Prospect Info: 2019 Prospects PART 2

[krutovsdonut]

https://thehockeywriters.com/canucks-top-ten-prospects-midseason-2019-20/

favourite quote:

"Brogan Rafferty has had an eye-opening season"

 

[ChilliBilly]

We have a plethora of riches on D. Not one elite, but 5 - 6 NHL / AHL tweeners. Brisebois, sautner, Rathbone, Rafferty, Juolevi, Woo, etc.

With Tryamkin likely coming back, our problem is salary cap.

 

[Scumbag Frank]

We have a plethora of riches on D. Not one elite, but 5 - 6 NHL / AHL tweeners. Brisebois, sautner, Rathbone, Rafferty, Juolevi, Woo, etc.

With Tryamkin likely coming back, our problem is salary cap.

A plethora of riches of NHL/AHL tweeners? You can sign cheap bottom pair guys like Fantenberg for free every year.
Brisebois and Sautner aren't making the NHL at this point - #6/7s at best if they do.
Rathbone is a longshot due to being undersized & defensively weak. Patrick McNally put up great numbers at Harvard too.
Rafferty is also a longshot unless he improves his defense dramatically - defensemen who struggle with defense at the AHL level don't stick in the NHL no matter how many points they score. He's also 24 so he doesn't have years to figure it out.
Juolevi isn't dominating the AHL and still has trouble at times defending AHL forwards. He isn't tracking to be a top 4 guy.
Woo is the only guy that I could see becoming a top 4 D and even then it's a longshot until we see him dominate the AHL.
Tryamkin is basically Jordie Benn - worthless.

The lack of any promising young D other than Quinn Hughes is the organization's #1 problem.

You want to see what an actual plethora of riches on D looks like, see Colorado's under 25 group:
Makar, Girard, Byram, Timmins, Zadorov, Ryan Graves. That's crazy.

 

[krutovsdonut]

A plethora of riches of NHL/AHL tweeners? You can sign cheap bottom pair guys like Fantenberg for free every year.
Brisebois and Sautner aren't making the NHL at this point - #6/7s at best if they do.
Rathbone is a longshot due to being undersized & defensively weak. Patrick McNally put up great numbers at Harvard too.
Rafferty is also a longshot unless he improves his defense dramatically - defensemen who struggle with defense at the AHL level don't stick in the NHL no matter how many points they score. He's also 24 so he doesn't have years to figure it out.
Juolevi isn't dominating the AHL and still has trouble at times defending AHL forwards. He isn't tracking to be a top 4 guy.
Woo is the only guy that I could see becoming a top 4 D and even then it's a longshot until we see him dominate the AHL.
Tryamkin is basically Jordie Benn - worthless.

The lack of any promising young D other than Quinn Hughes is the organization's #1 problem.

You want to see what an actual plethora of riches on D looks like, see Colorado's under 25 group:
Makar, Girard, Byram, Timmins, Zadorov, Ryan Graves. That's crazy.

you must really hate us.

you pick the best young team in the league and include their established nhl dmen to compare to our prospects, and we still look pretty good in comparison if you ignore the way you trash every one of our prospects. but the real question is how do we compare to the rest of the league, not just the best young team?

half those players come from colorado flushing their previous failed core and trying to reboot and they are ten+ years into their rebuild. we'll probably have decent defensive depth if we are still drafting 3rd overall 4 years from now and have traded horvat and boeser for futures.

byram and girard come from the duchene trade.
zadorov is from the ror trade

 

[4Twenty]

We have a plethora of riches on D. Not one elite, but 5 - 6 NHL / AHL tweeners. Brisebois, sautner, Rathbone, Rafferty, Juolevi, Woo, etc.

With Tryamkin likely coming back, our problem is salary cap.

Usually if they're not elite, you wouldn't refer to them as "riches". They certainly have a plethora of tweeners. I would imagine that isn't unique.

@krutovsdonut why is that considered "hate" when out of the other side of your mouth, you say it "looks pretty good in comparison"? If it looks good, then it's not hate.

I love the goalpost moving to their "10 year+ rebuild".

This is a classic case of you "anti-negging". You deem something negative and argue against it, when there really isn't anything wrong with what that poster said. He questioned calling a bunch of tweeners a "plethora of riches". That's a perfectly legitimate response.

It would be awesome if instead of anti-negging, you would do the actual work you're requesting - "how do we compare to the rest of the league"?

