The Prospects Thread XXIII - Stats, Lists in OP

[WTG]

 

[Lindgren]

It's a bit odd to me that Subban isn't his team's MOP nominee. They chose to go with their goalie instead, and he has had a good season (going strictly by stats).

McEneny didn't make it for overeager of the year. Obviously he's no Darren Archibald.

Cassels is nominated for MOP.

 

[WetcoastOrca]

We've got two finalists!
Cole Cassels named a finalist for Eastern Conference OHL Player of the year.

 

[Wilch]

I get the manic argumentative people going over the top adding to their frustration but at points last year McCann was in the conversation when it looked like we were going to be picking 10-12. Feebs, Tiranis, Arms, and BC were adding he was a potential target in those spots, mostly on the outside but not a long shot.

There was a lot of Benning can do no wrong and that didn't help. I still think his top 3 picks were good, 4th is ok, 5th was great, next 2 were not good. At the end of the day if you can get 1-2 NHL players from a draft it was successful.

This team does need another 2004 draft to make up for the 2007 and 2008 swing and a miss drafts.

Towards the draft, the opinions have changed.

They also had Barbashev ahead of McCann for the most part, I thought that was the unanimous understanding at the time.

 

[Nuckles]

Man...looking back at last year's draft, I would have drafted a completely different group of guys at the time (and I think I still prefer this over the group we took).

1st (6th): William Nylander (I still prefer the guy. He's doing well in the AHL so far as an 18 year old, and he's that potential top 6 offensive center we needed/need.)
1st (24th): Ivan Barbashev (He was at the top of my list of available guys at that point. If he had been taken I would have taken Pastrnak or Scherbak.)
2nd: Either Vladislav Kamenev or Roland McKeown (I was somewhat high on both guys, though I would have also been tempted to nab the top rated goalie...though unlikely considering we had Lack, Markstrom, and Eriksson.)
3rd: Either Jack Glover (if taken Kamenev) or Brayden Point (if taken McKeown)
5th: Oskar Lindblom (I had this guy pegged as a late 3rd/early 4th round pick.)
6th: Ondrej Kase
7th: Lukas Sutter


- I also would have made sure we got the 10th overall pick+ for Kesler. In that case I'd take Virtanen/Ritchie/Ehlers (in that order) and would probably also try to trade up from 36th to 30 or 32 to nab Barbashev (I was really high on him, shocked he fell that far, would have probably given up what most people would consider an overpayment to move up 4-6 spots).
- McKeown would be a bad pick, Kamenev pretty solid (in my opinion). I think I would still prefer Kamenev over Demko by a small margin, though I probably would taken McKeown at the time because I drafted two forwards in the 1st.
- Glover would be meh, Point would have been good, I still think both would be better options than Tryamkin (especially Point).
- Forsling turned out to be a steal (so far), but Lindblom has been impressive as well. Tough one for me, would probably prefer Forsling.
- Not even going to talk about the last two picks, I'm not really someone who looks at guys who might be projected to go in that range. I kind of knew a bit about those two guys but it was basically a complete shot in the dark. They will probably be nothing, just like the guys we took in those spots.


(mods: sorry if this is in the wrong thread. Please move to appropriate thread if considered off-topic)

 

[alternate]

Pedan -
Tryamkin -

-McNally
-Hutton

 

[tc 23]

That's cool. Good on Subban.

 

[Bad News Benning]

Slight OT, but the Miller acquisition has predictably come back to bite our ass.

Earlier than I expected too.

On the topic of prospects - he made 4 accelerated movements and 2 of them may end up being jackpots while the other 2 may completely flop.

We'll have to see about that, but I'm hopeful because I love Baerstchi and Pedan has really grown on me.

Miller acquisition hasn't bitten us on the ass. I know people have a very sour taste in their mouth after Luongo/Schneider ordeal but let's not have it cloud our judgement. A lot of foreshadowing going on assuming that Miller will bite us in the ass. So far Miller has won 28 games for us, and has had positive impact on this team. I love lack but how many games do you really think he could've handled this year after what happened down the stretch last season? and that's putting a lot of faith in Markstrom to handle those other starts. This isn't Lack vs Miller, It's a Lack+Miller= a chance to win more games than we lose. Only in Vancouver could we turn having two good goalies into a negative.

