Why does Canucks player development suck so much?

[The Optimist]

I agree with your view point. I thought you were assuming if Luc didn't die he would be in the NHL.

I think it is more about the drafting. The 2004 draft was excellent. Hansen, Edler and Brown were after the 2nd round and all contributing with NHL teams. After that though, from 2005-2010, 2nd round and after only Mason Raymond has turned out. The rest haven't done anything at the NHL level.

The chances that an NHler being found beyond the first round is small. Add in that the Canucks traded a lot of picks during this time period makes the odds even smaller. Finally, a huge amount of luck plays a part. It's too small of a sample size to say anything meaningful.

 

[racerjoe]

I agree with a few here, I don't think you can say our deveoping has been bad, especially when you look at the hole we have from a lack of picks/bad luck. We have developed some great talent to including a top end goalie, a young undrafted dman, and a few 5th round picks. Hell look at mid-late raound pics like bieksa, Hansen, both seem to have been realy well developed.

I do agree too that having our own farm team will once again help. Having guys be in our organization from bottom to top will help.

 

[canucksfan]

The chances that an NHler being found beyond the first round is small. Add in that the Canucks traded a lot of picks during this time period makes the odds even smaller. Finally, a huge amount of luck plays a part. It's too small of a sample size to say anything meaningful.

Lack of draft picks certainly impacts it. However, they should get more than one decent layer from that time period. They have made some dumb selections.

 

[vancityluongo]

It is because we kept trading our draft picks to try and win the Stanley cup. That strategy failed, and now we are paying for it, but we are slowly making up for it now.

This is exactly it.

On top of that, when you're routinely blowing high picks on scrubs (Ellington, Mallet, etc.), it's hard to produce results given that players that are often terrific picks simply don't pan out regardless of the quality of player development (Jordan Schroeder). Who was Gillis supposed to graduate to the team the past few years? Sergei Shirokov? Anton Rodin?

A team like St. Louis is reaping the benefits of two stud selections in the first round in 2010 - Jaden Schwartz at 14 and Vlad Tarasenko at 16. The Canucks highest pick in that draft was Pat McNally at 115.

 

[ProstheticConscience]

Recently it's been dumping draft picks in an effort to land that experienced guy who puts the Canucks over the top as a contender, but historically it's something else.

Our player development sucks because it's always sucked, and so far nobody's had the will to make the organizational changes to turn it around. Maybe Benning and Linden will finally bring the ruthlessness to cut the dead weight and bring in people with a track record of success; I had high hopes for Gillis when he first came in, but obviously he failed. Ron Delorme: the guy's survived how many different GMs here? He's the most obvious example of organizational loyalty gone awry. Personally I think there's too many people like him in the corporation who are there because they've just always been there, not because they're any bloody good at what they do. That has to change if the Canucks are finally going to reliably produce their own good NHL talent.

 

[Rotting Corpse*]

The chances that an NHler being found beyond the first round is small. Add in that the Canucks traded a lot of picks during this time period makes the odds even smaller. Finally, a huge amount of luck plays a part. It's too small of a sample size to say anything meaningful.

Yes and no. Even given their picks, and given what you said, you still expect to get *something* once in awhile That 2007 draft is incredible; none of the players taken even developed into regular AHL players. That has to be some kind of a rare feat.

 

[jigsaw99]

The chances that an NHler being found beyond the first round is small. Add in that the Canucks traded a lot of picks during this time period makes the odds even smaller. Finally, a huge amount of luck plays a part. It's too small of a sample size to say anything meaningful.

that's totally not true at all. Look at Canucks roster only Sedins/Hamhuis/Sbisa/Kassian is 1st round picks. Look at an elite team like the Bruins and see that Paille, Hamilton and Rask are 1st round picks.

 

[NoShowWilly]

1. Canucks traded away a lot of picks over the last 10 years, especially 2nd round picks.

2. They didn't have their own farm team and were positioned in places like Chicago that wanted to win over development.

3. The Canucks were a very strong team that stayed healthy on their top end which made it nearly impossible for a couple of players to break through.

4. Recent picks traded away trying to win now.

5. Wasted picks on older players because they were apparently ahead in their development.

6. Our drafting sucks.

 

[Horse McHindu]

I hope gillis' final parting gift, stability in Utica, will improve development. Moving from Manitoba to Chicago to Utica with the carousel of coaches and motivations (Chicago overplaying veterans) contributed to our woeful futures. Solid control of our prospects in Utica, extra practice time, as well as fan support all should help shinkaruk, gaunce, etc develop.

I agree with this 100%

Couldn't have said it better myself.

 

[racerjoe]

Yes and no. Even given their picks, and given what you said, you still expect to get *something* once in awhile That 2007 draft is incredible; none of the players taken even developed into regular AHL players. That has to be some kind of a rare feat.

That's drafting, not development, tough to develop a player that doesn't make it into your system.

