Boston Bruins After 1/3 of the Season...

[LouJersey]

should we look at the draft results from a 3 year stretch of hockey and let you defense your statement? ive already looked at the results myself and feel comfortable with my statement

Sure, start from 2009 and see how many first rounders got second contracts.

 

[Alberta_OReilly_Fan]

Sure, start from 2009 and see how many first rounders got second contracts.

you can do 2009-2011... ive just done 2011-2013 since your argument was that in recent years the drafting has gotten remarkably better than my 50% judgement

I always love when people back up their argument with a bit of research when its easy enough to do. so I wait to see how you prove me wrong and how strongly defensable your position is after examing the evidence

 

[LouJersey]

you can do 2009-2011... ive just done 2011-2013 since your argument was that in recent years the drafting has gotten remarkably better than my 50% judgement

I always love when people back up their argument with a bit of research when its easy enough to do. so I wait to see how you prove me wrong and how strongly defensable your position is after examing the evidence

2009-2012 I have come up with about 85% of first rounders getting second NHL contracts. Some players in 2013 are still on their entry level.

 

[LouJersey]

should we look at the draft results from a 3 year stretch of hockey and let you defense your statement? ive already looked at the results myself and feel comfortable with my statement

here I did it for us

lets go back 5 drafts so that the kids have had a fair chance to make it and see who is looking like they have a good career going...
2013
mackinnnon, barkov, drouin, jones, Monahan, nurse, ristolainen, hovart, wennberg, mantha seam to be the 10 guys you can say are top contributors to their team
lindholm, domi, and maybe Theodore all could join that list... and who else?
I see 8 guys I would call career bubble players/ahl talent... and the other 9 guys fall into the category of having no trade value imo and will probably bounce around the nhl
2012
lets say murray, galchenuk, reily, lindholm, dumba, trouba, Forsberg, ceci, hertl, teruvainen, vasilevsky, maata, skejei and maybe pearson look like 14 solid picks
jankowski and subban might be slow developers with a chance to make it
I see only 5 guys that are pretty much done at this point so the other 9 guys should still get another chance to make it but are more suspect than prospect now
2011
Hopkins, landeskog, huberdeau, Larson, zibanjedab, scheifele, coutourier, Hamilton, brodin, miller, klefblom, namesiknov, murphy, and rackell all seem like 14 guys we would all like on our team
strome, baertschi could still become more than 3rd line 40 point guys I guess...
I'm not sure who else on the list is a success...
if you disagree with me on some names... tell us what is your definition of a good first round pick or a solid nhl player

this is what you said .

More than 50% of first round picks will never play well enough to earn a second nhl contract.

 

[JP Nolan]

I loved the Hamilton return based on the timeline and the crap his agent tried to pull to steer him to Chiarelli.

JFK
Senyshyn
Lauzon

Very good haul for da ginger feather

The jury is still out on this haul. Hamilton did not hold any cards and Sweeney panicked so bad on this deal in two severe rookie mistakes.

1- what he got back. He could have traded Hamilton to twenty other teams in the coming months after the draft and gotten a more ready NHL caliber player or players. Dougie had tremendous value (i hated the guy) but there were many suckers out there who loved the kid. And NHL GMs as well. There was no rush. And OK....So he took the deal he took.

2- He compounds the weak trade by making the WRONG pick at the draft, when everyone knew who he should have taken. It is a move that haunts us.

I can live with those two mistakes but it hurt the team the last two seasons and a talet for talet guy on our team could have made a big difference in missing the playoffs two years...Lets give him a pass.

LOUZAN.....I would think this kid should be ready for a look by now ? I know he is tough.

JFK, i saw every game he played here and about 6 games in college. Lets just say the Bergeron comparisons it is safe to say are a bit off. I am not holding my breath this kid ever becomes a top 6 winger. I doubt it from what i gather.

Senyshen, He has the tools, lets see if he has the drive.

Nothing here screams lock. But we have a long way to go before Hamilton status is achieved. I will say one thing, Right now as of this very second and the last two years plus.... it has been a total bust......That much i can say with certainty.

