Jump to content
The Official Site of the Vancouver Canucks
Enter Search Term. Use arrows to navigate between autocomplete results. If no results appear, use Enter to do a full site search.
Forum Closure ×
Canucks Community
Forum Closure

PDSF: (P1) Calgary Flames vs. (WC2) Colorado Avalanche | Avalanche win series 4-1

Rate this topic

-Vintage Canuck-
 Share

2019 Stanley Cup Playoffs | Round 1  

103 members have voted

  1. 1. Who will win the series?

This poll is closed to new votes

  • Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.
  • Poll closed on 04/14/2019 at 02:30 AM

Recommended Posts

canuck73_3 Canucks Hall-of-Famer

canuck73_3

Posted
Posted
48 minutes ago, steviewonder20 said:

That’s true and part of the problem. Clearly MT has made an immediate impact and we could have used his 34 goals this year. I do hope OJ works out; we can’t afford misses when picking 5th, and the jury is still out on JV as well.

Expecting a dman to be jn the NHL by 20 is a fools game. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
steviewonder20 Canucks Rookie

steviewonder20

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, canuck73_3 said:

Expecting a dman to be jn the NHL by 20 is a fools game. 

Ok, here’s some data. In looking at all of the D drafted between 1st and 5th place since 2010, 9 played in the NHL within one year (Dahlin, Heiskanen, Hanifin, Ekblad, Jones, Murray, Reilly, Larsson, and Gudbranson), one played after 2 years (Reinhart), and only Juolevi and Makar have not.

 

My point is not that OJ won’t make the NHL. It is that for a top 5 pick he’s not where 10 out of 11 of the other top 5 picks are at. Yes, he’s had injuries but the others mentioned all made the jump quite soon. I would love for him to be a top pairing D or even a second pairing and if he becomes a star, I was wrong and I’d be happy to be wrong b/c I want the Canucks to thrive. But your statement about not expecting a 20 year old D to be in the NHL doesn’t apply to top five picks, according to the last 9 years of data.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
canuck73_3 Canucks Hall-of-Famer

canuck73_3

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, steviewonder20 said:

As noted by the data in my post previous to this one, it’s not a fools errand expecting a top 5 D draft pick to be in the nhl at age 20.

Agree to disagree when you ignore the injuriy sustained to Juolevi. Every player develops differently, and he likely would have played this year if not for injury. However I stand by Expecting a defenseman to play in the NHL by 20 is a fools game, and I prefer them not to be rushed into the league. If they're ready they're ready and that's fine but never fault them if it takes an extra year especially with setbacks. 

 

As for the list of players who made it, pretty clear Reilly, Gudbranson and Larsson clearly could have used a bit more seasoning in the minors (by which I mean 1 year or so) 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
steviewonder20 Canucks Rookie

steviewonder20

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, canuck73_3 said:

Agree to disagree when you ignore the injuriy sustained to Juolevi. Every player develops differently, and he likely would have played this year if not for injury. However I stand by Expecting a defenseman to play in the NHL by 20 is a fools game, and I prefer them not to be rushed into the league. If they're ready they're ready and that's fine but never fault them if it takes an extra year especially with setbacks. 

 

As for the list of players who made it, pretty clear Reilly, Gudbranson and Larsson clearly could have used a bit more seasoning in the minors (by which I mean 1 year or so) 

Yes, we can agree to disagree. I do think there are two separate issues here: (1) have injuries impeded OJ’s progress? Sure. (2) Is it a fools errand to expect a (top 5) D to be in the NHL by age 20? The data suggests the answer to that is no. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
canuck73_3 Canucks Hall-of-Famer

canuck73_3

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, steviewonder20 said:

Yes, we can agree to disagree. I do think there are two separate issues here: (1) have injuries impeded OJ’s progress? Sure. (2) Is it a fools errand to expect a (top 5) D to be in the NHL by age 20? The data suggests the answer to that is no. 

Data is debateable with how poor defensively Gudbranson and Reilly are and how meh Larsson is. Just because they played in the NHL by 20 doesn't mean they SHOULD have. 

  • Wat 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
steviewonder20 Canucks Rookie

steviewonder20

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, canuck73_3 said:

Data is debateable with how poor defensively Gudbranson and Reilly are and how meh Larsson is. Just because they played in the NHL by 20 doesn't mean they SHOULD have. 

Ok, so now “expecting” is added as well as “should”. I think we should leave this as us agreeing to disagree and call it a day. I do appreciate being able to have a discussion without name calling, as that seems to be too common on cdc. Have a good night.

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Sean Monahan Canucks Star

Sean Monahan

Posted
Posted
3 hours ago, canuck73_3 said:

Data is debateable with how poor defensively Gudbranson and Reilly are and how meh Larsson is. Just because they played in the NHL by 20 doesn't mean they SHOULD have. 

Larsson isn’t really meh, just miscast on the Oilers. He’d be s big upgrade to our blue line. 

  • Cheers 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
oldnews Canucks Hall-of-Famer

oldnews

Posted
Posted (edited)
6 minutes ago, canuck73_3 said:

He's improved yes, but to be fair him, Reilly and Gudbranson were all slightly rushed imo. 

Larsson was an absolute stud in New Jersey.

Larsson was a Calder candidate as a rookie.

His 2nd and 3rd seasons however = injuries really limited his ice - like Gud - like Juolevi = like Ryan Murray.

Elite shutdown guy by the time he was dealt to Deadmonton.

I'd take any of these guys in a heartbeat, frankly.

 

Edited by oldnews
  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
canuck73_3 Canucks Hall-of-Famer

canuck73_3

Posted
Posted
Just now, oldnews said:

Larsson was an absolute stud in New Jersey.

His 2nd and 3rd seasons however = injuries really limited his ice - like Gud - like Juolevi = like Ryan Murray.

Larsson was a Calder candidate as a rookie.

Elite shutdown guy by the time he was dealt to Deadmonton. 

I'd take any of these guys in a heartbeat, frankly.

 

Maybe I just didn't pay attention to him in Jersey, will admit don't watch a lot of Devils games. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
oldnews Canucks Hall-of-Famer

oldnews

Posted
Posted
6 minutes ago, canuck73_3 said:

Maybe I just didn't pay attention to him in Jersey, will admit don't watch a lot of Devils games. 

Personally I don't particularly care about Juolevi's development timeline - it's what he does once he's healthy and here that matters.

The thing about players like him who aren't necessarily physically matured at draft time - he was drafted for his hockey intelligence - he has a projectible frame - and when he's ready, I have no doubt he'll be a very good NHL defenseman.

And the guys that are drafted high - who are defensive blueliners or two-way blueliners - I don't exptec them to excel at the NHL level as quickly as players whose bread and butter are puck moving - and don't have to handle the harder, heavier NHL minutes.  So guys like Gud, Larsson, Murray, Juolevi - I think it's to be expected that they won't be 'impact' players/dominant at 18, 19, 20 yr olds.

 

I also think that's why a player like Dahlin isn't necessarily at the head of the Calder conversation.  His production was good - but he's not a 1D type as a rookie - he's still relatively sheltered - with a high proportion of pp productiion - but  not ready to play the kind of minutes he will in the future.

  • Cheers 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
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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