Quote:
Originally Posted by PlayfulGenius
Hahaha, now you're agreeing with my original point...nice!
I wonder if you'll notice??
|
I agree with you that Horak has been a borderline NHLer to this point. That point however is pretty much irrelevant to ranking our prospects since he has not achieved his complete upside. We're trying to rank these prospects based on how good they'll be as NHLers. Not how good they are right this second.
Do Klimchuk and Poirier have greater upsides than borderline NHLers? Of course. Does Horak have a greater upside than a borderline NHLer? Yup.
So why did you bring up borderline NHLers at all? That is what I'm still wondering about. As I said, guys like Krys Kolanos and Jamie Lundmark are/were borderline NHLers. I don't believe any of Poirier, Klimchuk or Horak look to be borderline NHLers at this point.
Commenting that the Flames should hope their 1st rounders in a deep draft will be better than a partially developed young player is right now is just a bad comparison. You are attempting to compare the upside of players drafted this year with the current status of a young player who hasn't fully established himself in the NHL yet. It is like comparing apples to oranges.
If you want to compare upside then do that.
If you want to compare current levels of development do that.
Don't try to mix and match by comparing upside vs current levels of development, it just doesn't make sense.
Horak - upside is a 3rd liner. Perhaps 2nd liner if he develops well. His current status as a borderline NHLer isn't particularly relevant except that he is closer to achieving his upside than Poirier or Klimchuk. Calling him a borderline NHLer in a discussion about prospect upside doesn't do much except confuse the issue because you make people think of true borderline NHLers like Krys Kolanos, Jamie Lundmark, etc.
That's my take anyways. Obviously we're nitpicking terms again. That's what most of arguing sports on the internet is anyways.