Hit the post
I have your gold medal Zippy!
If the blueline didn't suck balls and the prospect pool there didn't just essentially consist of just Juolevi (5th overall selection), I'd actually feel pretty good about the future.
If the blueline didn't suck balls and the prospect pool there didn't just essentially consist of just Juolevi (5th overall selection), I'd actually feel pretty good about the future.
Hmmmm we have our biases but here they are (including rookies):
Goalie:
Demko
Dipietro
Fwd:
Pettersson
Gaudette
Boeser
Dahlen
Lindy Boy
Lockwood
Palmu
D:
We need d prospects
Guess Juolevi is already a bust (despite having played zero NHL games) in your opinion...
Prospect pool isn’t the problem. The problem is the lack of productive trades over the past 4 years. I count exactly one trade - Dahlen - that looks like it has the potential to be a long term part of a rebuild. The remainder - Gudbranson, Sutter, Baertschi, Granlund, Prust - have just frittered assets away while contributing nothing of long term value to the team.
A team like Winnipeg, in addition to their drafting, acquired core pieces like Byfuglien, Wheeler, and Myers in trades over that time. Not to say Benning should be able to match the quality of those deals - those may be among the best trades in the past 8 years - but he needs to accomplish more than just Dahlen over a span of 5 summers. Relying entirely on the draft for talent - esp when no additional picks are being acquired - is what will keep this rebuild on a snail’s pace.
Technically most busts play zero games
So Dahlen, Demko and Elias are busts too? Good to know...
They'll certainly be entertaining & with Demko hopefully succeeding - the team might be able to get into the playoffs with a meh blueline. Course, any kind of post-season success will need a much better D which Benning hasn't shown any indication of acquiring.Yeah... But it would have to be a seriously legit prospect at the blueline.
We are really not on schedule to create a contender core around the cheap contracts of our current top6 graduates.
Could be. We don’t know they aren’t.
Spoken like a true Benning hater. Keep the faith bro...
Unpopular opinion, but it always seems kind of stupid to me that players are no longer considered prospects the moment they graduate to the NHL. Just the idea that you could be viewed has having a poor prospect pool just because all of your prospects were good enough to be in the NHL right away..... doesn't compute to me.
Spoken like a true Benning hater. Keep the faith bro...
Unpopular opinion, but it always seems kind of stupid to me that players are no longer considered prospects the moment they graduate to the NHL. Just the idea that you could be viewed has having a poor prospect pool just because all of your prospects were good enough to be in the NHL right away..... doesn't compute to me.
Either conclusion could be drawn (it seems like we should either change the way the word is used or find a better word for the more meaningful but inaccurate interpretation of it).That's not an argument against considering those players as non-prospects, it's an argument against talking about having a good prospect pool as if it's a meaningful thing.
Having a good prospect pool means by definition having a bunch of players who haven't proven anything. It's not something anyone should brag about and doesn't matter to anything.
Either conclusion could be drawn (it seems like we should either change the way the word is used or find a better word for the more meaningful but inaccurate interpretation of it). That said, the word "prospect" has never inherently communicated this for me by its definition alone, personally. Calling Boeser a prospect makes enough sense to me. He's still a candidate that we look forward to seeing becoming a greater thing in the future.
Edit: You're right, it's not so much an issue with the meaning of the word itself but the connotations that we associate with it, how we use it, and the usefulness of what it actually means.I suppose, but it's a reasonably bright line that you can draw which would be difficult to draw otherwise. Is Connor McDavid still a prospect? Seems weird after multiple Hart trophies but he was drafted the same year as Boeser and still probably hasn't had his best season.
You go on a few dates with someone and she's a prospect but if you're calling her your girlfriend then that's something else, even if you're looking forward to the future.
I include him in the prospect pool because he's far from reached he has a big room to grow and its on an ELCI fail to see why Boeser is still included in the "prospect pool" after finishing his first full season. Sure he is of course still very young but I wouldnt count him a prospect anymore. So that leaves the Canucks with Pettersson, Demko, Dahlen and Juolevi as the top prospects along with some solid guys in Lind and Gaudette.
Its probably save to say the Canucks have an above average prospect pool but even if you look at who has graduated (Boeser, Virtanen) its hardly something to get overly excited about in particular if you consider what could have been if they were really rebuilding instead of just being the worst team over the last 3 years caused by sheer incompetence.
How is Juolevi (sp?)Hmmmm we have our biases but here they are (including rookies):
Goalie:
Demko
Dipietro
Fwd:
Pettersson
Gaudette
Boeser
Dahlen
Lindy Boy
Lockwood
Palmu
D:
We need d prospects
Players should be referred to as prospects until they finish their ELC. Virtanen is no longer a prospect, Boeser is, Pettersson is even if he gets 75 points next year, Stecher isnt etc
I don't know about Virtanen, I think he tops out as a middle 6 player but I could be wrongIt's a bit of a chicken and egg scenario. For a team that's been so awful for several seasons, we SHOULD have a good prospect pool. And we do. Boeser has graduated from the prospect ranks and become a legitimate impact player, but Pettersson is exciting as all get out, Demko looks like a stud, Virtanen and Juolevi are still developing, and hopefully guys like Lind, Dahlen, Gadjovich, DiPietro, Lockwood, etc. can pan out.
There is the point, though, that it could have been even better - Virtanen and Juolevi are still developing, but it's tough to watch the guys picked immediately after them (some of whom a large number of posters here badly wanted the Canucks to pick) already making an impact in the NHL.
Anyway - to answer your question: yes, I think the Canucks have built a pretty damn good prospect pool, although it hasn't been very quiet! It could have been a bit better with some shrewder decisions at the draft table, too.