Prospect Info: Who is the Canucks #4 prospect?

[CanaFan]

And regarding the scrimmage, while Jensen may have not done a whole lot, you could tell he was a better player. This guy has NHL vision and theres only so much you can do when every player on the ice is fighting to be noticed, they dont exactly play a typical NHL game. When Jensen got the puck, he looked for NHL types of plays, made great passes, etc - Hunter Shinkaruk on the other hand, skated as hard as he could and held onto it and tried to deke and dangle. Which impressed fans. It made him stand out more but it should hardly make you feel like hes the better prospect

Hard to believe the player who is two years older and has just had a stint in the SEL looks better than an 18 year old eh? Seriously, how can you go on and on about "shiny new toy syndrome" then make direct comparisons between a 20 year old in his 3rd camp vs an 18 yo in his first? At least evaluate then on the same basis.

And on the matter of SNTS, people need to consider that as players develop and their future projection becomes less cloudy that it can work both for and against that player. Everyone know Shinkaruk has things to work on, but at 18 it is entirely normal and expected. Jensen on the other hand is showing many of the same inconsistencies at 20 as he did at 18. Sure he is more experienced, but with this the expectations of his performance increase as well. If after 2 years Shinkaruk still has weight and strength issues, then fans will be rightly concerned with him also. But at the moment he is rightly given the benefit of the doubt that comes with be 18 and not 20. When Jensen was 18 fans were forgiving of his inconsistent play, as many junior age players suffer the same. But at 20 he should be showing better efforts more often, and so these concerns are not so easily glossed over.

As I say, experience is a double-edged sword and you can't only look at the positives that it brings, since the path to the NHL is an ever-narrowing one. Jensen still has plenty of time to fix his issues, though not as much as Shinkaruk does.

 

[Pseudonymous*]

I'm not sure, maybe a bit more. If he wants to get in the range of guys like Skinner, Parise Duchene, Crosby, etc he'll need to put on 20lbs. Some guys his height like Giroux and Eberle can excel at 175-185, but they're a bit more rare. Either way, he's got some work cut out for him in the weight room.

he has the wellwood, sedin body type, not exactly a body that adds on 15-20lbs of muscle. and if they did, it would definitely hinder their abilities

 

[Pseudonymous*]

Hard to believe the player who is two years older and has just had a stint in the SEL looks better than an 18 year old. Seriously, how can you go on and on about "shiny new toy syndrome" then make direct comparisons between a 20 year old in his 3rd camp vs an 18 yo in his first? At least evaluate then on the same basis.

I didn't, that was another user. Get your quotes right.

And on the matter of SNTS, people need to consider that as players develop and their future projection becomes less cloudy that it can work both for and against that player. Everyone know Shinkaruk has things to work on, but at 18 it is entirely normal and expected. Jensen on the other hand is showing many of the same inconsistencies at 20 as he did at 18. Sure he is more experienced, but with this the expectations of his performance increase as well. If after 2 years Shinkaruk still has weight and strength issues, then fans will be rightly concerned with him also. But at the moment he is rightly given the benefit of the doubt that comes with be 18 and not 20. When Jensen was 18 fans were forgiving of his inconsistent play, as many junior age players suffer the same. But at 20 he should be showing better efforts more often, and so these concerns are not so easily glossed over.

As I say, experience is a double-edged sword and you can't only look at the positives that it brings, since the path to the NHL is an ever-narrowing one. Jensen still has plenty of time to fix his issues, though not as much as Shinkaruk does.

But in regards to your post (even if youre lumping different peoples opinions and arguments together) , inconsistencies? hes a young player, playing pro. they wont be consistently putting up points and thats the type of player he is. a point getting, when ehs not getting points, hes not as noticeable, like sedins. why they get ridden more about not scoring than other players, theyre pure point getters and nothing else.

and in those years, he's switched leagues, it almost always takes time to adapt to a new league. and so far in this latest league (ahl) - hes put up respectable numbers for his first 28 game stint.

Do you really think hes all that far away? (jensen) - The guy already got a call up after only 28 games pro. When did schroeder start getting his chances? Hodgson also got his early. Points aren't all that its about, when your skill is obvious, they get a shot and usually shine in a league among other great players. Especially when you have nhl size

His 28 games were fine, he played fine and he will be in the nhl real soon and produce. Hunter will be in the ahl for a couple years probably before even getting a shot and even then, when he comes up, he better produce offense, because players who dont have great nhl size or strength, well tehy dont get the opportunities bigger players do

Thank god for Schroeder being a good defensive player or else he would have been thrown back in the AHL to rot. Earns him more time to learn to adapt his size to the NHL

 

[shortshorts]

Jensen
Schroeder (though I don't rank him as a prospect anymore)
Gaunce
Lack

 

[StringerBell]

he has the wellwood, sedin body type, not exactly a body that adds on 15-20lbs of muscle. and if they did, it would definitely hinder their abilities

I think it's too soon to make definitive claims like that, but for the sake of argument how much do you think he can add without it hindering his ability?

