Gwyddbwyll said:
It doesnt just "look" better - it is already equal since Draper has produced as many NHLers in 4 years as the previous 5 years did. These guys with potential are actually above and beyond this - so if as likely, a few make it through, they are extra.
Exactly what do you base this on? Of everyone picked in Draper's four drafts, 2 (Sjostrom and Spiller) have played more than 10 NHL games. If there was hockey right now, Briere, Esche, Letowski, Vaananen, Kolanos, Abid, and possibly Wallin would have NHL jobs. That's 6-7 guys. Brutal on both ends, but to say that Draper has produced more NHL players is just factually wrong.
Gwyddbwyll said:
Actually Sjostrom is pretty good when you look at the rubbish forwards taken after him. Only Hemsky stands out.
The next two guys selected, Hamhuis and Hemsky, are miles ahead of Sjostrom. Kobasew, taken next after that, is comparable, but probably ahead of Sjostrom as well. Is Sjostrom a bad pick? No, he'll be a quality 15-goal third-line player for Phoenix, and that's not an awful return. Is it a really good pick? Clearly not.
Gwyddbwyll said:
I dont think you know anything about Podlesak to describe him as rubbish. He was a fantastic prospect and in 2002 was rated Phoenix's best prospect and one of the top 50 by NHL GM's. Three successive severe concussions have put his career in jeopardy.. its amazing he's even playing hockey again.
I'm very familiar with Podlesak, and saw him play quite a bit in the WHL. I thought it was an awful pick when Phoenix took him as high as they did in 2001, and nothing has changed. Big body with decent mobility, but didn't have the skills to be a top-6 forward in the NHL nor the grit to be a bottom-6 guy. Awkward as hell. Czech version of Jeff Toms.
Gwyddbwyll said:
Oh really.. Toivonen? And you talk about remembering to rate people how they used to be seen? Koreis was ranked WAY higher than Toivonen at the time.
2002 was a terrible draft year, surely you know this. Its easy to play games and build a "superdraft" three years later. Considering this, Leneveu was a GREAT pick at #45.. a top 10 goalie prospect out of all recent drafts. Zeiler is not that great a prospect.. I am guessing you dont really know these guys because Callahan is a significantly better prospect than Zeiler and probably Jones too. Leneveu is getting ready to enter the NHL and Koreis and Eager look like solid bets to play as well. Just because they have limited upsides of third liners doesnt make them bad picks, actually if they reach it, they'll be better picks than half the first round. I believe I said 4 or 5 of these guys will at least play in the NHL rather than all of them becoming career NHLers. That would still be an excellent draft class in a terrible year, on a par with virtually any other NHL team.
Give me a break. Yes, it was a weak draft. But Phoenix had one of the weakest drafts that year, especially given the picks they had. Eager and Koreis were
brutal picks. Looking at the guys taken between picks 19 and 25, who were on the table for Phoenix to select, these guys are (easily) the two worst selections right now. These are *not* solid bets. Koreis looks like a total washout, while Eager does have 4th line potential. A couple mid-round picks developing decently doesn't come close to erasing the rotten first round at this point.
Wait another 2-3 years and see how bad this draft ends up looking. As I said previously, Phoenix's 1998 and 1999 drafts looked decent a couple years afterward, too.
I'm not familiar with Callahan, but Jones is more highly regarded as far as I know.
Gwyddbwyll said:
A reach? This is a bad thing? Isnt that what a 'steal' is? Considering he went on to become the WHL scoring leader, this is one reach that looks like a good pick with hindsight.
A reach is a player who goes well ahead of where he should have gone. Scoring points in the WHL doesn't mean much if you don't have the tools to be a quality pro. My guess is he'll struggle pretty badly next year in the AHL.
Gwyddbwyll said:
Sorry but your analysis is brutal. Leneveu is "decent" ? Try top 10 goaltender prospect.
I'd have him at 12-18 goaltender prospect. As I said, good pick. But in Draper's first three drafts this is to me the only really good pick Draper made, along with maybe Gelech.
Gwyddbwyll said:
Briere and Esche were not really home runs that they may appear. Briere caused problems for 95% of his time here and Esche never played well for us. Regardless, Draper has gotten us just as many NHLers already and its highly likely late bloomers will start adding to the numbers.
This is irrelevant. The scouting staff's job is to identify guys who have the tools to become quality NHL players. Whether they develop in Phoenix or elsewhere, the scouting staff was still correct with the original pick and deserve full credit. If Eager develops into a standout with Philly, then Draper deserves kudos for his selection, regardless of the fact that he was dealt.
And again, Draper has not gotten you more NHLers.
Gwyddbwyll said:
It was *terrible* before Draper, now its merely average. Go back and look at Focht, Safronov, KELMAN and you'll start appreciating guys like Sjostrom and Leneveu a little better.
As I said, I see zero improvement. Little skill drafted up front, nothing on the blueline. Few quality picks. No stud position players in the system, aside from Ballard who was not a Phoenix draft. Obviously we're not going to agree.
Are you?
