Have the canucks quietly built up a solid prospect pool?

[Hoghandler]

Can you elaborate on the treatment of players in the NHL vs KHL?

One of the running themes on the podcast 'spittin chicklets' is about how crappy NHL'ers experiences have been going over to play in the KHL. Multiple stories about how much worse the treatment is there and having to travel from shit hole town to shit hole town. They love getting into it on the podcast if you're interested in hearing more about it.

How many NHL teams consistently do better than "the stupidest possible system of picking players" you refer to? I'm genuinely interested to know.

None. Go to any other section of this site and you hear about how their stupid management team can't out draft the posters on their own board. They just don't realise it's survivorship bias leading them to that conclusion. 10 posters will show they have done a superior job, while the other 40 aren't as eager to post their results. Gives the impression that uninformed posters will do a better job than trained experts. Sometimes they will do better, often not. It's simply a numbers game.

 

[PuckMunchkin]

None. Go to any other section of this site and you hear about how their stupid management team can't out draft the posters on their own board. They just don't realise it's survivorship bias leading them to that conclusion. 10 posters will show they have done a superior job, while the other 40 aren't as eager to post their results. Gives the impression that uninformed posters will do a better job than trained experts. Sometimes they will do better, often not. It's simply a numbers game.

You should look in to the system in question by @Melvin before you trash it.

 

[Hoghandler]

You should look in to the system in question by @Melvin before you trash it.

Before I trash it?

 

[Bojack Horvatman]

This type of argument has been in existence for decades. Previously the argument was that if you follow Central Scouting's rankings the Canucks would have drafted a lot better.

How many NHL teams consistently do better than "the stupidest possible system of picking players" you refer to? I'm genuinely interested to know.

This was literally the stupidest way I could think of for picking players.

Whom Would Toddler of Drafted?

I thought it would be interesting to compare Benning's 1st round picks to the lowest bar possible. Give a toddler a flash card with the top 5 left on Bob Mckenzie's draft rankings and have him pick by inee minee miny mo. To simiulate this I used a random number generator. Each player was assigned a number from 1-5 depending on where they were ranked among Bob's list.

Toddler picks:

Haydn Fleury
Brock Boeser
Matthew Tkachuk
Michael Rasmussen
Noah Dobson

So far Benning has 2 1st liners\top pairing D while the Toddler also has 2. Benning's prospect wins because of Hughes as, he is better than the toddler's other prospects.

The Toddler picked Boldy in this years draft. Is it Better than Benning's drafting? No, but it isn't much worse.

 

[mossey3535]

I'm not claiming anything. I'm contesting a claim for which no evidence was provided.

Yet you continually make counter claims without attempting to provide your own evidence.

You like throwing the phrases strong or weak correlation around, but you never mention what that correlation is, or provide stats.

Your arguments mostly consist of opposing another poster's view and demanding that they provide evidence to back it up, but you yourself never come armed with much if any.

 

[mossey3535]

Drafting is a crapshoot.

Benning's greatest strength is almost universally recognized to be drafting.

His demonstrated ability in almost every other aspect except maybe RFA contract signings (with the exception of inexplicable raises to guys like Granlund) has been poor.

We've been in the basement of the league for half a decade - the fact that our prospect pool strength is at question by anyone is a massive failure.

You could easily argue the Ducks have a better prospect pool outside of EP, and they've missed the playoffs once in the same time frame.

 

[VanJack]

Other than Boeser, Pettersson and Hughes (the latter two basically falling into their laps), the rest of the drafting has been 'iffy' at best. They're still banking heavily on Demko, but general consensus is that Juolevi and Virtanen were 'mistakes' given where they were picked. And McCann has rounded into a useful player, but who can forget that David Pastrnak was the next guy picked in that 2014 draft.

Once you get out of the first round, the results basically fall off the table. Gaudette was a nice find in the fifth round and it looks like Madden might be a keeper from the third round. But unless Lind and Gadjovich pick up their games; or Trymakin makes a triumphant return from the KHL, most of the rest are a dog's breakfast.

