Prospects Thread 2012-13

[Potatoe1]

Who's better?

Bieksa?
Weise?
Volpatti?
Kassian?

Nope - I think Mallet is it. In 2010-11 he was Rimouski's "goon"... but then he had to go and become an offensive top 6 force for them in 2011-12!

I don't want to get too far ahead of things, but I liked what I saw.

S_C

Should be noted that he was fighting Carter Bancks who is listed at 5'10 and 165. Anything other then a total beating in that fight would be concerning.

I think it is wayyyy early to claim he is tougher then guys like Kassian, and Bieksa, guys who have fought and won against legitimate NHL scrappers.

Either way, liked what I saw from Mallet as well, that was a great hit and over all he looked quite comfortable on the ice.

[Southern_Canuck]

Sunday Oct 21

QMJHL

Cape Breton 5 Rimouski 4
Honzik still recovering from shoulder surgery (Bureau 31 saves on 35 shots)

OHL

Kingston 2 Kitchener 5
McEneny 0 points, -1

London 4 Sudbury 2
Corrado 2 assists, even

S_C

[RoyalDude]

Who's better?

Bieksa?
Weise?
Volpatti?
Kassian?

Nope - I think Mallet is it. In 2010-11 he was Rimouski's "goon"... but then he had to go and become an offensive top 6 force for them in 2011-12!

I don't want to get too far ahead of things, but I liked what I saw.

S_C

Should be noted that he was fighting Carter Bancks who is listed at 5'10 and 165. Anything other then a total beating in that fight would be concerning.

I think it is wayyyy early to claim he is tougher then guys like Kassian, and Bieksa, guys who have fought and won against legitimate NHL scrappers.

Either way, liked what I saw from Mallet as well, that was a great hit and over all he looked quite comfortable on the ice.

You're a beaut Potroast...I just searched 5 different sites and all had Banks listed between 5'11 180 to 185 lbs.I go with the averages. Instead of narrowing down on the shortest and lightest version of his stats. But I guess to back your arguments and to cool the excitement over Mallet I can see why you fudged the numbers.

Bancks is 3 years older than Mallet. Mallet is a rookie out of the Q. Yes, slightly bigger at 6'1 195 lbs. But Let me guess, your stat for Mallet would be umm something like 6'3, 220 lbs????

Oh and Bancks is no stranger to fighting btw, and is known to not be afraid to stick up for his teamates. He plays an aggressive, physical game, aggitating game and will drop his mits and can fight. You make him sound like he is some sort of wimpy Jordan Schroeder or something.

[Potatoe1]

You're a beaut Potroast...I just searched 5 different sites and all had Banks listed between 5'11 180 to 185 lbs.I go with the averages. Instead of narrowing down on the shortest and lightest version of his stats. But I guess to back your arguments and to cool the excitement over Mallet I can see why you fudged the numbers.

Oh and Bancks is no stranger to fighting btw, and is known to not be afraid to stick up for his teamates. He plays an aggressive, physical game, aggitating game and will drop his mits and can fight. You make him sound like he is some sort of wimpy Jordan Schroeder or something.

Ok so Banks is 5"11, 185, and scrappy....

LOL what does that have to do with my post?

Again,,, Bieksa and Kassian have both scrapped and "won" against real NHL scrappers in the 6'1 to 6'4 range. Beating up a minor pro, smaller then Cody Hodgson hardly puts Mallet at the top of the heap for canuck fighters.

[Fred]

Jeremy Price

Price has blossomed into one of the best defensemen coming out of the ECAC. He led the Raiders in defenseman scoring with 23 points (two goals, 21 assists) in 36 games. Two notable strides in Price’s development has been his continually improving defensive zone play and utilizing his 6’1”, 190-pound frame more effectively. And these improvements have contributed to making him a more complete defenseman. Furthermore, none of it has come at the expense of his superb offensive side.

Patrick McNally
18/10/12

http://bostonherald.com/sports/college/ ... ey_d-light

[dbr]

Jeremy Price

Price has blossomed into one of the best defensemen coming out of the ECAC. He led the Raiders in defenseman scoring with 23 points (two goals, 21 assists) in 36 games. Two notable strides in Price’s development has been his continually improving defensive zone play and utilizing his 6’1”, 190-pound frame more effectively. And these improvements have contributed to making him a more complete defenseman. Furthermore, none of it has come at the expense of his superb offensive side.

Patrick McNally
18/10/12

http://bostonherald.com/sports/college/ ... ey_d-light

Boy picking these unheralded kids headed into the college ranks seems to be shaping up like a disastrous strategy for Gillis, eh Fred?

