Quote:
Originally Posted by wingmaker
Perhaps it's just a semantics thing. I understand that Baertschi, for example, was projected to be a first line winger and still carries that as his perceived potential, where as Granlund and Poirier were probably projected to be second line players when they were drafted, thus they were drafted later. However, since then, both Granlund and Poirier have improved their games and have put up better numbers and shown more than they did in their draft year. Will they become more than what was projected of them? Maybe maybe-not, but they certainly have changed the conversation...
|
Of course they have, and this is reflected in how they have shot up the rankings.
Quote:
Originally Posted by wingmaker
...and if they continue to evolve could exceed the original projections, therefor making the concept of a "ceiling" irrelevant...
|
Or, it is a mere acknowledgement of what one's "ceiling" actually is. It should not be considered permanently fixed, but fixed relative to everything we know about each player at any given time. With added information, the ceiling is liable to change.
Quote:
Originally Posted by wingmaker
These are young players. Of course we all look at them and project what they will become. That is the fun of these polls. All I am saying is that they still have the ability to evolve and exceed expectations. Capping their potential with a concept like "ceiling" does nor reflect the reality that player development is fluid and not a set progression towards an already determined potential.
|
I would recommend that you not interpret the word as a hard cap, then. Its a projection, and one that is not inflexible. It's just a measure based on what we know, and for each player, it fluctuates with time.