Prospect Info: 2018 Prospects Thread

[RobertKron]

Are there a lot of players we moved on from you would like back because Benning was wrong about them?

I mean, yeah, I’d probably rather have McCann and a second than Gudbranson, and Forsling than fourteen minutes of Clendenning.

 

[sting101]

More than the trades have.

More than Baertschi Dahlen Leipsic Goldobin Palmu Brisebois Motte Pouliot Granlund ?

 

[sting101]

I mean, yeah, I’d probably rather have McCann and a second than Gudbranson, and Forsling than fourteen minutes of Clendenning.

Yes no doubt on McCann that was a colossal f*** up.

 

[CanaFan]

More than Baertschi Dahlen Leipsic Goldobin Palmu Brisebois Motte Pouliot Granlund ?

No, I’m fine with trades where we sent a vet for a younger player or pick. Never had a problem with any of Dahlen or Leipsic. Didn’t like targeting Goldobin for Hansen but happy Benning finally moved Hansen. Baertschi was fine.

Dislike Vey, Pedan, Clendenning, Granlund, Gudbranson, Pouliot, and Motte. Very different types of trades than the above.

 

[carrotshirt]

Are there a lot of players we moved on from you would like back because Benning was wrong about them?

Vanek
Hamhuis (would still be our third best Dman)
Richardson
Bonino
McCann
Every draft pick he moved out.

 

[Tables of Stats]

Vanek
Hamhuis (would still be our third best Dman)
Richardson
Bonino
McCann
Every draft pick he moved out.

I don't think Vanek would have wanted to stay around. He knew he was a rental and signed here when his value was on the low side. While I don't like the return we got for him I don't think he would have chosen us over Detroit if both teams gave him equal offers.

I didn't like letting Hamhuis walk for nothing but I don't think I'd have wanted to keep him for all the years between letting him walk and now. He might have won us an extra couple games and really killed our draft picks even more than our bad luck and late season surges already have.

I agree we should have held on to Richardson.

If we kept Bonino our top three would have looked like Bonino, Horvat, and Henrik. That doesn't really give us any good lines to shelter wingers on. Suter doesn't do this very well either but can take harder defensive matchups that Bonino couldn't. I know the idea of a skilled third or 4th line is popular right now but even with Bonino, I question if we'd have the horses. Still, any timeline where we don't give Suter a retroactive NTC is a better one than the one we got.

McCann, yes. This is a no-brainer given the absolute garbage player we got back.

The picks, I somewhat agree. The age gap experiment hasn't exactly netted many hits, but we'd have to give back Baertschi who, while not a star player or even a core piece, is better than the expected value of the pick we traded for him. In this case, I don't want back every pick or even the methodology of trying to cheat the system by trading picks for players with some development, we just need a better pro scout to make that idea work.

 

[skyo]

Yep. And that's the funny thing. While people on here were praising Shinkaruk, Benning could smell the poo from a mile away.........and knew that while Shinkaruk's stats were impressive that year, the way he was scoring goals wouldn’t translate to the NHL level.

I expect Shinkaruk to be riding buses in Norway within the next few years.

And when Gaunce goes on waivers....I expect ms and a few others to cry their little hearts away..................but like Corrado and Santorelli....just chill FFS.

 

[DomY]

Corey Pronman at The Athletic has been doing NHL farm system rankings. Vancouver is No. 2 with Quinn Hughes and Elias Pettersson ranking as "Elite Prospects." This is high praise considering there are only 8 of them in the entire league according to his rating system (Hughes, Pettersson, Middlestadt, Zadina, Svechnikov, Kotkaniemi, Borgstrom, and Thomas). Dahlin is alone at the top as a "Special Player."

He ranks 8 prospects on the Canucks as "Legit" or higher, legit meaning they have a legit shot to be top-line players. Most interesting is that he has Hughes ranked ahead of Pettersson in the top 20, and the 2nd best player in the Canucks systems under 23 (behind only Boeser). Goldobin was not considered a prospect for the purposes of this ranking.

