Discussion in 'NHL Draft - Prospects' started by Minith55, Jul 25, 2006.
what do u guys think?, personally i whould have gone with Staal
Brian Lee is a longterm project ala Fischer for my habs ,
while Staal definately look better right now, lee could pass him in the long run.
but I would also take Staal over Lee right now but I wouldn't count Lee out of the race.
yes!!!! Ive been saying this for months. Sure Lee may be a project or whatever but Staal is pretty much a safe bet to be a #1-2 defenseman (leaning toward #1). Lee has sooooooo many question marks still and to be honest he was not very impressive last WJCs. Lee may end up better then stall but the chance of that is pretty small (as much as my fellow sen fans want to admit).
Inside most of them really do wish we got stall instead of Lee but they wont admit it. for the record though id rather have lee then bourden.
IMO, yes! I would have gone with Staal, and still would right now.
Lee has more offensive upside and could be a force. Staal is ahead of Lee now but lets wait and see 3-5 years from now. Ottawa scouts are some of the best in the league, no reason to doubt them. Lee has a higher upside, lets wait and see if he can reach his potential.
I'd rather Kopitar over both of them. Staal will be good, Lee could be great. Thats the difference between the two.
I think so but you never know in the future.... I say ask this question in 2-3 years.
when they were drafted lee was considered a reach... i wasnt high on staal either and i still doubt that he will be a1 or 2 dman i can see third dman ... i would go for lee
A report out a couple weeks ago wrote about Lee having increased his size and strength dramatically and that his development is really coming along well.
Mark Stall gets more press but Brian Lee could very well be the better player.
see wit i mean folk, fuhr yea he may be better in 3-5 but thats a hugggeee question mark if he will. We should hav went with stall
a #1 dman is only good? they both could be great, again staal is a sure thing pretty mcuh while lee is may be better but he may not, he has a lot of ways to go.
he may of got strong, which i hope he did cuz he was a stick, but ill wait to see him in the wjcs to see if he really improved or not.
I think Ottawa made the right choice given their organization needs, direction, and current status. Just like I said in the NYR-OTT proposal thread, since much of it did become Staal vs. Lee: did Ottawa mess up? I'll explain below (a bit of a long read).
Here's my reasoning. Ottawa is always picking in the mid-low 20's. That is likely not to change any time son. Our scouts have proven the ability to find good, solid players in that range. But you can have the best scouts available working around the clock, every day, in preperation for the draft. If all the future stars are gone by the time you pick - as is often the case picking where the Sens do - you're plain out of luck (this is of course excluding the later round picks who become great players, but rather is considering the general "1st round prospects" that come along each year).
I think at #9 Ottawa had to take a swing at the fences. By taking Brian Lee over Marc Staal and Luc Bourdon they did just that. He's riskier, but that's just what I like about him. If he pans out to be the absolute best he can be, I don't think we are having this converstaion is 3 or 4 years. Everyone will be looking back saying "They [Ottawa] have done it again at the draft table.". And that's important. To have that one guy in the system who can really hit it big for you. We can play it safe and go with players with rather certain second pairing upside in our usual spot each year. If not you can always trade up a bit. But not often will a team like Ottawa get a chance at a Brian Lee. Not often will they get a chance at a potential huge star. And even if it is just that - potential - I think it was the right move to take the chance. Thanks to some lottery luck getting the 9th overall selection we at least had the chance to do so, for the first time since 1997 (Marian Hossa at 12th overall, and we even apparently overreached at the time). I bet it'll be another good 3-5 years before we get that chance again.
It may one day prove to not have been the best choice but again, given the circumstances, I think we made the right pick for the "home run" potential. All we Sens fans can do now is sit back and hope the roll of the dice is favorable. The high regard Ottawa holds Lee in is at the very least positive, since our scouting staff has seldom steered us wrong before. We had (reporetedly) Lee ranked 4th overall on our list going into the draft in a year featuring Sidney Crosby. That's high praise from proven individuals. And our very own director of amateur scouting, Franky Jay, was the man responsible for taking Lee over Jack Johnson to the 2004 American WJC team. So obviously the Sens are very high on the kid.
