Quote:
Originally Posted by Dorkmaster
Here is what I don't really understand. The Flames have holes everywhere and yet we would rather take Barkov than Jones even when Jones is consensus number one?
.
|
I agree. Too much emphasis is put on position. Most, if not all of these prospects will not step in right away, and if they do, they aren't likely to be key players immediately. Not to mention the unpleasant truth that any of them could end up being busts or not live up to expectations.
For this reason, you need to take the best player available. If you're an optimist, you might even point out that some centre we already drafted (maybe Jankowski), or some later round dark horse could develop beyond expectations in a couple of years. Drafting for present needs is not a great strategy IMO.
People might point out to the rarity of #1 centres available on the market, which is a fair observation (but it's not an impossibility either), but elite players in general are rare enough that if you think one has even a slightly better chance of panning out or being a better player, you need to jump on it. How many Iginla calibre players have we had in the past 16 years? One! It's still once is a hockey generation for us. Isn't that rare enough? How many Al MacInnis's have we have since we traded him? Zip.
I'm not saying Drouin or Jones are better prospects than Mackinnon or Barkov, but if I was a GM and I thought they were even slightly better (or had a slightly smaller chance of being a bust), there is no way I wouldn't take them over the others.