He could absolutely be great, but I think the hyberpole needs to be turned back a bit. I find it very hard to believe he will go from a consensus #3d to a franchise player after missing 3/4 of the last 2 years.
Franchise player is major hyperbole IMO, but just wondering if it's a misuse of words.
I think Valimaki's upside after seeing him in the NHL is similar to Hamilton's upside (which isn't even at it's peak yet) which may be a high end 2D, occasional 1D. Heck, with injuries included, I think he's a comparable to Chychrun easily. I might be wrong, but I really think he's exceptionally similar to Chychrun and that kid is also just scratching the surface.
Yes, there's a huge difference in potential and NHL performance. But Valimaki showed NHL performance and NHL upside in the NHL. This isn't pure projections from a lower league. The kid is not a potential tweener and has already shown he is a surefire NHLer. At his young age, he showed stable 4/5D capabilities and showed 3D flashes much earlier than expected as a green horn. The kid showed as much, if not more poise as Andersson at the age of 20 as Andersson did at the age of 21 and as a result played 24 games to Andersson's 10. Andersson played 79 games at the age of 22. He just ironically comes from Nokia and wasn't as indestructible as the dumb phones of yore. Seriously though, we are comparing what Valimaki has achieved directly against his peers in the NHL and he gets high marks. Think about that for a sec.
Valimaki has been evaluated at the NHL level by most is his brains/hockey IQ. He can already process the game at an average to slightly above average level for all dmen IMO almost 2-3 seasons earlier than expected (ie: A Kylington and Anderson parallel trajectory). He wasn't using physical tools and pure adrenaline motor to stay afloat. When I watched him, I felt like he is top 4 quality now. I think he's on par with Andersson, but Andersson is more physically and mentally mature being 2 years older than he is. I feel he is the same tier of player as Hanifin, but Hanifin is more consistent at the moment.
Yes, Valimaki was slated to be a 3D, but 2D upside and possibly mid/late career mid range 1D upside (ie: Gio's super stable but not premier elite levels) aren't insane with this guy. Heck as an absolute flub and failure situation I think for Valimaki is a Brodie career parallel. That's still a solid 2D range situation with 1D flashes and IMO is similar to what Chychrun is showing right now with higher end back end talent on the roster, no?
All in all, with injury considerations and lost development, I think Valimaki has shown enough at the NHL level to show he easily will be a premium 2/3D in the same vein as Chychrun. What constitutes as franchise D might be watered down these days, but I don't think it's hyperbole or homerism at all to believe he will be a premium dman (not elite) for his career. Look at the draft rankings that other fan bases vote on. Valimaki was always considered in the top tiers of that draft group of dmen and still technically is even with the time lost to injury. That outside perspective is important to consider. If they too think Valimaki is a good one, why shouldn't we?
Seriously consider this fact in a vaccum right now. We have 3 dmen from the 2015 draft on our back end (Hanifin, Andersson and Kylington) and Valimaki is from the 2017 draft.
By NHL games played, Andersson is a sophomore, Kylington is a rookie and Hanifin is a vet. Valimaki with injury currently sits on par with Kylington. That group alone is a damn solid group to grow with. Adding Valimaki is amazing as it is a group of 4 that all seems to have 2nd pairing floor.
OT: With the Gustafsson acquisition, the 2013 love affair isn't over yet.
I am not disparaging your remarks super. I think your opinion has plenty of merit. I just feel like you're more pessimistic than cautiously optimistic.
