Canucks News N Notes 24-25

[UWSaint]

Players drafted in the 4th round over 10 year draft span between 2008 and 2017 who made an impact in the NHL:

2008 - 3 - Holtby, Brodie, Nyqvist
2009 - 5 - Craig Smith, Ekholm, Vatanen, Marcus Foligno, Ben Chariot
2010 - 0
2011 - 2 - Pageau, Gaudreau
2012 - 1 - Josh Anderson
2013 - 5 - Saros, Wood, Paul, Graves, Copp, Motte
2014 - 6 - Toews, Arvidsson, Heinen, Lafferty, Bunting, Shesterkin
2015 - 2 - Matthieu Joseph, Nicolas Roy
2016 - 1 - Duhaime
2017 - 3 - Anderson, Swayman, Batherson

I guess the only argument against this trade would be, due to the shit show numbers in 4th round picks ever panning out, isn’t the risk/reward greater by giving a 23 year old Podkolzin one more kick at the can to see if he can evolve into a player than by trading him for a “4th round pick”?

My answer would be yes. If he doesn’t work out, we waive him, lose him for nothing, big fucking deal, whoopdie do to the 4th round pick.

I think they chose “optics” over everything, the criticisms for trading him now for a shite asset is better than the criticisms they’d receive for losing him through the waiver wire for nothing.

I would’ve preferred giving him one more chance

Its hard to argue against the proposition that 4th rounders aren't typically worth all that much. Or more accurately, are typically worthless, with the occasional contributor.

But your list is bizarre. Seems to me guys that played 7 full seasons (Donskoi) or have been starting goalies (Grubauer) "made an impact." Denis Savard is still active and has played almost 800 games (not on your list). And what's your metric for writing off other active player from recent years while contending that Podkolzin, drafted two years later, has room to evolve? Toropchenko from 2017, for example, appears to be a fairly hard to play against bottom 6 player.

First rounders who don't make it as regulars when their first waiver eligibility comes up -- what's the "hit rate" on that? That's the relevant comparison. There are occassional Michael Grabners (traded when Canucks didn't have an everyday spot, then failed to make it out of the camp of the team he was traded to), but I am thinking most of the time they turn out more like Juolevi and Kratsov and Goldobin (to name a few the Canucks have experience with).

[UWSaint]

First rounders who don't make it as regulars when their first waiver eligibility comes up -- what's the "hit rate" on that? That's the relevant comparison. There are occassional Michael Grabners (traded when Canucks didn't have an everyday spot, then failed to make it out of the camp of the team he was traded to), but I am thinking most of the time they turn out more like Juolevi and Kratsov and Goldobin (to name a few the Canucks have experience with).

And I say this thinking there is more than a non-zero chance Podkolzin becomes a decent middle six NHL contributor. If you saw my posts when Sprong was signed and subsequent player movement all but necessitate (unless Sprong was waived), I thought trading Hoglander instead would have been better asset management. It would have brought a better return and would have given Pod his last shot with the Canucks instead of somewhere else.

So who do you think should have been sent packing? Because someone making more than $800K had to be if the Canucks were to start the season with (1) five players with NHL experience at center and (2) not using LTIR.

[Chef Boi RD]

I may have missed 2 or 3 names, me bad…I guess. But what I should’ve done, maybe is made a list of 4th rounders who ended up being core players or “very good” players or excellent or right on which isn’t many. The ones who fall outside of that like your Savards and Graves well, still not worth the risk of Podkolzin getting his shit together, IMHO. But hey that’s just me.

[Cousin Strawberry]

Interesting regarding Demko Widow.

I noticed that top goaltending prospect in Nashville Askarov or whatever is possibly on his way out. I'd take a run at that guy he's a monster

[Meds]

If indeed Demko’s health is again suspect, then I think the plan should be to try and get him healthy and trade him next summer.

[Ronning's Ghost]

If indeed Demko’s health is again suspect, then I think the plan should be to try and get him healthy and trade him next summer.

Demko's health was suspect when they drafted him.

In April of 2015, during the offseason following his sophomore year, Demko underwent surgery on both hips at New York City's Hospital for Special Surgery. For almost four years, he had dealt with immense pain from tears in his acetabular labrums, a ring of cartilage at the hips

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thatcher_Demko

(and I will note here for any other posters hobbled by age who might have the resources to go outside the system that New York City's Hospital for Special Surgery is regarded as the finest orthopaedic surgery hospital in the world.)

