Kole Lind | RW

[wildcam]

5 hours ago, kloubek said:

I can't agree or disagree with whether he will be good enough to be a #2 center - but I WILL say that college hockey is a completely different animal from the NHL, and I don't think the fact he is tearing it up down there means he is destined to be a solid NHL player.  There have been plenty of players at the top of that league who never amounted to NHL players at all.  On the other hand, there have been some really great players to come out of there as well.  I just don't think we have enough information yet to make those kinds of assumptions either way.

 

 

That goes for any leagues? Look how many top top NHL picks don't turn out..

Thing about Gaudette is he is a complete player 200 foot game, We are seeing so many players come out of college and they play such a complete game..

We Don't know how he will be but odds are looking good that he will be a very good NHL player after what he has done at college level leading scorer.... Grit, skill, 200 foot game very complete player

[kloubek]

1 hour ago, wildcam said:

That goes for

We Don't know how he will be but odds are looking good that he will be a very good NHL player after what he has done at college level leading scorer.... Grit, skill, 200 foot game very complete player

Complete provides a good opportunity when what you thought was big skill at lower levels doesn’t translate well into the NHL. Same with grit.  Both great attributes but not one that alone will make a guy a second liner. That’s, say, a Dowd.

 

To be top six you need translatable-to-NHL offensive skills.  I’m not saying he doesn’t have them... I’m just saying it remains to be seen - well before planning on him filling a top six role.

 

If he gets there, I’ll be absolutely thrilled. But for now, I’ll be happy if he is only a true contributor on this team. 

[MoneypuckOverlord]

13 hours ago, Eastcoast meets Westcoast said:

Sounds like a player every team needs and most lack. 

 

Lind is like an extra first rounder. 

He is pretty much progressing ahead of more then half of the 1st rounders from 2017.  what a home run pick by the Nucks.

[Ray_Cathode]

On 25/01/2018 at 9:34 AM, kloubek said:

He won't be our #2 center ever, imo.  Horvat is our #2 but he isn't really a "proper" 1st line center.  That job I suspect will go to Pettersson, as I just don't see us moving him to the wing.

 

Anyway, I agree that Gaudette and Juolevi will likely both be ready to play on the Canucks next season - but is there going to be room for Gaudette?  Almost certainly if we don't re-sign the Sedins but if we do, I wonder if we might play him in the AHL for one season.

On a good team, Horvat is neither a number 1, nor a number 2 center - he is a pretty strong three.  We see him as other than that, but consider, when Henrik and Kesler were in their prime, what would Horvat have been?  He wouldn't have taken Henrik's place, and certainly not Kesler's - he would have been a three.  Having that kind of depth in the middle is what contending teams are made of.  We have become so used to losing here, that we don't see ourselves in relation to the kinds of lineups really strong teams have.  It is a testament to how far the team had fallen off by the end of Gillis's rule here.  Sadly, Canuck ownership did not buy into a rebuild right at the outset of the Sedin's decline and Kesler bailing - it would have saved three years or so.

[Ray_Cathode]

49 minutes ago, kloubek said:

Complete provides a good opportunity when what you thought was big skill at lower levels doesn’t translate well into the NHL. Same with grit.  Both great attributes but not one that alone will make a guy a second liner. That’s, say, a Dowd.

 

To be top six you need translatable-to-NHL offensive skills.  I’m not saying he doesn’t have them... I’m just saying it remains to be seen - well before planning on him filling a top six role.

 

If he gets there, I’ll be absolutely thrilled. But for now, I’ll be happy if he is only a true contributor on this team. 

Dowd is the place where plays and possession go to die.

[The Great Canucks]

3 minutes ago, Ray_Cathode said:

On a good team, Horvat is neither a number 1, nor a number 2 center - he is a pretty strong three.  We see him as other than that, but consider, when Henrik and Kesler were in their prime, what would Horvat have been?  He wouldn't have taken Henrik's place, and certainly not Kesler's - he would have been a three.  Having that kind of depth in the middle is what contending teams are made of.  We have become so used to losing here, that we don't see ourselves in relation to the kinds of lineups really strong teams have.  It is a testament to how far the team had fallen off by the end of Gillis's rule here.  Sadly, Canuck ownership did not buy into a rebuild right at the outset of the Sedin's decline and Kesler bailing - it would have saved three years or so.

Umm, no. He is easily a number two center at the very least. He isn't even in his prime yet, either. Being a possible first line center isn't farfetched at all.

[Ray_Cathode]

10 hours ago, kloubek said:

That's a lofty statement.  So I suppose this means you believe Horvat will be our #1 center, and Pettersson will be moved to LW?

No, it means that on a good team, Horvat is a three.  Think Henrik and Kesler in their prime - that is a contender's one and two - Horvat would take the place of neither - but he would be a strong three.  Horvat was not a big scorer in junior, he was number three among centers - even on his junior team - behind Domi and Tierney.

