Quote:
Originally Posted by ricardodw
People tend to make light or not realize how exceptional Horak has done to date... from the 2009 draft he is #22 in NHL games played (81) ..... only 16 guys drafted in the First round have more NHL games than him.
Not too much of a stretch to say that Horak would have been a good pick at #17-20 in that first round.
|
Overlooking the team he played for. Realistically on 25+ other teams he barely steps on NHL ice if at all.
And I guess it depends how you want to define a a good pick at #17-20. He's looking like he has a good chance of becoming an NHLer so in that regard he'll accomplish more than a lot of other players picked in that area. However, he's not looking close to the top 20 of players coming out of that draft in my opinion. There's a lot of decent defenseman like de Haan and Rundblad that will take more time to develop but have higher ceilings. There's really a lot of players that have had only a cup of coffee in the NHL but are probably projected to have more upside than Horak but have less games played due to their teams depth. The Ducks alone might have 3 players from that draft in Palmieri, Holland and Vatanen.
I also disagree with the previous poster who compared Klimchuk and Poirier's upside to what Horak is now. I know it wasn't a perfect analogy and even Horak's upside is higher than it is now, but that would require both of the 2013 1st rounders to get weaker pretty much. Horak's lack of strength really hurts his potential. He's only 22 so he can buff up and he's not without skill but
this Horak would never be able to touch the third line of a competitive team. At least with Poirier if his offense doesn't completely translate to the NHL has a chance of getting bigger, more physical and with his speed make him a plausible 3rd liner. He's not nearly as top 6 or farm team like Horak is (should be).