 

[00BW]

This thread is crazy. A healthy team that goes 8-2 to get the team into a playoff spot 1/3rd of the way into the season and most of the posters here are Debbie Downers that just want to b***h. I had to laugh at the poster on page 2 trying to negatively compare Sweeney to Epstein with a trait they share. Epstein, the greatest GM in Red Sox history (two championships and the foundation for a third) and probably the best GM currently in the MLB who ended the two longest North American sports championship droughts, has a record any NHL GM would love to have.

There is a great mix of skilled young guys and vets. We saw the team falter when too many key vets were out and too many rookies had to play. A couple of them were not ready or can't play the roles asked but once the vets like Krejci came back, everyone fit their roles. With the good goaltending and some health this team could make it to the Eastern Conference Finals.

It's great to see how well setup for the future the Bruins are. Someone on Twitter posted the stat that they are the 11th youngest team right now but simply removing Chara makes the Bruins the 3rd youngest. The development path through Providence is also in top form with Heinen, DeBrusk, and Grzelcyk all needing a full AHL season last year and now playing like solid NHLers. They were told what they needed to do, put in the effort honing those new skills, and now they and the Bruins are reaping the benefits. Heinen in particular looks like a completely different player; Bergeron may be the only forward on this team harder on the stick at winning puck battles than he is right now. JFK, Senyshyn, and Zboril are following along a similar development path and should be ready to push out more vets for jobs next year or fill in late in the year or playoffs.

 

[DKH]

The jury is still out on this haul. Hamilton did not hold any cards and Sweeney panicked so bad on this deal in two severe rookie mistakes.

1- what he got back. He could have traded Hamilton to twenty other teams in the coming months after the draft and gotten a more ready NHL caliber player or players. Dougie had tremendous value (i hated the guy) but there were many suckers out there who loved the kid. And NHL GMs as well. There was no rush. And OK....So he took the deal he took.

2- He compounds the weak trade by making the WRONG pick at the draft, when everyone knew who he should have taken. It is a move that haunts us.

I can live with those two mistakes but it hurt the team the last two seasons and a talet for talet guy on our team could have made a big difference in missing the playoffs two years...Lets give him a pass.

LOUZAN.....I would think this kid should be ready for a look by now ? I know he is tough.

JFK, i saw every game he played here and about 6 games in college. Lets just say the Bergeron comparisons it is safe to say are a bit off. I am not holding my breath this kid ever becomes a top 6 winger. I doubt it from what i gather.

Senyshen, He has the tools, lets see if he has the drive.

Nothing here screams lock. But we have a long way to go before Hamilton status is achieved. I will say one thing, Right now as of this very second and the last two years plus.... it has been a total bust......That much i can say with certainty.

sounds like you watched a lot more hockey then me on the kids but I see JFK as a center not a winger.

I watched him live at BU and in Providence and as a parent of players and coach I look for specific attributes and decision-making and ability to find open space to be on both ends of plays.

JFK certainly looks the part to me but you may see things I don't

I disagree with the entire post like every single area touched

I'm not saying your right or I am but no one in all my time here have I ever read and been 180 degrees remove on everything you post going back

 

[Alberta_OReilly_Fan]

this is what you said .

More than 50% of first round picks will never play well enough to earn a second nhl contract.

its a quote i picked up from i think cliff flecher if i remember correct... what he meant and what i mean is that by the time a pick has completed his first contract hes either part of your plans... or he isnt. alot of these guys might be waived and stick around for a cup of coffee... so yeah they might get a 1 year minimum contract... even a 2 year deal like jimmy hayes

but was jimmy hayes deserving? my true point was worth a 2nd contract. are you happy if jimmy hayes or mark stuart or brent connolly got second contracts with us?

only around 50% will deserve a second contract..
qualify as bonafide nhl players

however you want to word it... i stand by my point that fan expectation of success for first round picks is out of step with reality

 

[TaroTsujimoto]

I am going to keep saying it until everyone is in agreement. This team is elite. I mean, what are we missing exactly. Nothing major. We're got a great 1-2 punch down the middle, a couple of elite wingers in Marchand and Pastrnak, great forward depth (might not be room for Spooner/Cehlarik/Vatrano), a legitimate #1 defenceman in Chara, an elite puck moving defenceman in Krug, a strong defence corps overall, a recent Vezina winner in net, a top PP when everyone is healthy (see last season), a great PK, and we play strong team defence and are very well coached. A lot of teams which the naysayers/underraters probably consider "contenders" have bigger holes/weaknesses than we do. It's telling that the WORST thing I can say about this team is that some of the rookies could potentially hit a wall.