 

[Rotting Corpse*]

That's drafting, not development, tough to develop a player that doesn't make it into your system.

Fair enough. It's bananas, either way.

 

[Jack Tripper]

well, its hard to have depth in the system when the canucks in the past decade have had multiple years where their entire class havent played a single nhl game

2010 was a lost year because the canucks didnt have a pick until the 4th round

then you hve the infamous 2007 draft which correctly fed into to dave nonis' dismissal as they couldnt even produce an ahl player out of the draft, let alone a nhl player

last two years have been much better as the organization seems to have recognized that the lack of selections was the biggest factor in the brutal depth of the prospect pool

 

[RandV]

I think Gillis was the first GM we had who even gave a crap about development. The system he set up will be improved upon, hopefully, by the new regime. We finally have some decent prospects in the pipeline, but it will be another two/three years before we see how they are brought along.

Nonis paid lip service to it but I don't think he made a single change to the scouting staff that he took over from Burke, and he blew loads of draft picks at the trade deadline.

I have no idea what an expected time line should be for revamping your scouting system, but Gillis took a couple seasons to do so the '08 and '09 draft were more or less made under the old guard, '10 we didn't pick until the 4th round, so it really wasn't until 2011 that Gillis revamped system went into effect.

Those first three years are the group that you expect to be making the NHL right now, which is why our development looks so abysmal. Going two seasons without our own farm team, thanks to Winnipeg's return to the NHL, really hurt here as well. Nothing wrong with the drafting from 2011-13 and with Utica in place development should go much more smoothly. Really the only problems is Gillis didn't fix the WHL and QMJHL scouting like he did for the OHL, and the trend of picking overagers with our 2nd/3rd round picks looks like a failed experiment.

 

[F A N]

With trading Kesler, the only 1st round picks we have playing on this team are the Sedins and quasi-Jensen. That's absolutely pathetic.

The only 1st round pick playing for Boston is Dougie Hamilton and quasi-Caron.

None of our draft picks from the last three years have played a NHL game

Same thing with the Red Wings, the Bruins and other teams.

We are by far the worse team in the league at developing NHLers and this was the biggest failure of the Gillis Administration.

Whether Gillis failed in developing NHLers remains to be seen. These type of things can change quickly, if Connauton, Schroeder, and Jensen are full-time NHLers next season that immediately improves the record. To be fair, Gillis should be judged based on his later drafts because he should be given time to improve the team's drafting and development.

I think Gillis gets very little credit for the changes he implemented that affected the team's scouting and development. Gillis was not a GM who stood pat. He bolstered the scouting staff quite a bit and actually redeployed people. He hired Gagner which helped us land Tanev. He redeployed Smyl which helped us land college UFAs like Volpatti. He even removed Delorme from being in charge of the NHL draft and sent him out scouting the WHL. Gillis may be guilty of chasing goalposts but he saw that his QMHJL picks weren't working out and shifted his focus on improving his WHL scouting and continued to bolster his OHL scouting.

 

[vadim sharifijanov]

1. Canucks traded away a lot of picks over the last 10 years, especially 2nd round picks.

2. They didn't have their own farm team and were positioned in places like Chicago that wanted to win over development.

3. The Canucks were a very strong team that stayed healthy on their top end which made it nearly impossible for a couple of players to break through.

4. Recent picks traded away trying to win now.

5. Wasted picks on older players because they were apparently ahead in their development.

6. Our drafting sucks.

/thread

 

[Rebuilt]

1. Canucks traded away a lot of picks over the last 10 years, especially 2nd round picks.

2. They didn't have their own farm team and were positioned in places like Chicago that wanted to win over development.

3. The Canucks were a very strong team that stayed healthy on their top end which made it nearly impossible for a couple of players to break through.

4. Recent picks traded away trying to win now.

5. Wasted picks on older players because they were apparently ahead in their development.

6. Our drafting sucks.

Tampa fan here.

I think your development has been good. Its the fact you have drafted late that has cost your team the most. Then the fact your young players have had to fight against a stacked line up to get ice time is the other.

Go to hockeydb.com and check out each teams draft per year and you will see that rarely do their prospects become NHL players either.

 

[Love]

Because Ron Delorme.

 

[TheDude008]

take a minute and check out our history of first round picks (i know we all know it's bad, but when you actually look at it; it hurts)
..we've been a mess. you can't develop top players when you make such poor picks.

*be warned, it's pretty painful to see some of the players we missed out on. might've actually won a cup by now.

 

[go comets]

I hope gillis' final parting gift, stability in Utica, will improve development. Moving from Manitoba to Chicago to Utica with the carousel of coaches and motivations (Chicago overplaying veterans) contributed to our woeful futures. Solid control of our prospects in Utica, extra practice time, as well as fan support all should help shinkaruk, gaunce, etc develop.

