turnbuckle*
Guest
)While there was just something about Esposito that never has turned me on,in his defense I will point outsomething I was not aware of this season--we all expected him to be a "go to guy" on the #1 line as most teams do with their top "phenoms" --But Patrick Roy has used him as the Ramparts #2 line centre this year--though he doesplay onthe PP---still as the top line centre I expected at least 100 pts at this juncture of the season =about equivalent to Gagner's totals --instead Espo has just 74 --but given he omly is the 2nd line centre that is not shabby....as a 2nd line centre the primary duty is not all out attack,but also some checking of the other teams top 2 lines as well as an offensive attack on transitions...if Esposito's totals are less than we all expected this mere useage on line#2 is self-explanatory...the "selfish " charge is not substantiated by his assists to goals ratio which is 2 to 1 in favour of assists...HOWEVER-I still maintain that if Espo were a true "phenom" --he would have kicked out the incumbent #1 centre--because Jr. teams do not do this to their "star" players who SHOULD be the "go to guy" on the team-is it Espo's fault tht Roy is not using him in the expected role=maybe/maybe not
--it can explain Espo's lack of the "expected" points --but not if he did or did not do anything to deserve not getting the proper "promotion"....IF it is Espo's own fault he did not get the chance as the go to guy at centre --then bad on him;if it his not his fault,then bad on Patrick Roy for putting the kid in an apparent failing (to meet expectations) situation...
Perhaps the very nature of plaing "2nd fiddle" has not inspired Espo to rise above this adversity --had he done that ,perhaps more scouts would have credited him with
overcoming the coach's error;perhaps by apparently not doing enough to overcome this unfortunate situation,scouts are questioning his character and ascrbing a sulking or selfishness to his play that may or may not be really warranted.
So we have 4 views on him
1-has the talent/was mis-used/did not rise above the adversity =AVOID!
2- has the talent/was mis-used/did ok given the circumstances= BARGAIN
if falls further than originally thought in the draft and will blossom
when given the proper "go to " role...
3- has the talent -but had to learn humbleness =coach correct in pegging
him down a notch=he will learn from this and be better for it when he
does get the chance to carry a team as "go to" top line guy = will be
better for this = BARGAIN if falls further than expected originally..
4= nah! talent was over-rated though his attitude not the problem
some make it out to be...he's ok -but overall should be more
ab 8-15 pick than a top 8 pick...
Take your pick of the above...
However the very thought that we must analyze this kid this way suggests
"something" is off --instinct says no way to top 5...perhaps risk it in the 6-10 slots...
I'm not sure he fits precisely into any of those four categories. I think his skiil was a bit overblown going into the season because he benefited greatly from playing with Radulov. i also think his attitude is poor...but the biggest strike against him is his work ethic - he dogs it out on the ice the majority of the time. Scouts don't like to see that in their top ten picks unless he's scoring at an incredible rate. Brendl is a prime example - scouts hated his work ethic, but it's kinda tough to pass over a guy that scores 70 goals in his draft year. Scouts are trying not to make that mistake again - look at where Schremp was drafted for instance.
what scouts do however is figure out