Not to mention we have a log-jam as it is on the blueline. Having a project in Lee may be a good thing for us right about now, rather than another talented blueliner (like a Staal) knocking on the door needing playing time. Lee's smooth, mobile, puck moving game and right-handed shot also brings more of what we need to the table right now as opposed to the physical, more defense oriented games of Staal and Bourdon. Volchenkov, Lyamin, Meszaros, and Schubert already give us four good, young defensemen with similar games - all four of them left handed shots aswell. But there's no Brian Lee in the system in terms of style.
And hey, even if Lee does turn out worse than Bourdon and Staal he should still become better than a prospect we likely would have selected in our usual draft position, without the lottery. So the glass if half full on my table.
09. OTT - Lee
10. VAN - Bourdon
11. LAK - Kopitar
12. NYR - Staal
That's how it went. Not just Staal, but you could make the same case with Bourdon or Kopitar with that pick, as at the time it seemed like a reach. Same thing with the Nucks taking Bourdon, maybe should've gone with Kopitar and Staal, but who knows, only time will tell. One thing though, the Sens have basically the best scouts in the league, so you gotta have some faith in them. It's not like Pheonix taking a guy like Blake Wheeler. I remember watching that draft, as a Canuck fan watching Kopitar, who was supposed to be one of the elite, fall down the list, I was getting excited. Then I remembered Ottawa was ahead of us, and was thinking damnit, I know they're going to take him. Then they took Lee, who? Then of course we passed on Kopitar as well and took Bourdon, but I didn't feel that bad because Ottawa passed on him as well.
I don't think of Staal as a future #1 dman though. I think he's basically a sure thing to be a good #2/3. Lee I feel could be a #1, but the chances of him reaching that are much lower than Staal reaching a #2 level.
Why? We have enough safe players on our team, why not go for a homerun at 9 in the draft, we pick so late every year. A number 1 star defenseman is what lee could become no need to play it safe. If there is any team in the NHL that does not need people to question who they pick it is the Ottawa Senators.
I wonder how many posters in this thread have seen much of Lee?
eh, with the depth the sens have on D (even with Chara gone) picking a guy like Lee isn't as risky as it would have been for, say, the Rangers. They can pick Lee and give him plenty of time to develop and hope he reaches his potential. So it's probably not a bad thing that they picked him.
They're both different players. Rangers Assistant GM Don Maloney was recently talking about having Marc Staal and he really wasn't interested with his offensive game. He was more concentrated on the fact that the Rangers will have to play Crosby/Malkin 8 times a year and Ovechkin 4. He said having a guy like Marc Staal can seriously neutralize a teams offense.
In terms of Lee, IF he puts it all together he is going to be an offensive dynamo that will be able to dominate with the puck.
As a Rangers fan I think I am biased in 2 ways:
1. I will think my player is better.
2. After years of a soft blueline and an almost non-existent defense that would get owned by (Jagr, Lemieux, Lindros, Elias etc) I feel that having a player who is elite when it comes to shutting top players down, is more valuable.
In my opinion definately. Lee is more a Redden type - finess guy. Staal will give you the grit and determination - something Muckler says he has been looking for.
Brain cramp imo. Lee is going to be a good player in 5 years. Staal would make the club this year and contribute.
Quote of the day. But more probably have seen Staal and he does bring a lot of potential to the table right now.
I am no expert in regards to the Senators depth, but who will replace Chara and Pothier next season? Any prospects ready to step in?
I think what people are also failing to recognize is that Ottawa has that something when it comes to developing defensemen. As well, Ottawa already has a Marc Staal type in Phillips and a punishing hitter in Volchenkov. Lee has the ability to be a power play quarterback like Brian Leetch. Everyone talks about Redden and how he's a great defenseman, but Lee has a chance to be an elite offensive defenseman. That's the difference between Lee and Staal.
Have the individual stocks of Kopitar, Staal, Bourdon, and Lee really changed that much relative to each other?
I don't think they have, and I think the same teams might pick the same players if the draft was held today.
Maybe it's just me, but I look for raw potential when observing players at such a young age. And Lee's is off the screen.
I've seen a fair amount of Staal following the OHL with the Ottawa 67's. Lee I saw at the WJC (obviously) but also with the Siouix thanks to the NHL Network. NCAA hockey is quite hard to find here, save that channel.
Separate names with a comma.