 

[hellstick]

Shades of 1970... Buffalo beat us again.

 

[Ryp37]

Hughes being above Pettersson is laughable

 

[CanaFan]

Corey Pronman at The Athletic has been doing NHL farm system rankings. Vancouver is No. 2 with Quinn Hughes and Elias Pettersson ranking as "Elite Prospects." This is high praise considering there are only 8 of them in the entire league according to his rating system (Hughes, Pettersson, Middlestadt, Zadina, Svechnikov, Kotkaniemi, Borgstrom, and Thomas). Dahlin is alone at the top as a "Special Player."

He ranks 8 prospects on the Canucks as "Legit" or higher, legit meaning they have a legit shot to be top-line players. Most interesting is that he has Hughes ranked ahead of Pettersson in the top 20, and the 2nd best player in the Canucks systems under 23 (behind only Boeser). Goldobin was not considered a prospect for the purposes of this ranking.

Interestingly, outside of Hughes and Pettersson, he doesn’t see any of our other prospects as “High End” or “Very Good” prospects. Gaudette, Lind, Juolevi, Demko, Dahlen, and Dipietro all fall under the “Legit” prospects category, which is his 5th tier below Special (Dahlin), Elite, High End, and Very Good. Haven’t tallied up how many prospects league wide fall under these two intermediary labels but it speaks to the Canucks pool being weighted heavily by our most recent #5 and #7 picks rather than by the quality of the next group (at least in Pronman’s eyes). Which is no surprise really though I think some talk about our prospect pool like we have 6 or 7 surefire NHL studs.

 

[ChilliBilly]

Interestingly, outside of Hughes and Pettersson, he doesn’t see any of our other prospects as “High End” or “Very Good” prospects. Gaudette, Lind, Juolevi, Demko, Dahlen, and Dipietro all fall under the “Legit” prospects category, which is his 5th tier below Special (Dahlin), Elite, High End, and Very Good. Haven’t tallied up how many prospects league wide fall under these two intermediary labels but it speaks to the Canucks pool being weighted heavily by our most recent #5 and #7 picks rather than by the quality of the next group (at least in Pronman’s eyes). Which is no surprise really though I think some talk about our prospect pool like we have 6 or 7 surefire NHL studs.

Surprised Woo and Gadjovich aren't listed under legit.Also surprised that Gaudette is not very good. Or Demko. Even Dahlen should be close.

maybe we should see if Buff can't tell the difference between Dahlen and Dahlin.

 

[CanaFan]

Surprised Woo and Gadjovich aren't listed under legit.Also surprised that Gaudette is not very good. Or Demko. Even Dahlen should be close.

maybe we should see if Buff can't tell the difference between Dahlen and Dahlin.

Woo yes, Gadjovich no. Gadj will have skating challenges at the NHL level that could seriously limit him. I do think Woo is both fairly safe and has decent untapped upside.

 

[Canucks LB]

Vancouver Canucks – Offseason Prospect System Review

After just looking at this again, Our prospect pool is absolutely ridiculous, I can't even imagine if we get another top pick this year.

All we need is a RHD top prospect and a center/wing (Matters where EP fits).

And we are basically done

 

[Pip]

More than Baertschi Dahlen Leipsic Goldobin Palmu Brisebois Motte Pouliot Granlund ?

I’d probably take a package of McCann, a second, and Forsling over that group. Baertschi is ok but I don’t think he’s more valuable than McCann. Dahlen vs Forlsing should be interesting to follow, and the second is likely worth more than the rest of the other assets combined since it’s just a bunch of waiver wire players.

 

[Just A Bit Outside]

Vancouver Canucks – Offseason Prospect System Review

After just looking at this again, Our prospect pool is absolutely ridiculous, I can't even imagine if we get another top pick this year.

