Edited September 5, 2017 by Comet Fan 0727

[N4ZZY]

42 minutes ago, Comet Fan 0727 said:

9 NHL games equal NHL ready?  

I think Boeser still has a lot to prove. 9 NHL games does not make an NHL career. He looks to be ready, but I've heard rumors and reports that some in Canuck management aren't happy with his skating - so while he may think he's improved in his skating, maybe he hasn't improved as much. Not every prospect is a Horvat. I can see the very real possibility that he starts the season down in Utica, and then gets call ups during the year, because we all know just how fragile Canuck players are, especially with their travel and the conference they're in. 

 

[stawns]

4 hours ago, 48MPHSlapShot said:

That is unless we sign a veteran to fill his spot when he's already NHL ready coughboesercough

aside from goals, what about Boeser's game makes you think he's ready?  You do a lot of moaning about it, but never really give an argument why he should have a spot reserved for him.

Edited September 5, 2017 by stawns

[VegasCanuck]

4 hours ago, J.R. said:

Boeser didn't 'have' a spot and no one is stopping him from taking one.

I really don't know why so few people get this concept. Everyone seems to love the Edmonton model of tank for 10 years and rush your kids to the NHL, stunting their development.

 

Anyway, Plus 1

[VegasCanuck]

1 hour ago, stawns said:

aside from goals, what about Boeser's game makes you think he's ready?  You do a lot of moaning about it, but never really give an argument why he should have a spot reserved for him.

Exactly, other than the Sedins and a few others, I don't think anyone really has a spot guaranteed. Have to show up in camp and prove that you can still perform like last year. I believe that we will have enough room this year that we could bury someone in Utica if it was really necessary.

[Rick Blight]

33 minutes ago, VegasCanuck said:

I really don't know why so few people get this concept. Everyone seems to love the Edmonton model of tank for 10 years and rush your kids to the NHL, stunting their development.

 

Anyway, Plus 1

Not trying to be argumentative but I haven't seen people on here saying they "love the Edmonton model of tank for 10 years and rush your kids to the NHL stunting their development" or any similar facsimile of this concept. Edmonton certainly appeared to rush their 18 year old 1st round picks into the NHL before they were ready. They may have appeared to look NHL ready at camp and in pre-season games simply because there was nothing on their roster that was any better than them at that time. That is why it is a smart move by Benning to bring in veteran players that will make our young guys prove they are capable of beating out the vets or require more seasoning in Utica. 

 

I don't pretend to know if Boeser is NHL ready or not but I am optimistic that he is. I say this based on his 9 games last year, his stellar collegiate career and the fact that some of his college teammates and peers have already had decent rookie seasons in the NHL (Caggiula and Stetcher in particular). I also think it is relevant to point out that Boeser is 20 years old and NHL size, unlike the 18 year olds that Edmonton rushed to the NHL

Unless your name is McDavid or Matthews it is highly unlikely that any 1st year pro is going to have a roster spot sewed up or even declared NHL ready before they have attended their 1st training camp. They need to perform at camp and in exhibition games and let their performance determine if they are, or are not, NHL ready.

 

There are many posters on here who declare that spending time in Utica will not hurt our prospects, and while I agree with this assessment, I believe we also have to recognize this should not be interpreted as a reason to send them to Utica. Stage of physical and mental development along with performance should determine where these players should play.

 

[48MPHSlapShot]

26 minutes ago, Rick Blight said:

Not trying to be argumentative but I haven't seen people on here saying they "love the Edmonton model of tank for 10 years and rush your kids to the NHL stunting their development" or any similar facsimile of this concept. Edmonton certainly appeared to rush their 18 year old 1st round picks into the NHL before they were ready. They may have appeared to look NHL ready at camp and in pre-season games simply because there was nothing on their roster that was any better than them at that time. That is why it is a smart move by Benning to bring in veteran players that will make our young guys prove they are capable of beating out the vets or require more seasoning in Utica. 

 

I don't pretend to know if Boeser is NHL ready or not but I am optimistic that he is. I say this based on his 9 games last year, his stellar collegiate career and the fact that some of his college teammates and peers have already had decent rookie seasons in the NHL (Caggiula and Stetcher in particular). I also think it is relevant to point out that Boeser is 20 years old and NHL size, unlike the 18 year olds that Edmonton rushed to the NHL

Unless your name is McDavid or Matthews it is highly unlikely that any 1st year pro is going to have a roster spot sewed up or even declared NHL ready before they have attended their 1st training camp. They need to perform at camp and in exhibition games and let their performance determine if they are, or are not, NHL ready.

