Prospect Info: Canucks 2017 Prospect Rankings - #16

[Saturated Fats]

POLL #14 (103 votes)
Zack MacEwen - 14 votes
Evan McEneny - 24 votes
Jack Rathbone - 17 votes
Petrus Palmu - 11 votes
Jalen Chatfield - 9 votes
Griffen Molino - 7 votes
Andrey Pedan - 3 votes

Rank | Player | POS | 2016/17 Team | HT | WT | DOB | Drafted/Acquired | 2016 Rank | Poll% (Tot.)
1|Brock Boeser|RW|Vancouver (NHL)/Univ. of North Dakota (NCAA)|6.01|192|Feb 25 1997|23rd (2015)|1 (-)| 48.2%(166)
2|Elias Pettersson|C/LW|Timra IK (Allsve.)|6.02|165|Nov 12 1998|5th (2017)|NEW| 89.33%(150)
3|Olli Juolevi|D|London (OHL)|6.03|187|May 5 1998|5th (2016)|2 (-1)| 64.44%(180)
4|Thatcher Demko|G|Utica (AHL)|6.04|192|Dec 8 1995|36th (2014)|3 (-1)| 62.11%(161)
5|Jonathan Dahlen|C|Timra IK (Allsve.)|5.11|176|Dec 20 1997|Trade via OTT (2017)|NEW| 77.12%(118)
6|Adam Gaudette|C|Northeastern (NCAA)|6.01|183|Oct 3 1996|149th (2015)|10 (+4)| 57.24%(153)]
7|Nikolay Goldobin|LW/RW|Vancouver (NHL)/San Jose (AHL)|6.00|185|Oct 7 1995|Trade via SJ (2017)|NEW| 71.33%(150)
8|Jake Virtanen|RW|Utica (AHL)|6.01|207|Aug 17 1996|6th (2014)|4 (-4)| 43.50%(177)
9|Kole Lind|RW|Kelowna (WHL)|6.01|185|Oct 16 1998|33rd (2017)|NEW| 46.15%(143)
10|Jonah Gadjovich|LW|Owen Sound (OHL)|6.02|201|Oct 12 1998|55th (2017)|NEW| 49.01%(151)
11|Will Lockwood|RW|University of Michigan (NCAA)|5.11|172|June 20 1998|64th (2016)|14 (+3)| 32.14%(140)
12|Jordan Subban|D|Utica (AHL)|5.09|185|Mar 3 1995|115th (2013)|7 (-5)| 1st to 50 & OP
13|Guillaume Brisebois|D|Charlottetown (QMJHL)|6.03|190|Jul 21 1997|66th (2015)|9 (-4)| 46.83%(126)
14|Michael DiPietro|G|Windsor (OHL)|6.00|201|June 9 1999|64th (2017)|NEW| 57.58%(99)
15|Zack MacEwen|C/RW|Gatineau (QMJHL)|6.03|205|July 8 1996|Free Agent (2017)|NEW| 30.10%(103)

15. Zack MacEwen
2016/17 season: Gatineau - 66GP 31G 43A

- Canucks Army profile of MacEwen

- Canucks throw away contract on MacEwen (yikes!)

​

Eligible prospects
Rodrigo Abols
Brock Boeser
Matthew Brassard
Guillaume Brisebois
Cole Candella
Michael Carcone
Cole Cassels
Anton Cederholm
Jalen Chatfield
Jonathan Dahlen
Thatcher Demko
Michael DiPietro
Jonah Gadjovich
Adam Gaudette
Nikolay Goldobin
Kristoffer Gunnarsson
Philip Holm
Lukas Jasek
Olli Juolevi
Joseph LaBate
Yan-Pavel Laplante
Kole Lind
William Lockwood
Zack MacEwen
Evan McEneny
Brett McKenzie
Griffen Molino
Petrus Palmu
Andrey Pedan
Elias Pettersson
Jack Rathbone
Ashton Sautner
Mackenzie Stewart
Jakub Stukel
Jordan Subban
Jake Virtanen
Dmitri Zhukenov

Click to read more...

 

[VanJack]

Went 'off the board' with Carcone.....I realize that young prospect d-men like McEneny are always more valuable and that most Utica posters who watched Carcone were less than enthralled.

But I was quietly impressed that as a player who could have gone back to the Q as an overager, he still manged to stay in the Comets lineup night after night. For that reason, he should already be ahead of MacEwan who finished 15th in the voting.

 

[NoShowWilly]

people are voting for a guy that is going back to play high school hockey this year vs a guy that was called up to the nhl this past year.

