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

Recommended Posts

36 minutes ago, Alflives said:

Johnson is just now coming on 650 for an interview.  

Gosh, I do not like Rin-Tool. Johnson sounds like a good kid though, he'll work hard and become a top 6 NHLer

  • Vintage 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, NUCKER67 said:

Gosh, I do not like Rin-Tool. Johnson sounds like a good kid though, he'll work hard and become a top 6 NHLer

Ron Tool’s voice is grating on the nerves.  

Johnson is a late bloomer, so likely he’s still got a great deal of physical maturing to do.  He could develop (mature) into an amazing player.  

  • Hydration 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, higgyfan said:

My preference right now is 'the Russian kid', but I would be happy with 'the local boy' as well.  I don't understand all the comments about Johnson's stature. At 18yrs, he's bound to grow in weight (and possibly height) over the next few years.  Already, he has put on 5 lbs (175lb).  Also, his older brother Kyle (23yrs) plays for Yale is 5'11 @ 180lbs which is decent weight for hockey.

 

Regardless, he sure has a boat load of talent.  https://theprovince.com/sports/hockey/nhl/vancouver-canucks/highly-skilled-hometown-boy-kent-johnson-could-be-available-at-no-9-for-the-canucks

I think the stature thing is overblown. He is listed mostly as 6'1-167lbs from what I have seen. It's literally 1" shorter and 8lbs lighter than both Guenther and Beniers, who nobody question on their stature, and some even talk about it like strengths for them. Whether those measurements are accurate, that's a different story.

 

I've posted about his size before, and also provided clips to show he doesn't exactly play small, making lots of plays under pressure and in battle along the boards. Even if he only gets to 185lbs, I don't think it will be a major problem.

 

For those who say he plays a perimeter game, that I can understand. Some can be successful this way, but many others fail. I do remember reading an interview where Johnson explained he had to adjust to playing LW this year rather than his natural C, which took him some time to figure out how to maintain his effectiveness on the wing. Doing this as a 1st yr player in NCAA, and still putting up numbers like he did, is quite impressive. Whether he stays a LW or transitions back to C, I think he has the IQ to be effective at the next level in either position.

  • Hydration 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

If Johnson is there at 9 I'm taking him (assuming no one big drops). This is hopefully the last time we pick in the top 10, we need all the skill and upside. We can get a shutdown player as a UFA.

  • Like 2
  • Hydration 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I've read things like:

 

#1 Euro prospect

Strong skater, speed

Excellent puck control, good hands

Wrist shot is a weapon

Physical

Smart

Game-breaking potential

Could be the best C in the class

 

RATY

 

If he's developed and coached properly, he could be very good.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, NUCKER67 said:

I've read things like:

 

#1 Euro prospect

Strong skater, speed

Excellent puck control, good hands

Wrist shot is a weapon

Physical

Smart

Game-breaking potential

Could be the best C in the class

 

RATY

 

If he's developed and coached properly, he could be very good.

 

 

Raty's dropped off A LOT, to the point that scouts don't consider him to be that great of a prospect anymore, at least not worth taking with a high pick.
 

Definitely not the best C in the class.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Jimmy McGill said:

I'm assuming by this that you'd don't have a daughter.

Assume all you want, you do know the saying about that, right?

The guy did a horrible thing, he was punished by the courts, and is attending counselling, that is supposed to be the end of it.

2 hours ago, shayster007 said:

But he has made a positive first step.

First step?

Admitting guilt in court wasn't a first step?

Accepting and abiding by the courts order wasn't a first step?

Apologizing  wasn't a first step?

Attending counselling, and being monitored by his junior team wasn't a first step?

Going public and admitting to the world, or those that care, wasn't a first step?

 

Oh, now it's a first step?    Ok then.

  • Vintage 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Dazzle said:

Raty's dropped off A LOT, to the point that scouts don't consider him to be that great of a prospect anymore, at least not worth taking with a high pick.
 