 

[BruinDust]

its a quote i picked up from i think cliff flecher if i remember correct... what he meant and what i mean is that by the time a pick has completed his first contract hes either part of your plans... or he isnt. alot of these guys might be waived and stick around for a cup of coffee... so yeah they might get a 1 year minimum contract... even a 2 year deal like jimmy hayes

but was jimmy hayes deserving? my true point was worth a 2nd contract. are you happy if jimmy hayes or mark stuart or brent connolly got second contracts with us?

only around 50% will deserve a second contract..
qualify as bonafide nhl players

however you want to word it... i stand by my point that fan expectation of success for first round picks is out of step with reality

It's nice and all that you whipped out a quote from Cliff Fletcher from probably the mid 90s, but you're ignoring the fact things have changed.

1) Scouting is better now. Teams are investing more money into scouting, because they understand in a cap system, drafting and development are simply more important now than when they were pre-cap when you could fix problems easier via trade and free agency. More money invested = more scouts, more games being seen, more information to base a decision on. They also have much more access to video, more access to information on where these players are that need to be scouted.

2) Teams are investing more in development. We are seeing player development coaches assigned to minor league teams, and were now seeing AHL team-specific goaltending coaches.

3) Overall fitness of young players. Gone are the days when kids get drafted based on pure talent, and now they have to start eating and training like a professional. These kids are doing this stuff at a much younger age, eating right, training right, and by the time they are drafted, these kids are already used to the type of off-ice dedication it takes to perform at a higher level. No longer do teams have to draft kids based on talent alone and HOPE they mature into being committed to fitness and nutrition.

4) Analytics and advanced stats. While me personally I'm not a huge fan, they do have value, and teams have more now to go by when evaluation players than just the old time basic stats of G, A, Pts, and +/-.

Thus, success rates from 1st round picks is much higher than whenever Cliff Fletcher made his 50/50 quote.

 

[Alberta_OReilly_Fan]

I am going to keep saying it until everyone is in agreement. This team is elite. I mean, what are we missing exactly. Nothing major. We're got a great 1-2 punch down the middle, a couple of elite wingers in Marchand and Pastrnak, great forward depth (might not be room for Spooner/Cehlarik/Vatrano), a legitimate #1 defenceman in Chara, an elite puck moving defenceman in Krug, a strong defence corps overall, a recent Vezina winner in net, a top PP when everyone is healthy (see last season), a great PK, and we play strong team defence and are very well coached. A lot of teams which the naysayers/underraters probably consider "contenders" have bigger holes/weaknesses than we do. It's telling that the WORST thing I can say about this team is that some of the rookies could potentially hit a wall.

I remember 2011... following our collapse in 2010 from the 3-0 lead

We actually did that in second round... then in 2011 we finshed over 100 points regular season and won the division...

But struggling to 7 games in first round had this place screaming for blood. Chiarelli and julien needed to be fired. Chara wasnt captain material. Krejci couldnt carry savards jockstrap.

Very few voices of reason told us to relax... the team was good.

Then we went to finals 2 of next 3 times

This team now is filling up with kids the way that team did. Im sure there will be growing pains similar to blowing a 3-0 playoff lead

But maybe some fans here that missed the ride last time around would be happier if they jumped on this bandwagon in a more timely fashion.

I see very good things about to happen. So much negativity really saddens me for my fellow fans. Being allowed to cheer the growth of these kids is a privlidge im so thankful for

Go bruins go

 

[Alberta_OReilly_Fan]

It's nice and all that you whipped out a quote from Cliff Fletcher from probably the mid 90s, but you're ignoring the fact things have changed.

1) Scouting is better now. Teams are investing more money into scouting, because they understand in a cap system, drafting and development are simply more important now than when they were pre-cap when you could fix problems easier via trade and free agency. More money invested = more scouts, more games being seen, more information to base a decision on. They also have much more access to video, more access to information on where these players are that need to be scouted.

