2011 draft class - really that weak?

Discussion in 'NHL Draft - Prospects' started by Johnny Danger, Jan 10, 2011.

  1. Johnny Danger

    Johnny Danger Registered User

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2002
    Messages:
    1,087
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    141
    Location:
    Suisse
    Home Page:
    with 5 months left .. do you think the 2011 draft is that weak as it was said before?

    which year can it be compared to?

    how is 2012 supposed to be?
     
  2. koh19

    koh19 Registered User

    Joined:
    May 19, 2006
    Messages:
    1,170
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    86
    Location:
    Fribourg
    We won't know till 5-8 years down the road if it's weak or not.
     
    Last edited: Jan 10, 2011
  3. 40oz

    40oz ..........

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2007
    Messages:
    16,953
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    114
    Every year this thread pops up, claiming the next draft to be the weak one.



    Not that it isn't weak, but this thread always pops up.

    A good sign of a weak draft is what ever the cost of a first rounder at the deadline, so we'll see.
     
  4. Pulkkinen

    Pulkkinen Elias Lindholm.

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2010
    Messages:
    146
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Occupation:
    Sociology & Statistics.
    Location:
    Barcelona.
    Home Page:
    Maybe "weak" is not the exactly word.

    We came from a very strong 2010 promotion, plenty of good players, top-end talent, long term prospects with a lot of potential, and also a number of outsiders at lower rounds who can turn into regular NHL players. And this promotion, in my opinion, is just normal. Maybe average is a better word, if you prefer. There are players who can establish at the top in a few years, like Couturier, Larsson, Nugent-Hopkins, Landeskog, Murphy, Musil, Siemens or Saad, a good number of players with a really bright future, like Strome, Huberdeau, Hamilton, Armia, outsiders like McNeill, Jaskin, Trocheck, Jenner, Mayfield, Biggs, and players who used to be well-ranked and they have a lot of potential and a lot of things to show, like Ambroz, Catenacci, Rask, McColgan, St. Croix, Lessio, among others, and maybe lacks deep at lower rounds, some good goalie prospects, because only Gibson seems to be a top prospect, and more top European talent, but i think that this can be a good promotion.

    The problem is that, if you compare this year's promotion with 2010 and now, with 2012, which seems to be one of the best in recent years, 2011 is not better, but that doesn't mean that is weak.
     
  5. S E P H

    S E P H @SEPH_WHL

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2010
    Messages:
    14,351
    Likes Received:
    2,459
    Trophy Points:
    156
    Occupation:
    WHL
    Location:
    Toruń, PL
    The top 30, including the top 10 in 2011 is much better than 2010, but I do not see the depth in the later rounds compared to other drafts. I do think it's much better than some scouts are saying.

    2012 is looking like the best draft since 2008.
     
  6. crazyaces*

    crazyaces* Guest

    well 2011 is kind of weird one because their isn't that highend 1st overall talent. Sure you have Courturier, but I don't think he's NHL ready, if he does play, he'll have a very low impact, and he needs more time to develop. Larsson might play right away, but even he is suspect, and could stay in Sweden, or play in the AHL. RNH and Landeskog need more time as well. I would really be surprised if someone was drafted and played more than 9 games in the NHL next year, which is also a good (early) indication how weak or strong the draft pool is - Look at the last 3 drafts and count how many players played in the NHL right away and stuck - a lot.

    You could probably compare the 2011 to the 2007 draft, except you don't have a super star in Pat Kane for the 1st overall pick.

    2012 is still early but that one is looking really good.
     

Share This Page

monitoring_string = "358c248ada348a047a4b9bb27a146148"