You need to let it go. We wouldn’t have drafted Kopitar. We would’ve drafted Brule.
Naw, I don't, whether you get lucky and hit in hindsight doesn't matter. It's the entire philosphy that is wrong. Picking goalies with top 5 picks is a waste of draft capital. There is no reason for doing it, ever.You need to let it go. We wouldn’t have drafted Kopitar. We would’ve drafted Brule.
As it so happens, arguably 3 of the best five players in that draft are goalies. Quick went in the 3rd round so that wasn’t predictable. But in retrospect Rask would’ve been a great choice for top five as well.
Funny, I’d forgotten that Rask was actually drafted by the Leafs.
I just gave you two examples where it made sense... and you STILL don't get it?
The Kopitar fantasy is made up completely with hindsight.You need to let it go. We wouldn’t have drafted Kopitar. We would’ve drafted Brule.
As it so happens, arguably 3 of the best five players in that draft are goalies. Quick went in the 3rd round so that wasn’t predictable. But in retrospect Rask would’ve been a great choice for top five as well.
Funny, I’d forgotten that Rask was actually drafted by the Leafs.
Price and Rask are easily two of the top 5 players in that draft and yet you should never draft a goalie top five.
Makes sense…
You need to let it go. We wouldn’t have drafted Kopitar. We would’ve drafted Brule.
As it so happens, arguably 3 of the best five players in that draft are goalies. Quick went in the 3rd round so that wasn’t predictable. But in retrospect Rask would’ve been a great choice for top five as well.
Funny, I’d forgotten that Rask was actually drafted by the Leafs.
I seem to remember hearing it would be Brule. In any event Kopitar was taken six or seven slots later…
I just don’t understand how anyone can complain about a pick that we used on a HOF player. Seems pretty silly. We’ve made so many mind numbingly dumb decisions at the draft the past 20 years, that was best pick we made in that time frame and it’s not even close. Juries still out on a lot of these other kids we have now. But the chance of them making the impact Price did for many years is very small. Price was challenging Crosby for most impactful player in the league at his peak.Price and Rask are easily two of the top 5 players in that draft and yet you should never draft a goalie top five.
Hindsight is 20/20. Still doesn't justify picking a goalie top 5 imo, it worked out that we got a generational like player with PRice. 99% of the time that won't happen, so even though we struck gold it doesn't justify the philopshy imo. There's goalies found every draft in the later 1st or even later rounds.
I'm not complaining, what is done is done, it is the idea of picking a goalie top 5 I disagree with, not with how Price performed.
I wasn’t coming at you. I was just pointing out the general narrative because the Price/Kopitar argument has been around forever. Had we had a competent management team that could’ve found a way to get the center we needed to go with Price, there would be no reason for that debate to even exist.
Well there was sone debate about whether that was Timmins pick, gainey’s pick etczx. Obviously we had him 5th, my point being, it was far from a consensus pick, it was seen as a teach at the time of draft
While I don’t disagree that Price wasn’t the reason our incompetent management couldn’t find a center. I will never be convinced drafting a goalie top5 passes any sort of risk/.benefit analysis.
Henrik Lundqvist was chosen I think 200th overall (6th or 7th round) in 2000, and was recently voted into the Hockey Hall of Fame. With goalies, you never know.
I disagree, because as an asset, it doesn't really matter if he is perceived to be the bpa or not. His value won't carry that weight forward. I struggle with using any 1st round pick on a goalie tbh. I would consider late teens and beyond. Plenty of good goalies after pick 15-20 usually. Like we did this year, that is the approach I like. Pick number 69, worth the gamble. If he becomes a competent starter its like we saved ourselves a first rounder and let some other team squander their assets chasing after a player in a very volatile position that is extremly difficult to project.
Price had his peers and people all around the hockey world not only giving him the throne as best goalie, but in the mix as best player in the league from 2014-17. He was just as valuable at that point as anyone. I can’t think of another goalie other then Hasek that’s ever done that. I understand what you’re trying to say about goaltenders value in comparison to other positions from an asset point of view, but Price was an exception. Things went sideways after we extended him and the injuries just piled on into his 30’s. But he carried one of the worst teams I’ve ever seen make the playoffs within 3 games on a SC. And it took a team cap bullying us in the finals to finally end that run.
Except when they’re picked top five, you do.
