Quote:
Originally Posted by Tinordi
Yeah I'm letting it go, just can't help but feel that if you're going to have a crap season at least get a great prospect out of it. At sixth, we might get a great player and we might not.
But would the logical extension of your argument be that picking higher is even more important if the draft is so deep, so that you get the best of the best? I think you're arguing against yourself.
|
If we assume all the best players 5-10 years from now will be ranked exactly as they are now, then yes of course 1>6. Even if that was true though, we can't pick at 1, so don'tworrybehappy.
Bottoming out last year at 6th would have been more painful than doing the same this year. Say Lindholm and Monahan were drafted last year instead of this year. Maybe they'd be drafted after Yakupov at 2 and 3. Say we finished sixth - we'd be lamenting the fact that we're not picking top three, because look at how awesome those players are. Well now we're able to get one of them at six, so #### yeah!
Jets fans were probably bummed they had to settle for Trouba at 9 instead of the six dmen picked ahead of him. Now he's looking like a total stud. And that was just last year.
That a look at
this list and compare the rest of the draft to the top 3. I'd take any number of players from 7 onwards over #1 and #3. Ducks got not one, but TWO franchise forwards at 19 and 28.
Yes, many of the best players in the league were picked 1,2,3,4,5. But we're neither bad enough to pick there (yet) nor do we win trades with the Leafs, so we're "stuck" with sixth.