Quote:
Originally Posted by 19Yzerman19
The order in which I would select the players in question having no thought for team need or other tangential issues. I don't believe for a second that the actual draft order will look anything like that list.
This is correct, except I'm not underrating them, I'm simply not prioritizing them. In fact I am not prioritizing any particular tools, because I feel that assessing players on the basis of individual particular skills they may possess simply clouds the issue. The point is to select the best hockey player. Whether a guy has strength and "character" (whatever that means) or not, if it doesn't result in him playing the game better, I do not care about it. That being said, I am also not prioritizing specific offensive tools - otherwise Virtanen, with his speed and shot, would be well inside the top 10 and Nylander, who is probably the most skilled player in the draft, would be #1.
As for size, this has always been overrated. These are 17 year old kids playing against other teenagers. If a guy has a "man's body", and is successful in junior, it's a pretty good assumption that a large part of his success in junior is owing to the fact that he's playing against opponents who do not have that particular attribute. The instant he steps into the pro leagues he immediately loses this advantage, and will never regain it.
Having a "do not draft" list is pretty stupid, in my view, but it's especially stupid if consensus top 40 picks are on the list. If a guy who's the 12th best hockey player in the draft is get-able with the 25th pick, you take him. I don't care what the rumours are about him.
|
Well I'm glad the Flames don't see things the way you do.
1) Character is hugely important. It affects on ice because guys with high character are more likely to continue to improve and thus succeed. There's a lot of improvement all these players still have to do and it happens if you work hard. Burke talks about them having multiple words for work ethic that they're looking for in Flames players. Being a good teammate is important in creating a positive dressing room culture. Getting all your players working hard and putting everything on the line is a huge part of creating a winning culture. That you don't think is important is a real head scratcher. Leadership can come from high character guys. Determination and work ethic can mean you are a consistent performer instead of a guy who disappears for long stretches. Character does translate onto the ice, not sure how you can't see that.
2) Your view on size is way off IMO. Smaller players have a much more difficult time adapting to the NHL because some of the moves they use in junior just won't work at the NHL level and they don't have the size and strength to power through checks. NHL calibre defensemen can manhandle smaller forwards and not everyone is determined to fight through it and succeed. Bigger players have a much easier time translating their game to the NHL. They don't lose their size advantage, that is silly to suggest. Guys like Ritchie and Ekblad will have elite size/strength at the NHL level because they're already bigger than your average NHLer. Ekblad will be able to manhandle most NHL forwards. Ritchie will be able to power through the checking of your average NHL defenseman. Smaller forwards are much more easily contained and shut down by big defensemen. Smaller defensemen have a much harder time trying to contain and shut down big forwards. This seems so obvious to me that I find your argument bewildering.
You massively underrate both character and size. But the Flames don't so I'm happy we're in good hands.