 

[PhilMick]

people are voting for a guy that is going back to play high school hockey this year vs a guy that was called up to the nhl this past year.

 

[LickTheEnvelope]

Went with Chatfield. Probably could go Carcone, McEneny or Rathbone but meh.

 

[Braeden]

Went with Chatfield again. Think he has the ability to become a VERY good bottom pairing defenceman in the NHL one day. Uses his size and has a very good defensive stick. Think my order goes Chatfield/McEneny/Palmu/Rathbone/Carcone.

 

[denkiteki]

Molino again

Reason - I think his floor is already higher than a lot of the other prospects projections (not actual ceiling but likely projections). He'll also likely play a bigger role next season (in both Utica and likeky 'nucks) and more likely to actually play in the NHL next season than anyone else on the list (while everyone left on the list are going to be long shots to play in the NHL anyways). McEneny is probably the only other player who might play in the NHL next season but he'll likely start 11th or so on the depth chart (8 NHL D + Holm/Subban both likely ahead of him).

Rathbone is interesting but he's going to prep school then Harvard so he could be 5 years away. Also the last 2 "top" players from Harvard (Vesey and now Kerfoot) did not sign with the team that drafted them, so i'm not exactly convinced we'll be able to sign him. Those 2 are the likely reasons he fell in the draft (although his projections were anywhere from 57 - 100+ so on some boards, he didn't exactly drop) and the same reason i doubt i'll vote for him in polls until we run out of anyone else remotely interesting.

 

[David Bruce Banner]

Went 'off the board' with Carcone.....I realize that young prospect d-men like McEneny are always more valuable and that most Utica posters who watched Carcone were less than enthralled.

But I was quietly impressed that as a player who could have gone back to the Q as an overager, he still manged to stay in the Comets lineup night after night. For that reason, he should already be ahead of MacEwan who finished 15th in the voting.

Word was Carcone was playing better by the end of the season. Just goes to show what a large step it is from the CHL to the AHL. We'll have to see how MacEwen fares.

That said, I went with McEneny, who I think could be a classic late bloomer.

 

[denkiteki]

Word was Carcone was playing better by the end of the season. Just goes to show what a large step it is from the CHL to the AHL. We'll have to see how MacEwen fares.

That said, I went with McEneny, who I think could be a classic late bloomer.

Actually there's another reason for that.

Carcone was on the 4th line for most of the season and pair'd with Cassels. Once Green stopped playing him with Cassels/gave him more offensive opportunity, he started producing more.

Of course one problem with Utica's team last year was the fact they had quite a few "offensive" players who were/are liabilities in their own end (Grenier, Carcone, Virtanen, and later on Goldobin... on top of Valk who was the only real good offensive center but also a liability defensively) so Green tried to shatter some of them. That was one of the reasons Carcone being stuck on the 4th line (tho like i said all year last year, i wish Carcone got Grenier's role instead of the 4th line role since Grenier was't even in our long term plans).

I.e. Carcone only had 3 points in his first 26 games but between Feb/March (when 'nucks had a ton of players called up, including Labate/Grenier), Carcone had 10 points in 19 games. If you want to reduce that sample by just when Grenier/Goldobin was not in Utica

Grenier was recalled on Feb 24, Carcone had 1 point that game and none on the other game Grenier missed during that recall. He returned March 1 and Utica didn't have another game till the 5th but Grenier was recalled again on the 10th (until 14th). Carcone got 2 points in those 3 games. Carcone continued to score tho since Labate was still up until March 29th (reason most of Carcone's production actually came in March). April, Carcone only had 2 points in 7 games (since everyone was back down including Goldobin for a few games). Of course interestingly enough, due to increased production while everyone was away, Green actually seemed to be playing Carcone more later on in the season even with everyone back.

Its an insanely small/isolated sample size but it would suggest that if he was given a bigger role (say top 6 instead of 4th liner), he would've produced a lot more. Personally i think he would've played Grenier's role better than Grenier... One of the reasons i kept arguing we shouldn't resign Grenier after Utica's season ended.

Also note, anyone who looks at stats, remember that despite Grenier's size, he doesn't actually use it so Carcone could actually fill his entire role. I actually think Carcone was more physical than Grenier but since i don't think AHL tracks hits, that's hard to really back-up. Also could just be because Grenier is so big yet he isn't physical that it really stands out and the fact a smaller player hitting someone bigger probably sticks to my memory more than a big player hitting a smaller player.

 

[M2Beezy]

Mceneny Chatty the Bone and Palmu still good options. Nice depth here

 

[MS]

Voted Chatfield. Have a good feeling about him and feel he's a better prospect than Brisebois.

