If Boucher was a top 20 pick, he would be considered our consensus top prospect. The main thing holding him back is that he was a 4th round pick and people factor that in. If you think he only has a good wrist shot, you probably haven't seen too many Sarnia games this year.
If Boucher was a top 20 pick, he would be considered our consensus top prospect. The main thing holding him back is that he was a 4th round pick and people factor that in. If you think he only has a good wrist shot, you probably haven't seen too many Sarnia games this year.
What the **** does that even mean?
If he was a top 20 pick? Maybe if he had more than a wrist shot, he would have been a top 20 pick. But he doesn't so he wasn't. And draft status is totally irrelevant.
Well he could have easily improved the other facets of his game since being drafted
I understand that, which is why I said draft status is irrelevant. That's not what was said though. What was said was that Boucher would be our top prospect if he was a top-20 pick. To which I said, if Boucher had more than a wrist shot, he would have been, and then he would be our top prospect. But he doesn't, so he wasn't, so he isn't.
So he still doesn't have anything more than a wrist shot, is that what you're saying?
At this point, yes. Can easily change, but I really don't understand how he's our second best prospect. Merrill, Severson, Matteau, and Santini are all clear cut better prospects. And you can make a case for Gelinas too. All 5 of those guys are safer bets to be NHLers, some of them also have higher upside.
At this point, yes. Can easily change, but I really don't understand how he's our second best prospect. Merrill, Severson, Matteau, and Santini are all clear cut better prospects. And you can make a case for Gelinas too. All 5 of those guys are safer bets to be NHLers, some of them also have higher upside.
Clear cut better prospects? Santini? This is incomprehensible. Exactly how many Sarnia games did you watch this year?