Why has the conversation about prospects changed?

[D-Money]

On 10/13/2020 at 1:07 PM, CallAfterLife said:

...Ridiculous. 

The last word summed up the OP nicely.

 

We’ve had rookie of the year finalists 3 years in a row, which only happened once in the history of the NHL (when there were fewer teams, and none of their finalists actually won). So rookies are making the team, being put into key roles, and excelling. Others are coming along more slowly, but being worked in gradually (Demko, Gaudette, MacEwen) And looks like there will be spots for 2-3 more next year as well.

 

But you can’t just call all the young guys up at once. That’s just dumb.

[Monty]

20 minutes ago, D-Money said:

But you can’t just call all the young guys up at once. That’s just dumb.

I'm sorry, are you insinuating that the Edmonton Oilers have been unsuccessful in their 10 year youth movement? 

[CaptKirk888]

On 11/10/2020 at 2:12 PM, lmm said:

I think continuously comparing the Canucks and Oilers is a bit of a red herring.

It could be argued that over the past 20 years, there is little to choose between the two.

Both teams have one quality playoff run.

both teams sank to the bottom or near bottom of the league for 3-5 years.

 

Vancouver has made the playoffs 12 times in the last 20 years. Edmonton 5. Vancouver has 8 series wins in that time to Edmonton's 4. Vancouver has twice during that 20 years been a dominate team with the West Coast Express and then the Sedins including 2 presidents trophies. The Oilers had one fluky run to the cup other than that mostly years of futility.

[MikeyD]

I love your evaluation of those prospects hahahahaha

[Lazurus]

On 10/13/2020 at 7:07 PM, CallAfterLife said:

About 5 years ago the conversations on these boards went as follows: The Canucks need scoring so Hunter Shinkaruk should be called up. The Canucks need a puck moving defenceman so Jordan Subban should be called up. The Canucks need a physicality so Alex Grenier should be called up. 

 

The Canucks literally have better versions of Shunkaruk, Subban and Grenier in their system right now. 

 

Hoglander is a better version of Shinkaruk. Hoglander may be shorter but his fitness level is incredible and he isn't afraid to play a gritty game and battle for pucks. His hands are arguably better than Shinkaruk's as well. Kole Lind isn't as flashy as Hoglander in terms of his puck skills but he's even feistier. That's not to say he doesn't have good puck skills though. Lind basically plays the way we all want Virtanen to play. Lind isn't as fast as Virtanen but he works to forecheck and hit. Lind also has better hockey IQ and can make plays with his teammates. Plus Lind has some major character and determination. He had a disappointing first season in Utica and put in the work in the off season to make himself a better player. Grenier was a big guy that never quite figured out how to use his size to dominate opponents. Lind may be a bit smaller but he isn't afraid to punch above his weight. 

 

The Canucks now have Rafferty and Juolevi. Subban was an elite power play QB but could never figure out how to defend and transition the puck up ice. Rafferty and Juolevi are both able to do this. Rafferty prefers to skate the puck up ice himself. Juolevi prefers to hang on to the puck and wait for a good pass to open up. These we're skills that Subban never quite managed. 

 

People are forgetting that just two years ago Juolevi was his team's best defenceman in the Liiga playoffs. He's struggled with injuries that have taken away from his mobility but hopefully now that he's healthy he can develop into a top 4 defenceman. I can easily see Juolevi developing into a Jonas Bordin type of defenceman. He may not always be a factor on the score sheet but he'll do a bunch of little things to ensure that his teammates do score. 

 

Hoglander, Lind, Rafferty and Juolevi are great prospect but now that the Canucks are winning there's no confidence in them. 

 

When the Canucks were losing the mentality around prospects was completely different. Fans just wanted them to be played for the sake of playing them in order to see something new. Now that the Canucks are winning and have a better set of prospects that have been properly developed suddenly they aren't good enough. Ridiculous. 

It is all about selling hope.

