Pre-Game Talk: 2014 WJC Discussion [Horvat, Shinkaruk, Gaunce invited to Camp]

[m9]

I think they should probably throw Gaunce in the fire and move JS for a pick/prospect unless they give him a shot on the wing in the top 6.

Schroeder would still be an excellent 13th forward, no need to trade him this year. He can be what Ebbett was last year at the very least.

 

[Ernie]

Schroeder would still be an excellent 13th forward, no need to trade him this year. He can be what Ebbett was last year at the very least.

Except that Ebbett was just as good a player as he was last last year, at both the AHL and NHL level. So "at the very least" might be a little optimistic. It's more like "to avoid losing him to waivers."

The prospect of either Sestito or Schroeder being in the starting lineup doesn't make me happy, but they can't both be scratched if the team wants to have 8 defensemen on the roster.

 

[m9]

Except that Ebbett was just as good a player as he was last last year, at both the AHL and NHL level. So "at the very least" might be a little optimistic. It's more like "to avoid losing him to waivers."

The prospect of either Sestito or Schroeder being in the starting lineup doesn't make me happy, but they can't both be scratched if the team wants to have 8 defensemen on the roster.

Schroeder was already better than Ebbett last year, and that was even before Schroeder had a great final couple months in the AHL. Having him as the 13th forward because someone like Horvat or Gaunce plays his way into the 3rd line center spot is a nice situation.

 

[PhilMick]

Almost all top 6 player in the NHL show off elite skills and production at lower levels and sure Gaunce could rise over his 3rd line projection but he is already playing a bit like one in the OHL, with his size and physical maturity and production a top 6 placing seems unlikely.

Probably even more so with our current lineup at Center and Bo in the system as well.

It's almost a certainty that by the time Ryan and Bo are 1,2 on this team and Gaunce hopefully on the 3rd line doing well that another more offensive "top 6 " type of center will be drafted and in the system (5 years out).

Maybe Gaunce exceeds projections and expectations but the likelihood is that he will be a very solid 3 line center in the NHL (which is something the Canucks really need as well)

Like 22 points in 17 playoff games? I guess we can only dream...

I was hoping someone would weigh in on my attempt at comparing him to Backes a few posts back. I'd like to know how they compare, I really only notice Backes when he's doing something dirty, but I'd be surprised if someone told me he has vastly better puck skills than Gaunce. At the same age, Brendan was a ppg player in the best junior league in the world, Backes was a ppg in an inferior league.

 

[Tiranis]

Every NHL player shows their best stuff in their first 30 NHL games...

 

[Mr. Canucklehead]

Every NHL player shows their best stuff in their first 30 NHL games...

Hey, it worked for Jason King.

 

[Betamax*]

Poor Gaunce, it's his day to be piled on now

I personally do not put any value into what Sutter says. Nothing in his past makes me think he is a good evaluator of talent.

I think Gaunce's ceiling is 2nd line center. Back to back 30 goal seasons may not be elite offense but it should still be given consideration as possible 2nd line talent. I believe the intangibles argument pigeon holes players like Gaunce into the 3rd line role. Just as it did with Kesler and look how that turned out.

That's kinda where my head's at too.

I hate to discredit a coach of his ability, but... I believe this is the first time, or one of the first times he's seen Gaunce play, and the week, or three days that they played with each other shouldn't make Sutters assertions of what he will be, credible. However this is why you need to make a good first impression.

To be fair to Sutter, He's an ex-NHLer. He's coached at both the highest level in NHL Pro Hockey and Junior Hockey. So his opinion, to me, counts a lot. More so than any random poster here. How many here have actually seen Guance play ... in-person? And not formulated their opinions on him via other third party assessments, scouting reports and youtube video clip "highlights."

He's probably already been given an extensive pre-scouting assessment by Hockey Canada Scouts' on what to expect from each player even if he hadn't seen him playing prior to this evaluation camp, so his own personal observations during the camp probably re-affirm what they thought of him prior to this camp.

 

[Bieksa#3]

To be fair to Sutter, He's an ex-NHLer. He's coached at both the highest level in NHL Pro Hockey and Junior Hockey. So his opinion, to me, counts a lot. More so than any random poster here. How many here have actually seen Guance play ... in-person? And not formulated their opinions on him via other third party assessments, scouting reports and youtube video clip "highlights."

