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

Recommended Posts

On 1/15/2020 at 1:59 PM, Kanukfanatic said:

Good point. After looking into it further the list is not any more impressive than the first.

 

Rookie AHL D men that were in top 5 (or so) D scoring in their rookie year:

 

2017/18

Sami Niku (2nd for D) - 21/22 yrs old; playing low minutes with Jets

 

2015/16

Brandon Montour (2nd for D)  - 21-22 yrs old; doing well in NHL

 

2013/14

Brenden Kichton (6th for D) - 21/22 yrs old; never heard of him lol; never made the NHL

 

2012/13

Justin Schultz (1st for D) - 22-23 yrs old; has done well in NHL after a rocky start

Adam Clendening (3rd for D) - 20-21 yrs old; meh

Torey Krug (4th for D) - 21-22; has done very well in NHL

Sami Vatanen (5th for D) - 21-22 yrs old; done well in NHL

 

2011/12

Matt Donovan (4th for D) - 21-22 yrs old; did not pan out in NHL

 

2009/10

PK Subban (3rd for D) - 20-21 yrs old; you may have heard of him

 

2008/09

Mattias Karlsson (4th for D) - 23-24 yrs old; went overseas to play hockey

 

2006/07

Nathan Oystrick (3rd for D) - 24-25 yrs old; did not pan out after minimal games in NHL; went overseas

 

Obviously this is just what happened to others rookies that were in the top 5 for AHL scoring for D men.  All the rookies that led the AHL in scoring (or top 5) and that did very well in the NHL were 20-21-22 years old when they did well in the AHL.

 

The few older rookie D men that did well in the AHL in terms of scoring did not pan out in the NHL.

 

None of this means Brogan Rafferty will not do well in the NHL.  It just tempers my expectations of him being able to become even a top 6 NHL defender.

 

I sure hope he does though. Our Canucks team could really use it!!!

 

This is some good research there. I do agree that the older ones usually don't pan out as much as they may be on top of their development curves. But the sample size for the 23-24 year olds are fairly small. I would compare rafferty to a shultz in the best case btw. That is exactly who I was expecting him to be. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Major Canucks Fan said:

This is some good research there. I do agree that the older ones usually don't pan out as much as they may be on top of their development curves. But the sample size for the 23-24 year olds are fairly small. I would compare rafferty to a shultz in the best case btw. That is exactly who I was expecting him to be. 

What about Gio?  Wasn’t he a rather late bloomer, who wasn’t even drafted?

Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, Rindiculous said:

While I’m not the hugest on plus minus, I do think what does matter is plus minus above or below the team average.  That way we take out the how good a team is factor.  Pouliot has the second worst plus minus on his team meaning he is one of the worst liabilities on his team while Rafferty is tied for the best plus minus on his team with the Comets which means he’s one of the most reliable if not the most reliable player on his team.  So I have a feeling he will be a lot less of a Pouliot and a lot more like a Stecher.  Stecher always is one of if not the best plus minus players on the Canucks.

Your post on plus/minus is pretty simplistic imo.

 

You said "Pouliot has the second worst plus minus on his team meaning he is one of the worst liabilities on his team".  So with your simplistic explanation of how plus/minus works then you must think that our own Quin Hughes is one of the worst liabilities on the Canucks as he has a -9 and is the 3rd worst plus/minus on the Canucks.

 

That is dumb.  Many players that have or are near to having the worst plus/minus on their teams play against other teams best players and play big minutes. Many times that is why they have a bad plus/minus.  This is not always the case but often it is.

 

Stecher has one of the best plus/minus on the Canucks because he plays low minutes (comparatively) and against weak opposition compared to Hughes.

 

I don't mean to pick out your post but many posters type that same crap and it is simply wrong.

 

Don't get me wrong, I think Pouliot is a plug as an NHLer.  But using his plus/minus to make that argument is silly.

 

Other bad plus/minus players:

Alex Ovechkin is -13. Worst on his team.

John Klingberg is -9. Worst on his team.

Phil Kessel is -17. Worst on his team by far...but yes he ain't good defensively.

Gabriel Landeskog is -7. Worst on his team.

John Tavares is -5. Worst on his team.

 

These are all very highly skilled and very good players. Their plus/minus does not tell even a small portion of the whole story imo.

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, Alflives said:

What about Gio?  Wasn’t he a rather late bloomer, who wasn’t even drafted?

Gio was 22 when he first played with the flamers...only 7 games.  After that he played many games each year.  

 

His highest scoring years started when he was about 30 (with one good year when he was 27).  He was a real late bloomer.  Not normal at all but possible.

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Camel Toe Drag said:

I think it would be wise to lock him (Brogan) in at a 3 year 6 mil contract. His floor is at least a 6 d-man which would in turn replace Stech but if he turns out to be better than a 6 D (which I am 99% sure is the case) then we're laughing.

 

With that being said I do love Richmond Troy and his heart.

There is no rush to re-sign him.  He is Canucks property through the 2020-21 season.  Let's see what we've really got first.  That dangle was vs a 20 year old AHL rookie.

 

He has made a big jump this year.  I think he needs a test to see how he'll play at the next level and to learn what fitness and training he needs to work on in the off season (if any).  Based on the "filthy mits" post, he has no shortage of confidence.  He needs a shot at the bigs this season.

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Kanukfanatic said:

Your post on plus/minus is pretty simplistic imo.

 

You said "Pouliot has the second worst plus minus on his team meaning he is one of the worst liabilities on his team".  So with your simplistic explanation of how plus/minus works then you must think that our own Quin Hughes is one of the worst liabilities on the Canucks as he has a -9 and is the 3rd worst plus/minus on the Canucks.