All we need is a RHD top prospect and a center/wing (Matters where EP fits).

And we are basically done

This team is nowhere near being done. None of the guys have done anything yet in the NHL and until they do so, the Canucks should be adding even more prospects to the pool.

Many teams have had great prospect pools in the past that have never amounted to anything.

I like the depth a goalie.

Defense still needs alot of work as IMO, Hughes is the only legit prospect and he has a ton of questions given his lack of size and strength.

Forwards are decent but Pettersson needs to prove he can play centre otherwise he's a winger. Gaudette likely tops out as a 3C at best.

Not my ideal definition of done.

 

[Canucks LB]

This team is nowhere near being done. None of the guys have done anything yet in the NHL and until they do so, the Canucks should be adding even more prospects to the pool.

Many teams have had great prospect pools in the past that have never amounted to anything.

I like the depth a goalie.

Defense still needs alot of work as IMO, Hughes is the only legit prospect and he has a ton of questions given his lack of size and strength.

Forwards are decent but Pettersson needs to prove he can play centre otherwise he's a winger. Gaudette likely tops out as a 3C at best.

Not my ideal definition of done.

two more elite prospects and it's done, we will be a playoff team no question.

Depth will hopefully come with the 2nd 3rd+ rounders.

Lets see what we DO have for elite talent. And what the roster may look like in 2 years from now. (in a perfect world, I know it's not realistic to have every prospect hit)

FILL - EP - Boeser
Sven - Horvat - Lind (Again, we need Dahlen or Lind to hit BADLY, or we are forced to draft a Winger)
Dahlen - Gaudette - Virtanen
Roussel- Beagle - Fill

So for forwards we have CLEAR needs to Wingers, Ideally LW (if Dahlen does not turn out), and if he does, we need RW (encase lind does not turn out).

This also leaves us with some room for one or more (out of nowhere) prospects make a jump. Like Gadjovich, Palmu, Jasek, etc.

Defense is not nearly as good and we need clear help.

Hughes / FILL
Edler / Tanev
Juolevi / FILL
FILL

Lots of room to fix this defense, I think it should be vital for the Canucks to continue focusing on this, And hope that woo/Tryamkin/Rathbone /Brassard / utunen make a jump.

Goaltending: Demko

Summary: So, Basically I have it like this:

In the next two years we should finish in the bottom 10 in both years, Ideally next year we finish bottom 5th.

Massive Needs: Elite LW/RW (based on how good lind/dahlen does / Elite D-man (Assuming EP is a stud Center)
Strong Needs: Depth Defense
Small Needs: Depth Forwards

If everything goes correctly in the next two years, and Tramkin possibly comes back, or another D-man makes a jump, this team should be in the playoffs in two years, and legit cup contenders by year 4.

NEXT YEAR DRAFT: It has a ton of top end Centers, Only one top end offensive prospect in the draft, Maybe two.

The year after that: Seems to have a good mix of positions, good timing since we should (key word should) be at the end of the rebuild and focusing more on playoffs.

IF YOU DO NOT FEEL LIKE READING, JUST CLICK HERE AND HAVE A LISTEN, I made an audio clip as well.

 

[Fire Benning]

The problem with ranking prospect pools is that it's not necessarily a great indicator of drafting ability, a lot of exceptional young players make the jump to the NHL not too long after they're drafted which typically deems them ineligible to be included in these types of lists, so for example Juolevi is considered a good prospect but a number of players who were drafted around him have already graduated prospect status to becoming NHLers. Essentially having a good prospect pool doesn't automatically indicate good drafting

 

[pgj98m3]

two more elite prospects and it's done, we will be a playoff team no question.

Depth will hopefully come with the 2nd 3rd+ rounders.