He's probably already been given an extensive pre-scouting assessment by Hockey Canada Scouts' on what to expect from each player even if he hadn't seen him playing prior to this evaluation camp, so his own personal observations during the camp probably re-affirm what they thought of him prior to this camp.

Well said

And when we drafted Gaunce, he wasn't expected to be anything more than a 3rd line center. Not sure what's so bad about the comments of Sutter.

 

[Betamax*]

Well said

And when we drafted Gaunce, he wasn't expected to be anything more than a 3rd line center. Not sure what's so bad about the comments of Sutter.

If Gaunce develops into a Manny Malhotra type, that plays the important defensive minutes, PK, takes important face-offs etc.. and can contribute 30-40 points at his peak of his offensive capabilities at the NHL levels, I think Canucks fans should be happy. Joel Otto could possible be another comparable, minus the increased offense that Otto brought to the table (noting that he played in a higher scoring era of the 80s, early 90s) and pugnacity as evident in his PIMs.

If Gaunce can somehow kick in a series winning goal for the Canucks sometime in his career, Canucks fans will be happy with this pick.

The downside, is if Gaunce is the next Denis Pederson. You have a serviceable NHLer for several years but you'd be hoping for more out of a 1st round pick.

 

[NoRaise4Brackett]

I think the Gaunce assessment was fair. The part about being strong defensively while knowing his offensive limitations, could actually be a good thing. Show's that he's reliable and knows his role. He played solid D, and despite his moderate offensive skills, he produced enough points to lead the team. Maybe he just isn't aggressive enough in Sutter's eyes to be a pro as of now, but I imagine he left a positive impression for the role he would be considered for in the WJC's.

Shinkaruk's was accurate, needs to work on D. No surprise there.

I loved his take on Bo. He "really, really liked him". Can do it all.

 

[monster_bertuzzi]

Except that Ebbett was just as good a player as he was last last year, at both the AHL and NHL level. So "at the very least" might be a little optimistic. It's more like "to avoid losing him to waivers."

The prospect of either Sestito or Schroeder being in the starting lineup doesn't make me happy, but they can't both be scratched if the team wants to have 8 defensemen on the roster.

I don't see why. Schroeder showed he could at least be a decent bottom 6 PP guy last year and Sestito the best enforcer we;ve had for a while.

 

[Canucker]

To be fair to Sutter, He's an ex-NHLer. He's coached at both the highest level in NHL Pro Hockey and Junior Hockey. So his opinion, to me, counts a lot. More so than any random poster here. How many here have actually seen Guance play ... in-person? And not formulated their opinions on him via other third party assessments, scouting reports and youtube video clip "highlights."

He's probably already been given an extensive pre-scouting assessment by Hockey Canada Scouts' on what to expect from each player even if he hadn't seen him playing prior to this evaluation camp, so his own personal observations during the camp probably re-affirm what they thought of him prior to this camp.

So what would Mike Milbury's opinion count for?

I'd take several poster's opinions over his and many other ex-NHL players, coaches and GM's opinions, including Sutter's.

 

[Betamax*]

Why?

So what would Mike Milbury's opinion count for?

I'd take several poster's opinions over his and many other ex-NHL players, coaches and GM's opinions, including Sutter's.

Why would you take several other posters' opinion over someone who has played the game and coached the game at its highest level? Maybe because those opinions are more upbeat and positive and agree with the way you would like things to be?

 

[Canucker]

Why would you take several other posters' opinion over someone who has played the game and coached the game at its highest level? Maybe because those opinions are more upbeat and positive and agree with the way you would like things to be?

Just because some chump played the game at a high level or coached the game at a high level doesn't make them an expert at all facets of the game. There are always idiots who make it to high levels based on talent or hard work and not intelligence.

 

[Betamax*]

Sutter is no Milbury when it comes to talent evaluation.

Just because some chump played the game at a high level or coached the game at a high level doesn't make them an expert at all facets of the game. There are always idiots who make it to high levels based on talent or hard work and not intelligence.

Yeah, I re-read your comments and you were largely directing them towards Milbury, who I'd agree with you has a dubious record when it comes to hockey talent evaluation (Dipietro vs. Luongo etc..)

IMO, Brent Sutter is no Mike Milbury when it comes to junior talent evaluation. Didn't Sutter coach the Canadian World Hockey Junior Team to two consecutive Gold Medals and in addition to the Super Series International Tournament? At the junior international level, he has a "pretty" impressive undefeated 19 wins, 0 loss, with 1 tie via the Super Series.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brent_Sutter

That's why when someone of Sutter's pedigree offers his opinion on players, I take notice of ... especially over some random hfboards poster, to be honest.