In fact the Canucks have had better success signing un-drafted UFA's than they have uncovering gems in later rounds. So I agree with mossey3535....drafting has been overrated.

 

[Hoghandler]

We've been in the basement of the league for half a decade - the fact that our prospect pool strength is at question by anyone is a massive failure.

We were in the basement for 4 years - though 30% of the league finished below the Canucks last season. If you want to see how the Canucks have done re-stocking the pipeline during that time, compare their 22 and under talent to see how the rest of the league looks in that age bracket.

If it doesn't look good, then it should be in question. I haven't looked at every other team, but at quick glance, things look pretty damn good. Especially without having the luxury of drafting any higher than 5.

 

[Bad Goalie]

The Lind and Gadjovich stuff is pretty funny. Moreso Lind due to the fact he's a cautionary tale on people losing their crap on the Höglander pick.

Not saying they're the same player, or anything, just the comments like "I can't believe this guy didn't go in the first round! What a steal." Obviously there are reasons guys don't go in the 1st.

Brisebois may go down in history as the prospect most hyped by the organization for no good reason. It's actually become a punch line. At least Brandon Reid was really fast.

I have told you that as far as the prospects in Utica are concerned the word coming to Vancouver and to the fan base has been smoke blown up the ass of the Vancouver fan base by Benning through the work of Pseudo GM Johnson.
Thus:
Brisebois is having a great season in Utica.
Juloevi os playing some great hockey.
Chatfield is playing very well. A pleasant surprise.
It's all been hype because he knows nobody beyond a few Canucks die-hards has ever even seen them play.
Dahlen is close to NHL ready. Just needs to become a little more aggressive and get used to the smaller ice surface.

We know Benning hasn't even been to Utica until just before this season ended since the 2014-15 playoff run!

Johnson was watching them on TV in Nashville most of his 1st season.

Even when he started coming to home games he kept such a low profile it was unlikely more than a handful of fans would have known him if he had a seat next to them.

I keep up with the evening news and I don't recollect ever having seen one of our sportscasters actually talking to him on the air. They just say according to Comets GM Johnson "..............."

 

[Hit the post]

I have told you that as far as the prospects in Utica are concerned the word coming to Vancouver and to the fan base has been smoke blown up the ass of the Vancouver fan base by Benning through the work of Pseudo GM Johnson.
Thus:
Brisebois is having a great season in Utica.
Juloevi os playing some great hockey.
Chatfield is playing very well. A pleasant surprise.
It's all been hype because he knows nobody beyond a few Canucks die-hards has ever even seen them play.
Dahlen is close to NHL ready. Just needs to become a little more aggressive and get used to the smaller ice surface.

We know Benning hasn't even been to Utica until just before this season ended since the 2014-15 playoff run!

Johnson was watching them on TV in Nashville most of his 1st season.

Even when he started coming to home games he kept such a low profile it was unlikely more than a handful of fans would have known him if he had a seat next to them.

I keep up with the evening news and I don't recollect ever having seen one of our sportscasters actually talking to him on the air. They just say according to Comets GM Johnson "..............."

I'd suggest you send in your resume to Benning for the GM job but you're not qualified as you've actually seen the Comets play in person.

 

[Melvin]

You should look in to the system in question by @Melvin before you trash it.

I feel like I keep getting alerts to posts I'm mentioned in where I can't see the quoted post. I'm not sure if this is good or bad.

Please let me know if someone makes an intelligent argument with actual coherent points and I'll be happy to address it.

 

[ProstheticConscience]

I feel like I keep getting alerts to posts I'm mentioned in where I can't see the quoted post. I'm not sure if this is good or bad.

Please let me know if someone makes an intelligent argument with actual coherent points and I'll be happy to address it.

You're not missing much.

