Prospect Info: Who is the Canucks #3 prospect?

[alternate]

Yeah, Lack is pretty far down the list for me. Coming off a year of injury and playing a position as currently devalued as it is, I dunno. Hard to rate him ahead of anyone that has a realistic shot at being top 6 forward or top 4 dman. All ten guys are more important than goalie, as far as developing from within imo and that pushes Lack down my list.

 

[Hammer79]

So? he was drafted in the 2nd round, and had 107 pts in 87 games in his draft year and 132 PIMs! he's clearly Canucks #1 prospect. Why would GMMG pick him so high otherwise?

I like Mallet, but he's not this high on the list at this point.

How has Jensen fallen off?

http://www.hockeydb.com/ihdb/stats/pdisplay.php?pid=128613

4 points in 20 AHL games with a -9 . He clearly needs to step it up next year and at this point deserves to be pushed down this list a few spots.

 

[jimmythescot]

Eddie Lack. Seems like people like the new shiny toys.

I'm worried about his flexibility after his surgery. If he's fine he would have been my second pick. Now I'm probably not going to pick him until 6 or so.

We'll find out soon enough.

 

[canuck4life16]

I like Mallet, but he's not this high on the list at this point.



http://www.hockeydb.com/ihdb/stats/pdisplay.php?pid=128613

4 points in 20 AHL games with a -9 . He clearly needs to step it up next year and at this point deserves to

be pushed down this list a few spots.

i think he was injuried so that might be a factor

 

[kilgore111]

I think KAssasin should be the other three you mention......a potential power forward that can score, fight, hit

He's not in the discussion here as not defined as a "prospect", not one of the choices. To me Kassian is looking like one of those who have a decent combination of size and talent but he still has not IMO put it all together yet. For me this coming year will show whether he has it to be more than a dime a dozen big body. Hope he does but so far it has not been there

 

[701]

He's not in the discussion here as not defined as a "prospect", not one of the choices. To me Kassian is looking like one of those who have a decent combination of size and talent but he still has not IMO put it all together yet. For me this coming year will show whether he has it to be more than a dime a dozen big body. Hope he does but so far it has not been there

I think Torts will be all over Kassian's case very quickly, and either make him or break him. No tolerance at all for a guy wandering around and playing in spurts. And also maybe not maintaining the highest standard of fitness. This could also be what awaits Jensen, to some degree, when he begins playing for Torts.

 

[y2kcanucks]

I vote Corrado because I don't think Schroeder should be considered a prospect still.

 

[Hardyvan123]

I'm undecided between Corrado and Jensen. I'm not sold on Corrado having first pairing upside but I have little doubt he'll be a good second pairing guy. I think Jensen has the first line upside of a 30-30-60 guy in his prime, but I'm not sold on him reaching it.

I'm not sure if Corrado is going to be that much better than Tanev, which isn't a bad thing just not sold on his ceiling although his floor is solid.

Jensen is still too much of a wild card for me so I took Gauance who IMO will have the best chance of being a solid top 9 forward or top 4 Dmen of all the guys left at this point.

 

[Wisp]

Tanev is a weird player and outside of their circumstances (eg, playing collected in the NHL without much pro-experience), they don't have much in common as players.

 

[CanaFan]

30 points for a defenceman is still very good

and in hamhuis' case, extremely representative of his good 5 on 5 breakout play

I'm not slagging Hamhuis or Corrado by saying this, but any decently mobile D who plays 2nd PP minutes can reach 25-30 pts in a season. I still wouldn't describe them as having good offense or as having high offensive skills. Fortunately for both they have other skills that guarantee/will guarantee steady NHL employment.

 

[Wisp]

I'm not slagging Hamhuis or Corrado by saying this, but any decently mobile D who plays 2nd PP minutes can reach 25-30 pts in a season. I still wouldn't describe them as having good offense or as having high offensive skills. Fortunately for both they have other skills that guarantee/will guarantee steady NHL employment.

your reasoning is fine, but I suspect you don't realize the bulk of Hamhuis' points come at even strength, though? If this was a regular length season, he'd likely have 32 regardless of PP time.

He's always been productive with minimal powerplay time, which I would describe as a "high offensive skill."

 

[CanaFan]

your reasoning is fine, but I suspect you don't realize the bulk of Hamhuis' points come at even strength, though? If this was a regular length season, he'd likely have 32 regardless of PP time.

He's always been productive with minimal powerplay time, which I would describe as a "high offensive skill."

I realize this but it USA bit chicken and egg; does Hamhuis get so few PP points because he is t offensively inclined or because he doesn't get the minutes, which is likely a sign that his coach doesn't see him as offensively inclined. My point remains that his points are fine but not outstanding or even a big part of his game. I have trouble projecting Corrado as a Hamhuis type Dman, but using the same comparison I don't believe Corrado has "great" ie 40+ points upside.

 

[tc 23]

4 points in 20 AHL games with a -9 . He clearly needs to step it up next year and at this point deserves to be pushed down this list a few spots.

