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

Kole Lind | RW


Canucksin2013

Recommended Posts

10 hours ago, Fred65 said:

Well, Rob, I understand your theory. Here's my question, if you! know there's a huge difference and the need to improve how come Lind didn't know. Why does it take the introduction to the blunt end to get him motivated? He should have been busting down the door to the rink with his super strength and improved speed last September. I don't think it's a mystery that the AHL is a big step up from junior hockey. He knows now but frankly, he should have known last September ......  IMO

All kinds of things are told to kids, what gets absorbed varies by individual and until the experience the life of a professional athlete they cannot just adjust automatically without some period of adjustment....and each period varies by length and path.    

 

You say the "should have know" last September.    Why?   Why is he expected to be different than 98% of all kids in junior hockey that are given a chance at being a professional.  Only a handful make the transition right from junior without so much as a hiccup - very small percentage.    Why expect him to be in that very minute percentage?    Is that even remotely fair?

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, vannuck59 said:

Lind would have been better off playing for the Giants where he could have dominated than he would have transitioned better to the AHL sitting on the bench being scratched, showed him nothing time to clean house in Utica . Once again this shows how JB fails at prospect development.

teen-talk-fbv2.jpg

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Rob_Zepp said:

All kinds of things are told to kids, what gets absorbed varies by individual and until the experience the life of a professional athlete they cannot just adjust automatically without some period of adjustment....and each period varies by length and path.    

 

You say the "should have know" last September.    Why?   Why is he expected to be different than 98% of all kids in junior hockey that are given a chance at being a professional.  Only a handful make the transition right from junior without so much as a hiccup - very small percentage.    Why expect him to be in that very minute percentage?    Is that even remotely fair?

3

I don't get the pity party for kids that have failed to make the most of their opportunities. I can tell you this I'd left home to work away at 16 and worked a seven day week with 8 hours days a good day and I'd do that for 12 month stretches, no going home at night or weekends off. The bottom line you make the most of the chances you're given or someone passes you by without a glance. If Lind needs a dispensation then he's not the kid we want. Did you see how Pettersson adapted, in a foreign country, played a significant role and worked his tail off?  Lind had the same opportunity. You can't sell me on his lack of preparation much like I don't have much sympathy for Virtanen .... never mind shotgun Jake how about buckle down Jake. :lol: 

Edited by Fred65
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Rob_Zepp said:

You realize this was EP40's second year of professional hockey?    

 

Not sure what the hate on for Lind is all about but for a first year professional, who had some injury issues, he did just fine by all accounts.   You can others can continue to criticize all you like - won't change the fact that his year was far more typical for a first year professional than the opposite.

 

I still don't get this expectation for these kids to be "perfect" out of the gate.   I assume all you critics were 100% perfect at your jobs the first day as well and there was no learning curve or develoment process involved whatsoever.....:rolleyes:

You are probably right about that. After all, how long does it really take to learn how best to push a broom or a wheelbarrow?

  • Cheers 1
  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, Fred65 said:

Well, Rob, I understand your theory. Here's my question, if you! know there's a huge difference and the need to improve how come Lind didn't know. Why does it take the introduction to the blunt end to get him motivated? He should have been busting down the door to the rink with his super strength and improved speed last September. I don't think it's a mystery that the AHL is a big step up from junior hockey. He knows now but frankly, he should have known last September ......  IMO

 

3 hours ago, stawns said:

Agree completely........you can "know" everything that needs to be done, but only the experience of actually going through a full season at a new level will lead to true development.  We should all be encouraged by the the way that KL and JG finished their seasons.  I expect a significant jump for them both next season.

Was just going to post that there can be a BIG difference between 'knowing' and 'doing'.

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, WeneedLumme said:

You are probably right about that. After all, how long does it really take to learn how best to push a broom or a wheelbarrow?

Some need to learn the phrase "do you want fries with that?" too remember.....

  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Where'd Luongo? said:

Just realized this guy played on the same team I was on as a kid :D

I played with Cole's granddad, or maybe his great granddad?

Cole is going to be really good next season.  The kid needed to grow up, and become responsible for himself.  He's going to have a full summer of top training, and have an actual understanding of what to do off ice (between games) when living on his own.  

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, Rob_Zepp said:

You realize this was EP40's second year of professional hockey?    

