Discussion in 'NHL Draft - Prospects' started by RightKinger, Jan 27, 2007.
Two small guys with loads of offensive talent.
Similarities? Differences? Potential? etc.
Patrick Kane is a better player in nearly every single category.
I like Kane better, too, but God only knows what kind of awful situation he could end up with, as far as playing on an awful team. Little has a job waiting for him in a year or two centering either Kovalchuk or (if they re-sign him after the 2007-08 season) Hossa, or maybe both.
Isn't Bryan Little the better two-way player. He's also much tougher, right? Kane's more like a Hejduk and Little is more like a Langkow, I think. I've never seen either player, and I'm just going off of what I've read, so I could be way off.
By the way, Bryan Little is nearly 200lbs and is absolutely ripped. I would not call someone who is two hundred pounds of muscle a small guy.
Well, Kane is not stronger or more able to play a well-rounded game. Yet. Although I'm thinking he won't ever be either, age differences aside. I'd take Little over him for the NHL. I'd sign Chris Drury as a free agent before I'd sign Daniel Briere too, as an illustration.
Pat Kane has way more potential then Littlle. It's as simple as that.
You put words in my mouth.
You sure come up with a good reason. I'm sure you helped a lot of people lol.
You can't really come up with a reason for a guy having more potential. He just has more raw talent, thus having more potential.
He has more raw offensive talent but the guys going to get knocked around in the big leagues and has never impressed in his own zone. Little isn't the defensive liability Kane seems to be.
I couldn't care less about Little being more responsible defensively at this point. If he can't score, which is his main job, he won't have too much worth in the bigs. And in the WJC, Little was a complete non-factor offensively, as opposed to Kane who was a year younger and the best forward on his team.
Kane is faster, more agile, more creative with the puck, better playmaker, and has a better touch around the net. I take Kane 10 out of 10 times.
I don't think anybody would dispute that. I also think approximately 99.999% of anybody surveyed would take Kane. I'll be happy in my own little .001% of the world who takes Little. Crossing my fingers that the lax atmosphere of the OHL this year hasn't robbed him of the fire he'll need to make that Drury=Little vs. Briere=Kane comparison stick. It's a worry, I admit. But I'd still take Drury over Briere.
Separate names with a comma.