But you can't only look at the 20 games he had in the AHL and not count his work in the SEL this season. He's been playing against men all year long and led all SEL rookies and his SEL team in goals. I take his sub-par AHL stats with a grain of salt because, from all accounts, he was being misused in the AHL as he joined mid-season and the coach opted to play veterans over the young prospects.

 

[Wolfhard]

But you can't only look at the 20 games he had in the AHL and not count his work in the SEL this season. He's been playing against men all year long and led all SEL rookies and his SEL team in goals. I take his sub-par AHL stats with a grain of salt because, from all accounts, he was being misused in the AHL as he joined mid-season and the coach opted to play veterans over the young prospects.

Condemned for a poor showing in 20 games, but not really exalted for the 6 goals in 8 AHL games the previous year. I think he's got the Kassian effect, where he relies on his size for scoring opportunities, but as the difficulty level rises, he doesn't always battle against bigger stronger players to keep earning those chances.

 

[Wisp]

I realize this but it USA bit chicken and egg; does Hamhuis get so few PP points because he is t offensively inclined or because he doesn't get the minutes, which is likely a sign that his coach doesn't see him as offensively inclined. My point remains that his points are fine but not outstanding or even a big part of his game. I have trouble projecting Corrado as a Hamhuis type Dman, but using the same comparison I don't believe Corrado has "great" ie 40+ points upside.

I think the mistake you're making is that even strength offensive ability and power play offensive ability are separate skill sets.

 

[canuck4life16]

is it time for canucks prospect #4? i know who I will pick!

 

[Blue Suede Shoes]

I'm not slagging Hamhuis or Corrado by saying this, but any decently mobile D who plays 2nd PP minutes can reach 25-30 pts in a season. I still wouldn't describe them as having good offense or as having high offensive skills. Fortunately for both they have other skills that guarantee/will guarantee steady NHL employment.

I wonder if people have unreasonable expectations of scoring in the NHL? Because in 2011-2012 (last full season) there were only 43 defencemen who scored 30 points in the NHL. Most of them were getting lots of powerplay time.

So offensively, if Hamhuis can be in that group (which he was), that places him in the top-60 dmen in scoring - mathematically a top-pairing dman.

Of course that only includes the offensive side... but for Hamhuis (and Corrado) their defensive game is by far the more impressive part of their game... so their should be no question Hamhuis is a top-paring dman.

So if Corrado can be compared to Hamhuis, that seems to imply he has potential to be a top-pairing dman. And if he can put up 30 points, that definitely puts him well within the NHLs top-pairing dmen in terms of offense.

 

[CherryToke]

I vote Corrado because I don't think Schroeder should be considered a prospect still.

where would you put Schroeder if he was still a prospect?

I voted for him because he's on the list but I agree, he shouldn't be.

 

[CanaFan]

I think the mistake you're making is that even strength offensive ability and power play offensive ability are separate skill sets.

I'm not really arguing *how* Hamhuis does or doesn't get his points, only that he isn't a big offensive contributor. If he gets his points mainly at ES then great, nothing wrong with that. But the fact that he plays a reasonable number of PP minutes - 3rd among Canuck Dmen last season - and does t put up *big* points is part of the story. You can't discount it merely because it doesn't fit the narrative. Hamhuis is a good, but not high end point producer. He's borderline elite defensively and has great vision and first pass out of the zone. I'd be thrilled if Corrado reaches this level, but I don't expect him to put up more points than Hamhuis. What are we really even debating here?

 

[y2kcanucks]

where would you put Schroeder if he was still a prospect?

I voted for him because he's on the list but I agree, he shouldn't be.

I would probably have Schroeder here if he were to be considered a prospect. But he played over 50% of our games last season so to me that's not a prospect. Just my own criteria though.

 

[CanaFan]

I wonder if people have unreasonable expectations of scoring in the NHL? Because in 2011-2012 (last full season) there were only 43 defencemen who scored 30 points in the NHL. Most of them were getting lots of powerplay time.

So offensively, if Hamhuis can be in that group (which he was), that places him in the top-60 dmen in scoring - mathematically a top-pairing dman.

Of course that only includes the offensive side... but for Hamhuis (and Corrado) their defensive game is by far the more impressive part of their game... so their should be no question Hamhuis is a top-paring dman.

So if Corrado can be compared to Hamhuis, that seems to imply he has potential to be a top-pairing dman. And if he can put up 30 points, that definitely puts him well within the NHLs top-pairing dmen in terms of offense.

That's fine and good. None of what I'm saying is a critique on either player's status or projection to become a top pairing player. I was merely responding to one posters notion that Hamhuis produces a high level of offense, which I disagree with. It's fine to peg him in the top 43 Dmen based on his recent two seasons, but historically Hamhuis has mostly been below the 30 point mark and in the mid-high 20's. Given his age and number of years in the league, this is where I mostly see him in terms of offensive production (25-30 pts). Lately he's put up a bit more and that likely can be accounted for by the different system and more offensive push in Van vs Nash. Still don't see Hamhuis as an "offensive" player, and I don't mean that as a slight but just reality.

 

[Numbers]

Top Prospects

Horvat
Gaunce
Schroeder
Corrado
Jensen
Shinkaruk
Lack
Ericsson
Etc......