 

Not sure what the hate on for Lind is all about but for a first year professional, who had some injury issues, he did just fine by all accounts.   You can others can continue to criticize all you like - won't change the fact that his year was far more typical for a first year professional than the opposite.

 

I still don't get this expectation for these kids to be "perfect" out of the gate.   I assume all you critics were 100% perfect at your jobs the first day as well and there was no learning curve or develoment process involved whatsoever.....:rolleyes:

The issue isn't that we expect Lind and Gadjovich to be putting up a point a game or something, but if you look at any player on our team (that didn't even have a good season) that you'd expect to play an offensive role (At this point Virtanen hasn't really put himself in that conversation yet, though I still do expect him to eventually be able to put up points) they've all had much better first seasons in the AHL points wise than either of them (Virtanen being the exception if you want to include him).

 

Go look at the first AHL season numbers for Granlund, Leivo, Pearson, Goldobin, Baertschi, and Spooner. I suppose the best comparable is Baertschi given the first season with a decent amount of games in the AHL came at the same age (as opposed to the others, who were at least a year older than Lind/Gadj), though Pearson played the year he was drafted as an overager and put up 47 points in 64 games.

 

Certainly these players have room to grow, and for all I know they could really up their point production towards something worth getting excited about, but as it stands, we should be expecting something less than what Baertschi or Pearson are giving us, by a decent margin. Obviously point totals in year 1 don't mean everything, but they're sure not giving us something to be really excited about.

Edited by Psycho_Path
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Psycho_Path said:

Obviously point totals in year 1 don't mean everything, but they're sure not giving us something to be really excited about.

Yes, point totals in year 1 definitely don't mean anything. But showing substantial improvement between the beginning and end of their first pro season does. Anybody who is upset with their first professional year has unrealistic expectations.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, janisahockeynut said:

After turning Pro

 

My rule is with forwards 3 years

With Dmen 4 or 5

 

After that......it didn't work out...…..thanks for coming

I don't disagree that there is some indication of what kind of player could turn out to be after 3 years of pro hockey.  However, a lot of players bloom later than that too.  

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, stawns said:

I don't disagree that there is some indication of what kind of player could turn out to be after 3 years of pro hockey.  However, a lot of players bloom later than that too.  

I guess the thing is, if they are not showing at the end of their ELC.....that is not a good thing

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, janisahockeynut said:

I guess the thing is, if they are not showing at the end of their ELC.....that is not a good thing

As long as progress is being made I think teams will wait as long as they need to.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you look at a player like Tyler Benson's AHL production who is 6-7 months older than Lind who had worse junior numbers but similar draft position. It makes you worry a bit about Lind's game not translating well to the pro game. Lind still has time to close the gap but if he is not able to post close to a PPG pace next year, it doesnt look good on his chances to become a top 6 player. 

 

I think they should have left him in the WHL one more year to marinate 

Edited by Bure_Pavel
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, Psycho_Path said:

The issue isn't that we expect Lind and Gadjovich to be putting up a point a game or something, but if you look at any player on our team (that didn't even have a good season) that you'd expect to play an offensive role (At this point Virtanen hasn't really put himself in that conversation yet, though I still do expect him to eventually be able to put up points) they've all had much better first seasons in the AHL points wise than either of them (Virtanen being the exception if you want to include him).

 

Go look at the first AHL season numbers for Granlund, Leivo, Pearson, Goldobin, Baertschi, and Spooner. I suppose the best comparable is Baertschi given the first season with a decent amount of games in the AHL came at the same age (as opposed to the others, who were at least a year older than Lind/Gadj), though Pearson played the year he was drafted as an overager and put up 47 points in 64 games.

 

Certainly these players have room to grow, and for all I know they could really up their point production towards something worth getting excited about, but as it stands, we should be expecting something less than what Baertschi or Pearson are giving us, by a decent margin. Obviously point totals in year 1 don't mean everything, but they're sure not giving us something to be really excited about.

Baer was a high first round pick that put up historic numbers in junior....not really a fair comparison.   Further, the team strength and style of play that an AHL team has also dictates something like "points".   This fixation with points is odd.   There are lots of NHL players who didn't blow the AHL away and vice versa.   

  • Cheers 1
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...