Quote:
Originally Posted by BACKCHECK!!!
I'll have to disagree with you an awful lot on that one.
If there's two kids standing side by side, and one of them is playing in the NHL at 21, and the other is not, it's pretty much a no-brainer to me* which one of them I'm going to rate more highly as a future NHL player.
(*unless one of them is a goalie or something)
|
I don't think NHL executives think that way. I think they realize circumstance brings player X into the NHL for a 30 some games, but is he penciled into your opening night roster this fall? Probably not. So he's there but not there.
A guy like Hickey is trending towards a potential top pairing defenseman in the NHL which is so highly valuable that Treliving is fielding calls in droves from other GMs.
Having said that, I certainly respect picking Granlund here. There are no easy choices.
I think Hickey is a top pairing upside with a risk that he may stall.
I think Janokowski is 2nd line center upside with a risk that he may be a fourth line guy.
I think Granlund is a top 6 upside with little fear that he's an NHLer .
So I get the thinking. What I don't get is the thinking that there is only one way to think.