 

[Pseudonymous*]

I think it's too soon to make definitive claims like that, but for the sake of argument how much do you think he can add without it hindering his ability?

Not sure really, when you work out when you got excess fat, you typically lose 5 right away and then start gaining. and the whole time youre gaining, youre dropping some excess fat. so maybe 10 lbs? no idea, depends over how long of a time youre talking about, but yeah, maybe 10lbs but even then. it takes a while to really change when u have that type of body type, sedins worked really hard at it every year since they entered. and theyre like 6'2 so that helps them too, dont need to increase quite as much because that reach helps some

and thats just overall weight, not muscle. nobody gains 15-20lbs of muscle in that kind of time without juicing.

i see him playing at 190 in the nhl, just in better shape. if he is actually 180 or 182 or whatever now. but he will always have that type of body in his younger years.

I would also think he really worked out hard and bulked up for his combine too, if they know this is what scouts and GMs look at, maybe he didn't want to be 170 and got up to 180 with some excess water weight and recent gains? His arms are tiny , yet to see his legs but he looks very small so wouldn't doubt if he got up to to just over 180 for this combine

and most just automatically add a certain weight to a guy after hes drafted but there are certain body types that pack on weight and some that dont, he doesn't have that. meanwhile, a guy like mckinnon or horvat could easily.

 

[yoss]

That was good stuff, right there.

Man I'm looking forward to our prospects this year. Lot of different guys battling for spots, journeymen vets and young guys. I'm interested to see what line-up steps out onto the ice for game one of the season. A new coach makes it all the more unpredictable.

 

[StringerBell]

Not sure really, when you work out when you got excess fat, you typically lose 5 right away and then start gaining. and the whole time youre gaining, youre dropping some excess fat. so maybe 10 lbs? no idea, depends over how long of a time youre talking about, but yeah, maybe 10lbs but even then. it takes a while to really change when u have that type of body type, sedins worked really hard at it every year since they entered. and theyre like 6'2 so that helps them too, dont need to increase quite as much because that reach helps some

and thats just overall weight, not muscle. nobody gains 15-20lbs of muscle in that kind of time without juicing.

i see him playing at 190 in the nhl, just in better shape. if he is actually 180 or 182 or whatever now. but he will always have that type of body in his younger years.

He was 172 at the combine, and you can easily gain 15-20lbs over 2-3 offseasons (hence "couple years"). I see him playing at 190 too, give or take a few pounds, so I don't know what our disagreement is here

 

[Pseudonymous*]

He was 172 at the combine, and you can easily gain 15-20lbs over 2-3 offseasons (hence "couple years"). I see him playing at 190 too, give or take a few pounds, so I don't know what our disagreement is here

ahhh, that makes so much more sense. i was baffled by the 180 or whatever i just saw on a site. he looked so thin in his interview. (and poor body fat percentage)

if hes 172 now, i dont see him being 190 in 2-3 years, not with his body type. no way.

185 max

 

[arsmaster*]

ahhh, that makes so much more sense. i was baffled by the 180 or whatever i just saw on a site.

if hes 172 now, i dont see him being 190 in 2-3 years, not with his body type. no way.

185 max

Lol. I love Internet fitness guru's.

What body style exactly are you going on about here?

Is there a specific term for it?

His body style you keep comparing to Wellwood and the Sedin's. you look at those guys lately? They don't look the same.

I'm guess your entirely referring to his round face, because I've never seen him shirtless, have you?


18 pounds in 3 years is quite attainable for one of his "body type" ask Welly.

Anyways, I don't really need a response, I just don't really get this type of BS.

An extomorph like nugent-Hopkins will struggle to put on mass, a shorter/stockier guy won't.

 

[Pseudonymous*]

http://play.shl.se/video.2024833355001

goto 2:23

I like this goal better than that shootout goal in the post above

 

[Pseudonymous*]

Lol. I love Internet fitness guru's.

What body style exactly are you going on about here?

Is there a specific term for it?

His body style you keep comparing to Wellwood and the Sedin's. you look at those guys lately? They don't look the same.

I'm guess your entirely referring to his round face, because I've never seen him shirtless, have you?


18 pounds in 3 years is quite attainable for one of his "body type" ask Welly.

Anyways, I don't really need a response, I just don't really get this type of BS.

