View Single Post
Old
03-19-2012, 01:45 PM
  #92
GAGLine
Registered User
 
GAGLine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 9,275
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BobMarleyNYR View Post
Yes, we really are.

Not only did Gilroy put up staggering numbers, while being billed as a star two-way D with great wheels, BUT all but like 4 NHL teams were legit trying to get.

Someone said he was 27. He wasn't, he was 25. Schultz is 21... that is not a tremendous difference when you're talking about polished prospects. Of course, pre-draft there is a huge difference between a 17-year-old kid and a 21-year-old OAer.
That is a tremendous difference. At 21, Gilroy wasn't even a blip on the NHL radar. Schultz is better than a point per game on a team that's having a down year.

Quote:
People put way too much emphasis on age, especially when you're talking 21-25, NCAA, non-pro... and remember, Gilroy was built like an 18-year-old.

I'm not saying don't sign him, just don't have expectations. Remember Gilroy and Thomas Pock (identical situation). Hell, remember the Zuccarellos, Heikkinens, Baldwins, Jamtins, Denisovs, Yeremeyevs, Fabian Brunnstroms (mostly Euros, but same fundamental concept, just drawing a blank on unrafted NCAA signees)... then again, remember the Girardis...
All undrafted players were undrafted for a reason. The odds of any of them becoming good NHL players is low. But there are more than enough successes that NHL teams have to keep looking and try to sign the ones they feel can become good players.

Besides, what's the downside? Does it really matter to the Rangers if Gilroy fails, or Zucc, or whoever? They didn't give up anything to get those players. They didn't even spend a draft pick on them. The only concern is the 50 contract limit, but I'm sure each team allots a certain number of contracts each year to signing undrafted FAs. So they are going to sign players, it's just a matter of hoping they get lucky.

Schultz is a completely different case. He wasn't undrafted. He was a 2nd round pick (8 picks before Stepan) who may have gone higher if he'd been playing in the CHL rather than the BCHL. Schultz isn't some late bloomer who dominated younger players. He's a kid whose stock was high as an 18 year old and has only improved since. Apples and oranges.

No, that doesn't guarantee that he'll be a good player in the NHL, but he has a far, far better chance than Gilroy did. And for all the crap Gilroy takes, he's become a regular NHL player. He never lived up to the hype, but he's a serviceable bottom pair dman.

GAGLine is offline