Seems like everyone freaks about stuff that hasn't happened yet. People freak out thinking we are going to lose Baertschi on waivers next season or that we won't sign Hutton or Subban, or that we will lose Lack before any of this is even close to happening. Not sure why everyone waste so much energy worrying about ****...A lot can happen between now and even the start of next year that it's silly to worry about.

 

[ginner classic]

The Canucks Q scouting was abysmal. It's quite possible in his first draft after having just joined the organization that Benning was not going to put his faith in any recommendations coming from the scout(s) that were covering that league. If Barbashev and McCann were rated on the same tier, you go with the scouts that have a better record.

Or the simpler explanation, they just liked McCann better. While I really wanted Ehlers, I can't fault anything the Canucks did in the first three picks. They were all justifiable and in the case of Demko....just perfect.

 

[Verviticus]

Miller acquisition hasn't bitten us on the ass. I know people have a very sour taste in their mouth after Luongo/Schneider ordeal but let's not have it cloud our judgement. A lot of foreshadowing going on assuming that Miller will bite us in the ass. So far Miller has won 28 games for us, and has had positive impact on this team. I love lack but how many games do you really think he could've handled this year after what happened down the stretch last season? and that's putting a lot of faith in Markstrom to handle those other starts. This isn't Lack vs Miller, It's a Lack+Miller= a chance to win more games than we lose. Only in Vancouver could we turn having two good goalies into a negative.

do you understand what "contracts" are, or the term "AAV"? how about "salary cap"

 

[vanuck]

The Canucks Q scouting was abysmal. It's quite possible in his first draft after having just joined the organization that Benning was not going to put his faith in any recommendations coming from the scout(s) that were covering that league. If Barbashev and McCann were rated on the same tier, you go with the scouts that have a better record.

Or the simpler explanation, they just liked McCann better. While I really wanted Ehlers, I can't fault anything the Canucks did in the first three picks. They were all justifiable and in the case of Demko....just perfect.

I don't know about that. Barbashev IIRC was projected to go in the same vicinity (late 1st) as where McCann ended up being taken and 1st round picks are usually where the GM makes his call. Plus I doubt Benning wouldn't have scouted both of them himself, even as assistant GM in Boston.

 

[Shink]

Man...looking back at last year's draft, I would have drafted a completely different group of guys at the time (and I think I still prefer this over the group we took).

1st (6th): William Nylander (I still prefer the guy. He's doing well in the AHL so far as an 18 year old, and he's that potential top 6 offensive center we needed/need.)
1st (24th): Ivan Barbashev (He was at the top of my list of available guys at that point. If he had been taken I would have taken Pastrnak or Scherbak.)
2nd: Either Vladislav Kamenev or Roland McKeown (I was somewhat high on both guys, though I would have also been tempted to nab the top rated goalie...though unlikely considering we had Lack, Markstrom, and Eriksson.)
3rd: Either Jack Glover (if taken Kamenev) or Brayden Point (if taken McKeown)
5th: Oskar Lindblom (I had this guy pegged as a late 3rd/early 4th round pick.)
6th: Ondrej Kase
7th: Lukas Sutter


- I also would have made sure we got the 10th overall pick+ for Kesler. In that case I'd take Virtanen/Ritchie/Ehlers (in that order) and would probably also try to trade up from 36th to 30 or 32 to nab Barbashev (I was really high on him, shocked he fell that far, would have probably given up what most people would consider an overpayment to move up 4-6 spots).
- McKeown would be a bad pick, Kamenev pretty solid (in my opinion). I think I would still prefer Kamenev over Demko by a small margin, though I probably would taken McKeown at the time because I drafted two forwards in the 1st.
- Glover would be meh, Point would have been good, I still think both would be better options than Tryamkin (especially Point).
- Forsling turned out to be a steal (so far), but Lindblom has been impressive as well. Tough one for me, would probably prefer Forsling.
- Not even going to talk about the last two picks, I'm not really someone who looks at guys who might be projected to go in that range. I kind of knew a bit about those two guys but it was basically a complete shot in the dark. They will probably be nothing, just like the guys we took in those spots.