McEneny is probably next, but I feel like he plateaus as a good AHL player.

 

[Nucker101]

Rathbone for me

 

[denkiteki]

Voted Chatfield. Have a good feeling about him and feel he's a better prospect than Brisebois.

McEneny is probably next, but I feel like he plateaus as a good AHL player.

You have to remember to take everything in context. Chatfield is a year older than Brisebois while playing in the same league. The age makes a huge difference in the CHL. Interestingly enough tho Chatfield (statistically) actually had a better year the year before his overage season.

 

[MS]

You have to remember to take everything in context. Chatfield is a year older than Brisebois while playing in the same league. The age makes a huge difference in the CHL. Interestingly enough tho Chatfield (statistically) actually had a better year the year before his overage season.

When I watch Chatfield play I notice him in a positive way. Guy skates well, reads the play well, is aggressive and makes plays defensively.

Brisebois I constantly find to be weak and timid. And despite their listed size, Chatfield just looks bigger on the ice.

I said this in another thread, but Brisebois is the sort of guy on paper I usually really like (good-sized, high-IQ defender with a good first pass) but every time I watch him I'm just incredibly underwhelmed.

 

[Southern_Canuck]

Rathbobe.

Looks like a fire hydrant, strong, and has demonstrated "playmaking defenseman" possibilities, albeit at a low level of hockey. I think the the upside of possible top 4 puck moving D is worth voting at this stage.

I totally get why someone would vote Chatfield, McEneny, or Molino here.

S_C

 

[denkiteki]

When I watch Chatfield play I notice him in a positive way. Guy skates well, reads the play well, is aggressive and makes plays defensively.

Brisebois I constantly find to be weak and timid. And despite their listed size, Chatfield just looks bigger on the ice.

I said this in another thread, but Brisebois is the sort of guy on paper I usually really like (good-sized, high-IQ defender with a good first pass) but every time I watch him I'm just incredibly underwhelmed.

Basically the difference between a flashy player and one who just tries to do his job while not standing out. Brisebois reminds me a lot of Tanev in that you don't see him making many mistakes or not notice him on the ice at all. That isn't exactly a bad quality for a D and he's the type of player you might not notice when he's on the ice but you'll notice him more when he's off the ice.

That was actually his role last year and he did it pretty well. He was part of the "shutdown" pair (with Meloche) while Carl Neill (our former prospect) was the one who made flashy plays in another pairing (with Olivier Joeseph, 23rd overall pick this year).

Also remember that Brisebois scored 47 points while being the shutdown D and NOT on the first PP unit (at least after Neill joined Charlottetown). That's more than Chatfield in his 20 or 21yr old season. I didn't follow Windsor since we don't have any prospects there (at least until Chatfield was signed) so i got no idea how he was deployed. He looked fine in his highlights but i don't think he'll be a comparable to Brisebois right now. Might get a better idea next year when they're teammate and possibly even a pairing (tho im guessing Brisebois ends up with Sifer while Chatfield might get Pedan or Sautner as his partner.. assuming Subban/McEneny stays together).

 

[Rotting Corpse*]

When I watch Chatfield play I notice him in a positive way. Guy skates well, reads the play well, is aggressive and makes plays defensively.

Brisebois I constantly find to be weak and timid. And despite their listed size, Chatfield just looks bigger on the ice.
.

Isn't this based on like, one scrimmage 3 weeks ago?

 

[Canucks LB]

Molino is underrated, I can easily see him turn into a hansen.

 

[MS]

Basically the difference between a flashy player and one who just tries to do his job while not standing out. Brisebois reminds me a lot of Tanev in that you don't see him making many mistakes or not notice him on the ice at all. That isn't exactly a bad quality for a D and he's the type of player you might not notice when he's on the ice but you'll notice him more when he's off the ice.

That was actually his role last year and he did it pretty well. He was part of the "shutdown" pair (with Meloche) while Carl Neill (our former prospect) was the one who made flashy plays in another pairing (with Olivier Joeseph, 23rd overall pick this year).

Also remember that Brisebois scored 47 points while being the shutdown D and NOT on the first PP unit (at least after Neill joined Charlottetown). That's more than Chatfield in his 20 or 21yr old season. I didn't follow Windsor since we don't have any prospects there (at least until Chatfield was signed) so i got no idea how he was deployed. He looked fine in his highlights but i don't think he'll be a comparable to Brisebois right now. Might get a better idea next year when they're teammate and possibly even a pairing (tho im guessing Brisebois ends up with Sifer while Chatfield might get Pedan or Sautner as his partner.. assuming Subban/McEneny stays together).

