Prospect Info: Vancouver Canucks Top 25 Prospects 2015 - #5

[Addison Rae]

Cole Cassels

 

[ugghhh]

Cassels. It scares me that Corrado has 7 and Brisebois has 0. Sorry but Corrado is not a better prospect than him.

Corrado is a decent AHL defender who has NHL games under his bet. He's shown flashes of NHL potential.

Brisebois might never even reach that point.

 

[MS]

I think he's too old to be considered a prospect by HF standards.

Cassels for me as well.

He's 24 years old, not a prospect anymore according to HF's rules.

But Grenier is?

They're the same age and draft year, Kenins is just born a couple months earlier in the same year. Seems ridiculous.

Edit - and Friesen is listed here despite being older than Kenins and so is Cannata who is more than a full year older.

 

[StrictlyCommercial]

Cassels. It scares me that Corrado has 7 and Brisebois has 0. Sorry but Corrado is not a better prospect than him.

We'll find out pretty quickly whether Corrado sticks in the NHL. I'll admit he's taken longer to get here than i originally expected, but I still rate him very highly (above even Hutton, the other prospect I've been talking up for far too long).

 

[Verviticus]

Cassels. It scares me that Corrado has 7 and Brisebois has 0. Sorry but Corrado is not a better prospect than him.

uh... how? the only thing brisebois has going for him over corrado is that he was drafted by a different gm.

neill might even be a better prospect than brisebois

 

[Pip]

Cassels. It scares me that Corrado has 7 and Brisebois has 0. Sorry but Corrado is not a better prospect than him.

I don't understand.corrado is the better prospect...

 

[banme*]

uh... how? the only thing brisebois has going for him over corrado is that he was drafted by a different gm.

neill might even be a better prospect than brisebois

If you have watched both of these guys play, it's pretty clear Brisebois is a better hockey player than Neill.

 

[MS]

But Grenier is?

They're the same age and draft year, Kenins is just born a couple months earlier in the same year. Seems ridiculous.

Edit - and Friesen is listed here despite being older than Kenins and so is Cannata who is more than a full year older.

Continuing on from this, prospect criteria is as below :

A player will be considered a prospect until he meets the following criteria:

If a prospect is a skater (forward, defenseman) and has played in 65 NHL games or more before the completion of the season of his 24th birthday; or, if a goaltender has played in 45 NHL games before the completion of the season of his 24th birthday, that player will be considered graduated to the NHL. Conversely, if a player completes the season of his 24th birthday without passing those milestones, then that player will no longer be considered a prospect by Hockey’s Future, regardless of the player’s status with his NHL club.

An NCAA player who signs his first contract at or above the age of 22 has three years to meet the above criteria (65/45), while those NCAA players that turn pro under the age of 22 will be subjected to the criteria above.

European players who sign their first NHL contract at or above the age of 22 have three seasons from the time they sign that contract to meet the above criteria. Those European players below the age of 22 that have signed a NHL contract will be subjected to the criteria in section one.

Section one is the meat of the criteria as it will govern the majority of players that vie for a NHL roster spot. Sections two and three are simply an acknowledgement that some prospects arrive on the scene a bit later than their peers, thus needing some time past their 24th birthday to develop into an NHL-caliber player.

Bolded is relevant.

Based on this, Kenins is absolutely still a prospect by HF criteria.

Cannata and Friesen are not.

 

[VC]

Continuing on from this, prospect criteria is as below :



Bolded is relevant.

Based on this, Kenins is absolutely still a prospect by HF criteria.

Cannata and Friesen are not.

I was the one that pointed out that Kenins was too old. I noticed the part about college players but missed the part about European players. :facepalm

So I guess it is add Kenins back and remove Grenier, Cannata and Friesen.

 

[Nuckles]

Continuing on from this, prospect criteria is as below :



Bolded is relevant.

Based on this, Kenins is absolutely still a prospect by HF criteria.

Cannata and Friesen are not.

I was the one that pointed out that Kenins was too old. I noticed the part about college players but missed the part about European players. :facepalm

So I guess it is add Kenins back and remove Grenier, Cannata and Friesen.

Noted.

 

[Lemmiwinks]

Cassels. Wanted him at #4. Seems so much more likely to be a player than Shink, albeit with less offensive upside.

Next up:
Shink
Frankie
Pedan

 

[DL44]

I was the one that pointed out that Kenins was too old. I noticed the part about college players but missed the part about European players. :facepalm

So I guess it is add Kenins back and remove Grenier, Cannata and Friesen.

Noted.

So would this be a good time to state... a big CONGRATS to Grenier, Cannata and Friesen for no longer being prospects!

 

[thefeebster]

Cassels. It scares me that Corrado has 7 and Brisebois has 0. Sorry but Corrado is not a better prospect than him.

And the reasoning behind this statement is?

Corrado's progression is where we hope Brisebois to be in a couple years. If he was left in Utica like he should have been and played the full season, he was on pace to score 35 points, which is more than respectable for his stage of development. Plus he has shown the ability to play at the NHL level. Very few weaknesses in his game and still has top 4 potential IMO.

I've seen people say he has plateaued. Just no. Sauve is an example of a guy who plateaued in the Q and simply never got any better. Corrado has developed year over year.