An extomorph like nugent-Hopkins will struggle to put on mass, a shorter/stockier guy won't.

What are you talking about, internet fitness gurus? are you implying i dont know about fitness? ive spent everyday at the gym, for most of my life. and im naturally 150 and 6'2 but i sit at 190, its not easy maintaining that. ive always worked out with somebody, of all body types, 10 years of daily fitness allows for a pretty educated opinion of such a thing

And yes you can tell a body type while someone in in a t-shirt. his face, neck, arms, shoulder width, peak of where his biceps meet his forearm, height, weight. If you can't get a pretty good idea, then you clearly haven't worked with many people in the gym. Theres also a video of him on canucks.com - finishing the grouse grind. btw (in shorts and a t-shirt)

i also saw him huffing and puffing the entire scrimmage, dont put alot of weight into it, but its something to consider anyway (esp since noone else was)

and youre right about a body type like RNH will have more troubles putting on weight, but a guy like shinkaruk wont be far behind, why? because hes not allowed to gain fat, he has to be in shape. - we're not talking about fat gain

and there are 3 main types, ectomorph , mesomorph and endomorph, doesn't mean there aren't variations. there are guys who are soft and will always be somewhat, and have to work hard to gain muscle but can easily gain fat

obviously you can be shocked by someone as there is always exceptions, but i'd figure i would give my opinion on the fact that people think hes going to suddenly be an inch taller and 20 lbs heavier. lol

 

[StringerBell]

ahhh, that makes so much more sense. i was baffled by the 180 or whatever i just saw on a site. he looked so thin in his interview. (and poor body fat percentage)

if hes 172 now, i dont see him being 190 in 2-3 years, not with his body type. no way.

185 max

I'm sorry, but you can't make definitive statements like that. He's absolutely allowed to bulk/cut in the offseason and if he's a total beginner 18lbs over 3 offseasons is a perfectly reasonable goal.

 

[Pseudonymous*]

I'm sorry, but you can't make definitive statements like that. He's absolutely allowed to bulk/cut in the offseason and if he's a total beginner 18lbs over 3 offseasons is a perfectly reasonable goal.

total beginner? the guy is an athlete , highly touted pick in the draft, i really dont think hes new to the weight room. im pretty confident they all work pretty hard, cardio and weight training

and sure, 18lbs for a certain body type. i dont see it likely with his.

and im not making a definitive statement, everything i post is an opinion. and my opinion is i dont see that likely at all. but lets wait and see

and since we're talking a difference of 5-10lbs, theres a chance i could be wrong obviously..

either way, getting a little off topic, hes not 5'11 200 lbs. lol like alot of comparisons and i think the difference should be considered

hes working against his size, period. thats all im trying to say

 

[Verviticus]

What are you talking about, internet fitness gurus? are you implying i dont know about fitness? ive spent everyday at the gym, for most of my life. and im naturally 150 and 6'2 but i sit at 190, its not easy maintaining that. ive always worked out with somebody, of all body types, 10 years of daily fitness allows for a pretty educated opinion of such a thing

a dedicated fitness master such as yourself would have no trouble explaining what the bold means, right?

 

[Pseudonymous*]

a dedicated fitness master such as yourself would have no trouble explaining what the bold means, right?

sure, it means if i stopped working out or taking in 5000+ calories a day (one or the either), it wouldn't take long for me to drop to 150.... not long at all.

basically my sitting weight when i took time away from the gym but still managed to take in a high amount of calories. its the weight your body wants to get back to. alot of people are naturally thinner or heavier than they are, youre natural body weight isn't what you sit at when you work out 2 hours a day and constantly dieting, atleast not my view on it. anyway.

 

[Verviticus]

sure, it means if i stopped working out or taking in 5000+ calories a day, it wouldn't take long for me to drop to 150. one or the either... not long at all.

basically my sitting weight when i took time away from the gym but still managed to take in a high amount of calories

well obviously if you stop eating to maintenance you're going to lose weight, but why are you suggesting it's not feasible to

A: stop going to the gym
B: stop eating 5k calories

and still maintain your weight? the difference in calories consumed by a 150lb sedentary individual and a 190lb sedentary individual is like a can of coke and one mcdonalds cheeseburger a day, and that's me being generous

obviously there's a resting appetite that some people are comfortable with that will make this exercise yield different results in different people, but your statement seems to imply that a body type is related to a certain weight rather than an affinity for gaining and losing that weight, the weights distribution and the individuals response to fitness activity

 

[ohnoeszz]

But in regards to your post (even if youre lumping different peoples opinions and arguments together) , inconsistencies? hes a young player, playing pro. they wont be consistently putting up points and thats the type of player he is. a point getting, when ehs not getting points, hes not as noticeable, like sedins. why they get ridden more about not scoring than other players, theyre pure point getters and nothing else.