[Odd.]

1 minute ago, Ray_Cathode said:

No, it means that on a good team, Horvat is a three.  Think Henrik and Kesler in their prime - that is a contender's one and two - Horvat would take the place of neither - but he would be a strong three.  Horvat was not a big scorer in junior, he was number three among centers - even on his junior team - behind Domi and Tierney.

Yup, now he's number one and Tierney is a 3rd liner and Domi converted to wing cause he couldn't play center at the NHL level. Why bring up junior? 

[Ray_Cathode]

3 minutes ago, The Great Canucks said:

Umm, no. He is easily a number two center at the very least. He isn't even in his prime yet, either. Being a possible first line center isn't farfetched at all.

Would he have knocked out Henrik or Kesler in their prime?  No.  That was a contending team.  On a contending team, he is a three.  He is only a one or two here, because this version of the Canucks is pathetic.  Is he a guy who puts the team on his back when nobody else is going?  No.  That would be a guy like Boeser.  That is what elite looks like, not Horvat - who has the odd good game and the odd great play.

[Odd.]

2 hours ago, Ray_Cathode said:

Would he have knocked out Henrik or Kesler in their prime?  No.  That was a contending team.  On a contending team, he is a three.  He is only a one or two here, because this version of the Canucks is pathetic.  Is he a guy who puts the team on his back when nobody else is going?  No.  That would be a guy like Boeser.  That is what elite looks like, not Horvat - who has the odd good game and the odd great play.

What?

 

Kesler was 25/26 and Henrik was in his late 20's when they finally started to consistently put up 70+ a season. Horvat is 22 years old and was on pace for a 70-75 points before his injury. 

 

Horvat is already better than what Kesler was at that same age. We don't even know what Horvat in his prime loosk like yet because hes 22. If you are talking about Horvat in his prime vs Kesler in his prime then please wait another 4-5 years when Horvat actually hits his prime. If you are comparing Horvat right now vs Kesler in his prime, what the hell is even the point? That's like saying would you take Henrik Sedin when he was 24 vs Naslund when he was in his prime? How does that work? Obviously you take the guy in his prime. 

 

You say the version of today's canucks is pathetic. You're actually trying to compare a player who is playing on a rebuilding team and has YET to reach his prime to a player, in his prime playing with a contending team.. how does that work? that's so dumb.

Edited January 27, 2018 by Odd.
Not on pace for 70-75 points but point still stands.

[Ray_Cathode]

2 minutes ago, Odd. said:

Yup, now he's number one and Tierney is a 3rd liner and Domi converted to wing cause he couldn't play center at the NHL level. Why bring up junior? 

Because it illustrates his potential.  His skill level.  Yes, he has outplayed Domi and Tierney (at least he has since Domi got hurt).  But, he is likely to never be more than a sixty point guy at best - he's been kind of stuck at the level for the past two years.  He does other things, he has learned to play defence, but he is not even an elite penalty killer, and he has not even made the first unit power play.  He is not a Sedin, who in his prime was a number 1 center, he is not even a Kesler in his prime.  When Henrik and Kesler dropped off, the Canucks were done as a contending team.  Time to move them on and rebuild.

[Ray_Cathode]

3 minutes ago, Odd. said:

What?

 

Kesler was 25/26 and Henrik was in his late 20's when they finally started to consistently put up 70+ a season. Horvat is 22 years old and was on pace for a 70-75 points before his injury. He's still on that pace (if it were an 82 game season for him). 

 

Horvat is already better than what Kesler was at that same age. We don't even know what Horvat in his prime loosk like yet because hes 22. If you are talking about Horvat in his prime vs Kesler in his prime then please wait another 4-5 years when Horvat actually hits his prime. If you are comparing Horvat right now vs Kesler in his prime, what the hell is even the point? That's like saying would you take Henrik Sedin when he was 24 vs Naslund when he was in his prime? How does that work? Obviously you take the guy in his prime. 

 

You say the version of today's canucks is pathetic. You're actually trying to compare a player who is playing on a rebuilding team to a player, in his prime playing with a contending team.. how does that work? that's so dumb.

Horvat is scoring at a pace of .71 pts per game this year.  Over 82 games, that adds up to about 56 points - that is a long way from 70-75 points.  Dominant players carry a team.  Right now, we are as bad with Horvat as without him.  In addition, dominant players in this era tend to dominate much earlier than in the past.  He is a couple of months from his 23rd birthday and has been in the league for 5 years - in Kesler's fifth season, he had 59 points and was among the very best defensive centers in the league.

