Quote:
Originally Posted by FlameZilla
If being a sports fan for the last 30 years has taught me anything it's that you can't bank on "can't-miss" prospects to have long and successful careers in any top league of any sport. You can hope that they pan out, but you cannot 100% count on them to. This applies exponentially more to late-round picks. We certainly can't expect a scenario where, for example, 7th-round pick Tim Harrison pots 30 goals in a season, so there's no need to prepare for a scenario where that happens. Sure, it's a 'preferable scenario', but it's unlikely to happen. May as well focus on improving our depth in that position rather than assuming or planning for long-shot prospects to fill major organisational needs.
I personally think Monahan & Jankowski have first line C potential & I imagine the vast majority on here would agree. I wouldn't bet my life on either of them being legitimate 1st-liners on a good team, but I also wouldn't rule out both of them panning out & forming a lethal 1-2 punch down the middle as we haven't seen since Nieuwy/Gilmour. Having them in the stable of prospects is amazing & I am very excited to watch them develop, but I hope management continues to address that organisational need in upcoming drafts instead of assuming that we're all sorted for the foreseeable.
|
Yes I agree with pretty much everything you said. My issue was with the posters preference for top-3 picks. If we're talking what is preferable (ie, not necessarily realistic), I would prefer to never draft in the top 3 and have 3-7th round picks turning into stars. We already have a couple potentials in 4th rounders Gaudreau and Brodie. Its not that I'm holding out hope for that to happen, I'm just saying that top-3 picks shouldn't really be preferable over anything, as it means the team sucks. What should be preferable is having a development system good enough that it doesn't matter where a kid was drafted, they have a chance to become anything. The potential of every kid drafted is almost limitless.