2) Teams are investing more in development. We are seeing player development coaches assigned to minor league teams, and were now seeing AHL team-specific goaltending coaches.

3) Overall fitness of young players. Gone are the days when kids get drafted based on pure talent, and now they have to start eating and training like a professional. These kids are doing this stuff at a much younger age, eating right, training right, and by the time they are drafted, these kids are already used to the type of off-ice dedication it takes to perform at a higher level. No longer do teams have to draft kids based on talent alone and HOPE they mature into being committed to fitness and nutrition.

4) Analytics and advanced stats. While me personally I'm not a huge fan, they do have value, and teams have more now to go by when evaluation players than just the old time basic stats of G, A, Pts, and +/-.

Thus, success rates from 1st round picks is much higher than whenever Cliff Fletcher made his 50/50 quote.

And yet if you take the actual draft class and try to find more than 15 names you call successful picks you will embarrass yourself here

If mark stuart and brent connolly and malcolm subban arent successful picks you will be hard pressed to find better than 50% success

But feel free to toss out some names and see if you can make a case

 

[Alberta_OReilly_Fan]

It's nice and all that you whipped out a quote from Cliff Fletcher from probably the mid 90s, but you're ignoring the fact things have changed.

1) Scouting is better now. Teams are investing more money into scouting, because they understand in a cap system, drafting and development are simply more important now than when they were pre-cap when you could fix problems easier via trade and free agency. More money invested = more scouts, more games being seen, more information to base a decision on. They also have much more access to video, more access to information on where these players are that need to be scouted.

2) Teams are investing more in development. We are seeing player development coaches assigned to minor league teams, and were now seeing AHL team-specific goaltending coaches.

3) Overall fitness of young players. Gone are the days when kids get drafted based on pure talent, and now they have to start eating and training like a professional. These kids are doing this stuff at a much younger age, eating right, training right, and by the time they are drafted, these kids are already used to the type of off-ice dedication it takes to perform at a higher level. No longer do teams have to draft kids based on talent alone and HOPE they mature into being committed to fitness and nutrition.

4) Analytics and advanced stats. While me personally I'm not a huge fan, they do have value, and teams have more now to go by when evaluation players than just the old time basic stats of G, A, Pts, and +/-.

Thus, success rates from 1st round picks is much higher than whenever Cliff Fletcher made his 50/50 quote.

For what its worth... you forgot there was around 24 teams then and 30 in recent years

The % of success is around the same... as you like %... but the number of hits has increased due to the factors you point out.

But i wasnt arguing whether teams spend more on scouting. I was just arguing the resulting success of draft picks

This is measured by looking at each pick and deciding case by case are you happy with him?

I think you are an astute judge of hockey. Pick a year... list the 30 players... yes or no... if you get more than 15 yes it wont be much more. If you get less it wont be much less.

Ive done this myself many times. 50% is the magic number

Elliminate top 5 picks from consideration and the % drops to around 40

Its easy to look af hockeydb and see this for ourself if anyone wants to debate it

 

[BruinDust]

And yet if you take the actual draft class and try to find more than 15 names you call successful picks you will embarrass yourself here

If mark stuart and brent connolly and malcolm subban arent successful picks you will be hard pressed to find better than 50% success

But feel free to toss out some names and see if you can make a case

I guess it comes down ones definition of "successful" picks.

I'd call Mark Stuart a success. Played almost 700 games and 10 years in the league.

Brett Connolly is at 300 and he's only 25. He may never be what he was projected to be, but he's a solid 3rd line NHL player and likely will get to 500 GP.

I just looked at 2012, which is considered a weak draft overall. While it may lack star power, I'd only call 6 of the 30 1st round players "unsuccessful".

Reinhart
Grigorenko
J.Schmaltz
Gaunce
Samuelsson
Matteau

And 4 of those 6 were chosen between 25 and 30. So by my count thats a 80% success rate based on what I call a successful 1st round pick.