 

[StrictlyCommercial]

I would've voted Kenins here, but i'll give you a pass Nuckles. Isnt Grenier 23.

 

[VC]

I would've voted Kenins here, but i'll give you a pass Nuckles. Isnt Grenier 23.

He is 24 before the start of next season... that I don't know where the leaves him.

 

[Tobi Wan Kenobi]

And the reasoning behind this statement is?

Corrado's progression is where we hope Brisebois to be in a couple years. If he was left in Utica like he should have been and played the full season, he was on pace to score 35 points, which is more than respectable for his stage of development. Plus he has shown the ability to play at the NHL level. Very few weaknesses in his game and still has top 4 potential IMO.

I've seen people say he has plateaued. Just no. Sauve is an example of a guy who plateaued in the Q and simply never got any better. Corrado has developed year over year.

He's more composed with the puck. Has a better stick and has the frame to put on weight. There's more offensive upside with Brisebois and I see a better all around defenseman. I don't care about what Corrado has accomplished or hasn't. I'm looking at a better player when I watch the two. I don't see Corrado being anything more than a 4 and I see more upside with Brisebois. He reminds me of Tanev defensively but with more offence. Tanev is a 2 imo. I could see that with Brisebois. He's the type of guy you stick a dynamite offensive defenseman with that could potentially be a top pair. I don't see that with Corrado and I think a lot of people will see it that way, and soon.

 

[Addison Rae]

He's more composed with the puck. Has a better stick and has the frame to put on weight. There's more offensive upside with Brisebois and I see a better all around defenseman. I don't care about what Corrado has accomplished or hasn't. I'm looking at a better player when I watch the two. I don't see Corrado being anything more than a 4 and I see more upside with Brisebois. He reminds me of Tanev defensively but with more offence. Tanev is a 2 imo. I could see that with Brisebois. He's the type of guy you stick a dynamite offensive defenseman with that could potentially be a top pair. I don't see that with Corrado and I think a lot of people will see it that way, and soon.

If this were the case don't you think he'd go higher in the draft?

 

[pitseleh]

If this were the case don't you think he'd go higher in the draft?

I can't speak to this specific example, but it is pretty common that new prospects get overrated and older, more established prospects get underrated because it is easier to stand out in junior than in pro leagues. People tend to forget that the pro league prospect looked just as good when they were playing junior. I think you have to take general sentiment with that grain of salt in mind.

Its the same way people pencil in a half dozen or more of the team's best prospects as top-6/top-4 players in future lineups, forgetting that for even the best drafting teams only a small number of players will ever make it to that level.

 

[Numbers]

Clendening is going to play his way into Canucks top 4 next year I think. Under the radar guy, but he is one of the Canucks best prospects.

 

[shortshorts]

Gaunce should be going #1.

 

[MS]

I was the one that pointed out that Kenins was too old. I noticed the part about college players but missed the part about European players. :facepalm

So I guess it is add Kenins back and remove Grenier, Cannata and Friesen.

Noted.

Grenier would still seem to be a prospect. Wording is vague.

 

[Proto]

Cassels, then Shinkaruk for me. Then I'm going off the board and voting for Subban until he gets picked

 

[Tobi Wan Kenobi]

If this were the case don't you think he'd go higher in the draft?

His offence is untapped but it's definitely there. If he wasn't playing on basically the worst team in the CHL he would've gone higher.

 

[timw33]

Cassels really upped his stock this year.

 

[thefeebster]

He's more composed with the puck. Has a better stick and has the frame to put on weight. There's more offensive upside with Brisebois and I see a better all around defenseman. I don't care about what Corrado has accomplished or hasn't. I'm looking at a better player when I watch the two. I don't see Corrado being anything more than a 4 and I see more upside with Brisebois. He reminds me of Tanev defensively but with more offence. Tanev is a 2 imo. I could see that with Brisebois. He's the type of guy you stick a dynamite offensive defenseman with that could potentially be a top pair. I don't see that with Corrado and I think a lot of people will see it that way, and soon.

You don't care what Corrado has accomplished or hasn't? Lol then how are we analyzing players in this annual poll?

Your points are arguable so I don't see a reason to be scared that Corrado has votes and Brisebois doesn't (or didn't at the time, looks like he has one now). There is nothing that stands out to put Brisebois as the undoubtedly better player, as you imply with the original comment. More composed with the puck? Arguable. Both have their composed and panicky moments. Better Stick? Yes, he is not physically strong enough to use his body, so he does use his stick much more and does it well. A Frame to put on weight? That's assuming Frankie doesn't? Do you remember him when he was drafted? He put on quite a bit of muscle and he's not done yet. More offensive upside? Arguable. Brisebois is the better passer on the PP, Corrado hands down wins on his shot. They are different. Corrado is also much more confident in carrying the puck up the ice. Brisebois showed issues with this in the games i saw.

I don't dispute the Tanev stylistic comparison, as i used it myself in the Brisebois thread after watching him several times. But at the OHL level, Corrado also showed the same potential and I likened him to a more assertive natured Tanev with a better physical game and better shot. IMO, both have top 4 upside, even Benning said top 4 for Brisebois.