 

[Bleach Clean]

Unfortunately you don't get 2 picks. MS will tell you Merkley was his first choice.

It's not 'talking ****' to look at draft lists. All of the picks are reasonable and defensible. The point is to show it's not so easy to find elite talents just because you have some good picks. Sometimes you need to tip your cap to a guy you otherwise think is a 'moron'.

Benning can draft Boeser and Pettersson and still be considered a moron overall. These aren't mutually exclusive concepts.

I had Konecny or Boeser for that draft. Why? Because the order hadn't played out yet. It's likely the same for MS here. Without naming his pick at the time it was made, you could continue to criticize his options. Wrongfully. That's not a genuine argument.

The real question is: How did he isolate Boeser? He doesn't get paid millions of dollars to do so. He hasn't thoroughly scouted the player. He probably knows far less about the player than VAN management does... yet, he still does as well. How?

 

[bandwagonesque]

Yet you continually make counter claims without attempting to provide your own evidence.

You like throwing the phrases strong or weak correlation around, but you never mention what that correlation is, or provide stats.

Your arguments mostly consist of opposing another poster's view and demanding that they provide evidence to back it up, but you yourself never come armed with much if any.

Again, I'm not making any claim. I'm asking someone who did to provide evidence to substantiate it.

 

[PuckMunchkin]

I feel like I keep getting alerts to posts I'm mentioned in where I can't see the quoted post. I'm not sure if this is good or bad.

Please let me know if someone makes an intelligent argument with actual coherent points and I'll be happy to address it.

Sorry. No intelligent argument here.

 

[The Drop]

There's zero argument that can be made that the Canucks have drafted well.

Even if it was average, Benning's greatest strength was apparently amateur scouting ( and labelled as a draft guru) and so he's failed at that as well.

The 2015 and 2016 drafts look like we'll have Boeser and Gaudette to show for and that's with a 5th overall pick. And ZERO second round picks in either of those drafts

 

[F A N]

There's zero argument that can be made that the Canucks have drafted well.

They have drafted two straight Calder finalists. There is a chance that Hughes makes it 3. That's without a top 3 pick. Which teams can boast that in the past 10 years? I don't think the Canucks have drafted well per se but I won't say there's zero argument.

 

[megatron]

They have drafted two straight Calder finalists. There is a chance that Hughes makes it 3. That's without a top 3 pick. Which teams can boast that in the past 10 years? I don't think the Canucks have drafted well per se but I won't say there's zero argument.

I believe hes taking into account the full body of work rather than doing the equivalent of taking nice soundbites out of a dull interview.

 

[F A N]

I believe hes taking into account the full body of work rather than doing the equivalent of taking nice soundbites out of a dull interview.

Is there only one way to evaluate a team's drafting? His statement was "there's zero argument."

If you have a choice between a GM who absolutely nails his first round picks but nothing more vs a GM who is hit and miss with his first round picks but drafts pretty well overall in the later rounds who would you pick? It's been discussed before. It's definitely a worthy discussion IMO.

The age old measuring stick for amateur scouts is to get at least 2-3 NHL players out of every draft. I think that is fair. Every GM we have ever had here have certainly had drafts that produced nothing. So if you can consistently draft 2-3 NHL players out of every draft then I think you have drafted well. If you don't accomplish that, you better hit on your first round pick.

At the end of they day, Canucks fans care about drafting stars starring for the Vancouver Canucks. How many of us would call the 2013 draft a bad draft when we drafted Horvat? How many of us like the 2014 draft despite drafting potentially 5 legitimate NHL players? Ideally, you hit on your first round pick and then get another player or two in the later rounds.

If EP is going to be as good as we hope he will be very few here is going to care if everyone else we drafted in 2017 is a bust. But if Hughes isn't close to being as good as the next few Dmen drafted, how many of us care that Woo and Madden become good but not star NHL players? My guess is most prefer to have the much better Dman instead.

 

[Mr. Canucklehead]

There's zero argument that can be made that the Canucks have drafted well.

