Canucks Young Guns

[5thhorseman]

I reckon Reef was at the bottom of a good many dogpiles.

[Cherry Picker]

If he wants to eat his pets who am I to point fingers. We’ve all been there.
Actually, that might be a good way to fatten up Elias, but I’d still like him to stay wiry.

[Blob Mckenzie]

I’d still like him to stay wiry.

Are we talking about Reef or Elias ?

I think Reef is more crafty than he is wiry, but that’s just my opinion

[2Fingers]

I’d still like him to stay wiry.

Are we talking about Reef or Elias ?

I think Reef is more crafty than he is wiry, but that’s just my opinion

The difference is that I don’t give a shit what anyone here thinks or writes. I don’t live my life through this site like others do.

[Mickey107]

I’d still like him to stay wiry.

Are we talking about Reef or Elias ?

I think Reef is more crafty than he is wiry, but that’s just my opinion

The difference is that I don’t give a shit what anyone here thinks or writes. I don’t live my life through this site like others do.

I don't believe that. Everyone does to varying degrees. Impossible not to.
Are you saying you never get an emotional signal when you see an avatar quoting you?

[Chef Boi RD]

I’d still like him to stay wiry.

Are we talking about Reef or Elias ?

I think Reef is more crafty than he is wiry, but that’s just my opinion

The difference is that I don’t give a shit what anyone here thinks or writes. I don’t live my life through this site like others do.

Easy big fella. Eeeeeeeaaaassyyyyy

[ESQ]

I have no skin in this game. Just drawing a parallel to The Fake. He went through a bulking phase and a phase where he looked like a marathon runner. He is in his draft + 4 season and he had an even more disappointing draft + 1 season and has proceeded to serve up three pretty disappointing seasons as a pro. He has yet to crack 20 points in a season as a pro. He isn’t very physical anymore and he is soon to be 22. I have been scolded by posters that I need to be patient and “power forwards take longer to develop”. “Is the book written on Virtanen yet”, they shriek. Keep in mind he has to clear waivers next year.

Ah gotcha. With Jake, there's two questions: was he worth a 6th overall pick, and is he continuing to improve.

I think it's fair to say after 4 seasons and the better players that have emerged from later in the 2014 draft that no, he wasn't worth the 6th overall.

But on the positive side, I think he is improving still. Even over the course of the season, I think he's gotten better - even as he remains in an offensively-limited role. His fancy stats seem to be decent, while he's getting under 12 min/game and no pp time.

Either way I’m not a huge fan of the Canucks training staff in the past few years. Too many injuries and players showing up overweight and out of shape.

Yeah you gotta wonder about that. My favourite aspect of the Gillis regime was his empirical, unconventional approach to the game. The fact that he turned the sleep doctors' data into an improved travel schedule for the canucks was tremendous imo.

Prior to 2014/15, we were middle-of-the-pack for CHIP/ man-made games lost. In the past 3 seasons, we've been in the top-3 each year.

[Chef Boi RD]

I could see Jake eventually being a beast in big games like the playoffs. He's got a young mind and is on the slow boat to china, ya can't give up early on players like Jake. Frustrating as hell but me thinks the kid can be a lot for opposing teams to handle in the mean something season

[Mickey107]

When his mind works, his talent is immense. At least top six!
I'm simply NOT giving up on the guy but somebody has got to fix that on?off switch.
Inevitably that has to be himself, damn it. Wish I knew the answer.

[Island Nucklehead]

Ah gotcha. With Jake, there's two questions: was he worth a 6th overall pick, and is he continuing to improve.

I think it's fair to say after 4 seasons and the better players that have emerged from later in the 2014 draft that no, he wasn't worth the 6th overall.

But on the positive side, I think he is improving still. Even over the course of the season, I think he's gotten better - even as he remains in an offensively-limited role. His fancy stats seem to be decent, while he's getting under 12 min/game and no pp time.