[Alflives]

2 minutes ago, Ray_Cathode said:

Horvat is scoring at a pace of .71 pts per game this year.  Over 82 games, that adds up to about 56 points - that is a long way from 70-75 points.  Dominant players carry a team.  Right now, we are as bad with Horvat as without him.  In addition, dominant players in this era tend to dominate much earlier than in the past.  He is a couple of months from his 23rd birthday and has been in the league for 5 years - in Kesler's fifth season, he had 59 points and was among the very best defensive centers in the league.

I love Horvat.  I would love him more if he had Kesler’s Mean streak.  

[Gurn]

16 hours ago, Rob_Zepp said:

If he is worth it (e.g. legit NHL player) then it is moot as he will be re-signing likely prior to end of ELC anyway.   If he isn't, it doesn't matter.   This is one area of the collective agreement that gets a lot of chatter but really isn't much of an issue.

If he waits, the cap goes up and his base wage will get higher?

[48MPHSlapShot]

47 minutes ago, Ray_Cathode said:

On a good team, Horvat is neither a number 1, nor a number 2 center - he is a pretty strong three.  We see him as other than that, but consider, when Henrik and Kesler were in their prime, what would Horvat have been?  He wouldn't have taken Henrik's place, and certainly not Kesler's - he would have been a three.  Having that kind of depth in the middle is what contending teams are made of.  We have become so used to losing here, that we don't see ourselves in relation to the kinds of lineups really strong teams have.  It is a testament to how far the team had fallen off by the end of Gillis's rule here.  Sadly, Canuck ownership did not buy into a rebuild right at the outset of the Sedin's decline and Kesler bailing - it would have saved three years or so.

[Guest]

I know what Ray Cathode is trying to say...  Bo should be a number 2 center though, not number 3.  

 

If you take out the Pittsburgh Penguins and their ridiculous Crosby-Malkin 1-2 punch, Bo Horvat will compare favourably to just about any 2nd line center in a couple of years.

[kloubek]

1 hour ago, Ray_Cathode said:

No, it means that on a good team, Horvat is a three.  Think Henrik and Kesler in their prime - that is a contender's one and two - Horvat would take the place of neither - but he would be a strong three.  Horvat was not a big scorer in junior, he was number three among centers - even on his junior team - behind Domi and Tierney.

Hey now - I certainly disputed being so sure Horvat going to be a good 1st line center at some point, but claiming he is a 3rd is totally off base.  Here's a few facts for you:

Naslund, Bertuzzi and the Sedins all had a noticeable jump in their stats at 24 and 25.  It is not unusual for a player to take a few years to hit their stride.  Yes, some have ridiculous rookie years (Boeser) but generally speaking, development happens over a few.  To compare his current stats to other players in their prime is irrelevant.

 

At 22, he is scoring at around 55 points a season.  That's better than the vast majority of players who become excellent, first line players - including the ones from our own Canucks past above. I'm not saying he WILL be one - jury is still out, but the potential is there and we have to wait and see.

 

There are stats online, but apparently in today's NHL, 2nd line centers typically score between 39 and 55 points.  This puts Horvat at the high end of a 2nd liner as it stands. You talk about on a good team, but if the range goes as high as 55 points across all teams then that's about as good as it gets.  (3rd line typical average range is 31 to 39 by the way).  Now, even though we try to roll our lines more than most, decreasing atoi slightly isn't going to drop him to the bottom of that range.. maybe knock him down to 52-53, which is still really, really good.

 

And again, he's 22.

 

I'm not going to lie - I'm kind of sick of people on here 1) Acting like they are clairvoyant and know exactly whether a player will develop or not, and 2) Ignoring even the most basic facts before they spew out their negativity.

 

Bottom line: You're wrong.  He's not a 3rd line center now, and he won't likely be going forward.  He's already playing like a reasonably high-end second, and although I feel his development "stalled" a bit over the last year, I would be surprised if he didn't improve at least just a bit... which would put him pretty much as a poor-man's 1st line center.  (Which is how we play him now anyway)  Or better.

Edited January 27, 2018 by kloubek

[Gaudette Celly]

44 minutes ago, Ray_Cathode said:

Horvat is scoring at a pace of .71 pts per game this year.  Over 82 games, that adds up to about 56 points - that is a long way from 70-75 points. 

Last year 103 players had 50 or more points.  Subtract 9 defencemen, and that gives 94 forwards -- basically indicating baseline first-line production equivalence for the league.  Bo is beyond that point already, at just 22.  To call him anything less than a 2nd line C is a terrible undersell and does not at all comport with reality.  Kesler didn't get past 37 points until he was 24, and Henrik put up 42 at age 23.

[GrizzlyAdams]

........... more importantly, Kole Lind scored again tonight

 

This goal pushes his point streak to 17 games 

[AlwaysACanuckFan]

 

.

Edited January 27, 2018 by AlwaysACanuckFan