 

[Glove Malfunction]

its a quote i picked up from i think cliff flecher if i remember correct... what he meant and what i mean is that by the time a pick has completed his first contract hes either part of your plans... or he isnt. alot of these guys might be waived and stick around for a cup of coffee... so yeah they might get a 1 year minimum contract... even a 2 year deal like jimmy hayes

but was jimmy hayes deserving? my true point was worth a 2nd contract. are you happy if jimmy hayes or mark stuart or brent connolly got second contracts with us?

only around 50% will deserve a second contract..
qualify as bonafide nhl players

however you want to word it... i stand by my point that fan expectation of success for first round picks is out of step with reality

If they are worth a 2nd contract, they get a second contract. like Lou said, the number deserving of a second contract is significantly more than 50%. I don't see how you can argue that even though they got a second contract, they are not included in that number.

 

[Glove Malfunction]

For what its worth... you forgot there was around 24 teams then and 30 in recent years

The % of success is around the same... as you like %... but the number of hits has increased due to the factors you point out.

But i wasnt arguing whether teams spend more on scouting. I was just arguing the resulting success of draft picks

This is measured by looking at each pick and deciding case by case are you happy with him?

I think you are an astute judge of hockey. Pick a year... list the 30 players... yes or no... if you get more than 15 yes it wont be much more. If you get less it wont be much less.

Ive done this myself many times. 50% is the magic number

Elliminate top 5 picks from consideration and the % drops to around 40

Its easy to look af hockeydb and see this for ourself if anyone wants to debate it

Can you just admit you are completely making these numbers up?

 

[Alberta_OReilly_Fan]

I guess it comes down ones definition of "successful" picks.

I'd call Mark Stuart a success. Played almost 700 games and 10 years in the league.

Brett Connolly is at 300 and he's only 25. He may never be what he was projected to be, but he's a solid 3rd line NHL player and likely will get to 500 GP.

I just looked at 2012, which is considered a weak draft overall. While it may lack star power, I'd only call 6 of the 30 1st round players "unsuccessful".

Reinhart
Grigorenko
J.Schmaltz
Gaunce
Samuelsson
Matteau

And 4 of those 6 were chosen between 25 and 30. So by my count thats a 80% success rate based on what I call a successful 1st round pick.

If you are calling stuart sucessful you are on my page... not many here will agree.

Macquaid imo is a better career dman than stuart was... this debate was fired up when posters were saying you dont draft guys like mcquaid in first round... dont take checkers or fighters in first round

Personally i disagree. I have no problem if tom wilson or manny malhotea are picked in first round

Alot of scorers are picked in first round and never become better than 40 point guys. Are they a success? I believe the fastest path to hell is to have a bunch of soft 40 point guys in your lineup who dont play defense

I believe winning hockey comes from winning matchups. A 4th line that routinally wins its matchups is valuable in my estimation.

If you cant win matchups then at least make sure you dont lose them.

A superior 4th liner like manny malhotra helped his team. Thats another measure of what i call successful picks... guys that helped

Every team has guys in a lineup that just take space and dont help much. We used to dress guys like jordon caron and joe morrow and jimmy hayes. They werent all first round picks but we thought they might help... they didnt really help much.

I might have been taken too literally when it was interpreted a guy would be out of the league after his first contract.

When i say earn a second contract i mean play well enough to get more than a one year minimum deal. I mean have trade value so you dont get waived or dealt for a late pick.

Anyhow my main point is give our own kids and management a break... some wont make it, but thats normal

 

[Alberta_OReilly_Fan]

Can you just admit you are completely making these numbers up?

Nope but obviously you can shut me up by picking a draft year and putting yourself on the line

Until then im right and your wrong so it would be bad to admit to this falsehood you wish to support

 

[BruinDust]

If you are calling stuart sucessful you are on my page... not many here will agree.

Macquaid imo is a better career dman than stuart was... this debate was fired up when posters were saying you dont draft guys like mcquaid in first round... dont take checkers or fighters in first round

Personally i disagree. I have no problem if tom wilson or manny malhotea are picked in first round

Alot of scorers are picked in first round and never become better than 40 point guys. Are they a success? I believe the fastest path to hell is to have a bunch of soft 40 point guys in your lineup who dont play defense

I believe winning hockey comes from winning matchups. A 4th line that routinally wins its matchups is valuable in my estimation.

If you cant win matchups then at least make sure you dont lose them.

A superior 4th liner like manny malhotra helped his team. Thats another measure of what i call successful picks... guys that helped

Every team has guys in a lineup that just take space and dont help much. We used to dress guys like jordon caron and joe morrow and jimmy hayes. They werent all first round picks but we thought they might help... they didnt really help much.

