Worth selecting a goalie in the 1st round??

[stardog]

Drafting them top 4-5 is just being plain stupid.
QUOTE]

I disagree with this. While it is starting to get to the point where it seems that there is a rule that a goalie must be taken in the top-5 each draft, there are some talents deserving of being picked there. If you look at goalies who were seen as top-5 franchise guys (Luongo, Dipietro, and Fleury), they tend to make the NHL much quicker than other goalie prospects. At the age of 25, Luongo has become the leading Vezina candidate and became a solid starter 4 years after he was drafted. Dipietro has become a solid starter, 4 years after he was drafted. Fleury is to be determined but has shown signs that he will develop rapidly. To say it is stupid to draft goalies in the top-5 is ignorant. Unless you can think of any other top-5 drafted goalies, I submit that an average of a 4 year development time is quite acceptable and that so far, Florida has gotten full value out of Milbury drafting Dipietro and Luongo=).

I completely agree with you.

And I am not speaking on Vladdy's behalf (cuz we all know that noone speaks for him ) but I think that he meant that there were and are exceptions to this as well. Perhaps the guys you listed above were exceptions (although in hindsight, it looks like Heatly is going to be better at his position than Dipietro is at his).

 

[Vlad The Impaler]

To say it is stupid to draft goalies in the top-5 is ignorant. Unless you can think of any other top-5 drafted goalies, I submit that an average of a 4 year development time is quite acceptable and that so far, Florida has gotten full value out of Milbury drafting Dipietro and Luongo=).

I think it's sad that you call my point of view "ignorant" and then demonstrates in part the kind of crap it has gotten Milbury into in your very next sentence.

Drafting goalies top 5 is extremely foolish, whether you wanna believe it or not. Goalies simply require too much maintenance for too long, and carry more question marks than any other player in the game.

It's a huge waste of time and money to draft them so early when there are excellent players available. It's a rule of thumb but of course can be broken IF it is truly worth it. There is a point where you have to draw the line but before that point I just wouldn't do it.

For instance, there's no way Lehtonen should have been drafted before Bouwmeester and Pitkanen. It's just plain dumb to do so. But there was a significant cutoff in quality after that so 4th overall would have been fine with me.

 

[Vlad The Impaler]

And this isnt directed towards Vlad, but I find it incredibly hard to believe that someone wouldn't take either Maffy or Dipietro in the first round.

Indeed, it would be plain crazy. In fact, I can't see not drafting M-A in the first half of the 1st round (I wasn't watching DiPietro enough before his draft year to rank him with any credibility) and still looking yourself in the mirror. The fundamentals, athleticism and attitude are simply too great to ignore.

Guys like Fleury have a place in the first round. It's just that one has to realize the massive headache goaltending prospects can be. The North American ones are even more of a pain in the ass.

PS: stardog, don't know if you cleaned your PM box. I tried to send you a PM three days ago but your box was full. Clean your ****, man!

 

[moosefan]

Great, now how many of those D were top-2, which equates to #1 keepers? In 1990, only two would even be considered (Hatcher and Sydor). That's two out of 7. In '91, I'd say only Niedermayer. That's 1 out of 6. Is this worth continuing?

Just because there are fewer goaltending positions on the ice, don't equate the number of starting keepers to game-breaking defensemen. 1 out of 6 is only 17%. If half of the keepers you listed were starters (and I'm too lazy to check, but I would assume that they are), then the numbers are similar and I'm wrong.

~Crazed.

I agree with this. There are just as many mistakes with picking goalies as forwards and d-men. I know his question was, is it worth taking one...but that is like asking are they worth it and I think they are worth it.

 

[Jaded-Fan]

Goaltending is the single most important position in hockey . . . perhaps in any sport . . . just like pitching in baseball, except that the goaltender starts almost every game, the pitcher only one in five . . . a Gretzky and Mario can carry a team, but do not handle the puck (or mishandle) as much as the one who backs them in goal . . . look to Mario as an example, amazing numbers year after year (remember when points approached 200 per year and we wondered if the 200 barrier would be broken, that was Mario) and yet he never won diddly until Tom Barrasso came onto the Pens . . . am I saying that Barrasso was more important than Mario and that the Pens if given the choice between the two should take Barrasso? . . . of course not, what I am saying is that the MAF's, the Luongo's, and the DiPiertros of the world are taken right where they should have been taken . . . look at the last five 'future franchise' goaltenders taken . . . one is only just behind Brodeur and number two in the league, none washed out and only DiPietro can be called wanting at all, and he is not all that bad. Now look at the 'can't miss' forewards of the league, the 'next gretsky' . . . the 'next Mario' . . . how has their success rate been? . . . no, the scouts have it right and the goaltenders in question were taken right where they should have been.

 

[DaveyCrockett]

I think it's sad that you call my point of view "ignorant" and then demonstrates in part the kind of crap it has gotten Milbury into in your very next sentence.

Drafting goalies top 5 is extremely foolish, whether you wanna believe it or not. Goalies simply require too much maintenance for too long, and carry more question marks than any other player in the game.

It's a huge waste of time and money to draft them so early when there are excellent players available. It's a rule of thumb but of course can be broken IF it is truly worth it. There is a point where you have to draw the line but before that point I just wouldn't do it.

For instance, there's no way Lehtonen should have been drafted before Bouwmeester and Pitkanen. It's just plain dumb to do so. But there was a significant cutoff in quality after that so 4th overall would have been fine with me.

Sorry, that was harsh. My point is that the major problem with drafting goaltenders is development time. With top level guys, like Dipietro and Luongo, that problem does not exist. Would you have drafted Marleau or Jokinen ahead of Luongo if the draft was done over? Hell no. Would you have drafted Heatley over Dipietro? Hell yes. The debate isn't about whether a goalie was a bad pick at that time because one guy chosen after him had a better career. The issue is development time because we all know the draft is a crapshoot. Luongo and Dipietro have both developed in a time of 4 years, a time that is very reasonable. That is an equivalent time to the majority of forward and defense prospects. While a top-5 franchise goalie pick won't play (well) at 18, they will develop faster than other goaltending prospects and are ultimately a worthwhile pick. So far, drafting a goalie top-5 has not proved riskier or less worthwhile than drafting a foward or defenseman,

 

[stardog]

Indeed, it would be plain crazy. In fact, I can't see not drafting M-A in the first half of the 1st round (I wasn't watching DiPietro enough before his draft year to rank him with any credibility) and still looking yourself in the mirror. The fundamentals, athleticism and attitude are simply too great to ignore.

Guys like Fleury have a place in the first round. It's just that one has to realize the massive headache goaltending prospects can be. The North American ones are even more of a pain in the ass.

PS: stardog, don't know if you cleaned your PM box. I tried to send you a PM three days ago but your box was full. Clean your ****, man!

Haha! Sorry bro....go ahead and re-send it! I cleaned it all out this time. As always, good post with a well thought out view. Of course I happen to like where Maffy was taken, but we all know I am biased on the subject. I wouldnt have minded them staying in the 3 spot and taking Horton or Zherdev though.