 

There are many posters on here who declare that spending time in Utica will not hurt our prospects, and while I agree with this assessment, I believe we also have to recognize this should not be interpreted as a reason to send them to Utica. Stage of physical and mental development along with performance should determine where these players should play.

 

Thank you!! +1

 

Not to derail this thread any more than I already have, but the fact is that you really don't know if anybody is "NHL ready" until they actually play in the NHL. In the nine games Boeser did play, in addition to putting up some good numbers, he didn't look out of place whenever he was on the ice and appears to be ready and willing to put in the time and effort to working on any shortcomings he might have. 

 

Certainly I've seen less "proven" players make NHL squads.

 

What bothers me is the narrative that people try to push in times like these. People will say things like "It's up to the player to push the door down" and things of that ilk, when really it just comes down to opportunity being taken away. The logistics of the situation all of the sudden become irrelevant. Even if players like Boeser or Virtanen happen to outperform guys like Vanek and Eriksson, do you really think that one of those guys will be cleared out to make room for the young player? Of course not.

 

Anyways, back on topic.... As much as I'm thrilled Pettersson is doing well right now, I find it a little unsettling that he's still being used primarily on the wing. I'd really like to see him in the middle, even if it means a bit of a drop in production in the short term. 

Edited September 5, 2017 by 48MPHSlapShot

[aGENT]

41 minutes ago, 48MPHSlapShot said:

Even if players like Boeser or Virtanen happen to outperform guys like Vanek and Eriksson, do you really think that one of those guys will be cleared out to make room for the young player? Of course not.

There's room for at least 3 of the four FWIW. And Vanek especially, I think they'd have zero problem moving/trading if either/both of those guys look miles ahead of him.

 

So no, not 'of course not'.

[48MPHSlapShot]

28 minutes ago, J.R. said:

There's room for at least 3 of the four FWIW. And Vanek especially, I think they'd have zero problem moving/trading if either/both of those guys look miles ahead of him.

 

So no, not 'of course not'.

I find it interesting that you use the term "miles ahead of him". Why is that the standard? Seems pretty unrealistic. What if Boeser or Virtanen (or someone else for that matter) looks slightly better?

[VegasCanuck]

1 hour ago, Rick Blight said:

Not trying to be argumentative but I haven't seen people on here saying they "love the Edmonton model of tank for 10 years and rush your kids to the NHL stunting their development" or any similar facsimile of this concept. Edmonton certainly appeared to rush their 18 year old 1st round picks into the NHL before they were ready. They may have appeared to look NHL ready at camp and in pre-season games simply because there was nothing on their roster that was any better than them at that time. That is why it is a smart move by Benning to bring in veteran players that will make our young guys prove they are capable of beating out the vets or require more seasoning in Utica. 

 

I don't pretend to know if Boeser is NHL ready or not but I am optimistic that he is. I say this based on his 9 games last year, his stellar collegiate career and the fact that some of his college teammates and peers have already had decent rookie seasons in the NHL (Caggiula and Stetcher in particular). I also think it is relevant to point out that Boeser is 20 years old and NHL size, unlike the 18 year olds that Edmonton rushed to the NHL

Unless your name is McDavid or Matthews it is highly unlikely that any 1st year pro is going to have a roster spot sewed up or even declared NHL ready before they have attended their 1st training camp. They need to perform at camp and in exhibition games and let their performance determine if they are, or are not, NHL ready.

 

There are many posters on here who declare that spending time in Utica will not hurt our prospects, and while I agree with this assessment, I believe we also have to recognize this should not be interpreted as a reason to send them to Utica. Stage of physical and mental development along with performance should determine where these players should play.

 

I don't get argumentative from your reply at all. If anything, for the most part, its reinforcing what I've been saying for a long time.

 

"If" they are ready, they will force their way onto the team!

 

The issue that I usually have, is people sometime expect that to happen immediately, as opposed to sending a player who doesn't have to be exposed on waivers, down for a week or two while you work out the cap space and asset management.

 

An example from last year would be Stecher. He played his way onto the team in camp, but was sent down to start the season because there wasn't a spot immediately available that wouldn't result in us potentially losing an asset that we weren't ready to give up on. Playing 5 games in Utica while a spot opened up through trade, or as it often turns out, through injury, didn't hurt his development at all. Point is, we don't have to get upset, just because someone who played well in Exhibition isn't on the opening night roster. There are a lot of variables to balance and we don't get paid millions of dollars to know exactly how the cap and cap relief works.

 

If someone is pushing and showing clearly they belong in the NHL, the team will figure it out how to make that happen. Knowing when to practice patience and when not to, often builds championships!

 

Plus 1, by the way.