I've seen this other places too... its really not true. Jensen has a very very good defensive game. He's much closer to a Eriksson or Hossa type than he is given credit for. Everyone is focusing on his ability as a sniper but he has a 200 foot game and excels in transition.

And I feel like he's been labeled inconsistent by fans who have their own notions about what he should be producing. It reeks of number watching.

 

[Pseudonymous*]

well obviously if you stop eating to maintenance you're going to lose weight, but why are you suggesting it's not feasible to

A: stop going to the gym
B: stop eating 5k calories

and still maintain your weight? the difference in calories consumed by a 150lb sedentary individual and a 190lb sedentary individual is like a can of coke and one mcdonalds cheeseburger a day, and that's me being generous

Sure, of course you'll lose or should i say, could lose, never said anything about not losing, my point is that it is a dramatic difference, answer this, how many 190lb people who work out would drop down to 150 if they stopped working out with the same diet they have while working out hard? Take into account your appetite is raised while working out which means if you were not working out, your body doesn't need as much calories.

I know friends who can maintain their weight very well after they stop working out with proper diet (actually most of them). Sure they lose muscle tone but their overall weight stays roughly the same, its because their body doesn't metabolize calories the same way.

 

[Pseudonymous*]

I've seen this other places too... its really not true. Jensen has a very very good defensive game. He's much closer to a Eriksson or Hossa type than he is given credit for. Everyone is focusing on his ability as a sniper but he has a 200 foot game and excels in transition.

And I feel like he's been labeled inconsistent by fans who have their own notions about what he should be producing. It reeks of number watching.

I never said hes bad without the puck, i said hes just not noticeable , unless you are specifically looking for it. If i am wrong, most fans wouldnt' think hes one dimensional. LOL its because those are subtle things he does. Typically if you aren't laying the body whatsoever when you dont have the puck , you wont be too noticeable without the puck

I think jensen's defensive game is fine

 

[Verviticus]

Sure, of course you'll lose or should i say, could lose, never said anything about not losing, answer this, how many 190lb people who work out would drop down to 150 if they stopped working out with the same diet they have while working out hard? Take into account your appetite is raised while working out which means if you were not working out, your body doesn't need as much calories.

I know friends who can maintain their weight very well after they stop working out with proper diet (actually most of them). Sure they lose muscle tone but their overall weight stays roughly the same, its because their body doesn't metabolize calories the same way.

Yeah that was mostly my point. I think the vast majority of people will keep most of their weight, but they won't have the same amount of lean muscle mass.

Sorry, I thought you were implying that weight is primarily a function of birth rather than of diet and activity

 

[moby]

Jensen

 

[Pseudonymous*]

Yeah that was mostly my point. I think the vast majority of people will keep most of their weight, but they won't have the same amount of lean muscle mass.

Sorry, I thought you were implying that weight is primarily a function of birth rather than of diet and activity

I just included that in there because i think a hardgainer/ectomorph who has gained 30-40lbs of lean muscle mass proves alot more than some person who packs on lbs easy. and mentioning 150 is where i typically start and revert back to kind of helps show that im a hard gainer. because thats a very thin frame, 30 waist.

thankfully i work from home, all i do all day is eat and workout to maintain a respectable level

 

[opendoor]

I know friends who can maintain their weight very well after they stop working out with proper diet (actually most of them). Sure they lose muscle tone but their overall weight stays roughly the same, its because their body doesn't metabolize calories the same way.

Are you saying if you ate at maintenance levels that you'd still lose weight? That doesn't make any sense.

 

[Pseudonymous*]

Are you saying if you ate at maintenance levels that you'd still lose weight? That doesn't make any sense.

No im saying if i eat the same VERY high amount of calories as i do when i work out but stop working out, my body wants to drop until it gets to 150. i never said anything about maintenance levels. obviously maintenance levels are what you need to take in to maintain

if i eat the same amount while im working out, typically your body has more calories to work with and will most likely store them as fat. however in my case, my body doesn't metabolize them very well if im not working out. so my maintenance level would be even HIGHER. to an almost unreachable level

to even consume 5-6k a day with a small stomach/frame, is very tough and time consuming.

all im saying is my body doesn't doesn't metabolize calories as well as somebody who has a bigger frame and can gain weight easily and the only way to get it to, is to work out consistently. you metabolize calories more efficiently when you work out. typically the sign of a hard gainer.

and jeez, all my point was is im a hardgainer and i work out daily, so im not just some keyboard warrior pretending i know about fitness. lol no reason to rip into every detail. want me to post pics.