 

[Canucker]

Yeah, I re-read your comments and you were directing them towards Milbury, who I'd agree with you has a dubious record when it comes to hockey talent evaluation (Dipietro vs. Luongo etc..)

IMO, Brent Sutter is no Mike Milbury when it comes to junior talent evaluation. Didn't Sutter coach the Canadian World Hockey Junior Team to two consecutive Gold Medals and in addition to the Super Series International Tournament? At the junior international level, he has a "pretty" impressive undefeated 19 wins, 0 loss, with 1 tie via the Super Series.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brent_Sutter

That's why when someone of Sutter's pedigree offers his opinion on players, I take notice of ... especially over some random hfboards poster, to be honest.

I wouldn't call Sutter an "idiot" but I would disagree with any assessments of Gaunce topping out as a 3rd line center. I doubt Sutter even watched Gaunce play any OHL games prior to this camp, so I think it would be a bit premature to call him a 3rd liner...the kid is 19 years old and still has a lot of room to grow, especially offensively.

 

[Blue Suede Shoes]

Well said

And when we drafted Gaunce, he wasn't expected to be anything more than a 3rd line center. Not sure what's so bad about the comments of Sutter.

This isn't how I remember it. Leading up to the draft, there were only a few sources that I remember reading that pegged Gaunce's upside as a third liner. Most places had Gaunce as a top-6er. The most common pro comparisons I remember pre-draft were to Ryan O'Reilly and Jordan Staal. David Backes came up a few times as well.

NHL Draft Prospect Profile #13: Brendan Gaunce

In terms of a comparison and future projection, Gaunce reminds us of Ryan O’Reilly of the Colorado Avalanche. We believe he has the potential to be a top 6 offensive contributor and to play effective shut down defence against the other team’s best players. We even believe that if Gaunce can improve his quickness, he might be able to become a top line player, similar to a David Backes of the St. Louis Blues.

-Last Word On Sports


It wasn't until after the Canucks drafted him, I remember a couple of the TSN analysts started pointing out his flaws, and that's when the claims of a 3rd-line ceiling really took off.

At the time I liked the pick so much because I was confident that we got a great 3rd line center to play behind Henrik and Kesler - a position I thought he could take up very soon after he steps into the NHL. But I felt as though he could likely progress up the depth chart into the top-6 as he grew older (and I still feel that way).

 

[Hardyvan123]

Like 22 points in 17 playoff games? I guess we can only dream...

yes that playoff showing was good and gaunce looks like the type of guy who won't lose much going into the playoffs and might even step it up sorta like Bolland.

I was hoping someone would weigh in on my attempt at comparing him to Backes a few posts back. I'd like to know how they compare, I really only notice Backes when he's doing something dirty, but I'd be surprised if someone told me he has vastly better puck skills than Gaunce. At the same age, Brendan was a ppg player in the best junior league in the world, Backes was a ppg in an inferior league.

player comps are always hard to do and for one to Backes there are dozens of others to other guys who might look better or worse, each situation is so unique that it's hard to do fair comps.

Backes is much larger player than Gaunce and it's hard to debate how a first year in college against guys up to 3 years older is in comparison to Guance who is big mature and only guys 1 year older are in the OHL as well. the WCHA is a pretty good league and both guys were 19 year olds so I'm not sure where you get that the WCHA is an inferior league.

 

[jigsaw99]

This isn't how I remember it. Leading up to the draft, there were only a few sources that I remember reading that pegged Gaunce's upside as a third liner. Most places had Gaunce as a top-6er. The most common pro comparisons I remember pre-draft were to Ryan O'Reilly and Jordan Staal. David Backes came up a few times as well.

NHL Draft Prospect Profile #13: Brendan Gaunce

-Last Word On Sports


It wasn't until after the Canucks drafted him, I remember a couple of the TSN analysts started pointing out his flaws, and that's when the claims of a 3rd-line ceiling really took off.

At the time I liked the pick so much because I was confident that we got a great 3rd line center to play behind Henrik and Kesler - a position I thought he could take up very soon after he steps into the NHL. But I felt as though he could likely progress up the depth chart into the top-6 as he grew older (and I still feel that way).

