Prospect Info: Who is Canucks #4 prospect?

[deckercky]

All this will tell us is that "wow...Canucks have some pretty good players available still at #15!, and actually have 25 prospects worth mentioning!". That, and rough relative values. Looking at the voting percentages, it's pretty obvious that the Canucks have 3 standout prospects, then a pile of good prospects that each have different advantages and disadvantages compared to each other.

 

[LeftCoast]

IMO, there is a clear top 3 (Horvat, Shinkaruk, Virtanen).

After that there is a next 4, any of which could end up as good or better than the top 3, but each has a risk associated.

Linden Vey - Draft pedigree is over rated here. Vey has consistently improved his production at every level, but will not get his due until (if/when) he has a break out season in the NHL. Has been a PPG player at the AHL level for 2 seasons, but was held back behind depth in LA.

Dane Fox - Undrafted, was ranked in the mid-second round in his draft year. Broke out as an over age junior, so comparables are difficult. Has incredible hands, NHL size and a decent 2-way game.

Brendan Gaunce - put up good, but not eye popping numbers in the OHL. Said to lack elite scoring skill. Has a very NHL ready frame and a mature 2-way game.

Thatcher Demko - it's hard to compare goalies to skaters. He was the top ranked and highest drafted player at his position in the draft. May be the best of the bunch, but will take a while to develop.

The next grouping includes Jensen and McCann - I put them in their own tier because while they may end up as good as any of the 4 above, they have little chance of reaching the expectations of the top 3.

 

[SighReally]

We're not talking about evidence that he's a top 6 forward, though.....

"Jensen has a lowered bust factor"
"Jensen has a very good top 6 upside"

These aren't big leaps at all-- I'd say a five game (think it's a little more than that) stretch where he was on fire at the NHL level in his first real stint is some evidence of these (pretty tame) suggestions.

He certainly had top 6 upside when he was drafted, and after catching fire in the SEL, then playing inconsistent hockey, playing inconsistent hockey at the AHL level and then catching fire, and then this stretch, sure he's proven that he's got consistency issues, but I don't think you can argue that it's unreasonable to suggest that he does have top 6 upside.

The fact that he floundered the rest of the way in the NHL while playing a Top 6 role without the Sedins and his less than stellar performance in the first half of the AHL season suggests otherwise both about his Top 6 upside and thus, his bust factor since he will most likely not make the NHL as a Bottom 6 forward. If he can't create offense without the Sedins (and let's be real, Byron Bitz scored goals with them) he's not going to be a Top 6 forward. I want to see more evidence of his offensive abilities firstly in the AHL (consistency) and in the NHL (able to create offense without help of good to elite players).

So...what is 'evidence' in your eyes? Saying McCann has better tools? If Jensen's actual performance isn't evidence, then I expect some magical even more objective form of evidence to be developed by you, or I expect you to stop talking about prospects altogether.

Projecting McCann as a player who was just drafted and projecting Jensen as a player as a player 2 years after his draft is vastly different. The only tools and evidence of evaluation of McCann is only his years in juniors and, taking into account his skillset, pedigree and input from those who watch the games (i.e. his GM's evaluation on CanucksArmy), one can make a projection of what sort of player he can be. Obviously we can't predict accurately how he's going to perform since performance usually isn't a linear function but our evaluation of him is based off what he's done so far. It is the same with Jensen but now we have two extra data sets to work with and these two data sets aren't glowing recommendations. Top 6 players don't spend half of a year in Utica floundering nor do they flounder when given a top 6 role without elite players.

So yes, the 'evidence' is solely based on a player's performance. We have less evidence to work with McCann since obviously he was just drafted but Jensen we have more of and make a more precise evaluation of his play and future projection. His performance right now is middling at best, pretty bad for a first rounder at worst. So there you go.

Some people really can't take any criticism at prospects who are really floundering.

 

[Shareefruck]

The fact that he floundered the rest of the way in the NHL while playing a Top 6 role without the Sedins and his less than stellar performance in the first half of the AHL season suggests otherwise both about his Top 6 upside and thus, his bust factor since he will most likely not make the NHL as a Bottom 6 forward. If he can't create offense without the Sedins (and let's be real, Byron Bitz scored goals with them) he's not going to be a Top 6 forward. I want to see more evidence of his offensive abilities firstly in the AHL (consistency) and in the NHL (able to create offense without help of good to elite players).

The fact that he couldn't produce at a top six level in his first NHL year suggests that he doesn't have top 6 upside?

He caught fire when he played with Burrows and Henrik, he cooled down when he played with the Twins (and when the Twins started playing awful, at that-- what pace were they on in the second half? Like.. 30-40 points?). Burrows was a 25 point guy next to them last year. Even if you think they're still 70 point players, the Sedins are no longer guys who you can put any plug with and expect them to be spoonfed twenty goals.

All a guy needs to do is show flashes of something in order to have upside as "that thing". You seem to be asking more for a guarantee.

Jensen looks like he's confidently better than a 4th liner CURRENTLY. I'd say that limits his bust potential. During his streak with Sedin/Burrows, he didn't look like he was being carried by either of them so much as he seemed to spark the other two.

And listen, I'm actually of the opinion that Jensen is nowhere near McCann as far as prospects go. I don't see his ceiling as ever being more than a lower to middle tier second liner. But he does project reasonably safely to be a player at the NHL level and he does have decent offensive upside. I don't think the sky's the limit for him, but I think he's doing fine.