The Canucks have done very well to get as much out of Demko as they have. Getting a player that good in the 36th spot is one of the stronger pieces of evidence that someone who wanted to argue that Benning was good at drafting could offer.

But the Demko window problem is just a subset of the entire Canuck window problem as they transition from don't-say-the-R-word to what the ownership-management group believes is a competitive phase: some shorter windows, started over an extended period, make it tough to line up those windows for multiple seasons. I think they're going to have to make some savvy and ruthless trades and astute free-agent signings to even make the most of the Hughes window. And while Hughes is already by most measures the best defenceman the Canucks have ever had, if they don't find a way to look after him better, I think he might not have many seasons near the top of his game, either.

[Todd Bersnoozi]

And MCP you are 1/5 on your five examples of these late blooming power forwards. You got Bert correct.

Shure.
You win.

U doods got me curious, so I did a little thinking/research. I seem to recall hearing that power forwards take longer to develop as well, not sure where. Think mostly during the time when we had Bert, a bit when we had Virts.

Here is my list, what do u guys think?
- The dood sitting right in front of us and the engine that drives our offence most nites: JT "F"in Miller!
- Chris Kreider: was like 31 yo b4 he broke out with a 50G campaign
- Tage Thompson: broke out like 6 years after his draft year
- Anders Lee: 6 years after draft year
- Brock Nelson: 5 years after draft year
- Alex Tuch: 5 years after draft year
- The other Bertuzzi (Bert's nephew?), Tyler: 6 years after draft year

That's all I can think for now, sure there's more out there.

[Madcombinepilot]

And MCP you are 1/5 on your five examples of these late blooming power forwards. You got Bert correct.

Shure.
You win.

U doods got me curious, so I did a little thinking/research. I seem to recall hearing that power forwards take longer to develop as well, not sure where. Think mostly during the time when we had Bert, a bit when we had Virts.

Here is my list, what do u guys think?
- The dood sitting right in front of us and the engine that drives our offence most nites: JT "F"in Miller!
- Chris Kreider: was like 31 yo b4 he broke out with a 50G campaign
- Tage Thompson: broke out like 6 years after his draft year
- Anders Lee: 6 years after draft year
- Brock Nelson: 5 years after draft year
- Alex Tuch: 5 years after draft year
- The other Bertuzzi (Bert's nephew?), Tyler: 6 years after draft year

That's all I can think for now, sure there's more out there.

There was lots more (we can re-include Neely on me being ‘1/5’, we traded him on his 21st birthday after we gave up on him) I just was too tired to argue with Blobbie over the concept when he just wanted to shit specifics.

[Cornuck]

Wow - this should be interesting. Glad he's still with the team - LINK

GM Patrik Allvin announced that IanClark asked for a new position with the team and will now work as a goalie scout and goaltending development coach.

“With Clarkie wanting something different at the hockey club, we were extremely fortunate to have Marko in the system and ready to take on the responsibility of becoming our new goaltending coach in Vancouver. Unfortunately, Ian can no longer go on the ice regularly to do the things that have made him successful. But this new role will fit with his expertise and having Clarkie going out to find and develop talent will be a big asset to the organization.”

[Blob Mckenzie]

And MCP you are 1/5 on your five examples of these late blooming power forwards. You got Bert correct.

Shure.
You win.

U doods got me curious, so I did a little thinking/research. I seem to recall hearing that power forwards take longer to develop as well, not sure where. Think mostly during the time when we had Bert, a bit when we had Virts.

Here is my list, what do u guys think?
- The dood sitting right in front of us and the engine that drives our offence most nites: JT "F"in Miller!
- Chris Kreider: was like 31 yo b4 he broke out with a 50G campaign
- Tage Thompson: broke out like 6 years after his draft year
- Anders Lee: 6 years after draft year
- Brock Nelson: 5 years after draft year
- Alex Tuch: 5 years after draft year
- The other Bertuzzi (Bert's nephew?), Tyler: 6 years after draft year

That's all I can think for now, sure there's more out there.

