This is like the Malkin vs. Ovechkin comparisons last year, hardly fair. Staal is not just playing in the NHL but fairly dominating in some ways out there. He is nearly impossible to separate from the puck, rarely makes mistakes showing a maturity far far beyond his years (is he still 18 for Christ's sake?) and is our best defensive forward aside from Crosby and that includes Malkin. Oh year, leads the league in short handed goals too. The others can be as good, or even better, but until they prove it in the NHL like he has he has a definate leg up in the comparison game.
Not sure what does
a definite leg up exactly mean but..
of course being proved in NHL already is a plus for Staal but i never shared the logic that who's proved in NHL is automatically the better pick at that point in time. Is he the safer pick? yes (most of the times at least). Does that mean the better pick? Not necessarily, at all.
That logic was used thousands of times to disclaim comparisons between Kovalchuk and Ovechkin, just to make an example, along with the claim whoever would take Ovechkin over Kovalchuk while Ilya was already scoring 40 in the NHL was a fool..
yeah, fools.. ask now. Btw, now they would reply that NOW is different cause NOW Alex is proved.. so apparently no one can be free or able to see further than NHL evidence shows
Same argument one year later with Ovechkin and Malkin..
and it gets way worse when this brilliant logic gets applied to players not even on the same planet.. like, say, Jeff Carter vs Malkin, or Bergeron vs Crosby, or Steen vs Backstrom.. the
"Hey, come back once your little guy will have played at least one game in the big show before professing him better.." comment will be always good and ready to surface.. despite bringing that logic to its ultimate consequence would make you take Kris Beech over Tavares today, for example..
now, anyone can fairly say that he would take the proven guy cause he doesn't feel comfortable enough by his impressions from what he has seen of that other player outside fo the NHL, but i am a
little bit tired of listening this argument as automatically decisive reason or even proof of anything
(not saying you were doing that now, it's probably the wrong occasion i'm taking the time for this little rant).
Back on topic..
Staal has been a very pleasant surprise (i could only read about him leading towards the draft). An already effective player at 18 at the NHL level as you reasoned and with unexploited potential.
That said, he wouldn't be the first one i would pick out of these 3.
Call me crazy, but even if he has yet to step up on the NHL's ice Backstrom is the sure thing for me, as he looked before the draft already. He has #1 center for the next 10/15 years written all over him as far as i'm concerned, while Staal is an already effective player and a really seducing package.. that could develop into a #1 center, but as well who could not i guess.. at least in my mind.
Toews would be third on my list.