I can't imagine a list that includes Sautner and Brisebois especially, wouldn't land very high up a ranking list....but then I'm guessing there will be a caveat for all the other teams based on how long they've been rebuilding.

 

[Diversification]

We have a plethora of riches on D. Not one elite, but 5 - 6 NHL / AHL tweeners. Brisebois, sautner, Rathbone, Rafferty, Juolevi, Woo, etc.

With Tryamkin likely coming back, our problem is salary cap.

We need one of Brisebois, Sautner, Rafferty, Juolevi, Tryamkin, Woo to hit for us in the next few years - hit meaning they demonstrate that they can handle top4 defensive minutes. A bunch of rounds in the chamber but a lot of uncertainty until one of them actually does. Of those, I'd say Tryamkin and Juolevi are the 2 most likely.

While I wouldn't characterize that as a plethora of riches, the situation is far from hopeless as some might suggest.

 

[4Twenty]

We need one of Brisebois, Sautner, Rafferty, Juolevi, Tryamkin, Woo to hit for us in the next few years - hit meaning they demonstrate that they can handle top4 defensive minutes. A bunch of rounds in the chamber but a lot of uncertainty until one of them actually does. Of those, I'd say Tryamkin and Juolevi are the 2 most likely.

While I wouldn't characterize that as a plethora of riches, the situation is far from hopeless as some might suggest.

Yeah, not sure who called it hopeless, but somewhere in between hopeless and a plethora of riches makes sense.....I know people hate the "m" word, but that's a mediocre group of u25 defense even if you put Hughes on it.

 

[Diversification]

Yeah, not sure who called it hopeless, but somewhere in between hopeless and a plethora of riches makes sense.....I know people hate the "m" word, but that's a mediocre group of u25 defense even if you put Hughes on it.

Agreed. And I wasn't accusing you of calling it hopeless, but there definitely some on this board who view our blueline prospects... dimly.

 

[krutovsdonut]

Usually if they're not elite, you wouldn't refer to them as "riches". They certainly have a plethora of tweeners. I would imagine that isn't unique.

@krutovsdonut why is that considered "hate" when out of the other side of your mouth, you say it "looks pretty good in comparison"? If it looks good, then it's not hate.

i can't read a post gleefully trashing a bunch of oue prospects with obvious potential while pumping another team's tires any other way. ryan graves is a guy the avs salvaged after the rangers gave up on him at 22 when he regressed, but brisebois is definitely not making the nhl as a prospect at 22. sure thing.

I love the goalpost moving to their "10 year+ rebuild".

This is a classic case of you "anti-negging". You deem something negative and argue against it, when there really isn't anything wrong with what that poster said. He questioned calling a bunch of tweeners a "plethora of riches". That's a perfectly legitimate response.

It would be awesome if instead of anti-negging, you would do the actual work you're requesting - "how do we compare to the rest of the league"?

I can't imagine a list that includes Sautner and Brisebois especially, wouldn't land very high up a ranking list....but then I'm guessing there will be a caveat for all the other teams based on how long they've been rebuilding.

if i am anti negging, what exactly are you doing? why the label to delegitimize people you disagree with? the reality is i saw a bad post and responded.

and i think it was a terrible post. he questioned the plethora of riches comment by comparing a bunch of prospects to a team with a bunch of established nhl players, and he picked the best young team in the league. it was a ridiculous comparison because the op couldn't actually find a list of actual prospects to fit his narrative.

which is to sat the op didn't do any work to produce the terrible post i commented on, so why should i produce work to comment on it? that is a tired roe schtick to assign homework to anyone who questions what they say.

 

[UK Canuck]

The Podfather has his first KHL goal!!!!!

 

[canuckking1]

The Podfather has his first KHL goal!!!!!

Great news!


First of many I hope.

 

[UK Canuck]

Great news!


First of many I hope.

nice goal as well, powered to the net, deked round the goalie and slipped it inside the post

 

[4Twenty]

i can't read a post gleefully trashing a bunch of oue prospects with obvious potential while pumping another team's tires any other way. ryan graves is a guy the avs salvaged after the rangers gave up on him at 22 when he regressed, but brisebois is definitely not making the nhl as a prospect at 22. sure thing.



if i am anti negging, what exactly are you doing? why the label to delegitimize people you disagree with? the reality is i saw a bad post and responded.

and i think it was a terrible post. he questioned the plethora of riches comment by comparing a bunch of prospects to a team with a bunch of established nhl players, and he picked the best young team in the league. it was a ridiculous comparison because the op couldn't actually find a list of actual prospects to fit his narrative.

which is to sat the op didn't do any work to produce the terrible post i commented on, so why should i produce work to comment on it? that is a tired roe schtick to assign homework to anyone who questions what they say.