Definitely not the best C in the class.

Yeah, Raty did drop down like a rock, but I'm not sure why. Is it because he didn't have a good season, didn't produce like expected? Does he have attitude problems like Laine?  Can he find his game with the right coaching? I guess it is a big risk at #9.   

  • Hydration 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, 73 Percent said:

Where were these grades pulled from?

And maybe RW should be an "A" when you add my avatar to the list

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Can anyone post a summary of the Johnson interview?
I think he'd be a great pick. Not as boom or bust as some people think, because he actually tries to play defense.

Like with Edvinsson, it depends on how coachable he is. 

Edited by Nave
Link to post
Share on other sites

Button was on Donnie and Dhali and was asked: if he was VAN and had to choose between Hughes and Johnson, who would he take?  Flat out said take the Dman. In fact, he went on to mention Hughes, Clarke and Edvinsson should be the pick. I think one of them make it to #9. If those guys are gone, take the best forward available?

  • Hydration 2
  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, NUCKER67 said:

Button was on Donnie and Dhali and was asked: if he was VAN and had to choose between Hughes and Johnson, who would he take?  Flat out said take the Dman. In fact, he went on to mention Hughes, Clarke and Edvinsson should be the pick. I think one of them make it to #9. If those guys are gone, take the best forward available?

I would take both Hughes and Clarke over Johnson. Edvinsson I'd have to think about a bit more. That would be a tough call for myself.

Link to post
Share on other sites

https://theprovince.com/sports/hockey/nhl/vancouver-canucks/canucks-jim-benning-buoyed-by-draft-options-in-a-challenging-scouting-year?utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Facebook&fbclid=IwAR2IOA2T12xJItjLl8FtZJreHNpCUXDdMFW07_5N2ZKUC-CMRnA1phX6xfk#Echobox=1626735778

 

I’d be delighted if a kid like McTavish is still up for grabs with our 1st pick. Lucius, Guenther, Johnson, Edvinsson, Clarke, Hughes are all solid picks as well if they’re available. My target is Hughes for sure. Having a all brother duo again but in the backend this time would be something exciting to watch. Sillinger, Svechkov, Lysell are interesting as well. Lots of good players to choose from. Very exciting

Edited by Beary Sweet
Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, Sp3nny said:

I would take both Hughes and Clarke over Johnson. Edvinsson I'd have to think about a bit more. That would be a tough call for myself.

Same here, it's possible they'll have to choose between Edvinsson, Johnson and Guenther - that's a tough call, but I guess they have to go with the D? Seems so anticlimactic. Waiting all this time to get a prospect who's recently gotten poor reviews, and hoping he turns out like he should. I feel that way about Juolevi.  Still waiting for him to break into the NHL as a Top 4 Dman.

 

Button says to take the D, even though he knows VAN's C prospects aren't great.  Then again, Edvinsson could really turn out to be something, an elite defender with size. Cup teams need guys like that.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, shayster007 said:

"Well ya, we we been watching this kid um for awhile now. Well, you know, we like that um he's a hard working kid. You know, we talk to the player, talk to the coaches, talk to his parents and we think he's got a good head on his shoulders. He's um got elite hands and thinks the game at a high level. We think um we're getting a really good young player here that can play, you know, for the Canucks for a long time."

 

-Jim Benning, probably, when we draft Johnson

This mans Jim Benning is on point

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

#9 - Hughes or Edvinsson  (assuming Power and Clarke are gone)

#41 - Stankoven, Bourgault, Pinelli, Dean, Samoskevich, Broz  (Centres) 

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, HighOnHockey said:

he's very likely a top five pick, maybe even top three.

True, all 4 of the big D could be taken ahead of the #9. They're all good and Top 4 Dmen are expensive if trying to get one through a trade.  If they're gone, I guess Benning goes with the best available forward (my guess is Lysell, Johnson, Guenther or Sillinger).  I suspect Wallstedt could be gone early too. 

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...