Lets see what we DO have for elite talent. And what the roster may look like in 2 years from now. (in a perfect world, I know it's not realistic to have every prospect hit)

FILL - EP - Boeser
Sven - Horvat - Lind (Again, we need Dahlen or Lind to hit BADLY, or we are forced to draft a Winger)
Dahlen - Gaudette - Virtanen
Roussel- Beagle - Fill

So for forwards we have CLEAR needs to Wingers, Ideally LW (if Dahlen does not turn out), and if he does, we need RW (encase lind does not turn out).

This also leaves us with some room for one or more (out of nowhere) prospects make a jump. Like Gadjovich, Palmu, Jasek, etc.

Defense is not nearly as good and we need clear help.

Hughes / FILL
Edler / Tanev
Juolevi / FILL
FILL

Lots of room to fix this defense, I think it should be vital for the Canucks to continue focusing on this, And hope that woo/Tryamkin/Rathbone /Brassard / utunen make a jump.

Goaltending: Demko

Summary: So, Basically I have it like this:

In the next two years we should finish in the bottom 10 in both years, Ideally next year we finish bottom 5th.

Massive Needs: Elite LW/RW (based on how good lind/dahlen does / Elite D-man (Assuming EP is a stud Center)
Strong Needs: Depth Defense
Small Needs: Depth Forwards

If everything goes correctly in the next two years, and Tramkin possibly comes back, or another D-man makes a jump, this team should be in the playoffs in two years, and legit cup contenders by year 4.

NEXT YEAR DRAFT: It has a ton of top end Centers, Only one top end offensive prospect in the draft, Maybe two.

The year after that: Seems to have a good mix of positions, good timing since we should (key word should) be at the end of the rebuild and focusing more on playoffs.

IF YOU DO NOT FEEL LIKE READING, JUST CLICK HERE AND HAVE A LISTEN, I made an audio clip as well.

Could you possibly have more ‘ifs’....talk about premature ejaculation.
Beyond the top ten picks the statistics aren’t great

 

[VanJack]

The problem with ranking prospect pools is that it's not necessarily a great indicator of drafting ability, a lot of exceptional young players make the jump to the NHL not too long after they're drafted which typically deems them ineligible to be included in these types of lists, so for example Juolevi is considered a good prospect but a number of players who were drafted around him have already graduated prospect status to becoming NHLers. Essentially having a good prospect pool doesn't automatically indicate good drafting

Except that neither Pettersson nor Hughes was drafted anywhere close to being the first overall draft pick in their respective draft years. Meanwhile Boeser was in the back half of the 2015 first round. And guys like Lind, Demko, Dahlen, Gaudette, Palmu and DiPietro were drafted a long way from the top end of the draft. Somebody in the Canucks amateur scouting department has to be doing something right.

 

[CanaFan]

Except that neither Pettersson nor Hughes was drafted anywhere close to being the first overall draft pick in their respective draft years. Meanwhile Boeser was in the back half of the 2015 first round. And guys like Lind, Demko, Dahlen, Gaudette, Palmu and DiPietro were drafted a long way from the top end of the draft. Somebody in the Canucks amateur scouting department has to be doing something right.

Ya, cause 1st overall guys are rarely in prospect pools for more than one summer. If we had drafted Hischier instead of Pettersson, where would our prospect pool rank today? 10th? Lower?

Prospect pools are transient and the better the prospect, the less time they spend in your pool. Olli Juolevi and Alex Nylander are the only top 10 picks from 2016 still listed as prospects. It’s only partially coincidence that Vancouver and Buffalo are also the 1-2 prospect pools in the league. Dahlin (1) Mittelstadt (8), and Nylander (8) for Buffalo. Hughes (7), Pettersson (5), and Juolevi (5) for Vancouver. Lots of high picks, slow graduation to NHL. That’s how you win the game of prospect pools.

