Ive talked alot about how I disagree with the Jets drafting Scheifele. I think thats why we are getting this type of talk in this thread.
Ahh... Interesting. My point was I hope no one is attacking you as a person because that would be unfair and wrong.
In regards to the subject at hand, I kind of hybrid myself.
My opinions:
I'm fine with people thinking Scheifele was a reach or wanting Couturier or Hamilton above Scheifele
(especially 'cos I was in team Couturier), because relative to
general scouting opinion he wasn't as high regarded as some that were available... of course that doesn't mean it was that way for the Jets' scouting notes. Also, being a reach at the time of the draft doesn't mean he won't be better than those who were on the board or negates his own potential as a prospect. Trouba is even an example of how this happens in how he's appearing to progress better than those who were selected before and had players on the board still remaining who were
generally considered better.
A good comment I once heard from an amateur scout was you shouldn't regret the prospect but the processes that got you there. I don't think the Jets'
dramatically changed their scouting process and values between 2011 and 2012 NHL Drafts. Yet we have (IMHO) many exceeding expectations (Trouba, Lowry, Kosmachuk, Olsen), some meeting expectations (Scheifele, Yuen) and some... ya... (Sutter, Serville, Brassard)
(keep in mind expectations are different for each of these). I don't dismiss any of the below expectations draft picks just because of the other above expectations draft selections.
Basically I don't think Trouba passing Scheifele would prove anything about Scheifele relative to the agreement or disagreement of picking him
(personally I don't think Trouba has passed Scheifele yet; I think a lot of it is combination of shiny new toy and a lot of people recognizing him for what he is when they didn't know much before; I think Trouba is developing at a faster rate though which means if everything stays the same he will pass Scheifele eventualy, which wouldn't surprise me even if that is in the next 2 years, but that's just my opinion).
I don't even think comparing to people who were left on the board is wise. Postma, Byfuglien, and Enstrom were all late round picks who turned out well, but doesn't mean that everyone in every team who chose a player before them that never reached the NHL made "the wrong choice". Was Detroit wrong in selecting 5 players who never touched the NHL before they drafted Datsyuk or 4 before Zetterberg? Development is never linear and it's more of a guess with a tiny bit of art and science when it comes to extrapolating the success of picks.
In the end, I'm currently (subject to change) content with our draft process and I'm happy with the progress both our high-end prospects have made.
I'm not sold on Scheifele being a true-blue high-end 1st line centre but even his largest (professional) critics have moved from saying on Scheifele projects to being a possible above-average 2C who is a safe below-average 2C to saying he is projecting to be a possible average 1C who is a safe above average 2C.
Personally, I think Scheifele (in competency) will be a slight upgrade to Little (which would go along the same lines as the above projections) where Scheif will have similar defensive abilities and goal scoring, but (IMHO) much greater playmaking ability.