When the team sucks, it is the "hope for the future" that sells tickets regardless of the players or can even crack the lineup

 

If the team is really good at evaluating talent and drafts good then they get that nice piece to hang hope on and sell tickets, that shiny new object to see. I they get lucky they can sell that draft pick for 5 years worth of ticket sales with good media manipulations and help from mainstream salesmen, what is good for the game is good for the media, truth need not be necessary, just a good story line. Just look at how the media has maintained how good this team is while losing and having a under .400 winning record.

 

One pandemic, on being able to be 11 million over the cap (cheating) and massively outstanding goal-tending performances from both goalies and simple fans are ecstatic that the team is now a contender or almost so. The media is even riding that wave for right now.

 

So the new saviors to watch, don't look behind the curtain now for what is really happening, Pold and Hola, Lind, Gadovitch, Juloevi is still an item

 

When a team cannot sell winning they sell hope. Vancouver is still selling hope

[Fred65]

To me it's mostly about the carousel of prospects and fans jumping after the draft from one prospect to the other, the next diamond in the rough. We apparently believe our prospects all have a great future ahead of them when in fact few will escape from the AHL.

[lmm]

On 12/1/2020 at 12:56 PM, CaptKirk888 said:

Vancouver has made the playoffs 12 times in the last 20 years. Edmonton 5. Vancouver has 8 series wins in that time to Edmonton's 4. Vancouver has twice during that 20 years been a dominate team with the West Coast Express and then the Sedins including 2 presidents trophies. The Oilers had one fluky run to the cup other than that mostly years of futility.

Hay Cap't I suspect you are trying to argue with me but your statements are not all facts .

 

We agree the Oilers have sucked for most of the last 20 years

but why compare our team to a steaming pile?

 

 

You say the Canucks dominated during the WCE era

check the numbers

Over a 5 year period while Bert Nazzy and BMo were in Vancouver, both teams finished 17th once and 15th once, Vacnouver finished 7th twice while Edmonton finished 14th twice.    That is what you call dominated? I thought you meant dominated the whole league.

2004 was our best showing finishing 7th in the league to Edmonton's 17th. But look further, we also "Dominated" Washington, Chicago and Pittsburg that year. Maybe we should pound our chests about how much better we are as a franchise than those 3 losers.

What did Patty Roy say? "I can't hear because of the 7 Stanley Cup rings in my ears"

No, better we console ourselves with being better than dEdmonton over the past while

2004? that was the year Tampa won their first Cup, but we were better than Edmonton----- yay

[IBatch]

8 hours ago, lmm said:

Hay Cap't I suspect you are trying to argue with me but your statements are not all facts .

 

We agree the Oilers have sucked for most of the last 20 years

but why compare our team to a steaming pile?

 

 

You say the Canucks dominated during the WCE era

check the numbers

Over a 5 year period while Bert Nazzy and BMo were in Vancouver, both teams finished 17th once and 15th once, Vacnouver finished 7th twice while Edmonton finished 14th twice.    That is what you call dominated? I thought you meant dominated the whole league.

2004 was our best showing finishing 7th in the league to Edmonton's 17th. But look further, we also "Dominated" Washington, Chicago and Pittsburg that year. Maybe we should pound our chests about how much better we are as a franchise than those 3 losers.

What did Patty Roy say? "I can't hear because of the 7 Stanley Cup rings in my ears"

No, better we console ourselves with being better than dEdmonton over the past while

2004? that was the year Tampa won their first Cup, but we were better than Edmonton----- yay

Two years with the WCE entering the playoffs the experts were calling us contenders, Naslund/Moore was our best shot unfortunately  - that is dominant enough ...and from 2000-2014 the only team to win more games then Vancouver was SJ in the entire league.   After that not so good.   Not much was really known about the cap during the 2000’s and how it would affect teams.   Now it’s pretty obvious once your short second contract window is up things can get tough fast - and you need a strong core to get it done ... only Boston and up until very recently SJ have managed to stay competitive most of the cap years.   Buffalo is looking like they might escape just as CAR did, from a decade without playoffs - but have to make it this year.     There was a short turn around between the Linden and WCE team, and the Sedin team.   Four years without a playoff game isn’t much for teams these days coming off a dominant cycle, that’s for certain. 
 