Edit: The second tier guys (Lind, Dahlen, Gaudette, etc) aren’t really why we are at the top of the league pools, at least on Pronman’s list. We actually have a slightly-above average number of guys “Legit Prospects” (6) but have below average “High End” (0) and “Very Good” (0) prospects. We got to #2 on the strength of Pettersson and Hughes. Without those two we are average-to-slightly-below-average. We are exactly where a team that has drafted 5, 5, and 7 without graduating anyone to the NHL should be.

 

[nuck luck]

Except that neither Pettersson nor Hughes was drafted anywhere close to being the first overall draft pick in their respective draft years. Meanwhile Boeser was in the back half of the 2015 first round. And guys like Lind, Demko, Dahlen, Gaudette, Palmu and DiPietro were drafted a long way from the top end of the draft. Somebody in the Canucks amateur scouting department has to be doing something right.

He said that other team's top prospects have already graduated to the NHL so this ranking system is not exactly honest. Where a player was drafted is mute in this case because the system only includes prospects:

After 5 drafts, Team A can have an average prospect pool due to multiple players already in the NHL. I would consider this an indicator of good drafting.

Team B can have the same number of picks as A at comparable spots, and Team B can have a great prospect pool because only 2 players have made it to the NHL after 5 F'N years! One of those being a 3rd liner...I would not consider this an example of good drafting.

Every team has prospects with high potential, but these players eventually faded away, what makes you think our prospects are different?

Granted, I think Hughes and Petterson will be in the top 2, but I'm not convinced they'll be game changers...especially in the playoffs. OJ's development has been underwhelming and JV on the 3rd line is not something to boast about for a 6th overall pick... BB, amateur scouts got this one right!

 

[DomY]

Interestingly, outside of Hughes and Pettersson, he doesn’t see any of our other prospects as “High End” or “Very Good” prospects. Gaudette, Lind, Juolevi, Demko, Dahlen, and Dipietro all fall under the “Legit” prospects category, which is his 5th tier below Special (Dahlin), Elite, High End, and Very Good. Haven’t tallied up how many prospects league wide fall under these two intermediary labels but it speaks to the Canucks pool being weighted heavily by our most recent #5 and #7 picks rather than by the quality of the next group (at least in Pronman’s eyes). Which is no surprise really though I think some talk about our prospect pool like we have 6 or 7 surefire NHL studs.

To add to this here's a bit more info:

- Listening to the "The Full 60" podcast by The Athletic, Corey Pronman said that without Dahlin the Sabres farm team would be ranked in the 11-12 range.
- The main page to the article has been updated with a chart showing the number of prospects for each team in each category. He also has a paragraph that says Buffalo is in a tier on its own, followed by a steep drop of to Vancouver alone in a tier, then a tier of Carolina/St. Louis, then NYI, then 6-14 all grouped together.

Having said this, I obviously plugged all this into a spreadsheet and to the best of my ability the weightings that made the most sense were as follows:

Dahlin: 100
Elite: 69 (nice)
High End: 30
Very Good: 16
Legit: 5
Have A Chance: 3
Depth: 1

It kind of makes sense. For example, I am very high on Will Lockwood, and I believe that he has 1st line potential. However, his wonky shoulder makes it unlikely that he'll even be an NHL player let alone one that takes regular 1st line shifts.

Lockwood is rated as a "Have A Chance" player. If you give him a say 5% chance of reaching his potential, that would mean a Rasmus Dahlin would be worth roughly 33 Will Lockwoods. Would I trade Dahlin for 33 Lockwoods/Woos/Gadjovichs/Jaseks? or 3 picks in the 15-45 range every year for 11 years? Honestly probably not but you can't deny that the value is kind of closer than you'd think at first glance.

When I get bored next week, I'll plug in all historic 15-45 range picks over the last 25 years into a random generator and see what 33 players you could get.

 

[Bougieman]

Hughes being above Pettersson is laughable

I don't know about "laughable". Maybe a small guffaw? Certainly not a big belly laugh though.

 

[DDRhockey]

Has pettersson arrived in vancouver yet?