(mods: sorry if this is in the wrong thread. Please move to appropriate thread if considered off-topic)

 

[Nuckles]

Quality post. Who needs Tiranis or Feebster when we have Shink

 

[Pip]

Shink the great contributor

 

[WetcoastOrca]

Man...looking back at last year's draft, I would have drafted a completely different group of guys at the time (and I think I still prefer this over the group we took).

1st (6th): William Nylander (I still prefer the guy. He's doing well in the AHL so far as an 18 year old, and he's that potential top 6 offensive center we needed/need.)
1st (24th): Ivan Barbashev (He was at the top of my list of available guys at that point. If he had been taken I would have taken Pastrnak or Scherbak.)
2nd: Either Vladislav Kamenev or Roland McKeown (I was somewhat high on both guys, though I would have also been tempted to nab the top rated goalie...though unlikely considering we had Lack, Markstrom, and Eriksson.)
3rd: Either Jack Glover (if taken Kamenev) or Brayden Point (if taken McKeown)
5th: Oskar Lindblom (I had this guy pegged as a late 3rd/early 4th round pick.)
6th: Ondrej Kase
7th: Lukas Sutter


- I also would have made sure we got the 10th overall pick+ for Kesler. In that case I'd take Virtanen/Ritchie/Ehlers (in that order) and would probably also try to trade up from 36th to 30 or 32 to nab Barbashev (I was really high on him, shocked he fell that far, would have probably given up what most people would consider an overpayment to move up 4-6 spots).
- McKeown would be a bad pick, Kamenev pretty solid (in my opinion). I think I would still prefer Kamenev over Demko by a small margin, though I probably would taken McKeown at the time because I drafted two forwards in the 1st.
- Glover would be meh, Point would have been good, I still think both would be better options than Tryamkin (especially Point).
- Forsling turned out to be a steal (so far), but Lindblom has been impressive as well. Tough one for me, would probably prefer Forsling.
- Not even going to talk about the last two picks, I'm not really someone who looks at guys who might be projected to go in that range. I kind of knew a bit about those two guys but it was basically a complete shot in the dark. They will probably be nothing, just like the guys we took in those spots.


(mods: sorry if this is in the wrong thread. Please move to appropriate thread if considered off-topic)

So far, I prefer McCann and Demko over your picks in those spots. Virtanen was not my pick as I had Ehlers. But between Nylander and Virtanen I'd take Virtanen. I'm not convinced that Nylander is gritty enough to be as effective in the West and, of the two, I think Ehlers is more skilled. But I think any of Ehlers, Virtanen, Nylander or Ritchie would have been solid picks.
And honestly saying you would have got the 10th for Kesler is great but there is no evidence that it was available.
At this point I think McCann may very well end up as good as the 10th pick. His offensive improvement over his draft year has been very positive and his defence was already his strong point.

Of course, early days and who knows how it ends up.
I remember the excitement when we drafted the Board concensus picks Hodgson and Schroeder. These things will take a while to work out.

 

[Nuckles]

So far, I prefer McCann and Demko over your picks in those spots. Virtanen was not my pick as I had Ehlers. But between Nylander and Virtanen I'd take Virtanen. I'm not convinced that Nylander is gritty enough to be as effective in the West and, of the two, I think Ehlers is more skilled. But I think any of Ehlers, Virtanen, Nylander or Ritchie would have been solid picks.
And honestly saying you would have got the 10th for Kesler is great but there is no evidence that it was available.
At this point I think McCann may very well end up as good as the 10th pick. His offensive improvement over his draft year has been very positive and his defence was already his strong point.

Of course, early days and who knows how it ends up.
I remember the excitement when we drafted the Board concensus picks Hodgson and Schroeder. These things will take a while to work out.

People always talk about how you need to be gritty to play well in the West, but if you have enough skill then, quite frankly, it doesn't matter. There are plenty of highly skilled top 6 guys in the West who don't play with much grit.