EDM isn’t the best team to compare to anyone, but sure is a great example of how not to do it.  And for sure aren’t the only team with long, long stretches with no playoffs since the cap started.. 

Edited December 3, 2020 by IBatch

[CaptKirk888]

12 hours ago, lmm said:

Hay Cap't I suspect you are trying to argue with me but your statements are not all facts .

 

We agree the Oilers have sucked for most of the last 20 years

but why compare our team to a steaming pile?

 

 

You say the Canucks dominated during the WCE era

check the numbers

Over a 5 year period while Bert Nazzy and BMo were in Vancouver, both teams finished 17th once and 15th once, Vacnouver finished 7th twice while Edmonton finished 14th twice.    That is what you call dominated? I thought you meant dominated the whole league.

2004 was our best showing finishing 7th in the league to Edmonton's 17th. But look further, we also "Dominated" Washington, Chicago and Pittsburg that year. Maybe we should pound our chests about how much better we are as a franchise than those 3 losers.

What did Patty Roy say? "I can't hear because of the 7 Stanley Cup rings in my ears"

No, better we console ourselves with being better than dEdmonton over the past while

2004? that was the year Tampa won their first Cup, but we were better than Edmonton----- yay

Nope, not arguing, just disagreeing with your original statement It could be argued that over the past 20 years, there is little to choose between the two.

Which I took as comparing the two teams as equal (steaming piles). Your own response confirms my opinion.

[BCNate]

On 10/13/2020 at 12:07 PM, CallAfterLife said:

About 5 years ago the conversations on these boards went as follows: The Canucks need scoring so Hunter Shinkaruk should be called up. The Canucks need a puck moving defenceman so Jordan Subban should be called up. The Canucks need a physicality so Alex Grenier should be called up. 

 

The Canucks literally have better versions of Shunkaruk, Subban and Grenier in their system right now. 

 

Hoglander is a better version of Shinkaruk. Hoglander may be shorter but his fitness level is incredible and he isn't afraid to play a gritty game and battle for pucks. His hands are arguably better than Shinkaruk's as well. Kole Lind isn't as flashy as Hoglander in terms of his puck skills but he's even feistier. That's not to say he doesn't have good puck skills though. Lind basically plays the way we all want Virtanen to play. Lind isn't as fast as Virtanen but he works to forecheck and hit. Lind also has better hockey IQ and can make plays with his teammates. Plus Lind has some major character and determination. He had a disappointing first season in Utica and put in the work in the off season to make himself a better player. Grenier was a big guy that never quite figured out how to use his size to dominate opponents. Lind may be a bit smaller but he isn't afraid to punch above his weight. 

 

The Canucks now have Rafferty and Juolevi. Subban was an elite power play QB but could never figure out how to defend and transition the puck up ice. Rafferty and Juolevi are both able to do this. Rafferty prefers to skate the puck up ice himself. Juolevi prefers to hang on to the puck and wait for a good pass to open up. These we're skills that Subban never quite managed. 

 

People are forgetting that just two years ago Juolevi was his team's best defenceman in the Liiga playoffs. He's struggled with injuries that have taken away from his mobility but hopefully now that he's healthy he can develop into a top 4 defenceman. I can easily see Juolevi developing into a Jonas Bordin type of defenceman. He may not always be a factor on the score sheet but he'll do a bunch of little things to ensure that his teammates do score. 

 

Hoglander, Lind, Rafferty and Juolevi are great prospect but now that the Canucks are winning there's no confidence in them. 

 

When the Canucks were losing the mentality around prospects was completely different. Fans just wanted them to be played for the sake of playing them in order to see something new. Now that the Canucks are winning and have a better set of prospects that have been properly developed suddenly they aren't good enough. Ridiculous. 

The reason you hear less push to get prospects in the line up here  is because it is happening naturally now.  We have legit prospects cracking the roster...look at the past 2 years, EP, Hughes, Demko, Gaudette.  There is no forced conversation about it because people are seeing it happen.