Even if it was average, Benning's greatest strength was apparently amateur scouting ( and labelled as a draft guru) and so he's failed at that as well.

The 2015 and 2016 drafts look like we'll have Boeser and Gaudette to show for and that's with a 5th overall pick. And ZERO second round picks in either of those drafts

Well. I disagree that there’s zero argument to be made that he’s drafted well. Sure there’s a bit of a “chicken and the egg” argument about good drafting being linked to high picks being linked to poor seasons for the team, but the Canucks have historically been lousy at drafting great talent even with high picks - so hitting on those is still important. Boeser and Pettersson have legitimate claims to being some of our best first round picks in franchise history, and both were finalists for the Calder Trophy - something that the Canucks hadn’t had since Mattias Ohlund’s rookie year.

He’s had some good drafts, some average and a truly awful one - but I’d still say that puts him on the upper end of our drafting GMs.

To answer the thread question of have we built up a good prospect pool - I would say not yet. We have absolutely nailed a few crucial picks which has given us some high quality young talent which is extremely important, and a couple of our depth picks have pleasantly surprised as well - although not many after the 2014 draft. However, our other depth round picks have yet to really establish anything at even the minor pro level as evidenced by Utica’s struggles. IMO once that starts to happen, we can talk about having strong prospect depth.

 

[Lindgren]

The Canucks should have a better prospect pool because they should have been acquiring draft picks in trades at deadlines, and not giving up picks in other deals.

There have been obvious misses in the draft, and there have been a couple of big hits. I'm okay with that, but not with the lack of quantity.

 

[The Drop]

Well. I disagree that there’s zero argument to be made that he’s drafted well. Sure there’s a bit of a “chicken and the egg” argument about good drafting being linked to high picks being linked to poor seasons for the team, but the Canucks have historically been lousy at drafting great talent even with high picks - so hitting on those is still important. Boeser and Pettersson have legitimate claims to being some of our best first round picks in franchise history, and both were finalists for the Calder Trophy - something that the Canucks hadn’t had since Mattias Ohlund’s rookie year.

He’s had some good drafts, some average and a truly awful one - but I’d still say that puts him on the upper end of our drafting GMs.

To answer the thread question of have we built up a good prospect pool - I would say not yet. We have absolutely nailed a few crucial picks which has given us some high quality young talent which is extremely important, and a couple of our depth picks have pleasantly surprised as well - although not many after the 2014 draft. However, our other depth round picks have yet to really establish anything at even the minor pro level as evidenced by Utica’s struggles. IMO once that starts to happen, we can talk about having strong prospect depth.

He deserves all the credit in the world for hitting it out of the park on Boeser and Pettersson. Also looks like Hughes is a great pick. Gaudette appears to be a NHLer and Tyler Madden also looks like a good pick. Demko looks to be projecting well.

Outside of those players, I don't see much in terms of prospect depth. They haven't had a single player from the 2016 draft play and NHL game. (which prob will be broken after Juolevi plays this year).

 

[ChilliBilly]

Where did this happen?

I would be shocked if he doesn't come back to the NHL in a year. Way too much money to leave on the table. Not to mention NHL players are treated so much better than guys in Russia.

Would be nice if he brings Podkolzin with him. Add a couple more physical specimens to the mix.

Can't. Podkolzin has 2 years left, Try only one. We could easily see Tryamkin here for the end of the season, and have the same thing happen next season with Podkolzin. (We can dream, can't we?)

 

[The Drop]

Can't. Podkolzin has 2 years left, Try only one. We could easily see Tryamkin here for the end of the season, and have the same thing happen next season with Podkolzin. (We can dream, can't we?)

I believe Podkolzin can be bought out of his final year of his contract but said he wanted to finish out his contract though.

 

[ChilliBilly]

I believe Podkolzin can be bought out of his final year of his contract but said he wanted to finish out his contract though.

Pod has said he will play out his contract.