I might have been taken too literally when it was interpreted a guy would be out of the league after his first contract.

When i say earn a second contract i mean play well enough to get more than a one year minimum deal. I mean have trade value so you dont get waived or dealt for a late pick.

Anyhow my main point is give our own kids and management a break... some wont make it, but thats normal

Good post, totally agree.

I think some fans (not point fingers at anyone here, just in general) believe if a guy chosen in Rd. 1 doesn't become a Top 6 forward, or Top 4 D, or a No.1 goaltender, then the pick is unsuccessful.

Some guys are chosen because they project to be say, a top 6 forward, but end up growing and adapting to be something else that helps a team win. Malhotra is a great example. Chosen 5th overall, but carved out a nice career as a top face-off guy and big shutdown 3rd line center.

Last time I checked, you need quality players who like you said, help you win, on the bottom 6, on the 3rd pair, and backing up the starter. Been true forever, and is even more true now the ways teams use their entire line-up, need their back-up to play 20-25 game a year and give them a chance to win those games. Look at that 2011 team. Every player, save Thornton, had a role on special teams. And we know that Thornton had an important job as well.

 

[Alberta_OReilly_Fan]

I guess it comes down ones definition of "successful" picks.

I'd call Mark Stuart a success. Played almost 700 games and 10 years in the league.

Brett Connolly is at 300 and he's only 25. He may never be what he was projected to be, but he's a solid 3rd line NHL player and likely will get to 500 GP.

I just looked at 2012, which is considered a weak draft overall. While it may lack star power, I'd only call 6 of the 30 1st round players "unsuccessful".

Reinhart
Grigorenko
J.Schmaltz
Gaunce
Samuelsson
Matteau

And 4 of those 6 were chosen between 25 and 30. So by my count thats a 80% success rate based on what I call a successful 1st round pick.

In 2012 yakupov has already been jettisoned by 2 organizations.

Reinhart has cleared waivers

Pouliot had injury problems but was allowed to go ufa

Kokkoek spent over half of season in ahl last year

Griegorenko is a defensive weak 3rd liner with 64 pointd in 217 games

Zeimus girgensons has 89 in 303

That 6 of top 15 picks i dont think could make our lineup above a 4th line role

And i see another 6 in bottom 15 i also wouldnt want in our lineup

Im not including subban and jankowski and terravainen but honestly are they proven successes?

These are the types of guys that get you over 50%. These are the type of guys that fans have to expect if they want to believe most first rounders make it

Who would we rather have... shenshyn and debrusk and zboril or jankowski and subban and teravainen?

For me theres not a huge difference yet but our kids still have more upside imo

Im not saying those 3 picks we made are homeruns... but they are rather normal

 

[BruinDust]

In 2012 yakupov has already been jettisoned by 2 organizations.

Reinhart has cleared waivers

Pouliot had injury problems but was allowed to go ufa

Kokkoek spent over half of season in ahl last year

Griegorenko is a defensive weak 3rd liner with 64 pointd in 217 games

Zeimus girgensons has 89 in 303

That 6 of top 15 picks i dont think could make our lineup above a 4th line role

And i see another 6 in bottom 15 i also wouldnt want in our lineup

Im not including subban and jankowski and terravainen but honestly are they proven successes?

These are the types of guys that get you over 50%. These are the type of guys that fans have to expect if they want to believe most first rounders make it

Who would we rather have... shenshyn and debrusk and zboril or jankowski and subban and teravainen?

For me theres not a huge difference yet but our kids still have more upside imo

Im not saying those 3 picks we made are homeruns... but they are rather normal

Some guys simply take longer than others.

Pouliot finally seems like he is establishing himself as an NHL player in Vancouver.

Koekkoek to awhile, but he's now made it and is a 3rd pairing guy on a good team.

Girgensons hasn't been able to replicate his scoring as a rookie, but he's a 3rd line C with over 300 games at age 23.

Jankowski chose to spend his entire 4 years in NCAA, but is playing well for Calgary and looks here to stay. Just took more time to get there.

Subban took a long time too, but looks like he has a chance to at least carve out a nice career as a solid back-up.