Well the team ending up in utica was basically a last resort. They wanted to be in abbotsford. That didn't work out, so the tried Seattle and Peoria before settling on utica. So it was pretty much dumb luck.... And I doubt this team gells the way it did with a long travel schedule of a team out west.......

 

[NoShowWilly]

Tampa fan here.

I think your development has been good. Its the fact you have drafted late that has cost your team the most. Then the fact your young players have had to fight against a stacked line up to get ice time is the other.

Go to hockeydb.com and check out each teams draft per year and you will see that rarely do their prospects become NHL players either.

since 2004. Including players that still might have a chance of playing a game.

2004 - Schneider Edler Brown Hansen
2005 - Bourdon(he would have been there) Raymond
2006 - Grabner
2007 -
2008 - Hodgson
2009 - Schroeder, Andersson, Connaugton, Cannata
2010 - McNally, Friesen
2011 - Jensen, Grenier, Corrado, Tommernes
2012 - Gaunce, Hutton
Last 2 years are up in the air still.

yeah i was being a little over dramatic. still hurts when a grand total of 6 players with any remote promise remain in the organization from a 7 year period. only 2 are with the club.

Cannata is currently #5 on the depth chart.
Andersson is far off still.
McNally stunted hard
Friesen is likely to be overrun next year. I'm being generous here.

Edler and Hansen are both looking for bounce backs.

We have a grand total of 4 drafts picks with our team right now. None were drafted after 2004.

There's much more promise for serviceable NHL players from 2011-2014

 

[blendini]

Tampa fan here.

I think your development has been good. Its the fact you have drafted late that has cost your team the most. Then the fact your young players have had to fight against a stacked line up to get ice time is the other.

Go to hockeydb.com and check out each teams draft per year and you will see that rarely do their prospects become NHL players either.

Takes a fan from another team to post the most reasonable message

The future is looking much better for the Canucks. We will start seeing the results in the next 2/3yrs and beyond.

It's been a long time since the Canucks have had players coming up from the farm team that can actually play well. Finally some depth!

 

[alternate]

We've just came out of a period where we were one of the most successful teams in the league and it was primarily on the backs of home-grown talent.

Most of our 1st rounders lately have been good. Schroeder busted, but was considered a good pick by many. White busted, but if you take out Perron who had question marks and even St Louis passed on 2x that year, there's not really anyone taken in the next 30 or so picks that would have been significantly better. 2007 was just a crappy draft.

And when you talk player development, you can't just ignore UDFAs. Tanev and Lack have both developed quite nicely.

I mean if Hodgson, Grabner and Schneider were still here, and Bourdon hadn't passed, would the OP be raving about our player development? Obviously we can be better...as can every organization...but we've improved by leaps and bounds since the 90s.

The lack of later round hits is a bit concerning, but even then Corrado looks good, Connauton played in the NHL last season, Cannata still has a chance, Friesen just had a great 2nd half in the A, and there's a few others that still have a shot.

 

[Wisp]

The greatest and most fondly remembered contribution by Mike Gillis is going to be the team owning it's own farm club.

 

[dave babych returns]

When you think about problems with development I think Jordan Schroeder's career has been emblematic of the issues the Canucks have had.

Played for three different AHL teams (owned and operated by three different groups), different organisational mandates and I don't know how many coaches.. playing behind veterans who he was by many reports outperforming..

I don't know if a different path would have turned him into an impact NHL player by now but it sure must be tough for players who aren't already on their way down that path due to their own talents and maturity.

I have almost no problem with how young players have been handled by the big club though.

 

[LolClarkson*]

I was just reading through a thread in the NHL forum talking about what team's have the most of their 1st round picks playing for them. With trading Kesler, the only 1st round picks we have playing on this team are the Sedins and quasi-Jensen. That's absolutely pathetic.

None of our draft picks from the last three years have played a NHL game, only 37 total NHL games have been played from our picks in the last five years. And only 92 total in the last seven years. In the last seven years this team hasn't been able to develop one of it's picks into a full time NHL player. Thank goodness for the signing of Chris Tanev or this would be even more laughable.

We are by far the worse team in the league at developing NHLers and this was the biggest failure of the Gillis Administration.

This has been a problem through the organization's history but was alleviated for awhile when we had a quasi-NHL team in the Moose developing and churning out young prospects for the team. But since the Canucks shifted around affiliates and largely seem to have no idea what they're doing, the pipeline of good surprisingly undrafted prospects has dried up.

I know Canucks fans are excited about all our draft picks but if they aren't being developed properly and won't make an impact, I fail to see what it accomplishes other than hindering young promising careers.

Umm

Schnieder
Grabner
Hodgson
Tanev
Lack
Connauton (NHL player in DAL)

Other regime

H Sedin
D Sedin
Kesler
Hansen
Edler
Beiksa
Raymond
Mike Brown

just off the top of my head. I'd say we are one of the better teams at it.