mnwild2012
Registered User
- Jun 11, 2011
- 26
- 0
Well the scouts were wrong about Gillies so there is a chance they are wrong about Gabriel
Honestly, I'm thinking hes just throwing picks away because we've been so close to contract limits. Thats the only way I can even justify this. So stupid.
Pretty much. But then why wouldn't he just do some more throw away picks in the 7th round, a la Nanne. Or maybe with their first draft with an ECHL team they are thinking about more than one organization.
Honestly, I'm thinking hes just throwing picks away because we've been so close to contract limits. Thats the only way I can even justify this. So stupid.
He has great "work ethic" is usually like saying to a friend before a blind date "she has a great personality."
Trusting Fletcher / Flahr to have their reasons for the pick =/= blindly defending a pick.
If Clutterbuck didn't play with Tavaras, he would have also had crap CHL numbers. Nobody is complaining about him being a 3rd round pick.
So Tavares turned a guy who would have had 10-15 points into a PPG player?
Question: Do you think this is a stupid pick because you know alot about this player or solely because he was left of the CSS rankings?
Well scoring is a little easier in the chl.
Because he's an overager that sounds like Gillies?
I'm sorry....but I seem to remember Gillies being selected by the previous regime. What the heck does he have to do with Gabriel? Gillies was drafted in the 1st round, Gabriel in the 3rd.
I gotta chuckle at how a 3rd round pick has some around here with their undies in a bunch.
A lot. Why not just keep Gillies? Gillies and Gabriel were both described as high character, gritty players that were still developing offense (and in the case of Gillies, he was still 18 when he was picked). Why use a pick on a guy that you just had?
.
You are aware that this pick was most likely a pick for the future and not a current need? (ie he probably wasn't selected to replace Gillies)
How much of the future? He's 20 years old. He is more than likely going to be placed in the AHL next year.
Sure...and if he pans out like the Wild think he has a chance to, he might see NHL action a few years down the road. Like I said, this is a pick for the future.
I'm not sure if we're even disagreeing. I don't know how clutter's role was defined in the chl but playing with tavares, under a different coach, he was likely being used a little differently and was better served (and more able, because of the relative lack of defense) playing in different areas of the ice. Clutter found a great niche here rushing people and capitalizing on the loose pucks he took. He had more opportunity with tavares to score in different ways.So Clutter scores 20-30 points in the NHL without Tavares, yet he wouldn't have had 20-30 in the CHL if he didn't have Tavares?
You realize just how far you're reaching right now?
It's more for now. If it was for the future, he would be stashed for 2 years in the WHL, then kept for a few more years in the AHL and maybe crack the NHL in 4-5 years. But since he's 20, he'll be in the AHL. So what? We're going to keep him in the AHL for 4 years? 5 years?