There was lots more (we can re-include Neely on me being ‘1/5’, we traded him on his 21st birthday after we gave up on him) I just was too tired to argue with Blobbie over the concept when he just wanted to shit specifics.

Neely scored 36 goals before his 22nd birthday. He was the victim of a shitty trade, not late development. So you're still 1/5.

Jagr, Primeau, Tocchet, Fraser, Probert, Clark, Lucic, Lindros, Brindamour, Shanahan, Deadmarsh, Tkachuk x 3, and on and on. There is zero evidence that "power forwards" take any longer than any other skaters to develop. All kinds of D-men, skilled forwards etc have also had longer development curves. Just because a few tards in the media have spewed this nonsense for years, doesn't make it so.

And " Virts" was not a power forward.

[UWSaint]

I may have missed 2 or 3 names, me bad…I guess. But what I should’ve done, maybe is made a list of 4th rounders who ended up being core players or “very good” players or excellent or right on which isn’t many. The ones who fall outside of that like your Savards and Graves well, still not worth the risk of Podkolzin getting his shit together, IMHO. But hey that’s just me.

Whatever the metrics are for fourth rounders should be applied to first rounders who didn't earn a regular NHL job by the time they became waiver eligible. What is their hit rate under whatever metric is used, and how does it compare with 4th rounders? Bersnoozi's list of later breaking players isn't apples to apples. Guys like Miller and Kreider and Tuch may not have broken out yet, but they were established NHL players by the time they reached Podz' status. Someone like Lee was always a project (he was a 6th rounder).

At 23, its not unusual to not have reached your peak. But if you a first rounder hasn't made the NHL as a regular, especially a forward, that's a problem. And if you haven't showed consistent progress, that's another flag on top of the problem.

This isn't to say Podkolzin's done for sure, or that part of his problem wasn't the result of how the team managed him. Three different NHL coaches, three different systems, another coach in the AHL. It seemed to me and some others on the board that they wanted him to be a kind of player he was not. And I think that got in his head -- as he worked on executing the way they wanted, he stopped getting better at (or even doing) the things that had previously showed promise. You could almost see him *thinking* through his play, and it left him a step behind. And that's too bad. My recollection from the WJC's is that the kid was always in the right place and he was determined; he seemed to lose that intuition, and along with it, lost a bit of his hockey IQ (especially in the o-zone).

[Madcombinepilot]

And MCP you are 1/5 on your five examples of these late blooming power forwards. You got Bert correct.

Shure.
You win.

U doods got me curious, so I did a little thinking/research. I seem to recall hearing that power forwards take longer to develop as well, not sure where. Think mostly during the time when we had Bert, a bit when we had Virts.

Here is my list, what do u guys think?
- The dood sitting right in front of us and the engine that drives our offence most nites: JT "F"in Miller!
- Chris Kreider: was like 31 yo b4 he broke out with a 50G campaign
- Tage Thompson: broke out like 6 years after his draft year
- Anders Lee: 6 years after draft year
- Brock Nelson: 5 years after draft year
- Alex Tuch: 5 years after draft year
- The other Bertuzzi (Bert's nephew?), Tyler: 6 years after draft year

That's all I can think for now, sure there's more out there.

There was lots more (we can re-include Neely on me being ‘1/5’, we traded him on his 21st birthday after we gave up on him) I just was too tired to argue with Blobbie over the concept when he just wanted to shit specifics.

Neely scored 36 goals before his 22nd birthday. He was the victim of a shitty trade, not late development. So you're still 1/5.

Jagr, Primeau, Tocchet, Fraser, Probert, Clark, Lucic, Lindros, Brindamour, Shanahan, Deadmarsh, Tkachuk x 3, and on and on. There is zero evidence that "power forwards" take any longer than any other skaters to develop. All kinds of D-men, skilled forwards etc have also had longer development curves. Just because a few tards in the media have spewed this nonsense for years, doesn't make it so.

And " Virts" was not a power forward.

Ok. Thanks Blobbie.

[Blob Mckenzie]

No problem MCP107

I could have also mentioned Ovechkin, Benn, Iginla, Gillies, Landeskog and your buddy Messier. But I think you get the point.

[Strangelove]

[Cousin Strawberry]

So is Demko really not going to be ready for camp or is this all speculation?