I notice Brisebois a fair bit - it's just that I constantly notice him getting physically overwhelmed. And Chatfield is not a 'flashy' guy - he's just a guy that skates well, has terrific gap control, and is constantly involved in the play and making good plays.

Brisebois had 22 PP points last year to Chatfield's 8 - he was getting a lot of PP icetime. Both were used as the main shutdown defender for their teams.

Maybe I've just had lousy viewings of Brisebois. But again in the prospects game a couple weeks back, you couldn't tell him from the fringe camp invites while Chatfield was one of the best players on the ice.

I was a massive Tanev fan when he was in our system. I don't get the same vibe from Brisebois.

 

[MS]

Isn't this based on like, one scrimmage 3 weeks ago?

And watching Chatfield 5 times in the Memorial Cup. Well, mostly watching him at the Memorial Cup.

 

[Get North]

I voted McEneny because he's safer to project and I'm excited to see what he can next season after proving himself at the AHL level last season and getting a call-up.

Chatfield really impressed me at the Memorial Cup though. He was really solid and played top-pairing on Windsor with Sergachev. Sure, he was an overager, but the tools he possessed had nothing to do with being older than the other players. He just skated well, made the right plays, and knew when to jump in and out of the plays. It isn't easy to compliment a guy like Sergachev who will rush the puck up the ice at times, and play passive at other times. Bit of a wild player to pair with and Chatfield did well.

The one thing Chatfield has over Brisebois for sure, is he isn't easy to play against like Brisebois. Brisebois was always known as a bit soft for a good sized player in his draft year and one of the reasons he wasn't ranked higher.

I like Rathbone a lot too, I know he's a new guy, but he has tools that can take you to the NHL. Skates well with a good head and plays strong defensively despite his size.

The prospect pool looks much better than last year with intriguing signings like Molino, MacEwan, and Chatfield. They could turn out to fail at the AHL level, but I like them more than Sautner and LaPlante who didn't really produce well or skate well like the ones we signed. They had good pedigree, but pedigree can come from playing on great teams like Sautner. The drafting looks better too, instead of guys like Stewart, Pettit, Abols who didn't produce well, we have guys like Palmu and Rathbone that bring more intriguing skill-sets.

 

[denkiteki]

I notice Brisebois a fair bit - it's just that I constantly notice him getting physically overwhelmed. And Chatfield is not a 'flashy' guy - he's just a guy that skates well, has terrific gap control, and is constantly involved in the play and making good plays.

Brisebois had 22 PP points last year to Chatfield's 8 - he was getting a lot of PP icetime. Both were used as the main shutdown defender for their teams.

Maybe I've just had lousy viewings of Brisebois. But again in the prospects game a couple weeks back, you couldn't tell him from the fringe camp invites while Chatfield was one of the best players on the ice.

I was a massive Tanev fan when he was in our system. I don't get the same vibe from Brisebois.

Even prospect game was really just 1 game. Chatfield and MacEwen stood out in that game but also remember they are older than majority of the players. Age was a factor in that game since all the stand outs were older. I.e. Gaudette was probably the best player but he also happens to be 20 (21 later this year). If you look at the D for example, Chatfield and Irving were basically the 2 oldest (and i think a lot of fans are interested in Irving after he had a strong camp/game). They were 2 of 3 (Jamieson being the 3rd) with a 96 birthday (and Brubacher is a late 95 who i'm sure management would likely keep tracking). Everyone else had a '97 or later birthdate.

Even forwards, you only have 9 (out of both teams) that have a '96 or earlier birthday so again they (Chatfield, MacEwen, etc) were basically playing against younger players. Or basically like U20 team playing against U18 team or imagine highschool Srs playing against Jrs. Its a huge disadvantage/advantage (depending on which side you're on).

After the rookie game, i'm guessing Chatfield MIGHT make Utica but even then its a maybe. I have Brisebois as a lock on the team and i'm guessing most fans do as well. If Chatfield was a lock, we probably wouldn't have signed Sifers to a 2 year deal (to be the 2nd RH D behind Subban). After all, Utica already has 3 "vet" forwards signed and likely will see 2 more forwards with "vet" status being sent down (max 5, since Holm is the only VE likely to be sent down, none of the others qualify as VE).

 

[Josepho]

Molino is underrated, I can easily see him turn into a hansen.

Molino will never have the same "nose for the net", tenacity or vision of Hansen.

I don't see anything worthwhile in his game.