You mean he chose the team that actually has a plethora of riches to compare to? That makes sense to me.

You were the one who brought up the idea they needed to be compared to all the other teams, I thought you would be interested in doing that work. You were the one who suggested more homework needed to be done.

 

[sting101]

It was a pessimistic dismissive post though.

Tryamkin could easily be as effective as Zadorov by next season.
Rafferty is tearing the AHL up and may need some defensive work but you think Timmins doesn't need some work also. He's slowed considerably after a nice start. Rafferty could be as good or better given his adjustment to pro hockey 24 or not. No one thought Dan Boyle was gonna be much at 24. I would be careful capping a player on his curve.
Byram i love but he's had a poor draft +1 season so far regressing in production (20pts in 30 games) and not exactly dominating the U20s (2 assists in 7 games) Lets wait till he dominates the AHL before we throw him way ahead of Juolevi who everyone seems to think regressed in his draft +1 but did better than Byram has to date. I will say Byram is a superior skater which may make all the difference but in 2017 people were projecting Juolevi too so....
Graves has been a nice find also but i dont exactly see him as a stud going forward...he's having a bit of an anomaly year so far. He's solid for 1 year after 260 games in the AHL. We'll see
Brisebois and Sautner are not the same player. Brisebois can really skate. His career will be defined by mistakes and puck moving. Yes likely a depth guy but it's lazy and erroneous to just toss him and Sautner into the same pile.
Woo i'm not a huge fan of but he's pretty mature and solid could be a Carlo type if everything goes perfectly. That's a BIG IF he can adjust to NHL speed.....i'm really skeptical
I'm more a fan of Utunen than Rathbone. Both are interesting long shots

It's easy to project but as we've seen over the years don't cash cheques till these guys are actually good NHLers. The Avs young D is probably as good as it gets but as Krutov said it cost them a Conn Smyth #1 C in O'Reilly and Duchene. It's not like they just drafted them without those currencies as well as adding scoring up front.

If the point is the Avs have built an incredible group of young D then sure everyone would agree. If the point is the Canucks are doing a poor job relative to the Avs then give the Canucks the O'Reilly Duchene returns and re compare. I'm not sure what creating that comp really shows other than the Avs correctly used that currency to address a horrible defense.

 

[4Twenty]

It was a pessimistic dismissive post though.

Tryamkin could easily be as effective as Zadorov by next season.
Rafferty is tearing the AHL up and may need some defensive work but you think Timmins doesn't need some work also. He's slowed considerably after a nice start. Rafferty could be as good or better given his adjustment to pro hockey 24 or not. No one thought Dan Boyle was gonna be much at 24. I would be careful capping a player on his curve.
Byram i love but he's had a poor draft +1 season so far regressing in production (20pts in 30 games) and not exactly dominating the U20s (2 assists in 7 games) Lets wait till he dominates the AHL before we throw him way ahead of Juolevi who everyone seems to think regressed in his draft +1 but did better than Byram has to date. I will say Byram is a superior skater which may make all the difference but in 2017 people were projecting Juolevi too so....
Graves has been a nice find also but i dont exactly see him as a stud going forward...he's having a bit of an anomaly year so far. He's solid for 1 year after 260 games in the AHL. We'll see
Brisebois and Sautner are not the same player. Brisebois can really skate. His career will be defined by mistakes and puck moving. Yes likely a depth guy but it's lazy and erroneous to just toss him and Sautner into the same pile.
Woo i'm not a huge fan of but he's pretty mature and solid could be a Carlo type if everything goes perfectly. That's a BIG IF he can adjust to NHL speed.....i'm really skeptical
I'm more a fan of Utunen than Rathbone. Both are interesting long shots

It's easy to project but as we've seen over the years don't cash cheques till these guys are actually good NHLers. The Avs young D is probably as good as it gets but as Krutov said it cost them a Conn Smyth #1 C in O'Reilly and Duchene. It's not like they just drafted them without those currencies as well as adding scoring up front.

