Quote:
Originally Posted by Erick Estrada
I think it's fair when you pick a consensus 2nd round pick or later player in the 1st round. The NHL is no different than any other league in that when a team goes off the board at the draft they are criticized. Some teams redeem themselves if that pick turns out to be a good player but most teams have to live with the criticism because the reaches don't pan out. They rarely do that's why they are called a 'reach' as you are going against the consensus. The consensus is never always right but they are right more than they are wrong.
Personally I'm not losing sleep over the whole Jankowski pick but it's fair game for McKenzie to say what he did. Until Jankowski does anything in the NHL it's fair criticism. We would be making fun of the Oilers right now if the shoe was on the other foot. I still make fun of them for picking Moroz with the 31st pick in that draft. It's fair.
|
Only 2 players from that draft have done anything of note in the NHL so far (3 if you include Hertl).
It's way too early to start criticizing that pick. Why should the default position be to criticize until Jankowski proves them wrong? Holding back criticism until Jankowski proves them right seems like the more reasonable and "fair" position (unless they think that has already happened, in which case I would really question their insight when at least 7 players drafted ahead of Jankowski haven't sniffed the NHL yet, and many of the ones who did are not close to being established by any means... and only 4 players drafted after him have played in the NHL with the most being 17 games).