 

Next year you will see Hoglander, Joulevi, Rathbone, Rafferty all get time in the NHL at some point, a couple of them likely right out of camp.  Lind is not far off either, probably the following season with Podkolzin.  That's 10 drafted/signed rookies in 4 years making the team.  Not really sure how you see any lack of confidence, if they earn a spot, they get a spot, which has been proven pretty consistently during JB's tenure.

[lmm]

4 hours ago, CaptKirk888 said:

Nope, not arguing, just disagreeing with your original statement It could be argued that over the past 20 years, there is little to choose between the two.

Which I took as comparing the two teams as equal (steaming piles). Your own response confirms my opinion.

I guess it comes down to what our criterion is for success.

The older I get the simpler it becomes - CUPs

and we don't have any

That doesn't mean I won't enjoy the ride, but I do not see much point in gloating.

And I am not the kind of fan that wishes injury or failure on our rivals. I would like nothing better than Calgary and Edmonton to be the 2nd and 3rd best teams in the league. 

I would rather recreate the battle of Alberta including the Canucks or Detroit/Colorado rather than Vancouver winning the Presidents Trophy because 6 teams in the west are all whipping boys.

 

So we can go back and forth arguing the minutia about 8 series wins versus 4, but the bottom line is neither team has got the job done.

 

And ignoring Edmonton because they can't teachus anything possitive ( unless it is 'hire a good GM- Ken Holland)

the Canucks have many instances of GM success and failure

Every Canuck  GM has brought something and none have brought enough, and that goes for the team they assembled as well.

Quinn brought us Linden, Bure, McLean but not Gretzky or Jagr

Keenan brought us Bertuzzi but not much else

Burke brought us the Sedin and the goalie graveyard

Nonis brought Luongo and Pat White

Gillies brought us to the cup final and Horvat but also the Luongo recapture and a boatload of NTCs and no prospects

Benning brought draft picks that are actually turning into players but also cap problems and Luoi/Gagner/Spooner/Baertschi/Ferland

 

its not that I think we should copy the "Edmonton Model" but continuously comparing ourselves to the Oil  seems a losers game to me

[CaptKirk888]

4 hours ago, lmm said:

I guess it comes down to what our criterion is for success.

The older I get the simpler it becomes - CUPs

and we don't have any

That doesn't mean I won't enjoy the ride, but I do not see much point in gloating.

And I am not the kind of fan that wishes injury or failure on our rivals. I would like nothing better than Calgary and Edmonton to be the 2nd and 3rd best teams in the league. 

I would rather recreate the battle of Alberta including the Canucks or Detroit/Colorado rather than Vancouver winning the Presidents Trophy because 6 teams in the west are all whipping boys.

 

So we can go back and forth arguing the minutia about 8 series wins versus 4, but the bottom line is neither team has got the job done.

 

And ignoring Edmonton because they can't teachus anything possitive ( unless it is 'hire a good GM- Ken Holland)

the Canucks have many instances of GM success and failure

Every Canuck  GM has brought something and none have brought enough, and that goes for the team they assembled as well.

Quinn brought us Linden, Bure, McLean but not Gretzky or Jagr

Keenan brought us Bertuzzi but not much else

Burke brought us the Sedin and the goalie graveyard

Nonis brought Luongo and Pat White

Gillies brought us to the cup final and Horvat but also the Luongo recapture and a boatload of NTCs and no prospects

Benning brought draft picks that are actually turning into players but also cap problems and Luoi/Gagner/Spooner/Baertschi/Ferland

 

its not that I think we should copy the "Edmonton Model" but continuously comparing ourselves to the Oil  seems a losers game to me

Ok.  I was not the one comparing us to the Oil, you were, re: there is not much difference in the 2 franchises over the past 20 years. I disagreed and gave you examples of how the Canucks have been more successful over that time span.

I also agree that gaining Stanley is the ultimate goal. 