The noticeable improvement is certainly a promising sign, although I'm not sure he'll ever be able to move beyond the 6th overall label, at least here in Vancouver. Nothing wrong with keeping him as a depth/energy player that can move up the lineup when injuries hit, but it's tough watching what Ehlers and Nylander (and even Nick Ritchie) are doing and not wish they were doing it for us.

Prior to 2014/15, we were middle-of-the-pack for CHIP/ man-made games lost. In the past 3 seasons, we've been in the top-3 each year.

I'd be curious what DHA thinks of the Canucks training regime, or if he's heard anything about their fitness as it relates to their injuries. Are they doing something different, not doing something other teams are doing, or is this multi-year stretch of injuries just the result of bad luck and soft injury-prone players.

[Hockey Widow]

Hard to think fractures are “training” related. Legs, ribs, back, wrist, finger etc. That’s bad luck. So many injuries have come off shot blocks so that’s systems related I guess but do you want to take shot blocking out of the game?

To me anyway training related issues would be more like soft tissues, strains, pulls, sprains.

Fluke injuries too, Brock’s back comes to mind. Pucks to face/jaw/eye.

For me I would look at training and training staff if we had a rash of groin pulls or other strains and sprains, even though those could be fluke too, like a high ankle sprain after a weird collision. And some players will always be at risk.

I think we’ve had gross bad luck since Manny’s eye injury. Heck maybe since Ohlund’s eye injury. These last three seasons have been brutal.

We’ve had players who were relatively healthy until they got to Vancouver and then they get a rash of fluk injuries. Ballard, Sutter and Gudbranson come to mind.

Don’t know what it is.

[Island Nucklehead]

Not saying it's a factor (just asking if), but it's tough looking at the Man-Games-Lost for the past couple seasons and thinking "that's just hockey".

Guys like Tanev (and maybe Gudbranson at this point) are probably just built in the Sami Salo mould, but if we avoid even 1-3 serious shoulder/rib/knee injuries because our training/recovery regime improves, that's a huge boost to the quality of the lineup.

Maybe, as you suggest, it's just a bad multi-year stretch. If that's the case, probably better to go through it now, building up that "positive karma" for years when we're actually competitive.

[Ronning's Ghost]

Hard to think fractures are “training” related. Legs, ribs, back, wrist, finger etc. That’s bad luck.

viewtopic.php?f=2&t=11230&p=297947&hilit=women#p297947

So many injuries have come off shot blocks so that’s systems related I guess but do you want to take shot blocking out of the game?

viewtopic.php?f=2&t=11230&p=297835&hili ... es#p297835

or is this multi-year stretch of injuries just the result of bad luck and soft injury-prone players.

We’ve had players who were relatively healthy until they got to Vancouver and then they get a rash of fluk injuries. Ballard, Sutter and Gudbranson come to mind.

That argues against IN's hypothesis that management is undervaluing durability in assessing what a hockey player could bring to the organization.

Some blame travel, but the Canucks' travel schedule is not that much worse than some of their near neighbour franchises (Calgary, Edmonton, San Jose), but their injury record lately has been. (viewtopic.php?f=2&t=11230&p=297835&hili ... hy#p297835)

Don’t know what it is.

I'm not sure, either, but the thing that they can change fastest and easiest is their training program.

Maybe someone should ask Sami Salo ?

[Island Nucklehead]

That argues against IN's hypothesis that management is undervaluing durability in assessing what a hockey player could bring to the organization.

Not sure that's my hypothesis. I seem to recall them touting Sutter's durability when he was acquired. If anything, I think management has a tendency to overvalue the THN scouting report (Sutter, Gudbranson) in their player evaluation.

Durability is such a tricky "attribute" to judge that it's probably not a trait worth seeking out in player acquisition. Bandaids/injury-prone players, on the other hand, are easy to spot and should probably be avoided (unless they come at a steep discount).

[Cousin Strawberry]

Gudbranson is made of glass. Shouldn't we be able to see through him when viewed through alternate spectrums?