And yeah, I know the 10th pick could have been completely off the table. I'm still bitter about the return we got. I absolutely think we should have been able to get more (either quality or quantity) if there was a better negotiator than Benning making the trade.

There's nothing wrong with McCann, he's a solid pick for where we were drafting, but there was a clearly better player available at the time who we passed on. I think McCann absolutely has the potential to become a good 2nd liner, but I think Barbashev will become a better player overall. If Barbashev had been taken before our pick then I doubt there would be nearly as much complaining about the McCann pick.

Yep, it will be a long time before we know how well we did in the draft. Virtanen could end up a bust and Tryamkin could become the next Chris Pronger*.

*for the love of the hockey gods, please no one reply thinking I said Tryamkin has Pronger potential. I'm saying unpredictable things can happen.

 

[WetcoastOrca]

People always talk about how you need to be gritty to play well in the West, but if you have enough skill then, quite frankly, it doesn't matter. There are plenty of highly skilled top 6 guys in the West who don't play with much grit.

And yeah, I know the 10th pick could have been completely off the table. I'm still bitter about the return we got. I absolutely think we should have been able to get more (either quality or quantity) if there was a better negotiator than Benning making the trade.

There's nothing wrong with McCann, he's a solid pick for where we were drafting, but there was a clearly better player available at the time who we passed on. I think McCann absolutely has the potential to become a good 2nd liner, but I think Barbashev will become a better player overall. If Barbashev had been taken before our pick then I doubt there would be nearly as much complaining about the McCann pick.

Yep, it will be a long time before we know how well we did in the draft. Virtanen could end up a bust and Tryamkin could become the next Chris Pronger*.

*for the love of the hockey gods, please no one reply thinking I said Tryamkin has Pronger potential. I'm saying unpredictable things can happen.

Stopped reading your post after you said that Tryamkin has Chris Pronger potential%^(&&%^%%&*((%@$%@!!!!!!


My main point on Nylander, was that I saw the choice as between two skilled guys: Nylander vs Ehlers. Of those two I think Ehlers is more skilled and likely to have a bigger impact. And two big physical guys: Ritchie and Virtanen. Of those two I didn't really have a preference at the draft but since then I've been underwhelmed with Ritchie and really intrigued by the way Virtanen plays, despite the numbers not being there. Still too early to say who ends up as the best pick.

 

[VC]

Man...looking back at last year's draft, I would have drafted a completely different group of guys at the time (and I think I still prefer this over the group we took).

1st (6th): William Nylander (I still prefer the guy. He's doing well in the AHL so far as an 18 year old, and he's that potential top 6 offensive center we needed/need.)
1st (24th): Ivan Barbashev (He was at the top of my list of available guys at that point. If he had been taken I would have taken Pastrnak or Scherbak.)
2nd: Either Vladislav Kamenev or Roland McKeown (I was somewhat high on both guys, though I would have also been tempted to nab the top rated goalie...though unlikely considering we had Lack, Markstrom, and Eriksson.)
3rd: Either Jack Glover (if taken Kamenev) or Brayden Point (if taken McKeown)
5th: Oskar Lindblom (I had this guy pegged as a late 3rd/early 4th round pick.)
6th: Ondrej Kase
7th: Lukas Sutter


- I also would have made sure we got the 10th overall pick+ for Kesler. In that case I'd take Virtanen/Ritchie/Ehlers (in that order) and would probably also try to trade up from 36th to 30 or 32 to nab Barbashev (I was really high on him, shocked he fell that far, would have probably given up what most people would consider an overpayment to move up 4-6 spots).
- McKeown would be a bad pick, Kamenev pretty solid (in my opinion). I think I would still prefer Kamenev over Demko by a small margin, though I probably would taken McKeown at the time because I drafted two forwards in the 1st.
- Glover would be meh, Point would have been good, I still think both would be better options than Tryamkin (especially Point).
- Forsling turned out to be a steal (so far), but Lindblom has been impressive as well. Tough one for me, would probably prefer Forsling.
- Not even going to talk about the last two picks, I'm not really someone who looks at guys who might be projected to go in that range. I kind of knew a bit about those two guys but it was basically a complete shot in the dark. They will probably be nothing, just like the guys we took in those spots.