In all due respect, I think this debate (if that is what this is) has missed the original point. I am not gloating about anything, the fact is that for those 20 years Vancouver had more success, there is no arguing that. 

I really don't care about what each GM did or did not do as we are here now and Benning and crew have to deal with that. 

What exactly is Edmonton's model? Lose a bunch of times and get top 5 picks, play them right away without development? IDK, maybe fill me in on that?

 

[lmm]

1 hour ago, CaptKirk888 said:

Ok.  I was not the one comparing us to the Oil, you were, re: there is not much difference in the 2 franchises over the past 20 years. I disagreed and gave you examples of how the Canucks have been more successful over that time span.

I also agree that gaining Stanley is the ultimate goal. 

In all due respect, I think this debate (if that is what this is) has missed the original point. I am not gloating about anything, the fact is that for those 20 years Vancouver had more success, there is no arguing that. 

I really don't care about what each GM did or did not do as we are here now and Benning and crew have to deal with that. 

What exactly is Edmonton's model? Lose a bunch of times and get top 5 picks, play them right away without development? IDK, maybe fill me in on that?

 

if you scroll back to page one, you will see that I responded to Coolboarder, who was comparing the Canucks to the Oilers.

 

my response to Coolboarder was, " I think continuously comparing the Canucks and Oilers is a bit of a red herring"

 

you chose to take up your argument with line 2 of my response.

 

Now you don't  like the silly comparisons that I make to prove the inanity of comparing our team to the worst in the league.

 So we are left debating the minutia of whether the Canucks have been better or a lot better or dominant

or we can debate whether McD and Drais are better than the Hankydanks or not

or we can debate whether one year of Pronger was better than one year of Quinner

and you can always fall back onto 8 series wins over 4 if it makes you feel good

but the bottom line is I think it is stupid to compare your team to the worst in the league, but that is what we are doing.

 

BOLDED

you have got that right, so i see no need to help you with that.

[CaptKirk888]

9 hours ago, lmm said:

if you scroll back to page one, you will see that I responded to Coolboarder, who was comparing the Canucks to the Oilers.

 

my response to Coolboarder was, " I think continuously comparing the Canucks and Oilers is a bit of a red herring"

 

you chose to take up your argument with line 2 of my response.

 

Now you don't  like the silly comparisons that I make to prove the inanity of comparing our team to the worst in the league.

 So we are left debating the minutia of whether the Canucks have been better or a lot better or dominant

or we can debate whether McD and Drais are better than the Hankydanks or not

or we can debate whether one year of Pronger was better than one year of Quinner

and you can always fall back onto 8 series wins over 4 if it makes you feel good

but the bottom line is I think it is stupid to compare your team to the worst in the league, but that is what we are doing.

 

BOLDED

you have got that right, so i see no need to help you with that.

Why so snarky? 

[lmm]

10 hours ago, CaptKirk888 said:

Why so snarky? 

was I being snarky?

Sorry

...

hangs head in shame

[CaptKirk888]

18 hours ago, lmm said:

was I being snarky?

Sorry

...

hangs head in shame

No problem Imm. I felt the convo was going off the rails. I don't think we should compare our crew to the Oil either, was never my point.

…

Laughs outwardly.

[iceman64]

On 10/13/2020 at 2:11 PM, brownky said:

There's still a crowd that wants year after year of "chances at the first overall pick".

 

I'm fine with whatever the coaching staff want to do right now. I'd "like" to see what OJ can do for real now that he's healthy and skating/training properly. Rafferty is probably ready to make an appearance, as are the stewing prospects down there. Drafting them to never play them or even give them a chance is stupid.

 

Stoked about Rafferty, has only a few minor improvements to work on but that will come with experience, love his size and skill..

We might just have a top 10 D-corps soon, and with forward, when the tweaks are done and set, and experienced together, we won't be counted out of the elite.

Yeah that still might be 2 seasons away but our core looks great and supporting cast is improving and depth for a change is/will be there when we need it most. 

Thinking this team is going to be a lot of fun to watch up against the league's best, thanks JB... 

Edited December 9, 2020 by iceman64