 

That is dumb.  Many players that have or are near to having the worst plus/minus on their teams play against other teams best players and play big minutes. Many times that is why they have a bad plus/minus.  This is not always the case but often it is.

 

Stecher has one of the best plus/minus on the Canucks because he plays low minutes (comparatively) and against weak opposition compared to Hughes.

 

I don't mean to pick out your post but many posters type that same crap and it is simply wrong.

 

Don't get me wrong, I think Pouliot is a plug as an NHLer.  But using his plus/minus to make that argument is silly.

 

Other bad plus/minus players:

Alex Ovechkin is -13. Worst on his team.

John Klingberg is -9. Worst on his team.

Phil Kessel is -17. Worst on his team by far...but yes he ain't good defensively.

Gabriel Landeskog is -7. Worst on his team.

John Tavares is -5. Worst on his team.

 

These are all very highly skilled and very good players. Their plus/minus does not tell even a small portion of the whole story imo.

Well, looking at Ovechkin, last year he was a plus player and Washington was 3rd overall in the east, this year he is a big minus and Washington is out of the playoffs - so one could justifiably say that his +/- reflects his inferior play this year.

 

6 hours ago, Alflives said:

What about Gio?  Wasn’t he a rather late bloomer, who wasn’t even drafted?

Average age of NHL rookies is 23.1 years. So, Rafferty will just be a year late.

 

https://www.minnesotahockey.org/news_article/show/1022364

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Ray_Cathode said:

Well, looking at Ovechkin, last year he was a plus player and Washington was 3rd overall in the east, this year he is a big minus and Washington is out of the playoffs - so one could justifiably say that his +/- reflects his inferior play this year.

 

Average age of NHL rookies is 23.1 years. So, Rafferty will just be a year late.

 

https://www.minnesotahockey.org/news_article/show/1022364

Is that for rookie defensemen?

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

We are clearly saving Rafferty to remain a rookie next year in the NHL in case we don't have our annual Calder candidate for next season. If Binnington could be in the running for Calder at his age, Rafferty could as well.

 

Seriously though, I think we need to realize and understand that we actually are starting to build depth so we don't have to rush a guy like Rafferty as soon as he has some success. We can focus on developing him in his weaknesses and bring him in when he is more ready to stick in the NHL when he's up.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Ray_Cathode said:

Well, looking at Ovechkin, last year he was a plus player and Washington was 3rd overall in the east, this year he is a big minus and Washington is out of the playoffs - so one could justifiably say that his +/- reflects his inferior play this year.

 

What do you mean Washington is out of the Playoffs?

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Horvat is a Boss said:

 

What do you mean Washington is out of the Playoffs?

Lmao yeah they're tops in the league. Fun fact. The pesidents trophy winner has made the playoffs every year NHL.

Edited by 73 Percent
  • Haha 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Ray_Cathode said:

Well, looking at Ovechkin, last year he was a plus player and Washington was 3rd overall in the east, this year he is a big minus and Washington is out of the playoffs - so one could justifiably say that his +/- reflects his inferior play this year.

Huh?

 

 

dubas.PNG.1a8bb55e0b0b7a2aa487e30df1ad824c.PNG

 

Talk about crazy league parity when the first place team is out of the playoffs!!!

 

:lol:

 

 

:ph34r:

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, Kootenay Gold said:

I think the biggest difference between the two players is in their commitment to improve on their deficiencies. Derrick at age 26 never seemed able to do that and while the jury is still out on Rafferty who is only 24; he seems to be getting better by the month. Time will tell if he continues to progress to the point that he can transition into a full time NHL'er.

I don't have  a problem with +/- as long as it's for a long stech, time/#games eliminates much of the failure of the stats. This is similar to rating Tryamkin in the KHL when some one like Linden Vey is 5th highest points produced in that league. Tough to project how they'll do in the NHL. But Rafferty is sort of dominating in the AHL which looks good. Plus he's the only prospect to find himself in that enviable position in the various leagues our prospects are playing in.

Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, Kanukfanatic said:

Your post on plus/minus is pretty simplistic imo.

 

You said "Pouliot has the second worst plus minus on his team meaning he is one of the worst liabilities on his team".  So with your simplistic explanation of how plus/minus works then you must think that our own Quin Hughes is one of the worst liabilities on the Canucks as he has a -9 and is the 3rd worst plus/minus on the Canucks.

 

That is dumb.  Many players that have or are near to having the worst plus/minus on their teams play against other teams best players and play big minutes. Many times that is why they have a bad plus/minus.  This is not always the case but often it is.

 

Stecher has one of the best plus/minus on the Canucks because he plays low minutes (comparatively) and against weak opposition compared to Hughes.

 

I don't mean to pick out your post but many posters type that same crap and it is simply wrong.

 

Don't get me wrong, I think Pouliot is a plug as an NHLer.  But using his plus/minus to make that argument is silly.

 

Other bad plus/minus players:

Alex Ovechkin is -13. Worst on his team.

John Klingberg is -9. Worst on his team.

Phil Kessel is -17. Worst on his team by far...but yes he ain't good defensively.

Gabriel Landeskog is -7. Worst on his team.

John Tavares is -5. Worst on his team.

 

These are all very highly skilled and very good players. Their plus/minus does not tell even a small portion of the whole story imo.

Dude what are you even on about lol

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Ray_Cathode said:

Well, looking at Ovechkin, last year he was a plus player and Washington was 3rd overall in the east, this year he is a big minus and Washington is out of the playoffs - so one could justifiably say that his +/- reflects his inferior play this year.

 

Average age of NHL rookies is 23.1 years. So, Rafferty will just be a year late.

 

https://www.minnesotahockey.org/news_article/show/1022364

Washington is in first place in the league there bud

  • Hydration 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...