That's the same assessment for Horvat

 

[PhilMick]

This isn't how I remember it. Leading up to the draft, there were only a few sources that I remember reading that pegged Gaunce's upside as a third liner. Most places had Gaunce as a top-6er. The most common pro comparisons I remember pre-draft were to Ryan O'Reilly and Jordan Staal. David Backes came up a few times as well.

NHL Draft Prospect Profile #13: Brendan Gaunce

-Last Word On Sports


It wasn't until after the Canucks drafted him, I remember a couple of the TSN analysts started pointing out his flaws, and that's when the claims of a 3rd-line ceiling really took off.

At the time I liked the pick so much because I was confident that we got a great 3rd line center to play behind Henrik and Kesler - a position I thought he could take up very soon after he steps into the NHL. But I felt as though he could likely progress up the depth chart into the top-6 as he grew older (and I still feel that way).

Well said.

 

[Luck 6]

This isn't how I remember it. Leading up to the draft, there were only a few sources that I remember reading that pegged Gaunce's upside as a third liner. Most places had Gaunce as a top-6er. The most common pro comparisons I remember pre-draft were to Ryan O'Reilly and Jordan Staal. David Backes came up a few times as well.

NHL Draft Prospect Profile #13: Brendan Gaunce

-Last Word On Sports


It wasn't until after the Canucks drafted him, I remember a couple of the TSN analysts started pointing out his flaws, and that's when the claims of a 3rd-line ceiling really took off.

At the time I liked the pick so much because I was confident that we got a great 3rd line center to play behind Henrik and Kesler - a position I thought he could take up very soon after he steps into the NHL. But I felt as though he could likely progress up the depth chart into the top-6 as he grew older (and I still feel that way).

I hope you're right. Personally, I thought #3C when we picked Gaunce. I was fine with that though, that's a critical position to fill and it's importance is understated. If you have a great #3C who can fill in the #2 spot when injuries occur, you have a much better shot at going far in the post season.

 

[Wilch]

I believe the consensus ranking for Gaunce was around 15 or so before the draft, so he slid about 10 spots.

 

[Pip]

I don't think he is capped as a third line player, but rather that is likely what he'll become. Im not going to expect him to make the top 6, as I feel that is getting my hopes up a little too much. I think I will have a better idea after a couple NHL seasons, but even then nothing is assured. Thats why I never understood making definitive ceilings for players when we watched Kesler and Burrows' progression first hand.

 

[PhilMick]

yes that playoff showing was good and gaunce looks like the type of guy who won't lose much going into the playoffs and might even step it up sorta like Bolland.



player comps are always hard to do and for one to Backes there are dozens of others to other guys who might look better or worse, each situation is so unique that it's hard to do fair comps.

Backes is much larger player than Gaunce and it's hard to debate how a first year in college against guys up to 3 years older is in comparison to Guance who is big mature and only guys 1 year older are in the OHL as well. the WCHA is a pretty good league and both guys were 19 year olds so I'm not sure where you get that the WCHA is an inferior league.

Gaunce was 6'-1 3/4" 207 lbs at the combine weigh in last year. We can take those as exact numbers. He's been through two pro camps and two Gary Roberts camps since then. Backes' numbers from the Blues team page are 6'-3", 221 lbs. I don't think anyone takes those numbers as accurate. Size-wise, Gaunce could end up quite similar.

I don't mean to smear the WCHA, I really like college hockey, but I maintain my position that the OHL is absolutely the best junior league around.

 

[Luck 6]

I don't think he is capped as a third line player, but rather that is likely what he'll become. Im not going to expect him to make the top 6, as I feel that is getting my hopes up a little too much. I think I will have a better idea after a couple NHL seasons, but even then nothing is assured. Thats why I never understood making definitive ceilings for players when we watched Kesler and Burrows' progression first hand.

Yep, that's an example of two players who were labeled as 3rd liners and essentially rose above those standards to become 1st/2nd line forwards. It happens, which is why I don't like to label "ceilings" on players. When I say I believe Gaunce has 3rd line upside, what I mean is I believe he will become a good 3rd line center. Could he become a 1st line center? Yup, it's just too damn hard to predict how certain players will develop, so it isn't wise to rule anything out. It's not like I'd be shocked to see Gaunce as our future #2C, but I think he'll top out as a good #3C. I sure hope I am understating him, and I hope his development curve peaks late.