View Single Post
Old
10-04-2004, 05:37 PM
  #67
Fletch
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Brooklyn
Posts: 21,469
vCash: 500
Two inches is not a big difference...

so, a person two inches shorter than Dawes (about 5'6) should be looked at nearly as favorable as Dawes, no? I think there has to be some cutoff. The difference between Parise (who I thought was 5'11, but we'll call it 5'10) and Dawes isn't that large, but the difference between Parise and a 6-footer is two inches - the difference between Dawes and a 6-footer is four inches.

It shouldn't automtically make him better, but perhaps his style of play, coupled with his size, make him better-suited for the NHL. Perhaps Dawes, who may rely on speed and may be physical, can get away with that against the younger, and often small, competition in juniors, but his style, matched with his size, may not currently bode well for the NHL. The real point is that just because you score more points than a guy, on the same team and even in the same league, does not make you better-suited for the NHL. Certain styles that one's successful with at one level just may not fly when he gets to the NHL.

And where teams pick are actually pretty important. I think if you did an analysis, the percentage of draftees making the NHL (playing a meaningful number of games) drops as you go from round 1-9. While I don't know that for a fact, it's a pretty good assumption, I believe. Yeah, there are 9th rounders playing in the NHL, obviously. But guys in the first round typically turn out better than guys in later rounds. And as a hockey analyst/scout/coach, or whatever, you play the percentages and often focus more effort/time on those higher rounds at the expense of others (unless there's something extraordinary) because something was there to pick them high and in life you play the percentages.


Last edited by Fletch: 10-04-2004 at 05:41 PM.
Fletch is offline