(mods: sorry if this is in the wrong thread. Please move to appropriate thread if considered off-topic)

Draft Gripe Thread

I was firmly in the Nylander/Ehlers camp though I do see the value that Virtanen brings to a team. If the Canucks got the 10th pick, I wanted Barbashev there so yes I was disappointed when he wasn't taken at 24. I figured Barbashev would of been gone by 24 and had wanted Larkin/McCann at that spot it is bitter sweet. I was somewhat high on Demko, had him as a late first and happy with getting the top rated goalie in the draft. After that I didn't follow that closely.

 

[Jyrki21]

The Canucks Q scouting was abysmal. It's quite possible in his first draft after having just joined the organization that Benning was not going to put his faith in any recommendations coming from the scout(s) that were covering that league. If Barbashev and McCann were rated on the same tier, you go with the scouts that have a better record.

The Canucks weren't scouting these guys in a vacuum. There were piles of data/assessments on both guys out there -- you frankly don't really need to rely on your own scouts at all, particularly for the upper-echelon players, as the various thought experiments have shown (e.g. drafting purely off Central Scouting's list produces better results than paying the Canucks' scouts).

 

[Szechwan]

Meh, I was thinking the same thing Shink was. That entire post was a waste of time and was 100% hindsight. Literally contributed nothing but fanciful "what could have been's."

I mean really.. if you're going to re-do the Kesler trade in your imagination, why not hold out for Vatanen or Lindholm? Amateur.

 

[Pip]

Meh, I was thinking the same thing Shink was. That entire post was a waste of time and was 100% hindsight. Literally contributed nothing but fanciful "what could have been's."

I mean really.. if you're going to re-do the Kesler trade in your imagination, why not hold out for Vatanen or Lindholm? Amateur.

It's not really hindsight if he was thinking that way at the draft.

 

[Ernie]

Meh, I was thinking the same thing Shink was. That entire post was a waste of time and was 100% hindsight. Literally contributed nothing but fanciful "what could have been's."

I mean really.. if you're going to re-do the Kesler trade in your imagination, why not hold out for Vatanen or Lindholm? Amateur.

Yup, and this thread is usually full of good info, best to keep it on the current prospects and limit the huge tangents.

 

[WetcoastOrca]

Yup, and this thread is usually full of good info, best to keep it on the current prospects and limit the huge tangents.

Speaking of which, there hasn't been much info on our prospects recently. With playoffs getting started I'm intrigued to see who steps up their games.
McCann and Cassels could be set for long runs and a potential head to head. It would be nice to see Virtanen go on a run as well.

The player I'm most intrigued to watch is Cole Cassels, finalist for player of the year award. His style of play seems like it should translate well to the playoffs.

 

[coastal_nuck]

Meh, I was thinking the same thing Shink was. That entire post was a waste of time and was 100% hindsight. Literally contributed nothing but fanciful "what could have been's."

I mean really.. if you're going to re-do the Kesler trade in your imagination, why not hold out for Vatanen or Lindholm? Amateur.

Not sure how his post was based solely on hindsight if he thought that way during the draft as well. Nothing wrong with it in my opinion.

During the draft, I was peaved that we picked Virtanen. Sure, he has the right tools but I was really hoping that we picked Nylander or Ehlers as well. Forget the speculation that their styles won't work in the Western conference. They wouldn't be the only smaller sized skilled players to succeed here. It's still too early to reference what has happened since the draft as evidence to support that assertion but Ehlers and Nylander certainly haven't slowed down since then. I would pick either of those players before Virtanen today.

Same goes for McCann. I think he's progressed very well this year and in all likelihood, will be a good player in the NHL. So it's hard to knock this one in hindsight. However, at the draft? I was gunning hard for Barbashev and still would today.

Regardless though, we didn't. I think it was a mistake to not have selected Ehlers/Nylander/Barbashev but I digress. I'll happily be proven wrong here though. I'll cheer for them as they are Canucks now and hope that they succeed as solid NHL'ers deserving of their draft positions.

 

[Startel]

When do the playoffs start for the OHL?