If the point is the Avs have built an incredible group of young D then sure everyone would agree. If the point is the Canucks are doing a poor job relative to the Avs then give the Canucks the O'Reilly Duchene returns and re compare. I'm not sure what creating that comp really shows other than the Avs correctly used that currency to address a horrible defense.

How could Tryamkin "easily" be as effective? Based on what?
Now we're knocking Byram and artificially using him to compare with Juolevi? Weird.

Why is it lazy to compare Sautner and Brisebois, if either make it, it'll be on a bottom pair. They're cohorts.

Benning traded a selke winner comparable to ROR, picked Luca Sbisa in the deal. Yeah, they didn't have a duchene to move, but they also had plenty of quality veterans who's trade returns combined could come to the same level as Duchene's return, ie/ The return for Bieksa, Garrison and Hamhuis could've easily been a 1st and three 2nd's.

The only people who didn't get the point, are ones like yourself and krutov who regularly rail against negativity and pessimism. The purpose of bringing up the Avalanche was to point out a team that actually has a "plethora of riches". It wasn't meant to compare the Canucks to the Avs....that's you guys moving the goal posts.

 

[Lindgren]

Hoglander has a goal. Rogle leads 2-0 in the second period.

 

[krutovsdonut]

You mean he chose the team that actually has a plethora of riches to compare to? That makes sense to me.

You were the one who brought up the idea they needed to be compared to all the other teams, I thought you would be interested in doing that work. You were the one who suggested more homework needed to be done.

chillbilly was expressly referring to prospects, not nhl roster players. he listed only prospects and he didn't even mention hughes.

drunkan moved the goalposts and compared those prospects to proven nhl players, downplaying their potential by comparing them to established players. that's dumb and unfair.

is zadorov a prospect after 7 nhl seasons? how the heck do you fairly compare him to a guy still in junior like woo?
is girard a prospect in his 3rd nhl season?
is graves a prospect in his 2nd nhl season?

does the canuck prospect list still suck by comparison if those guys are removed? i don't care whether makar and quinn are in or out since they cancel each other out, but technically we should ditch them too when discussing prospects.

and, also, does the canuck prospect list still suck when you recall we are several years behind the avs in any rebuild?

 

[4Twenty]

chillbilly was expressly referring to prospects, not nhl roster players. he listed only prospects and he didn't even mention hughes.

drunkan moved the goalposts and compared those prospects to proven nhl players, downplaying their potential by comparing them to established players. that's dumb and unfair.

is zadorov a prospect after 7 nhl seasons? how the heck do you fairly compare him to a guy still in junior like woo?
is girard a prospect in his 3rd nhl season?
is graves a prospect in his 2nd nhl season?

does the canuck prospect list still suck by comparison if those guys are removed? i don't care whether makar and quinn are in or out since they cancel each other out, but technically we should ditch them too when discussing prospects.

and, also, does the canuck prospect list still suck when you recall we are several years behind the avs in any rebuild?

i just don't think the Canucks have a plethora of riches on the blueline.

I don't really care to dig into the Avalanche's prospect pool or young players, but you may find it interesting Canucks "prospect" Nikita Tryamkin is older than any Avalanche player that's been mentioned here.

 

[krutovsdonut]

i just don't think the Canucks have a plethora of riches on the blueline.

I don't really care to dig into the Avalanche's prospect pool or young players, but you may find it interesting Canucks "prospect" Nikita Tryamkin is older than any Avalanche player that's been mentioned here.

lol, this is so salty. why are you defending that post so hard?

chillbilly's "plethora" list is of 5-6 guys who he actually named who he said "we have".

tryamkin was mentioned in the next paragraph as an additional defence asset "likely coming back".

as noted, chillbilly didn't mention hughes either. when he referred to a plethora of 5-6 players, he was obviously referring to the 5-6 prospects he actually named.

i understood it. i think anyone reading it understood it, unless they didn't want to so they could make a post trashing canuck prospects by comparing them to established nhl players, or unless they felt the strange urge to defend a post trashing canuck prospects.

 

[4Twenty]

lol, this is so salty. why are you defending that post so hard?

chillbilly's "plethora" list is of 5-6 guys who he actually named who he said "we have".

tryamkin was mentioned in the next paragraph as an additional defence asset "likely coming back".

as noted, chillbilly didn't mention hughes either. when he referred to a plethora of 5-6 players, he was obviously referring to the 5-6 prospects he actually named.

i understood it. i think anyone reading it understood it, unless they didn't want to so they could make a post trashing canuck prospects by comparing them to established nhl players, or unless they felt the strange urge to defend a post trashing canuck prospects.

