Going to say it for this thread too:
I get a kick that we include Juolevi’s +\-. When do we add his corsi?
Bears repeating that while Tkachuk would look great in a Canuck uni, they do have a boat-load of young forwards enroute like Gaudette, Lind, Pettersson and Gadjovich, while Horvat, Boeser and Goldobin are already here.....but that blueline...Yikes!....After Juolevi and Tryamkin who's no longer here, who else do they have in the pipeline? Hutton and Stecher look like they've plateaued and nobody in Utica jumps off the page. Unless Juolevi falls flat on his face, he's virtually the only d-man they have on the prospect depth-chart.
I don't think they have much projection left to be honest. I don't see much room for further development so I think you're looking at #4/5 type defenseman on a good team.Stecher and Hutton have plateaued? I was not aware that d-men typically plateau in their 2nd or 3rd NHL seasons. Good to know.
Bears repeating that while Tkachuk would look great in a Canuck uni, they do have a boat-load of young forwards enroute like Gaudette, Lind, Pettersson and Gadjovich, while Horvat, Boeser and Goldobin are already here.....but that blueline...Yikes!....After Juolevi and Tryamkin who's no longer here, who else do they have in the pipeline? Hutton and Stecher look like they've plateaued and nobody in Utica jumps off the page. Unless Juolevi falls flat on his face, he's virtually the only d-man they have on the prospect depth-chart.
It's a nice thought, but teams that actually draft impact d-men in the first round are reluctant to trade them for a forward prospect. You usually have to sweeten the pot with either another roster player or a draft pick. Said it before but bears repeating....when you assess the Canucks' prospect pool, the blueline is definitely their weakest link.So you trade one of these young forwards for a comparable defensive prospect with a team that has a surplus of young defenceman. Always go BPA.
a good tea
I don't think they have much projection left to be honest. I don't see much room for further development so I think you're looking at #4/5 type defenseman on a good team.
it took 7 posts this time for tkachuk to come up.
i think we're improving.
19 year old defensemen scoring at a near point-per-game clip in a solid men's league under the watchful eye of one of the best defenders in Canucks history. I know there's a love affair with Tkachuk out there, but damn. I think Juolevi is going to be a damn good player for this team for a long time.
It's the 4th best league in the world?Not sure how strong that league is when a pair of 40 year olds who couldn't hack it in the NHL are leading the team in scoring.
It's the 4th best league in the world?
Slightly worse than AHL probably
Alot of ppl eanted Chychrun if they went with a dman.Bears repeating that while Tkachuk would look great in a Canuck uni, they do have a boat-load of young forwards enroute like Gaudette, Lind, Pettersson and Gadjovich, while Horvat, Boeser and Goldobin are already here.....but that blueline...Yikes!....After Juolevi and Tryamkin who's no longer here, who else do they have in the pipeline? Hutton and Stecher look like they've plateaued and nobody in Utica jumps off the page. Unless Juolevi falls flat on his face, he's virtually the only d-man they have on the prospect depth-chart.
Not sure how strong that league is when a pair of 40 year olds who couldn't hack it in the NHL are leading the team in scoring.