[tempz]

Originally Posted by Fire

Your logic seems very flawed. You claim the inability to produce points in junior somehow magically removes the grittiness of players once they turn pro? I can see logic if you claim that he will never become more than a below average point producer in the NHL.

Even if what you are saying is true, 45 games is not a big enough sample size.

He is saying defencemen who can't put up points in Junior do not have enough hockey IQ to be able to play regular minutes in the NHL, in any role. And statistics back his statement. So how is that very flawed?

Originally Posted by sureLoss

There is a strong correlation between defense man scoring in junior and NHL success.

Read this analysis of all the CHL dmen taken in the first 3 rounds from 1999 to 2008:

http://thats-offside.blogspot.ca/201...and-draft.html

The author went on to show that dmen who had low scoring in their draft year but still went to have NHL success as he defines it had significant scoring in their junior years after being drafted:

http://thats-offside.blogspot.ca/201...eman-post.html

Everyone arguing with Backcheck needs to read what Sureloss linked a few pages back, copied above for ease of clicking. Those blog posts explain the theory very clearly, it has to do with .6 PPG in your draft year or within two seasons of your draft year. Meaning statistically speaking this is a massive year for Sieloff.