Edited September 6, 2017 by VegasCanuck

[Rick Blight]

3 minutes ago, VegasCanuck said:

I don't get argumentative from your reply at all. If anything, for the most part, its reinforcing what I've been saying for a long time.

 

"If" they are ready, they will force their way onto the team!

 

The issue that I usually have, is people sometime expect that to happen immediately, as opposed to sending a player who doesn't have to be exposed on waivers, down for a week or two while you work out the cap space and asset management.

 

An example from last year would be Stecher. He played his way onto the team in camp, but was sent down to start the season because there wasn't a spot immediately available that wouldn't result in us potentially losing an asset that we weren't ready to give up on. Playing 5 games in Utica while a spot opened up through trade, or as it often turns out, through injury, didn't hurt his development at all. Point is, we don't have to get upset, just because someone who played well in Exhibition isn't on the opening night roster. There are a lot of variables to balance and we don't get paid millions of dollars to know exactly how the cap and cap relief works.

 

If someone is pushing and showing clearly they belong in the NHL, the team will figure it out how to make that happen. Knowing when to practice patience and when not to, often builds championships!

 

Plus 1, by the way.

Well said.........most on here will agree that a spot on the roster must be earned and that some patience must be exercised to determine the best course of action for asset management purposes.

[stawns]

52 minutes ago, 48MPHSlapShot said:

I find it interesting that you use the term "miles ahead of him". Why is that the standard? Seems pretty unrealistic. What if Boeser or Virtanen (or someone else for that matter) looks slightly better?

Then they will likely go to Utica for top 6 mins and injury depth like they should.

[48MPHSlapShot]

10 minutes ago, stawns said:

Then they will likely go to Utica for top 6 mins and injury depth like they should.

So in other words it's not an even playing field.

 

Got it.

[stawns]

11 minutes ago, 48MPHSlapShot said:

So in other words it's not an even playing field.

 

Got it.

Is this your first year watching the NHL?  Of course it's not an even playing field for players Who have proven they can play and produce at the NHL level and players who have proven nothing.  Jesus, it's like you have no  actual hockey experience whatsoever........it's always been that way.

[GreyHatnDart]

10 minutes ago, 48MPHSlapShot said:

So in other words it's not an even playing field.

 

Got it.

Unfortunately it can't be an even playing field. If you have similar assets, one of which you could potentially lose for nothing, of course you'd move down the asset that you can't lose. No brainer. 

[lethal_spaghetti]

We lost what 400+ man games last year to injury? Let them start in Utica if they dont start in the NHL right away and come up when we will inevitably have an injury.

Stecher started the year in Utica last year as well. Im just glad we will have quality players to call up. Not rushing the kids is going to prove optimal in the future. 

[Rollieo Del Fuego]

2 hours ago, 48MPHSlapShot said:

Thank you!! +1

 

Not to derail this thread any more than I already have, but the fact is that you really don't know if anybody is "NHL ready" until they actually play in the NHL. In the nine games Boeser did play, in addition to putting up some good numbers, he didn't look out of place whenever he was on the ice and appears to be ready and willing to put in the time and effort to working on any shortcomings he might have. 

 

Certainly I've seen less "proven" players make NHL squads.

 

What bothers me is the narrative that people try to push in times like these. People will say things like "It's up to the player to push the door down" and things of that ilk, when really it just comes down to opportunity being taken away. The logistics of the situation all of the sudden become irrelevant. Even if players like Boeser or Virtanen happen to outperform guys like Vanek and Eriksson, do you really think that one of those guys will be cleared out to make room for the young player? Of course not.

 

Anyways, back on topic.... As much as I'm thrilled Pettersson is doing well right now, I find it a little unsettling that he's still being used primarily on the wing. I'd really like to see him in the middle, even if it means a bit of a drop in production in the short term. 

To remain on topic....I think it is great that he is getting time at all 3 forward positions, his FO work needs to improve anyway before he can be an NHL center and it's never a bad thing to be able to play any position.

Elias may end up the steal of the draft with those magic hands....

[aGENT]

4 hours ago, 48MPHSlapShot said:

I find it interesting that you use the term "miles ahead of him". Why is that the standard? Seems pretty unrealistic. What if Boeser or Virtanen (or someone else for that matter) looks slightly better?

Because that's what the standard should be. The small sample size of a good preseason does not beat years of pro experience. Nor should it. 

 

Particularly when 'slightly better' is extremely hard to  quantify accurately in said, small sample size.

 

You want the job? You better damn well look like an obvious improvement over the guy with a ton of experience.

 

 

Edited September 6, 2017 by J.R.