[Fred]

What i didn't like was one year he tels us they have time to mature in the NCAA then the year prior he convinces two players to leave the NCAA before they graduate....bit of a contradiction. I guess different horse for different conditions

[dbr]

Schroeder and Cannata, right?

Schroeder is physically mature at this point - obviously he's a shrimp but by all reports he's built like a tank.. not a player who needs time to "grow" and if the development path isn't going as planned there why not make a change.

Cannata.. well he achieved just about everything he could at the NCAA level. Time to take the next step.

As for Price and McNally, I only checked one site (sorry RD) but they both look like beanpoles.. both in the neighbourhood of 6'1 175 lbs which makes Chris Tanev look like a heavyweight by comparison. I would guess that even if the NCAA is the best place for them now, if either of them adds 15-20 lbs or spends a season dominating at that level then the Canucks will once again come calling with a contract for them.

I just don't see how the Canucks actions are contradictory, I guess.

[Fred]

No Canatta graduated.
Schroeder, Tanev, Connautin left Uni before they graduated. The he tells the assembled media in Vcr that Labate, Price, Hutton, McNally, can have time to develop in the university ranks, "it's good for them" like it's a flash of inspiration. But I guess it's courses for horses.

I wish I had trouble putting on weight

[dbr]

No Canatta graduated.
Schroeder, Tanev, Connautin left Uni before they graduated. The he tells the assembled media in Vcr that Labate, Price, Hutton, McNally, can have time to develop in the university ranks, "it's good for them" like it's a flash of inspiration. But I guess it's courses for horses.

I wish I had trouble putting on weight

I don't think you can count Tanev, with free agents it's totally different. Even if you thought that any NCAA program was 10x better than any other league for player development, when you sign an undrafted player out of those ranks you are making the choice between having that player in a relatively bad development situation or not having them at all (and risking some other team signing them).

As for Connauton, I don't know his situation - perhaps the Canucks don't think highly of the coaches and/or program Western Michigan, or perhaps they do think very highly of Don Hay, or perhaps they like to see players whose major junior rights are held by teams in close proximity move over to those teams, who knows.

In any event I think you're interpreting Gillis words an actions in a pretty uncharitable fashion, which is totally your right but it makes the "contradictions" you point out seem pretty chintzy.

[Potatoe1]

Schroeder - Physically ready for Pro Hockey

Tanev - Free agent, doesn't count.

Connautin - Lacked defensive awareness and needed more games not more practice time. + Was going to the Giants to play for one of the best coaches not in the NHL

This of course has been explained over and over to you so I'm not sure why we are even bothering.

[Fred]

No Canatta graduated.
Schroeder, Tanev, Connautin left Uni before they graduated. The he tells the assembled media in Vcr that Labate, Price, Hutton, McNally, can have time to develop in the university ranks, "it's good for them" like it's a flash of inspiration. But I guess it's courses for horses.

I wish I had trouble putting on weight

I don't think you can count Tanev, with free agents it's totally different. Even if you thought that any NCAA program was 10x better than any other league for player development, when you sign an undrafted player out of those ranks you are making the choice between having that player in a relatively bad development situation or not having them at all (and risking some other team signing them).

As for Connauton, I don't know his situation - perhaps the Canucks don't think highly of the coaches and/or program Western Michigan, or perhaps they do think very highly of Don Hay, or perhaps they like to see players whose major junior rights are held by teams in close proximity move over to those teams, who knows.

In any event I think you're interpreting Gillis words an actions in a pretty uncharitable fashion, which is totally your right but it makes the "contradictions" you point out seem pretty chintzy.

OK f***k it that's what I believe same goes for Pot, you're for ever looking for a fight screw u

[Aaronp18]

OK f***k it that's what I believe same goes for Pot, you're for ever looking for a fight screw u

Geez Fred, that time of month?

I don't think anyone is looking for a fight and both dbr and Pot are simply explaining why Gillis isn't necessarily contradicting himself.

It seems fairly evident that Gillis and the Canucks deal with each player, and what they feel is best for that player, on a case by case basis.

[dbr]

Hey fair enough. What I posted is what I believe. We're bantering back and forth, just like at the pub amirite?

[Aaronp18]

Hey fair enough. What I posted is what I believe. We're bantering back and forth, just like at the pub amirite?

Yeah but this is kind of like bantering about hockey with my wife.

"Why do you always have to correct me? Why can't you just agree with me?"

"I have no problem agreeing with you hon, just try to be right about something!"



Then I duck!!