Wow all those Fox votes came at once, last time I checked it was 8-1 for Parsons
Went with Parsons. Out of curiosity, just how far do people think Hunter Smith has fallen as a result of his AHL rookie year?
I think Fox has top 3 upside. If he reaches that, he will be an extremely valuable player for us.
You think all of our good D prospects have top 3 upside
I kid I kid, but seems like that is a common phrase used on Anderssen, Kylington and now Fox.
Even Wotherspoon and Hickey had it to an extent for a while.
For me, the bar has been set for what defines the perfect top 3 with Chicago's. Keith, Seabrook and Hammer.
You think all of our good D prospects have top 3 upside
I kid I kid, but seems like that is a common phrase used on Anderssen, Kylington and now Fox.
Even Wotherspoon and Hickey had it to an extent for a while.
For me, the bar has been set for what defines the perfect top 3 with Chicago's. Keith, Seabrook and Hammer.
Parsons for me. I love his competitiveness, he would be a loo of other teams best goaltending prospect, and I really don't think he is that far off from McDonald at this point, certainly if you look at where they were at the same age.
I think parsons is slightly undervalued since he played on an excellent knights team. He is very good statistically anyway. Will be interesting to see how he develops.
You think all of our good D prospects have top 3 upside
I kid I kid, but seems like that is a common phrase used on Anderssen, Kylington and now Fox.
Even Wotherspoon and Hickey had it to an extent for a while..
Upside for our defensemen (key word being upside)
Kulak - Justin Braun (#3)
Hickey - Travis Hamonic (#3)
Wotherspoon - Paul Martin (#4)
Kylington - Duncan Keith (#1)
Fox - Ryan Ellis (#3)
Andersson - Slava Voynov (#2)
Ollas-Mattsson - Brooks Orpik (#4)
Culkin - David Schlemko (#4)
Falkovsky - Franson -#5
Kanzig - Deryk Engelland - #7
Bruce - Chris Breen - AHL
Morrison - Rundblad - #6
Rafikov - ???? - #?
Yes but it's easy to say top 3 upside and ignore that its a longshot that they hit that. Just poking fun at the fact that it's thrown around so much on here.
I don't like calling Paul Martin a #4, the guy was a legit top pairing guy, and at worst a #3 for a good chunk of his career. What he is now? Sure, #4 is probably generous on some nights.