Quote:
Originally Posted by Caged Great
If they're making good progress on where they were last year, then in my books they're doing great. That can go sideways at any point.
McDonald's GAA has dropped by 0.40 this year
Hickey is 9th in Defensemen scoring by players under the age of 21 in the NCAA and only Werenski and Hanifin are younger than him (both expected to be top 8 picks this year)
Smith already matched his goal output in 27 less games. Has only 10 points to go to exceed his point totals.
That's what you're hoping for when you're making picks outside the first round. Whether they can make the next steps is tbd.
|
Most teams could make that claim about a lot of their picks, it is not exactly surprising that guys playing in the same league and are a year older (Smith) are doing better.
Hickey was always going to be a good pick, he was a solid player in Midget AAA, arguably one of the top dmen at nationals in Leduc that year and was a top dman in the AJ and got a scholly in his first year in the league to a top school, that is usually a good indicator of success.
But to say Smith is a good pick because he has 30 points in 37 games and has matched his previous year total basically sounds good because he was so anemic the year before offensively.
If I was Arizona I would be much more excited about Dvorak or Tampa with Point.
Either way based on what you can judge the Treliving and Burke combo on the results are pretty pathetic, this is Feaster's team and basically Feaster's players or stalwarts left over from the previous regime are the reason this team is doing well. Treliving and Burke have shown their ability to sign the taxi squad, they have a keen eye for the black aces of hockey. Where the picks end up is more of a longterm process.