Teravainen is unquestionably a successful 1st rounder.

 

[Alberta_OReilly_Fan]

Some guys simply take longer than others.

Pouliot finally seems like he is establishing himself as an NHL player in Vancouver.

Koekkoek to awhile, but he's now made it and is a 3rd pairing guy on a good team.

Girgensons hasn't been able to replicate his scoring as a rookie, but he's a 3rd line C with over 300 games at age 23.

Jankowski chose to spend his entire 4 years in NCAA, but is playing well for Calgary and looks here to stay. Just took more time to get there.

Subban took a long time too, but looks like he has a chance to at least carve out a nice career as a solid back-up.

Teravainen is unquestionably a successful 1st rounder.

if we agree again then we must agree the bar is lowered for senshyn and zboril and if these guys here are being called good picks after making it as a 3rd pair or 3rd liner after 5 years, then our guys deserve more than 30 games in ahl before being written off

we prob agree more than we disagree on this debate... but at the heart of it i want to point out that getting clear cut stud contributors isnt the norm. to get better than 50% requires alot of questionable guys getting the stamp of approval.

these type of names are who we debate after the first 12 or 13 best picks are removed from the table.

i think debrusk already is on his way to a success. if either zboril or senshyn join him to me thats a raging success. and if they dont, it isnt to be a shock to me. odds are 50 50 and sometimes tails comes up 2 flips in a row

 

[Fenian24]

I am going to keep saying it until everyone is in agreement. This team is elite. I mean, what are we missing exactly. Nothing major. We're got a great 1-2 punch down the middle, a couple of elite wingers in Marchand and Pastrnak, great forward depth (might not be room for Spooner/Cehlarik/Vatrano), a legitimate #1 defenceman in Chara, an elite puck moving defenceman in Krug, a strong defence corps overall, a recent Vezina winner in net, a top PP when everyone is healthy (see last season), a great PK, and we play strong team defence and are very well coached. A lot of teams which the naysayers/underraters probably consider "contenders" have bigger holes/weaknesses than we do. It's telling that the WORST thing I can say about this team is that some of the rookies could potentially hit a wall.

If you feel this team "Elite" the Jets must be the 85 Oilers and the Kings the 58 Canadiens.

Elite teams aren't one and done in the playoffs or fighting for a playoff spot, they don't have holes on their second, third and fourth lines, they don't have question marks on D and they don't hope and pray some of their genius GMs draft picks pan out. They don't give away top 4 D for three suspect prospects, they don't lack identity.

Do they have some elite players, absolutely. Pastrnak, Bergeron and Marchand are top end players on any team in the league. McAvoy looks like a future number one and possibly a top 5 D in the league. Carlo could develop into a good top 4 shutdown D. DeBrusk looks like a good second or third line w as does Hienen.

They also have much better management and coaching than Sweeney and Cassidy

As a team they are a long, long way from elite.

 

[BruinDust]

If you feel this team "Elite" the Jets must be the 85 Oilers and the Kings the 58 Canadiens.

Elite teams aren't one and done in the playoffs or fighting for a playoff spot, they don't have holes on their second, third and fourth lines, they don't have question marks on D and they don't hope and pray some of their genius GMs draft picks pan out. They don't give away top 4 D for three suspect prospects, they don't lack identity.

Do they have some elite players, absolutely. Pastrnak, Bergeron and Marchand are top end players on any team in the league. McAvoy looks like a future number one and possibly a top 5 D in the league. Carlo could develop into a good top 4 shutdown D. DeBrusk looks like a good second or third line w as does Hienen.

They also have much better management and coaching than Sweeney and Cassidy

As a team they are a long, long way from elite.

Are they, because they have likely the best record in the NHL (or close) the last 11 games (9-2). And they are doing this with more rookies in the line-up then we have seen in years.

Are they elite right now? No.

But they certainly aren't a "long, long way" like you are suggesting.

Your definition of what an elite team is in today's NHL is way off-base.

 

[ODAAT]

And O'Gara and Emil Johannsson, and maybe even Urho too- imagine an entirely homegrown D corps. 1/3 into this season and a lot to like for the future (and the now).

speaking of Urho, do you or anyone know the likely scheduled time of North American arrival for him? Next season? Thx in advance