He was referring to it as "riches". That isn't riches.

That's the dispute man. I don't even know what you "understood" from chillybilly....It isn't about understanding to me at least, it's about me disputing that list is riches.

Is Capobianco, Dineen, Sarijarvi and Mayo and embarassment of riches? no. It's comparable to the list chilly billy trotted out.

Again with the anti-neg, since you disagree you're labeling anyone who doesn't think that list is a plethora of riches just wants to trash the Canucks. It's a really pathetic way to enter discussions. Reality is, that list of prospects is shit. And if you asked any other fanbase they'd say the same damn thing.

Post that list on the trade boards......"what is the value of this plethora of riches on the Vancouver blueline".....it would get laughed off the damn forum.

 

[bandwagonesque]

Benning traded a selke winner comparable to ROR, picked Luca Sbisa in the deal.

This is a gross exaggeration. Ryan O'Reilly was 24 at the time and was in excellent health, having missed two games in the past two seasons. Kesler was 30, had serious and well-documented hip problems and had missed nearly half of the past two seasons.

 

[bobbyb2009]

This is a gross exaggeration. Ryan O'Reilly was 24 at the time and was in excellent health, having missed two games in the past two seasons. Kesler was 30, had serious and well-documented hip problems and had missed nearly half of the past two seasons.

And had a no trade clause and would only waive it for one team.

 

[bandwagonesque]

And had a no trade clause and would only waive it for one team.

Yep. This kind of deliberate ignorance of details which completely change the character of a situation is making it impossible to have real conversations about anything on this board.

 

[sting101]

How could Tryamkin "easily" be as effective? Based on what?
Now we're knocking Byram and artificially using him to compare with Juolevi? Weird.

Why is it lazy to compare Sautner and Brisebois, if either make it, it'll be on a bottom pair. They're cohorts.

Benning traded a selke winner comparable to ROR, picked Luca Sbisa in the deal. Yeah, they didn't have a duchene to move, but they also had plenty of quality veterans who's trade returns combined could come to the same level as Duchene's return, ie/ The return for Bieksa, Garrison and Hamhuis could've easily been a 1st and three 2nd's.

The only people who didn't get the point, are ones like yourself and krutov who regularly rail against negativity and pessimism. The purpose of bringing up the Avalanche was to point out a team that actually has a "plethora of riches". It wasn't meant to compare the Canucks to the Avs....that's you guys moving the goal posts.

Past play history and age.
Fact is he has.
Already explained it.
Wrong thread. And No its not even close and you know as well that the team took their BPA in McCann.
Kinda disingenuous considering the very thing you were claiming wasn't happening is exactly what you just did.

 

[Scumbag Frank]

you must really hate us.

No? I'm a Canucks fan just like you. I guess you're implying I have some kind of agenda, but no agenda here.
I love our U25 forward group but I'm worried about our U25 D group and hope it gets better so we can be a contender.

you pick the best young team in the league and include their established nhl dmen to compare to our prospects, and we still look pretty good in comparison if you ignore the way you trash every one of our prospects. but the real question is how do we compare to the rest of the league, not just the best young team?

I didn't say we're better or worse than the rest of the league. All I said is I don't see any young top 4 D in the organization aside from Hughes and maybe Woo, and I pointed to Colorado as an example of what a real plethora of riches looks like.
Comparing U25 groups is better than comparing 'prospect pools'. We have a good young forward group because guys like Pettersson are already in the NHL, so I don't see the point of excluding young NHL players.

I'm not "trashing prospects", I'm trying to project realistically who's gonna be a top 4 D man.
Woo I could maybe see - the rest of the guys I just don't see it. I like defensemen who are good in their own end and think it's a pre-requisite to be a top 4.
Who do you think is likely to become a top 4?
Different story with our forward prospects, where you can realistically project guys like Madden or Podkolzin or Hoglander becoming a top 6.

half those players come from colorado flushing their previous failed core and trying to reboot and they are ten+ years into their rebuild. we'll probably have decent defensive depth if we are still drafting 3rd overall 4 years from now and have traded horvat and boeser for futures.
byram and girard come from the duchene trade.
zadorov is from the ror trade

I didn't mention anything about this, nor did I criticize management for not having a better pool. You seem to have implied that yourself.
All I said is I don't see a lot of promise in our young D-men pool regardless of why that is.